Ovechkin milestone thread - 850 and Beyond!

[Lshap]

Continued from last thread

This is not a thread to discuss Ovechkin's political positions. This is your warning.

Click to read more...

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

OV is the greatest player ever cause goals are the only thing that matter.

People who don’t understand that there are more assists than goals in a game don’t understand the value of goals.

As OV climbs toward 895 we should be on alert for serious debates about a ‘big 5’

Did I miss anything fam?

 

[WarriorofTime]

There is zero argument to be made for OV in that regard. Don’t worry, OV will go down as the greatest goal scorer. His spot is safe. You don’t have to shoehorn him into the top 5 to ‘respect him’ and you don’t have to make Mario look like a guy who can’t hold Gretzky’s jockstrap.

Funny, how all I ever said was that I don't see much of a good argument for outside of Top 10-ish while you've been saying "Top 15-20" which makes no sense outside of a massive 80s/early 90s bias, and yet you keep mowing down this strawman because someone dare insinuate something about a "big 5" in the event of a bunch of different hypotheticals being reached.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Kind of list that puts Ovechkin around 20 even with 900 career goals probably looks like:

Gretzky - untouchable
Lemieux - also untouchable
Yzerman - better
Sakic - better
all 3 of the big goaltenders from the 90s - better
Jagr - eh it's close but he's got all those Art Rosses, so better
Lidstrom - better
Bourque - better
Forsberg - would have been better if not for injuries
Lindros - would have been better if not for injuries
Messier - better
Trottier - better
Bossy - would have been better if not for injuries

"but don't worry, I have Ovechkin edging out Mike Modano"

 

[ALLCAPSALLTHETIME]

Keeping things on topic as it seems to have been derailed a bit...

Ovechkin needs 28 goals to pass the legendary Gordie Howe for most goals scored for a single franchise. (786)

 

[Zuluss]

The reason why we do not have a Big 5 but rather Big 4 is not that Gretzky (or Orr, or Howe, or Lemieux) is so good that he lacks peers.
The reason there is no Big 5 is that there is no consensus #5 player all-time. People will argue for Bobby Hull, Beliveau, Hasek, Bourque, etc. in this position, and all them have an argument, and no one clearly has a much better argument than anyone else.

At the moment, Ovechkin is one of that group of players who have an argument for #5 all-time. Whoever your opponent picks as #5, it is always possible to say "Ovechkin is better or at least as good because..."

Ovechkin's legend is guaranteed to grow with time, just as Jagr's legend is growing. The longer Ovechkin spends without a heir who would in turn win 7-9 Rockets and challenge the career goals record, the greater is going to be the awe of future generations for what Ovechkin did.

It is possible, especially if Ovechkin adds to his resume and no one else emerges as a dominant force, that at some point of time Ovechkin will become a very common pick for #5 all-time. That would be the moment when Big 4 will turn into Big 5.
And no, it will not require an argument for Ovechkin>Lemieux or Ovechkin>Howe (even though I dread that future generations will make the latter argument - wrongly, but Howe does not get the respect he deserves even today).

 

[Randyne]

As OV climbs toward 895 we should be on alert for serious debates about a ‘big 5’
Did I miss anything fam?

Yep. Haters hate his top 3 hardware conquered in the toughest worldwide pool ever, pretending that means nothing.
In 16 seasons out of 114 major trophies Ovechkin won 16% of them. If NHL treated him like Crosby he could've won 19% of them (22 trophies= 3 Ross, 4 Harts, 10 Rockets, 3 TL, Smythe, Calder. Top 2 all-time hardware behind only Gretzky).

 

[gtrower]

Did I miss anything fam?

If we’ve learned anything from Part II of this thread, it’s that the answer to this question is yes.

 

[Midnight Judges]

OV is the greatest player ever cause goals are the only thing that matter.

People who don’t understand that there are more assists than goals in a game don’t understand the value of goals.

As OV climbs toward 895 we should be on alert for serious debates about a ‘big 5’

Did I miss anything fam?

Yeah you missed the part where you asserted that Ovie can't be part of a big 5 because that would indicate 5 players were all on the same level, except nobody else is on Wayne's level, so you kinda made no sense there.

Anyway, there is no "big 4" because Lemieux and Orr are massively overrated and have no business being put on a level with Gretzky. They both have massive gaping weaknesses on their resumes. Not so for Howe and Gretzky.

 

[HurricaneFanatic]

Mario was better defensively than Wayne. That's all I got. Gretzky was pretty lousy defender.

 

[HurricaneFanatic]

Yeah you missed the part where you asserted that Ovie can't be part of a big 5 because that would indicate 5 players were all on the same level, except nobody else is on Wayne's level, so you kinda made no sense there.

Anyway, there is no "big 4" because Lemieux and Orr are massively overrated and have no business being put on a level with Gretzky. They both have massive gaping weaknesses on their resumes. Not so for Howe and Gretzky.

What was Lemieux weakness? Besides cancer?

 

[Midnight Judges]

What was Lemieux weakness? Besides cancer?

Lemieux missed 22 games with cancer.

The other games he missed were primarily due to a bad back, and many were simply due to him being a quitter. Clearly, durability was a huge weakness for Lemieux.

Quitting is an obvious weakness. Poor leadership was also a huge weakness for Lemieux - one that Jagr inherited. You realize that the Pens traded away a hall of fame defenseman at the beginning of his prime (Zubov) for a washed-up player in return, all because Mario was pissed that Zubov didn't pass him the puck enough on the power play, right?

 

[NigerianNightmare]

Yeah you missed the part where you asserted that Ovie can't be part of a big 5 because that would indicate 5 players were all on the same level, except nobody else is on Wayne's level, so you kinda made no sense there.

Anyway, there is no "big 4" because Lemieux and Orr are massively overrated and have no business being put on a level with Gretzky. They both have massive gaping weaknesses on their resumes. Not so for Howe and Gretzky.

A very interesting opinion! How come are Bobby Orr and Mario Lemieux overrated?
I think they were as good as Gretzky (if not better)

 

[Midnight Judges]

A very interesting opinion! How come are Bobby Orr and Mario Lemieux overrated?
I think they were as good as Gretzky (if not better)

That's nuts.

Gretzky was league MVP 9 times. Lemieux and Orr each won that 3 times.

Orr played half a career. Gretzky was superior to Orr for as many games as Orr played, and had another hall of fame career after that.

I don't know what kind of rationale makes these players equal. It is unfathomable to me.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

Lemieux missed 22 games with cancer.

The other games he missed were primarily due to a bad back, and many were simply due to him being a quitter. Clearly, durability was a huge weakness for Lemieux.

Quitting is an obvious weakness. Poor leadership was also a huge weakness for Lemieux - one that Jagr inherited. You realize that the Pens traded away a hall of fame defenseman at the beginning of his prime (Zubov) for a washed-up player in return, all because Mario was pissed that Zubov didn't pass him the puck enough on the power play, right?

Wow, I’ve heard a lot of things about the guy who did everything he could for the franchise he loved, including saving it in bankruptcy to keep it in Pittsburgh, but ‘quitter’ has never been one of them.

 

[Beljavskij]

Lemieux missed 22 games with cancer.

The other games he missed were primarily due to a bad back, and many were simply due to him being a quitter. Clearly, durability was a huge weakness for Lemieux.

Quitting is an obvious weakness. Poor leadership was also a huge weakness for Lemieux - one that Jagr inherited. You realize that the Pens traded away a hall of fame defenseman at the beginning of his prime (Zubov) for a washed-up player in return, all because Mario was pissed that Zubov didn't pass him the puck enough on the power play, right?

Well, you don't think it affected him before they discovered the cancer? Like those 22 games happened during his treatment, but it's not like they discovered it day one right?

Funny then that despite all of Lemieuxs "poor leadership" he still led his team to TWO Stanley cups and was best when it mattered the most. He is also the G/gp leader in the playoffs (players born after 1900 and onwards), and is 2nd all time in p/gp in playoffs. Kind of looks like a guy who leads his team when it matters the most. I think you consider Ovechkin as a pretty good leader, yet he has only been able to lead his team past the 2nd round once. Leadership?

 

[Beljavskij]

At the moment, Ovechkin is one of that group of players who have an argument for #5 all-time. Whoever your opponent picks as #5, it is always possible to say "Ovechkin is better or at least as good because..."

Ovechkin's legend is guaranteed to grow with time, just as Jagr's legend is growing. The longer Ovechkin spends without a heir who would in turn win 7-9 Rockets and challenge the career goals record, the greater is going to be the awe of future generations for what Ovechkin did.

It is possible, especially if Ovechkin adds to his resume and no one else emerges as a dominant force, that at some point of time Ovechkin will become a very common pick for #5 all-time. That would be the moment when Big 4 will turn into Big 5.
And no, it will not require an argument for Ovechkin>Lemieux or Ovechkin>Howe (even though I dread that future generations will make the latter argument - wrongly, but Howe does not get the respect he deserves even today).

But you can make an equally good argument for Crosby at 5 as Ovechkin? So I don't see your point here?

How do you know Ovechkins legend will grow any more than Crosbys?

 

[NigerianNightmare]

That's nuts.

Gretzky was league MVP 9 times. Lemieux and Orr each won that 3 times.

Orr played half a career. Gretzky was superior to Orr for as many games as Orr played, and had another hall of fame career after that.

I don't know what kind of rationale makes these players equal. It is unfathomable to me.

Orr was a defenceman who would lead the league in scoring and win the Stanley cups. Yes, he had a short career but he has a strong case for the No 1 spot of all times.

Since the 1984/85 season, when Lemieux arrived, Gretzky has won 4 Harts. So they are pretty close head-to-head.

 

[Dr Pepper]

But you can make an equally good argument for Crosby at 5 as Ovechkin? So I don't see your point here?

How do you know Ovechkins legend will grow any more than Crosbys?

Breaking the league's career goals record might have that effect.

Just a hunch.

 

[Beljavskij]

Breaking the league's career goals record might have that effect.

Just a hunch.

Yes, but I mean Ovechkin could break his leg in the game today and never play another game. Or regress so that it takes 9 seasons to get those final goals. We just don't know what the future holds.

 

[Dr Pepper]

Yes, but I mean Ovechkin could break his leg in the game today and never play another game. Or regress so that it takes 9 seasons to get those final goals. We just don't know what the future holds.

Sure, there are variables that could impact either player.

But between the two of them, the one whose legend has the potential to grow more is undoubtedly Ovechkin.

What can Crosby do to top it, outside of winning every Hart trophy from now until retirement?

 

[Beljavskij]

Sure, there are variables that could impact either player.

But between the two of them, the one whose legend has the potential to grow more is undoubtedly Ovechkin.

What can Crosby do to top it, outside of winning every Hart trophy from now until retirement?

Probably win another SC and Smythe in convincing fashion. That would give Crosby 4 SCs in the modern era. Very impressive. And 3 Smythes (sharing record with Roy for most CS).

The goalscoring record would be incredibly impressive and it just becomes a debate about record vs winning (which is already the case).

 

[WarriorofTime]

What was Lemieux weakness? Besides cancer?

Lemieux was always injured. It wasn't just cancer. His conditioning was terrible. There's luck that goes into injuries, but it was partially his own fault. He had a dominant '96 season post-cancer, it was the back injuries that really forced him to retire.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Funny then that despite all of Lemieuxs "poor leadership" he still led his team to TWO Stanley cups...

Sure - with 7 other hall of famers on the team.

 

[Midnight Judges]

I think you consider Ovechkin as a pretty good leader, yet he has only been able to lead his team past the 2nd round once. Leadership?

Give Ovechkin 7 other hall of famers, let's see how he does.

As it stands, Ovie has only ever had 1 (Nick Backstrom) unless you want to count 38 and 39 year old Fedorov.