Ovechkin Milestone Thread 2.0 - Passed some guy named Wayne, now NHL goalscoring leader (895)

[CpatainCanuck]

I was right regarding what Ovechkin needed to do: I just didn't expect him to actually do it.

 

[Roshi]

I think the stick thing gets overblown. Lots of players scored 40-50 goals a season back in the 1980s with wooden sticks. Some of those guys would never sniff 50 goals in today's game too.

Ovechkin won 4 Rockets as the lone 50 goal scorer during that season and another Rocket with 49 goals. Crosby even won a Rocket with 44 goals.

Why didn't other players score 50 during those seasons with better stick technology?

Also not accounting, you would have to give the same benefits to every other player in the league aswell. Give Wayne "todays video training", yeah teams would be heavily scouting on Wayne's weaknesses and how to stop him.

 

[ITM]

my reply (generated by my assistant, have not read it myself )

I appreciate the engagement here, and I’ll clarify my position since there seems to be some misunderstanding about my intent. My initial response wasn’t meant to dismiss your appreciation for Gretzky or even the broader discussion about eras and styles of play. It was narrowly addressing one specific claim—the 50% figure for Gretzky’s goals from "his office"—which you presented as a rough estimate but later defended as if it were a grounded statistic. That’s the only part I took issue with, because in debates like this, speculative numbers (even when qualified with "probably") often get repeated as fact over time.

To your point about Ovechkin: yes, his "office" is a well-known euphemism, and no one disputes that he scores disproportionately from the left circle. But the reason I pushed back on the 50% Gretzky claim is that (a) it wasn’t sourced, and (b) the conversation had shifted into comparing the two players’ scoring profiles, where precision matters. If we’re talking about Ovechkin, the actual breakdown of his goals is well-documented: around 60-65% of his goals come from the left side/circle (per NHL shot charts and independent tracking), about 20-25% from the right, and the rest from mid-slot or other areas. That’s not pedantry—it’s just the reality of his shot distribution. Gretzky’s, by contrast, was far more dispersed because of his playmaking role and the era’s defensive schemes.

That said, I fully agree with your broader sentiment: Gretzky’s dominance was holistic. His shooting percentage (17.6% career, versus Ovechkin’s 12.8%) and playmaking elevate him beyond any single statistical comparison. But that’s exactly why I think conflating their "greatness" is unproductive—they’re fundamentally different players. Ovechkin’s singular achievement is volume goal-scoring in a low-scoring era; Gretzky’s was redefining the sport’s ceiling. The reason people (including me) resist overarching comparisons isn’t to diminish Gretzky—it’s to acknowledge that Ovechkin’s goal record, while historic, exists in a narrower context.

As for the "emotive" phrasing, I was referring to the rhetorical framing (e.g., "breathing the same air"), which leans on nostalgia. That’s not a criticism—it’s natural when discussing legends—but it does shape debates. If we’re dissecting stats, let’s cite them; if we’re discussing intangible impact, let’s own that subjectivity. Mixing the two is where threads get muddy.

So, to tie this up: I’m not here to "scratch a weird itch" or dunk on Gretzky’s legacy. I’m arguing for clarity in comparisons. You want to celebrate Gretzky’s era-defining genius? I’m with you. You want to call Ovechkin the GOAT pure scorer? The numbers support it. But presenting estimates as "attendant to fact" (even probabilistically) without data invites correction—just as I’d expect if I claimed Ovechkin scores "most" of his goals from the right side.

P.S. For the record, I’d love to see that shot map of Gretzky’s goals if you have it handy. Genuinely curious!

Appreciate the effort, k:

Above in red re: "around" and "about": Would you prefer collegial allowances for your inexact estimates, or would you prefer being pressed to provide an exact number in accordance with your clearly implied impeccable standards (i.e. estimates without date inviting correction.)?

P.S. Otherwise all good.

 

[Tawnos]

Yeah like in spider-man movies. That's a media fake. Behind the net is a very tiny space. You just can't avoid hits there:

You should watch some interviews of players talking about what it was like playing against him. You'll hear things like "playing against smoke" or "trying to hit a rope"... it's not a media fake. It's legitimately the way it was. You're also mistaking cause for effect here. The reason why players didn't try to chase Gretzky behind the net is because when they did early in his career, they got burned almost every time. Basically, try to aggressively defend Gretzky when he's got a stationary pick and you'll get embarrassed. Most of the clips you posted didn't involve guys setting up with the puck behind the net, but bang-bang plays involving a player trying to skate it back there. Gretzky was an expert at avoiding that kind of stuff. Part of what made him so hard to hit was his awareness of where everyone on the ice was. That wouldn't change. And if it sounds like I'm talking about the guy like he was superhuman... it's because he was.

 

[Tawnos]

Also not accounting, you would have to give the same benefits to every other player in the league aswell. Give Wayne "todays video training", yeah teams would be heavily scouting on Wayne's weaknesses and how to stop him.

The point of bringing all that stuff up is to illustrate how silly the "give Ovechkin the advantage of shooting on bad goalies" point is. All eras have their advantages available to all players.

 

[Roshi]

The point of bringing all that stuff up is to illustrate how silly the "give Ovechkin the advantage of shooting on bad goalies" point is. All eras have their advantages available to all players.

Sure. But bringing terrible goalies from the 80s for todays game increases scoring in quite a different way than giving Gretzky a new stick or, lol, video tapes.

There is evidence on the other aspect, scoring actually was way higher back then. Even with wooden sticks. Thats the whole point of that idea.

Comparing those two things are very different. One thing would increase the scoring league wide as overall, where the other one likely doesnt give big advantage to an individual over the field.

But that said, i dont care and i dont want to get suck on a silly discussion like that. Until Elon Musk invents time machine neither thing will happen. Meanwhile Ovechkin already beat the record so even the point of the experiment has waved off.

 

[Tawnos]

Sure. But bringing terrible goalies from the 80s for todays game increases scoring in quite a different way than giving Gretzky a new stick or, lol, video tapes.

There is evidence on the other aspect, scoring actually was way higher back then. Even with wooden sticks. Thats the whole point of that idea.

Comparing those two things are very different. One thing would increase the scoring league wide as overall, where the other one likely doesnt give big advantage to an individual over the field.

But that said, i dont care and i dont want to get suck on a silly discussion like that. Until Elon Musk invents time machine neither thing will happen. Meanwhile Ovechkin already beat the record so even the point of the experiment has waved off.

Don't laugh at video tapes. Video coaching (combined with analytics) is a HUGE part of why scoring is up right now compared to recently. Obviously, you could say that it's the analytics making the difference, but they're less effective to implement without video coaching.

I do not accept the premise of transporting 80s goalies to today's game increasing scoring. Sure, if you transported them with their pads and style of the time yes... of course it does. But you're talking about the period of time before pads became far more lightweight and before breakthroughs in goalie coaching, both of which allowed for the modern butterfly revolution in the early-to-mid 90s. If you look at the goals scored in the 80s through a post-goalie revolution lens, then yeah they look awful... but the 80s goalies weren't "terrible" in terms of their talent. If you bring 80s goalies into the modern league with it's advantages for the position, they're just as good as modern goaltenders.

Comparing the two things is very different because you're not making a equivalent comparison.

 

[Roshi]

Don't laugh at video tapes. Video coaching (combined with analytics) is a HUGE part of why scoring is up right now compared to recently.

I do not accept the premise of transporting 80s goalies to today's game increasing scoring. Sure, if you transported them with their pads and style of the time yes... of course it does. But you're talking about the period of time before pads became far more lightweight and before breakthroughs in goalie coaching, both of which allowed for the modern butterfly revolution in the early-to-mid 90s. If you look at the goals scored in the 80s through a post-goalie revolution lens, then yeah they look awful... but the 80s goalies weren't "terrible" in terms of their talent. If you bring 80s goalies into the modern league with it's advantages for the position, they're just as good as modern goaltenders.

Comparing the two things is very different because you're not making a equivalent comparison.

Yes you are correct. Talent always existed. Training and gear did not, why it was easier to score for the talented players.

The difference between the fourth liner of an 80s team vs todays fourth liner is even bigger than the difference between goalies for this reason. The field is so much tougher for the talent to overcome today as the training and gearing up evolved simultaneously hockey growing as a sport.

I thought that is the whole point of that type of discussion, scoring was easier. Not because there wasnt talented players, but because the lack of training and gear and knowledge. Moving the goal posts to ”yeah but now give also the training and gear of today into the 80s”. Well yes, we have seen that actualize and the hockey has evolved quite amazingly in the past 20-30 years. Resulting into a lot more competitive sports and a lot tougher to score.

And now im right where i didnt want to be. I have no horse in this race and yet im spending my time with my phone instead of doing something equally non-benefitting thing

I get it, i get you. Im actually not on the ”lol 80s” camp. Im quite old myself and loved the old time hockey way beyond the product that goes down today. That was the golden time of hockey.

 

[Tawnos]

Yes you are correct. Talent always existed. Training and gear did not, why it was easier to score for the talented players.

The difference between the fourt liner of an 80s team vs todays fourth liner is even bigger than the difference between goalies.

I thought that is the whole point of that type of discussion, scoring was easier. Not because there wasnt talented players, but because the lack of training and gear and knowledge. Moving the goal posts to ”yeah but now give also the training and gear of today into the 80s”. Well yes, we have seen that actualize and the hockey has evolved quite amazingly in the past 20-30 years. Resulting into a lot more competitive sports and a lot tougher to score.

And now im right where i didnt want to be. I have no horse in this race and yet im spending my time with my phone instead of doing something equally non-benefitting thing

I get it, i get you. Im actually not on the ”lol 80s” camp. Im quite old myself and loved the old time hockey way beyond the product that goes down today. That was the golden time of hockey.

It's not moving the goal posts. From the beginning, people like me have been saying "if you transport players from one era to the other, you need to put them in the same circumstances of the players from that era." It's a common stance to take in these discussion. Scoring was definitely easier, but I don't think you can out-and-out say that Ovechkin would've been a better goalscorer when you put the two players in the same circumstances.

My personal view about the scoring being so way up in the 80s isn't about goaltending or talent gaps to the bottom of the forward lineup. It's more about defensive talent. And that's about talent dilution. The league went from 6 teams to 21 teams in the course of 12 years. The type of player that saw the worst of it was the defensive defenseman... because the Bobby Orr revolution also meant that the best D coming up were focused on offense at the same time that the talent pool hadn't caught up.

Even though it's a silly discussion, I still find it fun and fascinating.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Don't laugh at video tapes. Video coaching (combined with analytics) is a HUGE part of why scoring is up right now compared to recently. Obviously, you could say that it's the analytics making the difference, but they're less effective to implement without video coaching.

I do not accept the premise of transporting 80s goalies to today's game increasing scoring. Sure, if you transported them with their pads and style of the time yes... of course it does. But you're talking about the period of time before pads became far more lightweight and before breakthroughs in goalie coaching, both of which allowed for the modern butterfly revolution in the early-to-mid 90s. If you look at the goals scored in the 80s through a post-goalie revolution lens, then yeah they look awful... but the 80s goalies weren't "terrible" in terms of their talent. If you bring 80s goalies into the modern league with it's advantages for the position, they're just as good as modern goaltenders.

Comparing the two things is very different because you're not making a equivalent comparison.

A change as straight-forward as making 80 % of all Goalie Starts Canadian (as was the case 40 years ago) compared to 26 % (as is the case now) would alone have a huge effect on scoring, even if techniques/video review/training/pads etc. all remained the same.

More than 2X total (not proportionate) starts by Canadian Goaltenders forty years go in a 21 team league, compared to a 32 team league. That's a wild difference in terms of just competitive atmosphere to become an NHL goaltender and changes quality considerably even when controlling all other factors.

 

[Tawnos]

A change as straight-forward as making 80 % of all Goalie Starts Canadian (as was the case 40 years ago) compared to 26 % (as is the case now) would alone have a huge effect on scoring, even if techniques/video review/training/pads etc. all remained the same.

Well, sure. Canada's goalie development is also in particularly awful place the last decade or so, which is a factor that makes it difficult to compare using that method.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Well, sure. Canada's goalie development is also in particularly awful place the last decade or so, which is a factor that makes it difficult to compare using that method.

It was pretty bad 40 years ago too. That's just all that there was around so more of acceptance that it was just how goaltenders were.

Mike Liut, Grant Fuhr, Pete Peeters, Reggie Lemelin, Andy Moog, Rick Wamsley, Greg Millen, Don Beaupre, Bob Sauve, Pat Riggin.. far from an elite whose who, this was largely just a list of default names who happened to be around at the time. It was a pretty lousy era for Canadian Goaltenders and there just wasn't the same global scale to compete with them and take their jobs. Rough equivalent of if NHL starters will filled with guys we'd now call backups/AHL goalies.

 

[Tawnos]

It was pretty bad 40 years ago too. That's just all that there was around so more of acceptance that it was just how goaltenders were.

Not even close to true. If Canadian goaltending was today what it was even in the 80s, you'd see a share of goaltenders similar to the share of skaters. Around 43%.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Not even close to true. If Canadian goaltending was today what it was even in the 80s, you'd see a share of goaltenders similar to the share of skaters. Around 43%.

Nah this is assuming Canadian goaltenders were roughly in par proportionately with say forwards but the forwards of that generation were much stronger top to bottom. It was a very rough patch for Canadian goaltenders similar to now. I’d say it’s more akin to what nhl goaltending would look like today without globalization that began in the 90s and has continued today.

 

[Tawnos]

Nah this is assuming Canadian goaltenders were roughly in par proportionately with say forwards but the forwards of that generation were much stronger top to bottom. It was a very rough patch for Canadian goaltenders similar to now. I’d say it’s more akin to what nhl goaltending would look like today without globalization that began in the 90s and has continued today.

I couldn't disagree with this more. Your list was nonsense anyway. The best Canadian goalies of the decade were Roy, Hextall, Smith, Liut, and Fuhr. You left 3 of them off. I'm not sitting here claiming that it was the best era of Canadian goaltending, but it was an order of magnitude better than where it is today.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I couldn't disagree with this more. Your list was nonsense anyway. The best Canadian goalies of the decade were Roy, Hextall, Smith, Liut, and Fuhr. You left 3 of them off. I'm not sitting here claiming that it was the best era of Canadian goaltending, but it was an order of magnitude better than where it is today.

Playing fast and loose with the timeline here. Patrick Roy turned 25 on October 5, 1990. Someone like him coming around helped turn the tide for the goaltending position but that's really only towards the very end of the decade and that's only one guy. Other way with Billy Smith who turned 30 on December 12, 1980, and had 113 total regular season wins after 1981-82. My list was not "nonsense", it was goalies primarily associated with the 80s, all of whom rank very highly on Goaltender Wins in the decade spanning the 80s.

 

[Tawnos]

Playing fast and loose with the timeline here. Patrick Roy turned 25 on October 5, 1990. Someone like him coming around helped turn the tide for the goaltending position but that's really only towards the very end of the decade and that's only one guy. Other way with Billy Smith who turned 30 on December 12, 1980, and had 113 total regular season wins after 1981-82. My list was not "nonsense", it was goalies primarily associated with the 80s, all of whom rank very highly on Goaltender Wins in the decade spanning the 80s.

Roy played almost 200 games in the 80s, went to two SCFs and won one of them. Billy Smith played almost 400 games in the 80s and won 4 Stanley Cups. Both goalies are associated with the 80s, even if they are ALSO associated with other decades. A lot of those other goalies really were very good, and their numbers were victimized by the progress in the way the game was played offensively outstripping progress in the goaltending position.

Either way, we've digressed way away from Ovechkin's milestone, which doesn't really need any qualifications of "if he played in the 80s, he would've had way more" to be phenomenal.

 

[BallardEra]

This is where Ovechkin would be for career NHL goals if you only took his goals from age 30 until today:

 

[SkinsFan09]

mmmok.

He's also #27 on the most games played. so he's had a lot of games to get to those numbers.

he's #27 on the points per game and dropping as many active players are eclipsing him.

dude is a great player...but let's be honest...he spends a lot of time standing at the top of the circle waiting for others to do the work.

Many active players whose averages will also drop if they play until they are 40 like *checks notes* every single other player who has ever played in the NHL for a long time.

It is a testament to how good he is that people expect him at AGE 39 to be out there driving play like he's still 28. At 39 with two decades of wear you cannot be 1999 Jaromir Jagr. He's top 10 in points/60 overall and points/60 in 5 v 5 situations, that's as much as you can ask a player his age.

 

[Zuluss]

With a primary assist today, Ovechkin has tied Lucky Luc for #2 in career assists among LWs.
That also makes him #10 in career assists among all wingers.

 

[Hippasus]

Is there a more comprehensive list of all-time hit leaders than this?

NHL All-Time Hits Leaders

NHL players who hold the all-time record for the most hits in NHL. All-time hits leaders for NHL players.

www.quanthockey.com

I seem to remember Zdeno Chara registering higher than shown in the above list.

 

[Randyne]

With a primary assist today, Ovechkin has tied Lucky Luc for #2 in career assists among LWs.
That also makes him #10 in career assists among all wingers.

Ovechkin# among all (3259) Wingers:
#1 Goals
#1 Shots
#3 Points
#3 Primary Points
#3 Takeaways
#3 Hits
#9 Primary Assists
#10 Assists
#11 Secondary Assists
#14 Blocks

upd. for comparison
Sid# among all (1980) Centers:
#7 Assists
#7 Points
#7 Primary Points
#8 Primary Assists
#8 Secondary Assists
#8 Goals
#8 Shots
#11 Takeaways
#17 Blocks
#52 Hits

Hits/Blocks/Takeaways stats since 2005/06

 

[Calderon]

Even with the center position being much deeper than that of wingers, historically, #1-3 for career is arguably more impressive than #7-8, respectively.

 

[Mr Nogatco]

american dream

 

[Gerulaitis]

Ovechkin# among all (3259) Wingers:
#1 Goals
#1 Shots
#3 Points
#3 Primary Points
#3 Takeaways
#3 Hits
#9 Primary Assists
#10 Assists
#11 Secondary Assists
#14 Blocks

upd. for comparison
Sid# among all (1980) Centers:
#7 Assists
#7 Points
#7 Primary Points
#8 Primary Assists
#8 Secondary Assists
#8 Goals
#8 Shots
#11 Takeaways
#17 Blocks
#52 Hits

Hits/Blocks/Takeaways stats since 2005/06

Surprisingly, there stats demonstrate one thing - " it ain't even close ".

Unanimous decision for Ovechkin