The argument has raged on for so many years, who is better? Crosby or Ovechkin? What should make for interesting debates has become a matter of who can bitch about it more. Ovi fans call Sid a whiner, Crosby fans say Ovi has no real heart and relies on talent alone, Ovi fans are merely Sid haters, Sid fans are merely Pens biased Pens fans. Sadly, nobody is really getting to the nitty gritty of this argument, it's Lebron/Jordan all over again with hockey (note: Jordan easily wins, another blog for another day though).
Growing up in Hamilton, Ontario, the son of a sports fan, I was listening to sports radio talk shows, sports on TV, and even reading the sports pages of The Spec as far back as I can remember. Over the years, I could often see how biased many of them could be for many reasons, that being said however, a great deal of anyone involved in sports journalism had to be unbiased. However, the late Dick Beddoes, once hung the phone up on my father during his radio show, due to a hockey disagreement, as my Dad, a die hard Habs fan, and Beddoes a noted Leafs booster who never had anything good to say about the Habs, obviously butting heads. It just goes to show sports debates are very tricky, biases towards teams and players seem to make it hard to have a formidable debate.
I've engaged in spirited debates that often get ugly, but that's the beauty of talking about sports, but that being said, there's a fine line between spirited debates, and getting outright stupid. But rather than bitch about it, let's really look at this.
Sidney Crosby over the years in my opinion has often been painted with an unfair brush, because he "whines" to referees, and of course is referred to as a diver. Has Sid done these things? Sure. Do I necessarily agree with it? No. But here's the thing, a lot of the older hockey fans I've come across who despise Crosby, and yet praise the good ol' days of Gretzky and Lemieux, often forget that Gretzky was notorious for those things! Hell, he even admits it in his 1990 autobiography. Phil Esposito was king of the "C'mon Ref" cries, yet he's held in high regard by many older fans. Now again, we don't have to agree or enjoy it, but it does come with the game, and it's sad you can fault one player for it now, but not back then, merely because it was "back in the day". Crosby's leadership has been called into question several times, but see, I have trouble criticizing a guy, who has been his own worst critic on several occasions, often blamed himself for many of the teams shortcomings, and has never been afraid to share the spotlight with teammates Evgeni Malkin. However, in playoff time, Sid has often crumbled, but yet he's made it to the Cup twice, winning once, and has now made the conference finals four times.
In terms of the personal accolades Ovechkin gets, it's hard refute them. The fact is this, at the NHL awards at the end of every year, we need to remember, it's for regular season accomplishments, ONLY! The finalists are usually named during the first round of the playoffs, so when we try to argue that the MVP did nothing in the playoffs, it's actually irrelevant. Now were there times I felt in my own opinion that Ovi didn't deserve to win the Hart Trophy, absolutely. Were there times he was justified in those personal accomplishments? No doubt in my mind. Ovechkin's major criticism stem from his inability to get along with coaches, like his counterpart, his leadership has been called into question on several occasions, and of course the typical, "he's a puck hog". Fact is the Caps have a guy who passes the puck, his name is Nicklas Backstrom, a large reason why they had such a good year. And you can easily make a case for the other two disputes. Leadership is key in playoffs, and from the looks of it, he hasn't accomplished enough to justify the fact he's a great leader when it matters most. In my opinion, that was one of Brett Hull's biggest problems when he played it St. Louis. Had Brett Hull spent his entire career in St. Louis, I truly believe they never would've won the Cup either way, hence why his Cups came in places like Dallas and Detroit, who both greatly benefited from tremendous leadership both on and off the ice.
I hear, "Ovi has the stats and the awards", "Sid is better defensively", "Ovi kills Sid in plus/minus", "Sid makes the players around him better", etc. etc. etc. etc. And these points are all very valid. And you know what, I've had my own opinions about the deabte that has raged on, but only very few bug me.
One of which, "Ovi is a one man team, and has been carrying the Caps on his back for years". While it's true Ovi may be the only franchise forward on this team, over the years they've had a capable defense, and now they have a fantastic goaltender. To me the whole Ovi is a one man team debate couldn't be further from the truth. If that were true, would the Caps have had the season they had? I don't think so. If the whole one man team aspect were true, Selanne would've lead the Jets to a Cup easily back in the mid 90's. And let's point this out, since Ovi's rookie year, the Washington Capitals, have had FIVE 100 point seasons which include TWO first overall finishes, three 90 and above point seasons, and a first place finish in their division during the 48-game 2012-13 season. The fact is, you're capable enough to have a season like that, you should be able to get past the second round at least once, and the Caps have constantly failed to do so.
Now the debate of "Individual Performance" during the series. Many have gone on to say, "Ovechkin out performed Crosby so that makes his better". I have no problem telling you this, individual performance in the playoffs is a time where it matters the least. In playoffs, team efforts matter now more than ever. Now again, I'm not saying the Caps lost because of Ovi, because they didn't, they lost as a team, and individually Ovi played better. Ok, so what. In my opinion, Phil Kessel outplayed every one. So really the one-on-one match up between Crosby and Ovechkin really isn't relevant here. I've actually had people tell me and brag how Ovi was better than Sid, I responded with, "Yeah, and? Where's Ovi right now and where is Sid?". The answer, Ovi is once again sitting at home in mid-way, while Sid laces up his skates for the Eastern Confernce final. See how the individual debate means nothing now? And some even try to tell me, "Well Ovi is crying his way to the bank", and while I'm sure the man loves his money like many athletes do, the look on his face when the series ended said he does care that his team didn't win.
In the 1987 Wales Conference (today Western) Finals, the powerful Oilers with their pack of home grown all-stars, took on the upstart Detroit Red Wings, who had their best season in well over a decade. And here's the thing, in that series, Wayne Gretzky was out performed by Steve Yzerman. Not just statistically, but as a matter of fact, Stevie Y's, defensive prowess came into play as he was on Gretzky like white on rice as the old cliche goes. Yzerman had 2 goals and 4 assists with 6 points in 5 games, while the Great One has 2 assists the entire series. And sure the experience in that series helped Stevie Y grow as a hockey player, and he did get his fair share of praise, but at the end of the day, the real headlines, the big story, the Oilers were back in the finals after a one year absence, and Gretzky was hoisting the Cup for the third time shortly after. And like Kessel, Glenn Anderson and Mark Messier came up big when their teammate could not.
Personal match-ups are fun to talk about, I agree, Manning/Brady, Elway/Marino, Jordan/Lebron, Ali/Tyson, Ruth/Aaron, Gretzky/Lemieux, Howe/Richard, but when it seems to matter in the media than what really matters most at the end of the day, it just comes off as ridiculous. I often wonder, what would've happened if Gretzky and Lemieux would've faced in the playoffs, I can tell you right now, growing up watching these two, that if a 7-game series between the two, was, Gretzky having 5 goals 10 assists 15 points, and +6, while Lemieus was say, 5 goals 6 assists 11 points and -2, yet played better defensively, Gretzky would not be bragging or satisfied he out performed his counter part, he'd be upset he was going home empty handed. That's the kind of competitor he was. Same goes for Lemieux. They would never be concered trying to one-up each other, they'd be concerned leading their team to victory.
Now I understand egos in sports exist more than ever now, and yeah, sometimes it drives them even harder to achieve victory when someone is deemed better than they are. Yet in a sport like basketball, you can see ego often hurts even the most talented players, and prevents them from achieving any kind of championship success. Sure they love the money, but when they react to losing the way they do, you can tell it bruises said ego when it happens. Now the personal animosity between Ovi and Sid has existed in the past, but it seems to have cooled and has stricly remained a professional rivalry. The media portrays Ovechkin as someone whose soul purpose in his career is to be better than Crosby. For argument sake if that's true, than what has he really accomplished? He made sure Crosby was the second best player of his era. Ok, so, Crosby becomes the second best player of his era, with a hall of fame induction and his name on the Cup. Ovechkin gets into the hall of fame with a lot of goals, some MVP's, but known as the greatest player who never won it all.
That being said however, Ovi may have very well had that thought process at the age of 24, but I highly doubt now 30 going on 31, and over a decade under his belt in the NHL, he's all that concerned about being better than his rival.
Look at this if you will, now I know the era difference is like night and day, but I referred to Steve Yzerman earlier. Yzerman never once lead the league in scorng, won the Pearson (now Lindsay) award, yet never won the Hart trophy. But yet his greatness is etched in what he accomplished by focusing on being the man who lead his team. He has three cup rings, and a Hall of Fame induction to show for it.
Wayne Gretzky felt that his records meant nothing without a Cup.
Luc Robitaille once said he'd trade every goal he scored if he could just hoist the Cup.
The late great Jean Beliveau, who won 10 cups in his career, said it got sweeter every time.
Ray Bourque, after 21 years, left the city where he was adored and loved and accomplished so much, all so he could have a chance to win it all.
Now the whole "Championships Make you Great" debates not a black & white concept. Having 4 cups, makes Claude Lemieux an accomplished hockey player, but it don't make him greater than Bobby Clarke who has two. But when you look at the all time greats, and you make the comparisons, championships are a factor, it may not be cut and dry, but it definitely swings the debate one way.
The debate will rage on as their careers continue, and will rage on when they retire, and even after their both enshrined in the Hall of Fame.
For me when it comes down to it, Crosby has been his own worst enemy at times, but he seems more concerned about winning rather than being a statistic. Ovi seems to be just starting to get that at this point in his career.
