Who owned the "Best player in the World" title since the Wayne/Mario era

[Senor Catface]

Crosby has a track record of producing regardless of linemates, at ES, on the PP, in a more defensive role, etc.... It's ridiculous to try to imply he would not produce on any team in any situation. McDavid was great last year but he needs to own some of his team's lacklustre PP and the fact that he was not the best player this year when his team was battling for a playoff spot.

Crosby's scores at a 1.75 PPG to help his team win the Cup,what was McDavid scoring at a 1.75 PPG for?

Without McDavid the Oilers would have been 5-75-2.

 

[Plural]

My crack at post-expansion list

67-75 Orr
75-80 Lafleur
80-88 Gretzky
88-94 Lemieux
94-97 Lindros
97-01 Jagr
01-04 Forsberg
05-07 Thornton
07-10 Ovechkin
10-14 Crosby
14-16 Kane
16-18 McDavid

That's fairly good list. I'd probably sub out Lindros for Lemieux though.

 

[Legend Leinonen]

Subjective.

 

[daver]

That's fairly good list. I'd probably sub out Lindros for Lemieux though.

Especially when Mario outscored Lindros over the 94 to 97 period by 19 points in 25 less games. The title was there for the taking after Mario retired but Lindros couldn't get a full season in and Jagr moved to another tier in offensive production.

 

[tarheelhockey]

What a fabulation.

Jagr was a rock star in the late nineties, routinely picking up more ASG votes than Lemieux. He was getting voted into the EC starting lineup each and every ASG since his second season. If his rep was so bad and negative, how come the hockey fans wanted him at the ASG although he was far from elite then?

The truth is, in the nineties, Jagr was popular beyond comprehension. It was only during the 2000-2001 season and especially during the WSH period when his rep took a hit and his hockey stock plummeted.

Of course he had haters and detractors. That always happens with the best. But to say everything about him (but points) was a distinct negative is fabulation.

EDIT: Just checked. Yep. Jagr got fan-voted into the ASG starting lineup eleven times in a row from 1992 till 2003. You should bow down and apologize to the magic mullet and his legacy for regurgitating fantasies invented by his detractors and then passing them to the young, innocent and unsuspecting fans who gobble every word from the old

The 00-01 season was part of the timeframe we’re talking about here. The way that whole mess played out matters.

Anyway, I didn’t say he was unpopular. He was without question the best winger in the world and a charismatic figure. But he had negatives. He didn’t defend, he didn’t play a physical game unless he had the puck, and he had already developed a reputation for being a bit sulky when things didn’t go well. His clashes with Kevin Constantine were a distraction on a team that ultimately underachieved. He was still the best point scorer in the league, so you took the good with the bad and were usually happy to do so.

To put into context how much his reputation has recovered, 10 years ago the history board did a huge project to create an all-time top 100 list. Of the wingers on the list, 3 are typically mentioned as “generational” players: Gordie Howe (ranked #3), Bobby Hull (#5), and Maurice Richard (#6). Sometimes you’ll see an argument for Guy Lafleur (#15). You typically will not hear an argument for Ted Lindsay (#23). Jagr was ranked #25 in that list from 2008, two spots ahead of Mike Bossy.

In 2015, someone started a thread to revisit the topic of Jagr’s placement on the all-time list. Consensus had him in the #11-15 range. Now I ask you, what did Jagr do during that period to advance his ranking from 25 to 11? He played a lot more hockey, to be sure, and that counts for something. But it says a lot that prior to his renaissance as the “cool uncle” of the NHL, people most certainly did not regard him as having had particularly close to the caliber of career we’re comparing him to here.

 

[Epsilon]

This is a discussion probably better suited to the HoH board, but:

To put into context how much his reputation has recovered, 10 years ago the history board did a huge project to create an all-time top 100 list. Of the wingers on the list, 3 are typically mentioned as “generational” players: Gordie Howe (ranked #3), Bobby Hull (#5), and Maurice Richard (#6). Sometimes you’ll see an argument for Guy Lafleur (#15). You typically will not hear an argument for Ted Lindsay (#23). Jagr was ranked #25 in that list from 2008, two spots ahead of Mike Bossy.

In 2015, someone started a thread to revisit the topic of Jagr’s placement on the all-time list. Consensus had him in the #11-15 range. Now I ask you, what did Jagr do during that period to advance his ranking from 25 to 11? He played a lot more hockey, to be sure, and that counts for something. But it says a lot that prior to his renaissance as the “cool uncle” of the NHL, people most certainly did not regard him as having had particularly close to the caliber of career we’re comparing him to here.

I think there's some truth to this ("reputation recovery") but also I think part of it comes from viewing Jagr's accomplishments with the added context of what came afterwards. We are talking about a guy whose point finishes in the mid 90s-early 00s went 1st, 2nd, 6th, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 5th and then another 2nd in 2006. Since then only 3 guys have managed to win 2 Art Ross trophies and only McDavid has been able to do it in consecutive seasons. Jagr's offensive dominance during his time period (one which included Lemieux for some seasons and a host of other top-end offensive talent: Selanne, Lindros, Forsberg, Kariya, Sakic, etc.) stands out more strikingly now compared to what has come in the decade-plus since he was last a fixture at the top of the scoring table, whereas at the turn of the decade one might have expected someone (Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin) to exert more dominance over the scoring race than they have.

 

[tarheelhockey]

This is a discussion probably better suited to the HoH board, but:



I think there's some truth to this ("reputation recovery") but also I think part of it comes from viewing Jagr's accomplishments with the added context of what came afterwards. We are talking about a guy whose point finishes in the mid 90s-early 00s went 1st, 2nd, 6th, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 5th and then another 2nd in 2006. Since then only 3 guys have managed to win 2 Art Ross trophies and only McDavid has been able to do it in consecutive seasons. Jagr's offensive dominance during his time period (one which included Lemieux for some seasons and a host of other top-end offensive talent: Selanne, Lindros, Forsberg, Kariya, Sakic, etc.) stands out more strikingly now compared to what has come in the decade-plus since he was last a fixture at the top of the scoring table, whereas at the turn of the decade one might have expected someone (Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin) to exert more dominance over the scoring race than they have.

True, but that effect can be almost entirely chalked up to injuries to Crosby, who led the league in PPG five times between 2007 and 2015 (almost the exact time period between those two threads). And for that matter, on the other end of the timeline it's noteworthy that Lemieux was still making a joke of the Art Ross race when he abruptly retired in 1997. That perfectly coincides with the beginning of Jagr's run of Rosses.

In a world where both Lemieux and Crosby have decently healthy careers, how far behind those guys would Jagr be? Two scoring titles against eight and five respectively? It wouldn't be close, it doesn't seem like the comparison between them as overall players would be much closer either.

BTW, I don't mean to overly disparage Jagr here. He was a great player. I just think he sits slightly outside the "generational" bubble, closer to the Lafleurs and Mikitas of the world than the Crosbys and Howes.

 

[Voight]

My crack at post-expansion list

67-75 Orr
75-80 Lafleur
80-88 Gretzky
88-94 Lemieux
94-97 Lindros
97-01 Jagr
01-04 Forsberg
05-07 Thornton
07-10 Ovechkin
10-14 Crosby
14-16 Kane
16-18 McDavid

One of the better lists but 94-97/98 should maybe go to Hasek? & I think Gretzky's reign should extend to 1991. That was his second last Art Ross & the last one with a massive point total. Then put Lemieux from 91-97.

10-14 Crosby is a tricky area because in that span he only has 1 full season, a 3/4 season, a almost 1/4 season and a 1/2 half season.

 

[Voight]

Crosby had 15 more goals in 7 less games and was on pace for only 3 less points. McDavid was not clearly better he was just clearly healthier.

McDavid won the scoring title. I don't care how he did. I don't care if he had 1 goal and 99 assist and the second place player had 88 goals and 1 assist.

Its hilarious seeing Crosby fans boast about goal scoring now that its convenient for them.

There should be an obvious balance between what a player accomplished on a per game basis and raw point totals. Whatever doubts there were about Crosby finishing 10 points behind in the regular season were removed after the playoffs were factored in. McDavid was not better than Crosby just from an offensive production standpoint and there was a clear gap in all around play.

Its not fair to account for playoffs seeing as some teams (Pittsburgh) are significantly better than others (Edmonton).

 

[GlitchMarner]

McDavid won the scoring title. I don't care how he did. I don't care if he had 1 goal and 99 assist and the second place player had 88 goals and 1 assist.

Its hilarious seeing Crosby fans boast about goal scoring now that its convenient for them.

Also, if we're going to put emphasis on two-way play, then Datsyuk was arguably better than Crosby in '08-'09. He was +34 and actually won the Selke. Crosby was +3 and didn't receive any Selke votes at all. He only outscored Datsyuk by six points. Datsyuk was an AS-2 while Crosby was an AS-3 and Pavel finished higher in Hart voting.

 

[Troubadour]

True, but that effect can be almost entirely chalked up to injuries to Crosby, who led the league in PPG five times between 2007 and 2015 (almost the exact time period between those two threads). And for that matter, on the other end of the timeline it's noteworthy that Lemieux was still making a joke of the Art Ross race when he abruptly retired in 1997. That perfectly coincides with the beginning of Jagr's run of Rosses.

In a world where both Lemieux and Crosby have decently healthy careers, how far behind those guys would Jagr be? Two scoring titles against eight and five respectively? It wouldn't be close, it doesn't seem like the comparison between them as overall players would be much closer either.

BTW, I don't mean to overly disparage Jagr here. He was a great player. I just think he sits slightly outside the "generational" bubble, closer to the Lafleurs and Mikitas of the world than the Crosbys and Howes.

Lemieux was still making a joke of the Art Ross race in 1997 precisely because he was the healthiest of the Art Ross candidates.

Lindros played 52, Kariya 69 and Jagr 63 games that year. They all looked way better than Lemieux and in all likelihood, at least one of them would have finished ahead of Mario, possibly all of them.

Which brings us to another thing. Jagr was not that healthy either. He won one Art (and lost one Hart) playing 63 games. Call it just a point collecting, but let's be honest -- he was better at it than Sid.

EDIT: Sakic and Forsberg each played 65 games in 96/97. You know, that's an easy Art.

 

[daver]

Also, if we're going to put emphasis on two-way play, then Datsyuk was arguably better than Crosby in '08-'09. He was +34 and actually won the Selke. Crosby was +3 and didn't receive any Selke votes at all. He only outscored Datsyuk by six points. Datsyuk was an AS-2 while Crosby was an AS-3 and Pavel finished higher in Hart voting.

In the regular season, it is a good argument. In the playoffs he was far behind. If Datysuk had complimented his 08/09 season with other Top 3 type seasons then he would have gotten some consideration. He is an Honourable Mention after the 08/09 season.

And again, the Best Player title is not won or lost in one season and anyways, OV and Malkin garnered more Best Player points than Datsyuk did that season if one looks at Hart voting and playoff performances.

The emphasis on 2-way play saw Datsyuk garner more Hart votes than Crosby who scored six more points although it can be argued that Crosby lost Hart votes due to Malkin being on the team.

 

[daver]

True, but that effect can be almost entirely chalked up to injuries to Crosby, who led the league in PPG five times between 2007 and 2015 (almost the exact time period between those two threads). And for that matter, on the other end of the timeline it's noteworthy that Lemieux was still making a joke of the Art Ross race when he abruptly retired in 1997. That perfectly coincides with the beginning of Jagr's run of Rosses.

In a world where both Lemieux and Crosby have decently healthy careers, how far behind those guys would Jagr be? Two scoring titles against eight and five respectively? It wouldn't be close, it doesn't seem like the comparison between them as overall players would be much closer either.

BTW, I don't mean to overly disparage Jagr here. He was a great player. I just think he sits slightly outside the "generational" bubble, closer to the Lafleurs and Mikitas of the world than the Crosbys and Howes.

I don't see how you can say that Jagr loses Art Rosses to a healthy Crosby, which is a sketchy assumption to begin with. He was dominating his peers in a couple of seasons (sans Mario) that Crosby only matched in his 2011 and 2013 seasons. They would be going head to head in their peaks/primes.

Say what you want about him about but you cannot question his offensive dominance and his durability (compared to Crosby) during his peak.

 

[Laineux]

In a world where both Lemieux and Crosby have decently healthy careers, how far behind those guys would Jagr be? Two scoring titles against eight and five respectively? It wouldn't be close, it doesn't seem like the comparison between them as overall players would be much closer either.

Whatever Crosby did between 10-13, Jagr actually did over full season(s). Jagr's peak isn't speculation and pro-rating, he lapped the field in a manner we may only speculate that Crosby could've done had the stars aligned.

The offensive peak comparison has to go to Jagr. Crosby might be the better all-time player, but Jagr had the more dominant peak.

 

[Revelation]

McDavid has been the best since 2016 AINEC. Even if he's not the most well rounded he's like a one dimensional 18 year old playing in a batman league. At some point the gap is so big it doesn't matter.

 

[Hynh]

McDavid has been the best since 2016 AINEC. Even if he's not the most well rounded he's like a one dimensional 18 year old playing in a batman league. At some point the gap is so big it doesn't matter.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

McDavid won the scoring title. I don't care how he did. I don't care if he had 1 goal and 99 assist and the second place player had 88 goals and 1 assist.

Its hilarious seeing Crosby fans boast about goal scoring now that its convenient for them.



Its not fair to account for playoffs seeing as some teams (Pittsburgh) are significantly better than others (Edmonton).

Goalscoring didn’t matter when ovechkin was putting up comparable points and more goals, yet now it does if Crosby has more goals.

Weird how that works

 

[Epsilon]

Lemieux was still making a joke of the Art Ross race in 1997 precisely because he was the healthiest of the Art Ross candidates.

Lindros played 52, Kariya 69 and Jagr 63 games that year. They all looked way better than Lemieux and in all likelihood, at least one of them would have finished ahead of Mario, possibly all of them.

Which brings us to another thing. Jagr was not that healthy either. He won one Art (and lost one Hart) playing 63 games. Call it just a point collecting, but let's be honest -- he was better at it than Sid.

EDIT: Sakic and Forsberg each played 65 games in 96/97. You know, that's an easy Art.

Huh? Lemieux led the league in PPG by 0.09 over Lindros and 0.10 over Jagr, which translates to an extra 7-8 points over a full season, and did it in more games (and as we've often observe, higher PPGs tend to be harder to maintain over a greater number of games). Lemieux also missed 6 games that season, so it's not like he got a full season and no one else did. Kariya finished 23 points behind Lemieux in 7 less games - you think that he was going to score at a 3ppg clip over the games he missed to catch Mario?

Jagr's 1996-97 is one of his seasons that gets a bit underrated though, given that he finished 3rd (barely behind 2nd) in PPG and 1st (by a clear margin) in GPG. And even then he finished 6th (only a few points out of 3rd) in points. With the goal scoring pace he was on, had he played the whole season he'd have likely finished 1st in goals, which would have been extremely impressive given the field he would have beat.

 

[McVespa99]

Love this discussion. I am basing my opinions on not just one season of play and that when more than one player has separated themselves from the pack, the title can be shared.

97/98 to 01/02
After Mario retired in 96/97, I think Lindros was the heir apparent to the title as he was going toe to toe offensively with Jagr while being a physical force but had yet another injury-shortened season in 97/98 while Jagr won the 1st of his four Art Rosses. So it's Jagr until 2001/02 despite a mediocre season (by his standards) with the Caps; he had earned the benefit of the doubt. HM - Sakic

02/03 to 03/04
I would give Forsberg the title even though he only played 41 games in 03/04.

05/06
Thornton reached his peak and Jagr returned to form. HM to Crosby and Ovechkin who gave notice that they have lived up to their hype.

06/07
Crosby followed up his historic 18 year old season with a decisive Art Ross win and Thornton kept up his amazing play.

07/08
Ovechkin had a generational goalscoring season while Crosby kept up his level of play in the regular season and in the playoffs. HM - Malkin

08/09
Ovechkin, Crosby, and Malkin all are clearly on a tier of their own from the league. HM - Datsyuk

09/10
Ovechkin had the chance to take the title on his own but couldn't better Crosby in the Olympics or the playoffs.

10/11
Crosby keeps the title despite only playing 41 games while Ovechkin has earned the benefit of the doubt after a mediocre season (by his standards).

11/12
Malkin has arguably the best season since the lockout, Crosby deserves to still be there despite only playing 22 games HM - Stamkos

12/13
Crosby keeps up his dominant pace. HM - Ovechkin has returned to from

13/14
Crosby establishes himself as the clear best from the league not seen since Jagr.

14/15 - 16/17
Crosby keeps the title with elite play in the regular season and in the playoffs. HM - Kane, Benn, Ovechkin, McDavid

17/18
Crosby has earned a year's grace at the top. McDavid and Kucherov have the best chance to join him.

Your a Flyers fan right?

 

[dma0034]

Hasek was the best player in the mid 90s. Then you had the Iginla era which was right before the Crosby/Malkin/Ovechlin dominance... where any year of them could be considered the best. Now McDavid is the best with really no real contender for that title. Maybe one of the other young guns will break through and challenge him.

 

[Troubadour]

Huh? Lemieux led the league in PPG by 0.09 over Lindros and 0.10 over Jagr, which translates to an extra 7-8 points over a full season, and did it in more games (and as we've often observe, higher PPGs tend to be harder to maintain over a greater number of games). Lemieux also missed 6 games that season, so it's not like he got a full season and no one else did. Kariya finished 23 points behind Lemieux in 7 less games - you think that he was going to score at a 3ppg clip over the games he missed to catch Mario?

Jagr's 1996-97 is one of his seasons that gets a bit underrated though, given that he finished 3rd (barely behind 2nd) in PPG and 1st (by a clear margin) in GPG. And even then he finished 6th (only a few points out of 3rd) in points. With the goal scoring pace he was on, had he played the whole season he'd have likely finished 1st in goals, which would have been extremely impressive given the field he would have beat.

Lindros was 23-24, Jagr was 24-25, Kariya 22, Lemieux 31, yet you hesitate to extrapolate the young players' numbers because PPG is harder to maintain over longer stretches while at the same time, you almost automatically credit the old Mario with 7 or 8 extra points because of PPG.

Again, they all looked better than Lemieux who would go on pointless streaks which lasted as long as 3 games. PPG generally tends to shrink the more games a guy plays, but at the same time, PPG is definitely easier to maintain (or even improve) when you're young. That's when you actually prefer continuity because that's when you still learn and improve over the course of the season.

I don't think that a season riddled by an injury or injuries helps your PPG all that much when you're 22 or 23. It's possible that Lemieux would have still won with the rest of the field healthy, but he definitely wasn't making a joke out of anything.

I remember Saku Koivu leading the race after 20 or 25 games. Then he got injured. I remember Forsberg leading the race. Then he got injured. Get my point? It was nothing like 95/96, and the Hart voting reflected that.

 

[daver]

Your a Flyers fan right?

What do you mean?

 

[daver]

Hasek was the best player in the mid 90s. Then you had the Iginla era which was right before the Crosby/Malkin/Ovechlin dominance... where any year of them could be considered the best. Now McDavid is the best with really no real contender for that title. Maybe one of the other young guns will break through and challenge him.

Not sure how you ignore Jagr completely but Hasek was late '90s, and Forsberg or Sakic had better cases to make the post-Hasek years their "era" than Iggy who had one elite regular season and one very good playoff, neither of which was better than Sakic's or Forsberg's best during that time, and was sandwiched by non-elite seasons. |If he had followed up his 01/02 season with another Hart worthy performance then he would have gotten consideration.

 

[Voight]

People often forget that in 1999, Jagr won the scoring title by 20 points, and also had 30 more points than fourth place.

The next year, he won it by 2 points despite missing 20 games.

He won five scoring titles, beating out the likes of HHOF'ers Selanne, Kariya, Forsberg, Bure, Sakic etc.

Yes he was MVP only once, but he came in 2nd four times.

1995 - Lindros had a larger percentage of the vote, seemingly won because of the leagues love affair with him

1998 - some guy named Hasek

2000 - had one less vote than Pronger. You want to talk about close margins? There you go. Had he played more games, he would have won it for sure.

2006 - Another close vote, Thornton switching teams and leading them to the playoffs won this one.

 

[ScaredStreit]

To keep it simple, just going to lump it into periods, with "early" being for example 2000 to 2005 and "late" being 2005-2010:

Late 90s: Jagr, honorable mention for Hasek
Early 2000s: I'm honestly not sure, no one stood out this period as being the best. You had Jagr and Hasek take a slight step backwards into a massive group with players like Iginla, Sakic, Forsberg, St. Louis and such. Forsberg missed an entire season, that's the big thing that's preventing me from saying he's the best. I'm not sure on this one.
Late 2000s: Ovechkin, not close
Early 2010s: Crosby, not close
Late 2010s: To be determined, we're only halfway through them right now.

Crosby has always been at a minimum just as good as Ovechkin. Ovechkin was never the best overall player in the league. Best goal scorer? Yes. Best offensive player? At times yes. But being better than Crosby AINEC? No.