Best player in the world: 2009

[wetcoast]

Ovechkin.

As for the playoff argument, I’m pretty sure Ovechkin would’ve gone further in the playoffs if Crosby was on his team as well.

Regardless the question isn’t who has the better year. There’s not anyone who’s have taken Malkin over OV back then. It’s not close.

Funny that Washington finished 4th in the regular season and Pittsburg 8th eh?

Washington had the much better lineup on paper outside of each teams top 2 players.

Also I didn't look but would bet that Backstrom was in on as many points for Ovi as Crosby/Malkin were.

The thing is that for the playoffs and overall all 3 guys are really close for that year.

 

[KrisLetAngry]

Gotta go Malkin this season.

That playoff run was bonkers.

 

[Offtheboard412]

Ovechkin is probably the right pick, but I think Malkin has a really strong case. Led the league in scoring in the regular season and playoffs. Led the league in takeaways (this was when everybody made a big deal about Datsyuk leading the league in takeaways every year). I'm not saying Malkin was a great defensive player but he was making an impact in all 3 zones.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Funny that Washington finished 4th in the regular season and Pittsburg 8th eh?

Washington had the much better lineup on paper outside of each teams top 2 players.

Also I didn't look but would bet that Backstrom was in on as many points for Ovi as Crosby/Malkin were.

The thing is that for the playoffs and overall all 3 guys are really close for that year.

I don’t care where they placed. I don’t care what happened in the playoffs. Malkin and Crosby were playing with each other. Of course they won multiple cups. If Ovechkin had either of them as a teammate he’d have won multiple cups too.

Ovechkin was the best player in the world at that time. Full stop.

 

[wetcoast]

I don’t care where they placed. I don’t care what happened in the playoffs. Malkin and Crosby were playing with each other. Of course they won multiple cups. If Ovechkin had either of them as a teammate he’d have won multiple cups too.

Ovechkin was the best player in the world at that time. Full stop.

If...... the fact of the matter is that side of each teams top 2 players Washington had the better roster but whatever right?

Either way one could make a case for 3 guys here being close but Ovi is winning it this year, next year will be more interesting.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

If...... the fact of the matter is that side of each teams top 2 players Washington had the better roster but whatever right?

There’s no way I’d take Washington’s roster over Pittsburgh’s when they’ve got a generational player and a superstar like Malkin.

Put Ovechkin on Pittsburgh and Malkin on Washington, you seriously don’t think OV will have more cups? Come on. Imagine OV and Crosby. They’d own the cup.

Either way one could make a case for 3 guys here being close but Ovi is winning it this year, next year will be more interesting.

Ovechkin is hands down best player in the world here. All credit to Malikin on a great year and cup win. But Ovechkin is a flat out better player.

 

[wetcoast]

There’s no way I’d take Washington’s roster over Pittsburgh’s when they’ve got a generational player and a superstar like Malkin.

The thing is that Washington had better regular season success and more top end talent than Pittsburg this year, it's all there in black and white.

Put Ovechkin on Pittsburgh and Malkin on Washington, you seriously don’t think OV will have more cups? Come on. Imagine OV and Crosby. They’d own the cup.

That kind of makes crosby look pretty good too eh?

Ovechkin is hands down best player in the world here. All credit to Malikin on a great year and cup win. But Ovechkin is a flat out better player.

I have no problem people picking Ovechkin but it's not a hands down situation as it's not like Crosby and Malkin weren't superstar elite this season right?

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

The thing is that Washington had better regular season success and more top end talent than Pittsburg this year, it's all there in black and white.

That kind of makes crosby look pretty good too eh?

I have no problem people picking Ovechkin but it's not a hands down situation as it's not like Crosby and Malkin weren't superstar elite this season right?

Of course Malkin and Crosby are incredible. Who’d say otherwise? Crosby’s a generational player just like OV is. Malkin is next level down but still amazing. Them being in the same team is insane.

 

[LevelingSolo]

This was Ovi until 2010-2011

 

[MMANumminen]

Ovi but H. Sedin should be in the poll at least

 

[wetcoast]

Ovi but H. Sedin should be in the poll at least

Wouldn't matter and I honestly wonder about the 09-10 next poll if Ovi/Crosby mop the floor with Hank.

 

[bobholly39]

Yes it did. No one cared that Lemieux had a below PPG playoff in 2001, while Sakic won the hart, playoff ross and rocket. No one cared Iginla missed the playoffs in 2002 while Lidstrom won the Norris and Smythe. No one cared Forsberg was out in round 1 in 03. No one cared that MSL won the hart/lindsay/ross and cup in 04. No one cared that Thornton's PPG dropped from 1.52 to 0.82 in 06 regular season vs playoffs. What exactly did Crosby do in the 07 playoffs? Nothing but no one cared. Also Crosby was not the 2nd best player in 08, he missed half the season and he didn't have the best playoffs either. Crosby was not a top 3 player in 09, at least according to the media and his peers as he wasn't a hart or lindsay finalist. Lots of people playing revisionist history here for Crosby and Malkin.

I feel like you're just throwing a lot of stuff that doesn't really go together.

Your initial claim was that playoffs are only brought up now that Ovechkin is on top.

I'm saying no - Sakic in 2001, MSL in 2004. It's brought up when the best playoff performers also are near the top overall as best player in league.

When the best player (or top ~2-3 for those over-sensitive HF'ers) is also close to being the best player in the world - it makes sense to count playoffs as a differentiator. If the best player in the playoffs is nowhere close to best player in the world, it doesn't.

2001, 2004, 2008, 2009....all of Sakic/MSL/Crosby/Malkin are close to best in the world, and also best playoffs. Playoffs matter more.

2006 none of Ward/Pronger (best in playoffs) close to best in the world, so playoff less impactful. Same for many other years.

It's not that difficult to follow.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Washington had the much better lineup on paper outside of each teams top 2 players.

That's plain false but okay.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Crosby assisted or scored the goal on 50 of Malkin's 113 points in this regular season.

Sidney Crosby 2008-09 Scoring Log | Hockey-Reference.com

Scoring for Sidney Crosby for 2008-09

www.hockey-reference.com

 

[MetalheadPenguinsFan]

Malkin

 

[GoldenKnight]

I'd give it to Malkin for 2009.

He had an Art Ross winning season followed by arguably the best Conn Smythe run of this century to date. Peak Malkin was also better defensively than peak Ovechkin (controller disconnected) as well.

I think Malkin has a really strong case. Led the league in scoring in the regular season and playoffs. Led the league in takeaways (this was when everybody made a big deal about Datsyuk leading the league in takeaways every year). I'm not saying Malkin was a great defensive player but he was making an impact in all 3 zones.

You're right, Malkin did lead the league in takeaways in 2009, and was pretty good in all 3 zones, as opposed to Ovechkin who really only put in the effort on one end of the ice.

1st in PPG

Let's take a closer look at this: 1.39 for Ovechkin and 1.38 for Malkin, which is equivalent to less than 1 point per 82 game season.

Lemieux often gets docked for his (post-prime) 1995-96 regular season because he sat out games where he was healthy (eg. back to backs), which gave him an artificially elevated PPG average on the year. The same can be said for Ovechkin in 2008-09, who missed several games while healthy for personal reasons. Ovechkin started out the year poorly, with only 5 points in his first 8 games (Malkin had 13 points in his first 8 games). Ovechkin then got to rest for several games while healthy, and no surprise, puts up a hot streak upon returning of 17 points in his next 8 games. It is highly doubtful Ovechkin does this if he was not nicely rested at that time.

Also, with a less than 1 point difference on the year according to PPG, score effects come into play. With just 4 games left to play in the regular season, Malkin is comfortably ahead of Ovechkin by 4 points, and both players have nearly identical TOI numbers per game at thus stage. Ovechkin is chasing Malkin, and still has some hope of catching him, and receives the following icetimes in the final 4 games of the season: 25:21, 20:08, 23:15, 23:19. He puts up 6 points. Malkin meanwhile is on cruise control in the lead, and his icetimes were: 22:19, 18:20, 16:53, and 19:37, well below his final season average of 22:31. He only puts up 5 points in his last 4 games as a result.

In sum, Malkin was better in terms of offensive production than Ovechkin both at their respective peaks, and throughout their careers as a whole. He most likely outproduces Ovechkin in 2008-09 again if Ovechkin plays all 82 games for two reasons: first, Ovechkin does not get the benefit of resting during the season while taking games off when he is healthy (ala Mario in 1995-96), which would lower Ovechkin's PPG; and second, because instead of decreasing Malkin's icetime at season's end, Malkin would be getting his usual TOI or an elevated TOI (like Ovechkin received) if he was behind (or tied) in the Art Ross race, which would likely have been more than enough for a player like peak Malkin to overcome a 0.01 PPG difference.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Malkin was definitely the better hockey player that year.

Malkin probably had more takeaways in the D zone that year than Ovechkin’s had in his entire life. Malkin was the number one reason the penguins won the Cup that year, even with someone as inept as Bylsma coaching the team.

 

[filinski77]

Ovechkin had the clear better regular season. 56 vs 35 goals is a huge difference. Points were a wash. Sure Malkin had more takeaways, but Ovechkin had 243 hits to Malkins 80. Ovechkin also had way better possession stats too.

Playoffs: Ovechkin was JUST as good as Malkin. And I refuse to give Malkin the edge simply because of team success. That’s silly.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Lemieux often gets docked for his (post-prime) 1995-96 regular season because he sat out games where he was healthy (eg. back to backs), which gave him an artificially elevated PPG average on the year. The same can be said for Ovechkin in 2008-09, who missed several games while healthy for personal reasons.

It was 3 games.

Ovechkin started out the year poorly, with only 5 points in his first 8 games (Malkin had 13 points in his first 8 games). Ovechkin then got to rest for several games while healthy, and no surprise, puts up a hot streak upon returning of 17 points in his next 8 games. It is highly doubtful Ovechkin does this if he was not nicely rested at that time.

So your theory is that Ovechkin wasn't rested to start the season? Huh. Ive never heard anyone claim that before.

And he needed 3 games of rest in order to get hot...for game 9? And this rest propelled him for the remaining 70 games?

And you doubt that Ovechkin could sustain this pace without those massively important 3 games of rest - even though this is the same pace Ovechkin sustained for the previous 80 games before this season as well as the next 72 games in the following season?!?

Wow! That is some seriously good 3 games worth of rest!

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

I'd give it to Malkin for 2009.

He had an Art Ross winning season followed by arguably the best Conn Smythe run of this century to date. Peak Malkin was also better defensively than peak Ovechkin (controller disconnected) as well.



You're right, Malkin did lead the league in takeaways in 2009, and was pretty good in all 3 zones, as opposed to Ovechkin who really only put in the effort on one end of the ice.



Let's take a closer look at this: 1.39 for Ovechkin and 1.38 for Malkin, which is equivalent to less than 1 point per 82 game season.

Lemieux often gets docked for his (post-prime) 1995-96 regular season because he sat out games where he was healthy (eg. back to backs), which gave him an artificially elevated PPG average on the year. The same can be said for Ovechkin in 2008-09, who missed several games while healthy for personal reasons. Ovechkin started out the year poorly, with only 5 points in his first 8 games (Malkin had 13 points in his first 8 games). Ovechkin then got to rest for several games while healthy, and no surprise, puts up a hot streak upon returning of 17 points in his next 8 games. It is highly doubtful Ovechkin does this if he was not nicely rested at that time.

Also, with a less than 1 point difference on the year according to PPG, score effects come into play. With just 4 games left to play in the regular season, Malkin is comfortably ahead of Ovechkin by 4 points, and both players have nearly identical TOI numbers per game at thus stage. Ovechkin is chasing Malkin, and still has some hope of catching him, and receives the following icetimes in the final 4 games of the season: 25:21, 20:08, 23:15, 23:19. He puts up 6 points. Malkin meanwhile is on cruise control in the lead, and his icetimes were: 22:19, 18:20, 16:53, and 19:37, well below his final season average of 22:31. He only puts up 5 points in his last 4 games as a result.

In sum, Malkin was better in terms of offensive production than Ovechkin both at their respective peaks, and throughout their careers as a whole. He most likely outproduces Ovechkin in 2008-09 again if Ovechkin plays all 82 games for two reasons: first, Ovechkin does not get the benefit of resting during the season while taking games off when he is healthy (ala Mario in 1995-96), which would lower Ovechkin's PPG; and second, because instead of decreasing Malkin's icetime at season's end, Malkin would be getting his usual TOI or an elevated TOI (like Ovechkin received) if he was behind (or tied) in the Art Ross race, which would likely have been more than enough for a player like peak Malkin to overcome a 0.01 PPG difference.

Lol what a garbage post. "OV got to rest several games". First of all, he missed 3 games lol. 2nd, his grandfather passed away, that's why he missed games. Pretty sure that's going to affect the way someone performs at their job. Yeah peak Malkin definitely out produced peak OV, that's why OV tore him a new hole in pts, goals, hart voting, lindsay voting and your fav stat PPG all 4 of those years right (07-10). And if you wanna talk about "artificially elevated PPG", Malkin is the poster child. Guy misses dozens of games every season but people like you keep pumping his PPG. But here you are writing an essay downplaying OV's PPG because he missed 3 games. So which is it?

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Malkin was definitely the better hockey player that year.

Malkin probably had more takeaways in the D zone that year than Ovechkin’s had in his entire life. Malkin was the number one reason the penguins won the Cup that year, even with someone as inept as Bylsma coaching the team.

Was waiting for you. Saw you posting in the MacK vs Forsberg thread that Forsberg was definitely not the best player from 97-04 because "he only had 1 top 5 hart finish". But in 09 since OV tore Malkin a new hole in hart voting, you suddenly don't care about the voting results and are bringing up "takeaways". Malkin was never the best player in the world, no one outside of a few delusionals were ever taking him over OV or Crosby (he had the best season in 11/12 but even then no one was taking him over Crosby).

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Was waiting for you.

How creepy.

Saw you posting in the MacK vs Forsberg thread that Forsberg was definitely not the best player from 97-04 because "he only had 1 top 5 hart finish". But in 09 since OV tore Malkin a new hole in hart voting, you suddenly don't care about the voting results and are bringing up "takeaways".

It’s not just about “takeaways”, it’s about the entirety of a player’s game on the defensive side of the ice…you know, the side of the ice that prime Ovechkin consistently ignored.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

How can it be “not close” when the guy used as a comparison won the regular season scoring title, the playoff scoring title and the cup .

 

[Midnight Judges]

How can it be “not close” when the guy used as a comparison won the regular season scoring title, the playoff scoring title and the cup .

Because Ovechkin had 21 more goals, was way more physical, and Malkin's stats were significantly helped by playing a ton with the third best player in the world (Crosby) who scored the goal or assisted on over 50 of Malkin's 113 points.

 

[Regal]

Because Ovechkin had 21 more goals, was way more physical, and Malkin's stats were significantly helped by playing a ton with the third best player in the world (Crosby) who scored the goal or assisted on over 50 of Malkin's 113 points.

The use of how many points Crosby/Malkin had one each other is nonsense. Malkin played about 1/3 of his ES time with Crosby and almost all his PP time. He scored at an extremely high rate at ES with Crosby (4.30 P/60), but still played a lot more time with players like an old Sykora and Fedotenko, and still produced at a high rate (2.72 P/60). Ovechkin meanwhile played the vast majority of his ES time with Backstrom, and a considerable amount with Semin, as well as the majority of his PP time. Your argument is trying to suggest that 1/3 of his ES time with Crosby is some huge advantage, but the reality is that advantage is offset by the poor linemates when Crosby wasn’t on the ice. It’s very likely Malkin scores a similar amount if he played as much with a Backstrom level player as often as Ovechkin did along with 1/3 of his time with a Semin level player, rather than Crosby for 1/3 of the time and mediocre linemates for the rest.