Classicnamesup
MVP Backhand Slapper
Crosby is a top 5 player ever but not below Toews? And somehow Toews is better? Toews never has and never will be
Lebrun: If Crosby wins another Stanley Cup, he will then become better than Toews
- Thread starter hockeykicker
- Start date
MakeTheGoalsLarger
Registered User
He says it's only about cups, yet a few players on the Hawks won as many cups as Toews. Same thing with Crosby and Pens.
Why is he making this about Crosby and Toews?
Why is he making this about Crosby and Toews?
clefty
Retrovertigo
So if Crosby wins a third Cup, he's better at winning Cups than Toews who has three Cups? What?
And yeah, if his point was just Cups, why bring up Toews and not, say, Duncan Keith or Patrick Kane?
If the Penguins win, then Kunitz will have won four. I guess he would stand above them all then?
And yeah, if his point was just Cups, why bring up Toews and not, say, Duncan Keith or Patrick Kane?
If the Penguins win, then Kunitz will have won four. I guess he would stand above them all then?
Once they're tied in Cups the tiebreaker moves on to the things that Crosby is better at then Toews, which is basically everything. The advantage Toews currently has in terms of the "ultimate prize" will no longer be an advantage and Crosby will surpass him with his advantage in every other category.
And they're singling out the captains because they're the leaders and faces of their team.
unknown33
Registered User
- Dec 8, 2009
- 3,942
- 150
Obviously cups only count when you're the captain. That's why Bobby Orr technically never won it.
Epsilon
#basta
Basically, because of the captaincy myth, i.e. the idea that the team captain has some outsized influence on winning championships beyond what they produce on the ice.
It's what Blackhawks fans will use to continue to cling to the idea that Toews is better than Malkin despite (assuming the Penguins win this year) having the same number of championships and Malkin having the better playoff performances across the board (decent chance to win his 2nd Conn Smythe this year).
Vancouver Canucks
Registered User
- Feb 8, 2015
- 14,591
- 2,587
I think people don't like to face the reality that at least one of Lemieux, Howe and Orr is not in the top three all time. It's just not feasible that all three are in the top three.
Trafalgar Sadge Law
Registered User
- Nov 8, 2007
- 11,483
- 6,911
Please tell me Lebrun is being tongue and cheek. Crosby could have 0 cups and he'd still be greater than Toews.
Epsilon
#basta
What? I don't really understand what you're saying here. Did you mean top 4?
No Fun Shogun
34-38-61-10-13-15
I love Toews, but I really wish media analysts would just pump the breaks on trying to say that he's better than Crosby. Have him in your top 100 and have him be a shoe-in for the HOF, that's nice. But c'mon with claiming that Toews is better than Crosby. Just annoying to state at this point and essentially ever.
Unless this is all a vast and long-standing conspiracy to get traffic from people.
Unless this is all a vast and long-standing conspiracy to get traffic from people.
madinsomniac
Registered User
Orr changed the game in a way no one ever has since and was the most dominant physical talent of his era...
Lemieux was probably the greatest pure talent though injuries and work ethic held him back,
Gretzky has all the stats...
Howe has a ton of accolades and unheatd of longevity ....
You can drop any one of them out of the top 3 and mot be wrong... even gretzky... depending on your preference of era, position impact and statistical importance, any one of them can be the best...
This is a fairly minor arguement in truth
Epsilon
#basta
I don't really think it's possible to drop Gretzky out of the top 3 in a coherent way. A bit more specifically, I think most/all arguments to have Lemieux in the top 3 also apply to Gretzky, in the sense of "if Lemieux is above Howe for reason X, then Gretzky also needs to be above Howe for reason X" (for one example). Unless someone's ranking is:
Orr/Howe
Howe/Orr
Lemieux
Gretzky
but I'd have a hard time seeing that justified...
Not disagreeing with your overall point, just nitpicking that part.
Number 1 is apparent, and we have three super-elite players to fill two remaining spots in the top three.
Someone has to be left off the podium and it will make a certain amount of people crazy. Someone else noted it earlier and I agree.
Epsilon
#basta
Tyler Myers
Registered User
What an idiotic statement. I think he would be comfortably ahead of Gretzky, Howe, Orr and Lemieux, but he's got a long way to go to catch Toews.
CokenoPepsi
Registered User
- Oct 28, 2016
- 5,032
- 2,494
No, you cannot drop Gretzky out of the top 3...top 2 would be an insult...he is the greatest...period
Wasnt there game in the playoffs a few years ago wher Toews lost it and took 3 minors in row, and one of his teammates had to calm him down in the penalty box. Yeah best leader in the world.
Gooch
Registered User
Gretzky obviously has #1 locked down, I don't think that's up for debate from any rational person.
To me there is an obvious player to omit from the top three and that's Gordie Howe. His accolade is his longevity which doesn't necessarily put him in for greatest player. He played during an era when there were a lot fewer players to compete against and fewer international players and he has the same amount of Art Ross Trophies that Lemieux has despite Lemieux playing during a hyper competitive era that even had Gretzky to compete against.
If you're going to put Orr in based on how good he was in the relatively short period of time he got to play due to injury then Lemieux has to be granted the same courtesy. Lemieux was the only player close to Gretzky's video game like numbers. While Gordie Howe put up a great career I see him more as a Ron Francis level of player.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
-
-
Leeds vs Southampton - WINNER GETS PROMOTED TO PREMIER LEAGUEWagers: 5Staked: $2,784.00Event closes- Updated: