Crosby enters the Top 100

Zuluss

Registered User
May 19, 2011
2,450
2,091
How many players in 100 years have multiple Richard wins? Off the top of my head I have

Gretzky
Lemieux
Bure
Crosby
Iginla
Esposito
Ovechkin
Richard
Howe
Stamkos
The hull's

Pretty elite company

Bondra
Selanne
Geoffrion

If we are talking all 100 years, then
Malone
Conacher
Cook
Dye
Hextall
Bentley.

A better question to ask, who on the list has only 2 top5 finishes and 4 top10 finishes. :naughty:

P.S. Also, googling "the worst argument in the world" can explain what is wrong with this list.
 

Zuluss

Registered User
May 19, 2011
2,450
2,091
Crosby career goals/game: .486
Tarasenko career goals/game: .427

But yeah, Tarasenko is totally a better goal scorer than Crosby, just like you're totally objective when talking about Crosby.

Well, yeah, if one values consistency/prime more than peak, these gpg numbers do suggest they are at least very close.
Crosby played a lot in a much higher scoring era, and Tarasenko did not hit the ground running, arriving during the lockout-shortened season with no decent pre-season. And yet their gpg difference pro-rates to 5 goals over 82 games.

It's also asinine to say that Crosby is only going to finish between 500 and 525 goals in his career. He's at 394 already and he's going to be playing for 7 years beyond this year at the absolute minimum (that's the date he keeps giving for a retirement date, at the end of his current contract). Let's say he gets 35 goals this year (completely fair guess), that has him at 417 goals with 7 years left. He needs 12 goals a season to hit 500 goals and 16 goals a season to hit 525 goals. Is it optimistic to say 600? Yeah, but that's a lot closer to reality than 500-525. Even with injuries, he's probably going to be hovering between 25 and 30 goals a season.

We will see in 5-7 years. When I said last January that Crosby was going to finish the season with 39 to 44 goals, nobody believed me too. :)
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,452
79,566
Redmond, WA
Well, yeah, if one values consistency/prime more than peak, these gpg numbers do suggest they are at least very close.
Crosby played a lot in a much higher scoring era, and Tarasenko did not hit the ground running, arriving during the lockout-shortened season with no decent pre-season. And yet their gpg difference pro-rates to 5 goals over 82 games.

A. No, Crosby did not play in a much higher scoring era. The only "much higher scoring era" Crosby played in was his rookie season. Even if you don't include anything before 2013, Crosby's goals/game is still better, with Crosby having a .455 goals/game and Tarasenko having a .427 goals/game.
B. Even if you exclude Tarasenko's first season because of the lockout shortened season (so starting at 2013-2014), Crosby still has a better goals/game than Tarasenko. Crosby is at a .459 goals/game and Tarasenko is at .452 goals/game.

So basically, if you ignore the first 8 seasons of Crosby's career and compare 22-26 year old Tarasenko to 26-30 year old Crosby, you can say they're equal. Sounds like a solid argument. To say that Tarasenko is a better goal scorer, especially if we're talking about Crosby's career, is absolutely baseless. He's a better sniper, but sniper and goal scorer aren't synonymous. He's not even a better goal scorer in his prime than a 30 year old Crosby is today.
 

Zuluss

Registered User
May 19, 2011
2,450
2,091
Tarasenko also never won a Richard, heck, not even "close" to it.

Crosby has two.

You can't put either of these guy ahead of Crosby at this stage.

Lecavalier, Cheechoo, Hejduk, Tkachuk all won a Richard.
Marcel Dionne never did. Go ahead, tell me all of them were better than Dionne at scoring goals. :laugh:

I am not even sure I will buy Bondra over Dionne as a goal-scorer, even though Bondra has two Richards, and Dionne has none.
 

Zuluss

Registered User
May 19, 2011
2,450
2,091
A. No, Crosby did not play in a much higher scoring era. The only "much higher scoring era" Crosby played in was his rookie season.

Well, somehow even in Crosby's 3rd season we had 10 40-goal players and in Crosby's 4th season we had 8.
Two years ago, we had 4, and Tarasenko was one of them. Last year, we had 3, and Tarasenko was 1 goal short.
To me, that's a difference.

B. Even if you exclude Tarasenko's first season because of the lockout shortened season (so starting at 2013-2014), Crosby still has a better goals/game than Tarasenko. Crosby is at a .459 goals/game and Tarasenko is at .452 goals/game.
So basically, if you ignore the first 8 seasons of Crosby's career and compare 22-26 year old Tarasenko to 26-30 year old Crosby, you can say they're equal.

Well, somehow 3 out of 4 top10 finishes in goals in Crosby's career came after 2013. So it is not like the post-2013 window excludes anything beside a lone Richard.
 

Sky04

Registered User
Jan 8, 2009
29,111
18,206
Still pretty underwhelming for how touted he was.

On pace for 35 goals this year... that'd give him 417 goals at the end of this season at age 30.... lets be genorous and say he only plays 8 more years and averages only 25 goals per season that'd finish him at 617 goals at age 38...which would be 17th all time. I mean this is also on top of him being on pace to be top-10 in assists and points all time as well....
 

Zuluss

Registered User
May 19, 2011
2,450
2,091
On pace for 35 goals this year... that'd give him 417 goals at the end of this season at age 30.... lets be genorous and say he only plays 8 more years and averages only 25 goals per season that'd finish him at 617 goals at age 38...which would be 17th all time. I mean this is also on top of him being on pace to be top-10 in assists and points all time as well....

I am a huge OV fan, and even I am not sure Ovechkin will average 25 goals for 8 seasons starting with the next one (which would have him top 800 career goals).
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,967
5,835
Visit site
You forgot Tarasenko. Also Kucherov will most likely pass him by the end of the year (he's 3 behind).

When either player leads the league in goals, you may have a case. And Kucherov is 3 behind what?

Considering Crosby is 2nd in playoff goals (1 behind Malkin) in his era and has the highest playoff run goal total in the last 20 years, he closer to Stamkos and Kovy than he is to anyone below him.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,967
5,835
Visit site
You read posts like satan reads the bible. You cherry picked one line from a long post. A post where I said I tought one SHOULD mention that Crosby was injuried during the years he was when discussing those Art Ross winners. I didn´t doubt Crosbys Richard win last year. Stamkos was referenced as a follow up to the line before. The whole sentence (not just your bolded part...):

"If you are refering to 10/11 and 11/12, I think it´s more than worth mentioning when discussing thoose Art Rosses that one of the favourites was out for more than half the seasons (and in 10/11 led the leauge in PPG as well...). Just like Stamkos injurie is worth mention when talking about Crosbys Richard last year. "

I was referring to 2010/11 and 2012/13. He wins those Art Rosses in a dominant fashion. He had two other seasons where he had the best PPG and one where he was 0.01 behind OV in PPG.

Crosby likely goes down in NHL history as the best player that missed putting up at least one full season at his peak. It is a joke to try to marginalize that in any way.

I am sure that he would choose to finish off his 2010/11 over losing the 2009/10 Rocket to OV.
 

The Grim Reaper

Registered User
Sponsor
Apr 18, 2017
10,804
14,489
Hobart, Tasmania
TIL some posters think Crosby is an average goal scorer.

He's an elite goal scorer, while also simultaneously being an elite playmaker. A rare breed. The best all-around offensive player since probably Jagr.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,967
5,835
Visit site
If you are refering to 10/11 and 11/12, I think it´s more than worth mentioning when discussing thoose Art Rosses that one of the favourites was out for more than half the seasons (and in 10/11 led the leauge in PPG as well...). Just like Stamkos injurie is worth mention when talking about Crosbys Richard last year. That said, I don´t like it when people assume Crosby would win thoose Art Rosses (or Stamkos that Richard...). Crosby had more impressive or equal point producing periods than thoose and lost Art Rosses. So thinking it´s a sure thing even if he didn´t play half the games is jumping to a conclusion. For example he started his 14/15 seasons almost as good as his much talked about 11/12. He had 33 TP after 22 GP (38 during 22 in 11/12...). Had his season ended there many would assume he again would have had a grand season. In reality that 22 sample size period with 1,5 PPG, on road for 123 TP, ended with 1.09 PPG and 84 TP in 77 GP. 51 points in his last 55 games. And no Art Ross. And he could have have won in 14/15 if he played all games. But then of course, Seguin was leading the race when he had that knee injurie... And in the end, I would deem that one to close to challenge. 3 points or less in 5 games for Crosby is not unlikely at all. In fact, that season it happened quite a few times. His lowest being 2 TP in 6 GP. Wich happened during 4 different streteches that season.

Why didn't you choose the season that was closer to his 11/12 season, the 2006/07 season? He was 34 points after 22 games for a 1.55 PPG and finished with a PPG of 1.52.

Or how about the 09/10 season where he was at a PPG after 22 and finished at a 1.35 PPG? Or 15/16 or this year where he has also picked up his pace from the 22 game mark onwards.

Instead you choose a season affected by a completely uncharacteristic mediocre showing. That's cherrypicking at it's finest.
 

feffan

Registered User
Sep 9, 2010
1,949
147
Malmö
Why didn't you choose the season that was closer to his 11/12 season, the 2006/07 season? He was 34 points after 22 games for a 1.55 PPG and finished with a PPG of 1.52.

Or how about the 09/10 season where he was at a PPG after 22 and finished at a 1.35 PPG? Or 15/16 or this year where he has also picked up his pace from the 22 game mark onwards.

Instead you choose a season affected by a completely uncharacteristic mediocre showing. That's cherrypicking at it's finest.

For starters, the 06/07 season is an outlier. And you know that as well as I. The PP-oppurtunities during that season (and the one before...) made players inflated paces doable during that season. It was in no way comparable to 5 years later as a season in the leauge. And your stats actually seem to prove my point. That hot and cold streaks are part of Crosbys game. And everything indicates that he had a hot streak inbedded in both 10/11 and 11/12. As he scored most of his points in short streaks.

Most important, Crosbys outlier/hot 06/07 was during november-december. Had he been injuried after for example his 28th game, he would have had a 1,8 PPG - and the legend for that season would be as for the 10/11 and 15/16. Or similiar after his 47th game, where he would have stood at a 1.7PPG. So even a 47 game sample is to small, as shown. Instead that season had it´s course and ended at a impressive 1.55. But had he been injuried earlier it would be used to suggest he would had scored 140-150 TP in what would have been claimed a aborted peak for him.

So it´s not about the start of the season, as I seemed to have let you believe. It´s about that Crosby (as just about every star player, maybe outside Sundin...) goes on hot streaks as well as cold streaks every season. But they even up in the end.

As shown before, he didn´t even keep that pace over thoose shortended season. In 10/11 most of the "damage" was done in 16-20 out of 41 games that season. The 22 game 11/12 season had him score 12 TP in his last 5GP. Had his season ended before that, his PPG would drop from 1.68 to 1.47. That´s how easy small sample sizes are affected. That´s why we can´t use Crosbys half seasons or less as an indication that he would hace continued that pace during the whole season. Because he never did when healthy, even if he had just as good or greater parts of others seasons. It evens out.

As said before, the 12/13 season is different because he played 12 games less and was 4 points after the Art Ross winner. And Crosby never went 12 games of scoring less than 5 points during 2009-2015. So that one you, as I said in my earlier post, without grapsing for a straw can say that Crosby would have won. That it was a shortend season, and as I see it that makes that Art Ross for St-Louis already having an asterix is another debate.

With the same statistical logic, getting back to the Richard. Peak Ovechkin never between 2005-2011 failed to score at least 2 goals during 10 GP (you can check it yourself if you don´t believe me...). So a sample size out of 475 GP for peak Ovechkin tells us that the Richard would have been his if he had played all games.

But different from the two scenarios above (Crosbys 12/13 Art Ross and Ovechkins 09/10 Richards...) Crosbys 10/11-11/12 seasons can´t be seen as statistics that can be used to draw any conclusions by. Just as we can´t say for sure that Ovechkin would have won the 08/09 Art Ross if he hadn´t went home to visit his ailing grandfather in october, even if he had an marginale better PPG than Malkin with only 3 less GP. Because peak Ovechkins went 3 games without scoring 4 points. So that´s a scenario that´s been proven to go either way.

To sum it up: Crosby has never during a full season kept his PPG pace (06/07 not included for PP-oppurtunities...) that he has had during his shortended season. But during his full seasons he´s had better or as good sample sizes as during his shortend injuried seasons - but never kept the pace. Therefore we can quite sure assume that Crobys wouldn´t had kept his pace during if he stayed healthy during his injuried seasons.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,967
5,835
Visit site
For starters, the 06/07 season is an outlier. And you know that as well as I. The PP-oppurtunities during that season (and the one before...) made players inflated paces doable during that season. It was in no way comparable to 5 years later as a season in the leauge. And your stats actually seem to prove my point. That hot and cold streaks are part of Crosbys game. And everything indicates that he had a hot streak inbedded in both 10/11 and 11/12. As he scored most of his points in short streaks.

Crosby lead the league in PPG five other times, with 2nd and 3rd place finishes being the norm for him. He has one season where he did not finish either Top 3 in points and/or PPG and that's his historic rookie season. How can you position 06/07 as an outlier in his career? There is no justifiable way you can do it.

The # of PP opportunities has zero to do with his ability to lead the league in points. He has the most ES points of his era, he has by far the best ES PPG of his era (0.81 vs. 0.71 for Malkin).

Your spinning is complete BS. We have 811 games that shows exactly where Crosby stands vs. his peers. He is the clear best per game player and is the 2nd highest goalscorer of his era.

If you aren't purposely throwing shit against the wall to see what sticks you might as well be because it looks like you have no idea what you are talking about.
 

BlueBull

Habby Man
Oct 11, 2017
1,698
1,435
Vancouver Island
Bondra
Selanne
Geoffrion

If we are talking all 100 years, then
Malone
Conacher
Cook
Dye
Hextall
Bentley.

A better question to ask, who on the list has only 2 top5 finishes and 4 top10 finishes. :naughty:

P.S. Also, googling "the worst argument in the world" can explain what is wrong with this list.
Did ypu mean the dumbest figh on the internet? There is a video on it and i can look at the locked thread too
 

feffan

Registered User
Sep 9, 2010
1,949
147
Malmö
Crosby lead the league in PPG five other times, with 2nd and 3rd place finishes being the norm for him. He has one season where he did not finish either Top 3 in points and/or PPG and that's his historic rookie season. How can you position 06/07 as an outlier in his career? There is no justifiable way you can do it.

The # of PP opportunities has zero to do with his ability to lead the league in points. He has the most ES points of his era, he has by far the best ES PPG of his era (0.81 vs. 0.71 for Malkin). If you aren't purposely throwing **** against the wall to see what sticks you might as well be because it looks like you have no idea what you are talking about.

You are once again taking one sentence and what seems like deliberately misunderstanding it. I never questioned his ability to lead the leauge in PPG or TP. Stop with accusing me of saying things I never dit! As said before. Get you #### together. I even "gave him" a Art Ross he really haven´t.

The outlier was that during no other full season in his career has he been close to 1.5 PPG. Sio using his PPG that season in any argument is as bad as using a 22 game sample size for a full season estimation. His (and all other 1st PP players...) saw an rise in their PPG during the 05/06 and 06/07 season. The reasons was the amount of PP:s after the lockout. That´s indisputable. Those years are 1st and 7th regarding Power Play Oppurtunites in NHL history. Then there was a huge fell off. Last year it was nearly half of the oppurtunities. That´s why Crosby had 48 PPA that year and his peak after that is 33 followed by 27. Heck. 06/07 Crosby would probably had won the Art Ross in 05/06. Probably scoring around 130TP. But we can´t give him credit for that. Because he wasn´t that player in his rookie season.

Nothing in your reponse had anything to do with my post. So argue against my post. Not what you by reading it for 10 seconds think I said.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,967
5,835
Visit site
The outlier was that during no other full season in his career has he been close to 1.5 PPG. Sio using his PPG that season in any argument is as bad as using a 22 game sample size for a full season estimation. His (and all other 1st PP players...) saw an rise in their PPG during the 05/06 and 06/07 season. The reasons was the amount of PP:s after the lockout. That´s indisputable. Those years are 1st and 7th regarding Power Play Oppurtunites in NHL history. Then there was a huge fell off. Last year it was nearly half of the oppurtunities. That´s why Crosby had 48 PPA that year and his peak after that is 33 followed by 27. Heck. 06/07 Crosby would probably had won the Art Ross in 05/06. Probably scoring around 130TP. But we can´t give him credit for that. Because he wasn´t that player in his rookie season.

Scoring was higher in that season than any since. It doesn't mean it's an outlier, at least in terms of Crosby's ability to lead the league with a clear best PPG.

You are spending a lot of effort to try to make a hypothetical argument that Crosby's Rocket wins are weak. The only other poster (Mr. Semi-decent) who agrees with this premise has been ridiculed.

The irony is that Crosby doesn't necessarily need a strong goalscoring resume to cement his legacy. He is acknowledged as an all around offensive force and player with no weaknesses.
 

feffan

Registered User
Sep 9, 2010
1,949
147
Malmö
Scoring was higher in that season than any since. It doesn't mean it's an outlier, at least in terms of Crosby's ability to lead the league with a clear best PPG.

You are spending a lot of effort to try to make a hypothetical argument that Crosby's Rocket wins are weak. The only other poster (Mr. Semi-decent) who agrees with this premise has been ridiculed.

The irony is that Crosby doesn't necessarily need a strong goalscoring resume to cement his legacy. He is acknowledged as an all around offensive force and player with no weaknesses.

Again. I didn´t attack Crosbys ability to lead the leauge in points. He can do that. He can also not do that. Bought things has happened. It was you who brought up Crosbys "missed" Art Rosses. Not me. And thoose short seasons can´t be used to assume he would lead thoose seasons in PPG.

And I never called his Richards weak. I said that context is needed for any trophy. Just as St-Louis Art Ross win needs an explanation that Sidney was only a few points after with 12 games less, Crosbys first
Richard needs an explanation about Ovechkins missed games that season. And even if Crosby had lost that Richard to Ovechkin it wouldn´t have been a weak scoring year for Crosby. Crosby would and still is a great goal scorer. It´s that you use his shortened injurie seasons as "missed Art Rosses" that is what I´ve disputed. Something YOU brought up. Not me. And I´ve shown with statistics that you have not replied to that "giving" Crosby Art Rosse when he played 22 and 41 games ain´t nearly the same thing as Ovechkin being 1 goal behind with 9 less games than Crosby and preusmable winning it if he played as many games. You are twisting my words to that I seem to be anti-Crosby. That´s not true at all. He has overall been the best player in the leauge since Ovechkins reign ended in 2010.

There´s no irony. Just you as it seems deliberate misunderstanding me. I´ve never even used the word "weak" in this debate. So once again. STOP with making up things about my posts and insinuating I said things I didn´t. I answered to the point that "Winning a rocket is winning a rocket." It was that statement alone I answered too. Then you brought in Art Rosses.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad