Exactly. The best example I can think of with something like this is in hockey. Ask most knowlegable hockey fans who'd they'd rather have Peter Forsberg or Eric Lindros. People would say Forsberg, even though Lindros was the more explosive and exciting player he couldn't stay healthy. Same here. Floyd is the Lindross.
Untill Floyd puts together a full year I'd take The Shark in a heartbeat
Ahhh!! Eric Lindros is my favorite hockey player ever!!
The comparisons are similar, but I think it's different when we're talking about 4 years of college versus 8-12 years in the pros though.
I never started the argument that durability is key to success really. Yeah it's important, but I just think that when we look at Shark, yes he was durable, but he was only making plays for two years as an upperclassmen.
I hardly think that when we look back at his career 10 or 20 years from now that the durability issue will come up that much.
With Floyd it will if he can't stay healthy, but at this point like I said, regardless of injuries, Floyd is way ahead of the curve because he has produced as a freshman and sophomore.
And when I said Floyd will have played a season worth of games more than Shark, I meant that as in playing games AND producing.
If Floyd doesn't stay healthy and stays in school, we'll still get roughly 35 games of All-American talent.
Isn't that better than Shark's 26?
And if Lindros doesn't get into the Hall of Fame soon, I'm going to flip the F out.