JianYang
Registered User
- Sep 29, 2017
- 17,940
- 16,436
Absolutely. We may never see an ovechkin type again in our lifetimes.
Just pointing out that counting a Richard as a "major" trophy and ignoring Hart nominations creates a misleading picture.
Crosby has a better a Hart record than OV despite missing three opportunities to win or garner a nomination.
For those now turning this into Crosby Is Not Generational; similar to my last example of Ovechkin being in the elite goal scoring class of Richard, Hull, Esposito and Gretzky based on many years of leading the league in goals, here are the leaders for seasons leading the league in points-per-game.
Gretzky 11
Lemieux 7
Howe 7
Esposito 5
Crosby 5
That's an odd standard, especially considering how Ovechkin has passed Hull and is, at least IMO, a better player than Hull was.Before Crosby and this generational frenzy, only Gretzky, Orr and Lemieux were considered generational. So 100 years of hockey and only three guys. Nowdays people argue for Crosby, McDavid, Ovechkin, Matthews, Laine and the list keeps on growing. So the last 10-15 years seem to have a particularly great gene pool...
If Bobby Hull isn't considered generational then neither is Ovechkin. As simple as that. And Bobby never was considered generational until the recent eroded version of the term came to use.
Ovechkin is the best goal scorer of this generation and it's not even close. Era adjusted he's arguably the best goal scorer of all time. How the hell is that not far above his peers?Neither Crosby nor Ovechkin are generational in my eyes. While Cros has come out ahead in the end run, he hasn't been that much better than OV and was for a period behind him.
For me, generational would describe a player far above his peers. Gretzky, Orr, etc.
Ovechkin is the best goal scorer of this generation and it's not even close. Era adjusted he's arguably the best goal scorer of all time. How the hell is that not far above his peers?
The people who are seriously saying nope are beyond delusional. You are watching the potential greatest goal scorer ever.
Scoring goals is the hardest thing to do in hockey. Scoring goals is literally how you win a game as the game is counted by number of goals. Both Crosby and OV are generational IMO. Hockey has also greatly changed with rules and play style, one player can't do it all anymore (though even back in the day Gretz had a stacked team). Agree to disagree though I guess.By this logic you'd have the best passer/shooter/hitter/etc as "generational." I think the term ought to apply to the complete player. I think your definition is valid, I just don't agree with it.
By this logic you'd have the best passer/shooter/hitter/etc as "generational." I think the term ought to apply to the complete player. I think your definition is valid, I just don't agree with it.
I really do not get those "he is just a generational goal-scorer" comments.
What next? "Jagr, a generational point-producer"? "Lidstrom, a generational Norris-winner"?
Ovechkin has three Harts and three Lindsays. He won an Art Ross and was mere 3 points behind the winner two more times (and within 6 points of the winner another two times). He has more assists than any winger drafted in the three years before or three years after him, and it may even remain this way when he hangs them up. It is not like goals are the only thing going on for Ovechkin.
Yes, his goals are so far into the stratosphere that everything else on his resume pales in comparison. But everything else on anyone else's resume except for Big 4 also pales in comparison to Ovechkin's goals. He is top5 (and probably now top3) goal-scorer all-time for a reason.