HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Gretzky, Lemieux and Crosby comparables

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-03-2013, 02:08 AM
  #26
Darth Yoda
Registered User
 
Darth Yoda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grovebranch's Crease
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,626
vCash: 613
Quote:
Originally Posted by shazariahl View Post
While I agree that era isn't being considered at all, he did obliterate the records. The NHL record books aren't written with adjusted scoring records, they're written with hard numbers. 92 goals. 163 assists. 215 points. Sure, there's also PPG records, etc. But they aren't adjusted for era either.

And I agree with what you said - he would have had most the records regardless. But it's not hard to see why a guy like Wilbon would say Gretzky "obliterated" the records, because he did. Before he came, Espo had the goals and points record, Orr the assist record, Howe the career records. Gretzky beat them all, and badly. He scored more assists in a season than Espo had in his record-setting season for points. He beat Orr's assist record by 61 assists, and beat it every season for like 10 straight seasons or so. He beat 50 in 50 with 50 in 39. And ya... none of those numbers are adjusted. But guys like Wilbon probably don't care about adjusted numbers. And why should they? The NHL doesn't care about them either.
Yeah but he not only forget to put it into tontext, he also said something like "records that will not be approached again". Damn right they wont be approached again, even if Gretzky got cloned one of these days they wont be approached again. Today we're living with some records that cant be beaten, and therefore i dont like when they get brought up at all, especially without context but even with it they still cant be beaten so what's the meaning with it. As i said earlier, Gretzky might quite possibly not even have had some of the goal scoring records if everything was even remotely fair era-wise.


Last edited by Darth Yoda: 04-03-2013 at 02:14 AM.
Darth Yoda is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 05:34 PM
  #27
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
He did'nt create anything, the scoring went up right before he got in the league and if anything he should have made the league more defensive minded since no-one could compete with him offensively. Instead, the league was still suffering from rapid expansion and bringing the WHA teams in so it was simply not equipped to have an answer for him.

But in a way nothing of the above is really important concerning your dislike of my last post, since whatever the reason was that the scoring went up, it did and Gretzkys stats just like everybody elses from that time are in fact inflated.

Edit: Seems like we have just got to hear from another of those fundamentalist believers in the perfect God called The Great One.
The NHL is a copycat league. When they saw that the Oilers were having success playing the way they were other teams tried it. Before the Oilers even won the idea was that a team like Edmonton could never win the Cup. A team like the Islanders were winning it. Great offense with a great all around game. Even in the early 1980s a lot of people criticized how the Oilers played. While the NHL was still high scoring in the 1970s the players who were leading the NHL in points (Esposito, Lafleur) were getting 130 a year (Esposito peaked at 152) and nowhere near 200. It was just unheard of for someone to dominate the league that much. If you asked people in 1979 if there will ever be a 200 point scorer the answer would have been "no".

I think what is more important here is not the hard numbers of Gretzky so much but the comparison to how he was 50% better than the next player in the NHL for so long. If his raw numbers don't impress you, what should impress you is how every other player in the NHL at that time had the same advantages and yet were 70 points away from him over a full season. That is some impact that I don't think we'll ever see again.

Big Phil is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 05:37 PM
  #28
Big Phil
Registered User
 
Big Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darth Yoda View Post
Yeah but he not only forget to put it into tontext, he also said something like "records that will not be approached again". Damn right they wont be approached again, even if Gretzky got cloned one of these days they wont be approached again. Today we're living with some records that cant be beaten, and therefore i dont like when they get brought up at all, especially without context but even with it they still cant be beaten so what's the meaning with it. As i said earlier, Gretzky might quite possibly not even have had some of the goal scoring records if everything was even remotely fair era-wise.
What was unfair?

Big Phil is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 05:44 PM
  #29
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,028
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to SaintPatrick33
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil View Post
What was unfair?
The implication is that the '80s were somehow "unfair" compared to the DPE in terms of scoring environment

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 08:56 PM
  #30
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,402
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post
This should also be interesting for Crosby fans to have a look at. The fact that Ovechkin is mentioned in the video is important. Before his recent slump (he's looking more and more like the Ovechkin of old lately), Ovechkin was the clear cut best player in the NHL, not Crosby.
In their time together in the NHL, AO has the better counting stats but this is only because of the time missed and Sid still has a 1.41 to 1.23 (Malkin, AO is 1.22) PPG lead over the next guy with a pretty large sample of games.



Quote:
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post
Malkin has to be included in this discussion.

I just wish though Crosby homer fans would admit to this. Crosby was "not the clear cut best player".
Malkin is skillswise one of the 3 best players in the league but he isn't the leader of that Pens team, Sid clearly is.

Malkin has 68% offensive zone starts to Sid's 47 in 13.

In 2012 it was 66-58 for Malkin.

In 2011 it was 55-47 for Malkin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
On the topic of Crosby/Malkin/Ovechkin, until Crosby's lows reach the level of Malkin's lows and Ovechkin's lows, I don't see myself struggling to rank Crosby above them while their careers are still relatively young. I mean, Malkin and Ovechkin have already had seasons where they dipped as low as .83 and .86 points-per-game; Crosby's lowest was 1.26. No misfires from the kid. He's more fragile, sure, but they haven't played so many more games that it is relevant yet, with Crosby being 1-2 years younger and all.
Excellent point that people tend to gloss over Sid hit the ground running and has been extremely elite while when he has played.

The 1.26 PPG in his rookie season is his lowest while he has scored at these rates since then

1.52
1.36
1.34
1.35
1.61 largely without Malkin
1.68
1.56 largely without Malkin

Hardyvan123 is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:12 PM
  #31
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
In their time together in the NHL, AO has the better counting stats but this is only because of the time missed and Sid still has a 1.41 to 1.23 (Malkin, AO is 1.22) PPG lead over the next guy with a pretty large sample of games.





Malkin is skillswise one of the 3 best players in the league but he isn't the leader of that Pens team, Sid clearly is.

Malkin has 68% offensive zone starts to Sid's 47 in 13.

In 2012 it was 66-58 for Malkin.

In 2011 it was 55-47 for Malkin.



Excellent point that people tend to gloss over Sid hit the ground running and has been extremely elite while when he has played.

The 1.26 PPG in his rookie season is his lowest while he has scored at these rates since then

1.52
1.36
1.34
1.35
1.61 largely without Malkin
1.68
1.56 largely without Malkin
3 seasons in which Crosby played a combined 99 games which isn't even equivalent to 1 1/2 seasons.

Since 2006-07 Crosby has yet to prove that he can maintain a clip better than 1.40 PPG over a full season.

His PPG has only gone up because of these short spurts in which he put up big numbers. He is benefiting from what I like to call the "Forsberg" factor.

Play great for short spurts and keep your PPG up and give the impression that you are more dominant than you actually are.

If Crosby can put up a PPG over 1.50 in a full season then I'll be the first to say I was wrong. Until then, Crosby has yet to distance himself from the pack the way Gretzky, Lemieux and later Jagr did.

Also if Ovechkin doesn't have his slump over the last 2 seasons (he seems to be rounding back into form this season) then I am willing to bet that his PPG would be a lot closer to Crosby's.

In fact just 3 seasons ago, Ovechkin's PPG was higher than Crosby's and they had both played 5 seasons in the NHL already.

livewell68 is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:13 PM
  #32
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,699
vCash: 500
1.52
1.36 53 of 82 games
1.34
1.35
1.61 largely without Malkin 41 of 82 games
1.68 22 of 82 games
1.56 largely without Malkin 36* of 48 games in an already shortened season while only playing against half the league

Just a coincidence I'm sure that 4 of his top 5 PpG seasons came when he only averaged about 38 games a season

I'm sorry but he NEEDS to put in some FULL seasons at his current production before this conversation and especially this thread title can be taken seriously what so ever.

Rhiessan71 is online now  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:15 PM
  #33
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,699
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post

If Crosby can put up a PPG over 1.50 in a full season then I'll be the first to say I was wrong.
And I'll be the second!

Rhiessan71 is online now  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:17 PM
  #34
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post

Just a coincidence I'm sure that 4 of his top 5 PpG seasons came when he only averaged about 38 games a season
.
As a matter of fact, it is. The eye-test works wonders here... he stepped up his game noticeably during that first huge year and then he got hurt. Then he came back and didn't miss a beat. And he hasn't missed a beat this season, where he suffered an even more ridiculously unfortunate injury. That's 100 games of 1.6ish ppg

I can't prove it and neither can you, but I'm certain this 1.6 is an actual measure of how good he is, and not just how much he produces in short stretches.

It really sucks, because historically he's far more productive post-all-star than he is pre. He's a guy that turns it on the more he plays. He's being robbed off some sick stats and we're being robbed of some sick hockey, but what we've seen IS Sidney Crosby and not just a guy who happens to have extended super hot streaks in between injuries. His entrance into his prime has COINCIDED with injury. Hence the "coincidence" of his best stats coming in shortened years.


Last edited by revolverjgw: 04-03-2013 at 09:25 PM.
revolverjgw is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:32 PM
  #35
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
As a matter of fact, it is. The eye-test works wonders here... he stepped up his game noticeably during that first huge year and then he got hurt. Then he came back and didn't miss a beat. And he hasn't missed a beat this season, where he suffered an even more ridiculously unfortunate injury. That's 100 games of 1.6 ppg

I can't prove it and neither can you, but I'm certain this 1.6 is an actual measure of how good he is, and not just how much he produces in short stretches.

It really sucks, because historically he's far more productive post-all-star than he is pre. He's a guy that turns it on the more he plays.
It's actually 99 games spread over 3 seasons mind you. History has always proven even in Gretzky and Lemieux' cases that the more you play, the more likely your PPG goes down.

Since I know so much about Jagr and pretty much know his stats by heart, I like to use him to prove my point here.

In 1999-00, in his first 39 games Jagr had 71 Pts (1.82 PPG) or 150 Pts over 82 games which would have even surpassed his own personal best of 149 Pts all while playing with Hrdina and Beranek as linemates. Injuries derailed his season and when he came back, he was slowed down and scored 25 Pts in his last 24 games. His PPG dropped 0.30 percentage points which is a 25 Pts difference over 82 games. Before you people also claim that Jagr is a notoriously slow finisher, please have a look at the fact that in 1998-99 and 2000-01 his second half numbers are better than Crosby's first half numbers in 2010-11.

All players are bound to hit slumps, injuries, run into hot goaltenders and or hot streaks during the course of a full 82 game season. Crosby's actual in game numbers have not taken a hit over the last 3 seasons due to the fact that we haven't seen him even hit a mini slump.

Heck even the best players of all-time have hit mini slumps by their own standards.

Crosby has yet to prove to me or anyone else that his most recent 1.60 PPG clip (over the last 99 games spread over 3 seasons) is his actual new level of play or is it rather just an anomaly in a career that is more on the level of 1.35 PPG (nothing to scoff at but not this "legendary" level that some of you are trying to sell)?

What he was doing this year was very good but it was in a short season and this is the very same reason why Jagr's 70 Pts in 48 games during the last lockout shortened season isn't looked upon as highly as the rest of his Art Ross winning seasons and 1995-96 and 2005-06 seasons.

livewell68 is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:36 PM
  #36
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post
I


Crosby has yet to prove to me or anyone else that his most recent 1.60 PPG clip (over the last 99 games spread over 3 seasons) is his actual new level of play or rather just an anomaly in a career that is more on the level of 1.35 PPG (nothing to scoff at but not this "legendary" player that some of you are trying to sell.)

Well actually a 1.35 ppg in this era is pretty much legendary-tier

But my point is that the eyetest shows that this Crosby IS better than the Crosby pre-injury. So it's not surprising that his best PPG seasons came recently. This is a better, smarter, more efficient player. So while Rhiessan was being sarcastic with his comment, he really needn't be. It IS a coincidence, not some sort of weird anomaly, though I understand why people believe it might be. I think his PPG would be as likely to go UP as it would be down (his history in long seasons at least suggests that), but I'm not really getting into that here.


Last edited by revolverjgw: 04-03-2013 at 09:47 PM.
revolverjgw is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:46 PM
  #37
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
Well actually a 1.35 ppg in this era is pretty much legendary-tier

But my point is that the eyetest shows that this Crosby IS better than the Crosby pre-injury. So it's not surprising that his best PPG seasons came recently. This is a better, smarter, more efficient player. So while Rhiessan was being sarcastic with his comment, he really needn't be. It IS a coincidence.
Then you have 3 legendary players because last time I checked, Malkin and Ovechkin's PPG were pretty close to Crosby's before 2010-11.

I'm not questioning the extent of Crosby's injuries or his willingness to play but I'm pretty sure that Malkin and Ovechkin have played hurt. We never really saw Crosby playing at 75% of his capability the last 3 seasons. We have seen that though with Ovechkin and Malkin. When Crosby's been in games, he's been as close to healthy as one can get. Doctors have been very cautious with Crosby and would not clear him to play if he wasn't healthy.

Maybe what I said isn't making much sense but what I'm trying to argue is that in order for Crosby to prove that he has reached a new level in his career, he has to be able to maintain a 1.50 + PPG over a full season. Even when healthy (2009-10), Crosby lost an Art Ross to Sedin of all people. Gretzky, Lemieux or even Jagr would never ever lose an Art Ross to Sedin if they were in their primes.

In order for Crosby to be compared to Lemieux and Gretzky, he has to first reach Jagr's level and stay on that level for a consistent period of time.

Jagr played at a 1.50 PPG clip or better in 6 seasons all which he played a minimum of 63 games in. That is 6 seasons of 120 + Pts clips.

So far Crosby has topped off at 120 Pts and that was a while ago too. Up until now he has failed in comparison to Jagr; Lemieux and Gretzky? Forget about it.

livewell68 is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:51 PM
  #38
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,699
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
Well actually a 1.35 ppg in this era is pretty much legendary-tier
Ovechkin
529 points (1.34 PpG) in his first 396 games (5 seasons)
More importantly he scored 269 goals during that stretch or 0.68 GpG

Crosby
506 points (1.36 PpG) in his first 371 games (5 seasons)
183 goals or only 0.49 GpG

Since that point, OV has slumped but Crosby has missed over 60% of his teams games.

Rhiessan71 is online now  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:51 PM
  #39
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post



Maybe what I said isn't making much sense but what I'm trying to argue is that in order for Crosby to prove that he has reached a new level in his career, he has to be able to maintain a 1.50 + PPG over a full season.
And that's fair, but I don't agree. I just don't need that kind of sample size. I think Crosby's last 100 games is indicative of what he'd do even if the games weren't broken up, but I accept that other people won't accept that. My eyes and my projections just inform my decision.

Quote:
Jagr played at a 1.50 PPG clip or better in 6 seasons all which he played a minimum of 63 games in. That is 6 seasons of 120 + Pts clips.
I put Jagr above Crosby offensively anyway (so far). But I consider Crosby a better player.

And Ovechkin was/is legendary tier, yes. He will go down as the second best LW ever. Malkin is well short of 1.35 but if he has enough dominant seasons to catch up, damn right he'll earn the legendary label.

revolverjgw is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:53 PM
  #40
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Ovechkin
529 points (1.34 PpG) in his first 396 games (5 seasons)
More importantly he scored 269 goals during that stretch or 0.68 GpG

Crosby
506 points (1.36 PpG) in his first 371 games (5 seasons)
183 goals or only 0.49 GpG

Since that point, OV has slumped but Crosby has missed over 60% of his teams games.
I don't see what point you're trying to make here, do you think I'm anti-Ovechkin just because I'm pro-Crosby? Or that I think there can only be one legendary player in an era? Ovechkin had a legendary run that only Bobby Hull can match at that position.

revolverjgw is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:54 PM
  #41
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,028
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to SaintPatrick33
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
And Ovechkin was/is legendary tier, yes. He will go down as the second best LW ever.
Really? I'm a Caps fan but come on

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:55 PM
  #42
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,699
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
I don't see what point you're trying to make here, do you think I'm anti-Ovechkin just because I'm pro-Crosby? Ovechkin had a legendary run that only Bobby Hull can match at that position.
I think it has more to do with what I would consider the use of the word "Legendary".
Seems a little too liberal to me but that's just my opinion.

Rhiessan71 is online now  
Old
04-03-2013, 09:57 PM
  #43
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Really? I'm a Caps fan but come on
Who do you think is better?

(I probably shouldn't do this, possible derailment incoming I guess it really IS true that you can't discuss Crosby without bringing Ovy in, even now )

revolverjgw is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 10:01 PM
  #44
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,028
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to SaintPatrick33
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
Who do you think is better?

(I probably shouldn't do this, possible derailment incoming I guess it really IS true that you can't discuss Crosby without bringing Ovy in, even now )
Luc Robitaille right off the top of my head. Look, as a Caps fan I love it when Ovi does well but I'm sorry he's not an ATG level player at this point. Whether he could be or not is a matter of speculation but at least right here right now he's not.

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 10:02 PM
  #45
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
And that's fair, but I don't agree. I just don't need that kind of sample size. I think Crosby's last 100 games is indicative of what he'd do even if the games weren't broken up, but I accept that other people won't accept that. My eyes and my projections just inform my decision.



I put Jagr above Crosby offensively anyway (so far). But I consider Crosby a better player.

And Ovechkin was/is legendary tier, yes. He will go down as the second best LW ever. Malkin is well short of 1.35 but if he has enough dominant seasons to catch up, damn right he'll earn the legendary label.
There is nothing that Crosby has done so far in his career that would indicate that he is a better player than Jagr was in his prime.

Jagr dominated games and seasons at a time in ways very few have in the history of the NHL.

Sure Crosby is more well-rounded player with very few weaknesses but that doesn't make him a better player than Jagr.

Offense was Jagr's forte and he did it better than anyone not named Howe, Lemieux, Gretzky or Orr.

It's not like he was consistently finishing in the top 5 in scoring in his prime, he was actually winning Art Ross trophy after Art Ross trophy.

The comparison between Crosby and Jagr is basically having a comparison between Yzerman (if we can have both the offensive machine version of him as well as the two-way version of him at the same time) vs Lemieux. Jagr would basically be a 130-160 Pts player in today's NHL with the way the game is called. Crosby at his best would have possibly challenged Jagr for an Art Ross but my bet would be that Jagr would still pull in a string of 4-5 Art Ross trophies.

I can probably name a good 30 players who were more well-rounded players than Jagr, but of those 30 players, I would say only a handful (if even that many) were better players than Jagr.

Here is my list of some of the best two-way players of all time (no disrespect to those players I missed on my list) and in bold are the players who are better than Jagr.

1. Orr
2. Howe

3. Bourque
4. Beliveau
5. Mikita
6. Harvey
7. Messier
8. Clarke
9. Trottier
10. Potvin
11. Gilmour
12. Fedorov
13. Yzerman
14. Forsberg
15. Chelios
16. Leetch
17. Sakic
18. Datsyuk
19. Toews
20. Crosby
21. Lidstrom
22. Stevens
23. Lindros
24. Modano
25. Francis

Of those players only Orr and Howe are clearly better than Jagr with possible arguments for Bourque and Beliveau.

There is more to hockey than scoring goals and racking up assists but very few could have a claim to doing that better than Jagr.

In my mind, and I'm sure a lot will agree with this, Jagr is the 5th greatest offensive player of all-time. In contrast, Crosby is nowhere being among the top 10 best two-way players, intangibles' players or offensive players of all-time.


Last edited by livewell68: 04-03-2013 at 10:21 PM.
livewell68 is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 10:16 PM
  #46
Cruor
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 325
vCash: 500
While on the subject of PPG which almost every Crosby-discussion brings up, why is say Forsberg universally derided for his PPG- numbers while for Crosby they are projected to whole seasons?

Cruor is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 10:22 PM
  #47
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by livewell68 View Post

Long post
I would say Crosby is much closer to Jagr offensively than you think. Both guys are the best and most consistent offensive players of their eras. I give Jagr the advantage offensively but it's not large, and Crosby contributes more all over the ice (especially being a center with more defensive responsibility). To me there's no doubt who I'd want, a solid two-way center of Crosby's immense scoring skill vs a moody one-dimensional winger with Jagr's slightly more immense scoring skill. But either way it's very close for me.

I agree that Jagr a top 5 offensive player. Talking about how legendary Jagr was at scoring is just preaching to the choir. It doesn't change anything about my view on Crosby, who I hold in higher regard than you do. And bringing up guys like Gilmour and Toews or whoever in an arbitrary list doesn't either. Crosby isn't just a star with a very good overall game, he's the best scorer of his era with a very good overall game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruor View Post
While on the subject of PPG which almost every Crosby-discussion brings up, why is say Forsberg universally derided for his PPG- numbers while for Crosby they are projected to whole seasons?
Forsberg, universally derided? He's a god on hfboards. And plenty of people knock Crosby all the time for his missed time, just scroll up

revolverjgw is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 10:31 PM
  #48
revolverjgw
Registered User
 
revolverjgw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,995
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Luc Robitaille right off the top of my head. Look, as a Caps fan I love it when Ovi does well but I'm sorry he's not an ATG level player at this point. Whether he could be or not is a matter of speculation but at least right here right now he's not.
I was afraid you'd say Robitaille. Ovechkin is a 2 time MVP, 3 time Lindsay winning, Richard hogging bodyblasting era-defining force of nature. I don't care what he does from now on (thankfully it looks like he's finding himself again), he's already left Luc is his rear-view mirror, even if he retires with less points or 40 goal seasons or whatever comparitively useless statistical feats Luc has on him. Great player, but Ovechkin dominated on another level. Now he's just pulling further ahead.

I was hoping you'd mention Ted Lindsay... I'd still disagree but it would make more sense, he's a better comparison. As far as I'm concerned, Lindsay is the only LW in the conversation with him (aside from Hull of course). Dickie Moore and Mahovlich and the like are great too, probably above Robitaille

revolverjgw is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 10:32 PM
  #49
livewell68
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,734
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
I would say Crosby is much closer to Jagr offensively than you think. Both guys are the best and most consistent offensive players of their eras. I give Jagr the advantage offensively but it's not large, and Crosby contributes more all over the ice (especially being a center with more defensive responsibility). To me there's no doubt who I'd want, a solid two-way center of Crosby's immense scoring skill vs a moody one-dimensional winger with Jagr's slightly more immense scoring skill. But either way it's very close for me.

I agree that Jagr a top 5 offensive player. Talking about how legendary Jagr was at scoring is just preaching to the choir. It doesn't change anything about my view on Crosby, who I hold in higher regard than you do. And bringing up guys like Gilmour and Toews or whoever in an arbitrary list doesn't either. Crosby isn't just a star with a very good overall game, he's the best scorer of his era with a very good overall game.



Forsberg, universally derided? He's a god on hfboards. And plenty of people knock Crosby all the time for his missed time, just scroll up
It's debatable if he's the best scorer of his era. He has all but 1 Art Ross to show for to receive "best scorer of his era" status.

Again you can bring up the whole two-way, defensively responsible argument all you want, but the eye test as you brought up earlier tells me that Jagr "dominated" in ways Crosby has only ever dreamed of. Heck even this season Crosby didn't wow me with his play. Malkin was more impressive and more dominant last season.

Just ask Big Phil, he will tell you that he thinks Malkin's season last year was the closest a player has come to dominating games the way Jagr did in his prime.

I'll take the moody, one-dimensional player who not only scored more than everyone else but also carried teams better than anyone else in his prime every day of the week over a player who is a good scorer and good two-way player with a deep team.


Last edited by livewell68: 04-03-2013 at 10:38 PM.
livewell68 is offline  
Old
04-03-2013, 10:33 PM
  #50
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,028
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to SaintPatrick33
Quote:
Originally Posted by revolverjgw View Post
I was afraid you'd say Robitaille. Ovechkin is a 2 time MVP, 3 time Lindsay winning, Richard hogging bodyblasting era-defining force of nature. I don't care what he does from now on (thankfully it looks like he's finding himself again), he's already left Luc is his rear-view mirror, even if he retires with less points or 40 goal seasons or whatever comparitively useless statistical feats Luc has on him. Great player, but Ovechkin dominated on another level.

I was hoping you'd mention Ted Lindsay... I'd still disagree but it would make more sense, he's a better comparison
More objectivity and less emotion in the evaluation of players please.

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:19 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.