Hart finalists, no McDavid

[Redrum]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Malkin has never missed the playoffs.

Ergo, Malkin is better than Crosby.

Whoa, you really missed the mark on that one. I know E being NG has a huge effect, but yikes!

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Redrum

Whoa, you really missed the mark on that one. I know E being NG has a huge effect, but yikes!

I got it. Crosby was just saving it up for the playoffs. He has a winner switch he just turns off and on.

Like tonight when the Pens lost, he was just saving it up for next year's playoffs. Chess not checkers.

[OldDutch]

Originally Posted by gamesaver

The difference is this: McDavid is a scorer, but Crosby is a winner. Crosby doesnt want to score highlight reel goals, he will do whatever it takes to win the game. He affects the game in all aspects. McDavid seems to think he has to skate circles around everyone. Crosby understands he doesnt have to, there are smarter, more efficient ways to turn the tables in your favor.

Hope McDavid is ready to share the spotlight with Kovi.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I got it. Crosby was just saving it up for the playoffs. He has a winner switch he just turns off and on.

Like tonight when the Pens lost, he was just saving it up for next year's playoffs. Chess not checkers.

It's still a team game, Crosby did his part and then some with 21 points in 12 PO games, Malkin was hurt and just couldn't be himself, Kessel was terrible and Murray was just OK. Stuff happens after 300+ games in three seasons. Something McJesus likely will never have to worry about!

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

It's still a team game, Crosby did his part and then some with 21 points in 12 PO games, Malkin was hurt and just couldn't be himself, Kessel was terrible and Murray was just OK. Stuff happens after 300+ games in three seasons. Something McJesus likely will never have to worry about!

So when they lose its a team game and when they win its all Crosby?

If the narrative is that Crosby wins because hes a winner than logically you have to accept that Malkin is an even bigger winner because Crosby never made the playoffs until he had Malkin.

It's funny how those that push the winner narrative barely acknowledge that Malkin exists though. I'm pretty sure Malkin had more points than Crosby for one of Crosby's latest Conne Smythes. Malkin also didn't make the cut for 100 greatest hockey players of all time.

[Matata]

It seemed to me Crosby dogged it for the first half of the season, hit the switch for the second half, then lit the afterburners for the post season. It all came across as methodical and deliberate.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Malkin fully deserved his Conn Smythe. Crosby probably didn't deserve either of his. Malkin also has just as many scoring titles as Crosby does. It's a reasonable case.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Malkin also has the advantage of playing against the 2nd pairing.

I’m not knocking Malkin at all though. Great player. You need great C depth to win cups.

Edit: Crosby also leads by example and might be the best in the league at it. Reporters often talk about how they can’t believe how hard and often he practices. Every aspect of the game. When your captain is doing that, and is the best in the game, everyone follows suit and the entire team improves. I think this is the main reason why the Penguins are so successful.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

So when they lose its a team game and when they win its all Crosby?

How about this?

The Penguins are a tremendously good team, and in large part because Crosby is the best player on the planet. I don't think it is any more complicated than that.

If the narrative is that Crosby wins because hes a winner than logically you have to accept that Malkin is an even bigger winner because Crosby never made the playoffs until he had Malkin.

I have no problem with that. The Penguins are incredibly fortunate to have on their roster arguably the two best players in the world.

It's funny how those that push the winner narrative barely acknowledge that Malkin exists though. I'm pretty sure Malkin had more points than Crosby for one of Crosby's latest Conne Smythes. Malkin also didn't make the cut for 100 greatest hockey players of all time.

It is not nearly sa funny as the bizarre Malkin v. Leon Draisaitl comparisons that numerous Oilers fans and propagandists love to trot out. Again, I think this whole discussion is fairly easily summed up as follows:

· Connor McDavid was rightly left out of the final three in Hart Trophy voting
· Sidney Crosby remains the best player in the world
· The combination of McDavid and Draisaitl is laughably not remotely comparable to the luxury that the Penguins continue to possess in Crosby and Malkin

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

[/I]
It is not nearly sa funny as the bizarre Malkin v. Leon Draisaitl comparisons that numerous Oilers fans and propagandists love to trot out. Again, I think this whole discussion is fairly easily summed up as follows:

· Connor McDavid was rightly left out of the final three in Hart Trophy voting
· Sidney Crosby remains the best player in the world
· The combination of McDavid and Draisaitl is laughably not remotely comparable to the luxury that the Penguins continue to possess in Crosby and Malkin

I don't even know what you are talking about here.

If you want to discuss evaluating players based on team success versus individual play that's where I will be.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I don't even know what you are talking about here...

You should probably read through the actual thread that is titled "Hart finalists, no McDavid." The discussion to this point has always been about how much better a player Crosby is than McDavid—that is, until you decided to weigh in and deflect attention from this to some arcane and fairly pointless note about Malkin never missing the playoffs.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

You should probably read through the actual thread that is titled "Hart finalists, no McDavid." The discussion to this point has always been about how much better a player Crosby is than McDavid—that is, until you decided to weigh in and deflect attention from this to some arcane and fairly pointless note about Malkin never missing the playoffs.

So what does that have to do with Draisaitl?

The Malkin point I feel is a strong one.

If you are the type of fan that bases everything on team success, than you get stuck in a catch 22 with Crosby vs Malkin. If Crosby is the best because he wins, well, he didn't win until he played with Malkin.

So if you are saying team success is the ultimate measuring stick, then Malkin has to be above Crosby.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

So what does that have to do with Draisaitl?

The Malkin point I feel is a strong one.

If you are the type of fan that bases everything on team success, than you get stuck in a catch 22 with Crosby vs Malkin. If Crosby is the best because he wins, well, he didn't win until he played with Malkin.

So if you are saying team success is the ultimate measuring stick, then Malkin has to be above Crosby.

From the perspective of a fan team success > player success. The rest is slop for the media to chew on in the off season. The fact of the matter is all time greats are measured by championships. Doesn't mean all hall of famers need to win cups. Still, the best players in the game win games because that's the point. Even if they need a lot of help from their team.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

So when they lose its a team game and when they win its all Crosby?

If the narrative is that Crosby wins because hes a winner than logically you have to accept that Malkin is an even bigger winner because Crosby never made the playoffs until he had Malkin.

It's funny how those that push the winner narrative barely acknowledge that Malkin exists though. I'm pretty sure Malkin had more points than Crosby for one of Crosby's latest Conne Smythes. Malkin also didn't make the cut for 100 greatest hockey players of all time.

They still got to the 2nd round of the playoffs...a "cup run" according to Oilers fans last year

and yeah 21 points FFS

Can't win the cup every year

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

So what does that have to do with Draisaitl?

The Malkin point I feel is a strong one.

If you are the type of fan that bases everything on team success, than you get stuck in a catch 22 with Crosby vs Malkin. If Crosby is the best because he wins, well, he didn't win until he played with Malkin.

I don't think it is at all a catch-22. The fact is that no matter how good a player is he will always require support from other excellent players to achieve his own goals. Malkin's being a tremendous hockey player should not devalue what Crosby has been able to accomplish. Let us also not forget that in the one and only season Crosby did not play in the playoffs he was eighteen-years-old. That was probably also a significant contributing factor.

So if you are saying team success is the ultimate measuring stick, then Malkin has to be above Crosby.

Perhaps, but I don't believe it in any way diminishes the value of Crosby's own stock.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

From the perspective of a fan team success > player success. The rest is slop for the media to chew on in the off season. The fact of the matter is all time greats are measured by championships. Doesn't mean all hall of famers need to win cups. Still, the best players in the game win games because that's the point. Even if they need a lot of help from their team.

Some fans think like that. I think its lazy thinking.

Its why guys like Hall and Kessel got crapped on by fans when they were in Edmonton and Toronto. Ditto for Iginla at the end of his career in Calgary.

It's why people were calling Toews a top 3 NHL center.

Its easier to just pin the success and failures of a team on one guy than to try and analyze the underlying factors of why certain teams win or lose.

[TheIronMaiden]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Some fans think like that. I think its lazy thinking.

Its why guys like Hall and Kessel got crapped on by fans when they were in Edmonton and Toronto. Ditto for Iginla at the end of his career in Calgary.

It's why people were calling Toews a top 3 NHL center.

Its easier to just pin the success and failures of a team on one guy than to try and analyze the underlying factors of why certain teams win or lose.

Let me get this straight, you think that valuing team success over individual success is lazy?

Moreover, if anything, valuing team success is the antithesis to singling out individual players. It is calling out the whole team, including the star players. Its the opposite of the scapegoating you claim would happen. It creates an atmosphere where everyone in the organisation is responsible for success. That is why Toews gets credit because he took advantage of the hard work of everyone in the Blackhawks organisation, and he helped turn that collective work into championships. Hockey is a team sport, those who play the best with their team are better than those who play the best despite their team.

[timbit]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Some fans think like that. I think its lazy thinking.

Its why guys like Hall and Kessel got crapped on by fans when they were in Edmonton and Toronto. Ditto for Iginla at the end of his career in Calgary.

It's why people were calling Toews a top 3 NHL center.

Its easier to just pin the success and failures of a team on one guy than to try and analyze the underlying factors of why certain teams win or lose.

Fair enough.

Where do you rank Crosby? Long term and recently?

Is he the most valuable and complete player ( 200 ft player) in the league for the best team over the past 10 years?

Has he been the most complete and valuable player in the regular season and playoffs for the Penguins , in winning the last two cups?

IMO, he is by far the greatest player in the NHL over the last decade and consistently met the most difficult challenge of being the best player in the playoffs,

He is also the most complete player and leader in the game over the last decade.

He has excelled and led his team by working hard to improve his early weaknesses....shot, face offs, strength etc. , to where he became close to or the best in those categories.

He almost always has been a positive factor in the big moments, including huge international tournaments.

[MoneyGuy]

Oilers semi-fan here with an unpopular opinion with like-minded, but I think that Crosby is clearly the league's best player. When you include defencemen and goalies I'm not even sure he's top three. No, I'm not trying to pander to this audience.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

Oilers semi-fan here with an unpopular opinion with like-minded, but I think that Crosby is clearly the league's best player. When you include defencemen and goalies I'm not even sure he's top three. No, I'm not trying to pander to this audience.

What exactly are you saying here?

Crosby is clearly the league's best player, but is not even top three when factoring goalies and defensemen into the equation?

How does this make a lick of sense?