How good would Crosby have been if not for injuries?

[daver]

This is not meant to regurgitate the pacing of his partial seasons, that has been done to death, but rather a look at his potential level of play, and how much potential, if any, was not met after his battle with injuries, most notably in 2011.

- Crosby was an absolute phenom as a teenager and had the best pre-draft CHL career ever. He was reasonably hyped as the best offensive prospect since Mario.

- He had the highest scoring finish as an 18 year old in NHL history (6th) and is only behind Wayne if that is changed to 18/19 year old seasons (i.e. rookie season starting at age 18).

- He was the only teenager in North American sports history to win a scoring title.

- He probably is also the youngest player to ever lead the NHL playoffs in scoring

- He is also the youngest to ever be a captain on a Stanley Cup winner

- He becomes one of the youngest players ever to have an Art Ross win and a Rocket win on his resume

At age 23, the traditional start of a player's peak, he is playing at a level for the first half of the 10/11 season that many consider the highest level of a play since Mario. He is dominating the league not just in points but also in goals, was playing excellent 2-way hockey, and carrying the offensive load for a Pens team that was still lacking in forward depth including an underperforming Malkin.

While he did play at the same overall offensive level in 2013, his goalscoring declined. It was thought that he reasonably became more of a perimeter player after the 2011 injuries. He surprisingly returns to elite goalscoring form for one season at age 29 (even after getting another concussion) and is compiling one the great elite longevity resumes of all-time as he went from prime to post-prime.

After his injuries, he gets credit for his offensive versatility and adaptability and for playing at a level and adding career value that was still is only bettered by a handful of players all-time.

So how good could he have been?

Click to read more...

 

[Michael Farkas]

Probably as good as he turned out...except more trophies to count for his efforts. So, for some, that means the world...

 

[DitchMarner]

Best case scenario is Connor McDavid through nine seasons with possibly a better late offensive prime (2015 to 2018) than he had. That would be enough to have him undisputably at number five all-time and might have some arguing him over Mario.

 

[bobholly39]

Crosby fully realized his potential. He's as good as he could have been.

The only place for improvement is his career. And if no injuries - yes that means more individual trophies, and probably a couple of really nice peak seasons.

I have him #5 right now - on the upper end of projections with no injuries, he'd definitely be a concensus #5 and possibly make into a big 5.

 

[JackSlater]

I do think that Crosby would have been better, in that to me the way that Crosby developed is on the low end of his potential. He lost some of his speed in 2008 with a high ankle sprain and never quite had that speed again. That can mostly be compensated for. The big injury is obviously when he got Steckeled, and that is where the major loss is. Crosby's style of play changed after that, less aggressive and he possibly didn't get to build on the gear he was showing in 2010-2011.

Crosby was never going to be Gretzky/Lemieux/Orr at his peak, he just isn't as good as them, but I do think that a player who works that hard and is that smart could have shown improvement beyond where he was at 23, especially if he had more speed. That is normally the area where offensive superstars peak. I do not think that he would have been drastically better, just better.

 

[VanIslander]

Turn injuries off...

• Would he be top-5 in NHL scoring for 20 consecutive years?
• Would he win 8 consecutive Harts?

...

The fact is:

9 & 99 were a tier above 4, 66 & whomever injured have you.

So, maybe 3rd all time you might eagerly think; only, if you turn injuries off for one guy, you gotta turn injuries off for Orr & Lemieux as well and then the what-if scenario is ****'ed!

Hence, in no universe does anyone (to date) make Mount Rushmore.

The future is open. By 2030 or beyond, someone might... someday someone will...

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

His trophy case would be closer to McDavid's, but overall career wise he'd basically be the same as he is now.

 

[MadLuke]

It depends on how much he was affected by the lower body injuries that removed some explosiveness to his game, maybe he adjusted really well to those limitations and the version of 2011-2013 Crosby was really close to as good as it could have been... maybe he was quite lucky during those stretch and it was a bit lower.

Like a Forsberg-Lindros, they played enough to give us a good clue, I think, chance are he peaked quite close to his potential, maybe you have 2011 with better skating being even better.

- He had the highest scoring finish as an 18 year old in NHL history (6th) and is only behind Wayne if that is changed to 18/19 year old seasons (i.e. rookie season starting at age 18).

- He was the only teenager in North American sports history to win a scoring title.

For those points, he was possibly really pro-ready and mature physically for his age.

 

[Staniowski]

I think Crosby would be somewhat better without the ankle and concussion injuries. They did affect his scoring.

But Crosby has always adapted well to his injuries (and otherwise), so he's still done well enough to be at or near the top of the heap for a very long time.

Without the injuries, 6 scoring titles would probably be a conservative estimate. Probably 6 to 8 would be reasonable.

 

[GMR]

His trophy case would be closer to McDavid's, but overall career wise he'd basically be the same as he is now.

I think that's correct. He's likely not jumping into the top 4. Certainly would be top 10 but many think he's already there.

 

[MadLuke]

Few athletes give the impression that they would have kept motivated, put their mental and body ready for every season than Crosby even if he win 3 art ross in a row, but we cannot know how it plays out, what if Malkin never get to be the number 1, does he stay a pen forever and what not.

A lot of things bounce their way in that back to back cup run, there a very possible world where he has yes 4-5 Ross, but only 1 cup and he is retire right now. All the 2010-2015 Penguins playoff lost (some that would be a very big blackmark on him and them, like the Flyers terrible series) got erased with winning, winning always clean all sport sins, but a scenario that Malkin-Crosby are both healthy, big playoff contender and never get it done after 2009, those season are better being more than your regular Art Ross wins if you do not want to end up with Jagr legacy.

Jagr show how it can be cruel if you do not win for a long time in your prime, how that guy was not a mainstay in the 5th best ever debate...

 

[JackSlater]

Few athletes give the impression that they would have kept motivated, put their mental and body ready for every season than Crosby even if he win 3 art ross in a row, but we cannot know how it plays out, what if Malkin never get to be the number 1, does he stay a pen forever and what not.

A lot of things bounce their way in that back to back cup run, there a very possible world where he has yes 4-5 Ross, but only 1 cup and he is retire right now.

How many trophies Crosby would end up with is not the same question as how good Crosby could have been. Trophies can give you a rough idea of a player but they are not close to wholly representative. Honestly, a healthy Crosby at least doubles his individual trophies but clearly that would exaggerate how much better he would be without injuries.

 

[MadLuke]

exaggerate how much better he would be without injuries.

And how much value he would have had on the Penguins, they never missed the playoff all those injured years, we would never have assumed that type of record without him those years.

All those points would have been near meaningless for the franchise (in terms of winning anything), it is all about what more they can do in the playoff with never injured Crosby, 2011 being an obvious year.

I was saying this because I feel like we have a good grasp on what peak Crosby would have been, maybe a bit faster than 2011 Crosby, but that probably about as good as it could get, the question is more how much he would have been able to play 80 games year after year, with the long playoff and does the decline occur around the same time, sooner or later without the head injuries.

 

[JackSlater]

And how much value he would have had on the Penguins, they never missed the playoff all those injured years, we would never have assumed that type of record without him those years.

All those points would have been near meaningless for the franchise (in terms of winning anything), it is all about what more they can do in the playoff with never injured Crosby, 2011 being an obvious year.

It's very hard to know. Boston would have been very difficult in 2011, Los Angeles would have been really difficult for anyone who made the finals in the East in 2012. Outside of those years I don't think that Crosby plays drastically better in the playoffs, maybe marginally so but not enough to make any difference. I doubt that Pittsburgh gets another Stanley Cup even if Crosby stays healthy based on what the competition was.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

It's very hard to know. Boston would have been very difficult in 2011, Los Angeles would have been really difficult for anyone who made the finals in the East in 2012. Outside of those years I don't think that Crosby plays drastically better in the playoffs, maybe marginally so but not enough to make any difference. I doubt that Pittsburgh gets another Stanley Cup even if Crosby stays healthy based on what the competition was.

I dont see the Pens getting past the Bruins in 2011. They'd still be without Malkin and in 2013 a healthy Crosby and Malkin got swept by basically the same Bruins team (except for Rask instead of Thomas)

 

[Michael Farkas]

Obviously tough to say, especially without Malkin...but I trust the advanced scout of Pittsburgh in a playoff series vs Tons o' Fun. It was Rask we struggled against because he was good.

 

[WarriorofTime]

Shooting % was probably gonna regress considering it did regress.

 

[JackSlater]

I dont see the Pens getting past the Bruins in 2011. They'd still be without Malkin and in 2013 a healthy Crosby and Malkin got swept by basically the same Bruins team (except for Rask instead of Thomas)

Yeah I think Boston wins that one. Can't rule Pittsburgh out completely but I'm thinking 80/20 that Boston wins. I also don't like Thomas' game at all but not enough to make me think Pittsburgh wins, especially with Fleury prominently involved.

 

[MadLuke]

Shooting % was probably gonna regress considering it did regress.

For sure, like during the second Rocket season.

but the on-ice shooting percentage did not nor the ppg

2011 before the injury, 20.8% shooting percentage, must go down, but

2011: 12.9 on ice shooting percentage, 104.4 pdo, seem unsustainable
next 58 games in 2012-2013, average was even higher 14.25%, 105.5 pdo

i.e. certainly the goal scoring calm down (he does not score 3 60 goals season in a row in the very low scoring dpe, almost certainly not 1 time), but overall scoring not that clear.

 

[norrisnick]

At best where he is currently ranked now. If I'm giving Crosby magical health, I'm giving everyone magical health and there were players worse off than him in that regard.

 

[daver]

At best where he is currently ranked now. If I'm giving Crosby magical health, I'm giving everyone magical health and there were players worse off than him in that regard.

Worse off in the sense they would have been better than Crosby as a player if not for injuries?

Or they would have had better careers than Crosby if not for injuries?

Crosby has a case for most trophies lost due to injuries and lost games at his peak.

 

[norrisnick]

Worse off in the sense they would have been better than Crosby as a player if not for injuries?

Or they would have had better careers than Crosby if not for injuries?

Crosby has a case for most trophies lost due to injuries and lost games at his peak.

Both.

 

[daver]

Both.

Who besides Orr and Mario?

 

[norrisnick]

Who besides Orr and Mario?

Lots of greats had massive injuries early in their careers that could have altered their trajectory. Howe fractured his skull at 21. Just because he was good after doesn't mean he couldn't have been better. Or Lindros. Or Forsberg. Or Yzerman's series of catastrophic leg/knee injuries early in his career that took away his mobility later in his career. Gretzky and Bossy's back injuries. League history is littered with injuries that altered the futures of many great players.

 

[daver]

Lots of greats had massive injuries early in their careers that could have altered their trajectory. Howe fractured his skull at 21. Just because he was good after doesn't mean he couldn't have been better. Or Lindros. Or Forsberg. Or Yzerman's series of catastrophic leg/knee injuries early in his career that took away his mobility later in his career. Gretzky and Bossy's back injuries. League history is littered with injuries that altered the futures of many great players.

You have listed a bunch of players who are rated behind Crosby who had injuries early on.

What is your argument that Lindros would have been better than Crosby as a player, at least offensively? He was not hitting Crosby's level of offensive dominance in juniors nor in the NHL when he was healthy.

What about the others? None of them had Crosby's pre-NHL pedigree nor early NHL dominance.