Edmonton is No Good XII: "I Dunno.. it's Just Not Good."

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by AFireInside

I would take Barkov, Kucherov, Mackinnon, and probably Makar over McDavid..

That's crazy. Look, I hate the Oilers with a passion, but given one player to start an organization with, other than Crosby, there is no player I take over McDavid.

[dissentowner]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

That's crazy. Look, I hate the Oilers with a passion, but given one player to start an organization with, other than Crosby, there is no player I take over McDavid.

It isn't crazy at all. I don't agree with the Barkov take but the rest I do. I would take Celebrini ahead of him too.

[looooob]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

That's crazy. Look, I hate the Oilers with a passion, but given one player to start an organization with, other than Crosby, there is no player I take over McDavid.

am I crazy (are we starting the franchise now?) to take 19 yo Celebrini over any of them?, certainly- and I respect the heck out of him, over 38 year old Crosby? no?

[Southside]

I listened to about 5 minutes of that. Good grief that Karius guy is something. Frank was destroying him.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

See, you are basing all this off of feelings and not stats. Fair enough, but look at TB when Kucherov was out all year. They inch into the POs, he comes back, and they win the cup. Look at Florida with and without Barkov.

The fact McDavid is the very best on a bad team doesn't mean that much to me. And it's not that bad of a team player wise anyway. They do have Draisaitl, Hyman, RNH. They have Bouchard and Ekholm.

If feelings are eye test, then yes that's 100% factoring in. He's the best I've ever seen, let alone in a comp vs Kucherov.

Florida's been without Barkov, but also Tkachuk for half the season. Now Marchand. Huge games lost totals across that roster.

In the Kucherov vs McDavid debate, I think each team's record (historically, regular season) is quite telling:

Tampa without Kucherov: 88-42-17

Edmonton without McDavid: 28–33–10

[mennoknight]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

If feelings are eye test, then yes that's 100% factoring in. He's the best I've ever seen, let alone in a comp vs Kucherov.

Florida's been without Barkov, but also Tkachuk for half the season. Now Marchand. Huge games lost totals across that roster.

In the Kucherov vs McDavid debate, I think each team's record (historically, regular season) is quite telling:

Tampa without Kucherov: 88-42-17

Edmonton without McDavid: 28–33–10

All that stat tells you is that Edmonton's team is bad and Tampa's is good

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by mennoknight

All that stat tells you is that Edmonton's team is bad and Tampa's is good

But goes back to the point of who's doing the heavier lifting on their respective teams, which is at the heart of who's the better player, IMO.

[Sylvanfan]

Originally Posted by Southside

I listened to about 5 minutes of that. Good grief that Karius guy is something. Frank was destroying him.

Yeah, Karius likely lost his job as the leadoff hitter for the state media. He got Noem'd!

I guess he's more in the unofficial role. He'll just be outcast. Stauffer is the one who has to carry water or face certain peril.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by looooob

am I crazy (are we starting the franchise now?) to take 19 yo Celebrini over any of them?, certainly- and I respect the heck out of him, over 38 year old Crosby? no?

Sorry, my fault for just reading the last page, and not seeing any context. Are we saying if we had to take whichever player currently in the NHL and their at this point skill level for one year? I'd still take McDavid or Draisaitl over anyone if we're talking playoffs and their game breaking ability.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

Sorry, my fault for just reading the last page, and not seeing any context. Are we saying if we had to take whichever player currently in the NHL and their at this point skill level for one year? I'd still take McDavid or Draisaitl over anyone if we're talking playoffs and their game breaking ability.

No, it's about the "best player in the game" term used by certain media. I said it's not backed up by any objective criteria since McDavid isn't the best in any stat, and hasn't been for years.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by dissentowner

It isn't crazy at all. I don't agree with the Barkov take but the rest I do. I would take Celebrini ahead of him too.

If Barkov and McDavid swapped teams, I could see a world where Edmonton wins both of those Cup finals.

[D as in David]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Can you imagine if he used his foot speed on the backcheck on 85% of his shifts?

The impact would be off the charts.

At the Olympics we saw that on more shifts than his entire time in Edmonton.

If you want to be the best player on the talent impact more parts of the game.

It's too bad for McDavid that the effects of elite-level coaching can't follow the player back to their regular team.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

But goes back to the point of who's doing the heavier lifting on their respective teams, which is at the heart of who's the better player, IMO.

See, you can make that argument, but it's sure debatable, and not supported by any objective facts because you'd have to have them switch teams to gauge it. Maybe Kucherov does just as heavy a lifting on Edmonton and for sure Barkov would change that team fundamentally. Honestly the fact TB survives better just means that their team is better, not Kucherov v. McDavid. The goaltending alone is a factor (look at how Calgary's goalies prop them up).

All this really says to me is that simply proclaiming McDavid "Best Player in the World" is not something that any media member should just do as if it's unarguable.

[direwolf]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

McDavid is still the best. He’s willed that Oiler team to the finals the last two years, let’s not forget.

He’s far from a perfect two way player, but whatever warts he’s got, his attributes more than make up for it.

Nah, McDavid is no good.

[Sylvanfan]

I think it's been pretty clear this year that Barkov is the most impactful player on the Panthers. The thing is McDavid probably could become a great two way player if he wanted to. A coach like Cooper would likely challenge him to become a Selke winner. But that goes against the Oiler philosophy of we want our offensive guys to score and win art ross trophies like they did in the 80's.

[GioforPM]

A poll is in order: Who is the best hockey player in the world? McDavid, Barkov, Mackinnon and Makar are probably the present candidates. I doubt you'd say Celebrini quite yet. One some past occasions you might have thrown a goalie in but not right now, I think.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

McDavid is still the best. He’s willed that Oiler team to the finals the last two years, let’s not forget.

He’s far from a perfect two way player, but whatever warts he’s got, his attributes more than make up for it.

That still doesn't make mcdavid "the best". What makes a guy "the best" is being the best. He hasn't been.

"Pretty good" seems more apt.

The pacific path has been garbage the last two years and will be again this year. It's not the gargantuan accomplishment some make it out to be.

Several teams in the east would have had repeat finals appearances with the path the oilers have had too. This division is amateur hour.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by howard_the_duck

If feelings are eye test, then yes that's 100% factoring in. He's the best I've ever seen, let alone in a comp vs Kucherov.

Florida's been without Barkov, but also Tkachuk for half the season. Now Marchand. Huge games lost totals across that roster.

In the Kucherov vs McDavid debate, I think each team's record (historically, regular season) is quite telling:

Tampa without Kucherov: 88-42-17

Edmonton without McDavid: 28–33–10

I assume you never saw Mario Lemieux play. I don't think McDavid is even in the same sentence as Super Mario.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

See, you can make that argument, but it's sure debatable, and not supported by any objective facts because you'd have to have them switch teams to gauge it. Maybe Kucherov does just as heavy a lifting on Edmonton and for sure Barkov would change that team fundamentally. Honestly the fact TB survives better just means that their team is better, not Kucherov v. McDavid. The goaltending alone is a factor (look at how Calgary's goalies prop them up).

All this really says to me is that simply proclaiming McDavid "Best Player in the World" is not something that any media member should just do as if it's unarguable.

Which is it then I guess? Are we saying team success is impossible to measure for these two players unless they switch teams, or are we saying that Kucherov has been to the finals a few times and has won a cup, therefore he's the better player? Because that was your earlier quote I was responding to.

If we're in agreement that Tampa is the far better team with these players not in the equation, then the quality of team Kucherov plays on absolutely factors into his stats AND playoff performance.

I do think you're right to question the unchallenged 'best player in hockey' title that McDavid has. I tend to agree with the title and think it's warranted, but it is absolutely debatable.

[howard_the_duck]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

I assume you never saw Mario Lemieux play. I don't think McDavid is even in the same sentence as Super Mario.

Mario was amazing, not taking away from that. Just the sheer force of McDavid, his skills to me are unmatched historically.

Where Mario had the incredible handles, McDavid can do that at speeds we've never seen before.