WilliamRanford
Registered User
- Sep 24, 2008
- 176
- 0
Ovechkin vs Lindsay
- Thread starter WilliamRanford
- Start date
Dark Shadows
Registered User
WilliamRanford
Registered User
- Sep 24, 2008
- 176
- 0
My assumption was career, based on the 2nd best of all-time assertion.
OV does have 5 straight AST's, but Lindsay had 9 in 10 years, so the peak discussion is admittedly much more interesting already.
OV does have 5 straight AST's, but Lindsay had 9 in 10 years, so the peak discussion is admittedly much more interesting already.
Certainly Ovechkin for peak performance.......although he simply hasn't played long enough to match Lindsay for career value.
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
If AO retired right now, he'd be behind Lindsay.
That said, I think when all is said and done, AO will be at least 2nd barring catastrophe.
That said, I think when all is said and done, AO will be at least 2nd barring catastrophe.
WilliamRanford
Registered User
- Sep 24, 2008
- 176
- 0
I agree. If he continues his pace, he will be a lock for 2nd best LW.
Though I will say that Kariya was looking to have that kind of potential as well, and then Suter got into his Delorean and changed the future. Lindros could have entered the convo for top 10 C of all-time if he didn't get scrambled as well. It's amazing how quickly the can't-miss 'generational players' can fall by the wayside.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Kariya was never as good as Ovechkin though. I don't think he would have passed Lindsay even with a healthy career. I'm not even sure if he would have reached Frank Mahovlich level - maybe in the regular season, but Mahovlich is ranked the 3rd best NHL LW largely because of what he did in the playoffs. (I'm purposely omitting Kharlamov because his ranking is all over the board).
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
JackSlater
Registered User
- Apr 27, 2010
- 18,124
- 12,790
I would already put it as essentially a toss up, perhaps leaning toward Ovechkin. Ovechkin clearly has the peak already locked up, and Lindsay's longevity is not overly impressive. As long as Ovechkin doesn't fall off the map I can't imagine him being lower than Lindsay.
WilliamRanford
Registered User
- Sep 24, 2008
- 176
- 0
I do agree with you, but I think Kariya gets underrated a little bit. His prime was mostly during the dead puck era, first Mario and Gretz and then a stunning late decade Jagr. He had some 2nd and 3rd place point finishes in there, if I remember correctly. That's some decent results against all-time greats. OV's put up his Arts against Joe Thornton, the Sedins, and younger Crosby. Not sure if they're directly comparable, but Kariya was an impressive player before that Suter hit.
Here's points per game over first 5 years by LW:
http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...at=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points_per_game
That Kariya's only 0.09 PPG behind OV when his first 5 years were 94-99, is very, very impressive.
Last edited:
WilliamRanford
Registered User
- Sep 24, 2008
- 176
- 0
Now that is some hyperbole.
Winning one playoff round in your first 5 years isn't exactly the stuff of legends. If he doesn't turn his ship around, he could be the next Dionne (49 playoff GP in 18 seasons). He's at a fairly large inflection point in his career, where he could end up either a top 20 great, or just another good player. What separates greatness from goodness in the NHL, whether we like it or not, is postseason success.
Well, I'm pretty sure I already stated, "/thread", but I guess I'll be polite and respond anyway.
I agree with you that team success in the post season is important, and if I were voting for who to put in the Hall of Fame, my vote would go to Lindsay as he has had the more distinguised career up to this date. But if we're strictly talking about who is better, there is absolutely no question that the choice should be Ovechkin. I'm not sure that Lindsay ever had a single season where he was better than any of Ovechkin's top 4 seasons.
WilliamRanford
Registered User
- Sep 24, 2008
- 176
- 0
Well, if you're not sure, do some research! Let's compare each player's only Art Ross season:
Lindsay 49-50
1949-50 24 Detroit Red Wings NHL 69 23 55 78
Art Ross, won scoring race by 13%, won assists race by 53%!
107 adjusted points
Ovechkin 07-08
2007-08 22 Washington Capitals NHL 82 65 47 112
Art Ross, won scoring race by 6%, won goals race by 25%
122 adjusted points
So, Ovechkin had a better absolute year, but Lindsay had a better relative year against his own peers.
So, to say Lindsay never put up a season as dominant as Ovechkin, I think is plain wrong.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Dionne only had 45 points in those 49 playoff games, despite playing in a higher scoring era. Ovechkin has 40 points in 28 playoff games. Hardly equivalent.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Lindsay's Art Ross season is weird. Has there ever been a player who won an Art Ross by more than 10% who finished so low in the Hart voting? Lindsay's own linemmate, Sid Abel got significantly more Hart consideration than Lindsay did:
1949-50
HART: (18-18-18)
1. Chuck Rayner, NYR G 36 (8-6-0)
2. Ted Kennedy, Tor C 23 (4-3-5)
3. Maurice Richard, Mtl LW 18 (3-2-5)
4. Sid Abel, Det C 10 (0-3-4)
T5. Bill Durnan, Mtl G 6 (2-0-0)
T5. Milt Schmidt, Bos C 6 (1-1-1)
T6. Edgar Laprade, NYR C 3 (0-1-1)
T6. Ted Lindsay, Det LW 3 (0-1-1)
7. Turk Broda, Tor G 2 (0-1-0)
8. Red Kelly, Det D 1 (0-0-1)
Edit: It can partly be explained by the fact that Lindsay scored so few goals relative to his linemates:
Lindsay: 23-55-78
Abel: 34-35-69
Howe: 35-33-68
Abel also played much more defense than his wingers at the time from what I have read, but of course, Ovechkin isn't exactly stellar defensively (and anecdotally, Lindsay was excellent defensively when asked to play that way).
WilliamRanford
Registered User
- Sep 24, 2008
- 176
- 0
On second thought, is OV's peak clearly better?
Top 10 point finishes:
Lindsay: (1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 7, 9)
Ovechkin: (1, 2, 2, 3, 6 (so far this season))
Looks like OV needs to put up 2 or 3 more top 3 seasons before we call the peak for him.
Top 10 point finishes:
Lindsay: (1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3, 7, 9)
Ovechkin: (1, 2, 2, 3, 6 (so far this season))
Looks like OV needs to put up 2 or 3 more top 3 seasons before we call the peak for him.
WilliamRanford
Registered User
- Sep 24, 2008
- 176
- 0
My point was more along the lines of he's at risk of having a career free of post-season relevance, usually defined as going deep over having a good PPG... neither player (has) made it past the 2nd round in their careers.
Last edited:
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
Lindsay's 2nd place finishes were all to his linemate Gordie Howe, twice by huge margins:
1951-52:
1. Gordie Howe*-DET 86
2. Ted Lindsay*-DET 69
3. Elmer Lach*-MTL 65
4. Don Raleigh-NYR 61
5. Sid Smith-TOR 57
While I think the "he played with better linemates" argument is often overdone, when you are outscored by your linemate by such a huge extent, I do think your total is slightly inflated. IMO Lach had the better offensive season in 51-52.
52-53:
1. Gordie Howe*-DET 95
2. Ted Lindsay*-DET 71
3. Maurice Richard*-MTL 61
4. Alex Delvecchio*-DET 59
Wally Hergesheimer-NYR 59
10 points is a huge gap between 2nd and 3rd. But then, Howe was 24 points ahead of Lindsay, so he could have made the difference. Maybe. I'm not sure whether Lindsay or Richard had the better offensive season in 53.
56-57:
1. Gordie Howe*-DET 89
2. Ted Lindsay*-DET 85
3. Jean Beliveau*-MTL 84
4. Andy Bathgate*-NYR 77
5. Ed Litzenberger-CBH 64
Well, Beliveau didn't exactly play with chopped liver and Howe and Lindsay were basically equals here, so I don't think there is much of a Howe effect.
The one thing Ovechkin has over Lindsay by a ton is Hart consideration, but it wasn't Lindsay's fault he was overshadowed by Howe and Red Kelly on his own team. But the thing is, Ovechkin hasn't been overshadowed by anyone in the league, other than this current partial season.
WilliamRanford
Registered User
- Sep 24, 2008
- 176
- 0
That's some great analysis.
One thing that may have hurt Lindsay's Hart vote was his abrasive style of play, which didn't really endear him to opposing teams/fans/sportswriters. In his Art Ross season, he had 141 PIMs, over 2 per game.
In terms of linemates' influence, I think I'll give you 51-52, but that margin in 52-53 is very substantial. And couldn't it be argued that Howe was influenced by Lindsay as well? 5 of his 6 Art Rosses were with Terrible Ted on his left flank.
After Lindsay was traded in 1957, Howe had his longest stretch of being outside of the top 3 scorers in his career. Here's Howe's finishes, with bold being when he played with Lindsay...
1949-50 NHL 68 (3)
1950-51 NHL 86 (1)
1951-52 NHL 86 (1)
1952-53 NHL 95 (1)
1953-54 NHL 81 (1)
1954-55 NHL 62 (5)
1955-56 NHL 79 (2)
1956-57 NHL 89 (1)
1957-58 NHL 77 (4)
1958-59 NHL 78 (4)
1959-60 NHL 73 (5)
1960-61 NHL 72 (5)
1961-62 NHL 77 (3)
1962-63 NHL 86 (1)
1963-64 NHL 73 (5)
1964-65 NHL 76 (3)
1965-66 NHL 75 (5)
1966-67 NHL 65 (4)
1967-68 NHL 82 (3)
1968-69 NHL 103 (3)
1969-70 NHL 71 (9)
tony d
Registered User
Ovechkin looks to be on the verge of many great things but until he retires we don't know if he will be better or worse than Lindsay.
EagleBelfour
Registered User
As of right now, I would say that Ovechkin is probably n.4 on my list, with Bobby Hull, Ted Lindsay and Frank Mahovlich still a step above him, while Cy Denneny and Dickie Moore are very close behind him. I have no doubt that Ovechkin can catch Ted Lindsay before the end of his career, although goalscoring isn't the only thing that make a hockey player. However, I don't see him catching Bobby Hull. (I left out non-NHL player out of the discussion)
