Speculation: Next Flyer to Reach 100 Points in a Season.

[Spongolium*]

I have a really strong feeling Giroux is going to do it. The guy just seems to be in the right area's all the time. All he needs is one regular line-mate with a little chemistry. Similar to the Briere - Prospal situation.

Briere once hit 95 , I believe Giroux has a lot more natural talent that Briere too.

 

[Hockeypete49]

With a balanced attack I doubt that anyone could reach that mark on this time. However to answer your poll G would be the one to have a shot. I read where someone said he was not a young player. He just turned 23!! OMG I guess if you hit say 27,28 its over

 

[Jester]

I have a really strong feeling Giroux is going to do it. The guy just seems to be in the right area's all the time. All he needs is one regular line-mate with a little chemistry. Similar to the Briere - Prospal situation.

Briere once hit 95 , I believe Giroux has a lot more natural talent that Briere too.

As noted in this thread, a lot of guys put up high point totals right out of the lockout when teams hadn't adjusted defensively to the new rules, and the officials hadn't begun to slacken off the crackdown.

Alfredsson, for example, posted 103 pts... well outside his career norm in '05-'06. Since then scoring has gone down in each subsequent year, I believe.

If we got back to the officiating the first couple years (especially the first) after the lockout, we'd have a few guys with a chance.

With a balanced attack I doubt that anyone could reach that mark on this time. However to answer your poll G would be the one to have a shot. I read where someone said he was not a young player. He just turned 23!! OMG I guess if you hit say 27,28 its over

When you're 27/28 you're on the tail end of your offensive prime. Offensive production is a young man's game.

Gretzky's best single offensive season (PPG) came when he was 23 years old. His peak offensive years were 21-27, with a notable tail off in per game production after that, registering his final 2.00+ PPG season when he was 30.

Lemieux followed a similar pattern.

Yzerman's best offensive season? 23. Never topped 100 pts after the age of 27.

Player in the 90s, Joe Sakic. 6 1.20+ PPG seasons prior to the age of 28 (9 total), 4 the rest of his career (11 total) -- and 2 of those were in his 29 and 30 year old season.

23 is young, and Giroux is going to have a long career ahead of him. However, if you want to talk about Giroux and point production, the fact of the matter is that he isn't young. Young guys are the ones that put up points in this league.

Top 10 in Scoring last year
Henrik Sedin 29
Sidney Crosby 22
Alex Ovechkin 24
Nicklas Backstrom 22
Steven Stamkos 20
Martin St Louis 34
Brad Richards 29
Joe Thornton 30
Patrick Kane 22
Marian Gaborik 27

This stuff is important to understand, because it's the very reason contracts like the one Ilya Kovalchuk signed are completely asinine. Kovalchuk has been an offensive force in this league for years now, but signing him for 27 y/o forward isn't a great deal because he's very likely to see a decline over the next few years (I think this year is an outlier). Goal scoring in particular does not tend to age all that well. Hull posted 5 straight 50+ goal season 25-29, and would have had another when he was 30 in the lockout shortened season. Never sniffed 50 again, and broke 40 only twice.

After the mid 20s good offensive players remain good, but they tend not to be the player you saw when they were, say, 23.

 

[Spongolium*]

Yzerman's best offensive season? 23. Never topped 100 pts after the age of 27.

You know the reason behind this though right?

Yzerman could of quite easily been in the top 3 for most points scored.

 

[Jester]

You know the reason behind this though right?

Yzerman could of quite easily been in the top 3 for most points scored.

Not quite easily. Yzerman took on a more two-way game, but the less reported on aspect of all of that is that it directly coincided with the period when the vast majority of offensive players hit the wall on their elite years (and they tend to become better all-around players at the same time). This gets scooped up into a narrative of Yzerman becoming a better two-way player/captain and getting a Cup, but that's writing the nice narrative... rather than he just started to lose a step to his offensive game.

A 30 y/o guy is likely to produce less than his 23 y/o self, but that doesn't mean he's "worse" as a player... may very well be a better all-around player. Experience doesn't help you all that much offensively, but it absolutely helps you everywhere else on the ice (especially as your twitch muscles begin to slow down).

Yzerman (by his standards) had a terrible season when he was 29, posting 0.81 PPG. He followed that with 1.19, 1.05, .92, .93, 1.01, .96, and .92 before he was essentially in his twilight. He didn't cease being a very good offensive player, but he did hit the wall right when everyone seems to. He may have committed more to defense, but I very much doubt that accounted for the roughly 30% drop in offense from his peak to his early 30s in its entirety.

And when you go to per game, which is a lot more useful for these type of discussions... he's right up there (sadly they don't have an easy listing of it that I can see). However, the only guys ahead of him that had similar longevity would be Gretzky, and Dionne... Lemieux would be ahead of him (only 900 games... amazing).

 

[Hockeypete49]

As noted in this thread, a lot of guys put up high point totals right out of the lockout when teams hadn't adjusted defensively to the new rules, and the officials hadn't begun to slacken off the crackdown.

Alfredsson, for example, posted 103 pts... well outside his career norm in '05-'06. Since then scoring has gone down in each subsequent year, I believe.

If we got back to the officiating the first couple years (especially the first) after the lockout, we'd have a few guys with a chance.



When you're 27/28 you're on the tail end of your offensive prime. Offensive production is a young man's game.

Gretzky's best single offensive season (PPG) came when he was 23 years old. His peak offensive years were 21-27, with a notable tail off in per game production after that, registering his final 2.00+ PPG season when he was 30.

Lemieux followed a similar pattern.

Yzerman's best offensive season? 23. Never topped 100 pts after the age of 27.

Player in the 90s, Joe Sakic. 6 1.20+ PPG seasons prior to the age of 28 (9 total), 4 the rest of his career (11 total) -- and 2 of those were in his 29 and 30 year old season.

23 is young, and Giroux is going to have a long career ahead of him. However, if you want to talk about Giroux and point production, the fact of the matter is that he isn't young. Young guys are the ones that put up points in this league.

Top 10 in Scoring last year
Henrik Sedin 29
Sidney Crosby 22
Alex Ovechkin 24
Nicklas Backstrom 22
Steven Stamkos 20
Martin St Louis 34
Brad Richards 29
Joe Thornton 30
Patrick Kane 22
Marian Gaborik 27

This stuff is important to understand, because it's the very reason contracts like the one Ilya Kovalchuk signed are completely asinine. Kovalchuk has been an offensive force in this league for years now, but signing him for 27 y/o forward isn't a great deal because he's very likely to see a decline over the next few years (I think this year is an outlier). Goal scoring in particular does not tend to age all that well. Hull posted 5 straight 50+ goal season 25-29, and would have had another when he was 30 in the lockout shortened season. Never sniffed 50 again, and broke 40 only twice.

After the mid 20s good offensive players remain good, but they tend not to be the player you saw when they were, say, 23.

So the average age of the top ten was 26. G is into his 1st month as a 23 year old. He will play half of next season as a 23 year old. This is only his second full season as a pro. I like his chances of improving on his point production for years to come.

 

[Jester]

So the average age of the top ten was 26. G is into his 1st month as a 23 year old. He will play half of next season as a 23 year old. This is only his second full season as a pro. I like his chances of improving on his point production for years to come.

...yeah, and the guys pulling the average up? Most of 'em were studs when they were 23.

Joe Thornton: 101 pts in dead puck hockey at 23.

Brad Richards: (who has never hit 100 pts) 74 and 79 pts at 22/23 heading into the lockout.

Marian Gaborik: PPG player at 23, 38 goals in 65 games.

St Louis and Sedin are a different story, for different reasons... but to argue that 23 is "young" as far as putting up points is to to ignore the fact that the vast majority of "scorers" in the NHL are putting up high point totals at 23, and many are doing so prior to that age.

 

[Claude28Giroux]

Oh wow, another thread dominated by jester and another poster.

Jesus, take a break.

Jester goes hard

 

[Hockeypete49]

...yeah, and the guys pulling the average up? Most of 'em were studs when they were 23.

Joe Thornton: 101 pts in dead puck hockey at 23.

Brad Richards: (who has never hit 100 pts) 74 and 79 pts at 22/23 heading into the lockout.

Marian Gaborik: PPG player at 23, 38 goals in 65 games.

St Louis and Sedin are a different story, for different reasons... but to argue that 23 is "young" as far as putting up points is to to ignore the fact that the vast majority of "scorers" in the NHL are putting up high point totals at 23, and many are doing so prior to that age.

Well I hope he falls in line with guys like Mark Messier, Jason Arnott among others. It all is in the way you want to look at things. Dude he just turned 23. It is not over for G. You can throw out all the stats you want. But you cannot predict what anyone can in life now can you? Anyone can say what has happened in the past. I look at G and see a young man on the rise with many good years ahead him. Thats all.

 

[Hockeypete49]

Jester goes hard

LOL How true

 

[CS]

Post-Lockout Era
2010-11: (pacing) Stamkos, H. Sedin, *Crosby, D. Sedin
2009-10: H. Sedin, Crosby, Ovechkin, Backstrom
2008-09: Malkin, Ovechkin, Crosby
2007-08: Ovechkin, Malkin
2006-07: Crosby, Thornton, Lecavalier, Heatley, St. Louis, Hossa, Sakic
2005-06: Thornton, Jagr, Ovechkin, Heatley, Alfredsson, Crosby, E. Staal

Dead Puck Era
2003-04: N/A
2002-03: Forsberg, Naslund, Thornton
2001-02: N/A
2000-01: Jagr, Sakic
1999-00: N/A
1998-99: Jagr, Selanne, Kariya
1997-98: Jagr
1996-97: Lemieux, Selanne

High Scoring Era
1995-96: Lemieux, Jagr, Sakic, Francis, Forsberg, Lindros, Kariya, Selanne, Mogilny, Federov, Weight, Gretzky
1994-95: N/A (semi-lockout)
1993-94: Gretzky, Federov, Oates, Gilmour, Bure, Roenick, Recchi, Shanahan
1992-93: Lemieux, Lafontaine, Oates, Yzerman, Selanne, Turgeon, Mogilny, Gilmour, Robitaille, Recchi, Sundin, Stevens, Bure, Tocchet, Roenick, Janney, Sakic, Juneau, Hull, Fleury, Francis
1991-92: Lemieux, Stevens, Gretzky, Hull, Robitaille, Messier, Roenick, Yzerman, Leetch
1990-91: Gretzky, Hull, Oates, Recchi, Cullen, Sakic, Yzerman, Fleury, MacInnis, Larmer
1989-90: Gretzky, Messier, Yzerman, Lemieux, Hull, Nicholls, Turgeon, Lafontaine, Coffey, Sakic, Oates, Robitaille, Francis

Etc...

My point being, if this was pre-DPE, I would say Richards, Carter, Giroux, and Briere (maybe JVR if he turns into his potential) might have all had a pretty respectable shot at 100 with Giroux being the favorite to crack that number pretty high and often.

Through the DPE, nobody on our team is coming close.

Now that the DPE is over, you'd think we would have a better shot of throwing somebody up there right? Not really.

The post-DPE world averages roughly 4.5 hundred point scorers a year (with the emphasis being titled higher because of the two early years though it should eventually stabilize somewhere around 3-4). The DPE averaged around 1.4 per year, but this is a far cry from the high-scoring era which I won't even bother calculating.

Odds are that if nothing changes nobody on our roster will see 100 points, and if one of them does, it will be a one-time thing during perfect conditions when they are getting maximum ice time and have the perfect mates both defensively and offensively to pull it off. Having a little luck doesn't hurt either. I could see a couple 90s for all of Richards, Carter, and/or Giroux (possibly JVR but not Briere because I don't see him playing this level in later years) somewhere in their prime, but this won't be until our roster flattens out and there is less talent to spread the ice time around with. I doubt it will happen in the next 3, 4, or even 5 years if at all.

So no, no one will hit 100 because no one will hit 90 until this roster make-up changes, and this roster make-up won't change until we change our GM, change our organizational philosophy, or strike complete blanks on our depth acquisitions of future years.

 

[PhillyFlying]

our depth is too solid for any of our players to reach 100. we don't rely on one line for offense and our powerplay is extremely hot/cold. giroux and carter are probably the best bet though. richards' points potential is probably maxed out around 80-90 and i'm sure once JVR gets going he'll be about the same. if our powerplay has a hot year and giroux gets a few bonafide sniping wingers, 100 points is entirely possible.

 

[Jester]

Well I hope he falls in line with guys like Mark Messier, Jason Arnott among others. It all is in the way you want to look at things. Dude he just turned 23. It is not over for G. You can throw out all the stats you want. But you cannot predict what anyone can in life now can you? Anyone can say what has happened in the past. I look at G and see a young man on the rise with many good years ahead him. Thats all.

Who is saying "it's over" for G? Please say where that was expressed? This thread is about the next "100 point season" and someone noted that Giroux was "young" if you're talking about 100 pts, which you then made a snide remark about. That's ignorant. 23 isn't young if you're talking about high point totals. Scoring is a young man's game, the really good guys start early (as Giroux is) and a lot of the 100 pt guys are hitting it by the time they're 23. He's certainly a young player, with many good years ahead of him... but the reality is that he's essentially into his prime offensive years already, so to refer to him as "young" is ignoring when players start producing points in this league.

Arnott: 0.87, 0.88, 0.92, and 0.85 PPG to start his career when he was 19, 20, 21, and 22. His career average is 0.78 PPG. So, he doesn't support your point. He's also never sniffed 100 pts, so I'm not sure why you're bringing him up. His career high is 76 pts.

Mark Messier: 106 and 101 pts when he was 22 and 23.

 

[Jester]

our depth is too solid for any of our players to reach 100. we don't rely on one line for offense and our powerplay is extremely hot/cold. giroux and carter are probably the best bet though. richards' points potential is probably maxed out around 80-90 and i'm sure once JVR gets going he'll be about the same. if our powerplay has a hot year and giroux gets a few bonafide sniping wingers, 100 points is entirely possible.

Depth doesn't really factor into it all that much. Guys are getting their ice time... and we have a couple of guys near pacing for career years (Briere is on pace to set a career high in goals, for example). Earlier in the year Richards was matching his career high in assists pace (despite having his weak wings). The PP having a down year is impacting that a bit for guys... but it isn't going to make up the 20+ pts most of them are trailing 100 pt pace by.

 

[Embiid]

As noted in this thread, a lot of guys put up high point totals right out of the lockout when teams hadn't adjusted defensively to the new rules, and the officials hadn't begun to slacken off the crackdown.

Alfredsson, for example, posted 103 pts... well outside his career norm in '05-'06. Since then scoring has gone down in each subsequent year, I believe.

If we got back to the officiating the first couple years (especially the first) after the lockout, we'd have a few guys with a chance.



When you're 27/28 you're on the tail end of your offensive prime. Offensive production is a young man's game.

Gretzky's best single offensive season (PPG) came when he was 23 years old. His peak offensive years were 21-27, with a notable tail off in per game production after that, registering his final 2.00+ PPG season when he was 30.

Lemieux followed a similar pattern.

Yzerman's best offensive season? 23. Never topped 100 pts after the age of 27.

Player in the 90s, Joe Sakic. 6 1.20+ PPG seasons prior to the age of 28 (9 total), 4 the rest of his career (11 total) -- and 2 of those were in his 29 and 30 year old season.

23 is young, and Giroux is going to have a long career ahead of him. However, if you want to talk about Giroux and point production, the fact of the matter is that he isn't young. Young guys are the ones that put up points in this league.

Top 10 in Scoring last year
Henrik Sedin 29
Sidney Crosby 22
Alex Ovechkin 24
Nicklas Backstrom 22
Steven Stamkos 20
Martin St Louis 34
Brad Richards 29
Joe Thornton 30
Patrick Kane 22
Marian Gaborik 27

This stuff is important to understand, because it's the very reason contracts like the one Ilya Kovalchuk signed are completely asinine. Kovalchuk has been an offensive force in this league for years now, but signing him for 27 y/o forward isn't a great deal because he's very likely to see a decline over the next few years (I think this year is an outlier). Goal scoring in particular does not tend to age all that well. Hull posted 5 straight 50+ goal season 25-29, and would have had another when he was 30 in the lockout shortened season. Never sniffed 50 again, and broke 40 only twice.

After the mid 20s good offensive players remain good, but they tend not to be the player you saw when they were, say, 23.

Excellent..then you would agree that Carter at 26 will probably never score 40 again so hence he's at best a perennial 30 goal scorer and in the next 11 years he's going to decline to a perennial Nodl scorer...Cartsiephan thanks you

 

[Jester]

Excellent..then you would agree that Carter at 26 will probably never score 40 again so hence he's at best a perennial 30 goal scorer and in the next 11 years he's going to decline to a perennial Nodl scorer...Cartsiephan thanks you

I am not a huge fan of Carter's contract. The cap number is nice, but the injury risk is significant... and, yes, I wouldn't expect Carter to be popping 40 with much regularity (if at all) in the latter half of that contract.

On the upside, Carter, unlike Kovy, brings a lot more to the table than just scoring. It makes sense to lock up these top end guys through their early 30s, but after that you want to reassess what you have.

 

[Embiid]

I am not a huge fan of Carter's contract. The cap number is nice, but the injury risk is significant... and, yes, I wouldn't expect Carter to be popping 40 with much regularity (if at all) in the latter half of that contract.

On the upside, Carter, unlike Kovy, brings a lot more to the table than just scoring. It makes sense to lock up these top end guys through their early 30s, but after that you want to reassess what you have.

Yeah I hear ya..the length of the contract is a bit much for me even if it's cap friendly for now. I worry about the long term implications. If we had the cap flexibility I would have preferred a 3-4 year deal at more money like 6M or so but couldn't really do that given the offseason signings etc...

 

[Hockeypete49]

Excellent..then you would agree that Carter at 26 will probably never score 40 again so hence he's at best a perennial 30 goal scorer and in the next 11 years he's going to decline to a perennial Nodl scorer...Cartsiephan thanks you

Yep it is all down hill now for Carter and Richards. They have hit their scoring peak If a just turned 23 year old is not young as far as scoring goes then Jeff and Mike better sign up for AARPJVR you had better hurry up. I know one thing some of our fellow boarders should be dance instructors because they sure as hell do a lot of tap dancing.OMG I wonder how it feels to be NEVER WRONG

 

[Jester]

Yep it is all down hill now for Carter and Richards. They have hit their scoring peak If a just turned 23 year old is not young as far as scoring goes then Jeff and Mike better sign up for AARPJVR you had better hurry up. I know one thing some of our fellow boarders should be dance instructors because they sure as hell do a lot of tap dancing.OMG I wonder how it feels to be NEVER WRONG

I love when people make snide comments about never being wrong. As if you didn't just suggest Jason Arnott and Mark Messier above as if they somehow supported the point you were trying to make in refuting my observation that 23 isn't "young" to be putting up big points... believing you were right.

I also wonder about people over the age of 12 that rely heavily on emoticons, but that's another matter.

 

[Hockeypete49]

I love when people make snide comments about never being wrong. As if you didn't just suggest Jason Arnott and Mark Messier above as if they somehow supported the point you were trying to make in refuting my observation that 23 isn't "young" to be putting up big points... believing you were right.

I also wonder about people over the age of 12 that rely heavily on emoticons, but that's another matter.

Hey Jester how you doing? Long time no see Look I do not want to get into a pissing match with you on this. You have your opinion and I have mine. Thank God Montreal traded John LeClair to us. It was all down hill after he turned 26. Oh that Peter Stastny was washed up to along with Phil Esposito and Joe Sakic and heck even Tim Kerr etc etc. I can pull names out of a hat to and throw numbers around. It depends on the individual, injuries etc. Nothing is etched in stone. I to also wonder what it must be like to live with someone who is never wrong about anything, but that is another matter. Must be 80 and alone.

 

[Jester]

Hey Jester how you doing? Long time no see Look I do not want to get into a pissing match with you on this. You have your opinion and I have mine. Thank God Montreal traded John LeClair to us. It was all down hill after he turned 26. Oh that Peter Stastny was washed up to along with Phil Esposito and Joe Sakic and heck even Tim Kerr etc etc. I can pull names out of a hat to and throw numbers around. It depends on the individual, injuries etc. Nothing is etched in stone. I to also wonder what it must be like to live with someone who is never wrong about anything, but that is another matter. Must be 80 and alone.

At the age of 23, Joe Sakic had 3 100 point seasons and a 94 point in 69 games season on his resume.

Peter Stastny wasn't in the NHL at 23, and posted 109 pts in his first season in the league at age 24. He hit 111 pts at 31, and followed that with 85, 73, 60, 62, 40, 16, and 2 point seasons. His best two season in the NHL came when he was 25 and, you guessed it, 26.

Tim Kerr... injured his 23 y/o season, and his 50 goal campaigns were ages 24-27... before his career was essentially ruined by injuries. Had one great year left in him at age 29.

John Leclair... a bigger guy (they tend to develop slower), and also a guy that needed to get a chance. And, lets be real, his numbers were also aided by getting to play with one of the best players in the history of the NHL during his prime. Even then, his career as an elite scorer was done at age 30.

Phil Esposito is the only one that kind of sorta backs up your point, and, of course, there are exceptions to ever rule. However, even he hit the wall rather earlier than you might expect based on your belief system. He hit the wall at age 32. Coming off essentially 7 consecutive 100 point seasons, he never scored more than 83 points in the following 6 seasons and was a remarkable -117 to close out his career over those seasons.

Of course, as you've proven in other threads where you put out BS and make snarky comments after the fact, you're so disingenuous that rather than copping to the rather simple fact (23 isn't "young" if you're talking about people putting up points) that you're creating a straw man argument "it's all downhill after 26." You won't find that statement by me (or anyone else) anywhere in this thread. Scoring tends to decline once you get out of the mid 20s (so the 23-27 range with a bit on either side) on average. Players may have some boom years, but they tend to decline to a level somewhere below what they were producing in their peak years. Nowhere was it suggested that a player was "washed" up after that. In fact, I specifically said that what you tend to see is players improve in other areas with experience... scoring doesn't tend to improve with experience after a rather early growth period, however. So you get on with your bad self tearing down that paper tiger you've invented to make yourself feel better.

However, here was the original point which you have completely and utterly failed to really prove as an incorrect one: a 23 y/o isn't young in the scoring game. That's it. A 20 y/o kid is, but by 23 things are starting to solidify. Especially given that the original observation was in relation to 100 pt scorers, and how he was "young" for that type of discussion. He isn't.

You can throw all the snark that you want around, but that was the point and you have failed to prove it incorrect. It's easy to be right most of the time when you don't open your mouth without looking into ****.

 

[Hockeypete49]

No need to buy bait for this fish. Just drop down the hook. Guarantee to get a bite every time. It is just way to easy.

 

[Spongolium*]

Jester, stats don't make everything. Every single person on this board just looks at stats to make all their points. They forget that you are actually dealing with real living people.

You cannot predict anything in the NHL. Absolutly nothing. You can try, and sometimes you will get it right. But did anyone see Henrik sedin becoming a 100 point player when he was 23. How did he do when he was 23 Jester?

Look, people change, circumstances change, things happen. You cannot state that 23 is not young as a point scorer. At 23, you still have a minimum of 5 years to post good point total. Just because it doesn't happen often, doesn't mean that you can write off Giroux already. Giroux has always been a late bloomer, not only that, but he has always dominated his age group, just like Mike Richards has always had team success follow him.

 

[Chicken Chaser]

No need to buy bait for this fish. Just drop down the hook. Guarantee to get a bite every time. It is just way to easy.

Like Sunfish/Bluegills? those damn fish catch themselves, its more of an effort every summer to keep them off my hooks than it is to actually try and catch worth while fish

 

[Jester]

No need to buy bait for this fish. Just drop down the hook. Guarantee to get a bite every time. It is just way to easy.

It's also rather easy to spot the intellectually dishonest, who spout BS and then run away behind sarcasm and snark when they get called out on their displayed ignorance.

Just like Paul Holmgren runs a multi-million dollar organization, right? Or is that Peter Lukko?

It's very easy to be smug when you spout ******** (regularly) and neither back it up, nor admit to it when your incorrect observations are pointed out to you. George W. Bush has made a career of it.

Jester, stats don't make everything. Every single person on this board just looks at stats to make all their points. They forget that you are actually dealing with real living people.

No one forgets that they are dealing with real living people. You just constructed the definition of a straw man argument, which defines the rest of the post.

You cannot predict anything in the NHL. Absolutly nothing. You can try, and sometimes you will get it right. But did anyone see Henrik sedin becoming a 100 point player when he was 23. How did he do when he was 23 Jester?

Actually, yes, they did. Everyone was very confused why the Sedin twins didn't develop quicker. However, more importantly, you should internalize the following observation: there are exceptions to every rule.

Look above, however, Hockeypete49 rattled off a slew of names of supposed players that somehow backed up his defensible position and they almost all conformed perfectly to what I was arguing. The Peter Stastny one was just pure gold.

And your belief that you cannot predict anything in the NHL is... certifiably false. Given enough evidence, you can predict within a reasonable margin of error a great deal quite accurately. For example, given the history of the league and the thousands of players that have spent time in the NHL, by the age of 23 most elite scorers have begun putting up big point totals and you can make determinations based on that.

Look, people change, circumstances change, things happen. You cannot state that 23 is not young as a point scorer. At 23, you still have a minimum of 5 years to post good point total. Just because it doesn't happen often, doesn't mean that you can write off Giroux already. Giroux has always been a late bloomer, not only that, but he has always dominated his age group, just like Mike Richards has always had team success follow him.

Who the **** is writing off Giroux? He's a very good scorer now, and I expect him to put up good point totals throughout his career (I always have). I don't expect him to be a 100 pt guy in this league, and I doubt we will see significant change from the level he's at now. And... late bloomer? He scored 103 pts his first season in the Q. There's also a difference between being a late bloomer as a teen (physically maturing) and later on in life.

However, the original argument was made by Sawdalite, that Giroux was "young" if you're talking about scoring in the NHL (specifically in relation to guys that hit 100 pts). That is an empirically false claim. NHL players with extreme consistency start putting up high point totals at or before the age of 23. 23 is NOT young by any argument you might want to make when it comes to scoring in the NHL. The majority of the skill-set required to put up high point totals: quickness, twitch reflexes, durability, etc. are stuff that doesn't age well.

If you want to argue that he may be a "late bloomer" that's fine... but you are applying the term "late bloomer" for a reason, no? Maybe, because he didn't bloom when most do?