Video Nasty
Registered User
- Mar 12, 2017
- 4,842
- 8,515
4. Big 5. To me - this would imply that by the time he retires, you can make a legitimate case for McDavid > Orr, or McDavid > Lemieux or even McDavid > Gretzky. To me this seems very unlikely. It's not impossible (which is impressive on its own), but unlikely. Gretzky has 10 art ross trophies. If McDavid could match that, or come close with 8 or 9 (2nd best ever has 6), along with adding a lot of playoff success (multiple cups/smythes) in what will be seen as a more competitive era than Gretzky - maybe he can reach this tier? I'd say below 5% odds he reaches that high, but not impossible.
My best guess is McDavid flirts between #2 and #3.
I look at the Big Four a bit differently. No one tops Gretzky, so that eliminates the remaining three members having arguments for #1, as you first outline. I understand the people who do make their personal cases for any of the other three members. To me, the Big Four is a collection of players who through some combination of play, talent and career, have ironclad arguments against everyone else that comes after.
By legitimate Big Five, I mean that McDavid is on track to join that group and will do so not just as the consensus 5th best player ever, but as someone who one can make an argument for against the other members, excluding Gretzky in my eyes.
If he were to enjoy a full 20 year career, yes I can see myself persuaded into ranking him as being the second greatest player ever, even though I would always have someone like Lemieux ranked ahead of him as a player. I value both longevity and high level of play, and not relying on what ifs whenever possible.
I’m also recognizing the willingness that this current generation and someone who is just beginning to watch hockey right now knowing McDavid as the best player in the game will have to rank him highly going forward.