Crosby is now Top 5.....(MOD EDIT: career value affected by injury)

[daver]

.....in career value affected by injury.

This past playoffs was a microcosm of Crosby's career being frustratingly cut short with injury at the worst possible time. It was another opportunity to confirm his status at, or close to, the very top of the league; this time in the form of an elite playoff run, one that if it went three rounds or more, could have solidified the argument for him at #5.

Instead of closing out the Rangers who were dead in the water late in the 2nd period of Game 5, Crosby gets knocked out again, and the Pens lose the series.

Is there any other player who lost out on as much career value as him besides Mario and Orr? Unlike Crosby, I think Lindros was destined to not have a long career.

I would say there is a decent argument that he lost out on more value than Orr did.

Click to read more...

 

[JackSlater]

A whole lot of generous assumptions going on up there. I do believe that the injury to Crosby swung the Pittsburgh-Rangers series, but an elite round or two would not "confirm his status at the very top of the league" or really impact anything big for him historically. For the guys near the very top it's extremely difficult to move the needle much in the late stages of their careers. To use an example of a player in the same tier as Crosby, Bobby Hull had a great playoffs in 1971 as Chicago fell just short of the Stanley Cup. I don't think that the 1971 playoffs come up very often when discussing Hull's place all time.

Crosby's place is impacted by injuries when people want to just count trophies or people are looking for reasons to downgrade him. Injuries cost Crosby a fairly certain Hart/Art Ross combination in 2011 and 2013. It shouldn't matter all that much considering that he was the obvious best player in the NHL in those years, but people can make it matter if they want to. Of course, you can play that game with other all time greats as well, including Hull being extremely likely to win the 1965 Art Ross if not for his knee injury. Crosby getting injured after a strong start to his first round series in the 2022 playoffs is nothing in the historical sense.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

.....in career value affected by injury.

This past playoffs was a microcosm of Crosby's career being frustratingly cut short with injury at the worst possible time. It was another opportunity to confirm his status at, or close to, the very top of the league; this time in the form of an elite playoff run, one that if it went three rounds or more, could have solidified the argument for him at #5.

Instead of closing out the Rangers who were dead in the water late in the 2nd period of Game 5, Crosby gets knocked out again, and the Pens lose the series.

Is there any other player who lost out on as much career value as him besides Mario and Orr? Unlike Crosby, I think Lindros was destined to not have a long career.

I would say there is a decent argument that he lost out on more value than Orr did.

Not sure how much of an argument there is that he lost out on more than Orr did.

Bobby Orr's career was over at only 26 years old, yeah he had 3 more seasons but only played 36 total games in those 3 years. That's like saying Crosby's career ended in 2014. I know Crosby has lost chunks of seasons but your career being all but over at 26 from injuries is another level IMO.

In terms of what they were robbed of by injuries, I think Crosby and Neely have very similar stories.

Both put up dazzling seasons and looked otherworldly at times (Crosby on a higher level than Neely) when they were healthy. Both lost out on years worth of peak seasons due to their injuries.

In 90 and 91, At ages 24/25 Neely put it all together and was an elite goal scorer in addition to his physical play and fighting scoring 55 (2nd in the league) and 51 (3rd in the league). Then in the 91 ECF you get the Ulf Samuelsson cheapshots. As a result, Neely only plays in 22 games total the next 2 seasons. He comes back in 94 and scores 50 in 44 on 1 leg and playing only 49 games due to his injury. Holds on for 2 more years, but never playing more than 49 games in a season before having to finally retire at 30.

Top 5 injury careers, Id say

1. Orr
2. Mario
3. Crosby
4. Lindros
5. Neely

 

[bobholly39]

Orr missed ~50% of his career. And defensemen often age very well, so he might have too.

Crosby played ~90% of his career.

Absolutely no argument to make that injuries impacted Crosby more.
If you're focusing entirely on peak? Sure maybe Crosby takes a bit more of a hit - but even then:

Lemieux was playing at a Gretzky like level - maybe above - from ~88 on. And he missed practically full seasons in the early 90s and was nowhere near 100% when he did play. In terms of high end peak, no one was more impacted than him.

Orr - he won the Art Ross as a defenseman in his last full season. Good chance he had at least ~2-3 more seasons close to that level. So - he missed out on some significant peak years.

Yeah - Crosby's case starts at #3 at the very highest. Orr/Lemieux - in some order - are always top 2 for me.

 

[VanIslander]

He has been top-5 in NHL goals 2 times. 2... in a 17 year career. That suuuucks! (Heck, he has only once even reached the 45-goal mark?)

He has been top-5 in NHL points 9 times in 17 years due to assists (not Gretzky, Boucher, Oates level of performance, but top-10ish in passing).

He has one of the most meh regular season careers of any generational talent: season ticket holders haven't gotten anywhere near as advertised.

A HHOF-inductee, but CLEARLY not a top-10 hockey career.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Prior to the 2018-19 season, your initial list in the top 100 players of all-time project placed Crosby 10th.

Since that point, he has added a 2nd Team AS at center, a 5th place AS center finish, a 2nd place Hart finish, a 4th place Hart finish, a 4th place Selke finish, another 100 point season, a 7th place assist finish, a 5th and a 10th place point finish, four more seasons well over a point per game into his mid-30's...and is clearly still one of the league's most elite players, but his stock has dropped for you?

 

[bobholly39]

He has been top-5 in NHL goals 2 times. 2... in a 17 year career. That suuuucks! (Heck, he has only once even reached the 45-goal mark?)

He has been top-5 in NHL points 9 times in 17 years due to assists (not Gretzky, Boucher, Oates level of performance, but top-10ish in passing).

He has one of the most meh regular season careers of any generational talent: season ticket holders haven't gotten anywhere near as advertised.

A HHOF-inductee, but CLEARLY not a top-10 hockey career.

In 2018 we ranked the top 100 hockey players of all-time. You had voted Crosby 10th all time in your initial ranking.

So in 2018 he was top 10 all time. But 4 years of hockey later - which includes a 2nd place and 4th place hart placement notably - he's somehow gone from being top 10 to no longer being top 10?

That's a hell of a non-biased opinion you have there.

Also - top 5 in scoring 9x is meh? lol. Mario Lemieux was top 5 in scoring 9x. Howe and Gretzky more than that. Maurice Richard too. Unless i'm forgetting someone obvious - that's more than anyone else in history of the NHL.

"meh" indeed.

Prior to the 2018-19 season, your initial list in the top 100 players of all-time project placed Crosby 10th.

Since that point, he has added a 2nd Team AS at center, a 5th place AS center finish, a 2nd place Hart finish, a 4th place Hart finish, a 4th place Selke finish, another 100 point season, a 7th place assist finish, a 5th and a 10th place point finish, four more seasons well over a point per game into his mid-30's...and is clearly still one of the league's most elite players, but his stock has dropped for you?

I think I was a minute too late

 

[tabness]

Welcome back @daver haven't seen you around since like late in the Edmonton/LA series, good to have you back fighting the good fight though lol

I disagree of course and all I know is

 

[MadLuke]

He has been top-5 in NHL points 9 times in 17 years due to assists (not Gretzky, Boucher, Oates level of performance, but top-10ish in passing).

Howe and Gretzky more than that. Maurice Richard too.

I do not think so, only Howe and Gretzky has more Top 5 finish in point in the history of the league.

Points

1.	Gordie Howe*	20
2.	Wayne Gretzky*	16
3.	Maurice Richard*	9
	Andy Bathgate*	9
	Stan Mikita*	9
	Mario Lemieux*	9
	Sidney Crosby	9

He has been top-5 in NHL goals 2 times. 2... in a 17 year career. That suuuucks! (Heck, he has only once even reached the 45-goal mark?)

Give you that, a perfect way to present someone that won the Rocket 2 times, you made an art of presenting things in a way to fit a narrative.

 

[Big Phil]

It can be argued that outside of Orr and Lemieux that Crosby is next in line with most career value lost to injuries. That being said, in 2013 we thought he was never going to get out of this funk of partial seasons, and then he really has been pretty good since then. 2022 was unfortunate, because it looked like Crosby was poised for a nice run.

I am trying to think of a player or even a goalie, that had as much of their career taken away as Crosby. The first one I think about it Bossy. Retiring at 30 years old with just 10 years in the NHL isn't great. He had a 60+ goal season in 1986, which he often had, then a 37 goal season in 63 games, and then retired. He's on pace for another 50 and then retires. That's tough. Crosby still has had some good moments from 30 years old onwards. Bossy didn't.

 

[VanIslander]

Thank you MadLuke for reminding us that in terms of scoring production, it's Howe, Gretzky and .... a list of also rans. 9 & 99.

(Crosby ain't top 9)

Put the injury card in the garbage. It is overplayed.

 

[MadLuke]

It is hard to tell even the Forsberg, Bure, Kariya, Lindros, specially Lindros does not seem clearly behind here at first glance, the Crosby year lost were during the usual peak of 22-26 year's old that make them specially harsh lost.

When talking missing after 30 year's old, you already usually saw the best of the player and more than enough to fully evaluate, I think.

The is there a better Lemieux than the 88-89 version without injuries is somewhat a what if, but Lemieux had the chance to put historically dominant season on the board and playoff runs, the what if is not much about how high he could have jumped, but how much could he have sustained.

Crosby, what if is more what if the dominance he put during is peak his a small sample aberration and not something close to what he would have done playing 90% of the game has well.

 

[LightningStorm]

It is hard to tell even the Forsberg, Bure, Kariya, Lindros, specially Lindros does not seem clearly behind here at first glance, the Crosby year lost were during the usual peak of 22-26 year's old that make them specially harsh lost.

When talking missing after 30 year's old, you already usually saw the best of the player and more than enough to fully evaluate, I think.

The is there a better Lemieux than the 88-89 version without injuries is somewhat a what if, but Lemieux had the chance to put historically dominant season on the board and playoff runs, the what if is not much about how high he could have jumped, but how much could he have sustained.

Crosby, what if is more what if the dominance he put during is peak his a small sample aberration and not something close to what he would have done playing 90% of the game has well.

This was the first thought I had when reading the OP. The effect Crosby's injuries have had on him really is the opposite, where we never saw what his highest peak could've been, but he's still had longevity in his career in spite of that. 2011 would've been his best regular season had he not gotten injured,

As for your question about Lemieux having a more dominant season than 88/89, 92/93 is your answer. In the 60 games he played, he was on pace to surpass Gretzky's single season goals and points records. And this was while he was recovering from cancer. A healthy Lemieux possibly becomes the only player to score 100 goals in a season that year. While I do think Gretzky would've been the #1 forward career wise in NHL history no matter what, I do think a healthy Lemieux surpasses Gretzky when it comes to peak. After his 88/89 season, he never played at least 70 games until 95/96. I do think a healthy Orr has a chance at being better than Gretzky though.

Lemieux and Orr are in a tier of their own in terms of career value lost to injury. To a certain degree both lost peak and longevity due to injuries. I'd put Crosby in the next tier along with Bossy and Lindros.

 

[daver]

The bad luck and bad timing of his injuries is as much of a factor as the actual lost time.

2010/11 - He was finally having a signature peak regular season after raising very lofty expectations after his 2nd year where he was arguably on Wayne's level at the same age. (Wayne never won a scoring title as a teenager). His playoff success in between 06/07 and 10/11 certainly glossed over the hoped-for jump in regular season dominance that Wayne and Mario saw in their first four years. I would argue he would have had better regular seasons in 08/09 and 09/10 if not for two SCFs in a row. In any event, he was playing amazing hockey in 2010/11, better than peak OV, before getting injured. If he even had played 20 more games that year and won the Art Ross, that season would hold a lot more value, IMO.

11/12 - Another lost season at his peak

12/13 - Another peak season lost due to a reduced schedule due to a lockout then a very unlucky injury with 12 games left. If even played 4-5 more games that season, he wins the Art Ross with a dominant PPG and perhaps erases any doubts as to the strength of his 10/11 season.

14/15 - After a statistically dominant Art Ross win the year before, he is off to a great start, extending his most dominant stretch of hockey in raw statistical terms, before getting a viral illness that effectively wipes away the season.

He is now at the age where players start to slowly regress so he lost out on 4 seasons of potential peak due to missed time. I would argue that Orr had more seasons to put up peak performances.

16/17 - A possible Art Ross is affected by a concussion at the start of the season. Despite this, he still wins the Rocket. In the playoffs, Crosby is off to a great start in the playoffs, notably against the Caps after two games, with 11 points in 7 games. He gets yet another concussion in Game 3, which, at the very least, affects his performance against the Caps. The opportunity for him to lead the playoffs in scoring, perhaps in a dominant fashion, is lost.

21/22 -As mentioned in the OP, the Pens looked like they could at least get to the 3rd round and Crosby was playing his best hockey in years; a chance to really cement a #5 player all-time argument for him.

 

[bobholly39]

The bad luck and bad timing of his injuries is as much of a factor as the actual lost time.

2010/11 - He was finally having a signature peak regular season after raising very lofty expectations after his 2nd year where he was arguably on Wayne's level at the same age. (Wayne never won a scoring title as a teenager). His playoff success in between 06/07 and 10/11 certainly glossed over the hoped-for jump in regular season dominance that Wayne and Mario saw in their first four years. I would argue he would have had better regular seasons in 08/09 and 09/10 if not for two SCFs in a row. In any event, he was playing amazing hockey in 2010/11, better than peak OV, before getting injured. If he even had played 20 more games that year and won the Art Ross, that season would hold a lot more value, IMO.

11/12 - Another lost season at his peak

12/13 - Another peak season lost due to a reduced schedule due to a lockout then a very unlucky injury with 12 games left. If even played 4-5 more games that season, he wins the Art Ross with a dominant PPG and perhaps erases any doubts as to the strength of his 10/11 season.

14/15 - After a statistically dominant Art Ross win the year before, he is off to a great start, extending his most dominant stretch of hockey in raw statistical terms, before getting a viral illness that effectively wipes away the season.

He is now at the age where players start to slowly regress so he lost out on 4 seasons of potential peak due to missed time. I would argue that Orr had more seasons to put up peak performances.

16/17 - A possible Art Ross is affected by a concussion at the start of the season. Despite this, he still wins the Rocket. In the playoffs, Crosby is off to a great start in the playoffs, notably against the Caps after two games, with 11 points in 7 games. He gets yet another concussion in Game 3, which, at the very least, affects his performance against the Caps. The opportunity for him to lead the playoffs in scoring, perhaps in a dominant fashion, is lost.

21/22 -As mentioned in the OP, the Pens looked like they could at least get to the 3rd round and Crosby was playing his best hockey in years; a chance to really cement a #5 player all-time argument for him.

If you want to come up with a formula of "least games missed yet most impact by those missed games" maybe Crosby is near top. But overall, no way.

Orr is the best D of all-time.
In some order, Lidstrom/Bourque/Shore/Harvey are the most common names for slots 2-5.
Orr retired at age 26.
All 4 of those other defensemen peaked way past age 26, and often past 30.
So - you can hypothesize that we never even got to see peak Orr - he may have peaked 2-3 years after he had to stop playing like those others did at ages ~28+.

Lemieux also missed a lot more impactful time than Crosby did.

Finally - in the 2022 playoffs, I agree Crosby played great, and maybe Pens win and maybe they don't if he isn't injured, but in the end they lost fair and square in round 1 even after Crosby came back in game 7. You're reaching, and by a lot.

 

[Rengorlex]

14/15 - After a statistically dominant Art Ross win the year before, he is off to a great start, extending his most dominant stretch of hockey in raw statistical terms, before getting a viral illness that effectively wipes away the season.

He is now at the age where players start to slowly regress so he lost out on 4 seasons of potential peak due to missed time. I would argue that Orr had more seasons to put up peak performances.

16/17 - A possible Art Ross is affected by a concussion at the start of the season. Despite this, he still wins the Rocket. In the playoffs, Crosby is off to a great start in the playoffs, notably against the Caps after two games, with 11 points in 7 games. He gets yet another concussion in Game 3, which, at the very least, affects his performance against the Caps. The opportunity for him to lead the playoffs in scoring, perhaps in a dominant fashion, is lost.

21/22 -As mentioned in the OP, the Pens looked like they could at least get to the 3rd round and Crosby was playing his best hockey in years; a chance to really cement a #5 player all-time argument for him.

Some of these sound like they are coming from a very Crosby-centric perspective. We are assuming that Crosby would play uninterrupted hockey at the best of his abilities and seeing every aberration from that as an evil force keeping him from accomplishing what he should have. Every player in this league plays through injuries, every player is infected with illnesses throughout the season.

We could just as easily say that every time that Malkin played a healthy season after his rookie year he outproduced Crosby. What if Malkin had been healthy through his career? Every player would look so much better if they played 82 games of healthy hockey at the top of their abilities every year.

Crosby certainly missed a lot in 10-13, but the rest of these are really stretching it.

 

[VanIslander]

What if, what if, what if...

Too many "what if's".

Talking about future potential is great, but about past failures to perform is sad.

 

[Rengorlex]

What if Crosby's teams would have failed him in his Cup runs and he wouldn't have any Cups or great playoff runs?

Why should what ifs only apply to adding to his resume instead of substracting from it?

 

[buffalowing88]

Hockey players are constantly getting injured and missing time, even the biggest stars. It's shitty but I don't think Crosby separates himself from the pack as everyone else has listed here (Orr, Lemieux, etc.) when it comes to missing games at their prime.

But yeah, 2010-2013 serve as lost years that probably would have included a couple of the best seasons of the 21st century. Players peak right around 23-25 in the NHL and his peak was lost in that regard.

 

[The Pale King]

Crazy, just the other day I was ranking players with the initials "S.C." by percentage of forecasted career value lost to injury* (minimum 100 NHL games) and I actually have Sidney Crosby 2nd on my list. PM me if you want my top 50 or the list of 16+ metrics I used to determine this.
1. Shane Corson 19.8
2. Sidney Crosby 16.4
3. Shawn Chambers 14.2
4. Steve Chiasson 14.1
5. Sylvain Cote 12.6

*if we include other player's injuries, Sprague Cleghorn easily slots in at #1

 

[daver]

Some of these sound like they are coming from a very Crosby-centric perspective. We are assuming that Crosby would play uninterrupted hockey at the best of his abilities and seeing every aberration from that as an evil force keeping him from accomplishing what he should have. Every player in this league plays through injuries, every player is infected with illnesses throughout the season.

We could just as easily say that every time that Malkin played a healthy season after his rookie year he outproduced Crosby. What if Malkin had been healthy through his career? Every player would look so much better if they played 82 games of healthy hockey at the top of their abilities every year.

Crosby certainly missed a lot in 10-13, but the rest of these are really stretching it.

The same can be said for Mario and Orr too.

 

[Michael Farkas]

So the missing time due to injury thing with Crosby doesn't do a lot of damage for me. It's obviously sorely devastating to the binary, trophy counting types. But that's no way to live...that kind of thing is just a guide so that we know who to look at more closely. It's like Central Scouting's draft lists...it's not really a serious ranking...it's just a watchlist. "Oh look, Central has him at 32...all right, let's take a look..."

I mean, same thing with stats, right? And I brought this up in the "Why don't we do a best defensive forwards of all time list?" - well, how good do they have to be at offense for us to notice them? What if it's Tyler Wright or Craig Adams? We're sunk. So, you see a guy score 412 points in 62 games in the QMJHL, all right, I'll take a fast look and make sure that he's 5'5" and not very fast and then move on with my day...

Anyhow, the trophy counts and the raw numbers, that's just a guide. That's the "hey, look at me...it looks like I was good"

Now, unlike guys who had careers cut unreasonably short - Orr, Bossy, etc. where it really actually affected their per-game numbers (no post-athletic-prime seasons) or it affected how many team-seasons they were actually anywhere near the proceedings, that's legitimate. We don't know how they might have adapted with age. What happens to Orr if he had Bourque? What happens to Orr if the Blackhawks fall into a huge hole and he's all by himself there? What happens - God save us - if he got to skate around the players and goalies that played in 1981...? He's probably the #1 player of all time. But we don't know. We have a good guess, that's why he's ranked consistently as the #1 d-man goin' away...but we don't know how he might have aged, what happens when the skating goes. What happens to Bossy as that Islanders team attritions away...? Can he still score 50 goals in his sleep then?

But the thing with Crosby is that now he's in his mid 30's, he's still a super elite player in this league. He's been playing all of this time. He missed splotches of seasons, but he's in all of them, he's run the gamut of teammates - and maybe that will be further tested here in the next couple of years...certainly Malkin has suffered some attrition. But there's no reason to believe that he wouldn't have been just as good in the, whatever, 212 games that he's missed, as he was in the 1300 games that he's played. Obviously, there's more to go and if he falls off a cliff, we'll see it happen...but nothing's a guess with Crosby at this point. He's consistently been the best or one of the best players in the league from the age of 18 through now...

All right, he missed 12 games once and it cost him an obvious, windmill dunk MVP. Ok, but we know. He didn't even have to score in those last 12 games, we know that's his. We don't need to sit there and try to abacus it out anymore...this wasn't Pelle Lindbergh where we have no idea where it might have gone and who he might have been...we're going to end up with probably ~1500 games of "holy ****, that guy was great in every situation he was put in" - he was penalized for missing those games in the seasons that he missed them in. That's the trophy counting stuff. He got struck down for that then. It's probably closer to double jeopardy to hit him again for his overall career.

What's in doubt about him? What's the thing that we're not sure he can do at an elite level? What's the eye test lacking about his game? There's just nothing there, no box that hasn't been checked. It's about a dozen years of being the best player in the league, and another five of being top 3 to 5. Who else has a comparable resume looking down from the blimp cam? It's not 10 guys, ya figure, right?

It's tough because we're in the moment and you have real fans that are really affected by this guy. But if this was the resume of someone who played from 1956 to 1973, he'd be a hell of a lot closer to #1 than he would be "not top 9" or whatever nonsense. And I'm not saying he's 1, or he's breached the Big 4. I'm just saying, what are we talking about here...? This is as dynamite of a player and as dynamite of a career as this game has ever seen...

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Kudos to the Tyler Wright reference - I loved that dude.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I would have loved to see more of his absolute peak―basically his 2011 and 2012 seasons―to see how better than the rest of his prime it would have been. Otherwise, the injuries don't change much about his legacy. He lost a few trophies but everyone knows what he was, except at his absolute peak, which is still a partial mystery.

I say 2011 and 2012 because it's clear by 2013 he was not as good as he had been in 2011, even if he was still the best player in the world. So by 2013 his "absolute peak" had ended.

 

[JackSlater]

So the missing time due to injury thing with Crosby doesn't do a lot of damage for me. It's obviously sorely devastating to the binary, trophy counting types. But that's no way to live...that kind of thing is just a guide so that we know who to look at more closely. It's like Central Scouting's draft lists...it's not really a serious ranking...it's just a watchlist. "Oh look, Central has him at 32...all right, let's take a look..."

I mean, same thing with stats, right? And I brought this up in the "Why don't we do a best defensive forwards of all time list?" - well, how good do they have to be at offense for us to notice them? What if it's Tyler Wright or Craig Adams? We're sunk. So, you see a guy score 412 points in 62 games in the QMJHL, all right, I'll take a fast look and make sure that he's 5'5" and not very fast and then move on with my day...

Anyhow, the trophy counts and the raw numbers, that's just a guide. That's the "hey, look at me...it looks like I was good"

Now, unlike guys who had careers cut unreasonably short - Orr, Bossy, etc. where it really actually affected their per-game numbers (no post-athletic-prime seasons) or it affected how many team-seasons they were actually anywhere near the proceedings, that's legitimate. We don't know how they might have adapted with age. What happens to Orr if he had Bourque? What happens to Orr if the Blackhawks fall into a huge hole and he's all by himself there? What happens - God save us - if he got to skate around the players and goalies that played in 1981...? He's probably the #1 player of all time. But we don't know. We have a good guess, that's why he's ranked consistently as the #1 d-man goin' away...but we don't know how he might have aged, what happens when the skating goes. What happens to Bossy as that Islanders team attritions away...? Can he still score 50 goals in his sleep then?

But the thing with Crosby is that now he's in his mid 30's, he's still a super elite player in this league. He's been playing all of this time. He missed splotches of seasons, but he's in all of them, he's run the gamut of teammates - and maybe that will be further tested here in the next couple of years...certainly Malkin has suffered some attrition. But there's no reason to believe that he wouldn't have been just as good in the, whatever, 212 games that he's missed, as he was in the 1300 games that he's played. Obviously, there's more to go and if he falls off a cliff, we'll see it happen...but nothing's a guess with Crosby at this point. He's consistently been the best or one of the best players in the league from the age of 18 through now...

All right, he missed 12 games once and it cost him an obvious, windmill dunk MVP. Ok, but we know. He didn't even have to score in those last 12 games, we know that's his. We don't need to sit there and try to abacus it out anymore...this wasn't Pelle Lindbergh where we have no idea where it might have gone and who he might have been...we're going to end up with probably ~1500 games of "holy ****, that guy was great in every situation he was put in" - he was penalized for missing those games in the seasons that he missed them in. That's the trophy counting stuff. He got struck down for that then. It's probably closer to double jeopardy to hit him again for his overall career.

What's in doubt about him? What's the thing that we're not sure he can do at an elite level? What's the eye test lacking about his game? There's just nothing there, no box that hasn't been checked. It's about a dozen years of being the best player in the league, and another five of being top 3 to 5. Who else has a comparable resume looking down from the blimp cam? It's not 10 guys, ya figure, right?

It's tough because we're in the moment and you have real fans that are really affected by this guy. But if this was the resume of someone who played from 1956 to 1973, he'd be a hell of a lot closer to #1 than he would be "not top 9" or whatever nonsense. And I'm not saying he's 1, or he's breached the Big 4. I'm just saying, what are we talking about here...? This is as dynamite of a player and as dynamite of a career as this game has ever seen...

That's all very true for the most part, though I do think that the missed time in 2011 leaves a bit of mystery. Crosby missed an easy Art Ross and Hart in 2013, but we had seen him at that level before and only people who are desperate to pump up Ovechkin or slavishly devoted to trophies will care that he missed 10 or 12 games that year. 2011 was the best that Crosby ever looked, and while 40 games or so that season satisfies me (given the rest of his career establishes that he was a consistently elite player) it would have been nice to have seen whether he would maintain it, drop off, or even improve his level of play.

The trophies shouldn't matter to people who were there to actually watch the player, but he is probably the best player ever whose peak is still partially a question mark.