Morgoth Bauglir
Master Of The Fates Of Arda
Could Crosby have won the Art Ross running away two of the past three years if not for injuries?
Could haves are irreverent. You either did or you didn't.
Could Crosby have won the Art Ross running away two of the past three years if not for injuries?
Could haves are irreverent. You either did or you didn't.
I think context is needed in these discussions except the OP wants to focus on numbers only. And numbers only, it's Crosby.
That being said, do you think that Jagr could have put up the second best 18 year old season in NHL history or put up historic numbers in his second year like Crosby?
Could Crosby have won the Art Ross running away two of the past three years if not for injuries?
Answer to your first question is no. I don't think Jagr could have put forth the same 18-year rookie season Crosby did. There is effectively one player in the history of this sport who could match up with that season. But he played in different league.
Second question is not as important. I am well aware of the exploits of Crosby in the past few years. The question right now isn't if he would have won the scoring race without injuries.
The real question is: how much value does Crosby's partial, albeit offensively superior, seasons account for. Nobody here is stupid. We know Crosby was the easy PPG leader in those seasons. We are just trying to put the right value to go along those seasons. Just like you see, it's not an easy thing to do.
Could haves are irreverent. You either did or you didn't.
I've never suggested using this as a variable in the comparison. Per game impact it's Crosby. You want to even things out with the injury angle, fine.
IMO, if Crosby puts up a dominant PPG this year and plays 70+ games, the injury card gets put away.
Just like Jagr could have produced better in his first 3 years if he got more minutes, wasn't European etc..but didn't.
Just like Jagr didn't produce in his first 3 years.
Just like Jagr could have produced better in his first 3 years if he got more minutes, wasn't European etc..but didn't.
For any game that has a recap on NHL.com, there's a 3 stars section. While game results are listed as far back as '97/98 or something, I think the recap/boxscores are only available right now from about '99/00 onward. I can tell you that Thornton, Laaksonen, and Heinze were the three stars in Pittsburgh's last game of the '99/00 season against Boston.
Funny, but no one is holding up Jagr's first three seasons as "could haves". On the other hand, every case being made for the Crosby's last three seasons are built on a mountain of "could haves".
I haven't been using "what if" scenarios in the comparison. Most posters agree that Crosby was better on a per game basis over the 8 years.
I haven't been using "what if" scenarios in the comparison. Most posters agree that Crosby was better on a per game basis over the 8 years.
OK then. Let us completely leave out Crosby's PPG and Jagr's problems with Euro/US?
I think context is needed in these discussions except the OP wants to focus on numbers only. And numbers only, it's Crosby.
That being said, do you think that Jagr could have put up the second best 18 year old season in NHL history or put up historic numbers in his second year like Crosby?
Could Crosby have won the Art Ross running away two of the past three years if not for injuries?
Change "impossible to verify or refute" to "incredibly time consuming and not really worth the effort."
Well, I think it's rubbish to say that Crosby entered the league as a good defensive player who was any better without the puck than those two. He developed his defensive game sometime between his actual Hart season in 2006-07 and the season when he should have won in 2009-10.
I haven't been using "what if" scenarios in the comparison. Most posters agree that Crosby was better on a per game basis over the 8 years.
He was PPG his 2nd year and had 94 points in his 3rd year.
What do you mean leave out Crosby's PPG? Why isn't it relevant? Don't make me go to Mario again.
A PER game basis. Crosby only plays about 75% of a season. Is he 20% more dominant than Jagr? Would you rather have 78 games a year of Jagr or 60 of Sid?
So more overall production > superior per game impact?
So more overall production > superior per game impact?
saintpatrick said to you that could haves are irrelevant. The things you did only matter. Remember what you response to it was?
"Just like Jagr could have produced better in his first 3 years if he got more minutes, wasn't European etc..but didn't."
Now, if Jagr adapting in the NHL doesn't matter, why should Crosby's projected point finishes matter? Just saying.
Both players had superior per game performances, right?
Mario produced better than the other guys I mentioned when he wasn't injured.
Crosby produced better than Jagr when he wasn't injured.
I don't see a difference.
Wasn't last year a monster season for Crosby despite his injury?
Actually there is quite a difference between Mario and Sid.
Sid plays a 2 way game while Mario had to put up video game numbers to avoid being a liability at ES.