How crazy is it that Ovechkin may tie Gretkzy and Bossy for most 50-goal seasons this year?

[Oil Dood]

No, but, lots of the stories that are coming out question whether he is the greatest person to ever play the game and the nicest guy.

Meh, hockey has never had an ambassador like him, that is what makes him special on top of his great skills.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Meh, hockey has never had an ambassador like him, that is what makes him special on top of his great skills.

meh.

 

[WingsFan95]

It's hard to evaluate him in comparison to Lemieux. Mario did more with passing as a Center and Bossy was Bossy. Then you have Hull leading the league 7 times. He's definetly a better goal scorer than Gretzky though and I think whatever debate there was on that front ended a couple years back.

His quest for 895 will depend on his desire and his health. Not his ability to do it.

 

[Jedub]

you can’t be serious. If that hypothetical player was a better goal scorer than ovechkin, they would be scoring more goals than Ovechkin.

but it doesn’t matter, because the fans will twist the stats until they can pretend that hypothetical player is a better goal scorer. It’s more mental/emotional than it is based on stats.

in 30 years, possibly all of these Ovechkin goals are going to be argued are only really worth 0.75 of a goal, and Gretzky’s are only worth 0.23

man, that’s so dumb it actually hurts to think about

there is literally nothing stopping a player from scoring 200 points this year or next. All of the league rules are tailor made for it to happen. And it might happen, but until it does it just means no one has reached that level of dominance in the game since the 80’s.

10/10 troll

 

[Oil Dood]

meh.

Exactly. He is the greatest player of all time and the greatest ambassador the sport has ever known. He literally transended the sport like no other player in history. To put it blunt he is the greatest. Dig for some second hand stories if you like it does not matter. Because of him the league was able to expand where it did. No player past or present has impacted the game and the record book like him. If someone beats any of his records that is a good thing, it means that scoring is not dead.

 

[Oil Dood]

It's hard to evaluate him in comparison to Lemieux. Mario did more with passing as a Center and Bossy was Bossy. Then you have Hull leading the league 7 times. He's definetly a better goal scorer than Gretzky though and I think whatever debate there was on that front ended a couple years back.

His quest for 895 will depend on his desire and his health. Not his ability to do it.

Hull was a better shooter but without a set up man (Oates) he was not as effectve. Mario and Gretzky were the drivers.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Hull was a better shooter but without a set up man (Oates) he was not as effectve. Mario and Gretzky were the drivers.

He was talking about Bobby, not Brett

 

[Oil Dood]

He was talking about Bobby, not Brett

That makes more sense. Bobby Hull was good, very good.

 

[beowulf]

Bossy retired at 30

Exactly, nice for Ovi but not all that impressive.

 

[Randyne]

in 30 years, possibly all of these Ovechkin goals are going to be argued are only really worth 0.75 of a goal, and Gretzky’s are only worth 0.23

Adjusted goals don't depend on time. They depend on league-wide scoring environment. Here is how adjusted stats value goals from 95 years ago:

	Season	Goals	Adjusted	AdjG/G
Nels Stewart	1925-26	34	59	1.74
Nels Stewart	1927-28	41	55	1.34
Nels Stewart	1928-29	44	55	1.25
Nels Stewart	1929-30	44	64	1.45
Nels Stewart	1930-31	42	50	1.19

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

 

[SwaggySpungo]

No, but, lots of the stories that are coming out question whether he is the greatest person to ever play the game and the nicest guy.

And what are these “stories”?

 

[CasusBelli]

I’d like to see the ratio of OV goals to total NHL goals for each season he’s been active (and then compare that to such ratio for other all-time greats) . That should adjust for goal-scoring frequency across eras. Alternatively, you could look at total goals scored divided by total NHL goals scored during OV’s tenure.

I love my Rangers, and though some of my fellow fans might consider me a traitor for saying this, it was a true joy to see OV lift the Cup. Such a likable guy and phenomenal talent; I just can’t bring myself to cheer against him.

 

[Fantomas]

10/10 troll

No doubt.

 

[Adam da bomb]

And what are these “stories”?

Beyond the regular he was a gambling addict and a lousy tipper? I mean these guys are millionaires they don’t need to stiff the person working minimum wage.

 

[Bandit]

It’s not crazy at all. Ovechkin is one of the greatest goal scorers the nhl has ever seen. Not sure why it always has to devolve into who was the greatestestest

 

[SwaggySpungo]

Beyond the regular he was a gambling addict and a lousy tipper? I mean these guys are millionaires they don’t need to stiff the person working minimum wage.

So those are the “stories”? Anything else? Did he jaywalk once?

 

[Leksand]

Ironically, that is true, at least for Gretzky’s last 5 seasons (25% of his career) which were all during the dead puck era.

His final season, an average of only 5.26 goals-per-game were scored in the NHL. No season in Ovechkin’s career has ever had such low scoring.

So it’s not true for almost 75% of his career then. My wild guess is that he scored a tad more than 75 % of his career total goals during those years. All said and done, in my mind you have to say he is the best offensive player of time, but that does not imply some normalization of scoring numbers over time silly or stupid.

 

[Sam Spade]

He also might not. Just sayin'.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Well of course he's said that. What else is he supposed to say?

Ovie will be the 1972 Dolphins of hockey. Set the record, and every time a HOF’er falls short and retires, he publicly pops a bottle of champagne.

 

[RorschachWJK]

you can’t be serious. If that hypothetical player was a better goal scorer than ovechkin, they would be scoring more goals than Ovechkin.

but it doesn’t matter, because the fans will twist the stats until they can pretend that hypothetical player is a better goal scorer. It’s more mental/emotional than it is based on stats.

in 30 years, possibly all of these Ovechkin goals are going to be argued are only really worth 0.75 of a goal, and Gretzky’s are only worth 0.23

man, that’s so dumb it actually hurts to think about

there is literally nothing stopping a player from scoring 200 points this year or next. All of the league rules are tailor made for it to happen. And it might happen, but until it does it just means no one has reached that level of dominance in the game since the 80’s.

Reading this thread brings this question: are you posing as a very...erm... simple person or is that genuine?

 

[slovakia18]

This proves one thing to me....

Vanek doesn't get enough love.

For Sure, Vanek was until 2014 one of the best winger in that league. i ll never forget the seaosn 2013(Lockout Season) he had 2times a 5 point game, lead the league the first 15 games in points and Goals. Than he played 10 Games with an injurie and miss 10 Games because of that, and had in the end 41 points in 38 Games. But the really strange thing is, he played with a "dead" team , no elite Center no Elite winger on his Team. Imagine what would happen he would have a Bäckström, Malkin who ever on his line that year...

 

[oilexport]

Amazing accomplishment for goals. Wayne still the best until he gets beat.

 

[SwaggySpungo]

It’s not crazy at all. Ovechkin is one of the greatest goal scorers the nhl has ever seen.

Then why diminish what he’s in the process of accomplishing?

 

[Bandit]

Then why diminish what he’s in the process of accomplishing?

You took what I said as diminishing his achievement? Weird take.

 

[Leksand]

What I'm saying is that there isn't an absolute value for greatness, because of all the ways that it can be defined. It's easy to compare players within the same subset of rules and factors, but if you seek to compare across decades, you have to acknowledge that there are enough fundamental differences to account for that you have to refine the argument and by what measure greatness is defined. That's why I've consistently said that Ovechkin, the greatest goalscorer of his generation, belongs on the mantle of all-time players, but the legacy is nuanced. When I saw Gretzky on the ice, I always marveled at his vision and ability to be a step ahead. When I saw Lemieux play, I marveled at his hands and ability to score from anywhere. When I watch Ovechkin--and I've long enjoyed watching him play--I marvel at the blistering pace of his slapshot especially off a one-timer.

What does it mean to be the GOAT, or the best goalscorer? If it's about picking one player to have the puck on their stick in a situation where you have to score, I'm picking Lemieux over Ovechkin hands down based on what I've seen with my own eyes. If the question is who the de facto scoring champion is, it's without hesitation Wayne Gretzky. I'm not seeking to discredit what Ovechkin has accomplished; he's in the process of authoring his own legacy and if he can stay healthy and continue to fill the net with pucks, how he ultimately slots into the pantheon changes. Health and durability can be their own form of greatness, but I'll probably remember Ovechkin as being the beast that you fed the puck to and counted on hammering away, rather than as the sniper who could bury the puck on a whim.

As a general rule, I'm against sensationalism and the obsession with any singular account of "THE BEST EVER" or "THE WORST EVER" which seems to consume popular culture. At the end of the day, anyone can convince themselves of whatever they want, but if you start with a conclusion and seek to prove it backwards, you fail to account for too many blindspots. Adjusted statistics can be a fun way to parse a perspective as fodder for a conversation, but if you think that it is some mic drop maneuver that "proves" that today's greats are greater than past greats... well, go ahead, I guess. Feel free to say and believe as you choose. I'm just presenting my skepticism and a couple of reasons why.

*shrugs*



I'm not arguing in favor of any method of determining a precise answer to this question, because it isn't a question that can be answered precisely. I was a stats junkie for a long time, and it's definitely fun and interesting to parse through information and weigh different perspectives. But I am strictly arguing against adjusted stats being used as some altar of purity; if we acknowledge that it cannot be a perfect model for comparison, then I agree it should be used in addition to rather than in substitution of other methods. Statistics can be compelling which is why the presentation of adjusted numbers deserve an asterisk and debate.

That’s a great response and I fundamentally agree with all you say.

Though I would say Ovechkin’s playing style and goal scoring is quite a bit more exhilarating than you describe it. I guess I’m biased I’ve seen him played live many times, seen him practice, and won a cup for us.

I’d also maintain that to the extent that the comparison of players is focused on numbers the there will be “adjustors” intentionally or unintentionally, knowingly or unknowingly.