Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Round 2, Vote 3

Status
Not open for further replies.

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,377
7,717
Regina, SK
Give Jagr the edge in the regular season although Crosby has a PPG dominance argument in his favour.

uhhh, yeah, and it's not by a small margin, either. He was 32% better than an average superstar (let's say the rest of the top-10 are average superstars). Jagr was 23% better. That's not insignificant.

Still no Makarov? Shame.

I'm starting to feel all people who hurt Canada internationally are getting a shaft here. Hasek, Jagr, Makarov, Ovechkin are all bound to be lower then I would have them.

Anyone with an established history of hurting Canada earns a great deal of respect from me. I can't speak for everyone, but personally I don't know what the heck you're talking about.

Star Power


OTOH, Crosby is without a doubt the biggest star since Lemieux, and the biggest non-Big 4 star since 1970.He's been the face of the league for his entire career and a flawless ambassador to the game.His name goes beyond hockey.

You sure about that? I would say he's the been the best player since Lemieux, and without a doubt best player of his generation, but if we're talking about literal star power then there's one player who probably has him beat. Let's be real here, what gives Maurice Richard star power over Jean Beliveau is exactly what gives Ovechkin star power over Crosby.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,783
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
uhhh, yeah, and it's not by a small margin, either. He was 32% better than an average superstar (let's say the rest of the top-10 are average superstars). Jagr was 23% better. That's not insignificant.



Anyone with an established history of hurting Canada earns a great deal of respect from me. I can't speak for everyone, but personally I don't know what the heck you're talking about.



You sure about that? I would say he's the been the best player since Lemieux, and without a doubt best player of his generation, but if we're talking about literal star power then there's one player who probably has him beat. Let's be real here, what gives Maurice Richard star power over Jean Beliveau is exactly what gives Ovechkin star power over Crosby.

Except at Tim Horton's and their hockey card promotion.
 

BenchBrawl

Registered User
Jul 26, 2010
31,063
13,996
You sure about that? I would say he's the been the best player since Lemieux, and without a doubt best player of his generation, but if we're talking about literal star power then there's one player who probably has him beat. Let's be real here, what gives Maurice Richard star power over Jean Beliveau is exactly what gives Ovechkin star power over Crosby.

I'd say your comparison would hold until 2009-2010, but then it collapses just as Ovechkin did.

Crosby survived and ''became Béliveau''.Ovechkin failed to ''become Richard'', especially through his lack of success when playing under pressure (i.e. scoring a crap ton of spectacular playoff goals).The complete catastrophe was dodged last year, but that's a long way from what could have been had he maintained his prime.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,377
7,717
Regina, SK
I'd say your comparison would hold until 2009-2010, but then it collapses just as Ovechkin did.

Crosby survived and ''became Béliveau''.Ovechkin failed to ''become Richard'', especially through his lack of success when playing under pressure (i.e. scoring a crap ton of spectacular playoff goals).The complete catastrophe was dodged last year, but that's a long way from what could have been had he maintained his prime.

Yes and no. To people like us, he collapsed. To regular fans, he's no worse in their eyes. He just keeps racking up all those regular season goals.
 

BenchBrawl

Registered User
Jul 26, 2010
31,063
13,996
Yes and no. To people like us, he collapsed. To regular fans, he's no worse in their eyes. He just keeps racking up all those regular season goals.

You really think Ovechkin is a bigger star than Crosby as a whole?

I don't know man, I don't see that but maybe he is.

Edit: BTW, star power is a huge reason why I ranked Ovechkin as high as I did.I don't like his resume one bit outside his prime, and I don't like his continual struggle to help his team advances until last year at age 32.So I'm not that far from you, I think he was one of the big stars since 1970.
 

Sentinel

Registered User
May 26, 2009
13,259
5,057
New Jersey
www.vvinenglish.com
The complete catastrophe was dodged last year, but that's a long way from what could have been had he maintained his prime.
"Complete catastrophy"? That's a bit of an overstatement.

At any rate, Ovechkin has more personality in his pinky than Crosby in his entire body. Crosby's main personality trait used to be his incessant whining. While it stopped being the case a few years ago, he still doesn't have any charisma to speak of. Ovechkin has it in oodles. Just look at his Cup celebration. There was more emotion and passion in his one win than in Crosby's three.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Canadiens1958

BenchBrawl

Registered User
Jul 26, 2010
31,063
13,996
"Complete catastrophy"? That's a bit of an overstatement.

At any rate, Ovechkin has more personality in his pinky than Crosby in his entire body. Crosby's main personality trait used to be his incessant whining. While it stopped being the case a few years ago, he still doesn't have any charisma to speak of. Ovechkin has it in oodles. Just look at his Cup celebration. There was more emotion and passion in his one win than in Crosby's three.

Ovechkin was on his way to be ''the best player to never win a cup'', or ''the best player to never get past the 2nd round'', and he was approaching this title dangerously at the age he was at.

And he didn't even have the excuse of playing on the Atlanta Trashers or other such garbage team.Washington has been strong for most of his career.

Star power is not about personality.Ovechkin sounds a bit over the top; appealing to 20 years olds maybe.Not to me.You grow up you want to be Ovechkin, then you're 35 and you wish you were Crosby.
 
  • Like
Reactions: seventieslord

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,783
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
"Complete catastrophy"? That's a bit of an overstatement.

At any rate, Ovechkin has more personality in his pinky than Crosby in his entire body. Crosby's main personality trait used to be his incessant whining. While it stopped being the case a few years ago, he still doesn't have any charisma to speak of. Ovechkin has it in oodles. Just look at his Cup celebration. There was more emotion and passion in his one win than in Crosby's three.
Winning the SC trumps all the individual honours.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,377
7,717
Regina, SK
Like - I really want a Potvin v. Shore discussion, because I'm still not super convinced that Shore should be where we have him.

Being voted the most valuable player in the league more times than Potvin was voted the most valuable defenseman isn't enough for you, hey?

3rd period/OT lead management

"Surr. 3rd lead" means that goalie's team had a lead in the 3rd period and lost it.
"Surr. 3rd/OT tie" means that goalie's team was even with opponent in the 3rd period or OT and lost it.

Note: You can lose surrender a 3rd period lead AND a 3rd/OT tie in the same game. You can surrender them multiple times in a game, in fact. The per-game metric does not reflect the amount of leads or ties had, it is exactly what it says: per game.

Surrendered 3rd per lead:
Sawchuk 7 in 103 (every 14.71 GP)
Dryden 9 in 112 (every 12.44 GP)

Plante 10 in 110 (every 11 GP)
Brodeur 25 in 204 (every 8.16 GP)
Hall 15 in 114 (every 7.60 GP)

Hasek 16 in 114 (every 7.13 GP)
Roy 44 in 247 (every 5.61 GP)

I don't think this is useful as a "per game" thing. I think what we really need to know is how many shots they faced in these situations to really understand their performance. There's too much noise here. For all we know, Roy surrendered the lead all 44 times he had it, and Plante had the lead 110 times and only surrendered it ten times. there has to be a better way...
 
  • Like
Reactions: overg

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,377
7,717
Regina, SK
but Ovechkin could be argued as the best goal scorer ever

most statistically impressive goal scorer perhaps, but that's not the same thing as literally the best. Like, can you really say he can score goals like Mario? If you told them both to do nothing but try to score goals for a season, what would Mario have scored? 120? 130? We already know how many OV would score if he played like that.
 

steve141

Registered User
Aug 13, 2009
1,147
245
Somehow I still see Eddie Shore at the bottom of the list of defencemen.

Shore has dropped quite a lot for me over the last few months. The biggest argument for Shore has always been his Hart record. I don't think that record is as impressive as it seems.

Defencemen received a lot more Hart votes during Shore's era than others. Hart voting is not a good way of comparing defencemen across eras.

Top five finishes in Hart voting for defencemen during their careers
CareerTop five finishesTop five finishes for any defencemanShare of nominationsHart nominated defencemen
Shore82928%Clancy, Clapper, Colville, Conacher, Coulter, Dutton, Gardiner, Goodfellow, Hitchman, Johnson, Mantha, Seibert, Shore.
Potvin21613%Bourque, Coffey, Howe, Langway, Orr, Park, Potvin, Salming
Bourque51338%Bourque, Coffey, Howe, Langway, Pronger
Lidstrom1333%Coffey, Lidstrom, Pronger
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Lidstrom and Bourque actually have a higher share of defenceman Hart nominations during their careers than Shore. Defencemen were ten times more likely to be nominated for the Hart during Shore's career than during Lidstrom's. Using unadjusted Hart voting seems like a flawed way of comparing defencemen.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,783
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Playoff data - R-on vs R-off

(Request to moderators - can anyone help me fix the formatting, ie removing the bold, from the Potvin and Bourque tables? Thanks!)

This metric compares the R-on and R-off ratios for each player (1960 onwards) in their five longest playoff runs. "R-on" is the ratio of even-strength goals for, to even-strength goals against, while the player is on the ice. "R-off" is the same ratio, while they're off the ice. As always, I can send the raw data to anyone who wants it.

Stan Mikita

SeasonGames R ON R OFF INCREASE
1970-7118 1.88 1.17 60%
1972-7315 0.81 1.18 -31%
1964-6514 1.43 1.27 12%
1961-6212 2.80 0.63 348%
1960-6112 2.25 1.27 78%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Mikita's results are all over the place, but they're favourable overall. The Blackhawks did 93% better at ES with Mikita on the ice (over his five longest postseasons). His performance in 1962 (when he set the single-season record for playoff scoring) is absurdly good. On the other hand, it's a strike against Mikita that when he was at his absolute peak (1964 to 1968 - four Art Ross trophies in five years), he performed well below expectations (averaged -12% over those years - in other words, his teams did better with him off the ice).

Denis Potvin

SeasonGames R ON R OFF INCREASE
1979-8021 1.63 1.03 58%
1982-8320 2.67 1.50 78%
1983-8420 0.80 1.50 -47%
1981-8219 1.50 1.94 -23%
1980-8118 3.57 1.86 92%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Potvin's results are mixed, but positive overall (+32%). He looks bad in 1984 (during the Islanders' failed drive for five) but has three very strong performances during their dynasty. (I don't know why his numbers look so bad in 1982). He wasn't necessarily robbed of a Conn Smythe in any one year, but he was easily in the running two or three times. Not reflected here are some of the pre-dynasty years, where Potvin posted some ridiculous results. He averaged an 150% improvement in the four years leading up to the Islanders' first Stanley Cup - a staggering achievement.

Ray Bourque

SeasonGames R ON R OFF INCREASE
1987-8823 1.80 1.04 74%
2000-0121 1.82 1.53 19%
1990-9119 0.83 0.76 9%
1989-9017 1.92 0.63 203%
1982-8317 1.88 0.69 173%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
I already shared these numbers in the previous thread. Bourque's are very impressive (his team nearly doubled their performance - a 96% improvement - on average over his five longest playoff runs). What stands out about Bourque is his consistency - he never faltered on any of his team's longest playoff runs. The consistency is also evident from his R-ON ratio - aside from 1991, he was consistently around the 1.8-1.9 range, regardless of how good his teams were. But he struggled badly in 1994 and especially 1992 though.

Mark Messier

SeasonGames R ON R OFF INCREASE
1993-9423 2.00 1.15 74%
1989-9022 1.23 1.88 -35%
1986-8721 1.87 1.50 24%
1983-8419 1.75 2.33 -25%
1987-8819 1.69 1.43 18%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Messier's results aren't great (+11% on average), but we need to take a deeper look. He consistently had a strong R-ON ratio while he was on the ice, but he doesn't look great according to this metric because his teams generally had strong R-OFF ratios. Not surprising as, in many of these years, Gretzky and Kurri were dominating at even-strength. Looking after Gretzky's departure, Messier looks great in 1994 (which is what we'd expect), but he looks a lot worse than I though in 1990.

Jaromir Jagr

SeasonGames R ON R OFF INCREASE
1990-9124 1.18 1.75 -32%
2012-1322 0.92 1.59 -42%
1991-9221 1.24 1.12 10%
1995-9618 1.54 0.84 83%
2000-0116 1.57 0.76 106%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
I think we all know the problem with Jagr's playoff resume. He accumulated a lot of points over a long period of time, but never had a career-defining run where he dragged his team to the finals. I wouldn't put too much stock into 1991 (his rookie season, where he played limited minutes on a very strong team) or 2013 (age 40) - I'd almost give him a pass for those two years. But he looks solid in 1992, and fantastic in 1996 and 2001. If we look at his absolute peak (1995 to 2001), he's solidly into the positives in six out of the seven years (and he doubles his team's ratio in three out of those seven years). His lack of a signature run is absolutely a knock against him, but prime Jagr was still a very good, consistent postseason performer.

Nicklas Lidstrom

SeasonGames R ON R OFF INCREASE
2001-0223 1.38 1.82 -25%
2007-0822 1.80 2.00 -10%
1997-9822 1.75 1.42 23%
2008-0921 2.00 1.72 16%
1996-9720 2.33 1.43 63%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Lidstrom suffers from the same problem as Messier, and his results are very similar (+14%). His actual level of performance while on the ice is quite high, but it doesn't look great because he played on such strong teams. Still, I think it's troubling that in his eight longest playoff runs (the eight where he makes it past the second round), he's never higher than +23%, and his ratio is only very slightly higher than the team's average. For all the talk about Lidstrom being a better playoff performer than Bourque as an individual, I'll point out that the Red Wing barely outperforms Bourque while playing on much stronger teams.

Sidney Crosby

SeasonGames R ON R OFF INCREASE
2008-0924 1.64 1.00 64%
2016-1724 1.22 1.44 -15%
2015-1624 0.90 1.48 -39%
2007-0820 1.78 1.04 70%
2012-1314 0.77 1.13 -32%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Crosby's results are inconsistent. His results are stellar through 2010, and surprisingly bad after. I know that part of it is due to Malkin being a big part of the "R-Off" calculation, so he faces a similar problem as Messier and Lidstrom. But his performance in 2016 was disappointing (especially for a Smythe winner) - for all the talk of Crosby being a great two-way player, the Penguins were actually outscored at ES while he was on the ice, despite being a very strong club while #87 was on the bench. Crosby actually has a negative cumulative R-ON from 2010 to 2017, on a team that's been solidly positive over those years.

Alex Ovechkin

SeasonGames R ON R OFF INCREASE
2017-1824% ?? ?? ??
2008-0914 2.43 0.72 236%
2011-1214 0.80 1.00 -20%
2014-1514 0.73 1.21 -40%
2016-1713 0.64 1.00 -36%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
We all know what happened with Ovechkin. For years he was labelled a choker and a loser. Then he had a career-defining playoff run - the type he was always capable of having - and suddenly half of the main board is calling him a top ten player all-time. As you can seem I don't have the data for 2018. I know it was a very good run, but I can't tell you if it was historical or merely very good. Aside from that, Ovechkin had one extremely strong performance in 2009 (this was during his "Bobby Hull phase", and then three disappointments (thus was during his "Brett Hull phase"). It's a tale of two careers here. Ovechkin was stellar through 2010, then generally bad afterwards.

Stan Mikita. RS/PO PIMs thru 1965 impacted his performance.
 

Captain Bowie

Registered User
Jan 18, 2012
27,139
4,414
Shore has dropped quite a lot for me over the last few months. The biggest argument for Shore has always been his Hart record. I don't think that record is as impressive as it seems.

Defencemen received a lot more Hart votes during Shore's era than others. Hart voting is not a good way of comparing defencemen across eras.

Top five finishes in Hart voting for defencemen during their careers
CareerTop five finishesTop five finishes for any defencemanShare of nominationsHart nominated defencemen
Shore82928%Clancy, Clapper, Colville, Conacher, Coulter, Dutton, Gardiner, Goodfellow, Hitchman, Johnson, Mantha, Seibert, Shore.
Potvin21613%Bourque, Coffey, Howe, Langway, Orr, Park, Potvin, Salming
Bourque51338%Bourque, Coffey, Howe, Langway, Pronger
Lidstrom1333%Coffey, Lidstrom, Pronger
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Lidstrom and Bourque actually have a higher share of defenceman Hart nominations during their careers than Shore. Defencemen were ten times more likely to be nominated for the Hart during Shore's career than during Lidstrom's. Using unadjusted Hart voting seems like a flawed way of comparing defencemen.
Well said.
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,783
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
Clarifying the obvious for certain readers.

Hart Trophies are rare. season to season comparisons such as 1990 Messier to 1997 Hasek and/or 1997 are what is available.

Likewise goalie Hart Trophies.

Strong or weak Hart Trophies can only be compared to Hart Trophy seasons.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,990
Brooklyn
Shore has dropped quite a lot for me over the last few months. The biggest argument for Shore has always been his Hart record. I don't think that record is as impressive as it seems.

Defencemen received a lot more Hart votes during Shore's era than others. Hart voting is not a good way of comparing defencemen across eras.

Top five finishes in Hart voting for defencemen during their careers
CareerTop five finishesTop five finishes for any defencemanShare of nominationsHart nominated defencemen
Shore82928%Clancy, Clapper, Colville, Conacher, Coulter, Dutton, Gardiner, Goodfellow, Hitchman, Johnson, Mantha, Seibert, Shore.
Potvin21613%Bourque, Coffey, Howe, Langway, Orr, Park, Potvin, Salming
Bourque51338%Bourque, Coffey, Howe, Langway, Pronger
Lidstrom1333%Coffey, Lidstrom, Pronger
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Lidstrom and Bourque actually have a higher share of defenceman Hart nominations during their careers than Shore. Defencemen were ten times more likely to be nominated for the Hart during Shore's career than during Lidstrom's. Using unadjusted Hart voting seems like a flawed way of comparing defencemen.

Yes, when looking at Hart records of defensemen and forwards pre-Norris Trophy, we should always assume that it was much easier for defensemen to get Hart nods, and conversely, there were fewer Hart spots available for forwards. In other words, Howie Morenz had competition for the Hart from all the defensemen in the league, in addition to the forwards.

But let's not forget that Shore still led all defensemen in All Star/Hart voting 8 times, AKA 8 Norris Trophy equivalents. And while defensemen during Shore's era racked up Hart voting, none of them but Shore was actually able to win the trophy more than once. Shore won it 4 times himself. All other pre-Norris defensemen won the trophy 5 times total (Herb Gardiner 1927, Babe Seibert 1937, Ebbie Goodfellow 1940, Tom Anderson 1942, Babe Pratt 1944).

It was absolutely much easier for defensemen to get Hart recognition in Shore's day. But, compared just to other defensemen, he destroyed his competition.
 

VanIslander

20 years of All-Time Drafts on HfBoards
Sep 4, 2004
36,168
6,851
South Korea
Strong or weak Hart Trophies can only be compared to Hart Trophy seasons.
That's like saying Art Ross trophies can only be compared with Art Ross trophies. Even if Gretzky had insane point totals that season and another guy finished 2nd with a lot of votes but clearly 2nd, ... that is irrelevant in comparing to another year where there were no superstar all-time performances and one guy edged out others.

That is like blind cup counting.

Instead, sometimes the runner-up one year is equal to the winner another year, in terms of the significance attempted to be reflected by the trophy.

In 1990 Hart voting...

Messier 227
Bourque 225
Hull 80

TWO BLOODY VOTES!!! :confused: Messier and Bourque had the same number of 1st place votes, Bourque had a few more 2nd place votes but Messier had several more 3rd place votes (Oilers were in the news a lot that season: the bounce-back year without Gretzky).

In 1987 Bourque finished 2nd in Hart voting to an insane Gretzky who had a league-leading 183 points in goals and assists ( :eek: 80 points more than the 2nd place point getter that season).
 
Last edited:

Sadekuuro

Registered User
Aug 23, 2005
7,025
1,450
Cascadia
Nicklas Lidstrom

SeasonGames R ON R OFF INCREASE
2001-0223 1.38 1.82 -25%
2007-0822 1.80 2.00 -10%
1997-9822 1.75 1.42 23%
2008-0921 2.00 1.72 16%
1996-9720 2.33 1.43 63%
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Lidstrom suffers from the same problem as Messier, and his results are very similar (+14%). His actual level of performance while on the ice is quite high, but it doesn't look great because he played on such strong teams. Still, I think it's troubling that in his eight longest playoff runs (the eight where he makes it past the second round), he's never higher than +23%

What about that +63% on the chart there?
 

quoipourquoi

Goaltender
Jan 26, 2009
10,123
4,130
Hockeytown, MI
So, are the higher numbers better or worse in this?

Low numbers are very, very bad (for the team) in that they create a higher burden on that teams’ goaltending. Essentially it is a measure of what percentage of goals the team can allow compared to the amount of goals that a team would be expected to allow on the same number of shots against in order to break even on GF/GA.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,377
7,717
Regina, SK
Shore has dropped quite a lot for me over the last few months. The biggest argument for Shore has always been his Hart record. I don't think that record is as impressive as it seems.

Defencemen received a lot more Hart votes during Shore's era than others. Hart voting is not a good way of comparing defencemen across eras.

Top five finishes in Hart voting for defencemen during their careers
CareerTop five finishesTop five finishes for any defencemanShare of nominationsHart nominated defencemen
Shore82928%Clancy, Clapper, Colville, Conacher, Coulter, Dutton, Gardiner, Goodfellow, Hitchman, Johnson, Mantha, Seibert, Shore.
Potvin21613%Bourque, Coffey, Howe, Langway, Orr, Park, Potvin, Salming
Bourque51338%Bourque, Coffey, Howe, Langway, Pronger
Lidstrom1333%Coffey, Lidstrom, Pronger
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Lidstrom and Bourque actually have a higher share of defenceman Hart nominations during their careers than Shore. Defencemen were ten times more likely to be nominated for the Hart during Shore's career than during Lidstrom's. Using unadjusted Hart voting seems like a flawed way of comparing defencemen.

Something like this needed to be done, but this doesn't go deep enough. Not all top 5 finishes are the same, are they?
 

Canadiens1958

Registered User
Nov 30, 2007
20,020
2,783
Lake Memphremagog, QC.
That's like saying Art Ross trophies can only be compared with Art Ross trophies. Even if Gretzky had insane point totals that season and another guy finished 2nd with a lot of votes but clearly 2nd, ... that is irrelevant in comparing to another year where there were no superstar all-time performances and one guy edged out others.

That is like blind cup counting.

Instead, sometimes the runner-up one year is equal to the winner another year, in terms of the significance attempted to be reflected by the trophy.

In 1990 Hart voting...

Messier 227
Bourque 225
Hull 80

TWO BLOODY VOTES!!! :confused: Messier and Bourque had the same number of 1st place votes, Bourque had a few more 2nd place votes but Messier had several more 3rd place votes (Oilers were in the news a lot that season: the bounce-back year without Gretzky).

In 1987 Bourque finished 2nd in Hart voting to an insane Gretzky who had a league-leading 183 points in goals and assists ( :eek: 80 points more than the 2nd place point getter that season).

Ross and Stanley Cup wins are the result of on ice competition.

Hart Trophy wins are the result of media voting. No playoff competition and upsets. 1990 talk of vote manipulation to get the two point gap in Messier's favour.

Gretzky's sanity was never questioned. Why raise it now?
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
19,278
8,286
Oblivion Express
Not gonna lie, my body IS ready to vote Messier #1 if someone massages my brain in that direction throughout the week.

Best playoff performer this round with Plante, managed to grab two Hart with 66/99 still in their prime, all-around play, leadership, longevity.I'm not totally convinced Crosby is better.


Crosby is a better regular season player by a decent margin. Same thing on the international stage.


Scoring Finishes:


Sidney Crosby

1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 6

Mark Messier

2, 3, 5, 5, 7


-It's not close. Take out Gretzky and Mario and Messier still lags well behind Crosby as a consistent top end scorer. And again, Sid lost at least 2 shoe in Art Ross titles due to deliberate/freak injuries.



Hart Trophy Voting:


Crosby:

1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 5, 6


Messier:

1, 1, 2, 9, 9


-Top end is similar but Crosby blows Messier out in terms of depth.



AS Finishes:



Crosby

1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2

Messier

1, 1, 1, 2


-Again, Messier and Sid both look good in terms of peak, but Sid simply has better depth here.



TABLE 1 - BEST SEVEN YEARS, POINTS (last updated: 2018)

Wayne Gretzky 155.6
Phil Esposito 130.4
Gordie Howe 125.5
Mario Lemieux 119.8
Bobby Orr 114.8
Jaromir Jagr 114.2
Bobby Hull 108.3
Stan Mikita 107.8
Jean Beliveau 105.7
Guy Lafleur 104.5
Ted Lindsay 104.4
Marcel Dionne 103.3
Sidney Crosby 102.4
Maurice Richard 102.4
Howie Morenz 102.2
Andy Bathgate 101.1
Alex Ovechkin 98.4
Joe Sakic 97.7
Bill Cowley 97.0
Charlie Conacher 96.2
Bill Cook 96.0
Joe Thornton 95.6
Frank Boucher 95.1
Mike Bossy 94.8
Evgeni Malkin 93.7
Bryan Trottier 93.7
Steve Yzerman 93.2
Teemu Selanne 92.7
Martin St. Louis 92.4
Syl Apps Sr 92.4
Sweeney Schriner 91.3
Bobby Clarke 90.4
Max Bentley 90.4
Peter Forsberg 90.3
Nels Stewart 90.3
Adam Oates 90.0
Bernie Geoffrion 89.9
Mark Messier 89.6
[TBODY] [/TBODY]


TABLE 2 - BEST TEN YEARS, POINTS (last updated: 2018)

Wayne Gretzky 144.7
Gordie Howe 118.1
Phil Esposito 117.6
Mario Lemieux 112.0
Jaromir Jagr 105.9
Stan Mikita 102.5
Bobby Hull 101.8
Jean Beliveau 100.0
Sidney Crosby 99.3
Maurice Richard 97.9
Marcel Dionne 97.5
Ted Lindsay 95.8
Andy Bathgate 95.6
Alex Ovechkin 94.1
Joe Sakic 94.0
Bobby Orr 92.1
Guy Lafleur 91.0
Joe Thornton 90.8
Mike Bossy 89.4
Howie Morenz 88.9
Frank Boucher 88.8
Steve Yzerman 88.8
Teemu Selanne 88.7
Bryan Trottier 87.2
Nels Stewart 87.1
Bill Cowley 86.7
Evgeni Malkin 86.7
Martin St. Louis 86.3
Adam Oates 86.2
Jean Ratelle 85.3
Mark Messier 85.0
[TBODY] [/TBODY]


-Pretty large gap in scoring averages. Sid is simply a more potent producer offensively speaking.



Results - top 300 ES VsX (1960-2017) - best seven years

1GRETZKY, WAYNE 111
2JAGR, JAROMIR 81
3ESPOSITO, PHIL 75
4LEMIEUX, MARIO 74
5HULL, BOBBY 74
6LAFLEUR, GUY 72
7MIKITA, STAN 71
8CROSBY, SIDNEY 70
9YZERMAN, STEVE 68
10THORNTON, JOE 68
11BOSSY, MIKE 67
12OVECHKIN, ALEX 67
13SAKIC, JOE 66
14DIONNE, MARCEL 66
15KURRI, JARI 66
16ULLMAN, NORM 66
17RICHARD, HENRI 65
18LINDROS, ERIC 65
19RATELLE, JEAN 65
20IGINLA, JAROME 65
21ST. LOUIS, MARTIN 64
22HOWE, GORDIE 64
23KANE, PATRICK 64
24ORR, BOBBY 64
25TROTTIER, BRYAN 64
26MAHOVLICH, FRANK 64
27LECLAIR, JOHN 64
28BATHGATE, ANDY 64
29SELANNE, TEEMU 63
30MALKIN, EVGENI 63
31ROBITAILLE, LUC 63
32SEDIN, HENRIK 63
33OATES, ADAM 62
34MESSIER, MARK 62
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

-Even Strength Sid looks a notch better.


How about Adjusted +/-


Glossary of Terms:

SFrac: Season Fraction. 1.00 is a full season. I prefer it to games played because it gives a 48 game season, a 74 game season, an 80 game season or an 82 game season the same weight.
$ESGF: Even-strength goals for, normalized to a 200 ESG scoring environment and with estimated SH goals removed.
$ESGA: Even-strength goals against, normalized to a 200 ESG scoring environment and with estimated SH goals removed.
R-ON: Even strength GF/GA ratio when the player is on the ice.
R-OFF: Even-strength GF/GA ratio when the player is off the ice.
XEV+/-: Expected even-strength plus-minus, which is an estimate of the plus-minus that an average player would post with the same teammates. The calculation is described above.
EV+/-: Even –strength plus-minus, which is simply plus-minus with estimated shorthanded goals removed and normalized to a 200 ESG environment.
AdjEV+/-: Adjusted even-strength plus-minus, which is even-strength plus-minus minus expected even-strength plus-minus. This is the final number.
The following three stats evaluate special teams play and are not related to adjusted plus-minus. I’m including them in the table for a quick reference to the player’s contributions outside of even-strength play.
PP% : The % of the team’s power play goals for that the player was on the ice for.
SH%: The % of the team’s power play goals against that the player was on the ice for.
$PPP/G: Power play points per game, normalized to a 70 PPG environment and with pre-1988 PP assists estimated.

Results
Here are the top 100 in career adjusted even-strength plus-minus, as well as the players in the HOH Top 100 and several others who were strongly considered for voting.

RankPlayerGP$ESGF$ESGAR-ONR-OFFEV%EV+/-XEV+/-AEV+/-AEV+/-/82
1Jaromir Jagr1711179413321.350.9340%461-6953025
2Ray Bourque1612169112311.370.9542%460-4850826
3Bobby Orr65710445261.991.0349%5181350563
4Wayne Gretzky1487189314921.271.0447%4013936220
5Larry Robinson1384163210221.601.3443%61125036021
6Nicklas Lidstrom1564168211891.411.1741%49314934418
7Joe Thornton144612699551.330.9635%314-2834219
8Teemu Selanne1451123210021.230.8735%230-10133219
9Mark Howe9299396281.500.9639%311-2033029
10Al MacInnis141613979921.411.1138%4048132319
11Stan Mikita139312208251.481.1233%3957332319
12Mario Lemieux91510928831.240.8446%209-11031929
13Bobby Clarke11478944981.801.2030%3978231422
14Eric Lindros7608425651.490.9542%276-2229832
15Borje Salming1148120610561.140.8243%150-14829821
16Dave Taylor11118766711.300.8430%205-8629121
17Peter Forsberg7087414321.711.0738%3092428533
18Gordie Howe9219197241.270.8536%195-8928425
19Pavel Datsyuk9538585531.551.0734%3053027524
20Bryan Trottier127910817241.491.1733%3579026717
21Mike Bossy7527324081.801.1736%3255926629
22Sidney Crosby7828486021.410.9641%246-1826428
23Guy Lafleur112610796461.671.3534%43216826419
24Marcel Dionne1348112610191.100.8035%107-15626316
25Henrik Sedin12489517071.350.9831%244-1225517
26John Leclair9678685861.481.0835%2823624621
27Daniel Sedin12258916601.350.9729%231-1424516
28Larry Murphy1615153412751.201.0239%2581424412
29Denis Potvin106011227531.491.2343%36912724219
30Alex Tanguay10889457131.331.0035%232223017
31Scott Stevens1635165812651.311.1942%39316223012
32Brad Park111512128661.401.2042%34512522116
33Ron Francis1731137412491.100.8934%125-9522010
34Brad McCrimmon122210417261.431.1834%3149422015
35Chris Kunitz8847054711.501.0531%2331721720
36Brian Rafalski8338235831.411.0538%2402421521
37Chris Pronger116710608581.230.9939%201-720815
38Frank Mahovlich104810227221.421.1835%3009420616
39Steve Shutt9307904361.811.4529%35414820618
40Sergei Fedorov124910187661.331.0832%2524720614
41Marian Hossa130910267581.351.1230%2686420513
42Ryan Getzlaf8617405461.350.9836%194-719919
43Patrik Elias12409126911.321.0431%2202319813
44Steve Larmer10067505771.300.9532%173-2419716
45Brian Propp10167675241.461.1231%2434919516
46Zigmund Palffy6846155021.230.8037%114-8019423
47Terry Harper106611088901.241.0443%2182519315
48Craig Ramsay10706944621.501.1225%2314218915
49Keith Tkachuk12019928951.110.8736%98-8818613
50Charlie Simmer7125243951.330.8329%130-5618621
51Gary Roberts12249607231.331.1031%2375318412
52Chris Chelios1651147611521.281.1839%3241431819
53Bobby Hull92310047291.381.1840%2759418116
54Lubomir Visnovsky8837917021.130.8338%88-9218017
55Jonathan Toews7176664561.461.0934%2103118021
56Jere Lehtinen8756164131.491.0728%2032318017
57Pierre Turgeon129410428391.241.0433%2032417811
58Luc Robitaille1431120410281.171.0033%175-217710
59Kenny Wharram6676114051.511.1031%2063217321
60Brendan Shanahan152411819601.231.0732%221491729
61Dmitri Khristich8116084721.290.9030%136-3517117
62Alex Ovechkin9218907021.271.0339%1871617115
63Carl Brewer5336484561.421.0744%1932317026
64Joe Sakic1378127211051.151.0038%167-216910
65Daniel Alfredsson124610108181.231.0433%1922316911
66Milan Hejduk10208406621.271.0233%178916914
67Pierre Pilote6608736521.341.1149%2215216921
68Jarome Iginla1554123811431.080.9136%95-731699
69Petr Svoboda10478126221.311.0532%1902216813
70Michael Nylander9207185851.230.9332%133-3016315
71Jason Arnott12449637921.221.0132%171816311
72Michel Goulet10898126881.180.9232%123-3916312
73Simon Gagne8226004461.340.9829%153-716116
74Henrik Zetterberg10008726721.301.0835%2004016013
75Marek Malik6915824411.320.9534%141-1815919
76Jean Ratelle128010738341.291.1432%2398115810
77Zdeno Chara1350127110621.201.0739%2085015710
78Marian Gaborik9897566241.210.9534%132-2515713
79Joe Reekie9027166041.190.9135%112-4015314
80Jacques Lemaire8528114841.681.5233%32717515215
81Theoren Fleury10849427951.191.0036%147-315011
82Joe Pavelski8065924451.331.0031%147-114915
83Ron Stackhouse8898938531.050.8242%40-11014914
84Alexander Semin6505214021.300.9131%119-3014919
85Bill Hajt8548135841.391.1937%2288114814
86Patrice Bergeron8996845161.321.0530%1682014813
87Mike Foligno10186655571.190.9028%107-4014712
88Ulf Samuelsson10809117751.170.9836%135-1114711
89Cliff Ronning11377095921.200.9326%117-2914611
90Steve Sullivan10117456211.200.9530%124-2114512
91Mats Sundin1346113910241.110.9635%115-281439
92Doug Gilmour147411419971.141.0034%14411438
93Henri Richard9989336631.411.2833%27012914112
94Paul Kariya9898347431.120.9138%91-5114112
95Pavol Demitra8477165541.291.0535%1622214014
96Sergei Gonchar1301111310101.100.9537%104-361409
97Keith Carney10188186881.190.9835%131-813911
98Martin St. Louis11349859391.050.8636%46-9213810
99Jeremy Roenick13639898221.201.0532%167301388
100Sergei Zubov106810428271.261.1442%2157813711
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

PlayerGP$ESGF$ESGAR-ONR-OFFEV%EV+/-XEV+/-AEV+/-AEV+/-/82
Steve Yzerman1514135211481.181.0936%205731317
Paul Coffey1409162513251.231.2043%3011751267
Phil Esposito1282130210151.281.2537%2871661218
Duncan Keith9139788161.201.0843%1624511811
Evgeni Malkin7066775321.271.0838%1452911614
Alex Delvecchio10179328651.080.9236%67-491169
Scott Niedermayer126311699441.241.2339%225139866
Jean Beliveau7486534901.331.3031%16397667
Patrick Kane7406975761.211.1638%12161607
Tim Horton1010119610271.161.1748%169114565
Johnny Bucyk1299109610651.030.9832%30-15453
Brett Hull126910939951.101.1238%9975232
Dave Keon12969188481.081.1029%7054161
Mark Messier1756141813021.091.1333%11610970
Gilbert Perreault11919809041.081.1336%767330
Bob Gainey11606455251.231.5123%120155-35-2
[TBODY] [/TBODY]


-Messier suffers from two factors – he played on a team with Gretzky for years on a different line, and he had several terrible years at the end of his career. Remove these final years and adjust for the Gretzky factor, and his numbers are closer to Yzerman.

Even still if you put Messier up to Yzerman's level, he's outside the top 100 players. Crosby comes in 22nd. Large gap.




Top ten in scoring & Selke voting (in the same season)


PlayerSeasonScoringSelke
Adam Oates1993310
Anze Kopitar201871
Bobby Clarke197882
Brent Sutter1985108
Bryan Trottier1981108
Bryan Trottier198482
Daniel Alfredsson200644
Daniel Alfredsson2008910
Doug Gilmour198756
Doug Gilmour199371
Doug Gilmour199442
Henrik Zetterberg200863
Jari Kurri198392
Jari Kurri198473
Jari Kurri198524
Jari Kurri198645
Jari Kurri1987210
Jari Kurri1989810
Jeremy Roenick199279
Joe Pavelski201488
Joe Sakic2000810
Joe Sakic200122
Joe Sakic200259
Joe Thornton201645
Mark Messier199259
Martin St. Louis200414
Michel Goulet198438
Mike Modano200296
Mike Modano2003106
Nicklas Backstrom2010410
Nicklas Backstrom201747
Patrik Elias200138
Pavel Datsyuk200841
Pavel Datsyuk200941
Pavel Datsyuk2013103
Peter Forsberg199826
Peter Forsberg199948
Peter Forsberg200314
Rick Middleton1984104
Ron Francis199551
Ron Francis199642
Ron Francis199788
Ron Francis199854
Ryan Getzlaf2014210
Sergei Fedorov199421
Sergei Fedorov199691
Sidney Crosby201637
Sidney Crosby2017210
Sidney Crosby2018109
Steve Yzerman2000101
Zack Parise200958
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

-Sid's becoming quite the 2 way player in an all time sense. He's probably not quite as good as those Selke finishes indicate (most scoring line F's who get higher end votes aren't) but the fact remains Sid has long been a 200 foot player. He combines elite offense with solid to good defensive acumen. Messier was a strong PK'er but I don't think there really is much gap if any defensively speaking at ES. Sid is simply a much better offensive talent.




Playoff comparison:

No question Messier still holds an advantage here. But that gap has shrank considerably since 87's back to back titles.

Considering the bulk of MM's career came in the highest scoring era of all time and he played on possibly the greatest offensive team in league history:

Messier is 4th all time in playoff points per game. Crosby is 8th. And Sid never had anything close to what Messier did around him as far as offensive stars.

Messier's raw numbers are much more impressive but that is in large part because he has 236 career games to Crosby's 160. Let's wait and see where Sid ends up when it's all said and done.


Sid has the back to back Smythes. Messier could have easily had more than the one, but Sid's 2009 was very impressive, just slightly less so than Malkin and he was also strong in 2008 when he led the entire postseason in assists and points.

Crosby has 63 Career Multi Point games in playoffs (3rd all time) in 160 games. Mark Messier, 2nd all time, had 77 but in 236 games. If Sid plays near 236, he's going to pass Messier here.

39.3% for Sid

32. 6% for Messier

And again, who was playing in the much more favorable scoring environment?

Messier is better, I just don't think the gap is as wide as people think.


Crosby vs Messier on the international stage:


Crosby simply looks more impressive IMO.

2 Olympic Gold medals in 2 tries (2010/2014)
-Scored Golden goal in OT of gold medal game 2010. Cultural impact of winning gold on your home soil after a terrible showing in 2006 was massive.
-Scored big goal in gold medal game in 2014

1 World Championship Gold (2015)
1 World Cup of Hockey Gold (2016)
-MVP and leading scorer
1 World Junior Gold (2005)

-Also named Best Forward at World Championship in 2006. Something Messier never did in any of his tournaments.

-Youngest Player in history to win a World Championship scoring title (2006). Something Messier never did in any tournament. Crosby led the WC's in scoring in 2006 and the World Cup of hockey in 2016.

-Member of Quadruple Gold Club (Gold medeal at World Junior, WC', Olympics, and WCOH)

-Only player in hockey history to captain every team of the quad/triple gold clubs.

-Orr, Gretzky and Crosby are the three players in history to win the Hart Trophy, the Conn Smythe Trophy, and MVP at the Canada Cup or World Cup of Hockey.

-He is the 6th player in NHL history to win the Stanley Cup three times with two Olympic gold medals. Crosby joins Igor Larionov, Martin Brodeur, Scott Niedermayer, Duncan Keith, and Jonathan Toews as the players who make up that prestigious fraternity

-Crosby has 47 points in 37 senior team games for Canada = 1.27 PPG
-Messier has 32 points in 38 games for Canada = 0.84 PPG

Messier won gold 3 times at Canada Cups in 84, 87, and 91 but never was a top scorer, never made a post tournament AS team. Same thing when Canada was silver in 89 at the WC's or 96 at the WCOH.


Summery:

-Sid clearly has an advantage as a regular season player IMO. You can throw out Gretzky and Lemieux in defense of Messier but even removing them it doesn't alter MM's scoring placements much or award finishes. And Sid could argue he lost 2 of his most prime seasons due to injuries that were literally no fault of his own robbing him of another 2 Harts and Art Ross's and 1 Lindsay.

I still have Messier as the more impressive postseason player. He posted some big numbers, won 6 Cups and had great longevity as a big game player. Perhaps Sid catches/passes him but as of now Messier deserves the nod here.

Sid is the more impressive international player. Better overall results, especially as the captain, massive, massive goal for Canada in 2010. Simply better.

There will only be a few spots separating them for me but Sid has edged past Messier IMHO based on a lot of what I posted above.
 

BenchBrawl

Registered User
Jul 26, 2010
31,063
13,996
I'll read that post tomorrow, since I was going to bed, but I'm very interested in seeing how Crosby and Messier (and Morenz) did against top two-way centers in the playoffs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImporterExporter

Dr John Carlson

Registered User
Dec 21, 2011
10,067
4,664
Nova Scotia
An assessment of post-2010 Alex Ovechkin

Alex Ovechkin is my favourite player, so I feel obligated to write about him now that he's available. I've always tried to be as objective as possible when watching him which has lead to some disagreements with other Capitals fans who I feel are a bit disillusioned into still believing he's that player that dominated the league during his first five years. He's a pretty polarizing player... although a lot less so now that the biggest hole in his resume has finally been filled. Everyone can agree that he was a beast up until 2010 (or to be more specific, the 2010 Olympics), but not everyone can agree on his real value since then. I'll be talking in this post about how I feel about him since then - both positively and negatively - and try to give some context to his numbers that can only really be had if you've watched him as much as I have over the years.

Playoff performance
This is less crucial an issue for Ovechkin now that he's a Cup/Smythe winner. But last Spring doesn't invalidate all the years of disappointment the Capitals endured over his career. Again, we can all agree that he was excellent in the postseason during his 2008-2010 peak, and doesn't deserve much blame for those years' failures... rather the fault lies in their then AHL-caliber defense. Since then, though, how much blame can be assigned to Ovechkin? Here are some stats that compare regular season and playoff per-game production among the core Capitals forwards from the 2011 playoffs to the 2015 playoffs:

PlayerGPG - RegularGPG - PlayoffsDiffPPG - RegularPPG - PlayoffsDiffGP - RegularGP - Playoffs
Ovechkin0.570.36-0.211.010.68-0.3336444
Backstrom0.230.14-0.090.950.49-0.4633143
Johansson0.180.11-0.090.540.34-0.2034544
Semin0.340.30-0.040.760.43-0.3314223
Brouwer0.280.09-0.190.520.26-0.2629335
Ward0.210.14-0.070.440.51+0.0727635
Laich0.170.11-0.060.440.43-0.0129037
Chimera0.150.23-0.080.380.48+0.0136944
[TBODY] [/TBODY]

I didn't include the past three playoffs. I feel like 2016 and especially 2017 weren't poor performances by the team, but rather they just ran into a powerhouse team that would've beaten them regardless. Since I don't really consider them 'disappointments' and the reason they lost is easily attributable to playing an excellent team, I feel like they don't require this level of explanation. To me, the 2011-2015 stretch is much more relevant to look at when assessing Ovechkin's playoff resume.

Based on these stats, Ovechkin does deserve some blame for the failures of these years. This correlates closely with what it looked like to me when watching... the team as a whole had serious offense problems, and while Ovechkin played generally well, he didn't as much as he should've been able to. Their core forwards really underperformed as a whole here, while their main bottom-6ers produced well. Backstrom in particular drops heavily... I'm not being biased when I say that Backstrom was a bigger culprit than Ovechkin during these years, maybe similar to how many say Mikita was a bigger culprit than Hull for the 60s Blackhawks relative lack of success... Backstrom's slow skating made him an easier target for defenses to swarm off the rush resulting in reduced effectiveness.

So on the whole, Ovechkin wasn't the biggest problem, but he was one of the problems. I will add though that 2013 was his worst playoffs easily and was the only time he genuinely performed poorly, he was a ghost at even strength... while the 2015 playoffs he was excellent despite the stats maybe not backing it up. Apart from that, playoff criticism for Ovechkin is fair.


The two anomaly seasons
A lot has been made about the weird two years in the middle of what should've been his prime, where he regressed heavily and became a 30 goal scorer. This is definitely where context is needed... there are a lot of reasons for his production in these two seasons. 2010-2011 Ovechkin was actually an excellent player that was more a victim of circumstance than anything. An abnormally low shooting percentage (he would've had 46 goals had he shot his career average of 12.5%) combined with the Bruce Boudreau's transition from run and gun offense to a trap system meant that Ovechkin's totals were bound for regression. In fact, his totals were affected much less drastically by this system change than the rest of the core's totals. Backstrom went from 101 points to 65. Semin went from a 93 point pace to a 68 point pace. Mike Green went from being over a point per game to under .5 per game. Also worth noting that Ovechkin lead the team in +/- that season. There's no doubt that he wasn't the player he was from 2008-2010, but I would say his play this season was roughly equal to that of his sophomore 'slump' 2007 season. Still dynamic and explosive.

2011-2012 is a different story. There's already been stuff posted about his time in the Hunter trap system. His TOI was reduced by 2 minutes and was sometimes playing fewer than 15 minutes per game when the team was leading. Naturally, this was not the optimal structure for Ovechkin. However, while it's again inevitable that such a system would restrict point totals, it's also true that this was the year he fell off a cliff stylistically. His skating and puck handling abilities took a noticeable step backwards which lead to pretty much a total collapse of his neutral zone transitional abilities. This produced a lot of strange moments where he would attempt to go through the defense like he always did, but his legs and hands wouldn't cooperate, and the defense would just swarm him and clear. Rushes died on his stick almost every time. His possession metrics nosedived. All of this is reflected in the lowest PPG pace of his career at only 26.

On the surface, these two seasons stick out like sore thumbs on Ovechkin's resume... in reality it should only be one season that sticks out. Capitals fans feared that 2011-2012 Ovechkin was what he would be in the future, but thankfully he adapted his game to accommodate his declined physical gifts and became a triggerman rather than a puck carrier.


The Powerplay
I imagine powerplay scoring will be brought up as a strike against Ovechkin, saying that he relies on the powerplay more than others in this vote. This would be valid criticism if he wasn't such an integral part of the powerplay. He makes Washington's powerplay work simply by being on the ice. His shot is the most dangerous weapon he possesses, and is the source of most of his goals, so I won't look deeply into that. Instead, I'll look at some instances of him contributing to the powerplay without even touching the puck. Here's one recent example from this season in a game against the Canucks. It's not an Ovechkin goal; instead, it's a Kuznetsov goal. Look at how the PK is set up here right before Carlson passes to Kuznetsov for the one-timer:

66d6a3e951.png



Not a single PKer on Kuznetsov's side of the ice. This is a common trend for Washington on the PP, but I chose this one because this camera view captures this over-coverage nicely. Just by being on the ice, in his usual spot, is enough to leave another teammate totally open.

Another instance of Ovechkin's powerplay value is when teams shadow him. It's funny when I go into other teams' GDTs and see how often they complain about leaving Ovechkin unmarked. They usually say that their team should just leave a guy covering him and make it a 4 on 3... teams have tried this and failed. Again, here's a recent example from this season. This time, a Niskanen goal:

c528281d0f.png



Niskanen is pretty close to where Ovechkin normally is... that's because Ovechkin was being shadowed, and in response to that, purposely took himself completely out of the play, making it a de facto 4 on 3. This space created by Ovechkin taking the shadow PKer to the net allowed for a wide open shot with no PKers available to intercept the pass or to deflect the shot. Watch the video of the goal to see how Ovechkin recognizes that he won't be able to get a good shot off and instead parks next to the net... stick not even on the ice because he knows he's not there to receive a pass... literally standing motionless and doing nothing yet still being the most important skater on the ice.

Ovechkin's contributions to the league's best powerplay in both the regular season and playoffs should be a credit to him, not a strike against. From 2013 onwards, when they switched to their current structure, their powerplay is 1st in the league at 23.9%. In the playoffs, this number rises to 24.4%, good for tops among teams with over 20 playoff games played during this time span. They won a Cup and two President's Trophies with this powerplay as their most dangerous weapon, and Ovechkin is the driving force that makes the powerplay tick; this shouldn't be discredited. Genuine question: has there ever been a PP player whose abilities command as much respect as Ovechkin?


Defense
I'll just go over this part of his game quickly, he's an offensive winger whose main focus isn't defense (like Richard, like Jagr... to varying degrees). The most common complaint is his backchecking, which really isn't fair. He's a competent backchecker... at this point in his career he gets on his horse to backcheck harder than he rushes up ice on an offensive break, I really do mean that... Ovechkin's biggest problem defensively is defensive zone positioning and awareness. Barry Trotz got a lot of credit, undeservedly so IMO, for turning Ovechkin into a responsible 200 foot player. In reality, he went back to playing a steadier version of what he had always been prior to the arrival of Adam Oates as head coach (I could write a lot more words about Oates and other failures of management, but I'll just leave this article here since it sums up the best parts: link).

One of the problems is not having a more solid coaching staff supporting him during his formative years in the league. Coming into his draft, Ovechkin was actually heralded as being a strong 200-foot player (evidence straight from Pierre McGuire and Brian Burke). He just never developed beyond this stage, unfortunately... Glen Hanlon wasn't an NHL-level head coach, and Bruce Boudreau practically encouraged Ovechkin to not play much defense. This has really hurt him now that he can't rely on skating and a 'bull in a china shop' approach to defense.... the fundamentals that should've been developed earlier in his career were never in place. Instead, his only role defensively now is to cover the shot from the left point and not move around much... this results in occasional shot blocks but also means that his line gets hemmed in their zone frequently, which is a problem that has increased with being on Kuznetsov's line rather than Backstrom's, as Kuznetsov is less capable as a defensive centre.

So no, Ovechkin isn't very good defensively. He hasn't been turned into a 200 foot player as he's gotten older... he does block shots sometimes which is good, it's an improvement over the Adam Oates '-35' disaster years, but he's not a strong defensive player. Felt like that needed to be confirmed.

--

I didn't write this to advocate for Alex Ovechkin, rather to just give him as fair an assessment as I could on his career since his peak. I feel like it's useful to gain some context and insight into his production and play style, so that votes are being based less on pure stats or preconceived notions and more on what's really gone on with him. I'll add a couple extra thoughts in another post after this that I couldn't find a good spot for in this long post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad