View Single Post
11-25-2012, 03:47 PM
Global Moderator
tarheelhockey's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 52,261
vCash: 1020
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Because whether a player is injury prone or not is a big part of his makeup as a player maybe?
1) I don't judge players as being better or worse at hockey because of their injury status. Again, Larry Murphy was not better than Bobby Orr, GP and counting stats be damned.

2) Calling Crosby "injury prone" is... I dunno, not quite right. We're not talking about a guy who misses games with sore ankles or broken noses. Holding players out of action to heal concussions is a post-Lindros standard, and Crosby is the highest profile player of the era to get his brain scrambled. How many games would Trottier have missed in his prime if he were held out for even the slightest sign of concussion?

Above and beyond this thread, I think we're going to have to start changing the way we think about durability. Concussions are not like twisted ligaments, and if the medical knowledge had always been there to identify the long-term danger of repeated concussions we would have seen a lot more missing GP in years past.

tarheelhockey is offline   Reply With Quote