What does Kucherov need to do to surpass Ovechkin and become the greatest Russian player to ever play in the NHL?

[Fantomas]

Ovechkin's best year is still better than Kucherov's. Do any adjustment and it's quite obvious.

So what argument does Kucherov have? He has two Hart-worthy seasons, while Ovechkin has many more. He'd have to keep this level going for a while and he won't.

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

Good god man. I don’t even know what to say this stuff. Goalie gear doesn’t have any affect on the absoute explosion of offense since it changed? Kucherovs style means the goalie gear change wouldn’t affect him? What???

I’m not even going to dignify the EA nonsense with a reply.

And to suggest Malkin isn’t a superstar because superstars always put up seasons like Kucherovs this year.. so by your own admission Kucherov was only a superstar this season and 18-19. Got it.

With the defined terms, at least I ensure mutual understanding. Because if we don't agree on the meaning of the term Superstar, Franchise, Elite and each time I have to explain myself again, it's tiring.

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

Ovechkin's best year is still better than Kucherov's. Do any adjustment and it's quite obvious.

So what argument does Kucherov have? He has two Hart-worthy seasons, while Ovechkin has many more. He'd have to keep this level going for a while and he won't.

In which season Ovechkin put his name on the record 144 times among 291 goals for his team ? The 2008 and 2010 seasons come closest and are far behind Kucherov's 2nd best season.

Previously, the number of top 5 and top 10 seasons in PPG was recorded. Kucherov already has more than Ovechkin even though he is far from having finished his career.

He is far ahead in the Play-Offs.

 

[Randyne]

Playoff Kucherov >>>>> Playoff Ovechkin

Playoff Ovechkin with Stamkos/Hedman/Vasilevski/Point>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kucherov

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

If we don't count Cups and Conn Smythe (mostly team awards), don't count Calder (because it's not among 'the best player' awards, even if AO won it over 102-point Crosby) and generously give Kucherov all the trophies he hasn't won yet this year, then:

Kucherov has 2 Art Rosses, 2 Harts, 2 Lindsays, 2x1st and 2x2nd NHL AST.
Ovechkin has 1 Art Ross, 3 Harts, 3 Lindsays, 9 Rockets, 8x1st and 4x2nd NHL AST.
Malkin has 2 Art Rosses, 1 Hart, 1 Lindsay, 3x1st NHL AST (a stronger poistion though).

100-point seasons: 4-4.
Top 5 point finishes: 5-5.

Goal scoring obviously massively favors Ovechkin. Both guys are main scoring forwards not known for their defensive game. A massive style difference of a finesse playmaker vs aggressive goal scorer. Ovechkin has another dimension as an effective physical player.

I think it's clear that Ovechkin has achieved more, in an era when scoring was more difficult, on a much weaker team as well. But one more season with major awards, and it will be perfectly fine to reason that Kucherov's peak is as good or better as Ovechkin's was.

What makes it very difficult to argue Kucherov's overall legacy over Ovechkin is that AO is the best of all time at what he does (scoring goalz) and, God willing, will have the numbers to show it, even over guys who played in ridiculous era like the 80s.

And while it's relatively minor for their NHL ranking, it would be a bit bitter to call Kucherov 'the greatest Russian to play in the NHL' when he has zero championships with the national team. Not to diminish Kucherov for Tampa's long PO runs lol, or not to say he hasn't been great for the national team, but... still.

It's true that hockey community is notoriously conservative and somehwat biased towards the players who were high flight prospects, high draft picks and early bloomers.

But arguing that it's not easier to score today than it was 10-15 years ago is just... strange. The league has made numerous steps to increase scoring: different policy towards enforcing the rules (no uncalled interference/obstruction all over the ice (that consequently led to near-extinction of defensive defensemen), 3v3 OT, goaltender equipment, less physicality (flying headshot charges were the norm during 'the big 3' prime). And it's good. Skilled players prevail now.

Also, it's not like 'the big 3' fell of the face of the Earth. If we consider 2017 (1st McDavid Art Ross) the start of the new era, season by season:

2017: Crosby 2nd in points and wins Rocket (44 goals), Malkin 3rd in PPG among regular players (Kucherov 4th), Ovechkin has a garbage season.
2018: Ovechkin wins Rocket (49 goals), Malkin 3rd in PPG among regular players (Kucherov 4th), Crosby has a solid season. Ovechkin has his highest points total since 2010. Malkin has his highest points total since 2012.
2019: Ovechkin wins Rocket (51 goals), Crosby t-5th in points, Malkin has a weakish season. Kucherov wins the Art Ross.
2020, shortened asterisk season: Ovechkin wins Rocket (48 goals), Malkin is 7th in PPG among regular players (also has his best PPG since 2012. Kucherov 10th), Crosby has a weakish season.
2021, crappy COVID season: first year all 3 aren't really that impressive: Crosby (34 y.o.) 10th in points, but Ovechkin (36) and Malkin (35) have weakish seasons. Kucherov resting on laurels))
2022: Ovechkin (37) 4th in goals (50 goals) and has his highest points total since 2010. Crosby and Malkin miss a lot of time and have solid part-seasons.
2023: another weak season for the old guard: Ovechkin 10th in goals (40 goals), Crosby and Malkin 16th and 26th in points. However, Crosby (35) has his 2nd best points totals since 2014.
2024: similar to the last season. Crosby (36) again has his 2nd best points totals since 2014.

So, answering the question 'why wouldn't old stars score more than when the scoring went up - they... did exactly that. All three had been world class before hitting ~35, when it's completely expected to decline.

The competition of number of goals is not enough. Matthews is better than Ovechkin in this area and yet he is clearly below Kucherov.

Malkin, I tend to think is above Ovechkin and is underrated. But as a career masterpiece, I take that of Kucherov.

Since 2016, Kucherov has been above Ovechkin in level, he has had better regular seasons, has a Play-Off career well above him, has more titles, is indefinitely more talented in his game... .

The only thing he has less is the Rocket trophy but it's not a very important trophy. If tomorrow Kucherov gets up in the morning telling himself that he wants this trophy, he accumulates shots - reduces his collective game and he gets it.

Kucherov is on top of Matthews. And Matthews is an improved version of Ovechkin. It's logic.

Playoff Ovechkin with Stamkos/Hedman/Vasilevski/Point>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Kucherov

Yes we saw it in 2018, Ovechkin won by being the 4th best player on his team after Carlson, Holtby and Kuznetsov.

The only player from Kucherov's generation to be better than him is McDavid and it's very close. Ovechkin is very far from McDavid.

Everyone says that the current generation is exceptional in talent and superior to the Crosby generation and the 2nd best player would be lower than the 2nd best player of the previous generation....

Kucherov has a level very close to McDavid. Wake up.

 

[VistamarCroissants]

Hi there,
Two things:

1. Actually, the greatest is Fetisov because of his international resume and 2 Stanley Cups. Ovechkin is certainly number 2 on the list. But based purely on the NHL career, Ovechkin tops the list.
2. Kucherov needs another 2 Hart and 3 Art Trophies and at least 1 more Stanley Cup to be in the top 2 conversation

 

[Zerotonine]

Prime Ovechkin >>>>> Prime Kucherov.

Prime Bure >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

Hi there,
Two things:

1. Actually, the greatest is Fetisov because of his international resume and 2 Stanley Cups. Ovechkin is certainly number 2 on the list. But based purely on the NHL vareer, Ovechkin tops the list.
2. Kucherov needs another 2 Hart and 3 Art Trophies and at least 1 more Stanley Cup to be in the top 2 conversation

Yet all it took was 1 Stanley Cup, 3 Hart and 2 Art for Ovechkin to be in your conversation. Why do we need 3 Stanley Cup, 4 Hart and 5 Art for Kucherov ?

Fetisov, we must stop Soviet romanticism. He was far from the best in the NHL and there was a huge gap in level between the Canadian and Soviet elite in the 80s.

 

[VistamarCroissants]

Yet all it took was 1 Stanley Cup, 3 Hart and 2 Art for Ovechkin to be in your conversation. Why do we need 3 Stanley Cup, 4 Hart and 5 Art for Kucherov ?

Fetisov, we must stop Soviet romanticism. He was far from the best in the NHL and there was a huge gap in level between the Canadian and Soviet elite in the 80s.

1. Because Ovechkin is likely to outscore #99 within a couple of seasons

2.. True, the gap was huge at times, especially in the 1981 Canada Cup final and the club superseries

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

1. Because Ovechkin is likely to outscore #99 within a couple of seasons

2.. True, the gap was huge at times, especially in the 1981 Canada Cup final and the club superseries

1. This doesn't hold up the goals argument since Ovechkin struggled to score more than 90 points in a season and lead his team far into the Play-Off. Matthews is doing better than Ovechkin in this area and that doesn't make him at Kucherov's level. When Matthews beats Ovechkin's record, it won't make him better than Kucherov because he will have the goals record.

2. Superseries do not mean long-term value. When they arrived in the NHL, we saw that the Soviet stars were far from the best. Makarov was only 4th in points in Calgary at his best season. The next generation (Fedorov, Bure, Molginy) was stronger.

 

[Demandedace]

The only thing he has less is the Rocket trophy but it's not a very important trophy. If tomorrow Kucherov gets up in the morning telling himself that he wants this trophy, he accumulates shots - reduces his collective game and he gets it.

lmao there are some bad takes in this thread but this one definitely takes the crown for worst of all

 

[WarriorofTime]

2. Superseries do not mean long-term value. When they arrived in the NHL, we saw that the Soviet stars were far from the best. Makarov was only 4th in points in Calgary. The next generation (Fedorov, Bure, Molginy) was stronger.

I'm more of the school of "it's a bit too difficult to compare Soviet and Russian NHL era" because of the circumstances and content to just leave them as separate categories.

I think your point is not entirely fair though. You are comparing guys that came in very young into the NHL and got to develop into it versus players that had developed entirely in different system with different styles of play, different ice surface and then were just dropped right in. That is not an apples to apples situation.

 

[VistamarCroissants]

1. This doesn't hold up the goals argument since Ovechkin struggled to score more than 90 points in a season and lead his team far into the Play-Off. Matthews is doing better than Ovechkin in this area and that doesn't make him at Kucherov's level. When Matthews beats Ovechkin's record, it won't make him better than Kucherov because he will have the goals record.

2. Superseries do not mean long-term value. When they arrived in the NHL, we saw that the Soviet stars were far from the best. Makarov was only 4th in points in Calgary. The next generation (Fedorov, Bure, Molginy) was stronger.

1. Matthews is not a Russian in case you don't know. And he won't beat the goal-scoring record in near future.

2. You probably haven't watched the 1980's if you say that the Soviets were far from the best. The Mogilny generation couldn't routinely beat the best Canadians unlike their predecessors in the late 70s and 80s

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

lmao there are some bad takes in this thread but this one definitely takes the crown for worst of all

Beating Matthews would have been complicated, it's true, but having a 50-goal season like Ovechkin, Kucherov makes it easy if he wants.

44 goals, 100 assists it's better than 65 goals, 47 assists.

The Rocket Trophy is a question of will and style of play. If McDavid wants to focus on the number of goals, he can win the Rocket Trophy. Same thing for Kucherov who is a very good goal scorer.

 

[orby]

Ovechkin peaked in a much lower-scoring era. Kucherov is a fantastic player but comparing his "peak" numbers to Ovechkin's is not an apples-to-apples situation. I will concede that Kucherov has the more impressive playoff resume, but the sheer length of time for which Ovi was an elite goal scorer and threat to win the Rocket is astounding and gives him a clear edge IMO.

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

I'm more of the school of "it's a bit too difficult to compare Soviet and Russian NHL era" because of the circumstances and content to just leave them as separate categories.

I think your point is not entirely fair though. You are comparing guys that came in very young into the NHL and got to develop into it versus players that had developed entirely in different system with different styles of play, different ice surface and then were just dropped right in. That is not an apples to apples situation.

Yeah so that's the reward for the excuse. I struggle with the idea of establishing a guy as better than a guy over an idealization of what he could have done. Same for Sabonis. We established a myth because in one match he dominated Robinson but, I am very skeptical of the idea that he was really better than him.

If Markov and Gonchar had experienced the same thing, we could have built the same myth but we clearly saw that they were far from Lidstrom.

In general, we saw that there were no big differences between performances in Europe and North America. If you're good in Europe, you're good in North America. You adapt very quickly and if you're not able to adapt, it's because you're not that strong.

Fetisov was the best Soviet defender in the 80s but he's not worth much on a global scale. The best current Russian defender is far from the best.

 

[thegazelle]

I think there are two considerations here: from a statistics perspective and from a marketing perspective. I don't think the general hockey audiences will ever see Kucherov greater than Ovechkin. Being a solid overall player will help win championships and keep their team in the winner's circle, but it's not as sexy as pure scoring prowess - which is why, even though I am not a fan, I acknowledge the interest in Auston Matthews as a goal scorer. In general, it's the goal scorers that grace the cover and screens of video games, that have recognizable endorsement contracts and for whom the media focuses. Ovechkin has also had a stellar career with significant individual hardware via his Rocket Richard trophies. Him now knocking on a decades old Gretzky record few would think would be broken in their lifetime.

The other thing is - goals equate to highlight reels and Ovechkin throughout his career was on a ton of them. Statistics aside and overall contribution aside, that's what most viewers will remember, so from what perspective that gives Kucherov a larger hill to climb to usurp the greatest Russian title from O.V.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Yeah so that's the reward for the excuse. I struggle with the idea of establishing a guy as better than a guy over an idealization of what he could have done. Same for Sabonis. We established a myth because in one match he dominated Robinson but, I am very skeptical of the idea that he was really better than him.

You could just say "we're not really sure" instead of just making an assumption that they weren't that good based on flimsy reasoning.

In general, we saw that there were no big differences between performances in Europe and North America. If you're good in Europe, you're good in North America. You adapt very quickly and if you're not able to adapt, it's because you're not that strong.

Baseless statement. The fact that the "next generation" that came over when still very young was able to do well suggests that there is little reason to think the prior generation wouldn't have as well had they come over in similar circumstances.

 

[VistamarCroissants]

Yeah so that's the reward for the excuse. I struggle with the idea of establishing a guy as better than a guy over an idealization of what he could have done. Same for Sabonis. We established a myth because in one match he dominated Robinson but, I am very skeptical of the idea that he was really better than him.

If Markov and Gonchar had experienced the same thing, we could have built the same myth but we clearly saw that they were far from Lidstrom.

In general, we saw that there were no big differences between performances in Europe and North America. If you're good in Europe, you're good in North America. You adapt very quickly and if you're not able to adapt, it's because you're not that strong.

Fetisov was the best Soviet defender in the 80s but he's not worth much on a global scale. The best current Russian defender is far from the best.

What you wrote about Fetisov is the best joke of the day.
Everybody knows that Fetisov was more than impressive on "a global scale".
At least do some research before posting this hilarious stuff

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

Ovechkin peaked in a much lower-scoring era. Kucherov is a fantastic player but comparing his "peak" numbers to Ovechkin's is not an apples-to-apples situation. I will concede that Kucherov has the more impressive playoff resume, but the sheer length of time for which Ovi was an elite goal scorer and threat to win the Rocket is astounding and gives him a clear edge IMO.

2023/4 : 6,23 goals per game
2007/08 : 5,57 goals per game

Proportional to the number of goals scored in 2024, Ovechkin's best season is just 125 points - a far cry from Kucherov's 144 and below his 2nd best season.

What you wrote about Fetisov is the best joke of the day.
Everybody knows that Fetisov was more than impressive on "a global scale".
At least do some research before posting this hilarious stuff

He hasn't done anything in the NHL that would establish him as the best Russian player of all time.

Soviet players from the 80s are overrated. None have dominated in the NHL. Just an accumulation of IIHF titles without NHL players and at a time when Sweden, Finland and USA were not developed.

They were very good players but none had the level to beat Gretzky or Lemieux for the Hart/Art Trophy. And Fetisov didn't have the level to win the Norris.

It's a regrettable to fantasize about a past rather than savoring a proven present. The pinnacle of russian hockey is today and even more so tomorrow.

 

[Fantomas]

In which season Ovechkin put his name on the record 144 times among 291 goals for his team ? The 2008 and 2010 seasons come closest and are far behind Kucherov's 2nd best season.

So you have to do proper statistical adjustments first, because league scoring is different. Furthermore most of Kucherov's points are assists. Ovechkin was an elite+ scorer in his prime, Kucherov is not.

Fetisov was the best Soviet defender in the 80s but he's not worth much on a global scale.

You post a lot and most of it is embarrassing.

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

So you have to do proper statistical adjustments first, because league scoring is different. Furthermore most of Kucherov's points are assists. Ovechkin was an elite+ scorer in his prime, Kucherov is not.

Season 2007/08 : 5,57 goals per game
Season 2023/24 : 6,23 goals per game

Proportional to the number of goals scored in 2024, Ovechkin only reached 125 points in his record year. Very far from 144.

In his prime, Ovechkin accumulated countless shots on the ice to painfully reach 112 points. At his prime, Kucherov helped his teammates score 100 times alongside 44 goals.

Stamkos has just said that the most amazing thing is that he plays without trying to score points. Ovechkin did not give this impression in 2008. His ultra-selfish play was denounced.

 

[VistamarCroissants]

2023/4 : 6,23 goals per game
2007/08 : 5,57 goals per game

Proportional to the number of goals scored in 2024, Ovechkin's best season is just 125 points - a far cry from Kucherov's 144 and below his 2nd best season.


He hasn't done anything in the NHL that would establish him as the best Russian player of all time.

Soviet players from the 80s are overrated. None have dominated in the NHL. Just an accumulation of IIHF titles without NHL players and at a time when Sweden, Finland and USA were not developed.

They were very good players but none had the level to beat Gretzky or Lemieux for the Hart/Art Trophy. And Fetisov didn't have the level to win the Norris.

It's a regrettable to fantasize about a past rather than savoring a proven present. The pinnacle of russian hockey is today and even more so tomorrow.

So you are seriously judging them by their performance in the 90s when they were already past their prime and were about to retire?

Fetisov was a Norris-calibre defenseman throughout the 80s.

The 80s was their pinnacle. Today the Russians wouldn't beat Canada by 7 goals in a best-on-best format. Perhaps, they couldn't beat a Canadian B team either..

My advice: find some 80s videos from Canada Cups and Superseries. Than your opinion will change

 

[Dirtyf1ghter]

So you are judging them by their performance in the 90s when they were past their prime and were about to retire?

Fetisov was a Norris-calibre defenseman throught the 80s.

The 80s was their pinnacle. Today the Russians wouldn't beat Canada by 7 goals in a best-on-best format. Perhaps, they couldn't beat a Canadian B team either

At 30 you are at your prime.

Let's admit that these guys were stronger before, even by doubling their number of points, they were not at the level of the best.

Russia has its chances today. USSR 80s is also the team that loses against the American academics.

 

[VistamarCroissants]

At 30 you are at your prime.
Let's admit that these guys were stronger before, even by doubling their number of points, they were not at the level of the best

Not in their generation. Their prime was in the 20s