Do you see Kucherov having an argument for best Russian player of all time?

[Sweetpotato]

We're comparing him to other Russians. Great deal of the best Russians of all time never even played in the NHL.

Jesus Murphy lol

I'm aware who we're comparing him to, I'm saying there's very little chance he's catching Ovechkin as the greatest Russian of all time if he's not building a trophy case due to there being so many new young franchise talent coming in that will likely be out producing him.

 

[Sweetpotato]

So does he need to leave the NHL in order to be better than them? The point is his legacy most likely stops growing if he doesn't win anything else in the NHL individually, unless he starts winning a bunch more cups. Other Soviets having been elsewhere doesn't have anything to do with their point.

THANK YOU LOL

Someone understood my god.

 

[MeHateHe]

I mean, I don't speak Russian, so I don't know how Kucherov would fare in an argument with Kharlamov.

 

[Bolt32]

I think right now I would say Ovi had a better career than Kucherov. If he comes out and puts together a few more 130 point seasons then I believe he will surpass him. It's honestly too early to tell. I do believe he is up there however.

 

[authentic]

Statistically he may have a good case for #2, but I don't see what he does to separate himself from a peak Malkin or Fedorov. Based on watching them I'm even inclined to give Datsyuk the edge at his peak, he was just that good of a two-way player. Kucherov does have insanely good playoff stats, obviously helped by his team (same with his regular season stats) but at the same time he would likely put up huge numbers regardless getting more ice time on a weaker team. This especially benefits him in the playoff thoughs, but at the same time it's hard to imagine anyone in this era scoring much more in his place if at all.

 

[Alexanderthe89]

Kucherov's peak is certainly noteworthy but he doesn't belong anywhere near this conversation yet. He'll need two monster seasons just to have a chance at having as many points as Ovechkin has goals. The playoff resume helps but needs to show longevity before he gets to be in the same conversation as Fedorov/Mogilny/Bure/Malkin, let alone Ovechkin.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Ovi and Malkin will be hard to beat. Ovi especially.

 

[DFC]

I think he's nearing the top of that "second tier." I don't think anybody can really be compared to Ovy before the majority of their career is played out. Too hard to imagine anybody having the kind of longevity required to overtake him.

I think he's pretty close to Malkin, above Fedorov, hard to judge against Datsyuk.

 

[jcs0218]

Ovi isn't best russian player. That's Kharlamov & Makarov. But they never played in NHL. In Makarov's case he entered the league already way past his prime.

As good as Makarov was in the 1980s, I think he is over-rated by some on these boards from an all-time perspective.

He made his NHL debut as a 31 year old in 1990. Maybe not his prime, but not old either.

He posted his best season that year, with 86 points. He ranked 30th in scoring that year.

This was at a time when the NHL was high scoring.

I think someone that has Makarov's ranking on HFBoards should have performed better than that, even as a 31 year old.

 

[authentic]

As good as Makarov was in the 1980s, I think he is over-rated by some on these boards from an all-time perspective.

He made his NHL debut as a 31 year old in 1990. Maybe not his prime, but not old either.

He posted his best season that year, with 86 points. He ranked 30th in scoring that year.

This was at a time when the NHL was high scoring.

I think someone that has Makarov's ranking on HFBoards should have performed better than that, even as a 31 year old.

I'm pretty sure that's not such an unusual decline at that time, or even today for that matter. Especially considering he was not accustomed to the NHL I really don't think that should be counted as too much of a negative against him. I also don't think he should rank above anyone like Malkin, Fedorov, Datsyuk or Kucherov either.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Makarov did well given his age and having never played in the NHL.

That being said, trying to guess how the best Russian NHL players compare with the best Soviet era players is basically a fruitless and pointless comparison. There just isn't a direct way to compare how those guys would have done in the NHL so it's all speculative. I think it's a bit silly to say guys like Kharlamov & Makarov were for sure better than Ovechkin and Malkin. They may have been, but there isn't enough evidence to say so for sure.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

I see many people still buy in to the Kharlamov hype. One of the most overrated players ever.

 

[wetcoast]

Fetisov, Makarov, Tretiak, and Ovi are hard to top.

Fedorov as well. Kuch will end up in the top 10 one would think, might even be there by now.

 

[tarheelhockey]

For the past 3 years or so, he's been playing at or near the highest level of any Russian player. The other contenders who have hit a comparable level are pretty obvious -- Ovechkin, Malkin, Fedorov, Bure, Makarov, Kharlamov.

Assuming Kucherov doesn't take another step up and become the unanimous MVP of the world (which would be a higher level than any of those other guys managed to achieve) the question is one of consistency. If he keeps playing like he is right now for another 5+ years straight, it becomes a question of whether he outlasted Ovechkin as an all-round force. And then it becomes a question of whether post-peak Ovechkin is more valuable than post-peak Kucherov.

Will that happen, I kind of doubt it. But it could happen. So I'm saying it's too early to tell.

 

[wetcoast]

He will never be considered greater than Ovechkin even if he were to have a good enough career to justify it. Ovechkin’s rocket wins and goal totals are just too legendary.

But on an somewhat unrelated note, I don’t see why Kucherov shouldn’t be considered just as good or possibly better than Patrick Kane when it’s all said and done. There’s really nothing Kane has done that Kucherov hasn’t, and Kucherov has more of his career left to add to the resume.

I’m sorry but Kuch is still quite a bit behind Kane even if he has the best season of the 2.

The thing is that Kuch has 2 seasons that are on par with Kane’s worst and the worst season of the 2.

Kane has been arguably the 4 th best forward regular season and playoffs in his NHL time, can Kuch claim that.

I havent looked but maybe he’s in the top 10 and that’ s it.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

As far as hockey talent goes he's probably barely in my top-10 Russians of all time.
Career is a different story, especially if he achieves dynasty status with the Lightning. He'd probably be up there

 

[Adele Dazeem]

For the past 3 years or so, he's been playing at or near the highest level of any Russian player. The other contenders who have hit a comparable level are pretty obvious -- Ovechkin, Malkin, Fedorov, Bure, Makarov, Kharlamov.

Assuming Kucherov doesn't take another step up and become the unanimous MVP of the world (which would be a higher level than any of those other guys managed to achieve) the question is one of consistency. If he keeps playing like he is right now for another 5+ years straight, it becomes a question of whether he outlasted Ovechkin as an all-round force. And then it becomes a question of whether post-peak Ovechkin is more valuable than post-peak Kucherov.

Will that happen, I kind of doubt it. But it could happen. So I'm saying it's too early to tell.

No mention of Datsyuk, Mogilny, Kovalev?
Kucherov (currently) is slightly above or equal to guys like Kovalchuk and Yashin

 

[tarheelhockey]

No mention of Datsyuk, Mogilny, Kovalev?
Kucherov (currently) is slightly above or equal to guys like Kovalchuk and Yashin

I mean the list can go on and on if we're talking about guys who very briefly touched that level. At some point you have to draw a line... Malkin and Kharlamov are a pretty big step up from Mogilny and Kovalev. Datsyuk does indeed belong in the conversation there, though.

Kucherov has been pretty much hands-down the best RW in the world for the period 2018-2021. Kane and Pastrnak are in contention at their best, but Kucherov has maintained that level more consistently (especially in that the other two had mediocre 2017-18 seasons). I don't think there's a LW seriously in contention (Ovechkin is great but he's not at a Hart level nowadays) which makes Kucherov the best winger during this time period.

Was Kovalchuk ever the best winger in the world, even for one season let alone a block of 4 seasons? I don't think so. His peak was like Ovechkin's post-prime form.

Carry that comparison through to Mogilny and Kovalev. Were they ever the best winger in the world, even for one year? No.

Yashin of course was a center which makes a hard peer-to-peer comparison, but how many years was he... let's say a top-5 forward in the world? Maybe 1999 and that's it? And then we turn to the playoffs and the comparison becomes embarrassing for him.

For now, Kucherov is better compared to Malkin, Datsyuk, Makarov, and Kharlamov -- guys who had similar windows of extremely high-level dominance.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

I mean the list can go on and on if we're talking about guys who very briefly touched that level. At some point you have to draw a line... Malkin and Kharlamov are a pretty big step up from Mogilny and Kovalev. Datsyuk does indeed belong in the conversation there, though.

Kucherov has been pretty much hands-down the best RW in the world for the period 2018-2021. Kane and Pastrnak are in contention at their best, but Kucherov has maintained that level more consistently (especially in that the other two had mediocre 2017-18 seasons). I don't think there's a LW seriously in contention (Ovechkin is great but he's not at a Hart level nowadays) which makes Kucherov the best winger during this time period.

Was Kovalchuk ever the best winger in the world, even for one season let alone a block of 4 seasons? I don't think so. His peak was like Ovechkin's post-prime form.

Carry that comparison through to Mogilny and Kovalev. Were they ever the best winger in the world, even for one year? No.

Yashin of course was a center which makes a hard peer-to-peer comparison, but how many years was he... let's say a top-5 forward in the world? Maybe 1999 and that's it? And then we turn to the playoffs and the comparison becomes embarrassing for him.

For now, Kucherov is better compared to Malkin, Datsyuk, Makarov, and Kharlamov -- guys who had similar windows of extremely high-level dominance.

The issue with comparing a player's statistical peaks and evaluating their "talent" with relation to how well they do in comparison with their peers is the misstep of not comparing the peers of one player to another. Kucherov has less competition than the guys mentioned above - as a result his performance looks better on paper.

That being said my comment was based on their talent level not necessarily their point production, in which case, Kucherov is easily up there.

 

[authentic]

For the past 3 years or so, he's been playing at or near the highest level of any Russian player. The other contenders who have hit a comparable level are pretty obvious -- Ovechkin, Malkin, Fedorov, Bure, Makarov, Kharlamov.

Assuming Kucherov doesn't take another step up and become the unanimous MVP of the world (which would be a higher level than any of those other guys managed to achieve) the question is one of consistency. If he keeps playing like he is right now for another 5+ years straight, it becomes a question of whether he outlasted Ovechkin as an all-round force. And then it becomes a question of whether post-peak Ovechkin is more valuable than post-peak Kucherov.

Will that happen, I kind of doubt it. But it could happen. So I'm saying it's too early to tell.

I think Datsyuk should be in there. Back to Back 4th place finishes in points + a Selke trophy and 1 dominant playoff run. Also has the best possession metrics as well as some other advanced stats since they've been tracked for most of his career.

 

[authentic]

The issue with comparing a player's statistical peaks and evaluating their "talent" with relation to how well they do in comparison with their peers is the misstep of not comparing the peers of one player to another. Kucherov has less competition than the guys mentioned above - as a result his performance looks better on paper.

That being said my comment was based on their talent level not necessarily their point production, in which case, Kucherov is easily up there.

I'm not sure how relevant the competition is here in regards to Mogilny and Kovalev. Their peaks are perhaps underrated, but would either of them have scored more than 128 points or had 63 points in their last 42 playoff games in Kucherov's place? I can comfortably say neither would come close.

Datsyuk is a different story since he controlled the play all over the ice to an extent very few players have, he was much more than his offensive point totals indicated.

 

[Adele Dazeem]

I'm not sure how relevant the competition is here in regards to Mogilny and Kovalev. Their peaks are perhaps underrated, but would either of them have scored more than 128 points or had 63 points in their last 42 playoff games in Kucherov's place? I can comfortably say neither would come close.

Datsyuk is a different story since he controlled the play all over the ice to an extent very few players have, he was much more than his offensive point totals indicated.

When it's all said and done I think what you're saying will hold true. Just have to see how his career develops. Does he have another gear when he's in the twilight of his career - similarly to some of the great Russian players.

 

[wetcoast]

I think you're massively underrating Fedorov due to point totals and ignoring the fact that his offense was muted due to role in many Detroit years, as well as the fact he was one of the best defensive players in the league, while Kucherov doesn't offer too much else besides his offense and is an average star winger in terms of all-around game.

I know you're a very points-heavy guy, which is fine, but I'm not. Even still, Kucherov also only has 4 seasons as an elite scorer so far anyway (finishes of 1,3,5,7). Fedorov had 4 seasons as a top 10 or borderline scorer as well (finishes of 2, 9, 12, 14) while being elite defensively, plus that longevity. And even looking at peak, while I think Fedorov's '94 gets overrated, he was still better than Kucherov imo who, as noted at the time, was somewhat inflated by secondary PP assists on a stacked PP and put up 8 more points in a league that wasn't actually that different of a scoring environment. I don't think a roughly 15% difference in points makes up for Fedorov's two-way play, especially when Fedorov had more ES and primary points. I think putting Kucherov ahead of playoffs right now is also silly and ignores higher totals relative to the league these days than in the mid to late 90s, as well as overrating points over two-way play. Fedorov had 4 straight years where he could have been the Conn Smythe winner.

If Kucherov puts up a few more big seasons, he'll likely end up ahead, but I don't see the argument today whatsoever, and he's already 28, so it's not a given.

As for Malkin, I wasn't lumping him and Fedodov together, just listing the other two to pass behind Ovechkin.

I agree with this excellent post and seriously I think I would take Dats 4 year peak over Kuch right now as well but overall when it’s all said and done it will be very interesting to see where he stacks up all time among Russian NHLers.

Right now there is an obvious top 3 in Ovi, Feds and Malkin

After that the order is more debatable according to individual preferences but would be very interesting to see.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I think Datsyuk should be in there. Back to Back 4th place finishes in points + a Selke trophy and 1 dominant playoff run. Also has the best possession metrics as well as some other advanced stats since they've been tracked for most of his career.

I agree, there was that window of a few years where Datsyuk was right there with the Big 3 in a race for the best overall player in the world. That's pretty much where Kucherov is now, with a different version of the Big 3.

The issue with comparing a player's statistical peaks and evaluating their "talent" with relation to how well they do in comparison with their peers is the misstep of not comparing the peers of one player to another. Kucherov has less competition than the guys mentioned above - as a result his performance looks better on paper.

That being said my comment was based on their talent level not necessarily their point production, in which case, Kucherov is easily up there.

I'm not comparing statistical peaks, though. If that were the case, then Kovalchuk would be a lot higher on the list. But we all know who Kovalchuk really was when it came to the 200-foot game. Likewise, Ovechkin was a much better overall player in the late 2000s than he is today, even if the stats don't quite capture it.

Strongly disagree that Kucherov has less competition than Dead Puck guys. Who was Kovalchuk's competition at wing when he led the league in goals in 2004? St. Louis, Iginla... Rick Nash? Naslund?

How about Kovalev's best years? Yashin's? Those years were the heyday of Jagr and an increasingly damaged Forsberg, Sakic's late prime, Pavel Bure floating at the red line, Selanne and Fleury beginning their decline. Lindros was already finished, Mario wasn't even in the league. Guys like Recchi and Elias were top-10 forwards, less on the strength of their performance than on the fact that there were multiple superstar forwards on the sidelines at all times.

Right now Kucherov is in that "best player in the world" debate primarily against McDavid, with perennial competition from MacKinnon. Post-prime Kane is still performing at a level comparable to an aging Selanne. Post-prime Crosby is easily the equal of an aging Sakic. And then on top of those you throw in Matthews, Draisaitl, Panarin, and the machine-consistent Ovechkin. A few years ago he was up against younger versions of Malkin and Giroux. And that still leaves out guys like Pastrnak and Marchand and Barkov. That's a level of depth pretty easily comparable to, if not greater than, the late 1990s. To stand on top of that group and easily be more consistently outstanding than all but perhaps McDavid is a strong endorsement.

In short, the difference today is that Kucherov is a guy who keeps this year's flash-in-the-pan player from being mistaken for a legit superstar. Whereas in 2000, guys like Yashin and Kovalev were evidence that the legit superstars had gone missing, which allowed this type of player to become a top-5 forward for a brief time.

 

[Love]

I’m sorry but Kuch is still quite a bit behind Kane even if he has the best season of the 2.

The thing is that Kuch has 2 seasons that are on par with Kane’s worst and the worst season of the 2.

Kane has been arguably the 4 th best forward regular season and playoffs in his NHL time, can Kuch claim that.

I havent looked but maybe he’s in the top 10 and that’ s it.

Kucherov has a better regular season and playoff PPG. He has the better individual seasons for both playoffs and regular season. Kane is thought of as this hyper elite playoff performer and he is, but consider this: Kucherov could surpass Kane in total playoff points this season. Kuch is only 10 points behind Kane in career playoff points despite being almost 5 years younger and having played 28 less playoff games.

The only thing Kane has won that Kuch hasn’t is the Conn Smythe. Kuch could easily win that in the next couple weeks and even without that, Kuch has proven to be at least as good as Kane as a playoff performer (that’s me being generous to Kane).

So Kuch being “quite a bit behind Kane” is quite the bold claim. Not sure how/why Kuch is so far behind Kane? Or even behind him at all? To me Kuch’s career will surpass Kane very soon if he hasn’t already.