1994-95: teams played 48 games (lockout).
Normaly they play 82.
To adjust this, a statistic is multiplied by a schedule adjustment of 82/games played.
In a 48 game season it is multiplied by 1.71.
Right now Crosby is averaging very close to 1.4 PPG for his career. Assuming that this will be his average throughout his career, and that he stays healthy throughout also....
Average of 78 games per season multiplied by 22 seasons is 1,716 games.
Average of 1.4 PPG for 1,716 games is 2,407 points.
These are some pretty big assumptions. A number of things could happen that would change these numbers quite a bit. He could average 1.75 points per game for his career and break Gretzky's record. Or maybe he gets injured before he is 30 and his career is shortened. IMO, if he can stay healthy and play with the longevity of guys like Sakic, he has a shot at it. One thought crossed my mind and that was, "What if he played as long as Howe?" If he played until he was fifty, he would hold every scoring title when he was done. There are so many things that could happen to affect his future that it is too hard to accurately predict what will happen.
I think that if Crosby can score 2200+ points, then one could make a serious case for him being the best player of all-time.
It is a certainty that Gretzky's point totals were significantly inflated due to the state of the NHL in the 80's. His stats in the 90's are a clear example of this. If the NHL does not change drastically, anyone who comes close to Gretzky's point totals could be considered as good, if not better.
Kurri joined the team, but was nothing more than an average second-liner at that point. Gretzky (...) Kurri was way, way back with 32 goals and 75 points. During the playoffs, Gretzky scored 21 points in 9 games. Kurri was again way behind him, with 12 points.
You realize the ridicule of this point?
That Kurri was an "average second liner" scoring 75 points exactly tells you how Gretzky's points (160+) were much less impressive than 160 points now.
Nowadays first line forwards (and good ones) get 75 points.
And good first liners get 12 points in 9 playoff games.
By the playoffs Kurri had been moved to Gretzky's line. Mid season line juggling if I'm not mistaken. So that Gretzky took a rookie playing like a 2nd/3rd liner and turned him into a 12 in 9 playoff scorer says alot about Gretzky's ability as well. Obviously Kurri developped well from there as well.
__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
I can't see Gretzky holding it forever, someone is going to come around one day who is just so good that even in the NHL he's going to skate circles around everyone and score like 5 a game. He can't hold it for the whole time the NHL is around.
If anybody in the near or distant future has a chance, it's Crosby.
ah, i see. adjusted totals if GPG during gretzky's career were as during last season.
i don't think approaching some of Gretzky's numbers would prove Crosby's 'greatness'. unless nobody else in the league came even close. and there are players hot on his tail in the scoring race.
During Gretzky's prime, he completely and totally destroyed every record, and left an incredible gap between his domination and anybody else's. we can break it down by year. let's begin in the 81-82 season:
Gretzky scored 43% more goals, 45% more assists and 44% more points than the second leading scorer.
the next year, he scored 51% more goals, 62% more assists, and 58% more points than #2.
in 83-84 he got even better, scoring over twice as many goals, a whopping 117% more, 37% more assists, and an incredible 63% more points than the #2 scorer.
the next year he scored only 2 more goals than #2 Jari Kurri, but tallied 108% more assists and 54% more points than him.
again, in 85-86 he continued this trend. racking up 75% more assists, and 52% more points than anyone else in the league.
in 86-87 he tallied 124% more assists and 69% more points than the second leading scorer.
for the next two seasons, he would not lead the league in scoring, however he was hardly far behind like everyone else was for years. 87-88 he trailed Lemieux's 168 points by a mere 19 points (11%). and in 88-89, trailed Lemieux's 199 by 31 (16%).
Gretzky would again lead in scoring, never by such huge margins though, and neither would or has anyone else to this day.
6 seasons of complete and utter domination of anyone else who ever came before, played against, or came after him. no way Crosby is close, nor will he ever be.
Call me when Crosby has Messier, Kurri, Anderson, Coffey...
We can keep going back and forth all we want here.
Well Crosby is already a Hart trophy and one year of leading the league in scoring behind. Plus Crosby has already had Mario and Palffy playing with him. He will have Malkin, Staal, Whitney, Gonchar playing with him for the next several seasons at least. But hey Crosby has just been playing with a bunch of ECHL calibre players so far in his career and will continue to play with ECHL calibre players forever while every member of the Oilers was a HHOFer, even in the first 2 years of Gretzky's career he was on a deep, deep team with HOF wingers on both his flanks.
By the playoffs Kurri had been moved to Gretzky's line. Mid season line juggling if I'm not mistaken. So that Gretzky took a rookie playing like a 2nd/3rd liner and turned him into a 12 in 9 playoff scorer says alot about Gretzky's ability as well. Obviously Kurri developped well from there as well.
I'm not disputing once second Gretz's abilities.
He's the best ever, period.
But Kurri an "average second line winger" with 75 points says a lot about the period of time they were playing in.
Plus Crosby has already had Mario and Palffy playing with him.
You're kidding right? Palffy retired due to injuries half the season, and Mario barely played at all.
Oh yeah, Crosby got most of his points in the second half, playing with Colby Armstrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2007 Sens Rule!
He will have Malkin, Staal, Whitney, Gonchar playing with him for the next several seasons at least.
You mean two rookies, a sophomore and Gonchar? Great. That's probably comparable to the powerful Edmonton Oilers of the 80s, who won a Stanley Cup without 99, right? No.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cup 2007 Sens Rule!
But hey Crosby has just been playing with a bunch of ECHL calibre players so far in his career and will continue to play with ECHL calibre players forever
Nobody said that. If your only argument is to try to stretch arguments into non-valid ones, your argument will lose its validity as well.
People need to get over the Crosby-Gretzky numbers comparision. Crosby will never get 92 goals or 163 assists or 215 points or 2857 points in his career. It simply is not possible.
However Crosby doesn't need to do that to join the elite category of players: Orr, Mario, Gretzky, Howe.
Crosby just needs to lead the NHL in scoring almost every season over a 10+ year run, win or bw runner-up for the Hart 5 or 6 or 7 times and lead a team to the Stanley Cup at least once and preferably twice or 3 times.
Who Crosby is competing against in Historical perspective is Esposito and Bobby Hull and Guy Lafleur and Jaromir Jagr. If Crosby is to cross the line to ultimate greatness and be remembered as among the very greatest to ever lace on skates he needs to top Espo who dominated the NHL offensively for 7 seasons and was good in the rest of them and led Team Canada to the greatest international win ever in 1972 and won 2 Cups on a great team. He needs to top Lafleur and his short period of 6 or 7 years of great dominace in the NHL in the mid-later 1970's. He needs to top Jagr who has like 5 or 6 scoring titles and is still among the best players in the NHL at 35 and shows no sign of slowing down and will possibly end up as the 2nd leading NHL scorer ever. He needs to top Hull who is regarded as the 6th or 7th or at least top 10 ever all-time. Hull who was the Consensus best player of an entire decade - the 1960's. Who had a whole ProfessionalLeague basically created because of him.
Topping those 4 will be hard. All led their teams to Cups, all were regarded as great players and yet none are even discussed as the best player ever. (Hull by a few maybe).
What does Crosby need to do to top those 4 players? A heck of alot! Play 15+ quality years as the top or one of the the top 2-3 players in the world (Lafleur didn't), lead his team to multiple Cups, (Hull couldn't) play a strong 2-way overall game and never be regarded as just an offensive player (Lafleur, Jagr). Never be overshadowed by a teammate (Espo with Orr, Jagr with Mario). Be regarded as a winner and be loved and respected by millions (Jagr is not loved or respected like he could be, neither was Espo). Be iconic as a player, I think Lafleur and Hull were iconic players but Lafleur wasn't for long enough and while Hull was he couldn't win more than one Cup and Howe the iconic player of the 1950's was around for Hull's entire career, even his final season, and overshadowed Hull).
Be regarded as a winner and be loved and respected by millions (Jagr is not loved or respected like he could be, neither was Espo).
Funny I'd say many don't like Mario at all, and I myself among others, don't like Gretzky one bit.
That's for their personnality. I lloved both players.
look adjusted # don't mean anything. it's just another way for someone to try to briing 1 player's stats down to justify why you think the other is better. the fact remains that gretzky scored 2857 and for crosby to be considered greater he will have to at least match those numbers not matct an adjusted # of 2200.
You're kidding right? Palffy retired due to injuries half the season, and Mario barely played at all.
Oh yeah, Crosby got most of his points in the second half, playing with Colby Armstrong.
You mean two rookies, a sophomore and Gonchar? Great. That's probably comparable to the powerful Edmonton Oilers of the 80s, who won a Stanley Cup without 99, right? No.
Nobody said that. If your only argument is to try to stretch arguments into non-valid ones, your argument will lose its validity as well.
The argument that Gretzky was with a bunch of talented players his first 2 season and Crosby has played with Bush leaguers is rubbish. Crosby started with Mario on his line in his rookie season. A washed up Mario that played only 20 games or so but Mario nonetheless. This season Crosby has played on a line with Malkin for much of the season, and on the PP with Malkin. Malkin right now is better than anyone was on the Oilers of Gretzky's first 2 seasons. The 80/81 versions of Kurri and Messier and Lowe and Coffey are not nearly as good as the 2006/07 Malkin. Malkin may never be the player those Edmonton stars were but he is better now than they were then. And Crosby has Whitney and Gonchar right now as his offensive D-Men - hardly terrible offensive puck moving defencemen.
Crosby's team now and his linemates pale in comparison to the Oilers of the mid-80's but Gretzky's first 2 seasons were not with a loaded team. The 1st year Gretzky didn't have hardly any of those players and the 2nd those players were raw rookies and played like it - while Gretzky played like by far the most dominant player on the planet.
I am not dissing Crosby - he is great - but the revisionist history about Gretzky's early years is getting really tired, as is the "Crosby has no linemates" when he has played with Malkin for much of the season and on the PP and Malkin is a great player.
Funny I'd say many don't like Mario at all, and I myself among others, don't like Gretzky one bit.
That's for their personnality. I lloved both players.
Fan love has nothing to do with being great.
Of course it does. Many love Gretzky and Mario. Some hate them but most don't.
But the point about being loved wasn't about them it was about Jagr. Players like Gilmour, Yzerman and Sakic are loved and idealized. People look more at their strengths not their faults. Jagr, Lindros, Hasek are not loved they are more villanized and many look at their weaknesses or injuries and faults rather than their sheer dominance at their peaks.
Crosby to be considered a true all-time great at the end of his career needs to be in the loved and idealized category.
That Kurri was an "average second liner" scoring 75 points exactly tells you how Gretzky's points (160+) were much less impressive than 160 points now.
Nowadays first line forwards (and good ones) get 75 points.
And good first liners get 12 points in 9 playoff games.
People need to have a good look at this quote, because it's true.
The argument that Gretzky was with a bunch of talented players his first 2 season and Crosby has played with Bush leaguers is rubbish. Crosby started with Mario on his line in his rookie season. A washed up Mario that played only 20 games or so but Mario nonetheless.
I stopped reading right there.
If you start your point by saying Crosby played with Mario, it's not worth discussing.
It wasn't Mario, it was a shadow of Mario that played 20 games on one leg.
Giving Crosby any sort of advantage because he played with Mario (and BTW, NOT one the same line, as Sid started on the second line) is simply ludicrous.
Of course it does. Many love Gretzky and Mario. Some hate them but most don't.
But the point about being loved wasn't about them it was about Jagr. Players like Gilmour, Yzerman and Sakic are loved and idealized. People look more at their strengths not their faults. Jagr, Lindros, Hasek are not loved they are more villanized and many look at their weaknesses or injuries and faults rather than their sheer dominance at their peaks.
Crosby to be considered a true all-time great at the end of his career needs to be in the loved and idealized category.
Nope, you're making out to be like your opinion is everyone's opinion.
I personally think very highly of Jaromir Jagr, Dom Hasek and others.
Just because they're not good ole' canadians or even north americans and don't have their mentality doesn't mean they're villains.
Jagr has always been a great effort guy, conrtary to popular HF urban legend, and he played through injuries for most of his career.
He's simply a living hockey legend.
Hasek was also an incredible guy.
Would you say Roy is loved by everyone? That's certainly not the case.
Lemieux neither, and he's a legend.
