I do understand your point, and agree to a certain degree. I'd rather compare Lindros to Neely. Neely retired due to injuries in the prime of his career, and was remembered as an all-time great and was elected into the hall of fame. Lindros had better numbers than neely before the Stevens hit in 2000, but chose to keep on playing. Subsequently, his numbers have gone down and people seem to forget how great he was in the 90s. In fact, very few people still consider Lindros to be a "hall of fame" candidate.
Why are we punishing Lindros for getting back up from terrible injuries and continuing his career against most odds, but we reward Neely for retiring and not giving it a shot? Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to understate the condition neely was in, nor am I saying that there was any chance in the world that another human being could play with his injuries, but I still find it rediculous that Lindros, based on what happened to neely, would probably have gotten into the hall of fame had he retired in 01, but now there's practically no shot b/c, instead of throwing in the towel, he decided to continue his career at a lesser level of ability.
Players shouldn't be punished for getting back up.