Sidney Crosby surpassing Alexander Ovechkin in career points watch (UPD: Ovechkin ahead by 6)

[Bougieman]

Appreciate this thread, OP. An interesting thing to have noticed.

 

[FinProspects]

As @Plural mentioned - this should have happened few years ago already. Kudos to Ovie on the "comeback" after few more underwhelming seasons point-wise. Now he is on pace to score 100p, which is really impressive (altough 16 others are also, if we include Matthews and Bergeron, which is just nuts).

 

[JoVel]

No it won’t be lol. Not at all. Sure he can be the goat goal scorer. But that’s about it

"Greatest goal scorer of all time, that's about it". Yeah no big deal.

 

[TheTang58]

only on HF is being a goal scorer a secondary citizen when it comes to all time greats......

No but there are other aspects of the game besides goal-scoring. If determing which player is better was as simple as seeing which one scored more goals then there'd be no point to debating.

 

[shtorm2005]

No but there are other aspects of the game besides goal-scoring. If determing which player is better was as simple as seeing which one scored more goals then there'd be no point to debating.

There are other aspects besides points too. Datsyuk, for example, was a better 2-way forward than Crosby, but still ppl value his slightly better production a way above than Datsyuk's ability to prevent opposing team to score.
Its all comes to what ppl prefer more, but on the Ice, these stars are quite equal and can outplay each other any given day.

 

[FinProspects]

There are other aspects besides points too. Datsyuk, for example, was a better 2-way forward than Crosby, but still ppl value his slightly better production a way above than Datsyuk's ability to prevent opposing team to score.
Its all comes to what ppl prefer more, but on the Ice, these stars are quite equal and can outplay each other any given day.

Yeah Datsyuk's 2x97points seasons+Selke are really, really underrated. He was on par with the big three during the time.

 

[AD1066]

You mean a system that has existed for literally the entirety of hockey history? Lmao. Sure, it's completely arbitrary, definitely.

I'm not complaining, but it is arbitrary. There's no real basis for awarding one or two or three assists per goal, just successively smaller correlations with each touch, until it becomes something close to +/-, which is fairly worthless. And so a system that on average award about 1.6 assists for every goal is going to favor players whose skill sets favor puck distribution. I think Crosby is the better player, but him passing Ovechkin isn't all that notable, when his game is better suited to point accumulation under the system in place, and if not for some really bad luck, he'd already be ahead.

It's not always arbitrary. Sometimes a goal straight up doesn't happen without the play of the secondary assiter.

It's true, but on average a secondary assist is less likely to be the primary cause of a goal. And there undoubtedly some great efforts on ternary assists, but the correlation between third touches and goals is low enough that we don't bother counting them. I'm not disputing that assists are valuable, and are sometimes more important than the act of putting the puck in the net itself. I'm just saying that the decision made at the inception of the sport to award up to two assists instead of one or three was arbitrary at the time, regardless of whether we agree it works pretty well for determining the best players.

 

[ovikovy817]

Again this thread? Someone posted this in january 2018 I think, but Ovi still ahead

 

[daver]

Ovechkin will likely play longer and regain the lead at some point. Obviously Crosby would be ahead at the moment without some bad injury luck, but playmakers also benefit from a scoring system that arbitrarily awards up to two assists per goal.

Maybe OV should try to be a better playmaker then. Sounds like it is pretty easy to simply become one.

 

[Shrimper]

Can we not do this and just enjoy both players?

 

[TheGuiminator]

It’s funny how Crosby’s haters think that his point production only rely on secondary assist. They just can’t admit that Sid outproduced Ovy through all their careers (ppg wise), so they bring this argument to make you think that the majority of Crosby’s points are « luck » and he’s not that great, which is complete bullshit. Hell, nobody brings that argument on a Gretzky debate and he damn sure got a plenty of secondary assists during his long ass career but who cares? He was still the best playmaker there ever was. Give credit where credit is due, Ovy is indeed the best goal scorer of the two, but Crosby is the better player offensively and overall, the only reason why it’s still a debate it’s because Sid missed most of his prime years.

 

[AD1066]

Maybe OV should try to be a better playmaker then. Sounds like it is pretty easy to simply become one.

Sure, because that's exactly what I was saying.

 

[daver]

I'm not complaining, but it is arbitrary. There's no real basis for awarding one or two or three assists per goal, just successively smaller correlations with each touch, until it becomes something close to +/-, which is fairly worthless. And so a system that on average award about 1.6 assists for every goal is going to favor players whose skill sets favor puck distribution. I think Crosby is the better player, but him passing Ovechkin isn't all that notable, when his game is better suited to point accumulation under the system in place, and if not for some really bad luck, he'd already be ahead.


It's true, but on average a secondary assist is less likely to be the primary cause of a goal. And there undoubtedly some great efforts on ternary assists, but the correlation between third touches and goals is low enough that we don't bother counting them. I'm not disputing that assists are valuable, and are sometimes more important than the act of putting the puck in the net itself. I'm just saying that the decision made at the inception of the sport to award up to two assists instead of one or three was arbitrary at the time, regardless of whether we agree it works pretty well for determining the best players.

So Crosby passing OV in points is what then?

A somewhat meaningless statistical accomplishment because it is clear Crosby is the better offensive player regardless of a goal to assist breakdown?

Or meaningless as Crosby has benefited more from this arbitrary decision to award two assists (which is debatable anyways)?

A second question, what would you say is the appropriate way to acknowledge playmaking? If more often than not, a 2nd assist happens more than a 3rd assist in comparison to a 3rd assist to a 4th assist, wouldn't that make it reasonable to award second assists, which are only awarded if they apply anyways?

 

[Elganja]

Can we not do this and just enjoy both players?

could not say it better myself -- 100% agree

 

[Colorado Avalanche]

When two players start their careers the same season and one has 5 fewer points in 141 less games played. It’s painfully obvious who the better player is

Where's the goal count? Goals are worth more in my eyes. The hardest job in NHL

 

[dr robbie]

Both will retire with the exact same number of points. It's the only conclusion to their intertwined careers.

 

[TheBluePenguin]

Ovi is the better goal scorer, and Sid is the better player, that is not a slight at either player who will both be top 10 all time players when all is said and done. People get to emotional in these threads.

 

[Riddum]

I don't think it really matters in terms of who's the better player. I mean, Dave Andreychuk has more points than both. Is he better than both? If you think Crosby is the better player, then he still will be with more career points than Ovechkin. If you think Ovechkin is the better player, I don't see why that would suddenly switch if/when Crosby surpasses him in points.

But still worth tracking.

Andreychuk is 331 pts below points per game. He is not even supposed to be in the conversation with these guys.

Sid is 263pts above PPG and Ovi 127 pts.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Where's the goal count? Goals are worth more in my eyes. The hardest job in NHL

Good thing your eyes have nothing to do with majority of the hockey worlds mentality. When was the last time Ovechkin was top 10 in scoring?

 

[bobc222]

Good thing your eyes have nothing to do with majority of the hockey worlds mentality. When was the last time Ovechkin was top 10 in scoring?

Sorry, just a little confused, how is the winner determined in a hockey game?

 

[Dondini]

"Greatest goal scorer of all time, that's about it". Yeah no big deal.

Looool exactly my thoughts as well. The fan boys on here are a joke sometimes.
And for the record I have Crosby as the better career player(not by a whole lot tho)

I just can’t handle the one sided arguements when it comes to ovechkin vs Crosby.

If you are 100% new to the game come on here you run the risk of thinking ovechkin is ranked 5th all time and Crosby somewhere around 500th. Or Crosby 5th and ovechkin 500th

 

[Sun God Nika]

When two players start their careers the same season and one has 5 fewer points in 141 less games played. It’s painfully obvious who the better player is

The one who stays healthy and played more games?

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

It's not always arbitrary. Sometimes a goal straight up doesn't happen without the play of the secondary assiter.

right, and sometimes it doesn't happen without a 3rd assist, or a key screen in front. Maybe a defensive play that springs the whole rush.

I like the secondary assist, but I get what the guy is saying. Ultimately it's all "arbitrary" though- some goals are lucky bounces anyone could put in yet we consider that the most important stat, and some 3rd assists are things of beauty that are the key to the whole play. Gotta draw the line somewhere, a goal and two assists is a good line to my mind. Usually captures those most involved, I could see the argument for a divide between first and second assists, but that distracts from the main point which is- let's- debate- unsolvable- debates!!!!

 

[Goose]

I don't think it really matters in terms of who's the better player. I mean, Dave Andreychuk has more points than both. Is he better than both? If you think Crosby is the better player, then he still will be with more career points than Ovechkin. If you think Ovechkin is the better player, I don't see why that would suddenly switch if/when Crosby surpasses him in points.

But still worth tracking.

You can compare points when the player's play in the exact same era. I respectfully disagree with your comparison of Andreychuk here. There's lots of arguments to be made for/against both players as the better player. They play such different roles and are so close in overall points/impact/hardware/legacy that if you want to delve into trying to "prove" one is empirically better than the other: well, have at it.

But to dismiss comparative point totals in games played is wrong IMO, the fact that Crosby will likely end up with more points in less games does mean something. It is not the be-all end-all argument for Crosby being better, but it's quantifiable evidence of Crosby's impact.

 

[Randyne]

Being 50G scorer much harder being 80P scorer.
Here is the table total number of players with 10,20,30...90 points-assists-goals seasons since 1968 (50 years):

P-A-G scorers	Points scorers	Assists scorers	Goals scorers	P/G proportion	A/G proportion
10	20844	17521	11233	1.86	1.56
20	14718	9866	4887	3.01	2.02
30	10436	5125	1784	5.85	2.87
40	7206	2325	579	12.45	4.02
50	4774	958	189	25.26	5.07
60	3007	360	39	77.10	9.23
70	1804	131	14	128.86	9.36
80	972	63	4	243.00	15.75
90	525	30	1	525.00	30.00

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

The table shows exponential growth of points and assists scorers over goal scorers.