Tsn: is Crosby the best penguin ever

[Infinite Vision*]

As far as I can perceive, for most sensible regular contributors to this board (and I'm not claiming to be either of those things), playoff performance tends to be used as a tie-breaker between players of similar stature. I've never seen anyone here suggest that say, Henri Richard is better than Mario on account of the rings he garnered.

In asking us to judge Mario on his first five years alone, don't forget that after five years we'd seen Mario run amok against the world's best in the Canada Cup. He'd surpassed Esposito's 152 point mark by emphatic margins twice and actually made some of Gretzky's hitherto stratospheric individual scoring records look catchable. Whereas despite Sid's many virtues, last summer we were scratching our heads and wondering how he'd let Henrik Sedin win the Ross, as well as asking when he was going to up the ante scoring-wise by surpassing Jagr and Thornton's points tallies from 05-06. Or tallying more goals in a single season than Jonathan Cheechoo. In short, after five years Lemieux seemed to have limitless possibilities-even when compared with Gretzky. Whereas some of Crosby's supporters have to contort themselves to explain why 120 points was his ceiling over the first five years of his career. Hence I don't put them on an equal footing, despite Sid's playoff heroics.

In terms of the Penguins as a club, after five years Mario had led them to consecutive seasons above .500 for the first time in over a decade and their best regular season points haul since 1975. Mario's arrival helped the Pens to an instant 15 point jump in the standings (compared to the zero point bounce they enjoyed in Crosby's rookie year). In Mario's second season the Penguins achieved their highest points tally since 1979. Unfortunately for them the Wales was a far tougher conference than the Campbell, so they hit a glass ceiling that prevented them reaching the playoffs. Mario getting injured in 86/87 didn't help.

If we're to compare apples with apples, we have to take into account the salary cap, drastically more liberal free agency and changes in the draft, all of which arguably give rebuilding clubs more flexibility now than they enjoyed in the 80s.

First off Henrik and Daniel vastly improved last year as evidenced by their stats and more importantly, their play. Also if Crosby played with a clone of himself and Henrik played with Dupuis and Kunitz I would bet the two wouldn't be remotely close stats wise.

Also about Crosby matching Jagr and Thornton's points from 05-06 I'll just quote an earlier post of mine.

Jagr: 05-06 82 gp, 123 pts, played with Nylander and Straka.

Thornton: 05-06 81 gp, 125 pts, played with Jonathan Cheechoo.

League wide gpg in 05-06: 6.17

Crosby: 06-07 79 gp, 120 pts, played with Colby Armstrong and an on the verge of being waived Mark Recchi.

League wide gpg in 06-07: 5.89

I would add that Crosby also had a superior all-around game than those two even at that point in his career.

So in other words, Crosby's season following the one where you say he hasn't approached the levels of Thornton or Jagr, was actually better, if not at the very least just as good.

We have to explain why his ceiling has only been 120 points so far? I think you should explain why you're evaluating a player based on an arbitrary number.

 

[BraveCanadian]

We have to explain why his ceiling has only been 120 points so far? I think you should explain why you're evaluating a player based on an arbitrary number.

For the one billionth time though.. the reason why it matters is that Crosby's ceiling so far is only as good as a past his prime Jagr in a league with similar scoring and both with post lockout rules.

That is a fact that immediately blows up any argument about Crosby as a generational player, as well being the best Penguin ever, at least for the time being.

End of story.

 

[Stray Wasp]

First off Henrik and Daniel vastly improved last year as evidenced by their stats and more importantly, their play. Also if Crosby played with a clone of himself and Henrik played with Dupuis and Kunitz I would bet the two wouldn't be remotely close stats wise.

Also about Crosby matching Jagr and Thornton's points from 05-06 I'll just quote an earlier post of mine.



We have to explain why his ceiling has only been 120 points so far? I think you should explain why you're evaluating a player based on an arbitrary number.

Why am I interested in the 120 points barrier? 'Cause two blokes not called Crosby have exceeded it since 2005. (It might be mischief to mention Jagr exceeding 120 in the dead puck era.) Not that I'm denying Crosby is the best right now. Just a strange anomaly that five years into his career, he hadn't set the statistical bar among his peers. Isn't the idea of the best that they tend to lead while others follow?

That's the interesting thing to me. With Crosby, it's demanded we make allowances for other people outscoring him. With Gretzky, it's demanded we consider his winning the Ross by 75 points as "dropping off". Interesting perspective on a couple of generational talents, that. Come to think of it, no one needed to make allowances about Gretzky's linemates in 79/80 when he tied for top scorer as an eighteen year old rookie on a cobbled-together expansion team.

 

[zeus3007*]

If he isn't traded, he will easily be the second best Penguin ever, behind only Mario, and honestly, if he doesn't have the health issues Mario had, he may end up being the best ever. Right now, he is third, behind Mario and Jagr, although not far behind Jagr. Remember, its the best PENGUIN ever, not the best player to wear a Penguin uniform, so you can't include Jagr's post-Pittsburgh accomplishments.

 

[Infinite Vision*]

Why am I interested in the 120 points barrier? 'Cause two blokes not called Crosby have exceeded it since 2005. (It might be mischief to mention Jagr exceeding 120 in the dead puck era.) Not that I'm denying Crosby is the best right now. Just a strange anomaly that five years into his career, he hadn't set the statistical bar among his peers. Isn't the idea of the best that they tend to lead while others follow?

That's the interesting thing to me. With Crosby, it's demanded we make allowances for other people outscoring him. With Gretzky, it's demanded we consider his winning the Ross by 75 points as "dropping off". Interesting perspective on a couple of generational talents, that. Come to think of it, no one needed to make allowances about Gretzky's linemates in 79/80 when he tied for top scorer as an eighteen year old rookie on a cobbled-together expansion team.

Read the part of the post I quoted in my last post. Context people. Not pick you're number and see who matches it what year.

 

[Infinite Vision*]

For the one billionth time though.. the reason why it matters is that Crosby's ceiling so far is only as good as a past his prime Jagr in a league with similar scoring and both with post lockout rules.

That is a fact that immediately blows up any argument about Crosby as a generational player, as well being the best Penguin ever, at least for the time being.

End of story.

Yeah, you bet.

 

[overpass]

Count me as one who has Crosby as the 3rd best Penguin so far, although I think he will almost certainly pass Jagr.

Jagr had some advantages in 2005-06 that Crosby hasn't had. His linemates have been mentioned. Also, from what I remember, Tom Renney basically ran his bench around getting Jagr's line out in offensive situations, both against weaker opposition and for offensive zone faceoffs. (Sorry, no source, just memory). Crosby has not had that advantage. In fact, Malkin has been getting the easier matchups and more offensive zone faceoffs in the past few years. And this season, since Staal is out, Crosby is taking on the toughest matchups and is the primary choice for defensive zone faceoffs - and he's still outscoring at an incredible rate.

I think Crosby's scoring numbers have been depressed to some degree by his linemates in the past couple of years at least, although it's hard to say to what degree. But I don't think that was the case in the 2006-07 season. He scored over half his points on the power play playing with Gonchar, Malkin, Recchi, and Ryan Whitney.

 

[Stray Wasp]

Read the part of the post I quoted in my last post. Context people. Not pick you're number and see who matches it what year.

Read it again. Alas, it looks just as evasive as it did the first time.

I'd venture that when we're talking statistics, picking some number as an important milestone is unavoidable.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I wrote this earlier in the thread but I think it bears repeating:

Is being the best Penguin only about individual accolades, or is it about creating the most success for the franchise?

Also, people who are bringing up Jagr's seasons outside the Pens are sort of missing the point.

 

[tarheelhockey]

For the one billionth time though.. the reason why it matters is that Crosby's ceiling so far is only as good as a past his prime Jagr in a league with similar scoring and both with post lockout rules.

Ceiling in points, not in overall play... right?

That is a fact that immediately blows up any argument about Crosby as a generational player, as well being the best Penguin ever, at least for the time being.

End of story.

Well if he follows through with his current track and is the best player of his generation, how could you not characterize him as generational?

 

[BraveCanadian]

Well if he follows through with his current track and is the best player of his generation, how could you not characterize him as generational?

Yeah and if I win the lottery next year I'll be a millionaire too. It doesn't mean it is going to happen.

Crosby's ceiling is not high enough above his peers so far to give him a generational status in my books based on peak, so he'll have to do it through longevity (ala Howe etc.) and he hasn't played long enough to do that yet.

I define a generational talent as one you see roughly each generation and that means there is no guarantee of there being one in the league at any given time. (like right now or between Orr and Gretzky for example)

I'm talking about guys that are so mindbogglingly ahead of their peers that they have appeared only sporadically throughout NHL history.

Examples of skaters who I consider generational talents:

Howe, Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux. Maybe Hull. Probably forgetting someone.

Jagr gets an honorable mention. He was almost there in his peak.. was amazing.

 

[SidGenoMario]

I don't get why Jagr wasn't a generational talent.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I don't get why Jagr wasn't a generational talent.

Borderline in my opinion.. the argument could certainly be made.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Ok, you're using "generational" in a stricter sense than I thought.

To follow up on the other part of that question... by "ceiling" you mean "offensive ceiling", right? You're not comparing Crosby's defense, faceoffs, leadership, etc to Jagr are you?

 

[Internet Explorer]

Crosby is not the best penguins ever. He won't ever beat Lemieux records or what he did for the Penguins. He may end up beating Jagr's records but that's about it. Pretty much end of story.

a small caveat; there's zero shame in being the runner up to #66.

 

[Derick*]

I don't get why Jagr wasn't a generational talent.

The semantics of the word generational make almost any argument about who's generational irrelavent.

I think if we're going to use the word "generational" that means we only get one per generation. As a star hockey player's career, barring injury, lasts at least 15 years, let's say there has to be some period of 15 years from which you were the greatest player on average through that time. Overlapping is okay though (obviously they can't perfectly overlap or else it's impossible that both were the best in that sample, but I mean a 15 year sample where you were the best on average in those 15 years can overlap).

That means there's Morenz, Harvey, Howe, Orr, Gretzky, and Hasek. No one else, not even Lemieux.

Of course being non-generational doesn't make you worse than someone who's generational. Right now Crosby looks like he will be looked back on as our generation's greatest player, even though Lemieux was better.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Ok, you're using "generational" in a stricter sense than I thought.

To follow up on the other part of that question... by "ceiling" you mean "offensive ceiling", right? You're not comparing Crosby's defense, faceoffs, leadership, etc to Jagr are you?

Yes.

I already agreed with another poster earlier than Crosby is a more well rounded player than Jagr but I disagreed he had equaled or surpassed him offensively.

 

[Hardyvan123]

No, that isn't more meaningful when you're asking who is the best Penguin ever.

It is a crutch used by Crosby supporters to blow him up even more than the ridiculous amount he normally is because he happened to hit the ground running in the NHL (and good for him doing so).

Well it makes more sense to compare apples to apples for me and I'm not a supporter of anyone, I look at the facts and make a judgment call.

Based on their 1st 5 years it's pretty close overall IMO and arguments on those 5 years can be made for either guy quite strongly..

 

[BraveCanadian]

Well it makes more sense to compare apples to apples for me and I'm not a supporter of anyone, I look at the facts and make a judgment call.

Based on their 1st 5 years it's pretty close overall IMO and arguments on those 5 years can be made for either guy quite strongly..

No it doesn't. You're just changing the argument to make the newer player look better.

Best Penguin ever is the question.

Not best first 5 years.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Yes.

I already agreed with another poster earlier than Crosby is a more well rounded player than Jagr but I disagreed he had equaled or surpassed him offensively.

Gotcha.

 

[Seanconn*]

11 scoring titles in a 14 year period. (only three art ross trophies were won by a player not Mario Lemieux or Jaromir Jagr from 1988-2001... and that player was Wayne "freaking" Gretzky)

Crosby has TONS and i means TONS of work to do, if he wants to be considered the second best Pen ever. and would literally have to start scoring 150 points a year for the next 4-5 years to be considered better than mario.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Yeah and if I win the lottery next year I'll be a millionaire too. It doesn't mean it is going to happen.

Crosby's ceiling is not high enough above his peers so far to give him a generational status in my books based on peak, so he'll have to do it through longevity (ala Howe etc.) and he hasn't played long enough to do that yet.

I define a generational talent as one you see roughly each generation and that means there is no guarantee of there being one in the league at any given time. (like right now or between Orr and Gretzky for example)

I'm talking about guys that are so mindbogglingly ahead of their peers that they have appeared only sporadically throughout NHL history.

Examples of skaters who I consider generational talents:

Howe, Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux. Maybe Hull. Probably forgetting someone.

Jagr gets an honorable mention. He was almost there in his peak.. was amazing.

I'm kinda wondering about your list and if you give any credit to the idea that it might be harder to dominate in a more talent league as well to some degree and that getting the most points by any player might be different in 1984 than 2011?

I'm not all that comfortable about the term generational talents as the criteria is kinda flaky if 3 generational guys can be playing at the sesame time as some might suggest (If Jagr is added to the mix).

It's just a personal thing though and I know why people use it.

 

[Hardyvan123]

No it doesn't. You're just changing the argument to make the newer player look better.

Best Penguin ever is the question.

Not best first 5 years.

I'm not changing the argument just stating the obvious that it's a little more fair to any argument to compare apples with apples.

Of course if you use the my big daddy is bigger than your small brother argument Mario wins hands down here. (17 seasons to 5)

I personally have no vested interest on which player has the better career but I will be following them and comparing them at the same stage along the way to make the observations have anything of real value to me, but hey that's just me.

 

[Hardyvan123]

http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

Here is a list of franchise scoring for what it is worth as some guys just love total actual stats.

 

[Derick*]

11 scoring titles in a 14 year period. (only three art ross trophies were won by a player not Mario Lemieux or Jaromir Jagr from 1988-2001... and that player was Wayne "freaking" Gretzky)

Crosby has TONS and i means TONS of work to do, if he wants to be considered the second best Pen ever. and would literally have to start scoring 150 points a year for the next 4-5 years to be considered better than mario.

Technically no player other than Gretzky or Colby Armstrong won an Art Ross from 1981 to 1991.