Proving what exactly? That you're a raging Crosby homer or just an idiot? Or both?
Those are some of the best best players EVER to lace up the skates in the NHL, you can't disqualify them from discussion because they happened to play at the same time that Gretz and Lemieux did, that's ******ed. Some numbers:
Jagr is 10th all-time in goals, and 8th in pts. Sakic is 15th in goals and 9th in points. They've both got 2 cups too.
Hell I didn't even mention Messier (7th all time in goals, 2nd all-time in pts!) and SIX Stanley Cups to show for it...guess how many pts he scored his rookie year? 33. Not exactly a banner year for him.
So fine, be ignorant and refuse to recognize that these guys are greats of the game who are EASILY part of any conversation regarding Crosby vis a vis greatness at this point, etc etc, that's your perogative. But my point stands, these are all guys who dominated at the highest level for many years, and they didn't all start off with 100pt rookie seasons. There are dozens of factors at play that determine what kind of rookie season a player will have, ignoring them is stupid. When Crosby joined the Pens, they were in complete rebuild mode, they had a bunch of aging vets on their way out the door so there was no reason not to play him in all situations and give him a big jolt of on-ice experience (as a result, he led all forwards on the team averaging over 20 mins a game and 5:40 in PP time!). The Pens were terrible back then...the had seasons of 69, 65, 58 and then again 58 pts the year Sid joined. The next year they added Malkin and BAM, they shot to 105. Contrast that with Stamkos' rookie season where they have Vinny and St. Louis already in place...Stammer averaged under 15 mins per game his rookie year and 2:50 on the PP. You gotta factor this stuff in or just talking outta your ass