Is Ovechkin the greatest LW ever?

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Personal preference RE: Bure. IMO Ovechkin's physical presence puts him above Bure in the entertainment factor.



Well if you want to go there thats fine. But what about 09-10? He was easily the best player in the league and lost out to Sedin. He missed 10 games and still put up 109 pts and 50 goals on a president's trophy winning team.

Sedin played the full 82 games and finished with 3 more points and 21 fewer goals. (for kicks Ovechkin finished that season a +45 compared to Sedin's +35)

If want to take away his 2013 hart then you have to give him the 09-10 hart.

If harts for best player it should be

Ovechkin 08,09,10
Crosby 07,13,14

Both should have three harts in healthy seasons

 

[BobRouse]

If harts for best player it should be

Ovechkin 08,09,10
Crosby 07,13,14

Both should have three harts in healthy seasons

In the end it works out evenly for Ovie. He got a somewhat questionable one in 12-13 and definitely didn't get one he deserved in 09-10.

His possession metrics are at the levels of the Boudreau era despite constantly being force fed Jay Beagle who sucks those numbers down.

If he continues at this pace this year and the Caps do well then a 4th hart is very possible.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

In the end it works out evenly for Ovie. He got a somewhat questionable one in 12-13 and definitely didn't get one he deserved in 09-10.

His possession metrics are at the levels of the Boudreau era despite constantly being force fed Jay Beagle who sucks those numbers down.

If he continues at this pace this year and the Caps do well then a 4th hart is very possible.

The only way I can see him winning the hart this year is if he gets into the top 5 in points

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

So, he was sent down cause he was no longer effective?

It's WHA not AHL.

Yup... He couldn't cut it. Sorry, you are correct WHA.

Also, Richard is RW.

I know. Was just referring to where they were on the All-time lists. I've edited the post to be a little more clear. HB historians have Hull 5th. I'd put Richard there. Either way though both were awesome and I don't think it's crazy to put Hull there.

Then again he did get sent down to the AHL midway through his career so...

 

[BobRouse]

The only way I can see him winning the hart this year is if he gets into the top 5 in points

Yeah but thats not out of reach by any stretch.

I've never seen a player hit more goal posts than he has this year so hopefully those start going in down the stretch.

 

[Plural]

Yup... He couldn't cut it. Sorry, you are correct WHA.

I know. Was just referring to where they were on the All-time lists. I've edited the post to be a little more clear. HB historians have Hull 5th. I'd put Richard there. Either way though both were awesome and I don't think it's crazy to put Hull there.

Then again he did get sent down to the AHL midway through his career so...

Yeah, Richard is more than reasonable over Hull. Definitely. A little while back he was the most popular choice for the 5th best player ever. Truly a hockey icon and playoff monster.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Yeah, Richard is more than reasonable over Hull. Definitely. A little while back he was the most popular choice for the 5th best player ever. Truly a hockey icon and playoff monster.

Seventieslord and I have had many a debate over that. I personally think the HFboards guys are out to lunch on this one but that's okay. Hull is a respectable choice for 5th and other guys - Harvey, Shore... would be acceptable as well. Richard is my number five though.

 

[Mrb1p]

He's number two right now, and he can beat Hull if he plays 8 or so more seasons and produces at a pace of 60 points +

 

[Lurked4Yearz]

The guy is less than 350 away and relatively young. He could be effective for the next decade. If there were no lockouts, he'd be less than 300 away. It is totally within reason to believe that he can reach 800. In fact, it might be a safer bet to say that he will (barring major injury or further lockouts) than to say that he won't. I think people are just so down on all the goal scorers that have regressed in recent years that they don't want to admit that it can be done.

No, it is not within reason to expect him to hit 800. Only 2 players in history have broken that barrier. 500 is guaranteed and probably 600. After that, 700 and 800 are realistic with lots of ifs.

Also, it would be great if there were no work stoppages and injuries the rest of his career. Unfortunately those are sad realities and a part of the game. One bad wrist injury and there goes his shot, one bad leg/ankle injury and there goes his explosiveness.

The problem is that Wayne only scored roughly 200 goals after turning 30. Ovechkin should be able to easily clear that by enough to get close to 750-800.

And thankfully he had scored at a ridiculous pace before then.

 

[MOGlLNY]

How? They essentially had the same prime points-wise. Ovechkin is a better goalscorer sure, but what's the difference? Robitaille stayed consistent until the end of his career and scored at a pace comparable to the one Ovechkin is currently on.

Ovechkin is ahead of Luc. -Kings fan

 

[AvsGuy]

Isn't Luc Robitaille the highest scoring LW of all time? He's been pretty easily discarded in this thread.

 

[Plural]

Isn't Luc Robitaille the highest scoring LW of all time? He's been pretty easily discarded in this thread.

Robitaille played in high scoring era for the most of his career.

Let's make a comparison:

Hart Trophies:

Hull: 2
Ovechkin: 3
Luc: 0

Hart trophy finishes:

Hull: 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 5th, 7th
Ovechkin: 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 6th
Luc: Never received Hart votes.

Art Ross trophies:

Hull: 3
Ovechkin: 1
Luc: 0

Rocket (or retro Rocket)

Hull: 7
Ovechkin: 4 and counting
Luc: 0


All-Star selections:

Hull: 10X 1st team, 2X 2nd team
Ovechkin: 6X 1st team, 2X 2nd team
Luc: 5X 1st team, 3X 2nd team


Point finishes:

Hull: 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 9th
Ovechkin: 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 7th, 8th
Luc: 5th, 5th, 9th 10th


Goal finishes:

Hull: 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th
Ovechkin: 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 5th
Luc: 4th, 4th, 6th, 7th, 7th, 9th, 9th, 10th, 10th

Impressive record for all, but one of these things is not like the others.

 

[beowulf]

No, you can.

WHy? He is up there for his position as far as all time players.

Ovechkin is good and one day might be seen as the best over to play his wing but not sure if it will be any time soon.

 

[Bee Sheriff]

WHy? He is up there for his position as far as all time players.

Ovechkin is good and one day might be seen as the best over to play his wing but not sure if it will be any time soon.

Apparently he was "born in the wrong generation".

 

[Frank the Tank]

Apparently he was "born in the wrong generation".

He does have the benefit of the bar being much lower for LW in terms of all-time greats. Robitaille is worthy HHOF member and yet he would not be in the top-10 for any other position.

 

[BobRouse]

Robitaille was a very very good scorer. But he was never close to being a dominant force like Ovechkin hence all the Hart trophies.

So Luc isn't in the discussion here.

 

[Plural]

Apparently he was "born in the wrong generation".

Take a look at the list above. It should demonstrate pretty clearly why Luc is a notch below Ovechkin, let alone Hull. He just simply is inferior player when compared to these two.

 

[DanZ]

Yeah but thats not out of reach by any stretch.

I've never seen a player hit more goal posts than he has this year so hopefully those start going in down the stretch.

They're going in right now.

 

[AvsGuy]

Robitaille played in high scoring era for the most of his career.

Let's make a comparison:

Hart Trophies:

Hull: 2
Ovechkin: 3
Luc: 0

Hart trophy finishes:

Hull: 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 3rd, 5th, 7th
Ovechkin: 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 6th
Luc: Never received Hart votes.

Art Ross trophies:

Hull: 3
Ovechkin: 1
Luc: 0

Rocket (or retro Rocket)

Hull: 7
Ovechkin: 4 and counting
Luc: 0


All-Star selections:

Hull: 10X 1st team, 2X 2nd team
Ovechkin: 6X 1st team, 2X 2nd team
Luc: 5X 1st team, 3X 2nd team


Point finishes:

Hull: 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, 9th
Ovechkin: 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd, 7th, 8th
Luc: 5th, 5th, 9th 10th


Goal finishes:

Hull: 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th
Ovechkin: 1st, 1st, 1st, 1st, 3rd, 3rd, 4th, 5th
Luc: 4th, 4th, 6th, 7th, 7th, 9th, 9th, 10th, 10th

Impressive record for all, but one of these things is not like the others.

One of these things is not like the others because one of these things played in the same time frame as Gretzky, Lemieux, and whomever was piggybacking points off of those two.

Genuine questions, who were Robitaille's linemates for most of his career, and how did Brett Hull not outscore him throughout his career? Hull had some uber-high scoring years, and he didn't finish with more points than the guy who won 0 Harts or Art Rosses?

 

[nobuddy]

Yes he sure is/will be.

 

[Plural]

One of these things is not like the others because one of these things played in the same time frame as Gretzky, Lemieux, and whomever was piggybacking points off of those two.

Genuine questions, who were Robitaille's linemates for most of his career, and how did Brett Hull not outscore him throughout his career? Hull had some uber-high scoring years, and he didn't finish with more points than the guy who won 0 Harts or Art Rosses?

Really, a guy who finished 5th, 5th, 9th and 10th in points in his career did it cause of Gretzky/Lemieux?

All right, I'll play.

In 87-88 Luc finished 5th in points behind Lemieux 168, Gretzky 149, Savard 131, Hawerchuk 121. He tied Messier and Stastny in points with 111. So, taking away #66/#99 Luc is tied for third in scoring.

In 91-92 Luc finished 5th in points behind Lemieux 131, Stevens 123, Gretzky 121, Hull 109. He tied Messier for 5th with 107. So, taking away Lemieux and Stevens (although that is quite dubious) and Gretzky Luc is tied for 2nd.

In 92-93 Luc finished 9th in points behind Lemieux 160, LaFontaine 148, Oates 142, Yzerman 137, Selanne 132, Turgeon 132, Mogilny 127, Gilmour 127. Robitaille had 125 points. Take away Lemieux and he is 8th.

In 88-89 Luc finished 10th in points behind Lemieux 199, Gretzky 168, Yzerman 155, Nicholls 150, Brown 115, Coffey 113, Mullen 110, Kurri 103, Carson 100. Luc had 98 points. Take away Lemieux and Gretzky and he is 8th.

This is all done without taking any consideration to the fact that Luc played in the same team as Gretzky did.

Now we have Luc with point finishes of 2nd, 3rd, 8th and 8th. Without adjusting the Gretzky factor. So we are really being generous for him here.

Could you point out the reason why Luc never received a single Hart vote?

Edit: Are you seriously asking the Hull question? Brett played 1269 games opposed to Luc who played 1431 games. Robitaille scored 1394 points and Hull amassed 1391 points. So, Brett lost by three points and played almost 200 less games. Does that answer your question?

 

[Cult of Hynes]

Yeah, Bure was more fun to watch, Ovechkin is the better player. He edges him out goal scoring wise, better playmaker and much better durability. The Stats and hardware prove it.

Bure was also a better player. He didnt have a Nicklas Backstrom on his team to help out or a Mike Green to pass and put up points. Sorry, the stats and hardware dont prove anything given the time Bure played and how he was targeted, especially his knees and how he played in a clutch and grab era.

Spoken like someone that has never watched hockey in the 90s.

 

[kmad]

Could you point out the reason why Luc never received a single Hart vote?

The Hart trophy has a well-documented bias in favour of players who are more valuable than other players.

 

[Plural]

Bure was also a better player. He didnt have a Nicklas Backstrom on his team to help out or a Mike Green to pass and put up points. Sorry, the stats and hardware dont prove anything given the time Bure played and how he was targeted, especially his knees and how he played in a clutch and grab era.

Spoken like someone that has never watched hockey in the 90s.

I watched Bure a lot. I've read about him a lot. I know about him a lot.

There is not a chance in this world that Bure is better player than Ovechkin. Not a chance.

Ovechkin scored 106 points as a rookie in a team where the next highest scorer was Zubrus with 57 points.
Ovechkin scored 65 goals in a team where the next highest scorer was rookie Backstrom with 69 points.

Bure scored 58 and 59 goals back to back season in the middle of the dead puck era. But he was cherry picking like no-one else those seasons. When Bure actually had any kind of overall game was back in the early 90's.

There is effectively no case for Bure over Ovechkin. That debate died a long time a go.

If you are interested, go check out the discussion here:

About Ovechkin: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1743379

About Bure: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1770919

 

[Plural]

The Hart trophy has a well-documented bias in favour of players who are more valuable than other players.

Nicely done.