Crosby vs. Alex Ovechkin vs. Malkin debate

by Mill Grove 8 on Apr 23, 2009 2:13 PM EDT Comment 54 comments

So Tyler Kennedy scored again. It was no doubt the biggest goal of his live and a huge goal in terms of this series. He's the man. The word is out. Marc-Andre played the best game of his life and overshadowed everyone but Kennedy's goal was important. Moving on...

I watched the Capitals play the Rangers last night since the Penguins didn't play and I want to jump on board this Crosby vs. Alex Ovechkin vs. Malkin debate. Undoubtedly there are other players to through into the mix of "who is the best player in the World right now," my short list would include several goalkeepers who are playing out of their gourd right now, at least three Red Wings and Wayne Gretzky, whose numbers are so unbelievably untouchable that AO, Crosby and Malkin will be lucky to come close. Throw his old ass into someone's power play and I guarantee he still lights up the scoreboard like a fireworks display, with all due respect to Mario Lemieux, of course.

Ovechkin sucks. Or at least he did last night. I saw the highlights of him finally playing playoff hockey on Monday night, and he looked good. He hustled. He played some defense. But who cares? That's playoff hockey he was playing. Kennedy plays with that kind of passion on a Wednesday game in Albuquerque.

AO wasn't even the best player on the ice yesterday, let alone the world, Henrik Lundqvist was. And no, it wasn't because AO's shots were so amazing they spawned flames, on ice, while traveling at the speed of sound. AO's shots were predictable and blocked, save one, but if any of the aforementioned players shot 11 times at something, they'd hit it too. They would not only hit it - they'd kill it and eat it.

AO turns the puck over more than Brooks Orpik, who turns more things over than a pair of tongs.

Question: who turned the puck over on the play that was all over every sports medium Monday night and Tuesday where AO made that diving back-tracking steal? Ovechkin.

Sergi Federov played better than AO, and he was drafted in '89, when AO was turning over toys in the sandbox at the age of four.

On a serious note, AO and the Capitals remind me of the Penguins back in '07 when they needed to just make the playoffs and get some experience. The Penguins are winning close playoff games now because they took those lumps. The Capitals, while they looked very dangerous heading into this year's playoffs, just don't have that playoff gear.

The content expressed in fanposts does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the staff here at Pensburgh.com. FanPosts are opinions expressed by fans of various teams throughout the league but may be more Pittsburgh-centric for obvious reasons.

0 recs | Comment 54 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

lol

i love how tis guy is so “dangerous”. anyone who throws the puck at the net as much as him is destined to get a goal or two. he is not neraly as gifted as crosby, malkin, or even stall. no way is this guy deserving the MVP. you have to make you teammates better. 54-57 with 500+shots on net is not making anyone better. OVIE, your an avaerge power forward at best. who would you take, kevin stevens in the 1991-1992 or ovie now. my money is on stevens.

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 2:30 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Wow. As a Flyers fan, that’s probably the most blatantly incorrect opinion due to bias since Philly.com writers were calling for Kunitz to be suspended. You named four players that you think are way better than him, all of whom were Penguins. Homer! Overrated? Not making his team better? Debatable, but I’ll give it to you.

However, with all the shots he takes, how do you think he gets those shots if his teammates suck so much? He would obviously have to CREATE those opportunities by himself. Second of all, you can’t score if you don’t shoot. And he didn’t get “a goal or two”. He got a few more than that.

And “average” power forward? Not as good as Kevin Stevens? Come on… be honest with yourself.

by Geoff Detweiler on Apr 23, 2009 2:52 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs

To Clarifiy

I’m not saying he’s better than Crosby or Malkin, but to dismiss him from the top 3 players in the NHL is ridiculous. Arguments can be made for Iginla, Datsyuk, Nash, etc., but not Staal.

There is a legitimate argument between the three, and Ovechkin can’t just be thrown out because he’s not a Penguin.

by Geoff Detweiler on Apr 23, 2009 3:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You are ridiculous. Staal > Ovechkin? Not even Ray Schero would take Staal over AO. And for the turnover that led to his great backcheck? The puck bounced on him, it was a bad pass, and I think it was tipped. Don’t characterize it like he went D to D right to Korpikovsky. He got a bad break and chased the dude down. If Orpik gets that same pass it’s either a) a goal b) a big MAF save or c) a PIM. No way Orpik diffuses that play. I understand you guys are biased and love Malkin and Crosby (for good reason) and that AO hasn’t been very dangerous this playoffs. But keep it honest or you just sound like a bunch of guys that can’t objectively discuss hockey. That’s not what I expect from this site, I expect more from you or I wouldn’t bother coming around.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Everyone’s got their opinions.

Ovechkin ~~-even though he’s still been shooting a lot from maybe questionable areas -~~ still has enough power and shock factor in his shots to score at any time (I think of the crazy spin-around shot he scored on no less than his current nemesis Lundqvist after a weird bounce).

It’s easy now that the Caps are down 3-1 and the Pens are up 3-1 to make some points about the individual players but what does it count for now?

Really I’m over it. AO does some things better than Crosby, Malkin or anyone else in the league. But Crosby can do some stuff that Ovechkin can’t do and Malkin has some attributes that no one else has…Really you could say the same for Pavel Datsyuk and a bunch of other players too.

They’re all fairly unique. They’re all generational talents. I prefer to just enjoy the shows they put on rather than argue who’s better. It’s too tough, on any given night any one of those guys can take it to another level, only to be outdone the next. It’s impossible to say.

Hockey’s a team sport, a game of inches and it comes down to the team around the superstars, not just the star.

by Hooks Orpik on Apr 23, 2009 4:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I agree with all of that, and note that I didn’t try to say that AO was better than Sid or Geno. But comparing Staal to him is just not grounded in reality by any measure. I was just trying to address what I felt were some inaccuracies in your characterization of AO, which I feel are beneath this site. I like your commentary. I like the thoughts you bring. I expect and accept that you don’t think AO is the best player in the world, I just want the debate to be honest and based on what is really going on. Not childish fanboy statements and mediocre photoshops.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 4:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Haha, gotcha. Staal > Ovechkin is just crazy…I like Jordan a lot, but let’s be real: he’s probably only the third best player in his family right now (considering how defensively sound Marc is).

Hey, it’s just like at the Rink when people are trashing Crosby saying earlier this year that Savard was better. Just take a chuckle and move on, can’t let it affect you too much, gotta have a filter on there somewhere, you know?

by Hooks Orpik on Apr 23, 2009 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah. I guess you could say it’s a tough day for me. I thought about pointing out that Jordan isn’t the best Staal but then I’d just get “The whole Staal family is better than AO… including mom and dad!!!11”

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 4:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

but….they are.

news flash…..
genos parents have agreed to terms to punch out about 5 more baby malkins to aid in pens future development

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 4:21 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Trolling on your own site. Amazing.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 4:24 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i thought it was a fairly entertaining discussion. yes AO is a better goal scorer then jordan but imo jordan does all the little things much better. all the staals do the little things much better.

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 4:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

im more frustrated that we wont see a pens caps series this year. its not the playoffs without playing the caps.

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A team needs players like Jordan Staal to be successful…He’s improving on faceoffs every year, he’s the team’s top PK’ing forward and he’s imposing his will on games lately. And, the usual disclaimer, he’s still just 20 years old and learning how to play in his 6’4" 220 pound frame.

But to say he’s a better player or more valuable than Ovechkin is something that really shouldn’t be said. If AO was a Penguin and J. Staal was a Capital I doubt any Pens fans would still even talk about that point.

by Hooks Orpik on Apr 23, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If AO was a Penguin, Malkin would be a Blackhawk, and Cam Barker would be a Cap. A scary, parallel universe that is.

That said, no Staal is as good as Ovechkin is, that’s why Marc has a partner to help contain him and why Eric has the 2nd most goals in the NHL.

Not to mention, Toews and Backstrom are both a hell of a lot better than Jordan, and they all play the same position.

by DrinkingPartner on Apr 23, 2009 4:38 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Parallel Universe

…and the Pens would have lost one ball in the Crosby Lotto and Crosby would probably be somewhere else as well.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And the Caps would have gained a ball. God, the 2005 Draft was handled poorly.

by DrinkingPartner on Apr 23, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Not to mention, Toews and Backstrom are both a hell of a lot better than Jordan, and they all play the same position.

I think that debate is a lot more interesting…If you look at the goals/assists you’d say Backstrom and Toews for sure.

But consider Toews played 0:39 short-handed a game (this reg season), Backstrom got 0:59 SH ice-time per game and Staal played 3:31, anchoring the top SH unit.

No doubt that Backstrom is a much better playmaker, and Toews provides more goal-scoring, but Staal is a very, very solid player away from the puck. No offense to Backstrom or Toews, but the Pens already have Crosby and Malkin.

Staal, a blossoming 30 goal scorer with PK ability, is a very good player that fills a need for the Pens better than Backer or Toews would have.

So I wouldn’t say either are “a hell of a lot better” than Staal. They’re all 20/21 years old. Let’s look back in 5-7 years and see how they end up. All will be great players, but I think the Pens made a smart choice to round themselves out.

by Hooks Orpik on Apr 23, 2009 4:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If I were Ray Schero I would have taken Kessel. Man what Crosby could do with that speed and shot on his wing.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 4:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

nah

we have plenty of young wingers coming up in the system. would it be nice, sure. but right now we have a three headed monster. all three centers have different types of games and if you sleep on any of the three your in deep kim-chi

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Plenty of young wingers. Right.

3 out of your top 15 prospects? And the best one you have wasn’t even drafted by you, or around when Kessel was available.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If I were Ray Schero I would have taken Kessel. Man what Crosby could do with that speed and shot on his wing.

Both have kind of crushed it as being “nothing” but back in the day Kessel and Crosby had issues with each other.

I don’t remember exactly what, I think it was some sort of Canada/USA game where Kessel’s mom was banging on the glass yelling at Crosby and then Sid scored a goal and told her basically to STFU.

Again, my memory could be off, and maybe it had nothing to do with the draft, but I don’t think the two of them get along very well.

Also, at the time remember that Kessel’s stock was dropping like a stone, for whatever reason, since he was initially the “next next next” one.

by Hooks Orpik on Apr 23, 2009 5:02 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah his stock was dropping and I think that definitely was a factor. In retrospect I think his stock dropped because he was tabbed as the No. 1 when he was 16 so he had 2 years or pressure and scrutiny to continue to justify that billing. Really, I don’t think you could have gone wrong with any of those top 5 picks, I just think having an elite scorer to put with either of you elite centers would be brutal to have to defend.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 5:19 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed. staals play away from the puck is what makes him a beast. comparing any of the young talent to each other is like apples and oranges, unless they are third line centers.

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 5:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They’re all fairly unique. They’re all generational talents. I prefer to just enjoy the shows they put on rather than argue who’s better.

That is exactly how I feel about it. I think each year one of them will rise to the top. But year to year it is any one’s guess which one of the three it will be.

by PensFan024 on Apr 23, 2009 4:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sergi Federov played better than AO..

i call shenanigans.

by Natty Bumppo on Apr 23, 2009 3:24 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

oh, and it’s spelled fedorov.

by Natty Bumppo on Apr 23, 2009 3:36 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Natty — you might want to start with your own fanbase first. :)

by Hooks Orpik on Apr 23, 2009 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

oh, we’ve had worse jersey fouls.. :)

by Natty Bumppo on Apr 23, 2009 4:05 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ahahahahaha

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

compare the seasons

compare the two years. in 1991-1992 season kevin stevens had 54 goals, 69 assits, with 254 PIM. that was his third full season in the league. a majority of that year his linemate lemuix was out. at this time it was his third full season in the nhl, during a time period when hook and holding were not looked at the same way. yes ever since he got injured in the islanders seires in 1993 he was never the same. unfortunatly i cannot find stevens’s shot totals that year however i highly doubt he came anywhere close to the whopping 528 shots AO has. that is being honest with myself. AO is not all world. i will continue to stand by my comment that he is an average power forward. on the kunitz hit. it was clean, he didnt elbow him in the head. if he did kimmo would still be in the hospital. the reason i say staal is better is beacuse he is not a primadona, and his work in the corners makes plays happen for his teamamtes.

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 3:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

...

sorry, i was bouncing back and forth. got the 3rd full season thing in there twice. im at work leave me alone

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

But comparing players from 20 years apart never works. And Stevens only played 16 games without Lemieux. Both Stevens and AO finished second in the league in points, true, but 52, 46, 65, 56 goals in his first four full seasons for AO. 29, 40, 54, 55 for KS in his first four full. Comparable, but edge to Ao. Plus, who’s to say that AO couldn’t have scored like Brett Hull from that year (70 goals)? Noone knows. Who’s to say KS can skate in this time period? Noone. It’s all stats that nobody can properly compare.

The issue I have is that in 2009, saying AO isn’t one of the three best players in the league is ridiculous. And you just made it easy by claiming four Penguins are better than him.

by Geoff Detweiler on Apr 23, 2009 3:41 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Compare the Eras

How many times did Stevens lead the league in goals? Points? Anything? How many times was Stevens MVP? How many times did Stevens outscore the second leading goal scorer in the league by 20%? How many times did Stevens reach a goal total that nobody in the league had reached in over a decade? Get over yourself. Assssssssss.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 3:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

its way to early to compare this guy to brett hull much like its to early to compare sid or geno to greatsky or lemuix. the reason why i go back to that time period is simply because it was harder to find open ice to make a play or get a quality shot off. there were no interferance calls back then, no obstruction calls. saying just because this guy leads the league in goals scored makes him all world is ludicrious. outscoring the oppisition by 20%… he took nearly 50% more shots… genuis. if you cant come with a constructive conversation like shagg, go away

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 3:48 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

shooting percentage

AO, 10.6%, shots taken 528
geno, 12.35%, shots taken 290
sid, 13.9%, shots taken, 238
stall, 13.3%, shots taken 166

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 3:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

When was the last time anyone won anything because of shooting %? Never. That’s like me bringing up face off % to say that Malkin and Crosby aren’t among the top centers in the league.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 3:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Easier to find open ice in the late 80s and early 90s? Really? When the depth of skill in the league was near it’s all time low? How about the quality of goaltenders? How about the fact that AO spent 2 years without a legit center and his third was with a rookie. If it was so easy to get shots then why doesn’t everyone shoot more? Because they realize that not shooting the puck is a better way to help the team score? Unlikely. Every coach says to shoot the puck and get it on net. Are you ready to tell me why Phil Esposito was no good either? Why is it not impressive that the guy can singlehandedly get himself scoring chances? I don’t see how outscoring every other player in the league isn’t all world. If it was so easy to do what he does then why don’t the truly all world player do it? If you can’t come up with an objective and rational argument, go away. Oh, and you really must be a true hockey fan if you spell Gretzky with an ‘s’ (and I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt on putting “Great” in there).

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 3:53 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

an all time low?

yeah an all time low. when guys like chelios, messier, sakic, felix potvin, ken daneyko, al iafrate, sylvan cote, luc robitille, were all in thier prime. i am not syaing phil e was not good. course not. im saying that AO is overrated. partly because he’s a fresh face and a new attitude in a game that desperatly needs good pub. hes been able to give that un like sid who is as engaging in an interview like a wet mop. typoes happen. hes not creating scoring chances, hes flodding the net with pucks. those are two disctinctly different things. i appoligze for my mistypings..it happens

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 4:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

A) that is less than 1% of the league you listed B) my comment was the depth of skill C) Sylvan Cote? Ken Daneyko? Felix Potvin? Al Iafrate? Really? You don’t watch much hockey do you. None of those guys are particularly defensive stalwarts. For a guy who’s name has “oldtimehockey” you sure don’t know much about the history of the game. I don’t think any educated observer would say that the 80s-early 90s weren’t the most offensive era of the game and that the depth in skill wasn’t very poor, including goaltending.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 4:10 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

rofl

sylvan cote and ken daneyko were some of the best defensive defenssemen in the game during that time. al could change the course of a game with his cannons from the point. ed belfour, tom barrasso, felix potiv, dom hasek was breaking in then, ron hextall. there was plenty of depth back then. the late 80s and early 90s were more offensive not because the “depth of goaltending” but rather the wide open nature of the game untill around 1992 when the trap came into being.

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 4:15 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i figured an honest caps fan would remember iafrate and cote. not to mention gonchar.

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 4:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I do remember them. But a) Iafrate is an offensive guy, not defensive guy so he doesn’t relate to your Stevens argument. B) Gonchar didn’t come up in that era, neither did Hasek. C) None of those guys are HoF players, which is where you should probably be looking if you are comparing the guys that are shutting down Stevens and AO. Felix Potvin? Were you just a Leafs fan or something? Guy had like 2 good years and disappeared. The trap really didn’t take over until 1995 when the Devils won the Cup. Bottom line, you can keep throwing a handful of players at me but that doesn’t address DEPTH. Depth, by definition, means a lot of good players. That was not the case. Even guys that played during that era admit that most of them couldn’t play now.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Are we really arguing over whether or not Ocho is overrated. I mean, c’mon now. I hate the guy in a rivalry sort of way. But really? Overrated?

by PensFan024 on Apr 23, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

so unless they are in the HoF they suck…is that it? there are a lot of players today that will not make the hall. therefore there is no depth now either

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 4:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You’ve got a long, difficult argument to prove that Sylvain Cote and Ken Daneyko were two of the best defenseman in the game at any point in their careers, especially when compared to Bourque, Chelios, Stevens, McInnis… the list goes on.

by DrinkingPartner on Apr 23, 2009 4:42 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

exactly. but there was no depth back then.

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You haven’t named more than 1% of the league. Go turn on NHL network and watch an old time game. Guys routinely got open shots from the middle of the hashmarks. That just doesn’t happen today. Goalies are better now, pads are bigger, D are better, coaching is better, there are a lot of things going on. Point is it is much much harder to score now than when Stevens did it. The numbers demonstrate that as the scoring has declined. Unless you are ready to assert that the goals are down because the NHL skill level is at an all time low. I’m ready for your half-witted attempt to make that point. Your own guys are telling you that you’re wrong, so suck it up, tuck your tail between your legs, and let it go.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 5:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

no, actually he just helped me prove my point that there was depth back then. i am still trying to figure out whats got you all spooled up to the point of throwing out lame half witted insults. keep trying to bash me because i disagree with what your spouting off. is AO a better goal scorer, yep. does that matter right now for the pens…nope. whiether its easier to score now then in the early 90s is debateable. one day i would agree on that point, the next i would disagree. the goalies arent so much better as they are different styles. back then Roy was one of the only butterfly goalies in the game. keep throwing mud like a child rather then having a contructive conversation.

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 5:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

just because total goals, total 50 goal scorers are down doesnt nessicarily indicate its harder to score. are shot totals down?

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 5:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

If goals are down I’d say it’s pretty conclusive evidence that goals are harder to score. There is no such thing as a constructive conversation with you. I make a point and you re-frame the issue so that you can make another point. You start with Stevens was better than AO. I show you it’s wrong. You argue with my characterization of the depth of the 80s-90s. You name 5 players. Then you name 5 other players. You aren’t sticking with the argument. You are just saying what you want to convince yourself AO isn’t that special. Even the other Pens fans here don’t agree with you.

by Fehr and Balanced on Apr 23, 2009 5:17 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

you say there was no depth, there are plenty of players back then who were dangerous. i named a few, drinking partner named a few. it is to early in AO’s career to say what he will become. he could fesibly end up like stevens and have 4 or 5 good years then fall off the planet due to injury. it is not conlcusive just because goals are down its harder to score. you said yourself you cant score if you dont shoot. if shots are down then it would stand to reason that goals are down. is AO a great personality and a good talent. yes. is he mvp worthy, no. is he a great goal scorer yes. would i want him on the pens thus requireing us to get rid of someone we have on the roster to make room. no. does the league need him to keep being a nutter, yes.

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 5:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

it was a moderatly different game back then. the players now are a bit bigger, a lot stonger and faster. take KS and stick him in this day and age and he may struggle. take AO and stick him in the hook hold and impede at all costs era and he may struggle also. but the simalarities end at the goals and total points scored. ks was a much grittier player. see 250 pim’s in an age when penalties had to be blatant. not like today when someone so much as looks at one of the young stars and they get a free trip to the box

by oldtimehockey09 on Apr 23, 2009 5:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs