Crosby vs. other former top prospects

Discussion in 'NHL Draft - Prospects' started by Big Phil, Aug 5, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Big Phil

    Big Phil Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2003
    Messages:
    26,992
    Likes Received:
    279
    Trophy Points:
    154
    Just comparing Sidney Crosby to other top fromer prospects. I know its been done to death but with all of the bashers he has around right now I thought I'd do a little analysis.

    Crosby numbers in his draft year:
    66g 102a 168 points

    Compare this to other former high draft picks who are very good players in the NHL right now, or were or will be. This was their draft year stats

    Thornton 41g 81a 122 points
    Lecavalier 44g 71a 115 points
    Spezza 43g 73a 116 points
    Marleau 51g 74a 125 points
    Lindros 71g 78a 149 points

    Now we all know how good Thornton is in the NHL. Many would say he's the best centre in the game. He's already been a Second Team all-star in '03. Lecavalier you could argue is the most talented player in the NHL, and was the World Cup MVP, and already a Stanley Cup champion. He could put up 100 points this year. Spezza will always be a great playmaker, and Marleau is well on his way to having an even better career with SJ. Lindros, well we all know how good he was.

    But to me with the exception of Lindros, Crosby outperformed all of those guys at the same age by 50%, at least production wise. The only thing I can think is that all of those guys are at least 6'2". But Crosby makes up for it with his strength.

    So why is it that so many guys are doubting him already. When you compare him to some pretty good names he's about 50% bette than them. What gives?
     
  2. Skrymir

    Skrymir Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2002
    Messages:
    3,163
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    132
    Location:
    Ottawa
    Home Page:
    Lets not forget another top prospect out of the Q dubbed the next Gretzky.

    ALEXANDRE DAIGLE

    53 GP 45 G 92 A 137 PTS (9 less games than Crosby)

    The expectations on Daigle are quite similar to those on Crosby. The style of play and attitude of each player is quite different, but no draft pick is ever a sure thing.
     
  3. JayRice66

    JayRice66 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Water Treatment Operator
    Location:
    Wheeling, WV
    Alot of people are bitter because he is not on there team. The guy has talents that even Lecavalier and Thornton now can't match. There great players, but in the end, I believe Crosby will surpass even them.
     
  4. JayRice66

    JayRice66 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Water Treatment Operator
    Location:
    Wheeling, WV
    Daigle was far from being Crosby. Daigle was a good junior player. But the guy didn't have no where near the talent that Crosby did. Daigle was horrible when it came to seeing the damn ice. The guy was almost blind at times. I'm not saying Crosby is a sure thing. But Daigle he is not.
     
  5. Hedberg

    Hedberg MLD Glue Guy

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    16,397
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    116
    Location:
    BC, Canada
    The impressive thing about the stats is the CHL has gotten more defensive since guys like Lindros and Daigle played and he outscored them
     
  6. Jacob

    Jacob Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    41,590
    Likes Received:
    2,162
    Trophy Points:
    235
    Home Page:
    What were Daigle's numbers like in the WJCs and in the QMJHL playoffs? Just out of curiosity.
     
  7. Big McLargehuge

    Big McLargehuge 12

    Joined:
    May 9, 2002
    Messages:
    68,522
    Likes Received:
    672
    Trophy Points:
    215
    Location:
    S. Pasadena, CA
    Daigle had a ton of talent, but lacked any vision at all. That's probably Crosby's strongest aspect.
     
  8. jcoldwell

    jcoldwell Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    1,070
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Big Phil, you mentioned guys that weren't compared to Gretzky at all. Yes Lindros was the next one but we know what happened. I think it is unfair to compare anyone to Gretzky, Lemieux, and other greats as there is only one of a kind.

    If we want to compare stats to the last year the player played Junior then lets see some others to compare to.

    Wayne Gretzky (1977-78) 64gp 70g 112a 182pts 14pims
    Mario Lemieux (1983-84) 70gp 133g 149a 282pts 92pims
    Steve Yzerman (1982-83) 56gp 42g 49a 91pts 33pims
    Pat LaFontaine (1982-83) 70gp 104g 130a 234pts 10pims

    So to me, Crosby is his own player and shouldn't be compared the the other greats in the game. Let him make his own mark in the league.
     
  9. JeffW

    JeffW Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2005
    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That blows my mind every time I see it. :eek:
     
  10. Vincent_TheGreat

    Vincent_TheGreat Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    6,128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Ontario
    Home Page:
    Just for reference you should always include games played, it can make a huge difference.

    Crosby 62gp 66g 102a 168 points

    Thornton 59gp 41g 81a 122 points
    Lecavalier 58gp 44g 71a 115 points
    Spezza 56gp 43g 73a 116 points
    Marleau 71gp 51g 74a 125 points
    Lindros 57gp 71g 78a 149 points

    A few points;
    -Thornton was not even the top scorer on his team, but plays in a tougher league and in a time when scoring was up.
    -Lecavalier had an off year and if not for an amazing playoff performance with a fractured ankle may have gone 2nd overall.
    -Spezza was in his 3rd year, thats a big advantage period. He was not considered dominate but still a special talent.
    -Marleau played the most games of any prospect by far and in arguably the toughest of the 3 leagues. He was also inconsistent.
    -Lindros was the man, in a tough league, he dominated.
    -Crosby dominated the Q. He was the most dominant player offensively. Low scoring period, but high scoring league.

    Most Pure talent - Lecavalier
    Best Skater - Marleau
    Best Shot - Lindros
    Best Passer - Thornton
    Best stickhandler - Lecavalier
    Most Offensive - Crosby
    Most Defensive - Crosby
    Most Physical - Lindros
    Most NHL ready - Lindros
    Most dominant - Lindros
    Most Consistent - Crosby
    Least Consistent - Marleau
    Most hyped(draft year only) - Crosby, Lindros, Lecavalier, Spezza, Thornton
     
  11. GnomE

    GnomE Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2005
    Messages:
    280
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    A long time ago, someone did an analysis comparing Crosby's and Lemieux's stats during their junior careers. Factoring in goals per game, it was proved that Crosby had more impressive stats and a better junior career. Mind you, however, it doesn't mean that Crosby is a more impressive prospect than Lemieux was.
     
  12. WhiskeyYourTheDevils

    WhiskeyYourTheDevils yer leadin me astray Sponsor

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2005
    Messages:
    17,584
    Likes Received:
    1,310
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Strategy / Analytics
    Location:
    Raleigh, NC
    how can you say that? Crosby led the league in scoring by 52 points, lindros led it by 21.
    2004-2005 top 10 points in QMJHL
    1 Sidney Crosby, Rimouski..........168
    2 Dany Roussin, Rimouski...........116
    3 Marc-Antoine Pouliot, Rimouski...114
    4 Maxime Boisclair, Chicoutimi.....108
    5 David Desharnais, Chicoutimi..... 97
    6 Stanislav Lascek, Chicoutimi..... 90
    7 Alex Bourret, Lewiston........... 86
    8 Alexandre Picard, Lewiston....... 85
    8 Josh Hennessy, Quebec............ 85
    10 Philippe Dupuis, Rouyn-Noranda... 84
    10 Brent Aubin, Rouyn-Noranda....... 84

    1990-1991 top 10 scorers OHL
    1 Eric Lindros, Oshawa.............149
    2 Chris Taylor, London.............128
    3 Todd Simon, Niagara Falls........125
    4 Jason Winch, Niagara Falls.......122
    5 Rob Pearson, 2 teams.............118
    6 Jason Firth, Kitchener...........112
    7 Joey St. Aubin, Kitchener........111
    7 Brett Seguin, Ottawa.............111
    9 Jason Cirone, 2 teams............110
    10 Jarrod Skalde, 2 teams...........104

    Crosby was DEFINITELY more dominant on the scoreboard. Unless you are saying lindros dominated by means of physicality, then your right. But if you ask anyone who knows junior hockey, they will tell you that Sidney Crosby was harder to contain and stop, the numbers prove that. If Lindros was more dominant, then how come he was contained easier than crosby?
     
  13. Vincent_TheGreat

    Vincent_TheGreat Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    6,128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Ontario
    Home Page:

    Yes I meant dominant as overall, not just scoring, thats why I had most offensive and defensive seperately! So in that respect Lindros was more dominant, but Crosby was more dominant scoring hence Crosby ranked as most offensive.
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2005
  14. Vlad The Impaler

    Vlad The Impaler Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    11,984
    Likes Received:
    94
    Trophy Points:
    176
    Location:
    Montreal
    Well, you said it yourself. Big difference between the scoreboard and the guys on the ice.

    Crosby can and has been contained by 3rd pairing Q Ds and German hacks.

    Lindros against his peers just looked totally out of place. His dominance extends beyond scoring. His numbers alone do not justify the type of prospect he is. None of the numbers here do. You didn't fear Eric Lindros solely on the fact he could score on you.

    In fact, I don't even know why I am participating to this thread, since it's based on a premise (stats alone) that is completely ******ed,
     
  15. Vincent_TheGreat

    Vincent_TheGreat Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    6,128
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Ontario
    Home Page:
    Well obviously its not great to go on stats alone, but it seems thats how thee original poster wanted to do things.
     
  16. Crosbyfan

    Crosbyfan Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2003
    Messages:
    10,497
    Likes Received:
    92
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Stats are still facts, whereas anecdotal evidence is only as good as the storyteller and his sources. Lindros is better remembered as he was at 18, where he excelled against NHL and International players at the Olympics and Canada Cup, than at 17. At 18 Lindros IMO was easily one of the top 50 players in the World on a tournament basis. How well would he have done with an NHL schedule?

    Sid has not proven himself at that level, although he hasn't had the chance yet and as of today he is still 17.

    He has proven that at 17 he's more successful than Lindros was at 17 in Junior.
    If he's half as successful as Lindros was at 18 he will be well on his way to a successful career.

    Could he be more successful at 18 than Lindros was? Who knows, but I think he could.if the thugs don't get him. Eric didn't have to play an 80 game NHL schedule at 18, physically dominant as he was he may not have been ready. (not that anyone is ever ready for the cheapshots to the head that are allowed in hockey)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"