Jagr vs Crosby, who "was" more talented?

Status
Not open for further replies.

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
'11-12 to present:

Malkin 284 (1.23)
Crosby 276 (1.32)

Malkin with 8 more points (and 26 more goals) in 22 more games.
Seems pretty close to me.

I must say, you have an amazing talent for choosing criteria that gives you the results you want. I'm not joking - it's actually very impressive.
 

Saku11

Registered User
Jan 25, 2010
4,907
57
Anything can happen and if you think 2014-15 Crosby is anywhere near as good as previous years Crosby then you need a reality check.
Yeah anything can happen , but he is once again leading the league in scoring although clearly not 100%.They should have done that wrist surgery in the offseason. But he has been absolutely flying again for a while now so things look a bit better. Just dont see him out of top 10 in scoring in atleast five seasons from now on is he is even half healthy.Just dont see it.
 

Beau Knows

Registered User
Mar 4, 2013
11,525
7,293
Canada
If you look at the rates these 2 scored at in their 1st 10 years overall Crosby has an advantage:

Leagues top points per game players seasons 1-10:

2005-2015
1. Crosby: 1.37
2. Malkin 1.20
3. Ovechkin: 1.18
4. Forsberg: 1.13
5. Thornton: 1.08
+9 more at 1.0 or higher

1990-2000:
1. Lemieux: 2.06
2. Gretzky: 1.37
3. Lindros: 1.36
4. Jagr: 1.32
5. LaFontaine: 1.30
6. Selanne: 1.29
7. Sakic: 1.28
8. Forsberg: 1.25
9. Oates: 1.24
10. Kariya: 1.23
+18 more at 1.0 or higher

Through 10 seasons Crosby has left his peers in the dust in ppg. Only 13 others have managed to be ppg in this league, while during Jagrs 1st 10 seasons 27 other players managed to.

Obviously for Jagr you ignore #99 and #66 as outliers, but in his 1st 10 years Jagr is right there with his peers while Crosby was far ahead of his. Jagrs peak was immense, and Crosby's consistency and immediate impact in the league have been just as impressive.
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
If you look at the rates these 2 scored at in their 1st 10 years overall Crosby has an advantage:

Leagues top points per game players seasons 1-10:

2005-2015
1. Crosby: 1.37
2. Malkin 1.20
3. Ovechkin: 1.18
4. Forsberg: 1.13
5. Thornton: 1.08
+9 more at 1.0 or higher

1990-2000:
1. Lemieux: 2.06
2. Gretzky: 1.37
3. Lindros: 1.36
4. Jagr: 1.32
5. LaFontaine: 1.30
6. Selanne: 1.29
7. Sakic: 1.28
8. Forsberg: 1.25
9. Oates: 1.24
10. Kariya: 1.23
+18 more at 1.0 or higher

Through 10 seasons Crosby has left his peers in the dust in ppg. Only 13 others have managed to be ppg in this league, while during Jagrs 1st 10 seasons 27 other players managed to.

Obviously for Jagr you ignore #99 and #66 as outliers, but in his 1st 10 years Jagr is right there with his peers while Crosby was far ahead of his. Jagrs peak was immense, and Crosby's consistency and immediate impact in the league have been just as impressive.

Why their 1st 10 and not best 10?

This is an example of choosing criteria that you know in advance will benefit Crosby
 

Beau Knows

Registered User
Mar 4, 2013
11,525
7,293
Canada
Why their 1st 10 and not best 10?

This is an example of choosing criteria that you know in advance will benefit Crosby

I was actually surprised Lindros was ahead of Jagr. Obviously Jagr's early years are what caused that.

Can't really look at in quite the same way that way though by 10 best seasons. If you look at their 10 best seasons it would be hard to compare them to their peers overall (ie what did Sakic, Kariya etc do in all these specific seasons combined). Easy to do so by season though, so easy the stats don't require any queries:

Jagr ppg finishes:
1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3

Crosby finishes:
1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6

When you adjust for #99/#66 those are probably extremely similar.

Jagr ppg rates:
1.81, 1.57, 1.52, 1.51, 1.50, 1.49, 1.46 1.32, 1.24, 1.14

Crosby ppg rate:
1.61, 1.56, 1.52, 1.36, 1.35, 1.34, 1.30, 1.26, 1.11
 
Last edited:

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
Why their 1st 10 and not best 10?

This is an example of choosing criteria that you know in advance will benefit Crosby

Agree, OP is about their talent levels. Comparing them thru ten seasons is an interesting discussion on its own though, a good one to pass the quiet summer months.
 

livewell68

Registered User
Jul 20, 2007
8,680
52
I was actually surprised Lindros was ahead of Jagr. Obviously Jagr's early years are what caused that.

Can't really look at in quite the same way that way though by 10 best seasons. If you look at their 10 best seasons it would be hard to compare them to their peers overall (ie what did Sakic, Kariya etc do in all these specific seasons combined). Easy to do so by season though, so easy the stats don't require any queries:

Jagr ppg finishes:
1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3

Crosby finishes:
1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6

When you adjust for #99/#66 those are probably extremely similar.

Jagr ppg rates:
1.81, 1.57, 1.52, 1.51, 1.50, 1.49, 1.32, 1.14

Crosby ppg rate:
1.61, 1.56, 1.52, 1.36, 1.35, 1.34, 1.30, 1.26, 1.11

You missed Jagr's 1994-95 season when he had a PPG of 1.45.

I count 7 seasons for Jagr where he played at a 120 + pts pace.

Also Crosby's 2 best PPG seasons on your list are when he played 41 and 36 games.

Jagr never played less than 45 games (2013-14) in a season in his career.

Also Jagr's PPG in 1995-96 was 1.82, not 1.81.

Also Jagr's PPG in 1993-94 was 1.24 so his best finishes are as such:

1.82, 1.57, 1.52, 1.51, 1.50, 1.49, 1.45, 1.32, 1.24 and 1.17 (2006-07 at age 35).
 
Last edited:

livewell68

Registered User
Jul 20, 2007
8,680
52
You missed Jagr's 1994-95 season when he had a PPG of 1.45.

I count 7 seasons for Jagr where he played at a 120 + pts pace.

Also Crosby's 2 best PPG seasons on your list are when he played 41 and 36 games.

Jagr never played less than 45 games (2013-14) in a season in his career.

Also Jagr's PPG in 1995-96 was 1.82, not 1.81.

Also Jagr's PPG in 1993-94 was 1.24 so his best finishes are as such:

1.82, 1.57, 1.52, 1.51, 1.50, 1.49, 1.45, 1.32, 1.24 and 1.17 (2006-07 at age 35).

Going by these numbers, Jagr's highs are higher and happened more frequently while he doesn't fall behind in consistency as he played at a 100 + pts clip 9 times in his career (same amount as Crosby) but Jagr also has 3 more 90+ pts pace seasons to go along with the 9 in which he played at a 100+ pts clip.

They both have five 100+ pts seasons.

Jagr though also has five 94 + pts seasons.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
I was actually surprised Lindros was ahead of Jagr. Obviously Jagr's early years are what caused that.

Can't really look at in quite the same way that way though by 10 best seasons. If you look at their 10 best seasons it would be hard to compare them to their peers overall (ie what did Sakic, Kariya etc do in all these specific seasons combined). Easy to do so by season though, so easy the stats don't require any queries:

Jagr ppg finishes:
1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 3

Crosby finishes:
1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6

When you adjust for #99/#66 those are probably extremely similar.

Jagr ppg rates:
1.81, 1.57, 1.52, 1.51, 1.50, 1.49, 1.32, 1.14

Crosby ppg rate:
1.61, 1.56, 1.52, 1.36, 1.35, 1.34, 1.30, 1.26, 1.11

PPG finishes are fine although 22 games is definitely not enough to count.

PPG rates vs. peers is a better way to compare as opposed to straight up. As you can tell, you are only feeding the "raw points only" crowd.
 

Beau Knows

Registered User
Mar 4, 2013
11,525
7,293
Canada
PPG finishes are fine although 22 games is definitely not enough to count.

PPG rates vs. peers is a better way to compare as opposed to straight up. As you can tell, you are only feeding the "raw points only" crowd.

I didn't include the 22 game season.
 

bambamcam4ever

107 and counting
Feb 16, 2012
14,303
6,344
There may or may not be merit to this. I know that circa 2009-10, Crosby saw a lot of defensive zone starts, while Malkin got the lion's share of the offensive zone starts. (It was the main argument for Crosby for the 2009-10 Hart over Sedin and Ovechkin, which is why that year in particular sticks in mind).

It would be interesting to look at Crosby's offensive zone starts season-by-season and compare them to his even strength scoring numbers each year.

I'm not sure at the moment how Crosby was used from 10-13, but when he won the Art Ross last year, he played against the 29th hardest competition of any forward in the NHL, IIRC, which makes his 17 point margin of victory even more impressive.
 

Voight

#winning
Feb 8, 2012
40,373
16,652
Mulberry Street
I think a loss in 2009 can be forgiven when you are busy trying to win a Cup.

This is an insanely stupid excuse. Technically every player in the league is busy trying to win the cup but that doesnt stop them from scoring, even if you take out the tank job teams (which none of the top scorers are on) every top offensive player is busy trying to win the cup.

Ovechkin may not win the Art Ross this year because hes too busy trying to win the cup.

0 top 10 scoring finishes for a 28 and beyond crosby? Impossible

I would be careful young lad, you're dismissing a variety of factors that could cause you to eat your foot.

2012-13-present

Ppg leaders

Crosby 1.28 105 point pace
Malkin 1.12 92 point pace

As you can see in crosbys undisputed reign as the best player in the world he is dominating Malkin.

Whats the point of comparing him to Malkin when his "rival" is Ovechkin? Ovy is easily better than Geno.


Also, undisputed is the wrong word to use. Its disputed daily by hockey fans and the like whether Crosby or Ovechkin is the better player/best in the world. So you might wanna use "arguable" or something like that next time
 

Nathaniel

Registered User
Oct 18, 2013
13,603
4,969
This is an insanely stupid excuse. Technically every player in the league is busy trying to win the cup but that doesnt stop them from scoring, even if you take out the tank job teams (which none of the top scorers are on) every top offensive player is busy trying to win the cup.

Ovechkin may not win the Art Ross this year because hes too busy trying to win the cup.



I would be careful young lad, you're dismissing a variety of factors that could cause you to eat your foot.



Whats the point of comparing him to Malkin when his "rival" is Ovechkin? Ovy is easily better than Geno.


Also, undisputed is the wrong word to use. Its disputed daily by hockey fans and the like whether Crosby or Ovechkin is the better player/best in the world. So you might wanna use "arguable" or something like that next time

There is no argument for ovechkin over crosby when you combine the last 3 years. Also ovechkin is by no means easily better than malkin
 

livewell68

Registered User
Jul 20, 2007
8,680
52
There is no argument for ovechkin over crosby when you combine the last 3 years. Also ovechkin is by no means easily better than malkin

Ovechkin has 1 Hart, 2 Richard trophies and on his way to a 3rd in 3 years.

He'll also be a Hart finalist this year while I don't see Crosby finishing top 5. A hot streak in an overall average season won't change that.
 

Nathaniel

Registered User
Oct 18, 2013
13,603
4,969
Ovechkin has 1 Hart, 2 Richard trophies and on his way to a 3rd in 3 years.

He'll also be a Hart finalist this year while I don't see Crosby finishing top 5. A hot streak in an overall average season won't change that.


12-13
Crosby 56 points in 36 games 1.56 ppg
Ovechkin 56 points in 48 games 1.09 ppg

13-14
Crosby 104 points in 80 games 1.30 ppg
Ovechkin 79 points in 78 games 1.01 ppg

14-15
Crosby 79 points in 71 games 1.11 ppg
Ovechkin 75 points in 75 games 1.00 ppg

No contest the last 3 years
 

Rhiessan71

Just a Fool
Feb 17, 2003
11,618
24
Guelph, Ont
Visit site
12-13
Crosby 56 points in 36 games 1.56 ppg
Ovechkin 56 points in 48 games 1.09 ppg

13-14
Crosby 104 points in 80 games 1.30 ppg
Ovechkin 79 points in 78 games 1.01 ppg

14-15
Crosby 79 points in 71 games 1.11 ppg
Ovechkin 75 points in 75 games 1.00 ppg

No contest the last 3 years

C'mon dude, lets not get silly. Even if Crosby holds on and wins the Ross this year, it will be with what? Like 85 points?
What's more impressive, an 80-85 point season or a 50 goal season?

That's a rhetorical question btw

Winning an Art Ross with 85 points is not that impressive. It just means someone had the best bad year of the bunch.
Scoring 50 though, that's a whole other level and considering OV is about to become only the 7th player in history to record his 6th 50 goal season (all during Crosby's career BTW), that is more impressive by far.
 
Last edited:

feffan

Registered User
Sep 9, 2010
1,949
146
Malmö
On a sidenot (well, maybe not - as the thread is about talent...):
Even if not exactly anything near his stride when in prime there was a moment of vintage Jagr yesterday :D

[NHL]2014021129-773-h[/NHL]

2 points from old teammate Francis at 4th place and 4 from 1.800 with 6 games to go :) One more season and Howe is actually doable (54 points away today...) and two more and Messier is in reach for second place (91 points...). Even if it will probably take two and three seasons. Or playing on a offensive oriented team.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
C'mon dude, lets not get silly. Even if Crosby holds on and wins the Ross this year, it will be with what? Like 85 points?
What's more impressive, an 80-85 point season or a 50 goal season?

That's a rhetorical question btw

Winning an Art Ross with 85 points is not that impressive. It just means someone had the best bad year of the bunch.
Scoring 50 though, that's a whole other level and considering OV is about to become only the 7th player in history to record his 6th 50 goal season (all during Crosby's career BTW), that is more impressive by far.

If being the best scorer on the planet is not impressive, what is? Since you seem incapable of adjusting raw points, it hard to give your opinions merit.

I'm not saying 50 goals is not impressive, or that OV does not have a case to considered better than Crosby this year, but according to recent MVP and Lindsay voting, goals scored is only part of the equation along with the talent of linemates.

In 2013, Crosby was considered better by his peers despite scoring 15 goals to OV's 32. Last year despite scoring 50 goals, OV was not in the Top Ten Hart voting or in the Top 3 Lindsay voting. The fact that OV's linemate is right there with him in the Art Ross race this year needs to be considered. Both Crosby and Malkin arguably lost MVP and Lindsay votes over the years because of their influence on each other.

Coming into this season, Crosby was the clear #1, as clear as anyone has been since 2001 when Jagr started to regress. If the season ended today, Crosby still retains #1, OV has moved into a clear #2 position, while Malkin, based primarily on his inability to play full seasons, is #3.

Of course playoff performances could affect this. IMO, OV especially needs to improve on his recent performances.
 
Last edited:

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
Ovechkin has 1 Hart, 2 Richard trophies and on his way to a 3rd in 3 years.

He'll also be a Hart finalist this year while I don't see Crosby finishing top 5. A hot streak in an overall average season won't change that.

Crosby was never more than 8 points out of the Art Ross lead, and that was 20 or 30 games ago. I highly doubt the "average" NHL forward was only 8 points of the Art Ross lead.

An Art Ross win is an Art Ross win. Don't be surprised if he gets MVP consideration and I'm not sure you want to open up a discussion on points accumulation that should be deemed less valuable compared to others. Was there ever a player who was positioned to score points more than Jagr in Pittsburgh during his Art Ross run? In comparison to Crosby, without a doubt he was. This is why he probably didn't get the expected recognition during those years and is rated lower in overall rankings despite being statistically a Top 5 offensive player all-time.

If he does win, I challenge you to put up a poll and ask who was the less impressive Trophy winner, OV last year as the Richard winner or Crosby this year as Art Ross winner. This year's Lindsay voting may answer that question for us.
 
Last edited:

Nathaniel

Registered User
Oct 18, 2013
13,603
4,969
C'mon dude, lets not get silly. Even if Crosby holds on and wins the Ross this year, it will be with what? Like 85 points?
What's more impressive, an 80-85 point season or a 50 goal season?

That's a rhetorical question btw

Winning an Art Ross with 85 points is not that impressive. It just means someone had the best bad year of the bunch.
Scoring 50 though, that's a whole other level and considering OV is about to become only the 7th player in history to record his 6th 50 goal season (all during Crosby's career BTW), that is more impressive by far.

3 art ross trophies> 6 50 goal seasons. 3 art ross trophies puts crosby cements crosby as an all time legend. Only the true greats have won that many. 50 goals is great but everyone knows ross>richard. If crosby wins the art ross 20-30 years from now no one will be saying ovechkin was better. History remembers the art ross winner majority of the time.
 

Nathaniel

Registered User
Oct 18, 2013
13,603
4,969
The funny thing is if crosby loses the art ross all you will hear is how "so and so won the art ross against a prime crosby" and "crosby can't even dominate" but now that he's in a position to win its "not impressive" yeah hate is hate
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->