McDavid Right Now vs. Crosby at His Peak

[filinski77]

McDavid put up 116 points in 78 games last year. Ovi’s best was 112 in 82, so McDavid has the edge in PPG and single season point totality already. If not for Kuch last year, he’d have clean swept every non-rocket award. It’s not gonna take long for him to surpass both Ovi and Sid in terms of point production and accolades. Ovi will always have his legendary goal scoring but McDavid is clearly a not well-rounded player and he’ll surpass Sid once he makes some more playoff runs as he’a already close to him achievements-wise

In Ovi's best seasons:
2007-2008 = 6% lead over #2 in points, and 25% lead over #2 in goals
2009-2010 = 10% lead over #2 in points/gp, and 10% lead over #2 in goals/gp

McDavid:
2016-2017 = 3% lead over #2 in points/gp (Crosby missed 7 games), 32% less goals than #1
2017-2018 = 6% lead over #2 in points, only 1% lead over #2 in points/gp (mackinnon missed a few games), 16% less goals than #1
2018-2019 = 4% less points/gp than #1, and 20% less goals than #1

In total, McDavid has never had a relative point advantage as peak Ovechkin did, let alone the goalscoring dominance added to it, Ovechkin was also going up against young and dominant Malkin and Crosby.

As far as total points go, it's essentially a wash as Ovi in 2009-2010 was on pace for 124 points (he missed 10 games), and was on pace to lead the league in points by 12. Whereas McDavid last year was on pace for 122 points, 6 less than the league leader. League scoring was also up last year compared to 2009-2010.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

He's not even remotely close to McDavid for anything skating related, nobody is. It's hands down the most dominant tool either of them has.

Crosby is a much smarter player, and his greatest tool.

And his balance on his skates and ability to change direction are certainly not several steps down. McDavid is obviously more explosive and faster in a straight line.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Ask this question in 10 years when McDavid has had the chance to build up as many haters as Crosby.

Every dominant player/team who is on top for a long time will gather haters.

McDavid is too young and hasn’t had enough playoff success to garner the amount of detractors that Crosby has.

There are a number of people in this thread who are saying anything they can to diminish Crosby’s accomplishments and I suspect it’s because they’ve grown to hate him over the years due to his success.

No one is hating Crosby or diminishing his accomplishments. There’s nothing to diminish anyways.

It’s using his peak as “consecutive” while ignoring the fact that he didn’t achieve much because he wasn’t playing, but hey let’s act like he would have anyway and go off of that.

Easily Crosby. The biggest shame in recent memory is how he was injured at his absolute peak and never had that one full year which showed just how dominant he was. Between November 2009 - 2012 he was on pace for 130+ points over 200 games, though it was split between seasons.

If he finished 2010/11 he would have easily cleared 130 points, with much better 2-way play than McDavid, in a significantly lower scoring year. And with Malkin slumping so playing with Dupuis and Kunitz without a Draisaitl.

Yes, there were HUGE gaps between those years....

He wouldn’t have “easily” cleared 130 points, no matter the pace....and continuing to fill in those years with what you feel would have happened doesn’t change the reality of the situation. No one can say where he would have landed simply because he didn’t play enough games, but to just suggest he would have maintained that pace because he’s Crosby is nonsense. Also, Crosby wasn’t that good defensively at his peak, that just started coming around over the last few years. Stop morphing 2011 Crosby with 2019 as if they are the same player.

 

[Just doink]

Crosby is a bit too much stevenyzerman for my taste, x-factor is what separetes sheeps from goats.

McDavid.

 

[JasonRoseEh]

McDavid isn't the caliber of player Ovechkin or Crosby were at their peaks, he can get there but he isn't there yet.

 

[Beauner]

Crosby is a bit too much stevenyzerman for my taste, x-factor is what separetes sheeps from goats.

McDavid.

excuse me?

 

[Just doink]

excuse me?

Jack of all trades, master of none.

But is young 130pts Crosby better hockey player than selke worthy older 100pts Crosby?

 

[Beauner]

Jack of all trades, master of none.

But is young 130pts Crosby better hockey player than selke worthy older 100pts Crosby?

once again.....

excuse me?

 

[Regal]

He never regressed because he obviously didn’t play enough games and enough games consistently. It’s about the convenience of his peaks consisting of times where he didn’t cool off and his production didn’t drop off because they are such small sample sizes, which normally happens. It’s the convenience of people getting to add more mystique to his seasons and write it the way they please. Facts are, we have no idea how he would have ended those seasons, but where certainly isn’t any “it’s safe to say he would have done this and that.” And using that to fill in the gaps. Sure, very very big chance he walks away with most of the awards in 2011 and 2013, but he didn’t.....so why treat it like he did? It’s not about what he is capable of achieving, it’s about him not achieving those awards or numbers but getting the benefit of the doubt, doesn’t work like that.

I mean, really? “Why didn’t he regress?” Don’t you think it’s easier to maintain a certain level of production over 22 and 36 games separately with lots of time in between compared to 164 games back to back, let’s say WITH playoffs? It’s pretty obvious.

It's easier to maintain peak levels over smaller samples, yes, but saying he didn't regress because he didn't play enough games is a cop out. We're talking three seasons of chunks of games where he just happened to be producing like a hot streak? It's just not believable that it wasn't at least somewhat sustainable.

And the point isn't to project him over more games, so I don't know why you're bringing it up. The point is to talk about how he played over that period. Using PPG or pace just puts it into context. McDavid hasn't reached that level of play over significant samples, even in the best parts of the seasons he's played.

How we determine peak is subjective, and needs to be defined in each instance in order to have a proper discussion. What people are saying is that if they could add one player playing at their best to their team, they would choose Crosby based on how he played during those seasons. That's one subjective take on peak. Going by best single season is another subjective take that is also legitimate and no one is arguing that those seasons should be considered in that instance. They're two separate arguments and yet you keep conflating them. It's a perfectly reasonable take to think that Crosby had a higher peak level of play but that their best seasons are roughly a wash or an edge to McDavid.

 

[Regal]

whats impressive about playing 11 games a season?
most hockey people would say "cool, now let's see it for a whole season"

They would say that if he did it once. If he kept doing it it would become a pattern. The idea that someone keeping up their play over multiple shortened seasons isn't an indication that they could keep up a similar level over a single season is simply baffling.

 

[authentic]

In Ovi's best seasons:
2007-2008 = 6% lead over #2 in points, and 25% lead over #2 in goals
2009-2010 = 10% lead over #2 in points/gp, and 10% lead over #2 in goals/gp

McDavid:
2016-2017 = 3% lead over #2 in points/gp (Crosby missed 7 games), 32% less goals than #1
2017-2018 = 6% lead over #2 in points, only 1% lead over #2 in points/gp (mackinnon missed a few games), 16% less goals than #1
2018-2019 = 4% less points/gp than #1, and 20% less goals than #1

In total, McDavid has never had a relative point advantage as peak Ovechkin did, let alone the goalscoring dominance added to it, Ovechkin was also going up against young and dominant Malkin and Crosby.

As far as total points go, it's essentially a wash as Ovi in 2009-2010 was on pace for 124 points (he missed 10 games), and was on pace to lead the league in points by 12. Whereas McDavid last year was on pace for 122 points, 6 less than the league leader. League scoring was also up last year compared to 2009-2010.

Overall I think they were all close but I'm inclined to give peak Ovechkin the slight edge. However there has been no better ES player than McDavid since Lemieux, and I think his peak will end up the best but that is not for certain.

 

[Regal]

probably cause he never had to deal with the rigors of a long season...where regression would have no doubt occurred

using your logic, you'd be impressed if McDavid had 9 straight seasons where he only played 11 games yet had a 5.00 points/60
I mean, it's 99 straight games of dominance!

In the two longest samples of those seasons he started the season on time and played along with everyone else. He didn't have any advantage in terms of health due to the rigors of the season for the period he played.

 

[Offtheboard412]

I'll take Sid at his peak. McDavid could potentially match it. I really don't see a big difference between the two when looking at their actual numbers they put up. McDavid has had better luck with injuries which has allowed him to have better art ross finishes. It seems like a lot of posters on this site seem to want to speak into existence a level of dominance for McDavid that simply isnt there. At least not yet.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

In the two longest samples of those seasons he started the season on time and played along with everyone else. He didn't have any advantage in terms of health due to the rigors of the season for the period he played.

Crosby knew he could go all out since he was expecting to get hurt though.

Sorry, just trying to make sense of certain posters' logic.

 

[daver]

McDavid put up 116 points in 78 games last year. Ovi’s best was 112 in 82, so McDavid has the edge in PPG and single season point totality already. If not for Kuch last year, he’d have clean swept every non-rocket award. It’s not gonna take long for him to surpass both Ovi and Sid in terms of point production and accolades. Ovi will always have his legendary goal scoring but McDavid is clearly a not well-rounded player and he’ll surpass Sid once he makes some more playoff runs as he’a already close to him achievements-wise

You need some context on those point totals. All seasons aren't the same.

And OV in 09/10 had the better PPG than McDavid last year.

 

[Sergei Shirokov]

Going Crosby here

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Crosby is a bit too much stevenyzerman for my taste, x-factor is what separetes sheeps from goats.

McDavid.

Jack of all trades, master of none.

But is young 130pts Crosby better hockey player than selke worthy older 100pts Crosby?

What does this even mean?

 

[leafsloverblahblah]

Do you think McDavid is a better player right now than Crosby was at his peak? I think most people would consider Crosby's peak when he put up 51 goals (and 109 points in 81 games in 2009/10) and then 66 points in 41 games the next year before his injury issues, but it's up to your interpretation what his peak is.

Do you think McDavid is a better player right now than Crosby was at his peak? I think most people would consider Crosby's peak when he put up 51 goals (and 109 points in 81 games in 2009/10) and then 66 points in 41 games the next year before his injury issues, but it's up to your interpretation what his peak is.

 

[leafsloverblahblah]

McDavid. There is no competition, he makes players have unbelievable years. Jake
Guentzel only had 76 points playing with Crosby whereas Leon Drasitil had 105 playing with McDavid. You can't compare McDavid to Crosby it's unfair and it makes Crosby look bad.

 

[GreatGonzo]

It's easier to maintain peak levels over smaller samples, yes, but saying he didn't regress because he didn't play enough games is a cop out. We're talking three seasons of chunks of games where he just happened to be producing like a hot streak? It's just not believable that it wasn't at least somewhat sustainable.

And the point isn't to project him over more games, so I don't know why you're bringing it up. The point is to talk about how he played over that period. Using PPG or pace just puts it into context. McDavid hasn't reached that level of play over significant samples, even in the best parts of the seasons he's played.

How we determine peak is subjective, and needs to be defined in each instance in order to have a proper discussion. What people are saying is that if they could add one player playing at their best to their team, they would choose Crosby based on how he played during those seasons. That's one subjective take on peak. Going by best single season is another subjective take that is also legitimate and no one is arguing that those seasons should be considered in that instance. They're two separate arguments and yet you keep conflating them. It's a perfectly reasonable take to think that Crosby had a higher peak level of play but that their best seasons are roughly a wash or an edge to McDavid.

No it doesn’t work that way at all. The long grind of an 82 game season will have regress and will see almost every top player have their ups and downs in terms of production. That is lessened significantly when you only play 22, 36, or even 41 games. It isn’t hard to understand unless your new to the game of hockey. He had no regress because there wasn’t enough time in to show it, regress is inevitable the more games you play, no matter how much you don’t lik the it hear it. Crosby playing 22 games in 2012 means he missed 60 games, yet many like to cite those 22 games as “the best Crosby, and CLEARLY better than McDavid.” Crosby wasn’t so amazing those small sample sizes that the remaining games he missed wouldn’t have made a difference on his awesomeness.

McDavid had 62 points in the first 41 games of the 2019 season and the same amount of points the last 41 games of the 2018 season. that’s a 4 point difference. Is that really significant enough to say he’s NEVER been on that level? Really? You can nit pick any amount of 22, 36, or 41 game sample size within McDavids seasons....I’m sure there are multiple that are around where Crosby stood. The difference is McDavid played the remaining games, Crosby didn’t....allowing this mystique to grow.

And my point is Crosby didn’t sustain that level of play for a long enough time to be objectively better than anything McDavid has done. There were 212 games played between 2011-13, Crosby played 99 of them between 3 years, not even half of them. No one can safely say or assume his peak was greater based on this alone. Peak Crosby will always be a mystery, you can’t change that or try to glorify it into something it’s not.

 

[GreatGonzo]

You need some context on those point totals. All seasons aren't the same.

And OV in 09/10 had the better PPG than McDavid last year.

Ya but Ovechkin had better linemates that year than McDavid did last year.....or does that suddenly not matter?

I thought linemates was everything?

 

[SillyRabbit]

McDavid. There is no competition, he makes players have unbelievable years. Jake
Guentzel only had 76 points playing with Crosby whereas Leon Drasitil had 105 playing with McDavid. You can't compare McDavid to Crosby it's unfair and it makes Crosby look bad.

You heard it here first guys, Jake Guentzel and Leon Draisitil are equal caliber players and Draisitil's success is due solely to that of McDavid. Put him on the Penguins and he'd be a 75 point player.

 

[Puckstop40]

Slight edge to Crosby for me.

 

[BL92]

Hard to say but I think I'd go with Crosby, as a Pens fan I'm a little biased though. I think McDavid is more flashy and dynamic but Crosby is a better all-around player with unmatched puck protecting skills.

 

[McDavidCrushedLarkin]

McDavid. Crosby doesn't turn Draisaitl's into superstars.