HOH Top 60 Wingers of All Time

[tarheelhockey]

As big of a gap as there is between Lafleur and Ovechkin in playoff scoring, there's just as big a gap developing in their goal scoring.

Both players have 6 Art Ross relevant seasons, with Lafleur's being a little more significant. But the goal scoring gap now looks like this:

Lafleur 1 2 2 2 3 7

Ovechkin 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 5

That's a HUGE difference in caliber as a goal scorer. As it stands, Ovechkin should pass Lafleur in career goals next season, and he's only 30. He has a good chance at finishing with A LOT more career goals and points than Lafleur.

If this gap continues for an appreciable period into the future, I'd tend to agree that it stops making sense to hold Ovechkin's lack of a strong 20-game run in higher regard than his demonstrated dominance over hundreds and hundreds of games.

 

[bobholly39]

Well we have reached an impass.For me it is a pretty serious weakness against the players he's being compared to.It's all relative.

I think this weakness is much more serious than lack of longevity too.Longevity is nice but it's not crucial neither.People remember the legends based on their highest and their glory.That's the truth in any field, not just sports.

I agree that we have reached an impass.

My issue here is i feel my own arguments are a bit half-hearted because Ovechkin is only halfway into his career. He's still the best goal-scorer in the league. He has so much left to do. You almost seem to be arguing as if his career was already over, and how it doesn't measure up to Lafleur.

If you were to go into a coma and wake up in exactly 2 years and find out Ovechkin just won 2 cups + 2 conn smythes - can you honestly tell me it would shock you?

I fully expect his career to compare very, very nicely to Lafleur at the end of it. He has 6 goal titles now. What if he reaches 9 or 10 (the record is 7 I believe)? What if he ends up topping Gretzky for career goals?

There's still a lot he can do to make it so it's a very easy case of Ovechkin > Lafleur when their careers are over, be it in the playoffs or not. Even for people who value peak/playoffs more than other criteria (as you seem to be arguing).

 

[BenchBrawl]

As big of a gap as there is between Lafleur and Ovechkin in playoff scoring, there's just as big a gap developing in their goal scoring.

Both players have 6 Art Ross relevant seasons, with Lafleur's being a little more significant. But the goal scoring gap now looks like this:

Lafleur 1 2 2 2 3 7

Ovechkin 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 5

That's a HUGE difference in caliber as a goal scorer. As it stands, Ovechkin should pass Lafleur in career goals next season, and he's only 30. He has a good chance at finishing with A LOT more career goals and points than Lafleur.

If this gap continues for an appreciable period into the future, I'd tend to agree that it stops making sense to hold Ovechkin's lack of a strong 20-game run in higher regard than his demonstrated dominance over hundreds and hundreds of games.

I agree but I don't think goalscoring is as important as playoff performance.I could just nitpick their playmaking gap and make Ovechkin look bad:

Top 10 assists

Ovechkin: 6, 6, 10
Lafleur: 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5

It's not really relevant.We already know Ovechkin is a much better goalscorer than Lafleur (but hey, while I'm at it, is he a better goalscorer in the playoffs?).Goalscoring is Ovechkin's castle.It's the backbone of his resume.Of course he's going to be better than almost all players in this range on that point.

Also, to make myself clear, it's obvious Ovechkin's regular season resume will trump Lafleur's due to longevity.Even prime longevity.But what Ovechkin is missing is important and crucial.And what he's missing is pretty much Lafleur's greatest strenght.

 

[BayStreetBully]

As big of a gap as there is between Lafleur and Ovechkin in playoff scoring, there's just as big a gap developing in their goal scoring.

Both players have 6 Art Ross relevant seasons, with Lafleur's being a little more significant. But the goal scoring gap now looks like this:

Lafleur 1 2 2 2 3 7

Ovechkin 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 4 5

That's a HUGE difference in caliber as a goal scorer. As it stands, Ovechkin should pass Lafleur in career goals next season, and he's only 30. He has a good chance at finishing with A LOT more career goals and points than Lafleur.

If this gap continues for an appreciable period into the future, I'd tend to agree that it stops making sense to hold Ovechkin's lack of a strong 20-game run in higher regard than his demonstrated dominance over hundreds and hundreds of games.

I think he needs to be "dominant" though. A cup would help, as well as an Art Ross. But even without a cup or Art Ross, I might be able to see the argument for Ovechkin over Lafleur if he kept up his 50 goal seasons and got into 800 goal territory. BUT:

Even if he doesn't win the Art Ross, I'd need to see him at least be close. As in top 3 finishes. He hasn't done that since 2013. Like BenchBrawl, I'm not as impressed when Ovechkin scores 50 goals/20 assists. I want to see 50 goals/40 assists.

As it stands, both Ovechkin and Lafleur have 5 top-3 Art Ross finishes. If Ovechkin isn't more dominant during his bread and butter (regular season), I fail to see how he'll get above Lafleur, even with 800 goals or more 50 goal seasons.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I agree but I don't think goalscoring is as important as playoff performance.

I would disagree with that. Playoff performance is a good tiebreaker between similar quality players, but it doesn't leapfrog an otherwise lesser player completely over someone who's higher on the ladder. For example, you just said the following upthread:

Ovechkin is already ahead of Bossy in my book.Bossy's offensive peak cannot compete with Ovechkin's.Bossy is a legendary playoff goalscorer and performer, which is why he's in the conversation in the first place.

A couple of years ago, Ovechkin and Bossy had about the same level of offensive portfolio. The fact that Bossy got it done in the playoffs tended to nudge him ahead of Ovechkin -- as seen in this list's ranking of them #8 and #9 respectively. But as you just said, Ovechkin has now surpassed Bossy's offensive peak, and with that the playoff argument becomes kind of irrelevant. It makes the gap a little closer, maybe, but the consensus seems to be that Ovechkin eclipsed Bossy as soon as a clear distinction emerged in their level of dominance as a goal scorer.

The same would apply to Lafleur, if Ovechkin could put some distance between them. Of course that hasn't happened yet, Ovie could break his ankles playing basketball tomorrow and it would all be settled in Lafleur's favor. But hypothetically, if Ovechkin strings together some more big seasons then he'll "Bossy" his way past Lafleur as well.

I could just nitpick their playmaking gap and make Ovechkin look bad:

Top 10 assists

Ovechkin: 6, 6, 10
Lafleur: 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 5

I just don't see a gap in assists having "face value" when you're comparing a dynasty star to a one-man show. Lafleur was a better playmaker than Ovie to be sure, and that is part of the picture here, but the gap in their goal scoring is bigger and IMO more important.

I think he needs to be "dominant" though. A cup would help, as well as an Art Ross. But even without a cup or Art Ross, I might be able to see the argument for Ovechkin over Lafleur if he kept up his 50 goal seasons and got into 800 goal territory. BUT:

Even if he doesn't win the Art Ross, I'd need to see him at least be close. As in top 3 finishes. He hasn't done that since 2013. Like BenchBrawl, I'm not as impressed when Ovechkin scores 50 goals/20 assists. I want to see 50 goals/40 assists.

As it stands, both Ovechkin and Lafleur have 5 top-3 Art Ross finishes. If Ovechkin isn't more dominant during his bread and butter (regular season), I fail to see how he'll get above Lafleur, even with 800 goals or more 50 goal seasons.

I agree with this. Maybe there comes a point where he can compile his way up the ladder (what if he becomes the first to hit 900?) but that seems kind of academic for now.

 

[seventieslord]

I never said Ovechkin was weak in the playoffs, but we're not trying to make him rise from 37th to 29th of all-time, you're trying to make him jump over Guy Lafleur.

I completely agree. This reminds me of what I had to tell people when I was taken to task for criticizing Rocket Richard for being weak defensively. I'm not using this fact to justify him being worse than Bossy, Lafleur, Mahovlich or Brett Hull - It's just why I don't have him ahead of Harvey, Beliveau, Hull, Shore, or Bourque (yes, there was a time not that long ago where he seemed to be the overwhelmingly popular choice for #5 all-time)

I just don't see a gap in assists having "face value" when you're comparing a dynasty star to a one-man show. Lafleur was a better playmaker than Ovie to be sure, and that is part of the picture here, but the gap in their goal scoring is bigger and IMO more important.

But even more important is point production.

Lafleur: 1, 1, 1, 3, 3, 4
Ovechkin: 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4

as prime point producers they are close to equal - the fact that Lafleur did the same thing in the playoffs those six seasons is why I voted him over Ovechkin and why I still would today.

 

[ThreeLeftSkates]

Ovechkin is already ahead of Bossy in my book.Bossy's offensive peak cannot compete with Ovechkin's.Bossy is a legendary playoff goalscorer and performer, which is why he's in the conversation in the first place.

The only player in history to score 50 goals nine times in a row Bossy?

 

[BenchBrawl]

The only player in history to score 50 goals nine times in a row Bossy?

This is very nice, but scoring 50 goals in the 80s is not the same as scoring 50 goals today (of course the value of 50 goals is different each year, not just decade).

 

[ThreeLeftSkates]

This is very nice, but scoring 50 goals in the 80s is not the same as scoring 50 goals today (of course the value of 50 goals is different each year, not just decade).

Five of those seasons were 60 goals. Which, I guess, is even nicer.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Five of those seasons were 60 goals. Which, I guess, is even nicer.

http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1738369

 

[Regal]

I just don't see a gap in assists having "face value" when you're comparing a dynasty star to a one-man show. Lafleur was a better playmaker than Ovie to be sure, and that is part of the picture here, but the gap in their goal scoring is bigger and IMO more important.

I would agree with this for the first half of Ovechkin's career, but not the last few seasons. I think it's pretty clear that Ovechkin has changed his game to focus on goalscoring to the detriment of his assist totals. It's not as if he's producing decent 1st line assist numbers either. You have to go down all the way to number 94 Adam Henrique on the point leader list to find someone with less and he was 203rd in assists! I don't see the point in focusing on goals when the assist totals are so scarce. It ignores too much of what is going into Ovechkin's goal totals. Point finishes seems like a far more useful comparison.

 

[Sentinel]

Under different circumstances I wouldn't have a problem with low Ovechkin's assists. He likes to score goals more than to pass because he is so good at it. He is now in a legitimate conversation of being a top five bombardier of all time.

But I ultimately judge a player on what he does to help his team win, especially in playoffs and international tourneys. All things considered, I don't think Ovechkin helps his team win as much as Bossy and Lafleur did, especially when it mattered.

 

[daver]

Guy Lafleur is #19 on the HOH all-time list. OV being Top 20 at this point and on the heals of Jagr on the HOH wingers list doesn't seem right. Perhaps he has passed Bossy's regular season resume but I don't think he is clearly ahead of him overall when the playoffs are factored in; certainly not to the tune of "now let's consider Lafleur". Not just yet anyways.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Was there a discussion about Hull vs Selanne? I was surprised to see the Finnish Flash rank ahead, especially by seven spots.

 

[seventieslord]

Was there a discussion about Hull vs Selanne? I was surprised to see the Finnish Flash rank ahead, especially by seven spots.

Yes, lots. Hull took a real hit in round 2 as he was just so much less versatile than the other guys in his rounds.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Serious but random question, how far is Patrick Kane from Dickie Moore? It looks much closer than I expected.Especially if we conservatively project how Kane career could end up, it's not that far-fetched to think Kane will end up on top.

 

[MXD]

Serious but random question, how far is Patrick Kane from Dickie Moore? It looks much closer than I expected.Especially if we conservatively project how Kane career could end up, it's not that far-fetched to think Kane will end up on top.

Without really thinking about it, +- 10 spots.

He passed Bure, and didn't pass St-Louis. Though there's probably eight nor nine players in that situation and only three spots between them.

Kane will almost assuredly pass St-Louis IN THAT LIST. He'll also pass Iginla simultaneously.

I can't really see him NOT passing Moore, unless he regress to a 65pt forward starting from next season. I don't quite think that's happening.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Without really thinking about it, +- 10 spots.

He passed Bure, and didn't pass St-Louis. Though there's probably eight nor nine players in that situation and only three spots between them.

Kane will almost assuredly pass St-Louis IN THAT LIST. He'll also pass Iginla simultaneously.

I can't really see him NOT passing Moore, unless he regress to a 65pt forward starting from next season. I don't quite think that's happening.

That means Kane will most likely end up as a Top 20 (and maybe even Top 15) winger ever.

My point is that he will end up higher on the all-time list of his position than Keith.

We can debate the relative difficulty/value of achieving a Xth or Yth ranking in list A or B, but assuming they are roughly equivalent in the Top 15-25 range, Kane would be the top player from that Chicago core.

There's also a difference between what happens from now on and what happened in the ''dynasty'' years for Chicago.Many people think Keith was more valuable, but I think it's pretty close.Kane scored so many clutch points.It's not sure Chicago wins any of those cups without Kane.Same with Keith.

Edit: I mixed up this thread with the Keith vs Kane vs Toews thread, hence me bringing up Keith in this post.

 

[MXD]

That means Kane will most likely end up as a Top 20 (and maybe even Top 15) winger ever.

My point is that he will end up higher on the all-time list of his position than Keith.

We can debate the relative difficulty/value of achieving a Xth or Yth ranking in list A or B, but assuming they are roughly equivalent in the Top 15-25 range, Kane would be the top player from that Chicago core.

There's also a difference between what happens from now on and what happened in the ''dynasty'' years for Chicago.Many people think Keith was more valuable, but I think it's pretty close.Kane scored so many clutch points.It's not sure Chicago wins any of those cups without Kane.Same with Keith.

Edit: I mixed up this thread with the Keith vs Kane vs Toews thread, hence me bringing up Keith in this post.

Will reply in appropriate thread.

 

[daver]

Is OV now in the #5 or # 6 spot in most people's minds?

 

[MXD]

Is OV now in the #5 or # 6 spot in most people's minds?

Can't rank him ahead of Lafleur. Playoffs.

 

[seventieslord]

Yep, I think he definitely passed Bossy. Cook/Makarov are really subjective judgments as they're tough to directly compare to him. But then to 5th, no. Too wide a gap in playoff records.

 

[tarheelhockey]

What's Ovechkin's ceiling? Is there anyone in the top-5 who is simply too far ahead of him to be surpassed in a realistic scenario? Howe seems to me to be obviously of a higher caliber, no matter what Ovie does during his late career. Anyone else?

 

[seventieslord]

What's Ovechkin's ceiling? Is there anyone in the top-5 who is simply too far ahead of him to be surpassed in a realistic scenario? Howe seems to me to be obviously of a higher caliber, no matter what Ovie does during his late career. Anyone else?

He could pass Lafleur if he posts a freakish number of regular seasons to outweigh the playoff difference, or really just do anything in the playoffs at all.

To pass Jagr for 4th it would take both, not just one or the other. (Jagr himself doesn't really have a "signature' run, but he has a couple of cups where he was "good", the 1996 semis run, a few 7-13 game playoffs where he was "great", and a couple times where he at least helped his team to round 3/4. With 2.5x as many playoff games & points as Ovechkin to date, that's a long record of making the playoffs, advancing in the playoffs, and being a reason why you did)

To pass Richard for 3rd it would take both, but even more in the playoffs. He's already Richard's equal as a regular season scorer, and can begin to top him starting this season, but that's a slow process and he's aging, and he'll never approach his playoff legacy, the best he can do is a couple cups as a leading player and a smythe in one of them, along with two more excellent regular seasons, then it begins to be fathomable.

To pass Hull.... it would only take some token playoff achievement to match him on that side, but in the regular season... hmm, nothing he can realistically do is going to put himself ahead as a point producer, not based on best 3 (Hull ahead 338-306 in VsX) , 5 (538-504), 7 (738-689), 10 (1001-936) or any number of seasons, really. It's not really close in VsX, and if it was, Ovechkin doesn't even have the "but he scored more goals" tiebreaker.

Let's assume Ovechkin's 2016 was not indicative of age-related decline. In 2015 he posted a VsX of 94. Let's say he does that again this year and the next two. And that's really the best we could possibly expect from him as a point producer right now, agree? Hull would still, at that point, be ahead by 3% in 10-year VsX, and progressively more ahead the more you focus on absolute primes and peaks, up to a 10% edge in best three seasons. And that will always be the case, unless Ovechkin puts up a couple more 100+ VsX seasons, and who could possibly envision that happening at this point?

I'd put Richard as the highest standard he could possibly top.

 

[Trafalgar Sadge Law]

Can someone explain to me or direct me to the thread that led to Iginla being ranked so high? He's a great player but I just can't see any argument that justifies top 25 all time good, especially ahead of a guy like Bure. This isn't just me being an Oilers homer as I hate the Canucks and Flames equally either. I get that he has the Art Rosses, Rocket Richards, 1st team all star selections and all that, but he accomplished those in the least talented era in NHL history, in years with near 2011-2012 levels of suckage for right wing talent, competing against the likes of Markus Naslund/Rick Nash for his awards and the likes of Bill Guerin/Alexei Kovalev for his all star selections. That's a bunch of players who can not, should not, and will not make the Hall of Fame. A player like Bure getting second team all star selections competing against Selanne and a non-Capitals Jagr to me is far more impressive than getting a first team all star selection against Bill Guerin of all people (again this is coming from an Oilers fan, as much as he was a fan favourite he just wasn't a truly great player). To me the 30-40 range near players like Robitaille and Kariya is more in line than just 2/3 spots behind Kurri and Hull, who accumulated their accolades in seasons where right wingers weren't awful. Martin St. Louis also seems a bit too high for the same reasons as Iginla, Art Ross in an era completely devoid of talent, all star selections around when Neal/Gaborik were getting the same, but at least he had a few years against a real star like Ovechkin and some monstrous playoff runs.