Did Ovechkin become close to what Lindros was supposed to be ?

[streitz]

Neely wasn't the playmaker Lindros was.

That's true but he was a better goalscorer.

 

[sr edler]

That's true but he was a better goalscorer.

If Lindros put all his focus on goal scoring, like Neely did, backed up by Bourque and Oates, I think the difference would have been quite miniscule between them. The other way around, Neely as a playmaker, is a harder cookie to sell.

 

[GoGoSens]

lol he's no where nearly as physical as Lindros.

Lindros was mean, nasty could end a career with a clean hit, he also had elite offensive skill.

He single handly took his phillies team to the finals.

I would take a healthy Lindros over any center in the league today if it meant I could have him in his prime right now.

He would wreck this league and could dominate a game more than even McDavid can.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

If Lindros put all his focus on goal scoring, like Neely did, backed up by Bourque and Oates, I think the difference would have been quite miniscule between them. The other way around, Neely as a playmaker, is a harder cookie to sell.

as I pointed out in the Neely thread, this is false.

Neely was Neely long before Oates.

-He scored 55 and 51 pre Oates
-He had his 4 dominant playoff runs, including 2 Finals appearances pre Oates
-He never played anything close to a full season with Oates playing only 162 games over 5 seasons
-Even when he did play with Oates, he was not 100%
-The only season he was classic Neely with Oates was the 50 in 44, and even then he only played 49 games that year

To your playmaker point, I can counter with linemates. Who's to say Neely isnt a better playmaker with a LeClair next to him. No offense to them but Carpenter, Brickley, Janney are not near the class of LeClair.

Lindros v Neely comes down to what you value more, IMO.

You choose Neely if you want the better goal scorer, better hitter and better fighter
You choose Lindros if you want the better overall offensive player and (slightly) better player

 

[The Macho King]

Ovi can lay some big hits, but I never thought of him as a "power forward" like I do when I think of Lindros.

 

[popo]

Messier was the best historical Lindros comparison. That was the name everyone cited as a comparable for Lindros hype when he was being drafted and coming into the league.
The difference was Lindros was a super sized Messier. That difference was profound enough to make it that Lindros was a unique player in history.

Similarly I can't think of a lot of guys like Ovechkin - his longevity, goal scoring prowess, size and speed, and enthusiasm. Coming into the league I thought he was like Kovalchuk - big Russian, right shooting LW, with speed and primarily a shooter.

 

[sr edler]

as I pointed out in the Neely thread, this is false.

Neely was Neely long before Oates.

-He scored 55 and 51 pre Oates
-He had his 4 dominant playoff runs, including 2 Finals appearances pre Oates
-He never played anything close to a full season with Oates playing only 162 games over 5 seasons
-Even when he did play with Oates, he was not 100%
-The only season he was classic Neely with Oates was the 50 in 44, and even then he only played 49 games that year

To your playmaker point, I can counter with linemates. Who's to say Neely isnt a better playmaker with a LeClair next to him. No offense to them but Carpenter, Brickley, Janney are not near the class of LeClair.

Lindros v Neely comes down to what you value more, IMO.

You choose Neely if you want the better goal scorer, better hitter and better fighter
You choose Lindros if you want the better overall offensive player and (slightly) better player

Janney was a near elite playmaker himself.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Messier was the best historical Lindros comparison. That was the name everyone cited as a comparable for Lindros hype when he was being drafted and coming into the league.
The difference was Lindros was a super sized Messier. That difference was profound enough to make it that Lindros was a unique player in history.

See, if people don't want compare Ovechkin to Lindros, I don't think you can compare Lindros to Messier. Messier was basically Howe 2.0 in the physical department. I don't think anyone ever really played crash-and-bang to the borderline insane level that Lindros did, and where Howe and Messier's longevity is incredible, Lindros' short career speaks for itself there.

 

[psycat]

lol he's no where nearly as physical as Lindros.

Lindros was mean, nasty could end a career with a clean hit, he also had elite offensive skill.

He single handly took his phillies team to the finals.

I would take a healthy Lindros over any center in the league today if it meant I could have him in his prime right now.

He would wreck this league and could dominate a game more than even McDavid can.

Might be true but peak Ovi >>> McDavid

 

[Lukin1978]

lol he's no where nearly as physical as Lindros.

Lindros was mean, nasty could end a career with a clean hit, he also had elite offensive skill.

He single handly took his phillies team to the finals.

I would take a healthy Lindros over any center in the league today if it meant I could have him in his prime right now.

He would wreck this league and could dominate a game more than even McDavid can.

Yeah I’ve never seen a combination like prime Lindros

 

[Hanji]

lol he's no where nearly as physical as Lindros.

Lindros was mean, nasty could end a career with a clean hit, he also had elite offensive skill.

He single handly took his phillies team to the finals.

I would take a healthy Lindros over any center in the league today if it meant I could have him in his prime right now.

He would wreck this league and could dominate a game more than even McDavid can.

Was Lindros ever healthy for a prolonged period of time?
I recall Lindros as exceedingly injury prone; and that's excluding the concussions.

Yes he would wreck today's league until he'd inevitably be knocked unconscious with his head down; history repeated.
Bull in a china shop = playing with fire. Dominant but unsustainable.

 

[Whaleafs]

Lots of good points.

No doubt Lindros was meaner & was an unparalled physical force when he first came into the league. A runaway for Lindros with the fighting sure, but its been slowly phased out of the league during Ovie's time anyway. I doubt the Capitals ever wanted him to fight even if he wanted to. I guess the real point was can you think of anyone comparable besides Ovechkin to Lindros that you would expect to contend for the Hart & Art Ross but also has this side to his game:

 

[streitz]

If Lindros put all his focus on goal scoring, like Neely did, backed up by Bourque and Oates, I think the difference would have been quite miniscule between them. The other way around, Neely as a playmaker, is a harder cookie to sell.

Neely had plenty of good goal scoring seasons with Linseman and Jannry who were far inferior to Leclair/Recchi.

 

[The Panther]

Neely had plenty of good goal scoring seasons with Linseman and Jannry who were far inferior to Leclair/Recchi.

I would say Janney was much the better playmaker than Recchi, and obviously Leclair.

Lindros was a more multi-skilled offensive player than Neely. I agree that Neely was better at purely goal scoring than Lindros, but it's like saying Dennis Hull was better at goal scoring than Jean Beliveau.

Not sure why we are talking about Neely...

 

[streitz]

I would say Janney was much the better playmaker than Recchi, and obviously Leclair.

Lindros was a more multi-skilled offensive player than Neely. I agree that Neely was better at purely goal scoring than Lindros, but it's like saying Dennis Hull was better at goal scoring than Jean Beliveau.

Not sure why we are talking about Neely...

I agree with Lindros being more skilled then Neely


The reason I brought him up was Benchbrawl mentioned no player having the package of skill and intimidation Lindros brought. I said Neely was close, I'd even say Neely was more physical.

 

[Merya]

Lindros was mean, nasty could end a career with a clean hit, he also had elite offensive skill.

He would wreck this league and could dominate a game more than even McDavid can.

Yeah 20 game suspensions would let him try to train skating. Lindros was only an above average skater among peers. All of his strengths are outlawed and all of his handicaps are more important than ever.
No Lindros would not have a significant role in NHL nowadays. His skillset is completely wrong for today.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Lindros' physical game was a lot more reckless and prevalent. Think Ovie's buddy and linemate, Tommy Wilson for a comparison physically. And obviously endowed and supplemented by near, if not generational type talent.

 

[ted2019]

as I pointed out in the Neely thread, this is false.

Neely was Neely long before Oates.

-He scored 55 and 51 pre Oates
-He had his 4 dominant playoff runs, including 2 Finals appearances pre Oates
-He never played anything close to a full season with Oates playing only 162 games over 5 seasons
-Even when he did play with Oates, he was not 100%
-The only season he was classic Neely with Oates was the 50 in 44, and even then he only played 49 games that year

To your playmaker point, I can counter with linemates. Who's to say Neely isnt a better playmaker with a LeClair next to him. No offense to them but Carpenter, Brickley, Janney are not near the class of LeClair.

Lindros v Neely comes down to what you value more, IMO.

You choose Neely if you want the better goal scorer, better hitter and better fighter
You choose Lindros if you want the better overall offensive player and (slightly) better player

If Neely was the player you said he was, then how come he never got any attention for a Hart Trophy? The only vote he received was 9th in 93/94 when he scored 50 in 49 games. Also, Lindros doesn't get enough credit for playing in his own zone. The only time he was a minus player was the final 2 of his career, when he was done and even then, he was only a -3 & -1. Neely was a + 83 in his career (+137 in Boston), while Lindros was a +215 in his career (+ 183 in Philly). Lindros was also a dominant in faceoffs, as he averaged 55.91% for his career. Eric Lindros Stats and News

 

[streitz]

If Neely was the player you said he was, then how come he never got any attention for a Hart Trophy? The only vote he received was 9th in 93/94 when he scored 50 in 49 games. Also, Lindros doesn't get enough credit for playing in his own zone. The only time he was a minus player was the final 2 of his career, when he was done and even then, he was only a -3 & -1. Neely was a + 83 in his career (+137 in Boston), while Lindros was a +215 in his career (+ 183 in Philly). Lindros was also a dominant in faceoffs, as he averaged 55.91% for his career. Eric Lindros Stats and News

 

[streitz]

Yeah 20 game suspensions would let him try to train skating. Lindros was only an above average skater among peers. All of his strengths are outlawed and all of his handicaps are more important than ever.
No Lindros would not have a significant role in NHL nowadays. His skillset is completely wrong for today.

He'd still be a top player today. He had skill he wasn't just a bull in a china shop, if anything the less physical league today might help him since he wouldn't have to be worried about being killed by Stevens.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Yeah, not having to worry about head hits and a lot of d-men working to hold lines just with an active stick, Lindros would be a force today...

 

[GoGoSens]

Might be true but peak Ovi >>> McDavid

lol Peak Ovi does not own Mcdavid

Mcdavid is not even at his peak and he already has 2 art ross trophies.

And ovie never had the skill to take over a game like Mcdavid does, I have seen no one with this skill since Lindros.

Mcdavid is the only reason the oiliers are not worse than they should be.

 

[Voight]

I've seen Lindros up close and personal during his stay in Philly. I was 6'5" 235 lbs. then. Eric was maybe an 1/2 of inch shorter and had I'd say, 15 lbs. on me. I was more muscular, but Eric was thicker throughout his body. Also, Eric could do it all out on the ice. He played defense, incredible forechecker and was basically a menace to society on skates. Eric was a tremendous player and had the strength of Paul Bunyan with players literally hanging off of him and he was still able to pass the puck or get a quality shot on net. As someone else said, Eric would fight. He would fight heavyweights like Scott Stevens, Marty McSorley, Derian Hatcher , Ken Daneyko, Chris Simon, Lyle Odelein , Stu Grimson and many others. According to dropyourgloves.com, Lindros was 32-2-10 in the NHL ( only losses was to McSorley & Hatcher).

except keep his head up

 

[Cursed Lemon]

And ovie never had the skill to take over a game like Mcdavid does, I have seen no one with this skill since Lindros.

What even is this sentence

Lindros isn't the ultimate skill player and Ovi was absolutely that good early in his career.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

lol Peak Ovi does not own Mcdavid

Mcdavid is not even at his peak and he already has 2 art ross trophies.

And ovie never had the skill to take over a game like Mcdavid does, I have seen no one with this skill since Lindros.

Mcdavid is the only reason the oiliers are not worse than they should be.

Ovechkin's 2008 campaign was better than any season McDavid has had to date. And him from 05-2010 is probably at worst, equal to current McDavid.