Where does Kucherov rank among Russians?

[WarriorofTime]

It doesn't seem to be a problem for other all-time level players to substantially improve their teams goal differential when they step on the ice.

All you did was (a) remove his peak, (b) then show that outside his peak he was an average FIRST line even strength player and the best powerplay, and (c) not include that he remained very good another like seven seasons even after that?

...what are we even doing here? Like you don't want to say this is agenda-based, but I don't know how else to interpret it at this point? I don't even know what point you're trying to reach in the roundabout way here

Nobody in their right mind would say that Ovechkin provides no surplus value, I happen to think that his counting stats tend to severely overrate him as a player and there isn't much meat to his game after 2011.

Goal scoring will always be the NHL's most valued skill, imo.

 

[KareemTrustfund]

Should they be excluded of all-time best conversation because they took time to get first line-starting role spot ?

Brady didn’t play average for years so this is bad comparison

 

[WarriorofTime]

Brady didn’t play average for years so this is bad comparison

Brady was the backup as a rookie..

Kucherov being "average for years" is a gross exaggeration. He was 27th in NHL in points in his second season (2014-15) without a ton of opportunity. I remember that postseason well as a Hawk fan and the "triplet" line was all anyone was talking about it seemed.

 

[MadLuke]

Nobody in their right mind would say that Ovechkin provides no surplus value, I happen to think that his counting stats tend to severely overrate him as a player and there isn't much meat to his game after 2011.

There is a bit of maybe speaking over each other, changing subject a little bit.

The Capitals have the best power play during that time frame, Ovechkin 121 PPG dwarf everyone else.

Someone can say he was one of the best player in the league while being overall net value at 5v5 your average good first line at the same time.

 

[KareemTrustfund]

Let's rewind the conversation.

There was a discussion with Malkin about Crosby drawing tougher Even Strength Matchups, you responded asking why Kucherov didn't put up the same numbers as Malkin when he wasn't on the top line. This implies the situations were equal. I responded pointing out despite any semantical line calling, Malkin played the equivalent of top line minutes from the jump and Kucherov did not, which indicates a big reason Kucherov did not have higher production earlier. Then you responded discussing how if Kucherov were better he'd have more ice time.

You changed the discussion from production related to nominal line number to one about how if a player is good, they force a coach to give them more ice time quicker. Of course we could take that logic to silly conclusions. If Dominik Hasek were any good, why was he the backup for so long?

I mean you’re taking the fact that Kucherov wasn’t getting enough ice time and spinning it into some net positive for him. Obviously it’s hard to put up Malkin numbers with that low of ice time. But the fact remains , if he WAS as good as Malkin that wouldn’t have been an issue, he would have had that ice time. This isn’t the argument that you seem to think it is. He didn’t put up a truly elite year until six years after he was drafted. That matters. Longevity matters. Malkin lead the league in points per sixty as recently as 19/20. He had a ppg season at 20 as a rookie. The guy has never not been elite. Cant say that for Kucherov and in a debate of the best ever it matters.

 

[Despote]

There is a bit of maybe speaking over each other, changing subject a little bit.

The Capitals have the best power play during that time frame, Ovechkin 121 PPG dwarf everyone else.

Someone can say he was one of the best player in the league while being overall net value at 5v5 your average good first line at the same time.

Sure, I already credited Ovechkin as having been arguably the best powerplay player in the league through that stretch. It's valuable...

but other players that are in top xx all time discussions tend to not have problems being elite on the powerplay and at 5vs5. The way Ovechkin's 5vs5 game fell off is very unusual for the caliber of player he is usually thought of as.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I mean you’re taking the fact that Kucherov wasn’t getting enough ice time and spinning it into some net positive for him. Obviously it’s hard to put up Malkin numbers with that low of ice time. But the fact remains , if he WAS as good as Malkin that wouldn’t have been an issue, he would have had that ice time. This isn’t the argument that you seem to think it is. He didn’t put up a truly elite year until six years after he was drafted. That matters. Longevity matters. Malkin lead the league in points per sixty as recently as 19/20. He had a ppg season at 20 as a rookie. The guy has never not been elite. Cant say that for Kucherov and in a debate of the best ever it matters.

Through Age 22 season, Malkin was definitely ahead with double the career points (304 vs. 149).

Are you saying that makes it impossible for Kucherov to ever close the gap? I dunno if I follow the logic. There is a roster politics at play as well. If a player isn't a very high draft pick, they don't usually start on the top line unless the team just has nobody, which wasn't the case in Tampa Bay. Do you feel similarly about players like Datsyuk and Zetterberg who joined the Red Wings mid-pseudo dynasty and started buried and had to work their way up?

This is not unique to hockey, by the way. Nikola Jokic is regarded as the best player in the NBA right now (will win his third MVP this season, reigning Finals MVP). He was a rotation player his first couple seasons with great per minute numbers. He was a 2nd round pick (like Kucherov) so he wasn't given the keys to the castle right away. Yes, it hurts as far as counting the number of big time seasons and does effect the composite totals which is a big factor in longevity discussion, but it should hardly act as a disqualification for discussion on all time placement because someone wasn't a high draft pick.

 

[KareemTrustfund]

Through Age 22 season, Malkin was definitely ahead with double the career points (304 vs. 149).

Are you saying that makes it impossible for Kucherov to ever close the gap? I dunno if I follow the logic. There is a roster politics at play as well. If a player isn't a very high draft pick, they don't usually start on the top line unless the team just has nobody, which wasn't the case in Tampa Bay. Do you feel similarly about players like Datsyuk and Zetterberg who joined the Red Wings mid-pseudo dynasty and started buried and had to work their way up?

I think the only way Kucherov could pass Malkin all time is if he starts pulling away significantly with awards. His slow start hurts him and Malkin’s longevity means he has too stay elite until 36 at least.

I think Malkin has more years where he was among the best of the best he doesn’t get credit for aside from 2009 and 2012 which are comparable to Kucherovs 2019 and 2024

In 2019/20 he was third NHL in points per 60. Nobody even thinks of Malkin being among the best this year when he was.

17/18. He LEAD the NHL in Points per 60

16/17. Also lead the NHL in pp60 and lead the playoffs in scoring.

15/16 he was sixth

13/14. Another after thought season. He LEAD the NHL in pp60.

Even as early as 07/08 he was 2nd.

My point is , he was always amongst the best of the best. Kucherov wasnt and that kind of hurts him.
To answer your question about Datsyuk and Zetterberg, yes. I do think it hurts their overall standing. As it should. I don’t hold Datsyuk in nearly the same regard as OV, Malkin or even Kucherov. Longevity matters to me , like I said. Even Fedorov had some very very ugly offensive seasons in a super high scoring era that people seem to gloss over. I like to look at the entire body of work.

 

[jigglysquishy]

Points/60 doesn't mean much other than how your coach used you.

 

[Matsun]

This has got to be the dumbest argument. Why didn’t Kucherov put up Malkin esque numbers when he wasn’t on the top line then? Why’d it take him six years after being drafted to even put up a PPG season? What a tiresome argument.


If Kucherov was as good as Malkin or Ovechkin he would have been way better way sooner.

In Kucherovs first 3 seasons he is 3rd in playoff scoring. In his 4th season he is 4th in PPG and 2nd in GPG. In his 5th season he is 3rd in scoring and then in his 6th season he wins the art+hart.

It's not like Kucherov was doing nothing before he entered his prime.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I think the only way Kucherov could pass Malkin all time is if he starts pulling away significantly with awards. His slow start hurts him and Malkin’s longevity means he has too stay elite until 36 at least.

I think Malkin has more years where he was among the best of the best he doesn’t get credit for aside from 2009 and 2012 which are comparable to Kucherovs 2019 and 2024

In 2019/20 he was third NHL in points per 60. Nobody even thinks of Malkin being among the best this year when he was.

17/18. He LEAD the NHL in Points per 60

16/17. Also lead the NHL in pp60 and lead the playoffs in scoring.

15/16 he was sixth

13/14. Another after thought season. He LEAD the NHL in pp60.

Even as early as 07/08 he was 2nd.

My point is , he was always amongst the best of the best. Kucherov wasnt and that kind of hurts him.

Malkin has 4 top 10 point finishes in his career. Kucherov has 6. Doesn't that factor into your "among the best" seasons, instead of pretending Kucherov was only good in 2019 and 2024? Kind of ironic you were taking a hardline "if you were so good, your coach would have played you more" earlier and are now clinging tightly to points per 60, yeah?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Brady wasn't much of anything for the first 4 or 5 years of his career...his team won a couple playoff games. But he wasn't special statistically or by the eye test. His history got re-written to justify the fetishism of Super Bowl victories and the insane weight that football fans put on them for player evaluation. And while Brady did continue to improve and became elite and an all time player...he wasn't for the first few years of his career.

I'm not sure what else is going on on this page...

 

[GlitchMarner]

Regarding mid-career Ovechkin: I think coaching may have played a bigger role in his transformation from a dynamic ES scorer to a unique Power Play threat than some people may think.

He changed so much from what he was originally during that time. His game always relied a great deal on raw athleticism and I think his physical attributes simply declined to some extent. But he was not by any means an old man in, say, 2014.

Hell, in 2022 (when he was an old man by hockey standards) he was one of the best ES scorers in the League in the first half.

It could simply be that the Capitals didn't need him or want him to be much of a puck carrier in the middle portion of his career and wanted to take advantage of his shot more than his other skills during that time. They had good success from 2015-2017, winning numerous division Titles and two President's trophies, so whatever they were doing was working pretty well.

I'd say the 2017 playoffs put an end to that era of his career. He started the next season on fire and ended up winning the Cup. I don't have statistical evidence for this, but I'd say he was less PP-reliant from 2017 to 2022 or so than he was in the middle portion of his career.

He's had different career phases but has always produced at a high level. That kind of longevity as a scorer really gives a player's career a lot of value. He had a good five or six year stretch of being a very strong ES player offensively - is that really so different than a guy like Lafleur?

 

[Michael Farkas]

His game always relied a great deal on raw athleticism and I think his physical attributes simply declined to some extent.

The timeline for this makes sense. It's same basic timeline that we see for "freak athlete, but..." players - Phaneuf, Seth Jones, Eric Lindros, etc.

The thing about Ovechkin is that there's a subset of his "A" game that is all-time...and it's uniquely scalable and transferrable...and everyone knows it, and they can't do much about it. It makes him a really tough player to rank.

It's sort of like Cole Eiserman in this draft class. He can't do anything but score...but damn, he's good at scoring. How high in the draft can you be comfortable taking that guy? It's really tough.

 

[The Panther]

Kucherov to Ovechkin is a bit like comparing Beliveau to Hull. I would view them as quite different-style players, and thus not easily comparable.

My own preference in terms of offensive players is tilted towards those who are both passers and goal scorers, not towards those who are only elite at one or the other. So, the Kucherov or Malkin skill-set is generally more impressive to me than the Ovechkin skill-set. Ovechkin is obviously more elite at what he does well, which does count for a lot, but for me his style is more limited.

Anyway, for this reason, I would put the peak level of Malkin or Kucherov slightly above Ovechkin.

As to the 'all-time ranking' question, it's too early to tell.

 

[KareemTrustfund]

Malkin has 4 top 10 point finishes in his career. Kucherov has 6. Doesn't that factor into your "among the best" seasons, instead of pretending Kucherov was only good in 2019 and 2024? Kind of ironic you were taking a hardline "if you were so good, your coach would have played you more" earlier and are now clinging tightly to points per 60, yeah?

Are you always this intentionally thick?

There is no irony here. You act as though I don’t acknowledge Kucherov is elite. I’m well aware of this top ten finishes. He’s had a great six year stretch. He’s not been as good as Malkin for as long. I don’t know about “clinging” to PP60.. it’s a fine way to show Malkin has still been elite for 17 years. Honestly man, it’s time to take a break. If you don’t want to accept my reasoning , that’s fine. You can go on your merry way.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Are you always this intentionally thick?

There is no irony here. You act as though I don’t acknowledge Kucherov is elite. I’m well aware of this top ten finishes. He’s had a great six year stretch. He’s not been as good as Malkin for as long. I don’t know about “clinging” to PP60.. it’s a fine way to show Malkin has still been elite for 17 years. Honestly man, it’s time to take a break. If you don’t want to accept my reasoning , that’s fine. You can go on your merry way.

Let’s leave the personal insults aside. Of course Malkin has been longer. He is older and been around a much longer time. I’m not sure why you are so defensive around this particular topic. Your reasoning is getting a bit inconsistent and flimsy as to what makes Malkin superior at this point.

 

[KareemTrustfund]

Let’s leave the personal insults aside. Of course Malkin has been longer. He is older and been around a much longer time. I’m not sure why you are so defensive around this particular topic. Your reasoning is getting a bit inconsistent and flimsy as to what makes Malkin superior at this point.

Not an insult. You are intentionally twisting my points. Obviously Malkin played longer and is older , how is that your takeaway from what I said? I don’t know how I can make it much simpler for you tbh. The argument I make is very consistent. If pointing out Malkin’s underrated later years is making a flimsy argument , than yours is a complete train wreck.

Kucherov took six years to finally have a good season. And by good season I mean a season where you can point to them and say that’s an elite player. Malkin and a Ovechkin were immediate. I just don’t understand why that doesn’t matter to you. We are talking the best of the best.

What’s the argument for a Kucherov over Malkin? Even accumulative point totals don’t favor Kucherov, especially how easy it is to score in this climate since the goalie gear shrinkage. Let’s be honest. He thrives in todays NHL, but he was never going to be seen in this light had that not happened imo. He showed no sign of it before 17-18. And he had plenty of time. Kucherovs linemates have been exceptionally better in his art Ross years compared to Malkin. Malkin winning one in 2009 with Fedotenko and Talbot was a miracle.

I do think it could be possible for Kucherov to pass Malkin. I dont think it’s very likely because of his start. That’s just my opinion on it. If he gets another hart, than the trophy cases are close at least ( although I value Conn Smythe a bit more ). If the trophys start to really skew toward Kucherov , than sure. But right now you kind of have to go with the guy who had more elite years at Kucherovs age.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Six years to have a good season? What? He was 27th in points his second year.

 

[MadLuke]

Six years to have a good season? What? He was 27th in points his second year.

Second year 2014-2015, he was 6th in the league in points per 60 at 5v5, also when he was on the ice that year, no team scored like Tampa with him on the ice:

Player Season Totals - Natural Stat Trick

His line was arguably the best at creating offense and his GF% was Bergeron-Marchand level.

Were they helped by coach deployment, being a bit under the radar, etc... But in hindsight, at least stat wise, sign of greatness were already there.

Guy Lafleur, Hasek, there will be a lot of example of not having an explosive nhl start in term of opportunity from greats and it can hurt you a lot if you are trying to compete with McDavid-Gretzky-Lemieux-Orr (imagine trying to claw back a deficit with Gretzky), with Malkin that arrive in the nhl only after turning 20 and will miss a lot of time in his career that not a show stopper, imo.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Second year 2014-2015, he was 6th in the league in points per 60 at 5v5, also when he was on the ice that year, no team scored like Tampa with him on the ice:

Player Season Totals - Natural Stat Trick

His line was arguably the best at creating offense and his GF% was Bergeron-Marchand level.

Were they helped by coach deployment, being a bit under the radar, etc... But in hindsight, at least stat wise, sign of greatness were already there.

Yeah, that was the Hawks most recent cup, so I was watching nearly every shift of those Playoffs. The "triplet" line Ondrej Palat-Tyler Johnson-Nikita Kucherov was getting lots of discussion and praise around the League.

 

[killa3312]

Not an insult. You are intentionally twisting my points. Obviously Malkin played longer and is older , how is that your takeaway from what I said? I don’t know how I can make it much simpler for you tbh. The argument I make is very consistent. If pointing out Malkin’s underrated later years is making a flimsy argument , than yours is a complete train wreck.

Kucherov took six years to finally have a good season. And by good season I mean a season where you can point to them and say that’s an elite player. Malkin and a Ovechkin were immediate. I just don’t understand why that doesn’t matter to you. We are talking the best of the best.

What’s the argument for a Kucherov over Malkin? Even accumulative point totals don’t favor Kucherov, especially how easy it is to score in this climate since the goalie gear shrinkage. Let’s be honest. He thrives in todays NHL, but he was never going to be seen in this light had that not happened imo. He showed no sign of it before 17-18. And he had plenty of time. Kucherovs linemates have been exceptionally better in his art Ross years compared to Malkin. Malkin winning one in 2009 with Fedotenko and Talbot was a miracle.

I do think it could be possible for Kucherov to pass Malkin. I dont think it’s very likely because of his start. That’s just my opinion on it. If he gets another hart, than the trophy cases are close at least ( although I value Conn Smythe a bit more ). If the trophys start to really skew toward Kucherov , than sure. But right now you kind of have to go with the guy who had more elite years at Kucherovs age.

Without the injuries, Kuch is almost certainly looking at 7 straight 100+ point seasons with an outside chance at 8 (He had 85 in in 74 games in 2016-17). He missed the entire 20-21 season but dominated in the playoffs and based on his history it’s a safe assumption if healthy he hits it that year. He has been elite for a long time now and honestly should have probably won the Smythe the year Hedman won it and is one of the best playoff performers of his era so him not having one should not be used against him. Voting for these awards is so subjective and the media gets it wrong a lot of the time.

 

[Despote]

Without the injuries, Kuch is almost certainly looking at 7 straight 100+ point seasons with an outside chance at 8 (He had 85 in in 74 games in 2016-17). He missed the entire 20-21 season but dominated in the playoffs and based on his history it’s a safe assumption if healthy he hits it that year. He has been elite for a long time now and honestly should have probably won the Smythe the year Hedman won it and is one of the best playoff performers of his era so him not having one should not be used against him. Voting for these awards is so subjective and the media gets it wrong a lot of the time.

I find it extremely unlikely that Kucherov hits 100 points in the shortened 2021 season.

 

[killa3312]

I find it extremely unlikely that Kucherov hits 100 points in the shortened 2021 season.

Lol, I forgot Covid was a thing apparently. I guess I should have said he would have been on a pace that during a normal season would have netted him 100+ points.