Well once you name the 75 best players of all times, the rest of the list is based on opinion. I personally would have crosby at 90, and ovechkin at 95.
Well once you name the 75 best players of all times, the rest of the list is based on opinion. I personally would have crosby at 90, and ovechkin at 95.
Ovechkin is definately ahead of Crosby at this point.
I think Ovechkin would be somewhere between 100 and 120. Crosby would be between 150 and 200.
Ovechkin is definately ahead of Crosby at this point.
I think Ovechkin would be somewhere between 100 and 120. Crosby would be between 150 and 200.
This is my problem with simply award counting. I fail to see how Crosby would be that far back of Ovechkin when there are legitimate debates about who is better.
This is my problem with simply award counting. I fail to see how Crosby would be that far back of Ovechkin when there are legitimate debates about who is better.
Exactly. Additionally, would Ovechkin have won the Hart in 07-08 if Crosby hadn't missed nearly a third of the season? If the Hart count was flipped would anyone feel Ovie was better than Sid?
Exactly. Additionally, would Ovechkin have won the Hart in 07-08 if Crosby hadn't missed nearly a third of the season? If the Hart count was flipped would anyone feel Ovie was better than Sid?
Holy cow was 07-08 that long ago? I hope that's not a serious question.
Exactly. Additionally, would Ovechkin have won the Hart in 07-08 if Crosby hadn't missed nearly a third of the season? If the Hart count was flipped would anyone feel Ovie was better than Sid?
Yes, OV would in all likelihood have won the Hart that year regardless. Crosby's extrapolated numbers are 37+74=111. Scoring 65 goals is quite extraordinary. While there are several flaws with adjusted numbers the fact that he places third all time says something about how amazing that season was.
Definitely top 100. Between the two of them I'd put Crosby over Ovechkin due to playoffs/Olympics.
I have no problem ranking Crosby over Ovechkin but he was mediocre (by his standards) in the Olympics so I don't really see that as an argument in his favor. He scored one huge goal but I'm not comfortable evaluating a player based on one single play. Additionally, Ovechkin has the game winner against Canada in the 06 Olympics.
My main point is that Crosby has a gold while Ovechkin does not. And it doesn't really matter how he did - Crosby's participation in the tournament will be remembered for that goal the same way Paul Henderson is for his goal in 72.
My main point is that Crosby has a gold while Ovechkin does not. And it doesn't really matter how he did - Crosby's participation in the tournament will be remembered for that goal the same way Paul Henderson is for his goal in 72.
No argument there. Though I'm not sure it should count for much in a ranking of individual players like the HoH top 100. However, Crosby is for sure the more famous and recognized player of the two.
I like the player Ovechkin better than Crosby but I don't know if I still rank him ahead of Crosby. Although I wouldn't fault Ovechkin for his teams performance. He does the important stuff and not just goal scoring. To answer the OP, I believe they are fringe top100s.
Exactly. Additionally, would Ovechkin have won the Hart in 07-08 if Crosby hadn't missed nearly a third of the season? If the Hart count was flipped would anyone feel Ovie was better than Sid?
Ovechkin's 07-08 is the most impressive non-Lemieux season I've seen from a player since Fedorov's 93-94. So I think it's pretty likely he would have.
Someone in a thread a little while ago said that Crosby is pretty close to Sid Abel in career accomplishments by now. He might have passed Abel by now. So that would indicate that Crosby (and probably Ovechkin) are both fringe Top 100 players by now.
Personally, when we restart the list (are we still doing that?), I'd like to only include players who played before the lockout because I think it's just too hard to rate guys like Crosby and Ovechkin who are still in the upswing of their careers. Then include the two of them in the update in a few years (by which time they should be at least Top 50).
So consensus seems to be that, yes, they are both in at the cusp now. If they both got suffered career-ending injuries tomorrow, I doubt anyone would put together a convincing argument to keep them out of the top 100.
And it doesn't really matter how he did - Crosby's participation in the tournament will be remembered for that goal the same way Paul Henderson is for his goal in 72.
I don't.
Pretty much everyone did it for Canada, Crosby was no standout at all.
My main point is that Crosby has a gold while Ovechkin does not. And it doesn't really matter how he did - Crosby's participation in the tournament will be remembered for that goal the same way Paul Henderson is for his goal in 72.
Don't compare Henderson's goal in '72 with Crosby's goal in 2010.
They're not even on the same planet.
Pretty much everyone did it for Canada, Crosby was no standout at all.
I remember thinking in the dying moments of the gold medal game how invisible Crosby had been throughout the entire tournament.
Using his gold medal winning goal as justification for anything is akin to using Henderson's game 8 goal as reason to induct him into the HHOF. One moment does not define a player.
The thing with Crosby is he has accomplished everything you could ask for. He has won the Hart, Richard and a lot more individual trophies. He scored the game winning goal for Canada to win gold, won the Stanley Cup and was the youngest captain to win the Cup. Ovechkin has won the Hart and the Richard and a couple other trophies but he doesn't have the the 2 big awards and that's a gold metal and a Stanley Cup. So right now Crosby is ahead of Ovechkin.
