"Who Was Better, Crosby or MacKinnon?" Has Become A Valid Question

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

I cant continue to discuss things with someone who can't even read, props for recognizing and admitting your limitations at least.

So yeah, you think the low scoring of the early 2010's was due to a decrease in the elite players in the league. An odd view I disagree with.

Please don't try to represent me not giving a shit about your latest bad faith argument as a problem with my reading capabilities. It just makes it obvious that you can't come up with a coherent argument that refutes what I'm saying and have to resort to insults.

 

[klefbombs shoulder]

Please don't try to represent me not giving a shit about your latest bad faith argument as a problem with my reading capabilities. It just makes it obvious that you can't come up with a coherent argument that refutes what I'm saying and have to resort to insults.

It is noteworthy if you are not correctly registering what other people are saying. Again props for at least admitting it.

Nope, you are the one making the claim. Provide evidence to back your claim.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Point finishes

Crosby : 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 5, 6, 10

Mac: 1*, 5, 5, 5, 7, 8

Remove the duplicates:

Crosby's: 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 6, 10

Mac's: 5, 5, 7, 8


PPG finishes

Crosby: 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 4, 6

Mac: 1*, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9

Remove the duplicates:

Crosby's PPG finishes: 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 6

Mac's PPG finishes: 5, 7, 9

You missed another 10th place finish for Crosby

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

28 year old Crosby scored 85 points for third in points. 35 year old Crosby scored 93 points. Does this guy truly believe Crosby is now better than he was at 28? The league has become much more offensive oriented and players like mcdavid and mackinnon are fully utilizing that. But no way are they hitting 140 in the 2010-2018 era.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

It is noteworthy if you are not correctly registering what other people are saying. Again props for at least admitting it.

Nope, you are the one making the claim. Provide evidence to back your claim.

I've already provided a bunch of evidence that using raw trophy counts and scoring ranks in different eras to prove which player had a better season doesn't really prove much, and that context is needed for those numbers to be considered in any sort of serious way. You've provided nothing to counter my evidence, so the ball is now in your court to convince me that finishing 2nd with 89 points in 75 games is better than finishing 5th with 111 in 71. Or that winning the Ross with 87 is better than finishing 2nd with 141.

I've also provided evidence that there was a 7 year stretch of relatively weak drafts ( at least in terms of top scorers) between 2006 and 2012, which caused a reduction in the number of forwards in the league capable of scoring at a PPG rate or higher, and explained how this made it easier to win a Ross in 2013-14 than it is today, when there's so many elite guys capable of putting up big numbers. Now it's your turn to explain how 7 consecutive drafts that only produced 2 or 3 top offensive players total had zero impact on the talent level of the league.

 

[klefbombs shoulder]

I've already provided a bunch of evidence that using raw trophy counts and scoring ranks in different eras to prove which player had a better season doesn't really prove much, and that context is needed for those numbers to be considered in any sort of serious way. You've provided nothing to counter my evidence, so the ball is now in your court to convince me that finishing 2nd with 89 points in 75 games is better than finishing 5th with 111 in 71. Or that winning the Ross with 87 is better than finishing 2nd with 141.

Where does finishing 4th with 150 rank compared to this?

I've never disputed the individual seasons you are bringing up, I don't really care how you rank them. Maybe your confusing what people have been saying again. I care about your absurd claim that there were less elite players in the NHL during DPE 2.0. And no, it is not something you have provided evidence for. The only arguments you have made for it is listing off a few random players names.

28 year old Crosby scored 85 points for third in points. 35 year old Crosby scored 93 points. Does this guy truly believe Crosby is now better than he was at 28? The league has become much more offensive oriented and players like mcdavid and mackinnon are fully utilizing that. But no way are they hitting 140 in the 2010-2018 era.

Era adjustments are fake news, just ask SakicGmHead.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Where does finishing 4th with 150 rank compared to this?

I've never disputed the individual seasons you are bringing up, I don't really care how you rank them. Maybe your confusing what people have been saying again. I care about your absurd claim that there were less elite players in the NHL during DPE 2.0. And no, it is not something you have provided evidence for. The only arguments you have made for it is listing off a few random players names.


Era adjustments are fake news, just ask SakicGmHead.

Nicholls was playing with Gretzky, which obviously inflated his numbers, so probably not all that favorably once you consider the context. I certainly wouldn't consider it to be exactly the same as every 4th place finish in every other season, and would probably struggle to call it better than most 6 and 7th place finishes.

And, yes, I have provided that evidence earlier in the thread. There were 7 years that produced a grand total of 2 PPG players (3 if you want to include Tavares), starting in 2006 with EJ going 1OA, and ending with Yakupov's draft in 2012, and gave a sampling of the more than 3 PPG+ players who retired, went to the KHL, or fell off before 2012 that didn't all immediately get replaced by a comparable PPG scorer. My conclusion is that more PPG+ scoring talent going out than coming in over a 7 year period results in less PPG+ scoring talent in the league. It's not exactly rocket science.

And, no matter how many times people try to put words into my mouth, I have have zero problem with era adjustments. My issues are with using raw scoring ranks and trophy counts as evidence of who is a better player, and pretending 7 straight years of weak drafts has zero impact on the talent level of the league.

 

[Praetorian Caps]

Crosby. Even as a Capitals fan I've always thought of him as an all time great.

 

[daver]

I've already provided a bunch of evidence that using raw trophy counts and scoring ranks in different eras to prove which player had a better season doesn't really prove much.

The OP uses raw points to make their argument. Looking at raw points only is far more unreasonable than looking at trophies and scoring ranks only. Hence the vast majority of people countering the OP with trophies and scoring ranks.

You have given no indication that you aren't using raw points only to rate Mac and Crosby and using cherrypicked "evidence" to back it up.

You have also decided to treat the '12 to '16 timeframe as being uniquely affected by a lack of talent while refusing to acknowledge that scoring also went down in the late '90s despite all of the elite talent (your words) in the league.

No, you are quite happy to suggest that Crosby, the clear PPG leader from '07 to '13, in the middle of his prime, regressed in 2013/14.

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

That’s literally your post dude wtf

Except it's literally not.

I said they were winding down or broken down. You said there was no overlap in their careers at all...

 

[authentic]

Except it's literally not.

I said they were winding down or broken down. You said there was no overlap in their careers at all...

Except it literally is…

… There was no overlap in their careers as elite players

 

[FriendlyGhost92]

Except it literally is…

… There was no overlap in their careers as elite players

When you brought up their birth years to point out that there was "No overlap" in their careers at all, and now want to hide behind "I meant as elite players" once the mutual season was brought up...

I see what you mean now but the players you originally mentioned Gretzky, Lemieux and Yzerman were born from 1961-65 so of course there would be no overlap with Crosby, Ovechkin and Kane born 1985-88.

It was a nice try, at least.

 

[klefbombs shoulder]

And, yes, I have provided that evidence earlier in the thread. There were 7 years that produced a grand total of 2 PPG players (3 if you want to include Tavares), starting in 2006 with EJ going 1OA, and ending with Yakupov's draft in 2012

So thats your evidence... ok.

1993-2005 produced a grand total of 4 PPG players. A 13 year stretch with 4 players. Similar rate to the 2 PPG players in 7 years. Surely this is a vacuum of talent worse than the early 2010's according to your logic?

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

The OP uses raw points to make their argument. Looking at raw points only is far more unreasonable than looking at trophies and scoring ranks only. Hence the vast majority of people countering the OP with trophies and scoring ranks.

You have given no indication that you aren't using raw points only to rate Mac and Crosby and using cherrypicked "evidence" to back it up.

You have also decided to treat the '12 to '16 timeframe as being uniquely affected by a lack of talent while refusing to acknowledge that scoring also went down in the late '90s despite all of the elite talent (your words) in the league.

No, you are quite happy to suggest that Crosby, the clear PPG leader from '07 to '13, in the middle of his prime, regressed in 2013/14.

Which one of my posts do you think was about ranking Mack and Crosby, relative to each other? Because nothing I've said was meant to suggest one is definitely better than the other, only to question the metrics being used by some people to "prove" their opinion is right. If you think Crosby is better, great. If you think Mack is better, great. Just don't use stupid metrics to try to prove your opinion as "right".

And I highlighted 2012-16, which had noticeably fewer elite caliber scorers due to 7 consecutive drafts with very little offensive talent while the previous generation of high end players aged out, as an example why simply winning a Ross isn't necessarily better than finishing 2nd in any other year. To try to make this clear enough for you, I'm not saying Crosby regressed that season, I'm saying his competition for that Ross was never even close to his level.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

So thats your evidence... ok.

1993-2005 produced a grand total of 4 PPG players. A 13 year stretch with 4 players. Similar rate to the 2 PPG players in 7 years. Surely this is a vacuum of talent worse than the early 2010's according to your logic?

Yeah, I'd absolutely agree that stretch of drafts was relatively weak, and have zero problem saying that those drafts definitely contributed to the drop in scoring we saw starting in 1996, especially when combined with guys like Gretzky and Lemieux leaving the league around that time.

But, I'd also say that the drafts prior to 1992 produced a lot of elite players, and a lot them were still in the league until after the 2005 lockout, so the impact those 13 weaker drafts had on overall league talent was less noticeable at the time. By 2012, it had been 19 consecutive drafts with only a handful of elite players coming into the league, so the impact was much more pronounced.

 

[klefbombs shoulder]

so the impact those 13 weaker drafts had on overall league talent was less noticeable at the time.

Prove it.

You keep making grand sweeping statements with nothing to back them up. Please provide tangible proof that the league wide scoring environment was lower from 2010-2016 purely due to lack of elite talent in the league.

Also why not prove that the "weak" drafts of 1992-2004 had a less noticeable impact on "overall league talent".

 

[RR44]

Mackinnon is a monster but let's please not do this.

I couldn't agree more...now cue the following in a Bill Belichick presser with his bunny hug cutoff sleeves:

"no way mate we're talking about Sidney Crosby now, yeah I'm not putting anyone in Sidney Crosby's class. So you can put everyone down below that, that's alot of respect to alot of good players now but we're talking about Sidney Crosby."

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Prove it.

You keep making grand sweeping statements with nothing to back them up. Please provide tangible proof that the league wide scoring environment was lower from 2010-2016 purely due to lack of elite talent in the league.

Also why not prove that the "weak" drafts of 1992-2004 had a less noticeable impact on "overall league talent".

How exactly do you want me to prove that I didn't notice something while watching hockey back in the late 90s that I did notice in 2014 when it got much worse?

Should I point out that the top 5 in scoring in 1998-99 was Jagr, Selanne, Kariya, Forsberg and Sakic, who were all from pre-92 drafts and are all career PPG players, so there was still some pretty elite talent at the top of the league, even with the noticeable loss of Gretzky or Lemieux at #1? Lindros , another pretty elite guy, finished 8th that year with 93 points in 71 games. 12 guys scored at least 82 points that season, compared to only 5 in 2013-14.

Over more than just one season, there were 14 players who were PPG or better between 1996-97 and 2000-01 (100 games minimum), compared to only 7 between 2012 and 2016? 32 guys over 0.9 PPG compared to only 17. Is that good enough, or do I also need to explain how problems get more noticeable when they are much worse?

Admittedly, I did start to notice a drop off starting in 2002 when Iginla won, and then Forsberg stayed healthy enough to limp away with it despite Naslund playing 7 more games, and then MSL won before the lockout. After the lockout, the league added OV, Malkin and Crosby, who almost immediately took over the top spots in the scoring races, but the rest of the league was still visibly trending down in terms of talent. That didn't really noticeably change until 2016-17, when McDavid put up his first 100+ season.

The next year, McDavid did it again, Kucherov put up 100. Malkin stayed healthy and had 98 in 78 games. MacKinnon put up 97 in 74, and a bunch of other really good youngsters put up PPG+ seasons for the first time. Since then, some of those really good youngsters have developed even more, a bunch more really good youngsters have joined the league, and we're lucky to get to enjoy an era of hockey that has more elite scorers in it than we've seen in at least 20 years.

 

[klefbombs shoulder]

Over more than just one season, there were 14 players who were PPG or better between 1996-97 and 2000-01 (100 games minimum), compared to only 7 between 2012 and 2016? 32 guys over 0.9 PPG compared to only 17. Is that good enough, or do I also need to explain how problems get more noticeable when they are much worse?

12 guys scored at least 82 points that season, compared to only 5 in 2013-14.

You've just made an argument against yourself.

League wide scoring was roughly equal between these two periods, around 2.7 GPG. So if one period has significantly higher number of ppg and 0.9ppg players and it had no real effect on the larger picture of league wide scoring. And why would it? We are talking about 14 players, and 7 players, and 32 players and 17 players. That simply isn't a big enough group of people to move the needle significantly in a league with hundreds of players.

Thanks.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

28 year old Crosby scored 85 points for third in points. 35 year old Crosby scored 93 points. Does this guy truly believe Crosby is now better than he was at 28? The league has become much more offensive oriented and players like mcdavid and mackinnon are fully utilizing that. But no way are they hitting 140 in the 2010-2018 era.

It's crazy that people still don't get that.

Unless, as you said, their argument is that Crosby is actually better as a 35 year old than he was in his prime at 27/28.

 

[McVespa99]

It should be acknowledged that MacKinnon has put up prime Crosby-esque numbers for 7 straight seasons...

Regular Season

MacKinnon (2018 - '24)
249 goals, 664 points, +142 in 474 games

Crosby (2007 - '14)
235 goals, 667 points, +125 in 469 games


Playoffs

MacKinnon (career)
44 goals, 100 points, +34 in 77 games

Crosby (2008 - '13)
37 goals, 100 points, +16 in 77 games



So, forget about Yzerman vs Sakic, Bourque vs Lidstrom, and Gretzky vs Lemieux!

There is only one debate that matters. The Nate Debate. And it is here...

Mac is a beast. But this has not become a valid question

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

You've just made an argument against yourself.

League wide scoring was roughly equal between these two periods, around 2.7 GPG. So if one period has significantly higher number of ppg and 0.9ppg players and it had no real effect on the larger picture of league wide scoring. And why would it? We are talking about 14 players, and 7 players, and 32 players and 17 players. That simply isn't a big enough group of people to move the needle significantly in a league with hundreds of players.

Thanks.

Only if you pretend everything else is exactly the same between the eras, or don't understand how averages work.

The reality is that the pre-lockout era had more elite players, but also a lot more guys who couldn't score for shit. Between 1996-97 and 2000-01, there were 91 guys who played at least 200 games and scored less than 0.2 PPG. Between 2011-21 and 2015-16, there were only 59, so even with fewer outliers at the top, the average stayed pretty much the same as the low end scoring improved pretty significantly.

To demonstrate this very simply, the set of numbers 100, 90, 80, 20, 10, 0 has an average value of 50, just like the set of 80, 70, 60, 40, 30, 20. Based on your logic, 80 = 100 because they are both the highest number in sets with the same average. And, also, 80 > 90, because being 1st is better than being 2nd. And 80 > 80, because 1st is better than 3rd. Based on my logic, 100 > 80, 90 > 80, and 80 = 80, regardless of where they rank in their respect sets. The challenge is getting everyone to agree on which seasons are the 100s and which are only 80s.

 

[Givememoneyback]

Only if you pretend everything else is exactly the same between the eras, or don't understand how averages work.

The reality is that the pre-lockout era had more elite players, but also a lot more guys who couldn't score for shit. Between 1996-97 and 2000-01, there were 91 guys who played at least 200 games and scored less than 0.2 PPG. Between 2011-21 and 2015-16, there were only 59, so even with fewer outliers at the top, the average stayed pretty much the same as the low end scoring improved pretty significantly.

To demonstrate this very simply, the set of numbers 100, 90, 80, 20, 10, 0 has an average value of 50, just like the set of 80, 70, 60, 40, 30, 20. Based on your logic, 80 = 100 because they are both the highest number in sets with the same average. And, also, 80 > 90, because being 1st is better than being 2nd. And 80 > 80, because 1st is better than 3rd. Based on my logic, 100 > 80, 90 > 80, and 80 = 80, regardless of where they rank in their respect sets. The challenge is getting everyone to agree on which seasons are the 100s and which are only 80s.

Now do goalies.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

Now do goalies.

From 1996-2001, among goalies with 200 games played, the top guys were Hasek, Roy, Brodeur, and Belfour.

From 2011-2016, 200 games minimum, the top guys were Schneider, Quick, Lundqvist, Rask, etc.

But, 2011-16 doesn't have anyone as bad as Damian Rhodes, and many more guys in the middle, so their average numbers look better despite having no one who even remotely compares to Hasek, or Roy.

 

[daver]

From 1996-2001, among goalies with 200 games played, the top guys were Hasek, Roy, Brodeur, and Belfour.

From 2011-2016, 200 games minimum, the top guys were Schneider, Quick, Lundqvist, Rask, etc.

But, 2011-16 doesn't have anyone as bad as Damian Rhodes, and many more guys in the middle, so their average numbers look better despite having no one who even remotely compares to Hasek, or Roy.

Here is all you need to know to answer the question whether the drop in scoring from '12 to '16 was due to factors other than a significant drop in talent.

Crosby's PPG from 14/15 to 15/16: 1.08 (2nd best in the league)

Crosby's PPG from 17/18 to 22/23: 1.16 (10th best in the league)

If the there was a significant increase in talent starting in 2017, how in the hell does an over age 30, post-prime Crosby INCREASE his PPG?

The clear, obvious answer was there was yet another change in league scoring levels attributed to factors besides some sort of inexplicable league-wide drop in talent.

The vast majority of the league's elite scorers saw an increase on their PPG starting in 2016/17