What about Jason Allison? He looked to be a budding superstar (2 top 10s in points, 4 top 10s in assists) until the leg injury at the age of 26 made him miss a season and a half. When he finally came back after the lockout, he couldn't skate anymore
He'd still have to wait behind Oates and his skating wasn't great to begin with.
I also wonder if Allison would have been any better than say Bobby Smith overall even if healthy?
He'd still have to wait behind Oates and his skating wasn't great to begin with.
I also wonder if Allison would have been any better than say Bobby Smith overall even if healthy?
He did manage 60 pts in 60 games for the Leafs in his last season, for all the complaints about his skating, he never seemed to have a hard time putting up points. Aside from the injuries, I think it was more a personality defect that held him back. From his unreasonable demands on the Bruins to other character issues I think he could have been a lot better than he was.
He'd still have to wait behind Oates and his skating wasn't great to begin with.
I also wonder if Allison would have been any better than say Bobby Smith overall even if healthy?
in an alternate universe where jason allison was healthy and the DPE never ended, i can see him getting to that bobby smith or maybe pierre turgeon level. but even if he had stayed healthy, i don't see him as any higher than even, say, neal broten if he had to play the second half of his career in the post-lockout NHL.
but that said, i really liked allison. at his healthiest best, his size and ability to shield the puck made him as good of a non-physical center as there was in the DPE. such amazing vision on that guy.
Crosby's resume is good enough to be considered for Hall induction.
Well that means Lindros should be a lock then... (only difference is a Stanley cup... which I know means a lot)
In his prime was top 5 all time in PPG, top 10 players arguably ever in his prime, and is still all time top 20 in PPG, even though the last few years of his career he was a shell of himself.
As up to this point in their careers, in games played, Lindros had almost exactly the same PPG as Crosby, with three of Lindros's prime years being in the lowest scoring era since the 60's (though in the last year or two the scoring is getting close to the late 90's, and Lindros's first year was absurd for scoring!)
Lindros 431 GP = 600 Points
Crosby 434 GP = 609 Points
1992/93 to 1999/00 scoring Playoffs
GP G A P PPG GP G A P PPG
Mario Lemieux 228 205 275 480 2.105 40 26 32 58 1.450
Jaromir Jagr 575 328 504 832 1.447 79 49 49 98 1.241
Eric Lindros 486 290 369 659 1.356 50 24 33 57 1.140
Teemu Selanne 564 346 383 729 1.293 21 13 7 20 0.952
Pat LaFontaine 278 135 219 354 1.273 12 4 12 16 1.333
Joe Sakic 553 264 429 693 1.253 93 43 60 103 1.108
Peter Forsberg 393 142 349 491 1.249 84 38 56 94 1.119
Paul Kariya 376 210 254 464 1.234 14 8 9 17 1.214
Wayne Gretzky 488 145 449 594 1.217 52 27 49 76 1.462
Pierre Turgeon 537 263 390 653 1.216 56 17 33 50 0.893
Pavel Bure 448 291 237 528 1.179 51 29 31 60 1.176
Adam Oates 582 181 501 682 1.171 53 12 37 49 0.925
Steve Yzerman 583 240 419 659 1.130 103 39 58 97 0.942
Alex Mogilny 511 269 298 567 1.110 48 19 18 37 0.771
Sergei Fedorov 515 238 331 569 1.105 111 36 82 118 1.063
Ron Francis 609 185 488 673 1.105 55 17 40 57 1.036
Mats Sundin 606 272 381 653 1.078 48 22 19 41 0.854
Brett Hull 561 308 294 602 1.073 96 46 43 99 1.031
Mark Recchi 616 247 407 654 1.062 45 17 26 43 0.956
Theo Fleury 611 260 381 641 1.049 42 25 31 56 1.333
Mark Messier 549 200 373 573 1.044 59 22 44 66 1.119
Well that means Lindros should be a lock then... (only difference is a Stanley cup... which I know means a lot)
In his prime was top 5 all time in PPG, top 10 players arguably ever in his prime, and is still all time top 20 in PPG, even though the last few years of his career he was a shell of himself.
As up to this point in their careers, in games played, Lindros had almost exactly the same PPG as Crosby, with three of Lindros's prime years being in the lowest scoring era since the 60's (though in the last year or two the scoring is getting close to the late 90's, and Lindros's first year was absurd for scoring!)
Lindros 431 GP = 600 Points
Crosby 434 GP = 609 Points
1992/93 to 1999/00 scoring Playoffs
GP G A P PPG GP G A P PPG
Mario Lemieux 228 205 275 480 2.105 40 26 32 58 1.450
Jaromir Jagr 575 328 504 832 1.447 79 49 49 98 1.241
Eric Lindros 486 290 369 659 1.356 50 24 33 57 1.140
Teemu Selanne 564 346 383 729 1.293 21 13 7 20 0.952
Pat LaFontaine 278 135 219 354 1.273 12 4 12 16 1.333
Joe Sakic 553 264 429 693 1.253 93 43 60 103 1.108
Peter Forsberg 393 142 349 491 1.249 84 38 56 94 1.119
Paul Kariya 376 210 254 464 1.234 14 8 9 17 1.214
Wayne Gretzky 488 145 449 594 1.217 52 27 49 76 1.462
Pierre Turgeon 537 263 390 653 1.216 56 17 33 50 0.893
Pavel Bure 448 291 237 528 1.179 51 29 31 60 1.176
Adam Oates 582 181 501 682 1.171 53 12 37 49 0.925
Steve Yzerman 583 240 419 659 1.130 103 39 58 97 0.942
Alex Mogilny 511 269 298 567 1.110 48 19 18 37 0.771
Sergei Fedorov 515 238 331 569 1.105 111 36 82 118 1.063
Ron Francis 609 185 488 673 1.105 55 17 40 57 1.036
Mats Sundin 606 272 381 653 1.078 48 22 19 41 0.854
Brett Hull 561 308 294 602 1.073 96 46 43 99 1.031
Mark Recchi 616 247 407 654 1.062 45 17 26 43 0.956
Theo Fleury 611 260 381 641 1.049 42 25 31 56 1.333
Mark Messier 549 200 373 573 1.044 59 22 44 66 1.119
And what about the playoffs where (going into this season) Crosby averaged 1.32 PPG over 62 games to 1.08 over 53 games for Lindros?
I believe Crosby is 24. By the time Lindros was 24, the vast majority of his career was spent in a VERY high scoring era. Despite this, Sid's PPG was better.
I believe Crosby is 24. By the time Lindros was 24, the vast majority of his career was spent in a VERY high scoring era. Despite this, Sid's PPG was better.
I did it by games played... and as everyone knows, Lindros was far more physical, plus there was the lockout in 94-95, which resulted in only reaching the same number of games as Crosby when he was 26 (also as he did not play in his first eligible NHL year.)
1992/3-1999-00 average goals per game by forwards: 5.05 (Lindros missed almost 40 games during his first two years... which were the high scoring ones.)
2005/6-2011-12 average goals per game by forwards: 4.82 (During this time Crosby missed most of his games during the two lowest scoring years.)
a 0.2 gpg difference over 82 games is 8.2 goals per team over a whole year... about 3 points difference for a player of Crosby or Lindros caliber.
So no, not exactly a VASTLY higher scoring era, unless you count 0.2 gpg as vast.
When you factor in injuries, the years when the players missed the most games, I believe the difference between the two in relation to PPG in correlation with the GPG of the team, would be... about the same as the PPG each player actually got over this time... which are both almost identical.
They, talent wise, are extremely similar, I would take Lindros for his total dominance during his prime. (when he was not injured!) But that is my opinion, and can totally see why someone thinks Crosby is better, they are so ridiculously close on so many levels.
Hopefully Crosby does what Lindros could not, recover fully from concussion and play at his peak into his 30's.
And what about the playoffs where (going into this season) Crosby averaged 1.32 PPG over 62 games to 1.08 over 53 games for Lindros?
I do agree that Lindros should be in the HHOF
Once you take out the 3 games for the stars (when Lindros was injured and past it) he had 1.15 PPG.
Still not as good as Crosby, but I believe Crosby has had a better team that scored more during those runs... also the fact that in such a small sample size, one good or bad game either way makes a 0.1 PPG difference! (But I suppose that is what makes the Playoffs, one game can change everything!)
I do think Crosby has the edge in playoff performance though, more PPG and a cup shows this.
Both Lindros and Crosby, in primes, are obviously top 10 all time players, and would be hard to pick between.
Both Lindros and Crosby, in primes, are obviously top 10 all time players, and would be hard to pick between.
I consider the ability to be healthy enough to play games as part of a players' prime, so I'm going to have to disagree with this. Especially for Lindros, who doesn't have the "playoff legend" thing that Sid does. And even then, it's highly debatable. "All time" goes back a long time.
Pavol Demitra.
I thought he looked good when I watched him in NHL games, and he has good stats both regarding points per game and +/-. Internationally he was good too, and here is a thread talking about him as a tournament MVP. http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...d.php?t=743763
Below is a table showing how much he managed to improve his NHL team's winning percentage when playing.
(pGP is games he played in. xGP is games missed. cGP is the lowest of pGP and xGP.
pWins is team's winning % when he played. xWins when he didn't play. diff is the difference, i.e. by how many percentage units he improved his team.)
Seas
Age
Name
Pos
Team
pGP
G
A
Pts
GD
pWins
xGP
cGP
xWins
diff
1993-94
19
Pavol Demitra
L
OTT
12
1
1
2
-7
0.191
72
12
0.234
-0.044
1994-95
20
Pavol Demitra
R
OTT
16
4
3
7
-4
0.476
32
16
0.200
0.276
1995-96
21
Pavol Demitra
R
OTT
31
7
10
17
-3
0.393
51
31
0.235
0.158
1996-97
22
Pavol Demitra
R
STL
8
3
0
3
0
0.612
74
8
0.486
0.126
1997-98
23
Pavol Demitra
L
STL
61
22
30
52
11
0.630
21
21
0.514
0.116
1998-99
24
Pavol Demitra
L
STL
82
37
52
89
13
0.545
0
0
0.000
0.000
1999-00
25
Pavol Demitra
R
STL
71
28
47
75
34
0.702
11
11
0.477
0.225
2000-01
26
Pavol Demitra
R
STL
44
20
25
45
27
0.705
38
38
0.483
0.222
2001-02
27
Pavol Demitra
C
STL
82
35
43
78
13
0.574
0
0
0.000
0.000
2002-03
28
Pavol Demitra
C
STL
78
36
57
93
0
0.564
4
4
0.592
-0.028
2003-04
29
Pavol Demitra
C
STL
68
23
35
58
1
0.544
14
14
0.342
0.202
2005-06
31
Pavol Demitra
R
LAK
58
25
37
62
21
0.516
24
24
0.365
0.151
2006-07
32
Pavol Demitra
R
MIN
71
25
39
64
0
0.573
11
11
0.520
0.053
2007-08
33
Pavol Demitra
L
MIN
68
15
39
54
9
0.576
14
14
0.376
0.200
2008-09
34
Pavol Demitra
C
VAN
69
20
33
53
6
0.570
13
13
0.527
0.042
2009-
35
Pavol Demitra
C
VAN
28
3
13
16
3
0.600
54
28
0.582
0.018
Having checked every player on every team from 1987-88 to 2010-11, I can tell that he's at the very top, especially since repeating his good stat for so many seasons. For example, +.20 during five different seasons is really great, and he also managed it playing at least officially on three different forwards positions.
(Technical info: Wins are calculated by combining actual wins with Pythagoran win formula. Home and away games are taken care of, but not strength of opposition. Injuries of other players are also not being considered, yet, although an in-depth study of Demitra and his teammates still tels he considerably improved his team.
(Combining all seasons, Lidstrom is standing out as number 1, turning his Detroit from .45 to a typical league best of .65. And that is not even including 2011-12.)
in an alternate universe where jason allison was healthy and the DPE never ended, i can see him getting to that bobby smith or maybe pierre turgeon level. but even if he had stayed healthy, i don't see him as any higher than even, say, neal broten if he had to play the second half of his career in the post-lockout NHL.
but that said, i really liked allison. at his healthiest best, his size and ability to shield the puck made him as good of a non-physical center as there was in the DPE. such amazing vision on that guy.
Sure he was a slightly lesser version of Joe Thorton at his peak.
Pavol Demitra.
I thought he looked good when I watched him in NHL games, and he has good stats both regarding points per game and +/-. Internationally he was good too, and here is a thread talking about him as a tournament MVP. http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh...d.php?t=743763
Below is a table showing how much he managed to improve his NHL team's winning percentage when playing.
(pGP is games he played in. xGP is games missed. cGP is the lowest of pGP and xGP.
pWins is team's winning % when he played. xWins when he didn't play. diff is the difference, i.e. by how many percentage units he improved his team.)
Seas
Age
Name
Pos
Team
pGP
G
A
Pts
GD
pWins
xGP
cGP
xWins
diff
1993-94
19
Pavol Demitra
L
OTT
12
1
1
2
-7
0.191
72
12
0.234
-0.044
1994-95
20
Pavol Demitra
R
OTT
16
4
3
7
-4
0.476
32
16
0.200
0.276
1995-96
21
Pavol Demitra
R
OTT
31
7
10
17
-3
0.393
51
31
0.235
0.158
1996-97
22
Pavol Demitra
R
STL
8
3
0
3
0
0.612
74
8
0.486
0.126
1997-98
23
Pavol Demitra
L
STL
61
22
30
52
11
0.630
21
21
0.514
0.116
1998-99
24
Pavol Demitra
L
STL
82
37
52
89
13
0.545
0
0
0.000
0.000
1999-00
25
Pavol Demitra
R
STL
71
28
47
75
34
0.702
11
11
0.477
0.225
2000-01
26
Pavol Demitra
R
STL
44
20
25
45
27
0.705
38
38
0.483
0.222
2001-02
27
Pavol Demitra
C
STL
82
35
43
78
13
0.574
0
0
0.000
0.000
2002-03
28
Pavol Demitra
C
STL
78
36
57
93
0
0.564
4
4
0.592
-0.028
2003-04
29
Pavol Demitra
C
STL
68
23
35
58
1
0.544
14
14
0.342
0.202
2005-06
31
Pavol Demitra
R
LAK
58
25
37
62
21
0.516
24
24
0.365
0.151
2006-07
32
Pavol Demitra
R
MIN
71
25
39
64
0
0.573
11
11
0.520
0.053
2007-08
33
Pavol Demitra
L
MIN
68
15
39
54
9
0.576
14
14
0.376
0.200
2008-09
34
Pavol Demitra
C
VAN
69
20
33
53
6
0.570
13
13
0.527
0.042
2009-
35
Pavol Demitra
C
VAN
28
3
13
16
3
0.600
54
28
0.582
0.018
Having checked every player on every team from 1987-88 to 2010-11, I can tell that he's at the very top, especially since repeating his good stat for so many seasons. For example, +.20 during five different seasons is really great, and he also managed it playing at least officially on three different forwards positions.
(Technical info: Wins are calculated by combining actual wins with Pythagoran win formula. Home and away games are taken care of, but not strength of opposition. Injuries of other players are also not being considered, yet, although an in-depth study of Demitra and his teammates still tels he considerably improved his team.
(Combining all seasons, Lidstrom is standing out as number 1, turning his Detroit from .45 to a typical league best of .65. And that is not even including 2011-12.)
While Demitra was a decent to good player, sometimes stats like this show a correlation and are not a causal effect.
The part in bold tells us what happened but not exactly why.
It could also be a random oddity like how Iginla and Loungo have such bad Octobers as well.
In a large enough database of players there will always be oddities like this.
Once again not to say that he wasn't a decent to good player but he was never considered as one of the top 15-20 players in the world at any point was he?
During his very best season I remember he was called "just very good".
Demitra doesnt belong in the Hall, Palffy is much much closer (in terms of what if).
While Demitra was a decent to good player, sometimes stats like this show a correlation and are not a causal effect.
The part in bold tells us what happened but not exactly why.
It could also be a random oddity like how Iginla and Loungo have such bad Octobers as well.
In a large enough database of players there will always be oddities like this.
Once again not to say that he wasn't a decent to good player but he was never considered as one of the top 15-20 players in the world at any point was he?
I agree that even if the hadn't missed so many games, he may not have been HOF anyway. I meant to mention him more like an honorable mention as a player being great in many environments (several NHL teams, internationally) while also being injured.
I put forward the stat as an addition to usual stats being shown. Sad that you just seem to discarded it.
Last edited by plusandminus: 04-15-2012 at 06:07 PM.
Reason: no point try to explain
I dont think Lindros should count as a "what if he didnt get injured", instead he should count as "what if he could adapt his game to playing with men".
Palffy is an intresting case. I believe he has three top-10 in goals and four in points. Remarkable player playing for an septic tank of a team. He definitly had HHoF talent.
Demitra is a no.
Jason Allison didnt just have injuries against him but also his egoism.
