Higher Peak?

[The Gloaming]

Ovechkin with his 65 goal season, quite easily. If Crosby hadn't gotten injured in his crazy 10-11 campaign, it'd be him.

 

[Tweed]

Ovechkin with his 65 goal season, quite easily. If Crosby hadn't gotten injured in his crazy 10-11 campaign, it'd be him.

This doesn't make any sense. You're acknowledging that Sid played at a higher level, but then you're saying it doesn't matter because he was injured while he was playing at that higher level.

 

[The Abusement Park]

This doesn't make any sense. You're acknowledging that Sid played at a higher level, but then you're saying it doesn't matter because he was injured while he was playing at that higher level.

Because it's a total what if situation. Ovechkin did it for an entire season, if Crosby had played at that level all year than it'd be him, but he didn't.

 

[Tweed]

Because it's a total what if situation. Ovechkin did it for an entire season, if Crosby had played at that level all year than it'd be him, but he didn't.

The question wasn't "who played at an extremely high level for the longest?"... the question was "who do you guys think had a higher peak?".

 

[Mackinnonen]

Watch this video and you'll realize the answer is Ovechkin.

 

[Wulfgar]

For me, it is Ovechkin in 09-10. He was unreal that season, especially before the Olympics.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

The question wasn't "who played at an extremely high level for the longest?"... the question was "who do you guys think had a higher peak?".

Well if you want to break it down like that we might as well just look at who had the best game of their careers. Or maybe the best period.

Darryl Sittler; the greatest peak in hockey history.

 

[Tweed]

Well if you want to break it down like that we might as well just look at who had the best game of their careers. Or maybe the best period.

Darryl Sittler; the greatest peak in hockey history.

Yeah okay... I agree, let's get stupid about it. He's the one that's put an arbitrary 82 game threshold on the sample size. That's after acknowledging that he believed Sid would maintain his pace.

Edit: I find it funny how you consider straight points, the measuring stick.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

Yeah okay... I agree, let's get stupid about it. He's the one that's put an arbitrary 82 game threshold on the sample size. That's after acknowledging that he believed Sid would maintain his pace.

Edit: I find it funny how you consider straight points, the measuring stick.

You must not understand what the word arbitrary means.

 

[Tweed]

You must not understand what the word arbitrary means.

Why 82? Why not 164? Why 1 game? Why 1 Period? Why not 41 games?

Are you sure you understand what arbitrary means?

 

[silkyjohnson50]

Why 82? Why not 164? Why 1 game? Why 1 Period? Why not 41 games?

Are you sure you understand what arbitrary means?

82 games is a full regular season. Seems like a pretty standardized, non-random sample size for determining how well a player played over a period of time.

 

[Tweed]

82 games is a full regular season. Seems like a pretty standardized, non-random sample size for determining how well a player played over a period of time.

Are you suggesting a half season isn't?

 

[silkyjohnson50]

Are you suggesting a half season isn't?

Is a half season more beneficial to your argument?

 

[Tweed]

Is a half season more beneficial to your argument?

So now you're suggesting he only cited duration, to support his case.

 

[KrisLetAngry]

Crosby.

The crappy thing is he got injured.

But that dominance for that period is the highest peak I have seen in the NHL since the lockout.

 

[Tweed]

Crosby.

The crappy thing is he got injured.

But that dominance for that period is the highest peak I have seen in the NHL since the lockout.

Well apparently if you get injured, it doesn't count.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

So now you're suggesting he only cited duration, to support his case.

I just put it in desktop mode to see if you had an avatar. Checks out.

 

[Tweed]

I just put it in desktop mode to see if you had an avatar. Checks out.

Grade school response. "You're a fan of that team, so you must be a homer."

You're dodgin' the meat. The guy brought duration into the equation after acknowledging Sid played at a higher level. I pointed out how what he said doesn't make sense.

And all you've got is Darryl Sittler, who isn't even on op's list.

It's over man, take a seat.

 

[Super Hans]

Ovechkin had a 41-game stretch in 07-08 of 36g, 30a, 66p

Sidney Crosby's 41-game 10-11 season was 32g 34a, 66p

Pretty close, same sample size and what I would define as both players' peaks.

Crosby was pretty consistent that season with only 6 pointless games, but just 2 hat tricks and 2 4-point games.

Ovechkin was less consistent in that 41-game stretch with 12 pointless games, but had monster games with 2 4-goal games, 1 other hat trick, 3 5-point games and a 4-point game.

I think both players have a pretty good argument and I'm undecided between them.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

Grade school response. "You're a fan of that team, so you must be a homer."

You're dodgin' the meat. The guy brought duration into the equation after acknowledging Sid played at a higher level. I pointed out how what he said doesn't make sense.

And all you've got is Darryl Sittler, who isn't even on op's list.

It's over man, take a seat.

You then suggested that his 82 game sample size was arbitrary, which is absolutely not the case. When we discuss the greatness of players on an all-time level, do we not judge them on a season-by-season basis? When they hand out major awards, do they not do it on a season-by-season basis?

When discussing a player's peak, using a single season is generally the minimal standard. Otherwise we might just as well cut it to any length that fits an argument's need. Very similar to Mario fans love to break down certain segments of a season to show that he was as dominant as Gretzky.

 

[bobbydigital]

An argument can be made for either Crosby or Ovechkin but personally I'd have to go with Ovechkin.

Also, Merry Christmas!

 

[Captain Bowie]

In terms of single season, I'd go:

Ovechkin 07-08 (65 goals)
Crosby 13/14
Crosby 06/07
Ovechkin 12/13
Ovechkin 08/09
Kane 15/16
Crosby 09/10
Stamkos 11/12
Ovechkin 09/10
Crosby 10/11 (66 in 41)
Stamkos 09/10
Kane 12/13
Crosby 16/17 (projected)
Stamkos 12/13

Something like that. There are definitely 2 tiers here.

 

[TheKrebsCycle]

Crosby comfortably

 

[Tweed]

You then suggested that his 82 game sample size was arbitrary, which is absolutely not the case. When we discuss the greatness of players on an all-time level, do we not judge them on a season-by-season basis? When they hand out major awards, do they not do it on a season-by-season basis?

When discussing a player's peak, using a single season is generally the minimal standard. Otherwise we might just as well cut it to any length that fits an argument's need. Very similar to Mario fans love to break down certain segments of a season to show that he was as dominant as Gretzky.

Actually, as far as duration goes, when we discuss a player's peak, we're usually discussing the point from which the player entered his peak and began playing the best hockey of his career, to the point that he began to decline.

Mario fans have to break down his performances to "certain segments of a season", because they can't draw on a full season for comparison, given his injuries. You do know that... right?

 

[Captain Bowie]

Actually, as far as duration goes, when we discuss a player's peak, we're usually discussing the point from which the player entered his peak and began playing the best hockey of his career, to the point that he began to decline.

Mario fans have to break down his performances to "certain segments of a season", because they can't draw on a full season for comparison, given his injuries. You do know that... right?

There often isn't clearly defined beginning and end to a players peak. Crosby for example, his first and second best seasons statistically have come 7 seasons apart. Was that whole span his peak? He is scoring goals at the highest rate of his career, is he still in his peak? Has his whole career been his peak to date?