Is Crosby one of the best players ever?

[Craig2]

Name some players who have done all that in 4 seasons, and 2 half seasons please

I'm not arguing that his first six seasons aren't epic - they're amazing, some of the best accomplishments I've ever seen in a kid that age. However, if this is it, then I think he loses some lustre because of the fact that the doesn't accomplish anything after that age.

I'd also again point out that while he scored the Olympics-winning goal, that was the only point he had in the playoff round while Canada was carried by Toews (Best Forward award in the Olympics) and Shea Weber.

As a side, do you also believe that Matt Forte is better than Jim Brown?

[Sidthekidc87]

bdiam - I blatantly stated that for this arguments sake, I have no problem putting Orr above him

And so what if I think Crosby has more talent than Orr....just as I may have a bias against crosby, you apparently have a bias towards Orr

[Sidthekidc87]

I'm not arguing that his first six seasons aren't epic - they're amazing, some of the best accomplishments I've ever seen in a kid that age. However, if this is it, then I think he loses some lustre because of the fact that the doesn't accomplish anything after that age.

I'd also again point out that while he scored the Olympics-winning goal, that was the only point he had in the playoff round while Canada was carried by Toews (Best Forward award in the Olympics) and Shea Weber.

As a side, do you also believe that Matt Forte is better than Jim Brown?

its sad that someone has to result to making jokes when they run out of things to say in a conversation

And what does he need to accomplish...Im confused...if this is it for him, I see no holes in his accomplishments...what more does he need to accomplish?

obviously if gretzky and orr played for more games than they did, they would accomplish more - thats common sense

But if you were to rationally, and proportionately compare Crosby and his accomplishments to Gretzky and Orrs accomplishments, I have trouble not including him in that class

Key words - rational and proportionately

[Sidthekidc87]

And Im not going to be ignorant - I really had no problem with people putting guys like Orr and even Bossy/Hull in front of him - but to say he's not top 25, meaning he's not above Jagr or Potvin...well I'm sorry, as a hockey fan thats insulting

[Craig2]

I actually didn't think that was any more outrageous than stating that Crosby is more "talented" than Orr, so I couldn't resist poking fun.

Rationally, I'd say that Crosby has had a good a start to his career as almost anyone. However, to be a top-5 all-time talent takes, I believe, more than six full seasons. You can disagree, but that's my opinion. It's the same reason I can't think of Sandy Koufax as a top-5 pitcher, despite his peak value being among the highest ever......I think longevity, even if it's a few more seasons, needs to count for something.

I say all this, by the way, as a fan of the game who loves to watch Crosby.

its sad that someone has to result to making jokes when they run out of things to say in a conversation

And what does he need to accomplish...Im confused...if this is it for him, I see no holes in his accomplishments...what more does he need to accomplish?

obviously if gretzky and orr played for more games than they did, they would accomplish more - thats common sense

But if you were to rationally, and proportionately compare Crosby and his accomplishments to Gretzky and Orrs accomplishments, I have trouble not including him in that class

Key words - rational and proportionately

[NastyPatches]

As much as I like Crosby, there's no way he's done enough at this point to merit top-five discussion. I'd point out a few things from what I've read on this thread:

1) Closet full of trophies - Crosby has one Hart Trophy and one Art Ross, hardly enough to fill any closet. He also has a Cup, but I would point out that he lost out on the Conn Smythe to Malkin.

2) Olympics goal - That is an iconic goal, but where was he before that point? He had a decent start, but did not have a point against Russia in the QF or Slovakia in the semis. That team was carried by guys like Toews and Weber, not the alleged top-5 talent ever.

3) Longevity matters - I would never lump Crosby in with guys who take 20 years to score 500 goals, but I do think he needs more service before ranking him that high. Albert Pujols had a first-six seasons that rank among the best ever in MLB, but it took proving himself over a longer period before he was talked about in the same breath as the legends.

Crosby could end top-5, but he is not there yet.

+1000000

Couldnt have said it any better.

[RGM81]

To whom is it insulting? Sidney Crosby? Or you?

When ranking players, most tend to look at the entire body of work, not just snapshots. A guy that has 500+ goals will generally be ranked over a guy that had 4 40-goal seasons out of the box and all kinds of talent but then fizzled. This is part the reason that a guy like Eric Lindros, who was dominant as part of the LOD line with the Flyers for several years, often gets left out of the conversation of being among the all-time greats.

Crosby has the potential to be considered in that pantheon. But I don't believe, and this is just my opinion, that it's fair to say that a guy that has 6 seasons under his belt (2 of which cut short by injury) is greater than someone that had a longer career and racked up numerous accomplishments to their credit. Yes it's phenomenal that Crosby has a large number of awards & trophies after just a few years, but IMO it's too soon to start ranking him above a guy that played twice as long as has multiples of the awards that Crosby has earned.

If he never plays another game, he'll be considered among the greats and we will forever be speculate just how much more he could have accomplished.

[Sidthekidc87]

Well it just a matter of opinion then...while some think 6 seasons aren't enough, I think they are

I respect the opinion, as long as the talent and what he has done in the 6 year span is respected.....I still have him ranked in the top, as do other columnists...but everyone is entitled to their opinion

[Sidthekidc87]

To whom is it insulting? Sidney Crosby? Or you?

When ranking players, most tend to look at the entire body of work, not just snapshots. A guy that has 500+ goals will generally be ranked over a guy that had 4 40-goal seasons out of the box and all kinds of talent but then fizzled. This is part the reason that a guy like Eric Lindros, who was dominant as part of the LOD line with the Flyers for several years, often gets left out of the conversation of being among the all-time greats.

Crosby has the potential to be considered in that pantheon. But I don't believe, and this is just my opinion, that it's fair to say that a guy that has 6 seasons under his belt (2 of which cut short by injury) is greater than someone that had a longer career and racked up numerous accomplishments to their credit. Yes it's phenomenal that Crosby has a large number of awards & trophies after just a few years, but IMO it's too soon to start ranking him above a guy that played twice as long as has multiples of the awards that Crosby has earned.

If he never plays another game, he'll be considered among the greats and we will forever be speculate just how much more he could have accomplished.

I think Crosby is better player than lindros was in his prime....but again, my opinion

[theboxbreaker96]

ill be honest its extremly hard to say who is the top 5 crosby plays now when its hard to score goals. gretzky played when it was different he wasnt hit goalie pads and sizes different everything was different. You would have to imagine crosby playing when gretz and mario played would he put up the same #s or close to it id say yes