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

[Midnight Judges]

Ovechkin is the best player of his generation by virtue of scoring 48% more goals than the second place guy. That is a level of dominance unmatched by anyone outside the very best players of all time. Goal scoring is the most difficult thing to be consistent at. Look at the variances across player's careers, then look at Ovie's. Guy is a rock.

No other player of this generation has achieved such an eye-popping level of dominance over their peers in any regard that is even close to this.

IMO hockey fans credit and fault individual players for championships too much and this leads to a lot of stupid rankings (and the absurdly gargantuan overratedness of Toews). No single player can carry a hockey team to a cup. It has never happened. To credit individuals for championships is to give them credit for building their own teams - which they positively don't do.

Crosby gets tons of credit for being on Malkin's team and vice-versa. Without Malkin, Crosby has zero cups, the Pens likely never get past the Caps. And yet his legacy is 50% built on this arbitrary criteria.

Crediting Crosby for having Malkin is arbitrary. You hear it all the time "it's not fair but this is the way players are judged." Nonsense. The judgements need not be arbitrary.

What's not arbitrary are individual player's actual contributions. Not pace, but actual goals scored, actual assists, actual defense played, actual hits that caused a turnover, etc.

I'd rank Ovechkin in the top 10 players of all time, with a decent possibility that he could end up ahead of Bobby Hull.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Ovechkin is the best player of his generation by virtue of scoring 48% more goals than the second place guy. That is a level of dominance unmatched by anyone outside the very best players of all time. Goal scoring is the most difficult thing to be consistent at. Look at the variances across player's careers, then look at Ovie's. Guy is a rock.

No other player of this generation has achieved such an eye-popping level of dominance over their peers in any regard that is even close to this.

IMO hockey fans credit and fault individual players for championships too much and this leads to a lot of stupid rankings (and the absurdly gargantuan overratedness of Toews). No single player can carry a hockey team to a cup. It has never happened. To credit individuals for championships is to give them credit for building their own teams - which they positively don't do.

Crosby gets tons of credit for being on Malkin's team and vice-versa. Without Malkin, Crosby has zero cups, the Pens likely never get past the Caps. And yet his legacy is 50% built on this arbitrary criteria.

Crediting Crosby for having Malkin is arbitrary. You hear it all the time "it's not fair but this is the way players are judged." Nonsense. The judgements need not be arbitrary.

What's not arbitrary are individual player's actual contributions. Not pace, but actual goals scored, actual assists, actual defense played, actual hits that caused a turnover, etc.

I'd rank Ovechkin in the top 10 players of all time, with a decent possibility that he could end up ahead of Bobby Hull.

By that logic, Dionne has to be in your top 10? Right?

 

[Jim MacDonald]

I'll say top 25-30 right now. Once some cups come his way and/or a playoff series where you point as him being the difference that will obviously bump him up some more. 46 goals in 97 playoff games a good clip? Or with his goal scoring prowess you guys think he's come up short in the postseason to this point (goal-scoring wise)?

 

[66871]

Without Malkin, Crosby has zero cups

Link?

 

[bobholly39]

Ovechkin is the best player of his generation by virtue of scoring 48% more goals than the second place guy. That is a level of dominance unmatched by anyone outside the very best players of all time. Goal scoring is the most difficult thing to be consistent at. Look at the variances across player's careers, then look at Ovie's. Guy is a rock.

No other player of this generation has achieved such an eye-popping level of dominance over their peers in any regard that is even close to this.

IMO hockey fans credit and fault individual players for championships too much and this leads to a lot of stupid rankings (and the absurdly gargantuan overratedness of Toews). No single player can carry a hockey team to a cup. It has never happened. To credit individuals for championships is to give them credit for building their own teams - which they positively don't do.

Crosby gets tons of credit for being on Malkin's team and vice-versa. Without Malkin, Crosby has zero cups, the Pens likely never get past the Caps. And yet his legacy is 50% built on this arbitrary criteria.

Crediting Crosby for having Malkin is arbitrary. You hear it all the time "it's not fair but this is the way players are judged." Nonsense. The judgements need not be arbitrary.

What's not arbitrary are individual player's actual contributions. Not pace, but actual goals scored, actual assists, actual defense played, actual hits that caused a turnover, etc.

I'd rank Ovechkin in the top 10 players of all time, with a decent possibility that he could end up ahead of Bobby Hull.

I agree with the bolded 100%. In fact I agree with it so much i didn't even read the rest of your post, I wanted to reply to the bolded right away to express my agreement. I wish more people thought like you and I.

By the way - on an unrelated note - my top 4 players of all time in order are Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe and then Phil Esposito.

Esposito between 1965 and 1976 achieved an eye-popping level of dominance over all of his peers of scoring 48% more goals than the second place guy (in occurrence - Bobby Hull, waaay better than any goal-scoring competitor Ovechkin had to go up against these past 12 years). That is a level of domination unmatched by anyone outside of the very best players of all time. Goal-scoring is the most difficult thing to be consistent at after all, as you say.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

I agree with the bolded 100%. In fact I agree with it so much i didn't even read the rest of your post, I wanted to reply to the bolded right away to express my agreement. I wish more people thought like you and I.

By the way - on an unrelated note - my top 4 players of all time in order are Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe and then Phil Esposito.

Esposito between 1965 and 1976 achieved an eye-popping level of dominance over all of his peers of scoring 48% more goals than the second place guy (in occurrence - Bobby Hull, waaay better than any goal-scoring competitor Ovechkin had to go up against these past 12 years). That is a level of domination unmatched by anyone outside of the very best players of all time. Goal-scoring is the most difficult thing to be consistent at after all, as you say.

Esposito better than Orr?? Interesting.

 

[bobholly39]

Esposito better than Orr?? Interesting.

Thought my sarcasm was obvious

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Thought my sarcasm was obvious

When I first saw your reply, I made sure to double check the username. I was like: Umm okay..

 

[Sentinel]

Thought my sarcasm was obvious

Not at all. I kinda shrugged my shoulders and thought "OK, I guess this viewpoint has some merit, even if the guy is completely unaware of certain Bobby Orr." Then again, I tend to rank Esposito and Bossy higher than most people here.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Esposito is underrated IMO. He was a monster goal scorer and his 76 goal season is up there with the peak Gretzky and Lemieux seasons in terms of offense. Not at the top, but in the ballpark.

 

[Dallas Winston]

Esposito is underrated IMO. He was a monster goal scorer and his 76 goal season is up there with the peak Gretzky and Lemieux seasons in terms of offense. Not at the top, but in the ballpark.

It's the Orr effect. People forget that he was actually winning harts even with Orr on his team.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Esposito between 1965 and 1976 achieved an eye-popping level of dominance over all of his peers of scoring 48% more goals than the second place guy (in occurrence - Bobby Hull, waaay better than any goal-scoring competitor Ovechkin had to go up against these past 12 years). That is a level of domination unmatched by anyone outside of the very best players of all time. Goal-scoring is the most difficult thing to be consistent at after all, as you say.

Ovechkin's seasons overlap perfectly with Crosby's though, whereas Hull left the NHL for the last four seasons of your comparison. You could trim years to only compare when Hull was still in the NHL for Esposito's reference, and do the same for Kovalchuk/Ovechkin (Kovy being a better goal scorer than Crosby). This provides a tidy 8 year sample for each. In this instance Bobby Hull outscores Esposito by 11.4% whereas Ovechkin outscores Kovalchuk by 20%.

There's also the fact that Esposito had Bobby Orr - the player with arguably the greatest peak of any player of all time, and many folks in the hockey media think was the greatest player ever. Esposito's stats exploded during Orr's prime, and shriveled precipitously immediately afterwords. A shocking level of decline from 68 goals/145 points and +51 in '73-74 to 35 goals/83 points and minus 40 in '75-76. It is natural for a player to decline from age 31 to 33 but not nearly to this extent. The difference is clearly Orr. This indicates that Esposito, to some extent, was a product of Orr. Ovechkin might not have ever had a single hall of famer (outside of 38 and 39 year old Fedorov). Ovechkin is a product of Ovechkin.

What this demonstrates is that Alex Ovechkin is closer to Bobby Hull than he is to Phil Esposito, which is basically what I already stated.

 

[Sentinel]

I think it has already been proven that Esposito was not a product of Orr. Not to mention Esposito once actually beat Orr for the Hart. As an offensive player I think Ovechkin is pretty close to Esposito, but the latter is still ahead in both clutch and leadership.

 

[Midnight Judges]

I think it has already been proven that Esposito was not a product of Orr. Not to mention Esposito once actually beat Orr for the Hart. As an offensive player I think Ovechkin is pretty close to Esposito, but the latter is still ahead in both clutch and leadership.

Certainly he was an an all time great, but what evidence is there that Esposito would have achieved so much in terms of individual scoring without Orr?

 

[brachyrynchos]

Certainly he was an an all time great, but what evidence is there that Esposito would have achieved so much in terms of individual scoring without Orr?

Esposito was traded to the Rangers 12 games into the '75-76 season (16 pts), he finished the season with 83 points, which would've been tied for second on the team. Over the next 5 seasons he led the Rangers in scoring 3 times and 2nd once (by a point to Anders Hedberg). His numbers aren't as good as compared to playing with Boston, (who didn't benefit from playing with Orr) but I believe Phil showed he was still a player "away" from Orr.
CHI-235-74-100-174
BOS-625-459-553-1012
NYR-422-184-220-404
Of Esposito's 137 playoff points (130 games)
8 w/ Chicago in 29 games
27 w/ New York in 30 games
Esposito was in the playoffs 3 times with the Rangers, tied for 2nd in '80, and led them in points in their Finals run in '79 (18-8-12-20 in 18 games). Pretty good for a guy well in into mid-late 30's.

 

[Midnight Judges]

yeah I think we agree. IMO Esposito is a top 15-ish player of all time. If he didn't play with Orr and put up the same stats, I'd be calling him top 8.

 

[Sentinel]

Not to mention there was this little event in the fall of 1972, where Esposito was the undisputed best player, a great leader, and no Orr in sight.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

My problem with Ovechkin is that he seems like a one trick pony in the sense that if an opponent has figured him out, they really do have him figured out. Too often it seems like Ovechkin's impact on the games that matter in spring is basically undetectable. While this is a very, very small sample out of a big career, it's also the one where you really earn your chops as a superstar - and where your team really needs you to be that factor that carries the team. In the playoffs, there have been a couple of games like that for OV, but not a couple of *series*. I've seen enough of OV now to be highly skeptical of his ability to ever turn in a defining playoff run.

That's not an especially original point - but the reality is that this should be a heavy factor in weighing his ranking. A top 20 player all-time should have been able to carry a team to at least a Finals appearance for christ's sake.

 

[The Panther]

Certainly he was an an all time great, but what evidence is there that Esposito would have achieved so much in terms of individual scoring without Orr?

- 1968-69 season: Orr plays 67 games, gets 64 points. Espo plays the full season, gets 126 points. Obviously Orr is still a factor, but when Esposito out-scores him by 62 points, can we attribute his big season to Orr?
- 1972 Summit Series: Espo is generally regarded (esp. by USSR) as Canada's best player.
- Espo was 9th in goals between 1976 and 1980. He also led the Rangers in scoring in 1979 when they went to the Finals.

 

[daver]

Ovechkin is the best player of his generation by virtue of scoring 48% more goals than the second place guy. That is a level of dominance unmatched by anyone outside the very best players of all time. Goal scoring is the most difficult thing to be consistent at. Look at the variances across player's careers, then look at Ovie's. Guy is a rock.

No other player of this generation has achieved such an eye-popping level of dominance over their peers in any regard that is even close to this.

Their respective Hart records beg to differ. Clearly point totals are viewed as the primary metric for offensive eliteness, with a bias towards goalscoring given preference over playmaking on a secondary basis. Looking at their respective Hart finishes, they are very close and I don't think their is a particular bias for OV's goalscoring over Crosby's overall offensive production.

There is no argument that puts OV close to Crosby in playoff performances.

 

[VanIslander]

My problem with Ovechkin is that he seems like a one trick pony in the sense that if an opponent has figured him out, they really do have him figured out.

A a longtime Capitals and Sharks fan, I have the same gut reaction to Ovechkin as I do to Thornton. They are too easy to figure out. They ain't dynamic enough to overcome the closest checking of playoff hockey. Take away Joe's pass and OV's shooting lane and you've shut them down. Period. Ugh.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

A a longtime Capitals and Sharks fan, I have the same gut reaction to Ovechkin as I do to Thornton. They are too easy to figure out. They ain't dynamic enough to overcome the closest checking of playoff hockey. Take away Joe's pass and OV's shooting lane and you've shut them down. Period. Ugh.

That's exactly it. Ovechkin's Plan A is amazing to watch if an opponent isn't *on point* in taking it out of the game, but if they do take it out, there's no Plan B. He skates hard, he bangs, he shoots, that's breath-taking to watch when it works..but the truly great players have the hockey sense to adjust to the flows of the game, to work hard in the marginal situations, to create the little edges that come together in the end to win you those super-tight games. I feel like both the guys you mention lack that ability because in spite of having extremely high end individual skills - they're not 'thinking' hockey at the same level as some of the other players mentioned ahead of them.

 

[Canadiens1958]

That's exactly it. Ovechkin's Plan A is amazing to watch if an opponent isn't *on point* in taking it out of the game, but if they do take it out, there's no Plan B. He skates hard, he bangs, he shoots, that's breath-taking to watch when it works..but the truly great players have the hockey sense to adjust to the flows of the game, to work hard in the marginal situations, to create the little edges that come together in the end to win you those super-tight games. I feel like both the guys you mention lack that ability because in spite of having extremely high end individual skills - they're not 'thinking' hockey at the same level as some of the other players mentioned ahead of them.

Prime example would be Ovechkin when Adam Oates moved him to RW, a move which would have given Ovi extra protection carrying the puck up ice since being a RHS his body would be between the puck and checkers.

Did not work since Ovi did not adapt. Yet great wingers like Howe,Hull, and others were comfortable on both wings.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Their respective Hart records beg to differ. Clearly point totals are viewed as the primary metric for offensive eliteness, with a bias towards goalscoring given preference over playmaking on a secondary basis. Looking at their respective Hart finishes, they are very close and I don't think their is a particular bias for OV's goalscoring over Crosby's overall offensive production.

Ovechkin has 3 Harts. Crosby has 2.

3 > 2.

That's the most important metric.

Finishes are secondary to that. Crosby has 6 top three finishes to Ovechkin's 5. Ovechkin has 7 top six finishes - same as Crosby. Ovechkin will finish ahead of Crosby this year as well.

In 13 seasons, Ovechkin has finished ahead of Crosby 8 times for the Hart. Crosby has finished ahead of Ovechkin 4 times. (neither had consideration in 2012).

When it comes to Harts, the advantage is clearly Ovechkin's.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Prime example would be Ovechkin when Adam Oates moved him to RW, a move which would have given Ovi extra protection carrying the puck up ice since being a RHS his body would be between the puck and checkers.

Did not work since Ovi did not adapt. Yet great wingers like Howe,Hull, and others were comfortable on both wings.

The exact opposite is true. Ovechkin has continually adapted his game, and scored 50 goals as a RW - something no other player has done since 2012. Ovie's done it 3 times.

People say he relies too much on the power play, he changes and leads the NHL in ES goals 2 of the past 3 seasons.

People said he was dirty and reckless, he cleaned up his game.

People say he doesn't play defense, he's been playing good defense since Trotz took over.