Malkin or Lindros?

by turnituptoeleven on May 13, 2009 3:38 AM EDT

If you could choose either player in his prime...

Malkin

2X Hart finalist, 2X Pearson nominee, 1 Art Ross, Calder winner, 1.25 career P/G, 1.16 career playoff P/G, 1 Cup finals appearance

Lindros

1X Hart winner, 1X Pearson winner, Art Ross runner up by default, 1.13 career P/G, 1.07 career playoff P/G, 1 Cup finals appearance

During the 2002 games, I asked one of my friends who'd just gotten his Green Card whether he was for his native Canadians, or his newly beloved Yanks:

"It's hard to go against my roots, but Lindros can be such a bitch. I hope the US takes it to him hard and often. I hate to say it, but 'Go team USA'"

And there you are.

Personally, I'd take Lindros in his prime. He really was the complete package before he had his twenty or so concussions. Malkin hasn't peaked yet, so the question is a terrible one, but the two are so similar.

Thoughts? Feelings?

Poll

Lindros or Malkin?

Lindros

13 votes

Malkin

33 votes

46 votes | Poll has closed

If this FanPost is written by someone other than one of the blog's editors, the opinions expressed in it do not necessarily reflect those of this blog or SB Nation.

Tweet Comment 15 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Not sure how you can ask about their respective primes when Malkin hasn’t yet entered his and the numbers you popped in for Lindros are over his career (which obviously extended well past his best years).

But, for the sake of argument, in Lindros’s 3rd NHL season, he tied for the League lead in scoring (lost the Ross to J.J. by virtue of having fewer goals) and points per game and turned 22 in February.

In Malkin’s 3rd NHL season, he led the League in scoring and was 22 entering the season.

Lindros’s “adjusted” goals and points for his first three years were 33/60, 40/88, 50/121.

Malkin’s were 35/87, 52/115, 37/117.

Through three seasons, Lindros was +71, Malkin +35.

Lindros peaked in his fourth year, so I’d say ask me again after next season. But for now… my vote’s Malkin – he was fantastic a bit quicker.

(Btw, stats via HRef – Lindros; Malkin)

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on May 13, 2009 8:12 AM EDT reply actions

I agree, JP. The question is:

If you could choose either player in his prime…

Scary as it sounds, we haven’t seen Malkin’s prime. He’s played at a very high level for the past two seasons, but I think he could plateau even higher.

Lindros was a monster and certainly isn’t a bad pick if he’s in his prime and no concussions are in the future. But Malkin’s got very real 50 goal, 80 assist potential. No one in the league right now could do that. AO might be 65-70g, 60a, Crosby might be 40g, 90a but I don’t think either of them has the pure ceiling that Malkin does. Skating, deking, puck-control, reach, wrist shot, slap shot, passing, vision: he’s the complete package.

by Hooks Orpik on May 13, 2009 2:24 PM EDT up reply actions

Out of those three options for a 130-point season, though (50-80, 70-60, or 40-90), I’d take Ovie every time at 70-60.

by Scott in Shaw on May 13, 2009 3:31 PM EDT up reply actions

True a 70-60 season would top a 50-80.

But Malkin’s score 47 goals in a season and registered 78 assists, and his scoring has improved every season in the NHL.

Ovechkin’s scored 65 goals and his assist high is 54.

I think Malkin’s the closest (and most likely out of the three) to achieve the arbitrary levels I just picked.

by Hooks Orpik on May 13, 2009 3:55 PM EDT up reply actions

Most likely. I still think Ovechkin can put up 50-80 if his game ages well as he gets older (call it a hunch, I know the stats don’t necessarily support that), but I agree that Malkin is much more likely to do it.

by grapejoos on May 13, 2009 6:35 PM EDT up reply actions

An upgrade at RW over Kozlov would help Ovie’s assist totals, too. Even without that they are sure to go up as Nicky gains more confidence in his shot (which he did this year, see the ensuing point increase for Ovie).

by Scott in Shaw on May 14, 2009 4:41 PM EDT up reply actions

Further to that point, AO’s RWs have basically been Dainius Zubrus, Chris Clark and Viktor Kozlov, none of whom should be on anyone’s first (or perhaps second) line.

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on May 14, 2009 4:55 PM EDT up reply actions

I think getting some better players on Ovie’s line will help his assist totals go up. For sure teams in the future will gear up on Ovie more and he will need to get others involved. Hopefully those other players will be good scorers too.

by RedskinFan4Life on May 14, 2009 7:27 PM EDT up reply actions

Lindros or Malkin?

I take pre Ulfie Cam Neely

Ron and Fez Noon to Three

by YvonLabresMoustache on May 13, 2009 8:16 AM EDT reply actions

A friend of mine and I were talking about that. If the Caps had beaten the Pens in the 1991 playoffs, Cam Neely would have had a much better career.

by Sombrero Guy on May 13, 2009 9:23 AM EDT up reply actions

Maybe. Or maybe not.

If the Caps had won and Neely had never gotten Ulfed, he’d likely have played many more years in the NHL and might never have caught the acting bug, thereby denying the world his triumphant turn as Sea Bass.

So yeah, probably would’ve had a better hockey career. But who knows about the rest?

Japers' Rink: Hockey blogging from the most powerful city in the world

by J.P. on May 13, 2009 9:32 AM EDT up reply actions

Easy choice… Malkin doesn’t have the injury potential Lindros does… even when Lindros was at his peak, he was still getting dinged a lot more than Malkin.

Let's go Caps!

by MikeL-Pivonka on May 13, 2009 9:50 AM EDT reply actions

I’m going to go with Malkin for his skating and general non-bitchness, but it’s easy to forget how great Lindros was before Stevens ate his soul.

by grapejoos on May 13, 2009 11:18 AM EDT reply actions

I took Lindros. As J.P. noted, their respective production was pretty similar, and Lindros was a dominant physical force before he started getting hurt all the time, something Malkin’s not.

by David Getz on May 13, 2009 12:43 PM EDT reply actions