Prime Sundin - Forsberg - Alfredsson vs Ovechkin - Malkin - Kovalchuk

[OilCanada92]

Alfredsson scored 100pts 1x, on a stacked line in the highest scoring season in the last 25 years. There's a reason he only came top 15 in hart voting 1x in his career.

Sundin had two top 10 finishes and people talk about him like he was a superstar.

Team Sweden needs to rely on "peak seasons" to compare with what Team Russia brought on the average night.

 

[BrindamoursNose]

Don't forget to mention the Avs won a cup in 01 with Forsberg playing exactly zero games in the WCF and SCF.

Still had 14 pts in 11 games

 

[Regal]

What you're actually saying is that Naslund had one great season in that stretch and others that were good, but completely within striking distance of Alfredsson.

Yr	MN	DA
2000	0.79	1.04
2001	1.04	1.03
2002	1.11	0.91
2003	1.27	1.00
2004	1.08	1.04

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Or if you want to see how impressive those years were for Naslund in another way.

Naslund finished 4th, 5th and 6th in NHL PPG in those three seasons.
In Alfredsson's 04, 06 and 08, Alfredsson finished 3rd, 4th and 9th in NHL PPG.

So please, tell me more about how special Naslund's three seasons were vs a player who matched them, had a great career outside of them and was a way better defensive player.

What a stupid take. Please tell me more about how we should ignore a huge advantage in one season where he won the Pearson, because "it was just one season", and that 1.11 PPG is somehow close to 0.91. And that these advantages for Naslund were somehow the same as Alfredsson "matching him". Let's also pretend that scoring finishes are the same every year, that Alfredsson's missed games are not a negative and that Naslund actually finished 2nd, 2nd and 4th in scoring as opposed to PPG finishes, and ignore that Naslund's seasons were consecutive and that Alfredsson was outside of the top 10 in '07, which kind of misses the point of 'sustained offense'.

 

[authentic]

What you're actually saying is that Naslund had one great season in that stretch and others that were good, but completely within striking distance of Alfredsson.

Yr	MN	DA
2000	0.79	1.04
2001	1.04	1.03
2002	1.11	0.91
2003	1.27	1.00
2004	1.08	1.04

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Or if you want to see how impressive those years were for Naslund in another way.

Naslund finished 4th, 5th and 6th in NHL PPG in those three seasons.
In Alfredsson's 04, 06 and 08, Alfredsson finished 3rd, 4th and 9th in NHL PPG.

So please, tell me more about how special Naslund's three seasons were vs a player who matched them, had a great career outside of them and was a way better defensive player.

Alfredsson has possibly become the most underrated retired player I believe. He is rarely talked about and when he is he's usually underrated.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

2002 playoffs Forsberg scores league leading 27p in 3 rounds, but suffers game7 defeat vs Detroit. Once again Forsberg was the CS favorite if they went to the finals.

It’s worth mentioning that he did what he did during the 2002 playoffs without playing a single game during the regular season, as he was still recovering from injuries from prior postseason. That’s not normal.

As a Red Wings fan, I’ve watched a lot of great players battle my favorite team during the postseason with Lidstrom on the blueline: Lindros, Sakic, Iginla, Thornton, Getzlaf, Crosby, Malkin, and more. None of them were as terrifying for an opposing fan as Forsberg. He would make you hold your breath when he was on the ice. Just an absolute force.

I know that a guy like Ovechkin will undoubtedly be considered a better player in historical terms than Forsberg. But if I had to choose one of them to have for one game or one series with everything on the line, it wouldn’t even be a debate for me. I’d choose Forsberg without hesitation.

 

[silkyjohnson50]

Alfredsson has possibly become the most underrated retired player I believe. He is rarely talked about and when he is he's usually underrated.

At his best, he was so good and had such a well rounded game for a winger. I like his peak game over Kovalchuk’s.

 

[BrindamoursNose]

It’s worth mentioning that he did what he did during the 2002 playoffs without playing a single game during the regular season, as he was still recovering from injuries from prior postseason. That’s not normal.

As a Red Wings fan, I’ve watched a lot of great players battle my favorite team during the postseason with Lidstrom on the blueline: Lindros, Sakic, Iginla, Thornton, Getzlaf, Crosby, Malkin, and more. None of them were as terrifying for an opposing fan as Forsberg. He would make you hold your breath when he was on the ice. Just an absolute force.

I know that a guy like Ovechkin will undoubtedly be considered a better player in historical terms than Forsberg. But if I had to choose one of them to have for one game or one series with everything on the line, it wouldn’t even be a debate for me. I’d choose Forsberg without hesitation.

Not even a debate for me, either.

If there's 1 game to win it all: I take Forsberg over any of the 6 listed.

 

[Gurglesons]

Malkin is better than Forsberg so tired of this narrative.

They basically have every single narrative you can argue “not healthy”, “play behind a better C”, “lesser linemates”, etc. Malkin led his team in production twice on the way to the cup. Actually won two Ross’s, and has a moderately lighter PPG in 200+ more games.

 

[Gurglesons]

“High level for longer” doesn’t translate into “better” in my book, granted player A did it long and sustainable enough to prove his level.

Btw, I think I read “prime” somewhere in the OP

Malkin’s prime is 08-09 which is arguably the best individual year of hockey we’ve seen in the last 20 years.

 

[MadLuke]

Malkin is better than Forsberg so tired of this narrative.

They basically have every single narrative you can argue “not healthy”, “play behind a better C”, “lesser linemates”, etc. Malkin led his team in production twice on the way to the cup. Actually won two Ross’s, and has a moderately lighter PPG in 200+ more games.

Forsberg between 21 year's old and 33 vs Malkin between 21 and 33

Regular season
Forsberg 871 points in 697 gp +235, 1.25 ppg
Malkin 991 pts in 829 games, +71, 1.2 ppg

Playoff
Forsberg 166 pts in 144 gp, + 51, 1.15 ppg
Malkin: 165 pts in 161 gp, +7, 1.02 ppg

Relative to their peers, among player with at least 500 games during those times frame

Regular season
Jagr: 1.37 ppg, +214
Forsberg: 1.25 ppg, +235
Sakic: 1.19 ppg, +148
Lindros: 1.09 ppg, +171
Kariya: 1.05 ppg, +47

Playoff (at lesat 50 games)
Jagr: 1.19 ppg, +29
Forsberg: 1.15 ppg, +51
Sakic: 1.10 ppg, +8
Lindros: 1.08 ppg +8
Fedorov: 1 ppg, +34

Malkin
Regular season
Crosby: 1.26 ppg, +166
Malkin: 1.2 ppg, +71
Ovechkin: 1.09 ppg, +99
Kucherov: 1.06 ppg, +128
Kane: 1.05 ppg, +69

Playoff
Crosby: 1.13 ppg, +18
Getzlaf: 1.09 ppg, +14
Kucherov: 1.06 ppg, +25
Malkin: 1.02 ppg, +7
Pastrnak: 1.02 ppg, +0


Forsberg production in raw and relative number is really close to Malkin, but he has some of the best +/- of all time and excellent R/on vs R/off while having Sakic on is team.

I am not sure it is clear cut at least for the age both were in the nhl has of now.

 

[82Ninety42011]

The Russians could outscore the Swedes but the Swedes would most likely shut down the Russians head to head. I'm taking the Swedes easily here especially in the playoffs.

 

[Gurglesons]

Forsberg between 21 year's old and 33 vs Malkin between 21 and 33

Regular season
Forsberg 871 points in 697 gp +235, 1.25 ppg
Malkin 991 pts in 829 games, +71, 1.2 ppg

Playoff
Forsberg 166 pts in 144 gp, + 51, 1.15 ppg
Malkin: 165 pts in 161 gp, +7, 1.02 ppg

Relative to their peers, among player with at least 500 games during those times frame

Regular season
Jagr: 1.37 ppg, +214
Forsberg: 1.25 ppg, +235
Sakic: 1.19 ppg, +148
Lindros: 1.09 ppg, +171
Kariya: 1.05 ppg, +47

Playoff (at lesat 50 games)
Jagr: 1.19 ppg, +29
Forsberg: 1.15 ppg, +51
Sakic: 1.10 ppg, +8
Lindros: 1.08 ppg +8
Fedorov: 1 ppg, +34

Malkin
Regular season
Crosby: 1.26 ppg, +166
Malkin: 1.2 ppg, +71
Ovechkin: 1.09 ppg, +99
Kucherov: 1.06 ppg, +128
Kane: 1.05 ppg, +69

Playoff
Crosby: 1.13 ppg, +18
Getzlaf: 1.09 ppg, +14
Kucherov: 1.06 ppg, +25
Malkin: 1.02 ppg, +7
Pastrnak: 1.02 ppg, +0


Forsberg production in raw and relative number is really close to Malkin, but he has some of the best +/- of all time and excellent R/on vs R/off while having Sakic on is team.

I am not sure it is clear cut at least for the age both were in the nhl has of now.

Was this meant to disprove anything I said?

Forsberg was a fantastic talent, but he wasn’t healthy enough to be the contributor that his stats paint him as. That’s what I laid out in my post. Forsberg is a should’ve could’ve would’ve compared to Malkin. Which is sad because Malkin is the same type of idea.

Forsberg will forever be tarnished given his team won a cup without him.

 

[alexgreeen]

Russians easy

Ovi
Malkin
Forsberg

Sundin/Kovalchuk/Alfredsson

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Doesn't really prove your point. It just proves that Ovechkin needs to have the puck on his stick, IMO.

I'm not even interpreting that as a BAD thing, but you're coming in all hot so I'm gonna point of that it still supports my point.

Yes OV, just like every other elite offensive player, needs the puck on his stick. That's how they put up pts. That's why they are elite players, while guys like Alfredsson and Sundin are not. Very simple concept.

 

[RedLeader]

Small NHL ICE, maybe the russians. OV-Forsberg-Malkin-Sundin-Alfredsson-Kovalchuk ranking.

In a game on international ice, I would take the players that actually performed and won the Olympic gold. Also numbers wise Sundin is generational player on big ice. He has better numbers than anyone in the modern era imo.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

The russians play terrible together lol

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

I'd take the Russians, but they wouldn't play on the same line.

 

[psycat]

I mean the Russians are clearly better individual players but I would rather have the Swedes as a line if I couldn't split them up. Voted cyka blyat.

 

[BrindamoursNose]

I'd take the Russians, but they wouldn't play on the same line.

Well they're the only options in this poll. Of course they'd play on the same line in this scenario.

 

[trentmccleary]

Below is a table that attempts to factor in offense and defense, raw data and era-adjusted data. It's an average of their 7 best era-adjusted seasons.
The offensive stats are ones you already know and I averaged out the NHL average goals per game in their best seasons too.
ES GA/GP - Even strength goals against per game is a player's 'minuses' turned into a per game stat.
The table is sorted by a composite stat subtracting era-adjusted PPG - era-adjusted minuses per game.

Observations
Forsberg is the best - despite having his best raw seasons in lower scoring years, Forsberg outproduced (raw PPG) everybody else while posting the 2nd lowest minuses per game (very close to the lowest).

Minuses per game - I like how the test of it's perceived accuracy turned out. The table identifies Forsberg and Alfredsson as the best defensive players and Kovalchuk as the worst. That's what I would have expected. Though I did expect Ovechkin to come out worse than Malkin, though that might because I was ignoring that Pittsburgh has played some very high event hockey over the years (like a lot of 8-6 playoff game scores for example).
*Edit: A statistical error was corrected for Ovechkin's ES GA, putting him neck and neck with Malkin.

Kovalchuk wasn't nearly as great as his numbers suggest - his offensive numbers weren't as special as you think they were and he got eaten alive defensively because he only ever played to pad his offensive stats. That doesn't even factor in that he was 50% more power play time than any of the other top forwards in the league.

For the people who feel that the Swedes would accomplish more on the ice by being better defensively, the era-adjusted per game stat does suggest that may be correct.
Swedes total = 1.55 (71 + 51 + 33)
Russian total = 1.28 (56 + 50 + 22)

Avg GPG	Player	GP	G	Pts	GPG	PPG	ES GA/GP	Player	EA*GP	EA*G	EA*P	EA*PPG	EA*GA/GP	EA*PPG/GA
2.76	Forsberg	69	27	91	0.39	1.32	0.66	Forsberg	69	29	99	1.43	0.72	0.71
2.85	Malkin	71	36	92	0.54	1.30	0.81	Malkin	71	40	100	1.42	0.86	0.56
2.79	Alfredsson	72	31	81	0.43	1.12	0.64	Alfredsson	72	34	86	1.20	0.69	0.51
2.88	Ovechkin	77	51	98	0.66	1.27	0.82	Ovechkin	78	56	105	1.36	0.86	0.50
2.72	Naslund	79	37	80	0.47	1.01	0.71	Naslund	79	41	89	1.12	0.79	0.33
2.92	Sundin	78	36	86	0.47	1.10	0.77	Sundin	77	38	88	1.13	0.80	0.33
2.84	Kovalchuk	79	44	87	0.56	1.10	0.89	Kovalchuk	79	48	93	1.17	0.95	0.22

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

What a stupid take. Please tell me more about how we should ignore a huge advantage in one season where he won the Pearson, because "it was just one season", and that 1.11 PPG is somehow close to 0.91. And that these advantages for Naslund were somehow the same as Alfredsson "matching him". Let's also pretend that scoring finishes are the same every year, that Alfredsson's missed games are not a negative and that Naslund actually finished 2nd, 2nd and 4th in scoring as opposed to PPG finishes, and ignore that Naslund's seasons were consecutive and that Alfredsson was outside of the top 10 in '07, which kind of misses the point of 'sustained offense'.

Any higher end player could challenge for a scoring title if the head coach fiddles with their situation and they're lucky enough to be healthy.
load the top line
insane amount of PP time
offensive zone starts comparable to a QMJHL rookie playing in the Stanley Cup Finals
building a PP around that player
not having a reliable 2nd line
giving up on winning and actively making the team's game plan around winning an Art Ross for the last 1/3 of the season
allowing them to completely abandon defense to pad their stats

Non-generational talents can challenge for scoring titles over the short term if you give them the best situation possible to produce in. That doesn't make them 'Gretzky', it makes them fortuitous. That's why it's important to pay attention to their careers over the long haul, not just when they were in a good situation.

Btw, Alfredsson was outside of the top-10 in 2007 because he was moved off of the top line to create offense on other lines (partially due to the loss of Havlat).

 

[joe dirte]

At his best, he was so good and had such a well rounded game for a winger. I like his peak game over Kovalchuk’s.

At his peak, with jersey, kovalchuk actually also played a responsible game, but sure....

Those two are easily the bottom 2 of all players listed here anyway.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

2 Centers and a winger are always preferable to 1 Center and 2 wingers when it is close. I would have put Datsyuk in for Kovy to make it a 2 Center winger comparison, and picked the Russians over the Swedes pretty handily. No disrespect to the Swedish trio. But Malkin, Ovie, and Datsyuk. That's a lot of cups, talent, and winning to not pick them.

 

[authentic]

The Russians could outscore the Swedes but the Swedes would most likely shut down the Russians head to head. I'm taking the Swedes easily here especially in the playoffs.

I think it's a bit of a stretch to say Sundin, Alfredsson and Forsberg would most likely shut down prime Ovechkin, Malkin and Kovalchuk. Infact the most likely case is they just get outplayed and lose because of vastly superior offense.

 

[authentic]

Small NHL ICE, maybe the russians. OV-Forsberg-Malkin-Sundin-Alfredsson-Kovalchuk ranking.

In a game on international ice, I would take the players that actually performed and won the Olympic gold. Also numbers wise Sundin is generational player on big ice. He has better numbers than anyone in the modern era imo.

I wonder what made Sundin so good on big ice? Or was it just that he actually got to play with great talent and for his country?

 

[authentic]

Below is a table that attempts to factor in offense and defense, raw data and era-adjusted data. It's an average of their 7 best era-adjusted seasons.
The offensive stats are ones you already know and I averaged out the NHL average goals per game in their best seasons too.
ES GA/GP - Even strength goals against per game is a player's 'minuses' turned into a per game stat.
The table is sorted by a composite stat subtracting era-adjusted PPG - era-adjusted minuses per game.

Observations
Forsberg is the best - despite having his best raw seasons in lower scoring years, Forsberg outproduced (raw PPG) everybody else while posting the 2nd lowest minuses per game (very close to the lowest).

Minuses per game - I like how the test of it's perceived accuracy turned out. The table identifies Forsberg and Alfredsson as the best defensive players and Kovalchuk as the worst. That's what I would have expected. Though I did expect Ovechkin to come out worse than Malkin, though that might because I was ignoring that Pittsburgh has played some very high event hockey over the years (like a lot of 8-6 playoff game scores for example).

Kovalchuk wasn't nearly as great as his numbers suggest - his offensive numbers weren't as special as you think they were and he got eaten alive defensively because he only ever played to pad his offensive stats. That doesn't even factor in that he was 50% more power play time than any of the other top forwards in the league.

For the people who feel that the Swedes would accomplish more on the ice by being better defensively, the era-adjusted per game stat does suggest that may be correct.
Swedes total = 1.55 (71 + 51 + 33)
Russian total = 1.33 (56 + 55 + 22)

Avg GPG	Player	GP	G	Pts	GPG	PPG	ES GA/GP	Player	EA*GP	EA*G	EA*P	EA*PPG	EA*GA/GP	EA*PPG/GA
2.76	Forsberg	69	27	91	0.39	1.32	0.66	Forsberg	69	29	99	1.43	0.72	0.71
2.85	Malkin	71	36	92	0.54	1.30	0.81	Malkin	71	40	100	1.42	0.86	0.56
2.88	Ovechkin	77	51	98	0.66	1.27	0.78	Ovechkin	78	56	105	1.36	0.81	0.55
2.79	Alfredsson	72	31	81	0.43	1.12	0.64	Alfredsson	72	34	86	1.20	0.69	0.51
2.92	Sundin	78	36	86	0.47	1.10	0.77	Sundin	77	38	88	1.13	0.80	0.33
2.72	Naslund	79	37	80	0.47	1.01	0.71	Naslund	79	41	89	1.12	0.79	0.33
2.84	Kovalchuk	79	44	87	0.56	1.10	0.89	Kovalchuk	79	48	93	1.17	0.95	0.22

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Any higher end player could challenge for a scoring title if the head coach fiddles with their situation and they're lucky enough to be healthy.
load the top line
insane amount of PP time
offensive zone starts comparable to a QMJHL rookie playing in the Stanley Cup Finals
building a PP around that player
not having a reliable 2nd line
giving up on winning and actively making the team's game plan around winning an Art Ross for the last 1/3 of the season
allowing them to completely abandon defense to pad their stats

Non-generational talents can challenge for scoring titles over the short term if you give them the best situation possible to produce in. That doesn't make them 'Gretzky', it makes them fortuitous. That's why it's important to pay attention to their careers over the long haul, not just when they were in a good situation.

Btw, Alfredsson was outside of the top-10 in 2007 because he was moved off of the top line to create offense on other lines (partially due to the loss of Havlat).

This is a pretty good analysis, however for this poll if we're imagining them in their prime facing off against each other isn't 7 seasons a little much considering most players here didn't even have primes that long? I think 5 years at most would be a better comparison.