Ovechkin is scoring at a pace right now, that when adjusted for era, only Lemieux and Gretzky have had better seasons, and I don't think anyones expecting him to slow down too much. Combine that with what he's done so far, and let's be honest guys.
Ovechkin vs Moore revisited
- Thread starter raleh
- Start date
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Difference
The difference is that offense has various elements:
From - the player that starts or generates the offense - Harvey, Orr, Pilote, Potvin,etc.
Through - the player that makes the offense run, Mikita, Clarke, Trottier, Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe, Beliveau, etc
To - the scorer or finisher Hull, F. Mahovlich,etc.
Dickie Moore was one of the rare left wingers that could make an offense run with his passing. Ovechkin is showing signs of adding this element to his offensive game but until he does it over time I'll reserve praise. Bobby Hull and Frank Mahovlich developed this skill much later in their careers.
The difference is that offense has various elements:
From - the player that starts or generates the offense - Harvey, Orr, Pilote, Potvin,etc.
Through - the player that makes the offense run, Mikita, Clarke, Trottier, Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe, Beliveau, etc
To - the scorer or finisher Hull, F. Mahovlich,etc.
Dickie Moore was one of the rare left wingers that could make an offense run with his passing. Ovechkin is showing signs of adding this element to his offensive game but until he does it over time I'll reserve praise. Bobby Hull and Frank Mahovlich developed this skill much later in their careers.
Hawkey Town 18
Registered User
I agree with your point that there are various elements to offense and that certain players contribute to offense differently than other players do, but I am a bit confused as to how it relates to what we were talking about. Are you saying that because guys like Hull and Ovechkin are in the 3rd group (or more in the 3rd group if they are in both) opposed to the 2nd group, that defenses do not focus on them as much?
I also still don't see how a team focuses on a player more because he wins 2 consecutive scoring championships instead of one and a runner-up while still being the best player on his team?
In 1958-59 (which I've heard is considered the best Habs team of the 5-year stretch), Moore's teammates included the 1st team all-star center, defenseman, and goalie; 2nd team center and defenseman.
Today's equivalent (based on last year's awards) would have Ovechkin on the same team as Malkin, Datsyuk, Chara, Lidstrom and Tim Thomas.
You can not possibly make the argument that Moore and Ovechkin are/were equally relied upon by their respective teams.
Due to the breadth of Montreal's elite talent when Moore was a regular, I think the cups argument becomes completely moot. In light of their vastly different team situations, we need to narrow the scope of this argument to individual awards and talent, and Ovechkin cleans up.
I think Ovie is a top ten player at the end of his career. At the very least, at this pace he supplants Jagr as the top Euro skater, pretty easily.
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
Then tell me, why "best players to never win" lists are mostly post expansion players? Why are dynasties a thing of the past?
The past 15 years are the hardest it's ever been to win.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Modern Poster Bias
Modern poster bias, best players include the likes of Jeremy Roenick, Mats Sundin,etc Post expansion includes players like Dean Prentice and Doug Mohns who started their NHL career in the first half or the fifties.Simply many more post expansion players.
As for dynasties.It took from 1918 until 1949(32 seasons) before the NHL had a team the won three cups in a row, 1947-49 Toronto Maple Leafs. Two teams won two in a row - 1930,1931 Canadiens, 1936,1937 Red Wings.
If we go back thirty - two seasons (1978-2009) we see more teams(Canadiens,Oilers(2),Penguins, Red Wings) have won two in a row, with the Islanders winning four in a row.
It is possible to choose a fifteen season that supports your point but then it is equally possible to find similar fifteen season windows in the pre expansion era.
Modern poster bias, best players include the likes of Jeremy Roenick, Mats Sundin,etc Post expansion includes players like Dean Prentice and Doug Mohns who started their NHL career in the first half or the fifties.Simply many more post expansion players.
As for dynasties.It took from 1918 until 1949(32 seasons) before the NHL had a team the won three cups in a row, 1947-49 Toronto Maple Leafs. Two teams won two in a row - 1930,1931 Canadiens, 1936,1937 Red Wings.
If we go back thirty - two seasons (1978-2009) we see more teams(Canadiens,Oilers(2),Penguins, Red Wings) have won two in a row, with the Islanders winning four in a row.
It is possible to choose a fifteen season that supports your point but then it is equally possible to find similar fifteen season windows in the pre expansion era.
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Hilarious
This is hilarious. So Tim Thomas is the equal of Terry Sawchuk / Jacques Plante. Tom Johnson, Marcel Pronovost, Bill Gadsby are the equivalent of Lidstrom and Chara.
Dickie Moore was one of the main reasons why the Canadiens were a great dynasty. During the 1958-59 season when Doug Harvey was playing hurt most of the season it was Moore who made the left side of the powerplay work.
Bolded. Not what the thread is about but it sums up the agenda pretty well.
This is hilarious. So Tim Thomas is the equal of Terry Sawchuk / Jacques Plante. Tom Johnson, Marcel Pronovost, Bill Gadsby are the equivalent of Lidstrom and Chara.
Dickie Moore was one of the main reasons why the Canadiens were a great dynasty. During the 1958-59 season when Doug Harvey was playing hurt most of the season it was Moore who made the left side of the powerplay work.
Bolded. Not what the thread is about but it sums up the agenda pretty well.
You'd have to be dense to think I meant in an all-time manner. Obviously I was speaking of their performances that year.
Agenda? You got me. I've been sent by the CIA to discredit Dickie Moore.
I read the thread and I found your arguments against Ovechkin to be pretty weak and vague, as though you'd picked a side before considering the evidence. This is a slam dunk for Ovechkin.
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
Agree. I came in here thinking it was Ovechkin; I've since been swayed by good arguments in favour of Ovechkin and nothing of relevance in favour of Moore.
A third Hart trophy this year is going to put Ovechkin in some seriously elite company, the worst of which is still a top-20 player all-time. He's on his way to being that now; all he'll need is some more fluff (more seasons played to add career value and totals) and some team success.
A fourth Hart, a fifth, well, then at that point, forget waiting for the fluff, he's top-15 automatically. At this point I can see him being about 50th all-time. We waited so long to finish the 2009 revision, that there's already one glaring omission, even if we get Ovechkin in at 71st as a write-in nominee.
A third Hart trophy this year is going to put Ovechkin in some seriously elite company, the worst of which is still a top-20 player all-time. He's on his way to being that now; all he'll need is some more fluff (more seasons played to add career value and totals) and some team success.
A fourth Hart, a fifth, well, then at that point, forget waiting for the fluff, he's top-15 automatically. At this point I can see him being about 50th all-time. We waited so long to finish the 2009 revision, that there's already one glaring omission, even if we get Ovechkin in at 71st as a write-in nominee.
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
MXD did have a point though - what about Crosby then? I think most of us agree that Ovechkin has been better than Crosby so far - but the gap really isn't that huge.
3 Harts in a row is pretty incredible, though.
Edit: Maybe Sid Abel is a good comparison for Crosby. Similar peak, but Crosby is lacking the career value as of yet?
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,810
- 16,548
Abel was the first name that came to mind, due to somewhat similar accomplishments to date. Could've been Stewart or Cowley, I guess.
I'm pretty much on the Crosby side of the Crosby/Ovie fence, for the pretty good reason that I think Nicklas Backstrom is EXTREMELY underrated. Besides, face-to-face competition should matter, and while AO is certainly NOT to blame for Washington losing, Crosby needs to receive a premium for it...
Not to mention : Crosby is a center, and, by definition, has bigger responsabilities. The same (...LW) applies to Moore, but Moore was an extremely responsible player. And AO... well, he's responsible for a few injuries, but other than that....?!?!?!
(The last sentence completely disregards the current season)
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Good Argument
So your definition of a good argument is futuristic fantasy. What's next, palm readings of the players, a crystal ball for each player, horoscopes, etc.
So your definition of a good argument is futuristic fantasy. What's next, palm readings of the players, a crystal ball for each player, horoscopes, etc.
Can you realistically expect Ovechkin to suddenly stop being MVP calibre after this season?
seventieslord
Student Of The Game
I think Crosby and Abel have to be considered about equal right now. Or Crosby could still be 10 behind. Similar in a lot of ways, too. I think Crosby's accomplishments have had more dominance to them, but Abel also has the rest of his career on his side.
I've tended to rate Crosby ahead of Ovechkin too, but after this season... it's tough to do.
But, Ovechkin has played up to age 24 so far. He's had more opportunity to have the type of seasons that make you an all-time great. Crosby hasn't.
If you're a Crosby fan who wants to see him do better than Ovechkin (and I am) there is no shame in admitting Ovy has him owned for now, because Crosby really has two years to make up on him.
Hey, I'm just thinking out loud. The topic at hand is, has Ovechkin passed Moore in all-time greatness? The answer is yes. My only projection in saying that is assuming the rest of this season goes as it has been. The stuff about the 4th & 5th hart, that's a futuristic fantasy. Which isn't necessary to proving Ovechkin is ahead of Moore as of now.
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,810
- 16,548
Well... statistically, AO is ahead (but Crosby might reach the 500 pts mark with a higher PPG ratio than AO's did), and as far as completeness of the game... Well, I'd take Sidney's "whole" game before AO's "whole" game. And Crosby is a notch ahead in the playoffs...
You see, there ARE arguments for Crosby. Whether he's ahead or not of AO is a bit irrelevant -- but it's relevant that somebody could put up rational arguments based on stats, impression (and even BOTH, actually) that Crosby is, at the very worst, marginally behind AO at this point.
Moore and Abel are, for the sake of the argument, some 35 ranks apart in the Top-100.
While I can understand somebody ranking AO higher than Crosby (if they don't do a deeper analysis and only rely on Hart-counting, which has slowly become an illness worse than Cup-counting, or even REVERSE Cup-counting, as seems to happen with Dickie Moore --- if they do, it's a best a virtual tie for AO), I just cannot understand having Crosby WAY LOWER than AO --- and between 60th and 95th... there's quite a gap.
I do not qualify as a Crosby fan at all and I don't care whether he's better or not than AO. Although I fully expect the Crosby/AO debate will probably emulate the Trottier/Bossy depate in a few years.
Last edited:
MXD
Original #4
- Oct 27, 2005
- 50,810
- 16,548
Canadiens1958
Registered User
Sudden Drop in Performance
Many players experienced a drop in performance after and incredible start to their careers. Reason does not matter.
Short list - Terry Sawchuk, Frank Mahovlich, Earl Reibel - who lead the Red Wings in scoring at the age of 24 during the 1954-55 season ahead of Howe, Lindsay, Delvecchio and Kelly,
http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/DET/1955.html
Recently you have had Alexander Mogilny, Teemu Selanne, Jeremy Roenick, Eric Lindros, Real Cloutier amongst others that saw drastic drops in performance after promising starts.
So it is definitely realistic to tkae nothing for granted.
Many players experienced a drop in performance after and incredible start to their careers. Reason does not matter.
Short list - Terry Sawchuk, Frank Mahovlich, Earl Reibel - who lead the Red Wings in scoring at the age of 24 during the 1954-55 season ahead of Howe, Lindsay, Delvecchio and Kelly,
http://www.hockey-reference.com/teams/DET/1955.html
Recently you have had Alexander Mogilny, Teemu Selanne, Jeremy Roenick, Eric Lindros, Real Cloutier amongst others that saw drastic drops in performance after promising starts.
So it is definitely realistic to tkae nothing for granted.
Yeah, out of all those players you mentioned, only Eric Lindros had a peak value comparable to Ovechkin. Dickie Moore wasn't exactly mr.durability either.
When Ovechkin wins his 3rd hart trophy all of this nonsense about Dickie being better will end.
Guys like Gilbert Perrault get ranked around 80-90th on lists, Ovechkin has surpassed him by now.
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
For the record I think that the comparison is still incomplete until Ovechkin gets some more playoffs under his belt. But as far as the regular season goes, Ovechkin is better.
Only Selanne, Lindros and Sawchuk approached what Ovechkin's done. Only Sawchuk came close to multiple MVP seasons. Sawchuk is a top 30 all-time player. That might apply to Crosby. But Ovechkin has 2 goal scoring titles, a points title, 2 MVPs and 4 1st team all stars, and will likely be adding one more of each this year. Seriously, that is above and beyond what those players did.
Only Selanne, Lindros and Sawchuk approached what Ovechkin's done. Only Sawchuk came close to multiple MVP seasons. Sawchuk is a top 30 all-time player. That might apply to Crosby. But Ovechkin has 2 goal scoring titles, a points title, 2 MVPs and 4 1st team all stars, and will likely be adding one more of each this year. Seriously, that is above and beyond what those players did.
I choose fifteen because the first 30 years of expansion had serious parity issues. You are right that the first 40 years were a lot different than the original 6 teams. There was also more teams than the O6 era. Guys like Roy Worters belong in any best without a cup discussions. And Mats Sundin and JR are hardly who I was talking about. I was thinking Hall of Famers like Brad Park, Bjore Salming, Marcel Dionne, Dale Hawerchuk and Peter Stastny. The Original 6 era was the era when the highest percentage of players won cups. I don't see how you can dispute that.
Last edited:
Malkin4Top6Wingerz
Can you like, shutup
- Mar 14, 2009
- 5,032
- 9
Anybody else amused that the guy throwing around ridiculously flawed arguments in favor of a Habs legend with the username "Canadiens1958" is complaining about other people with agendas?
This is Ovechkin pretty easily though, he's likely going to coast to a third consecutive Hart trophy and another Art Ross despite missing almost 10 games this season.
