Had been no lockout in 2012-13, does Crosby win the Art Ross despite injury?

TheGuiminator

I’ll be damned King, I’ll be damned
Oct 23, 2018
1,971
1,654
With an 82 games schedule instead of 48 in 2012-13, do you think Crosby walks out with the Art Ross despite missing 25% of the season ?

Crosby put up 56 point in 36 games, missing 25% of the season. In a full season of 82 games, it translates to 96 points in ≃62 games.

You had St.Louis who was pacing for 102 points, but considering he was 37, it’s safe to say that his offensive production would’ve likely decrease and probably finished around 88-92-ish points over a full season. Then, you had Stamkos, Kane and Ovechkin who were pushing for the scoring title with a pacing of 97, 96 and 96 points respectively.

Now the question is : which player in the mix maintain, decrease or increase their pacing over a full season? Does it give Crosby a better chance to create a gap or do his peers have an even bigger advantage on him over a full season?
 

Video Nasty

Registered User
Mar 12, 2017
4,564
7,839
It’s possible but he could easily have still lost out on the Art Ross like most of his other healthy seasons.

The only thing I know for sure is that Crosby was unlikely to keep up his pace since he rarely did in full seasons past 2009-2010. So he wasn’t going to continue his pace which was already taking a hit in the lockout year. People clearly forget he had 45 points in his first 26 games. So if he was injured earlier, we would have more outlandish projections about how he was pacing for 140 points if it was a full 82 game year...even though he played 10 games beyond and put up only 11 points more.

Just one season later, at age 26, yes he won the Art Ross, but what did his scoring look like once he got up past half a season of games played? 37 points in his final 34 games after putting up 67 in his first 46. Again, if he got injured after 46 games, there would be those lamenting how he would have scored 120 points if healthy. Yet in reality he scored 104.

The point is, Crosby has never earned these benefits of the doubt. He has won two scoring titles and never won one while missing significant time ala Lemieux and Jagr.

I don’t see why St. Louis and Stamkos couldn’t have continued putting up points. Or even Ovechkin. I took a look at his game log and he played awesome, putting up 32 points in his final 18 games of the season (or to go back further, he started slow with 10 in his first 16 games, so he piled up 46 in his final 32). Maybe Crosby does win it, but that “lost” Art Ross is hardly the slam dunk fans make it out to be.
 
Last edited:

blogofmike

Registered User
Dec 16, 2010
2,178
926
Yes easily. Even if he came back 2 games earlier he would have won

Doesn't that make it more likely to have won over a 48 game year rather than 82? The shorter the season, the better his shot.

Also there's no telling how high Kane can push his point total if he gets to play the SE division too. Because of this, Kane is the only one in the top 5 who seems like he might benefit from an 82 game season. Kane's PPG might be the only one expected to go up of Kane, Crosby, MSL, Stamkos and Ovechkin.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kyle McMahon

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,078
14,589
He was back at the start of playoffs wasn't he? Which means that over 82 games, he'd likely have missed 12-13 games total only. Not 20. 25% of 48 games isn't 25% of 82 games.

So yes - assuming he misses only 12-13 games total, i'd say he would for sure have won the Art Ross. If he missed ~20 games? That's a lot harder. It's not impossible, since he was playing so well - but certainly no guarantee.
 

bambamcam4ever

107 and counting
Feb 16, 2012
14,303
6,344
He was back at the start of playoffs wasn't he? Which means that over 82 games, he'd likely have missed 12-13 games total only. Not 20. 25% of 48 games isn't 25% of 82 games.

So yes - assuming he misses only 12-13 games total, i'd say he would for sure have won the Art Ross. If he missed ~20 games? That's a lot harder. It's not impossible, since he was playing so well - but certainly no guarantee.
He came back game 2 of the playoffs, missing 13 games total. Keep in mind though that due to the shortened season the games weren't spaced as far apart as a normal season.
 

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,078
14,589
I don’t see why St. Louis and Stamkos couldn’t have continued putting up points. Or even Ovechkin. I took a look at his game log and he played awesome, putting up 32 points in his final 18 games of the season (or to go back further, he started slow with 10 in his first 16 games, so he piled up 46 in his final 32). Maybe Crosby does win it, but that “lost” Art Ross is hardly the slam dunk fans make it out to be.

I think typically the talk is "if he wasn't injured...." ....he'd have easily won the ross. No issue with that, or do you even disagree there? Because if he played the full 48 games, it seems pretty certain.

Both 2013 and 2011 would have been slam dunks had he played full seasons.

The debate around 2011 is more around if he'd have maintained his ~130 point pace or not. The Art Ross was won at 104 points. Nothing is ever 100%, but you can't get quite more 99.9% than that imo
 

Kyle McMahon

Registered User
May 10, 2006
13,301
4,352
I think typically the talk is "if he wasn't injured...." ....he'd have easily won the ross. No issue with that, or do you even disagree there? Because if he played the full 48 games, it seems pretty certain.

Both 2013 and 2011 would have been slam dunks had he played full seasons.

The debate around 2011 is more around if he'd have maintained his ~130 point pace or not. The Art Ross was won at 104 points. Nothing is ever 100%, but you can't get quite more 99.9% than that imo

I don't know if 2011 is quite that certain. McDavid was on pace for 130 points halfway through this season, but even before missing a handful of games, he was only tracking for maybe 110-115 at the point of his injury. That handful of missed games almost certainly has cost him the Art Ross now. Not an implausible scenario for 2011 (unless it comes with the qualifier that he indeed plays all 82 games).
 

FinProspects

Registered User
Sep 15, 2007
1,660
222
Assuming that half year was actually a full year and Sid being healthy is just too much of a speculation and different unrealistic scenarios.

I can also assure you that Sid would have taken a longer time to come back if it was just regular season.

Lets rather discuss on the actual full seasons where Sid missed time:)
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
Speculation that Crosby wins more Art Rosses really has no relevance to his all-time historical rating; it only serves to open the door to unnecessary subjective opinion.
 

TheGuiminator

I’ll be damned King, I’ll be damned
Oct 23, 2018
1,971
1,654
He was back at the start of playoffs wasn't he? Which means that over 82 games, he'd likely have missed 12-13 games total only. Not 20. 25% of 48 games isn't 25% of 82 games.

So yes - assuming he misses only 12-13 games total, i'd say he would for sure have won the Art Ross. If he missed ~20 games? That's a lot harder. It's not impossible, since he was playing so well - but certainly no guarantee.

They probably rushed his return back in 12-13 because of playoffs, so we don’t know exactly how many games he would’ve missed over a full season, but it’s very possible that he takes the remaining 15-20 games to fully recover.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobholly39

bobholly39

Registered User
Mar 10, 2013
22,078
14,589
I don't know if 2011 is quite that certain. McDavid was on pace for 130 points halfway through this season, but even before missing a handful of games, he was only tracking for maybe 110-115 at the point of his injury. That handful of missed games almost certainly has cost him the Art Ross now. Not an implausible scenario for 2011 (unless it comes with the qualifier that he indeed plays all 82 games).

Not sure I 100% understand what you're saying. I said, both 2013 and 2011 would be slam dunks Ross wins for Crosby if he played full season. So in 2013, if he wasn't injured with 12 games to go - he wouldn't have all of a sudden scored less than 4 points in remaining 12 games to lose out the art Ross. Pretty slam dunk. In 2011 - at the 41 game mark, he was on pace for ~130 points. The Ross was won with only 104 points. It's obviously no guarantee Crosby maintains his pace and has a flagship season of ~130 points - but I think that assuming he scores enough to top 104 points total and win the Art Ross seems pretty "slam dunk" to me. This season with McDavid isn't the best analogy - since it's a much higher scoring years - and many players have been pacing all year for 115-120+, even 130+ points.

Since we're on the topic of hypotheticals - I feel as though the bigger hypothetical are looking at both of Ovi and Malkin's flagship seasons, 2008 and 2012, and wondering about those Ross Trophies.

In 2008 - could Crosby have won the Ross? His ppg wasn't even higher than Ovi (slightly behind). Clearly i'm not saying "he for sure wins the Ross in a full season" - no. But considering how good he was at scoring points the previous year, and that very year, and considering his ppg was super slightly behind Ovi - in a full 82 game season I think there's definitely a possibility he wins out the Ross. Maybe 25% chance. Clearly - he wouldn't touch Ovi's hart.

In 2012 - it's less about prorating his ppg (in only 22 games) over a full 82 games and seeing by how much he outscores Malkin - then it is simply about considering how much better than anyone else in the league he was at scoring points in 2011, in 2012 and in 2013 - clearly he was at his best (better than Malkin by far in surrounding seasons). Had he played a full season - a season of 120+ points certainly seems a possibility. Let's say a 50% chance for the Ross that season, being conservative.
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
With the lockout? Yes, he basically just shows up at the NHL awards and takes everything. The Hart, Art Ross, Lindsay, etc. He was running circles around the pack that year in the NHL. But over a full season with his injury? Hmmm. He misses just 12 games right? He is on pace for 109 points in those 70 games. Yeah, no one else was hitting 109 that year, so he takes it. Malkin hit 109 the year previous and won the Art Ross and Stamkos was next with 97. Crosby wins here.
 

Kyle McMahon

Registered User
May 10, 2006
13,301
4,352
Not sure I 100% understand what you're saying. I said, both 2013 and 2011 would be slam dunks Ross wins for Crosby if he played full season. So in 2013, if he wasn't injured with 12 games to go - he wouldn't have all of a sudden scored less than 4 points in remaining 12 games to lose out the art Ross. Pretty slam dunk. In 2011 - at the 41 game mark, he was on pace for ~130 points. The Ross was won with only 104 points. It's obviously no guarantee Crosby maintains his pace and has a flagship season of ~130 points - but I think that assuming he scores enough to top 104 points total and win the Art Ross seems pretty "slam dunk" to me. This season with McDavid isn't the best analogy - since it's a much higher scoring years - and many players have been pacing all year for 115-120+, even 130+ points.

That's what I meant by the all 82 games qualifier. I agree with you, it would have taken a pretty severe and unlikely slump to not win the scoring title in 2011 if he played all 82 games. But if "full season" is say...75 GP (I think most of us would still consider 75+ games a "full season"), it's suddenly a lot less certain.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->