Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time

Status
Not open for further replies.

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
14,422
11,367
No idea on what you are actually talking about hear.

Yeah, I know you aren't being disingenuous.

The distinction between "shoot only" and "shoot first" is absolutely not without a difference. "Shoot only" means "does not pass" or "does not make plays."

"Shoot first" does not.

You think these slanders are unintentional. I do not.
 

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
14,422
11,367
If someone called Ovechkin a shoot only player then that would be incorrect, your problem seems to be with him being called a shooter.

I am fine with anyone calling him or any other player a shooter. I am fine with Ovechkin being called "shoot first."

"Shoot only" is just plain false. Obviously.
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
19,278
8,286
Oblivion Express
For someone so concerned about the "dishonesty" of things like shoot-only vs shoot-first and other frivolities that you're attempting to lawyer us on, you'd think you'd be on your best behavior when dealing with statistics...

Crosby has 1162 career points. Evgeni Malkin has been in on 212 of them. Which is 18.2%.

Malkin from Crosby is 113 points - 68 on the power play, 45 at even strength.
Crosby from Malkin is 99 points - 55 on the power play, 43 at even strength, 1 shorthanded.

58% of the Crosby-Malkin connection is from the power play. 12% of Crosby's career ES points does Malkin have a hand in and that's without removing empty net opportunities.

@Midnight Judges

Yeah I do stand by my statement.

This is why.
 

Michael Farkas

Celebrate 68
Jun 28, 2006
14,927
10,375
NYC
www.youtube.com
It also never hurts to try to semantically distract from a topic you're losing...

If anyone thinks that anyone else thinks that Ovechkin has "literally" never passed the puck in the NHL, they ought to be put in the puzzle factory...
 

Dennis Bonvie

Registered User
Dec 29, 2007
31,466
21,054
Connecticut
It also never hurts to try to semantically distract from a topic you're losing...

If anyone thinks that anyone else thinks that Ovechkin has "literally" never passed the puck in the NHL, they ought to be put in the puzzle factory...

"Shoot only" sounds a lot worse than "shoot first". Clearly a psychological ploy working on the more susceptible (younger) posters' minds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Midnight Judges

Midnight Judges

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Feb 10, 2010
14,422
11,367
It was actually Ovie vs Hull.

Nobody in the project was able to make much of a case for the discrepancy.
 
Last edited:

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
19,278
8,286
Oblivion Express
Bobby Hull record: (left NHL at 33)


Hart:

1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 3, 5, 7

All Star Finishes:

12 times

Scoring finishes:

1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9

Goal finishes:

1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,

Assists:

5, 5, 6, 6, 6,

7 year VsX:

108.3

7 year Goal VsX

70.2

Even Strength VsX

74

Postseason VsX

487 (15th all time from 1918 to present)

-Led postseason in goals 3 times, points once (1 Cup with 4 finals apperances)

-71 Cup final, Hull had 9 points and was a +4 in 7 games against the Habs. Team high

-65 Cup final, Hull had 4 points in 7 games. Even. Team high in points.

-62 Cup final, Hull had 8 points in 6 games. -2. Team high in scoring.

-61 Cup final, Hull had 7 points in 6 games. +4. 2nd in scoring.

28 points in 26 games and a +6. Led team in points 3 out of 4 times and was 2nd the only other time.

-Only 2 chances with national team and was fantastic both times against elite comp in best on best format.

-Main comp for LW postseason AS nods was Frank Mahovlich and Dickie Moore, early in his career (with John Bucyk), 2 players who will easily make the top 100 project.

-Main comp for Hart voting included Gordie Howe, Jean Beliveau, Stan Mikita, and Bobby Orr.



Alex Ovechkin Totals


Hart Record:

1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 6, 6, 9

AS finishes:

11 time AS

Scoring Finishes:

1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 7, 8,

Goal Finishes:

1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 3, 3, 4, 5,

Assists finishes:

6, 6, 10

7 year Vsx

98.4

7 year Goal VsX

59.5

Even Strength VsX

67

Postseason VsX

267 (169th....doesn't include last year so if somebody has the updated total for 8 that would be great)

-1 Cup win in 13 seasons. 1 trip.

-Got past the 2nd round only once. 2018.

-From 2008 to 2011 scored 50 points in 37 games (Team finished in standings 1st, 1st, 1st*, 1st). Never past 2nd round.

-From 2012 to 2017 scored just 40 points in 60 games (Team finished 2nd, 1st, miss, 3rd, 1st*, 1sts*). Never past 2nd round.

-Scored 27 points in 24 games during Cup winning year. 2nd on team. Led playoffs in goals.

-In 3 best on best tournaments (Olympics: Ovechkin's teams have finished 4th, 5th and 6th). He scored 11 points in 15 games.

-Ovechkin's comp for both AS and Hart shares is weaker than Hull's. By a lot, especially the Hart. His entire career is marked by repeated failures in big spots.

-Ovechkin won the Conn Smythe despite being outscored by Kuznetsov 18-12 in rounds 3 and 4. Considering Ovechkin doesn't contribute in a defensive manner or on the kill, is this not the same treatment as Crosby received 2 years earlier? Giving the award to the name over the better player(s)?

-Ovechkin has led the league in shots taken 11 times already in 13 years. The next closest player? Hull with 7. 3rd place is a slew of people with 4.

-His true shooting % when accounting for missed shots is 7.5%. 8436 shots attempted since his career began (actually doesn't include 06 or 07 as total shots don't exist).

-The next closest player that I can see is Eric Staal is 5693.

-That means Ovechkin has launched 2,743 more shots than any other player in the league since 2006.

-In any other sport we judge people on shooting % and efficiency, but despite Ovechkin being a shoot first and often shoot only player during his career (looking at goals and assist splits), we scoff at the notion? Why? I mean if a person needs 100 more shots to score a few more goals than the next guy do we not adjust for efficiency?

-Bobby Hull had 4539 shots on goal from 1960 until 1972. Next closest was Gordie Howe at 3709. Mikita was 3rd at 3218. Difference of 830.

-Ovechkin has had 5047 shots on goal since 2005-06. Next closest is Eric Staal at 3482. Difference of 1565.

-Hull faced stiffer comp for major awards and yet comes out looking better anyway. He was a more balanced offensive player. Better at even strength. Better in the postseason as a scorer. Showed well in 3 of his 4 Cup final appearances. Showed extremely well in his only 2 international appearances, despite being 36 and 38 years old. And then there is the tape. Watch Bobby Hull. Watch Ovechkin. Hull is clearly a more fluid and complete player.
 

ImporterExporter

"You're a boring old man"
Jun 18, 2013
19,278
8,286
Oblivion Express
Are we really going to continue ignoring the massive volume of shots Ovechkin has needed to garner the crown of greatest goal scorer of this generation with some claiming the best ever? Other team sports that involve shots, passes, etc involve efficiency. But people scoff at bringing up the huge advantage Ovechkin has had over the field. Consider:


Since 07-08 (when total shots attempted was tracked)



Ovechkin

Shots on net: 4230 (most in that span, next closest is Phil Kessel at 2979)
Total shots attempted: 8448
Goals: 538 (certainly the most by a lot)
Games: 878 (10th)
Goals per game: 0.61
Shots per game: 4.82 (1st place. Next closest is the legendary Rick Nash at 3.61)
True shooting % = 6.4%

Stamkos (career started a year later in 08-09)

Shots on net: 2205 (24th in that span)
Total shots attempted: 4060
Goals: 370 (2nd most)
Games: 704 (106th)
Goals per game: 0.53
Shots per game: 3.13
True shooting % = 9.1%

Crosby:

Shots on net: 2420 (17th in that span)
Total shots attempted: 4532
Goals: 354 (3rd most)
Games: 740 (92nd)
Goals per game: 0.48
Shots per game: 3.27
True shooting % = 7.8%


-Not only does Ovechkin have a much lower true shooting %, especially compared with Stamkos, he attempted more than 4000 more shots than Stamkos and just under that # compared to Crosby.

-His shots per game are more than 1 whole over the next closest player. Rick Nash.

-Crosby from 07-08 onward is 3rd in goals per game. 1st in assists.

-Stamkos is 2nd in goals per game. 33rd in assists.

-Ovechkin is 1st in goals per game. 30th in assists.

-Just food for thought when people talk about balance or the notion that Ovechkin is clearly the greatest goal scorer of the generation or more importantly all time....without applying context. You won't do it? I will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thegoldenyear

ChiTownPhilly

Not Too Soft
Feb 23, 2010
2,125
1,425
AnyWorld/I'mWelcomeTo
I'm very surprised Malkin isn't available for voting yet. He is better than most of these players.
Most(?!)

He might be (in my mind) a better option than a couple of the players, but [independent of how we feel], we like to keep the conversation focused on the players who were nominated.

Find a Russian Hockey-Enthusiast over the age of 50, and try to argue that Malkin is a superior player to Tretiak and Kharlamov, and see how far you get with that assertion...
 

Dr John Carlson

Registered User
Dec 21, 2011
10,067
4,663
Nova Scotia
I guess it just comes down to whether or not you believe generating a lot more shots is a positive or a negative. I strongly believe it's a positive, because unlike basketball it's very difficult to rack up tons of shots, therefore I rate Ovechkin highly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sentinel

unknown33

Registered User
Dec 8, 2009
3,942
150
I guess it just comes down to whether or not you believe generating a lot more shots is a positive or a negative. I strongly believe it's a positive, because unlike basketball it's very difficult to rack up tons of shots, therefore I rate Ovechkin highly.
It's probably positive to a certain degree, but I can see certain scenarios where a player just shoots to often.

This is hypothetical scenario and I don't know whether it's the case with Ovi or any such player. The numbers are made up to explain what I mean. I don't know if a study on shot quality exists, but it would be interesting.

Let's say a player has the bad tendency to take about 2 shot per game from unlikely positions and 2 from really good positions. His shots from the favorable position result in 95% of the goals he scores, the rest for just 5%.

In addition to that it happens a lot that in those low quality positions where he decides to shot, a teammate is in a position that would result in more goals than the 5% in case where the player shoots. Just bad decision making.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad