An Objective Subjectivity (or Vise Versa)
Recently, NHL.com staff writer Mike G. Morreale published articles highlighting the best Russian and Canadian players in the league today.
Sitting near the top of both lists were Penguins’ superstars Sidney Crosby (#1 Canadian player) and Evgeni Malkin (#3 Russian player). In an earlier article posted on Pens Labyrinth, I criticized Malkin’s slot among the best Russian players, suggesting he unquestionably belongs at the top of the list.
I have no qualms about Crosby’s ranking. But these recent Top 10 articles beg the following question: Who is the league’s best player?
Pardon the diplomacy, but it’s a tie; a tie between Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin. In other words, contrary to popular belief, the best player is not Alexander Ovechkin.
This is not just another article with a blatant Pittsburgh bias sprinkled with anti-Ovechkin sentiment. While, admittedly, I am a die-hard Penguins fan, my suggestion that Crosby and Malkin are “better” than Ovechkin should not be misconstrued as a slight on the Capitals’ star forward’s talents.
As much as it pains me to disclose, there is a lot about Ovechkin that goes beyond admirability. Without dispute he is the league’s premier goal-scoring threat. Moreover, coaching staffs that choose not to center game-plans directly and explicitly around him, ought to be fired.
He’s that dangerous. But he’s not the best.
Ovechkin is like the girl who’s only attractive with makeup on; catch a glimpse of the gal in the middle of the night or first thing in the morning and the impulse to change sexual orientations becomes overwhelming.
The point is, “AO” is one-dimensional.
When the pucks aren’t going in the net–and the opportunity to shout at the top of his lungs in front of a down-and-out opposing goaltender and a bewildered defenseman and backchecker isn’t there–Ovechkin is as much of a threat to contribute to the outcome of a game as an assistant coach might be during his team’s 2-on-1 opportunity.
That’s not what the best players are made up of.
“What?!” “Are you kidding me?!” “What about his physical presence?!”
Uh, what about it? Call me crazy, but skating from one goal-line to another at full speed before leaving your skates in an attempt to paralyze an unsuspecting player is not my idea of physical presence.
He’s a headhunter. Period. Don’t show me clips of his clean hits. That would have the same impact as showing a highlight reel of O.J. Simpson’s greatest plays. How about showing that other Simpson highlight? I thought so.
Crosby and Malkin, conversely, are like the girls who bring daylight to evenings, to follow the earlier metaphor.
Hat-tricks aren’t required of either player in order to contribute to an outcome of a game. Neither does paralysis.
Regardless of whether or not either player scores a goal–or otherwise configures in on one–their presence is felt for three, 20-minute periods.
“Yeah, but they can’t play defense!”
You’re right…if leading the league in takeaways (Malkin) doesn’t qualify as being defensively responsible.
“Yeah, but they’re not good at faceoffs!”
You’re right…if finishing in 5th place in both face-offs won and taken (Crosby) doesn’t qualify as being a responsible centerman.
But those are just details. Let us not forget that these players do contribute offensively. These players do win.
Whether we’re talking Art Ross or Hart or Lester B. Pearson or Conn Smythe, both Crosby and Malkin have gotten their hands of them.
Your potential denial notwithstanding, they’ve won the Cup, too.
Folks, it’s easy to suggest that the three best players in the league are Crosby, Malkin and Ovechkin. Just as easily, I submit, it is to suggest that Crosby and Malkin are at the top of that list.
If anything is difficult it is choosing between 87 and 71.
But like I said, it’s a tie.
Not that there’s anything wrong with that.