Best player in the world: 2006

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Jagr. 2pts behind Thornton but 25 more goals. Lol at Crosby getting any votes, guy was nowhere close to the best. Ignoring Thornton and Jagr, OV beat Crosby in goals, GPG, pts, PPG, Calder voting (124-4 1st place votes), hart voting, lindsay voting.. Crosby should have zero votes.

 

[FrankSidebottom]

Over Jagr or Thornton? No

Over the majority of the list? Yes

Save % .925 - 2nd in the league
GAA 2.09 - 2nd in the league
Shutouts 5 - tied for 4th
Goals Allowed Adjusted - 2nd
Record of 28-10
If he had played 50 games he might win the Vezina. He played 30 less games than Brodeur and had the same number of shutouts. Heck of a bounce back from Hasek after only playing 14 games in the NHL since the 01-02 season. He showed he was still the main that one year in Ottawa.

Then no need to make things more complicated than they are. There are some guys with zero or one vote but you want to add yet another option. Doesn’t make any sense, it’s not an option contest.

 

[Regal]

Jagr. 2pts behind Thornton but 25 more goals. Lol at Crosby getting any votes, guy was nowhere close to the best. Ignoring Thornton and Jagr, OV beat Crosby in goals, GPG, pts, PPG, hart voting, lindsay voting.. Crosby should have zero votes.

I think that’s likely people still confusing the title for the calendar year

 

[vancityluongo]

It's not about the 2006 calendar year, but the 05-06 season. OP insists on using confusing language.

Watching live, it was absolutely Jagr

ah this is how i voted as well - was surprised to see Sid so far behind the other two

In that case, I think Thornton had the best season but Jagr was the best player.

 

[Deas]

As it's not about calendar year I really think the thread titles should be edited

 

[authentic]

Jagr. 2pts behind Thornton but 25 more goals. Lol at Crosby getting any votes, guy was nowhere close to the best. Ignoring Thornton and Jagr, OV beat Crosby in goals, GPG, pts, PPG, Calder voting (124-4 1st place votes), hart voting, lindsay voting.. Crosby should have zero votes.

I wouldn’t say nowhere close, in the 2nd half of the season he scored at a 120 point pace. Just as in the first half Forsberg was the best player

 

[Jorma Heart]

The guy who made Jonathan Cheechoo a Rocket winning elite sniper

 

[Midnight Judges]

Holy cow I just noticed the homer votes for Crosby.

Oh well, it's not not as absurd as when a third of the history forum recently claimed Crosby was better than Ovechkin in the 2005-06 season. At least this forum can plausibly claim confusion.

 

[Machinehead]

I just take it for granted that "2006" in hockey means 05-06. That's how all trophies are awarded including the Stanley Cup.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Holy cow I just noticed the homer votes for Crosby.

Oh well, it's not not as absurd as when a third of the history forum recently claimed Crosby was better than Ovechkin in the 2005-06 season. At least this forum can plausibly claim confusion.

For the record, that's the opposite of what happened. See this post.

The HOH regulars decisively voted (17-2) that Ovechkin was better in 2006. It was non-History forum regulars who were mostly voting for Crosby.

I agree Crosby has no case whatsoever over Ovechkin (or Thornton, Jagr, Lidstrom, and Pronger) for 2006.

 

[Midnight Judges]

For the record, that's the opposite of what happened. See this post.

The HOH regulars decisively voted (17-2) that Ovechkin was better in 2006. It was non-History forum regulars who were mostly voting for Crosby.

I agree Crosby has no case whatsoever over Ovechkin (or Thornton, Jagr, Lidstrom, and Pronger) for 2006.

The final results were 29.5% of the history forum willing to revise history and claim Crosby was better than Ovechkin in 2005-06. It's not a good look.

Your characterization of it being only 2 regulars is not accurate. I don't really like calling people out but when I look at the list, it's a bunch of familiar names - not unfamiliar to that forum.

Why do you try to cover for this garbage? Why not address it head on? That forum has a very obvious set of biases. Addressing it and challenging it increases legitimacy. Sweeping it under the rug makes it weaker.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

The final results were 29.5% of the history forum willing to revise history and claim Crosby was better than Ovechkin in 2005-06. It's not a good look.

Your characterization of it being only 2 regulars is not accurate. I don't really like calling people out but when I look at the list, it's a bunch of familiar names - not unfamiliar to that forum.

Why do you try to cover for this garbage? Why not address it head on? That forum has a very obvious set of biases. Addressing it and challenging it increases legitimacy. Sweeping it under the rug makes it weaker.

What's there to cover for? It's an open poll, and the majority of the responses were from people who weren't History forum regulars. The people who were History forum regulars voted decisively in favour of Ovechkin (17 out of 19).

You're trying to characterize the results of poll as the consensus of the History forum. But the majority of the voters were people who don't post there regularly (I go into detail in the post about how I determine who's a "regular", so anybody can check my work). There were 19 votes from HOH regulars vs 41 non regulars. If there was a poll on, say, the Colorado sub-forum, and two-thirds of the voters weren't regular posters there, nobody would suggest that the results reflect what Avalanche fans think (especially if the outsiders voted differently than the regulars - which is exactly what happened here).

Once again, if you look at the HOH regulars, they (we) voted 90% in favour of Ovechkin. Isn't that a good thing - that the History forum was much more supportive of Ovechkin than random posters dropping by?

 

[Regal]

Holy cow I just noticed the homer votes for Crosby.

Oh well, it's not not as absurd as when a third of the history forum recently claimed Crosby was better than Ovechkin in the 2005-06 season. At least this forum can plausibly claim confusion.

What do you think about the homer votes for Ovechkin?

 

[Toby91ca]

The final results were 29.5% of the history forum willing to revise history and claim Crosby was better than Ovechkin in 2005-06. It's not a good look.

Your characterization of it being only 2 regulars is not accurate. I don't really like calling people out but when I look at the list, it's a bunch of familiar names - not unfamiliar to that forum.

Why do you try to cover for this garbage? Why not address it head on? That forum has a very obvious set of biases. Addressing it and challenging it increases legitimacy. Sweeping it under the rug makes it weaker.

Yes Ovechkin had more goals (he's a winger and goal scorer), he had 4 more points than Crosby. Both of them were pretty close that year....it's not like the comparison is who was the better center for the Oilers in 1986: Gretzky or Krushelnyski? I'd vote Ovechkin as the better player that year than Crosby, but a poll resulting in 71% Ovechkin and 29% Crosby doesn't seem like a travesty.

As to this poll, I don't think either deserve a vote.

 

[Midnight Judges]

What's there to cover for? It's an open poll, and the majority of the responses were from people who weren't History forum regulars. The people who were History forum regulars voted decisively in favour of Ovechkin (17 out of 19).

You're trying to characterize the results of poll as the consensus of the History forum. But the majority of the voters were people who don't post there regularly (I go into detail in the post about how I determine who's a "regular", so anybody can check my work). There were 19 votes from HOH regulars vs 41 non regulars. If there was a poll on, say, the Colorado sub-forum, and two-thirds of the voters weren't regular posters there, nobody would suggest that the results reflect what Avalanche fans think (especially if the outsiders voted differently than the regulars - which is exactly what happened here).

Once again, if you look at the HOH regulars, they (we) voted 90% in favour of Ovechkin. Isn't that a good thing - that the History forum was much more supportive of Ovechkin than random posters dropping by?

I think Mikefarkas, Pomminvilleknows, Beau Nows, DrJohnCarlson, Frisco, ScandaleduJour, Overrated, TheGuiminator, and Sancosm all post over there. Some more than others for sure. Regardless, they all voted in the poll.

That particularly bad poll result didn't really diverge from other bad faith efforts in the history forum where the consensus is that Ovechkin would have been the 5th greatest player on the 1956 Canadiens and the 7th greatest player in the NHL of the inexplicably illustrious 1950s - behind a 1 time Norris winner and zero time MVP who never led the NHL in anything. I realize you think that's defensible, but just know that it isn't.

What do you think about the homer votes for Ovechkin?

I voted for Jagr, so I don't agree. IMO the case for Jagr over Thornton is pretty good (same points, 25 more goals).

Ovechkin's case would be that the lottery team around him was garbage. And it was. But I don't think that makes up the 2 goal/17 point difference to Jagr. I mean, I don't agree with it but that's at least maybe sorta plausible.

That said, Ovechkin is clearly a better choice than Crosby for this particular season despite losing this poll to Crosby 18 to 11. That's not a tit for tat BTW. They're not even. The overreach of the Crosby voters is greater because Crosby is farther from the best player this season.

There truly is no case for Crosby. Anyone care to make one?

 

[Randyne]

What do you think about the homer votes for Ovechkin?

I wanted to vote for Jagr, then I saw Sid 12 vs Ovi 6. Then I tried to even out this nonsense. Then I saw your comment and voted for Jagr to make sidfans noticeable.
I think it's not homer votes it's willing to make things normal.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Yes Ovechkin had more goals (he's a winger and goal scorer), he had 4 more points than Crosby. Both of them were pretty close that year.

Centers aren't at some disadvantage here. Of the top 50 adjusted goal seasons of all time, something like 50% of them are from centers despite there being twice as many wingers in the NHL at any given moment.

You say "he's a goal scorer" as if that somehow wipes the value away.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Thornton's three year peak (2006-2008) where he led the league in assists for three straight years was a sight to behold.

He was just outdone by three generational talents coming into their own, partway through said peak.

Actually thornton was drastically better than ovechkin 2 out of those 3 seasons.

 

[Regal]

I think Mikefarkas, Pomminvilleknows, Beau Nows, DrJohnCarlson, Frisco, ScandaleduJour, Overrated, TheGuiminator, and Sancosm all post over there. Some more than others for sure. Regardless, they all voted in the poll.

That particularly bad poll result didn't really diverge from other bad faith efforts in the history forum where the consensus is that Ovechkin would have been the 5th greatest player on the 1956 Canadiens and the 7th greatest player in the NHL of the inexplicably illustrious 1950s - behind a 1 time Norris winner and zero time MVP who never led the NHL in anything. I realize you think that's defensible, but just know that it isn't.



I voted for Jagr, so I don't agree. IMO the case for Jagr over Thornton is pretty good (same points, 25 more goals).

Ovechkin's case would be that the lottery team around him was garbage. And it was. But I don't think that makes up the 2 goal/17 point difference to Jagr. I mean, I don't agree with it but that's at least maybe sorta plausible.

That said, Ovechkin is clearly a better choice than Crosby for this particular season despite losing this poll to Crosby 18 to 11. That's not a tit for tat BTW. They're not even. The overreach of the Crosby voters is greater because Crosby is farther from the best player this season.

There truly is no case for Crosby. Anyone care to make one?

I mean I agree with all that, including Jagr over Thornton. I’m just saying, there’s always votes that don’t have much justification.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

I think Mikefarkas, Pomminvilleknows, Beau Nows, DrJohnCarlson, Frisco, ScandaleduJour, Overrated, TheGuiminator, and Sancosm all post over there. Some more than others for sure. Regardless, they all voted in the poll.

That particularly bad poll result didn't really diverge from other bad faith efforts in the history forum where the consensus is that Ovechkin would have been the 5th greatest player on the 1956 Canadiens and the 7th greatest player in the NHL of the inexplicably illustrious 1950s - behind a 1 time Norris winner and zero time MVP who never led the NHL in anything. I realize you think that's defensible, but just know that it isn't.



I voted for Jagr, so I don't agree. IMO the case for Jagr over Thornton is pretty good (same points, 25 more goals).

Ovechkin's case would be that the lottery team around him was garbage. And it was. But I don't think that makes up the 2 goal/17 point difference to Jagr. I mean, I don't agree with it but that's at least maybe sorta plausible.

That said, Ovechkin is clearly a better choice than Crosby for this particular season despite losing this poll to Crosby 18 to 11. That's not a tit for tat BTW. They're not even. The overreach of the Crosby voters is greater because Crosby is farther from the best player this season.

There truly is no case for Crosby. Anyone care to make one?

Crosby had 4 less points both didn't make the playoffs. Both participated in the 06 world championships. Crosby led the tournament in goals with 8 and points with 16?

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

I voted for jagr. But ovechkin should be leading crosby Even if I think 102 points as an 18 year old is more impressive than 106 at 20. But ov did have a great olympics with 5 goals in 8 games so overall it's him for that season

 

[pcruz]

Let me ask again...


What year was it that Pronger dragged an average Oilers team to a Cup final?


Yeah.

Him

 

[Albatros]

Let me ask again...


What year was it that Pronger dragged an average Oilers team to a Cup final?


Yeah.

Him

Fernando Pisani almost dragged them all the way.

 

[Beau Knows]

I think Mikefarkas, Pomminvilleknows, Beau Nows, DrJohnCarlson, Frisco, ScandaleduJour, Overrated, TheGuiminator, and Sancosm all post over there. Some more than others for sure. Regardless, they all voted in the poll.

Oh god, we're back to keeping lists of posters who have made perceived slights against Ovechkin.

This isn't normal behavior.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Lots of worthy choices here. I’m going with Lidstrom. Jagr and Thoton are both very worthy as well.