Connor McDavid: Greatness Walks Among Us

[sns2]

Fellas, after last night - insane goal and four primary assists in only 17 minutes of icetime - I was again reminded that in #97 greatness walks among us. I’m not here to argue his place in the pantheon of all time greats. I am here to say that like 99, he is not of this world, and every hockey fan should watch and appreciate this guy. Just when you think you’ve see it all, he does something new. I watched 99 and now get to watch 97. Lucky buzzard I am.

[nighteyes]

He did the same when he was a kid playing for the Erie Otters of the OHL

[outofbounds]

Now only if he had a team to play with him...

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by outofbounds

Now only if he had a team to play with him...

Dri is an elite NHL player, easy top 5 in NHL
RNH-not a team in the NHL that wouldn't want hi in their top 6
Hyman
Kane
Bouch
List goes on. Just missing 1 or 2 key pieces but they seem to be pulling it together. This team will be in the playoffs. How far they get is anybodies guess. They do have the talent to go all the way.

[Talking moose]

Would have loved to see him play in the Gretzky/Bossy era when defence was nonexistent.
His numbers would be through the roof.

[mooseknuckle]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Would have loved to see him play in the Gretzky/Bossy era when defence was nonexistent.
His numbers would be through the roof.

Yes!! And gretzky in this Era, with the training, and different game. Would be cool to see how the two stack up in reverse eras

[Jack fish hunter]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Would have loved to see him play in the Gretzky/Bossy era when defence was nonexistent.
His numbers would be through the roof.

His career probably would’ve ended early because they actually hit back then…

[58thecat]

He is a talented player and just amazing to watch but that’s where it ends until he wins the Stanley cup, Olympic gold etc if not he is just a generational player that may fall short of the true great ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sns2]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

He is a talented player and just amazing to watch but that’s where it ends until he wins the Stanley cup, Olympic gold etc if not he is just a generational player that may fall short of the true great ones.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can’t go fo that. By your definition of greatness, not a single great player has ever played for the Canucks or Jets.

There are 32 teams all trying to win the same prize, and it’s a team game, and there’s a salary cap, none of which there were when so many of the players our generation often consider great, played the game.

Using simple statistics in a salary capped league, winning the cup is a pipe dream for the vast majority of players, and repeating as champs near impossible.

I’m still pretty convinced he will win a cup before he is done, but individual greatness is no guarantee.

If it were a legit qualification, the hall of fame would require it, no?

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by sns2

I can’t go fo that. By your definition of greatness, not a single great player has ever played for the Canucks or Jets.

There are 32 teams all trying to win the same prize, and it’s a team game, and there’s a salary cap, none of which there were when so many of the players our generation often consider great, played the game.

Using simple statistics in a salary capped league, winning the cup is a pipe dream for the vast majority of players, and repeating as champs near impossible.

I’m still pretty convinced he will win a cup before he is done, but individual greatness is no guarantee.

If it were a legit qualification, the hall of fame would require it, no?

The hall of fame has become saturated with above average players for the most part but very few are great.

My view is you need to win at all levels, lead on and off the ice and of course have longevity to have this success.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Talking moose]

One thing I don’t get is that mcdavid got his name on Canadas walk of fame before Sid……. So wrong…….

[sns2]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

The hall of fame has become saturated with above average players for the most part but very few are great.

My view is you need to win at all levels, lead on and off the ice and of course have longevity to have this success.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Above average guys like Jarome Iginla, Marcel Dionne, Dale Hawerchuk, Cam Neely, Brad Park, Patel Bure, the Sedins, Peter Stastny?

These guys were much more than above average hockey players.

[sns2]

Just saw this piece by Gino Reda from TSN on where McDavid fits on the greatest list of players all time.

Could you imagine McDavid against 5’9” goalies with pads half the current size? It would be obscene.

Anyhow, this is a good piece about exactly this topic.

https://www.tsn.ca/video/7-eleven-th...yers%7E2839057

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by sns2

Above average guys like Jarome Iginla, Marcel Dionne, Dale Hawerchuk, Cam Neely, Brad Park, Patel Bure, the Sedins, Peter Stastny?

These guys were much more than above average hockey players.

Even among your list some are better than others not sure at what level they have won at but I am on the side of Elks perspective on this.

Now if McJesus leads the oilers or any other team he plays on to a cup or two and stays healthy for 20 years adding to the record books then this is my definition of great.

So time will tell but he ain’t no Sid so far.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Talking moose]

So it’s Stanley cups that define “greatness “ then?
Well I guess the flames/oilers/nucks debate is over then……

[Supergrit]

For they most part not winning a cup is not the players fault
Gretzky was a great player and almost his entire career he had good teams to play with. When he left the oilers he never won a cup. Never really came close I think 5 game final in 1993

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by Supergrit

For they most part not winning a cup is not the players fault
Gretzky was a great player and almost his entire career he had good teams to play with. When he left the oilers he never won a cup. Never really came close I think 5 game final in 1993

Didn’t he win in LA?
Edit…. Just checked. lol you’re right. I been thinking for 30 years he did! Lol

[Supergrit]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Didn’t he win in LA?
Edit…. Just checked. lol you’re right. I been thinking for 30 years he did! Lol

I’ll admit the cup makes the legacy that much more I just can’t take nothing away from a player that played as hard as he could but was on a team that couldn’t get it done.
My opinion oilers won a cup with our Gretzky I don’t think the oilers would make the plays offs with out Mcdavid. I think Mcadavid is more important to the oilers now then Gretzky was

[yoteblaster]

As much as I dislike the Oilers, I can’t deny that McDavid is insanely talented. Not hoisting Lord Stanley has nothing to do with it in my opinion

[Talking moose]

Pretty much exactly the same as Crosby.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Pretty much exactly the same as Crosby.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Crosby is way down the list compare the top players like Orr and Gretzky, Borque and Robinson .McDavid isn't even in the top 50 for the current season.

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Crosby is way down the list compare the top players like Orr and Gretzky, Borque and Robinson .McDavid isn't even in the top 50 for the current season.

Sid isn’t one of the great ones?
Mcdavids plus minus is very slightly better than Sid’s career wise.
Sid has 3 cups……

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Sid isn’t one of the great ones?
Mcdavids plus minus is very slightly better than Sid’s career wise.
Sid has 3 cups……

Sid is 10 years older, past his prime. And even in his prime, he wasn't as strong offensively
as some of the biggest stars. What he did better than McDavid, was to lead his team to play their best.

[Talking moose]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Sid is 10 years older, past his prime. And even in his prime, he wasn't as strong offensively
as some of the biggest stars. What he did better than McDavid, was to lead his team to play their best.

The biggest game changer was a guy goes by Marc Andre fluerry.

[Curtsyneil]

Are you actually serious playing the plus minus card. It’s a brutal stat that means absolutely nothing and you can’t compare greatness to a stat like that !!!!

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Curtsyneil

Are you actually serious playing the plus minus card. It’s a brutal stat that means absolutely nothing and you can’t compare greatness to a stat like that !!!!

So which of the players with the top 10 career plus/minus hasn't won a Stanley Cup? How many of the top 25 haven't won a Stanley Cup? It must be a coincidence, that so many of them have won the cup.

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by Talking moose

Sid isn’t one of the great ones?
Mcdavids plus minus is very slightly better than Sid’s career wise.
Sid has 3 cups……

And memorial cup and World Cup and olympics and and and this simply is a great player that has achieved winning at all levels and a hockey sock of individual awards too


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brendan's dad]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Crosby is way down the list compare the top players like Orr and Gretzky, Borque and Robinson .McDavid isn't even in the top 50 for the current season.

I assume you are referring to Ray Bourque? Well if the winning the cup is a requirement of greatness, I have a hard time putting anyone in that category when they are a deadline trade to the cup favorite.

[Trochu]

Originally Posted by brendan's dad

I assume you are referring to Ray Bourque? Well if the winning the cup is a requirement of greatness, I have a hard time putting anyone in that category when they are a deadline trade to the cup favorite.

Bourque was traded to the Avalanche in 1999-2000 were the Aves finished 8th the league. Secondly, they didn't win the cup that year, so that's not why he's in that category.

[brendan's dad]

Originally Posted by Trochu

Bourque was traded to the Avalanche in 1999-2000 were the Aves finished 8th the league. Secondly, they didn't win the cup that year, so that's not why he's in that category.

My mistake, he won it the next year with the Avs and then retired. But the whole purpose of leaving Boston was to win a cup, why couldn't he motivate the Boston players to win the cup?