What are the odds that McDavid becomes a member of the Big 5?

[Professor What]

Connor McDavid appears to be on the cusp of joining some very elite company. Currently, he's leading the NHL in scoring, and he's an overwhelming favorite in the betting markets to be named MVP. Assuming that both of those things hold, he's about to win both the Hart and the Art Ross for the third time. Here are the lists of guys that have accomplished each of those feats:

Hart: Wayne Gretzky (9), Gordie Howe (6), Eddie Shore (4), Bobby Clarke (3), Mario Lemieux (3), Howie Morenz (3), Bobby Orr (3), Alex Ovechkin (3)

Art Ross: Wayne Gretzky (10), Gordie Howe (6), Mario Lemieux (6), Phil Esposito (5), Jaromir Jarg (5), Stan Mikita (4), Bobby Hull (3), Guy Lafleur (3)

Pulling off the double this year would make him the ninth player to make each list and only the fourth to make both -- and the other three are already "Big 4" members. What's more, McDavid is only 24, so barring disaster, it seems likely that he's going to be around for a long time yet, meaning there's plenty of time to continue to rack up accolades.

I'm going to make an assumption right now, but the details of the assumption aren't vital. I'm assuming Lemieux is in fourth place since that'sthe general concensus, and putting a name there makes it easier. If you find someone else to be fourth, simply put his name there in the discussion going forward. But basically, the question is, how close does McDavid need to get to Lemieux to become a member of an expanded Mount Rushmore of hockey, and what does it take to get him there?

I suppose that's largely determined by how big the gap between Lemieux and fifth place is, as well as who's in fifth place. Before I make an assumption there, I want to say that doing so is far more impoerfect because there are too many variables. If you like someone like Doug Harvey or Patrick Roy, the the above lists of awards are a moot point, because they weren't in contention for those lists, for all intents and purposes. Sure, anyone can win the Hart, but it's more difficult for goalies and all but impossible for defensemen. Again, a defenseman can win the Art Ross -- if he's Bobby Orr -- and goalies are completely out of luck there. So, if you like a non-forward in fifth place, the lists aren't as useful.

But, for the sake of discussion, let's put Jean Beliveau in fifth. Now, we're asking these questions: 1) What does it take for McDavid to pass Beliveau? 2) How far ahead of Beliveau is Lemieux? 3) Does McDavid just have to get to the point that he's closer to Lemieux than Beliveau, or does he need to close the gap further?

Now, even the assumption that Beliveau is in fifth shows that simply winning awards isn't a rubber stamp. That's largely why I chose him. Both he and McDavid are centers, so there's some degree of apples to apples, even if it's far from perfect, thanks to era. But Beliveau, while I believe a very sound option for fifth, isn't on either of those lists, which is a reminder that awards aren't always the be all, end all that they're made out to be.

So, the title has the question for discussion. How likely do you think it is that McDavid will one day be mentioned in the same breath as Gretzky, Howe, Lemieux, and Orr?

Click to read more...

 

[BenchBrawl]

Needs cups.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

I'm not sure Beliveau is 5. If McDavid is being discussed as entering the top 5 ever, surely Crosby has an argument for already being top 5.

 

[Professor What]

Needs cups.

I knew that was going to come up. I've never really been a fan of a player's individual greatness being tied to winning championships though. Now, if he consistently chokes in the playoffs year after year, and that's the reason they don't win, yeah, that's a problem. But a guy that does his job but is let down by his team is another story. It's not his fault, so it doesn't seem fair that he's punished for that. Of course, that's just my take, and I know plenty of people will disagree. I will say that I don't think we've seen enough of McDavid in the playoffs to really grade him there.

I'm not sure Beliveau is 5. If McDavid is being discussed as entering the top 5 ever, surely Crosby has an argument for already being top 5.

I didn't say Beliveau was five (though, in full disclosure, I do personally rank him there), but I also laid out my reasons for why I used him as fifth-place for the purposes of the thread. Also, take a look at the top 100 project that this board did a couple of years ago. Beliveau was sixth there. A lot of knowledgeable people worked on that, and it's pretty clear they thought that he's in that neighborhood.

Also, I definitely did not say that McDavid is in the top five of all-time. I simply pointed out that he's already racking up accomplishments that mean that he could end up in that conversation one day, and part of the definition of the thread is asking what it takes for him to get there eventually. As for Crosby, there are those who make the case for him as top 5 ever, but I think it's a very weak case, and I don't want to go down the road of that debate, and I won't. There's a lot less question about where he ends up than McDavid, since he's 10 years older, and I don't want to derail things.

 

[Sentinel]

He only has one Hart so far. This will be his second.

Beliveau is far from the Consesus #5. I have Hasek at #5.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I knew that was going to come up. I've never really been a fan of a player's individual greatness being tied to winning championships though. Now, if he consistently chokes in the playoffs year after year, and that's the reason they don't win, yeah, that's a problem. But a guy that does his job but is let down by his team is another story. It's not his fault, so it doesn't seem fair that he's punished for that. Of course, that's just my take, and I know plenty of people will disagree. I will say that I don't think we've seen enough of McDavid in the playoffs to really grade him there.

The greater the player in the all-time hierarchy, the more responsibility on his shoulders to win the Stanley Cup.

 

[Professor What]

The higher the player in the all-time hierarchy, the more responsibility on his shoulders to win the Stanley Cup.

Fair enough, but the Big Bad Bruins only won two Cups, and there are still plenty of people that rank him ahead of Gretzky and Howe, who both won twice as many, and the 70s Bruins arguably were disappointments in the playoffs by only winning two. We're also talking skaters, and an individual skater can't impact a Cup run as much as a goalie could, for example. For me, it all goes back to asking if the player did his own job. But again, we're probably a long way from the end for McDavid. For him to win the Cup, Edmonton will likely have to give him some more pieces or he'll have to go elsewhere. Of course, I could be proven wrong by their winning the Cup this year. But, if he stays there, and isn't given the pieces to win the Cup, if he proves to be a strong individual playoff performer, I'm not about to hold that against him.

 

[JackSlater]

Pretty low but you never know I guess. Much more likely that someone, possibly him, becomes a clear cut #5, which isn't quite the same thing. I'm not quite sure how to assess McDavid this year with how historically unusual the schedule has been other than noting how much better he looks than the other players. I'm confident that he's the best player in the NHL, as he has been for a few years, but covid has made things a bit muddled.

 

[SabbathBloodySabbath]

he's an overwhelming favorite in the betting markets to be named MVP. Assuming that both of those things hold, he's about to win both the Hart and the Art Ross for the third time.

Unless Draisaitl is bad at locking his doors, McDavid only has one MVP right now, not two.

 

[Professor What]

Unless Draisaitl is bad at locking his doors, McDavid only has one MVP right now, not two.

Okay, what's bad here is that it's not the first time I've made that mistake. It will be three Lindsay Awards... Still, the concept of the thread hasn't changed. But, yeah, you're right...

Edit: I really don't know why I have such a hard time keeping that straight. I've done the same thing with Crosby in the past too.

 

[Professor What]

He only has one Hart so far. This will be his second.

Beliveau is far from the Consesus #5. I have Hasek at #5.

Yeah, I address the Hart/Lindsay thing in the last post.

As for Beliveau, I must have done a much suckier job than I realized in laying out why I picked him. I'm not trying to say that he's anything of a consensus #5. I mentioned Harvey and Roy as other possibilities, and they're not the only other options. So, to try to make things very clear: I chose Beliveau for that spot for the purposes of this thread because 1) He and McDavid play(ed) the same position, making comparisons a little easier, and 2) He makes the point that, while awards are nice and certainly play into consideration, you can be an all-time elite player without having a mantle that's sagging because of the weight of the hardware on it.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i guess it depends how much of an upward trajectory mcdavid has in him, which i don't want to guess. but as of the age mcdavid is right now, as he's having his first bonkersly lapping the field scoring season,

howe had three straight art rosses, including his own-record-destroying 95 point season

orr had three straight hart trophies and just absolutely murdered the all time assists record (also set by himself)

gretzky was on hart number six and had murdered every single scoring record multiple times

all three guys also had 2+ cups

mario is the outlier here, especially in terms of playoff success, but at mcdavid's age he still had by far the two highest scoring seasons ever by a guy not named wayne, as well as large gaps in the non-gretzky goals and assists records

so mcdavid would have to improve a lot from here on in to be mentioned in the same breath as those four.

current mcdavid is probably looking up at 24 year old crosby, if that steckel concussion hadn't happened. mcdavid's current season is probably comparable to the 2011 season crosby would have had, but then there is the question of playoff success. crosby already had 90 playoff points by mcdavid's age.

 

[Nerowoy nora tolad]

I may be too easily convinced, but as far as Im concerned McDavid is already part of my big 5. Has been for 3 years at least

 

[Professor What]

i guess it depends how much of an upward trajectory mcdavid has in him, which i don't want to guess. but as of the age mcdavid is right now, as he's having his first bonkersly lapping the field scoring season,

howe had three straight art rosses, including his own-record-destroying 95 point season

orr had three straight hart trophies and just absolutely murdered the all time assists record (also set by himself)

gretzky was on hart number six and had murdered every single scoring record multiple times

all three guys also had 2+ cups

mario is the outlier here, especially in terms of playoff success, but at mcdavid's age he still had by far the two highest scoring seasons ever by a guy not named wayne, as well as large gaps in the non-gretzky goals and assists records

so mcdavid would have to improve a lot from here on in to be mentioned in the same breath as those four.

current mcdavid is probably looking up at 24 year old crosby, if that steckel concussion hadn't happened. mcdavid's current season is probably comparable to the 2011 season crosby would have had, but then there is the question of playoff success. crosby already had 90 playoff points by mcdavid's age.

I'm going to play some devil's advocate, both for and against McDavid here.

For him: That's an awfully big if that you're putting up with Crosby and the concussion. I'm not saying that I fundamentally disagree, but it's not something that can be ignored. It's no different from the argument that Lemieux would have broken Gretzky's records for goals and points if he didn't miss a chunk of 1995-96 with cancer treatments. I don't hold the cancer diagnosis against Lemieux since it's not something that could even arguably be avoided from conditioning, but the fact is, pace aside, it happened and he didn't break those records. Injuries/illness are part of the game. Keep in mind, McDavid was also derailed by that broken collarbone in his rookie year. Also, yes, Lemieux does have the biggest non-Gretzky point totals, but barring significant changes to the game, that's never going to be possible for McDavid, no matter how well he plays.

Against him: Yes, he's lapping the field this season, but how much of that is the division he's playing in. There's been a lot of talk about how high scoring is in the North Division, and that has to be helping his totals. He'd still be the league scoring leader under more normal circumstances with his current level of play, I believe, but it wouldn't be nearly so pronounced.

 

[Staniowski]

Rankings are largely meaningless.

But, McDavid is already one of the very best hockey players of all-time.

 

[Professor What]

Rankings are largely meaningless.

But, McDavid is already one of the very best hockey players of all-time.

Yeah, but they're fun. Lol

And I'm just wondering what people think about what it would take for him to change a nearly univerally accepted clear-cut top four into a top-five andhow likely they think it is. But yeah, he's something else. The fact that I even felt the desire to ask this question is proof of that.

 

[Nick Hansen]

IMO, he is the greatest talent since Lemieux. Where that puts him all-time we will see.

 

[Black Gold Extractor]

For the regular season:

1) Peak: At least two more years performing at this season's level. Gretzky had his 6 180+ point seasons, Howe had his domination from 1950-51 to 1953-54 (348 points to Lindsay's 261 and Richard's 238, 1.24 points/game versus 0.94 for both Lindsay and Richard), and Lemieux had 1988-89, 1992-93, and 1995-96.

-Notable non-Big Four with Big Four-like peak: Phil Esposito

2) Prime: McDavid already has seasons where he finished 1, 1, 2, and 2 in scoring (excluding the current ongoing season). If McDavid manages to replicate this season twice more as aforementioned, that would give him point finishes of 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2 after eight seasons. That would bring him to his age 27 season, when offence often starts going the wrong direction. If he manages to win one more Art Ross and place second (basically a mirror of what happened before this season) before entering his age 30 season, that would give him point finishes of 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2 after ten seasons. The minimum for the Big Four's forwards is 6 Art Ross trophies. I think that would be a reasonable requirement if we were to consider making it a "Big 5" (when considering a forward, anyway).

-"Five Art Ross Trophies" club: Phil Esposito, Jaromir Jagr

3) Goals, Assists, and Points: McDavid is kind of unlucky this season in the sense that Matthews is having a peak-Brett Hull-type season (1st in goals by a wide margin, T-66th in assists), otherwise McDavid might have been looking at replicating something that very few players have done: lead the league in goals, assists, and points in the same season. Gretzky did it 5 times (also leading in plus-minus in those 5 seasons), and Lemieux and Howe both did it twice. If McDavid manages to perform like this season at least two more times, it's possible he could have a season leading in all three major offensive categories... but ideally, he would have at least two seasons doing so.

-Notable one season wonders (at least for leading all three): Newsy Lalonde, Howie Morenz, Phil Esposito

For the post season:

1) At least a couple of deep and significant playoff runs. Gretzky and Howe led post-season scoring 6 times while Lemieux led twice. Orr, Gretzky, and Lemieux have two Conn Smythe wins each. Howe was a lock for at least one if the trophy had existed at the time.

-"Non-Big Four Multiple Conn Smythe wins" club: Bernie Parent, Patrick Roy, Sidney Crosby

2) Lead the NHL in post-season points-per-game when looking at significant stretch of time. This is more vague, but one would hope that the regular season is a good indicator of post-season performance.

3) This might be unfair, since team performance is very much beyond the influence of a lone individual, but all of the Big Four have at least two Cup wins. (As a long-suffering post-dynasty Oilers fan, I'll settle for one.)

This isn't so much a "definitive" list as much as it is a light demonstration of how much each of the Big Four accomplished. I certainly hope McDavid can do it (as aforementioned - Oilers fan here), but this is a discussion to be had at least half a decade down the road.

 

[The Panther]

First, the North division this season is lower scoring than it was last season. The average scoring in the North is League-average. And, generally, playing the same teams multiple times lowers -- not raises -- scoring (see: the 1950s/early 1960s). Also, the North division is not a weak division, at all. The division with the weakest teams to beat up on is the West and esp. the East, which has three clubs with a -40 or worse goal differential (the North, by contrast, has none).

So, why is McDavid scoring so well this year? Because he always does. Each season of his career, his PPG has increased and it is doing so this season AS USUAL. That said, my early guess would be that this season is probably his physical peak (akin to Gretzky around '83-'84), and that it's unlikely he'll be able to improve on this year's pace of scoring.

Second, McDavid is better right now than Crosby has ever been. To me, this isn't a debate (admittedly, I might be biased as an Oilers fan, but I was cheering for Crosby back in 2008-09 and so on, and yeah I like him). I don't think Crosby is anywhere near the 5th-best player of all time. Top 10, maybe, but also debatable. What Crosby is really good at is consistent excellence (no small feat!) and leadership stability. (McDavid could learn from the latter, but he's still young.)

Third, McDavid right now is the third-best NHL player I have ever seen, after only Gretzky mid-80s to early-90s, and Mario late-80s to mid-90s.

So, as the last statement suggests, I certainly think McDavid becoming a top-5 all time consensus choice is possible. But, as we all know, a big stack of things has to happen and go right for that to occur....

(And no, Stanley Cups are not essential. Nice, but not essential. Everyone repeat after me: 'Individuals don't win Stanley Cups... Individuals don't win Stanley Cups'...)

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

I've never really been a fan of a player's individual greatness being tied to winning championships though. Now, if he consistently chokes in the playoffs year after year, and that's the reason they don't win, yeah, that's a problem. But a guy that does his job but is let down by his team is another story. It's not his fault, so it doesn't seem fair that he's punished for that. Of course, that's just my take, and I know plenty of people will disagree. I will say that I don't think we've seen enough of McDavid in the playoffs to really grade him there.

The greater the player in the all-time hierarchy, the more responsibility on his shoulders to win the Stanley Cup.

i think one thing that will shape how mcdavid is seen is he was drafted to a team that had another superduperstar basically the same age as him. same as crosby. so if he doesn’t win multiple cups ppl down the road will want to know why.

hull and mikita come to mind.

I'm going to play some devil's advocate, both for and against McDavid here.

For him: That's an awfully big if that you're putting up with Crosby and the concussion. I'm not saying that I fundamentally disagree, but it's not something that can be ignored. It's no different from the argument that Lemieux would have broken Gretzky's records for goals and points if he didn't miss a chunk of 1995-96 with cancer treatments. I don't hold the cancer diagnosis against Lemieux since it's not something that could even arguably be avoided from conditioning, but the fact is, pace aside, it happened and he didn't break those records. Injuries/illness are part of the game. Keep in mind, McDavid was also derailed by that broken collarbone in his rookie year. Also, yes, Lemieux does have the biggest non-Gretzky point totals, but barring significant changes to the game, that's never going to be possible for McDavid, no matter how well he plays.

my point with crosby was just to give an example of a guy playing at a bonkers level that we all have seen “recently.” even if he’d been able to finish that field-lapping 2011 season, nobody would put him in a conversation with gretzky/orr/howe/mario up to age 24, so mcdavid will have to improve to join that conversation.

whereas those other guys had all already peaked by 24, even if none of their peaks were over yet.

 

[Professor What]

First, the North division this season is lower scoring than it was last season. The average scoring in the North is League-average. And, generally, playing the same teams multiple times lowers -- not raises -- scoring (see: the 1950s/early 1960s). Also, the North division is not a weak division, at all. The division with the weakest teams to beat up on is the West and esp. the East, which has three clubs with a -40 or worse goal differential (the North, by contrast, has none).

There was no North Division last season. It's a one-off thing because of Canadian border-crossing restrictions due to Covid. Also, while it's come back down to earth more than I realized, it is still the highest scoring divsion in the league. Here are the division and league scoring averages as of a Google standings search just now:

North: 6.011
East: 5.991
NHL: 5.892
West: 5.845
Central: 5.738

So, yeah, I'll walk back what I said a little, but if McDavid were playing in the Central Division instead of the North, it would probably have some impact. I never tried to suggest that he wouldn't be leading the league in scoring this season, because I know he would. But the balance is somewhere in between reality and my original impression. He probably wouldn't be winning by as much as he is, but he'd be winning by more than I originally thought.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Rankings are largely meaningless.

I mean, on some level, the entire sport of hockey is largely meaningless.

 

[Say Hey Kid]

I mean, on some level, the entire sport of hockey is largely meaningless.

Agreed. All sports.

5	Bobby Hull	LW	1939	Canada	Point Anne, Ontario
6	Jean Beliveau	C	1931	Canada	Trois-Rivieres, Quebec
7	Patrick Roy	G	1965	Canada	Quebec City, Quebec
8	Doug Harvey	D	1924	Canada	Montreal, Quebec
9	Maurice Richard	RW	1921	Canada	Montreal, Quebec
10	Ray Bourque	D	1960	Canada	Saint-Laurent, Quebec
11	Howie Morenz	C	1902	Canada	Mitchell, Ontario
12	Sidney Crosby	C	1987	Canada	Halifax, Nova Scotia

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

McDavid has no chance. The #5 player will always be one of the players listed above.

 

[The Panther]

There was no North Division last season.

Right, I think what I meant to say was that this season's NHL scoring is lower than last season's NHL scoring (2.88 per team this year compared to 2.97 last year), which is what I would expect when the same teams play each other a lot. And the scoring levels in the North are so close to within League average that it takes 9 full games before the North scores 1 more goal than the other divisions. The Oilers have played 51 games, which means if they were average they'd have scored almost 6 more goals than the average non-North club. McDavid factors into a lot of Oilers' scores, so in that case maybe he'd have 3 or 4 more points than if the Oilers were in another division. Which is to say he'd still be running away with scoring at basically the same rate he is now.

Also, why is his increase in PPG attributed to his division when he has increased his PPG every season? No doubt if Draisaitl were putting up the same stats as last year in this year, you'd be arguing that it's only because of his division.

Basically, every great scorer in history has had periods of 'advantage' to his stats. Maurice Richard and Max Bentley had the war years. The Howe, Beliveau, Hull eras had their mid-thirties-and-beyond seasonal stats inflated by League expansion. Bobby Orr's entire prime was with about 60% of the League being expansion teams. Gretzky and Lemieux peaked and entered, respectively, in the highest-scoring periods in modern history. I hardly think 56 games for McDavid under circumstances that allow his team 1 more goal scored every 9 games is worth raising eyebrows over.

 

[Cricket Green]

McDavid won't enter discussion for #5 or better until he has at least 2 Cups and 1 Smythe.