Do You Consider Ovechkin Generational?

[JasonRoseEh]

...Or you’re young enough to never have seen (or remember seeing) a truly generational player actually play in his prime.

Again, if you’re going to call Ovechkin generational, then you have to put Bobby Hull there too.

These players now are elite superstars. They’re not generational.

Ovechkin is better than Hull and a better goal scorer. This generation will go down as the Crosby/Ovechkin generation, that's the definition of generational. How are people still arguing this?

 

[JasonRoseEh]

If you are talking to me, then it's easy to see why today's goalies have the higher %s than in the 90s: there are fewer stars in the league who can put the puck past them than there were in the 90s. Other than Crosby, Ovy, Malkin, Kane, Kucherov, and McD nobody stacks up to the 90s stars, from Gretzky and Lemieux on down.

Ovechkin is certainly a generational player. In part because today's generation sucks.

Oh f*** off, where do you guys get this nonsense? The talent level of the NHL is higher than it's ever been from the net out. Ovechkin would put up 70-90 goals per year in the 80's and 90's.

 

[ThePlanet]

If you are talking to me, then it's easy to see why today's goalies have the higher %s than in the 90s: there are fewer stars in the league who can put the puck past them than there were in the 90s. Other than Crosby, Ovy, Malkin, Kane, Kucherov, and McD nobody stacks up to the 90s stars, from Gretzky and Lemieux on down.

Ovechkin is certainly a generational player. In part because today's generation sucks.

Hardly.

The average player in the league nowadays is much better. Faster, stronger, better defensively, and need to bring a consistent effert each night or they will be replaced. Today's superstars have far less time to make decisions with the puck, must make plays on the fly with precision, amazing skill, and above all else, speed. On top of that, the goalies are larger, and more technically sound, which makes today's stars that much more incredible. The game evolved from top to bottom, and to say that this generation sucks is absolutely false. Yeah, the Jim Carson era was fun, but if players fail to improve their game, and evolve with the sport, they'll find themselves out of the league.

 

[JasonRoseEh]

And this is where you digress into styles of play and contributions rather than actual output.

Ovechkin is no playmaker, he's not a two-way centerman. But what he is, is being arguably the best scoring winger of all-time. This is what makes him generational, his consistency as the top scorer when most top scorers tend to have 2-3 great seasons only to falter away into the averages following those seasons.

Ovechkin has a real chance at being top 3 in goals scored and top 15 in total points.

Ovechkin has an outside chance at being 1st overall in goals scored and top 10 in total points.

And that's beyond all other metrics were he will finish 1st overall.

Elite superstars are included in each generation by the dozens. Guys achieving those kinds of results only come once in every couple of generations.

He's objectively a playmaker and a very good one at that.

 

[xNogaitx]

He's objectively a playmaker and a very good one at that.

Sure, he does pass the puck well. My point wasn't to say he can't do that. More to say that he was generational based on his sniping winger abilities that are unmatched.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

When you watch Gretzky, Lemieux, and Jordan dominate like no other in their sports history; the word 'generational' means something significantly different.

It's like they belonged into another league.

If you started watching hockey sometime after 2000, I could see why you would make a case Crosby belongs with those guys, so it legitimizes this era.

 

[Sentinel]

Oh **** off, where do you guys get this nonsense? The talent level of the NHL is higher than it's ever been from the net out. Ovechkin would put up 70-90 goals per year in the 80's and 90's.

Sure. "190 goals" is even more realistic.

 

[Sentinel]

Hardly.

The average player in the league nowadays is much better. Faster, stronger, better defensively, and need to bring a consistent effert each night or they will be replaced. Today's superstars have far less time to make decisions with the puck, must make plays on the fly with precision, amazing skill, and above all else, speed. On top of that, the goalies are larger, and more technically sound, which makes today's stars that much more incredible. The game evolved from top to bottom, and to say that this generation sucks is absolutely false. Yeah, the Jim Carson era was fun, but if players fail to improve their game, and evolve with the sport, they'll find themselves out of the league.

Hilarious. Aging Jagr, Sakic, Selanne, and Brodeur were consistently above the average level of today's league, just like they were above the average level of the 90s league. Unless you think they somehow got BETTER with age.

Millennials...

 

[AlexBrovechkin8]

40 pages -- and counting -- arguing if (arguably) the greatest goal scorer to ever pick up a hockey stick is a generational talent. We should collectively shake our heads in shame.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I don't like the term. It makes no sense to me to talk about generational players when the best talents sometimes come in bunches.

Ovechkin to me is probably the best goalscorer in the history of the game. If you use a term that possibly exclude him from the top tier of players, it's a crap term.

 

[ThePlanet]

Hilarious. Aging Jagr, Sakic, Selanne, and Brodeur were consistently above the average level of today's league, just like they were above the average level of the 90s league. Unless you think they somehow got BETTER with age.

Millennials...

Yes, those players played very well into their later years, but why would you not expect star players to perform above average before father time takes it's toll?

Defense, goaltending, and training are the three main things that have improved since you returned from from the war in Korea.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Gretzky has five retro-Rockets.

You're right, my apologies. I included the fact that he's number one overall as another season.

 

[shtorm2005]

When you watch Gretzky, Lemieux, and Jordan dominate like no other in their sports history; the word 'generational' means something significantly different.

Someone who will dominate today the same way as Gretzky and Lemieux did back then, will be hundreds times better than Gretzky and Lemieux.

 

[pvr]

Ovechkin is better than Hull and a better goal scorer. This generation will go down as the Crosby/Ovechkin generation, that's the definition of generational. How are people still arguing this?

You might say and believe that, but Hull was outscoring his peers by greater margins, led the league as much, and unfortunately missed 3-5 years of goalscoring at the end of his career which conceivably could have put him close to 800 goals +/-.

They are very comparable right now, and arguably Hull still is ahead. Ovechkin could be reasonably be expected to overtake him in the next year or two with more Richards.

 

[JasonRoseEh]

Sure, he does pass the puck well. My point wasn't to say he can't do that. More to say that he was generational based on his sniping winger abilities that are unmatched.

I mean, I get it but why are we mincing words here? Alexander Ovechkin is a generational hockey player, full stop, why is this even being debated?

 

[JasonRoseEh]

Hilarious. Aging Jagr, Sakic, Selanne, and Brodeur were consistently above the average level of today's league, just like they were above the average level of the 90s league. Unless you think they somehow got BETTER with age.

Millennials...

All great players but if you're arguing they were at an elite level late in their careers you're going to lose that argument, badly.

I really don't want to approach this at any serious level as it can only be used to denigrate the players listed here, but only one of them is an absolute all time great and that's Jagr. The rest are some of the best of their eras no doubt but again, if you're saying the league currently doesn't have players like this then I'd put forward you simply do not watch hockey.

It's almost like Ovechkin still isn't absolutely dominating the league and is an elite player any longer. Oh what's that, he is? Good thanks. But of course, this era of hockey just sucks and that's why he's dominant. GTFO.

 

[george14]

Jagr was carrying around a mediocre team with no Lemieux a majority of his peak. From ‘95-‘01 he was a Hart Finalists 5 times, winning once. He won 5 scoring titles. And won 2 Pearsons while being a finalist 4 times. His peak was insane, he was a much more dominant player than Crosby was.

Really?

From 2012 - 2017 Crosby was a Hart finalist 4 times, winning it once. He won an Art Ross, 2 Pearsons, 2 Smythe's, 1 Richard. Add 2 Cups, Olympic Gold, World Championship Gold, World Cup Gold. Captained all of those teams and I believe won 2 Tourney MVPs.

You want to say his peak was "much more dominant"? I would disagree. You can argue it was more dominant, but not by much.

 

[Randyne]

Someone who will dominate today the same way as Gretzky and Lemieux did back then, will be hundreds times better than Gretzky and Lemieux.

Most likely he will fail human DNA test

 

[GreatGonzo]

Really?

From 2012 - 2017 Crosby was a Hart finalist 4 times, winning it once. He won an Art Ross, 2 Pearsons, 2 Smythe's, 1 Richard. Add 2 Cups, Olympic Gold, World Championship Gold, World Cup Gold. Captained all of those teams and I believe won 2 Tourney MVPs.

You want to say his peak was "much more dominant"? I would disagree. You can argue it was more dominant, but not by much.

Yes, really.

Once again, Jagr won 5 Art Rosses. He was Hart Finalists 5 times, and a Lester Pearson Finalists 4 times, winning the Hart once and the Pearson twice, in a 7 year span. ALL on mediocre teams for the most part. and trust me on this(because I can tell you clearly didn’t watch those Pen teams), they weren’t even close to the caliber teams that Crosby had. So yes, his peak was clearly more dominant. Crosby’s injuries did play a part in that, but Being healthy is part of dominance.

Playoffs and international success are certainly helped by a well rounded team overall(being the n stacked Canadien teams certainly helps). Jagr, as a Czech still won a gold medal in ‘98 and was still their best playoff performer from ‘98-‘01 by a WIDE margin. Not his fault he didn’t have a Malkin or Kessel to help carry the load in the post season.

 

[Nsjohnson]

Stop. 40 pages is insane.

This is not a drill.

STOP.

 

[Hippasus]

Peers are irrelevant. This is a list of the best goal scoring campaigns. For instance Wayne has several in there starting at 92.

I don't need to be informed about leage wide scoring. But still. If a non hockey fan is told Ovechkin is the best scorer ever, and then checks that list. There will be confusion.

Found it: Most Goals in One Season by NHL Players

If one decides who the best goal-scorers are based on raw statistics, one is letting circumstance dictate the outcome. If one looks at relative domination against a fixed reference point, such as the production of an average first-liner in the season a certain player, one can determinately compare across eras. There is no need to look at league-wide scoring in this scenario.

 

[Kimota]

He is not Generational. He IS an Entire Generation. Him and Sid pretty much.