Crosby's career goalscoring legacy

[filinski77]

What a weird argument to make to somehow devalue Crosby's similar goalscoring contributions to his team over his first 12 seasons. Crosby won an Art Ross as a child. He put up one of the best playoff goalscoring performances in the last 30 years as a child. Stamkos won a Rocket as a child. OV put up 50 goals as a child.

If anything, he should get credit for being the 13th best goalscorer over his first four seasons and a Rocket winner at age 22 vs. ONE 15th place finish for Pasta and ZERO Top 15s for Draisaitl by the age of 22.

And since you brought it up, it can be argued that Crosby's goalscoring peak started at age 22 thru age 23 until his concussion. Over the course of 119 games, he was scoring at a rate that was more dominant than any pace that McDavid, Pasta or Draisaitl ever achieved. The irony is that after his concussion, he then goes and puts up assists at a rate that was as dominant as McDavid did over the next 160 games.

The other poster said it best - on a part time basis, Crosby was one the best goalscorers in the league during his prime. If that was his full time job, he could have been among the very best of the past 25 years but it served the Pens very well for him to be an all around offensive force and reliable defensively.

Your argument is all over the place here.

I gave some facts for the current top-10 finishes, and cited I think those few players have a good change of passing Crosby as goal scorers all-time.

You say "Here is the ironic thing, all three had a chance to win a Rocket against Crosby in 16/17, " And are insinuating that just because some 20 year olds didn't beat Crosby in that ONE year, that they can't surpass him for a whole body of work (ie career).

It's the equivalent to me saying that Crosby had the chance to beat Lecavalier for the rocket in 2007 but didn't - and then use that to imply that Crosby can't be a better goal scorer all-time than Lecavalier.

You made a non-sense comment, just eat it lol. If you're going to debate in bad faith and keep moving the goal posts like that I'm out.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Here is the ironic thing, all three had a chance to win a Rocket against Crosby in 16/17, one of the "weakest Rocket wins in the last 25 years" according to you.

Not following. What does this mean? Is 2016-17 the definitive NHL season of all time to determine goal scoring? What is "ironic"?

 

[Video Nasty]

Brace yourselves.

I’d say his goal scoring legacy is pretty damn good.

He won a couple of Rockets, and though his other higher finishes are a little sparse, he seems primed to finish with around 675, which would be good enough for 13th all-time, where half of the players ahead of him started between the years of 1979-1986.

His season by season totals are not sexy. He hit 50 once. He crossed 40 just two other times, but he does have twelve 30 goal seasons. Like a lot of his career, he may not have actually done it all that much, but he clearly had the capacity to go out and score 35-45 goals while still finding the time to hand out 60-70 assists, and though often over-exaggerated, handling his other responsibilities.

He’s never going to be known as one of the best goal scorers of all-time, but after being feared that he wouldn’t have much of a career left in that 2011 and 2012 range, it’s wildly impressive that he would go on to score another 450 goals since.

 

[Crosby2010]

I'd argue the opposite. Players that are great enough (like Crosby, Beliveau, McDavid, etc) win Rockets because of being that much better than the rest of the league, not because they are great goal scorers.

But wouldn't that still make them great goal scorers if they are doing it better than anyone else in a particular season?