What were career expectations for Alex Ovechkin? Did he overachieve/disappoint?

[ImporterExporter]

The funny thing is I've NEVER said taking more shots is a bad thing. Ever.

You all just put those words in my mouth to deflect. It's ok. It's what happens when there isn't a valid counter.

It's not about being BAD or GOOD. I shouldn't have to repeat that every f***ing time somebody puts words in my mouth.

It's about the statistical advantage it gives Ovechkin over every other player in the field as it pertains to scoring goals.

Take last year for example. Do you really think OV was the best goal scorer in the league because he scored 1 more, 1 more goal than Leon Draisaitl?

OV took 628 total shots (338 on net).

Drai took 404 total shots (231 on net).

And OV scored 51. Drai scored 50.

Do I really need to finish the math here to illustrate how ridiculous it is to simply label player A as the superior goal scorer on the year? OV literally threw 224 more shots at the net than LD and scored 1 more goal. Woooooow!

Oh, I know, McDavid, blah, blah, unsustainable shooting %, blah, blah, blah. As if you can't counter with the quantity vs quality angle and say it's not like OV is being centered by Kris Beech. And at the end of the day it's not like the shot volume gap is even remotely close anyway. Most players in the NHL don't even take 224 shots a year and that's how many more shots OV took at the net vs the guy who finished 1 goal behind him.

Literally every sport we investigate ratios as it pertains to performance, but when it comes to shot volume in hockey, it's off limits. It's beyond asinine because there is literally no study here that shows having a singular player the overwhelming focal point of a teams offense is a good thing. Doesn't mean it's bad, but just assuming it's the former is BS.

It's no different than me taking 500 more shots on a par 3 than my buddy and then bragging that I sunk a hole in 1 before him.

That doesn't mean OV isn't amazing. It doesn't mean he isn't a legend and first ballot HOF'er who will probably go down as a top 10 player of all time when it's all said and done.

 

[Midnight Judges]

The funny thing is I've NEVER said taking more shots is a bad thing. Ever.

You absolutely did.

But if you're changing your argument based on information provided, then you are to be commended.

 

[ImporterExporter]

You absolutely did.

But if you're changing your argument based on information provided, then you are to be commended.

Prove it.

And again, you're just deflecting. Shocker.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Oh and btw, since people assume I can't be objective.

To answer the OP, OV exceeded expectations. He's been everything and more based on hype.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Even more interesting is that kuzy led the finals in scoring

No he didn't. He led the finals in points.

Scoring = goals.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

No he didn't. He led the finals in points.

Scoring = goals.

No everyone knows scoring is points. Your trying to reword 100 years of hockey history ffs

 

[tarheelhockey]

The funny thing is I've NEVER said taking more shots is a bad thing. Ever.

You all just put those words in my mouth to deflect. It's ok. It's what happens when there isn't a valid counter.

It's not about being BAD or GOOD. I shouldn't have to repeat that every ****ing time somebody puts words in my mouth.

It's about the statistical advantage it gives Ovechkin over every other player in the field as it pertains to scoring goals.

Take last year for example. Do you really think OV was the best goal scorer in the league because he scored 1 more, 1 more goal than Leon Draisaitl?

OV took 628 total shots (338 on net).

Drai took 404 total shots (231 on net).

And OV scored 51. Drai scored 50.

Do I really need to finish the math here to illustrate how ridiculous it is to simply label player A as the superior goal scorer on the year? OV literally threw 224 more shots at the net than LD and scored 1 more goal. Woooooow!

Oh, I know, McDavid, blah, blah, unsustainable shooting %, blah, blah, blah. As if you can't counter with the quantity vs quality angle and say it's not like OV is being centered by Kris Beech. And at the end of the day it's not like the shot volume gap is even remotely close anyway. Most players in the NHL don't even take 224 shots a year and that's how many more shots OV took at the net vs the guy who finished 1 goal behind him.

Literally every sport we investigate ratios as it pertains to performance, but when it comes to shot volume in hockey, it's off limits. It's beyond asinine because there is literally no study here that shows having a singular player the overwhelming focal point of a teams offense is a good thing. Doesn't mean it's bad, but just assuming it's the former is BS.

It's no different than me taking 500 more shots on a par 3 than my buddy and then bragging that I sunk a hole in 1 before him.

That doesn't mean OV isn't amazing. It doesn't mean he isn't a legend and first ballot HOF'er who will probably go down as a top 10 player of all time when it's all said and done.

In my head I read this post in the voice of a ranting George Costanza.

 

[Zuluss]

Stamkos in 2012? Sure 60 goals is nice, but he was on a bottom feeder of a team and was 23 points less than Crosby was in 2007.

You cannot compare raw numbers from a season when #10 in points had 95 points and a season when #10 in points had 78 points. That's a 22% difference.

Crosby-2007 led #10 in points by 26% and was 10% behind #10 in goals.
Stamkos-2012 led #10 in points by 24% and was 67% ahead of #10 in goals.

So in 2007 currency Crosby had 36g+84a=120p and the 2012 version of Stamkos would have had 67g+51a=118p. I do not think there are too many people who would not take the latter stat line in a heartbeat. It is an even clearer choice than Ovechkin over Malkin in 2009.

Ovechkin in 2015? What?

Let's do the same exercise. Ovechkin-2015 led #10 in points by 11% and #10 in goals by 61%. So in 2007 currency it is 65g+41a=106p. That's a harder comparison. I usually go by the rule of thumb "20 extra goals cover the gap of 10 points" (as in 60g+30a=40g+60a), so by that metric 29 extra goals by Ovechkin exactly cover the gap of 14 points.

This adjustment of Ovechkin-2015 that yields 65g+41a=106p in 2007 currency is not some magic or bending of reality. This is something everyone does implicitly when one says that OV's 2014/15 was probably better than his rookie season (52g+54a=106p). If Crosby-2007 had gone against this improved version of rookie Ovechkin, it is not clear Crosby would have got his Hart/Lindsay.

Other things to consider are the facts that 75% of OV-2015 assists were primary assists vs. 58% for Crosby-2007 and 51% of Crosby-2007 points were on PP vs. 42% for OV-2015.
Granted, those are minor things that should not be brought up unless the offensive output is close and we are splitting hairs, but it is close and we are splitting hairs comparing Crosby-2007 and OV-2015.

Ovechkin in 2013? Huh? Ovechkin didn't even have as good of a season as Crosby did that year.

And who says Crosby-2013 was worse than Crosby-2007? I thought 2013 was Crosby's peak year.

Same things, OV-2013 led #10 in points by 14% and #10 in goals by 52%. In 2007 currency, that would put him at 61g+47a=108p vs. Crosby-2007 with 36g+84a=120p. Again, in my eyes it is as close as it can be.

there is a reason no one cracked 120 points other than Sid since 1999 (until Kucherov last year).

... and this reason is the change in the league-wide scoring.
In 2007, #10 in points had 95 points
In 2019, #10 in points had 96 points
In 2008-2017, #10 in points averaged 80 points (19% difference)
In 2011-2017, #10 in points averaged 76 points (25% difference)

So, if you were wondering why Ovechkin was not a 100-point player post-2010 - well, if the scoring was as high as it was in 2006/07, when Crosby scored 120, OV-2015 would have been a 100-point player. OV-2013 would prorate to that too. OV-2014 would come close.

By the way, let's keep one thing in mind, secondary passes or not, every player that ever steps on the ice has as much of an opportunity to get them as the next, and that includes Ovechkin.

This is not quite right. The ability of a player to collect 2nd assists depends on his position on the ice (centers get more puck touches than wingers) and on how the team uses the player. Ovechkin, for example, is used as a trigger-man, especially on PP, and thus does not participate much in cycling the puck. This is how Caps PP is set up - even when the 2nd PP unit is on the ice. It is not like Eller is a better passer or better at cycling the puck than OV - Eller still is more likely to get a 2nd assist when he and OV are both on the ice during PP.

 

[Fantomas]

No but the goals, goals created crowd as the same time will spout off really weak secondary points and over rated defense arguments against contemporaries of Ovechkin thus creating a goals matter much more than anything else narrative.

Heck this was even the "excuse" for his Conn Smythe (scoring more goals than his teammate who had 5 more points in that playoffs)

Your goalposts are moving a lot here.

 

[ImporterExporter]

In my head I read this post in the voice of a ranting George Costanza.

Trust me, he's my favorite TV character of all time from my favorite sitcom of all time. I do this more than I probably should admit.

 

[Fantomas]

Take last year for example. Do you really think OV was the best goal scorer in the league because he scored 1 more, 1 more goal than Leon Draisaitl?

OV took 628 total shots (338 on net).

Drai took 404 total shots (231 on net).

And OV scored 51. Drai scored 50.

Do I really need to finish the math here to illustrate how ridiculous it is to simply label player A as the superior goal scorer on the year? OV literally threw 224 more shots at the net than LD and scored 1 more goal. Woooooow!

Do people remember that one time in the 1970s when Phil Esposito disgraced himself and his family by shooting the puck at the net 550 times?

 

[ImporterExporter]

Do people remember that one time in the 1970s when Phil Esposito disgraced himself and his family by shooting the puck at the net 550 times?

Shocker. You don't answer the question, you simply respond w/ hyperbole and sarcasm. It literally is the same tired response every time from the same few people who have no interest in having an intelligent and open discussion. Thanks for participating.

BTW, Espo had Bobby Orr. His career is nowhere remotely close to what it was, without #4.

Without Orr he probably only gets 412 shots at the net.

 

[JackSlater]

I don't think Ovechkin taking so many more shots is a bad thing. It's not like a strikeout in baseball (when that unquestionably puts you closer to ending the inning, and the game). If Ovechkin can generate so many shots, good for him - I don't see that as something that hurts his team.

I think that the crux of the matter for some is whether Ovechkin, since 2011, is usually generating the shots or just shooting the shots. The most important thing is to score of course, and he does that. If two lines are going to generate say ten shots each in a game, I'd rather the guy who scores one goal in six shots than one goal in seven. If the guy with seven shots however can generate more shots for his team then it's a different story.

The example over-simplifies things but there is a clear difference between Ovechkin 2006-2010 and Ovechkin 2011-2020 and I don't think that raw goal totals is where we find it. Either way he's done enough that to me he looks very likely to go down as the greatest, most accomplished goal scorer ever upon retirement.

 

[ImporterExporter]

I think that the crux of the matter for some is whether Ovechkin, since 2011, is usually generating the shots or just shooting the shots. The most important thing is to score of course, and he does that. If two lines are going to generate say ten shots each in a game, I'd rather the guy who scores one goal in six shots than one goal in seven. If the guy with seven shots however can generate more shots for his team then it's a different story.

The example over-simplifies things but there is a clear difference between Ovechkin 2006-2010 and Ovechkin 2011-2020 and I don't think that raw goal totals is where we find it. Either way he's done enough that to me he looks very likely to go down as the greatest, most accomplished goal scorer ever upon retirement.

Ding, ding, ding.

OV doesn't self generate shots even remotely close to the way he did a decade ago.

He is a trigger man. A damn good one but he is reliant on others to get him the puck in a position to be successful. That happens when you get older. Not a knock, just reality.

 

[ImporterExporter]

And for the 1000th time.

Shooting a lot isn't a bad thing. Shooting a lot isn't a bad thing.
Shooting a lot isn't a bad thing.

But it does give you an inherent advantage over the rest of the league when you rip far more shots than anyone else. Simple mathematical projection would nearly guarantee a goal scoring title if you even have a decent shooting percentage.

It's funny how goal scoring is still largely accepted in a vacuum. Raw totals require context just like any other stat.

The very fact that the usual suspects scoff at this and resort to childish retorts only reinforces my point.

 

[abo9]

I don't know how anyone could possibly make an argument that he has disappointed. I think everyone expected a dominant goal scorer along the lines of a Brett Hull, but with a physical edge like an Iginla. Blend those two players together and you get something like young Ovechkin.

For a long time there was a largely baseless argument that he was an underarchiever because he didn't really care about the Cup, couldn't lead a team, choked in the playoffs. Then he won the Cup and the Smythe and the playoff goal race, and that was the end of that.

The only real criticism I've seen leveled at him since then was the other day, when someone was going on about how he is more one-dimensional than he used to be. I don't see it, but then again it seems like an argument based in utterly unrealistic expectations of a 34-year-old winger.

IMO he has exceeded expectations by a pretty substantial margin. Instead of a rich man's Brett Hull, we got a rich man's Bobby Hull.

He is so good that he is expected to perform as well as any other year. Vultures that don't like him are waiting for a decline in his play and nitpick on everything they can.

Looking at the goal scoring races year after year, Ovechkin is alone at the top, with young players and one-year wonders popping up every year. Who's 30 or more and performing like he does?

 

[Fantomas]

And for the 1000th time.

Shooting a lot isn't a bad thing. Shooting a lot isn't a bad thing.
Shooting a lot isn't a bad thing.

But it does give you an inherent advantage over the rest of the league when you rip far more shots than anyone else.

Being good at hockey gives one an unfair advantage, proclaims area man.

 

[Zuluss]

I think that the crux of the matter for some is whether Ovechkin, since 2011, is usually generating the shots or just shooting the shots. The most important thing is to score of course, and he does that. If two lines are going to generate say ten shots each in a game, I'd rather the guy who scores one goal in six shots than one goal in seven. If the guy with seven shots however can generate more shots for his team then it's a different story.

Ovechkin is generating the shots in the sense that he is very good at getting open for a pass and can put a hard shot on goal even from an awkward pass. He can put a rolling puck on the net, a puck that wobbles erratically goes the same way, and even if one literally sends a pass two feet behind his skates, he still twists his body somehow and rips off a good shot while falling.

Many passes that go Ovechkin's way would not end up on the net if someone else is getting them, pretty much any player would just stop these awkward passes and cycle the puck. But Ovechkin shoots, forces the goalie to make a save and eventually scores.

But it does give you an inherent advantage over the rest of the league when you rip far more shots than anyone else.

Well, let other guys shoot more, probably they will score more. Any coach will tell you, put the puck on the net and good things will happen. Even if you do not score, someone will score from the rebound, or at the very least you will make the goalie work.

Ovechkin is good at putting the puck on goal in the situations when others would not be able to. So he benefits from that - many great goal-scorers were that way. Gordie Howe would post 350 shots per 70-game season in his 30s (that would prorate to 400+ shots over an 82-game season, more than Ovechkin took in any season after 2008/09). Gordie Howe's shooting percentage in those years was below 10% - he won the goal-scoring title only once after turning 30, but collected a lot of top5 finishes in goals along the way, and that's what counts, not how he got there. He just got the job done. Ovechkin gets the job done - in terms of scoring goals, he probably gets it done even better.

 

[Big Phil]

But that's exactly what you did.

He had injuries in 2008, 2011, 2012 and 2013 that possibly cost him a Hart/Art Ross. In the case of 2011 and 2013 it definitely cost him this.

I'm not saying Crosby hasnt the better PPG, clearly that's the case. I was just questioning the fact that you made all the arguments pro-crosby but didnt bother with anything outside of physicality for OV.

With Crosby it was easily a case of having it cost him in 2013. He ends up with the same amount of points as Ovechkin but with 12 less games. This isn't a "what if" scenario, he still nearly won the Art Ross. Even with missing 25% of the season it was still a great season from raw stats. So to people saying Ovechkin was better in 2013, it was a clear gap that season. You can't reward Crosby for what he didn't do though, 2011 was not a great season because he played just 41 games. You wish it was, but it wasn't.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Ovechkin misses more shots than any player in the league. But of course, nobody cares about that do they?

Not all shots are good and anyone saying they are is a moron. That's like saying all passes in the NFL are the correct decision. It's just like saying every shot in the NBA is a great one. Those sports we actually care about ratio's and investigating quality vs quantity. I can do this all day.

Taking low risk shots that ends up going to the other team is the same thing as a turnover.

Here comes the snarky quip in 3, 2, 1.....

 

[Voight]

Tampa drafted one at 3rd overall in like 2001? Scored like 37 points in 160 games.

I'd feel bad, but Chicago drafted two back-to-back the year before ... they scored 37 points between the TWO of them

I also just found out Tampa drafted Nikita Alexeev 8th overall in 2000 and what is really eerie is that along with Svitov (whom your thinking of) he also scored 37 points (in 159 games, Svitov played 179).....

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

upthread, i mentioned ovechkin's really impressive durability.

i kind of wanted to see just how impressive that is for a hart trophy-calibre player, so i ran a few numbers.



bathgate years 3 through 12: 696 games, out of 701 total (99%) / ages 22-31

hawerchuk through year 10: 793 games, out of 800 total (99%) / ages 18-27

henrik sedin through season 10: 810 games, out of 820 total (99%) / ages 20-30

gordie howe years 4 through 13: 688 games, out of 700 total (98%) / ages 21-30

marcel dionne through year 10: 779 games, out of 800 total (97%) / ages 20-29

gretzky through year 10: 774 games, out of 800 total (97%) / ages 19-28

ovechkin through year 10: 760 games played, out of 786 total (97%) / ages 20-29

bobby clarke through year 10: 773 games, out of 800 total (97%)

bobby hull through year 10: 674 games, out of 700 total (96%) / ages 19-28

** and then we have the bizarre special case of:

martin st. louis, seasons 5 through 14: 779 out of 786 (99%) / ages 27-37



the same guys by year 15, or, in the case of an O6 player, within a 15 year window:

howe, years 4 through 18: 1031/1050 (98%)

sedin, seasons 1 through 15: 1166/1196 (97/98%) — depending on whether you round to the second or third decimal

ovechkin to date: 1,133/1,164 (97%)

bathgate, seasons 3 through 17: 1,031/1,063 (97%) — includes a comeback season three years after he retired

dionne through year 15: 1,163/1,200 (97%)

hawerchuk through year 15: 1,137/1,176 (97%)

clarke through year 15: 1,144/1,188 (96%) — his entire career

hull through year 15: 1,036/1,080 (96%) — up to his jump to the WHA

MSL seasons 3 through 16: 1,065/1,114 (96%) — factors in year lost to lockout, begins from the year he became an NHL regular

gretzky through year 15: 1,125/1,208 (93%)



there might be guys i'm missing here, but this longevity is super impressive, especially given that he was elite all the way through unlike sedin, bathgate, dionne, hawerchuk, clarke, hull, and MSL. that means it's just ovechkin, howe, and gretzky.



fwiw, pat kane didn't make the cut up to year 10 but has since climbed to 95% of all possible games played midway through his 13th season.

also, if you take 10 and 15 season windows in joe thornton's career instead of starting from year one, he also makes the cuts.



and fyi, yes those lists are all ranked including the decimals you can't see so OV is 3rd in the 15 year window because he's slightly above bathgate, dionne, and hawerchuk in that order.

 

[TheMule93]

id argue he overachieved... cant really expect any prospect to win as many awards and accolades as he did. Cant expect any prospect to be the top all time goal scorer (era adjusted). He definitely exceeded expectations in that regard.

 

[MadLuke]

Ovechkin is generating the shots in the sense that he is very good at getting open for a pass and can put a hard shot on goal even from an awkward pass. He can put a rolling puck on the net, a puck that wobbles erratically goes the same way, and even if one literally sends a pass two feet behind his skates, he still twists his body somehow and rips off a good shot while falling.

Many passes that go Ovechkin's way would not end up on the net if someone else is getting them, pretty much any player would just stop these awkward passes and cycle the puck. But Ovechkin shoots, forces the goalie to make a save and eventually scores.

Could this be sustained if we look at team shot for when Ovechkin is on the ice versus other first liner ?

Between 2011-2012 to 2013-2014, among forward with 1500 minutes of toi:

Player Season Totals - Natural Stat Trick

#138 in shot for by 60 minutes

2014-2015 to 2016-2017:
Ovechkin #46
team canada line of Marchand-Bergeron-Crosby are the top 3 for those year's.

Not that special among forward of is own team:
Player Season Totals - Natural Stat Trick

Player Season Totals - Natural Stat Trick

Probably the best considering he is #2 but with more minutes played, by just arguably.


Generating shoot start by getting the puck out of your own zone, getting it to the offensive zone and can be complex to eye test an net shoot generating value.

Peak Ovechkin was an all time shoot generating machine and it shows:
Player Season Totals - Natural Stat Trick

Player Season Totals - Natural Stat Trick
#4 in the league (but behind 2 player's that played for those Detroit/Hawks) and even then it was still more him shooting a lot versus is team shooting way more when he was on the ice phenomenom that explained that huge amount of shoot taken.

How do we know that Ovechkin is overall generating shoot (net with is overall effect on the game) ? Bergeron/Marchand are for sure generating a lot of shoot, Ovechkin past 7-8 season seem much harder to say.

 

[Big Phil]

You cannot compare raw numbers from a season when #10 in points had 95 points and a season when #10 in points had 78 points. That's a 22% difference.

Crosby-2007 led #10 in points by 26% and was 10% behind #10 in goals.
Stamkos-2012 led #10 in points by 24% and was 67% ahead of #10 in goals.

So in 2007 currency Crosby had 36g+84a=120p and the 2012 version of Stamkos would have had 67g+51a=118p. I do not think there are too many people who would not take the latter stat line in a heartbeat. It is an even clearer choice than Ovechkin over Malkin in 2009.



Let's do the same exercise. Ovechkin-2015 led #10 in points by 11% and #10 in goals by 61%. So in 2007 currency it is 65g+41a=106p. That's a harder comparison. I usually go by the rule of thumb "20 extra goals cover the gap of 10 points" (as in 60g+30a=40g+60a), so by that metric 29 extra goals by Ovechkin exactly cover the gap of 14 points.

This adjustment of Ovechkin-2015 that yields 65g+41a=106p in 2007 currency is not some magic or bending of reality. This is something everyone does implicitly when one says that OV's 2014/15 was probably better than his rookie season (52g+54a=106p). If Crosby-2007 had gone against this improved version of rookie Ovechkin, it is not clear Crosby would have got his Hart/Lindsay.

Other things to consider are the facts that 75% of OV-2015 assists were primary assists vs. 58% for Crosby-2007 and 51% of Crosby-2007 points were on PP vs. 42% for OV-2015.
Granted, those are minor things that should not be brought up unless the offensive output is close and we are splitting hairs, but it is close and we are splitting hairs comparing Crosby-2007 and OV-2015.



And who says Crosby-2013 was worse than Crosby-2007? I thought 2013 was Crosby's peak year.

Same things, OV-2013 led #10 in points by 14% and #10 in goals by 52%. In 2007 currency, that would put him at 61g+47a=108p vs. Crosby-2007 with 36g+84a=120p. Again, in my eyes it is as close as it can be.



... and this reason is the change in the league-wide scoring.
In 2007, #10 in points had 95 points
In 2019, #10 in points had 96 points
In 2008-2017, #10 in points averaged 80 points (19% difference)
In 2011-2017, #10 in points averaged 76 points (25% difference)

So, if you were wondering why Ovechkin was not a 100-point player post-2010 - well, if the scoring was as high as it was in 2006/07, when Crosby scored 120, OV-2015 would have been a 100-point player. OV-2013 would prorate to that too. OV-2014 would come close.



This is not quite right. The ability of a player to collect 2nd assists depends on his position on the ice (centers get more puck touches than wingers) and on how the team uses the player. Ovechkin, for example, is used as a trigger-man, especially on PP, and thus does not participate much in cycling the puck. This is how Caps PP is set up - even when the 2nd PP unit is on the ice. It is not like Eller is a better passer or better at cycling the puck than OV - Eller still is more likely to get a 2nd assist when he and OV are both on the ice during PP.

I think you are overthinking things a lot here. Crosby has played in the same league as Ovechkin over the years. He had every bit of an opportunity to crack 100+ points as Ovechkin. Ovechkin hasn't done it in a decade though. Crosby cracked 100 last year while finishing 4th in Selke voting.