Hypothetical: If Ovechkin reaches 950 or 1000 goals, is he top ten all-time?

1000 goals is probably out of reach, but who knows with this guy? People have been writing him off since 2013 and he's as resilient as they come. Apparently he's announced that next season will be his last in the NHL, but I guess it's possible he'll change his mind and play one or two more.

This season, he's scoring at a 50+ goal clip. He's third in the League in goals playing for one of the best teams in the League. I think this season definitely adds to his career and legacy. Players usually don't add much this late, but I think it's possible (theoretically) for him to add even more.

Let's say he somehow maintains his pace since February or so of 2024 throughout next season, doesn't get hurt and scores over 50 goals and hits 950 career goals (possibly winning the Rocket Richard) and the Capitals are good again (not necessarily as good but one of the better teams in the EC). Would that be enough to solidify him as a top ten player all-time? What if he re-signs with WSH and puts up about 35 goals in 2027 and then hits 1000 goals the following season?

I know some already consider him a top ten player all-time and others will never put him ahead of guys like Crosby, Jagr, Bourque, Beliveau, Hull etc (even if he scored 1200 goals). But for those who see him in the range of players with an argument for top ten all-time, would hitting 950 or 1000 goals while remaining a top goal scorer in the League solidify him as a top ten player in NHL (or hockey) history?

I think a second Cup (with a solid to good playoff run) would really boost his legacy in some people's eyes. It could happen.
lol hes already top 10.
 
This was a great Math 150 example of Simpson's Paradox, if I recall.
Exactly. Luongo had a higher save percentage than Brodeur, both at even strength, and on the penalty kill. But because the Devils were much more disciplined than the Canucks, and Brodeur faced a lower percentage of shots in the tougher situation (PK), he had the higher save percentage overall. It's a classic example of Simpson's Paradox. (Okay, I'll stop derailing this thread now).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bear of Bad News
How is a guy, who will have the all-time goals record, not already top 10?
Stubbornness. They really, really do not want to acknowledge that players (in any sport) are far more talented today than they were 50 years ago. "Top 10" lists are always being eroded with time, the arguments that ignore this are incorrect.
 
He’s already in the top 10.
I guess it's a longevity thing vs a prime thing. He had a great prime. And it's cool he's padding goals but I don't think anyone has considered him a top player in the league the last 6-7 years. Were his 10 elite years top 10 in the nhl all time? Was he the best goal scorer ever or just the one who played the longest?

For example, A healthy lemieux probably smashes the goal scoring record. Bossy?
the last 7 years at 32+, he’s 4th in goals, 16th in points….what’s “top” mean to you? He’s not been elite overall in that period but certainly as a goal scorer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PlushMinus
Sone people already have him in the top 10, some don’t, which is not unusual as you could argue there are 10 candidates with a better case than him, especially if you’re not biased toward goalscoring. I personally have him 10th or 11th right now.

1000 goals would mean he adds to his already remarkable longevity, which would probably make him a top 10 lock. The answer is yes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Video Nasty
I know some already consider him a top ten player all-time and others will never put him ahead of guys like Crosby, Jagr, Bourque, Beliveau, Hull etc (even if he scored 1200 goals). But for those who see him in the range of players with an argument for top ten all-time, would hitting 950 or 1000 goals while remaining a top goal scorer in the League solidify him as a top ten player in NHL (or hockey) history?

I think a second Cup (with a solid to good playoff run) would really boost his legacy in some people's eyes. It could happen.
OV is his generation of players best goal scorer so I would probably put him in the top 10 myself ! :dunno:
 
So when he coughs up 2 goals in a 2-0 game 7 loss, that didn’t affect winning and losing?



Have dozens of examples like this.

Like floating at center ice when his team is losing game 7 OT.

The guy scored more goals than anyone. Playing for a first place team. In the lowest scoring era.

He should be like +300.

He’s not.

Because the stats are pointing to what anyone can see outside of the highlights.

He’s dangerous at both ends of the ice.


When he ripped off Crosby in Game 6 OT and effectively ended the Pens' run, did that effect winning and losing?



When he scored the GWG in Game 7 of the ECF in Tampa 62 seconds into the game, did that effect winning and losing?



When he opened the scoring in Game 3 of the SCF (series tied 1-1) and Vegas would only lead for something like 12 minutes for the rest of the series, did that effect winning and losing?



Or how about when he opened the scoring in Game 7 in New York in 2015, no one else on the Caps team managed to do anything offensively and the Caps lost 2-1 in OT? I guess that loss was his fault too, right?

 
Probably already in the Top 10.

Some people will say it is clear cut, but that's recency bias for you. There are many players that could be argued for, depending on what metrics we are comparing.
 
How are we defining top 10 of all time? If it’s relative to their peers, not a single player will ever be better than Gretzky. It was different circumstances in that era.

If it’s absolute skill - who is better - Gretzky wouldn’t even touch top 10. I mean Patty Kane is a better hockey player than Wayne. He’s just in an era where the talent pool is significantly better, and where top line players simply can’t score at the rates we used to see. McDavid clears everyone by a country mile and is he greatest player to ever lace up skates. Maybe not compared to his peers, but that’s why I ask what the heck people are asking when making these lists.

I know we are talking about Ovechkin here, and not Wayne. But it makes a difference in where we place them compared to old generation players.
I used to make this argument all the time, but seeing Ovechkin and Crosby do it approaching 40 has me rethinking it. Some guys just really are that special and can break the game open in any era. Gretzky with all the training from youth / equipment modern players have would still probably dominate, probably not like he did, but could see him retire a consensus top 5 player.

It's top to reach the very top though, cause of traditionalism and that there were fewer teams winning cups every year + a lot more truly awful teams, that I agree with.
 
Crosby is an all-time great player who would dramatically improve any team.

Unfortunately, his fans and the Canadian media get overzealous in support of Sid and the group think leads people to say ridiculous things - such as claiming Crosby carries the team or that he doesn't have quality players around him (which has seldom been true). The team's excellent winning % without Crosby does go some distance towards refuting those things.
What I noticed is that Crosby/Penguin fans tend to criticize attack Ovi/Caps(one trick pony, one dimensional etc) while Caps fans don’t attack Crosby and humbly focus on their team. It’s a good thing that the Caps fanbase has someone like Midnight Judges who fights back against harassment. Just curious, why doesn’t Caps media create similar narratives of Ovi being great on defense to counteract Crosby’ PR?.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: sanscosm
OV is his generation of players best goal scorer so I would probably put him in the top 10 myself ! :dunno:

He is but as a whole player id take Crosby, McDavid, arguably Peak Malkin over him and that's just players currently in the league and not projecting (for example) Makar as a truly all-time great defenceman. So let's say he is 3rd amongst active forwards when all is said and done and that's just one generation out of 15 or so. Far from a good argument in my opinion. Even if you limit it to somewhat "modern" players it's atleast 5-6 generations.

I am not against having him in a top 10 but it's certainly getting crowded in there. For me, for example, he is simply a worse player than Jagr and Jagr is fringe top 10 to begin with. Now he is a more "rare" player in that he might be the very best of all time at one thing but that's another question for me.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: sanscosm
I suspect he’s a lock for much of the hockey world with the goals record, particularly if one started watching during his career and also cares nothing for history.

I still think he belongs in that group of 8-10 players who all have compelling and valid arguments for any spot from #5 onwards, so I can’t pretend I don’t see the argument.

What keeps him in that 11 or 12 range for me is advancing past the second round just once, winning a lone Art Ross, stepping away from that all-around offensive force playstyle a few seasons too early, being under PPG past the age of 24, hitting 90 points just once past the age of 24, etc.

Totally understand him being higher on anyone’s list though.
 
Obviously a top 10 winger. If that makes him a top 10 overall, that depends on how many C, D, and G you put in there. Although, being the best goal scorer, that adds something. Being the best in the toughest category, that's something extra. 20 years from now, he'll clearly be one of the best.
 
Ovi has been the greatest goal scorer of all time to most since over 100 goals ago, the number of goals he ends up with won't change his all time ranking imo.

For me personally he's borderline top 10 and I'm not gonna scoff at any list that has him that high, but there are easily 10 skaters I would draft over him if I'm building a franchise.
 
Massively overrated.

Top 10?

At stats?

Sure.

At winning?

I can think of 25 players that would better help you win a must win game 7.

He’s no more a top 10 guy than Brett Hull was.

Fun to watch. Greatest scorer.

But what actually matters is not pure stats, but a player’s net effect on the ice.

And there is this whole other part of the game called defense where he’s arguably the worst floater of the modern era.

Hockey isn’t just stats.
I hope you don’t look up how terrible Crosby has been at scoring any goals in a Stanley cup final, or how lacklustre his playoff elimination game point and goal scoring is.
 
Gretzky
Howe
Orr
Lemieux
Hasek
Roy
Jagr
Crosby
McDavid
Hull
Beliveau
Bourque
Lidstrom
Harvey

Not saying all these guys are ranked higher but at least eight of them are for me. It’s not a slam dunk and some really good players will be left out of the top 10.

I understand many posters here are too young to give a crap about some of these names. But this topic involves looking at historical players and not just recent ones.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Ad

Ad