Lol. This is so manipulated. First of all. Why didn't you count his 2006 and 2007 seasons?? 2nd, why did you set the limit to exactly 10 games and counted 1998 (where he missed exactly 10 games) in the unhealthy category? I mean, if you would've counted all his seasons 1998 would look like one of the more healthy ones. 3rd, the 2004 season is an obvious outlier, as I mentioned previously, since he was so unusually dominant ppg wise before his injury that season that even though his injury in the fall 2003 hurt his ppg badly his season ppg still looks fantastic. It's a little bit the same thing that happened in 2005-06 however that time his ppg dropped off even more significantly after the injury.
First, don't accuse me of manipulating the data. I've been completely transparent about my approach, and have included Forsberg's entire career in Colorado. The numbers are what I've presented. I'm sorry that they don't support your theory.
You can use a different cut-off point (other than ten games) and the conclusion doesn't change much. We can say Forsberg had "unhealthy seasons" (missing 15+ games), "okay seasons" (missing 7-10 games) and "healthy seasons (everything else). His PPG those years are 1.25, 1.30 and 1.27. He has three seasons in each of those categories. You're making a big deal about, again, a 0.02 PPG difference.
Now let's turn to your analysis.
Why did you remove 2004? How is it an "outlier"? That was the season Forsberg tied his career high in points per game, while missing 43 games. The only reason I can see for excluding it is because it contradicts your position (injured season with high PPG).
Why did you remove 1995? It's not like Forsberg started of as, say, Joe Thornton - rushed to the NHL at age 18 while getting barely any ice time. As I'm sure you know, Forsberg was rookie of the year and tied Brett Hull, Joe Nieuwendyk and Sergei Fedorov in scoring that year. The only reason I can see for excluding it is because it contradicts your position (healthy season with low PPG).
Why did I exclude Forberg's time in Philadelphia? Well, in 2006 he scored exactly his career average (1.25 PPG) so regardless of how you choose to categorize that season, it wouldn't materially change the conclusion. By 2007 it was obvious that Forsberg was no longer the same player he used to be.
No matter how you slice the data, any objective review shows that Forsberg's production did not materially change regardless of the number of games he played. The only way to "show" that was the case is to selective exclude seasons that contradict your premise.