Jagr vs Ovechkin vs Crosby: Who is the best offensive player

[GreatGonzo]

It's possible, but even taking out '11, '12 and '13, he had a 1.35 PPG in the rest of his career games up to '13-14, so to go below 1.26 when it looked like he was peaking would have been unusual for him, though it is within the realm of natural variance. And even if he put up only a point per game in the 212 games he's missed in his career, his career PPG would only drop to 1.23, so I don't buy the idea that his career PPG makes him look better because he missed games. His consistency is what's kept it above his peers.

I never suggested it makes him look better, it’s purely about the context of games played. Well ya his PPG is higher because of the less games played while still producing. Crosby had a 1.61 PPG in 2011. No one can honestly say he would have maintained that kind of production. It’s nice to think about. It’s nice to imagine, but difficult to prove.

Crosbys PPG isn’t a product of minimal games played. But it’s hard to argue that it might be lower if he hadn’t been injured multiple times. Even a 1.23, that would put him 11th all time. And the more and longer he will play, that will go down with time. It’s only natural

There are two players ahead of Crosby in terms of GP and PPG and a ton of those close enough to be beneath him have less GP.

Since ‘06, the next closest PPG is Malkin, who has also missed considerable time during his career. The next is Ovechkin who has played 168 more games than Crosby, Patrick Kane is the next. Crosby has played a bit more games than both Malkin and Kane, but no surprise he’s produced at a higher rate.

It’s not a question of Crosby’s production. I’m sure he would still lead all players in PPG, but it’s difficult to suggest that it would be as high.

 

[Regal]

Well his PPG was 1.40 through the 13/14 season for his career, it has dropped to 1.28 (I was incorrect about 1.26). If you think about it, him playing an extra 112 games (amount he missed from 11-13) definitely has him closer to 1.2 than 1.3 (when you also take into account him aging, going through 2 Cup runs, and drop in production over these past 5-6 years). He would be 10th-all time in PPG and just a hair above Malkin, maybe even lower.

The talk about his production and his shiny PPG that is always used as a trump card is most likely gone. Because his lead over 2nd place is not enough to make it into an argument for Crosby, and 10th all-time in PPG isn't as good of an argument as 6th. Basically, his calling card of pace/production, one of his main arguments, is gone.

Except the only way his career PPG goes down is if, during those extra games he scored under 1.28 PPG, which is possible, but that would mean that he plays all those games well under what his career PPG was at the time. That's what seems to trip people up. The fact that his PPG would likely go down with more games in those partial seasons doesn't actually mean his career numbers automatically go down. In fact, his numbers would have to go down significantly in these years to not actually have a positive effect on his numbers. In 10-11 for example. He had 66 points in 41 games. Say he ends the season with 120 points. That's still 54 points in 41 games, or a 1.32 PPG, which would raise his career numbers. The reason his PPG has gone down considerably since 13-14 is because he got older and league scoring decreased. The bulk of his missed games though were at his peak. For him to keep 6th place on the all time PPG list for those extra 112 games, he only needed to score 128 points in those games, or a 1.14 PPG. That seems likely. To be at 7th place, he only needed to score 108 points in those 112 games. It's very unlikely he wouldn't have done that.

 

[Regal]

I never suggested it makes him look better, it’s purely about the context of games played. Well ya his PPG is higher because of the less games played while still producing. Crosby had a 1.61 PPG in 2011. No one can honestly say he would have maintained that kind of production. It’s nice to think about. It’s nice to imagine, but difficult to prove.

Crosbys PPG isn’t a product of minimal games played. But it’s hard to argue that it might be lower if he hadn’t been injured multiple times. Even a 1.23, that would put him 11th all time. And the more and longer he will play, that will go down with time. It’s only natural



Since ‘06, the next closest PPG is Malkin, who has also missed considerable time during his career. The next is Ovechkin who has played 168 more games than Crosby, Patrick Kane is the next. Crosby has played a bit more games than both Malkin and Kane, but no surprise he’s produced at a higher rate.

It’s not a question of Crosby’s production. I’m sure he would still lead all players in PPG, but it’s difficult to suggest that it would be as high.

Except mathematically, it's unlikely that happens. Crosby didn't need to maintain 1.61 PPG that season to keep his current career PPG. He only needed to score 1.28 in the remaining games. Yes it's natural for career PPG to go down over time as a player ages. Crosby's will go down with more games from this point. But you're equating this with missed time in his prime which is very different. It's actually more likely Crosby's career PPG would be slightly higher had he played out '08, '11, '12 and '13. I used the idea of him scoring at a point per game pace over his missed games as an extreme to show why this would have little effect on his numbers so far. Because he almost assuredly would have scored much more than that.

 

[sdf]

Having such garbage like ovechkin on the ice, is like the oposite team have a power play

 

[daver]

Nope. He won it, doesn't mean he deserved it. Those are 2 different things.

I hope you find the validation you're seeking for.

The history books won't have an asterix beside it indicating that you didn't think he deserved it. That's the bottomline here according to you. A win is a win.

It's ironic that you can list that playoff run as not even his in his Top 5 playoff runs for his career yet it is so triggering for you. If you have taken the time to decide he didn't deserve it in 2016, then certainly you are aware of his clear best playoff resume of his era and of the three players in the poll.

 

[daver]

Are people actually arguing that Crosby's career PPG would be lower if he played more games between 2010 to 2013?

His career PPG, and the gap between that and OV, speaks for itself. Any doubts about that are easily erased when looking at their playoff PPGs which is even more impressive for Crosby given he played many more games and many more games in the tougher later rounds, which according to the some means your PPG goes down as you play more games. Oh, the irony.

 

[bobholly39]

Are people actually arguing that Crosby's career PPG would be lower if he played more games between 2010 to 2013?

His career PPG, and the gap between that and OV, speaks for itself. Any doubts about that are easily erased when looking at their playoff PPGs which is even more impressive for Crosby given he played many more games and many more games in the tougher later rounds, which according to the some means your PPG goes down as you play more games. Oh, the irony.

No, it wouldn't. But to be fair - it also wouldn't change a whole lot for the positive. If he played every single game he missed during the 2011, 2012 and 2013 season - and if we assume his ppg in those games missed are 1.68 (the highest ppg he reached in any year, which was only over ~22 games in 2012) - his career ppg goes from 1.28 to 1.32. So - this is under optimal conditions. If you tamper your expectations more conservatively for those games missed - you go down to 1.31 career ppg, maybe even 1.30.

So we're talking about a 0.03 to 0.04 difference in career ppg. Not exactly earth shattering.

I think the value of those peak seasons - if seen to completion - aren't really tied to career ppg all that much.

 

[daver]

oh jesus christ

Ovechkin scored 134 points over 84 games for a 1.6 PPG from March 2009 - February 2010

Crosby scored 134 points in 83 games from March 2010 - April 2010, a 1.61 PPG

considering crosby played over seasons because he was injured, there is a GREAT chance that his PPG falls because history has shown that he couldn't keep his pace up.

OV played straight through

anything else you wanna know?

So according to you, the metric for establishing "peak level" is PPG, not points, over an 83 game stretch over two different seasons.

How about we add another 10 games? That should be even better right?

Crosby scored 149 points, 71 goals over 93 games from November 2010 to December 2011

NHL.com Stats

Ovechkin scored 145 points, 71 goals over 93 games from January 2009 to February 2010

NHL.com Stats

Three things:

1. CROSBY MATCHES OV's GOAL TOTAL, THE IDEA THAT OV WAS THE BETTER PEAK GOALSCORER IS NULLIFIED

2. YOU CLEARLY ARE OK WITH USING PPG AND GPG WHEN GAMES ARE MISSED

3. IT IS LAUGHABLE THAT YOU THINK THE RECORDS BOOKS ARE GOING SHOW THE "BEST PPGs OVER AN 83 GAME SAMPLE OVER MULTIPLE SEASONS"

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

You have a crystal ball? Does it show an alternate universe where he wasn't hurt and won the Ross? Btw, his PPG fell to an insignificant amount. There's an argument that he doesn't outscore his own team mate in Malkin (which happened the following year)

Crosby wouldn't have any of his Rockets had OV not been injured/missed games.

There’s no argument Crosby doesn’t outscore Malkin in 07-08. He had a 1.37 ppg at the time of his injury. And then had a 1.35 ppg over 20 playoff games. It would have been extremely close with ovechkin,

 

[Monk]

NHLPA Player Poll 2019-20

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

So Crosby gets the edge for offensive play because of his “defense”, oh man Daver.....

You can’t build a case for Crosby based on your opinion. You also have no crystal ball in front of you to suggest that you can guarantee that. Crosby isn’t deployed as a shut down center, having some responsibility defensively never took away his offense or how he is supposed to contribute.

If you are going to use such logic to boost Crosby, better use that fact that for a few years, Jagr was the lone man when it came to the Pens offense. No Malkin(Francis) on the second line, no Lemieux as his center, he drove his line and the offense.

Again, Daver deciding what context to use and ignore.

Who’s to say Malkin wouldn’t have still lead the Pens in scoring? It goes both ways. Maybe bring something with facts behind it then wishful thinking.

Malkin was not out scoring Crosby in 07-08
72 in 53 1.36
106 in 82 1.29
27 in 20 1.35
22 in 20 1.10

 

[daver]

No, it wouldn't. But to be fair - it also wouldn't change a whole lot for the positive. If he played every single game he missed during the 2011, 2012 and 2013 season - and if we assume his ppg in those games missed are 1.68 (the highest ppg he reached in any year, which was only over ~22 games in 2012) - his career ppg goes from 1.28 to 1.32. So - this is under optimal conditions. If you tamper your expectations more conservatively for those games missed - you go down to 1.31 career ppg, maybe even 1.30.

So we're talking about a 0.03 to 0.04 difference in career ppg. Not exactly earth shattering.

I think the value of those peak seasons - if seen to completion - aren't really tied to career ppg all that much.

Noone is arguing this anyways so no need to be "fair".

 

[bobholly39]

There’s no argument Crosby doesn’t outscore Malkin in 07-08. He had a 1.37 ppg at the time of his injury. And then had a 1.35 ppg over 20 playoff games. It would have been extremely close with ovechkin,

Your statements are way too definitive. There's always an argument.

The most likely scenario would have had Crosby finish second in between Ovi's 112 and Malkin's 106.
It's plausible Crosby's pace goes up, and he beats Ovi and finishes first
It's also plausible Crobsy's pace goes down, ans Malkin edges him out

Just to use rounded off probabilities - you could say 60% odds for scenario 1, and 20% each for scenarios 2 and 3.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Your statements are way too definitive. There's always an argument.

The most likely scenario would have had Crosby finish second in between Ovi's 112 and Malkin's 106.
It's plausible Crosby's pace goes up, and he beats Ovi and finishes first
It's also plausible Crobsy's pace goes down, ans Malkin edges him out

Just to use rounded off probabilities - you could say 60% odds for scenario 1, and 20% each for scenarios 2 and 3.

This was also a pre ankle injury Crosby. Remember that

 

[Kranix]

Are these three the best after the big four???
I voted Jagr, he's my favorite player of all time. But Ovi and Sid are in my top 5. Anybody here actually a big fan of both Ovi and Sid? I know I am.

 

[wetcoast]

Are these three the best after the big four???
I voted Jagr, he's my favorite player of all time. But Ovi and Sid are in my top 5. Anybody here actually a big fan of both Ovi and Sid? I know I am.

Sure I think most people are fans of both guys, just not fans or the others players fanatic club.

Both guys are hands down top 20 players of all time and are trending to both end up in the top 10, how can any actual fan of hockey not be fans of watching them play?

 

[Kranix]

I'm gonna say there's a big 7. Wayne, Gordie, Orr, Mario, Jagr, Ovi, Sid.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

I'm gonna say there's a big 7. Wayne, Gordie, Orr, Mario, Jagr, Ovi, Sid.

Ovechkin doesn’t belong unless we’re talking goal scoring. Even this year. 66 points in 67 games.

 

[Kranix]

Ovechkin doesn’t belong unless we’re talking goal scoring. Even this year. 66 points in 67 games.

I'm talking straight best of all time dawg. Goals are mega importanto in hockey. He's only what, 85 goals behind Gordie in 600 less games??

 

[filinski77]

Ovechkin doesn’t belong unless we’re talking goal scoring. Even this year. 66 points in 67 games.

You realize Ovechkin is 34 years old right? Paced out for 82 games this year:

Ovechkin = 58 goals - 81 points
Crosby = 32 goals - 94 points

And Ovechkin is almost 2 years older than Crosby is, which post-30 plays a significant factor in a players decline curve.

People shit on Ovi all the time, but don't realize how old the dude is and how much hockey he's played. If Crosby is *only* putting up 20-25 goals and a point/gp at 34 years old, no-one's going to be bashing him for that, cause it'll still be amazing for his age, yet so many posters love to use this as a negative for Ovechkin, despite it actually being one of the best 34 year-old seasons in NHL history.

 

[Kranix]

How many skaters are in on the Richard every season after age 30

 

[Fataldogg]

And even if he did, who cares? Peak OV tilted the ice more than Crosby ever did so it's an irrelevant point anyway. OV didn't need to play defense because the puck was never in his own zone. Crosby had to play D because he wasn't good enough to keep the puck in the offensive zone as much as OV.

This is what I dont get either.

Jagr has been criticized too. Jagr is arguably the best puck possession player in NHL history, he would have the opposition pinned in the defensive zone for 90% of his shift. I think Jagr did that more so than peak Ovechkin.

The best defense is a good offense. If the puck is rarely in your zone, you dont need to worry about that element of your game.

 

[Varan]

The history books won't have an asterix beside it indicating that you didn't think he deserved it. That's the bottomline here according to you. A win is a win.

It's ironic that you can list that playoff run as not even his in his Top 5 playoff runs for his career yet it is so triggering for you. If you have taken the time to decide he didn't deserve it in 2016, then certainly you are aware of his clear best playoff resume of his era and of the three players in the poll.

Do you not read what people post to you. I said it's an anomaly to the books because everyone in the hockey world knows that it wasn't deserved, but alas, I really don't want to continue this dead argument.

Triggering? You brought up the playoffs in the first place for no reason.

For the 3rd bolded, what was the point of bringing this up in an offensive debate? Why do you need so much approval.

 

[daver]

For the 3rd bolded, what was the point of bringing this up in an offensive debate? Why do you need so much approval.

Oh you don't remember?

Your insistence that an Art Ross win is an Art Ross win regardless of how much you win by. Seems rather silly to ignore Jagr's 20 point win in 98/99 or Crosby's 20% win in 13/14 in a thread about the "BEST OFFENSIVE PLAYER" don't you think?

 

[Varan]

So according to you, the metric for establishing "peak level" is PPG, not points, over an 83 game stretch over two different seasons.

How about we add another 10 games? That should be even better right?

Crosby scored 149 points, 71 goals over 93 games from November 2010 to December 2011

NHL.com Stats

Ovechkin scored 145 points, 71 goals over 93 games from January 2009 to February 2010

NHL.com Stats

Three things:

1. CROSBY MATCHES OV's GOAL TOTAL, THE IDEA THAT OV WAS THE BETTER PEAK GOALSCORER IS NULLIFIED

2. YOU CLEARLY ARE OK WITH USING PPG AND GPG WHEN GAMES ARE MISSED

3. IT IS LAUGHABLE THAT YOU THINK THE RECORDS BOOKS ARE GOING SHOW THE "BEST PPGs OVER AN 83 GAME SAMPLE OVER MULTIPLE SEASONS"

1. LOL. That was not the peak of his goal-scoring. I was just highlighting his peak as an overall player and point producer. [mod]

He has had stretches where he has scored 49 goals in 52 games dating from the end of 2013 to the start of 13/14 (GPG of 0.94) -- where has Crosby matched that?. He scored 65 over a season. He's also held a pace of 0.75 GPG for MUCH longer than Crosby (133 goals in 176 games). He's scored 95 in 121 from Dec '08 - Feb '10, a 0.79 GPG

On a very smaller scale, he scored 14 goals in 7 games. When has Crosby done that?

When has Crosby matched any of those runs?

The argument that Crosby is better at offense at his peak is null and void. He has no argument over OV. It is clear that they are tied in production. Credit to OV for lasting his peak longer, therefore as well as his goals. So OV > Crosby at peak.

2. I'm not okay with the games missed, but his best stretches were in that time frame. Obviously, point goes to OV for maintaining/exceeding his pace while playing every game (or close to every)

3. How else are you going to compare peaks? You have to show statistical analysis. We can use both peaks from start to finish, it's just that Crosby was injured during his peak, so what the hell else am I going to use to show his play during his peak?

smh daver you're better than this