How good would Crosby have been if not for injuries?

[Dingo]

I think Crosby's best was in those broken seasons. However, he at least got full seasons on either side of that period.

Lindros had Zero full seasons. Karlsson had a couple at his best, yet Id say his game was rounding and maturing when he lost his skating. Not sure I ever got to see him at what he could have reached. Forsberg had one season where he was the go to in Colorado, still missed seven games.

Gretzky gets a ton of support regarding the Suter hit, but, we got to see 11 seasons before that happened, so... no mystery there.

I THINK I saw Forsberg at his best for one 75 game season.

I don't think I saw Crosby, Lindros or Karlsson play a full season in full peak mode. Sucks, really. I'm not sure I can't say the same about Bure.... or rather, I never saw him play in an era that suited him with a puck moving dman or center.... and broken way too often.

 

[norrisnick]

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.

So... players that suffered from injuries early in their careers didn't do what Crosby did, so magically removing those injuries would make it impossible for them to be better than they were? Then Crosby couldn't be better than he was and the whole premise is silly, right?

Reality is already hard enough to compare, let alone adding the imagined into the mix as well.

 

[MadLuke]

I'm not sure I can't say the same about Bure....

1994 Bure was probably pretty much it, played 100 NHL games that year, scored 76 goals, 138 points. Fedorov did that year and he was not much older.

22-23 would not be particularly young to peak for a Calder winner type of player, Gretkzy 92 goals, yzerman 155 pts, Ovechkin 65 goals season, Lemieux 199 all around that time,

 

[Gorskyontario]

Still a tier lower than McDavid.

 

[Stephen]

The beauty of Sidney Crosby's career it's a fully realized one with no real what if's that would dramatically alter one's perception.

Maybe he could have topped up some 120+ point seasons before 2014 instead of the injury washed out years or the ones where he settled in the low 100s, with associated personal hardware, but he's already got a shelf with a Rocket, Hart, Art Ross, Lindsay. I don't think that would have altered his legacy except for the H2H stats watch vs McDavid years later.

Maybe he could have squeaked in another championship during the years of Kings and Blackhawks dominance, but maybe not. In any case another cup or even a Conn Smythe wouldn't have been any new ground.

And finally, maybe if he had been healthy between 2008 and 2013 it would have put more natural wear and tear on him and he would have been more run down in the early to mid 2020s. Who knows?

 

[Gurglesons]

Not sure it really changes his legacy at all to be honest.

Most people have him firmly in that 5 spot and those that don't probably don't change their mind if he wins a few more trophies.

I guess the big one is he wins the Ross over Benn and it makes it difficult to use that against him as many do.

 

[daver]

So... players that suffered from injuries early in their careers didn't do what Crosby did, so magically removing those injuries would make it impossible for them to be better than they were? Then Crosby couldn't be better than he was and the whole premise is silly, right?

Reality is already hard enough to compare, let alone adding the imagined into the mix as well.

No, I said that those players, before injuries, didn't do what Crosby did before his injuries.

Of those players you listed, who was better than Crosby at the same age before injuries?

 

[sr edler]

I feel Crosby didn't play in a rough or nasty enough era to be able to put an equal amount of blame on injuries as say guys like Kariya or Lafontaine and the like from 15-ish years earlier. Not saying he's got himself to blame for all of his injuries, but if you're a smallish guy and play that type of almost grinder-esque game, of course you're going to get bumped here and there along the ride.

I know this is a somewhat sensitive topic for some Pens fans, but if that Steckel incident happened to someone 15 years earlier, said player would have been laughed out of the building.

 

[daver]

Lindros had Zero full seasons.

Ironically his one "full" season was the strike shortened season, and even then he missed two games. You could argue that his "potential" was affected as early as age 19.

His numbers from the '95/96 season is as close as we can get to his peak potential as reasonably can be surmised as he turned 23 that year. He was as offensively dominant the next season but in a shorter amount of games.

Unlike Crosby, who had more injury bad luck and bad timing affect his peak, Lindros was fundamentally injury-prone due to his style of play and a full peak season was never in the cards unless he significantly changed his style which would have changed his offensive effectiveness.

 

[daver]

I feel Crosby didn't play in a rough or nasty enough era to be able to put an equal amount of blame on injuries as say guys like Kariya or Lafontaine and the like from 15-ish years earlier. Not saying he's got himself to blame for all of his injuries, but if you're a smallish guy and play that type of almost grinder-esque game, of course you're going to get bumped here and there along the ride.

I know this is a somewhat sensitive topic for some Pens fans, but if that Steckel incident happened to someone 15 years earlier, said player would have been laughed out of the building.

It's not about blaming injuries, it is wondering how much injuries affected what his true peak could have been.

I am sure if Crosby played 15 years earlier, he may have adjusted his game but also could have feasted on the bigger, slower d-men. But this is going down a hypothetical rabbit hole, this is not what the OP is about.

 

[Matsun]

The biggest problem with Crosbys legacy isn't the years he was injured between 11-13, it's the years he was healthy between 14-17. In those seasons he played atleast 75 games each year against very weak competition and he still only won 1 Art Ross.

Most points 14-17	Season	GP	P	PPG
Kane	15-16	82	106	1,29
Crosby	13-14	80	104	1,30
McDavid	16-17	82	100	1,22
Crosby	16-17	75	89	1,19
Benn	15-16	82	89	1,09
Kane	15-16	82	89	1,09
Getzlaf	13-14	77	87	1,13
Benn	14-15	82	87	1,06
Giroux	13-14	82	86	1,05
Tavares	14-15	82	86	1,05

And its not like he dominated on a per game level either.

Best PPG 14-17	Season	GP	P	PPG
Crosby	13-14	80	104	1,30
Kane	15-16	82	106	1,29
McDavid	16-17	82	100	1,22
Malkin	13-14	60	72	1,20
Crosby	16-17	75	89	1,19
Malkin	16-17	62	72	1,16
Kucherov	16-17	74	85	1,15
Getzlaf	13-14	77	87	1,13
Crosby	14-15	77	84	1,09
Benn	15-16	82	89	1,09

Here is Jagr from the same age range, in 2002 he joined Washington and dropped off otherwise he might've had 4 of the top 5 seasons in the span:

Best PPG 99-02	Season	GP	P	PPG
Jagr	98-99	81	127	1,57
Jagr	99-00	63	96	1,52
Jagr	00-01	81	121	1,49
Sakic	00-01	82	118	1,44
Selanne	98-99	75	107	1,43
Sakic	99-00	60	81	1,35
Sakic	98-99	73	96	1,32
Lindros	98-99	71	93	1,31
Bure	99-00	74	94	1,27
Forsberg	98-99	78	97	1,24

Look how both Jagr and Sakic dominate? That's what I would expect from Crosby.

I also don't think it should be unfair to expect better than 9th in scoring from Crosby in 2018 either:

Most points 17-18	GP	P	PPG
McDavid	82	108	1,32
Giroux	82	102	1,24
Kucherov	80	100	1,25
Malkin	78	98	1,26
MacKinnon	74	97	1,31
Hall	76	93	1,22
Kopitar	82	92	1,12
Kessel	82	92	1,12
Wheeler	81	91	1,12
Crosby	82	89	1,09

After that the new guys lead by McDavid reach the next level and I don't think it's fair to expect Crosby to contend for awards at that point.

 

[Fatass]

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.

Even with the injuries Crosby was key to his club winning three Cups. He’s clearly ahead of McDavid but behind Mario.
Crosby is a top 10 all time forward though.

 

[sr edler]

It's not about blaming injuries, it is wondering how much injuries affected what his true peak could have been.

Describe all the injuries then, describe when they happened chronologically and how they (supposedly) impacted his ceiling, but I feel this isn't something people want to do enough of on this board. People just want to post about awards and points and have kind of statistical dick measurement contests between their favourite players and their supposed rivals.

 

[daver]

Describe all the injuries then, describe when they happened chronologically and how they (supposedly) impacted his ceiling, but I feel this isn't something people want to do enough of on this board. People just want to post about awards and points and have kind of statistical dick measurement contests between their favourite players and their supposed rivals.

Maybe they did affect his ceiling, maybe they didn't. That's the point of thread.

 

[norrisnick]

No, I said that those players, before injuries, didn't do what Crosby did before his injuries.

Of those players you listed, who was better than Crosby at the same age before injuries?

Does it matter? What you are as a teenager doesn't always define what you can become later on.

It's awful restrictive for a hypothetical, my dude. "If you weren't as good or better than X in specific Y scenarios eliminating injuries doesn't matter"

 

[daver]

Does it matter? What you are as a teenager doesn't always define what you can become later on.

It's awful restrictive for a hypothetical, my dude. "If you weren't as good or better than X in specific Y scenarios eliminating injuries doesn't matter"

It should matter if you are going to make anything resembling a reasonable claim that a whole bunch of players that were never as good as Crosby at any age, would have been better at their peak potential ceiling.

Your argument is that we can never truly know anything so I guess we can get out the dart board to rate players.

Yzerman over Crosby? Sure why not?

Bossy too? Hey, we just don't know!

 

[norrisnick]

It should matter if you are going to make anything resembling a reasonable claim that a whole bunch of players that were never as good as Crosby at any age, would have been better at their peak potential ceiling.

Your argument is that we can never truly know anything so I guess we can get out the dart board to rate players.

Yzerman over Crosby? Sure why not?

Bossy too? Hey, we just don't know!

If you can make assumptions that injuries to Crosby held back his growth/career, that holds true for everyone. Or it doesn't and the thought exercise is pointless.

Leaning towards the latter...

 

[TheGuiminator]

He certainly wins the Hart, Art Ross, Lindsay (and possibly the Rocket Richard) in 2011. I don’t think he hits the projected 132 points, but anywhere between 115 and 122 points is a good bet. He still wins in dominant fashion, and we can now clearly identify his signature season that is missing. The same goes for 2013; he wins in dominant fashion and then wins it back in 2014, which would’ve been a noteworthy achievement for sure.

Even though I give him the benefit of the doubt for 2011 & 2013, the fact remains that the trophies and accolades are still missing, marking a significant gap in his career compared to McDavid, Lemieux, Howe, Orr, and Gretzky.

With two more Hart and Art Ross trophies in 2011 and 2013, which would make three dominant seasons in four years, I would have no hesitation ranking him as the fifth greatest player of all time. His underwhelming Art Ross losses to Sedin, Benn, Kane, and sophomore McDavid would weigh much less on his resume than they currently do

 

[Steve Kournianos]

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?

I could never explain or determine why his best season was at 19. He got smarter and was healthy in his prime and still never came all that close to a 2006-07 season that was believed to put him on a Gretzky/Mario trajectory more so than his 100-point rookie year. Was it Malkin’s quick ascension to stardom? Probably not, as Gretzky had Messier and Mario didn’t statistically regress after receiving Francis/Jagr. Was it injuries? I mean, he looked pretty amazing and healthy in 2010 after the ankle issue and then in 2014 after the concussions, albeit not quite on that 2007 level.

Other considerations might be players adapting to the rule changes, strong goalies in his division, and his refined two-way game. Again, I don’t think injuries impacted his statistical dip from generational star the whatever you would call the next rung below. He still looked amazing, but I got the sense he never got that 2006-07 mojo back for a full season, with 2010 being the closest. McDavid OTOH has had it since Day 1, which helped him overtake Crosby without debate.

All that said, it we use his p/g over full seasons coupled with perennial team success, we’re looking at two or three consecutive Harts between 2007 and 2009 and def another over Perry in 2011.

 

[norrisnick]

So why bother posting? Other than to make unreasonable claims.

I'll give you time to respond as I know you are likely posting "This topic is pointless" in a whole bunch of other threads.

I was clarifying the point. It is clear and now I know.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Bossy too? Hey, we just don't know!

We do. We can watch them. We don't need another three seasons of prime Bossy to determine much...just like we don't need another 150 Crosby games to see how good he really was...

 

[MadLuke]

If you can make assumptions that injuries to Crosby held back his growth/career, that holds true for everyone. Or it doesn't and the thought exercise is pointless.

Wait... do you suggest that any thought exercise about how unknown adults puck in nets with better health versus reality is not pointless ? We can do the one you suggest but seem incredibly harder to do (run a mental model in which every prospect and nhler are fully healthy),

The what if Orr as good knees, Lindros does not get commotion, Gretzky back does not get Suttered, Lemieux back disk operation goes well are a mainstay of this message board, which is most of the time hypothetical and pointless (what would possibly be the point of who win a seven game series 1976 Habs or 1984 OIlers, who was better at hockey Howe or Gretzky)

This is a simple hypothetical that you are free to participate in or not, it is defacto made to be 100% pointless and just for fun, no conversation in a hockey forum as some point, it is just an hobby like making wood sculpture or crossword.

 

[daver]

I could never explain or determine why his best season was at 19. He got smarter and was healthy in his prime and still never came all that close to a 2006-07 season that was believed to put him on a Gretzky/Mario trajectory more so than his 100-point rookie year. Was it Malkin’s quick ascension to stardom? Probably not, as Gretzky had Messier and Mario didn’t statistically regress after receiving Francis/Jagr. Was it injuries? I mean, he looked pretty amazing and healthy in 2010 after the ankle issue and then in 2014 after the concussions, albeit not quite on that 2007 level.

Other considerations might be players adapting to the rule changes, strong goalies in his division, and his refined two-way game. Again, I don’t think injuries impacted his statistical dip from generational star the whatever you would call the next rung below. He still looked amazing, but I got the sense he never got that 2006-07 mojo back for a full season, with 2010 being the closest. McDavid OTOH has had it since Day 1, which helped him overtake Crosby without debate.

All that said, it we use his p/g over full seasons coupled with perennial team success, we’re looking at two or three consecutive Harts between 2007 and 2009 and def another over Perry in 2011.

I don't think many people think 06/07 was his best season other than statistically. And many people will point towards him being as NHL ready as any player was up until that time coming out of juniors as a reason he was at least on Mario's level in his 2nd year.

 

[MadLuke]

He got smarter and was healthy in his prime and still never came all that close to a 2006-07 season

Is that really the case ?

In 2014 he was +18, outscored the average top 10 scorer by 27%
In 2007 he was +10, outscored the average top 10 scorer by 20%

In 2010 it was by 13% winning the Rocket, 58% goal for.

All his healthy season during his prime where probably at least somewhat close and some better.

In 2009, if play 2 mores games and score 3 mores points, he outscore the 10th best scorer in the league by 19%, that not the same as 26% like 2007 but the difference is purely power play points, and considering that in 2007 he was 10th in the league in Ev points and the penguins did lead the league in PPO how much was it the different environment, we can easily be blinded by that.

He was never fully the same skater after the 2008 ankle injury, so it could be right, he was scoring at an art ross winning pace of 115 pts by 82 games before it and the answer to your question could be as simple as that.

But higher scoring of 2006 and 2007 could distort things.

 

[bobbyking]

on mcdavids level