Do you think Ovechkin's legacy will improve over time?

  • PLEASE check any bookmark on all devices. IF you see a link pointing to mandatory.com DELETE it Please use this URL https://forums.hfboards.com/

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
14,174
11,006
So, the point is...

Lemieux advancing beyond the 2nd round in 4 of his 7 career playoff experiences, and 3 of 3 (?) best on best international tournaments (winning Gold in all of them) is equivalent or near equivalent to Ovechkin's 1 in 15 and 0 for 5 internationally?

That's where you went with that: "if defense is all result-based, then surely, the playoffs must be somewhere around that too...therefore Ovechkin must be..." situation. You brought famous winner and extremely-efficient-at-advancing-to-win stuff Mario Lemieux into the mix...?

"Best on best" lol. Those match-ups were mostly lopsided. It was often an NHL allstar team beating up on teams that were half full of failed NHL prospects. And actually Lemieux lost the worlds and world juniors, but I guess your point is....losing to lesser teams somehow isn't as bad as losing to...better teams who are still far inferior to Lemieux's team even if you remove Lemieux?

I like how you paint Lemieux's playoff career as "4 for 7" when in reality his career spanned 17 NHL seasons over 22 years, and he played in the playoffs in 8 different seasons (not 7).

So like, missing the playoffs five times - back when 16 out of 21 teams made it in - doesn't even register? Your opinion is that the team success standard abruptly cuts off at the playoff line, and everything below that is tossed out of history?

Lemieux's teams missed the playoffs 9 times in his 17 seasons (58% of the time).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
14,174
11,006
Mike and I went over the secondary/goal scorer thing a couple years ago and the preliminary conclusion is that its about 5-10%, across everybody, and subject to a ton of variance. It obviously affects someone who scores 40 goals more than someone who scores 20 goals, but the percentage of goals it affects is in the same ballpark.

[I went searching for the post and found it here: Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time - Preliminary Discussion Thread. I thought there was another follow-up from Mike where he broke down his video assessment of some goals but couldn't find it.]

As someone who in the end is mostly 'Points Uber Alles' in regards to forward impacts, I still understand that there's a shit ton of randomness involving points scored. In the end, it all sort of washes out, the positive and negative variance, and true talent mostly shines through over a larger sample.

There is however one points-related Ovechkin stat that I do want to point out that does affect him more than others. Nobody would disagree that Ovechkin is one of the most impactful players on the Power Play in NHL history, and yet when you look at his IPP (individual points percentage) compared to a whole host of other players, his total is substantially lower than just about everybody else. Thus, even though he's been on for almost 175 more power play goals than Crosby, he only has around 40 more power play points [in the 07-08 to 23-24 period]. If you look at the averages of a whole bunch of players, the superstars are around 70%, the stars are around 65%, and Ovechkin's at 60%. The forwards around him (or lower) include Pavelski, Marchand, Benn, Toews, E. Staal, Perry, Duchene, and Voracek, mostly secondary stars. [Even the players known more for their one-timers/shooting are still much higher - Stamkos 68.6, Pastrnak 69.9, Matthews 66.1. I went through 57 forwards and 28 defensemen, the highest scorers since 07-08 and summed their PPP and oiGF according to hockey-reference's extra stats.]

If you assume Ovechkin's power play impact is equivalent to the superstar players that are his normal peers, that would mean boosting his IPP to that 70% range, which would lead to an extra 84 points, or about 5 points per season (84/17, since we're missing the data from 05-06 and 06-07).

But again, I refer you back to my initial statement that there's a ton of randomness involved in points, and positive and negative variance wash out, and true talent shines through in a larger sample. We certainly have a large enough sample to state that Ovechkin's true talent on the power play is a 60% IPP. Whether that's an accurate measure of his power play talent is more subjective.

That's interesting data. I'm not surprised by it.

Ovechkin, on the PP especially, is worth quite a lot even just as a decoy. Teams have to lean a defender towards him more so than against other NHL players in that same point position. This created lots of space and quasi 4 on 3 opportunities for Oshie/Backstrom/Carlson/Green/Kuznetsov/Johhansson/Wilson, not to mention goalies leaning Ovie's way.

It would be one thing is the Capitals were doing this with a decent powerplay. But in fact they have the #1 powerplay in the NHL over the course of Ovechkin's career. And while those other players have come and gone from the Capitals (and one of them is even a fringe hall of famer), Ovechkin is the common denominator.

I think your way of quantifying it is pretty neat.
 

Michael Farkas

Celebrate 68
Jun 28, 2006
14,406
9,652
NYC
www.youtube.com
So like, missing the playoffs five times - back when 16 out of 21 teams made it in - doesn't even register? Your opinion is that the team success standard abruptly cuts off at the playoff line, and everything below that is tossed out of history?

Lemieux's teams missed the playoffs 9 times in his 17 seasons (58% of the time).
Not tossed out, it didn't seem relevant to the conversation. If it is, then...are you saying that Lemieux was also a bad regular season player and therefore his teams didn't qualify for the playoffs?
 

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
14,174
11,006
Not tossed out, it didn't seem relevant to the conversation. If it is, then...are you saying that Lemieux was also a bad regular season player and therefore his teams didn't qualify for the playoffs?

No.

I'm saying hockey is one of the ultimate team sports and it takes far more than any 1 player can provide in order to win a cup or a division. I think hockey history demonstrates this a thousand times over.

So I don't think you can always draw a direct line from team success to individual players. The media loves to do it because it makes for a great narrative. But it's not actually that neat and tidy.
 

Michael Farkas

Celebrate 68
Jun 28, 2006
14,406
9,652
NYC
www.youtube.com
No.

I'm saying hockey is one of the ultimate team sports and it takes far more than any 1 player can provide in order to win a cup or a division. I think hockey history demonstrates this a thousand times over.

So I don't think you can always draw a direct line from team success to individual players. The media loves to do it because it makes for a great narrative. But it's not actually that neat and tidy.
I see. It's "...the ultimate team sport" and winning games - even with the best players - is anything but a lock.

Winning is a product of, principally, defensive and offensive teamwork - is that fair to say or no?
 
  • Like
Reactions: overpass

K Fleur

Sacrifice
Mar 28, 2014
15,743
26,541
The “Ovechkin didn’t have help”thing is..something.

Poor guy stuck on 3 separate Presidents Trophy winning teams, with a Vezina award winning goalie, and 2 separate Jack Adams award winning coaches.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nathaniel Skywalker

MadLuke

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
10,398
5,951
And the HHOF counting way to look at it can be a bit of a self-fullfilling prophecy, what are the chance if they win 3 cups that Backstrom is kept out of the HHOF ? There could even be talk around Green-Semin.... winning is one of the ultimate best thing to get in one day.

Same if Joe Thornton end up with no HOF in their prime on those big Sharks team, they would be in, would they have won, 3 cup Marleau a controversial HHOF or a shoe in ?

Pens-Kings-Hawks they are filled of future HHOF because they won, what a never going over the second-round Toews career would look like, 883 pts in 1067 games, not a single Top 10 in points? Does he get the role in did in 2 olympics without having won anything before to shine.

Oilers-Isles-70s Habs, how many get in the hall without winning anything
 

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
14,174
11,006
The “Ovechkin didn’t have help”thing is..something.

Poor guy stuck on 3 separate Presidents Trophy winning teams, with a Vezina award winning goalie, and 2 separate Jack Adams award winning coaches.

Yeah that's a fair point: Braden Holtby had 3 very nice seasons.

And the Capitals were indeed stacked....from 2016 all the way up to 2017.

Trotz was excellent, and the franchise inexplicably let him walk after winning the cup in favor of the illustrious Todd Rierden (who I think you all had the recent pleasure of experiencing). That was one of the all-time dumbest moves by any franchise IMO.

BB was great, and hilarious, but he never did get over that hump.
 
Last edited:

MadLuke

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
10,398
5,951
And the Capitals were indeed stacked....from 2016 all the way up to 2017.
The non stacked leading the whole nhl 2009-2011 capitals


Do you have that same talk for Joe Thortons and his sharks ?

Who was better than Backstrom on the Shakrs ? Better scorer than Semin ?
Was Boyle much better than Green ?

That what great about Ovechkin career, being long for so good, 2 different era of president trophy teams
 

Dingo

Registered User
Jul 13, 2018
1,906
1,888
Ovechkin does deserve a lot of credit for adapting his approach to still be able to score tons of goals after his explosive skating/puck handling seemed to just disappear.

That a little too often gets misconstrued as

“Openly searching for goals” or whatever.
ya, he is doing what he can to continue to contribute.

My favorite players are the two way centers. However, if you have a teammate who's strength is scoring you want him shooting and scoring.

Reminds me a bit of when people in MMA fandom would complain that GSP 'only wants to wrestle'

ya, no shit, He could likely stand in the pocket and trade and win fights that way, but its all but gauranteed if he plays to his strengths.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Midnight Judges

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
14,174
11,006
The non stacked leading the whole nhl 2009-2011 capitals

Yes, the 2010 Caps won lots of games but that team was very flawed. They had a very poor blue line, no true 2C, and their goalie was Jose Theodore. Varlamov and Neuvirth would develop into solid goalies but they were rookies at the time.

Aside from Mike Green, most of the blue line was basically out of the NHL within a span of 3 years (Poti, Schultz, Pothier, Morrison, Corvo, Sloan, Erskine). Because they were not good players.

Carlson did play 20 rookie games though and in the playoffs. Alzner also played 20 or so games but not much in the playoffs.

Do you have that same talk for Joe Thortons and his sharks ?

Who was better than Backstrom on the Shakrs ? Better scorer than Semin ?
Was Boyle much better than Green ?

That what great about Ovechkin career, being long for so good, 2 different era of president trophy teams

I think Thornton likely does have more success if he had, say, Malkin or Jagr to split defenses with.

Same goes for lots of players who, through no fault of their own, didn't have much in the way of a running mate (Marcel Dionne, Jarome Iginla, etc).
 
Last edited:

Hockey4Lyfe

Registered User
Feb 26, 2018
6,860
4,382
I can’t take you seriously if you watch a hockey game of these two and you can’t see for yourself who the better overall hockey player is.

And truthfully, it hasn’t even been close in a couple years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nathaniel Skywalker

MadLuke

Registered User
Jan 18, 2011
10,398
5,951
I think Thornton likely does have more success if he had, say, Malkin or Jagr to split defenses with.
Not sure Mario did not face the best the other team could throw at him in the 91-92 runs because Jagr was on a different line.

Like, they did not fully optimize how much Chelios to keep a bit of him left for Jagr assignment....

I really doubt that is much the case, at a certain level teams do the maximum they can do and cannot do more in hockey.

Think of Gretzky, Lafleur or Bossy, who brought attention away from them on second line, having a great team is much more than that and I am not sure splitting defense exist much at a certain level.

Zetterberg for example:

3 game were played away, faced Malkin 24 minutes in 7 games at even strength. Lidstrom played 82 minutes against Crosby, 31 against Malkin, 21 vs Staal, that really does not look like some splitting defensive assignment.

Having better scoring when you are not on the ice help you, without any notion of splitting defense, being on the second line help you enormously in term of not playing the best of the other side obviously (if you still have competent enough linemate) but that not Mario-Thornton scenario....

Yes, the 2010 Caps won lots of games but that team was very flawed.
2009-2011 has well and flawed teams in the non cap era win quite often, were Mtl, Pens or Tampa they lost too significantly less flawed ? The Caps were I think, mostly unlucky, they dominated Mtl, do not think a big flaw was revealed, pushed the Pens in 7, etc...

The Caps were a +103 teams at even strength from 2009 to 2011, still +8 without Ovechkin on the ice (or +14 without Backstrom on the ice), that what the great that play a lot with the best player of their line can wish for, being able to win it by themselve without being hurt by the rest of the time they are not on the ice.

The Pens without Mario in their cups year were a bit below .500, minus team when he was not playing, which is a great spot to be for a superstar, that very similar to McDavid Oilers in the 3 last season and he was able to push them int he playoff.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad