View Single Post
11-23-2012, 11:57 AM
Registered User
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 45,930
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
What I find kind of funny is that if someone started a thread, "has Ovechkin been as good as Crosby during their careers", this forum would rightfully be all over that with rants about how there is more to the game of hockey than scoring points. The conclusion would be that he might have been the most dominant scorer in flashes, but not the best player for the whole period.

And if someone started a "has Malkin been the best player since the lockout" thread, it would be rants about inconsistency, laziness and lacking a complete game. The inevitable conclusion would be that he may have been the best in flashes, but not for the whole period.

And here we are in a Crosby thread, talking about inconsistency and injuries. Conclusion? Best player in flashes, but not for the whole period.

Which leads to the question: if none of these guys can be called the best player in the post-lockout period, who can? I mean, someone has to be the best of the era, right?
Don't get me wrong - I would have voted Crosby for the Hart in 2009-10 (I thought Henrik Sedin was a terrible decision and the result of the media wanting to give it to someone other than Crosby or Ovechkin). But I don't think he was decisively better - Ovechkin was still better offensively.

And as indicated in the link CYM posted, Lecavalier had a stretch in 2006-07 as good as Crosby in 2010-11. Difference being that Lecavlalier was able to play after his injury, which dragged his PPG down. And Ovechkin in 2009-10 was actually a little above Crosby in 2010-11 (from a purely point perspective, not an overall game) until his first suspension.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote