Sidney vs Mario

[tom_servo]

Thanks for clearing that up! Crosby is now for sure better than Lemieux.

I look more at Brad Richards 180 point season and Simon Gamache's 185 point season to measure how good Crosby will be.

What? Both players were 20 years old when they put up those numbers. Try comparing apples to apples.

 

[pei fan]

What is with this ridiculous formatting, anyway?

Ever heard of wordwrap?

I'm not sure what caused that but it's fine now.No, I don't know what word wrap is.

 

[pei fan]

What? Both players were 20 years old when they put up those numbers. Try comparing apples to apples.

Actually I think Richards was 19. Gamanche ,I don't know.But your basic premise is right.

 

[Hug Ben Laf]

What? Both players were 20 years old when they put up those numbers. Try comparing apples to apples.

BINGO! Well said, well said.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Thanks for clearing that up! Crosby is now for sure better than Lemieux.

That was really what I meant. Bravo !

I look more at Brad Richards 180 point season and Simon Gamache's 185 point season to measure how good Crosby will be.

Btw, Richards' 186 pts season was also his 18-19 year old season and Gamache's 184 pts season was his 19-20 year old season.

But keep comparing Crosby's undrafted seasons to seasons from drafted players if that makes you happy. It has very little credibility or relevance though.

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

That was really what I meant. Bravo !



Btw, Richards' 186 pts season was also his 18-19 year old season and Gamache's 184 pts season was also his 18-19 year old season.

But keep comparing Crosby's undrafted seasons to seasons from drafted players if that makes you happy. It has very little credibility or relevance though.

Well it just goes to show you that these guys were only a year or two older and they outproduced Crosby (by quite a bit). Pretty meaningful if you ask me.

 

[pei fan]

Well it just goes to show you that these guys were only a year or two older and they outproduced Crosby (by quite a bit). Pretty meaningful if you ask me.

Actually I think it's 2 and 3 years older as was already pointed out and even
as recently as those players the scoring was still higher than it is now.Labonte
coached both Richards and Crosby and he thinks Crosby is better than Richards
now.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Thanks to the people who understand what I was getting at. I was wondering, statistically, how Crosby compared to the other top picks from the QMJHL. After looking into it a little, it seemed that the only player that dominated at the level Crosby did this season, was Lemieux. I am glad to see that some people understood I was only comparing them at the junior level and not looking at potential.

I love a good statistical analysis. Yours was very interesting and is appreciated. However, it's stuff like this that makes it a little controversial, IMO.

So looking purely on stats, Crosby's 2005 season seems to be very similar to that of Lemieux's 1984 season. They match up almost in every category. If anything, this proves that Crosby does have the potential to be mentioned in the same breath as other greats such as Gretzky or Lemieux.

It's rather vague, it doesn't tell me much and on first impression, if it means what I think it means, I completely disagree.

Looking purely on stats, what this proves is that they had amazing offensive output and that based on one way to balance both eras, we could find their offensive output to be very similar. That's pretty much all it proves.

I've never had a problem with statistics. It's in the conclusions that I often find that they are a problem.

Still, I liked yours, so thanks!

 

[Cole Caulifield]

Well it just goes to show you that these guys were only a year or two older and they outproduced Crosby (by quite a bit). Pretty meaningful if you ask me.

I really have no idea what you're trying to prove here. There's a world of difference between Richards and Gamache. Are you trying to say Crosby will end up somewhere between that ?

Can't people have rational opinions when Crosby is involved ?

To some he compares unfavorably to guys like Gamache.

To others he'll be better than Lemieux and it would be a disapointment if he ended up "only" as good as Yzerman.

But it's my mistake. I'll now forever stay away from any threads involving Crosby. They fill up with haters and delusional Crosby worshippers.

 

[Le Golie]

I really have no idea what you're trying to prove here. There's a world of difference between Richards and Gamache. Are you trying to say Crosby will end up somewhere between that ?

Can't people have rational opinions when Crosby is involved ?

To some he compares unfavorably to guys like Gamache.

To others he'll be better than Lemieux and it would be a disapointment if he ended up "only" as good as Yzerman.

But it's my mistake. I'll now forever stay away from any threads involving Crosby. They fill up with haters and delusional Crosby worshippers.

You'll be back.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

You'll be back.

Maybe

D'oh !

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

I think Crosby will be a mix of Richards/Lecavalier in the NHL, I dont know where you got the idea that I think he's Gamache-like...

 

[pei fan]

I really have no idea what you're trying to prove here. There's a world of difference between Richards and Gamache. Are you trying to say Crosby will end up somewhere between that ?

Can't people have rational opinions when Crosby is involved ?

To some he compares unfavorably to guys like Gamache.

To others he'll be better than Lemieux and it would be a disapointment if he ended up "only" as good as Yzerman.

But it's my mistake. I'll now forever stay away from any threads involving Crosby. They fill up with haters and delusional Crosby worshippers.

I just love how some of you guys change the facts.What I said was why would Yzerman be his upside potential when Yzerman was never the dominant player of
his generation and never one a single scoring race.There is nothing delusional in
thinking that if all goes well Sidney has the potential to be dominant in the NHL.
What is delusional is thinking Yzerman is in the same class as Howe,Richard and
Beliveau.

 

[tom_servo]

Well it just goes to show you that these guys were only a year or two older and they outproduced Crosby (by quite a bit). Pretty meaningful if you ask me.

NHL scout --->

So meaningful that after Gamache put up 143 points, he was selected in the ninth round.

 

[Masao]

I would be more than happy if Crosby turns out like a healthy Forsberg.

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

NHL scout --->

So meaningful that after Gamache put up 143 points, he was selected in the ninth round.

And for good reason. Gamache isn't an NHL player. Did I compare Crosby to Gamache? No, I was looking at stats.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

And for good reason. Gamache isn't an NHL player. Did I compare Crosby to Gamache? No, I was looking at stats.

It boggles the mind what you were trying to accomplish when you said you thought Gamache's and Richards' stats were very significant when compared to Crosby's. You can only blame yourself for that.

 

[markov`]

I wanted to see how Sidney Crosby stacked up against the greatest player to ever come out of the QMJHL. Crosby is being hyped as the best player since Lemieux so I wanted to take a statistical look at their draft seasons.

Mario Lemieux 1.90 GPG 2.13 APG 4.03 PPG
Sidney Crosby 1.06 GPG 1.65 APG 2.71 PPG

Clearly, there is a difference, but the QMJHL was averaging 5.01 goals per team in 1984 compared to 3.19 this season. Therefore, lets convert Lemieux's stats, as if the average goals per team was the same as 2005.

Mario Lemieux 1.21 GPG 1.35 APG 2.56 PPG
Sidney Crosby 1.06 GPG 1.65 APG 2.71 PPG

Therefore, Crosby actually ends up with a higher PPG than Lemieux. Lemieux seems to be the better goal scorer, while Crosby racks up more assists.

The next item I wanted to look at was the goals per game of their individual team versus the league average. The number is the ratio of this.

Rimouski 2005 1.49
Laval 1984 1.50

Therefore, you could argue that both teams were about even in scoring in relation to the rest of the league.

The next item of interest is their production in relation to their team.

Mario Lemieux Goals: 25 % Assists: 17 % Points: 20 %
Sidney Crosby Goals: 20 % Assists: 18 % Points: 19 %

They both accounted for about the same amount of their team's production. Lemieux accounted for more of his teams scoring than Crosby. This along with the higher GPG seems to show, as expected, that Lemieux is a more natural goal scorer than Crosby.

The last item, I wanted to look at was how much better they were in PPG in relation to the next highest scorer on the team.

Mario Lemieux 1.47
Sidney Crosby 1.61

Crosby has a slight lead in this department but nothing significant.

So looking purely on stats, Crosby's 2005 season seems to be very similar to that of Lemieux's 1984 season. They match up almost in every category. If anything, this proves that Crosby does have the potential to be mentioned in the same breath as other greats such as Gretzky or Lemieux. Whether, he does or does not is yet to be seen.

For those people interested this is how other high draft picks from the QMJHL match up using the converted PPG:

Pat LaFontaine 1.97
Alexandre Daigle 1.87
Dale Hawerchuk 1.72
Vincent Lecavalier 1.70
Pierre Turgeon 1.64
Denis Savard 1.57

The best part is, you're comparing their draft years, but you forgot that back then players were picked one year older. So basically, you're comparing Lemieux 18 years old season to Crosby 17 years old season.

As a junior player, statistic are showing that Crosby has definitely more impact than Mario at the same age. He won't break his records because he won't be in the QMJHL at 18.

 

[Lionel Hutz]

This thread is exactly why I love HF boards.

 

[Blue Bullet]

Thanks for all the input. I knew about the Crosby and Lemieux age difference when i was doing it. One problem when comparing a draft year of one player to one that is not is that a player may take it up a notch in their draft year. I'm not saying that's the case, in this situation, but I believe that a player will give that extra little bit when being scouted.

Another reason is that, I wonder whether Crosby will put up better numbers if he played in the Q as an 18 yr old. If he did come back and play at 18 I could see his PPG dropping slightly similar to Jason Spezza but that's all hypothetical.

 

[Blue Bullet]

It's rather vague, it doesn't tell me much and on first impression, if it means what I think it means, I completely disagree.

Looking purely on stats, what this proves is that they had amazing offensive output and that based on one way to balance both eras, we could find their offensive output to be very similar. That's pretty much all it proves.

I've never had a problem with statistics. It's in the conclusions that I often find that they are a problem.

Still, I liked yours, so thanks!

I agree with your conclusion. I totally messed up what I meant to say there. What I was wanting to refer to is that you could justify the hype and buzz that Crosby may be the next one while other highly touted first overall picks like Daigle or Lecavelier were a step below. That was sort of the point of this whole thing was to see how impressive Crosby is at the junior level.

 

[tom_servo]

And for good reason. Gamache isn't an NHL player. Did I compare Crosby to Gamache? No, I was looking at stats.

You were comparing stats, arriving at the conclusion that Gamache's and Richards' totals during those particular seasons were meaningful in appraising Crosby's NHL chances, when they clearly aren't. So, no, you weren't just looking at stats.

 

[Hadoop]

Pat LaFontaine 1.97
Alexandre Daigle 1.87
Dale Hawerchuk 1.72
Vincent Lecavalier 1.70
Pierre Turgeon 1.64
Denis Savard 1.57

As someone else mentioned I think the more notable conclusion of this poster's analysis is how MASSIVELY Daigle underachieved in the NHL.

 

[tom_servo]

As someone else mentioned I think the more notable conclusion of this poster's analysis is how MASSIVELY Daigle underachieved in the NHL.

And regarding this group of players, he's the exception to the rule, no?

 

[CRUNK JUICE]

I've stands all I can stands, I can't stands no more. I've heard enough of this B.S. Mark this post, put it in the archives and save it in the highly unlikely event that I'm wrong so you can throw it back in my face. I'm DARING you to do so: Sidney Crosby will never be the calibre of player that Mario Lemieux was during his prime. NEVER. He is an extremely talented young man, gifted with incredible vision among other amazing skills, whom I personally feel will be a superstar somewhere around the level of Forsberg, Trottier, or maybe even Bobby Hull or Mark Messier (not comparing playing styles, just their level of impact on the game) during their primes.

And that's without the aid of my crystal ball, thank you very much.