Crosby vs Bourque?

[Nadal On Clay]

I mean... that's just wrong. Crosby had 63 points in 46 games when he got injured, which was good enough for 4th place in scoring behind Kovalchuk, Iginla and Lecavalier. Crosby had the highest points per game by an extremely thin margin. He was right there with the rest of the pack.

Ovechkin won the Art Ross with 112 points and would have gotten the goal tiebreaker even if Crosby had kept up his pace. And there's no way Crosby was snubbing a Hart from 65 goal Ovechkin, no way.

Crosby has obviously been good enough where he could have more individual awards.

I don't see the reason for trophy counting. Actually I think that it's largely irrelevant whether Crosby has four or two scoring titles... we know the caliber of player that he is based on a sample size of 1000 games and had he scored 40 point in 40 games in 10/11 and won the Ross doesn't change anything.

The guestion mark is whether Crosby could've lapped the field at his peak, which we never saw him do, and that does hurt him.

Technically he had 2 seasons where he was robbed of a guaranteed Ross (2013 and 2011) and 2 seasons where he could’ve won it (2015 and 2008)

 

[Laineux]

Technically he had 2 seasons where he was robbed of a guaranteed Ross (2013 and 2011) and 2 seasons where he could’ve won it (2015 and 2008)

Yeah, but a lot of players could have much deeper trophy cases than they do if they had perfect injury-free careers.

Crosby has been effected more than most for sure and every reasonable poster can admit that he's a better talent than two Arts would indicate.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Without the missed games, the art-Ross winners from 2007-2014 could’ve potentially been:

2007: Crosby
2008: Ovechkin
2009: Ovechkin
2010: Ovechkin
2011: Crosby
2012: Malkin
2013: Crosby
2014: Crosby

 

[JackSlater]

I'll go with Crosby here, with a little projection. As long as he ages even decently he should be ahead. Better peak, worse health, probably won't be able to touch Bourque in longevity though.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Im not favouring the playoffs over the regular season. That’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m just saying if you includes playoffs into the equation, it’s very close.

You also missed my point before. In those years, Ovechkin was playing on a run and gun system ran by Boudreau. I’m not saying that’s the reason for his high point totals but it certainly helped. When Boudreau was hired during the 2007-2008 season, OV gone from 92 to 112 pts, a 20 pts jump. When Boudreau got canned in the 2012 season, OV gone from 85 to 65 pts, this time a 20 pts deficit. That played quite a huge part on OVs offensive numbers since he was exempted from playing defense.

You can also look at linemates/teammates for reference. Backstrom gets 88 in 82, Semin gets 79 in 62 and Green gets 73 in 68. That’s huge help compared to Pens Malkin with 113 in 82, Staal with 49 in 82, Sykora with 46 in 76 and Fedotenko with 39 in 65 (Gonchar was injured for the most part of the season only played 25 games). Ovi had a huge advantage in qulity of teammates that season.

If you even ever watched them both that year, you could saw that they were very close as players and each one of them was bringing A LOT to their team. Ovechkin was obviously more electrifying, but Crosby was still as efficient as him.

I also have one question for you, who was the best in last year’s playoffs? Crosby or Ovechkin?

Sure it’s close but Ovi was still better that season. Malkin has a better case for number one than Crosby.

Look, all your doing is digging for some sort of fault against Ovi, as well as looking for things that would benefit Crosby. It doesn’t matter what system he played in, it doesn’t matter what linemates, none of that matters....your pointing it out as if it should. Ovechkin or Crosby have never needed the support of other great linemates to be top producers, that’s what makes them so great.

It’s no secret Ovid inconsistency’s have been noted and used against him....what I don’t understand is how you can say how the system he played for isn’t a result of his high totals, yet go further to explain why his totals sore/dip BECAUSE of the system. Fact is Ovi didn’t need Green, Semin, or even Backstrom.....if anything he made them better players, because I mean....look where Green and Semin are compared to Ovi.

Crosby was obviously better last post season. He had 6 more points after 2 rounds, what your not understanding is that they both had 21 points after two rounds in ‘09....the difference is Ovi had a superior regular season. This past year, I would give the slight edge to Ovi over Crosby based on his goal scoring, but both didn’t accomplish anything worth noting.

Like I said before, you can’t say Crosby was better that season just because he ended up winning the cup. That shouldn’t be held against Ovi, especially after that run.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Crosby had 63 points in 45 games before his ankle sprain. Tied for the league lead

Everyone was within a few points of each other regardless. So there really is no telling if he would or wouldn’t have won. Ovi in the end was a Hart and Lindsay winner for a reason.

 

[SillyRabbit]

Which is the third time that you're talking about?

2010/2011
2012/2013
2014/2015

 

[Laineux]

2010/2011
2012/2013
2014/2015

Sequin and Crosby had nigh-identical points per game and Price was winning the Hart regardless so I eouldn't count that.

 

[GlitchMarner]

Ovechkin was better than Crosby for a while, just like McDavid is better now. They have awards for a reason. Winning two or more Pearsons in a row is a big deal. Crosby has been at or near the top consistently since his second season, but he's not entitled to being the best player every season just because he's Sidney Crosby. Deal with it.

 

[GreatGonzo]

The “what if” or “should have” game is pointless....

Like, what if Bourque played full seasons in ‘83 and ‘89, most likely would have walked away with 7 Norris trophies. What if Bourque wasn’t edged out in the Hart race in ‘90? Would this be a different conversation.

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Sure it’s close but Ovi was still better that season. Malkin has a better case for number one than Crosby.

Look, all your doing is digging for some sort of fault against Ovi, as well as looking for things that would benefit Crosby. It doesn’t matter what system he played in, it doesn’t matter what linemates, none of that matters....your pointing it out as if it should. Ovechkin or Crosby have never needed the support of other great linemates to be top producers, that’s what makes them so great.

It’s no secret Ovid inconsistency’s have been noted and used against him....what I don’t understand is how you can say how the system he played for isn’t a result of his high totals, yet go further to explain why his totals sore/dip BECAUSE of the system. Fact is Ovi didn’t need Green, Semin, or even Backstrom.....if anything he made them better players, because I mean....look where Green and Semin are compared to Ovi.

Crosby was obviously better last post season. He had 6 more points after 2 rounds, what your not understanding is that they both had 21 points after two rounds in ‘09....the difference is Ovi had a superior regular season. This past year, I would give the slight edge to Ovi over Crosby based on his goal scoring, but both didn’t accomplish anything worth noting.

Like I said before, you can’t say Crosby was better that season just because he ended up winning the cup. That shouldn’t be held against Ovi, especially after that run.

Again, you’re looking at point production without context. The fact that Crosby played with lesser linemates did affect his point totals too. Do you think it’s only a coincidence that each of Semin, Green and Backstrom also had career years with Boudreau as their coach? Yet when Boudreau got fired, every players production dipped.

Linemates dont matter? Why? It’s just normal that a player with average linemates will have less points than a player with better linemates.

Even if they both had 21 pts, Crosby again, played with lesser linemates and played a better all around game.

Ovechkin might have had the better season, but the best player is totally arguable.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Everyone was within a few points of each other regardless. So there really is no telling if he would or wouldn’t have won. Ovi in the end was a Hart and Lindsay winner for a reason.

Crosby was comfortably ahead of Ovechkin at the time. The point is Crosby was the defending hart/Ross winner and was leading the league in scoring 50% through the season. Returned for the playoffs and led that in scoring. At the end of 07-08 I remember clearly Crosby still was recognized by the hockey world as the best player in the world

 

[GreatGonzo]

Again, you’re looking at point production without context. The fact that Crosby played with lesser linemates did affect his point totals too. Do you think it’s only a coincidence that each of Semin, Green and Backstrom also had career years with Boudreau as their coach? Yet when Boudreau got fired, every players production dipped.

Linemates dont matter? Why? It’s just normal that a player with average linemates will have less points than a player with better linemates.

Even if they both had 21 pts, Crosby again, played with lesser linemates and played a better all around game.

Ovechkin might have had the better season, but the best player is totally arguable.

My point is your creating context in order to favor Crosby which is totally bias.....none of what you said matters in terms of who is/isn’t better or more dominant. But pulling the “system” approach and arguing linemates only has one intention for you, to make Ovi look less, and Crosby look like a victim. Just stop. It doesn’t matter at all.

Because great players produce regardless. Besides your playing that card to gain this idea that Crosby’s point totals are truly affected by this, they aren’t. Same with Ovi. Sure having better linemates is beneficial, but if Definitely isn’t the difference between who was better.

That’s the style and system he thrives in....your talking as if Crosby is completely tamed into this defensive system with bad linemates.

More bias reasoning....Crosby gets the nod because of linemates and a sudden “all around game” that you clearly just decided to make up because it sounds pretty. Crosby was hardly a factor defensively those years, and he may have not had the best linemates, but let’s not forget who played right behind him with even lesser linemates, and ultimately wins Crosby his cup with one the best best playoff performances......leave that small part out and keep the focus on two factors that don’t really matter.

Using that argument, your saying Ovi was a product of his linemates while Crosby’s production suffered from it. Both are untrue.

Crosby was comfortably ahead of Ovechkin at the time. The point is Crosby was the defending hart/Ross winner and was leading the league in scoring 50% through the season. Returned for the playoffs and led that in scoring. At the end of 07-08 I remember clearly Crosby still was recognized by the hockey world as the best player in the world

I wouldn’t say Comfortably, and regardless....Ovi still ended the way he did and Crosby was still not clearly ahead of anyone, so no one can honestly say he would have won anything that year.

 

[AvInNebr]

LOL So many people on these boards don't know their hockey history very well. Ray Bourque is easily top 5 d-man of all time.
I've never been a Bruins fan, but to dismiss Bourque as being lesser a legend than Crosby is a pretty twisted joke.
Bourque created a truly mind-boggling level of offense.

As an 18 year old he was 4th in team points with 65 points.
When he was 22 he was 3rd in team points with 96 points and the player with the 4th most points had 61.
When he was 25 he was 1st in team points with 96 and Cam Neely was 2nd with 72.
When he was 29 he scored 94 points. Player with 4th most points had less than 60.
When he was 32 he was 2nd point points with 91 and the 5th most player had 64.
In his last season in the NHL he was 40 years old he put up 59 points.

He put up 1579 points in 1612 games. That's freaking insane.
FIVE Norris trophies. That's freaking insane and people would probably give it more attention if Lidstrom didn't start playing when Bourque was in the middle of his career.

Guys like Lidstrom and Bourque are only bested by Orr, Gretzky and Lemieux.

I think this is a lot closer than people think, and the above poster makes good points. Consider that Bourque did all this while playing against some of the greatest of all time. Gretzkey, Lemieux, Jagr ... those are players he had to play against. Sid is an all time great but don't discount Bourque in this and what he did against players that could be considered top 5 of all time, and competing for hardware not only against them but also against Lidstrom who is one of the all time greats defensively as well...

 

[Nadal On Clay]

My point is your creating context in order to favor Crosby which is totally bias.....none of what you said matters in terms of who is/isn’t better or more dominant. But pulling the “system” approach and arguing linemates only has one intention for you, to make Ovi look less, and Crosby look like a victim. Just stop. It doesn’t matter at all.

Because great players produce regardless. Besides your playing that card to gain this idea that Crosby’s point totals are truly affected by this, they aren’t. Same with Ovi. Sure having better linemates is beneficial, but if Definitely isn’t the difference between who was better.

That’s the style and system he thrives in....your talking as if Crosby is completely tamed into this defensive system with bad linemates.

More bias reasoning....Crosby gets the nod because of linemates and a sudden “all around game” that you clearly just decided to make up because it sounds pretty. Crosby was hardly a factor defensively those years, and he may have not had the best linemates, but let’s not forget who played right behind him with even lesser linemates, and ultimately wins Crosby his cup with one the best best playoff performances......leave that small part out and keep the focus on two factors that don’t really matter.

Using that argument, your saying Ovi was a product of his linemates while Crosby’s production suffered from it. Both are untrue.

I wonder why you are always putting words in my mouth. I never said Ovechkin was a product of his linemates, I never said Crosby was the best player of the 2009 playoffs ahead of Malkin.


Yes, coaching systems/linemates absolutely matter mostly Boudreau’s since it was the last true run and gun system in the last 10 years. So yes, obviously the players under a run and gun system are gonna get more points. That’s why you cant look into points without any context. Points don’t tell the whole story.

Yes Crosby has a better all-around game then Ovechkin. Just re-watch some parts of games between the Caps and Pens in 2009. He always had and will always have. Just the fact he’s a center gives him more responsibilities. He also can’t “cheat” as often as wingers does.

Crosby’s production didn’t suffer because of the quality of linemates? Yikes

That’s not bias, this is just facts.

 

[GreatGonzo]

I wonder why you are always putting words in my mouth. I never said Ovechkin was a product of his linemates, I never said Crosby was the best player of the 2009 playoffs ahead of Malkin.


Yes, coaching systems/linemates absolutely matter mostly Boudreau’s since it was the last true run and gun system in the last 10 years. So yes, obviously the players under a run and gun system are gonna get more points. That’s why you cant look into points without any context. Points don’t tell the whole story.

Yes Crosby has a better all-around game then Ovechkin. Just re-watch some parts of games between the Caps and Pens in 2009. He always had and will always have. Just the fact he’s a center gives him more responsibilities. He also can’t “cheat” as often as wingers does.

Crosby’s production didn’t suffer because of the quality of linemates? Yikes

That’s not bias, this is just facts.

Arguing about systems and linemates while trying to make Crosby look superior says everything. You don’t have to say it, your just doing a run a round. Your saying he scores more points because of the system, linemates, and now all of a sudden, Crosby was had an “all around” game back in ‘09 based on “parts of the games.” Crosby got a a lot better defensively much later, Ovechkin and him were hardly great in their own end. Also it’s As if Crosby didn’t work in a system that didn’t benefit him.....he wasn’t used defensively, he wasn’t stifled offensively.

No, it’s bias.....you are arguing that Crosby had a better playoff based on
1. Linemates
2. System
3. “Defense”
All in which you are dramatizing simply for Crosby.

Your right you didn’t say that, I did. Because. Ovechkin was the best player in the regular season while Crosby was the 2nd best in the playoffs, one is not the same as the other. Ovechkin was better that season, and your one of the few that actually think otherwise.

Crosby’s playoffs that year was definitely impressive....but your simply just looking and making up reasonings as to why he was. In the end he advanced and went on to win the cup . That’s the only reason why anyone would think otherwise

 

[GreatGonzo]

I think this is a lot closer than people think, and the above poster makes good points. Consider that Bourque did all this while playing against some of the greatest of all time. Gretzkey, Lemieux, Jagr ... those are players he had to play against. Sid is an all time great but don't discount Bourque in this and what he did against players that could be considered top 5 of all time, and competing for hardware not only against them but also against Lidstrom who is one of the all time greats defensively as well...

Also Bourque carried the Bruins offensively and defensively for a majority of his career. Crosby has had Malkin, Letang, and now guys like Kessel. Of course Crosby has been extremely valuable, but I would say Bourque was more to the Bruins. I mean to be a Hart Finalists twice, with three other top 5 placings is impressive for a defenseman.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

My point is your creating context in order to favor Crosby which is totally bias.....none of what you said matters in terms of who is/isn’t better or more dominant. But pulling the “system” approach and arguing linemates only has one intention for you, to make Ovi look less, and Crosby look like a victim. Just stop. It doesn’t matter at all.

Because great players produce regardless. Besides your playing that card to gain this idea that Crosby’s point totals are truly affected by this, they aren’t. Same with Ovi. Sure having better linemates is beneficial, but if Definitely isn’t the difference between who was better.

That’s the style and system he thrives in....your talking as if Crosby is completely tamed into this defensive system with bad linemates.

More bias reasoning....Crosby gets the nod because of linemates and a sudden “all around game” that you clearly just decided to make up because it sounds pretty. Crosby was hardly a factor defensively those years, and he may have not had the best linemates, but let’s not forget who played right behind him with even lesser linemates, and ultimately wins Crosby his cup with one the best best playoff performances......leave that small part out and keep the focus on two factors that don’t really matter.

Using that argument, your saying Ovi was a product of his linemates while Crosby’s production suffered from it. Both are untrue.

I wouldn’t say Comfortably, and regardless....Ovi still ended the way he did and Crosby was still not clearly ahead of anyone, so no one can honestly say he would have won anything that year.

It took Crosby two years to fully recover from that ankle sprain. Once he did he was easily the best player in the league again no contest. Crosby would have won the art Ross in 08. Not the hart admitted

 

[b in vancouver]

Nice to see a Crosby vs. Bourque thread got turned into Crosby vs. Ovechkin.

 

[GreatGonzo]

It took Crosby two years to fully recover from that ankle sprain. Once he did he was easily the best player in the league again no contest. Crosby would have won the art Ross in 08. Not the hart admitted

Once again, you can’t make that call. Just because you want to believe it doesn’t make it factual, and you can’t pass your opinion as such either. What he did after the fact has nothing to do with that Year, he didn’t win the scoring title in ‘09 or ‘10....so There is no way in knowing if he would have won the scoring title, it was a tight race in the end.

I mean Ovechkin was 6 points behind with 15 more goals...is it really that ludicrous to you to believe that Ovechkin still could have won? He ultimately ended up winning regardless.

 

[Larry Lightning]

Crosby pretty easily

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Arguing about systems and linemates while trying to make Crosby look superior says everything. You don’t have to say it, your just doing a run a round. Your saying he scores more points because of the system, linemates, and now all of a sudden, Crosby was had an “all around” game back in ‘09 based on “parts of the games.” Crosby got a a lot better defensively much later, Ovechkin and him were hardly great in their own end. Also it’s As if Crosby didn’t work in a system that didn’t benefit him.....he wasn’t used defensively, he wasn’t stifled offensively.

No, it’s bias.....you are arguing that Crosby had a better playoff based on
1. Linemates
2. System
3. “Defense”
All in which you are dramatizing simply for Crosby.

Your right you didn’t say that, I did. Because. Ovechkin was the best player in the regular season while Crosby was the 2nd best in the playoffs, one is not the same as the other. Ovechkin was better that season, and your one of the few that actually think otherwise.

Crosby’s playoffs that year was definitely impressive....but your simply just looking and making up reasonings as to why he was. In the end he advanced and went on to win the cup . That’s the only reason why anyone would think otherwise

Crosby always had a more developed all-around game back then, while Ovechkin was recognized as a unidimensionnel player by some. Again, all-around game doesn’t automatically screams defense. You could argue Crosby was better defensively simply based on positioning, but defense is just a part of the “all around game”.

Speaking of the linemates/teammates argument, they were basically the only argument to defend Ovechkin/Caps underperformances in the playoffs, but it doesn’t apply to Crosby because he “has to produce anyways”? People often gave Ovi the benefit of the doubt when his teammates gone MIA. Why wouldn’t they give it to Crosby?

Also, I’m not a fan of this expression, but Crosby has been more “clutch” when it mattered the most during the game 7 when all the eyes were on both superstars. OV had his chance to shine on a breakaway early in the game, but got robbed by Fleury. Crosby put up a great performance with 2 goals and a primary assist (I got told primary assists are worth more than secondary assists) while Ovechkin got one goal on a terrible decision by Fleury when it was 5-0.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Once again, you can’t make that call. Just because you want to believe it doesn’t make it factual, and you can’t pass your opinion as such either. What he did after the fact has nothing to do with that Year, he didn’t win the scoring title in ‘09 or ‘10....so There is no way in knowing if he would have won the scoring title, it was a tight race in the end.

I mean Ovechkin was 6 points behind with 15 more goals...is it really that ludicrous to you to believe that Ovechkin still could have won? He ultimately ended up winning regardless.

Ok we can at least admit he would have been very close to Ovechkin. Second in scoring at least. 72 points in 53 games and 27 points in 20 games in the playoffs. 99 points in 73 games

 

[GreatGonzo]

Ok we can at least admit he would have been very close to Ovechkin. Second in scoring at least. 72 points in 53 games and 27 points in 20 games in the playoffs. 99 points in 73 games

Of course. He would have definitely been up there threatening for it. No doubt.

Crosby always had a more developed all-around game back then, while Ovechkin was recognized as a unidimensionnel player by some. Again, all-around game doesn’t automatically screams defense. You could argue Crosby was better defensively simply based on positioning, but defense is just a part of the “all around game”.

Speaking of the linemates/teammates argument, they were basically the only argument to defend Ovechkin/Caps underperformances in the playoffs, but it doesn’t apply to Crosby because he “has to produce anyways”? People often gave Ovi the benefit of the doubt when his teammates gone MIA. Why wouldn’t they give it to Crosby?

Also, I’m not a fan of this expression, but Crosby has been more “clutch” when it mattered the most during the game 7 when all the eyes were on both superstars. OV had his chance to shine on a breakaway early in the game, but got robbed by Fleury. Crosby put up a great performance with 2 goals and a primary assist (I got told primary assists are worth more than secondary assists) while Ovechkin got one goal on a terrible decision by Fleury when it was 5-0.

Then that’s my fault because when I hear “all around”, I think a player with great defense while having offense. Regardless, I don’t see how he was more “all around” offensively. I mean they had very similar stats.

Linemates was never the reasoning, it was the team in general. Literally the same reasoning as to why Crosby and Malkin took another 7 years to win a cup, two players can’t carry a team like that over and over again. I have no clue where you are getting all this talk from because it can’t be any further from the truth.

Ovechkins lack of playoff success PLAGUED his name and legacy up until this past season while it brought Crosby to a whole other level. Ovechkin was the caps best playoff performer regardless, but the team around him always seemed to fall short. But Crosby gets full credit for his playoff success in general, all while Ovechkin was seen as inferior because of it.

I mean you can call it “clutch”, but the Pens won 6-2, with Ovi scoring one of those goals. I mean Crosby contributed, but how much credit of “clutchness” are you going to give someone in a 6-2 win?

 

[b in vancouver]

Once again...
can't there be a decent thread that doesn't get shanghaied? If all you guys were going to do was start a Crosby vs. Ovechkin argument - why not just start the millionth 'Crosby vs. Ovechkin' thread? I for one was actually interested in the topic of whom people thought was higher ranked between Sid and Ray as I haven't really seen it play out before... but I guess not because you guys gotta get in a three page pissing match.