Will Ovi breaking Gretzky's goalscoring record change or influence his legacy?

[Scandale du Jour]

Gretzky’s records weren’t usually discussed in hockey circles because they were thought to be unbreakable, including 894.

No one is even close to that number, not even legends like Jagr or Howe who played in the NHL for over 25 years and aged as well as they possibly could.

As great as Ovi was at his peak, his legacy as a player really took off in the past 10 years after the 2012 season. All the experts in the media were telling us that Ovi was finished.

Since then, he has achieved the following:
- 1x Hart
- 7x Rocket
- 1x Stanley Cup
- 1x Conn Smythe
- Climbed to 3rd place all time, pretty much guaranteed to retire 1st or 2nd at worst.

That’s a 1st ballot HHOF resume from age 27-37, far removed from his peak.

Of... course? I fail to understand what you are trying to argue here.

My point was:

- Numbers in hockey are not as "mythical" as in baseball. At least, not scoring totals. So, there are not tied to one's legacy as much. Gretzky is not linked
- Despite that, it would boost his legacy tremendously because it is a great accomplishment + it will be heavily marketed... as it should be!
- I do not think it impacts his all-time ranking if he does beat it. Like, the difference between finishing with 885 or 900 is negligible in the grand scheme of things. If you move him up (if he beats the record) or down (if he stalls at like 889), I think it is a filmsy argument.

Nothing you said addresses any of what I said. Maybe you are responding to my other post. In that case, well, your numbers kinda confirmed what I was saying. He "specialized" after a little dip in overall production and it resulted in a goal scoring "resurgence" but his points total never reached what they were during his peak. Of course, it is an HOF resume, but it is regression due to usage AND capacities nonetheless. If anything, it shows how unbelievable his peak was when the resume you posted is "regression".

 

[AM]

It’s hard to evaluate such things. In Gretzky s time, games ended tied. He probably could have had a few more in such a situation. You know seeing as they changed the rules to not allow 4-4 because of Gretzky. 3 on 3 would probably have helped him out abit.

 

[BobCole]

It’s hard to evaluate such things. In Gretzky s time, games ended tied. He probably could have had a few more in such a situation. You know seeing as they changed the rules to not allow 4-4 because of Gretzky. 3 on 3 would probably have helped him out abit.

Thought they changed the rules to not allow 3 on 3?

 

[Ivo]

While this might be a little extreme, Ovi is also an extremely sheltered player that simply doesn't produce overall given his unique situational playing time and things could get ugly in Washington at some point.

Just to be clear, when I say that he should be playing in the KHL, I didn’t mean he’s not a good enough player for the NHL, but that that is where he belongs as a person.

 

[Video Nasty]

Disclosure: Intention in this post is observant, emotionless commentary on how the current and future crowd might view the aftermath of Ovechkin breaking Gretzky's record.

I've always thought that it would affect the perception of his career more among people who are newer fans to hockey or those in the future who may not have been born yet or watched a game.

For the active audience that is easily influenced or hasn't formed their own opinion, I think there has also been a power with having his name associated on a near daily basis whenever he passed a legend on his way up the all-time list. In a way, there is some mythical fable building occurring as we speak. He's 20 goals from being the third player ever with 800, 22 from passing Howe, and preparing his final assault on Gretzky's mark. As someone who wouldn't mind Gretzky keeping the record, I'm not immune to how rad it is to witness this chase.

That being said, I think most have made up their mind by this point. Support for Ovechkin being the greatest goal scorer ever became really vocal when he reached 600. Their stance obviously does not change as of now.

Others who favor Gretzky considering he owns so many goal related records while passing first, Lemieux, and the usual handful or so of other contenders, most are unlikely to change regardless of what happens.

So that brings us to the future, those discussing legends that they didn't follow in real time or only caught the tail end of their careers. There will be a very interesting, vocal crowd who are going to scratch their heads when looking at just raw numbers and no context, and wonder why the guy who broke Gretzky's goal record, won 3 Harts and was runner up 2 more times, 3 Pearson/Lindsays, 9 Rockets, a Cup/Smythe, and whatever final raw numbers he puts up is behind his contemporary that he also directly won a Calder over.

P.S. Please don't quote my prior sentence and tell me why. That's not what I'm saying.

 

[ottawa]

His legacy will already be that he is the greatest goal scorer ever.

Beating Gretzky's record would more just cement the legacy, rather than change anything about it.

It will definitely change it, it'll go down in the history books.

 

[UConn126]

I'm not sure whether it changes his legacy. Whether he catches Gretzky or not, he's still the greatest goal scorer of his generation, and among the best all time. Potentially the best ever given a lot of his goals came in a time when scoring league-wide was down, and he lost a crap load of games to lockouts and the pandemic. Him winning a Cup was huge in cementing him as an all-time great, and while I'm not particularly a fan of the Caps, I would love to see Ovi catch the scoring record as a fan of the sport.


IMO, what poses a bigger risk to his legacy is all the off-ice stuff pertaining to recent current events, but we're not supposed to get into that here.

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

Except Gretzky did it while recording almost 2,000 assists… not 600.

Also didn't Gretzky notably say something along the lines of, paraphrased, being bored scoring, and he changed his game to be more of the guy that setup the plays?

Like Gretzky purposefully tried to stop scoring as many goals himself to become a better playmaker.

Maybe I'm misremembering the quote, but I felt like he said something like that. Someone please correct me here.

(not diminishing what any other player has done, but Gretzky was definitely something else)

 

[WhalerTurnedBruin55]

The only thing that really changes is the record books.

Ovechkin unparalled is the best goalscorer long term during his career amongst any of his peers.

The goalnumber is only important for the recordbooks; but push comes to shove, the guy with the higher number will keep his name next to that stat.

The fact that anyone might even come close to a Gretzky record is neat to watch. And far more intriguing than Patrick Marleau usurping Gordie Howe's record.

Personally, I'm fine with Ovechkin trying, and overall, if he doesn't make it, it'll be fun to see the next player that potentially is in the conversation (whomever that may be in the future).

 

[Alexander the Gr8]

Of... course? I fail to understand what you are trying to argue here.

My point was:

- Numbers in hockey are not as "mythical" as in baseball. At least, not scoring totals. So, there are not tied to one's legacy as much. Gretzky is not linked
- Despite that, it would boost his legacy tremendously because it is a great accomplishment + it will be heavily marketed... as it should be!
- I do not think it impacts his all-time ranking if he does beat it. Like, the difference between finishing with 885 or 900 is negligible in the grand scheme of things. If you move him up (if he beats the record) or down (if he stalls at like 889), I think it is a filmsy argument.

Nothing you said addresses any of what I said. Maybe you are responding to my other post. In that case, well, your numbers kinda confirmed what I was saying. He "specialized" after a little dip in overall production and it resulted in a goal scoring "resurgence" but his points total never reached what they were during his peak. Of course, it is an HOF resume, but it is regression due to usage AND capacities nonetheless. If anything, it shows how unbelievable his peak was when the resume you posted is "regression".

I’m not arguing with you, just putting things back in their context. I only disagree with you on one point.

I feel like there is a strong emphasis on stats. I mean, just look at HF.

Basic stats like points and goals are known and tracked by the entire hockey fandom, and many fans even track advanced stats.

And yeah, Ovi finishing at 880 or 900 won’t change my opinion of him. If his body fails close to the finish line, the vast majority of people will still consider him to be the greatest goalscorer of all time.

 

[Scandale du Jour]

I’m not arguing with you, just putting things back in their context. I only disagree with you on one point.

I feel like there is a strong emphasis on stats. I mean, just look at HF.

Basic stats like points and goals are known and tracked by the entire hockey fandom, and many fans even track advanced stats.

And yeah, Ovi finishing at 880 or 900 won’t change my opinion of him. If his body fails close to the finish line, the vast majority of people will still consider him to be the greatest goalscorer of all time.

Oh, you are right, there is a lot of emphasis on numbers. My point was mostly that there is no mythical single number to beat in hockey like 60, 61, 714 and then 755 were in baseball... or hitting for ,400 or 56 straight games with a hit (well, maybe 50 goals in 50 games).

There are plateaus, accomplishments, benchmarks, that's for sure. I guess perception will change once Ovechkin is really close to the record. I do not think his goal total will be remembered by all, but people sure will remember he is the one who scored the most. That, in itself, is indeed a legacy booster. I just don't think the number itself (or holding the record) comes with the same clout it does in baseball. Different cultures.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Four comments:

1. If Ovechkin gets the all-time record for goals, regardless of how he gets there (see point #3), absolutely it will influence his legacy among casual fans. Most hockey fans don't do deep analysis, so holding a significant all-time record will boost his legacy. (In fifty years, Ovechkin's one-sentence summary could be something like "all-time leader in goals scored, won three Hart trophies, won an Art Ross and Conn Smythe, big hitter, greatest or 2nd greatest LW in NHL history").

2. Regardless of whether Ovechkin gets to #895, I don't think it changes much about his career (beyond superficial bullet points). Career totals have always been a poor way to evaluate a player. Besides, Ovechkin has already surpassed Gretzky by any reasonable measure of era-adjusted goals.

@Weztex and @bobholly39 cover this well in their posts. If you don't already have Ovechkin ranked as the greatest goal-scorer all-time when he's at 880-something goals, whether he gets another ten goals beyond that is superficial and arbitrary. To make an analogy - I've seen people say that Peter Bondra didn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame after 2006 (when he was at 498 goals), but he magically became a HOF'er in 2007 (when he was terrible but scored five more goals). This "line in the sand" type of thinking is completely arbitrary and emphasizes numbers for the sake of numbers. (Stats can be the byproduct of playing well, but they're not the end goal in and of themselves).

3. That being said, it would also depend on how Ovechkin reaches #895. If he scores, say, 45, 40 and 35 goals in consecutive seasons (always playing at a high level), that would make his career more impressive because instead of having a 17 year prime, that means that he'd have a 20 year prime. Very few players have performed as well as Ovechkin in his mid 30's, and if he plays at an all-star level for three more years, he's getting into Gordie Howe and Ray Bourque territory.

On the other hand, if Ovechkin suddenly begins struggling and hangs on for six years as a powerplay specialist (otherwise relegated to the third-line ), and gets 20 goals per year this way, that adds nothing to his legacy. (This is how Dave Andreychuk reached 600 goals). If Ovechkin scores 40-45 goals for two years and retires with ~860 goals, I'd find that more impressive than if he reaches 895 goals, playing six years as a geriatric Dave Andreychuk clone. What counts is the level of performance.

4. I don't think much changes for Gretzky if Ovechkin reaches #895. For the superficial fans (who are looking for bullet points, rather than any deep analysis) - Gretzky still has another 60 records, so he'll be fine. For those doing a deeper dive - a lot of regulars on the History forum (myself included) already don't consider Gretzky the greatest goal-scorer in NHL history (so it's not like he's losing the top spot in this category). Ovechkin will continue to climb the all-time rankings if he continues to play at an all-star level, of course, but what counts is his level of performance (rather than the career totals for the sake of career totals).

 

[Alexander the Gr8]

Oh, you are right, there is a lot of emphasis on numbers. My point was mostly that there is no mythical single number to beat in hockey like 60, 61, 714 and then 755 were in baseball... or hitting for ,400 or 56 straight games with a hit (well, maybe 50 goals in 50 games).

There are plateaus, accomplishments, benchmarks, that's for sure. I guess perception will change once Ovechkin is really close to the record. I do not think his goal total will be remembered by all, but people sure will remember he is the one who scored the most. That, in itself, is indeed a legacy booster. I just don't think the number itself (or holding the record) comes with the same clout it does in baseball. Different cultures.

I think it's because the all-time HR records in baseball are attainable, and also because of the man who currently holds these records. If Wayne Gretzky was the Barry Bonds of hockey, the entire hockey community would be rooting for Ovechkin to set a new record, to make the record "legitimate" again.

 

[PaulD]

Four comments:

1. If Ovechkin gets the all-time record for goals, regardless of how he gets there (see point #3), absolutely it will influence his legacy among casual fans. Most hockey fans don't do deep analysis, so holding a significant all-time record will boost his legacy. (In fifty years, Ovechkin's one-sentence summary could be something like "all-time leader in goals scored, won three Hart trophies, won an Art Ross and Conn Smythe, big hitter, greatest or 2nd greatest LW in NHL history").

2. Regardless of whether Ovechkin gets to #895, I don't think it changes much about his career (beyond superficial bullet points). Career totals have always been a poor way to evaluate a player. Besides, Ovechkin has already surpassed Gretzky by any reasonable measure of era-adjusted goals.

@Weztex and @bobholly39 cover this well in their posts. If you don't already have Ovechkin ranked as the greatest goal-scorer all-time when he's at 880-something goals, whether he gets another ten goals beyond that is superficial and arbitrary. To make an analogy - I've seen people say that Peter Bondra didn't deserve to be in the Hall of Fame after 2006 (when he was at 498 goals), but he magically became a HOF'er in 2007 (when he was terrible but scored five more goals). This "line in the sand" type of thinking is completely arbitrary and emphasizes numbers for the sake of numbers. (Stats can be the byproduct of playing well, but they're not the end goal in and of themselves).

3. That being said, it would also depend on how Ovechkin reaches #895. If he scores, say, 45, 40 and 35 goals in consecutive seasons (always playing at a high level), that would make his career more impressive because instead of having a 17 year prime, that means that he'd have a 20 year prime. Very few players have performed as well as Ovechkin in his mid 30's, and if he plays at an all-star level for three more years, he's getting into Gordie Howe and Ray Bourque territory.

On the other hand, if Ovechkin suddenly begins struggling and hangs on for six years as a powerplay specialist (otherwise relegated to the third-line ), and gets 20 goals per year this way, that adds nothing to his legacy. (This is how Dave Andreychuk reached 600 goals). If Ovechkin scores 40-45 goals for two years and retires with ~860 goals, I'd find that more impressive than if he reaches 895 goals, playing six years as a geriatric Dave Andreychuk clone. What counts is the level of performance.

4. I don't think much changes for Gretzky if Ovechkin reaches #895. For the superficial fans (who are looking for bullet points, rather than any deep analysis) - Gretzky still has another 60 records, so he'll be fine. For those doing a deeper dive - a lot of regulars on the History forum (myself included) already don't consider Gretzky the greatest goal-scorer in NHL history (so it's not like he's losing the top spot in this category). Ovechkin will continue to climb the all-time rankings if he continues to play at an all-star level, of course, but what counts is his level of performance (rather than the career totals for the sake of career totals).

Great post

 

[Hockey 4 Life]

Don't see ovi breaking the record. The caps and ovi look like time has finally caught up to them.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

If ovechkin isn't shooting he literally does nothing

 

[NickyFotiu]

I would not be shocked if Ovi does not get there (or if he does). Getting older is not easy. As far as Gretz goes its not a big deal. Wayne never thought of himself as a goal scorer.

 

[Alexander the Gr8]

Don't see ovi breaking the record. The caps and ovi look like time has finally caught up to them.

Based on a 2 game sample size?

 

[KCC]

Don't see ovi breaking the record. The caps and ovi look like time has finally caught up to them.

People have been saying this for the last 5 years and he has always turned it around throughout the season. It will eventually happen but we will see. Elite goal scorers are streaky. They go ice cold and then get a bunch.

 

[wetcoast]

Ovie is old and slowing down .. but lets not take what he looks like now and paint that as his whole career.

Dudes entering his 17th season.

I'm not as I think that he is the greatest goal scorer of all time but his blip last year was basically a blip, his goal scoring aside he just isn't really all that great anymore as an overall player and that's been for quite a while really.

 

[wetcoast]

Just to be clear, when I say that he should be playing in the KHL, I didn’t mean he’s not a good enough player for the NHL, but that that is where he belongs as a person.

Fair enough and I agree but that's also not a hockey viewpoint either way.

 

[Holymakinaw]

Anyone noticing how invisible Ovechkin has been to start the year? It's early, obviously, but...........it's called AGING. I know some of ya think he's superhuman or something but he's actually just a regular man. Look for a massive downturn from him, as early as this year.

 

[Schennanigans]

No matter what he finishes with Mario and Wayne are the better players.

 

[SnipeShowJB11]

Except Gretzky did it while recording almost 2,000 assists… not 600.

Yup. Ovi is a one of many GOAT's. I will never look at him as some great guy though b/c of his pathetic leadership buddies.

 

[PaulD]

If ovechkin isn't shooting he literally does nothing

yep

and did you see that powerplay ? Yikes

It was 26th last season. Be lower this season if last night was any indication.

No matter what he finishes with Mario and Wayne are the better players.

the list is longer than that