When injury ruined run for an individual Trophy or record

TheGuiminator

I’ll be damned King, I’ll be damned
Oct 23, 2018
1,971
1,654
The 2012-13 Crosby obviously had the scoring title locked up, with a bow on top, if he'd just played a couple more games. No doubt about that one.

But 2010-11...? Meh. I really hesitate to assume anything when a guy played 50% of the games. A lot of stuff can happen in those other 41 games.

Here were the NHL scoring leaders after Crosby went down on Jan. 5th, 2011:
1. Crosby -- 66 points in 41 games
2. Stamkos -- 56 points in 41 games
3. St.Louis -- 51 points in 41 games

Then, these were the leaders after that point until the end of the regular season:
1. Perry -- 54 points in 39 games
2. D. Sedin -- 54 points in 43 games
3. Iginla -- 51 points in 41 games

Daniel Sedin was the Ross winner with 104 points. So, Crosby would have needed 39 points in his last 41 games to clinch the Art Ross. Would he probably have done that? Of course. Would he certainly have done that? I'm not sure. In the second half, players like Kane, Tavares, and Kovalchuk were scoring at a pace that Crosby would have needed to better in order to win that Ross.

Just saying, it's hard to award a guy things when he missed half the time.

At that point of his career, Crosby NEVER had a stretch of 41 games were he averaged less than a point per game. So it’s more than probably that he wins the Art Ross that year, I could’ve bet my house quite honestly. At the very worse, his pacing would had drop at a 90 pts pace, that still gives him 111 points, good enough for the Art Ross.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
Next, the Art Ross. I'd say a healthy Mario had a 50% chance to the Art Ross, with Wayne taking the other 50%. It's certainly not "assured", as you put it.

Mario had an 11 point lead while outproducing Wayne by 10% over the previous 140 games. For Mario to lose the Art Ross (assuming Wayne puts up 156 points if he played 80 games) that year he would have had to score only 34 points in 22 games, a ppg of 1.55, a 43% drop in his PPG over the previous three seasons.

How do you figure there is a 50% chance his PPG will decrease by 43% in those 22 games?
 
  • Like
Reactions: frisco

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
The 2012-13 Crosby obviously had the scoring title locked up, with a bow on top, if he'd just played a couple more games. No doubt about that one.

But 2010-11...? Meh. I really hesitate to assume anything when a guy played 50% of the games. A lot of stuff can happen in those other 41 games.

You might have a point if by "a lot of stuff" you mean only one thing; Crosby scores below a PPG over 41 games, and by "can happen" you mean something that never came close to happening in his career until 14/15.

Funny how you are not hesitant to assume that Mario's PPG in his last 20 games in 92/93 was unsustainable.
 

Varan

Registered User
Nov 27, 2016
6,467
4,771
Toronto, Ontario
Injuries imo played a part in preventing Ovechkin from sweeping the 4 major awards 3 years in a row. That would've been a feat that rivals the big 4.
 
Last edited:

frisco

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Sep 14, 2017
3,553
2,643
Northern Hemisphere
well you actually need jagr, sakic, and bure to all still miss the games they missed for turgeon to take it.

as it stands they scored 30, 14, and 28 actual points more than him.
Yes, that's true. Jagr had 1.52 points/game, Sakic 1.34, and Bure and Turgeon were both 1.27.

My Best-Carey
 

frisco

Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Sep 14, 2017
3,553
2,643
Northern Hemisphere
That's a bit of a stretch, in my opinion.

Next, the Art Ross. I'd say a healthy Mario had a 50% chance to the Art Ross, with Wayne taking the other 50%. It's certainly not "assured", as you put it. Here's how the NHL scoring lead went that season:

Up to February 14th 1990
1. Lemieux -- 121 points in 58 games
2. Gretzky -- 110 points in 58 games
The thing you're not considering is without the back injury Lemieux not only doesn't miss the games but he plays at 100% instead of grinding it out at 50-60% at best with the debilitating back injury.

My Best-Carey
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
Would Cam Neely have won the Hart had he been healthy in 1993-94, when he scored 50 goals in 44 games? Accounting for an inevitable dry spell, a healthy Neely that season would have probably scored 80-85 goals.

Hard to say. Fedorov had a heck of a year for Detroit and you always have to factor in the Oates theory and of course there was Norris winning Bourque on the Bruins too.

As it stands, Bourque finished 6th in Hart voting, Neely 9th and Oates 12th. I think it is similar to 1991 when they favoured Hull over Oates because the goal scorer is usually going to get the benefit of the doubt. But in a full season does Neely surpass Bourque on his own team? Yeah, maybe.

1994 had some good players at the top of the Hart voting, Fedorov, Hasek, Beezer, Gilmour and Roy rounded out the top 5. Bourque, Stevens and I have no idea how Graves got there but he rounds out the top 8. Would have been hard to beat a Selke winner who had 120 points on a great team though either way.
 

The Panther

Registered User
Mar 25, 2014
19,110
15,573
Tokyo, Japan
I think it is similar to 1991 when they favoured Hull over Oates because the goal scorer is usually going to get the benefit of the doubt.
This comment just made me think that Oates's missing 19 games in 1990-91 might have cost Wayne Gretzky a 10th Hart trophy.

Considering Oates's torrid scoring pace that season, if he hadn't missed his 19 games (and to be fair, let's say Gretzky and Hull hadn't missed their 2), this is what St. Louis's and L.A.'s top-scorers might have looked like that season:

Blues
1. Oates - 151 points (+20)
2. Hull - 134 points [88 goals] (+24)

Kings
1. Gretzky - 167 points (+31)
2. Robitaille - 96 points (+29)

As both teams were similar in the standings, I don't think any big "team narrative" would have pushed one ahead of the other. My thinking is that Oates and Hull would have split a lot of votes, meaning Wayne would have won it. (He certainly deserved this '91 Hart more than he did the '89 one.)
 

TheDevilMadeMe

Registered User
Aug 28, 2006
52,271
6,980
Brooklyn
Lemieux in 89-90 almost assuredly wins the Ross, Hart, and Penguins make the playoffs if he doesn't hurt his back. Also, at only five games to the point scoring streak (46 to Gretzky's 51) when he was hurt he probably gets that record.

Pierre Turgeon at 1.27 points/game for a full 82 beats Jagr for the Ross in 2000 (assuming Jagr is NOT healthy and still misses his games).

My Best-Carey

Pierre Turgeon probably wins the 1999-00 Art Ross if he stays healthy, assuming Jagr still misses the games that he did.

Considering Turgeon was 4th in points-per-game that year, it seems odd to project him for that Art Ross, rather than Jagr, Bure, or Sakic.

Edit: Beaten by @vadim sharifijanov

Seriously though, what is it with "Turgeon would have won the Art Ross in 2000 if...?"

It's becoming like "Iginla would have won the 2002 Hart if it weren't for x writers leaving him off the ballot!" (More writers left Theodore off the ballot than Igilna)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: kaiser matias

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
Injuries imo played a part in preventing Ovechkin from sweeping the 4 major awards 3 years in a row. That would've been a feat that rivals the big 4.

Crosby could have won the Art Ross in 07/08 if not for injuries but to your bolded comment, OV was not 10 missed games or so from doing something that rivaled the Big 4.

He would have had three years that could be argued as the best three year stretch among the non Big Four crowd but would have some tight competition especially if you apply the "if not for injury" argument to every other player like Jagr example.
 

Varan

Registered User
Nov 27, 2016
6,467
4,771
Toronto, Ontario
Crosby could have won the Art Ross in 07/08 if not for injuries but to your bolded comment, OV was not 10 missed games or so from doing something that rivaled the Big 4.

He would have had three years that could be argued as the best three year stretch among the non Big Four crowd but would have some tight competition especially if you apply the "if not for injury" argument to every other player like Jagr example.
Maybe he would have but no one knows

He missed 3 games in the beginning of the 08/09 season which could have allowed him enough games to take the Ross from Malkin

He missed 10 games due to injuries and suspension in 09/10 which would have definitely given him the Ross, Rocket, and Hart.

While he doesn't have the substantial missed time like others have, he's definitely missed out on a few trophies.

No current player has been capable of sweeping all 4 awards. No one. And taking the awards for 3 years in a row while leading the entire league in GPG AND PPG? No one comes close. That is complete domination not seen in a long time no matter how you try and spin it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,425
Vancouver, BC
well you actually need jagr, sakic, and bure to all still miss the games they missed for turgeon to take it.

as it stands they scored 30, 14, and 28 actual points more than him.

Well, yeah.

Hold everything else steady and he stays healthy and he wins. Which is the point of the thread? It isn't 'what happens if every player in the league was healthy'. Wouldn't have been the first time a guy wins not having the best points/game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frisco

quoipourquoi

Goaltender
Jan 26, 2009
10,123
4,126
Hockeytown, MI
With slightly better health in 1998-99 and 1999-00, Joe Sakic is probably a 5x 1st Team All-Star at Center.

1998-99
1st Team: 30-67-97 in 78 GP
2nd Team: 44-50-94 in 82 GP
Sakic: 41-55-96 in 73 GP

1999-00
1st Team: 35-44-79 in 78 GP
2nd Team: 38-43-81 in 77 GP
Sakic: 28-53-81 in 60 GP
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDevilMadeMe

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
Maybe he would have but no one knows

He missed 3 games in the beginning of the 08/09 season which could have allowed him enough games to take the Ross from Malkin

He missed 10 games due to injuries and suspension in 09/10 which would have definitely given him the Ross, Rocket, and Hart.

While he doesn't have the substantial missed time like others have, he's definitely missed out on a few trophies.

No current player has been capable of sweeping all 4 awards. No one. And taking the awards for 3 years in a row while leading the entire league in GPG AND PPG? No one comes close. That is complete domination not seen in a long time no matter how you try and spin it because you feel left out that even the great Crosby couldn't do what he did.

His 3 year peak has already been given it's due. 6 more games played doesn't change it from being among the best among outside of the Big 4 to rivaling the Big 4 no matter how you spin it. Crosby's what ifs, unfortunately, are lot more significant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobholly39

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,584
15,948
Well, yeah.

Hold everything else steady and he stays healthy and he wins. Which is the point of the thread? It isn't 'what happens if every player in the league was healthy'. Wouldn't have been the first time a guy wins not having the best points/game.

i guess so. but because the original poster noted that jagr has to miss the same games, it seemed worthwhile to point out that two other players also needed to miss games for turgeon to win the art ross.

and no it wouldn't be the first time a guy wins the art ross while not having the best points/game. but it would be the first time since 1960 that an art ross winner would need to be totally healthy and have three different guys to miss games to take it. by my count the only art ross winners who even finished 3rd were MSL in 2004 and jamie benn in 2015.
 

MS

1%er
Mar 18, 2002
53,362
83,425
Vancouver, BC
i guess so. but because the original poster noted that jagr has to miss the same games, it seemed worthwhile to point out that two other players also needed to miss games for turgeon to win the art ross.

and no it wouldn't be the first time a guy wins the art ross while not having the best points/game. but it would be the first time since 1960 that an art ross winner would need to be totally healthy and have three different guys to miss games to take it. by my count the only art ross winners who even finished 3rd were MSL in 2004 and jamie benn in 2015.

It was an unusual year and if Turgeon had been the one to stay healthy, he probably wins an Art Ross. Nobody is arguing that he'd have won it in a strong year over a healthy Jagr.

If that happens - and it was a fluke injury, torn thumb ligaments - his career is probably viewed completely differently. And I'm not sure why people get so defensive when it gets brought up as a possibility.
 
  • Like
Reactions: frisco

robsenz

Registered User
Apr 15, 2007
3,553
2,416
I would have liked to see Karlsson’s season if the Cooke Achilles slice never happened.

He was playing at a level we hadn’t seen before or since.

100%, also related to Karlsson was the year Giordano was killing it and got injured, I felt like he had the Norris up until that point.
 

vadim sharifijanov

Registered User
Oct 10, 2007
28,584
15,948
It was an unusual year and if Turgeon had been the one to stay healthy, he probably wins an Art Ross. Nobody is arguing that he'd have won it in a strong year over a healthy Jagr.

If that happens - and it was a fluke injury, torn thumb ligaments - his career is probably viewed completely differently. And I'm not sure why people get so defensive when it gets brought up as a possibility.

technically, he still needed 31 points in the remaining 30 games to win it, assuming that his goals-to-assist ratio stays exactly the same. being that the season before he finished just under a point/game (29 points per 30) and the season after he finished just barely over (31 over 30), i'm not sure why this keeps getting brought up as a probability as opposed to, as you say, a possibility.
 

Varan

Registered User
Nov 27, 2016
6,467
4,771
Toronto, Ontario
His 3 year peak has already been given it's due. 6 more games played doesn't change it from being among the best among outside of the Big 4 to rivaling the Big 4 no matter how you spin it. Crosby's what ifs, unfortunately, are lot more significant.
his what if's don't match a sweep of all 4 awards for 3 years straight no matter how you spin it. it affects some trophies he lost out on.

it was not 6 games. he missed out on 13. those 13 would've not just given him a few extra trophies, but would've cemented his place amongst the greatest of all time, far above anything anyone else has accomplished in his era
 

Big Phil

Registered User
Nov 2, 2003
31,703
4,144
This comment just made me think that Oates's missing 19 games in 1990-91 might have cost Wayne Gretzky a 10th Hart trophy.

Considering Oates's torrid scoring pace that season, if he hadn't missed his 19 games (and to be fair, let's say Gretzky and Hull hadn't missed their 2), this is what St. Louis's and L.A.'s top-scorers might have looked like that season:

Blues
1. Oates - 151 points (+20)
2. Hull - 134 points [88 goals] (+24)

Kings
1. Gretzky - 167 points (+31)
2. Robitaille - 96 points (+29)

As both teams were similar in the standings, I don't think any big "team narrative" would have pushed one ahead of the other. My thinking is that Oates and Hull would have split a lot of votes, meaning Wayne would have won it. (He certainly deserved this '91 Hart more than he did the '89 one.)

Yeah, hard to say. 1991 was one of those last Gretzky years where he more or less lapped the field (had 122 assists to Hull's 131 points). Not quite at the level of the 1980s, but it was the last time we saw Gretzky be that dominant. By the way, no one could keep pace with those 200 point seasons for very long so I never get why people think Gretzky's L.A. years are a "drop".

I think the 86 goals narrative was the reason for Hull winning the Hart. I have to admit, if only one player in NHL history has more goals in a season than you, then that season is going to get some attention.

However, I too think Gretzky could have won it in 1991. He checked off all the boxes. Dominant scoring title. 70 points ahead of his closest teammate, on a very good regular season team, etc.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
his what if's don't match a sweep of all 4 awards for 3 years straight no matter how you spin it. it affects some trophies he lost out on.

it was not 6 games. he missed out on 13. those 13 would've not just given him a few extra trophies, but would've cemented his place amongst the greatest of all time, far above anything anyone else has accomplished in his era

Crosby was dominating the league in PPG in manner that would have rivaled Howe's dominance in his four year peak. If you are going to claim that something could have rivaled the Big Four, or one member of the Big Four, that would have been it.

To be clear, I am not arguing that he could have done this, OV's hypothetical is a lot more plausible.

Noone is reasonably arguing that OV playing 13 more games over three seasons moves his peak among the Big Four. As I said, it is already reasonably viewed as the best three year stretch of his era and among the best three year goalscoring stretches of all-time. Saying "three in a row!" or saying "lost the Art Ross and Hart to H. Sedin" both would be given objective assessment.
 

daver

Registered User
Apr 4, 2003
25,820
5,710
Visit site
It was an unusual year and if Turgeon had been the one to stay healthy, he probably wins an Art Ross. Nobody is arguing that he'd have won it in a strong year over a healthy Jagr.

If that happens - and it was a fluke injury, torn thumb ligaments - his career is probably viewed completely differently. And I'm not sure why people get so defensive when it gets brought up as a possibility.

Countering a claim with objective input is not "getting defensive". That he also would not have won the Art Ross over a healthy Sakic, Bure or even Forsberg seems like an obvious thing to point out.
 

Varan

Registered User
Nov 27, 2016
6,467
4,771
Toronto, Ontario
Crosby was dominating the league in PPG in manner that would have rivaled Howe's dominance in his four year peak. If you are going to claim that something could have rivaled the Big Four, or one member of the Big Four, that would have been it.

To be clear, I am not arguing that he could have done this, OV's hypothetical is a lot more plausible.

Noone is reasonably arguing that OV playing 13 more games over three seasons moves his peak among the Big Four. As I said, it is already reasonably viewed as the best three year stretch of his era and among the best three year goalscoring stretches of all-time. Saying "three in a row!" or saying "lost the Art Ross and Hart to H. Sedin" both would be given objective assessment.
It's not just about PPG. It's the fact that OV led the league in PPG AND GPG, being #1 in points and goals, top-10 in assists, #4 in +/- , beating the next highest PPG by 0.14 and the next highest GPG by 0.15, while dishing out 200+ hits a season. Offensively, he was unmatched.

Since you like bringing up leads over #10:

GPG and goals lead over #10: 0.27 and 64 goals

PPG and points lead over #10: 0.38 and 75 points

He was just on another level. Usually the players who run the league in terms of PPG and points don't have the goals edge over others. Ovechkin brought the best of both worlds
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->