Crosby vs. Ovechkin: a progressive ranking from 2006 to today (#1 -2005/06)

[daver]

This will be an exercise of establishing an HOH consensus (or at least a decent majority) on how these two rate all-time vs. each other. It will go through every season to:

(1) Establish who had the better season/who was better player using the usual analysis in Top 100 player rankings (e.g. scoring, goals, PPG, playoffs, 2-way play, intangibles)

(2) Update a head-to-head ranking that is cumulative i.e. after 2005/06, Ovechkin was ahead, after 2017, Crosby was ahead.

This will be done by a poll.

Season #1 - 2005/06

Crosby - 6th in scoring (the 2nd best scoring finish in NHL history by a player who was 18 years to start the season). Lead WHCs in scoring, youngest ever to do so.

Ovechkin - 3rd in points/goals; one of the best rookie campaigns in NHL history regardless of age


Comment: Both lived up to the hype they had prior to playing in the NHL. Ovechkin had the better season but both were expected to improve especially Crosby. Ovechkin was almost two years older with significant pro experience.

Click to read more...

 

[bobholly39]

You plan on running 16 consecutive Ovechkin vs Crosby polls? Isn't that a bit extreme?

 

[jigglysquishy]

Can't wait to get our 5th Crosby or Ovechkin thread on the front page.

110 of pro hockey history and we focus on two active players.

 

[ESH]

I don’t think either player really established their superiority in their rookie season. Ovechkin had the slightly better season and won the Calder, but it’s just one season right.

I’m sure most people would agree that creating a new thread for each season is unnecessary. It’s pretty obvious who was better in the next 3 seasons, so there’s not much discussion to be had in 3 separate threads.

 

[seventieslord]

Does age matter? As of 2006, I believed Ovechkin definitely had the better season and was better at the time, but attributed that mostly to him being 20 while Crosby was 18. For his age, Crosby was better, but does that matter in this poll?

 

[daver]

Does age matter? As of 2006, I believed Ovechkin definitely had the better season and was better at the time, but attributed that mostly to him being 20 while Crosby was 18. For his age, Crosby was better, but does that matter in this poll?

No, age doesn't matter in the terms of the poll and OP. This is really just to get things rolling.

 

[daver]

I don’t think either player really established their superiority in their rookie season. Ovechkin had the slightly better season and won the Calder, but it’s just one season right.

I’m sure most people would agree that creating a new thread for each season is unnecessary. It’s pretty obvious who was better in the next 3 seasons, so there’s not much discussion to be had in 3 separate threads.

I am sure you mean the three seasons after 06/07. But the point isn't to list who was better in each season, it is to establish who was ahead after the end of each season.

I am sure 100% of people agree that Crosby moved ahead after the 06/07 season but when, if at all, did OV pass Crosby during the next three seasons?

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

The difference between them has always been this. When Crosby is better in a season he is MUCH better. Think 06-07 12-13 13-14 15-16 16-17 18-19 20-21. When ovechkin is deemed better it is usually because crosby missed significant time and by default you get the " well a full season is worth more" crowd running see 07-08 10-11 11-12 19-20. Then you have other seasons where ovechkin is deemed better even with Crosby outscoring him see 14-15 17-18. In 05-06 08-10 while ovechkin was better Crosby was still an undisputed top 3 player in the world and performed as such. Never have you seen Crosby reach the lows ov has in a full season. Think 65 points 69 points 71 points in full or close to full seasons. Ovechkin has struggled to be a ppg player in some seasons since the age of 26 and even sometimes he barely made it. The only reason it's being brought up again is because once again Crosby has been injured as he was much better than ovechkin last season

 

[dr robbie]

I don't think you're going to get any meaningful results from this. People are too swayed by their flavor of the week and personal biases in addition to a likely low sample size for such a narrow view. Just my thoughts.

 

[hamzarocks]

I see Crosby as the 6th to 10th best player all time when it's all said and done

I see OV as the 8th to 12th best player all time when it's said and done

OV could end better than Crosby all time if you view Crosby as the 9th or 10th best player and have OV 8th or 9th.

The names I see in that list in order for top 5 and then non order the next 10

Gretzky
Howe
Orr
Lemiuex
McDavid

Crosby
Bobby Hull
Hasek
OV
Jagr
Bourque
Roy
Beliveau
Lidstrom
Phil Esposito


HM: Sakic, Malkin, Draisaitl, Messier, Yzerman, Mikita, Brodeur, Bossy, Potvin, Shore, Lafleur, Coffee, Harvey, Plant, Dryden

Those are the top 30 names I expect to be consensus top 30 players all time in 10 years from now.

I do accept I'm missing legends from most of the 30s-60s so we could see 5 or 6 of them also being in the discussion there

 

[daver]

I think most people think that Ovechkin had the better season but some will not concede that he was the better player given the age difference.

Time for Season #2.

 

[bobholly39]

I see Crosby as the 6th to 10th best player all time when it's all said and done

I see OV as the 8th to 12th best player all time when it's said and done

OV could end better than Crosby all time if you view Crosby as the 9th or 10th best player and have OV 8th or 9th.

The names I see in that list in order for top 5 and then non order the next 10

Gretzky
Howe
Orr
Lemiuex
McDavid

Crosby
Bobby Hull
Hasek
OV
Jagr
Bourque
Roy
Beliveau
Lidstrom
Phil Esposito


HM: Sakic, Malkin, Draisaitl, Messier, Yzerman, Mikita, Brodeur, Bossy, Potvin, Shore, Lafleur, Coffee, Harvey, Plant, Dryden

Those are the top 30 names I expect to be consensus top 30 players all time in 10 years from now.

I do accept I'm missing legends from most of the 30s-60s so we could see 5 or 6 of them also being in the discussion there

Regarding McDavid at #5. He's going to need massive playoff success imo.

McDavid is a similar caliber player than Crosby. He has the opportunity (hopefully) to have an injury-free career that Crosby never had, so it makes sense he could reach higher (and who knows, maybe he's even a bit better than Crosby on top of that). But it'll be very hard to rank #5 without playoff success.

I know not everyone believes in the big 4 - but I've been a very long supporter of the "big 4". Gretzky and Howe almost always get their due - it's Orr and especially Lemieux that have doubters. The reason why I'm such a big supporter of the "big 4" outside of their peak play, is also their playoff play.

You could make an argument - and not even that difficult an argument - that Lemieux's 2 smythe playoff runs are better than anyone outside of the big 4. And - same for Orr. And - Gretzky obviously too. Without those 2 legendary playoff runs that both Orr and Lemieux have - I think their lack of longevity could hurt them a bit more.

So - as good as McDavid may end up being in the regular season, he'll need some playoff magic too to rise so high (especially if he wants to detach himself from the pack at #5). He's still young - so obviously he can still have that tremendous playoff success, not suggesting otherwise, but we'll see.

As for Draisaitl - I think I saw you mention in another thread you expect him to finish top 15? Might have been someone else who said that, but I notice you list him here. I dunno - I think Draisaitl is playing fantastic this year, and building a very consistent prime/peak so far - but that's still way too high a bar imo. The things that stand out about him that hurt him a lot in comparison with the caliber of players here:

- Lack of playoffs also (Malkin is a good comparable, and his 2009 playoff run is such a huge part of his legacy. Draisaitl needs something like this to distance himself a bit from McDavid, as Malkin did with Crosby in 2009)
- The McDavid effect is hard to quantify. In the past 5 years, McDavid has been a lot better in 3 years - Drai was only "a bit" better the year he swept awards (3 point difference paced out to 82 games, and without season ending early for Covid McDavid may have topped him) - and this season is still too early. So if Draisaitl makes a career of scoring a lot, but usually a decent gap behind McDavid, it stands out a bit less.

Very talented player - but I'd be shocked to see Draisaitl end up anywhere near this high

 

[Zuluss]

The comparison has been done for us by Calder voters

Crosby lost 124-4 in terms of 1st place votes and he also collected a fair share of 3rd-place and 4th-place votes (meaning that, among rookies, some voters placed him behind Henrik Lundqvist and even Dion Phaneuf)

The fact that almost half of voters in the poll have Crosby ahead and the plurality puts Ovechkin ahead by "a little" underscores the huge bias against Ovechkin and renders the results of such polls here useless

 

[filinski77]

The comparison has been done for us by Calder voters

Crosby lost 124-4 in terms of 1st place votes and he also collected a fair share of 3rd-place and 4th-place votes (meaning that, among rookies, some voters placed him behind Henrik Lundqvist and even Dion Phaneuf)

The fact that almost half of voters in the poll have Crosby ahead and the plurality puts Ovechkin ahead by "a little" underscores the huge bias against Ovechkin and renders the results of such polls here useless

Yup, Ovi was 100% ahead after their rookie seasons.

Just goes to show how big the bias was and still is against him.

 

[Matsun]

Neither made the playoffs and Ovechkin won the Calder hands down, this should be a clear win for Ovechkin.

 

[foame]

I don't see what's wrong with picking Crosby.
The question OP poses is: "how do these two players rate all-time vs. each other". That is different question from one that poses a yearly comparison (which arguably has already been done via Hart- and Ted Lindsay-votes). Given the "all-time"-context one should consider factors such as age, pressure, team performance, results and many other things as well as international play.

The factors for that perticular season - Crosby going from junior to pro-level - and - Ovechkin moving to another country and a smaller rink - are rather hard to fully judge but I think it's fair to say that both performed on an all-time level during their rookie-season. With that said, I'm more impressed with Crosbys performance given his age than Ovechkins performance given his transition. Malkin performed almost equally great the very next year but none at Crosbys age has performed as well as he has the last 30 years. To take it further: it can be argued that Crosbys rookie-season is the very best of any player at that age, even Gretzky and Orr.

For full disclosure:
I accidentely picked "Crosby by a lot" but meant to select "Crosby by a little".

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I think Ovechkin was pretty clearly ahead after the end of the 2005-06 season (and it's a matter of semantics as to whether it's by "a lot" or "a little").

It's easy to look back on the stats 15 years later and conclude that it was very close, because Ovechkin only outscored Crosby by 4 points. But the Calder trophy voting tells a different story (Ovechkin was ahead 124-4 in first-place votes). So does the Hart voting (Ovechkin finished 6th and was named on 40 of 129 ballots; Crosby was only named on 2 ballots).

I think there are two reasons why they finished with such similar point totals, but Ovechkin was widely considered the better player. Firstly, Crosby unquestionably had a better supporting cast. 62 of his 102 points were scored with Lemieux, Palffy, Recchi or Gonchar. (Of course, that doesn't mean Crosby only would have scored 40 points without any of them - but it does speak to how much more offensively talent his linemates were). Second, Ovechkin was very consistent throughout the year. He was far superior to Crosby for about two-thirds of the season, then Crosby went on a tear during the last two months. Usually the player ending the season on a hot streak helps, but apparently not in this case.

Both players were on the ice for a similar number of ES goals against in a similar number of ES minutes. (Crosby's personal ES GAA was about 7% higher - that's a small advantage for Ovechkin, but neither player focused very much on defense their rookie seasons. Both were playing on teams that were terrible at goal prevention).

On the other hand, it's tough to overstate the difference in physical maturity between an 18 year old and a 20 year old (they're about 22.5 months apart). I think a very solid argument can be made that, taking their ages into account, Crosby's season was more impressive. But it sounds like that isn't the question here.

 

[daver]

I think there are two reasons why they finished with such similar point totals, but Ovechkin was widely considered the better player. Firstly, Crosby unquestionably had a better supporting cast. 62 of his 102 points were scored with Lemieux, Palffy, Recchi or Gonchar. (Of course, that doesn't mean Crosby only would have scored 40 points without any of them - but it does speak to how much more offensively talent his linemates were). Second, Ovechkin was very consistent throughout the year. He was far superior to Crosby for about two-thirds of the season, then Crosby went on a tear during the last two months. Usually the player ending the season on a hot streak helps, but apparently not in this case.

I picked OV by a bit but you bring up some interesting talking points.

Crosby certainly needed some time to hit a stride that you would have expected based on his talent level if it wasn't his rookie season. After the 30 game mark, he was 3rd in points and in PPG the rest of the way and the vast majority were not with Lemieux, Palffy, and Recchi.

I think that their raw totals best reflect their seasons without much context to apply.

 

[Dingo]

on the plus side, its great that these two have been SO GOOD for SO LONG. they hype has been lived up to and even exceeded.

on the minus, these arguments that have gone on for sixteen years are..... i mean, exhausted 5 years ago.

 

[Zuluss]

I don't see what's wrong with picking Crosby.
The question OP poses is: "how do these two players rate all-time vs. each other". That is different question from one that poses a yearly comparison (which arguably has already been done via Hart- and Ted Lindsay-votes). Given the "all-time"-context one should consider factors such as age, pressure, team performance, results and many other things as well as international play.

Back when Crosby and Ovechkin were just starting their careers, a common narrative was that yes, Ovechkin was having better seasons, but Crosby was still a better player because Crosby is younger, playmakers peak later than goal-scorers, Ovechkin's style of play would not age well and would result in injuries, etc. So Crosby was expected to sort of keep up, and then, when Crosby would turn 25 or so, he was expected to close the gap easily and to go on to a better career.

What we now know of those expectations is that they did not materialize. Crosby never had a better season than Ovechkin's 2007/08 (or in fact even any of Ovechkin's 2007-2010 peak seasons). First Crosby was injured, then he struggled to outscore Jamie Benn of all people, and then all of a sudden Crosby was already 30 and over the hill.

So judging Ovechkin's and Crosby's first seasons "considering age and other factors" is just a way of smuggling into the issue the old expectations that we know did not work out and pretend that they actually did. That's what is wrong with all those things like "Crosby's 2005/06 was worse than Ovechkin's, but at the same time more impressive and marked him as a better player, because Ovechkin was 20, and Crosby was 18".

 

[Big Phil]

Ovechkin had a slightly better season. He scored 4 more points, his team was slightly better, and on that horrible team he was still a +2. Not only that, but he scored that magical goal vs. the Coyotes while on his back. He was the sexier pick at the time for sure, flashier as well even though Crosby still had his moments.

My thought was that Crosby was still the one you wanted to build your team around, even in 2006. The future was brighter with him. He was a centre, he was younger, etc.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Ovechkin clearly had a better rookie season.

The guy will never get a fair shake from some in this forum.

 

[JackSlater]

Ovechkin clearly had a better rookie season.

The guy will never get a fair shake from some in this forum.

Ovechkin is winning this poll by a solid margin. I wouldn't think that the greatest hits were necessary in the polls that he wins.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Ovechkin is winning this poll by a solid margin. I wouldn't think that the greatest hits were necessary in the polls that he wins.

Fair enough. It's a mere 34% of the forum willing to revise history for Crosby.

 

[bobholly39]

Fair enough. It's a mere 34% of the forum willing to revise history for Crosby.

Blame OP. He needs to do a better job of explaining the question. A few have already raised the question about "more impressive due to age?". I think saying Crosby's rookie season is more impressive due to age (18 vs 20) is probably a defendable position. OP didn't explain it well enough.

If it's strictly better season - this should be Ovi pretty unanimously.