Where do you place Ovechkin on your personal list of the greatest players of all time?

[Nick Hansen]

We've discussed Crosby extensively on here but Ovechkin is also an interesting case, obviously. To me, he is kind of tricky to really nail down in history. There is a solid argument that he's the best goalscorer ever but his lack of playoff success is concerning. His all-around game is also questionable.

Where do you put Ovechkin? Is he a top 20 player, for instance?

Click to read more...

 

[daver]

I think Jagr is a very good comparable. Some very high end seasons, some OK ones, an even more questionable all around game, and a playoff resume that is lacking in comparison to his direct peers but not nearly to the extent of OV.

I would keep OV behind him unless he puts up the big Cup run that Jagr is lacking.

 

[bobholly39]

I'd say he's top 20, but near the bottom, in the 15-20 range.

There's a range of 10+ guys or so who can be argued for 5th all time, depending on what criteria someone favors. Guys like Hull, Beliveau, Richard, Harvey are usually towards the top of that grouping, but then you also have guys like Roy, Hasek, Bourque, Jagr and a cpl of others who get named.

I think Crosby as of today is among that grouping in argument for 5th (lack of longevity to be near the top of it, but very well pacing for it with a full career).

I think Ovechkin is definitely not in that grouping, nor is he likely to end up in it - but he's right behind. So he's with guys like Lidstrom, Messier, Mikita, Lafleur, etc.

Ovechkin is still young enough and close enough to peak ability that he can reach that upper tier if things go his way. He'd need 2 conn smythe worthy runs (and cups) to do so I feel, but depending on how strong an individual run is, or how 'not strong' it is - less or more than 2 might be needed.

 

[bobholly39]

I think Jagr is a very good comparable. Some very high end seasons, some OK ones, an even more questionable all around game, and a playoff resume that is lacking in comparison to his direct peers but not nearly to the extent of OV.

I would keep OV behind him unless he puts up the big Cup run that Jagr is lacking.

You seem to be more down on Jagr than most. Which is fine. Different people have different opinions about different players. But i'd argue your opinion/ranking of Jagr seems to be on the lower end of where most would rank him. I think there's an argument for him to rank as high as 5th all time after the big 4.

So I think there's a decent gap between the 2. I agree with your overall assessment of Ovechkin - I just disagree with your assessment of Jagr and so I think the comparison is a bit inadequate.

 

[VanIslander]

I love OV and he's been in my top-3 players for his entire career!!! I've been a Caps fan since Langway in '82.

Still,...

At left wing I've seen Krutov, Kamensky and Robitaille wow me (saw them all live in my adulthood), and I believe my boy OV is better than them, but ain't so quick to think the gap is much given how some players elevate their game when the going gets tough, and others shake their head at the bench and swear like OV does.

I do not believe my OV is a stitch better than either Bobby Hull or "Terrible" Ted Lindsay. Not a stitch, all things considered.

But I think him top-50 all time!

The best left winger of all time? Offensively or all round? If the latter, then clearly top 5 and likely top 3. If the former then clearly top 2.

An older Michael Peca and Chris Pronger and midcareer Patrick Marleau were usurped in my mind of "wow" "love this guy" sentiment when Alex was an NHL rookie (no, not "the goal", before that, the goal in California where he dumped the puck in, checked the dman into the ice, and recovered the puck for a shot on goal, a save, but still utterly amazing).

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

30...give or take a few spots

 

[quoipourquoi]

I don't know if he's top-20. I have four goalies, four defensemen, seven centers, and five wingers I just can't see bumping for a 5th offense-only player from the last 35 years.

 

[Thenameless]

He's tough to rank. I'd probably have him a little higher than most because while I respect defense, I like offense if that makes sense. He is clearly the best goal scorer of this generation, and I mean by far the best. Plus it's a pretty tough era to score in. Crosby though is clearly a better player than he is in the same generation. I'm not too worried about the holes in his playoff resume, because if you look deeper, he does produce in the playoffs.

From a team-building standpoint, it seems easier to surround a gifted one-dimensional scorer, with players that are defensively responsible, than to try squeeze goals out of more well-rounded players that don't possess the singular outlier talent. Basically, I'm in line with Bill Torrey's reasoning for taking Mike Bossy over Foster. And admittedly, I would have easily taken Daigle over Pronger, so it doesn't always work. And I'd be happy with Tavares over Hedman, even if Hedman provides more career value in the end.

His rank would depend highly on my team's needs, but I'd have to be in an actual draft situation to know where he'd go.

 

[The Panther]

I think Jagr is a very good comparable.

I've seen some other people say this, and I get the reason why (don't get me wrong, it's legitimate) -- but I just think Jagr hit a level of play that is above what Ovechkin ever reached.

I dunno. Jagr won 5 scoring titles in 7 years (and would have won another with NYR if not for a mini-slump in the last three games of the season), sometimes by crazy levels of dominance. During that 7 years, he scored almost 150 more points than Selanne or Sakic (and had the best plus/minus out of the top-eight guys of that period). He continued completely dominating -- in fact, dominating much more -- when Lemieux retired.

I know we can say that Ovechkin's level of goal-scoring dominance for his three-year peak (and maybe for his whole career, up to now) is on the same level as Jagr's scoring dominance those seven or more years, but I really think being a top-goals and top-assists player simultaneously -- and thus, regular scoring leader contender -- is 'harder' than merely being either/or.

Maybe what it comes down to is that I see Jagr as being the guy who can do it all by himself, whereas I see Ovechkin more as the guy who can do some of it by himself, but to hit his peak level (c. 2007 to 2010) he needs some help. I mean, Jagr scored 127 points at the height of the DPE when the next best guy on his team was Martin Straka.


Anyway, about Ovechkin's "ranking": I also find it difficult to say... yet. I'm gonna wait until he's retired to attempt it, because every year I think "maybe this is the year he'll contend for the Cup / a Gold Medal", and once he does, we'll be forced to re-evaluate him. But every year the Caps choke, or Russia chokes.

He'll certainly way up there in the list of great players and even higher in the list of great goal-scorers. But I don't think he'd be in the top-10 or 15 players. Without giving it too much thought, I'm guessing he's around 20th or something, but, as I said, there's still lots of chance for him to move up.

 

[daver]

I've seen some other people say this, and I get the reason why (don't get me wrong, it's legitimate) -- but I just think Jagr hit a level of play that is above what Ovechkin ever reached.

I dunno. Jagr won 5 scoring titles in 7 years (and would have won another with NYR if not for a mini-slump in the last three games of the season), sometimes by crazy levels of dominance. During that 7 years, he scored almost 150 more points than Selanne or Sakic (and had the best plus/minus out of the top-eight guys of that period). He continued completely dominating -- in fact, dominating much more -- when Lemieux retired.

I know we can say that Ovechkin's level of goal-scoring dominance for his three-year peak (and maybe for his whole career, up to now) is on the same level as Jagr's scoring dominance those seven or more years, but I really think being a top-goals and top-assists player simultaneously -- and thus, regular scoring leader contender -- is 'harder' than merely being either/or.

Maybe what it comes down to is that I see Jagr as being the guy who can do it all by himself, whereas I see Ovechkin more as the guy who can do some of it by himself, but to hit his peak level (c. 2007 to 2010) he needs some help. I mean, Jagr scored 127 points at the height of the DPE when the next best guy on his team was Martin Straka.


Anyway, about Ovechkin's "ranking": I also find it difficult to say... yet. I'm gonna wait until he's retired to attempt it, because every year I think "maybe this is the year he'll contend for the Cup / a Gold Medal", and once he does, we'll be forced to re-evaluate him. But every year the Caps choke, or Russia chokes.

He'll certainly way up there in the list of great players and even higher in the list of great goal-scorers. But I don't think he'd be in the top-10 or 15 players. Without giving it too much thought, I'm guessing he's around 20th or something, but, as I said, there's still lots of chance for him to move up.

I don't know. His rookie year, 2007/08 and 2008/09 seem to be more on his own than with help. I agree that two players with similar production can be differentiated by how much support they had which I think applies to OV's 2009/10 season. To be fair, Jagr's 95/96 and 00/01 seasons also requires some context named Mario.

But saying that Jagr, in general, was a player who could do it by himself moreso than OV is a fair assessment along with Jagr being more of an all around offensive force. Perhaps Jagr is clearly ahead of OV rather than just one Conn Smythe worthy run ahead.

 

[tony d]

Top 20-30. Easily a top 3-5 goal scorer all time and probably the #3 LW all time behind Hull and Ted Lindsay.

 

[Rygu]

Top 50.

 

[GMR]

Top 20-30. Easily a top 3-5 goal scorer all time and probably the #3 LW all time behind Hull and Ted Lindsay.

If he hasn't already passed Ted Lindsay, he's pretty darned close. Obviously doesn't have the Cups and isn't as good an all around player, but he's going to have another season in 2018 where he finishes top 5 in goals (maybe first overall). The accolades are still growing.

 

[Sentinel]

I think he is already ahead of Lindsay. Top 20 for me with a potential to go higher with a deep playoff run.

 

[Terry Yake]

top 30

but in terms of best pure goal scorers he's easily top 3

 

[Kshahdoo]

What is a single international tournament, you can say, Russia won because of Ovi? Yeah, zero. Malkin scored 19 points in 10 games at WHC 2012 and was the major factor in that win. Ovi has played at ton of tournaments and mostly sucked, just ocasionally being above average.

I know, for NHL fans international tournaments mean almost nothing. But we are talking about the whole hockey here... or not? If not, then yeah, he's great. But still hasn't won anything.

 

[JackSlater]

Roughly in the high teens.

 

[Spirit of 67]

We've discussed Crosby extensively on here but Ovechkin is also an interesting case, obviously. To me, he is kind of tricky to really nail down in history. There is a solid argument that he's the best goalscorer ever but his lack of playoff success is concerning. His all-around game is also questionable.

Where do you put Ovechkin? Is he a top 20 player, for instance?

Tough call. He's a bit too one dimensional for my tastes. However, that dimension is a very important one and he's one of the best all time at it.

Won't venture a guess.

 

[Nick Hansen]

What is a single international tournament, you can say, Russia won because of Ovi? Yeah, zero. Malkin scored 19 points in 10 games at WHC 2012 and was the major factor in that win. Ovi has played at ton of tournaments and mostly sucked, just ocasionally being above average.

I know, for NHL fans international tournaments mean almost nothing. But we are talking about the whole hockey here... or not? If not, then yeah, he's great. But still hasn't won anything.

His international play has been very disappointing, agreed. I think Malkin, Radulov and Kovalchuk all have been better.

 

[Sentinel]

Tough call. He's a bit too one dimensional for my tastes. However, that dimension is a very important one and he's one of the best all time at it.

Won't venture a guess.

I categorically disagree when people call Ovechkin "one-dimensional." He's got 511 assists (as a winger, which by default is harder to do), has been one of League's leaders in hits since day one, and is one of the most electrifying players and greatest promoters of the sport in history!

There are really only two areas where he is lacking: two-way play (so did Jagr, Richard, etc.) and playoff success (this is a big one). I see no reason to place him below 20.

 

[psycat]

Didnt we have this thread like 1 day ago? Anyway same answer as there- Slightly below Crosby(10-15, closer to 15 I guess of all time- Ovechkin that is- Crosby in the 6th-12 range)

And that involves abit of projection meaning that's where they will end up. I mean could change if Crosby wins 2 more Harts/Ross or whatever or if Ovechkin have a Yzerman-esque backend of his career with a couple of Smythe's.

 

[Spirit of 67]

I categorically disagree when people call Ovechkin "one-dimensional." He's got 511 assists (as a winger, which by default is harder to do), has been one of League's leaders in hits since day one, and is one of the most electrifying players and greatest promoters of the sport in history!

There are really only two areas where he is lacking: two-way play (so did Jagr, Richard, etc.) and playoff success (this is a big one). I see no reason to place him below 20.

I think it's hard to figure out where to rank him.

I tend to stay away from rankings (maybe other than top 5) because the top 20 could be 50 players long.

 

[Dallas Winston]

Top 25. Around the 20th spot. He will never make the top 10 or even 15 without some playoff success. And with Malkin playing too his potential again might further hurt his legacy.

 

[bobholly39]

Top 25. Around the 20th spot. He will never make the top 10 or even 15 without some playoff success. And with Malkin playing too his potential again might further hurt his legacy.

The only way Malkin can ever hurt Ovechkin's legacy is by surpassing him and thus bumping him down 1 spot. At this point this seems highly unlikely though not completely impossible. But outside of that - nothing Malkin does or doesn't do will affect how Ovechkin is ranked.

There was a thread recently discussing players affecting other players legacies and i just don't buy into it. You build your own legacy based on what you do, that's it. I'm assuming that's what you meant

 

[Dallas Winston]

The only way Malkin can ever hurt Ovechkin's legacy is by surpassing him and thus bumping him down 1 spot. At this point this seems highly unlikely though not completely impossible. But outside of that - nothing Malkin does or doesn't do will affect how Ovechkin is ranked.

There was a thread recently discussing players affecting other players legacies and i just don't buy into it. You build your own legacy based on what you do, that's it. I'm assuming that's what you meant

If at the end of their careers malkin is seen as the better player that will hurt ovechkins ranking because he would "only" be the third best player of his generation behind Crosby and Malkin. Right now I would put malkin over ovechkin.