Can Alexander Ovechkin Become The Greatest European Hockey Player Of All Time?

[JagerMeister]

Can Alexander Ovechkin Become The Greatest European Hockey Player Of All Time?

 

 

 

I certainly think so, he is like the russian Bobby Hull, both have led the league in scoring a similiar amount of times and by fairly huge margins. And im pretty sure most of you have Bobby Hull ahead of Jagr, Hasek and Lidstrom in your all time lists.

 

  IMO, Ovechkin would need to catch up to Bobby Hull in leading the league in goal scoring, then maybe I will put him ahead of Jagr, as for the other 2, I guess it depends on who you think dominated their position the most.

[flyercanuck]

@JagerMeister

 

Prime Datsyuk is a better player than Ovechkin IMO. Not goal scorer, player. Ovechkin is just lacking in a lot of other parts of the game. It's a team sport, not a "how many goals can I get" sport. Lidstrom was better too. 

[yave1964]

Holy crap i never thought of it.

 

Yes he could, based off longevity and if he so desires to stick it out. He needs a few cups or the big BUT  will hang over his name like it does many another player, as in he was great BUT he never won a cup. The whispers have become a roar already in that regard as far a she is concerned.

 

 But if he so chooses to stick around in NA there is no reason he couldnt get 600 goals, maybe approach 700 and possibly even surpass that total. So I think the question is statistically can he become the greatest Euro ever, and then you look at the nuances, Hasek in net, Lidstrom and his perfect positioning, Jagr and the joy he brought to the game on every shift as an elder statesman, will Ovie continue to be considered a floater who put up points or will he finally break through? Looking at the Capitals, well, adding Oshie and subtracting Green and Ward is at best a sideways move so I do not think they are improved so unless Holtby takes yet another step, Carlson becomes a God on the back end and a couple of the kid forwards become stars the team is doomed for that 6-8 playoff spot and an early out year in and year out. If that occurs I dont see him as the greatest.He simply has to win a cup.

[BluPuk]

You're kidding, right? Or trolling.....

[JagerMeister]

You're kidding, right? Or trolling.....

It is absolutely not an absurd notion to think that Ovechkin could possibly become the greatest European forward of all time. He is possibly the greatest European power forward already and most definitely the greatest euro goal scorer, and he is only 29.

[JagerMeister]

@JagerMeister

 

Prime Datsyuk is a better player than Ovechkin IMO. Not goal scorer, player. Ovechkin is just lacking in a lot of other parts of the game. It's a team sport, not a "how many goals can I get" sport. Lidstrom was better too.

I guess it depends on how high you value defense and play making over goalscoring aND physicality... but Ovechkin is undoubtedly the best at what he does, and goals are the deciding factor to win games.

...Kinda unrelated, but you must not be too big on Brett Hull, considering even he was more one dimensional then Ovechkin.

[ScottM]

Could he? Yeah, he could. Will he? I doubt it.

 

I'll start by dealing with the Bobby Hull measuring stick. I do have Hull ahead of Jagr and Hasek, although comparing goalies and skaters is very difficult. I do not, however, have Hull ahead of Lidstrom. I actually have Lidstrom one spot ahead of Hull. With that in mind, let's now compare Hull and Ovechkin.

 

These are a couple of guys with similar styles and were both all about scoring goals, so the comparison is a good one. I'm on record on this forum as saying that Ovechkin could reach 700 goals, so what if he does? Does that mean he passes Hull since he would have passed him in career goals? Not necessarily. In fact, I'd argue that 700 isn't enough to pass Hull. Between his NHL and WHA seasons, Hull scored 913 goals. I don't think he would have reached 900 if he had stayed in the NHL, but I feel quite confident that he would have reached 800-825. So first, before we can talk about Ovechkin passing Hull, he needs to be closer to that neighborhood. But is that enough? Honestly, I'm not so sure that it is. The first time Hull led the league in goals, he scored 39. That wouldn't cut it today. Even with the ridiculously low offensive numbers required to be among the league leaders this past season, Ovehckin, Stamkos, and Nash all beat that number, and Tavares was only one away. That's partly because of a shorter season, and partly because of the style of the era. Even then, Hull still managed 50+ goals five times in the NHL, including the first three occasions that anyone scored over 50. When you add in the 77 goal season he had in the WHA, it seems obvious that he would have reached 50 at least once more.

 

Granted, today's game is pretty low scoring, and that makes what Ovechkin has done very impressive. That 65 goal season he had a few years ago was really quite remarkable. Because of things like that, he's one of the best left wingers to ever play the game despite his being one-dimensional. That begs the question, would Hull be able to match or exceed what Ovechkin has done? Comparing across eras is hard, but necessary on a topic like this, but my answer is yes. Considering all the things that would have worked against Hull scoring the number of goals he did in his time, I'm quite comfortable in saying that if he were a player of this era that he'd do it all again, and probably more, thanks to the longer season.

 

I say all of that to say this: I don't think Ovechkin will reach Hull's status, and if I have Hull behind Lidstrom, that means he won't catch Lidstrom as the top European player ever. Lidstrom is a decent offensive player, but not a powerhouse. In my opinion, that's about the only "knock" someone could make on him. Even then, he has over 250 goals and over 1,100 points. He was a master at shutting down opposing star forwards, was one of the smartest players to play, and as @yave1964 said, he was a master of positional play. One dimensional guys like Hull and Ovechkin can go a long way when they are as exceptional as those guys are at that one dimension, but they don't always stack up well against a more complete player like Lidstrom.

 

So, greatest European player period? No. Greatest European forward? That one, he just might win in the end.

[Polaris922]

He just might. I loved Lidstrom's talent, but have Jagr ahead of him. Different positions, I know, and that makes it tough to really say who matters most, but Jagr was a big, strong forward who could fake you out of your skates one shift then just bull rush through you with his size the next. I always enjoyed watching him play, and equally hated it when he was with a rival squad.

It's difficult comparing defenseman with goal scorers with goaltenders... But for the sake of argument, Ovechkin has what it takes to get to that level as a forward. IF he proves to be a team guy and not a superstar floundering on his own being an ass.

[JagerMeister]

Could he? Yeah, he could. Will he? I doubt it.

I'll start by dealing with the Bobby Hull measuring stick. I do have Hull ahead of Jagr and Hasek, although comparing goalies and skaters is very difficult. I do not, however, have Hull ahead of Lidstrom. I actually have Lidstrom one spot ahead of Hull. With that in mind, let's now compare Hull and Ovechkin.

These are a couple of guys with similar styles and were both all about scoring goals, so the comparison is a good one. I'm on record on this forum as saying that Ovechkin could reach 700 goals, so what if he does? Does that mean he passes Hull since he would have passed him in career goals? Not necessarily. In fact, I'd argue that 700 isn't enough to pass Hull. Between his NHL and WHA seasons, Hull scored 913 goals. I don't think he would have reached 900 if he had stayed in the NHL, but I feel quite confident that he would have reached 800-825. So first, before we can talk about Ovechkin passing Hull, he needs to be closer to that neighborhood. But is that enough? Honestly, I'm not so sure that it is. The first time Hull led the league in goals, he scored 39. That wouldn't cut it today. Even with the ridiculously low offensive numbers required to be among the league leaders this past season, Ovehckin, Stamkos, and Nash all beat that number, and Tavares was only one away. That's partly because of a shorter season, and partly because of the style of the era. Even then, Hull still managed 50+ goals five times in the NHL, including the first three occasions that anyone scored over 50. When you add in the 77 goal season he had in the WHA, it seems obvious that he would have reached 50 at least once more.

Granted, today's game is pretty low scoring, and that makes what Ovechkin has done very impressive. That 65 goal season he had a few years ago was really quite remarkable. Because of things like that, he's one of the best left wingers to ever play the game despite his being one-dimensional. That begs the question, would Hull be able to match or exceed what Ovechkin has done? Comparing across eras is hard, but necessary on a topic like this, but my answer is yes. Considering all the things that would have worked against Hull scoring the number of goals he did in his time, I'm quite comfortable in saying that if he were a player of this era that he'd do it all again, and probably more, thanks to the longer season.

I say all of that to say this: I don't think Ovechkin will reach Hull's status, and if I have Hull behind Lidstrom, that means he won't catch Lidstrom as the top European player ever. Lidstrom is a decent offensive player, but not a powerhouse. In my opinion, that's about the only "knock" someone could make on him. Even then, he has over 250 goals and over 1,100 points. He was a master at shutting down opposing star forwards, was one of the smartest players to play, and as @yave1964 said, he was a master of positional play. One dimensional guys like Hull and Ovechkin can go a long way when they are as exceptional as those guys are at that one dimension, but they don't always stack up well against a more complete player like Lidstrom.

So, greatest European player period? No. Greatest European forward? That one, he just might win in the end.

Even 800 goals is plausible for someone like Ovechkin, in 10 seasons, Ovechkin would need to average atleast 30 goals to get to 760 goals, and I think me and you both know that Ovechkin still has a few 50-40 goal seasons left in him. He also has the durability to play until 40 years old, and if 42 year old Jagr was able to get 24 goals, then im pretty sure Ovechkin will be able to as well during his 40s.

As for ovechkin not reaching Hull status, Hull had very similiar stats to Ovechkin at the age of 29. Ovechkin led the league in goal scoring 5 times to Hull's 6. Hull has 3 art ross trophies and 2 harts to Ovechkins 1 art ross and 3 harts (excluding his pearsons because they were not given during Hull's time)

Obviously Hull at 29 still looks slightly more impressive then Ovechkin, but Ovechkin still has alot more time to surpass Hull and it is very possible that could happen.

Ofc, this is assuming Ovechkin doesnt leave to the KHL...

[flyercanuck]

I guess it depends on how high you value defense and play making over goalscoring aND physicality... but Ovechkin is undoubtedly the best at what he does, and goals are the deciding factor to win games.

...Kinda unrelated, but you must not be too big on Brett Hull, considering even he was more one dimensional then Ovechkin.

 

I value ALL those things. 

 

Goals ARE the deciding factor. And Ovechkin has proven plenty of times he's just as good at letting the opposition score as he is at scoring. He's proven he thinks it's more important that HE score than his team wins. He's proven that he thinks he's above coming back and helping his team. He plays on a talented team that always goes nowhere in the playoffs. And with all that, may be the worst captain in the league. If that all adds up to the best Euro ever, you're not using hockey math. Best goal scorer, ok.

 

And I'm equally as big a fan of Hull.

[JagerMeister]

I value ALL those things. 

 

Goals ARE the deciding factor. And Ovechkin has proven plenty of times he's just as good at letting the opposition score as he is at scoring. He's proven he thinks it's more important that HE score than his team wins. He's proven that he thinks he's above coming back and helping his team. He plays on a talented team that always goes nowhere in the playoffs. And with all that, may be the worst captain in the league. If that all adds up to the best Euro ever, you're not using hockey math. Best goal scorer, ok.

 

And I'm equally as big a fan of Hull.

He has never been a defensively responsible player, but the same can be said for many superstar hockey players. Jagr rarely bothered to play defense, Pavel Bure didn't even try post injury, and Lemieux was as lazy as they come defensively. And those are only a few names that first came to mind. Must not think too highly of these guys as overall players as well...

 

  But even then, your opinion of Pavel Datsyuk being better than Ovechkin, although your most likely in the minority, I believe Datsyuk can put up an argument.

[ScottM]

@JagerMeister I'll grant that 800 isn't entirely out of the question for Ovi, but I find it unlikely. While Jagr does prove that it's possible for a guy to still be a good scorer at that age, it doesn't make it any more likely for anyone else. That's the kind of thing that I'll believe when I see for anyone, no matter how great they are.

 

@flyercanuck I also think those aspects of a player's game are important, and while I think that it is possible for a guy to be so great at one or two parts of the game to rank highly on those things alone, a guy who's got a great all-around game can, at the very least, hold his own with a guy who's exceptional in some areas and bad in another. I don't think I'd take Datsyuk over Ovi as an individual player, but you make a good point. I will say this: if I were to choose one of those guys to build a team around, I'd take Datsyuk in a heartbeat.

 

One more thing I'll add about the Ovi vs Hull debate: Ovi hasn't, nor do I really expect him to play in a Stanley Cup Final as the centerpiece of his team. Bobby Hull played in multiple Finals series with the Black Hawks, and even won a Cup. While I think Ovi detracts from his team at times in the playoffs, Hull was an asset. That's one more thing that puts Hull above of Ovechkin for me.

[flyercanuck]

@ScottM

 

I was talking Brett  Hull, not Bobby.

[ScottM]

@ScottM

 

I was talking Brett  Hull, not Bobby.

 

I roll that back somewhat, although even he was a better playoff performer than Ovi. Not that he ever won the Cup in St. Louis when he was the guy. In that respect, they're very similar.

[JagerMeister]

@JagerMeister I'll grant that 800 isn't entirely out of the question for Ovi, but I find it unlikely. While Jagr does prove that it's possible for a guy to still be a good scorer at that age, it doesn't make it any more likely for anyone else. That's the kind of thing that I'll believe when I see for anyone, no matter how great they are.

 

@flyercanuck I also think those aspects of a player's game are important, and while I think that it is possible for a guy to be so great at one or two parts of the game to rank highly on those things alone, a guy who's got a great all-around game can, at the very least, hold his own with a guy who's exceptional in some areas and bad in another. I don't think I'd take Datsyuk over Ovi as an individual player, but you make a good point. I will say this: if I were to choose one of those guys to build a team around, I'd take Datsyuk in a heartbeat.

 

One more thing I'll add about the Ovi vs Hull debate: Ovi hasn't, nor do I really expect him to play in a Stanley Cup Final as the centerpiece of his team. Bobby Hull played in multiple Finals series with the Black Hawks, and even won a Cup. While I think Ovi detracts from his team at times in the playoffs, Hull was an asset. That's one more thing that puts Hull above of Ovechkin for me.

Ovechkin has not missed more then 10 games his whole career, he is more durable then Jagr, and is more consistent with his goal scoring as well. Ofc it makes him more likely to play into his 40s then others, because he is more durable then most hockey players.

 

Also, Hull had the fortune of playing with Stan Mikita and Pierre Pilote, both of them where top 3 at their position during their time, among with alot more depth in their team than Ovechkin's team. Do you think Washington would still be making it into the playoffs the same amount of times without Ovechkin?

[ScottM]

Ovechkin has not missed more then 10 games his whole career, he is more durable then Jagr, and is more consistent with his goal scoring as well. Ofc it makes him more likely to play into his 40s then others, because he is more durable then most hockey players.

 

Also, Hull had the fortune of playing with Stan Mikita and Pierre Pilote, both of them where top 3 at their position during their time, among with alot more depth in their team than Ovechkin's team. Do you think Washington would still be making it into the playoffs the same amount of times without Ovechkin?

 

First, nowhere did I say that Ovi wouldn't play into his 40's. I said that when it comes to being a good goal-scorer at Jagr's age, I take that on a case-by case basis. But that said, there are only 64 skaters in NHL history that have played to age 40 or beyond. The odds say no for any particular player, And truth be told, I don't see the heart in Ovi that I see in Jagr. Jagr plays for love of the game like few players I've ever seen. Another strike against Ovi is that as one-dimensional as he is, I think that once his goal scoring begins to drop, his ice time will follow. Time will tell.

 

Also, nowhere did I say that the Black Hawks of the 60s and 70s made the playoffs only because of Hull, or that the Caps would still be making the playoffs without Ovi. I made the point that Hull produced for his team in the playoffs and contributed strongly to the Finals runs, while Ovi does a disappearing act. Of his playoff appearances, only the 2009 playoffs really stand out for Ovi as far as personal play goes. Hull had several standout playoffs in two leagues, including three by the time he was Ovi's current age.

 

I don't mean to be rude, and I hope this doesn't come across as such, but I'm not going to argue just for the sake of arguing. We've been down that road enough times in the past, and it never leads anywhere.

[jammer2]

  I would have to say Lidstrom is the greatest Euro of all time, with Jagr and Hasek a solid 2-3. OV will need a cup to make a move into the top 3 IMHO.

[ScottM]

  I would have to say Lidstrom is the greatest Euro of all time, with Jagr and Hasek a solid 2-3. OV will need a cup to make a move into the top 3 IMHO.

 

Hasek is tougher to compare since it's goalie vs. skater, but I think you could have made your comment even if Hasek had never won a Cup. He literally dragged his team to the Finals in 1998 and made them competitive in said series. Ovi has frequently done just the opposite in his playoff career.

[jammer2]

Ovi has frequently done just the opposite in his playoff career.

 

 Actually, I just totaled OV's playoff stats, it does seem like he gets a bit of a bum rap when it comes to the playoffs. In 72 career playoff games, he has 71 points. Almost a point per game, not exactly pure superstar stats, but very respectable at the same time. He has lost a lot of 7 game series, pretty sure the Flyers beat him twice in Game #7's. At least now, OV has a legit goalie, no matter how good a forward plays, unless there is an elite goalie in the playoffs, you are gonna get beat a lot.

[jammer2]

@ScottM  I would put a few more guys into this mix for all time greatest Euro, Selanne and Kurri should be in the top 5 also.....and perhaps they should both be put ahead of OV also, after all, they have rings and championships, OV has squat.

 

 1)Lidstrom

 2)Jagr

 3)Selanne

 4)Kurri

 5)OV

 

 That is my top 5, off the top of my head....and even though he did not play in the NHL early on, Petr Stasney should be mentioned also....he is vastly underrated in my books. Does not get talked about enough.

[ScottM]

 Actually, I just totaled OV's playoff stats, it does seem like he gets a bit of a bum rap when it comes to the playoffs. In 72 career playoff games, he has 71 points. Almost a point per game, not exactly pure superstar stats, but very respectable at the same time. He has lost a lot of 7 game series, pretty sure the Flyers beat him twice in Game #7's. At least now, OV has a legit goalie, no matter how good a forward plays, unless there is an elite goalie in the playoffs, you are gonna get beat a lot.

 

His PPG isn't bad, but he traditionally has been bad in game 7. He's played in 10 of them over the course of his career, and has a grand total of six points. Before this past season, he had four points in eight game 7's with a +/- rating of -1. He was was a combined +2 in the two game sevens last season, and he had a point in each, so maybe that will prove to be a breakout for him, but the Caps have to have better out of their best player with the series on the line. That's almost like being anti-clutch.

[ScottM]

@ScottM  I would put a few more guys into this mix for all time greatest Euro, Selanne and Kurri should be in the top 5 also.....and perhaps they should both be put ahead of OV also, after all, they have rings and championships, OV has squat.

 

 1)Lidstrom

 2)Jagr

 3)Selanne

 4)Kurri

 5)OV

 

 That is my top 5, off the top of my head....and even though he did not play in the NHL early on, Petr Stasney should be mentioned also....he is vastly underrated in my books. Does not get talked about enough.

 

Yeah, Kurri and Selanne have to be in the mix. Stastny is a favorite of mine. I agree that he's underrated. Only Gretzky had more points in the 80s. That's impressive. The 4-6 seasons he missed playing in the NHL really hurt him.

[jammer2]

@ScottM   Hmmm, I knew he was not stellar in Game #7's, but those stats, very underwhelming. Those are the games where the superstar is supposed to throw the team on his back and lead the way....and like you said, he has failed in that respect. Perhaps having Holtby on his side will be the missing piece....who knows?

[JagerMeister]

@ScottM  I would put a few more guys into this mix for all time greatest Euro, Selanne and Kurri should be in the top 5 also.....and perhaps they should both be put ahead of OV also, after all, they have rings and championships, OV has squat.

 

 1)Lidstrom

 2)Jagr

 3)Selanne

 4)Kurri

 5)OV

 

 That is my top 5, off the top of my head....and even though he did not play in the NHL early on, Petr Stasney should be mentioned also....he is vastly underrated in my books. Does not get talked about enough.

Have to disagree here as well, Ovechkin has won more individual accolades then the two of them combined. Ovechkin is certainly a top 5 player of his generation, but its harder to say that for the other 2.

 

And also, Kurri was on one of the greatest teams of all time and Selanne is an even worse playoff performer then Ovechkin.

[JagerMeister]

First, nowhere did I say that Ovi wouldn't play into his 40's. I said that when it comes to being a good goal-scorer at Jagr's age, I take that on a case-by case basis. But that said, there are only 64 skaters in NHL history that have played to age 40 or beyond. The odds say no for any particular player, And truth be told, I don't see the heart in Ovi that I see in Jagr. Jagr plays for love of the game like few players I've ever seen. Another strike against Ovi is that as one-dimensional as he is, I think that once his goal scoring begins to drop, his ice time will follow. Time will tell.

 

Also, nowhere did I say that the Black Hawks of the 60s and 70s made the playoffs only because of Hull, or that the Caps would still be making the playoffs without Ovi. I made the point that Hull produced for his team in the playoffs and contributed strongly to the Finals runs, while Ovi does a disappearing act. Of his playoff appearances, only the 2009 playoffs really stand out for Ovi as far as personal play goes. Hull had several standout playoffs in two leagues, including three by the time he was Ovi's current age.

 

I don't mean to be rude, and I hope this doesn't come across as such, but I'm not going to argue just for the sake of arguing. We've been down that road enough times in the past, and it never leads anywhere.

Haha embarassing post, sorry for my terrible reading comprehension on my part.

even then, i wont delete it, it would make a good facepalm for other posters to see...

 

....But what i was trying to say with my second paragraph is that, although i do agree with Hull being a better playoff performer, he was surrounded by much more talent then Ovi, i wasnt trying to say that Hull was the sole reason Chicago Blackhawks made the playoffs.

Also, I would argue Bobby Hull has never had a playoff run as dominant as Ovechkin's 2008-09