not best player.

most valuable--like said team would be terrible without him.
they didnt do much with him. so that one is dead.


he's not NEAR the best player either.


im sure its just a troll blog anyway. no way, anyone who professes to know anything about hockey can think ovechkin was the leagues best player this year.
laughable suggestion really
- hugefemale dog77

I get in an argument about this with my boss just about every day.

Sometimes yes, but not by design. Washington attempted to get Ovechkin away from those players (rightfully so) and did so successfully, thus the lower QoC.

Pittsburgh/Bylsma actively chose to intentionally place Crosby against the oppositions best because the Pens bottom 6 was a dumpster fire and couldn't handle it. Most coaches try to free up their point producers, the Penguins were forced to do the opposite last year.

Crosby owned the role and added 104 points while doing so.

If the Penguins ever tried to free Sid up he might get 130 points.

I suppose while I'm here I'll add that it should be Sid's 2nd Hart in the last 2 years. Sid and Ovie both missed a month of the regular season last year, at least one of them had a valid excuse.
- Ryan_Wilson

***drops the mic***

I gotta say, I never really expected people to agree with me, but I never expected people to just say "minus 35" over and over.

Plus minus does not factor in PP goals.

Plus minus credits you with one + if you score, an action that is mostly you. Yet, if you are scored against, you get a minus one, even though you are 1 of 6 players on the ice.

You can get an assist, do a line change and not get a plus. You can get a minus when you step on the ice fifty feet from the puck.


To say scoring a goal is the same as being on the ice when one goes in is ridiculous. Goalies let in bad goals, other players make bad decisions.

Of course, there's leeway here: every goal you score isn't just because of you, and you can easily be at fault for a goal, but despite that, these things don't balance out.

Even if you wanted to be generous, you could say scoring one goal was equal to a minus 3, and in that scenerio, Ovechkin still needs to be -153 before his 51 goals are negated.

The guy scored 8 more goals than anyone else.

He scored nearly a quarter of his team's total goals.

He scored these goals at a time when goal scoring is down and no one scores 50 and barely anyone scores 40.

Even if you won't conceed he should be given the Hart, you guys are underrating him to a ridiculous level.

I would also say that if you got 30 goals and were the best defensive forward in the NHL, a guy who scored 50 - no matter how he did it - is more valuable to his team.

Washington has one of the worst defense groups in the NHL. They do not really have a goalie. Their second line presents almost zero threat. If you put Crosby on Washington this last season, I would bet you they still miss the playoffs and Crosby is a minus player.

Also, and sorry for the long post, but to say Pavel Bure is better than Eric Lindros is the same thing as saying "I never saw either one play."
- James_Tanner

the argument against +/- is less effective for offensive players who don't receive time against opponents top lines. It's only valid for shutdown players. Guys who are not offensively gifted but play against top players. They have a valid argument for being -, AO does not. Also, you can say the Caps were not a great team, but he was -14 worse than the next guy on the team. That's a massive difference. -14 would be bad, -14 worse than anyone else on your team is embarrassing. Especially for a none shutdown player.

Bure changed hockey, one of the few players to do that. No one, and I mean no one skated at full speed and dangled the puck around when Bure broke into the league. He single handedly changed the dynamics of how players carried the puck on rushes. Lindros was maybe the first player to show why being oversized your whore pre-nhl career is a bad thing. He skated with his head down because he never had to have it up before he got to the NHL. He finally had to play against players his own size, and his career was shortened because of it. To say he's the best since Mario and Wayne is insulting to about 50-100 players since those guys who had just as much talent as Eric, but didn't shorten their own careers by playing like they were 12 years old. What does every coach tell young player. "Keep your head up!"

Even Crosby lost connection on his controller. Even Toews had 1 against LA. OV is the best scorer for the past decade and 2nd Best Scorer right now only behind Stamkos.
- SPIDEROCKSTAR

The fact that YOU are on the ovie bandwagon makes me feel so much more comfortable in my argument against

Ovie is a great goal scorer but that's it... this is a team sport. I just don't understand how you can be the most valuable player in the league when you hurt the team as much as you help. If you really want to help your team, you need to be able to defend as good as you score.

Ovie is a great goal scorer but that's it... this is a team sport. I just don't understand how you can be the most valuable player in the league when you hurt the team as much as you help. If you really want to help your team, you need to be able to defend as good as you score.
- drummer829

Toews is a far better hockey player than ovechkin.
Considering all the things hes able to do, and wll of the things thst entail what makes an elite player; iy;s not even really close actually

But his is so bad that you can't. Maybe if he was a -10 then I could understand because the caps themselves weren't too strong this year, but a -35 is a whole different story. It's not even like they were a terrible team. They were in the playoff hunt until the very end. I would put money on the fact that if ovi were somewhat defensively responsible, they could have made the playoffs
- drummer829

I agree. +/- might not be the most accurate stat, but it is a decent indicator. If you're -35 while putting up 79 points, you've got serious defensive issues with your game....and there's no doubt you're hurting your team.

There's several players I'd take over OV on my team. I'd take Malkin, Stamkos or Toews 100 out of 100 times if I had the choice.

Sid had a crappy post season, but he absolutely carried the Pens through all of those injuries. MVP no question.

If your argument about Ovechkin is correct, then you also need to write an opinion stating that Gretzky should turn over many of his Hart trophies to Mario Lemieux.

Why do people even get surprised when JT put up stupid poop like this anymore?

That was a hilarious read! You are dead on about Lindros but you are dead wrong about Ovechkin.

He's not the best hockey player in the world by a long shot. When you ask someone "Who's the one player you want to start your franchise with?" you only hear Crosby, Toews, Giroux maybe a goalie here and there.

Ovy plays like he's in junior where the best players hover around centre ice waiting for fast breaks. He doesn't even bother backchecking when he really should because he's one of the fastest players out there.
- Allan Bester

..He doesnt play anything like that. He's also not one of the fastest players out there.

Kessel is extremely valuable to the Leafs and had a monster season and we didn't make the playoffs. Missing the playoffs doesn't make Kessel/Tavares/Ovechkin/Karlsson any less valuable to their teams but it definitely takes them out of the running for MVP.
- coolehmon41

That's what I was getting at, I know I worded it a little weird.

Still, I'll never forgive the NHL/writers for giving Ovi the Hart over JT last year..

Lindros as good as Gretzky or Lemieux

He's not even close
- Reveen

Ditto that. You lost cred with that idea. Yes he did dominate
But not even close to G & L -those two are on another level
shared only with Bobby Orr.

[img][/img]

Seriously you have to stop. That is the dumbest comment to try and support your own point that I have ever heard. Why would plus/minus include pp goals? You have a man advantage, you should score.
- RobFlyers#1

I love how just about every comment that calls something "the dumbest ever" is an abject lesson in irony.

It seems to be at this point you have to be being obstinate on purpose.

The dumbest thing you have ever heard is that one of the reasons plus/minus is a bad stat is because it ignores power-play goals? Even though in this context people are using the -35 to completely disregard the guy's league leading amount of goals scored on the power-play?

Ok then.

I love how just about every comment that calls something "the dumbest ever" is an abject lesson in irony.

It seems to be at this point you have to be being obstinate on purpose.

The dumbest thing you have ever heard is that one of the reasons plus/minus is a bad stat is because it ignores power-play goals? Even though in this context people are using the -35 to completely disregard the guy's league leading amount of goals scored on the power-play?

Ok then.
- James_Tanner

What are you talking about? Why would plus/minus include PPG? You have an advantage thus you should score why would any give or get credit for plus for scoring on a power play. That's not how plus/minus works even if that's how you want it to. So he led the league in PPG....that does not mean he should be MVP of the league nor does leading the league in goals. There is a trophy for that called the Rocket Richard Trophy. You stated earlier that Ovi does not play against the other teams top offensive player but he plays against their best defensive players so that makes it worst because he on the ice not when the other teams best offensive players are on the ice but it's players that are not scorers making him a minus player. Nobody is disregarding ovechkin's goal scoring this past season it's you that disregards how bad defensively Ovi is and plus/minus is an indication of that -35 is horrible. Bottom line is can Ovi score goals...hell yes. Can he prevent them or even play semi defensive.....hell NO. Should he have been nominated for the Hart this season...No not a chance.

I gotta say, I never really expected people to agree with me, but I never expected people to just say "minus 35" over and over.

Plus minus does not factor in PP goals.

Plus minus credits you with one + if you score, an action that is mostly you. Yet, if you are scored against, you get a minus one, even though you are 1 of 6 players on the ice.

You can get an assist, do a line change and not get a plus. You can get a minus when you step on the ice fifty feet from the puck.


To say scoring a goal is the same as being on the ice when one goes in is ridiculous. Goalies let in bad goals, other players make bad decisions.

Of course, there's leeway here: every goal you score isn't just because of you, and you can easily be at fault for a goal, but despite that, these things don't balance out.

Even if you wanted to be generous, you could say scoring one goal was equal to a minus 3, and in that scenerio, Ovechkin still needs to be -153 before his 51 goals are negated.

The guy scored 8 more goals than anyone else.

He scored nearly a quarter of his team's total goals.

He scored these goals at a time when goal scoring is down and no one scores 50 and barely anyone scores 40.

Even if you won't conceed he should be given the Hart, you guys are underrating him to a ridiculous level.

I would also say that if you got 30 goals and were the best defensive forward in the NHL, a guy who scored 50 - no matter how he did it - is more valuable to his team.

Washington has one of the worst defense groups in the NHL. They do not really have a goalie. Their second line presents almost zero threat. If you put Crosby on Washington this last season, I would bet you they still miss the playoffs and Crosby is a minus player.

Also, and sorry for the long post, but to say Pavel Bure is better than Eric Lindros is the same thing as saying "I never saw either one play."
- James_Tanner

I think you contradicted yourself a bit. You say +/- doesn't factor in PP goals. That's exactly the point. That means all your goals came on the powerplay, and that your 5 on 5 play while you are on the ice is a -35 and one of the worst in the league. Say what you want about that Caps, but if you are the "MVP" you're controlling play to the point where you aren't getting scored on 35 times more than you're scoring in 5 on 5 play when you're on the ice. Not really hard to see that means your overall game is borederline awful. This is not a quality of an MVP player.

I love how just about every comment that calls something "the dumbest ever" is an abject lesson in irony.

It seems to be at this point you have to be being obstinate on purpose.

The dumbest thing you have ever heard is that one of the reasons plus/minus is a bad stat is because it ignores power-play goals? Even though in this context people are using the -35 to completely disregard the guy's league leading amount of goals scored on the power-play?

Ok then.
- James_Tanner

Give it up. Ovechkin was nowhere near the top player in the NHL this year, and for you or anyone else to suggest otherwise is completely ridiculous. Did you even watch the NHL this year, or are you just saying this to increase hits/comments?

Are you Richard Cloutier by any chance?

Give it up. Ovechkin was nowhere near the top player in the NHL this year, and for you or anyone else to suggest otherwise is completely ridiculous. Did you even watch the NHL this year, or are you just saying this to increase hits/comments?

Are you Richard Cloutier by any chance?
- laughs2907

Nailed it. It has to be he wants to increase his hits because nobody with half a clue that watched hockey this season would think the numbers Ovi put up we're that of an MVP.

Nailed it. It has to be he wants to increase his hits because nobody with half a clue that watched hockey this season would think the numbers Ovi put up we're that of an MVP.
- RobFlyers#1

The only reason is that I think goals are under valued and I want to talk about it.

I think if the Caps made the playoffs a lot of people would have voted for him.

You guys act like 51 goals is just pretty good.

Worst 50 goal season in history. Period.

The only reason is that I think goals are under valued and I want to talk about it.

I think if the Caps made the playoffs a lot of people would have voted for him.

You guys act like 51 goals is just pretty good.
- James_Tanner

But they didnt. And a big reason was that theyre best player is so deficient in so many areas of the game.

Hes good for a highlight reel goal now and again, and has a lethal one timer on the pp, but theres a pretty big list of players that are not only better hockey players, but also more deserving of the hart trophy as 'most valuable' to their teams success

The only reason is that I think goals are under valued and I want to talk about it.

I think if the Caps made the playoffs a lot of people would have voted for him.

You guys act like 51 goals is just pretty good.
- James_Tanner

51 goals is great, there is no questioning that. But goal scoring isn't the sole reason a player should be an MVP candidate or considered best player in the world. His defensive skills are lacking, and he didn't exactly rack up many assists either. What would a team rather have, a guy who will score 36 goals and rack up 68 assists, CONTRIBUTING to 104 goals his team scored, while not being a minus 35 while facing tougher competition, or a guy who gets sheltered a bit, has 51 goals, and contributed to 79 goals his team scored, is so bad defensively that he is a -35 on a team that wasn't even bottom 10 in the league in goal differential. I'd say most if not all teams would want the former.

51 goals is great, there is no questioning that. But goal scoring isn't the sole reason a player should be an MVP candidate or considered best player in the world. His defensive skills are lacking, and he didn't exactly rack up many assists either. What would a team rather have, a guy who will score 36 goals and rack up 68 assists, CONTRIBUTING to 104 goals his team scored, while not being a minus 35 while facing tougher competition, or a guy who gets sheltered a bit, has 51 goals, and contributed to 79 goals his team scored, is so bad defensively that he is a -35 on a team that wasn't even bottom 10 in the league in goal differential. I'd say most if not all teams would want the former.
- matt1396

They already make a trophy for goal scorers....it's called the Rocket Richard.

If we're calling the best player in the league the one who scores the most goals, we might as well just can one of these trophies.

I gotta say, I never really expected people to agree with me, but I never expected people to just say "minus 35" over and over.

Plus minus does not factor in PP goals.

Plus minus credits you with one + if you score, an action that is mostly you. Yet, if you are scored against, you get a minus one, even though you are 1 of 6 players on the ice.

You can get an assist, do a line change and not get a plus. You can get a minus when you step on the ice fifty feet from the puck.


To say scoring a goal is the same as being on the ice when one goes in is ridiculous. Goalies let in bad goals, other players make bad decisions.

Of course, there's leeway here: every goal you score isn't just because of you, and you can easily be at fault for a goal, but despite that, these things don't balance out.

Even if you wanted to be generous, you could say scoring one goal was equal to a minus 3, and in that scenerio, Ovechkin still needs to be -153 before his 51 goals are negated.

The guy scored 8 more goals than anyone else.

He scored nearly a quarter of his team's total goals.

He scored these goals at a time when goal scoring is down and no one scores 50 and barely anyone scores 40.

- James_Tanner

uh...maybe you're right and it's easier to be tagged into a minus as a result of your team, rather than a plus, but it does go both ways. You can just as easily step onto the ice having nothing to do with the play and get a +1 (probably more likely for defenders though).

However, this simply reinforces the inaccuracy of the plus/minus stat.

As for your main point, I agree that dominating the most difficult aspect of the game (ie: scoring) SHOULD put you in the running for MVP... but perhaps lacking in other areas, atleast in this season, counteracts it a bit.

He won last year because he killed the goals and had a solid all-around performance...I watched him play this year, and he really didn't do much beyond put the puck in the net - which is cool ofcourse.

My main reason why he SHOULDN'T win this year goes like this:

compare Giroux's late season push with OV's performance all season. To me, you could pretty much see (and feel) Giroux willing his team into the playoffs...he was getting goals and points that made a difference in tight contests and he was doing it basically on his own.

OV, in the later season - in games that they needed to win - didn't seem to have that umph...that passion to push his team. I am one of his biggest fans, but I really felt he just lost interest (maybe post-Olympic let-down or something), and decided not to be bothered with listening to Oates/getting the Caps to the play-offs.

I expect him to be his best next season, but this season, he fell off the wagon.

51 goals is great, there is no questioning that. But goal scoring isn't the sole reason a player should be an MVP candidate or considered best player in the world. His defensive skills are lacking, and he didn't exactly rack up many assists either. What would a team rather have, a guy who will score 36 goals and rack up 68 assists, CONTRIBUTING to 104 goals his team scored, while not being a minus 35 while facing tougher competition, or a guy who gets sheltered a bit, has 51 goals, and contributed to 79 goals his team scored, is so bad defensively that he is a -35 on a team that wasn't even bottom 10 in the league in goal differential. I'd say most if not all teams would want the former.
- matt1396

Contributing does not equate to scoring, first of all. The goalie that plays the puck out quick and gets his team a odd-man rush 'contributes', and probably doesn't get a point.

All we can say is that OV scored 51 goals and was involved in another 28, and your friend Sid scored 36 and was involved in another 68. Given that you have a 2:1 advantage in getting an assist over a goal, getting more assists isn't all that remarkable.

This also helps us consider team stats:

Pits outscored Wash by 17 goals (242 to 225).

That's an additional 17 goals that Crosby could have been involved in (and likely was).

Pits Goals Against for the season: 204 | Wash: 229

Washington Shots per game: 29.4 | Pits: 29.9

Wash Shots Against per game: 33.5 | Pits: 28.8

You can see that Washington was abysmal defensively this year - when you face more scoring chances than you generate, you should be OUTSCORED and lose in the long run.

The fact Wash was only outscored by 4 goals is largely due to OV; the fact they generated nearly as many scoring chances as Pits is definitely due to OV.
He makes this team look better than it is.

Let's ask every GM if they would like a 50+ goal scorer on their team - not a single one would say no. This puts OV in his own category of star to begin with, as no-one else fits that build this season.

His short-comings this year I feel prevent him from being in the MVP race, but let's not downplay what scoring 50 does for a team.