daver
Registered User
Perfect health? He missed chunks of time in every season. In 89-90 his back was so bad he needed surgery that would cost him 60 games the next season. I doubt if he was at 50% for that season.
The "what if" with Lemieux in this thread isn't just taking points/game when he was in the lineup and doing statistical extrapolation. It is, with good health, how much better would he have been? The clear understanding that he spent seemingly the majority of his career (even when in the lineup) severely hampered by injury and ailment which reduced his productivity. Is it not understandable that a player can be in the lineup but still have diminished skills due to injury? That's what I'm saying.
My Best-Carey
You are being intellectually dishonest.
He was pretty healthy in 84/85 and was 9th in PPG. Not close to Wayne's rookie year. He was healthy in 85/86 and, all things considered, was closer to Wayne than his rookie year, but still not as good. He missed time in 86/87 but before his injury, was not remotely close to showing a pace close to Wayne's 3rd year pace. He was healthy in 87/88 and was not close to Wayne's 4th year. He was healthy in 88/89 and did out up a year comparable to Wayne's peak. After that it seems that anything Mario did has to be qualified with inury and/or illness.
He did not produce at a pace in any year other than 92/93 that was comparable to Wayne.
So we are left either unreasonably speculating that Mario could have hit a level higher than he actually did and/or Mario cranking out seasons at his peak, year after year, which there is no evidence to support.
Or if you want to play the "Mario was never in perfect health" card we are left with the reality that unlike players like Orr or Crosby, Mario was never going to be in perfect health and was always going to miss time in his prime regardless.