Better partial season: 10/11 Crosby or 99/00 Jagr

[Midnight Judges]

Some folks on this forum wake up in the morning and thank Crosby the sun came up.

 

[authentic]

In 2011, Crosby scored 66 points in 41 games. As of January 5th, the next closest players had 56, 51, 50 and 50 points (Stamkos, St. Louis, and the Sedins).

In 2000, Jagr scored 73 points in his first 41 games. The next closest players had 56, 53, 52 and 49 points (Recchi, Turgeon, Nolan, and Bure).

Through 41 games, Jagr had more goals and more assists. Jagr had more points at ES, and on the powerplay. Jagr was farther ahead of his peers around the league. Jagr led his team in scoring by a wider margin. Crosby was +1 higher, which is remarkable given the quality of their respective teams (through 41 games, Crosby's Penguins were the #1 team in the east, while Jagr's Penguins were tied for 14th in the league - and there were only 28 teams then.

The only argument for Crosby, as far as I can tell, is that Crosby missing the entire rest of the season was somehow more impressive (or more beneficial to his team?) than Jagr coming back and playing well (just not as well as he did before he was injured).

In the past I may have said Crosby but there is really no debating this.

 

[Varan]

In 2011, Crosby scored 66 points in 41 games. As of January 5th, the next closest players had 56, 51, 50 and 50 points (Stamkos, St. Louis, and the Sedins).

In 2000, Jagr scored 73 points in his first 41 games. The next closest players had 56, 53, 52 and 49 points (Recchi, Turgeon, Nolan, and Bure).

Through 41 games, Jagr had more goals and more assists. Jagr had more points at ES, and on the powerplay. Jagr was farther ahead of his peers around the league. Jagr led his team in scoring by a wider margin. Crosby was +1 higher, which is remarkable given the quality of their respective teams (through 41 games, Crosby's Penguins were the #1 team in the east, while Jagr's Penguins were tied for 14th in the league - and there were only 28 teams then.

The only argument for Crosby, as far as I can tell, is that Crosby missing the entire rest of the season was somehow more impressive (or more beneficial to his team?) than Jagr coming back and playing well (just not as well as he did before he was injured).

good post

 

[JFedol]

Not partial, but I find it insane what Jagr was accomplishing 40ish games in throughout that season.

From opening day to December 31, 1999. His stats were 34 GP (7 games less than Recchi at 41), 31 Goals, 34 Assists, 65 PTS.

13pt lead over 2nd place Recchi as well.

That's a 74 goal, 156pt pace with either Straka or Hrdina as your 1C lol. Just unfathomable numbers

 

[Coffee]

This forum is so delusional and hard for Crosby that it’s kind of gross. The vote is nearly 60% in favor of Crosby at the time of this post.

Jagr played more games yet won the Art Ross while missing almost a quarter of the season. He won the Pearson and lost to Pronger by 1 vote for the Hart.

He even beats Crosby if you just compare their first 41 games.

Jagr had 33 goals and 40 assists for 73 points in his first 41 games which bests what Crosby did then, before, and forever after.

Most importantly, Jagr was the better player visually on the ice. I seem to remember many going gaga for Crosby in that solitary half and saying that it’s closest someone has come to...wait for it...peak Jagr (even though we have samples during Mario’s comeback and of course stretches from Ovechkin that are contenders).

But let’s keep pretending that Crosby would have scored 64 goals and 132 points despite never having a single season where he put together two complete halves of 1.60+ ppg. He also had a higher PPG in the first half of his sophomore season than his 2010-2011 season and a high pace through 55-60 games and still didn’t top 120.

Either people have a short memory or they didn’t see both seasons because if you did, it’s pretty obvious Jagr takes this, in terms of actual accomplishments, play level, and even the fantasy BS of comparing 41 game sample sizes and projections.

How bout now ?

 

[Nasti]

Jagr did what he did at the height of the dead puck era and without a Malkin on his team getting attention from other teams.

 

[Regal]

Jagr did what he did at the height of the dead puck era and without a Malkin on his team getting attention from other teams.

I do prefer Jagr, but I’m not sure if Malkin was much of a factor. He was below PPG when Crosby was injured and the Straka - Lang - Kovalev second line was pretty strong for Pittsburgh.