toby91_ca

Well...we've already seen tons of it obviously, but Edm plays Pit tonight and I'm already seeing a ton of McDavid vs Crosby articles and media discussions. Discussions about Crosby passing the torch as NHL's best on to McDavid, who was better 58 games into their careers, etc. Hard to believe, but Crosby is 29 now and Ovechkin is already 31. They'll both still be effective for several more years I'm sure, but good chance you start seeing them slowly fade from top of the league status. I'm not sure this is the year McDavid takes over (Crosby still looks dominant), but I wouldn't be surprised if next year is the year. Having looked back at guys like Gretzky and Lemieux, they haven't seemed to dominant too much after 30 (different circumstances, but that age level seems to hold true). Time will tell, maybe it will be another young guy that breaks through, but McDavid certainly looks like the guy at this point and the media isn't going to let us think otherwise for a while it seems. They already had the McDavid vs Matthews event last week.

This is from 5 years ago.

Where does career average 65pts a season come from?

1 - $10M isn't close to a max contract 2 - He's not worth that kind of money 3 - Even if he was currently, he's too old to be signing a 7 year contract for that type of money

While not quite the same scenario, is the "Crosby" lottery similar? The draft process was changed for that draft. I think every team was in on being able to get the #1 pick. I think Pittsburgh was still the worst team from the prior season, but technically, their odds of getting the first pick were reduced from what they otherwise would have been. In this situation though, it is different because there was already a draft in 2004 and no season in 2005, so that's why all teams were thrown in with possibility of getting #1. The current situation is different, but I could still see tweaks, which are reasonable and make sense. First, even if the Wings won all of their remaining games, they would still finish last, so they need to have the highest probability and it can't change from where it currently sits. For probabilities of the next lottery teams, I can see the percentages tweaked a bit or evened out a bit based on some logic, but not sure. Then, you also have to figure out the rest of the order. I think more time will be spent on this than really should though.

Pretty sure all the scheduled games are still showing on the calendar is because each game is postponed right now, they haven't "cancelled" the season. It's funny though, even if the season were to resume, we know it will be with a completely revamped schedule.

Luck is involved in being able to accumulate totals, but I have a hard time putting a lot of weight on that when it comes to determining who is a better player. Of course, it does play a role. I wouldn't look at a player that put up crazy numbers in 300-400 games in terms of all-time greatness.....that's tough luck, once you get past a certain point, I think you can reduce the impact of longevity. For example.....doesn't anyone on the planet think Ron Francis is a better scorer (point producer) than Lemieux? He's ahead of him on the all-time scoring list. Ovechkin currently has 16 more career goals than Lemieux, but he's played in 237 more games. That will be the argument a Lemieux backer who make. That's completely different than having 300 more goals than Lemieux in 600 more games or something like that....which is where it could go....but we're not there yet. The Ovechkin backer would argue league scoring was higher during Lemieux's career, which is probably true, but I haven't analyzed it (Lemieux did play during some really bad scoring years league wide I believe).

Already talking about truncated 1st round. The simple issues to point to right now would be the NYI....1pt out of wildcard, but they've only played 68 games vs the 70 games that the 2 wildcard teams have played. Vancouver is tied for last wildcard spot in the West, but technically out of playoff picture, they are 1pt back of 1st wildcard team and 2 games in hand.

Significant challenge would be that they couldn't just take the standings as they stand today because some teams have played 68 games, some 71 (if I'm accurate).

That's a good question. From my perspective, I probably have Mario in my "Gretzky bucket" in that I never really saw him as a pure goal scorer, but statistically speaking, hard to argue.

I looked it up, the last time a team had a +/- this bad was 20 years ago (99-00 Thrashers)

Yeah, it's getting pretty bad. I was looking at that stat earlier in the year, but hadn't paid much attention recently. They are firmly in last place by quite a margin, but that stat is even worse. They are -122, the 2nd, 3rd and 4th worst teams are a combined -130.

Looks like there will be a PHI/PIT or PIT/WSH 1st round series, either would be good. In terms of TB/CBJ, I think that is close to an impossibility at this point. TB is 8pts behind BOS with 12 games to go. The only was TB can play CBJ (in first round anyway) is if they win the division, otherwise, they wouldn't play a wild card team. Looks like it will be TB/TOR.

He was accumulating more assists than anyone else had points back in 85/86.....as I say, I just think he wasn't really a pure goal scorer, he was just a good hockey player and he scored when he needed to, but more often than not, looked to set up others. Moving to LA didn't really impact his production, it really was the hit from behind from Gary Suter in the 1991 Canada Cup....that had a significant impact on his production for the rest of his career (he was only 30 years old at the time as well....his numbers could have been even higher than they are).

You're correct on Ovechkin's consistency, but I wonder if a lot of that has to do with the league as well. Pre-injury, while Gretzky's goal scoring decreased in late 80s, I wonder how much is him vs. league.....i.e. where his totals compare against competition? It doesn't matter that much though, I don't have him at the top of my list....maybe unfairly though?

I think Gretzky lead the league 5 times, not 4. At the same time, I've never really thought about him as the best goal scorer because that was not the type of player he was. He put up huge goal totals just because he was that good....but goal scoring was secondary for him (same for Mario, but to a lesser extent). So I'm somewhat biased into thinking Bossy and Ovechkin are better goal scorers simply because that's their game. I mean, Ovechkin has 700ish goals and 570 assists. When Gretzky had 700 goals, his assist total was 1,400+....so you look at it a bit different. To set the record straight a bit on Gretzky's stats though, his goal scoring didn't go down that much at 26....yes, he scored 40 goals that year, but only in 64 games, he scored 54 in 78 games the next year, then 41 in 73 games the following year. The biggest turning point in his career was when he was 30 and got hit from behind into the boards by Gary Suter (international play). He was never the same player after that. His goal scoring (because as I suggested, was secondary) seemed to take the biggest hit. All that said, I think Ovechkin is the greatest goal scorer, most pure goal scorer. I would have liked to see what Bossy could have done if his career wasn't cut short.

I knew they were having a very bad year, but never looked at it too closely until today, not sure why, but I pulled up the standings. The first thing that jumped out at me is their goal differential (-69). Anyway, anyone else paying much attention to them right now? I couldn't help it, I had to go back and look at prior years and the Avalanche are currently on pace to have the worst year since Atlanta's expansion year (1999-2000). They are on pace for 50 pts and -115 goal differential. Buffalo came close to that bad, but not quite there.

Here's my basic logic...which is a cop out really, but it's true at the same time. Those suggesting Larkin has proven himself as a 1C.....I want to say are wrong, but at a minimum, would have a hard time supporting that. I'm not going to say he won't prove to be one over the course of his career, but he hasn't shown the consistency yet to suggest he's "proven". Did it look like he was well on his way last year after building and improving on 60+ points the year before? Absolutely. I'm guessing he'll bounce back at this year is just a stumbling block. Bad teams or not though, that can't be a big excuse. There are + and - in terms of being able to produce based on how good your team is. On the flip side, has this season proven anything regarding his ability to be a 1C going foward? Absolutely not, however, it's fair for people to be concerned.

All star game and selection is not what it used to be....I'm sure 90+% of that is because what it used to be is when I was a kid, so much different perspective, but for me, part of looking at player accomplishments is how many all star selections they have....which really doesn't make sense anymore. The best players don't always get selected anymore....didn't use to be that way. How does the #5 scorer not make the all star team? Is it annoying when players say stuff like what Larkin said? Sure.....easy to disparage him for that. However, since I don't care enough anymore, I'll just give him the benefit of the doubt and look at it this way: If I'm in Larkin's shoes....I'd be thinking to myself "please don't vote me in"....I'd be embarrassed being selected when I clearly don't deserve to be there....I'd be dreading showing up to the event. The John Scott was a completely different scenario....everyone had fun with that.

Could always look at it as the team is chasing history this year.....could they have the worst season in their history? It will be close, but I don't think they can pull it off due to the 3 point game in today's era. They have the best chance to pull off worst GF vs GA stat in history though. Currently sitting at -62, on pace for -159.....lowest in team history was 85/86 season at -149 and that makes this year look even worse as there was a lot more goal scoring in 85/86, so easier to get blown out and run up a huge -

Don't disrespect (by omitting) the legendary Dave Lewis!! Barry Smith was in there too, but just temporary, so he doesn't really count.

You're right on him being 5 years younger and about 5 years worth of wins away from Q, which is why I'm saying it's possible, but will he coach 5 years longer than Q? Who knows.

Possible, but I think Quenneville and Trotz are pretty big roadblocks between Babcock and #2 all-time. Paul Maurice even.

He probably played a style of game that makes you think he's bigger than he is and that's probably why his career didn't last as long as it could have.

Don't Zetterberg and Forsberg pretty much have the same body (size)? Draisaitl is quite a bit bigger than both.