Your expectations of Crosby after 2007

[Nadal On Clay]

He did get better though. Crosby's 2010 season was his best season - and good for a 3rd place Hart vote and only a bit worse than Ovechkin's 3rd best season.

No doubt expectations were wild - many Pens fans and Canadians on HF were predicting 135+ point seasons for several years. Reality Crosby failed to live up to imaginary Crosby and continues to do so, but that was never a reasonable starting point.

Probably the single biggest disappointment about Crosby is that he has been out-pointed, out-hardwared, and massively out-goaled by a Russian winger.

Crosby was supposed to be the best player of this generation, and he's only second best.

If Ovechkin didn't exist, would this thread exist? At the very least the tone would be different.

Are we already April 1st?

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

I remember that at the same time Crosby was having his monster sophomore season, Ovechkin seemed to regress in his sophomore season that year. I thought Crosby had for sure passed Ovechkin and it was a surprise to me when Ovechkin came back and outplayed Crosby the following two seasons.

This also goes to show that there will be no guarantees with McDavid moving forward.

Meh. 07-08 is a wash imo. Crosby had a dominant playoffs and was outperforming Ovechkin in the regular season before his ankle injury. Easy to takeover the pride when the king is not there

 

[Canucks1096]

After 2007 Crosby was the best player overall. However I thought he would peak a little higher. One main reason why Crosby get the best player label is not because of his high peak. It's because when he healthy he is almost always in the top 3 in scoring. I didn't expect Ovechkin, Malkin to have a better peak than Crosby. You can even make argument Kane Peak was higher than Crosby as well. I didn't expect Taveres, Benn and H Sedin to have a season better than Crosby as well.

Some may argue is that reason why didn't have a higher peak due to injuries. However we would never know how the 2011 season would of ended. I do know for a fact Crosby has had a half season stretch close to the same level in the first half of 2010/2011 season. Second half of 2009/2010 season Crosby had 60 something points. First half of 2006/2007 Crosby had close 70 points. First 31 games of 2016/2017 he had 25 goals in his first 31 games. All 3 levels were quite similar to 2010/2011. All seasons he couldn't keep it up the full year.

 

[The Panther]

Sure it was.

Mario's PPG - 1.78

Next best PPGs among the Top Ten scorers (non-Oilers):

1.61
1.54
1.45
1.45

Crosby's PPG - 1.52

Next best PPGs among the Top Ten scorers:
1.39
1.34
1.32
1.30

Very comparable gap between them and their respective peers, with a slight edge to Crosby.

I guess if you do it as a stat/era comparison to peers, then yes, Crosby's second season and Lemieux's come out very close. But I dunno... if Gretzky hadn't existed, Mario's 1986 would have been only 11 points shy of the biggest scoring season of all time. Crosby's second season may seen comparable in peer comparison (and certainly comparable in team-effect and on-ice goal differential, intangibles, etc.) but in the non-Gretzky world it was still 79 points shy of the top-scoring season ever. But yes, simply by peer comparison they're similar.

I guess the other thing is the styles of Lemieux and Crosby are so different. Young Lemieux looked like he was floating around out there, but he'd suddenly get the puck and take off for the net, making crazy moves and out-reaching defenders. Other than the moments when he was splitting defences, he looked very effortless. By contrast, Crosby, who is much shorter and more squat, has a playing style not unlike a third-line grinder in appearance, except way more talented.

I don't see why you would have thought that Crosby wasn't going to improve in some way, which he did in 2010/11 to 2013, past his 20th birthday as Wayne and Mario both did.

I already explained that, above. The Pens during Crosby's second season surged up in the standings, from a crappy team to a very good team. Generally speaking, young scorers tend to hit their peaks when their team improves and becomes competitive after not being so formerly.

See, for example, Yzerman in 1987-88, Gretzky in 1981-82, and a bunch of others. Naturally there are exceptions, but as I didn't expect the Pens to get noticeably better in the regular season than they were in 2006-07 (which they didn't), accordingly I didn't expect Crosby to do a lot better than he did.

 

[Troubadour]

He was only nineteen, so I don't see how anyone would have expected him not to improve. I was hoping for a 150-point season somewhere along the road.

I remember at one point during 06/07 he got so good, even his former detractors and Ovechkin cats admitted he was way better than Ovi. I definitely did not expect things to turn out the way they did eventually.

 

[daver]

I already explained that, above. The Pens during Crosby's second season surged up in the standings, from a crappy team to a very good team. Generally speaking, young scorers tend to hit their peaks when their team improves and becomes competitive after not being so formerly.

See, for example, Yzerman in 1987-88, Gretzky in 1981-82, and a bunch of others. Naturally there are exceptions, but as I didn't expect the Pens to get noticeably better in the regular season than they were in 2006-07 (which they didn't), accordingly I didn't expect Crosby to do a lot better than he did.

But then Yzerman got even better in 88/89 while his team regressed. That doesn't support your thoery.

In Crosby's case, he had the 2nd best 18 year old rookie scoring finish in NHL history after coming into the league as the best offensive prospect since Mario. It should have been no surprise that he did what he did the next year given his pedigree nor that his team would have been greatly improved with him producing like that. He had already shown he could carry a mediocre team to championships as a prospect.

The 06/07 Pens were a marginally better team offensively (24 more GFs), much of which you would point to Crosby for producing, while their defense was the primary reason for their improvement (last to 14th in GA).

And he did do a lot better at his peak but as we know, it is not reflected as a full season. I think a Wayne-like ascendance was the hope, as it is with McDavid, but given how much tighter the league is defensively, one has to wonder if generational talent can separate itself to the same degree given how the league has evolved. The three greatest offensive talents in NHL history all played in a 25 year period that saw the numbers of team increase by 400%.

 

[The Panther]

But then Yzerman got even better in 88/89 while his team regressed. That doesn't support your thoery.

Actually, you're quite right about that! (Although, I don't personally think Yzerman was "better" in 1988-89 than in 1987-88, but he did score more points.)

All I know is, I didn't expect Crosby to start joining Wayne and Mario with 150 point seasons. He didn't seem as exceptionally gifted in vision and/or physical skills. I mean, I don't think he was as good an offensive-zone passer as Joe Thornton, for example, and not as good a shooter as Ovechkin and some others. He was just a really, really good and talented player whom the media was ready to crown hockey king of the world when given the slightest chance. Maybe that overwhelming praise of him kind of turned off my expectation, too, I dunno.

...given how much tighter the league is defensively, one has to wonder if generational talent can separate itself to the same degree given how the league has evolved.

I don't think there's any doubt you are right about that.

The three greatest offensive talents in NHL history all played in a 25 year period that saw the numbers of team increase by 400%.

In my opinion, the only one of those three whose numbers/results clearly benefited from expansion/watered-down competition is Bobby Orr. From the end of Orr's rookie season to the start of his fifth season, the NHL grew by 117% in size.

By contrast, the NHL Gretzky entered in Oct.1979, though larger by 4 teams (including his), was of a total of 21 pro-teams in North America, compared to the 32 there were in 1974-75. The WHA "merger" in 1979 resulting in a reduction of pro-teams, not an expansion. Having said that, the 4 new teams that entered were all pretty bad that first year, but can Gretzky be said to have benefited when he himself was on one of the expansion teams?

Similarly, Mario entered a very stable League that didn't change teams at all for 7 years and even by 1997 had only increased by five.

 

[BenchBrawl]

It's not very hard to picture Crosby winning 5 consecutive Art Ross trophies without injuries and without Mike Johnston in 2015.Not to mention the damn lock-out year in 2013.

In 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, he's the overwhelming favorite, except maybe in 2012 where Malkin is burning it up, but didn't Crosby's absence weirdly contributed to that? Anyway, the PPG numbers, small sample size aside, are backing Crosby winning 4-5 Ross in this window.He was 1st in PPG all five years.

Not only that, but in those five seasons he was 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 years old, pretty much exactly the age range where the other Big Four had their out-of-this-world peak seasons.

My conclusion is that Crosby's peak was hidden from us.His career level looks like a plateau, but is it really the case if we think of 2011-2015 in a what-if scenario?

 

[daver]

It's not very hard to picture Crosby winning 5 consecutive Art Ross trophies without injuries and without Mike Johnston in 2015.Not to mention the damn lock-out year in 2013.

In 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, he's the overwhelming favorite, except maybe in 2012 where Malkin is burning it up, but didn't Crosby's absence weirdly contributed to that? Anyway, the PPG numbers, small sample size aside, are backing Crosby winning 4-5 Ross in this window.He was 1st in PPG all five years.

Not only that, but in those five seasons he was 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 years old, pretty much exactly the age range where the other Big Four had their out-of-this-world peak seasons.

My conclusion is that Crosby's peak was hidden from us.His career level looks like a plateau, but is it really the case if we think of 2011-2015 in a what-if scenario?

It should be somewhere between a "plateau" and a "what if scenario" which what I think most of the HOH considers.

Who knows what path his career would have taken if he had completed his 10/11 season. Would he have been as motivated to keep it up. Would the Pens had longer playoff runs in 2011 and 2012 which also could have affected his RS performances.

I think he goes down as the best player to not have at least one full season at his peak.

 

[Luigi Lemieux]

Truth be told i was expecting a peak of 160 after his 19 year old season. He was actually pacing for 135-140 at one point deep into the season. An additional 20-30 points to that didn't seem too farfetched.

A few things happened - a) scoring leaguewide plummeted after that year, b) he lost a bit of speed after the high ankle sprain, which he never quite recovered, c) Ovechkin/Malkin emerged to challenge him as best player, and at times took that mantle from him, d) we realized players were coming into the league closer to a finished product than in the past.

I'm certainly not disappointed in the slightest, he's still a top 10 player, has accomplished everything, and is a true winner. Some figured after 07 that he could be Gretzky/Lemieux tier, which it was apparent soon after that he isn't. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Big Phil]

Is there a near, or pretty near consensus that Crosby is the best player of his generation? I think from 2005-'10 there was this 1a) 1b) thing with him and Ovechkin. Both had things you loved about them and there was the odd time Malkin played at their level for a whole season, think 2009. After that, Crosby had that explosive beginning to 2010-'11 and Ovechkin had a drop in numbers that lasted for a little while. Some of that I think was caused by the 2010 playoff loss to Montreal where the Caps started playing a more cautious game instead of going full throttle. It contributed to Ovechkin's numbers dropping and the Caps were much less of a threat after this.

Outside of a big tear at the end of 2013 where he took the Hart from Crosby (Crosby wins this without an injury at the end of the year) he really didn't do much over the next 4 years, at least not on the "Ovechkin" level. Crosby himself had his struggles, but this was solely because of injuries. His 2011, 2012 and 2013 seasons he should have won the Art Ross, and almost certainly would have without injuries. Heck, he almost did it in 2013 still despite missing 25% of the season. Then the 2014 season, and that was where he took home everything at the awards show again. That year Ovechkin did have 51 goals to lead the league, but a -35 rating and a significant drop off in assists where he has pretty much been since.

I don't think anyone thought Ovechkin's career was better than Crosby's in 2014, so why now? Ovechkin is an all-time great, but overall I think you take Crosby's career. He was the more even distributor offensively (goals and assists), better defensively, better team success and has clearly had the better playoff career.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Is there a near, or pretty near consensus that Crosby is the best player of his generation? I think from 2005-'10 there was this 1a) 1b) thing with him and Ovechkin. Both had things you loved about them and there was the odd time Malkin played at their level for a whole season, think 2009. After that, Crosby had that explosive beginning to 2010-'11 and Ovechkin had a drop in numbers that lasted for a little while. Some of that I think was caused by the 2010 playoff loss to Montreal where the Caps started playing a more cautious game instead of going full throttle. It contributed to Ovechkin's numbers dropping and the Caps were much less of a threat after this.

Outside of a big tear at the end of 2013 where he took the Hart from Crosby (Crosby wins this without an injury at the end of the year) he really didn't do much over the next 4 years, at least not on the "Ovechkin" level. Crosby himself had his struggles, but this was solely because of injuries. His 2011, 2012 and 2013 seasons he should have won the Art Ross, and almost certainly would have without injuries. Heck, he almost did it in 2013 still despite missing 25% of the season. Then the 2014 season, and that was where he took home everything at the awards show again. That year Ovechkin did have 51 goals to lead the league, but a -35 rating and a significant drop off in assists where he has pretty much been since.

I don't think anyone thought Ovechkin's career was better than Crosby's in 2014, so why now? Ovechkin is an all-time great, but overall I think you take Crosby's career. He was the more even distributor offensively (goals and assists), better defensively, better team success and has clearly had the better playoff career.

After the 12/13 hart, OV did the following in the next 4 seasons (13/14-16/17):
3x rocket
Hart runner up
2x hart top 10
3x AST (1x 1st, 2x 2nd)
3x 50 goals (rest of the NHL combined had zero)

That's not "doing much"? That's entry into the HOF.

You take OV's career because a 16-11 gap in individual awards isn't close. Yes Crosby would have more if not for missed games (especially if you are giving him fantasy awards for a season he played 20 games, which is absolutely ridiculous). But fantasy goes both ways and OV would pick up more hardware in 08/09 and 09/10 as well. Looking at reality, Crosby has played 70+ games in 9 seasons. OV was better than him in 5 of those (05/06, 08/09, 09/10, 14/15, 17/18) and is better again this season. So in 10 of Crosby's healthy seasons, OV has been better 6x.

OV's career is better because he has a huge gap in individual hardware, he peaked higher and for longer, he has the best season of the generation, he has been better than Crosby in the majority of his (Crosby's) healthy seasons and he is the greatest goal scorer in history. No amount of team success changes who the better player is.

 

[The Panther]

Since Ovechkin has his Cup now, I'd rate those two guys dead even. One may pace ahead of the other from here on, but I don't think that'll happen.

Hopefully they'll retire at the same time, and then they can go in the Hall together.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Crosby clearly is more complete of a player than Ovechkin is, and since his offense is not lacking in comparison he is the better player.
What is more open to debate is who had the better career, perhaps what brought Howe above Orr in the current top 100 players project here. Maybe even what brought Howe over Lemieux even though even i as a Penguins fan can see that Orr was better than Lemieux and that #66 peak is borderline compared to Howe's.
Orr when on the ice was a better player than Howe though, and might be somewhat reminicent to Crosby vs. Ovechkin.

 

[The Panther]

Crosby clearly is more complete of a player than Ovechkin is, and since his offense is not lacking in comparison he is the better player.

I'm not sure why you say Crosby is "clearly" the more complete player. Of course a fair argument can be made there, but I certainly wouldn't say it's as clear as you're making out (or clear at all).

Ovechkin certainly has a physical element that Crosby mostly doesn't. Is there some huge difference between their ES results? I don't think so.

 

[daver]

Given the changes to league dynamics, I thought that Crosby could prove to be more comparable to the Big 4 than his numbers might show based on playoff performances and team success.

That has come true to a certain degree.

 

[daver]

I'm not sure why you say Crosby is "clearly" the more complete player. Of course a fair argument can be made there, but I certainly wouldn't say it's as clear as you're making out (or clear at all).

Ovechkin certainly has a physical element that Crosby mostly doesn't. Is there some huge difference between their ES results? I don't think so.

Besides the eye test and the responsibilities associated with being a #1C, he has gotten Selke recognition, is the much better ES scorer for their careers ).82 ES PPG vs. 0.69 , and has a significantly higher plus/minus.

There is a great argument he is the better all around offensive player anyways while, most importantly, carrying lower depth linemates more the majority of their careers.

OV hit like a truck with no regard for defensive positioning but really showed no aptitude for board play or responsible play in hos own end for most of his career.

 

[daver]

Crosby clearly is more complete of a player than Ovechkin is, and since his offense is not lacking in comparison he is the better player.
What is more open to debate is who had the better career, perhaps what brought Howe above Orr in the current top 100 players project here. Maybe even what brought Howe over Lemieux even though even i as a Penguins fan can see that Orr was better than Lemieux and that #66 peak is borderline compared to Howe's.
Orr when on the ice was a better player than Howe though, and might be somewhat reminicent to Crosby vs. Ovechkin.

If the discussion is limited to the regular season there is a debate.

 

[The Panther]

Besides the eye test and the responsibilities associated with being a #1C, he has gotten Selke recognition, is the much better ES scorer for their careers ).82 ES PPG vs. 0.69 , and has a significantly higher plus/minus.

I'm not really seeing three of these four points. (I'll leave aside "the eye test", as I have a feeling you're not exactly objective.)

First, while being a center is indeed a position of responsibility, I don't think we can fault Ovechkin for being a winger. That's just silly.

Second, "Selke recognition". Really? I personally don't value the Selke at all (as I don't understand what it means, and I don't think voters do either), and the voting record I see shows Crosby finished as high as 7th once in his career, which means the highest he ever finished was with 4.7% of the vote. It's completely negligible.

Third, the ES scoring. I guess if you consider 0.1 PPG as "much better", then Crosby is indeed the higher scorer on a per game basis. And Crosby is certainly the better playmaker and probably a better passer. My issue, however, with favoring Crosby strongly for 0.1 PPG is the number of games he's missed. It's just a lot. Crosby was doing remarkably well in the short seasons of 2010-11 and 2012-13, but it's just as likely that if he'd finished 2011 and played the full season in 2013, his rapid pace would have dropped (as he has never had a full season at that pace). If that had happened, his ES PPG might still be marginally higher than Ovechkin, but now we'd be into the 0.05-or-something range which is virtually meaningless.

And finally, the plus/minus. Yes, there is an argument for Crosby here. Since they each entered the League, Cros is at about +179 (in about 140 fewer games) and Ovie at about +101. (I'm tempted to suggest the difference-maker is simply Ovechkin's outlier 2013-14 season, when he inexplicably went -35... but I guess he has to own that!) It's a difference for sure, but is it really significant, given the vagaries of plus/minus? With high-scoring forwards, I personally tend to ignore plus/minus and look instead at actual goals-for and against when the player is on the ice. In this, Ovie is +792 and Crosby +727, which is to say about exactly even.


So, out of your four arguments, I can get behind the plus/minus one in Crosby's favor -- i.e., his results have been somewhat better at even-strength. That is notable, but it's not like Ovechkin is a slouch (he's still in the top-20 plus/minus players since he entered the League, and is 4th-best of PPG players in that span). But as mentioned, with offensive players, I personally only care about overall goal-differential (though this, too, obviously requires some context), and in this category, they're even (in fact, Ovechkin is better overall, but in 140-odd more games).


I think, if forced to distinguish the two players, I might argue that at their respective peaks Crosby is a slightly better player. My reasoning would be that he has proven capable of leading the League in goals and in assists, separately, which Ovechkin hasn't (though it's easy to forget that Ovechkin has been top-10 in assists three times). One could, of course, turn that around and say that Ovechkin has been far and away the best goal-scorer since he's been in the League, whereas Crosby has never really been far and away the best at anything (I wouldn't make that argument, but some might).

So, anyway, you can split a hair between them in my opinion. But I can't see any reason for your opinion that Crosby is "clearly" a more complete player.

 

[JackSlater]

Given the changes to league dynamics, I thought that Crosby could prove to be more comparable to the Big 4 than his numbers might show based on playoff performances and team success.

That has come true to a certain degree.

No, it really hasn't come true to any degree. Crosby still has no argument against any big four players. Should be more worried about his comparison with Ovechkin honestly and perhaps McDavid before long. Crosby should be compared with the Hull, Beliveau type players.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Regarding the Selke, while voters probably vote with different criterias its not like many of them are without merit.
Ovechkin is useless without his goals, unfortunately none of the Selke voters value his "physical" game in that regard.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Regarding the Selke, while voters probably vote with different criterias its not like many of them are without merit.
Ovechkin is useless without his goals, unfortunately none of the Selke voters value his "physical" game in that regard.

You think Ovechkin's 500+ assists are useless?

 

[Pominville Knows]

You think Ovechkin's 500+ assists are useless?

They are to some extent a product of him shooting the puck whenever he gets it.

 

[Big Phil]

After the 12/13 hart, OV did the following in the next 4 seasons (13/14-16/17):
3x rocket
Hart runner up
2x hart top 10
3x AST (1x 1st, 2x 2nd)
3x 50 goals (rest of the NHL combined had zero)

That's not "doing much"? That's entry into the HOF.

You take OV's career because a 16-11 gap in individual awards isn't close. Yes Crosby would have more if not for missed games (especially if you are giving him fantasy awards for a season he played 20 games, which is absolutely ridiculous). But fantasy goes both ways and OV would pick up more hardware in 08/09 and 09/10 as well. Looking at reality, Crosby has played 70+ games in 9 seasons. OV was better than him in 5 of those (05/06, 08/09, 09/10, 14/15, 17/18) and is better again this season. So in 10 of Crosby's healthy seasons, OV has been better 6x.

OV's career is better because he has a huge gap in individual hardware, he peaked higher and for longer, he has the best season of the generation, he has been better than Crosby in the majority of his (Crosby's) healthy seasons and he is the greatest goal scorer in history. No amount of team success changes who the better player is.

No, I mean from 2010-'14 he didn't do a whole lot that made you think he still "had it". Honestly, lurk around these boards with old threads from those years, the idea was that Stamkos was the better goal scorer at the time and not Ovechkin. The idea was that Ovie was doing what all great players do, have their goal totals drop in his late 20s. This was the consensus pretty much. Like I said, other than a surge in 2013 where he won the Hart thanks to a freak injury that robbed Crosby of 25% of the season he didn't do anything that made you think he was better than Crosby. Ovechkin has made up for it since, but again he hasn't had the overall arsenal from an offensive standpoint as Crosby.

Crosby has led the NHL in goals twice. Ovechkin 7 times. Obviously we know where the edge is there. But here is the question, is Ovechkin a better playmaker than Crosby? Not even close, no one is going to debate this and I think most would agree the gap between Crosby and Ovechkin as goal scorers is noticeably smaller than their comparison as playmakers. Also, Crosby is a far better goal scorer than Ovechkin is a playmaker. His career PPG is 1.29 to Ovechkin's 1.12 and right now at this moment they are more or less tied in overall points. Throw in Crosby's playoff performances, being a center taking faceoffs, more Selke recognition, better defensively, etc...…….it makes up for the edge in physical play Ovechkin has. Ovechkin will shoot whenever he gets the chance, off the rush or on the power play. Kudos to him for continuing to excel at this because even though teams know this is happening they haven't been able to stop it his whole career. But with Crosby you don't know what he'll do as much when he has the puck, and I find that more dangerous. Like I said earlier, the low assist years by Ovechkin - and they are continuing - aren't helping him when you compare him to Crosby and more of an overall approach to offense.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I'm not sure why you say Crosby is "clearly" the more complete player.

Dude, it's not even a little bit close...