Where Would Lindros rank All Time if injuries never squandered his potential?

[blundluntman]

If Lindros's career hadn't been derailed by injuries, where would he rank all time?


For reference, here are his numbers prior to his first concussion in 98:

Season	GP	Goals	Assists	Points	PPG (rank in the League)
1992–93	61	41	34	75	1.26 (24th in league)
1993–94	65	44	53	97	1.49 (4th in league)
1994–95	46	29	41	70	1.52 (1st in league)
1995–96	73	47	68	115	1.58 (3rd in league)
1996–97	52	32	47	79	1.52 (2nd in leauge
1997–98	53	25	37	62	1.17 (6th in league)

Personally, I'd probably have him somewhere in the top 10 if he'd reached his full potential and had a relatively healthy career, maybe even Top 5. Not sure how many Harts/Art Rosses he would've won due to Hasek/Jagr being around, but I wouldn't be surprised if he racked up some decent hardware and had more high AST finishes. I'd definitely consider taking a healthy Lindros over Crosby tbh.

Click to read more...

 

[Leafidelity]

Safely in the top 10

 

[norrisnick]

Are we magically erasing all his other injuries as well? He was missing 20% of the games when "healthy"...

 

[AvroArrow]

Top 5, but I value size and physicality a lot more than most people. To me he was basically like Lemieux offensively with Chris Pronger's size, nastiness and physicality. Complete monster, if you could import prime healthy Lindros into todays NHL he would be the most dominant player in the league in my opinion.

 

[blundluntman]

Are we magically erasing all his other injuries as well? He was missing 20% of the games when "healthy"...

Just assume he was relatively healthy; none of the concussion history and able to play 75+ games in 80% of the rest of his career. Just a "normal" career

 

[Regal]

I think he gets a little overrated offensively. He was obviously very good but was a bull who had lots of tools but didn’t have the offensive IQ of a Jagr, Crosby, McDavid, Kucherov, etc. I actually think offensively MacKinnon is a fairly similar level, though Lindros broke out earlier. Lindros was more physical, better defensively and great on the dot, but I’m not sure if even relatively healthy he’s a sure fire top 20 player without strong longevity, though he’s probably around that.

 

[DitchMarner]

To have been more of a long and consistent prime type of player, he would have had to play differently than he did. You can't play the way he did and have a healthy career. If he had toned down the physicality, he might not have been as dominant on a per game basis.

So I think you get less per game dominance and maybe slightly more or equal per season dominance in his prime but get a longer prime and career. I'm not sure he ends up top five or ten all-time, but he would generally be ranked higher than he is and his career would be considered better.

 

[Gregor Samsa]

He’d be in a discussion for top 5-15 all time. A true unicorn that had it all

 

[heretik27]

He had the physical gifts, but it's difficult to say what kind of longevity he may have had at his peak. Top 25 is a pretty safe conservative rank I feel, there's a lot of insanely talented players in the history of hockey and I wouldn't expect him to fall any lower than that if he had a normal career with the upside of being a top 10 player.

 

[Fig]

I think he gets a little overrated offensively. He was obviously very good but was a bull who had lots of tools but didn’t have the offensive IQ of a Jagr, Crosby, McDavid, Kucherov, etc. I actually think offensively MacKinnon is a fairly similar level, though Lindros broke out earlier. Lindros was more physical, better defensively and great on the dot, but I’m not sure if even relatively healthy he’s a sure fire top 20 player without strong longevity, though he’s probably around that.

??? Lindros was 5th fastest to 500 points at 352 GP. Gretzky was 234, Lemieux 287. McDavid and Crosby needed 369. Ovi 373. He was the all time points leader for world junior championships since like 1992 until Bedard beat him last year. He's ranked 21st all time PPG at 1.14 and he could re-enter the top 20 depending on what happens with Panarin, Draisaitl, Matthews and Kucherov's remaining careers.

I think Crosby, McDavid and Ovi beat him to 600 points (I don't know for sure, I think I read this somewhere... but it would need to be looked up) in less GP because of Lindros slowing down significantly due to injuries. He was basically destroyed by age 24-25 from injuries.

You can certainly say he was a lower hockey IQ tier to some of those guys and perhaps in a Mack or Ovi calibre of hockey IQ, but his physical tools were so ridiculous that part didn't matter he wasn't as high hockey IQ as those in the higher echelon. IIRC, his skating was also apparently quite good as well. He wasn't slow. He was a special type of prototypical game breaker we haven't seen since he retired. Even someone like Ovi is technically a Lindros lite... and Lindros was a C, not a winger.

Not even perfectly healthy, but IMO if Lindros has access to modern rules and medical technology, I think he'd cement himself somewhere in the 5-15 range if he played to age 35 with those benefits. He played to age 34 before retiring and he was PPG in all seasons except for his last 4.

Maintaining PPG until age 35 and maybe a bit of a 10-15% bump in GP for all the others seasons, I really do think he'd be sitting around 1000 games with around 1200 points. IMO that's at least in the Crosby and Ovi range of all time greats, but Lindros would have reasons to be considered better than them if he played out a career that way.

 

[bucks_oil]

I voted top-10 because that was clearly possible. According to this list, I could see him falling anywhere from 8th to 18th depending on how things turned out for him if healthier... but it gets tough right, because some of those guys would also have been healthier... so how healthy do we really mean?

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/3550299/2023/02/08/nhl99-ranking-the-greatest-players-in-modern-nhl-history/

 

[Regal]

??? Lindros was 5th fastest to 500 points at 352 GP. Gretzky was 234, Lemieux 287. McDavid and Crosby needed 369. Ovi 373. He was the all time points leader for world junior championships since like 1992 until Bedard beat him last year. He's ranked 21st all time PPG at 1.14 and he could re-enter the top 20 depending on what happens with Panarin, Draisaitl, Matthews and Kucherov's remaining careers.

I think Crosby, McDavid and Ovi beat him to 600 points (I don't know for sure, I think I read this somewhere... but it would need to be looked up) in less GP because of Lindros slowing down significantly due to injuries. He was basically destroyed by age 24-25 from injuries.

You can certainly say he was a lower hockey IQ tier to some of those guys and perhaps in a Mack or Ovi calibre of hockey IQ, but his physical tools were so ridiculous that part didn't matter he wasn't as high hockey IQ as those in the higher echelon. IIRC, his skating was also apparently quite good as well. He wasn't slow. He was a special type of prototypical game breaker we haven't seen since he retired. Even someone like Ovi is technically a Lindros lite... and Lindros was a C, not a winger.

Not even perfectly healthy, but IMO if Lindros has access to modern rules and medical technology, I think he'd cement himself somewhere in the 5-15 range if he played to age 35 with those benefits. He played to age 34 before retiring and he was PPG in all seasons except for his last 4.

Maintaining PPG until age 35 and maybe a bit of a 10-15% bump in GP for all the others seasons, I really do think he'd be sitting around 1000 games with around 1200 points. IMO that's at least in the Crosby and Ovi range of all time greats, but Lindros would have reasons to be considered better than them if he played out a career that way.

Lindros was great early because he had the body of a 25 year old at 18, and so his scoring numbers for “fastest to certain point totals” is going to look really good, especially since he came in when scoring was still high. But I think compared to the rest of the league he was more the type of guy who, if healthy, could win an Art Ross or two (was tied with better PPG in ‘95), but more often would be top 3/top5 a number of times, more like the MacKinnon/Kucherov/Draisaitl types than a Jagr/McDavid/Crosby who had the ability to win 5-6 (Crosby only won two but obviously could have won more). I think he was better than the first group of players when his all around game is considered, but I think he was slightly below the forwards who are typically put top 10 offensively.

 

[Fig]

Lindros was great early because he had the body of a 25 year old at 18, and so his scoring numbers for “fastest to certain point totals” is going to look really good, especially since he came in when scoring was still high. But I think compared to the rest of the league he was more the type of guy who, if healthy, could win an Art Ross or two (was tied with better PPG in ‘95), but more often would be top 3/top5 a number of times, more like the MacKinnon/Kucherov/Draisaitl types than a Jagr/McDavid/Crosby who had the ability to win 5-6 (Crosby only won two but obviously could have won more). I think he was better than the first group of players when his all around game is considered, but I think he was slightly below the forwards who are typically put top 10 offensively.

No matter how you want to slice it, 1.40 PPG average over 7 seasons is still impressive. I'm saying is that if he was just a little healthier and ended his career at age 35 with 1000 GP (extra season and extra 10-15 games average per season) and his career PPG was slightly higher at 1.2 PPG vs his actual 1.14, I think he'd easily be cemented at a top 5-15 player of all time. Apparently right now, there are some lists that have Lindros ranked in the 50s all time right now.

Or are you also somewhat implying that a Mack, Kucherov or Draisaitl type player has no chance at all in being in the discussions for the top 5-15 players of all time? I'm cool with that if you're consistent in that. I'm OK with Jagr/Crosby and Jagr edging out Lindros long term due to longevity with the amount of GP that is expected beyond 1000 GP.

It honestly does sound like we are kinda on the same page? I think you'd be more comfortable with Lindros in the 10-20 ish range vs 5-15 if he was healthier? I feel like some of your reasoning is a little strange, but I do believe we have opinion that is more similar than different.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

he might have made it into the Hall of Fame!

 

[amnesiac]

Id say around Malkin/Kane, top 50

he might have made it into the Hall of Fame!

imagine!

 

[daver]

He doesn't not get injured. His physicality was part of the reason he was as good as he was offensively.

 

[tabness]

he's already right up there with the absolute best in terms of play he'd just have a greater career i guess and maybe there is no less of a reason to turn the nhl into the powderpuff league it is today

 

[ThePlanet]

Way behind Lemieux.

 

[Felidae]

He would be competing with Jagr for the major awards (and title of best forward in the game), probably taking a few from him (most likely a Hart or pearson) like he did in 1994-95.

People talk about his game not aging well or his prime being short lived. But his top 10 PPG finishes extends to 8 seasons. For reference, That's the same number of top 10 PPG finishes Ovechkin has, and just one less than Jagr, both of these guys were mostly healthy throughout their career

So if he were playing in this era, presumably dealing with less injuries due to stricter boundaries on whats considered dirty, overall less physical era and better medical knowledge.. I think he'd be anywhere from top 25 to maybe even top 10, at least close to Jagr, but above someone like Messier who brings a somewhat similar level of physicality while not being as offensively talented (who is also considered by many, a top 25 player)

 

[BraveCanadian]

He was a real force before all the injuries took their toll.

I'll say top 10 but he would probably have been in the logjam for any spot 5+

 

[Staniowski]

If you look at his four seasons before the first major injury....'94, '95, '96, '97 (his 20, 21, 22, 23-year-old seasons), and imagine 10 years of that, then some natural decline....people are certainly going to rate that player very highly, no matter what you think of him. Probably as high as anybody (up to that point), other than Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux probably.

 

[KevinRedkey]

I'd probably have him near Crosby.

 

[Staniowski]

He doesn't not get injured. His physicality was part of the reason he was as good as he was offensively.

His physicality was a part of it, but only a part. It wasn't as dominant a part as some people might think.

I saw him play in person many times before he was drafted, and the biggest attribute that jumped out way back then was, besides his size, of course, his skating and mobility, and it was quite something to behold.

His talent was certainly a combination of his size, mobility, physicality, assertiveness, agressiveness, confidence, puck skills, shooting skills, playmaking, vision.

Even without physicality, he would've been a great scorer. But we never saw a healthy Lindros without the physicality.

 

[lawrence]

Just how good is Eric F in Lindros

Once again I"m just using numbers as facts.. here goes

Crosbys first 9 seasons. PPG Average 1.29
Mcdaivd first 9 seasons. PPG average 1.54
Lindros first 9 seasons. PPG average 1.34

LIndros first 9 seasons actually surpass sidney Crosby. side note, Lindros didnt play in the NHL D+1. Lindros also missed the entire 2001 season.

have LIndros not had injury issues, we would have witnessed one of the greatest power forwards, probably the greatest power forward of all time. I will even go as far as saying he will probably surpass Gordie Howe. Just look at his vitals. 6'4 240 pounds of muscle and speed? It's not hes like big slow guy though, he will hit you like a f in train.

Healthy Eric Lindros is a top 5 player of all time.

 

[TruePowerSlave]

Don't think Lindros could stay healthy without changing his game.

Skating with your head down and playing an extremely physical game will result in major injuries no matter what.