And Crosby's goalscoring numbers don't tell the whole story with his ability. Crosby was the better offensive player, period. As was Hull, Beliveau and Jagr.
Oh, the irony.
Where do you place Ovechkin on your personal list of the greatest players of all time?
- Thread starter Nick Hansen
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
And Crosby's goalscoring numbers don't tell the whole story with his ability. Crosby was the better offensive player, period. As was Hull, Beliveau and Jagr.
Oh, the irony.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 11,132
- 6,601
I know this is to show the technic of looking at raw value starting at a player first year can be misleading.
so in that spirit if we look in 5 years windows:
06-11
Crosby his 5th in goals, like a Staal close to Iginla, 4th in goal per game,
Ovy: .63
Kovalchuck: .55
Gaborik: .54
Crosby: .52
Heatley: .51
Stamkos: .49
12-17
crosby again a 4th in goal per game
Stamkos: .59
Ovy: .58
Malin: .48
Crosby: .45
Pacioretty/P.Kane: .43
18-23
30th in gpg, like a Barkov, Evander Kane
Crosby was a ~top 5 goal scorer of his era, by doing it 2 windows in a row and still putting goal after that you end up with the second most.
Kovalchuck, Stamkos, Ovechkin were clearly better after that he is a mix for a top 5 ish.
Ovechkin was 17-142-112 assist per game in those 3 window.
Has for being terrible for a Top 10 possible player
Crosby: 4-4-30
Jagr: 21-3-6
Beliveau: 2-1-9
Sakic: 29-13-12
Yzerman: 17-9-35
Among Canadian players only, he is exactly like Beliveau
Crosby: 1-2-9
Last edited:
filinski77
Registered User
- Feb 12, 2017
- 2,748
- 4,632
How is it ironic?
I said: "Your only criteria is raw goals (and if you know anything about my posts, I hate raw stats)." And "Crosby has so much other stuff going for him that 4x top-10 goal finishes isn't enough to NOT put him top-10 all-time either."
Those are two completely separate comments, about two completely separate things, and do not contradict each other. Get a grip.
You said "Crosby is arguably the 2nd greatest (using some of the criteria to rate OV as the possibly the "greatest goalscorer ever") goalscorer of his era"
-> The only thing that Crosby is the 2nd highest in in his era is raw goals (which is why in my first 'ironic' quote, I said that raw only doesn't tell the whole story. Ovechkin has the best top-10 goal finish record in NHL history. Crosby on the other hand is nowhere near having the 2nd best top-10 goal finish record in his generation.
That above has nothing to do with my second quote which you are claiming to be ironic with the first. You're being ridiculous.
It is a fact that Crosby has the worst goal-scoring track record of all top-10 all-time player considerations. Yet I even came out and said that he has so many other things going for him that I still consider him top-10. I'm literally praising the shit out of Crosby and you still come in looking for a fight with some shitty arguments that aren't even relevant to what I'm trying to say.
Victorias
Registered User
- May 1, 2022
- 341
- 585
Literally no one is doing that.
daver, fillinski, and bigbadbruins were all discussing whether Ovi’s goal scoring is significant enough to make up the difference in their playmaking ability and vice versa.
Felidae
Registered User
- Sep 30, 2016
- 13,001
- 16,718
Here's ovechkin's assist placements.
Assist finishes: 6, 6, 10
APG: 6, 10, 10
Maybe he wasn't a playmaker in the conventional sense, but hey. It got results.
Do I still think he's the most unbalanced player to be in the argument for a top 10 player? Yes.
I also dont think it's that outlandish to say that for a very brief time, Ovechkin was an elite playmaker.. just like how Crosby was elite at goalscoring for a brief time period. (Ofc, Crosby did it better and his goalscoring didn't decline to the same degree)
Assist finishes: 6, 6, 10
APG: 6, 10, 10
Maybe he wasn't a playmaker in the conventional sense, but hey. It got results.
Do I still think he's the most unbalanced player to be in the argument for a top 10 player? Yes.
I also dont think it's that outlandish to say that for a very brief time, Ovechkin was an elite playmaker.. just like how Crosby was elite at goalscoring for a brief time period. (Ofc, Crosby did it better and his goalscoring didn't decline to the same degree)
Last edited:
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
In the first three, we have one accurate pass, a 3 footer (assist #3)
Assist 4 - turnover/shot attempt
Assist 5 - Shot attempt
Assists 6 and 7 on the PP are very nice.
Assist 8 - shot attempt
Assist 9 - shot attempt
Assist 10 - Can't tell, he's not on the screen
Assist 11 - That would get flak from some, because it's whipped across and it's just about picked off, but instead lands perfectly for a teammate. I'm not taking any credit away from this one because the concept is right. I'm not sure if this exactly hits, but it's going to be close and the concept is good.
Assist 12 (this is the 4v4 goal vs Minnesota) - This is really nice.
Assist 13 - This is nice, too bad it's a secondary and doesn't count because the secondary makes the play. Kuznetsov doesn't make a better play here.
Assist 14 - shot attempt
Assist 15 - turnover/bobble
Assist 16 - (1st per power play goal vs Ottawa) It's funny, as much as I'd give more credit than most for A11, I'm not sure about this one. It looks really good, but I wonder a little bit about it. I'm inclined to give him credit here after a few watches because his head gets around and the spatial awareness -> mental process is really good. That said, if WSH17 scores this, I don't think he should get an assist at all. It appears to tip the slot man on its way across the net line.
Assist 17 - shot attempt
Assist 18 - Like it
Assist 19 - Outstanding fake-shot pass
Assist 20 - shot attempt (a poor one at that)
Assist 21 - Exit pass on the PP, fine pass
Assist 22 - shot attempt/turnover
Assist 23 - Excellent PP pass
Assist 24 - Good concept of an entry pass, it's half a beat late, and WSH56 doesn't trust he's going to get this, so he may have thrown the timing off of this a bit. But he's bailed out by Mackenzie Weegar's stumble and weak gap.
Assist 25 - shot attempt
Assist 26 - Average 6v4 pass
Assist 27 - Whiffs on the cross-ice pass (maybe for the best, as I think that's going to get tipped behind the intended receiver. Great salvage to keep the play alive.
Assist 28 - Ew. I thought the best one was going to be one of the fake shot passes...but he posterizes Darnell Nurse with a sultry dish. Love this.
Assist 29 - Standard PP pass
Assist 30 - Standard PP pass
Assist 31 - Really nice pass to the back post.
Assist 32 - shot attempt
Assist 33 - I don't know if he's shooting this or not. I think he deserves credit for a fake-shot pass here, but it's going to be a hell of a play for whoever WSH24 is...McMichael?
So, all in all, it's far, far from elite in terms of consistent complexity and general accuracy...but I don't think anyone but the lunatic fringe are going for "elite" in terms of his playmaking. It's...fine. This is also more or less checked out Ovechkin, to be fair. Look at the movement off of passes and shots, I mean, that's not a guy that's all that interested in the next step/sequence haha
But I mean, there's every assist from last year...this is obviously all the ones that worked out, but I don't think anyone wants to sit through every pass, right?
filinski77
Registered User
- Feb 12, 2017
- 2,748
- 4,632
Great point. And that's why I say that Ovechkin is one of the hardest players to rank all-time, due to his unconventional set of accomplishments and unconventional balance between all-around play, playmaking, goalscoring etc.
By the time his career finishes, Ovechkin will have:
1) Hundreds more goals than most of the top-10 all-timers
2) Even more of a gap when we consider adjusted goals
3) 2 more times leading the league in goals than #2 (who did it in a Canadian-only league), and essentially DOUBLE (or more) he amount of times leading the NHL in goals than any other player with an argument for top-10 all-time.
4) 4th or 5th all time in adjusted points
5) Top-10 al time in raw points
6) Arguably the best 3-year consecutive peak of any non big-4 player
7) The best (or 2nd best if Howe) dominant physical hitter of any player with a top-10 argument
8) Overall individual trophy case to compete against any top-5 player straight up
Does Ovechkin have a ton of faults on overall play, decline from his peak, team success etc? 100%. But he also has some of the highest 'good' arguments that make him such a unique case to rank all-time.
filinski77
Registered User
- Feb 12, 2017
- 2,748
- 4,632
Appreciate the time you put in, but kind of a waste of time wouldn't it be?
Ovechkin was 37 years old this season. Anything bad a player does at 37 years old isn't a negative towards them. If in 2 seasons when Crosby is 37 years old, he puts up 45 assists and half of them are routine secondaries, it would NOT be a negative against him.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Virtually no video is a waste of time. Also, this is about average for his assists/game in a season in his career. Are you suggesting that his playmaking ability has fallen off considerably since X time?
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 11,132
- 6,601
Depend what we mean by playmaking ability, does doing a zone entry an average Top 6 player would not have achieved, make a shot that was hard to handle rebound wise from a spot that almost no nhler would have made leading to a goal scored by someone else, I would imagine.
Anything playmaking outside reading play and making the actual pass probably declined quite a bit.
During his 3 season peak he was on the ice for 2361 shot for leading the league over the Red Wings corsi champion players, he was making play happen, second in shot by 60 minutes. last 3 season he his 108th below Jordan Staal, he does not create play/scoring chance for his team that would not have happened with an average forward with his staking-physicality, defenceman having to go back more to respect his speed with the puck at the same rate than in the past.
It could depend how much we restrict the notion of playmaking, but you do not go from Top 6 assist-art ross winning season to below 200th in assist per game without a decline in playmaking (or if that can be the case, we should probably just get rid of the assist stats).
While I agree that binary evaluation is problematic I think your presentation of tiers can be as problamatic if you are implying that the tiers are totally comparable and similar. I can see putting Ovechkin in a lower playmaker tier, 4th, 5th, whatever, but if we are being honest about the goalscoring tiers they are closer to reality when they are presented like this:
Tier 1: Ovechkin
Tier 2: -
Tier 3: -
Tier 4: Stamkos, Kovalchuk, Crosby, ...
I just think it should be taken into account how much Ovechkin is above the others in goalscoring, because the difference between Ovechkin's and Crosby's goalscoring is closer to the gap between Crosby's and for example Getzlaf's playmaking. The other great goalscorers are just in tier 2 because there are no Thorntons and Kanes to fill a tier between them and Ovechkin. I hope you get what I'm saying, I hope that makes sense somewhat.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
This is why these things are so tough unless you're really looking closely at it...
I would have expected an allegedly elite playmaker to not have his playmaking fall off considerably at this age. Especially because we see he's still capable of scoring. It's not like he's out there with a walker, he's out there throwing pucks into the net whenever he feels like it. So, we know he's still capable of playing.
So when you're evaluating the playmaking, the process matters a lot. You really have to put yourself in the head of the player, you have to look at that game through his eyes and see what he sees if you really want to get down to it.
With Crosby, I've remarked in other threads over the last couple of years here, that he seems to be - against all reasonable odds - improving his playmaking process because he's getting older, falling out of his athletic prime. He's inventing playmaking complexity that I'm not sure I've seen from him before. I'm not sure what the assist numbers say, and the team isn't very good overall, which doesn't help...but how he's processing the game mentally seems to be at all time high and it shows in his playmaking.
Back to Ovechkin, does this mean that when he had his few decent high assist seasons that he was actually just getting them on effort? You can go crazy going down this rabbit hole, and a top 10 finish isn't necessarily functionally different than a top-11 finish. But it's not like these are comfortable finishes...these are "in the pack" finishes. In '09, he's an assist way from not being top 10, in '10 he's three assists away, and in '11 (a season where Crosby didn't really play) he's four away. (Which is no different than Crosby's non-1st place goal finishes, before all the unbiased folks get upset).
When you look at those seasons - and we all remember, I hope - Ovy was a force. Highest shot total in '09 (526)...but also most shot attempts of his career (so, including misses and blocked) over 1000 (!). In 2010, not much different. He missed some games, but 11.3 shot attempts per game is second most of his career. 2011 is a touch lower than these, but still at 765 shot attempts, that's narrowly missing 5th most in his career.
Then you look, too, the 2009-2011 window is the weakest 3-year shooting percentage window of his career at 10.78%.
[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]2006-08[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2007-09[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2008-10[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2009-11[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2010-12[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2011-13[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2012-14[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2013-15[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2014-16[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2015-17[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2016-18[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2017-19[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2018-20[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2019-21[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2020-22[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2021-23[/TD]
[TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
So, and again, this is why you go to the tape...was he actually better at playmaking in his prime or was he just getting to more pucks and they didn't go in on the first try? Or, are we suggesting, that his technical passing ability and hockey sense and mental processor have fallen off so considerably with age that this is what you get...
Even though that doesn't generally seem to be the case with actual elite playmakers at the age of 34, 35, 36, 37...decline? Of course. But my man here is ranked 118th in assists the last four years. He's ~200th in the NHL in assists per 60 minutes 5v5. Tied with Keegan Kolesar. I don't know...I just don't know that this fall off is what you think it is...or, said another way, I don't think those three assist-total seasons were quite what you think they were...
I would have expected an allegedly elite playmaker to not have his playmaking fall off considerably at this age. Especially because we see he's still capable of scoring. It's not like he's out there with a walker, he's out there throwing pucks into the net whenever he feels like it. So, we know he's still capable of playing.
So when you're evaluating the playmaking, the process matters a lot. You really have to put yourself in the head of the player, you have to look at that game through his eyes and see what he sees if you really want to get down to it.
With Crosby, I've remarked in other threads over the last couple of years here, that he seems to be - against all reasonable odds - improving his playmaking process because he's getting older, falling out of his athletic prime. He's inventing playmaking complexity that I'm not sure I've seen from him before. I'm not sure what the assist numbers say, and the team isn't very good overall, which doesn't help...but how he's processing the game mentally seems to be at all time high and it shows in his playmaking.
Back to Ovechkin, does this mean that when he had his few decent high assist seasons that he was actually just getting them on effort? You can go crazy going down this rabbit hole, and a top 10 finish isn't necessarily functionally different than a top-11 finish. But it's not like these are comfortable finishes...these are "in the pack" finishes. In '09, he's an assist way from not being top 10, in '10 he's three assists away, and in '11 (a season where Crosby didn't really play) he's four away. (Which is no different than Crosby's non-1st place goal finishes, before all the unbiased folks get upset).
When you look at those seasons - and we all remember, I hope - Ovy was a force. Highest shot total in '09 (526)...but also most shot attempts of his career (so, including misses and blocked) over 1000 (!). In 2010, not much different. He missed some games, but 11.3 shot attempts per game is second most of his career. 2011 is a touch lower than these, but still at 765 shot attempts, that's narrowly missing 5th most in his career.
Then you look, too, the 2009-2011 window is the weakest 3-year shooting percentage window of his career at 10.78%.
[TABLE=collapse]
[TR]
[TD]2006-08[/TD]
[TD]
12.91%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2007-09[/TD]
[TD]
12.24%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2008-10[/TD]
[TD]
12.64%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2009-11[/TD]
[TD]
10.78%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2010-12[/TD]
[TD]
11.37%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2011-13[/TD]
[TD]
11.43%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2012-14[/TD]
[TD]
13.33%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2013-15[/TD]
[TD]
13.63%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2014-16[/TD]
[TD]
13.11%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2015-17[/TD]
[TD]
12.33%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2016-18[/TD]
[TD]
12.39%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2017-19[/TD]
[TD]
13.22%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2018-20[/TD]
[TD]
14.74%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2019-21[/TD]
[TD]
14.80%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2020-22[/TD]
[TD]
14.75%
[/TD][/TR]
[TR]
[TD]2021-23[/TD]
[TD]
14.32%
[/TD][/TR]
[/TABLE]
So, and again, this is why you go to the tape...was he actually better at playmaking in his prime or was he just getting to more pucks and they didn't go in on the first try? Or, are we suggesting, that his technical passing ability and hockey sense and mental processor have fallen off so considerably with age that this is what you get...
Even though that doesn't generally seem to be the case with actual elite playmakers at the age of 34, 35, 36, 37...decline? Of course. But my man here is ranked 118th in assists the last four years. He's ~200th in the NHL in assists per 60 minutes 5v5. Tied with Keegan Kolesar. I don't know...I just don't know that this fall off is what you think it is...or, said another way, I don't think those three assist-total seasons were quite what you think they were...
Last edited:
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Let's not go nuts...there was a time when he might not have even had the best wrist shot on his own team. Putting an NHL player three tiers above every other NHL player at anything is a bridge too far for me. I get the concept, but this isn't how I'd go about it...giving him his own tier as a goal scorer, hell, even his own tier and a half...sold. All day. But let's not go nuts...he lost a goal scoring race in his athletic prime to Vincent Lecavalier also.
That was not meant to be too literal, perhaps I should't have put it like that.
My point is: Let's say Crosby, Thornton, Malkin are the best playmakers* since the lockout and Crosby/Ovechkin joining the league. They led the league in assists 5 times, combined. If you throw in Henrik Sedin, they are at 8. Ovechkin led the league in goals 9 times. You can add up the 4 best playmakers of the era and they led the league in assists less times than Ovechkin led in goals. This gap is just absurd and should be weighted as such in my opinion. I think that was my point.
And yes, nowadays McDavid is stealing the assists lead, but Ovechkin was winning Rocktes with Matthews in the league who is a great goalscorer, so it is not like playmakers have inherently more competition, why should they. Ovechkin is just such an outlier in one category (goals) that there are no comparable tiers in other categories (here: playmakers).
*and of course McDavid, but he is not really in this conversation because his career is still in the first half and he very well might end up above Crosby/Ovechkin anyway
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,629
- 16,411
Two things that make Crosby particularly hard to evaluate as a goal-scorer:
First, despite him clearly being a better playmaker than goal-scorer, he has two goal-scoring titles, but only led the league in assists once. Is there any other player in NHL history who led the league in their weaker area (looking at goals vs assists), more times than they led the league in their stronger area?
Second, Crosby led the league in goals twice, but only placed in the top ten two more times (a pair of 7th place finishes). No player in NHL has such an odd record. Iginla might be the closest ("only" four top ten finishes - but at least he had two years in 3rd place).
Going back to consolidation (1927), 22 players have led the league in goals at least twice. The average number of top five finishes amongst these players is 6.6. 20 of these 22 players have at least four years in the top five. Aside from Crosby, the only other player without 4+ years in the top five is Doug Bentley (and he needs an asterisk, since his only two top five finishes were during the talent-depleted WWII).
That's why it's important to look beyond the binary of yes/no did someone lead the league. Crosby is up 2-0 on Jagr in terms of goal-scoring titles. But Jagr is pretty clearly the better goal-scorer (he was runner up 4 times, and also has seasons finishing 3rd, 4th, 6th and 9th).
First, despite him clearly being a better playmaker than goal-scorer, he has two goal-scoring titles, but only led the league in assists once. Is there any other player in NHL history who led the league in their weaker area (looking at goals vs assists), more times than they led the league in their stronger area?
Second, Crosby led the league in goals twice, but only placed in the top ten two more times (a pair of 7th place finishes). No player in NHL has such an odd record. Iginla might be the closest ("only" four top ten finishes - but at least he had two years in 3rd place).
Going back to consolidation (1927), 22 players have led the league in goals at least twice. The average number of top five finishes amongst these players is 6.6. 20 of these 22 players have at least four years in the top five. Aside from Crosby, the only other player without 4+ years in the top five is Doug Bentley (and he needs an asterisk, since his only two top five finishes were during the talent-depleted WWII).
That's why it's important to look beyond the binary of yes/no did someone lead the league. Crosby is up 2-0 on Jagr in terms of goal-scoring titles. But Jagr is pretty clearly the better goal-scorer (he was runner up 4 times, and also has seasons finishing 3rd, 4th, 6th and 9th).
Matsun
Registered User
- Aug 15, 2010
- 656
- 554
Anyone know what happened in 10-11? It was the last time we saw OV was a strong playmaker and he had just as many shots as his previous career best season, but he had by far his worst shooting %.
This season D.Sedin won the Ross with 104 points and Perry won the Richard with 50 goals when Crosby and Malkin both missed half the season. So maybe OV could've had a Hart/Lindsey season here with a normal shooting %, and maybe even a total sweep.
| Season | Age | GP | G | A | PTS | EV | PP | SH | GW | S | S% |
| 2005-06 | 20 | 81 | 52 | 54 | 106 | 28 | 21 | 3 | 5 | 425 | 12.2 |
| 2006-07 | 21 | 82 | 46 | 46 | 92 | 30 | 16 | 0 | 8 | 392 | 11.7 |
| 2007-08 | 22 | 82 | 65 | 47 | 112 | 43 | 22 | 0 | 11 | 446 | 14.6 |
| 2008-09 | 23 | 79 | 56 | 54 | 110 | 36 | 19 | 1 | 10 | 528 | 10.6 |
| 2009-10 | 24 | 72 | 50 | 59 | 109 | 37 | 13 | 0 | 7 | 368 | 13.6 |
| 2010-11 | 25 | 79 | 32 | 53 | 85 | 25 | 7 | 0 | 11 | 367 | 8.7 |
| 2011-12 | 26 | 78 | 38 | 27 | 65 | 25 | 13 | 0 | 3 | 303 | 12.5 |
| 2012-13 | 27 | 48 | 32 | 24 | 56 | 16 | 16 | 0 | 4 | 220 | 14.5 |
| 2013-14 | 28 | 78 | 51 | 28 | 79 | 27 | 24 | 0 | 10 | 386 | 13.2 |
| 2014-15 | 29 | 81 | 53 | 28 | 81 | 28 | 25 | 0 | 11 | 395 | 13.4 |
| 2015-16 | 30 | 79 | 50 | 21 | 71 | 31 | 19 | 0 | 8 | 398 | 12.6 |
| 2016-17 | 31 | 82 | 33 | 36 | 69 | 16 | 17 | 0 | 7 | 313 | 10.5 |
| 2017-18 | 32 | 82 | 49 | 38 | 87 | 32 | 17 | 0 | 7 | 355 | 13.8 |
| 2018-19 | 33 | 81 | 51 | 38 | 89 | 33 | 18 | 0 | 5 | 338 | 15.1 |
| 2019-20 | 34 | 68 | 48 | 19 | 67 | 35 | 13 | 0 | 3 | 311 | 15.4 |
| 2020-21 | 35 | 45 | 24 | 18 | 42 | 15 | 9 | 0 | 6 | 182 | 13.2 |
| 2021-22 | 36 | 77 | 50 | 40 | 90 | 33 | 16 | 1 | 5 | 334 | 15.0 |
| 2022-23 | 37 | 73 | 42 | 33 | 75 | 28 | 14 | 0 | 3 | 294 | 14.3 |
norrisnick
The best...
- Apr 14, 2005
- 32,059
- 17,582
Do we just ignore that Gretzky fell off a cliff as a goal-scorer from like 30 on? 53rd in goals from his 30yo season to 38yo, and 1st in assists. Ovechkin is 73rd in assists from his 30yo season through his 37yo season and 1st in goals. Is there a material difference between 53rd and 73rd in a key statistic for all-time great players if you specialize in another?
I get the difference in primes, but it seems awful weird to to hyperfixate on one player's imbalance in his 30s and ignore others for the same thing.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
I don't get the distraction to be honest. Why am I hyperfixated on the exact subject matter of the last several pages in the thread about the very player we're talking about? And I didn't even stick to his 30's, as you can see, I talk about his entire career. I don't think I even understand your question.
norrisnick
The best...
- Apr 14, 2005
- 32,059
- 17,582
Didn't stick to just the 30s but you seem to make sure to end with it as a highlight. Who cares how low Ovechkin was in assists from 34-38? How is that relevant? That's why I'm bringing up Gretzky's goals at a similar age. Because it's not something anyone should even think of with regard to either player's all-time placement.
Ovechkin's assists the last 4 years is the distraction here.
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
Maybe it's poor writing by me, but I see the line of reasoning as rather clear. It's not about Ovechkin assists vs Gretzky goals. It's the thought that Ovechkin was an elite playmaker and therefore, simply, thinker of the game...how did those qualities fall off so sharply when he could/can clearly play?
You can't generally "think" a goal into the net yourself. Gretzky's athletic abilities faded, his goal scoring fell...his playmaking, not nearly as much.
norrisnick
The best...
- Apr 14, 2005
- 32,059
- 17,582
And Ovechkin's goal scoring didn't fall nearly as much either so what are we even talking about?
Just take 100 of Ovechkin's goals he still laps the field without them and pretend they are assists if that helps ease the imbalance...
BraveCanadian
Registered User
- Jun 30, 2010
- 15,843
- 5,455
This is how I feel too. He's so hard to rank because Ovi has that big peak as a goalscorer who was engaged, dynamic, physical, and outstanding in the playoffs too.
Then he has years as a turret. Goal scoring is always valuable but the way the team is feeding him and all the ENG is just.. blah.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 11,132
- 6,601
It can be easy to lost track with 14page subject, there a conversation about Ovechkin playmaking or lack of to be a Top 10 player of all time, for example:
Ovechkin is 10th in assists in his era. Brett Hull was 22nd. Mike Gartner was 24th. And those were weaker talent pools.
Ovechkin is the only player in hockey history who can be top 10 at something in his era, and have a gaggle of people (Pens fans and Canadians) claiming he doesn't do the thing he is top 10 in.
And a conversation followed.
Ovechkin during his seasons between 25 and 30 years old, was 56th in assist, 97 in assist per game despite being by far the player in the nhl with the most minutes on the powerplay, almost 300 minutes more than any other forward, this is not just some cherry picking or looking at what he did in an old age, some of those season are with a president trophy team, the caps were 7th in goals during that time.
He was 258th in assist per 60 minutes at 5v5, just below teammate Tom Wilson.
Imo points tell a superior story to assists, so that breakdown is not necessarily that interesting, I get it to focus on goals over just points, but assists over just points can be interesting, but not that important. But, unlike during his peak, the story that the goalscoring was kept up at the cost of something for the rest of his career can be argued, scoring over 500 goals on a good team and being -21 after his 25 seasons, the team was around +211 at 5v5 during that time frame...
Last edited:
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
I guess peak Ovi might be his best argument but is it really top 5 of all time using 3 consecutive years?
Heck off the top of my head I think I can make a really good argument that Doug Gilmour in his first 2.5 Maple Leaf seasons has a better "peak."
Latest posts
-
-
-
Rumor: 2024-2025 Trade Rumors and Free Agency Talk | Part Deux- Latest: CobraAcesS
-
-
