Ranking These Players' Primes (#1)

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Crosby should have zero votes. 3 seasons he was injured and in the 3 he was healthy, OV was clearly better than him in 2 of them. Basically a vote for Crosby is saying his 3 seasons are better than 6 from OV, Jagr, Lafleur which is an absolute joke.

Good thing this poll is skewed because Crosby had a 12 year prime 07-19 easy answer here

 

[Trap Jesus]

Lafleur's prime is the entire reason he gets mentioned among the all-time greats, I'd go with him.

 

[wetcoast]

Crosby should have zero votes. 3 seasons he was injured and in the 3 he was healthy, OV was clearly better than him in 2 of them. Basically a vote for Crosby is saying his 3 seasons are better than 6 from OV, Jagr, Lafleur which is an absolute joke.

I think the people voting for him are talking about level of play not level of health and he did lead his team to 2 SC finals and as captain winning one of those.

Crosby, Lafleur, Forsberg, Jagr...heck pretty much all of the players aside from bossy have an argument here given strength and makeup of teams and other variables..

 

[Mighty Makar]

#87

 

[wetcoast]

Surprised by the lack of Lafleur. He was basically made for a 6 consecutive season question. His combination of health and consistency is better than anyone else here and it lines up perfectly with a 5 season run of playoff dominance where he led the playoffs in scoring 3 times. His whole legacy is based almost entirely on these seasons.

True enough but he also was on a dynasty and played in the 70s where the balance from top teams to weaker ones was significant but the real answer here is that on the main boards recency matters, heck Gordie Howe would probably not fair well here.

 

[wetcoast]

Im confused. Is this best 6 consecutive years or best prime?

Crosby hands down has the best prime.
But best 6 consecutive years - no. Prime to me can be more than 6 years

itès obviously best 6 year period as we all know that Crosby had had basically a 15 year prime, Foppa does well in this regard as well (as I really value guys who are elite from their first season onwards).

 

[wetcoast]

The wording in the OP leads me to select Lafleur. Jagr gives him very stiff competition but he also missed essentially a quarter of two seasons.

I think that the fact Jagr missed that time and still was 639 to 543 (Selanne of all players never would have guessed) over 2nd place in points helps him here.

Lafleur was 766-683 (Dionne)

 

[Fataldogg]

I love how Crosby has a 12 year prime, but Jagr only has a 5 year prime. On what planet? Jagr scored 123 points at the age of 35, if a season like that does not count as prime I don't know what does. Jagr was absolutely beyond elite for more than 5 years.

He is 2nd all time in points for a reason. Terrible argument by these Crosby supporters.

Yes, Crosby has been elite for a long time. So was Jagr, Lafleur, Ovechkin, etc.

 

[Steven Toast]

Should be Jagr or Lafleur

 

[blundluntman]

Value on ice means you have to be on the ice doesn't it? The fact that Crosby only won 1 hart and 1 lindsay during this time proves what the media and and players thought of his value and performances. In the given times Jagr won multiple lindsays and rosses. Lafleur multiple harts, lindsays and rosses. OV multiple harts, lindsays and rockets. OV was clearly better than Crosby in 07/08-09/10. Crosby was better in 06/07. Value on ice is clearly OV.

Yeah it does but Crosby's injuries don't take away from his value on ice because they weren't direct results of his playstyle like a Lindros or Forsberg (who were rather healthy in their primes anyway). The 08 ankle injury was a bad luck that could happen to anyone; Same with his concussion.

I used a 6 year prime instead of one peak season because I thought that'd be a large enough sample size to judge the quality of their prime without injuries skewing things too much. Accolades and awards are still important of course but it depends on the voter I suppose.

 

[JackSlater]

I think that the fact Jagr missed that time and still was 639 to 543 (Selanne of all players never would have guessed) over 2nd place in points helps him here.

Lafleur was 766-683 (Dionne)

It's impressive, though it helps that so many of the other top scorers of the time like Lindros, Kariya, Bure, Forsberg, Lemieux, and even Selanne himself, missed pretty much just as much time if not more over that span. But outscoring people while missing games doesn't add to "value on the ice" as specified in the OP. I do think that Jagr is a close second here and well above whoever is third.

 

[blundluntman]

My bad, I was only looking at the stats according to the OP and It looks like he forgot to bold Lafleurs' 76 & 78 season as points leader, which gives him 3 Art Ross instead of one. It's a big difference maker.

Change my vote for Lafleur

Thanks for pointing that out. I copied it from Wikipedia but bolding the stats to note they lead the league in their category is probably best.