Where does Ovie now rank all time?

[Midnight Judges]

Sure he lacks physicality maybe. I don't think in the grand scheme of things that's much of a weakness. Look at Gretzky or Lemieux. That's also more of a specific play style than a weakness in his career resume - which is what I meant. He has no weaknesses in his career resume.

2 art rosses is not a weakness. Beliveau has 1. Richard 0.

A weakness would be 0 rosses.

His resume is actually extremely well rounded. One of the most well rounded of all time. He isn't anywhere near the goal scorer Ovechkin is but he does have 2 rockets. Ie not a weakness. When you look at a player like Forsberg - goal scoring is a weakness

So your opinion is that 1 Art Ross is not a weakness for Beliveau, but 1 Smythe (while leading his generation in playoff GPG and being top 5 in playoff PPG [above 50 GP]) is a weakness for Ovechkin?

 

[bobholly39]

So your opinion is that 1 Art Ross is not a weakness for Beliveau, but 1 Smythe (while leading his generation in playoff GPG and being top 5 in playoff PPG [above 50 GP]) is a weakness for Ovechkin?

I believe 2 art Ross is not a weakness for Crosby among the top 20 players.

I believe Ovechkins overall playoff resume (particularly before this season - but still now) - is.

I didn't discuss Beliveaus weaknesses. I was saying Crosbys 2 art Ross look good in comparison.

 

[Midnight Judges]

I didn't discuss Beliveaus weaknesses. I was saying Crosbys 2 art Ross look good in comparison.

OK but you were not willing to say 1 was a weakness. You said 0 would be a weakness (obivously a low bar).

Would 1 art ross be a weakness for a player with Crosby's style in your opinion?

 

[bobholly39]

OK but you were not willing to say 1 was a weakness. You said 0 would be a weakness (obivously a low bar).

Would 1 art ross be a weakness for a player with Crosby's style in your opinion?

1 - maybe. But I think his very high ppg finishes help counter that.

I don't necessarily consider art rosses a category on their own either.

Regular season Awards? Sure. And Crosby has a ton. Hart Ross Lindsay etc. Its NOT a weak resume. He had the talent to have more - but overall his award case is very full and compares well to most of the greats.

As a regular season point producer - that's a category Crosby does very well in. 2 art rosses but also all the ppg finishes.

For what it's worth 3-4 years ago if you had asked me to list the weakness in Crosbys resume I would have (in fact I probably did if u look up my post history) - but it's almost as if he took it upon himself to address and fix them all since.

He had a great international resume- but 1 weakness was never dominating best on best tournament as the clear best player. Than he did so at the world cup.

He had a strong playoff resume (team success + individual play) - but no smythes and only 1 cup (despite 2 finals and some round 3 losses). Than he won a smythe and 2nd cup. You could argue a weakness was he didn't have a "strong" smythe after 2016 - and he earned one in 2017.

Goal scoring? He just won a 2nd rocket last year.

So yeah as of today Crosby has one of the most well rounded resumes with no weaknesses.

 

[Midnight Judges]

1 - maybe.

If you can't even say that 1 art ross would be a weakness for a playmaking center then it is pretty obvious you have structured your criteria around Crosby.

There is simply no way you'd be setting the bar so incredibly low for Ovechkin pertaining to Richard trophies if he only had 1 or 2.

You are eager to equivocate for Crosby and allow him to make up for the weakness with PPG, but not so for Ovechkin in the playoffs - despite Ovechkin being top 5 in playoff PPG in his generation (which is not even his strength) and being the absolute best at playoff GPG.

 

[steve141]

You should have read my post right above the one you quoted too.

I didn't say Ovechkin was a weak playoff performer per se. I was saying versus everyone else in the top 20 it was very weak. And it was. Who among most of the guys listed for top 20 in various lists on this thread had a worst record than his? Jagr is the only name I can think of and that's mostly only after this year and his smythe.

I think people are underselling Jagr's playoff resume. He has two Stanley Cups and is the only player outside of the Oilers dynasty to score over 200 playoff points. He never led his team to the cup but it's not like he never showed moments of greatness.

 

[Canadiens1958]

If you can't even say that 1 art ross would be a weakness for a playmaking center then it is pretty obvious you have structured your criteria around Crosby.

There is simply no way you'd be setting the bar so incredibly low for Ovechkin pertaining to Richard trophies if he only had 1 or 2.

You are eager to equivocate for Crosby and allow him to make up for the weakness with PPG, but not so for Ovechkin. -Despite Ovechkin being top 5 in playoff PPG in his generation (which is not even his strength) and being the absolute best at playoff GPG.

Except Jean Beliveau was a goalscoring center at least to the age of 27, slowly morphing into a playmaking center after the age of 30:

Jean Beliveau Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

 

[Midnight Judges]

Except Jean Beliveau was a goalscoring center at least to the age of 27, slowly morphing into a playmaking center after the age of 30:

Jean Beliveau Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

That's fair - if a guy is a goal scorer, you expect fewer assists and therefore fewer Art Ross trophies. It's still a weakness - especially relative to where some people put Beliveau all-time.

Beliveau's case is pretty firmly based on team accomplishments.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

That's fair - if a guy is a goal scorer, you expect fewer assists and therefore fewer Art Ross trophies. It's still a weakness - especially relative to where some people put Beliveau all-time.

Beliveau's case is pretty firmly based on team accomplishments.

Individual contributions to team accomplishments.

 

[Canadiens1958]

That's fair - if a guy is a goal scorer, you expect fewer assists and therefore fewer Art Ross trophies. It's still a weakness - especially relative to where some people put Beliveau all-time.

Beliveau's case is pretty firmly based on team accomplishments.

Deployment of team attributes. Bert Olmsted, Dickie Moore then Marcel Bonin were better suited for the board and corner work with Beliveau handling the slot area.

Still comes down to doing what is necessary to generate the team accomplishments.

 

[Sentinel]

1 - maybe. But I think his very high ppg finishes help counter that.

I don't necessarily consider art rosses a category on their own either.

Regular season Awards? Sure. And Crosby has a ton. Hart Ross Lindsay etc. Its NOT a weak resume. He had the talent to have more - but overall his award case is very full and compares well to most of the greats.

As a regular season point producer - that's a category Crosby does very well in. 2 art rosses but also all the ppg finishes.

For what it's worth 3-4 years ago if you had asked me to list the weakness in Crosbys resume I would have (in fact I probably did if u look up my post history) - but it's almost as if he took it upon himself to address and fix them all since.

He had a great international resume- but 1 weakness was never dominating best on best tournament as the clear best player. Than he did so at the world cup.

He had a strong playoff resume (team success + individual play) - but no smythes and only 1 cup (despite 2 finals and some round 3 losses). Than he won a smythe and 2nd cup. You could argue a weakness was he didn't have a "strong" smythe after 2016 - and he earned one in 2017.

Goal scoring? He just won a 2nd rocket last year.

So yeah as of today Crosby has one of the most well rounded resumes with no weaknesses.

His only real weakness is that he was out for ONE THIRD of his team's total games in his prime. Not a terrible indentation on his resume, but an indentation nonetheless. Crosby should be thanking his lucky stars he is playing in the era he is in.

 

[quoipourquoi]

His only real weakness is that he was out for ONE THIRD of his team's total games in his prime. Not a terrible indentation on his resume, but an indentation nonetheless. Crosby should be thanking his lucky stars he is playing in the era he is in.

To put it in perspective, Forsberg played a higher percentage of games from 1996-97 through 2003-04 (451/656) than Sidney Crosby played from 2007-08 through 2012-13 (310/458). It was a pretty rough patch for Crosby, even though these years accounted for 6 of his 7 best per-game numbers.

 

[bobholly39]

His only real weakness is that he was out for ONE THIRD of his team's total games in his prime. Not a terrible indentation on his resume, but an indentation nonetheless. Crosby should be thanking his lucky stars he is playing in the era he is in.

Oh for sure he missed a ton of games. And if by the time he retired he only had 800 total games or less in his career like someone like Lindros or Forsberg - id say his longevity is a very big weakness.

As it is - i don't think it is. I think his longevity will look quite well by the time he retires. Don't forget he started at 18 - very few players do in the NHL. So that helps to counter some of the games he missed.

And if he plays long enough he should have a very long career as he hasn't declined yet.

I would be more bothered by his games missed if there was a serious impact to his teams success. But there barely was one. They never missed the playoffs due to Crosbys injuries and Crosby never missed the playoffs due to health (i think only once in 2011).

Compare Crosby to Stamkos. Stamkos was injured 2 years ago and his team missed the playoffs. I'd be more likely to hold that against Stamkos than against Crosby in that sense.

 

[Sentinel]

I would be more bothered by his games missed if there was a serious impact to his teams success. But there barely was one. They never missed the playoffs due to Crosbys injuries and Crosby never missed the playoffs due to health (i think only once in 2011).

Compare Crosby to Stamkos. Stamkos was injured 2 years ago and his team missed the playoffs. I'd be more likely to hold that against Stamkos than against Crosby in that sense.

You have just literally given Crosby credit for having Malkin on his team. Ni-i-ce...

 

[Sentinel]

It depends how many they induct. I imagine Hank & Luongo will get in from this "era" , after that its anyones guess. I have a feeling Thomas will get in eventually, Bobrovsky will if he wins another Vezina (could get in even without one if he gets 400 wins) and possibly Price.

TBH I think only Price and Lundquist have a shot. Bobrovsky can keep winning Vezinas, but if he is never out of Round One (and to think Ovechkin was criticized for not making it past Round Two), he won't sniff the HOF. No for Thomas either. He had two great seasons.

 

[daver]

His only real weakness is that he was out for ONE THIRD of his team's total games in his prime. Not a terrible indentation on his resume, but an indentation nonetheless. Crosby should be thanking his lucky stars he is playing in the era he is in.

Given how important you seem to place on missing time in your prime, do you think you have limited the amount of his career as his prime to make your point? He was seemingly in his prime by the 2nd half of his rookie season and is still going.

And what exactly about this era does Crosby have to be lucky for? Please don't bring up WWIII... sorry, I meant the DPE.

 

[Voight]

TBH I think only Price and Lundquist have a shot. Bobrovsky can keep winning Vezinas, but if he is never out of Round One (and to think Ovechkin was criticized for not making it past Round Two), he won't sniff the HOF. No for Thomas either. He had two great seasons.

Luongo is getting in. He may lack hardware but his Vezina record is great (including the two times where he should have won), he'll have a ton of wins and his Hart record is solid for a goalie. Top 5 goalie for about a decade too.

I disagree about Bob. Say he wins one or two more Vezinas - he'd have the same as Roy/Brodeur, just behind Hasek for most of the modern era. (from when they stopped treating it as the Jennings trophy) You're really going to keep him out because he didn't make to the second round?

As for Thomas - Bill Durnan is in so I've always thought he has an outside chance.

Anyhow lets not get this thread off the rails.

 

[bobholly39]

You have just literally given Crosby credit for having Malkin on his team. Ni-i-ce...

Not really. You said Crosby missed a 3rd of his team's game in his prime.

So far he's played 864 out of a possible 1032 career games. That's about 16% games missed, or 1/6th or 1/7th. 1/3rd is a gross exaggeration.

What exactly is the weakness on the resume? If you said he lacked longevity overall - i'd disagree. 864 games by age 30 is a lot. The fact that he started at age 18 helps counted his games missed. In fact out of curiosity i looked up Gordie Howe - the player with the most games played in history. By age 30 he had 846 games played. Crosby is actually pacing ahead at the same age. So I think longevity-wise, short of any more surprises, he should do very well in his career.

If you argued that him being fragile/injured hurt his team results often - well that could be something to look at. But it doesn't seem to be the case. I'm sure Malkin helps yes - but this is about Crosby, and it's not really a weakness of his resume. in my opinion.

Look at Lemieux. He had Jagr, Francis, and many more. You can certainly say his games/season missed hurt his team results a lot. I don't necessarily think that's the case with Crosby, and don't consider it a weakness. Stamkos is a modern name i brought up in the same way.

 

[Sentinel]

Given how important you seem to place on missing time in your prime, do you think you have limited the amount of his career as his prime to make your point? He was seemingly in his prime by the 2nd half of his rookie season and is still going.

I have literally no idea what this paragraph means. Clarify please.

And what exactly about this era does Crosby have to be lucky for? Please don't bring up WWIII... sorry, I meant the DPE.

That he has not been slashed, elbowed, submarined, rammed, beheaded, and any of those things they did in hockey up until the lockout. In the 50s Crosby wouldn't last a season. In the 80s, Penguins would have to assign a full time bodyguard to him. In the 90s he would've been straight-jacketed and bodyslammed. If Gary Suter didn't get him, Scott Stevens would.

 

[daver]

That he has not been slashed, elbowed, submarined, rammed, beheaded, and any of those things they did in hockey up until the lockout. In the 50s Crosby wouldn't last a season. In the 80s, Penguins would have to assign a full time bodyguard to him. In the 90s he would've been straight-jacketed and bodyslammed. If Gary Suter didn't get him, Scott Stevens would.

I see you have laid out your argument without hyperbole. Thank you for that.

 

[daver]

I have literally no idea what this paragraph means. Clarify please..

Crosby has played about 85% of his regular season games and about 94% of his playoff games. Where are you coming up with him missing 1/3 of his games in his prime?

 

[Midnight Judges]

Not really. You said Crosby missed a 3rd of his team's game in his prime.

So far he's played 864 out of a possible 1032 career games. That's about 16% games missed, or 1/6th or 1/7th. 1/3rd is a gross exaggeration.

What exactly is the weakness on the resume? If you said he lacked longevity overall - i'd disagree. 864 games by age 30 is a lot. The fact that he started at age 18 helps counted his games missed. In fact out of curiosity i looked up Gordie Howe - the player with the most games played in history. By age 30 he had 846 games played. Crosby is actually pacing ahead at the same age. So I think longevity-wise, short of any more surprises, he should do very well in his career.

Don't you think the fact that the NHL season used to have 15% fewer games undermines your comparison a bit?

 

[bobholly39]

Don't you think the fact that the NHL season used to have 15% fewer games undermines your comparison a bit?

Not really. All I'm trying to say is that despite all his injuries - Crosby is pacing towards having decent overall career longevity. His early age start helps.

So I don't think lack of longevity will be a weakness in his resume

 

[JJ68]

the guy records 50 goals 25 assists during his peak like on avg...he's not balanced at all. He mostly stands in one spot and fires a blazer. Played decently in the playoffs.

Jagr would score you 40 while gaining 60 assists on avg. There's no debate. At 33 he recorded 123 points. GOAT winger of all time.

 

[Canadiens1958]

the guy records 50 goals 25 assists during his peak like on avg...he's not balanced at all. He mostly stands in one spot and fires a blazer. Played decently in the playoffs.

Jagr would score you 40 while gaining 60 assists on avg. There's no debate. At 33 he recorded 123 points. GOAT winger of all time.

Challenge is playing like the 2018 playoff Ovechkin during the rest of his career.Slipping back would be a negative.