Is Sidney Crosby on track to be (or already is) the 4th best forward ever?

[KoozNetsOff 92]

1-1-2-2-2-3-3-5-6-17-17-20-24

1-1-2-2-2-2-3-4-4-14

1-1-2-2-3-3-3-3-5-7

Sid, Bill and Hull.

Sid has done that with injuries too. Theres no contest that hes the 4th best forward all time now, hes running down Howe.

Lol.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Now a 7 time MVP finalist. And 5 out of the last 7 seasons.

 

[Thenameless]

Let's remove Wayne and Mario as statistical anomalies and see how Messier does.

Art Ross placings - 1, 2, 5, 5, 7, 12

vs.

Crosby - 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 4, 6, 10

See a difference?

Messier has a great argument to be rated higher based on his playoff resume but he also has this argument over Mario and Orr too.

Crosby is clearly ahead of him.

Hey, I agree that Crosby's better, but Messier is about a lot more than just points. When you factor in defensive ability, penalty killing, face-offs, physicality, and intimidation, he closes the gap quite a bit. If Crosby is having trouble with injuries in this era, he could conceivably be a lot worse off in Messier's era.

 

[Passchendaele]

Messier is one of the most overrated players of all time.

I'd take Yzerman or Sakic over him any day of the week.

 

[george14]

Now a 7 time MVP finalist. And 5 out of the last 7 seasons.

People only care about 1st place which I think is unfair.

Albert Pujols for instance. The guy has 2 or 3 MVPs but finished 2nd a bunch and many were to a roided Bonds.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

People only care about 1st place which I think is unfair.

Albert Pujols for instance. The guy has 2 or 3 MVPs but finished 2nd a bunch and many were to a roided Bonds.

Sure wins are the most important. But being a finalist doesn’t hurt your legacy.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

Sure wins are the most important. But being a finalist doesn’t hurt your legacy.

Wins are basically the most important thing. If you don’t win the award, you don’t get a “I got nominated” trophy.

Winning it more has way more weight than being nominated, as much as you’re trying to spin it otherwise.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Wins are basically the most important thing. If you don’t win the award, you don’t get a “I got nominated” trophy.

Winning it more has way more weight than being nominated, as much as you’re trying to spin it otherwise.

Guess what. It’s the next best thing and how am I spinning anything?

 

[Son Goku]

Wins are basically the most important thing. If you don’t win the award, you don’t get a “I got nominated” trophy.

Winning it more has way more weight than being nominated, as much as you’re trying to spin it otherwise.

Or it means you were consistently one of the best players year in and year out. Not many players can say that. He's behind only Gretzky and Lemieux in that category.

 

[TheTechNoir]

Key word "if". Players are judged on what they did, not what they might have or could have done.

Which makes Lemieux all the more insane.

"If" he had a reasonably healthy career, I think he separates himself from The Great One.

But as it is now, it is debatable. Or perhaps he is clearly number 2.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Which makes Lemieux all the more insane.

"If" he had a reasonably healthy career, I think he separates himself from The Great One.

But as it is now, it is debatable. Or perhaps he is clearly number 2.

Nah. We saw Lemieux at his best. He was great but he wasn't as good as Gretzky.

 

[daver]

Hey, I agree that Crosby's better, but Messier is about a lot more than just points. When you factor in defensive ability, penalty killing, face-offs, physicality, and intimidation, he closes the gap quite a bit. If Crosby is having trouble with injuries in this era, he could conceivably be a lot worse off in Messier's era.

"If Crosby is having trouble with injuries in this era, he could conceivably be a lot worse off in Messier's era"

Such a weak premise. We have zero idea how any player would do in any other era. It is completely subjective. You can just as easily argue Crosby excels even more offensively against less mobile defensemen or argubly a lower relative talent level in the league. IMO, these comments have no place in these comparisons.

As for Messier's other attributes, these all can serve to potentially differentiate forwards with similar offensive talent and resumes or even place him above players who were known to be lacking on the defensive side of things like Jagr or Esposito but it becomes sketchy and subjective.

I have the bolded the attributes that Crosby also shares. The only thing really lacking on Crosby's resume is intimidation but again, I don't think that makes up for the clear gap in offense.

 

[wetcoast]

1-1-1-1-1-2-2-5-6-8-9-15-19-22-27-27-33

Who is Jagr for $200?

 

[Thenameless]

I have the bolded the attributes that Crosby also shares. The only thing really lacking on Crosby's resume is intimidation but again, I don't think that makes up for the clear gap in offense.

Even in your bolded areas, Messier is still clearly superior.

 

[daver]

Even in your bolded areas, Messier is still clearly superior.

I see two Top Ten Selke places for Messier in a 21 team league vs. three (soon to be four) for Crosby in a 30 team league.

I see Crosby as winning the 2nd most faceoffs in his era in the regular season and the most for the playoffs at a 52% rate.

Crosby is well reknowned for his ability to possess the puck and his board play.

And I could easily argue that quality of linemates/teammates widens the offensive gap. IMO, Crosby has the most defensible position among the historical offensive elites players that his numbers were not inflated in any way by who he played with.

 

[Thenameless]

I see two Top Ten Selke places for Messier in a 21 team league vs. three (soon to be four) for Crosby in a 30 team league.

I see Crosby as winning the 2nd most faceoffs in his era in the regular season and the most for the playoffs at a 52% rate.

So, are you actually trying to say that Crosby is better defensively? Because if you are, you obviously didn't watch Messier play. Just so you understand the true difference, Messier was often his team's best penalty killing forward, and he was a very dangerous one at that, with 63 career short-handed goals. Crosby has 3. So, Crosby is either A) Not nearly relied on as much in critical defensive situations, or B) He's not nearly as good at it.

And as I said, Messier is also better at face-offs - way better. Go look at the numbers if you want to waste your time, and realize that Messier would have been even more dominant earlier in his career, before the stat was properly recorded.

Remember, I did say that Crosby is the better player, so you don't need to argue 'til you're blue in the face. But there are definitely things that Messier was better at, and defense and face-offs are among them.

 

[daver]

So, are you actually trying to say that Crosby is better defensively? Because if you are, you obviously didn't watch Messier play. Just so you understand the true difference, Messier was often his team's best penalty killing forward, and he was a very dangerous one at that, with 63 career short-handed goals. Crosby has 3. So, Crosby is either A) Not nearly relied on as much in critical defensive situations, or B) He's not nearly as good at it.

I replied with some evidence that disputes your claim that Messier was "clearly superior" defensively. I am saying that it should be removed from given serious consideration in this comparison.

Team situation and coaching would dicate useage on the PK. Hardly surprising that given how much more offense Crosby is relied on to produce than Messier was for his team his use on the PK would be limited.

It should be obvious to anyone that Crosby effectiveness is maximized at ES and on the PP; hardly an indicator that he is lacking on the defensive side of things.

 

[newfy]

I replied with some evidence that disputes your claim that Messier was "clearly superior" defensively. I am saying that it should be removed from given serious consideration in this comparison.

Team situation and coaching would dicate useage on the PK. Hardly surprising that given how much more offense Crosby is relied on to produce than Messier was for his team his use on the PK would be limited.

It should be obvious to anyone that Crosby effectiveness is maximized at ES and on the PP; hardly an indicator that he is lacking on the defensive side of things.

I dont think using selke finishes makes much sense at all given how much the award has changed since Messier played. Messier played at a time where it was guys like Gainey, Doug Jarvis and Dirk Graham were winning the Selke. A ~30-45 point forward isnt winning that award nowadays or really getting much tractoin toward it at all.

Proof of that is when Kesler finished ahead of Malhotra in Vancouver in 2010/11. In Messiers time, Malhotra runs away with that award over Kelser on his own team

 

[daver]

I dont think using selke finishes makes much sense at all given how much the award has changed since Messier played. Messier played at a time where it was guys like Gainey, Doug Jarvis and Dirk Graham were winning the Selke. A ~30-45 point forward isnt winning that award nowadays or really getting much tractoin toward it at all.

Proof of that is when Kesler finished ahead of Malhotra in Vancouver in 2010/11. In Messiers time, Malhotra runs away with that award over Kelser on his own team

So we'll just take someone's subjective opinion as proof that Messier was "clearly superior"? Or maybe remove defensive play as having any significance in closing the gap between Messier and Crosby.

 

[KingPuckChoo]

in my entire life as a hockey fan, i never quite understood why Mike Bossy is this severely underrated

 

[newfy]

So we'll just take someone's subjective opinion as proof that Messier was "clearly superior"? Or maybe remove defensive play as having any significance in closing the gap between Messier and Crosby.

I would say its a pretty well accepted opinion that Moose was a great two way player. Great two way players win the Selke in today's NHL muc moreso than purely defensive specialists in his NHL.

I think theres enough of Messiers games online that you can watch and form an opinion of yourself instead of allowing the opinions of hockey writers who arent infallible, from 2 completely different eras of hockey, with 2 clearly different standards for awarding the selke decide your opinion.

I dont think youll hear many people in the hockey world try to claim that Crosby was a better two way player than Messier. I think Crosby is better overall than Messier, but I think a lot of people arent going to take you seriously if the hill you choose to die on is that Crosby was his equal defensively

 

[Shareefruck]

I'm looking through the beginning of this thread, and I'm noticing a lot of very bizarrely nonsensical comments with logic along the lines of this:

"No!! Crosby is obviously not nearly as good as Gretzky, Lemieux or Howe! Therefore, he does not deserve to be placed below them!"

Weird.

 

[Thenameless]

I would say its a pretty well accepted opinion that Moose was a great two way player. Great two way players win the Selke in today's NHL muc moreso than purely defensive specialists in his NHL.

I think theres enough of Messiers games online that you can watch and form an opinion of yourself instead of allowing the opinions of hockey writers who arent infallible, from 2 completely different eras of hockey, with 2 clearly different standards for awarding the selke decide your opinion.

I dont think youll hear many people in the hockey world try to claim that Crosby was a better two way player than Messier. I think Crosby is better overall than Messier, but I think a lot of people arent going to take you seriously if the hill you choose to die on is that Crosby was his equal defensively

I find it almost comical that we both said the bolded, and yet, he still feels the need to defend Crosby's defensive game against Messier's. It really leads one to believe that he must not have watched hockey in the 1980's. The reasonable and knowledgeable hockey fan knows that offense goes to Crosby, while defense, physicality/intimidation, leadership, durability, and face-offs goes to Messier - but we all still take Crosby because he's so much better at offense, and we make reasonable allowances for what could have been given his injuries.

 

[Yackiberg8]

in my entire life as a hockey fan, i never quite understood why Mike Bossy is this severely underrated

You think he was the 4th best forward ever?

 

[bambamcam4ever]

People only care about 1st place which I think is unfair.

Albert Pujols for instance. The guy has 2 or 3 MVPs but finished 2nd a bunch and many were to a roided Bonds.

People exist who think Pujols wasnt juicing?