The Kevin Sheehan Show - The Great 800!

Episode Date: December 14, 2022

Kevin today on Alex Ovechkin's hat-trick last night in Chicago with his final goal being career number 800! ESPN's Greg Wyshynski was a guest on the show to discuss. Kevin had thoughts on a few Ron Rivera press conference comments from yesterday including what he said about Carson Wentz. The Athletic's New York Giants beat reporter Dan Duggan jumped on to talk about the Sunday night rematch. Kevin also with some Maryland-UCLA.   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

You don't want it. You don't need it. But you're going to get it anyway. The Kevin Cheyenne Show. Here's Kevin. Shearie drops it. Under opportunity, side of it, that is front image in. And the Capitals get the power play goal.

This is unbelievable. Alex Ovetskin having a night. That was the second of what would be a hat-trick night for the great eight. The third goal, which you'll hear a little later on. on in the show was historic number 800. What a night for Alex Ovechkin in Chicago. He's one goal away from tying Gordy Howl, two goals away from passing Howe on the all-time goals list.

We are a game or two or maybe three away from Gretzky 1, OV number two. Greg Wyshinsky, one of my favorite guests, senior NHL analysts for ESPN, will jump on with us for the final segment of the show today. you'll hear the call of number 800 last night in Chicago with Steve Levy on the call for ESPN as well. Look, there's no debating this. Not that we needed last night to come to this conclusion. Alex Ovechkin, in modern sports history, is the greatest team sport athlete in the history of this city. You know, if you take Walter Johnson and Sammy Baugh out of the conversation,

because those two are the other two that would be in consideration, but if we go, with modern sports history defined as, let's just say, the last 50 years, the last half century. Ovechkin is number one, no doubt. The conversation would really be about who's number two. I'd go with Daryl Green if we're just talking about pro team sport athletes. Patrick Ewing's four years at Georgetown would be in the conversation with Daryl for number two if we were considering college players that have played. in this city. I'd still have Darrell number two in front of Patrick, but if we're talking just pro,

Darrell would be my clear cut number two. And then it would be Elvin Hayes, Wes Unseld from the Bullets, Art Monk, John Riggins, Sonny Jurgensen, Ken Houston, probably from the skins, Max Scherzer, you know, that's probably the list for where number three would come from. But it would be Ovechkin, clear cut number one, and I think if we're just talking about pro sports athletes, Daryl Green number two on the list. And then the debate would be about number

three. And I'd have again, Daryl in front of Patrick Ewing anyway, as number two. More on Ovechkin's night coming up, his place in history. More on the Caps fifth straight win. Yeah, they won last night seven to three in Chicago

with Greg Wasinski later on in the show. Also on the show, today. Dan Duggan, who covers the Giants for the Athletic. We'll get Dan's thoughts on the upcoming game Sunday night and really his thoughts on the last game against Washington as well. So Dan will be coming up in the next segment. The show today is brought to you by MyBooky. Go to mybooky.orgie. Go to MyBooky.com. Use my promo code, Kevin D.C., and MyBooky will match your first deposit, dollar for dollar all the way up to a thousand bucks. If something's written in the promo code section, erase it, and write Kevin D.C.

And they'll give you free money. They're going to double your first deposit, again, all the way up to $1,000. And right now I'm just looking at my bookie. The Thursday night game tomorrow night, a significant game in the NFC. Again, I may have mentioned this yesterday, but the 49ers laying just three and a half at Seattle. That reeks. I think Seattle will be the first smell test pick of the weekend. And then Sunday night, Washington right now at MyBooky, is still minus four and a half.

MyBooky is fair. They've got fair point spreads. They've got fair pricing. You get paid if you win. Go to MyBooky.ag. And again, use my promo code, Kevin, D.C., for a doubling of your first deposit. Also, don't forget to rate us and review us on Apple and Spotify. wherever you can rate us and review us on Apple.

It allows you to rate us one to five stars. Five stars are nice. Appreciate that if you can do that and write a one to two sentence review. Anonymous on Apple podcast gave us more than a one to two sentence review. He gave us five stars and then wrote, I've been a huge fan since wearing Redskins jammies during the 1972 Super Bowl with the Over the Hill gang.

I cried when Roger the Dodger crushed our playoff hopes in 79. Yeah, that game, I think, is probably number one on the list of the absolute most destroyed and upset I have ever been after a game. 34 to 21 and Roger Stoback brings the Cowboys back with two touchdowns and the final two and a half minutes of the game, including the game winner to Tony Hill with 42 seconds left. And then Mosley didn't get a chance to kick what would. have been a 59-yard field goal at the gun because they let the final two seconds run off the clock, despite Don Warren and Joe Thaisman screaming for a timeout. That is the most devastating loss for me. I think number two would be Corey Lucius's shot to end Gravis Vasquez's career

in the second round of the 2010 NCAA tournament. That was awful. But the 79 playoff loss was, you know, I've talked about it many times, but it was the difference between the number one seed in the NFC playoffs with home field advantage and being completely out because Chicago had beaten the Cardinals earlier in the day, 44 to 6, and the point differential was a tiebreaker between the Bears and Washington for the wild card spot.

God, that was awful. If they had had the two-point conversion back then, Washington would have gone for two after the last touchdown in the fourth quarter, which was a John Reagan's 66-yard touchdown run. And maybe they would have had a 35 to 21 lead, and the game would have gone to overtime. But they didn't have the two-pointer back then. And they were not as precise with the clock, because that game would have been a game where they would have put two seconds back on the clock

and given Mark Mosley a chance at a 59-yard field goal to win the game. And he did have the leg for it. He did. He was one of the few kickers in the game that had the leg for it. By the way, Anonymous continues. I remember the fatigues game. I remember a happy birthday Joe Thysman. Yeah, that was a bad Monday night opener in Dallas.

I remember Mosley kicking in the snow. Speaking of that, there will be something on that specific game tomorrow here on the podcast. He said, I remember seat. Cushions. And he goes on and on. There is lots in here about the various games he remembers. I really do appreciate the very nice review Anonymous. You too can review us and rate us wherever they allow you to do that. But definitely on Apple, five stars and a quick one to two sentence review would be much appreciated. So I got this tweet from Derek. You can tweet me at Kevin She in D.C. about the conversation that Tommy and I were having yesterday about the kind of crowd we should expect on Sunday night. Derek wrote, yes, I think the crowd will be a good one, not the best, but a good one. But you missed the game, Sheehan, at FedEx. 2004 opener against Tampa Bay, Portis, Joe Gibbs's return, place was awesome.

Derek, that is a good one. And you're right. I miss that. Because that opener in 2004, Joe Gibbs' first game back, really, you know, that's the top of the list of Snyder's good moves, which is a very short list. You know, bringing Joe Gibbs out of retirement in 2004 was just a miracle. And it was something that energized this fan base, like really nothing has. You know, RG3 and 2012 did it to a certain degree. But Gibbs coming back in 2004 is number one on the all-time Snyder Good Moves list.

And that opener against Tampa Bay in September of 2004, I mean, the crowd was lit. Lit. And this was Clinton Portis's first carry in that game. Portis, welcome to Washington, Clinton Portis, goodbye, no flags, touchdown. 64 yards on Portis's first carry. They went on to win that game 16 to 10. It was close, and it would be a harbinger, by the way, of things to come. It was not a great offensive team that first year in Joe Gibbs's return.

But it was a tough team, and it was a team that kept getting better. as the season went along. They got off to a one-and-four start. But, you know, typical of Joe, they won three out of their last five games, and the two losses were super close. There was a loss in Dallas in the next to last game of the year. That was really, really a game in which Washington dominated, and Vinnie Testa Verdi, with 30 seconds to go in the game,

hit Patrick Creighton on a 40-yard touchdown pass that won that game. But, man, they were low-scoring games. that year. Washington really struggled to score with that team. But they did knock, if you recall, Randy Moss and the Minnesota Vikings out of the playoffs on the final Sunday of the year. Remember Moss leaving the field early? He was in such disgust. And that set up what would become a successful 2005 season. But Derek, you're right. You're right. That Tampa game was a raucous crowd. regular season crowd. I looked up the attendance for that game, 90,098.

The all-time NFL Redskins crowd at FedEx Field was the 2007 finale against the Cowboys. When the Cowboys had nothing to play for and Washington needed to win to get a wild card spot, remember this was the four-game win with Todd Collins at the end of 2007 following Sean's tragic death, 90,910. That was the biggest crowd ever at FedEx. The 2012 season ender, they had already begun to reduce the capacity. That crowd was just over 82,000 for the season ender against the Cowboys for the division title in 2012. So 90,910 in the 2007 finale is the largest crowd to ever see an NFL game at FedEx. The largest crowd period to ever see a football game at FedEx was 91,665 for the 2004 season opener between USC who was ranked number one and Virginia Tech.

And I do remember that game and I had people who were at that game say, that's the loudest FedEx has ever been. Was that Virginia Tech versus Southern. Cal game in 2004. But anyway, Derek, thanks. Yes, that Tampa game and the Joe Gibbs seasons there. Really, really good crowds. 2005, of course, and then six and seven. It really felt like that four-year period that things were kind of back to normal.

And they went to the playoffs twice during those four years. I'm thinking not a sellout for Sunday night, but close. And I think I told Tommy, you know, he said I was delusional when I said, what did I say, 75, 25. I don't know, somewhere around 70, 30, Washington to New York fans. Real good crowd, I think Sunday night. Not a sellout. I don't think it'll be close, though. There are just too many tickets that I'm seeing right now that are available.

If Washington wins Sunday night, they'll have their best record through 14 games, 8, 5, and 1. since 1992, when Washington beat Dallas 20 to 17 on a fumble recovery in the end zone by Danny Copeland. All right, that was the Cowboys Super Bowl season, the 92 Cowboys. Washington needed a couple of wins there and then needed some help after losing their season finale to the Raiders to get into the postseason. But when they beat the Cowboys, they improved to 9 and 5 from 8 and 5. but how incredibly pathetic is that? You know, if they win Sunday night, 8, 5, and 1 will be their best 14 game mark in 30 years.

You know, not 12 and 2, not 11 and 3, not even 10 and 4. I mean, are you kidding me? Like, I mean, I know I go to this every once in a while, but if someone had told me in 1992 when they beat the Cowboys that day at RFK, I was there. It was a wild end. to that game. Washington failed on fourth down to score in a 17-13 game, and then Aikman literally under pressure in the end zone gets hit by Jason Buck. The ball's loose. Nobody knows who's

recovered. And Copeland actually has the ball and he's running around out on the field saying, look, I got it. I was in the end zone. If somebody told me on that particular day that this is as good as it's going to be late in a regular season for the next 30 years. Wow. And by the way, let's be clear, a win Sunday night wouldn't be better than it was in 1992. 8.5 and 1 isn't better than 9 and 5, but it would be the best since. My reaction, if somebody had told me that in the moment, you know, in December of 1992, this is as good as it's going to be for the next 30 years, I would have thought that they were under the influence. But whoever said that back in 1992, if they had said it, would have been right.

And it would have been like, okay, let's enjoy 1992. Because that season, they ended up backing into the playoffs, then won a game at Minnesota, and then lost a close game in the divisional round against the 49ers. And that was Joe Gibbs' final game. He retired a couple of months later in March of 9th. 1993. All that aside, though, this team at 7-5-1 with a chance to get to 8-5-1, I think it's a good team. I don't think this is a fluke. It's not, you know, what they've produced in the past, you know, these late-season runs to make the postseason sort of backdoor style. You know,

this team with still four games left, it looks like a playoff team to me. Not a Super Bowl contender, team that looks like a team that should be in the playoffs. Should be and will be aren't the same thing. I understand that. But I do think they're better than the Giants. And while I would never say with this particular team that any game is a should win game, I do think they're better than New York. I think they're better than the Giants.

But the Giants have found a way to play everybody, for the most part, closely. despite what I would call a lack of talent, you know, on that roster. Like, I think it's clear that Washington has better players. I do. But the Giants are well coached and they have found a way all season long to keep it close. They have not won a game in a month and they've only won one time in the last month and a half. But in their losses over the last month and a half, you know, like they were, their seven and two start when they won seven games.

Every game's tight. You know, their seven wins this year are all by eight points or less, you know, all one score games in effect. The five games the Giants have lost, they've either had the lead or been tied heading into the fourth quarter in three of them. Last week was the one game this year where they really got hammered. You know, the Lions game was 31 to 18 that they lost, they were kind of in that game. They just kept turning the ball over. They've been a team like

Washington where they've played most of their games in a way in which winning and losing were basically during the game like even money odds. Daniel Jones, I was looking this up against Washington. I think we all know that he's played well against Washington for one and one as a starter. But in the games against Rivera's teams, he is two one-in-one against Rivera's teams starting in 2020. The average margin in the four games that Daniel Jones has started against Washington is one point per game. All right, 23 to 20, 20 to 19, 30 to 29, and 20 to 20 are the final scores of the four games that Daniel Jones has started against Ron Rivera's teams. He did not play in the season finale last year that Washington won 22 to 7. But how about that? I mean, does anybody really

think Sunday night's going to be that much different? Again, I do think Washington is better, but coaching, quarterback, a great player like Saquan Barkley, I don't know, this one feels like it's going to be tight, like a few plays will decide it. You know, turnovers are going to be huge. Mention this yesterday on the podcast that Washington is plus six during this, you know, stretch, whereas they were minus six during that one and four start. It's pretty obvious how critical turnover margin has been for them during this streak and how big turnover margin will be on Sunday night. Turnovers in the 20-to-20 tie, 1-1. You know, one more turnover in that game either way would have been the difference in the game.

For Washington, Ron Rivera said this yesterday about the team's biggest, biggest question mark areas. Quarterback and offensive line. Listen. Well, you know, with Taylor, you know, as with pretty much any quarterback, is, again, their ability to move and slide. within the pocket, that helps them in terms of pass protection. But I think if you're going to help, you've got to be able to run the football and be able to take it downhill and be physical and then offset that with good play action. And be aware of putting yourself more in third and short than third and long. I mean, that's the last thing you wanted to do is be in passing situations and have a long way to go. So I think, Michael, that the best thing,

we can do is, you know, really be able to run the ball successfully or just be really good on first and second down, whether you're throwing the ball quickly and getting it out of the quarterback's hands or you're going to play action or you're running it. You have to be efficient. This is Ron Rivera just emphasizing, you know, the formula, not that we needed it. I mean, staying ahead of the chains, you know, being in third and short, not third and third. long. That's what they have to be. It's actually really interesting when you consider the first giant game that they were three of 14 on third down overall, third and 21, three third and 13s, four third and tens and a third and eight in the game, and they were able to tie the football game.

So that's encouraging, you know, as it relates to this particular matchup, that they were in these third and longs consistently and they didn't lose the game. Because I think if anybody told any of us before the game, three of 14 and they're going to be in third and long consistently, we would have said loss. But the defense was outstanding. And, you know, a lot of those third and longs were with them moving the football and possessing the football and then having some negative plays. You know, penalties, sacks. but after they had possessed the ball for a while, and at the very least flipped the field.

Remember, I told you about the eight-minute possession that started at their five-yard line and only gained 38 yards but eight up eight minutes. So those are the things that, you know, the quirky things that will add up to not being very good on third down, but ending up in a tie against an opponent that you are, I think, slightly better than. And then yesterday we learned this about Carson Wence.

Here was Ron Rivera on Wence's availability for Sunday night. He's looked good. He's had a couple of good weeks of work. The first week he was on the side. The second week, he was integrated into some of the defensive stuff. He threw with the receivers. And then last week he was off. And so, you know, we chose not to make the move last week.

and then we made the move yesterday to activate him. And I think everything should go accordingly. He will be the primary backup going into this game and we'll go from there. He'll be the backup and we'll go from there. I got a couple of tweets from some of you about that line. Look, you know what it means. All right? You know what it means.

Ron Rivera's had plenty of chances to just say, Taylor Heineke's the starting quarterback the rest of the way. And in almost every single circumstance, he's talked about it being week to week. And we'll go from there with Wentsch yesterday. Wence is going to be the backup. That means we know for sure he's healthy enough to play for the first time. I believe the leash is short. I don't think I felt this way prior to last weekend, but I think the leash is short.

I think if they had lost the game to the Giants in the Meadowlands, 23 to 13, if the center doesn't get called for taunting, I think we'd be getting ready for a Carson Wentz start Sunday night. You know, I do. I believe that. I'm not saying that I'm in favor of it, as I've said previously. I think I'd stick and ride this out with Heineke. But why is the least short? Why would they have considered Wentz had they lost the game, even though?

though at that point Taylor's record would have been five and two versus five one and one because they're in this to be the best that they can be. And Taylor's record is the starting quarterback of this team this year is very much a product of a lot of things before you get to him.

You know, the list of why they are five, one and one in their last seven, six one and one in their last eight, It starts with defense, you know, and then it goes to the running game. And then you count a few spaces and you go to the coaching staff. And then you count a couple more spaces and you get to Taylor Heineke's X factor, is the way I'll describe it. More than really Taylor's play on the field. He ranks near the bottom of almost every statistical category, whether it's an analytics group,

like PFF or DVOA football outsiders or even traditional numbers. His performance and really, you know, the team's overall passing performance is more reflective of a team that in the last seven games should be three and four. You know, not five, one and one. But they are five and one, five one and one, mostly because of a defense and a running game and 15 takeaways. But what makes this complicated for the coaching staff is that, you know, there is an X factor. In three games in which the team went two, one and one in those three in those games,

or I'm sorry, in four games in which the team went two one and one, Taylor's play with the game on the line was significant to the outcome, the Green Bay game, the third and nine completion to Terry McLorn, that for all intents and purposes, ended the game, didn't give Green Bay enough time with the ball back to win the game. The Indianapolis game, two fourth down conversions on the drive that produced a field goal down 16 to 7 and a fourth down a fourth down conversion throw in the drive when they were down 16 to 10.

You never get to the Terry McLaurin 50-50 ball without Taylor converting two crucial fourth downs on the road in the fourth quarter against Indianapolis. I'd throw the Philadelphia game into the equation because he baited, baited the late hit that led to an automatic first down on a weird play. But what a gamer kind of a play that was. And then, of course, the fourth and four against the Giants and that final drive, where that wasn't the only good play on that final drive. I think the best play and the best throw he made was to Curtis Samuel on the play before the touchdown pass to Jahan Dotson. But, you know, that's what complicates it, right? Is that in a couple of key moments, in four of the games, you know, he produced plays that led to, I said a 2-1-1 record, a 3-0-1 record, 3-0-1.

I didn't mean to say 2-1-1, 3-0-1. They won the Green Bay game, they won the indie game, they won the Philly game, and they tied the Giants game. So that, you know, it's hard to yank a guy for making, you know, in four games, four key games, key plays that influence the outcome. Now, if someone said to you before the last seven games, the team's going to have one of the worst pass offenses in the league, right? 29th right now in DVOA ranking per football outsiders, you know, and lots of other statistical categories. with respect to the quarterback in particular, that speak to really losing record. If someone said bad passing offense, but they also said really good defense and running game, you'd still only say, four and three, something around there.

You wouldn't say five one and one. You wouldn't say that with one of the lowest rated worst pass offenses in the league, and by the way, the inability to score consistently, you wouldn't say, yeah, they're only going to lose one of those games. And that's why the leash is short. That's why it's short, because they see that too. Now, what's interesting is that he might be on a short leash, but in his case, at least there's a leash,

because he's still the starter. And these next few games, and personally I think he's going to get too minimum, or I would give him too minimum, I would give him this one and the 49er game. What an opportunity for him. If he runs the offense like he has, you know, the majority of the time, avoids the killer awful plays, whether it's luck or he just avoids them, which leads to the avoidance of one of those horrendous games like he had at the end of last year.

And the team wins enough to get into the postseason and throw in another magical player two at the end of a game in a couple of these wins at the end of the season. He's going to be a guy that ultimately kept, a guy that you traded for, spoke highly of, is earning $28 million a year and was the starter. He's going to be the guy that kept that guy from getting the job back, his job back. And that could be the impetus to a very interesting off-season conversation. Again, I'm with him for the next two. I'm still not convinced that Wentz is an obvious better solution.

And I just don't think you can pull a guy who the rest of the team prefers unless it's really obvious that he shouldn't be out there in front of the other guy. But for me, so far, it hasn't been obvious. So I'd stick with him. All right. Dan Duggan coming up in the next segment. I did want to mention real quickly, Maryland plays UCLA tonight, at Xfinity Center. Still a few tickets left.

UMD Terps, I'm sorry, UMTurps.com. It'll be an electric building tonight, even if it isn't a complete sellout. The students have sold out their allotment for a while. It'll be the first time UCLA's been back in College Park for a game since 40 years ago. 40 years ago, Lefty beat UCLA 80 to 79 in double overtime. That was a team that featured Ben Coleman, Herman Veal, Adrian Branch, Len Byes as a freshman, and they beat Rocket Rod Foster, Kenny Fields, and a UCLA team that in December of 1982 was ranked third in the country. That was the first win for Lefty over UCLA.

He had had two cracks at him in the 70s, one in a very famous game that kicked off the 1973-1974 season, at Pauley Pavilion, with UCLA having a massively long winning streak during the Walton era, and Maryland lost 65 to 64. They had the ball with a chance to take the lead in the final few seconds, and John Lucas, a freshman, turned the ball over, sophomore or freshman, at the time, turned the ball over at the end of the game. And UCLA scored on a breakaway layup that came kind of at the buzzer, and lefty ran to the scores table and talked the referees out of counting the final bucket.

He thought losing by a point to UCLA at Pauley Pavilion looked much better than losing by three. Maryland would be a top five team all year. UCLA would make it back to a final four and lose to NC State that year, the NC State team that beat Maryland in the all-time ACC tournament final, one of the greatest college games ever played, 103 to 100. Maryland then played UCLA again in 1975 at Cole Fieldhouse in the rematch. A very hyped regular season game. Maryland lost that game by 11, and then it would be another seven years before Maryland would face UCLA at home again,

and they beat UCLA 40 years ago in December of 1982, 80 to 79 in double overtime. Maryland and UCLA have played, you know, several times since they played, Maryland played at Pauley, I think once or twice. They played in the NCAA tournament in 2000. They played some neutral floor games against one another. UCLA blew Maryland out in 2000 and second round of that tournament. And then Maryland came back in 2001, 2002 and made the final four and eventually won the national championship. But big-time matchup, UCLA ranked right now. 14th in the coach's poll. Maryland's 17th in the coach's poll.

Maryland's a one-one-and-a-half-point favorite. Kind of a big spot for Maryland after two straight losses. I mean, not a game that's going to make or break this season, but it would be nice for them to get a big-time win at home tonight against UCLA. Go Terps. Up next, Dan Duggan from the athletic to talk about the Giants. right after these words from a few of our sponsors. All right, Sunday night in Landover, the rematch with the Giants on Sunday night football

and a massive game in the NFC wildcard race. Washington and the Giants. Dan Duggan covers the Giants for the Athletic, as I've mentioned many times, no matter who it is, Ben Standing, of course, and others. The athletics totally worth it. I'm a subscriber. You should be as well. You can follow Dan on Twitter.

at D-Duggan, D-U-G-G-G-A-N-21. All right, let's start with this, Dan. What happened from 7-2 to where they are right now at 7-5-1? How different of a team is it from the team that started the first half of the year? It's really not that much different. So since you gave the athletic plug, I actually wrote a story on Tuesday where I broke down the 10 biggest reasons because it's not just any one thing. But the number one reason I pointed to was like regression. was inevitable. This is the same roster

that everybody looked at in the summer and said they'll be lucky if they went five or six games. So obviously they significantly overachieved during that six and one, seven and two start. But it wasn't like you watch those games like, oh my gosh, we totally misjudged this team. It's so talented. Like they're just blowing teams out. Every game

is down to the wire. They're sort of just like close games in this league even out. It's really hard to, you know, just run the table in close games. So they were pulling out every game late and it was great, but you kind of knew at some point their lack of talent, lack of depth would catch up to them, and then really

would probably put it over the edge of injuries, which obviously is often the case in this league. But, you know, it takes Sunday's game against the Eagles, for instance. They obviously got blown out, but they didn't have Leonard Williams, who's, you know, arguably their best defense of the lineman. They didn't have a Dorian Jackson, who's unquestionally their best cornerback, and they didn't

have Xavier McKinney, who's a borderline Provo Safety. If you take those three guys out of a defense that was, you know, pretty thin to begin with, that's just kind of insurmount to when you face an offense as good as silly. And, you know, they're facing good teams. face Dallas. You know, they face Seattle. They're going to start this kid. So a lot of those factors have kind of combined to result in this slide, but it's not like, it's not shocking. You know, you get off that good start. You think, all right, they're a really good place, but you kind of felt

like at some point, it would be tough to continue to maintain that level of play. Yeah, you know, it's funny because obviously as a division foe, we pay attention to the other teams in the division and understood you were winning all those close games. But the truth is, you know, you guys had a lead even though you were very injured on Thanksgiving at Dallas, you know, at halftime. You certainly had a chance in that game you lost to Seattle. I think that game was tied in the fourth quarter. And obviously, if not for a taunting penalty against your center in the Washington game, that game would have been a winning game. So it is interesting. You know, you mentioned a couple of the injured players. And I was going to ask.

you about him, and I don't want to forget. Leonard Williams, McKinney, Jackson, are they going to play? I mean, you got O'Jolari back for the Washington game two weeks ago, and that was, you know, he was awesome in that game. What about the health for Sunday? Yeah, I mean, O'Jolari, it's like he's making up for a lot of time. He's played for four games. I get like four sacks and a couple strip sacks, and he's been a big boost to get him back. Leonard Williams, I would say, he's probably 50-50. We'll find out, you know, this afternoon how much he does on the practice field, but it's It's crazy because he's been an Ironman his first seven years. All of a sudden, this year he missed three games early in season with a knee injury.

Then he missed Sunday. He left that Washington game with a neck injury. He was on the practice field at the end of last week. He wasn't doing anything. That's like a first step. I don't know if there's enough time for him to go do some more rehab, get an active practices, tested out. I would think he'll play just because of his track record.

I don't know the sense of injury, so maybe he won't be able to. Dory Jackson now he's missed the last three games since kind of probably the worst decision, Brian Dable's maid was putting his number one cornerback at punt returner, and, you know, Dory Jackson's been playing really well a corner, but the one thing with him is he has an injury history, so it's kind of, the juice wasn't worth of squeeze there, and then predictably he got injured on a punt return. So he's sort of in the same boat as Leonard Williams as far as where he's at. Progress-wise, he was on the field late last week, too, but didn't do very much. His injury, they said, when it happened, was four to six weeks, so obviously Sunday would be

the top end of that timeline, so it's hard of me to say. Again, I'm probably, I probably I put him in the 50-50 basket. Again, we'll have a better idea later on Wednesday. And then McKinney, I think it's still a long shot. I mean, he had, his injuries really would kind of started this spiral. I mean, when he was bi-week down to Mexico and had a really bad hand injury, riding an ATV. And he got pins in three of his hands.

He was a pretty gruesome injury, and he got the pins out last week. He's saying, like, club it up, I'll go play. Brian Davel was much more cautious about that thing. You know, I think I'm not a doctor. I think there's more damage than just the standard broken fingers. so I don't think you can just club it up if there's still a lot of healing that needs to be done with the bones in his hands. So he's insisted that he's going to come back at some point this season,

but obviously the clock is ticking, and I'd be very surprised if he's cleared and ready to go for Sunday. Dan, what was the reaction there among the fans, among those of you who cover the team on the beat? What was the reaction to the first game, the 20-to-20 tie? Yeah, I mean, I think that the kind of knee-jerk reaction was, you know, they let that game slip away. Because, I mean, granted, you know, Washington was up 10-0. But then the Giants took control, and they just had so many opportunities there where their offenses couldn't do anything to put the game away.

You know, they had that seven-point lead forever. And obviously, Heineke makes that, you know, amazing escape and, you know, kind of just flings it on fourth down. There was so many chances that could have closed that game out. You mentioned the taunting penalty. That was a killer. But the decision that kind of probably had the most scrutiny was, fourth and three at the Washington 45 was, you know, around two minutes to go in overtime.

and they elect a pun. And it was probably the right call because a loss there would have killed them where the tie really didn't hurt them that much in the standing. But this is the same coach who in week one went for two when they scored against tennis late and they get it and they win. It kind of galvanized everybody. Then you're in another opportunity to make a statement. Like, we're going to go for it and win the game.

And he didn't do that. So that kind of was like, even though I understood it, it sort of was, it stood out as a contrast to how he approached early in the season. and I feel like things got a little tighter now that the playoffs are in sight. I'm curious, I think one of the significant plays in that game, and I was looking for a Brian Dable explanation on this. But when Washington, you know, after they punted on the fourth down, they took the delay game and tried to draw them off sides, didn't work, they punted,

Washington had a play that went out of bounds, and with the clock stopped, the Giants burned their final time out, which ended up costing them a lot of time after the third down run and may have cost him a chance on the next possession to get into field goal range. What was the reason he called that time out with the clock stop? Did you guys ever press them on it or not? Yeah, yeah. So that was one initially I was like what's going on here, but after guys just doing some

background reporting on it, what happened there was the Giants had the most unfortunate force fumble of all time. Because I think it was Robinson. He was going to go out of bounds anyways. And the Giants linebacker, Mike McFadden, he poked the ball up from behind. So the ball went out of bounds on a fumble there. So I think the clock was wrong on TV or something like that because I think it went out of bounds like 123. And it looked like

so the Giants call time out, like at 109 and why did the time kick off. But then they reset the clock to 123. So I think there was just a clock malfunction. I think like once the ball was out of bounds on a fumble, as soon as that ball gets back in bounds, they start the clock. Because you know, you can't fumble out of bounds, obviously, and intentionally, and they're not going to determine the intent of that fumble. So, he just gone out of bounds.

Yeah, the clock would have stopped. Giants would have made to save the timeout. But since it was knocked out by a fumble, they had to call a timeout to stop the clock, because otherwise Washington would have exhausted the whole 40 seconds, and obviously then that would have defeated the purpose. So they have to call the timeout based on the fumble. Hopefully I did you have explaining that, but that was definitely confusing in the moment. I think the confusion really was, I don't know if you're at the game or watch on TV.

I think the clock on TV somehow was a lot. Interesting. Where the reps reset it and they... Yeah. So it was called a fumble in bounds and so the clock was going to roll. Correct. Yeah, because he knocked the ball out of bounds. Like he wasn't out of bounds yet.

And I guess the situation there was the last two minutes or whatever you can't. The clock doesn't stop on a fumble out of bounds. The only thing that I mean, that would by the way make total sense. And yeah, I was watching it on TV. And so it looked like the timeout was called with the clock's. stopped. But I think they called the time out, you know, significant time after the play, like almost before Washington was going to line up and run their third down play with the clock stopped. I'd have to go back and look at it. Yeah, I think what happened was there must have

been some confusion on, you know, the happen on the other sideline, whether the ball, like, whether they knew it was a fumble, whatever. I think the ref basically either gave them the, you know, like, it was confusing. It was confusing. We'll help you. I don't know. I don't know exactly how that time worked out. But it seemed like the clock was at 109 and went back to 123. I'm not sure if the Giants called timeout immediately or there was miscommunication. The refurb of the rest of it was our fault for miscommunication. I don't know exactly the mechanics of it.

But that's the end of the day it was 123 either way. So they had to call a time out. And I thought that. But I trust me, I have the same reaction in live time. Yeah, because I was like, that's huge. And because really, I think going into the game, especially when it got to that point, not that we considered tie before the game started. But it was like, given that the rematch was back here,

I thought kind of a tie benefited Washington a little bit, especially with the Eagles coming up for the Giants. But, you know, there was a thought that I think a lot of us here had in watching the game. Well, I'll just share with you what my thought was. I really thought Washington was the better team. And at the same time, what you said is I think they also got lucky. Like both things were true. I thought that they were the better team throughout the game,

and yet the taunting penalty for all intents and purposes, and, you know, Heineke got away with a couple of throws there that could have gone the other way at the end of regulation and even on the drive that tied the game. And, you know, it felt like a tie was, you know, a tie and take it and run with it. But overall, do you feel in watching these two teams, the Giants are the better team, Washington's the better team, or they're dead even?

Well, you've got a competent answer to say dead even, you know, how they just play 70 minutes, and that's out played out. But it's funny, that kind of goes back to that, and the very first question when asked me is, like, the coaching staff here is on a tremendous job, because, yeah, if you line up these rosters and just do a draft, you're going to take a lot of the watching players in the top 10,

and you're going to take more of their starters in the Giants, I'm sure. But they just do a really good job of, like, managing the game in a way that it never gets out of hand, that they always are in striking distance, they're seem to be opportunistic. That's the stuff that kind of faded a little bit, but in that Washington game, I think you did see that. You look at that Washington defensive line against the Giants'

offensive line against the Giants' monumental mismatch. You also look at the Washington receivers against the giant secondary, especially without a door jack. That's a huge mismatchezed, sorry. And Washington exploited those, but somehow the Giants still hang around. You know, like they made the big play down the sideline

to Darius Slateon, where the offense was kind of scuffling at that point. They just kind of make timely plays. They're not a great. break down-in-out-out team, but they seem to make plays when they count on. So that's sort of that intangible that you can't measure. Because, yeah, I would say Washington has a better roster. And when they play again on Sunday night, I'm probably going to pick a three-point game one way or the other,

because I do think they're still, like, overall pretty evenly matched teams. Yeah, I mean, you talk about timely plays. I mean, that Slayton play, they catch early to 55-yarder, but the Slate and drop was massive when, because he was wide open, still not sure how he got so open. but if he makes that grab, you're already in field goal range at the end of regulation. Weird game overall. We're talking to Dan Duggan. Dan covers the Giants for the athletic.

So I'm curious, you're, you know, it's 13 games into this thing. Daniel Jones has been a key to seven wins, five losses, and a tie. What is the, I mean, we have a lot of conversations right now about the quarterback situation here, because I think most of us don't believe that the, Taylor Heineke is the future, but at the same time, he is probably the choice in the present, even over Carson Wentz. What is the short-term and then the long-term feeling among you guys when it comes to Daniel Jones? Yeah, I mean, listen, that's the question that's really sort of dominated this team and everything about it in the last couple of years now,

because you had the promising rookie year and then kind of step back with the Joe Judge Jason Garrett pairing, and then he had the injury last year where you missed the end of the season. So you kind of felt like, all right, year four, they didn't pick up the 50-year option, new regime. We know Brian Bable has done great work with Josh Allen. Like, this is it. This is the make-or-break year. We're going to know one way or another. And here we are, you know, 13 games into the season. And I still don't know. You know, you'd like to know that either they just went out and were terrible and he was terrible and he just easily pull the Band-Aid off. You're going to have a top 10 pick, go get the replacement.

Or the way they started, you're like, listen, this team wins 12, 13 games. Obviously, you're not going to move off from them. But if you're going to just fall somewhere in that middle, nine wins, maybe make the playoffs, maybe just miss. And he's been, like, the word I keep using for me, he's been fine. And that's fine. Like, that's, you can do a lot worse, but you can also do better. So the question is, if they feel like they can do better, how do they do better? Because I don't think they're going to go on, you know, great free agent quarterbacks don't

really hit the market anyways. I don't think they're going to go do something like that. Draft-wise, you know, as I mentioned, if they finish around, you know, eight, eight, eight and one, whatever might end up being nine-seven-and-one, it would be hard to get a quarterback, and let you kind of follow that buffalo blue, where they traded up a few times to get up in distance to get Josh Allen. But I don't know. It's crazy.

We're this far into his career, we're this far into the season, and there still isn't a clear answer. I mean, he has big supporters. He has big detractors. You know, obviously made their minds up long ago.

But if someone who's kind of neutral on him, I don't know. And I think the beauty of it is these next four games will probably go a long way, whether that's fair or not. I mean, if he leads them to the playoffs and, you know, anything can have much in the playoffs, that obviously is probably going to tilt the scale that direction.

If they just kind of continue this slide, and listen, He doesn't have a lot of help, so it wouldn't all be on him. At the same time, like, if they just collapsed here, I think it'd be harder to justify bringing him back rather than just say, let's try something new, you know, start the clock over the new rookie quarterback. Obviously, this is not the quarterback. Joe Shane and Brian Dable picked, you know,

they inherited him and tried to make the best of it. So that's going to be fascinating. I think Sunday night is the biggest game's career by far. So how are you responding that? You know, 60 minutes might go a long way to determine the next couple of years of the Giants' franchise's trajectory. I always wonder from afar if it's really, to judge him, you know, in kind of a conclusive way because of the fact that he's had all these

different coaches, the fact that there's never been much around him. I mean, you guys have invested in your offensive line. That's great. But I mean, what level of playmaking has he had around him other than Saquan Barkley? Like, part of me thinks that he's good enough to at least see what he would be like with some weapons around him. No, and that's fair. And like, listen, It's not a fair world because we've said that now for like three years. So at some point, you have to just wonder if it's ever going to happen because the difference is now the economics. Like if he was in year two or year or three, you'd feel great about him going to next year.

He'll be on the rookie deal. There's no really decision to make. It's not that bad enough. You're going to do a Josh Rosen type thing where you just dump him right away. Like you would let him grow. The fact they came in didn't pick up that fifth year option, now the finances come into the equation. Like, well, what's he going to command this year?

I have no idea on that. Like, I've just started talking to some league sources because I don't think they'd, ever franchise tag. He's definitely not a $31 million quarterback. I don't think at this stage, but is he going to be amenable to like a kind of bridge two-year, $30, $40 million deal or something like that? I don't know.

It's going to be the most fascinating subplot of this the law season to me, obviously in the Giants world. But even like league-wise, very rare you have a quarterback who's in the position that he's going to be in. It's just usually you kind of, you know where you don't, and now here we have four years in and you still have all these, I don't know, maybe you can sit on the fence so much. But no, I think to your point yet,

might not be fair, but just the finance my drive decision will, hey, you know, not everything's fair in this league, so we got we got to move on with a cheaper quarterback. I think that's a distinct possibility. I mean, I'll tell you, as far as the last game goes, I'm not sure that that game ends in a tie without him. I mean, he made a lot of

plays in that game under duress, and his running always seems to be a factor against Washington. All right, I'm curious, because around here, you know, as dysfunctional as this franchise has been now for, you know, the Snyder era, and we're all hopeful that that will be ending at some point in the near future.

It's also interesting to note that the Giants, you guys haven't been to the postseason in six years, and how hungry is the fan base for a playoff berth? I mean, it's been a while, you know, two Super Bowls in the last 15 years. I mean, obviously that's a hell of a lot better than Washington has done, but it's been, It's been some time since the Giants have been relevant. How important is this, do you think, to the fan base? How badly do they want it? Yeah, I mean, those Super Bowl are getting further and further in the rearview.

It's been a pretty lean decade since that second one. You know, the five years coming into the season, they were tied to the Jets for the worst record in the league. It's not like they've just kind of been mediocre. They've been absolutely, you know, an abject disaster for five years. So this year has definitely turned things around. It's funny because coming in, it was like, oh, this is year one of the rebuild, nobody, any expectations. But now it's funny how things kind of flip.

I think there are still some fans who kind of are this, you know, more peaceful outlook on, like, hey, anything they do this year, it's already been a success, whatever happens, happens. But there's definitely a segment of fan base who looks at and say, listen, start 6 and 1. We start 7 and 2. Like, we want to get in the players. We want to get back in it. Even if you know it's not really a Super Bowl caliber roster, but, like, again, anything

can happen to get in the place. You never know. So I think there's more fan base, more of the fan bases on that side of the coin. Like, let's just get in. like we're so close. But I do think there is, surprisingly, a patient segment that's like, listen, they've already overachieved. I feel really good about this new regime and anything else is gravy.

But no, I think definitely, and forget the fans, ownership is hungry to get back into the playoff the winning team because it's been a brutal stretch for them firing coaches every two years or placing GM stuff that they don't typically like to do. So a playoff berth will go a long way for the people upstairs. I would think that with all of the questions about Jones, at least one-year-old. question, and you know, it's always early. I mean, there's 13, he's 13 games into it. But I would bet that most people up there think they got it right finally with Brian Dable. Yes, but I would also caution that, you know, Ben McAdo went 11 and 5 and made the playoffs,

and people are talking about them as a dark core Super Bowl team in 2017, and then we all saw a collapse. Listen, I think that they're different. I think Brian Dable has shown more in this season than what Ben McAter did. I don't even go back to Joe's judge. I mean, know they finished six and ten, but his first season, they finished five and three after just a terrible start of the season, but there was sort of that feeling of like, oh, the arrows pointed up, and then obviously things fell apart for him. So I'm a little more cautious because I've kind of seen how things can slip here pretty quickly. I will say that, yes, I think Brian Davel is much better than those guys. I think he'll have a nice, long, successful career,

but that does stick in the back of my mind that I think there's been times where you felt like the Giants got their guy, and then within a year, they're firing him and starting the process over. again. By the way, in 2020, was Rivera a candidate for the Giants job? No, because he took the Washington job. Pretty quickly. Before the Giants, he started their process, which was a thing where people thought, oh, you know, Dave Gellman made to get back together. And I don't know what their relationship is a close enough one where Rivera was like going to wait for the Giants to come

around and was dying to reunite them. So yeah, no, I remember that being a thing at the time where he was an obvious candidate, but yeah, I think he took the Washington job before. the Giants even officially started their search. All right, two more, and we'll wrap it up. What are the keys from the Giants' perspective to coming in here Sunday night and winning? Yeah, I mean, I think, again, if you look at the problems ahead in the first game was, again, Washington's defensive line is a problem. Even if you look at some of the numbers, they ran the ball. It looks better than I think it was because a lot of those yards, especially for Sequin,

we're on the end of the half where Washington was playing the past and he broke a couple draws, but down in the downout they do not run the ball well. You know, Jonathan Allen, Darren Payne, gave a ton of problems to the interior off the line. So, I mean, that's always kind of point A1 with the team. It's been that way for a number of years. But as this slide has gone on, a lot of it has to do with, like, Dallas's pass rush killed him,

Philly's Pass Rush killed him, Washington's Pass Rush was a problem. So that's where I think it all starts for them. And then on the flip side, again, like, the biggest thing is, I think you get Adori Jackson back because at least he could, like, credibly cover Terry McLearn. I know Tamer Claren, a great player and had great games against good corners, but they just don't have a chance, really.

It was Savie Moreau, you know, travel with him again. That just obviously did not go well. And then there's a trickle-down where if a door he can at least cover Chairman Claren, then, you know, the secondary receivers from Washington, you have a better matchup, too. So that would be big because if he's out again, you just watched how that first matchup went. Didn't really go well, obviously, for the giant secondary.

So I think those are the two things. They just need to get a door jacked him back, and then offensively they need to figure out a way to neutralize Washington front, which is obviously easier set than done. It's amazing that Daniel Jones, the games he's played against Washington, three-point game, one-point game, one-point game, and a tie. These games have been super tight with him at the helm against Washington. Well, I should say, since Rivera got here against Rivera's Washington teams.

All right, you said a field goal either way, predict it. Cool. Yeah, I mean, I guess I got to pick the Giants. I don't think anyone who falls in who accuse me to being with a Homer, but it feels kind of like a Homer picked. I don't have a strong conviction one way or the other. Again, I think it's going to be a really close game, and maybe I can just pick a tie again for fun. But, yeah, I mean, they're evenly matched teams.

I know the fact that it's in Washington should work against the Giants, but I don't know. I mean, maybe it's, I may have until buying into some of that magic I thought earlier in the year where they just seem to find a way to pull games out. Now, I know that that's missing lately, but I just maybe they have one last one in reserve here where they can pull out a close game. And again, I'd be surprised if some does not come out of the wire, based on the stakes and the way the teams matched up and obviously what we saw two weeks ago.

Yeah, you know, too also, and I'm sure you have followed this to a certain degree from afar. But of the other three NFC East fan bases, it's been the giant fan base that hasn't really taken over FedEx Field, like the Cowboy fan base does and the Philadelphia fan base does. And there's an expectation, I think, for the first time and a long time, that there might be actually a legitimate home field advantage for Washington. on Sunday night. We'll see how that plays out, but it's been a while in a big game since they've really felt like they were the home team in that stadium. But anyway, Dan, thank you so much. Again, follow Dan on Twitter at D. D. D. D. Duggan 21. He is the Ben Standig,

equivalent for the athletic covering the Giants, and he did a great job here. I appreciate it. Enjoy the trip down in the game. All right. Thanks a lot. All right. When we come back, we will get back to Alex Ovechkin's historic night last night in Chicago with one of my favorites, Greg Wyshinsky, senior NHL writer for ESPN.com. We'll get to that right after these words from a few of our sponsors. Forecheck, Mampa, centers in front, whose Netsop had the shot. And there it is. 800. Alexander Ovechkin has done it. And here come the hats and the team. You have just witnessed the 800th goal for Alex Ovechkin. Yeah, that was number 800 last night in Chicago. Ovechkin with the hat trick.

What a response, by the way, from the Chicago fans, big-time hockey crowd there. And now he is won away from tying Gordy Hal for number two on the list, two away from passing him. Three home games to do it coming up as, well. Greg Wyshinsky is one of my favorites. He is a senior NHL writer at ESPN at Wysh-W-Y-S-H-Y-N-S-K-I on Twitter. So I just want to start with this. 800, what does it signify to you and to all of the hockey people? Like what was the reaction last night?

I know Hat Trick was kind of surprising, but what does 800 mean to you? well I mean for me it was it was relief because he scored a hat trick and scored 800 goals on our airwaves which was kind of cool you know we've been tracking him and trying to get as many caps games on the ESPN as we could so to have it happen last night the way it did was pretty cool you know it's an incredible achievement I mean I certainly as as everyone knows I have followed Ovechkin throughout his career when I was living in D.C. and then you know elsewhere as well and to think back to the guy that was score goals and electrify the crowd and put up big numbers as a young player, I certainly never thought it would continue like this. I mean, we've seen so many incredible goal scores in the last 25 or 30 years who reach a certain

point in their career. And then the skills atrophy or the legs go or they, you know, they don't have the same hunger that they do to achieve statistically. And it's never been the case of Ovi. I mean, for me, 800 signifies and, you know, you. unique physical specimen who plays the game with power and durability. It signifies a shot that we've only seen come across a few players in national history as far as effectiveness and its accuracy.

And above all else, man, just the desire to keep doing it and to keep excelling. Maybe the Gretsky record is the carrot in front of them, I don't know, but to do it and to do it the right way. Real brief, you know, I was at the Porter Governor's meeting this week in Palm Beach, and I was talking with Ted Leonesis. And, you know, one of the things we talked about was this idea that Ovechkin has come back on this contract extension, but he didn't come back to just be a third liner or to pop in on the power play and scores and goals. Like, he wants to remain a top line relevant player.

And that's something incredible thing for a player that's played as long as he has and accomplished what he's had. Joe B said this morning, Joe Beninotti, he was on with me on radio, said that, you know, here he is age 37, and you mentioned it, and he doesn't appear to be slowing down, but he kind of, you know, he didn't make the analogy, I made it after he said it, but he said his skill of being the greatest goal scorer and hand-eye coordination goal, you know, shooter, perhaps in the history of the game, It's one of those things that never ever leaves you. And I made the analogy to a basketball shooter. You know, anybody that's played basketball in their life knows, you know, the guys that are shooters, they never lose it.

You know, they can be 60 years old playing in a men's league or in a pickup game and they can still shoot it. Do you agree with that kind of analogy when it comes to Ovechkin? And does it enhance the chances that he's going to be around for, you know, several more years? Yeah, no, I think that's a good analogy, and you're right about the shooters. I think it's the same kind of thing. The big difference between, you know, basketball and hockey, obviously, is the amount of up and down and physical pole that hockey takes on the body. When you're skating the length of the ice, you know, yeah, you do get off the ice for your shifts and stuff, but you're still exerting an incredible amount of energy and you're still taking a physical beating in these games 82 times a season.

The thing that I think Joe B is getting at that I completely agree with because I've talked to other people about it in the last few years with regards to Ovetkin and this record chase, there are some goal scorers that rely on speed and they rely on slashing through opposing defenses. And then once those legs go, it changes. You know, you think about guys like Patrick Marlowe, for example, who was a great goal score for the sharks for a long time.

I mean, once he started to lose that elite speed, his game changed, right? So with Ovechkin, yeah, but he came up with the caps. It was like watching a comet. Like, that guy would absolutely, like, streak from one end of the ice to the other, score electrifying goals. It was sort of a signature thing,

but he was never reliant on that speed to score goals. And I think that's the big thing for Ovi is that, you know, as we've seen him age and maybe get a little bit less passionate about playing defense as he gets older and things that nature, the way he scores goals hasn't atrofied. It hasn't left him because it's something that can carry through as you get older because it's not reliant on some of those aspects of the players' game.

You lose as you get older. Yeah, no, that makes sense. Where does he rank for you on the all-time greatest offensive goal scores in the history of the game? He's the best goal scorer of all-time already. like he's a better goal score than Greta. And I say that with respect to Wayne and the numbers that he put up in a completely different era. Because like what Ovechkin has done against the best goal-tining the league has ever seen, against the most number of teams the league has ever seen,

the highest overall quality of talent league is seen, he's done it through defensive systems, he's done it against incredible defensemen, he's done it against a better league. than Gretzky did it in and a better league than Gordy Howe did it in. And all of those things combined to have scored 800, to me makes him the best goal score of all time, whether or not he catches Gretzky or not. To have done it now is to have done it at a time in the NHL that it is so much

harder to score goals, or at least it was until like the last two years. But overall, he's done it at a time when goal scoring was a lot harder than it was for Gretti. And to have done what he's done is just remarkable. Who's in the conversation for number two? I think Gretti, probably. I mean, Gretti,

was an incredible goal score. Brett Hall is up there too. Messier's up there too. I am intrigued to see where Conner McDavid ends up by the end of his career. I mean, he's putting up gargantuan offensive numbers

during the early part of his career. this season, he has really put an onus on putting the pocket of the net. He currently leaves the NHL and goal scoring. So that's, that's, I mean, I don't think he's a risk to catch Ovi, like if Ovi sets the Gratky record, because Connor hasn't had those like 50 goals, 60 goal seasons like Obechkin did early in his career. But he's, he's the one guy that I look at and say, okay, what are we going to end up with here statistically for this player?

because it just seems like he can post up numbers at well. You answered the question, and I figured that was the answer in terms of the greatest offensive goal score of all time. Here's a trickier one. Where does Ovechkin rank on the all-time list of greatest players? We did a book a few years ago, me and a couple of colleagues, that was our own version of the NHL 100. And we did rank the top 20 players.

And I have to go back and look to see where he fell, but I want to say if you rank him amongst forwards, he's obviously deep inside the top ten. If you rank him amongst all players, it's a tougher conversation. He might be hovering around 10. He might be just outside top 10. I mean, when you start talking about greatest players at all time, you are talking about a total package of player. And with due respect to Ovechkin, you know, he doesn't necessarily have the all-around game

of a Sidney-Crosby, for lack of a veteran. comparison. So while, if you're looking at this generation, the Sid-O-V, Magic Bird, NHL version generation, I think Sid's probably higher on the list of all-time great just because of all of the things he does. But Ovechkin, there's no question that I think he's, he's top 15 all-time, any position, probably top 10 all-time amongst forwards. Would it have changed any had they won another cup or two?

No, I just think it's the way he plays. I just think it's his game. I mean, he's an elite goal score. Underrated playmaker, too. I think that's one aspect of all these games that always gets overlooked is that it's not like he's putting up, you know, numbers where he's not creating goals for his linemates and picking up a set. So I think he's been an underrated playmaker.

You know, I don't think the team success part of it really would factor into, you know, his place amongst the immortals. But I do think, though, as a baseline thing, winning one obviously helped. When the capitals won, I wrote an essay about Ovechkin, and one of the points I made is that I'm relieved that when he, yeah, when he goes into the Hall of Fame,

we don't have to have that conversation now. Like, we can just celebrate the guy for the player that he was, for the record that he set, for the way that he, I mean, absolutely revived hockey in Washington and built an incredible fan base on his back. and not have to worry about having those. But he never won a cup conversations that would have dogged him because, you know,

the problem about, you know, Ovechekin's career has not been without on-ice criticism. He's getting a lot of off-ice criticism now because of the Russian invasion of the train and then rightfully so. But there's always been critics of his game. There's always been people that have said that, like, he doesn't do this, he doesn't do that, he doesn't do that, his back-checked, all this other stuff.

And there have been times when, you know, people have written books about Ovechkin and, you know, and being a coach killer and things that nature. So to take that off their plate, to take off the he never won thing off their plate, it was a really, really important thing and really, I think, clarifies how how great he is without having to have any caveats about it. Yeah, I think one of the things, Greg, really was, you know, he's your best player, and yet they kept losing these game sevens, many of them at home. And even though, you know, he played well in some of those series, he didn't necessarily have

have the greatest of seventh in deciding games. And so there was always that question of, well, how can he be what everybody thinks he is if he can't get his team through as a one seed against an eight seed in the first round? Right. And then, of course, like, not only do they finally win, but he wins the cons of mine in the process. He spikes the football, right?

Yeah. Not only do I get my ring, but I'm the reason we got the ring. And so that whole thing was like the perfect counter argument against anything people said about his prowess or his clutch play in the playoffs. And again, just to have him put it to bed and have the focus completely on his accomplishments as a player and not team success, which again is something that sometimes is out of his control. I mean, look, a lot of those early capital teams that weren't finding success in the playoffs was not because Alex was because Alex Semen pumped 100 shots on goal

and couldn't put one past Geroffaw-Hack. Halak is a name that will live in for me because I think many people believe that may have been their best team in 2010. Oh, yeah, yeah. And so, again, to have Ovechkin, you know, excel through all those years with different cast, and you think back that those early Caps teams, you know, the Young Guns team, it kind of reminds you the thing I talked about with Leonsis recently in the sense that the Gretzky record is something that Leontes obviously wants the Obey break, but the record that maybe means more to Ted than anything is the fact that Ovechkin's going to have done this with one team. And, you know, Kretke did it with multiple teams. Gordi Howe did it with multiple teams.

Ovetkin's going to set this record as a capital and having only played as a capital. If you want to talk about unbreakable records to have that amount of goals of one franchise in a salary cap era, when Ovetkins played his entire career, it's nothing short of remarkable. Yeah. I wonder, why do you think that is? why do you think he has stayed I mean the first contract obviously was 13 years but why do you think he's been so comfortable

here? So it's a combination of a couple things he obviously loves D.C. He obviously loves Ted. He's really, I talked to a veteran about that before the season as well about like when he became the all-time leading score for with one franchise

and he said, you know, he's now seen capital fans that came games of kids that are now like in their 20s and have grown up and have kids of their own. And he's been a part of this family for his entire career. And, you know, I've always said this about free agents and hockey that, like, they don't ever want to leave their stuff, right? They don't ever want to, like, go and move their stuff to another place.

I just want to be where their stuff is. And there's no reason for him to ever have left. The real remarkable thing, though, has flipped around to the team, is the fact that the capitals have remained as consistent and relevant and contending as they've been, and never had a reason to look to move them or to move on to a new thing. You think about the Chicago Blackhawks right now, and, you know, if I told you back after their third cup, that Patrick Kane and John Faye's would both probably not be Blackhawks anymore

and may not finish their careers in Chicago. You would have said, I was nuts. Like, those guys seem like lifers. But the minute, you know, you never know when the worm's going to turn on your franchise, and all of a sudden you have to start of thinking about rebuilding or whatever. And so it's attributed to the capitals that they've never had to go through that

while Ovechkin's been here. And he's never had to have that hard-to-heart conversation of, well, would it be better if I left? It's never happened. And that's a remarkable run for a franchise. Yeah, I mean, I'm not saying that New York or L.A. or, you know, Chicago wouldn't have been

cities that Ovechkin would have embraced. But I think the international nature of this city. And then I think what you said, they've been good. And they have created, he has created, by being here, a massive jump in the size of the fan base. And by the way, and I talked about this on radio. Like, it's not even a debate. Alex Ovechkin is the greatest team sport athlete in the history of this town, you know, especially of the last half century. I mean, Walter Johnson and Sammy Baugh are, you know, are in the conversation if you're going to go back and talk about the history of sports, but, like, it's not even close. Like, Darrell Green, I guess, would be the next one.

If we're going to include college players, Patrick Ewing had quite a four years at Georgetown. But, like, he's the good, on the one team, and you know this, and we've talked about this in the past, but on the one team that for a long period of time was irrelevant in this city, he's become the greatest team sport athlete in the history of this city. It's not even close. Yeah. I mean, I was, I was in D.C. when, when that arena was a hole in the ground, you know, and they were moving there and no one was really sure what it was going to mean for the sand base and what was going to happen. And in his early years, nobody was showing up.

I remember they were just giving away tickets. Like they were papering the building to get people to come to the capitals when Obie was there as a rookie. And then it didn't have to do it anymore because not only was an attraction and not only did the team around them get better, but you can't underestimate that for like a good decade, maybe even 50s, years. He made the team cool. Like, it was cool to be a catch fan. It was a party. Like, you'd go down at the MPI or Verizon or

whatever name it was at that point. Capital One. And then, you know, you'd go to the bars and you go to the bars afterwards, and it was like, it was like following a college team. Like, it was very much that we're all doing the same chance and we're wearing the same color and we're there to see the to root on the same team kind of vibe. And that,

to me, was always born from Ovechkin and his attitude, his swagger, and the way he played. Like, they weren't just the good team. They were the team that shot their own music video in a bar and false church, you know, and showed it on the Jumbotron. Like, they were, they were like the cool, the cool kids. And that definitely was something that was the trickle down from Obechkin and his outside personality. Again, like the Mick Jaggerid of Sidney Crosby's John Lennon, the, you know,

the Magic Johnson, the Sydney Crosby's Larry Bird. Like, there was always going to be that. comparison of one guy was a rock star, one guy was milked coast. Yeah, definitely. All right, two more for Greg Wyshinsky. The first is Ovechkin related. The second is just about the team right now. The team's playing well.

So, assuming health, does he pass Gretzky and when? I think he's going to pass Gretzky. I think the trajectory is there. And as we're seeing now this season, like even if he starts slow, it's going to pick up and he's going to do the thing. If you go based on his career goals for game average, it's going to take around 154 games. So that's sometime in early 2024, 25.

That's if he is in this time, that's if he can keep the scoring rate where it is. So that's the projection right now. If there's a downtick in his productivity, I still think he's going to be okay. He's banked so many goals. He's still productive. And like we talked about before, the way he scores tells you that he's going to still be able to do it.

And, you know, the other thing that Ted and I talked about at the Board of Governors is the fact that they've made the promise to him that they're not going to rebuild while he's here. Like, they're going to remain competitive, maybe to their detriment. You know, maybe it's better to try to, like, tank at some point to try to get like a top pick and, you know, start developing the next phase of the franchise when Ovetians no longer there. But they're going to keep competing competitive. they're going to try for the playoffs every year. And part of that was, you know, to try to surround Oveskin with the best talent possible so he can break this record.

And they've made that promise to him, and he's promised that he's not going to settle for being a third-liner who pops in a few goals in the power play once in a while. Like, he wants to be a relevant player for them. So it's a really interesting sort of symbiotic thing between him and the team as far as, like, their future. And again, like, you can make the argument that the Capitol should probably,

given the age of their core, we're transitioning into something else right now. But the bottom line is that he's made this team countless millions of dollars over the years. Like he has been an ATM machine for this franchise. And if there's any guy in this league where you structure your team for the next couple of seasons just for his benefit, it'd be Alex Ovechkin because that's how important he's been to the franchise. I have an additional question on that. How will Gretzky receive it?

I don't know anything about what Gretzky and Obechkin's relationship is. Will he cheer it on or not? They're friends. They've got a relationship now, and part of the mutual respect, I think, is the fact that Obechkin is attempting to do this as a relevant player. Like, we've seen so many records in sports set where the guy is, like, broke down, struggling to hang on, barely getting over the finish line. And that's not Ovechkin. And I think Gretti, from what I understand, is a huge fan of that. The other thing, too, is you have to remember,

Wayne is, the reason Wayne's awesome is that he's like the ultimate hockey nerd. Like, he's a guy that famously has put on disguises to go to the Hockey Hall of Fame to look at stuff. Now, most of it's his stuff. So maybe he's just, like, misses it. I don't know. But, like, he's just a real hockey nerd. And so because of that, you have to remember that when he was breaking Gordy Howe's records for points and for goals.

Gordy was on the road with him. He was there for some of those games. He was rooting on Wayne to break his records. And Wayne's carried that forward. Like, Gratzky's going to be there on the road with the capitals when Ovechkin is close to breaking his record. And he

talked openly about how he hopes that Ovechkin does it. And I think that's genuine. I mean, listen, none of us want our names. Right. Well, yeah. But he's not doing what Bruce Smith did, at the end of his career for the SAC record here in Washington. Precisely, yeah.

So this team, you know, you said, you know, keeping the team competitive, they've won five in a row, but do you see this team at the end of the year being a playoff team? I had them just missing. I think, I mean, they're doing what they need to do right now, which is to play well right before hopefully some more reinforcements arrive. And obviously playing well despite losing DARTCe Kemper for a little bit. But Charlie Lindgren's really been a self-great pickup for them in the off-season to stabilize that position. But here's the thing.

I don't think there is good as Carolina, and I don't think there is good as Pittsburgh. I don't know if they're as good as the Rangers. I'd probably say they aren't. I think they're probably around the same level as the Islanders, but the real X factor in that division is the devil, like who all of a sudden, despite hitting a bump in the road lately, banked a ton of points in the season. and they look very, very good, and they look like a playoff team. So that changes the math a little bit for the capitals.

And I do wonder, at the end of the day, if the top three spots in that division are locked up, and all of a sudden you're talking about a wild card, we're going to have the Islanders, Rangers, and, you know, teams from the Atlantic Division, all vying for those spots. It may not be, they may get squeezed out, but it won't be for lack of trying. Thank you for doing this, as always. Hope you're well. Happy holidays to you. Anytime. Thanks for having me.

Great job by Greg Wysinski on Ovechkin. And yeah, you know, the caps are not in the playoffs right now. The season, you know, is 10 games away from the halfway mark. And right now they're sitting there in their own division in sixth place with 34 points. But they have won five games in a row. And it's a long season. All right. That's it for today.

Back tomorrow with Tommy.