Where would you rank Sidney Crosby All Time?

[NigerianNightmare]

I wonder if you realize by bringing up the Malkin thing for Crosby is how it hurts Jagr by playing with a guy named Mario?

Crosby has been head and shoulders above Malkin for their careers and Jagr.......compered to Mario?

This is not a very well thought out argument.

Head and shoulders above Malkin who would win the Smythe ahead of Crosby, carried the load for the Pens winning the Art Ross and the Hart, and outscored him in the postseason several times?
Must be a very small head and tiny shoulders.


In the clutch and grab era, Crosby wouldn't have had such elite peaks. Jagr has excelled in different eras.

But if you choose to live in a parallel Crosby-centric universe, than thats your choice. Wishing you all the best etc

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Wrong. Crosby is slightly ahead of Malkin and of course Kane. A bit ahead of Francis.

The 90s superstars were on the whole different level. I'm telling you, Crosby is lucky he didn't have to face the Flyers with prime Lindros.

The History of Hockey forum had Crosby 108 spots ahead of Francis on the all-time lists. (The gap is surely larger now, as Crosby was added in fall 2018, and he'd rank higher today). Maybe the gap is really 90 spots, or 120 spots, but they're not remotely comparable as players.

How close would you rank them, and why?

 

[wetcoast]

Head and shoulders above Malkin who would win the Smythe ahead of Crosby, carried the load for the Pens winning the Art Ross and the Hart, and outscored him in the postseason several times?
Must be a very small head and tiny shoulders.


In the clutch and grab era, Crosby wouldn't have had such elite peaks. Jagr has excelled in different eras.

But if you choose to live in a parallel Crosby-centric universe, than thats your choice. Wishing you all the best etc

The numbers obviously speak for themselves, Crosby provides more offense in the playoffs and career for the Pens since the 06-07 season.

Regualr season

Crosby 1027-478-829-1307
Malkin 981-444-702-1146

Playoffs

Crosby 177-70-127-197
Malkin 173-65-111-176

Detroit as noted above game planned for Crosby and took their chances with Malkin, not really sure where you are getting this "idea" that Malkin is better than Crosby or that's is even really close either.

 

[NigerianNightmare]

The numbers obviously speak for themselves, Crosby provides more offense in the playoffs and career for the Pens since the 06-07 season.

Regualr season

Crosby 1027-478-829-1307
Malkin 981-444-702-1446

Playoffs

Crosby 177-70-127-197
Malkin 173-65-111-176

Detroit as noted above game planned for Crosby and took their chances with Malkin, not really sure where you are getting this "idea" that Malkin is better than Crosby or that's is even really close either.

Can't see Crosby stats being head and shoulders above Malkin who had more injuries and played less games

PS. 444 plus 702 equals 1146, not 1446

 

[NigerianNightmare]

The History of Hockey forum had Crosby 108 spots ahead of Francis on the all-time lists. (The gap is surely larger now, as Crosby was added in fall 2018, and he'd rank higher today). Maybe the gap is really 90 spots, or 120 spots, but they're not remotely comparable as players.

How close would you rank them, and why?

I haven't produced my top 50 or 100 lists. However, I would roughly rank Crosby 25-40 positions above Francis, simply based on the fact that Crosby has won more hardware.

Francis can't be outside of top 100 even if one includes all non-NHL Soviets starting from 1940s.

He's enjoyed a long productive career, a classy and consistent playmaker; he's top 5 in all - time scoring only behind Gretzky, Jagr, Messier and Howe if I remember correctly.

 

[nowhereman]

I haven't produced my top 50 or 100 lists. However, I would roughly rank Crosby 25-40 positions above Francis, simply based on the fact that Crosby has won more hardware.

Francis can't be outside of top 100 even if one includes all non-NHL Soviets starting from 1940s.

He's enjoyed a long productive career, a classy and consistent playmaker; he's top 5 in all - time scoring only behind Gretzky, Jagr, Messier and Howe if I remember correctly.

You're both severely overrating Francis and massively underrating Crosby. They are completely different calibers of player and it's evident that you are completely overwhelmed with nostalgia for the 90s. There's only one tier of player above Sid and it includes Gretzky and Orr.

 

[NigerianNightmare]

You're both severely overrating Francis and massively underrating Crosby. They are completely different calibers of players and it's evident that you are completely overwhelmed with nostalgia for the 90s. There's only one tier of player above Sid and it includes Gretzky and Orr.

You're severely overrating Crosby and massively underrating Francis who's the 5th greatest scorer in the NHL history.

Not really nostalgia for the 90s, but the league was more competitive back then - less teams, more talent.

There are 2 tiers above Crosby.

 

[tabness]

@NigerianNightmare I appreciate you bringing up the good old nineties (if I was a betting man I'd place by bets on the nineties and I'd fold instantly if I drew the awful hand of the 2006 to 2016 timeframe lol) and more importantly, taking a different approach than the usual awards voting/scoring placements be all end all that's usual on HFBoards. Like how people gonna say that stats can't be compared across eras (fair enough) but then go right ahead and compare awards voting/scoring placements across eras lol? It's farther from commensurability than just the stats!

Jordan was wise to respond to the Lebron thinking he's the best by noting you gotta actually play against the guys in the same context to really even begin to compare who's better.

It's nice to see someone else bringing the:



To the same handful of posters always coming with the tired:



As you said, a lot of this Crosby thing is just marketing lol

But like I gotta say, Crosby is one player of all the elite ones now that would be among the most era proof. Of course, he wouldn't dominate as much with all the other great players around, but he'd see less of a drop than say McDavid, who clearly is built for this era, but couldn't utilize his speed as much with the slashing and hooking back then. Crosby also has really worked on various areas of his game like few superstars before (faceoffs, shooting, tips, and so on), so I think he's just a guy who is down for the challenge of adjusting to whatever his circumstances are.

I also personally don't consider Francis to be among the superstar players of the eighties and nineties.

 

[Weztex]

It can make a difference. I'm a Mario Lemieux fan, and it still bothers me to this day that he missed games in his 199 point season. You see, he should be in the 200 point club. With better health, he easily has two seasons over 200, and maybe even a third. That one random goal in the 88/89 season puts him in the 200-point club.

There will be a big difference historically if Ovechkin ends up scoring less than 894 or more than 894. It's one of the first things future scholars of the game will look at. Two hundred years from now when we're all gone, one of the first things people will look at is who's got the most points, and who's got the most goals. Then, the deeper fans will go into greater granularity with things like points per game numbers and relative dominance over peers.

Again, I'm not saying it necessarily changes things for me between Crosby and Ovechkin (or Ovechkin and anyone else for that matter), but I am saying that it could make a difference for someone else. And it's not totally unreasonable as it's one of the most prestigious records one could hold in the NHL.

I feel you about the Lemieux 89 season. It certainly would have been a nice milestone. And just so you know I wasn't criticizing your personal ranking. I spend a lot of time learning about the history of the game and love the exercise of ranking players from different era. If someone told me he'd move Mario over Howe had he hit that 200 points mark I'd be up for an endless discussion, haha.

As for the Ovechkin record, I know for sure that it will move the needle for some people or, most likely, that it could become the primary criteria when talking about his career. To me it's hard to rationalize but hey, what can I do? Hopefully future publications and hockey history fans will take to time to look beyond that and not paint a so simplistic picture .

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I haven't produced my top 50 or 100 lists. However, I would roughly rank Crosby 25-40 positions above Francis, simply based on the fact that Crosby has won more hardware.

Francis can't be outside of top 100 even if one includes all non-NHL Soviets starting from 1940s.

He's enjoyed a long productive career, a classy and consistent playmaker; he's top 5 in all - time scoring only behind Gretzky, Jagr, Messier and Howe if I remember correctly.

You seem to be either overrating Francis, or underrating Crosby, or both. A few comments:

• Francis was a top ten scorer 5 times in his career (and only once did he lead his team in scoring while doing so). Crosby was a top ten scorer 12 times (he led his team in scoring ten of those years). Only two players in NHL history - Howe and Gretzky - have been in the top ten in scoring more than Crosby. Francis was never able to place in the top ten scoring from age 18 to 30, and he only started placing in the top ten once he was linemates with Lemieux and/or Jagr.
• Crosby was a vastly better playoff performer. Crosby played in six more games (177-171) and outscored Francis by 56 points (197-143) - and Francis had the advantage of playing more than half his playoff games during/prior to 1993, when the league was much higher scoring.
• Francis never placed in the top five in Hart voting in his entire career. Even if you exclude Gretzky and Lemieux, Francis still never makes the top five in any season. Crosby placed in the top five nine times (only Gretzky and Howe have more).

Francis was a better defensive forward than Crosby, and has higher career totals (but that's not a great argument, given that Francis has more points than Lemieux). But Crosby was a better scorer, had a higher peak, had a longer and better prime, and was a better playoff performer. They're not remotely comparable. This is like comparing Nicklas Lidstrom to Larry Murphy.

 

[sabremike]

These things are largely a waste of time because it's impossible to rank players against each other who played in completely different eras. What I will say is that seeing so many people here saying he is not close to the top only reinforces my belief he is actually the most criminally underated generational player not just in hockey but in any of the 4 major sports. People hate Crosby because their sheer hatred of him and the idea he is the biggest heel in the sport blinds them to just how great of a player he actually is.

 

[thadd]

First, I've got tons of respect for the guy.
He's the best player of his generation.
That being said he doesn't crack top 10.
#99
#66
Bourque
Lidstrom
Richard
Orr
Howe
Roy
Brodeaur
Hasek
Dryden

That's just off of the top of my head. Those guys are in front of Crosby.
That's not to say that Crosby isn't an amazing beautiful beast of a man who made hockey more exciting to watch than it was before he came into the NHL.

He's amazing and I'll never forget him even if I live to the age of 140.

 

[nowhereman]

You seem to be either overrating Francis, or underrating Crosby, or both. A few comments:

• Francis was a top ten scorer 5 times in his career (and only once did he lead his team in scoring while doing so). Crosby was a top ten scorer 12 times (he led his team in scoring ten of those years). Only two players in NHL history - Howe and Gretzky - have been in the top ten in scoring more than Crosby. Francis was never able to place in the top ten scoring from age 18 to 30, and he only started placing in the top ten once he was linemates with Lemieux and/or Jagr.
• Crosby was a vastly better playoff performer. Crosby played in six more games (177-171) and outscored Francis by 56 points (197-143) - and Francis had the advantage of playing more than half his playoff games during/prior to 1993, when the league was much higher scoring.
• Francis never placed in the top five in Hart voting in his entire career. Even if you exclude Gretzky and Lemieux, Francis still never makes the top five in any season. Crosby placed in the top five nine times (only Gretzky and Howe have more).

Francis was a better defensive forward than Crosby, and has higher career totals (but that's not a great argument, given that Francis has more points than Lemieux). But Crosby was a better scorer, had a higher peak, had a longer and better prime, and was a better playoff performer. They're not remotely comparable. This is like comparing Nicklas Lidstrom to Larry Murphy.

I respect this post, without a doubt. But the fact that you're having to compare Crosby to Francis, in a effort to fend off his haters, just shows how much hate Sid gets on this site. Comparing Crosby to Francis is pure lunacy.

If this thread has shown me anything, it's that there's a lot of whacked out opinions about hockey and it's history.

 

[wetcoast]

Can't see Crosby stats being head and shoulders above Malkin who had more injuries and played less games

PS. 444 plus 702 equals 1146, not 1446

The injuries don't account for the PPG which has Crosby at 1.27, Malkin at 1.17.

That's a noticeable difference when one gets into the super elite category, ie top 5 over a 1000 game sample of all players.

Put another way the gap between Crosby who is first to Malkin who is second is larger than Malkin to the 3rd guy with over 600 games played from 06-07 to 21-22.

NHL Stats

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

www.nhl.com

 

[wetcoast]

You're severely overrating Crosby and massively underrating Francis who's the 5th greatest scorer in the NHL history.

Not really nostalgia for the 90s, but the league was more competitive back then - less teams, more talent.

There are 2 tiers above Crosby.

Francis has the 5th most points in the NHL but that's also mainly being a product of the 80s and then playing with Jagr and Pittsburg.

The 5th greatest scorer in NHL having only 5 seasons in top 10 scoring makes it an inconsistent argument.

Ron Francis top 10 scoring finishes are 4,5,,5,8 (all with Pittsburg and never tops on his team) then a 9th with Hartford later in his career when some top scorers missed time with injuries.

Like others have pointed out you are under rating Crosby and over rating Francis and a deeper (not even that deep really a surface dive) dive supports the assertion that you are doing so.

 

[NigerianNightmare]

@NigerianNightmare I appreciate you bringing up the good old nineties (if I was a betting man I'd place by bets on the nineties and I'd fold instantly if I drew the awful hand of the 2006 to 2016 timeframe lol) and more importantly, taking a different approach than the usual awards voting/scoring placements be all end all that's usual on HFBoards. Like how people gonna say that stats can't be compared across eras (fair enough) but then go right ahead and compare awards voting/scoring placements across eras lol? It's farther from commensurability than just the stats!

Jordan was wise to respond to the Lebron thinking he's the best by noting you gotta actually play against the guys in the same context to really even begin to compare who's better.

It's nice to see someone else bringing the:



To the same handful of posters always coming with the tired:



As you said, a lot of this Crosby thing is just marketing lol

But like I gotta say, Crosby is one player of all the elite ones now that would be among the most era proof. Of course, he wouldn't dominate as much with all the other great players around, but he'd see less of a drop than say McDavid, who clearly is built for this era, but couldn't utilize his speed as much with the slashing and hooking back then. Crosby also has really worked on various areas of his game like few superstars before (faceoffs, shooting, tips, and so on), so I think he's just a guy who is down for the challenge of adjusting to whatever his circumstances are.

I also personally don't consider Francis to be among the superstar players of the eighties and nineties.

Thanks for sharing your opinion.

I wouldn't consider Francis a superstar either. He was a star due to his consistent performance.

I'm glad you agree that Crosby wouldn't be as much dominant in the clutch and grab era. He'd be there with the Sakics of the era but certainly not the top tier, though I wouldn't be surprised if peak Crosby wins a Hart one season over Iginla or Theodore

 

[NigerianNightmare]

You seem to be either overrating Francis, or underrating Crosby, or both. A few comments:

• Francis was a top ten scorer 5 times in his career (and only once did he lead his team in scoring while doing so). Crosby was a top ten scorer 12 times (he led his team in scoring ten of those years). Only two players in NHL history - Howe and Gretzky - have been in the top ten in scoring more than Crosby. Francis was never able to place in the top ten scoring from age 18 to 30, and he only started placing in the top ten once he was linemates with Lemieux and/or Jagr.
• Crosby was a vastly better playoff performer. Crosby played in six more games (177-171) and outscored Francis by 56 points (197-143) - and Francis had the advantage of playing more than half his playoff games during/prior to 1993, when the league was much higher scoring.
• Francis never placed in the top five in Hart voting in his entire career. Even if you exclude Gretzky and Lemieux, Francis still never makes the top five in any season. Crosby placed in the top five nine times (only Gretzky and Howe have more).

Francis was a better defensive forward than Crosby, and has higher career totals (but that's not a great argument, given that Francis has more points than Lemieux). But Crosby was a better scorer, had a higher peak, had a longer and better prime, and was a better playoff performer. They're not remotely comparable. This is like comparing Nicklas Lidstrom to Larry Murphy.

That's why I rank Crosby (a top 20 all time) ahead of Francis.

Francis faced a lot more competition in those days. Hence, no top 5 Hart finishes

 

[NigerianNightmare]

The injuries don't account for the PPG which has Crosby at 1.27, Malkin at 1.17.

That's a noticeable difference when one gets into the super elite category, ie top 5 over a 1000 game sample of all players.

Put another way the gap between Crosby who is first to Malkin who is second is larger than Malkin to the 3rd guy with over 600 games played from 06-07 to 21-22.

NHL Stats

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

www.nhl.com

Okay I agree - Malkin is a mediocre bum who was lucky to play with Super Elite Sidney Crosby.

Malkin's Hart, Smythe, Ross trophies were pure flukes.

Crosby is top 5 all time. He's head, shoulders, and other parts of his body above Jagr, Lafleur, Ovechkin and other mediocrities.

 

[hockeyisgud]

He's top 5 all time. If it was a Lindsay type award where you asked the players he would be there anyways

 

[wetcoast]

Okay I agree - Malkin is a mediocre bum who was lucky to play with Super Elite Sidney Crosby.

Malkin's Hart, Smythe, Ross trophies were pure flukes.

Crosby is top 5 all time. He's head, shoulders, and other parts of his body above Jagr, Lafleur, Ovechkin and other mediocrities.

This is a poor look on your part but it's your post but I'll suggest that your tone and misrepresentation of my post isn't going to impress anyone reading this thread who is actually serious about the question in hand.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

He's enjoyed a long productive career, a classy and consistent playmaker; he's top 5 in all - time scoring only behind Gretzky, Jagr, Messier and Howe if I remember correctly.

Yeah Mike Gartner is 8th all-time in goal scoring too.

 

[NigerianNightmare]

Yeah Mike Gartner is 8th all-time in goal scoring too.

That's because Mike Gartner was a great goal scorer of his era

 

[crosby87]

Have him outside the top 10 at the moment, but he's still got a few years left. For me careers have to conclude before I judge them, otherwise the 2003 class had 40 hall of famers instead of the more-than-likely 4-5 it's actually going to produce. Guys who were top guys like Staal, Vanek, Phaneuf, Carter, Seabrook, Parise, Getzlaf, Kesler, Richards, Eriksson and Perry all fell off and are likely not going to be HOFers. Bergeron, Weber, possibly Suter, Fleury, and maybe Corey Perry if he's lucky will get in.

Basically if Crosby tapers off and has four bad seasons to end his career I don't see how he can be top 5. I will say it's super impressive that both Crosby and Ovi are (more than likely) going to break the top 15 of all time in points despite coming up in a pretty low-scoring era.

If you're looking for longevity he just tied the record for most consecutive ppg seasons lol(17). He's about to be 35 not 30. all of those players you listed are very close to crosby in age(2-3 years).

 

[NigerianNightmare]

This is a poor look on your part but it's your post but I'll suggest that your tone and misrepresentation of my post isn't going to impress anyone reading this thread who is actually serious about the question in hand.

Plain and simple:

1. You're a Crosby fan

2. Crosby is overrated on the boards

 

[crosby87]

Plain and simple:

1. You're a Crosby fan

2. Crosby is overrated on the boards

its not just hfboards(he's actually ranked better outside of hfboards) where crosby is ranked 5-8 by the vast majority. Either everyones wrong and you're right or you have to take another look at how you're ranking players.