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.
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.
At scoring goals? It's not tough at all to say. We have numbers showing that there were considerably more goals scored per season in the 90s. Every year Hull scored 50+ goals would have been the highest scoring season since the dead puck era.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.
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.
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.
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 off course a much more dominant player overall during his peak, and his longevity is better.
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.
They always have been very similar.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.
True OV was a tougher more physical player.How many hits did Brett Hull throw out?
Hull got better defensively when he got to Dallas under Hitchcock. He took that to Detroit too.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.
At scoring goals? It's not tough at all to say. We have numbers showing that there were considerably more goals scored per season in the 90s. Every year Hull scored 50+ goals would have been the highest scoring season since the dead puck era.
Ovie - Oates - Hull
Ovechkin | Hull | |
Rockets | 9 (and counting) | 3 |
Top 3 in Goals | 11 (and counting) | 4 |
Top 5 in Goals | 13 (and counting) | 4 |
Top 10 in Goals | 14 (and counting) | 8 |
Hart Trophies | 3 | 1 |
Hart Trophy Finalist | 5 | 3 |
Art Ross | 1 | 0 |
Top 3 in Points | 5 | 1 |
Top 10 in Points | 8 | 3 |
“I can’t shoot the puck”
Comparing trophy counts when Hull played through the Gretzky/Lemieux era doesn’t really make sense. You’re talking about the most dominant players of all time so it was unusual for anyone else to get a look in.I suppose the answer is a hard no on this one.[TBODY] [/TBODY]
Ovechkin Hull Rockets 9 (and counting) 3 Top 3 in Goals 11 (and counting) 4 Top 5 in Goals 13 (and counting) 4 Top 10 in Goals 14 (and counting) 8 Hart Trophies 3 1 Hart Trophy Finalist 5 3 Art Ross 1 0 Top 3 in Points 5 1 Top 10 in Points 8 3
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.
Peak Ovi is Bobby.Ovechkin post 2010 has essentially been brett hull but not peak
thats why the table indicates top 3, 5, and 10, of which Ovie obliterates him.Comparing trophy counts when Hull played through the Gretzky/Lemieux era doesn’t really make sense. You’re talking about the most dominant players of all time so it was unusual for anyone else to get a look in.
In any case, I don’t really agree that they are ‘the same player’ because apart from being prolific scorers the rest of their games were quite different.