Ovechkin top 10 player of all time?

[TheAngryHank]

“Two way player”

“the award?”

ok so your whole analysis is Cups>everything else.

So we are back to Chris Kunitz>Alex Ovechkin.

Darren McCarty > Mario , 4 rings 2 stanley cup winning goals. Come at me lol.

 

[bobholly39]

OV has holes ok, but so does everyone else so what's the point? For example Crosby has no all time great seasons, his peak seasons are lacking compared to the others in top 10 contention. Jagr never led a team past the 2nd round of the playoffs. Richard never won a ross. Lafleur had a 6 year career. Etc, etc.

Different topic.

His goal scoring is the best ever. His peak, especially the 3 years, rivals anyone outside the big 4. Post expansion, he has more harts than anyone not named Gretzky and a bunch of other strong finishes too. After awarding retro rockets, he still has more individual hardware than anyone outside the big 4. Despite the myth, he is 1 of the best playoff performers of his era (among 50+ GP he is 2nd in goals, 1st in GPG, 3rd in pts, 3rd in PPG). So yeah, to just brush him off as "he's got his goal scoring but then he's a bit lacking" is just being lazy. His goal scoring obviously overshadows everything else but the rest of his resume stacks up to anyone too. And again, they all have holes so it's basically personal preference.

Crosby actually doesn't have holes in his resume. One of the most well rounded resumes ever in that sense - so he's a bad example. No he doesn't have an "all-time great season" that can rival the big 4 maybe (neither does Ovi, though his best is better) - but if we go off the top 100 list on the HOH section since it's easy to reference - are Crosby's best seasons really not up to par to the likes of the best seasons of Beliveau, Roy, Harvey, Richard, Bourque to name a few? I think he does fine here. Crosby is one of the few players who doesn't really have holes in his resume.

I think Ovechkin's 3 year peak is fantastic - i dunno if i'd have it as the best peak outside the big 4 though. Jagr, Lafleur, Hasek to name a few i feel might get a slight edge - but I suppose Ovi is up there too close enough.

That list was a joke, but let's pick out one name in particular: Bobby Hull. Hull is ranked 5th all time, compare him to OV. Their regular seasons are similar: OV has an extra rocket, Hull has more dominant wins. OV has an extra hart, Hull has more nominations. Hull has 2 extra rosses, OV has an extra PPG win. Hull has 2 extra 1st ASTs. Hull has more high end pt finishes. However, considering OV plays in a league with Europeans and Americans and obviously 31 teams instead of 6, I think that evens it out. I mean OV would have even more awards (09 ross & 10 hart immediately come to mind), more ASTs, better pt/goal finishes and more dominant rocket wins if only facing Canadians. His regular season resume would probably be better than Hull's in that scenario but at the moment they are close enough. So playoffs. Each has 1 cup, obviously in Hull's day you only needed 4 wins to make the SCF so that's not exactly a fair comparison. OV's cup is worth more imo. The smythe wasn't awarded when Hull won his cup and it's arguable if he would have won as Pilote had more pts as a Dman and Mikita had 3 less pts but 2 more goals. So who knows, but let's give him the smythe anyway. In his era for playoffs, after removing Howe and Orr (and some guy who only played 7 games), Hull was 1st in GPG and 3rd in PPG.. Exactly the same as OV. And again, give OV the same competition as Hull and he moves up to 2nd in PPG.

Obviously I'm not singling you out or anything and obviously that's not going into super details. I'm just saying in general, what does Hull have that OV doesn't? Yes there's minor arguments each way, but there's nothing that should make Hull 5th (and a basically consensus top 10) and OV questionable to crack the top 10. Anyone who ranks him below 15th at this point is just delusional (like those at the HoH).

I feel as though your Hull logic is similar to people who say "why should player XYZ be in the HOF if Andreychuk/Housley/etc made it". When you compare Hull and Ovi they do look close - but i don't think that means Ovi is #5 because Hull was voted #5 - when you compare Ovechkin to many others, it's easier to make an argument the other way. I wasn't as high on Hull as most. I'd still rank Hull above Ovi if both retired today - but I wouldn't have Hull #5 personally, and could see a scenario where Ovi passes by end of his career. I agree they're close.

As to the post of mine you responded to - I said to look at the top 20 list (doesn't matter if you agree with order or not) - and I ask how many of those players don't have a better playoff resume than Ovi? Majority do. At least 15. Ovi might be close to last. Hull is one of the few interesting ones - again i'm probably the wrong guy to sing the praises of Hull as i'm not as high on him than most.

 

[GreatGonzo]

You asked "why does he need a couple more good post seasons". That's the post of yours I responded to.
The OP is about Ovechkin being a top 10 player all time.

1. You completely ignored my question. My question was - out of the top 20 players, can you honestly say there aren't at least 15 with better playoff resumes? He even might be closer to 20th, than 15th.

So why does he need "a couple more good post seasons". Well - to rank in an all-time list, the best thing he can likely do is add to his post season resume. Another smythe or cup would be outstanding - simply a round 3-4 performance with very good individual numbers would also be great. It would just add to his resume, and help him climb up the ranks.

The one thing Crosby has that Ovi doesn't (and that very few in the top 20 have) is no real weakness in his resume. He only has 2 ross/hart, which is probably a bit disappointing for Crosby - but compared to most other players in the top 20, it's actually not bad. Playoffs are pretty good. International resume is good. Even goal-scoring - although Ovechkin trumps Crosby - among the top 20 players, Crosby does quite well in goal-scoring. Even peak - his peak seasons could have been a lot better without injuries (2011-2013) - but despite that, when you compare his peak to the peak of other players in the top 20, he also does quite well.

So when you ask a bunch of people who they rank top 10 all time - regardless of if someone counts playoffs more, prime, consistency, international resume, etc - Crosby does well in most metrics. But to the people who value playoffs very highly (and considering how significant playoffs are - it's many people) - playoffs are a weakness for Ovi among the top 20. The best thing Ovechkin can do to raise his stock further is keep adding to his playoff resume.

I think if Ovi broke the goal record it would be awesome. But I disagree completely that breaking it or not qualifies for top 10 player. He either qualifies as a top 10 player based on the body of his career - or he doesn't. Breaking the record shouldn't count in that sense. Because - what if instead of 895 goals, he scores 870 goals. That means not top 10 - but 895 means top 10? No, that's dumb. He'll either be good enough for top 10 based on his whole body of work come retirement or not - the record would be amazing - but i don't think the record in itself should be the deciding factor.

1. And again, which top 20 are you referring to? The HF top 20 of the top 100 list? Playoffs is a big factor, but it’s still something Ovechkin has regardless while having a better regular season resume than a lot of all time greats. In the end, many like to gravitate more towards playoffs when making those choices.

Ok, how many of those top 20 have cups AND smythes. Your citing a list that is entirely subjective regardless. If Ovechkin needs another cup and smythe despite his goal scoring dominance, peak, and overall individual success....then that means that the others around him have multiple cups and smythes....which I’m sure many of them don’t.

Crosby has consistency at a very high level with superior playmaking, Ovechkin has a better peak with superior goal scoring. But that’s my point, Crosby doesn’t really have a peak, unlike many others that would make up the top 10....but he has a lot of playoff success....so naturally that tends to secure his place, but the opposite is happening with Ovechkin, who has the peak/prime, and regular season success that rivals the very best, yet not enough playoff success?

People have always valued playoffs more, which put O6 talent higher in a lot of lists compared to modern era players, which I think is bogus. And it was the one thing that kept Ovechkin inferior to Crosby in many ways, while keeping his status low in terms of all time rankings....but he has playoff success now all while cementing his legacy as one, if not THE best pure goal scorer to ever play. That’s something he has over Crosby as well, a legacy in many ways.

And again, by citing that breaking the all time goal record wouldn’t be enough, and that it should be the entire body of work.....your not referring to anything but playoffs. If he did break the all time goal record, and moved up the stats in let’s say the top 15-20, add 3 Harts and Lindsays, add the most Rockets EVER, add possibly ending his career as THE best and most productive LWer ever....now add a Stanley cup and smythe. That’s an entire body of work, your whole idea that he needs more playoffs only shows a lack of acknowledgement of everything else he has achieved.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Darren McCarty > Mario , 4 rings 2 stanley cup winning goals. Come at me lol.

Claude Lemieux>Jaromir Jagr

Boom...

 

[bobholly39]

1. And again, which top 20 are you referring to? The HF top 20 of the top 100 list? Playoffs is a big factor, but it’s still something Ovechkin has regardless while having a better regular season resume than a lot of all time greats. In the end, many like to gravitate more towards playoffs when making those choices.

Ok, how many of those top 20 have cups AND smythes. Your citing a list that is entirely subjective regardless. If Ovechkin needs another cup and smythe despite his goal scoring dominance, peak, and overall individual success....then that means that the others around him have multiple cups and smythes....which I’m sure many of them don’t.

Crosby has consistency at a very high level with superior playmaking, Ovechkin has a better peak with superior goal scoring. But that’s my point, Crosby doesn’t really have a peak, unlike many others that would make up the top 10....but he has a lot of playoff success....so naturally that tends to secure his place, but the opposite is happening with Ovechkin, who has the peak/prime, and regular season success that rivals the very best, yet not enough playoff success?

People have always valued playoffs more, which put O6 talent higher in a lot of lists compared to modern era players, which I think is bogus. And it was the one thing that kept Ovechkin inferior to Crosby in many ways, while keeping his status low in terms of all time rankings....but he has playoff success now all while cementing his legacy as one, if not THE best pure goal scorer to ever play. That’s something he has over Crosby as well, a legacy in many ways.

And again, by citing that breaking the all time goal record wouldn’t be enough, and that it should be the entire body of work.....your not referring to anything but playoffs. If he did break the all time goal record, and moved up the stats in let’s say the top 15-20, add 3 Harts and Lindsays, add the most Rockets EVER, add possibly ending his career as THE best and most productive LWer ever....now add a Stanley cup and smythe. That’s an entire body of work, your whole idea that he needs more playoffs only shows a lack of acknowledgement of everything else he has achieved.

You keep dancing around the question.

Yes - I was talking about the top 20 list on the history top 100 list. I don't care if you agree with the ranking of the top 20 - it's just an easy to reference list, even if you change the order around. If you want to post your own top 20 player list of all-time instead - unless your list is very weird and unexpected - i'd expect Ovechkin also stands out as having one of the weakest playoff resumes.

Obviously his regular season resume is great - which obviously balances it out. But since this topic is about Ovechkin being top 10 all time, or even asking how high he can rise - all i'm saying is playoffs is probably still his biggest weakness (doesn't mean he's a bad playoff performer - it just means vs other top 10 players he's very weak in this area) - and so the best way for him to rise up the all time ranking is to keep on adding more meat to his playoff resume.

I'm not saying the all-time goal record would or wouldn't be enough. You're looking at it wrong. What I take exception to is people claiming the record itself makes a difference - it doesn't. What happens if Ovechkin finishes with 895 goals? He's top 10? Ok - what if instead he finishes with 893 - does that mean he's now not top 10? That's ridiculous. He'll either end up top 10 all time or not - and continuing to add impactful seasons, and even moreso impactful playoff runs to his resume - will help. Beating the record or getting close to it by virtue of more 50 and 40 goal seasons would be fantastic. Beating the record by playing till age 45 and instead only scoring ~25-30 goals a season - probably a bit less of a significant add-on to his resume.

Finally regarding Crosby - yes Ovechkin had some advantages over him (goal scoring, single peak season, etc). Quit looking at just 1 vs 1 comparisons though. We're talking all-time, so the better question is how does Crosby compare to the top 10-20 all-time in those metrics. I stipulate that among the top 10, or 20 players all-time, Crosby actually looks quite good for peak. Going back to the HF top 100 list on the history board - in the top 10 list you have Beliveau, Bourque, Roy, Harvey, Richard to name a few....i don't think Crosby's best peak seasons (whether it's 2007, 2010, 2014, 2013) look bad vs those guys.

 

[edog37]

No one who actually watched Trottier play would say that Backstrom is on the same level talent wise and impact. So again, tell all the stories you want, drop all the names you would like, even try to devalue what I say by citing your age superiority. We both know your full of it.

I mean you had no point, so there was nothing to miss

I said talent only, not impact. You can’t even quote me correctly & you want to debate me

 

[edog37]

OV .............Top 20.

that’s a fair placement. He’s Top 20 certainly, but no where near Top 10.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

It’s only weak given that they are all held by the same standards, which is nonsense. For example, you don’t hold the same standards when it comes to peak compared to the top 10 players, yet many have him cemented 5th despite it...so what’s the deal? You hold the same standards for Ovechkin but change them for Crosby?

That’s ironic coming from you. Jagr and Ovechkin have “weak” playoff resumes compared to who you would put in the top 10, yet that’s also subjective. For example, who is in your top 10? Are guys like Bobby Hull, Bourque, Hasek on it? What about the various players from the O6 who played in a 6 team league while surrounded with dynasty talent?

So again, are you comparing them to the big 4? Or other players that may make up the top 10 list?

There is no standards. It’s just a fact that Jagrs and Ovechkins playoff resume are lacking compared to the other greats such as Gretzky, Howe, Lemieux, Crosby, Beliveau, Richard, Roy, Orr etc.

 

[GreatGonzo]

You keep dancing around the question.

Yes - I was talking about the top 20 list on the history top 100 list. I don't care if you agree with the ranking of the top 20 - it's just an easy to reference list, even if you change the order around. If you want to post your own top 20 player list of all-time instead - unless your list is very weird and unexpected - i'd expect Ovechkin also stands out as having one of the weakest playoff resumes.

Obviously his regular season resume is great - which obviously balances it out. But since this topic is about Ovechkin being top 10 all time, or even asking how high he can rise - all i'm saying is playoffs is probably still his biggest weakness (doesn't mean he's a bad playoff performer - it just means vs other top 10 players he's very weak in this area) - and so the best way for him to rise up the all time ranking is to keep on adding more meat to his playoff resume.

I'm not saying the all-time goal record would or wouldn't be enough. You're looking at it wrong. What I take exception to is people claiming the record itself makes a difference - it doesn't. What happens if Ovechkin finishes with 895 goals? He's top 10? Ok - what if instead he finishes with 893 - does that mean he's now not top 10? That's ridiculous. He'll either end up top 10 all time or not - and continuing to add impactful seasons, and even moreso impactful playoff runs to his resume - will help. Beating the record or getting close to it by virtue of more 50 and 40 goal seasons would be fantastic. Beating the record by playing till age 45 and instead only scoring ~25-30 goals a season - probably a bit less of a significant add-on to his resume.

Finally regarding Crosby - yes Ovechkin had some advantages over him (goal scoring, single peak season, etc). Quit looking at just 1 vs 1 comparisons though. We're talking all-time, so the better question is how does Crosby compare to the top 10-20 all-time in those metrics. I stipulate that among the top 10, or 20 players all-time, Crosby actually looks quite good for peak. Going back to the HF top 100 list on the history board - in the top 10 list you have Beliveau, Bourque, Roy, Harvey, Richard to name a few....i don't think Crosby's best peak seasons (whether it's 2007, 2010, 2014, 2013) look bad vs those guys.

I wasn’t dancing around anything I just wanted to make sure with what you were referencing.

I have thoughts and ideas with that list, but since that’s not the question. Well, what you see as “Weak” is humorous considering what he’s up against. He didn’t get to play on any dynasty’s or in an O6 era like a Majority of those players, but sure...it’s “weak.”

Again, “weak” is subjective. He still is one of the best playoff performers of his era, and he still got it done. I mean Crosby’s cup wins and smythes are weak to many of those players too, yet that doesn’t get talked about? He has 3 cups and 2 smythes while not leading any one of them in scoring, and has by far one...if not the weakest smythe post lockout. If your going to compare, don’t treat Crosby like loyalty, see it for what it is. Crosby doesn’t have Richards goal scoring or cups in the playoffs, Crosby doesn’t have Orr, Lemieux, Gretzky numbers in the playoffs....

If it was Crosby In the same situation on the verge of breaking the all time assists record, I’m sure you would feel differently. Breaking that record is bigger than your thinking. It’s a record that hasn’t really been touched. It’s something special. If that’s not enough for you, then that’s fine, but your definitely underselling it.

Single season peak? No, he has a superior peak by far. Even Malkin has the better single season peak than Crosby, but Ovechkins 08-10 was better than anything Crosby put together. So don’t sell it short as a “single” season peak. He walked away with 2 Harts, 3 Lindsays, a scoring title, and 2 Rockets within that time. That’s a peak that puts him up there with the all time greats, something Crosby doesn’t have. I think Crosby and Ovechkin are better and more accomplished than most of those players. There is just a very big bias for players of that era.

There is no standards. It’s just a fact that Jagrs and Ovechkins playoff resume are lacking compared to the other greats such as Gretzky, Howe, Lemieux, Crosby, Beliveau, Richard, Roy, Orr etc.

And that again is all with Context. Believeau and Richards played on dynasties in the O6 era. Why can’t Ovechkin have more credit for his playoff success?

It’s also the Irony that Crosby is by far the weakest playoff performer between Gretzky, Howe, Lemieux, and Roy. With having the weakest smythes of them, why isn’t that being brought up?

I said talent only, not impact. You can’t even quote me correctly & you want to debate me

Yes you did, you said Backstroms impact On the Caps is similar to Trottier and the Islanders...

Regardless, still not the same talent. You really are fighting hard for that right aren’t you? Your wrong, get over it. No hockey fan would agree with you.

 

[bobholly39]

I wasn’t dancing around anything I just wanted to make sure with what you were referencing.

I have thoughts and ideas with that list, but since that’s not the question. Well, what you see as “Weak” is humorous considering what he’s up against. He didn’t get to play on any dynasty’s or in an O6 era like a Majority of those players, but sure...it’s “weak.”

Again, “weak” is subjective. He still is one of the best playoff performers of his era, and he still got it done. I mean Crosby’s cup wins and smythes are weak to many of those players too, yet that doesn’t get talked about? He has 3 cups and 2 smythes while not leading any one of them in scoring, and has by far one...if not the weakest smythe post lockout. If your going to compare, don’t treat Crosby like loyalty, see it for what it is. Crosby doesn’t have Richards goal scoring or cups in the playoffs, Crosby doesn’t have Orr, Lemieux, Gretzky numbers in the playoffs....

If it was Crosby In the same situation on the verge of breaking the all time assists record, I’m sure you would feel differently. Breaking that record is bigger than your thinking. It’s a record that hasn’t really been touched. It’s something special. If that’s not enough for you, then that’s fine, but your definitely underselling it.

Single season peak? No, he has a superior peak by far. Even Malkin has the better single season peak than Crosby, but Ovechkins 08-10 was better than anything Crosby put together. So don’t sell it short as a “single” season peak. He walked away with 2 Harts, 3 Lindsays, a scoring title, and 2 Rockets within that time. That’s a peak that puts him up there with the all time greats, something Crosby doesn’t have. I think Crosby and Ovechkin are better and more accomplished than most of those players. There is just a very big bias for players of that era.

And that again is all with Context. Believeau and Richards played on dynasties in the O6 era. Why can’t Ovechkin have more credit for his playoff success?

It’s also the Irony that Crosby is by far the weakest playoff performer between Gretzky, Howe, Lemieux, and Roy. With having the weakest smythes of them, why isn’t that being brought up?

Yes you did, you said Backstroms impact On the Caps is similar to Trottier and the Islanders...

Regardless, still not the same talent. You really are fighting hard for that right aren’t you? Your wrong, get over it. No hockey fan would agree with you.

Your logic continues to fail.

What does Ovechkin being "one of the best playoff performer of his era" matter in an all time sense? You realize hockey spans 100+ years. Is this thread about Ovi being top 10 all time or simply top 10 in past 20 years?

Ovechkin is definitely behind both Crosby and Malkin for playoffs. Probably some Chicago player(s) too. He's good at playoffs - great even - but compared to other usual top 10-20 all time players - it's a weakness. Why are you dancing around this point so much? Just acknowledge it and move on - its common sense.

Coming back to Crosby - much better playoff resume than Ovi. 4 "smythe-worthy cup runs". Yes even if you subjectively feel some of those 4 are better or worst than others - 4 is amazing, especially in this era of cap/parity. His overall production outside of those 4 runs is also good. So no Crosby wouldn't compare to Gretzky or Roy for playoffs - but among top 20 players all time his playoffs fair much better than Ovi - without looking at list id guess he's around middle

Also - you keep obsessing over comparing Ovechkin to Crosby only. This thread isnt about "whose better Ovi or Crosby" - its asking about Ovechkin all time. To rank Ovechkin (or Crosby) all time you need to compare them to all other usual suspects up for top 10-20 placement.

Ovis best full season is better than Crosby's. Even Malkins is. Sure. So what? My point was compared to any of the other top 10-20, Crosby isnt weak for peak. He's not #1 - but certainly not near the very bottom (as Ovi is for playoffs).

If Crosby was on the verge of beating the all time assist record he'd be a guaranteed top 5 player all time and likely quite a bit higher. The assist record is MUCH more impressive than the goal record due to the sheer volume of it.

But again - logic seems to fail you. Its not about whether the record is important or not. Its just about realizing that a few goals more or less makes zero difference. When Ovechkin is 40 and about to retire - we'll have the full scope of his career. His remaining 5-7 seasons and playoffs. At that point well be able to decide if his overall resume is worthy of top 20, top 10, top 5 or whatever. Whatever our decision on the matter is - for me whether he finishes with 897 career goals vs 887 will have 0 effect. How can 10 careers goals be significant in career assessment? It would be a stupendous feat to own the record, worthy of honor and bragging rights - but thats it. Ovechkin retiring at 40 with 887 goals or 897 goals ranks in the EXACT same position all time.

 

[daver]

Malkin		Crosby			Ovechkin
5 Gm 0+4=4, -1	Emery .909	5 Gm 3+2=5, 0	06-07 L Ott
4 Gm 2+5=7, +3	Gerber .912	4 Gm 2+6=8, +2	07-08 W Ott	07-08 L vs Phl	7 Gm 4+5=9, -1	Biron .908
6 Gm 4+5=9, 0	Biron .919	6 Gm 4+4=8, +2	08-09 W Phl	08-09 W vs NYR	7 Gm 3+4=7, +5	Lundqvist .908
6 Gm 4+4=8 +2	Elliott .853	6 Gm 5+9=14 +7	09-10 W Ott	09-10 L vs MTL	7 Gm 5+5=10, +5	Halak .939 Price .898
DNP	Roloson .949	DNP	10-11 L TB	10-11 W vs NYR	5 Gm 3+3=6, -1	Lundqvist .917
6 Gm 3+5=8 -1	Bryzgalov .871	6 Gm 3+5=8 -3	11-12 L Phl	11-12 W vs Bos	7 Gm 2+3=5, 0	Thomas .923
6 Gm 2+9=11, 0	Nabokov .842	5 Gm 3+6=9 -1	12-13 W NYI	12-13 L vs NYR	7 Gm 1+1=2 -2	Lundqvist .947
6 Gm 3+4=7, +1	Bobrovsky .908	6 Gm 0+6=6, -2	13-14 W CBJ	13-14 DNQ
5 Gm 0+0=0 -1	Lundqvist .939	5 Gm 2+2=4, +1	14-15 L NYR	14-15 W vs NYI	7 Gm 2+3=5, -3	Halak .926
4 Gm 2+5=7, -1	Lundqvist .867	5 Gm 3+5=8, +2	15-16 W NYR	15-16 W vs Phl	6 Gm 3+2=5, +1	Mason .852 Neuvirth .981
5 Gm 2+9=11, +7	Bobrovsky .882	5 Gm 2+5=7, -2	16-17 W CBJ	16-17 W vs Tor	6 Gm 3+0=3, +1	Andersen .915
5 Gm 3+2=5, -1	Elliott .856	6 Gm 6+7=13, +7	17-18 W Phl	17-18 W vs CBJ	6 Gm 5+3=8, -1	Bob .900
4 Gm 1+2=3, -1	Lehner .956	4 Gm 0+1=1, -4	18-19 L NYI	18-19 L vs CAR	7 Gm 4+5=9, -2	Mrazek .899
62 Gm 26+54=80		63 Gm 33+58=91	Pit 8-4	Wash 7-4	72 Gm 35+34=69

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Here's the raw data. I'm not saying Crosby or Malkin are worse than Ovechkin in the playoffs. I'm not disagreeing with you when you say Crosby or Malkin have been better in the playoffs. All I'm saying, again and again, is that there are reasons why the numbers for Crosby and Malkin are what they are.

The numbers under Malkin/Crosby/Ovechkin should be self-explanatory, the number next to the goaltender is their save percentage for that particular series. To further draw my narrative, Ovechkin missing the playoffs in 13-14 neatly divides his playoff numbers into the 2 sections of his career - peak and post-peak. Look at who Ovechkin faced in goal during his peak years, compared to who Crosby and Malkin faced during those same years. There's a reason why Pittsburgh has scored 224 goals in the 64 1st round games they've played [not including the Tampa series]. Washington's only scored 193 goals in Ovechkin's 72 games. Despite that massive gap in goals scored, Pittsburgh is 8-4 in the 1st round, not including the Tampa series, and Washington is 7-4 in the 1st round. There's a gap in point totals, but not really in team performance.

So let's get this straight. Crosby, the PPG leader for his era and one of the great offensive talents of all-time, torches a few goalies in his career and your conclusion is that it was weak goaltending? OV had plenty of chances to also torch weak goaltending.

That you dismiss all post 1st round stats because they fit your narrative is impressively biased.

That you spin, not even all of their 1st round numbers but just a partial amount of their 1st round numbers to fit your narrative is also impressively biased.

Their PPG numbers speak for themselves; that Crosby has done it over a significantly higher amount of games, with those games being ECF and SCF games, makes the PPG gap even more impressive.

Of course this doesn't even consider the gap in linemates, deployment, defense, and leadership.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

I wasn’t dancing around anything I just wanted to make sure with what you were referencing.

I have thoughts and ideas with that list, but since that’s not the question. Well, what you see as “Weak” is humorous considering what he’s up against. He didn’t get to play on any dynasty’s or in an O6 era like a Majority of those players, but sure...it’s “weak.”

Again, “weak” is subjective. He still is one of the best playoff performers of his era, and he still got it done. I mean Crosby’s cup wins and smythes are weak to many of those players too, yet that doesn’t get talked about? He has 3 cups and 2 smythes while not leading any one of them in scoring, and has by far one...if not the weakest smythe post lockout. If your going to compare, don’t treat Crosby like loyalty, see it for what it is. Crosby doesn’t have Richards goal scoring or cups in the playoffs, Crosby doesn’t have Orr, Lemieux, Gretzky numbers in the playoffs....

If it was Crosby In the same situation on the verge of breaking the all time assists record, I’m sure you would feel differently. Breaking that record is bigger than your thinking. It’s a record that hasn’t really been touched. It’s something special. If that’s not enough for you, then that’s fine, but your definitely underselling it.

Single season peak? No, he has a superior peak by far. Even Malkin has the better single season peak than Crosby, but Ovechkins 08-10 was better than anything Crosby put together. So don’t sell it short as a “single” season peak. He walked away with 2 Harts, 3 Lindsays, a scoring title, and 2 Rockets within that time. That’s a peak that puts him up there with the all time greats, something Crosby doesn’t have. I think Crosby and Ovechkin are better and more accomplished than most of those players. There is just a very big bias for players of that era.

And that again is all with Context. Believeau and Richards played on dynasties in the O6 era. Why can’t Ovechkin have more credit for his playoff success?

It’s also the Irony that Crosby is by far the weakest playoff performer between Gretzky, Howe, Lemieux, and Roy. With having the weakest smythes of them, why isn’t that being brought up?

Yes you did, you said Backstroms impact On the Caps is similar to Trottier and the Islanders...

Regardless, still not the same talent. You really are fighting hard for that right aren’t you? Your wrong, get over it. No hockey fan would agree with you.

Meh in a 4 year span Crosby walked off with a hart Lindsay rocket 2 smythes so yeah

 

[daver]

More to dismiss the myth that Crosby has has an easier time in the playoffs.

Out of the ten times the Pens and Caps have made the playoffs in the same year, the Caps have been the higher seed 7 out 10 times.

I can guarantee that the quality of goalies, defenses and teams they have faced is of marginal difference at best, and most likely favours Crosby if anything.

 

[Midnight Judges]

One could argue no

because Ovie specialty is goal scoring. PP

Players like Bourque, Crosby, Sakic literally had to do everything and log on a ton of mins. PK, PP, crunch time situations etc.

Uh Crosby barely pk’s In the regular season and flat out doesn’t pk in the playoffs.

 

[Hockey4Lyfe]

Uh Crosby barely pk’s In the regular season and flat out doesn’t pk in the playoffs.

why do you continuously go down the “Crosby never plays on the PK” and “Crosby isn’t good at defense” road when Ovechkin is literally awful at defense?

It doesn’t make sense in the context of propping Ovechkin up over Crosby.

 

[wetcoast]

why do you continuously go down the “Crosby never plays on the PK” and “Crosby isn’t good at defense” when Ovechkin is literally awful at defense?

It doesn’t make sense in the context of propping Ovechkin up over Crosby.

Stop making sense it won't work.

 

[Hockey4Lyfe]

Hell, a month ago the advance stats nerds were saying Ovechkin was a replacement level player.

Thats how awful Ovechkin was/is at 5v5 defense.

Someday some of you may realize that scoring goals is only one of the parts of being a complete hockey player.

 

[Midnight Judges]

why do you continuously go down the “Crosby never plays on the PK” and “Crosby isn’t good at defense” road when Ovechkin is literally awful at defense?

It doesn’t make sense in the context of propping Ovechkin up over Crosby.

Here are the facts and 10 years worth of data which clearly show that Sidney Crosby isn't just bad at defense, he utterly SUCKS at defense:

09/10 through 18/19 Regular Season
	Crosby	Bergeron	Ovechkin	Toews	Kopitar	Datsyuk
EV GA	481	379	548	470	493	240
EV TOI	10717	10251	12218	11276	12350	8438
Total EV GA/60	2.693	2.218	2.691	2.501	2.395	1.707
PPSHGA	53	24	51	31	31	16
PP TOI	2610	1933	3271	2198	2405	1343
Total	1.218	0.745	0.935	0.846	0.773	0.715
EV+PP GA	534	403	599	501	524	256
EV+PP TOI	13327	12184	15489	13474	14755	9781
EV+PPGA/60	2.404	1.985	2.320	2.231	2.131	1.570
PK TOI	295	1417	21	1156	1493	295
PK TOI/GP	27 seconds	1:57	2 seconds	1:35	1:57	41 seconds

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

"PPSHGA" = power play short handed goals against.

And playoffs:

09/10 through 18/19 Playoffs
Player	Crosby	Bergeron	Ovechkin	Toews	Kopitar	Datsyuk
EV GA	98	58	76	70	36	27
EV TOI	1912	1789	1768	1900	1293	931
Total EV GA/60	3.075	1.945	2.579	2.211	1.671	1.740
PPSHGA	8	4	3	2	1	3
PP TOI	483	320	463	326	268	203
Total	0.994	0.750	0.389	0.368	0.224	0.887
EV+PP GA	106	62	79	72	37	30
EV+PP TOI	2395	2109	2231	2226	1561	1134
EV+PPGA/60	2.656	1.764	2.125	1.941	1.422	1.587
PK TOI	24.5 Minutes	225	4:24	197	162	56
PK TOI/GP	13 Seconds	1:54	2 seconds	1:47	2:03	0:57

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[Midnight Judges]

why do you continuously go down the “Crosby never plays on the PK”...

Because Crosby fans can't stop saying things that are objectively false.

I rather enjoy fact checking, and unlike you, start from a point of truth before evaluating players.

 

[Beau Knows]

Yeah I think you have to put him in the top 10 at this point.

There might be three top 10 players in the league right now. Crosby, Ovechkin and likely one day McDavid.

 

[Khomutov]

Please, for guys like Ovechkin or Crosby the regular season doesn't matter at this point of their careers. Sure a 50 goal, or a 100 point season here and there is fine, but they won it all. So who cares about - 14 or similar stuff.

 

[Hockey4Lyfe]

Because Crosby fans can't stop saying things that are objectively false.

I rather enjoy fact checking, and unlike you, start from a point of truth before evaluating players.

but he does play on the PK. Whether it’s a minute a year or 100 minutes a year. He’s been on the PK before I’ve seen it with my own two eyes.

So you saying he doesn’t play on it is already starting from falsehood. So you aren’t evaluating anything from a point of truth.

 

[Hockey4Lyfe]

Here are the facts and 10 years worth of data which clearly show that Sidney Crosby isn't just bad at defense, he utterly SUCKS at defense:

09/10 through 18/19 Regular Season
	Crosby	Bergeron	Ovechkin	Toews	Kopitar	Datsyuk
EV GA	481	379	548	470	493	240
EV TOI	10717	10251	12218	11276	12350	8438
Total EV GA/60	2.693	2.218	2.691	2.501	2.395	1.707
PPSHGA	53	24	51	31	31	16
PP TOI	2610	1933	3271	2198	2405	1343
Total	1.218	0.745	0.935	0.846	0.773	0.715
EV+PP GA	534	403	599	501	524	256
EV+PP TOI	13327	12184	15489	13474	14755	9781
EV+PPGA/60	2.404	1.985	2.320	2.231	2.131	1.570
PK TOI	295	1417	21	1156	1493	295
PK TOI/GP	27 seconds	1:57	2 seconds	1:35	1:57	41 seconds

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

"PPSHGA" = power play short handed goals against.

And playoffs:

09/10 through 18/19 Playoffs
Player	Crosby	Bergeron	Ovechkin	Toews	Kopitar	Datsyuk
EV GA	98	58	76	70	36	27
EV TOI	1912	1789	1768	1900	1293	931
Total EV GA/60	3.075	1.945	2.579	2.211	1.671	1.740
PPSHGA	8	4	3	2	1	3
PP TOI	483	320	463	326	268	203
Total	0.994	0.750	0.389	0.368	0.224	0.887
EV+PP GA	106	62	79	72	37	30
EV+PP TOI	2395	2109	2231	2226	1561	1134
EV+PPGA/60	2.656	1.764	2.125	1.941	1.422	1.587
PK TOI	24.5 Minutes	225	4:24	197	162	56
PK TOI/GP	13 Seconds	1:54	2 seconds	1:47	2:03	0:57

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

You want to see how fast people stop reading your chart and all your fancy numbers?

Throw in power play short handed goals against as a stat. That’s how far I made it before I realized how dumb the entire thing is.

 

[Midnight Judges]

You want to see how fast people stop reading your chart and all your fancy numbers?

Uh, there is absolutely nothing fancy at all about it. It is the polar opposite of fancy. There's no BS "expected goals" or any other manipulated subjective crap in there (like what you just posted). It's simply even strength goals against while Sidney Crosby is on the ice. It is the pure unadulterated result of Crosby's defense, and Sid's results are dog poop.

Sidney Crosby's defensive statistics are friggin terrible - worse than Alex Ovechkin's in the regular season, and far worse than Alex Ovechkin's defensive result in the playoffs.

 

[mitchmagic]

Uh, there is absolutely nothing fancy at all about it. It is the polar opposite of fancy. There's no BS "expected goals" or any other manipulated subjective crap in there (like what you just posted). It's simply even strength goals against while Sidney Crosby is on the ice. It is the pure unadulterated result of Crosby's defense, and Sid's results are dog poop.

Sidney Crosby's defensive statistics are friggin terrible - worse than Alex Ovechkin's in the regular season, and far worse than Alex Ovechkin's defensive result in the playoffs.

Crosby plays a lot, more than any other forward. So his on-ice percentage of even strength goals against will be higher than most players.

You're basically citing +/-, which, in some contexts is a good stat. But I'd say it's a bit skewed in this case, as is the case with most players who play more than any other player on their team.