If you are failing at reading comprehension, there is multiple pages of discussion on Lemieux and Ovechkin. Last I checked this was a thread about if Ovechkin has any chance of beating Gretzky.
So may be you should get out of here with your shit?
What probability do you feel Ovechkin has to catch Gretzky now?
- Thread starter Big Phil
- Start date
- Status
If you are failing at reading comprehension, there is multiple pages of discussion on Lemieux and Ovechkin. Last I checked this was a thread about if Ovechkin has any chance of beating Gretzky.
So may be you should get out of here with your shit?
filinski77
Registered User
- Feb 12, 2017
- 2,714
- 4,486
Don’t see why you’re being a dick and saying I can’t comprehend what I am reading?
I completely understand that this thread is about Ovi catching Gretzky. But at least the Ovi vs. Lemieux discussions were based around goal scoring. You’re the one who came in randomly talking about Ovi vs. Lemieux as an overall player (which was completely irrelevant to both the OP, and to the discussions being had in the last page or 2 in this thread).
That’s a weird argument and also completely subjective. There is much more to the game than scoring goals; setting them up, defense, face-offs, hits, goaltending, etc.
Only 3 players in history have scored more goals than Brett Hull, and he isn’t even in my top 25 forwards ever.
I would say the same about having no goaltenders in your top10 list of best players ever or having no other defenseman besides Orr in your top10-top15. Doing so seems to suggest that you underappreciate a certain part of the game. Same with Ovechkin: one can argue whether his goal-scoring prowess puts him above Beliveau or not, or maybe you want to put your favorite goalie ahead of Ovechkin, but at some point Ovechkin becomes impossible to ignore, and that point comes around #8 or #10 all-time.
It is not about raw numbers, of course, it is about continued dominance over peers.
Did you know, for example, that no one in the league's history finished top5 in goals more than 8 times in his career - besides Bobby Hull, Richard, and Howe, who played in a six-team league? Not Bossy, not Gretzky, not Lemieux or Jagr or Esposito (Brett Hull, by the way, finished top5 in goals only 4 times). Heck, no one could even finish top10 10 times.
And then comes Ovechkin, who has 9 goal-scoring titles, 11 top3 finishes, and he is not done yet.
In the first 20 games of this year I was leaning towards 0. But I dunno now. Next year is the year he still needs to score big.
Good for Ovi he’s phenomenal.
But the arbitrary arguments that “the greatest goal scorer ever” and “must be in the top 10” are flawed and also biased. It’s clear you’re a big Ovi fan which is fine, but there are plenty of people who would not rank him top 10. I’m sure plenty experts and former players as well.
Sentinel
Registered User
It's like saying Gretzky was not a top 5 player in 1995. Nope, he wasn't at that point. So what?
Agree to disagree. Arguably greatest goal scorer for sure. He has an argument for top 10 all time in 167 more goals.
TheDawnOfANewTage
Dahlin, it’ll all be fine
- Dec 17, 2018
- 13,049
- 19,250
Adjusted for goals per game and average overall skill required Ovi is the best. This is my opinion, but it’s also a fact.
Sentinel
Registered User
There is nothing to disagree with here. Gretzky was NOT a top 5 player in the 1994-95 season. He was clearly below Lindros, Jagr, Sakic, Francis, and Hasek, and arguably below Leclair, Fedorov, and Coffey as well.
Not disagreeing with that. Not sure about below Francis, but I'm glad you brought him up. Very underappreciated player.
- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,440
- 11,387
That's a very strange argument, again. Bossy finished top 5 in goals 8 times in a 10 year career, yet you go and cite "dominance" by leaving out several key details?
Bossy has the highest GPG of all time and Ovechkin is 6th. No doubt, era matters. But I would argue Mike Bossy is the most dominant goal scorer ever, especially since you bring up "it isn't all about raw numbers". He played 10 seasons, finished top 5 in goals 8 times, scored 60 goals 5 times, scored 50 goals 9 times, and led the league twice. Oh yeah, and there were some schmucks playing against him named Lemieux and Gretzky.
I know your argument is going to say "Ovechkin led the league 9 times and that trumps everything". My counter-argument to that would be Bossy, Gretzky, Lemieux, and Hull were all playing against each other at one point. Ovi, without question, has a solid argument to be the best goal scorer ever. But that is not what this argument is about. You created an arbitrary argument about "well if he is the best ever (opinion) then he must be top 10 ever (opinion) or your list is flawed (opinion)."
I know I am bringing up other sports, but it's similar to how Wladimir Klitschko has the most heavyweight title defenses ever. I'm a massive boxing fan and I can't think of one person who would put Wlad in the top 5 Heavyweights ever, and I would not put him in the top 10 ever, maybe not even top 15. So my point is, just because you dominate an era, does not mean you are the best ever. And this is an easy point to illustrate here; considering when people discuss some of the best goal scorers ever (Richard, Hull, Hull, Gretz, Howe, Lemieux, Bossy, Ovi, etc.), many played against each other thus stealing accolades.
- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,440
- 11,387
Bossy is a fraud relative to this discussion.
7 different players had peak seasons higher than Mike Bossy's in Mike Bossy's era.
You simply cannot be the most dominant goal scorer ever when 7 different guys beat your best mark in the very same era. That fact alone obliterates your argument.
NHL Stats
Bossy played on an all-time great dynasty in the highest scoring years in NHL history. He had every conceivable advantage.
Scandale du Jour
JordanStaal#1Fan
What bugs me with people wanting to rank Ovechkin is the top 10 is that the only argument they seem to have is that he is a great (perhaps the greatest) goalscorer. That's the entire argument. It is a valid argument, but I think it is incomplete. Well, maybe not "incomplete" but I wonder how much it should influence the debate. Let's look at things in more depth.
Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr and Howe are the consensus top 4.
As you noted, discussion starts at 5.
Who are the "contenders" for 5 to 10? Hull, Richard, Béliveau, Lidstrom, Bourque, Hasek, Roy. Of course, then, there is the elephant in the room: Sidney Crosby. Many people consider him top 10, some will go as far as to say he is on track to the consensus 5.
To me. Béliveau is easily ahead of Ovechkin. Bourque, Lidstrom, Hasek and Roy are difficult to compare to Ovechkin because they play different positions. Hull and Richard are primarly goal scorers, so they can be a good comparaison. I feel like both were more complete players than Ovechkin (maybe not Richard)... at least post 2010-2011 Ovechkin.
Now, as I said before, the elephant in the room: Ovechkin's contemporary and main rival: Sidney Crosby.
One thing nobody will argue: Alexander Ovechkin is a better goalscorer than Sidney Crosby. During their entire careers, Crosby beat him in GPG only once (and it was a partial season for Sid). Career GPG are 0.61 vs 0.47. Over 82 games, it is 50 goals vs 39 goals for a 28% advantage for Ovechkin. I mean, it is pretty clear. No argument here. So, if someone wants to bring trophy counting, I'll just say that well, he has 9 Rockets, he is clearly the best goal scorer, duh. It is still super impressive and that's why Ovechkin at least deserves to be in the discussion for top 10.
If we look at overall offensive production.
Crosby's PPG is 1.28. Over 82 games, that's 105 points
Ovechkin's PPG is 1.11. Over 82 that's 91 points
Crosby wins by 15.4%
Over their careers, Ovechkin had the better PPG 4 times (all within their first 5 years) and Crosby had the better PPG 12 times, including the last 11 years.
Crosby never had a year under PPG. Ovechkin has 4 (5 including this one, but that's not fair, he is like 1 point behind pace).
Crosby seems to be winning by a lot, but, to me, it is incomplete. We need to look at things more closely. Peak Ovechkin (his first 5 years) was a different animal. Let's compare their first 5 years and then the other years (a point in time people like to refer as "Ovechkin declining" - his PPG declined, but his goalscoring remained fairly high: 0.68 vs 0.58, small decline, but we are talking over 11 years including like 1 or 2 outlier years)
First 5 years
Crosby's PPG is 1.36. Over 82 games, that's 112 points.
Ovechkin's PPG is 1.34. Over 82 games, that's 110 points.
Crosby wins by 1.8%.
For the first 5 years, if you want to argue that Ovechkin was a better player because he beat Crosby significantly while their PPG was nearly identical. I cannot put much of a fight. Heck, despite winning the overall PPG, Crosby lost 4 years out of 5.
Now, let's look at the last 11 years...
Last 11 years
Crosby's PPG is 1.23. Over 82 games, it is around 101 points.
Ovechkin's PPG is 0.99 (let's give him 1). Over 82 games, that's 82 points.
Crosby wins by 23%.
Productivity wise, it is not even close. Ovechkin is still the best goalscorer by about 10 goals/82 games (27%), but Crosby is the better point producer by 20 points/82 games (25%). Does a 27% in goal scoring erases a 25% PPG advantage? And we are not even talking about the rest of their games here nor are we talking about their team/international achievements, just pure offensive production. I think Crosby, for the last 11 years, has easily been the better players.
If we look at the playoffs, you can see the same dynamic.
Both were neck and neck during their first 5 years (1.32 for Crosby, 1.33 Ovechkin). Crosby had two finals, 1 cup and 2 CS worthy runs. Ovechkin never got out of the second round. So from a legacy standpoint, Sid at the better first 5 playoffs, but individually, Ovechkin was just as good.
Next 11 years, Crosby has 107 points in 106 games for 1.009 PPG. Ovechkin has 81 in 99 for 0.81 PPG. Over 82 games, it is 92 to 77. 19.4% win for Crosby. Legacy wise, Crosby played in 2 finals, won two cups and won two CS. Ovechkin played in 1 final, won 1 cup and 1 CS. Crosby wins from a productivity and legacy standpoint. Productivity wise, it is not even that close.
So, to me based on overall productivity, playoff productivity, playoff legacy AND having been the most productive player for 11 straight years, I put Crosby ahead of Ovechkin career-wise. I do not think the gap is that big and I DO think Ovechkin's goalscoring does close it a little - heck, I'd even have to acknowledge that Ovechkin might have peaked a little higher or, at least, he DID play during his entire peak and produce results. However, when you look at complete legacies, it is obvious is who ahead of who from an historical perspective.
If you cannot put Ovechkin before Crosby or Béliveau. Ovechkin is at best 7th all-time. Then, to decide if he is top 10, you need to compare him to Hull and Richard. You also have to figure out a way to determine if his impact was greater than guys like Shore, Lidstrom, Bourque, Roy and Hasek. Basically, you can have him anywhere from 7 to like 15. So, despite being the best goalscorer of all time, he COULD be as low as 15. Maybe even lower depending on the rankings. He could be as high as 7th though, and that's fair. Maybe even 5th if the argument is really compelling, but I would strongly disagree.
I mean, that's only my opinion and it is worth what it is worth, but I do not see anything "wrong" with it. I do not think Ovechkin being top 10 is a slam dunk strictly because he is the best goal scorer ever. He is certainly in the argument though and I would respect someone putting him as high as 5th. I'd disagree, but it would not be a stupid take.
filinski77
Registered User
- Feb 12, 2017
- 2,714
- 4,486
I appreciate the in-depth analysis, and I definitely agree that there is a lot of subjectivity when ranking the next group of players outside of the top-4. Ovi just has a tremendous resume that justifies a top-1o ranking imo.
Most goal leads of all time (may not be touched for decades), most goal/gp leads of all time. Will go down with either #1 or #2 most raw goals (which when adjusted for era will be #1). On top of that, only 3 players in history have more Hart trophies, only 2 players have more Lindsays (I get it's only been around for 50 years, but still impressive given the vast difference in league competition from the 60's and earlier vs. now), only 7 players in history have had more point/gp leads than Ovi.
Regarding Beliveau, Hull, Richard: Without looking too much into it (time constraint), I believe Ovi has better award finishes, way better goal finishes, and about equal point and point/gp finishes (may be even better when considering the internationalization of the NHL compared to the O6 - but I won't dive into that) than Beliveau and Richard. The only thing those 2 have on Ovi is that they won a million cups on a dynasty when there were only 6 teams in the league. Hull is a very close comparison imo.
HotPie
Registered User
- Dec 3, 2007
- 4,134
- 949
Admittedly I didn't read your entire post, but let me refer to this particular part.
Even if we assume that the only argument to rank Ovechkin in the top 10 is through his ability to score goals, I think it's a very legitimate and persuasive argument. The purpose of hockey is to score more goals than the opposing team to win games. I think the guy who's arguably the best/greatest at doing that (scoring goals) in the history of hockey absolutely deserves to at the very least be in the conversation for that spot.
If he breaks Gretzky's record, I think he's a lock for at least number 10. Ultimately though, this is all very subjective.
- Feb 10, 2010
- 14,440
- 11,387
Scandale du Jour
JordanStaal#1Fan
The biggest problem I have with trophy counting is that it does not tell the whole story. Trophy finishes is a better metric, but even then, it is flawed. Who was the competition? How many different trophies? To me, trophies are mostly marketing gimmicks. Very few defenseman/goalies win the Hart... and that's not because they are not more useful than a forward. It is because it is not sexy nor easy to quantify.
Outside of goal scoring, most of Ovechkin's domination came during a five year period. Outside of that, point-wise, he has been around PPG. I mean, that's great, but that's about 15-20th each year. Ovechkin has been around that mark for 11 years. You still have to look at the entire body of work and Ovechkin's is certainly worthy of top 10 consideration because of his consistency in the goal scorin department and because of his first five DOMINANT years.
The reason why I did the Crosby comparaison is because it is the only direct comparaison that somehow works. They started their careers at the same time and both have played on a stacked team for the vast majority of their careers. In terms of "outside conditions" they are the easiest to compare... and even then, there are flaws at comparing them. One is a winger, the other is a center. They do not have the same responsibilities on the ice. Crosby will never take as many shots as Ovechkin. Ovechkin will never be asked to win defensive match ups. You use your players to maximize their strenghts. Not having Ovechkin in position to take as many shots as possible would be stupid. Asking Crosby to just be a shooter would be as equally stupid.
Comparing between eras is nearly impossible. Same for Ds and Gs vs forwards. It becomes way too subjective (like, even if I hate the Habs, I will always be biased FOR Maurice Richard because of what he means to French Canadians. I will always be biased towards Mario and Sid, because I cheered for them. I will also prefer Sakic to Yzerman because I grew up a Nords fan, I have a hard time arguing for Patrick Roy because I think he is a shit person, etc). At the end of the day, it does not even really matter. It is just a fun exercise and can lead to fun discussions.
Goals are sexy and they are the primary objective, I agree. However, there is a ton of variables that goes into a hockey game and a majority of them has nothing to do with goal scoring ability. Preventing goals might be more important to scoring them in the grand scheme of things (hence the "defense wins championships" cliché). Goal scoring is VERY easy to quantify. The rest, not always as easy. I guess that's why we tend to exagerate the impact of a goal scorer. I mean, it does not really apply to an outlier like Ovechkin, but still. The "yes, but more goals" argument is a very bad one to me.
In my opinion, what saves Ovechkin when it comes to top-10 discussion is his first five years. Very few people had such a great 5-year stretch. It shows that he was MUCH more than just a goal-scorer early on - from an historical point of view, it counts for a lot. It also shows that, when he was not able to dominate as much, he adjusted his game to maximize his biggest strength and, to me, that's a positive. His incredible availability rate is also a HUGE positive (guys like Forsberg, Lemieux, Orr, Lindros and Crosby have a lot of what ifs).
He had two difficult seasons and then he rebounded to his career GPG or close to it. He was a "lesser" player, but he exploited his biggest strength and continued to bring a lot of value to his team. However, his overall production DID fall by a lot and this is why I do not buy the goal scoring argument. In order to produce goals at the level he does, the rest of his contributions suffer. Ovechkin became a "Cy Young" player after his first five years. I mean, it is not a HUGE negative in a vaccuum, especially considering that it made the Caps a better team (other players did more and the game plan focused less on just Ovechkin, but more on maximizing Ovechkin's scoring opportunities). We are talking about the top 10 ever, so we have to nitpick. His playoffs are also firmly behind Crosby and Malkin (production wise). He is closer to Kane on that front and Kane has two more Cups and the same number of Conn Smythe. So far his era, Ovechkin is, AT BEST, the 4th best in the playoffs.
So, his goalscoring in the regular season can push him very close to the top 10, but there are many things you can point out to push him further down in rankings. As I said, to me, he is AT THE VERY WORST a top 5 goal scorer ever (good arguments for him to be #1) and a top 15 player ever (could maybe reach #5 depending on how you structure the argument - I'd argue against it, but it would not be entirely stupid). The domination he had in years 1, 2, 4 and 5 mean more to me than his raw number of goals or number of Rocket Richards. We know he is the best goal scorer of his generation by a mile. To determine where he fits "all time", you have to watch more than just that.
Scandale du Jour
JordanStaal#1Fan
filinski77
Registered User
- Feb 12, 2017
- 2,714
- 4,486
Right, but not many players were at their peak forever. I think Ovi has a few things going for him in this aspect:
- One of the best peaks ever outside of the big-4 (3 straight pearsons with goal/gp and point/gp leads each year)
- The best goal-scorer ever (imo)
- Outside of his peak years, he still won 7 rockets (enough to tie #1 all-time), and Hart finishes of 1/2/6/7/9
He was near point/gp for that large middle chunk of his career, but you gotta remember that top players in those years were scoring 30-40 goals and only 80-90 points right. That was just a result of an extremely low scoring environment.
I agree it is hard to compare across era's, but we can only do the best we can. And when we try our best, based just on performance relative to peers, I think Ovi beats out those 2 Canadiens previously mentioned. And that's even before trying to consider the context of a 6-team Canadian league vs. a more international league.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Post-Game Talk: Utah No Names dunk on Pens (still not Sullys fault apparently)- Latest: Honour Over Glory
