Did including Toews into Top 100 Players instead of Malkin age well?

[Hockey Outsider]

If you rank Crosby over Ovechkin, you should rank Malkin over Sakic. Can't have it both ways, even if you are Canadian.

I think it's entirely consistent to rank Crosby over Ovechkin and Sakic over Malkin. Using this approach:

• the player with the higher peak is ranked lower in both cases
• the player with more top five (and top ten) scoring finishes is ranked higher in both cases
• in both cases, the player ranked first is the only one in each pairing named MVP of a best-on-best international tournament
• the better playoff performer is ranked first in both cases
• the better defensive player is ranked first in both cases

Sakic has a massive longevity advantage over Malkin. But that doesn't impact the Crosby/Ovechkin comparison since they've scored almost exactly the same number of career points (even if you're strictly counting games played, the gap between Sakic/Malkin is about 4 times bigger than the gap between Ovechkin/Crosby).

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Sakic
Hart: 1, 6, 7, 7, *7, *8
Ross: 2, 3, *3, 4, 5, 6, 6, *7, 9, 10
P/GP (at least 30 pts in season): 2, 3, 3, 5, 5, 6, 7, *9, *9
+ 1x Pearson, 1x Smythe
(* was after 33, the age of Malkin)

Malkin
Hart: 1, 2, 2, 7
Ross: 1, 1, 2, 4
P/GP (at least 30 pts in season): 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 5, 7, 7
+ 1x Pearson, 1x Smythe

What was daver saying about Top 3 Hart nominations on the last page again? Someone remind me.

 

[Gurglesons]

I think it's entirely consistent to rank Crosby over Ovechkin and Sakic over Malkin. Using this approach:

• the player with the higher peak is ranked lower in both cases ( which is the first part of the issue. )
• the player with more top five (and top ten) scoring finishes is ranked higher in both cases (that being said one player never won an Art Ross, one won two)
• in both cases, the player ranked first is the only one in each pairing named MVP of a best-on-best international tournament. (Who honesty cares about this?)
• the better playoff performer is ranked first in both cases (Malkin’s playoff performances are being really underwrote here. he basically did everything Sakic did in the playoffs.)
• the better defensive player is ranked first in both cases ( ok. )

Sakic has a massive longevity advantage over Malkin. But that doesn't impact the Crosby/Ovechkin comparison since they've scored almost exactly the same number of career points (even if you're strictly counting games played, the gap between Sakic/Malkin is about 4 times bigger than the gap between Ovechkin/Crosby).

 

[La Bamba]

I disagree. He has two Norris and Smythe. Even one individual trophy do a lot for a players legacy.

I think Malkin, Iginla, and Thornton had better careers at the time the top 100 were unveiled. Duncan Keith had good years but he was a bit of a late bloomer

 

[daver]

Sakic
Hart: 1, 6, 7, 7, *7, *8
Ross: 2, 3, *3, 4, 5, 6, 6, *7, 9, 10
P/GP (at least 30 pts in season): 2, 3, 3, 5, 5, 6, 7, *9, *9
+ 1x Pearson, 1x Smythe
(* was after 33, the age of Malkin)

Malkin
Hart: 1, 2, 2, 7
Ross: 1, 1, 2, 4
P/GP (at least 30 pts in season): 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 5, 7, 7
+ 1x Pearson, 1x Smythe

Remove Mario and a prime Wayne from the equation and Sakic's numbers look a bit better.

The better peak season is highly debatable, as is their 2nd best. There is certainly an argument that Malkin was the better player on a per game basis in the regular season but Sakic has a distinct advantage in longevity, more full seasons, and 2-way play.

Whatever advantage you want to give Malkin in the regular season (more high end seasons), Sakic has that advantage in the playoffs.

All of this adds up to a clear advantage for Sakic at this point in Malkin's career but it is not insurmountable for Malkin to perhaps catch up.

 

[Chimpradamus]

Aged well? It was laughable the day the list was posted. Now it's just embarrassing that Toews ended up in the top 100 list. I think Toews barely cracks the top 100 in the NHL today, nevermind in history.

 

[teravaineSAROS]

It's been almost three years. Move on with your life.

I'll move on with my life once Malkin is in the top 100.

 

[daver]

What was daver saying about Top 3 Hart nominations on the last page again? Someone remind me.

Why don't you start the 1000th OV vs. Crosby thread since you clearly want to derail this one.

 

[rintinw]

Remove Mario and a prime Wayne from the equation and Sakic's numbers look a bit better.

The better peak season is highly debatable, as is their 2nd best. There is certainly an argument that Malkin was the better player on a per game basis in the regular season but Sakic has a distinct advantage in longevity, more full seasons, and 2-way play.

Whatever advantage you want to give Malkin in the regular season (more high end seasons), Sakic has that advantage in the playoffs.

All of this adds up to a clear advantage for Sakic at this point in Malkin's career but it is not insurmountable for Malkin to perhaps catch up.

Sakic
Hart: 1, 5, 6, 7, *7, *8
Ross: 2, 2, *3, 4, 5, 5, 6, *7, 8, 9
P/GP (at least 30 pts in season): 2, 2, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, *9, *9
+ 1x Pearson, 1x Smythe
(* was after 33, the age of Malkin)

Changes in bold. Hart, Ross, P/GP finishes still noticeably better. Also keep in mind that in 20 years there may be a valid reasoning that you should remove Crosby or McDavid to get fair Malkin numbers for example.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Why don't you start the 1000th OV vs. Crosby thread since you clearly want to derail this one.

No my comment was right on point. You said in this thread you chose Crosby over Ovechkin because of Top 3 Hart Trophy nominations.

Malkin has three of those, and sakic has only one in the Top 5 for his entire career. But suddenly Top 3 Hart finishes don’t seem so important to you?

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

Why don't you start the 1000th OV vs. Crosby thread since you clearly want to derail this one.

Or the 1000th Toews is overrated thread.
We've had enough of them.

 

[Wings4Life]

Remove Mario and a prime Wayne from the equation and Sakic's numbers look a bit better.

If you're going to go there, we should be taking McDavid away for these comparisons as well, since he's already better than peak Crosby and is only getting better. And if Sid is as good as you say (he's not quite that good though) one can argue we should remove his totals as well.

Removing either player will boost Malkin's numbers as well.

 

[daver]

Also keep in mind that in 20 years there may be a valid reasoning that you should remove Crosby or McDavid to get fair Malkin numbers for example.

If they aren't being removed now they won't be in 20 years.

 

[daver]

If you're going to go there, we should be taking McDavid away for these comparisons as well, since he's already better than peak Crosby and is only getting better. And if Sid is as good as you say (he's not quite that good though) one can argue we should remove his totals as well.

Removing either player will boost Malkin's numbers as well.

How do you figure this?

And no, only Wayne and Mario are accepted as being the only two players in NHL that were unbeatable in their primes.

 

[Wings4Life]

I think it's entirely consistent to rank Crosby over Ovechkin and Sakic over Malkin. Using this approach:

• the player with the higher peak is ranked lower in both cases
• the player with more top five (and top ten) scoring finishes is ranked higher in both cases
• in both cases, the player ranked first is the only one in each pairing named MVP of a best-on-best international tournament
• the better playoff performer is ranked first in both cases
• the better defensive player is ranked first in both cases

Sakic has a massive longevity advantage over Malkin. But that doesn't impact the Crosby/Ovechkin comparison since they've scored almost exactly the same number of career points (even if you're strictly counting games played, the gap between Sakic/Malkin is about 4 times bigger than the gap between Ovechkin/Crosby).

Some good points, but why look at one international tournament when Malkin's been the better player internationally by a fair margin? My counter:

• Better Top 3 Hart Trophy nominations record: Malkin>Sakic, Crosby>Ovechkin
• Better Hart Trophy voting record: Malkin>Sakic, Crosby=Ovechkin
• Better international hockey career player: Malkin>Sakic, Crosby>Ovechkin
• Better international best-on-best statistics: Malkin>Sakic, Crosby>Ovechkin
• More Art Ross Trophies: Malkin>Sakic, Crosby>Ovechkin

Malkin is already deserving to be ranked ahead of Sakic. Now that he's over 1,000 career points, Malkin will just continue to build up his own longevity some more, which will push him farther up the ranks.

 

[Wings4Life]

How do you figure this?

It's already the majority opinion on here bud:

Is McDavid better than Ovechkin or Crosby ever were?

Most of those in denial will likely change their minds by the end of the current season as well, given that McDavid stays healthy.

Removing McDavid from the stats comparisons is valid, and will only look more so in the future.

 

[daver]

It's already the majority opinion on here bud:

Is McDavid better than Ovechkin or Crosby ever were?

Most of those in denial will likely change their minds by the end of the current season as well, given that McDavid stays healthy.

Removing McDavid from the stats comparisons is valid, and will only look more so in the future.

Funny how it isn't here:

18 year old Crosby, Hasek, Ovechkin, Jagr, McDavid - who do you draft and why?

In any event, neither have put themselves in the Wayne/Mario sphere. Why don't you start a poll asking that?

 

[Llewzaher]

I think Hawerchuk should have made the list ..

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Some good points, but why look at one international tournament when Malkin's been the better player internationally by a fair margin? My counter:

• Better Top 3 Hart Trophy nominations record: Malkin>Sakic, Crosby>Ovechkin
• Better Hart Trophy voting record: Malkin>Sakic, Crosby=Ovechkin
• Better international hockey career player: Malkin>Sakic, Crosby>Ovechkin
• Better international best-on-best statistics: Malkin>Sakic, Crosby>Ovechkin
• More Art Ross Trophies: Malkin>Sakic, Crosby>Ovechkin

Malkin is already deserving to be ranked ahead of Sakic. Now that he's over 1,000 career points, Malkin will just continue to build up his own longevity some more, which will push him farther up the ranks.

I think your 1st, 2nd and 5th points are valid, but they're all pretty much the same as what I already said - Malkin has a higher peak than Sakic, just as Ovechkin had a higher peak than Crosby. That's an important consideration when ranking players, but it's not the only one.

Point taken re international tournaments.

That being said, I'd challenge the notion that Malkin's offensive peak was really that much higher than Sakic's. Sakic once finished 2nd in scoring to a Lemieux-assisted Jagr (with a massive lead over the rest of the league), and once finished 3rd behind both Lemieux and Jagr. Lemieux is in another stratosphere compared to any player Malkin ever competed against for the Art Ross, and Jagr alone has as many scoring titles as Crosby, Ovechkin and Malkin combined. Taking competition into account, I'll grant that Malkin's 1-1-2 in scoring is more impressive than Sakic's 2-2-3, but it's not by a huge margin. Besides, Sakic's 2001 season is at least as good as Malkin's 2012 season (comparable offense, while being a Selke trophy finalist).

The simplest reason to rank Sakic ahead of Malkin is Sakic has 10 of the top 14 seasons between them (based on where they ranked in the scoring race). That's a massive advantage. Yes, Malkin was frequently injured, but that's a strike against him. Sakic was pretty clearly the better two-way player and his playoff resume is at least as good (so if he's already behind looking at scoring finishes, he just loses ground as we start looking at non regular season offense). Malkin can theoretically pass Sakic in the all-time rankings but he needs to start putting together full seasons.

 

[Bladerunner]

Toews over Malkin did not age well for a nano second.

I thought it was a joke from the get go - and I actually like and root for the Hawks.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Funny how it isn't here:

18 year old Crosby, Hasek, Ovechkin, Jagr, McDavid - who do you draft and why?

In any event, neither have put themselves in the Wayne/Mario sphere. Why don't you start a poll asking that?

Nice try daver, but that is a multi-player poll that has multiple alternative options, which skews the result. In the first poll above, every voter has to choose between Crosby and McDavid.

 

[Video Nasty]

People are still so fired up about Malkin’s omission that they’re tired of debating Toews and they’re skipping all the way to trying to say Malkin is better than Sakic?

Malkin is my favorite player of the post-lockout/pre-McDavid era and I’m staggered this is being brought to the table. I’m less staggered that people are using pure raw numbers with zero context when it comes to where each finished in points/ppg/finishes (though when I look at the raw numbers, it’s clear that Sakic has the majority of more impressive seasons).

Top end talent was a lot higher then compared to now.

Now I’m fully aware that Sakic didn’t finish 3rd or 4th constantly to the players I’m going to list but these are the only winners of the Art Ross trophy during the first 13 years of Sakic’s career (age 19-31)

Lemieux (5x) Gretzky (3x) and Jagr (5x)

Get back to me when Malkin has ever had to compete against this level of dominance in any fashion. And man, was Sakic on some really bad Quebec teams for the first four years or so of his career.

When Malkin is healthy and typically when Crosby is out, he peaks higher than Sakic I think. Pre-McDavid, I constantly thought under these conditions, he compares quite favorably to Lemieux or Jagr (or simply playing at a level I haven’t seen since them). It’s never for long stretches though and be it injury or the passiveness of being content to be Crosby’s side kick when Crosby is actually on the ice himself, he’s extremely inconsistent.

Overall career though? Sakic beats him handily in raw totals, playoff runs, two way play, leaving little imagination to the “what if game” and of course leadership.

 

[heysmilinstrange]

The reason why threads like this have continued over the years is that there used to be a large contingent of Blackhawks fans here who were incredibly obnoxious and arrogant about their team's successes. Now that their team is rebuilding and it's clear that a lot of their arguments about Toews no longer hold water, it's funny and cathartic to revisit their viewpoints. I think we all know that but let's state it clearly for the record.

Be a heck of lot healthier for one. Has two great Cup winning playoff runs. A rep for being solid, if not very good defensively.

Maybe Malkin passes him if he was able to put up more full seasons but he is hardly that much better as a player as being made out by the other poster.

Doesn't Malkin also have this? He led the playoffs in scoring in 2009 and 2017.

 

[GreatGonzo]

It’s more bizarre that JOE NIEUWENDYK is on that list. Say what you want about Sundin or Gartner.....but that’s just ridiculous. Goes to show you that a saucy story line holds more value than actual talent and individual achievements.

 

[PensandCaps]

Malkin should also easily be ahead of Messier (most overrated player ever)