What would it take for a player of today to challenge for a spot in the big 4?

[grentthealien]

The idea for this thread came to me after discussion about the Jordan vs Lebron debate in the golden state 80s Oilers thread. It seems to me that one thing hockey is missing today is a guy challenging to be an all time great. In Basketball you have Lebron chasing the ghost of Jordan. Each year in soccer Messi and Ronaldo make a case for their names to be up there with the likes of Maradona and Pele. In football the debate for the greatest of all time is still heavily contested and in recent times Tom Brady has made a case for himself as the greatest QB of all time.

These chases are compelling and draw quite an audience toward each sport. As much as the NHL should be applauded for its parity and competition I still believe we all like to witness greatness and that dynasties and phenoms in the right dose can be enjoyable even if you’re a fan of another team. So with all that in mind what would it exactly take for a player of today to reach the stratosphere of Gretzky, Orr, Lemieux and Howe? Or is it even possible with the way the game has evolved in the last 20 years?

There are only two players today that have even a snowball’s chance in hell at this feat in my mind and their names are Crosby and Mcdavid. Crosby has had a great career , but due in some part to injuries at the wrong time is really missing that extra gear to even enter the debate. He is just beginning his 30s now and if history is any indication is unlikely to have peak years at this stage of his career. He seems far more likely to be a lock for the top 15 and if he has a good 2nd half to his career possibly the top 10, but it really doesn’t look like there will be a case for him, but if you can make it by all means do so

Mcdavid has managed to obtain quite an award case at the age of 21 after leading the league in scoring back to back years, but he still has a ton to do before he can even be considered a great, however like all things young what he lacks in experience he makes up for in potential. He likely hasn’t reached his peak yet and if he can have a healthy career could really accumulate a lot of points and trophies. With scoring being much lower than it was in the live puck era and the league being much larger than ever before whatever successes he does have are going to have to be measured in that context.

So with all that in mind what exactly would he or a player of that quality have to do to have his name thrown into the hat? How many career points would he have to score? What would his peak seasons have to look like? What kind of balance between individual and team success would he have to have? These are the questions that come to mind and I’m curious what the hockey historians answers to them are so with that I turn it over to you guys.

Click to read more...

 

[daver]

Hockey seems to be a sport whose dynamics can diminish individual greatness moreso than other sports. There has been dramatic swings in scoring levels which can arguably limit the greatness of a player who will be measured by point totals. There is no comparable I can think of in other sports.

I think Wayne and Mario are the two most gifted forwards offensively who happened to come at almost at the same and at a time where offense was valued over defense which lead to their outlier talent to be maximized points-wise. Playing in a league with less parity and where most of the teams made the playoffs lead to easier games to wrack up points. I think their playoff games are a much better indicator of where both players stood in relation to the league when comparing them to players from the current league or the O6.

I think Howe has one peak season that stands apart from any other player outside of the Big Four and a couple of other seasons that are on par with the very individual seasons from players like Jagr, Hull, Belliveau and Richard (let's call them Tier 2 seasons). I know Esposito throws a wrench into this statement but he seems to be lower on almost everyone's best player list. Howe backs this up with an individual playoff resume befitting his regular season one. His incredible longevity contributes heavily to his Big 4 status. I think if a player put up multiple Tier 2 seasons, something that Jagr, Hull, Belliveau and Richard did not do, then the Howe only has the one outlier season (52/53) as potential separation.

Mario is gettable in terms of quantity of prime and playoff success but was clearly on a level above Howe in terms of peak.

I have argued that Crosby, if he continues to play at the same level, could start to have an argument over Howe in terms of quantity of prime. He also has a chance to better Howe's playoff legacy. At best, this could make the Big 4 into a Big 5. Maybe more Cups opens the door to passing Mario as some have suggested.

McDavid's start is as good as Crosby's which bodes well for him if he stays healthy.

 

[Sentinel]

Aaaand... it's Crosby time again!

How many "Tier 2" seasons did Crosby have?

 

[blogofmike]

McDavid getting more help from the left side of the ice on the powerplay could have given him a mid-level Big 4 season. Everyone knows Edmonton had a horrendous powerplay last year. They also had very low PP opportunity totals.

McDavid's 84 ES points were huge. Mario Lemieux only passed 84 ES points twice. Orr peaked at 83. In fact since the highly inflated 1992-93 season, only Jagr in 1996 has had more ES points in a season than McDavid did last year.

But that Oilers PP tanking really deflated his 2018 statistically. If the Oilers were an above average PP unit instead of a very poor one, it would not be unreasonable to expect McDavid to have scored 115-125 instead of 108.

 

[grentthealien]

McDavid getting more help from the left side of the ice on the powerplay could have given him a mid-level Big 4 season. Everyone knows Edmonton had a horrendous powerplay last year. They also had very low PP opportunity totals.

McDavid's 84 ES points were huge. Mario Lemieux only passed 84 ES points twice. Orr peaked at 83. In fact since the highly inflated 1992-93 season, only Jagr in 1996 has had more ES points in a season than McDavid did last year.

But that Oilers PP tanking really deflated his 2018 statistically. If the Oilers were an above average PP unit instead of a very poor one, it would not be unreasonable to expect McDavid to have scored 115-125 instead of 108.

That is what I hope for Mcdavid. If he could be a semi consistent 120 point scorer it would go along way. I think if absolutely all the stars align we could see a generational talent peak at 130 points someday again. League scoring would have to continue to go up a bit and the player of that caliber would have to be the best offensive star of his generation for sure, but it could be possible. Since I was born in the early 90s I really just missed out on seeing two all time greats at their offensive peaks so if I could live to see a 130 point player again I’d be satisfied.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

theoretical minimum needed:

forward:

1,500+ points at 1.5 ppg
5 Harts...and 10 total to 3 finishes
7 Ross... and only 1-2 times outside top 10
5 Rocket... and only 1-2 times outside top 10
10 AS-1, and never lower than AS-2
3 Cups
2 Smythe

defenseman:

1,000 points at 1.25 ppg
8 Norris... never below 5th in voting
5 Hart... 10 total top 3
5 Ross... 10 times top 10
2 Rocket... 5 times top 10
10 AS-1... never below AS-2
3 Cups
2 Smythes

 

[Midnight Judges]

There is no big 4.

Lemieux is nowhere near Gretzky in terms of greatness.

They're not on the same level. There could very well be a tier in between their tiers, and I would argue that there is: The Howe tier.

Lemieux could be picked off and passed. So could Orr. Both of those players have a gargantuan glaring weakness: longevity. A player of slightly less talent with a slightly lower peak but much better longevity could surpass them IMO.

It will absolutely not be Sidney Crosby. Crosby has precisely zero all-time great seasons and after the last 4 years of being an 80-something point player, the likelihood that it happens into his 30's seems remote.

If anyone from this generation can do it, it is Alexander Ovechkin. Ovechkin's 07-08 and 08-09 seasons are all-time great seasons. He swept almost everything in those years while being by far the best goal scorer and physically dominant. Ovechkin also has a shot at the all-time goals record - which is astounding considering he played basically his entire career in a dead puck era. If Ovechkin gets 800 goals, he has a clear case for surpassing Lemieux.

 

[Canadiens1958]

So far we have determined that it cannot be a Crosby or Ovechkin type career trajectory.

 

[MXD]

Hard to tell, but...
We'll know it when we'll see it.

 

[bobholly39]

If Crosby hadn't been injured at his peak (11, 12, 13) and had played to his pace in all 3 seasons (to be clear - i'm not saying he WOULD have maintained pace without injuries - i'm stating IF he had maintained pace...), and if he'd have a back half to his career worthy of his first half - I'd argue he'd be right there.

So....it's not impossible? McDavid has 2 art rosses in 3 years.....how does that pace out in 15 years? Does he win 10? 14? stay stuck at 2? win 4-5? Who knows, but the talent is there to do some damage.

I think a Crosby/McDavid type of talent with a 'perfect storm' of a career can break into the big 4.

So it's not impossible. Not even all that implausible.

Also - this is the Howe equivalency. Great peak, fantastic career/longevity - but not in the big 4 based on superhuman peak alone (as Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux would be). That type of peak is harder to envision.

 

[bobholly39]

theoretical minimum needed:

forward:

1,500+ points at 1.5 ppg
5 Harts...and 10 total to 3 finishes
7 Ross... and only 1-2 times outside top 10
5 Rocket... and only 1-2 times outside top 10
10 AS-1, and never lower than AS-2
3 Cups
2 Smythe

defenseman:

1,000 points at 1.25 ppg
8 Norris... never below 5th in voting
5 Hart... 10 total top 3
5 Ross... 10 times top 10
2 Rocket... 5 times top 10
10 AS-1... never below AS-2
3 Cups
2 Smythes

That bar is waaaaay too high imo. Especially the bolded.

Not sure if you were serious or not...

 

[JackSlater]

A player would need at least one peak season that blows everyone else away, like 130 points (for a forward) or something like that in this environment. At least one signature playoff run at that level too. Of course more than one of each would be better, and the season cannot be a complete outlier. Sustained excellence beyond that would also help differentiate the player, like Howe's six Art Ross trophies or Orr's eight consecutive Norris trophies. Crosby and Ovechkin have no chance to do it given their ages. McDavid has a chance but I doubt it.

 

[Midnight Judges]

theoretical minimum needed:

forward:

1,500+ points at 1.5 ppg
5 Harts...and 10 total to 3 finishes
7 Ross... and only 1-2 times outside top 10
5 Rocket... and only 1-2 times outside top 10
10 AS-1, and never lower than AS-2
3 Cups
2 Smythe

Seems to me it ought to be based on what Lemieux actually accomplished:

Points adjusted for era - equivalent of 1723 points from Lemieux's years (some of which were 40% higher scoring than today)
3 Harts
5 Ross
3 Rockets
5 AS-1 + 4 AS-2
Team accomplishments are situational - don't agree. Not everyone is going to have 5-6 other hall of famers on their team like Lemieux did.
Smythes help, but again they are dependent on the team, and Lemieux lucked out for a stretch there.

Additionally, I would say that these are not minimums necessarily, because additional superlatives in one area can substitute for superlatives in another area.

 

[Midnight Judges]

So far we have determined that it cannot be a Crosby or Ovechkin type career trajectory.

No you haven't.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

That bar is waaaaay too high imo. Especially the bolded.

Not sure if you were serious or not...

If you're making the big 4 as a defenseman, you are knocking out Orr. Which means you damn sure better accomplish more than he did.

1.29 ppg, 900 pts
3 harts
2 ross
8 norris
8 AS-1

 

[danincanada]

If you're making the big 4 as a defenseman, you are knocking out Orr. Which means you damn sure better accomplish more than he did.

1.29 ppg, 900 pts
3 harts
2 ross
8 norris
8 AS-1

Unfortunately that's the way most posters here think, as if the NHL was just as competitive in Orr's time as now. If one believes it is more competitive now (the scale can only be opinion) then the current player may not quite need to reach the heights for peer to peer domination that Orr hit, or the rest of the "big 4". Everyone is waiting for this player who completely dominates the league again but to me that player would be even more special if he can do it to a similar degree now. If it's even possible. It would probably be some genetic freak who has ridiculous physical skills with hockey sense and spacial awareness that blows everyone away too.

None of the Big 4 would dominate to the same degree if they started out today. Then again, if they didn't exist when they did things would be a lot different today as well because they all impacted the sport so much.

 

[bobholly39]

If you're making the big 4 as a defenseman, you are knocking out Orr. Which means you damn sure better accomplish more than he did.

1.29 ppg, 900 pts
3 harts
2 ross
8 norris
8 AS-1

Crosby has a career 1.29 ppg as a point producing center and is on the cusp of 5th all time.

If a defenseman in this era had a 1.25 career ppg he'd likely be unanimous #1 let alone part of big 4.

5 Hart + 5 Ross + 2 rockets for a defenseman....again forget the big 4 you're talking #1 by a LOT.

Defensemen don't usually win Hart trophies. I agree to break into the big 4 you'd need some but 5 is a lot. And 5 Ross? 2 rockets?

You're simply setting the bar way way too high.

Also regarding the AS1 - there's a lot more competition in today's era for those. Look at McDavid. He could win 8 art Ross in his career yet still end up with only 5-6 AS1. You have to take this into account when comparing AS across eras

 

[daver]

Also - this is the Howe equivalency. Great peak, fantastic career/longevity - but not in the big 4 based on superhuman peak alone (as Orr/Gretzky/Lemieux would be). That type of peak is harder to envision.

I don't think "great peak" adequately defines Howe's peak. Inarguably #4 best peak season, somewhat close to Wayne and Mario's best season but also arguably an outlier compared to his other Art Ross winning seasons. And I don't think "fantastic career/longevity" adequately defines Howe either. Howe sets the bar for the lonegvity/prime combination which is a good part of the reason he is in the Big 4, and is perhaps the only argument that any player in NHL history has over Wayne.

 

[daver]

Aaaand... it's Crosby time again!

How many "Tier 2" seasons did Crosby have?

I was referring to Crosby' level of play from 2010 to 2013 being on Tier 2. If you want to only focus on full seasons, statistically, his 13/14 season was a Tier 2 season as he was ahead of 2nd by the highest % since Wayne in the early '90s.

To save bickering, I completely acknowledge him not having a full season at his peak like Hull, Jagr, Belliveau and Richard.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

if crosby had been healthy and maintained the level of his 2011-2014 peak, stretched it out over eight or so years, had more playoffs like 2008 and 2009, and still had all his other accomplishments anyway, i would be fine with crosby vs mario as a prime/career vs peak argument.

 

[Canadiens1958]

No you haven't.

So you believe that a downward trajectory post age 24 is the way to go?

Ovechkin:
Alex Ovechkin Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Crosby:
Sidney Crosby Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Top 4 did not show a downward trajectory post age 24.

Basic issue with modern players is getting the extra TOI to generate performance.

Orr played in a two pairing era. Howe, Gretzky, Lemieux all received the benefit of extra shifts. Today every team rolls four lines. So the players like Ovechkin, Crosby, McDavid cannot dominate their positional scoring on a team.

 

[DannyGallivan]

We have to accept that not every generation will produce a legendary player.

 

[tony d]

Crosby is close as any player we have now to the big 4. That said his injuries of 2011-2013 really hurt his chances to get in the big 4. He may retire #5 all time but that'll be it.

 

[Midnight Judges]

If you want to only focus on full seasons, statistically, his 13/14 season was a Tier 2 season as he was ahead of 2nd by the highest % since Wayne in the early '90s.

That is an arbitrary measurement.

You are saying if Kane plays his best in 2014, then Crosby is worse, but since Kane played his best season in 2016, then Crosby is now considered better. Crosby had virtually zero control over when Kane's best season would be.

The league didn't change so much between those years that we are necessarily reduced to relying on highly volatile and unreliable factors. You reduce your evaluation to that unreliable factor by choice, because it leads to your desired result.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Top 4 did not show a downward trajectory post age 24.

Trajectories in hockey are not always linear.

Bobby Orr didn't decline after 24 but he fell off a cliff after 26. His career was virtually over.

Lemieux did very little after age 31 and had several down years prior.

Crosby and Ovechkin are still racking up Smythes and Rockets into their 30's.

I don't think there are any firm rules on trajectory in this regard. Lemieux and Orr were so weak in terms of longevity that it opens the door. That's a value judgement. Subjective to an extent. Many hockey fans weight peak so much that longevity means virtually nothing. IMO this is often disproportionate to the actual value a player brings to a team, and therefore misguided.