Who was a better player: Evgeni Malkin or Alexander Ovechkin?

[mikey]

I can't really get my head around this one, I realize. And I know where I'm asking this. But who was the better player between these two? I know Ovechkin has more of a "resume" because of the endless amount of goal-scoring titles and the like. I don't have an angle here, I just want to see how people talk about it more than anything...

[crusherstasiak]

feel malkin is more well rounded, ov's durability not withstanding
plus oveckin never single-handidly won a cup like geno did in 09

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

“was” a better player??




my initial gut says Ovi. But I think part of that is that the general public holds Ovi in higher regard because of his goal scoring

let’s compare skills

Ovi:
- better scorer
- more durable (300 more games played with only one more season)
- many more hits (3272 to 639)
- more disciplined (only 817 PIM vs 1150)

Geno:
- better playmaker
- better defensively (959 vs 636 in career takeaways)
- plays center, which is a more challenging position




overall I’ll give Ovi the slight edge. He has an argument for “greatest goal scorer of all time” which I think adds to his legacy

[Gaucho]

I pcked Geno but I'm biased.

[Nuge]

If you take both players absolute peak best they could play, Malkin was slightly better. But overall career-wise, Ovechkin played at his ceiling much more than Malkin, so I’d say he’s the better player.

[Gaucho]

that's probably correct

[Lelldorin]

On the cell phone and babysitting my kids, so short answer.

I would pick Crosby first, Ovechkin second and Malkin third if I wanted a franchise player. But it is closer than I thought between the latter two.

Obviously, Ovechkin has a better silverware cabinet but I believe his whole team played with the purpose of getting him PP and empty net goals. He also played with Bäckström that was a 1C.

Malkin played only one season with legit talent and as the No 1 player on the team. Kunitz and Neal are probably worse than Ovechkin's best line mates. But Malkin was really good that season. Otherwise, he played with quite bad players 5 vs 5.

You could make an argument that Malkin faced the 3rd and 4th best defensmen ok the opposite team since Crosbys line was considered better. Perhaps Malkin could have been considered better than Ovechkin if he constantly had been playing 5 vs 5 with talented line mates.

[meow]

One of these dudes is going to break the league goal scoring record

[willeyeam]

i'm not answering because i don't think i'd like my answer

[LeopardLetang]

i answered truthfully. I think it's telling that no one thinks it's too close to call even. basically it's a landslide and black and gold lenses

[skullman80]

I love Geno...alot. With that said I have to go Ovechkin. He may be a one trick pony, but that one trick is about to break Gretzky's goal scoring record. That what tilts it for me to him.

[nocera]

One of them was on the 100 Greatest Players of the NHL's First 100 Years list and one of them was Mr. 101. Case closed.

[mikey]

What if Ovechkin doesn't score another goal?

[Ad@m]

Til

Malkin - 1.13 ppg

Ovechkin - 1.08 ppg

[LeopardLetang]

Ovi is so much more destructive. you have to gameplan for him right? especially on the power play. but you have to be worried about him every time he's on the ice. he'll pop for a goal or pop you into the wall. When malkin was noticeably destructive it was usually self destructive. i freaking love malkin and his style of play. but ovi is a more dynamic force

[meow]

Nah Malkin is a at more dynamic. OV is straight ahead

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

Ovi is caveman dumb. Malkin is "drunk guy at pickup" dumb. If I had to choose one I'd definitely take the former

[mikey]

Nah Malkin is a at more dynamic. OV is straight ahead

This is my thought as well. It's part of the reason why I have more trouble than I should squaring the question...

[King Colby]

I went with #8 because of what Nuge said

[LeopardLetang]

Nah Malkin is a at more dynamic. OV is straight ahead

This is my thought as well. It's part of the reason why I have more trouble than I should squaring the question...

Oh we are using different definitions of dynamic i guess? In the hockey world it must mean different than what i mean?

I mean like crashing splash plays that a non hockey fan can watch and say wow that guy. Big hits big slappers. But where i could be wrong is i feel he has a bigger impact on the game. Goals and hits. I also thought opponent game plan? Would you guys agree to that? Or as a coach would you rather face ovi over malkin in a vacuum?

Is malkin with his dynamic playmaking a bigger impact?

He got kinda good at face offs now sometimes too? At least better.

[mikey]

Dynamic, to me, means being able to do a variety of things and process on the fly. Adaptable skill, adaptive hands, deceptive, etc.

Ovechkin was a power game. Very streamlined. He carried the length of the rink, he barreled into whatever was in his way, and he shot. It was probably a big reason why the Caps never went anywhere except the one time Kuznetsov showed up.

Ovechkin was easy to plan for, in some ways...that's why guys like Scuderi and Girardi could deal with him because he only really came down hill. His whole power play mystique is completely ended by Bryan Rust standing next to him. Now, that comes at a cost, of course. But could you stop him? Not necessarily. But he was reasonably predictable for an all-time skill player.

Malkin could do more...he was a much better playmaker, a much more advanced in his deceptive qualities, he held up as an impact player for much longer (I haven't seen Ovechkin take a stride in five years...he can still throw the puck in the net from anywhere)...Malkin processes on the fly (mental and technical) much more than Ovechkin for me.

I don't care about Malkin and faceoffs haha - that's not an element of this.

[willeyeam]

Geno is more well rounded. But the thing Ovi is good at - he's the best in the history of the league at it. Is Malkin close to being the best ever at any part of the game?

[meow]

Geno is more well rounded. But the thing Ovi is good at - he's the best in the history of the league at it. Is Malkin close to being the best ever at any part of the game?

No but do the pieces Malkin has add up to be greater than the one thing OV does? That’s the question

[mikey]

Exactly ^

The reward for being an unbalanced attacker at a weak position doesn't help clear this up. If Malkin all but refused to pass, he'd have - what - 600ish right now? But probably less than 1000 points. Would he be better as an Xth+Yth goal scorer of all time, as opposed to "unranked" as a goal scorer OR playmaker?

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

Ovi is much more one dimensional than Geno, certainly, but the magnitude of how good he was at that dimension is tremendous. Arguably the best ever. Stats aren't the end all be all but going by Adjusted Goals (which accounts for era), he is the best goal scorer ever: https://www.hockey-reference.com/leader ... areer.html


of course dynamism is preferred and that's why Sid is generally regarded as the best player over all three of these players. But the difficulty with this question is how we all define "better"; it's too theoretical and we'd all have different approaches to how we define "better"


I kind of like Leopard's framing of "if you were a coach, who would you rather face?" (or not face, I guess). For me it's Malkin because I feel like his knuckleheaded-ness is more exploitable. Even if you try to gameplan for Ovi by having a defender camp out by him, that means you are leaving holes elsewhere. Geno has more tricks but I'd try to get under his skin and try to draw penalties and make him go into hero mode. Now, of course, there's a chance he'd be "on" that night and get a hattrick with two assists. But that's a risk I'm willing to make