Every ranking update ever (Last MMA update: 8/17/25)
If you disagree with the placement of an athlete whose prime occurred before 1975, please read The ChatGPT Cautionary Tale before commenting.
The rest of the best MMA fighters of all time.
Uncategorized
Why is Alexander Ovechkin the 2nd Greatest Hockey Player of All-Time?
Wayne Gretzky is not only the greatest hockey player of all-time, but also the greatest athlete that the four major North American sports have ever produced. The gap between “The Great One” and everyone else in hockey history is as deep as, well, the ‘87 Oilers. That second spot, though, is up for grabs. There are compelling arguments to be made for Mario Lemieux, Gordie Howe, Bobby Orr, Patrick Roy, and even Sidney Crosby. The most compelling argument, however, goes to a player who is often dismissed from the conversation altogether, and that’s Alexander Ovechkin. There are flaws on Ovechkin’s resume. In fact, every player listed above has a major flaw on their resume. Lemieux was hardly a defensive stalwart, and he had just six seasons in which he played more than 67 games. Howe played in a league with six teams, which made his path to awards and championships the easiest of anyone in the conversation. Crosby was robbed of parts of several prime seasons due to concussion symptoms, and he has the fewest Hart/Vezina trophies of the group. Orr was essentially done by age 27, and played in the expansion era, which was the weakest in the history of the NHL. Roy won only half as many Vezinas as a rival goaltender (Dominik Hasek). They all have flaws. Aside from the very real North American bias that exists in these conversations, any “hate” (or let’s call it “lack of love”) for Ovechkin at the second spot exists under the mistaken assumption that a flawless candidate exists.
Goals are the goal
Before we move to Ovechkin’s resume, let’s tackle the biggest criticism that gets levied against him: “he’s just a goal scorer.” First, that’s not close to being true–and we’ll get to that shortly–but even if it were, there comes a point when an athlete is so superior at the most important skill in a sport, that none of the other stuff matters. Michael Jordan is the greatest scorer in the history of the NBA. He has the highest scoring average of all-time and led the NBA in scoring a record 10 times. Nobody in the modern era has ever come close to matching Jordan’s scoring. Nobody is out there dissing Jordan’s scoring because he never finished in the top 5 in assists. Alexander Ovechkin has led the NHL in scoring a record nine times. Nobody in the modern era of hockey has ever come close to that. We’re not talking about a good goal scorer, we’re talking about, by far, the greatest goal scorer of all-time, and that distinction has little to do with his status as the NHL’s all-time leading goal scorer, and everything to do with how much more he dominated his era than any player in history. The obvious counter is to point out that Jordan won six championships to Ovechkin’s one. However, Ovechkin’s competition hardly has Jordan-esque championship totals themselves. Lemieux and Orr seem to be the most popular choices at the second spot, and they each won two championships. They also had the luxury of playing with Jaromir Jagr and Phil Esposito–two of the top 20 greatest players of all-time–among others. Ovechkin has had no such luxury with Washington.
Points are flawed
Now, about that “just a goal scorer” criticism, which is just code for “doesn’t have huge point totals.” Hockey fans–me included–have a bad habit of obsessing over “points.” I was admittedly ecstatic when Connor McDavid became the first player since 1996 to reach the 150-point mark in game 80 of the 2022-23 season, and then again when he landed right on 100 points in the last game of the season in 2024-25 to extend his 100-point streak to five seasons. Points are fun. However, the fact that a goal, a primary assist, and a secondary assist are viewed equally is an absurdity. The second assist (which accounts for roughly half of all assists) often has little to do with the outcome of a play, and probably shouldn’t even exist (I mean, why not add a 3rd assist?). Even many primary assists are harmless passes that have little to do with the puck going in the net. If assists were fairly valued in the point tally, we wouldn’t even be having this conversation; Ovechkin would be the near unanimous choice. Let’s imagine that world–a world where the creator of the “points” statistic took an extra second to think about whether it made sense. Let’s imagine that a primary assist is worth ½ of a point, and a secondary assist is worth ¼ of a point (rough estimates of what fair values could be). Assuming there are as many primary assists as secondary assists, the average assist would equate to .375 points. This is what that world would look like:
With assists being fairly rated in the points statistic, nearly all of the concerns about Ovechkin’s point totals would be erased. He’d carry a clear points per game advantage over Howe, and his massive longevity advantage over Lemieux would be represented by a 300+ margin in career points. He would have a points lead over Crosby, who some view as the superior player simply due to his point totals. In that world, Ovechkin isn’t even overwhelmed by Gretzky’s production. The numbers in the table above represent a world where points are adjusted for league scoring pace and assists are valued fairly. This is much closer to reality than simply heading over to the points leaderboard and regurgitating a flawed statistic to devalue the greatest goal scorer in NHL history. The point of the game is goals after all, and Ovechkin is the greatest there ever was:
——————————————————————————————————————–
Ovechkin’s Goal Dominance
1). Led the NHL in goals 9 times which is the most in NHL history. No player to debut since 1979 has done it more than 3 (!!!) times.
2). No player has even finished in the top-5 in goals more than 6 times since 1979.
Editor’s Note: This is my favorite Ovechkin statistic.
3). Finished top-5 in goals 15 times, which is the most in NHL history. No player since the Original Six has done it more than eight times.
4). Most adjusted goals in NHL history (999), 74 ahead of 2nd place (Gordie Howe), 158 ahead of 3rd place (Jaromir Jagr), and 241 ahead of 4th place (Wayne Gretzky).
5). Most seasons with 50+ adjusted goals (11). Nobody else has more than seven (Rocket Richard), and nobody since the Original Six has more than five.
6). Most seasons with 40+ adjusted goals (16). Nobody else has more than 10 (Gordie Howe and Brett Hull). Gretzky and Lemieux have 15 combined (!!!)
Editor’s Note: This is my second favorite Ovechkin statistic.
7). Highest adjusted goals per game in NHL history (.67, tied with Mario Lemieux) despite playing in 575 more games than Lemieux (since 1935). For perspective, Bobby Orr’s entire career lasted 657 games.
8). Only player in the history of the NHL to be voted an NHL First Team All-Star at left and right wing.
9). Most NHL First Team All-Star selections (8) by a forward since the Original Six (tied with Gretzky).
10). Led the NHL in Power Play goals a record six times. No player since the Original Six has done it more than three times.
11). Only player in NHL history to lead the NHL in Power Play goals and Even Strength Goals five times each.
12). One of only four players in NHL history to win three Hart Trophies and a Conn Smythe Trophy.
——————————————————————————————————————–
Complete Player
Critics like to skewer Ovechkin for not having an “all-around game” in favor of Gretzky, Lemieux, and Crosby. Ostensibly, this means “doesn’t have a ton of assists,” but it really just ends up being a catch-all attempt at hand-wavery and selective reasoning meant to discredit Ovechkin. There are, of course, one-dimensional players, but Ovechkin isn’t one of them, and to compare his responsibilities to that of centers is the surest sign that an argument is not being made in good faith. Ovechkin plays a different position! He is every bit the all-around player as a winger that the aforementioned players were as centers. There has never been a modern elite offensive player who has come close to matching Ovechkin’s physicality. He is the all-time leader in hits among forwards in league history. He has more than three times as many career hits as Crosby, and, remarkably, he managed to do so while accruing fewer career penalty minutes than both Crosby and Lemieux despite playing ~140 and ~600 more games, respectively. Ovechkin is also an uncommonly strong defensive player among elite goal scorers. He has more defensive point shares than the top 10 goals scorers in NHL history with the exception of Jaromir Jagr. Ovechkin’s durability and availability is also unparalleled among elite offensive players. He played at least 79% of Washington’s games in every season of his career. Lemieux had 10 seasons in which he did not reach that mark, and Crosby had 5. When talk turns to Ovechkin lacking an all-around game, these aspects of his repertoire are conveniently left out. Ovechkin’s combination of elite goal scoring, physicality, defensive presence, and durability has never been seen before in NHL history.
Conclusion
While Ovechkin has the second most impressive resume in history, it’s not by a significant margin. The difference between Gretzky and Ovechkin is larger than the difference between Ovechkin and anyone in the top 15. It’s more likely than not that Lemieux would’ve had a superior resume had he been afforded the luxury of Ovechkin’s health, and that could be true for Crosby as well. That makes Connor McDavid a very interesting player to follow over the next 10 years. He has an opportunity to fully realize his career potential the way Lemieux and Crosby could not. If that happens, and he’s able to win a Stanley Cup or two, then Ovechkin’s hold on the second spot starts to become perilous. Until then, Ovechkin has the best case of a group of flawed resumes (relatively speaking, of course).
Why is Wilt Chamberlain Not in the GOAT Conversation?
If you are a basketball fan, chances are you have either believed at one time or still believe that Wilt Chamberlain is on the Mount Rushmore of professional basketball. Part of the reason you believe this is because he did things like score 100 points in an NBA game and average 50 points over an entire season. These feats are pretty spectacular. The other part of the reason you believe this is because people who don’t understand how much competition level matters tell you it’s true. So, it must be, right? Well, I’ll let you decide, but for all his exploits on the court, Chamberlain had the largest decline in career scoring average from regular season to playoffs in NBA history, played in a league that had just nine players who were taller than 6’9, and shot just 50% from the field during his record breaking season, including a meager 46.7% in the playoffs, despite playing against, by far, the weakest competition in NBA history. In fact, it wasn’t until he cut his field goal attempts in half during his age-30 season that his teams started to have success in the playoffs. Yes, all of those record breaking offensive achievements likely prevented playoff success. There are several players in NBA history who would have had little problem matching Chamberlain’s scoring prowess had they been afforded 40 shots per game by their head coach, and they likely would’ve done so with a much higher shooting percentage. This isn’t a Wilt thing, it’s an era thing. Chamberlain was the greatest player of a really flawed era.
Let’s get right into the ugly underbelly of Chamberlain’s competition. We cannot begin any conversation about Chamberlain’s status on the all-time list without loudly and emphatically stating that he did his cooking on “easy mode.” He was not only the tallest player in the NBA, but he was also at least three inches taller than 92% of the league, and at least six inches taller than 78% of the league. In fact, there were only nine players in the NBA who were taller than 6’9 in 1962. By 1982, that number had ballooned to 73. Height is a physical trait, not a skill. Yet, 21 of the first 25 NBA MVPs played center. That says quite a bit about what was important in the NBA in the 1960s. As the league became more skilled, being tall stopped mattering as much. Starting with Larry Bird’s MVP in the 1983-84 NBA season, 34 of the next 37 NBA MVPs were not centers. Magic and Bird ushered in the era of skill, and the league has not looked back. Chamberlain was tall and athletic, and that was largely it. NBA competition was so watered down in the 60s that being tall and athletic was the only prerequisite to dominating the league. It is not hyperbole to suggest that DeAndre Jordan would have been a monster in the 1960s. Footwork, skill, handles, and high-efficient shooting were merely a pipe dream. Chamberlain exclusively played within 10 feet of the basket because he had to. Consider he shot just 51% from the free throw line despite having nearly 12,000 attempts to figure it out. That’s worse than Shaq!
Now, about that 100 point-game and 50-point scoring average. On March 2, 1962, Wilt Chamberlain scored 100 points in an NBA game against a New York Knicks team that had just one player in the starting lineup taller than 6’6 (Cleveland Buckner, 6’9). Chamberlain hoisted a ludicrous 63 field goal attempts along with 32 free throw attempts, which means he took roughly 80 shots from the field if we include shot attempts in which he was fouled. Nobody has ever come close to taking that many shots in a single NBA game. In fact, Chamberlain missed 27 shots. Michael Jordan and LeBron James never averaged 27 shot attempts in their entire careers. For perspective, David Robinson entered the final game of the 1993-94 regular season in a razor-close battle with Shaquille O’Neal for the league scoring title. Robinson dropped 71 points largely by being force-fed the ball, just like Chamberlain’s teammates did in 1962. In a significantly more competitive NBA landscape, Robinson was much more efficient in his 71-point game than Chamberlain was in his 100-point game, beating him not just in field goal percentage (63.4% to 57.1%), but also in True Shooting % (68.3% to 64.9%). Robinson also scored 63% of San Antonio’s points compared to Chamberlain scoring 60% of Philadelphia’s. Several players throughout the history of the NBA had the talent to score 100 points in a game had they been gifted 80+ shot attempts, and many would’ve done it more efficiently. Robinson’s 71-point game provides a glimpse of that. The reason NBA teams don’t allow players to shoot that many times in a game is because it’s inefficient against good defenses. Chamberlain’s playoff success, or lack thereof, supports this.
Chamberlain took a lot of shots, and he missed a lot of shots. This is best exemplified by the 1961-62 season in which he averaged an NBA single-season record 50.4 points per game. While he chucked shots in 1962 like nobody before or since, he also missed a remarkable 1,562 shots, which is, by far, the highest total in NBA history. Nobody else has even missed 1,300 shots in a season. Chamberlain’s field goal percentage during his record-setting season was just 50.6%, despite shooting almost exclusively within 10 feet of the basket and playing against players who were several inches shorter than he was. That percentage would be borderline unplayable for a high-volume center in today’s NBA.
In the early days of the NBA, the league was regional, and the money was not lucrative. This resulted in a small talent pool to draw from. To water the league down even more, unofficial racial quotas made the league largely inaccessible to black athletes. Only 25% of the NBA was black in 1962. That number has been steadily above 70% since the late 70s. Chamberlain feasted on this compromised league and, even then, his numbers plummeted when it mattered most. Consider his career regular season scoring average was an impressive 30.1 points, but his playoff scoring average fell to just 22.5 points. While the league overall was competitively weak, there were good teams with legitimate defenses. These teams made life quite difficult for Chamberlain despite the fact that he was the most physically gifted player in the league by leaps and bounds. Modern basketball players prove every day that there’s more to the game than size and athleticism. That was true even in the 1960s as the Boston Celtics proved repeatedly throughout Chamberlain’s career. For all his dominance, Chamberlain was just 1-7 in playoff series against the Celtics.
Wilt Chamberlain was the greatest basketball player of all-time once upon a time. He was the king of his era, but his era was a small pond compared to the lakes and oceans that have existed since. It’s OK to acknowledge how much better Chamberlain was than the very homogenized collection of athletes that existed in the league’s infancy. It’s also OK to rate him higher than any player from his era. In fact, it would be illogical not to. However, it is disrespectful to the sport to ignore how little skill was involved in professional basketball in the 1960s. It’s also disrespectful to the stars who have thrived in a drastically more inclusive and competitive NBA environment in the six decades since.