Ovechkin top 10 player of all time?

[edog37]

And he succeeds at it. To an unbelievable degree. You forgot that part.

he’s clearly successful but unimaginative

 

[edog37]

At this point Ovechkin left Bossy in the dust.

you never watched Bossy play. Bossy was a much better goal scorer

 

[edog37]

So predictable that he still continues to do it and no one can stop it and no one can maintain the same level of scoring....hmmm.....

yes he does do it, but everyone on here acts like Ovechkin is magic in his game. His game is really simple on the whole. A big reason why he won’t win a second Cup.

 

[ovechkinbottom10]

yes he does do it, but everyone on here acts like Ovechkin is magic in his game. His game is really simple on the whole. A big reason why he won’t win a second Cup.

Totally agree, 100% objective, unbiased and true opinions being posted.

 

[GMR]

Based on what exactly?

sure there were a ton of great players while the talent pool was nowhere near deep. Goaltending and defenses were no where near the same level. All things you choose to ignore.

Being in the era as many greats doesn’t take away how Ovechkin dominated his era. Richard wasn’t a victim of over stacked talent.

You want me to make a list of great defensemen in Richard's era, and compare it to today's era? This argument has been done before. The original 6 had fewer teams, but plenty of elite players competing with each other, just on fewer teams. If you're going to use this against Richard, you can do the same thing to diminish Howe, Lindsay, Harvey, Plante, Sawchuk, Hull, or anyone else who played in the original 6 era. It's not restricted to Richard's ranking. Is Lundqvist a better goalie than Sawchuk because he's playing against more Europeans, more teams, etc?

 

[wetcoast]

If given a choice, is anyone taking prime Ovechkin over prime Peter Forsberg for a a best of 7 series?

The answer is the same as it was for Pronger and that would be a big fat NO.

Both players had much better playoff resumes.

 

[Neutrinos]

You want me to make a list of great defensemen in Richard's era, and compare it to today's era? This argument has been done before. The original 6 had fewer teams, but plenty of elite players competing with each other, just on fewer teams. If you're going to use this against Richard, you can do the same thing to diminish Howe, Lindsay, Harvey, Plante, Sawchuk, Hull, or anyone else who played in the original 6 era. It's not restricted to Richard's ranking. Is Lundqvist a better goalie than Sawchuk because he's playing against more Europeans, more teams, etc?

Yes, Lundqvist is the better goalie

 

[Zuluss]

That's a weak argument. Here's a list of the best wingers during Richard's era (1942-1960).

Gordie Howe
Maurice Richard
Ted Lindsay
Bernie Geoffrion
Andy Bathgate
Frank Mahovlich
Dickie Moore

Please give me a list of the best wingers who have played in Ovechkin's 30 team, watered down league? I guarantee you it won't have as many all-time greats on it. Richard had to compete with better player to be regarded as the top winger in the league.

Mahovlich, Moore and Lindsay were all LW, they were not Richard's competition in All-star voting at RW. Also, Mahovlich played his first full season in 1957/58, when Richard was already on the way out (played 28 games in 57/58, was old and not too productive for another two years, then retired). So Mahovlich is not even a contemporary.

Same is true about Bathgate, who was an RW, but did not hit his stride until 1955/56, so he was Richard's competition in All-star voting for essentially two seasons.

So Richard's competition at RW was Howe (for the second half of Richard's career) and Geoffrion for a couple of seasons less.

To get his first five spots on 1st All-star team, Richard had to beat Bill Mosienko (twice, 5 top10 finishes in points), Bobby Bauer (2 top10 finishes in points), Bud Polie (1 top10 finish in points) and youngster Howe (37 points in 40 games that season). Also in the beginning of his career, Richard lost in All-star voting to a certain Lorne Carr (not a HOFer, Bud Polie is also not, inducted as a builder).

It is also interesting that we do not even have a record who Richard had to beat to get to 2nd All-star teams when Howe was in his prime. If we go by points, Richard's competition for a spot on the 2nd All-star team was

1950-51 - Reg Sinclair, Johnny Peirson, Jimmy Peters (all at 39 points per 70 games, big stars like Abel, Lindsay, Bentley at 60 points per 70 games)
1951-52 - OK, here we have a Calder-winning Geoffrion
1952-53 - Geoffrion is in a sophomore slump, so we are back to Jimmy Peters and certain Wally Hergesheimer enjoying a career year (his full career was 351 games).
1953-54 - Geoffrion is back
1954-55 - Geoffrion plays even better, but now Howe has an off-season
1955-56 - Now we have very elite company at RW: Howe, Geoffrion, sophomore Bathgate, and Richard beats them all, but gets no love in Hart voting
1956-57 - Howe and Bathgate are there, Geoffrion is injured, Richard is 2nd All-star

So nah, spending half of one's career beating Jimmy Peters and Bill Mosienko does not strike me as hard as competing with peak Kovalchuk, peak Heatley, peak Benn, peak Marchand/Panarin.

 

[GMR]

Mahovlich, Moore and Lindsay were all LW, they were not Richard's competition in All-star voting at RW. Also, Mahovlich played his first full season in 1957/58, when Richard was already on the way out (played 28 games in 57/58, was old and not too productive for another two years, then retired). So Mahovlich is not even a contemporary.

Same is true about Bathgate, who was an RW, but did not hit his stride until 1955/56, so he was Richard's competition in All-star voting for essentially two seasons.

So Richard's competition at RW was Howe (for the second half of Richard's career) and Geoffrion for a couple of seasons less.

To get his first five spots on 1st All-star team, Richard had to beat Bill Mosienko (twice, 5 top10 finishes in points), Bobby Bauer (2 top10 finishes in points), Bud Polie (1 top10 finish in points) and youngster Howe (37 points in 40 games that season). Also in the beginning of his career, Richard lost in All-star voting to a certain Lorne Carr (not a HOFer, Bud Polie is also not, inducted as a builder).

It is also interesting that we do not even have a record who Richard had to beat to get to 2nd All-star teams when Howe was in his prime. If we go by points, Richard's competition for a spot on the 2nd All-star team was

1950-51 - Reg Sinclair, Johnny Peirson, Jimmy Peters (all at 39 points per 70 games, big stars like Abel, Lindsay, Bentley at 60 points per 70 games)
1951-52 - OK, here we have a Calder-winning Geoffrion
1952-53 - Geoffrion is in a sophomore slump, so we are back to Jimmy Peters and certain Wally Hergesheimer enjoying a career year (his full career was 351 games).
1953-54 - Geoffrion is back
1954-55 - Geoffrion plays even better, but now Howe has an off-season
1955-56 - Now we have very elite company at RW: Howe, Geoffrion, sophomore Bathgate, and Richard beats them all, but gets no love in Hart voting
1956-57 - Howe and Bathgate are there, Geoffrion is injured, Richard is 2nd All-star

So nah, spending half of one's career beating Jimmy Peters and Bill Mosienko does not strike me as hard as competing with peak Kovalchuk, peak Heatley, peak Benn, peak Marchand/Panarin.

I know. I'm talking about wingers in general. There were many great wingers during Richard's era. That's the point (which you obviously missed).

Meanwhile, Ovechkin is easily the best winger of his generation either at RW or LW. None of the modern players you listed will go down as all time greats other than Ovechkin. Just pointing out this era isn't as loaded with stars at that position, even in a 30 team league. The original six is frequently given the shaft in these discussions.

 

[GreatGonzo]

yes he does do it, but everyone on here acts like Ovechkin is magic in his game. His game is really simple on the whole. A big reason why he won’t win a second Cup.

Once again....So simple, yet so impactful and legendary. Oh ya...I heard that same thing about Ovechkin and why he will never win A cup....now it’s “ya that style is to simple, definitely won’t win a SECOND cup.”

I understand it’s really cool to hate on Ovechkin right now, and the goal posts will change constantly in order for there to be an agenda against him, but at the end of the day your entire argument is useless considering what he has achieved.

You want me to make a list of great defensemen in Richard's era, and compare it to today's era? This argument has been done before. The original 6 had fewer teams, but plenty of elite players competing with each other, just on fewer teams. If you're going to use this against Richard, you can do the same thing to diminish Howe, Lindsay, Harvey, Plante, Sawchuk, Hull, or anyone else who played in the original 6 era. It's not restricted to Richard's ranking. Is Lundqvist a better goalie than Sawchuk because he's playing against more Europeans, more teams, etc?

Answer me this, are defenses and goaltending superior in Ovechkins era or in Richards era?

 

[Zuluss]

I know. I'm talking about wingers in general. There were many great wingers during Richard's era. That's the point (which you obviously missed).

Meanwhile, Ovechkin is easily the best winger of his generation either at RW or LW. None of the modern players you listed will go down as all time greats other than Ovechkin. Just pointing out this era isn't as loaded with stars at that position, even in a 30 team league. The original six is frequently given the shaft in these discussions.

Well, you came up with the list of wingers in response to someone saying that Richard being a 1st or 2nd team all star fourteen times in his career is not as impressive as it sounds because the competition in the six-team league was weaker. At RW during the better half of Richard's career it was weaker indeed. Ovechkin's All-star voting record (8x 1st, 4x 2nd, 2x 3rd) is more impressive.

Speaking of wingers who overlapped with Richard's career, Ovechkin's list of contemporaries is also quite impressive: Jagr, Selanne, Iginla, MSL, Kane, D. Sedin, Kovalchuk, Hossa, Zetterberg. Why Kane, who was always thought as a smaller player than Ovechkin, would be a lower-quality contemporary than Mahovlich or Moore? I am not even sure about Bathgate and Geoffrion.

Also, we do not know how the younger folks will play out - Kucherov, Panarin, Pastrnak. Maybe 20 years down the road we would have them in the Mahovlich/Geoffrion group. Maybe even higher. Or maybe lower, who knows.

Another thing about larger league is that it gives an opportunity for a career year to a larger number of players. Jamie Benn's career is not as good as Dickie Moore's, but the 2-3 seasons when Benn was good, he was really strong competition.

 

[AM]

Not close to top ten.

 

[GMR]

Once again....So simple, yet so impactful and legendary. Oh ya...I heard that same thing about Ovechkin and why he will never win A cup....now it’s “ya that style is to simple, definitely won’t win a SECOND cup.”

I understand it’s really cool to hate on Ovechkin right now, and the goal posts will change constantly in order for there to be an agenda against him, but at the end of the day your entire argument is useless considering what he has achieved.
Answer me this, are defenses and goaltending superior in Ovechkins era or in Richards era?

There's more defensive systems nowadays, however, there's also more opportunities for 40 and 50 goal scorers and 100 point scorers. So the game is more offensive nowadays. Richard basically played in a dead puck era.

Regarding goaltending, there's more goaltending depth nowadays. They're better schooled as well. However, there were more elite all-time goalies in the 40's and 50's than there are today. Goalies like Sawchuk, Plante, Hall, Broda, Bower, Lumley, etc were some of the all-time best.

 

[GMR]

Yes, Lundqvist is the better goalie

He has a nicer helmet. And that's it.

 

[filinski77]

There's more defensive systems nowadays, however, there's also more opportunities for 40 and 50 goal scorers and 100 point scorers. So the game is more offensive nowadays. Richard basically played in a dead puck era.

Regarding goaltending, there's more goaltending depth nowadays. They're better schooled as well. However, there were more elite all-time goalies in the 40's and 50's than there are today. Goalies like Sawchuk, Plante, Hall, Broda, Bower, Lumley, etc were some of the all-time best.

There's only more opportunity for 50 goal scorers because of the difference in GP in a season.

For Richards first 15 seasons, there were 28 instances of a player with 0.61 G/GP or higher (50 goal on 82gp pace). Richard was 5 of those 28 instances (17.8%)

For Ovi's first 15 seasons, there have been 25 50 goal seasons (assuming Ovi, Matthews, Pastrnak hit 50 this year), and Ovechkin is 9 of those instances (36%) - and he has a 49 goal season ontop of that.

GP in Richards first 15 years of his career (42/43 - 56/57) - Richard played 857 GP in this timeframe
Sawchuk - 447
Plante - 197
Hall - 148
Broda - 345
Bower - 77
Lumley - 726

Here are some Goalies GP in Ovechkins first 15 years:
Lundqvist - 884
Fleury - 817
Luongo - 778
Price - 671
Rinne - 656
Quick - 638
Rask - 527
Brodeur - 526
Holtby - 458
Theodore - 333

Half your list barely played in Richards first 15 seasons. As far as him playing in the 'DPE', if you take both players first 15 seasons, and average out the GAA of the top 20 goalies (based on GP), here are the results:
Richard = 2.80 GAA
Ovechkin = 2.54 GAA

You can simply say things like "the game is more offensive nowadays" and "there were more elite goalies", but at least try and substantiate it with some sort of stat, other than just your thoughts and feelings.

 

[GreatGonzo]

There's more defensive systems nowadays, however, there's also more opportunities for 40 and 50 goal scorers and 100 point scorers. So the game is more offensive nowadays. Richard basically played in a dead puck era.

Regarding goaltending, there's more goaltending depth nowadays. They're better schooled as well. However, there were more elite all-time goalies in the 40's and 50's than there are today. Goalies like Sawchuk, Plante, Hall, Broda, Bower, Lumley, etc were some of the all-time best.

Yo6 keep beating around the bush here, defenses and goaltending are widely superior in both the highest level and depth. You keep insinuating that it’s only depth, that the top level players aren’t equal to the ones Richards went against, and that’s just plain false.

No one was saying there weren’t elite all time goaltenders during Richards days, only that there are more of them, and they are highly advanced. Much like defensemen overall are better.

It’s already been shown, Richards didn’t really go against guys like Sawchuk, Plante, Hall, and Bower for nearly half of his career, even less. You keep naming these wingers, goaltenders, and other “competition” but your just naming big names not realizing the time fram they overs lapped with Richard. I bulk of his scoring came before a majority of those guys hit their stride, much like a bulk of the wingers you claimed to be his competition weren’t even playing yet or hadn’t hit their stride.

also, DPE? Really? In Richards biggest goal scoring years. The GAA was 3.67(‘45) 3.16(‘47) 2.73(‘50). For Ovi, it’s 2.61(‘08) 2.73(‘09) 2.66(‘10). Ovechkins goal scoring from ‘13-‘16, the average was about 2.50 GAA.

 

[GMR]

Yo6 keep beating around the bush here, defenses and goaltending are widely superior in both the highest level and depth. You keep insinuating that it’s only depth, that the top level players aren’t equal to the ones Richards went against, and that’s just plain false.

No one was saying there weren’t elite all time goaltenders during Richards days, only that there are more of them, and they are highly advanced. Much like defensemen overall are better.

It’s already been shown, Richards didn’t really go against guys like Sawchuk, Plante, Hall, and Bower for nearly half of his career, even less. You keep naming these wingers, goaltenders, and other “competition” but your just naming big names not realizing the time fram they overs lapped with Richard. I bulk of his scoring came before a majority of those guys hit their stride, much like a bulk of the wingers you claimed to be his competition weren’t even playing yet or hadn’t hit their stride.

also, DPE? Really? In Richards biggest goal scoring years. The GAA was 3.67(‘45) 3.16(‘47) 2.73(‘50). For Ovi, it’s 2.61(‘08) 2.73(‘09) 2.66(‘10). Ovechkins goal scoring from ‘13-‘16, the average was about 2.50 GAA.

I bring up those names because people tend to diminish the original 6 era too much. I specifically said the players I named played in the 40's and 50's. They did. What's false about that? If you want me to say that Richard played against weaker competition, I don't believe that he did.

If today's era gives modern greats an advantage over older eras, then you have to say Malkin is superior to Beliveau and Lundqvist is superior to Sawchuk. And so on. It doesn't just stop with Richard and Ovechkin. I think you've underrating the original six era too much.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

you never watched Bossy play. Bossy was a much better goal scorer

LMAOOOO sure. Mike "2 rocket" Bossy

Ps: before you give the lame "no rockets because Gretzky/Lemieux" excuse, he came 2nd to Gretzky 1x, never to Lemieux.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

I bring up those names because people tend to diminish the original 6 era too much. I specifically said the players I named played in the 40's and 50's. They did. What's false about that? If you want me to say that Richard played against weaker competition, I don't believe that he did.

If today's era gives modern greats an advantage over older eras, then you have to say Malkin is superior to Beliveau and Lundqvist is superior to Sawchuk. And so on. It doesn't just stop with Richard and Ovechkin. I think you've underrating the original six era too much.

Players should be compared by their performance vs peers. OV was better than Richard, who is 1 of the most overrated players ever.

 

[GMR]

Players should be compared by their performance vs peers. OV was better than Richard, who is 1 of the most overrated players ever.

They should be compared to their peers. The problem is Ovechkin has no peers in today's era at wing. Part of that is due to his greatness. You also have to acknowledge that Richard played in an era with the best winger ever in Howe.

Why do you believe Richard was overrated?

 

[GreatGonzo]

I bring up those names because people tend to diminish the original 6 era too much. I specifically said the players I named played in the 40's and 50's. They did. What's false about that? If you want me to say that Richard played against weaker competition, I don't believe that he did.

If today's era gives modern greats an advantage over older eras, then you have to say Malkin is superior to Beliveau and Lundqvist is superior to Sawchuk. And so on. It doesn't just stop with Richard and Ovechkin. I think you've underrating the original six era too much.

You have brought up those names only to prove how much more competition Richard has had, all while totally ignoring the context in which they played. You can’t just name off a bunch of O6 legends that played around the same time Richards did, but at the same time, not really, and then try to pass it off as actual competition.

What’s false is the competition part and how it played into Richards numbers and what he was up against, as already shown by @Zuluss and @filinski77, you hardly took into consideration the time frame that they played and just listed great players. Richards competition at goalie for a majority of his career and prime didn’t consist of a many of those goalies, while his All Star competition was very much inferior compared to the names you listed.

You have attempted to manipulate great O6 names to make an argument for Richards being better. It’s lazy to say the least. No one is disrespecting the original six, you are simply overrating it’s overall play by using all time greats as evidence.

Richards is an all time great, but Ovechkin has clearly had the better career.

 

[GreatGonzo]

They should be compared to their peers. The problem is Ovechkin has no peers in today's era at wing. Part of that is due to his greatness. You also have to acknowledge that Richard played in an era with the best winger ever in Howe.

Why do you believe Richard was overrated?

And the peers you have compared Richards to aren’t really “peers” considering a majority of their careers didn’t overlap with Richards for a majority of his career.

Ok? Ovechkin played in an era with Sidney Crosby, the difference is their careers started at the same time, Howe didn’t hit his prime until 1951, 9 years after Richards started in the NHL. Again you are using the name to suit your agenda yet are ignoring the blaring differences in where their careers start and end.

from 1951-60, Howe had 806 points in 688 games. Richards had 552 in 574. As @Zuluss showed, it was only the second half where Howe was “competition”, but in the end it really wasn’t all that competitive between the two. All of his all star honors before Howe came from weaker competition, especially compared to Ovechkin.

 

[GMR]

There's only more opportunity for 50 goal scorers because of the difference in GP in a season.

For Richards first 15 seasons, there were 28 instances of a player with 0.61 G/GP or higher (50 goal on 82gp pace). Richard was 5 of those 28 instances (17.8%)

For Ovi's first 15 seasons, there have been 25 50 goal seasons (assuming Ovi, Matthews, Pastrnak hit 50 this year), and Ovechkin is 9 of those instances (36%) - and he has a 49 goal season ontop of that.

GP in Richards first 15 years of his career (42/43 - 56/57) - Richard played 857 GP in this timeframe
Sawchuk - 447
Plante - 197
Hall - 148
Broda - 345
Bower - 77
Lumley - 726

Here are some Goalies GP in Ovechkins first 15 years:
Lundqvist - 884
Fleury - 817
Luongo - 778
Price - 671
Rinne - 656
Quick - 638
Rask - 527
Brodeur - 526
Holtby - 458
Theodore - 333

Half your list barely played in Richards first 15 seasons. As far as him playing in the 'DPE', if you take both players first 15 seasons, and average out the GAA of the top 20 goalies (based on GP), here are the results:
Richard = 2.80 GAA
Ovechkin = 2.54 GAA

You can simply say things like "the game is more offensive nowadays" and "there were more elite goalies", but at least try and substantiate it with some sort of stat, other than just your thoughts and feelings.

Being on pace to score 50 goals is not the same as actually scoring 50 goals. Crosby was once on pace to score 64 goals. Something he's never come close to doing in a full season. Lemieux was arguably once on pace to score 100 goals in a season in 1993.

Also, did you adjust GAA based on goalies not wearing helmets during the 40's and 50's, let alone giant equipment that swallows up pucks? Or is that too hard to measure?

 

[GMR]

And the peers you have compared Richards to aren’t really “peers” considering a majority of their careers didn’t overlap with Richards for a majority of his career.

Ok? Ovechkin played in an era with Sidney Crosby, the difference is their careers started at the same time, Howe didn’t hit his prime until 1951, 9 years after Richards started in the NHL. Again you are using the name to suit your agenda yet are ignoring the blaring differences in where their careers start and end.

from 1951-60, Howe had 806 points in 688 games. Richards had 552 in 574. As @Zuluss showed, it was only the second half where Howe was “competition”, but in the end it really wasn’t all that competitive between the two. All of his all star honors before Howe came from weaker competition, especially compared to Ovechkin.

How many top 50 all time wingers has Ovechkin competed with at LW? Or hell, even at RW? At any point of his career? Jagr? Kane? Who else? How many of these modern goalies will go down as top 50 all-time? Yes, goalies are well schooled nowadays and wear big equipment to swallow pucks, etc. However, we can agree there's not many goalies in Ovechkin's era that will go down as all-time greats. Otherwise, guys like Fleury, Rinne, Rask, and others with impressive save percentages and GAA will get rated higher than great goalies from the 50's through 80's, who didn't put up similar stats. Hell, goalies didn't even wear helmets during Richard's career.

If you're giving Ovechkin an advantage over Richard based on era, you have to do the same with other star players from today's league. Then Doug Harvey is not on the same level as Duncan Keith or Brent Burns, who put up better offensive stats against European players, and top flight goalies. Drew Doughty blows Red Kelly's numbers out of the water. Why stop at Ovechkin? You have to similarly criticize every great player who played in Richard's era, regardless of position.

The one exception is likely Howe, whose scoring numbers still stand today.

 

[K Fleur]

Richard is pretty underrated if all you do to evaluate him is trophy count.