How good would Forsberg and Lindros been if they were not plagued by injuries?

[Dingo]

when looking at a per game vs Jagr, during their primes, whic coincided not only with each ither but with the Trap years, Forsberg is #2 to Jagr, and iirc, the gap isnt enormous. Jagr, for me, is the #3 or #4 offensive talent of my lifetime (Wayne, Mario, probably Conor) When considering the considerable difference in two way play between Jags and Fopps, I have to consider that prime Forsberg was arguably one of the #4-10 forwards in my lifetime.

I also can't see Lindros far off of this. Harder for me, as his peak was during a confusing transitional era, and he never had healthy seasons. My gut says he was every bit as good as Forsberg, however.

 

[NordiquesForeva]

I'm not too interested in Forsberg, as he had an incredible run in the latter half of the 1990s as one of the top players in the game in the regular season + playoffs with a good (not perfect amount) of health. These were during his prime years, and from watching him the majority of his career I think he was a better 200-foot player during that period as well, relative to his Art Ross/Hart year(s) in the early/mid-2000s. I'm pretty confident we saw him at his absolute best. Not sure where he could have taken his game to reach another level...maybe by taking more shots and relying less on his linemates to convert the opportunities that he created?

Lindros is the more intriguing discussion imho. I humbly suggest he could have toned down the violence, focused on generating offense and finishing/converting (he had a terrific shot), and been consistently one of the top (if not THE top) offensive producers from ~1994 to ~2004. This may have necessitated a change to the wing position, which would have served him well I think in terms of playing to his strengths and, more importantly, avoiding his weaknesses which seem to involve peripheral vision and carrying the puck while avoiding contact .

 

[Staniowski]

I'm not too interested in Forsberg, as he had an incredible run in the latter half of the 1990s as one of the top players in the game in the regular season + playoffs with a good (not perfect amount) of health. These were during his prime years, and from watching him the majority of his career I think he was a better 200-foot player during that period as well, relative to his Art Ross/Hart year(s) in the early/mid-2000s. I'm pretty confident we saw him at his absolute best. Not sure where he could have taken his game to reach another level...maybe by taking more shots and relying less on his linemates to convert the opportunities that he created?

Lindros is the more intriguing discussion imho. I humbly suggest he could have toned down the violence, focused on generating offense and finishing/converting (he had a terrific shot), and been consistently one of the top (if not THE top) offensive producers from ~1994 to ~2004. This may have necessitated a change to the wing position, which would have served him well I think in terms of playing to his strengths and, more importantly, avoiding his weaknesses which seem to involve peripheral vision and carrying the puck while avoiding contact .

I agree - I think Lindros could have toned it down and still been a great scorer.

 

[The Panther]

Lindros definitely should have played it smarter. There's nothing he could have about morons like Gino Odjick jumping him from behind and driving his head into the ice (twice in one game), but, for example, in the highlights' package earlier that someone posted (Lindros vs. Stevens), you can see a game where Stevens is hot and challenges Lindros for an extended sequence, and Lindros clearly doesn't want to fight. He eventually does, and it's just a wrestling match with no harm (apparently) done to either player. But I think that's the kind of thing Lindros should have avoided.

Messier is indeed a good comparable in this way. Young Messier (like, Howe) was actually scarier to other players because he didn't engage other players very often. But once in a while, he would snap or just go crazy on somebody for no apparent reason. Loose cannon, if you will, which is more frightening. So, I think Lindros should have taken the Howe/Messier-route -- prove yourself at a young age, then pick your spots carefully.

 

[Staniowski]

There seems to be a general belief that guys like Jagr and Crosby were better NHL scorers than Lindros. I don't really think this is true.

Here's Lindros and Jagr in the 5 relatively healthy Lindros years. They're both young and improving....(points-per-game):

'93 - Lindros 1.23; Jagr 1.16
'94 - Lindros 1.49; Jagr 1.24
'95 - Lindros 1.52; Jagr 1.46
'96 - Jagr 1.82; Lindros 1.58
'97 - Lindros 1.52; Jagr 1.51

And then in the following two seasons, Lindros has some significant injuries that affect his game....but in both seasons, at the time of his injuries (Nov. '97 and late Dec. '98), he is actually leading the NHL in scoring.

So, if Jagr is the better scorer, why is a healthy Lindros almost always outscoring Jagr?

After '99, of course, Lindros' health becomes much worse (multiple more concussions during the '00 season).

 

[Dale53130]

There seems to be a general belief that guys like Jagr and Crosby were better NHL scorers than Lindros. I don't really think this is true.

Here's Lindros and Jagr in the 5 relatively healthy Lindros years. They're both young and improving....(points-per-game):

'93 - Lindros 1.23; Jagr 1.16
'94 - Lindros 1.49; Jagr 1.24
'95 - Lindros 1.52; Jagr 1.46
'96 - Jagr 1.82; Lindros 1.58
'97 - Lindros 1.52; Jagr 1.51

And then in the following two seasons, Lindros has some significant injuries that affect his game....but in both seasons, at the time of his injuries (Nov. '97 and late Dec. '98), he is actually leading the NHL in scoring.

So, if Jagr is the better scorer, why is a healthy Lindros almost always outscoring Jagr?

After '99, of course, Lindros' health becomes much worse (multiple more concussions during the '00 season).

Not to mention that Lindros is a year younger, with two years less experience, under less than optimal conditions compared to Jagr being a young luxury piece on an All Time top heavy roster to play on, growing and developing under optimal conditions (especially on that hive-mind-esque power play).

I don't quite understand why people are so quick so assume that Lindros couldn't have possibly taken another offensive jump (or two), beyond whatever they feel that his peak was. He's still only 24 years old in 1997 (up to the 1996-97 season). He's only 5 years into his career by this point, with a bunch of set-backs (not including his concussion), still only playing less than 300 then.

 

[Michael Farkas]

I don't quite understand why people are so quick so assume that Lindros couldn't have possibly taken another offensive jump (or two), beyond whatever they feel that his peak was.

It's been mentioned. It's his lack of hockey sense, playmaking vision, playmaking creativity/variance. I'm not saying you have to agree or anything. Just saying, it's not tough to see why.

Even so, he could have a big goal scoring year in there. I just don't think his points per game or total points in a season would be so greatly affected...

 

[tabness]

I don't quite understand why people are so quick so assume that Lindros couldn't have possibly taken another offensive jump (or two), beyond whatever they feel that his peak was. He's still only 24 years old in 1997 (up to the 1996-97 season). He's only 5 years into his career by this point, with a bunch of set-backs (not including his concussion), still only playing less than 300 then.

I don't think it's too hard to foresee Lindros adding more to his game with experience, just like many goal scoring centers have done before and since. There are people who caricature Lindros as a Keith Primeau or Adam Creighton or something, as someone who was just a factor of his size or strength, and to that I'll simply respond that we've never seen another player like Lindros since and it certainly wasn't for lack of looking/developing, they were looking for or looking to make the next Lindros for an entire generation.

It should also be noted that Lindros worked hard on both his shot and skating in juniors, if there's any question of this guy's ability to add other dimensions and improve his game.

While I'm certainly not with any knocks on Lindros's hockey sense or nothing (don't just take my word for it, you can dig up tons of superlatives on Lindros's vision from his time in junior to his early years, the place where he was said to be lacking in comparison to Mario Lemieux generally was in his handles or "touch"), when you compare with McDavid/Forsberg/Crosby/Jagr, sure these are guys who are basically amongst the absolute best playmakers of the past 30 years right, so if you wanna say Lindros lacks a bit when compared to them in this aspect and wouldn't reach their level even with experience, well all right then.

Let's just take for granted that he didn't utilize his teammates as well as some of his peers at the time or in stature. Fair enough, I'm with it. How much of this is because of an inability to do so, and how much of this is because he had an absolutely amazing shot and could just drive to the net with impunity?

Lindros seemed to love the play of beating the defenseman wide/running over the defenseman, and either driving to the net himself for a scoring chance or going behind the net and finding the open man in the slot. This usually worked because the other defenseman, or a forward with backpressure, couldn't really do nothing to Lindros in either of these situations. Does he really need to bother with different plays many times, even if they were there? For most players they may have been higher percentage plays, but for Lindros?

I compare the situation to Brett Hull. His vision was off the charts and he was a great passer, but you knew he's shooting most times, even if there is a play open, because, well, he has probably the best shot ever lol, it's hardly a knock on his situational awareness.

I generally find the focus on Lindros's stats to be misplaced anyway, he's the posterchild for domination beyond stats.

His stats are amazing anyway, as others have already discussed, I'll go ahead and point to his road even strength scoring splits which could be argued indicate an adaptability to different situations. Forsberg is the closest comparable discussed here. Jagr sees a significant drop. Crosby got a modest drop. McDavid a bit more of a drop.

 

[tabness]

Lindros definitely should have played it smarter. There's nothing he could have about morons like Gino Odjick jumping him from behind and driving his head into the ice (twice in one game), but, for example, in the highlights' package earlier that someone posted (Lindros vs. Stevens), you can see a game where Stevens is hot and challenges Lindros for an extended sequence, and Lindros clearly doesn't want to fight. He eventually does, and it's just a wrestling match with no harm (apparently) done to either player. But I think that's the kind of thing Lindros should have avoided.

Messier is indeed a good comparable in this way. Young Messier (like, Howe) was actually scarier to other players because he didn't engage other players very often. But once in a while, he would snap or just go crazy on somebody for no apparent reason. Loose cannon, if you will, which is more frightening. So, I think Lindros should have taken the Howe/Messier-route -- prove yourself at a young age, then pick your spots carefully.

This one you can probably pin a bit on Flyers management and coaching for expecting Lindros to do everything and fight his own battles constantly.

Then again, even I am somewhat enamored by the idea of a player who can in the same game score a big goal or two, set up another one or two, absolutely pummel the other team's big defensemen, and of course, beat up their enforcer lol

 

[Troubadour]

For this nine-season period, Jagr is outscoring Forsberg (on pace) by only 6 or 7 points per season. In addition, Forsberg's ES numbers are better.

Wow, it seemed so unlikely, given how dominant Jagr was at ES and given how dependent Forsberg's production usually was on PP, yet it includes the WSH years, so I said what the hell, maybe, still checked though -- and it is not correct.

In that span, in 668 games, Jagr at ES scored G268 A332 TP600 which is good for an ESPPG of 0.898.

Foppa's numbers in 533 games during that same span were G132 A282 TP414, good for 0.776. At ES, the difference between them actually went from 0.8 to 0.12 in Jagr's favor. Forsberg assist ratio was slightly better, but as expected, Jagr wrecked him in the goal department.

 

[The Pale King]

Don't forget that Gretzky was actually in Duran Duran for a while...

Gretz was in Kajagoogoo, my man.

Wait no, that's Ziggy Palffy holy wow what a dead ringer.

 

[sr edler]

This may have necessitated a change to the wing position, which would have served him well I think in terms of playing to his strengths and, more importantly, avoiding his weaknesses which seem to involve peripheral vision and carrying the puck while avoiding contact .

The most devastating hit from Kasparaitis wasn't even an open ice hit as it happened along the boards.

 

[JackSlater]

Lindros definitely should have played it smarter. There's nothing he could have about morons like Gino Odjick jumping him from behind and driving his head into the ice (twice in one game), but, for example, in the highlights' package earlier that someone posted (Lindros vs. Stevens), you can see a game where Stevens is hot and challenges Lindros for an extended sequence, and Lindros clearly doesn't want to fight. He eventually does, and it's just a wrestling match with no harm (apparently) done to either player. But I think that's the kind of thing Lindros should have avoided.

Messier is indeed a good comparable in this way. Young Messier (like, Howe) was actually scarier to other players because he didn't engage other players very often. But once in a while, he would snap or just go crazy on somebody for no apparent reason. Loose cannon, if you will, which is more frightening. So, I think Lindros should have taken the Howe/Messier-route -- prove yourself at a young age, then pick your spots carefully.

Pronger (who is pretty candid in interviews) actually talked about just this before. Not sure if Messier or Howe ever laid it out, but I agree that they subscribed to this theory. Better to have a calculated violent episode that isn't super predictable than to always respond. Constant physicality takes its toll over time but you get a similar amount of space from the opposition if they just fear it rather than anticipate it.

Lindros definitely seems like he would have benefitted from the right mentor.

Also, a picture of Pronger and Lindros talking about dunking nerds in the toilet (probably)

 

[BraveCanadian]

Wow, it seemed so unlikely, given how dominant Jagr was at ES and given how dependent Forsberg's production usually was on PP, yet it includes the WSH years, so I said what the hell, maybe, still checked though -- and it is not correct.

In that span, in 668 games, Jagr at ES scored G268 A332 TP600 which is good for an ESPPG of 0.898.

Foppa's numbers in 533 games during that same span were G132 A282 TP414, good for 0.776. At ES, the difference between them actually went from 0.8 to 0.12 in Jagr's favor. Forsberg assist ratio was slightly better, but as expected, Jagr wrecked him in the goal department.

Yeah I immediately questioned that one because Jagr is one of the best ES players of all time.

Lindros was really good too if I recall.

 

[NordiquesForeva]

The most devastating hit from Kasparaitis wasn't even an open ice hit as it happened along the boards.

That is true. I think Lindros was susceptible to getting hit, and getting hit hard, whatever position he played unfortunately. Playing him on the wing, however, would in theory limit how much he'd be responsible for carrying the puck through the neutral zone (if he was paired with a strong centre) and allow him to focus on puck retrieval.

 

[The Panther]

Yeah I immediately questioned that one because Jagr is one of the best ES players of all time.

Wow, it seemed so unlikely, given how dominant Jagr was at ES and given how dependent Forsberg's production usually was on PP, yet it includes the WSH years, so I said what the hell, maybe, still checked though -- and it is not correct.

Sorry, I wasn't clear. When I said "better ES numbers", I simply meant plus/minus.

Also, a picture of Pronger and Lindros talking about dunking nerds in the toilet (probably)

"So Eric, what did Jack Slater do when you shoved his head in?"
"Ha! He cried for his mommy!"
"I love dunking nerds!"
"Me too, dude!"

 

[The Macho King]

I kind of refuse to "what if" Lindros. Part of what made him so fragile is what made him good. So, a healthy Lindros is a guy who played differently and maybe wasn't as effective.

 

[Overrated]

There seems to be a general belief that guys like Jagr and Crosby were better NHL scorers than Lindros. I don't really think this is true.

Here's Lindros and Jagr in the 5 relatively healthy Lindros years. They're both young and improving....(points-per-game):

'93 - Lindros 1.23; Jagr 1.16
'94 - Lindros 1.49; Jagr 1.24
'95 - Lindros 1.52; Jagr 1.46
'96 - Jagr 1.82; Lindros 1.58
'97 - Lindros 1.52; Jagr 1.51

And then in the following two seasons, Lindros has some significant injuries that affect his game....but in both seasons, at the time of his injuries (Nov. '97 and late Dec. '98), he is actually leading the NHL in scoring.

So, if Jagr is the better scorer, why is a healthy Lindros almost always outscoring Jagr?

After '99, of course, Lindros' health becomes much worse (multiple more concussions during the '00 season).

92/93 Jagr is 34th in PPG
93/94 Jagr is 15th in PPG

No need to add these seasons. It's clear different players peak at different ages. Jagr's prime started in 94/95. From 94/95 to 96/97 he had higher PPG. The GPG disparity was even higher. Same thing in the playoffs.

But yeah I guess they were somewhat close.

 

[Staniowski]

92/93 Jagr is 34th in PPG
93/94 Jagr is 15th in PPG

No need to add these seasons. It's clear different players peak at different ages. Jagr's prime started in 94/95. From 94/95 to 96/97 he had higher PPG. The GPG disparity was even higher. Same thing in the playoffs.

But yeah I guess they were somewhat close.

Jagr scored better in that one season, '96. Otherwise it was Lindros when healthy.

There's no reason to believe Lindros, if healthy, wouldn't have kept pace with Jagr from '98 onwards; scoring declined a bit, Jagr improved a bit (a normal progression for his age). Without concussions, Lindros would be right there.

Jagr lost his three biggest competitors (Lemieux, Lindros, Kariya) for scoring titles almost at the same time. This would've been possibly the best group of scorers (at the same time) in NHL history, and a real possibility that Jagr wouldn't have won any of them.

As it is, I'd consider Jagr and Lindros roughly the same as scorers, two of the very best ever.

 

[Overrated]

Jagr scored better in that one season, '96. Otherwise it was Lindros when healthy.

Sure in the three year period Lindros has a higher PPG twice and Jagr once. When it was Lindros winning the scoring race however they were more or less even but Jagr won it it was by a long shot. That is why you wanna arbitrarily focus on a season by season. It is also easier to have an outlier season when it's shortened. If you look at them overall Lindros was worse. Also Lindros suffered concussions all throughout his career including while a junior so I don't really see a reason why should I stop in 96/97. Lindros was clearly still in his prime as late as in 98/99.

There's no reason to believe Lindros, if healthy, wouldn't have kept pace with Jagr from '98 onwards; scoring declined a bit, Jagr improved a bit (a normal progression for his age). Without concussions, Lindros would be right there.

That is a what if. Since he suffered concussions as a junior I can then say that he maybe would have been better than Gretzky had he not suffered a single concussion.

Jagr lost his three biggest competitors (Lemieux, Lindros, Kariya) for scoring titles almost at the same time. This would've been possibly the best group of scorers (at the same time) in NHL history, and a real possibility that Jagr wouldn't have won any of them.

Kariya was never an Art Ross contender lol. He had the highest PPG only once and that was he had a short 22 game outlier season. With the exception of that one season he played the majority of games in that era and never seemed quite at Jagr's level. He was on Selanne's level. Had Lemieux not retired Jagr would have had extra 20 points every season. It's not like Jagr had everything going for him in the late 90s.