Where does Crosby rank as a goalscorer?

[WarriorofTime]

He has an argument for best playmaker of his era so not sure why it is manipulative.

Assist leaders since Crosby came into League

2005-06: Thornton
2006-07: Thornton
2007-08: Thornton
2008-09: Malkin
2009-10: H. Sedin
2010-11: H. Sedin
2011-12: H. Sedin
2012-13: St. Louis
2013-14: Crosby
2014-15: Backstrom
2015-16: Karlsson
2016-17: McDavid
2017-18: Wheeler/Giroux (tie)
2018-19: Kucherov
2019-20: Draisaitl
2020-21: McDavid
2021-22: Huberdeau
2022-23: McDavid

Cumulative:
Thornton - 3
H. Sedin - 3
McDavid - 3
Assorted - 1

It comes off as manipulative that you try and lump Crosby in with Thornton, H. Sedin and Backstrom in the sense "guys known to be playmakers, not goal scorers, and wow, look at how much he scored even though that wasn't really his thing" to build up his legend a bit more. Crosby was a great goal scorer and a great playmaker and was always known to be both. The years of Crosby-Ovechkin discourse has perhaps clouded your brain on this.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Crosby is the best playmaker born between Thornton (1979) and McDavid (1997). Best playmaker in an 18 year period is best playmaker in a generation.

If you look at assist finishes amongst the relevant players.

Thornton - 10 (1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 5, 7, 8, 8)
Crosby - 10 (1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 7, 7, 8, 9, 10)
H. Sedin - 8 (1, 1, 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 10)
McDavid - 7 (1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3)

Just top 3 finishes in assists
McDavid- 7
Thornton - 6
Crosby - 5
H. Sedin - 4

And realistically, Kucherov is in this group too. As is Malkin, from a pure ability standpoint.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Sorry, just tuning in here...we got some fairly unprovoked Ovechkin propaganda even though he's not really relevant to the thread given that he's on a peak that this thread's subject can't climb.

And then we got "it's manipulative to call Crosby a playmaking center"...?

I guess the whole playmaking vs balanced vs goal-scoring (if those are the three categories) really depends on your definitions. My line for "balanced" - or rather, my "zone" (?) for balanced - is actually quite thin. Thinner than folks might think. I think most players are better at one than the other, I think most players are biased towards one than the other...and, as such, they get that notation for me.

That's why other modifiers come into play...Henrik Sedin and Sidney Crosby are both playmaking centers for me. Henrik Sedin is purely a playmaker with limited goal scoring ability. Crosby has the ability to score goals, but it's not because he's liable to beat a goalie from mid-range with a powerful wrist shot...it's because X, Y, Z reasons...

This is kind of a YMMV deal...but ya know, my reports that I submit are about projection. I'm not sitting there calculating stats out. A good example is Trevor Connelly this year...projected 1st round pick. He started out with like a 3+16 line or something like that. Well, he's not a playmaking winger. His passing game was actually quite underwhelming, in fact. That's just how things broke for him. And you go into detail about the process in which he got those assists so that it's clear what you're getting.

If folks find Crosby to be a balanced offensive threat, I'd buy that no question. He's one of the best passers in the history of the game. And he led the league in goals because someone literally dared him to. But over the course of his career, he's a pass-first player. He's a playmaking center for me. And it just so happens that he can also score in the lowest layer of the offensive zone with regularity.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Crosby is the best playmaker born between Thornton (1979) and McDavid (1997). Best playmaker in an 18 year period is best playmaker in a generation.

So is Joe Thornton a generational talent because he was the best player born between Jaromir Jagr (1972) and Alexander Ovechkin (1985)?

That feels like a very arbitrary standard that you made up.

 

[jigglysquishy]

So is Joe Thornton a generational talent because he was the best player born between Jaromir Jagr (1972) and Alexander Ovechkin (1985)?

That feels like a very arbitrary standard that you made up.

I never used the term generational talent. Best in a generation doesn't make you generational.

Forsberg, Pronger, and Chara were all higher ranked than Thornton in the last HoH Top 100.

 

[WarriorofTime]

And he led the league in goals because someone literally dared him to.

This is the kind of "mythologizing" I can do without in any sort of player, past or present. I know it's not *exactly* what you said, but this almost reads like "He won a Rocket because he felt like it.. he could have won more if he just felt like it but decided not to", what's next, he could have won 10 Selke Trophies but was fine letting someone else do it?

 

[WarriorofTime]

I never used the term generational talent. Best in a generation doesn't make you generational.

Forsberg, Pronger, and Chara were all higher ranked than Thornton in the last HoH Top 100.

Which begs the question.. why IS Forsberg so highly regarded historically? Aside from the very obvious "you don't do that much when you don't show up", his best stretch is 1995-96 through 2002-03 (Ages 22-29) he produced 636 points in 494 games, which is a 1.287 PPG, it's very good of course (around 105-106 per 82 GP) and era-adjusted even better but is that enough to make up for all the missed time and very short career (708 GP)? I think the Top 100 list may be prioritizing "per game" a bit too much.

(and of course Forsberg is only 1 year after Jagr). It's tough to compare FWD to D granted.

 

[MadLuke]

his best stretch is 1995-96 through 2002-03 (Ages 22-29) he produced 636 points in 494 games, which is a 1.287 PPG, it's very good of course (around 105-106 per 82 GP) and era-adjusted even better

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

137 pts in 116 playoff games, and he was +174 in the regular season during that 96-03 stretch with only Jagr having an higher ppg.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Which begs the question.. why IS Forsberg so highly regarded historically? Aside from the very obvious "you don't do that much when you don't show up", his best stretch is 1995-96 through 2002-03 (Ages 22-29) he produced 636 points in 494 games, which is a 1.287 PPG, it's very good of course (around 105-106 per 82 GP) and era-adjusted even better but is that enough to make up for all the missed time and very short career (708 GP)? I think the Top 100 list may be prioritizing "per game" a bit too much.

(and of course Forsberg is only 1 year after Jagr). It's tough to compare FWD to D granted.

Forsberg being elite defensively plays into it too. And was generally seen as either first or second best playoff forward in that whole stretch (Sakic being the other name).

That he lead the league in points in 2003, PPG in 2004, and lead the league through the first 20 games on 2005-06 only adds to his legend. There was a 3-4 year period where when he was healthy he was the most productive player.

I'm not going to write a defense on Forsberg, as I'm the last guy to do so.

 

[Midnight Judges]

But getting ran by an Ovechkin teammate and taking a slap shot to the face, are 2 things that aren't normal hockey events. BTW, those 2 events kept Sid from having 4 Hart's and Art Rosses, which would certainly impact a comparison head to head. Are those durability issues or freak instances? Please, try and say they are the former.

Ah yes - the old "Crosby's missed games are super duper special and therefore don't count" argument.

Nevermind that your assertion that Crosby was targeted or got ran is utter gibberish (and irrelevant). Crosby abruptly turned with his head down while not looking where he was going and skated right into a player. That collision was completely Sid's fault. Of course, in Crosbystan this has somehow morphed over time into David Steckel being Satan reincarnated despite him having zero history of anything remotely dirty in his game and actually being a stand up guy who always answered the bell.

 

[Michael Farkas]

This is the kind of "mythologizing" I can do without in any sort of player, past or present. I know it's not *exactly* what you said, but this almost reads like "He won a Rocket because he felt like it.. he could have won more if he just felt like it but decided not to", what's next, he could have won 10 Selke Trophies but was fine letting someone else do it?

I mean, that was part of the deal. He learned that a former teammate bet that he couldn't...and Crosby is about as driven of a game-corrector, as driven as a player as we've seen...

Now, if you choose to extrapolate that out into 10 Selke Trophies, be my guest. Naturally, I think there's a limit as to what any player can do. So, you can't just dominate every single thing over a ton of time...he did sacrifice playmaking for goal scoring. He had the lowest assist output of his career in 2010 (48 in 53 games in '08 obviously notwithstanding).

The player was and is adaptable enough to do whatever you want and probably be the best at it. Faceoffs, goals, cycle game, rush game, whatever it is...he can do everything. Now, could he turn in 10 straight Rockets in seasons where he gets 10 straight Selkes? No, I don't see that. But that's not what my statement meant anyhow...

 

[WarriorofTime]

I mean, that was part of the deal. He learned that a former teammate bet that he couldn't...and Crosby is about as driven of a game-corrector, as driven as a player as we've seen...

And Eddie Shore walked 15 miles both ways to the ice hockey rink...

Pretty sure sports betting is illegal amongst active NHL players, should Crosby have received a half season suspension for illegally betting on NHL Awards?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Well, probably...it's not like the walk back would be any shorter than the walk there...

 

[MadLuke]

betting on NHL Awards?

If I remember correctly, it was about him ever scoring 50 or not.

 

[wetcoast]

Top 50, but honestly 30 is the max I'd go

He put up solid goal numbers and did so consistently but he was never an elite goal scorer.

Most of the accolades you listed are accumulation stats, not greatness stats. And the T2 in Rockets is misleading since the trophy wasnt made until 1999, so you may as well say "T2 all time Rocket Richard wins in his era" since his era is the only one to have the award exist in every year.

This is kind of how I'm leaning as well and I think this is a first reaction or guy check kind of question not one that you actually do a deep dive on with stats.

When I think of a goal socrer I think of snipers, like Ovi, Bure, both Hulls, Bossy, Richard ect...

The more complete players who also score a lot of goals I just don't think of them as goal scorers first so then it really muddies the waters a bit in trying to rank them.

Also I have no idea if Crosby was a "better" goal scorer than Nels Stewart, Joe Malone ect....

I mean he probably is but I'm going to put a ton more faith in saying he was a better player than all the guys I listed than being a better goalscorer than any of them.

 

[wetcoast]

Here is his completely cherrypicked best 93 game stretch of goalscoring:

NHL Stats

The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.

www.nhl.com

Goals - 71

2. 64
3. 49
4. 48
5. 47


GPG - 0.76

2. 0.67
3. 0.54
4. 0.52
5. 0.51

Funny that MJ didn't provide that list eh?

 

[DRW895]

The moment, when he scores a lot it seems he gonna be very high. but in reality - he willln`t catch even Mike Gartner

 

[Dingo]

Ya, he is a weird one in this regard. I immediately thouht of his two tied Rockets. But, aside from those spikes he has been more of a consistent, lowerlevel goalscorer, even on a per game basis (some of his best seasons were cut short, but he wasnt on pace to win the goalsoring race, just the Ross)

He is like a Gartner with a couple of Bondra spikes?

I seriously dont know where to put him here. I think above anyone in his actual generation (prime between 2007-2017ish) except Ovechkin and Stamkos. Without looking, Id say ahead of Kane and Malkin, but really close. Behind Kovalchuk, but they sort of only cross over in terms of generation.... much better staying power than Kovie, though.

In terms of peak ability? Bondra-ish

in terms of career as a goalscorer? Geez, honestly i am looking at closer to top 10 than 20. Id say higher than Yzerman for sure. At least Sakic-Jagr realm.

Depends how one rates longevity and health vs prime ability.

Which begs the question.. why IS Forsberg so highly regarded historically? Aside from the very obvious "you don't do that much when you don't show up", his best stretch is 1995-96 through 2002-03 (Ages 22-29) he produced 636 points in 494 games, which is a 1.287 PPG, it's very good of course (around 105-106 per 82 GP) and era-adjusted even better but is that enough to make up for all the missed time and very short career (708 GP)? I think the Top 100 list may be prioritizing "per game" a bit too much.

(and of course Forsberg is only 1 year after Jagr). It's tough to compare FWD to D granted.

ya, i think the time period mentioned having Pete second to only Jagr while being the two way guy... i mean

this is Trottier vs Gretzky, except the offensive gap is microscopic in comparison.

 

[MadLuke]

r, even on a per game basis (some of his best seasons were cut short, but he wasnt on pace to win the goalsoring race, just the Ross)

2011 I thought was more a big goal scoring season potential than the rocket winning seasons.


Goals Per Game

1.	Sidney Crosby • PIT	0.78
2.	Corey Perry • ANA	0.61
3.	Steven Stamkos • TBL	0.55

The 2010 Rocket winning season goal scoring continued in 2011, he was shooting a bit more, close to unsustainable shooting percentage, it was not a single season peak per say.

The 2016-2017 winning season was a strange first really hot half puck luck wise that went down after that

 

[WingsFan95]

Could we find 20 better goal scorers in NHL history than Crosby? I am just going to name the ones for sure that are ahead of him:

Gretzky, Ovechkin, Mario, Howe, Esposito, Bossy, Dionne, Bobby Hull, Brett Hull, Rocket, Yzerman, Selanne, Bure, Jagr. So that's 14 for sure that I would confirm. That puts him no better than 15th. I can't find a way to put him ahead of any of those names. Then there are other guys right there with him:

Beliveau, Mahovlich, Charlie Conacher, Iginla, Bondra, Goulet, Lafleur, Boom Boom, Stamkos, Kurri, Sakic, Robitaille.

Matthews eventually I would guess.

So yeah, I think he's top 20. The second tier list might have some ahead of him but not all either. Anywhere from 15-20 makes sense. He did lead the NHL in goals twice. Not to mention his 71 playoff goals so far. Heck, he just popped two last night! He's hardly finished.

Agreed on the 14 some names I'd add to the 2nd tier however:

Gartner who played on some pretty poor offensive teams and whose consistency is quite remarkable, it's funny because I think most people will look at his 80s numbers and scoff saying they were inflated but he scored 49, 45, 40, 35, 34 in the 90s in his 30s. Yeah he was only Top 5 once and Top 9 I think another few seasons but look at his total body of work, fact he scores 32 goals at age 37 on the freaking Coyotes circa 97 tells me he was severely undermined by surrounding talent. Iginla was too undermined by some mediocre support as he was certainly better than just the 4 seasons he was Top 10 in goals in terms of his skillset and opportunity on an even field. But I guess you can argue the same for a guy like Kovalchuk. Also would someone like Shanahan really be considered a worse goal scorer than Sid? To me his numbers are a reflection of playing on better teams where he didn't have to contribute as much.

Anywho, I take Kurri, Robitaille, Lafleur as above Crosby when I reflect on the impact of those guys. But I also think Bondra merits understanding when you look at him being a sniper and playing on far worse offensive teams. That has him slide to 19th. For me I'd like to see him finish out his career before I definitively have him as Top 20. Especially with a contemporary like Stamkos who I see as being a better pure goal scorer personally. I'm not considering the Matthews or Pastrnak examples as that's unfair and takes some foresight.

See if I consider Gartner's teams and his insane consistency and put him above Crosby along with Stamkos then that has Crosby at 21 and still competing with the likes of Iginla, Goulet, Sakic, Shanahan.

So I say Top 30 without question and borderline Top 20.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Crosby is far enough down the list of all time goal scorers that I don't really have to think about him in that context at all.

 

[filinski77]

Crosby has only 4 top-10 goal finishes in his career (1/1/7/7). Not nearly good enough for top-20 all time.

Just this generation, the following players have better goalscoring resumes: Ovechkin, Matthews, Stamkos, McDavid, Draisaitl, Iginla, Kovalchuk, Jagr

Other players with close or even track records that still have good years left, or are pretty close to Crosby: Pastrnak, Heatley

Realistically, Crosby is a great goal scorer, plagued by injuries, has played a lot of games this generation, but 1/1/7/7 finishes is just weak in an all-time convo.

 

[Michael Farkas]

So, you identified that he's a "great goal scorer"...why do you need to be so dependent on top X finishes?

 

[daver]

NHL all-time goalscoring title leaders (since 1944):

Ovechkin - 9
Hull - 7
Esposito - 6
Gretzky- 5
Howe - 5
Richard - 5
Lemieux - 3
Brett Hull - 3
Selanne- 3
Bure - 3

Ten players who have more than Crosby.

Which begs the question.. why IS Forsberg so highly regarded historically? Aside from the very obvious "you don't do that much when you don't show up", his best stretch is 1995-96 through 2002-03 (Ages 22-29) he produced 636 points in 494 games, which is a 1.287 PPG, it's very good of course (around 105-106 per 82 GP) and era-adjusted even better but is that enough to make up for all the missed time and very short career (708 GP)? I think the Top 100 list may be prioritizing "per game" a bit too much.

(and of course Forsberg is only 1 year after Jagr). It's tough to compare FWD to D granted.

This is the kind of "mythologizing" I can do without.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I find Sakic and Crosby are roughly comparable as goal-scorers.

Sakic is a bit ahead in terms of career numbers (625-580), but he's played around 140 extra games. Crosby is slightly ahead per game (0.47 vs 0.45 - and he did it in an era that was, on balance, a bit lower scoring).

Both were in the top ten in goals five times. Crosby has two goal-scoring titles, which is impressive. But in both cases, the best goal scorer of this generation either missed time (2010) or had an off year (2017). Sakic was runner up once (2001). Two RR trophies is impressive, but Sakic has all four of the next best scoring finishes (2nd, 5th, 6th and 6th).

Crosby was on pace for around 60 goals in 2011, which easily would have given him the Rocket Richard trophy. (But it hurts that he only scored 35 goals over his next 82 games after 2011 - was that 60 goal pace sustainable)? Three RR trophies would tie him with Bure, Selanne and even Hull. (On the other hand, Sakic was affected by injuries too - had he not missed nine games in 1999, he was on pace for another 2nd place finish. And obviously Crosby potentially scoring 60 goals in 2011 is more impressive than Sakic finishing runner-up in 1999 - but we're also talking about a 41 game sample vs 73).

Thinking about the "artistry" of it - Sakic has one of the best wrist shots in NHL history. Crosby doesn't have a singular defining skill that we associate with goal-scorers. (If we're strictly talking about output, then this is irrelevant).

Crosby seems to be the better goal-scorer at ES, and Sakic is better with the man advantage. (That's not an argument for or against either player; just a factual description).

Sakic is pretty clearly the better goal-scorer in the playoffs. Through their first 172 PO games (the length of Sakic's career), Sakic is ahead 84-69. (Crosby only scored 2 goals in the 8 extra games, so that doesn't do much for him). Despite making fewer trips to the Stanley Cup finals, Sakic led the playoffs in goals more often, and had that historic goal-scoring run in 1996. Sakic scored as many goals in the 2001 Stanley Cup finals (7 games against the New Jersey Devils at the peak of the Dead Puck Era) as Crosby did in his entire career (25 games). Plus Sakic has the all-time record for most playoff overtime goals.

On balance, Crosby is probably a bit ahead in the regular season, and Sakic is ahead in the playoffs. Overall they're probably roughly equal all-time. Sakic is maybe a top 20 goal-scorer in NHL history. (I've never heard anyone credible rank him in the top ten). I'm not going to put together a full list, but arguing by analogy, Crosby is probably also around 20th all-time.