Why Ovi is actually Brett Hull

Was looking at the all-time scoring leaders list and noticed Ovechkin’s numbers are eerily similar to Brett Hull’s. The difference between them is Hull has 82 more points in 64 more games (17 more goals). Considering Ovechkin has been at just under a p/pg for the past couple seasons (this one included) I figure at 1’249 games played (Hull’s total) Ovi will have about 25 less points and about 25-30 more goals. At state line that looks like this;

Brett 1’249 - 741 - 650 - 1’391
Alex 1’249 - 754 - 615 - 1’369

More interestingly, of their goal totals to date, they break down as such.

Brett 456 ESG - 265 PPG - 20 SHG
Alex 456 ESG - 264 PPG - 4 SHG

And have similar GWG’s with Hull at 110 and Ovechkin at 116.

Finally, Hull went 11 seasons not being near 100pts after he last hit the mark. Ovechkin is now in his 11th season since he last got near 100pts.

TLDR: This isn’t a serious deep dive, but they do have some serious similarities.

 

Ovie - Oates - Hull

 

Kind of wondering how a drunk Ovi sings now...

 

Can confirm, both party animals

 

I know it was a higher scoring era but I’m actually shocked to see how many assists Brett Hull had considering how good of a goal scorer he was. We know Ovechkin has more goals which is crazy considering the era but I had no idea how balanced his stat line is all the things considered.

 

Cant wait for the caps to win it in 20 years and seeing Ovi hammered cheering them on in the stands.

 

They're comparable to an extent, but Hull did play in the early to mid 90s when scoring across the League was higher (in some cases much higher) than it has been during Ovechkin's career (including the last three or four seasons). Both had excellent three season peaks, but at his peak Ovechkin could do things Hull never really could and was more of a factor in games in general than Brett was at his best.

 

Hull is one of the greatest, no doubt, but only scored 50+ twice without Adam Oates (92-94). (Oates was traded to Boston in Feb 1992)

Hull also had the benefit of playing in very high scoring era from 87-95, but did also play in the DPE from 97-04.

 

Ovechkin post 2010 has essentially been brett hull but not peak

 

Some might say with wood sticks and all the clutching/grabbing and general abuse that no longer exists that players today have something of an advantage.

Tough to say.

 

Hockey needs more Hulls and Ovis.

 

That would be hysterical

 

People saying Hull played in a higher scoring era, forget that almost half his career was in the dead puck era. And I'd argue his 86 goal campaign in 78 games beats Ovies 65. But pretty similar peaks. Ovie was of course a much more dominant player overall during his peak, and his longevity is better.

 

How many 50 goal seasons did Ovie hit without Backstrom?

 

Actually twice, Hull had 54 in 92/93 and 57 in 93/94, both times without Oates.

 

stand corrected.

 

love Backstrom, but hes not the 2nd greatest playmaker in hockey history (or 3rd if you want to argue)

Look at Neely's numbers with Oates if you care to see (had his 50 in 44 season). Hell, Oates was having 70 assist seasons at the peak of the DPE at age 38-39 with the Capitals of all teams. Think about that.

 

Hull was a far far better defensive and all-around player and these were not exactly strong traits of his. Ovechkin's 'legacy' is already being unraveled.

 

Depends on how you define "all around player" because Ovechkin is a physical specimen. He throws his weight around (perhaps less now than he used to) the way a true power forward does.

 

He scored 52 as a rookie before Backstrom joined the team. He scored 65 with Viktor Kozlov as his center in 2008, and then hit 51 2 years ago on Kuznetsov’s line.

Ovi didn’t need Nick to be a 50 goal scorer, but you could argue he would’ve had fewer 50 goal seasons without him.

 

in what universe was Hull a good defensive player?

and yeah, Im pretty sure we all know Ovie was 100 times more physical than Hull ever was. I would say Hull was more 1-dimensional than Ovie, for sure.

 

Yeah this but then again how many great goal scorers didn't play with good players.

 

Considering the era they played in, Ovechkins numbers are much, much more impressive.

 

I agree that it is meaningless to compare Hull and Ovi’s centers. They didn’t have many seasons at all playing with scrubs, but they did put up huge numbers even when playing with scrubs.

I meant to address the point that Ovi didn’t wait for Backstrom to arrive to be a 50 goal scorer.

 

Yeah this isn't a great comparison. Hull was a one-dimensional player who had his best seasons in a seriously inflated scoring era. He was great at what he did, no doubt, but he benefitted from the era and elite setup men. He is probably the most overrated player of all time. A better comparable for Hull is Laine.

Ovechkin is just a far more rounded player who has a much greater impact on his team. I would also say he's even better than Hull at the one thing Hull did well - goal scoring. In fact, accounting for eras it's not even close.