Again, I'd love to see what Malkin could have done during the era of firewagon hockey. Sure, he'd be competing with Greztky or Lemeiux, but tell me you wouldn't pay to see Malkin against the terrible defenses and goaltending of the era?
Ovechkin, on the other hand, I think would look pretty much the same-- he'd be an elite sniper like Hull, certainly-- but he's never had the playmaking prowess or the vision to effect the game quite like Malkin. And unlike Jagr or other more creative RWs, AO's always needed a good center to be truly effective.
Yeah, that's the other consideration -- the era. I'm sure I'll get a flak for this (though Cole will back me up) but forget top 100 of all time -- Malkin should probably be top 25 all time. The fact that he's consistently put the numbers up in today's league that he has and maintained a 1+ PPG his whole career while playing in this version of the league is pretty incredible. I don't know if people fully grasp the idea that back then a player like current-Kessel would be a 100+ point scorer every season. Current-Crosby and current-Malkin would be eviscerating that version of the league every single year.
I'm not saying that players "sucked" back then -- far from it. Things were just a hell of a lot different. The goaltending position was VASTLY underdeveloped compared to today. There were keepers from then that could have transitioned to today's league. But not many. The entire game was less rigid and less coached. Teams are automatons now. Everything is so tight... parity among teams is a thing. Every advantage counts. Shot blocking back then was kinda something to SEE, ya know? These days with equipment advancements and expectations from coaching... EVERYONE attempts to block every shot. Players don't take as many chances, defensemen are bigger/stronger/faster (as is everyone) and systems are beat into players heads going all the way back to juniors. And though you don't see QUITE as many players getting ridden like a mule through the neutral zone... I would argue interference all over the ice is a bigger problem today than back then.
What I'm getting around to is a player like Malkin would indeed be something to watch back then. And I really, really feel like the fact that he can take over games single-handedly these days, even just occasionally, is rather absurd. Nobody does that. Not like he does. So yeah... I'd call him a top 25 all timer. If things had turned out a bit different for him injury-wise, I don't think people would even bat their eyes at that assertion.
As far as Ovechkin? I dunno. I think his numbers would certainly get a bump back then. His shot is too zany and goaltenders had a tough time covering the top of the net, in the day. But as far as IMPACT goes? I agree he'd be about the same as now. The difference between he and Malkin is in impact. Malkin does so much more all over the ice and plays a much more important position. He makes more players around him better. He actually helps facilitate his team's offensive flow and goes a long way toward cleaning up his team's own end, too. When a big, rangy guy like Malkin is playing the kind of defense he can along with his sublime offensive ability... well... isn't it pretty obvious who the more impactful player is?
And I actually have a healthy amount of respect and even admiration for Ovechkin. Except when he's doing things like taking Gonchar out at the knees or helping Niskanen brain Crosby.
