"Sid may be the game's best player, but Alex is by far the most exciting to watch." - Paul Attfield, Globe and MailI guess it's better to be half right than all wrong.
"Sid may be the game's best player, but Alex is by far the most exciting to watch." - Paul Attfield, Globe and Mail
12 comments:
It's like trying to turn back the tide. Certain Canadian writers will never say that Crosby isn't the best because there's too much national pride invested in him. No matter what Alex does, there will be some from the Great White North who will always have to qualify his achievements so that Crosby is always a little bit better. You know that if AO wins the Art Ross, Hart and Pierson, some guy from the Toronto Star will say it's only because Sid got hurt. But we'll always know the truth is that Alex is just better.
satisfying to know that whereas alex will surely own both the calder and richard trophies during his career, sidney will never sniff either.
Better player meaning what? Does a better put up more points? Or does a better player do it all: pass, score, hit? I'd take the latter. You'd never see Sid cross the ice to check a guy like AO did to Begin Thursday night.
getting tired of these comparisons. they are both irreplaceable to their teams that play completely different styles.
In the end, the comparisons really should end at the bottom line, which is the number of Cups each has. So far, neither has one, but I think the Caps will have more in the end then the current Pens will.
More cups is kind of a dumb way to consider who's a better player. That's like saying if the penguins win a cup and we don't, that colby armstrong is a better than ovechkin. That may be true is *some* sort of comparison, (like who's the goofier looking guy) but it's not a fair comparison at all.
NS is right, it's just garbage, since they're entirely different in their playing style.
Going on what anonymous said, what qualifies as a better player? More points? More passing, scoring, hits? Some claim crosby is a better "all around" player. However, I think that's a bogus claim, since Alex has proven he can play 2-way at least well enough to maintain a big +/- and hits far more. If you want to go by points, even barring pussywillow's injury, you've got the leading goal scorer way high up in the points race too (and as luck would have it, he's taking off with that, now). Woulda, coulda, shoulda, whatever. Bottom line is Ovechkin's getting the spotlight with baby-boy out of the lineup, and people are forced to realize he's got the biggest contract for a reason.
I found this blog recently, glad to see there are other passionate Caps fans out there.
These guys are always going to be compared to each other, because they are the 2 best players to enter the league in a long time. It says a lot that two guys this young are the best players in the league, and it's a great thing for the NHL.
To the extent that they are both the leaders of their teams, I think cups are a valid way of measuring success. However, I think that once the Caps develop to the point where Ovechkin is surrounded by the kind of talent the Pens have, it will become clear that there is no comparison between the two. I didn't see Gretzky in Edmonton, but AO is the best player I have ever seen. That's enough for me, no matter how many points Sid puts up.
Grapejoos: I dunno, just cause they're both leader type figures for their clubs doesn't really mean cups are a good way to figure out who's better. There's a lot more talent surrounding crosby at the moment, than surrounding ovechkin here. At least for now. Cups are a team thing, not just 1 guy.
You show me 1 guy taking a cup all on his own, and I'll crown you the king of France.
Gretzky in Edmonton had the entire league's talent at the time backing him up. Had it been more diluted than it was, his numbers would still have been great, but maybe not that great.
Also, watching them play means far more than any statistics ever will. But we'll play the stats game too. Ovechkin's still in the lead.
I dunno, I think over 10 years I could have scored 500 goals playing on Gretzky's left wing. But, yeah, if you had to chose to defend Gretzky's line of me, him, and a traffic cone, or Messier's of him, Jari Kurri, and a bucket of rice, who would you defend?
And here comes Paul Coffey from the point.
Such a tough call.
Cups will be a bad sign of who is better.
Who cares who's better? The NHL SHOULDN'T.
Why?
Both sell tickets. Both put hind ends in arenas.
I'll tell you who I'd rather watch, though. Hits and grit and goals over faceoff wins and the occasional pretty goal.
It's almost impossible to really compare these two in terms of who's better. But it's fairly obvious to me that Alex is the more exciting to watch because of his grit and passion. However, I think when it's all said and done, the value of each player will be judged on how many cups they've won. I don't care if Alex wins Hart and Richard trophies every year. If he brings One cup, just one, then he's worth 124 million in my eyes.
hazardous:
I agree with a lot of what you're saying. There's no real way to compare the two, but we all know that people value championships above all else in sports.
I completely agree that the Pens are more talented now, though the Caps are (finally) moving in the right direction, it seems.
I mentioned Gretzky simply because he's the benchmark by which all great players are judged, and I didn't see him at his best. It was to underscore how good AO is, in my eyes. I haven't seen anyone with the goal-scoring skills he has, and when you add his personality, physical play, and fearlessness to that, it makes him pretty much the best player imaginable. As much as I hate the Pens, I do respect Crosby and his accomplishments, but as many have said, he can't compare when you take Ovechkin's physicality into account.
I just love the Gretzky/Crosby comparisons. Do the people who make these comparisons realize than at Crosby's current pace of 1.38 points per game he will have to play 2,065 games to tie Gretzky? Thats over 25 seasons! Don't think so.
Post a Comment