Best player in the world: 2009

[hamzarocks]

1. Ov
2. Malkin
3. Crosby

 

[GoldenKnight]

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?

Why are you so offended? Not everyone is going to vote for your favorite player, sorry.

It looks like the point of my post went straight over your head. If you can't see the difference in effect on PPG between a healthy player who always plays complete games in their entirety and then rests for a few games while healthy, and comes back on a hot streak after a rest, versus any other player who is injured partway through a game, can't skate/workout for a while due to injury, and eventually comes back probably still dealing with effects from said injury upon returning, then I can't help you. Most HoH posters have in the past agreed that taking healthy games off like Lemieux did in 1996 will artificially increase PPG, if only to a slight degree.

And yes, Ovechkin "only" missed 3 games. But the PPG difference that you mentioned between him and Malkin was "only" 0.01, which is equivalent to "only" a fraction of one point over the course of an 82 game season. So it does matter, and it does make a difference.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

With all the games OV has missed over the years due to family member deaths, it's hard to avoid the issue that he's prone to having his family members die.

 

[Video Nasty]

I think Ovechkin was the best player overall during the 2007-2008 through 2009-2010 seasons, but I also think Malkin’s Conn Smythe is so noteworthy, that it’s not remotely a reach to vote for him.

 

[wetcoast]

That's plain false but okay.

Sure and Ovi had crappy playmakers like Backstrom, Nylander and Fedorov....like I said Ovi isn't a poor choice in this poll but it's really close for 3 guys here.

 

[Wings4Life]

It's close, but I have to give it to Malkin for 2009, which was the beginning of his peak as a player.

Malkin and Ovechkin had about equal impact in the offensive zone, with Malkin bringing more in the other two zones that season. Add in a legendary Smythe run in the playoffs for Malkin, en route to winning the Cup, and it's too much to pass up.

For Ovechkin, the regular season award voting (which doesn't include playoffs, which some of us are voting on here) at the time felt like he received some sympathy votes after the death of his grandfather, who he was close with. Ovechkin and Crosby were both already established superstars, franchise players who had both already swept the major awards prior to this season. The awards are based in part on reputation as well as on storylines, and Ovie had plenty of both after coming back from his grandfather dying. Malkin on the other hand was not a franchise player yet IMO, just "that other guy" on a prime Crosby's team who was somehow having a better year than prime Crosby. The media didn't know what to make of that, or him, and that trend continued for years (2017 top 100 list lol) as Malkin rarely ever got his dues, IMO.

 

[Midnight Judges]

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.

It's the TOTAL time on ice with Crosby that matters (obviously).

Half of Malkin's ice time was with Crosby in 2009 yet you somehow have convinced yourself that's not an advantage. Point noted. Agree to disagree. Backstrom and Semin are nice players but it's not remotely comparable. Backstrom is not even a top 200 player of all time. Crosby is top 10.

Calling Sykora old is a reach. Dude was 32. He was a perfectly fine 20-30 goal player. Viktor Kozlov - who was Ovie's #2 linemate that season, was 33. Similar caliber of player. Of course, the linemates argument does a poor job of accounting for blue liners, and the Pens had a far superior blue line at the time.

Regardless, when two players have similar point production but one player has 60% more goals - that represents a very clear difference between them IMO.

 

[GoldenKnight]

On the topic of defensive play:

While Malkin led the league in takeaways that year, Ovechkin lead the league in giveaways, with 107 giveaways in 79GP. Malkin for comparison had 81 giveaways in 82GP.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

This was malkins season. Art ross, playoff top scorer. Smythe.

 

[daver]

Malkin. Best Players do not do the hot stick thing.

 

[AndreRoy]

I assume we’re talking 2008-2009 here? Because if the OP means 2009-2010 then I’d say omitting the guy who led the NHL in goals that season would invalidate the entire poll.

 

[daver]

I assume we’re talking 2008-2009 here? Because if the OP means 2009-2010 then I’d say omitting the guy who led the NHL in goals that season would invalidate the entire poll.

The OP seems to take some sort of pleasure in having this question asked in every poll.

 

[TheStatican]

Regardless, when two players have similar point production but one player has 60% more goals - that represents a very clear difference between them IMO.

Absolutely, goals should be valued more than assists... However it's not assists in general that are overvalued in point totals, it's secondary assists. I mean haven't you repeatedly made mentions of the lesser value of secondary assists in the board previously yourself? IIRC, you've made erroneous claims that certain players had a higher proportion of them then they actually did.

Anyhow, all points by the NHL's standards are equal, a goal being equivalent to a primary assist and secondary assist, but behaviorally we know this is false. Goals and primary assists are both strong indicators of positive offensive impact. Primary assists are almost always as essential as goals are when it comes to goal creation. Secondary assists however tend to be noisy and more random in nature, the totals for which often regress heavily in future periods. Knowledgeable people who follow the sport generally agree that a goal could be considered as being slightly more valuable than a primary assist, but significantly more valuable than a secondary assist, on average. This is not a dig at Ovechkin, I'm not saying he racked up a huge number of secondary assists, but neither did Malkin.


With that in mind here were each players totals for the season;
[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]

​

Regular Season​

[/TD]

[TD]

Gms​

[/TD]

[TD]

G​

[/TD]

[TD]

A1​

[/TD]

[TD]

A2​

[/TD]

[TD]

Primary Pts​

[/TD]

[TD]

​

Per gm​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

​

Ovechkin '09​

[/TD]

[TD]

79​

[/TD]

[TD]

56​

[/TD]

[TD]

32​

[/TD]

[TD]

22 (41%)​

[/TD]

[TD]

88 (80%)​

[/TD]

[TD]

1.11​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

​

Malkin '09​

[/TD]

[TD]

82​

[/TD]

[TD]

35​

[/TD]

[TD]

47​

[/TD]

[TD]

31 (40%)​

[/TD]

[TD]

82 (73%)​

[/TD]

[TD]

1.00​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Ovechkin has still has the edge but he's not "60% better", he's just 7% better in total and 11% better per game.

In the playoffs Malkin has the edge:
[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]

​

Playoffs​

[/TD]

[TD]

Gms​

[/TD]

[TD]

G​

[/TD]

[TD]

A1​

[/TD]

[TD]

A2​

[/TD]

[TD]

Primary Pts​

[/TD]

[TD]

​

Per gm​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

​

Ovechkin '09​

[/TD]

[TD]

14​

[/TD]

[TD]

11​

[/TD]

[TD]

6​

[/TD]

[TD]

4​

[/TD]

[TD]

17​

[/TD]

[TD]

1.21​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

​

Malkin '09​

[/TD]

[TD]

24​

[/TD]

[TD]

14​

[/TD]

[TD]

17​

[/TD]

[TD]

5​

[/TD]

[TD]

31​

[/TD]

[TD]

1.29​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

When you combine the two the difference between them is minimal:
[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]

​

RS+PO Combined​

[/TD]

[TD]

Gms​

[/TD]

[TD]

G​

[/TD]

[TD]

A1​

[/TD]

[TD]

A2​

[/TD]

[TD]

Primary Pts​

[/TD]

[TD]

​

Per gm​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

​

Ovechkin '09​

[/TD]

[TD]

93​

[/TD]

[TD]

67​

[/TD]

[TD]

38​

[/TD]

[TD]

26 (41%)​

[/TD]

[TD]

105 (80%)​

[/TD]

[TD]

1.13​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

​

Malkin '09​

[/TD]

[TD]

106​

[/TD]

[TD]

49​

[/TD]

[TD]

64​

[/TD]

[TD]

36 (36%)​

[/TD]

[TD]

113 (76%)​

[/TD]

[TD]

1.07​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Ovi's still got a large goals edge, which as I noted should still be considered a little more valuable than primary assists, but secondary assists while being worth less, are not entirely worthless and Malkin essentially makes up for the goals gap by virtue of having more of those.

 

[Midnight Judges]

IIRC, you've made erroneous claims that certain players had a higher proportion of them then they actually did.

Then you remember incorrectly.

 

[Mrb1p]

Im not sure why people are dismissing Crosby on account of PP points, there was a difference of 1 ES primary points between all three players, Ovi ran with it with Primary PP points and Sid was 5 behind and Malkin 12 behind ( 17 secondary PP assists have to weigh against you, thats 45% of your points.)

It's a year where I'm not sure there was a true best player on earth on results, I think on hype you go Ovechkin with his 2008 antics, on ice you go Crosby because that's the best he ever looked (maybe aside from 11-13 but that was a different Crosby) and I guess if you weigh heavily stats you go for Malkin.

To me, Id say Ovi Crosby Malkin, with Malkin being a clear third.

 

[TheStatican]

Then you remember incorrectly.

So this NOT you?

Sidney Crosby Top 5 player of all time

Hard to compare goalies and defenceman amongst forwards and difficult to compare forwards from different eras. IMO Ovechkin & Crosby should be slotted in the 5-10 range. Top 35 forwards all time... 1. Gretzky 2. Lemieux 3. Howe 4. Richard 5. Beliveau 6. Crosby 7. Ovechkin 8. Jagr 9. Hull 10...

forums.hfboards.com

It's the TOTAL time on ice with Crosby that matters (obviously).

Half of Malkin's ice time was with Crosby in 2009 yet you somehow have convinced yourself that's not an advantage. Point noted. Agree to disagree. Backstrom and Semin are nice players but it's not remotely comparable. Backstrom is not even a top 200 player of all time. Crosby is top 10.

Calling Sykora old is a reach. Dude was 32. He was a perfectly fine 20-30 goal player. Viktor Kozlov - who was Ovie's #2 linemate that season, was 33. Similar caliber of player. Of course, the linemates argument does a poor job of accounting for blue liners, and the Pens had a far superior blue line at the time.

Wait, what?
Malkin had 1302:27 minutes of ES ice time that season and he spent just 358.9 minutes of that together with Crosby. That's just 27.5% of his ES ice time, nowhere near half. And if your including powerplay time for some reason not only are you still wrong, but it's as flawed of an argument as I've seen on these boards.

Malkin's total ice time was 1846:24, Crosby meanwhile had a total of 414:51 minutes of powerplay time. Even if we assume Malkin was on the ice for every single minute of Crosby's ice time that's 772:45 minutes, which would amount to 41.9% of Malkin's total. And I doubt Malkin was on the ice for every single second of Crosby's powerplay time. Most of it sure, but not all. So more than likely the actual figure is around 40%.

But more importantly... just what kind of a powerplay do you think the Penguins were running that season? Was it a two-on-one type of scenario? Just Crosby and Malkin out there with a lone defender praying to whatever god he believed in while hopelessly trying to prevent them from scoring at will? I didn't think it needs to be said but two great players don't make an entire powerplay. The fact that Malkin and Crosby played on the same powerplay is completely immaterial to the actual numbers that matter - the efficiency rating of a teams powerplay and the number of goals they scored on it.

On that note I think we could all use a reminder about which team had a better powerplay that season. In the games Crosby missed the Pens powerplay went 0 for 3 & 3 for 16 a total of 3 for 19 in 5 games (15.8%). Excluding that here's how the teams compared;
[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]

​

[/TD]

[TD]

PPO​

[/TD]

[TD]

PP Goals​

[/TD]

[TD]

Efficiency​

[/TD]

[TD]

League Rank​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Capitals​

[/TD]

[TD]

337​

[/TD]

[TD]

85​

[/TD]

[TD]

25.2%​

[/TD]

[TD]

2nd​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Penguins​

[/TD]

[TD]

341​

[/TD]

[TD]

59​

[/TD]

[TD]

17.3%​

[/TD]

[TD]

20th​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Seems like that combination of Ovechkin, Backstrom, Semin, Mike Green - the leagues première offensive defensemen at that time and Brooks Laich along with Kozlov and Fedorov at times was actually pretty damn good.

Much more so than the Pens most common combination of Crosby, Malkin, Letang and Petr Sykora/Miroslav Satan/Jordan Staal. Crosby and Malkin are a great starting point for any powerplay unit, but a 32yo Sykora & 34yo Satan? Not so much. Letang meanwhile was just in his 2nd full year, he was not at Greens level yet and Staal had always been more of a defensive specialist. If the team had Gonchar and Kunitz out there on the man advantage for an entire season they would have been far better, but they didn't. Those two only played in 25 and 20 games each respectively.


Now that we've gotten that out of the way, let's focus on the Even Strength side of the ice. As noted above, Malkin was on the ice with Crosby for a total of 359 minutes at even strength that year, almost entirely in the regular season. In the playoffs despite barely playing any minutes together, Malkin's goal, point and primary point rates all increased. Sure he did a lot of his damage on the powerplay with Crosby, but his even strength numbers didn't decline either. In fact they were actually a little better too;
[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD][/TD]

[TD]ES GPG[/TD]
[TD]ES PPG[/TD]
[TD]Primary ES PPG[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Regular Season[/TD]
[TD]19 in 82 = 0.23[/TD]
[TD]70 in 82 = 0.85[/TD]
[TD]57 in 82 = 0.70[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Playoffs[/TD]
[TD]7 in 24 = 0.29[/TD]
[TD]20 in 24 = 0.83[/TD]
[TD]19 in 24 = 0.79[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

Now let's see how many minutes Ovechkin played with Backstrom and Semin... 1044 and 408 minutes each regular season and playoffs. 341 minutes with both of them together and an additional 1111 minutes with one of them separately. Nobody is claiming Backstrom and Semin are the same caliber of player as Crosby, but Crosby is not two or three times the caliber of player of them either lol. The 'bonus effect' of playing 359 ES minutes with Crosby is not greater than 1044 of Backstrom and 408 minutes with Semin. And in fact the cumulative even strength scoring rates of Ovechkin's and Malkin's line mates prove exactly that.

Here's all the linemates they spent more than 100 minutes of time on ice with at ES that season:
[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]

​

RS+PO 08-09​

[/TD]

[TD]

TOI​

[/TD]

[TD]

RS PPG​

[/TD]

[TD]

RS+PO PPG​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Backstrom​

[/TD]

[TD]

1043.6​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.56​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.57​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Kozlov​

[/TD]

[TD]

516.8​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.39​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.40​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Semin​

[/TD]

[TD]

408.3​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.76​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.72​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Fedorov​

[/TD]

[TD]

222.0​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.38​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.39​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Total/Average​

[/TD]

[TD]

2190.7​

[/TD]

[TD]

​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.54​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]

RS+PO 08-09​

[/TD]

[TD]

TOI​

[/TD]

[TD]

RS PPG​

[/TD]

[TD]

RS+PO PPG​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Fedotenko​

[/TD]

[TD]

652.1​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.54​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.54​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Sykora​

[/TD]

[TD]

559.9​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.36​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.33​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Crosby​

[/TD]

[TD]

358.9​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.81​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.82​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Cooke​

[/TD]

[TD]

170.2​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.39​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.37​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Dupuis​

[/TD]

[TD]

149.0​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.38​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.31​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Satan​

[/TD]

[TD]

129.9​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.38​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.38​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Talbot​

[/TD]

[TD]

126.2​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.25​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.31​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]

Total/Average​

[/TD]

[TD]

2146.2​

[/TD]

[TD]

​

[/TD]

[TD]

0.48​

[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Malkin only played with Cooke and Dupuis in the regular season, so I used their regular season even strength scoring rates. Not to worry though, this actually raises the final number since their scoring was higher in the RS alone.

The cumulative even strength per game scoring rate of the linemates Ovechkin had that season was 0.54
And the cumulative even strength per game scoring rate of the linemates Malkin had that season? 0.48

I'd say it's entirely clear who had the advantage of better linemates overall that season.

 

[Regal]

It's the TOTAL time on ice with Crosby that matters (obviously).

Half of Malkin's ice time was with Crosby in 2009 yet you somehow have convinced yourself that's not an advantage. Point noted. Agree to disagree. Backstrom and Semin are nice players but it's not remotely comparable. Backstrom is not even a top 200 player of all time. Crosby is top 10.

Calling Sykora old is a reach. Dude was 32. He was a perfectly fine 20-30 goal player. Viktor Kozlov - who was Ovie's #2 linemate that season, was 33. Similar caliber of player. Of course, the linemates argument does a poor job of accounting for blue liners, and the Pens had a far superior blue line at the time.

Regardless, when two players have similar point production but one player has 60% more goals - that represents a very clear difference between them IMO.

I would make a longer response but TheStatician did it for me. You keep trying to combine PP and ES time, but PPs are far more unit dependent than ES and the Caps had a much stronger PP. Who cares if Crosby is getting the points if the PP is under 18% when he Caps is over 25? It’s only the ES time that matters, and 1/3 of the time with Crosby and then the majority of the rest of the time with no one better than Sykora or Fedotenko isn’t some big advantage over almost entirely playing with Backstrom and 1/3 of the time with Semin.

Also, Sykora scored 25 goals, but he was significantly worse as an ES player from his prime years where he was a borderline star, which is why I called him “old Sykora”. But yes, Kozlov was a similar calibre player at that point. But Malkin played more with Sykora and Sykora was Malkin’s second best linemates whereas Kozlov was Ovechkin’s third

 

[Midnight Judges]

I would make a longer response but TheStatician did it for me. You keep trying to combine PP and ES time, but PPs are far more unit dependent than ES and the Caps had a much stronger PP. Who cares if Crosby is getting the points if the PP is under 18% when he Caps is over 25? It’s only the ES time that matters, and 1/3 of the time with Crosby and then the majority of the rest of the time with no one better than Sykora or Fedotenko isn’t some big advantage over almost entirely playing with Backstrom and 1/3 of the time with Semin.

Yeah the bit about disregarding PP time is just plain dumb. Powerplay effectiveness wins and loses games just like EV minutes do. In fact they're more impactful on a per minute basis. You desire to pretend it's nothing, but that is illogical.

Powerplay time together, if anything, counts for more because the ability to score is significantly enhanced. If Crosby and Malkin couldn't score together on the PP in 2009, then that's on them. And if Ovechkin was part of a more effective PP with lessor players, then that is likely partially to his credit.

 

[DevilsHughes86]

Malkin completely dominated those playoffs and was the reason the Pens won the Cup!

 

[akapidots]

Gotta go Geno here

 

[TheStatican]

Yeah the bit about disregarding PP time is just plain dumb. Powerplay effectiveness wins and loses games just like EV minutes do. In fact they're more impactful on a per minute basis. You desire to pretend it's nothing, but that is illogical.

Powerplay time together, if anything, counts for more because the ability to score is significantly enhanced. If Crosby and Malkin couldn't score together on the PP in 2009, then that's on them. And if Ovechkin was part of a more effective PP with lessor players, then that is likely partially to his credit.

Your whole point was that Malkin had, and I quote...

an advantage

...from playing together with Crosby for "half"(40% btw, not half) of his ice time, referencing their "powerplay" time in particular.

So how exactly did that provide "an advantage" to Malkin in the scoring race if they:

couldn't score together

On said powerplay?

You have to help us out here because it's an incredibly bizarre argument.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Ovechkin 1.39 ppg 114 points per 82
Malkin 1.38 ppg 113 points per 82
Crosby 1.34 ppg 109 points per 82.

Note that everyone lauds these seasons as part of ovechkins and Malkin peak while for Crosby it is always viewed as a bad season .

They were all super close

 

[Voight]

Ovechkin 1.39 ppg 114 points per 82
Malkin 1.38 ppg 113 points per 82
Crosby 1.34 ppg 109 points per 82.

Note that everyone lauds these seasons as part of ovechkins and Malkin peak while for Crosby it is always viewed as a bad season .

They were all super close

 

[nowhereman]

Ovechkin 1.39 ppg 114 points per 82
Malkin 1.38 ppg 113 points per 82
Crosby 1.34 ppg 109 points per 82.

Note that everyone lauds these seasons as part of ovechkins and Malkin peak while for Crosby it is always viewed as a bad season .

They were all super close

Yeah, the fact that people seem to be pushing aside Crosby as a distant third option is laughable. At the time, it was seen as a 1a vs. 1b situation between OV and Sid, with outlier opinions drifting toward Malkin. I give the edge to OV, as he had the hardware to back it all up, but they were largely the same level of player. On the other hand, Pens fans, players and opposing coaches saw Crosby as the better player between him and Geno, since he generally took the harder match-ups. And he was just as good as Malkin in the 2009 playoffs, with the exception of the Finals (although his line generated more shot/scoring opportunities). Malkin had a handful more PP assists but Crosby was stronger defensively, took hundreds more faceoffs, and, at least analytically, drove the team's offense at a greater rate. And this was the season after he lead the playoffs in scoring the year prior.

Either way, the three players were very close.

 

[MMANumminen]

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

Sure. Chara and Parise are in the poll though too