Jaromir Jagr vs. Alexander Ovechkin

[frisco]

Compare that to his regular season numbers...he isn't even PPG in the playoffs...

I get people like him since he turned into a clown but he was a support guy

Ovechkin has averaged 6.0 points/game in the playoffs over the past four seasons. At that established level of performance, he'll need another ten years to match Jagr's playoff totals.

My Best-Carey

 

[Midnight Judges]

I think that’s fair if you’re looking at players through the lens of their value as franchise players, but not so much when it comes to their abilities. You can try to get a sense of what a player was still capable of based on their play in the other league when considering their longevity. And lots of guys have reasons beyond “quitting to play lesser competition”. I wouldn’t fault someone like Ovechkin for leaving early if he wanted to raise kids in Russia, or someone like Bobby Hull for becoming the highest paid athlete in North America by going to the WHA.

I look at total career contributions/value as the criteria for greatness. As in, if you were an NHL GM and you knew you were going to get every goal, every assist, every pass, every hit, etc. - no more and no less than what actually happened - who do you take? ("best" more closely equates to peak or ability IMO).

Ability is merely the possibility to accumulate total career contributions/value more quickly, but if those contributions aren't realized, then the on-ice results aren't actually happening, and the player does not deserve credit for things not done.

A player can squander their ability by being a butthead. The mental side of sports is extremely important, and is reflected in this way. It is an inextricable aspect of any athlete. Jagr did a little of that, but for the most part I think he contributed to the best of his ability. Or a player can have their ability reduced by injuries. That's unfortunate, but it does lessen their actual greatness. This happens to every hockey player to some degree or other, even Ovie. The game is a grind.

I do not think lesser leagues are a good measuring stick for all-time greats. IMO Hull's decision was good for money but bad for legacy. Like the KHL, the WHA had lesser competition. I don't know how anyone could view the anomalous results of players who crossed over to the WHA and conclude anything other than this: They had less than world class depth of talent.

I would fault Ovechkin for going to the KHL. It's simply not the top competition. I'd be more inclined to give him credit for scoring 30 goals per season in the NHL, even if he was great in the KHL.

 

[CokenoPepsi]

Ovechkin has averaged 6.0 points/game in the playoffs over the past four seasons. At that established level of performance, he'll need another ten years to match Jagr's playoff totals.

My Best-Carey

Ovechkin lead his team to a Cup and won the Conn Smythe.

Jagr couldn't get his team out of the second round...

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Ovechkin lead his team to a Cup and won the Conn Smythe.

Jagr couldn't get his team out of the second round...

Don't you know Jagr won a cup in 1991 as the 10th best player on his own team?

 

[Dessloch]

Ovechkin lead his team to a Cup and won the Conn Smythe.

Jagr couldn't get his team out of the second round...

Thats not a good argument.

Ovi had 15 years on virtually the best team in the NHL and made it as far as the conference finals once.

Why should we expect Jagr to succeed even once carrying some sh** Penguins and Rangers teams to the playoffs at the lowest seeds? I mean if Ovi needed 15 years on stacked teams to reach the conference finals once, it would take a miracle for Jagr to turn any his Lemiex-less, Capr or Rangers teams into Stanley cup contenders by himself.

It can definitely be just as big accomplishment to carry a lesser team to the playoffs against the odds, as leading a stacked contender to the cup finals!

Its just a flawed argument to make.

 

[centipede2233]

Ovie was not a convincing smythe choice either. Kuznetsov was just as important offensively, scored the most important goal to eliminate Pittsburgh and played the more important position and a plus minus of 12 to Ovechkin’s plus 8. Ovie won that smythe based on name recognition over kuznetsov.

 

[frisco]

Ovechkin lead his team to a Cup and won the Conn Smythe.

Jagr couldn't get his team out of the second round...

Jagr made it past the 2nd round five times. As a 20-year old in 1992 he scored three straight GWG goals, two to finish off the first overall Rangers and then in Game One of the semi-finals vs. Boston, all with Mario out with an broken hand. He had 24 points in 21 games that year as a passenger. If you're trying to tout Ovechkin over Jagr, best leave out the playoffs altogether if you want to help your case.

My Best-Carey

 

[steleh]

I don't think a power forward's about being "punishing", I think a power forward's about being difficult to knock off the puck and to contain.

For example, I wouldn't consider Peter Forsberg a power forward even though he was very punishing.

You define a power forward as someone who is difficult to knock off the puck and hard to contain? Did i understand you correctly?
Yet in the next sentence you say you don't consider Peter Forsberg to be a power forward?

That's an interesting take to say the least

 

[filinski77]

Thats not a good argument.

Ovi had 15 years on virtually the best team in the NHL and made it as far as the conference finals once.

Why should we expect Jagr to succeed even once carrying some sh** Penguins and Rangers teams to the playoffs at the lowest seeds? I mean if Ovi needed 15 years on stacked teams to reach the conference finals once, it would take a miracle for Jagr to turn any his Lemiex-less, Capr or Rangers teams into Stanley cup contenders by himself.

It can definitely be just as big accomplishment to carry a lesser team to the playoffs against the odds, as leading a stacked contender to the cup finals!

Its just a flawed argument to make.

I agree with a good bit here. Jagr was a good playoff performer, who often lead his team in points/goals. If someone wants to make the argument that Ovechkin is better in the playoffs, there's more fair ways of doing so when comparing to their teams.

For example, here's Jagr's goal and point rankings compared to his team (I excluded his bad years when he was pushing 40 - as that's not fair.

Pittsburgh	Points	Goals
1991​	7​	9​
1992​	4​	3​
1993​	6​	4​
1994​	2​	2​	(Lemieux #1 in points and goals)
1995​	2​	1​
1996​	2​	1​	(Lemieux #1 in points)
1997​	1​	1​
1998​	1​	1​
1999​	2​	2​
2000​	2​	2​
2001​	3​	8​
Non-Pitt	Points	Goals
2003​	1​	3​
2006​	2​	5​
2007​	2​	2​
2008​	1​	1​

To summarize for Jagr (and note, the brackets are his ranking if we remove Lemieux)

	Points	Goals
# times 1st	4 (6)	5 (6)
# times 2nd	7 (5)	4 (3)

To summarize for Ovechkin

	Points	Goals
# times 1st	9​	9​
# times 2nd	3​	4​

Something like this clearly shows that Ovechkin was much more important to his teams in the playoffs than Jagr was, without getting into small digs around Jagr's compete level, or how far the team as a whole went etc.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

I agree with a good bit here. Jagr was a good playoff performer, who often lead his team in points/goals. If someone wants to make the argument that Ovechkin is better in the playoffs, there's more fair ways of doing so when comparing to their teams.

For example, here's Jagr's goal and point rankings compared to his team (I excluded his bad years when he was pushing 40 - as that's not fair.

Pittsburgh	Points	Goals
1991​	7​	9​
1992​	4​	3​
1993​	6​	4​
1994​	2​	2​	(Lemieux #1 in points and goals)
1995​	2​	1​
1996​	2​	1​	(Lemieux #1 in points)
1997​	1​	1​
1998​	1​	1​
1999​	2​	2​
2000​	2​	2​
2001​	3​	8​
Non-Pitt	Points	Goals
2003​	1​	3​
2006​	2​	5​
2007​	2​	2​
2008​	1​	1​

To summarize for Jagr (and note, the brackets are his ranking if we remove Lemieux)

	Points	Goals
# times 1st	4 (6)	5 (6)
# times 2nd	7 (5)	4 (3)

To summarize for Ovechkin

	Points	Goals
# times 1st	9​	9​
# times 2nd	3​	4​

Something like this clearly shows that Ovechkin was much more important to his teams in the playoffs than Jagr was, without getting into small digs around Jagr's compete level, or how far the team as a whole went etc.

Yeah, and for all that importance his playoff career amounts to nothing more than 15 years of early exits and getting carried by a hot goalie/defender combo to a Cup.

Crosby never led his team in scoring in a Cup winning year, does that make Ovechkin a better playoff performer than him too?

There's a certain level of irony in Ovechkin fans crying about how he had to do it all himself while ignoring how bad the Rangers, Caps and Mario free Pens teams were.

You think its a coincidence that the Pens went from 42 wins to 28 when Jagr left? Or the Rangers went from 27 wins to 44?

 

[filinski77]

Yeah, and for all that importance his playoff career amounts to nothing more than 15 years of early exits and getting carried by a hot goalie/defender combo to a Cup.

Crosby never led his team in scoring in a Cup winning year, does that make Ovechkin a better playoff performer than him too?

There's a certain level of irony in Ovechkin fans crying about how he had to do it all himself while ignoring how bad the Rangers, Caps and Mario free Pens teams were.

You think its a coincidence that the Pens went from 42 wins to 28 when Jagr left? Or the Rangers went from 27 wins to 44?

"Yeah, and for all that importance his playoff career amounts to nothing more than 15 years of early exits and getting carried by a hot goalie/defender combo to a Cup."
-> Clearly you don't understand the reason why I provided stats on the team relative point/goal finishes. Ovechkin, Crosby, and Jagr have never carried a team to a cup win by themselves. This is hockey, and is one of the hardest sports to have a single player carry a team in. It's clear that Jagr and Ovechkin were both good (or better) playoff performers over their careers, but looking at how they do relative to their team is valuable (especially when it's extremely hard to compare points across era's, and across different series since there's not an even distribution of teams played against).

"Crosby never led his team in scoring in a Cup winning year, does that make Ovechkin a better playoff performer than him too?"
-> Nope, never said that, nor was it the intention. What it does make Ovechkin though, is more valuable offensively to the Caps than Crosby was to the Pens over the course of their careers. And is also adds some valuable context when comparing team success across 2 different players on 2 different teams.

"There's a certain level of irony in Ovechkin fans crying about how he had to do it all himself while ignoring how bad the Rangers, Caps and Mario free Pens teams were."
-> First off, don't lump me in for crying about anything, as at no point was I at all.
-> Secondly, if you go back and look at the analysis I did, you'll see that I was comparing performance relative to your team (ie. if your team is bad, there should be no reason you're not consistently leading them in points/goals), PLUS: my results actually show that for the most part, Jagr was the best offensive player across his non-Pittsburgh playoff attempts. So no reason to bring this up, as you're arguing with yourself.

"You think its a coincidence that the Pens went from 42 wins to 28 when Jagr left? Or the Rangers went from 27 wins to 44?"
-> Never said that. As you can see from my analysis, it's pretty clear that Jagr from 1994 -> 2000 was one of Pittsburgh's best playoff performers.
-> Although, I do think you're wrong, since the way you're phrasing this comment, you're making it seem like the Pens did bad because Jagr left, or that the Rangers did good because Jagr came in.
-> To start it's clear that the Penguins were totally capable of winning Cups (2 of them) before Jagr became one of their top offensive talents. And the single biggest reason the Pens stopped winning playoff games after Jagr left was because of losing a high-quality healthy Lemieux. And then on top of that, they lost a significant amount of other really high-quality players other than just Jagr as well.
-> For the Rangers, your 44 wins number is irrelevant. The Rangers had their most playoff success (2 conference final losses and 1 cup final loss) after Jagr had left. They only won 11 playoff games with Jagr.

 

[dr robbie]

It's really weird to me that people are using Jagr as being one of the best players in the playoffs on a stacked Pens roster in his first 2 years as a slight against him somehow. I remember watching those series thinking he was playing phenomenally and I was absolutely ecstatic that the Pens got him at 5th (and he actually came over) and he contributed so quickly to their success. I guess it's just a different perspective/expectation?

 

[Beau Knows]

"Crosby never led his team in scoring in a Cup winning year, does that make Ovechkin a better playoff performer than him too?"

What is going on with this point that's being debated? None of Ovechkin, Jagr or Crosby have led their teams in scoring in a Cup winning year.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Ovie was not a convincing smythe choice either. Kuznetsov was just as important offensively, scored the most important goal to eliminate Pittsburgh and played the more important position and a plus minus of 12 to Ovechkin’s plus 8. Ovie won that smythe based on name recognition over kuznetsov.

The Capitals had three late third period or OT back-breaking game-winning goals in that Pens series:

Vrana from Ovechkin (game 5. 3rd period, 4 minutes left.)

Ovechkin from Backstrom (game 3. 3rd period, 1 minute left)

Kuznetsov from Ovechkin (Game 6. OT)

 

[centipede2233]

The Capitals had three late third period or OT back-breaking game-winning goals in that Pens series:

Vrana from Ovechkin (game 5. 3rd period, 4 minutes left.)

Ovechkin from Backstrom (game 3. 3rd period, 1 minute left)

Kuznetsov from Ovechkin (Game 6. OT)

Ok……

 

[Midnight Judges]

Yeah, and for all that importance his playoff career amounts to nothing more than 15 years of early exits and getting carried by a hot goalie/defender combo to a Cup.

Uh, what? Ovie won the Conn Smythe with 15 goals and 27 points. Calling that being carried is beyond absurd. Dude was excellent.

I don't know what is going through your brain here man.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Jagr made it past the 2nd round five times. As a 20-year old in 1992 he scored three straight GWG goals, two to finish off the first overall Rangers and then in Game One of the semi-finals vs. Boston, all with Mario out with an broken hand. He had 24 points in 21 games that year as a passenger. If you're trying to tout Ovechkin over Jagr, best leave out the playoffs altogether if you want to help your case.

My Best-Carey

How many times did Jagr pass the 2nd round without Lemieux? One time as a 40 year old passenger on Boston. Playoffs don't help Jagr unless you are giving him credit for riding Lemieux's coattails.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

It's really weird to me that people are using Jagr as being one of the best players in the playoffs on a stacked Pens roster in his first 2 years as a slight against him somehow. I remember watching those series thinking he was playing phenomenally and I was absolutely ecstatic that the Pens got him at 5th (and he actually came over) and he contributed so quickly to their success. I guess it's just a different perspective/expectation?

1992 sure, but you think Jagr was 1 of the best players in the playoffs in 1991? When he was 8th on the pens in scoring with 13pts in 24 games (3 goals)? A 1 way offensive winger who's barely 0.5 PPG is 1 of the best players, yeah that's definitely a different perspective.

 

[nowhereman]

How can it ever be a coin toss when one player has 500 points more than the other? In 4-6 years it could potentially be a coin toss, but at the moment Ovi is not even close, neither is Crosby I should say.

If total points does not matter for the "greater all time player" list, we could already crown Lemieux the king over Gretzky btw!

What kind of strawman is that? Why would you crown Lemieux over Gretzky when Gretzky was the better player, not only in terms of raw production but also in overall ability?

And if we're going strictly by total points and making leaps in judgement, I suppose that means that Ron Francis, Mark Recchi, Joe Thornton, Adam Oates and Doug Gilmour are all better than Crosby and Ovechkin, right? In reality, Sid and OV are not only in the same conversation as Jagr, there are very good cases to have them both ahead (I have OV and especially Sid ahead of Jagr). Jagr's all-time points are very impressive but they aren't everything.

Jagr played on garbage teams during his prime. Kind of unfair. Ovechkin has played on a contender for nearly his whole career and has managed to get out of the second round once. Albeit, a cup win.

I still consider Ovechkin's lack of playoff success a bit of a mark against him or, at least, I'm not going to ignore the success of other players to prop OV up. I also think his lack of success had less to do with bad luck/teammates than most Caps fans would concede (play style, position, leadership style, overall/two-way game, etc.). But Jagr's reputation as a primadonna who was difficult to coach and quit on his teammates is enough for me to go with OV. Even though I consider both to be good playoff performers, I don't think either is your ideal leader the way Beliveau, Sid, Messier, Lidstrom, etc. were. But I like OV's passion and intensity more in that position and would prefer him leading my team's troops.

 

[MacMacandBarbie]

Thats not a good argument.

Ovi had 15 years on virtually the best team in the NHL and made it as far as the conference finals once.

Why should we expect Jagr to succeed even once carrying some sh** Penguins and Rangers teams to the playoffs at the lowest seeds? I mean if Ovi needed 15 years on stacked teams to reach the conference finals once, it would take a miracle for Jagr to turn any his Lemiex-less, Capr or Rangers teams into Stanley cup contenders by himself.

It can definitely be just as big accomplishment to carry a lesser team to the playoffs against the odds, as leading a stacked contender to the cup finals!

Its just a flawed argument to make.

Not once have I looked at the Stanley Cup winner and thought OV’s caps were better besides the year they won the cup. What a silly take.

 

[Felidae]

It's really weird to me that people are using Jagr as being one of the best players in the playoffs on a stacked Pens roster in his first 2 years as a slight against him somehow. I remember watching those series thinking he was playing phenomenally and I was absolutely ecstatic that the Pens got him at 5th (and he actually came over) and he contributed so quickly to their success. I guess it's just a different perspective/expectation?

Maybe it's because at the time there were no expectations of Jagr to become what he was. So Jagr's performance was perceived much more positively back then.

In hindsight though, his first few years are pretty underwhelming compared to what he would become. Especially when you compare how other players of similar calibre started off their careers. Crosby and Ovechkin for instance, were superstars right out of the gate, finishing among the leaders in goals and/or points.

Imagine if Crosby's rookie season was around 50-60 points. Great for anyone else, dissapointing for someone touted as one of the best prospects of all time.

I think if Jagr had a similar level of expectation back then, people would have wanted more the first few years.

 

[Felidae]

I never said Jagr didn't deal with physical and/or mental stress/challenges, etc.

The point wasn't it was physically easier for Jagr, it was that Lemieux was the focus since day one in terms of opposition game plans, media spotlight, blamed for losses, etc while Jagr was shielded from all of that.

Fair point. Though I would argue

And as soon as he had that responsibility, we saw what happened. OV and Crosby had to deal with that pressure since day one. Considering Jagr couldn't handle it at his peak, I doubt he would have handled it as a rookie.

Ok sorry, it was the first 7 seasons of Jagrs career, not 10. Doesn't change the overall point.

As soon as he had that responsibility?

The first time was in 1994-95. As far as I'm aware, there were no rumblings about attitude issues.

In fact, I don't think there were any until a year or two before the 21st century. By that time he had already won 3 Art Ross trophies.

Even if there were, it certainly didn't affect his on ice performance.

 

[Dessloch]

Not once have I looked at the Stanley Cup winner and thought OV’s caps were better besides the year they won the cup. What a silly take.

Not a silly take considering the Caps have gained probably the most points of all teams in the regular season. Certainly on balance one of the most talented teams during the whole Ovi era - one of the reasons for the big thread on the main forum of course, which you of course think is silly because of your bias.

Even that thread is pointless since 30% of the posts are: "there are 32 teams in the league, hard to win". Well not all 32 teams have the same chance to win the cup every season, which is exactly the point of that thread. I am sure nobody would be coming for Ovi if he spent 17 years in Arizona.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

To summarize for Jagr (and note, the brackets are his ranking if we remove Lemieux)

	Points	Goals
# times 1st	4 (6)	5 (6)
# times 2nd	7 (5)	4 (3)

Minor correction but Jagr led his team in goals (in the playoffs) six times (1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2008) and if we back out Lemieux, seven times (those six years plus 1994).

Similarly he led his team in points (in the playoffs) six times (1997, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2007, 2008) and if we back out Lemieux, eight times (those six years plus 1994 and 1996).

You didn't show the results for assists but I count five leads for Jagr (1997, 1998, 2003, 2006, and 2008 - plus 2001 if you back out Lemieux) and four leads for Ovechkin (2008, 2010, 2019 and 2022) - I wouldn't have guessed it was so close in the assists category.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

In terms of who was more important to their teams, here's some data to consider:

Player	GP	G	A	P	Team	G%	A%	P%
Alex Ovechkin (actual)	147​	72​	69​	141​	388​	18.6%​	17.8%​	36.3%​
Alex Ovechkin (stop at 2019)	128​	65​	61​	126​	346​	18.8%​	17.6%​	36.4%​
Jaromir Jagr (actual)	208​	78​	123​	201​	666​	11.7%​	18.5%​	30.2%​
Jaromir Jagr (stop at 2008)	169​	77​	104​	181​	546​	14.1%​	19.0%​	33.2%​
Jaromir Jagr (1992 - 2008 only)	145​	74​	94​	168​	451​	16.4%​	20.8%​	37.3%​

The 3rd through 5th columns shows the actual goals, assists and points they scored. The 6th column shows the number of goals their teams scored (this number is not adjusted for any games the players miss). The last three columns show their "participation rate" in their team's offense.

Ovechkin scored or assisted on 36.3% of his team's playoff goals over the span of his career. If you stop at 2019, the result is very slightly higher, at 36.4%. (If you want to maximize Ovechkin's contribution percentage, we'd cut it off at 2016, in which case he'd be at 40.2% - but then he loses his Stanley Cup, his Conn Smythe, and his only playoff run that went past the 2nd round).

Jagr scored or assisted on 30.2% of his team's playoff goals over the span of his career. If you exclude his post-KHL comeback (where he scored 20 points in 39 playoff games from ages 39 to 43), the percentage rises to 33.2%. If you also exclude his first season (getting limited minutes on a deep team), his percentage rises to 37.3% (but he loses one of his two Stanley Cup victories). If I cherry-pick the absolute best run for Jagr (1994 to 2008), his contribution percentage is 42.5%, which (believe it or not) is approaching Gretzky/Lemieux territory - but this excludes both of his Stanley Cups.

For context (consider other great, recent playoff performers) - Joe Sakic comes in at (approximately) 37%, Sidney Crosby at 36%, Peter Forsberg at 35% (would be higher if he didn't miss so much time), and Evgeni Malkin and Patrick Kane at 32%. These are all career averages, and I can pick better results over shorter stretches for any of them.

Summary - it's true that Ovechkin contributed a greater percentage of his team's offense during the playoffs over the span of both their careers (36.3% vs 30.2%). But it's not really an apples-to-apples comparison (as this includes Jagr getting limited minutes on a deep team at age 18, and his post-KHL comeback from ages 39 to 43). Jagr is ahead looking just at their respective peaks or primes. Ovechkin, now 36, has only slowed down slightly. He's not going to surpass Jagr's contributions during their respective primes, but he can surpass him looking at their entire careers if he keeps up his high level of play over the next several years.