HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Pittsburgh Penguins
Notices

Crosby's trainer: "He's been symptom-free"

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-06-2012, 11:18 AM
  #126
DoctrSteveBrule
BrooksOrpeck
 
DoctrSteveBrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,218
vCash: 500
Here is the analysis I was talking about...

http://smokedegrees.blogspot.com/201...rers-peak.html

All it takes is a little bit of googling but hey, why do that when you can just insult a guy for looking at data and not find any real information on your own, right?

DoctrSteveBrule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 11:19 AM
  #127
DoctrSteveBrule
BrooksOrpeck
 
DoctrSteveBrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Frasier Crane View Post
As if that's relevant in any way with the way the game has changed both in style and workout advancements. What a joke.
so decreases in goal scoring league-wide and increased physical wear and tear, lead you to believe that players goal scoring abilities will become more sustainable, not less? Interesting.

DoctrSteveBrule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 11:23 AM
  #128
SCUDeriMISSILE
We traded Staal
 
SCUDeriMISSILE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 14,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctrSteveBrule View Post
so decreases in goal scoring and increased physical wear and tear, lead you to believe that players goal scoring abilities will become more sustainable, not less? Interesting.
We're not comparing his goal totals to the guys from the 70s - we're comparing him against his current peers. Even if the peak-goal amounts are fewer than they were years ago, it doesn't mean they're not still peak totals. The actual amount of goals doesn't matter as long as they continue to go up or stay around the same number.

You think that increasing physical strength/being more health conscious doesn't allow for players to have a greater amount of prime years than guys who chain-smoked and didn't lift weights? Interesting.

And this goal-scoring vs. production argument is idiotic. Yeah, they'll become physically stronger and better passers, but just the goal totals will go down because...?


Last edited by SCUDeriMISSILE: 08-06-2012 at 11:30 AM.
SCUDeriMISSILE is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 11:23 AM
  #129
DoctrSteveBrule
BrooksOrpeck
 
DoctrSteveBrule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,218
vCash: 500
Sorry guys, I never should have said something about Sid that wasn't completely positive. He can walk on water. I apologize deeply.

DoctrSteveBrule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 11:27 AM
  #130
Ogrezilla
Arrogant Yinzer
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 29,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctrSteveBrule View Post
Sorry guys, I never should have said something about Sid that wasn't completely positive. He can walk on water. I apologize deeply.
I hate talking to people that say **** like this when people disagree with them. It's a discussion. Discuss. At least it lets us know who isn't worth having an argument with.

Ogrezilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 11:35 AM
  #131
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 14,198
vCash: 500
We've reached the point in the offseason where we're doubting a guy's goal scoring abilities. A guy who was scoring at will just a year and a half ago.

mpp9 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 11:48 AM
  #132
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
I know it isn't exactly comparable. Comparing the leader's scoring to the average scoring or even next highest scoring is probably a better comparison. If Sidney Crosby has 150 points this year and the next highest is Malkin around 107 again and the rest of the pack is below 100 I think it would be hard to argue that it isn't one of the best seasons ever. A bit below Gretzky and Lemieux's best but still towards the top.

Malkin last year was the most separation a player has had from the rest of the pack since Jagr was doing it.
I'll say this much: I certainly wouldn't complain with that season

With that said, check out this streak of "Gretzky vs. second-best" for seven consecutive years during the 80s.

1980-81: Gretzky: 164 points. Next Best: 135 points. Diff: 29 points
1981-82: Gretzky: 212 points. Next Best: 147 points. Diff: 65 points
1982-83: Gretzky: 196 points. Next Best: 124 points. Diff: 72 points
1983-84: Gretzky: 205 points. Next Best: 126 points. Diff: 79 points
1984-85: Gretzky: 208 points. Next Best: 135 points. Diff: 73 points
1985-86: Gretzky: 215 points. Next Best: 141 points. Diff: 74 points
1986-87: Gretzky: 183 points. Next Best: 108 points. Diff: 75 points

It's absolutely mind-boggling that Gretzky routinely outscored the second-best point getter by 70+ points. That means he outscored the second-best scorer by about 1 POINT PER GAME!!

I understand that the 80s were a higher-scoring era, but Gretzky's absolute dominance over the competition is something that I really don't think HF understands.

LetangInTheSO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 11:52 AM
  #133
Ogrezilla
Arrogant Yinzer
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 29,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
I'll say this much: I certainly wouldn't complain with that season

With that said, check out this streak of "Gretzky vs. second-best" for seven consecutive years during the 80s.

1980-81: Gretzky: 164 points. Next Best: 135 points. Diff: 29 points
1981-82: Gretzky: 212 points. Next Best: 147 points. Diff: 65 points
1982-83: Gretzky: 196 points. Next Best: 124 points. Diff: 72 points
1983-84: Gretzky: 205 points. Next Best: 126 points. Diff: 79 points
1984-85: Gretzky: 208 points. Next Best: 135 points. Diff: 73 points
1985-86: Gretzky: 215 points. Next Best: 141 points. Diff: 74 points
1986-87: Gretzky: 183 points. Next Best: 108 points. Diff: 75 points

It's absolutely mind-boggling that Gretzky routinely outscored the second-best point getter by 70+ points. That means he outscored the second-best scorer by about 1 POINT PER GAME!!

I understand that the 80s were a higher-scoring era, but Gretzky's absolute dominance over the competition is something that I really don't think HF understands.
well I never said it would put Sid on Gretzky's level, just that the one season could be comparable

that 86-87 season is the most dominant of those when compared to the rest of the league. That's crazy.

Ogrezilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 11:53 AM
  #134
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogrezilla View Post
well I never said it would put Sid on Gretzky's level, just that the one season could be comparable
Not saying you did, just bringing it up as a basis for comparison

LetangInTheSO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 11:56 AM
  #135
Saku11
Registered User
 
Saku11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctrSteveBrule View Post
. Pegging Sid for 40+ when he's only done that once seems more irresponsible to me...
Thats because the season he scored 50 he was more of a pass first player and didnt posses the shot he does now. He was waayy more dangerous shooting the puck after the 09 offseason. To boot, i think the season was the first he used one-piece synthetic stick. I think its very reasonable to expect he scores over 40 next season.


Last edited by Saku11: 08-06-2012 at 12:01 PM.
Saku11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 11:56 AM
  #136
Ogrezilla
Arrogant Yinzer
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 29,204
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
Not saying you did, just bringing it up as a basis for comparison
ya Gretzky was insane.

Ogrezilla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:01 PM
  #137
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctrSteveBrule View Post
what I said had nothing to do with point production what so ever...it was about GOAL SCORING
No kidding. Which is why I was asking for you to provide evidence because I was curious to where your claim was coming from. I mentioned the other article becuse it was the only thing relevant I could think of that may back your claim.


Last edited by Shady Machine: 08-06-2012 at 12:13 PM.
Shady Machine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:06 PM
  #138
Saku11
Registered User
 
Saku11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,171
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
I understand that the 80s were a higher-scoring era, but Gretzky's absolute dominance over the competition is something that I really don't think HF understands.
He was pure genius. I think if he didnt start playing hockey he would be a famous inventor or something like that.

Saku11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:09 PM
  #139
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnrealMachine View Post
From my understanding, Dr. Carrick was involved in treating his condition, not diagnosing it. Those responsible for his diagnosis were the team doctors and any medical attention he received before turning to Dr. Carrick. Look, I am as frustrated by anyone else as to what a debacle that turned into, but the blame should be placed at those who initially diagnosed him, not those who tried to treat a misdiagnosed condition.
I surely place blame on those responsible for the initial diagnosis, as well. With that said, for a chiropractor not to recognize that his patient has broken vertebrae?

LetangInTheSO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:12 PM
  #140
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoctrSteveBrule View Post
Here is the analysis I was talking about...

http://smokedegrees.blogspot.com/201...rers-peak.html

All it takes is a little bit of googling but hey, why do that when you can just insult a guy for looking at data and not find any real information on your own, right?
That article is garbage to be honest. It says nothing about their averages at certain ages, rather just what ages did their BEST 3 goal scoring years come from. So basically, just because some guy had his best years when he was 21, 24, and 27 for example, doesn't mean he didn't have a better average from ages 27-29 than he did at ages 24-26.

Looking at this data is certainly helpful in forming an opinion, but to conclusively say "goal scorers peaks are from ages 24-26" based on this data is pretty ridiculous. Which is why I asked the question in the first place. The analysis is just missing a lot of data and doesn't account for changes in eras, technology, nutrition and training habits, longevity of players, etc.

Shady Machine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:15 PM
  #141
Sidney the Kidney
Selke BylsmAdams
 
Sidney the Kidney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,837
vCash: 80
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
I'll say this much: I certainly wouldn't complain with that season

With that said, check out this streak of "Gretzky vs. second-best" for seven consecutive years during the 80s.

1980-81: Gretzky: 164 points. Next Best: 135 points. Diff: 29 points
1981-82: Gretzky: 212 points. Next Best: 147 points. Diff: 65 points
1982-83: Gretzky: 196 points. Next Best: 124 points. Diff: 72 points
1983-84: Gretzky: 205 points. Next Best: 126 points. Diff: 79 points
1984-85: Gretzky: 208 points. Next Best: 135 points. Diff: 73 points
1985-86: Gretzky: 215 points. Next Best: 141 points. Diff: 74 points
1986-87: Gretzky: 183 points. Next Best: 108 points. Diff: 75 points

It's absolutely mind-boggling that Gretzky routinely outscored the second-best point getter by 70+ points. That means he outscored the second-best scorer by about 1 POINT PER GAME!!

I understand that the 80s were a higher-scoring era, but Gretzky's absolute dominance over the competition is something that I really don't think HF understands.
Oh God, the bolded, the bolded, and the bolded.

It's one of my pet peeves about this website. So many people who probably weren't even born during Gretzky's prime weighing in on how good he'd be today. All they spout is "80's were high scoring", without looking at the context of just how far ahead of his peers Gretzky was.

Sure Gretzky's actual totals were inflated because of the 80's style of play. But he was still producing head and shoulders above anyone else (until Mario came into the league) in the league. Even if you factor in lower scoring in today's game, that would be like a player scoring 150 to 160 points a year, when the next best scorer was hovering around 100.

But I've come to expect no less from a website where the vast majority of folks think that all the best players in hockey history played within the last 10 years.

Sidney the Kidney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:19 PM
  #142
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney the Kidney View Post
Oh God, the bolded, the bolded, and the bolded.

It's one of my pet peeves about this website. So many people who probably weren't even born during Gretzky's prime weighing in on how good he'd be today. All they spout is "80's were high scoring", without looking at the context of just how far ahead of his peers Gretzky was.

Sure Gretzky's actual totals were inflated because of the 80's style of play. But he was still producing head and shoulders above anyone else (until Mario came into the league) in the league. Even if you factor in lower scoring in today's game, that would be like a player scoring 150 to 160 points a year, when the next best scorer was hovering around 100.

But I've come to expect no less from a website where the vast majority of folks think that all the best players in hockey history played within the last 10 years.
I definitely agree and as someone who wasn't alive during his prime years, it isn't fair for me to really comment. He was head and shoulders above the competition. In terms of legacy, no one will ever dominate the game like he or IMHO Lemieux did. Defenses and goalies are just flat out better and the level of general competition is better. So it's really an impossible exercise to say how he would produce today.

Shady Machine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:27 PM
  #143
UnrealMachine
Registered User
 
UnrealMachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
I surely place blame on those responsible for the initial diagnosis, as well. With that said, for a chiropractor not to recognize that his patient has broken vertebrae?
The nature of that particular injury seems extremely difficult to diagnose/treat without a dedicated MRI machine. Since the treatment involved actually getting neck surgery, I'm not sure what more Dr. Carrick could have done?

UnrealMachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:32 PM
  #144
Coach John McGuirk
Bylstarded
 
Coach John McGuirk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Jersey Shore, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 13,723
vCash: 500
I just wholly disagree. Gretzky was an incredible player, for sure one of the best ever to play, but there were so many factors in his favor it was ridiculous.

Nobody EVER put a body on Gretzky. Two reasons: They would get the **** kicked out of them by McSorely or Semenko.

Gretzky was one of very few "athletes" playing in the NHL at the time. He trained, and he took care of himself. Guys used to smoke between periods, and drink beers in the locker room. As a whole, the NHL was full of beer league players back then.

The goalies rarely took away the lower part of the ice, had much smaller pads, and weren't nearly the level of athlete guys back in the 90's were, let alone today.

Nobody is saying Gretzky was anything but an amazing player. I just think his totals were seriously inflated because of several factors. I also believe Lemieux is the best ever to play the game, homer or not.

Coach John McGuirk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:32 PM
  #145
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
Great Play Orpik!
 
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 40,161
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shady Machine View Post
I definitely agree and as someone who wasn't alive during his prime years, it isn't fair for me to really comment. He was head and shoulders above the competition. In terms of legacy, no one will ever dominate the game like he or IMHO Lemieux did. Defenses and goalies are just flat out better and the level of general competition is better. So it's really an impossible exercise to say how he would produce today.
It's interesting to consider how productive players like Makarov, Larionov, and Krutov would've been in the '80s had they been able to play in the NHL.

We know they could compete with the likes of Gretzky and Lemieux in international competition, and we've seen how well Russia's best have fared in their primes in the NHL since then.

They wouldn't have beaten Gretz, but I think his scoring title margins could've been a fair bit smaller.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:33 PM
  #146
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnrealMachine View Post
The nature of that particular injury seems extremely difficult to diagnose/treat without a dedicated MRI machine. Since the treatment involved actually getting neck surgery, I'm not sure what more Dr. Carrick could have done?
I'm not a doctor, so I can't tell you explicitly what he should/could have done. With that said, at face value, I just find it bizarre that a chiropractor wouldn't recognize broken vertebrae in a patient. Moreover, we're not talking about a run-of-the-mill patient. We're talking about the most important/high-profile patient the guy has ever worked with. For his own sake, you think the guy would have done everything to ensure that the injury he was treating was treating was indeed the correct one!

LetangInTheSO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:40 PM
  #147
UnrealMachine
Registered User
 
UnrealMachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,070
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
I'm not a doctor, so I can't tell you explicitly what he should/could have done. With that said, at face value, I just find it bizarre that a chiropractor wouldn't recognize broken vertebrae in a patient. Moreover, we're not talking about a run-of-the-mill patient. We're talking about the most important/high-profile patient the guy has ever worked with. For his own sake, you think the guy would have done everything to ensure that the injury he was treating was treating was indeed the correct one!
Well, you are assuming that it was possible for Dr. Carrick to even be able to make that diagnosis. It might not have been. Not a knock on him per se, as there are dedicated specialists with dedicated equipment to diagnose and treat such a condition. I still maintain that it was the original medical team that is by far the most culpable in this. Or should I say ex-medical team.

UnrealMachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:44 PM
  #148
Shady Machine
Registered User
 
Shady Machine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 9,703
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rowdy Roddy Peeper View Post
It's interesting to consider how productive players like Makarov, Larionov, and Krutov would've been in the '80s had they been able to play in the NHL.

We know they could compete with the likes of Gretzky and Lemieux in international competition, and we've seen how well Russia's best have fared in their primes in the NHL since then.

They wouldn't have beaten Gretz, but I think his scoring title margins could've been a fair bit smaller.
That's also an excellent point.

Shady Machine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:46 PM
  #149
PensFanSince1989
Registered User
 
PensFanSince1989's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
I'll say this much: I certainly wouldn't complain with that season

With that said, check out this streak of "Gretzky vs. second-best" for seven consecutive years during the 80s.

1980-81: Gretzky: 164 points. Next Best: 135 points. Diff: 29 points
1981-82: Gretzky: 212 points. Next Best: 147 points. Diff: 65 points
1982-83: Gretzky: 196 points. Next Best: 124 points. Diff: 72 points
1983-84: Gretzky: 205 points. Next Best: 126 points. Diff: 79 points
1984-85: Gretzky: 208 points. Next Best: 135 points. Diff: 73 points
1985-86: Gretzky: 215 points. Next Best: 141 points. Diff: 74 points
1986-87: Gretzky: 183 points. Next Best: 108 points. Diff: 75 points

It's absolutely mind-boggling that Gretzky routinely outscored the second-best point getter by 70+ points. That means he outscored the second-best scorer by about 1 POINT PER GAME!!

I understand that the 80s were a higher-scoring era, but Gretzky's absolute dominance over the competition is something that I really don't think HF understands.
Gretzky also changed the way offense was played, a change that systems and defences have accounted for. He wouldn`t dominate like that if his prime was today. However, credit goes to him for changing the game.

PensFanSince1989 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-06-2012, 12:46 PM
  #150
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnrealMachine View Post
Well, you are assuming that it was possible for Dr. Carrick to even be able to make that diagnosis. It might not have been. Not a knock on him per se, as there are dedicated specialists with dedicated equipment to diagnose and treat such a condition. I still maintain that it was the original medical team that is by far the most culpable in this. Or should I say ex-medical team.
I absolutely agree. With that said, the more I read about Dr. Carrick, the more I'm convinced that he practices a pseudo-science and likely did nothing to actually help Sid. Of course that's conjecture, but the evidence surely doesn't weigh in Dr. Carrick's favor. I don't think that Sid's camp's "positive words" about Dr. Carrick change my position on the subject.

LetangInTheSO is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 10:04 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.