Artemi Panarin vs Auston Matthews

[Tad Mikowsky]

As I showed, I did know what I was doing, and I did not misuse any stats; I didn't even use any stats. I was calling out the wrongful use of a stat by another, after his hostile bumping of this thread.
The personal attacks include calling me a "super Matthews fanboy", calling me a "propagandist", calling my post a clown post, and calling me a fool. Those are personal attacks.
Please do not misrepresent the situation, and please do not derail this thread further. This doesn't even have anything to do with you.

No no, you do misuse stats, as pointed out in nearly every thread that you use them in.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Yes, 3 years worth of games is a better sample than 50. I can’t believe you find that hard to understand.

Yes, 3 years of games is better than 50 games. 3 years of games, while excluding the most recent 50 of those, is problematic. Please read the post carefully next time.

No no, you do misuse stats, as pointed out in nearly every thread that you use them in.

1. No, I do not misuse stats, in any thread.
2. I have not even used stats in this discussion, which means your comments have no relevance to this thread.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

I would say that it depends if they’re thinking very long term or winning now. Pretty sure all would choose Matthews with a long term plan, but I feel most would take Panarin if they want the best impact right now. Panarin right now is just on another level.

I am not so certain most would take Panarin, regardless of age.

Admittedly, I do find it amusing how often Leaf young players get compared to older players. Even setting that aside, I would wager it would surprise folks here how many of them would select Matthews (and I say that with no disrespect to Panarin).

 

[Albus Dumbledore]

The poll never specified it was this year though. It merely asked “who’s better” in which case prior performance is a useful tool to use in conjunction with current performance, especially when prior performance has a much larger sample.

Most people were referring to now, ik some leafs fans were doing in general.
But unless specified general rule is now but I digress.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Most people were referring to now, ik some leafs fans were doing in general.
But unless specified general rule is now but I digress.

Yes, the OP does imply “now”. As in, “who is the better player right now”, not “who is having the better season.”

In order to determine who is better, we don’t use just the most recent game they’ve played, right? On a similar note, I don’t think we should use just the most recent season they’ve played in either.

 

[Albus Dumbledore]

Yes, the OP does imply “now”. As in, “who is the better player right now”, not “who is having the better season.”

In order to determine who is better, we don’t use just the most recent game they’ve played, right? On a similar note, I don’t think we should use just the most recent season they’ve played in either.

I mean I would they're are asking who's been better likely this season. Usually a small sample of recent games is ludicrous in any manner(sample size wont equate to any meaningful data).

I agree looking in the last few seasons when comparing players generally. But it just seems OP wanted to see who's been better this year and not past few seasons which would also mean Matthew's career essentially which also drags him down since hes still growing. Seems flawed when comparing younger players and much older players.

I think it's close either way and have no problem with either player being picked.
They both have there advantages playing on who they play for imo.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

I mean I would they're are asking who's been better likely this season. Usually a small sample of recent games is ludicrous in any manner(sample size wont equate to any meaningful data).

I agree looking in the last few seasons when comparing players generally. But it just seems OP wanted to see who's been better this year and not past few seasons which would also mean Matthew's career essentially which also drags him down since hes still growing. Seems flawed when comparing younger players and much older players.

I think it's close either way and have no problem with either player being picked.
They both have there advantages playing on who they play for imo.

I mean, we’re pretty much getting into semantics here, but the OP literally asked “who’s better”. That’s asking who the better player is right now, not who has been better over a specific sample. I don’t really get how “who’s better” could be interpreted as “who has been better this season” or “who is in the process of having the better season.” I mean, I think

In order to determine who is the better player right now, it makes the most sense to place a higher degree of emphasis on this season, but not to ignore the past few seasons entirely. Hell, even for the purpose of analyzing this current season, it might make more sense to place slightly more emphasis on the last 10 games than the first 10, although most people wouldn’t bother to do that because it’s very tedious and probably pointless as well in the grand scheme of things.

When looking at their full bodies of work with a healthy degree of increased emphasis on more recent results, I have the same conclusion as you. They’re pretty close offensively; Panarin is a bit ahead in that category this season, but that’s mostly due to inflated oiSH (see the difference between GAR and xGAR), and Matthews is historically an equal or slightly superior offensive player. Defensively, they’re about even this season, but Panarin’s defensive impact this year is pretty much in line with what it’s always been, while Matthews’ defensive impact is a major 180 from what it’s been in the past. While Matthews is young and still growing, some of the research on defensive impact shows that players actually decline as soon as they grow in the league, so I don’t entirely subscribe to the notion that Matthews’ defensive improvement is just normal improvement with age. I’m much, much more confident in Panarin’s ability to maintain a strong defensive impact going forward than I am in Matthews’, because Panarin has done it over many full seasons.

 

[Dion TheFluff]

I mean, we’re pretty much getting into semantics here, but the OP literally asked “who’s better”. That’s asking who the better player is right now, not who has been better over a specific sample. I don’t really get how “who’s better” could be interpreted as “who has been better this season” or “who is in the process of having the better season.” I mean, I think

In order to determine who is the better player right now, it makes the most sense to place a higher degree of emphasis on this season, but not to ignore the past few seasons entirely. Hell, even for the purpose of analyzing this current season, it might make more sense to place slightly more emphasis on the last 10 games than the first 10, although most people wouldn’t bother to do that because it’s very tedious and probably pointless as well in the grand scheme of things.

When looking at their full bodies of work with a healthy degree of increased emphasis on more recent results, I have the same conclusion as you. They’re pretty close offensively; Panarin is a bit ahead in that category this season, but that’s mostly due to inflated oiSH (see the difference between GAR and xGAR), and Matthews is historically an equal or slightly superior offensive player. Defensively, they’re about even this season, but Panarin’s defensive impact this year is pretty much in line with what it’s always been, while Matthews’ defensive impact is a major 180 from what it’s been in the past. While Matthews is young and still growing, some of the research on defensive impact shows that players actually decline as soon as they grow in the league, so I don’t entirely subscribe to the notion that Matthews’ defensive improvement is just normal improvement with age. I’m much, much more confident in Panarin’s ability to maintain a strong defensive impact going forward than I am in Matthews’, because Panarin has done it over many full seasons.

that's a fair statement but in Matthews defense, the eye test supports the numbers since Keefe has taken over as he has looked far more engaged, committed and attentive in the defensive zone since the coaching change. I'm optimistic about the probability of him maintaining his solid defensive play so long as Keefe sticks around and keeps pushing the right buttons (which I'm confident he can do) but I guess we will have to wait and see...

 

[Albus Dumbledore]

I mean, we’re pretty much getting into semantics here, but the OP literally asked “who’s better”. That’s asking who the better player is right now, not who has been better over a specific sample. I don’t really get how “who’s better” could be interpreted as “who has been better this season” or “who is in the process of having the better season.” I mean, I think

In order to determine who is the better player right now, it makes the most sense to place a higher degree of emphasis on this season, but not to ignore the past few seasons entirely. Hell, even for the purpose of analyzing this current season, it might make more sense to place slightly more emphasis on the last 10 games than the first 10, although most people wouldn’t bother to do that because it’s very tedious and probably pointless as well in the grand scheme of things.

When looking at their full bodies of work with a healthy degree of increased emphasis on more recent results, I have the same conclusion as you. They’re pretty close offensively; Panarin is a bit ahead in that category this season, but that’s mostly due to inflated oiSH (see the difference between GAR and xGAR), and Matthews is historically an equal or slightly superior offensive player. Defensively, they’re about even this season, but Panarin’s defensive impact this year is pretty much in line with what it’s always been, while Matthews’ defensive impact is a major 180 from what it’s been in the past. While Matthews is young and still growing, some of the research on defensive impact shows that players actually decline as soon as they grow in the league, so I don’t entirely subscribe to the notion that Matthews’ defensive improvement is just normal improvement with age. I’m much, much more confident in Panarin’s ability to maintain a strong defensive impact going forward than I am in Matthews’, because Panarin has done it over many full seasons.

Semantics aside sure.

As far as defense it's tough to say. Matthew's has been insanely better but that's because he chooses to be. Since he gets extra minutes now, hes going to produce over the course of the game. Meaning he has no problem back checking and playing hard on D.

I would argue the direction the team is going in that Matthew's will maintain his new found d zone play. He was drafted to be one and is finally blossoming into one. Despite not having the success in the past and panarin having it. Matthew's role in Keefe system is to be the guy in all situations sans pk. Hes the go to guy for offense and defense now. Babs would use him like an offensive player and he played like one.

 

[Dekes For Days]

In order to determine who is the better player right now, it makes the most sense to place a higher degree of emphasis on this season, but not to ignore the past few seasons entirely.

At the beginning of this thread, when I looked at offensive production from 2017/2018-present, you came in and shrank that sample size by a year, because that made Panarin look better.
Now, when looking at defensive impact using a stat in a highly problematic way, you ignore this current season in which Matthews has been better than Panarin by your metric, and put emphasis on the previous 3 years, because that makes Panarin look better.

Through this, you pretend that playing with mediocre relative linemates, largely a rotating cast of rookies, in front of the likes of Gardiner/Zaitsev is in any way comparable for defensive help to playing with better linemates, largely established players or stars, in front of the likes of Keith and Jones.

They’re pretty close offensively

Maybe at ES, depending on what samples you use, how you value primary points, and how sustainable you think Panarin's current level is (hint: not very). On the PP, Matthews is better.

Defensively, they’re about even this season, but Panarin’s defensive impact this year is pretty much in line with what it’s always been, while Matthews’ defensive impact is a major 180 from what it’s been in the past.

Panarin is at 2.88 xGA this season, significantly worse than any other year, largely because xGA tends not to transfer much with a player, and is highly dependent on external factors to the player in question, mostly defensemen.

Matthews is at 2.61 xGA (not sure how that's "even"), which is in line with his 1st year in the league, not a complete 180.

While Matthews is young and still growing, some of the research on defensive impact shows that players actually decline as soon as they grow in the league, so I don’t entirely subscribe to the notion that Matthews’ defensive improvement is just normal improvement with age.

So Matthews' improved metrics don't count, because you apparently think that as players improve with age, experience, comfort in the league, and enter their prime, they get worse defensively? Maybe that should give you an indication that you are measuring defensive impact in highly flawed and problematic ways.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

At the beginning of this thread, when I looked at offensive production from 2017/2018-present, you came in and shrank that sample size by a year, because that made Panarin look better.
Now, when looking at defensive impact using a stat in a highly problematic way, you ignore this current season in which Matthews has been better than Panarin by your metric, and put emphasis on the previous 3 years, because that makes Panarin look better.

Through this, you pretend that playing with mediocre relative linemates, largely a rotating cast of rookies, in front of the likes of Gardiner/Zaitsev is in any way comparable for defensive help to playing with better linemates, largely established players or stars, in front of the likes of Keith and Jones.

Maybe at ES, depending on what samples you use, how you value primary points, and how sustainable you think Panarin's current level is (hint: not very). On the PP, Matthews is better.

Panarin is at 2.88 xGA this season, significantly worse than any other year, largely because xGA tends not to transfer much with a player, and is highly dependent on external factors to the player in question, mostly defensemen.

Matthews is at 2.61 xGA (not sure how that's "even"), which is in line with his 1st year in the league, not a complete 180.


So Matthews' improved metrics don't count, because you apparently think that as players improve with age, experience, comfort in the league, and enter their prime, they get worse defensively? Maybe that should give you an indication that you are measuring defensive impact in highly flawed and problematic ways.

You just told me that using RAPM xGA is “a highly problematic way” to measure defense, and then used raw on-ice xGA rates to compare a player on the New York Rangers to a player on the Toronto Maple Leafs. That is next level cherry picking and hypocrisy; you have no right to call anybody out for any sort of agenda.

Here's some reading for you, since you're still getting a bunch of things wrong:

https://hockeyviz.com/static/pdf/ritsac19.pdf (Early career improvement in defense is selection bias, not real.)

(RAPM xGA and CA is more repeatable than raw xGA and CA)

 

[All Mod Cons]

You just told me that using RAPM xGA is “a highly problematic way” to measure defense, and then used raw on-ice xGA rates to compare a player on the New York Rangers to a player on the Toronto Maple Leafs. That is next level cherry picking and hypocrisy; you have no right to call anybody out for any sort of agenda.

Here's some reading for you, since you're still getting a bunch of things wrong:

https://hockeyviz.com/static/pdf/ritsac19.pdf (Early career improvement in defense is selection bias, not real.)

(RAPM xGA and CA is more repeatable than raw xGA and CA)

Jesus Christ, is this what hockey has become?

 

[WetcoastOrca]

No no, you do misuse stats, as pointed out in nearly every thread that you use them in.

No! No! No!
The Leafs are just a really stacked team at every position similar to the Oiler dynasty teams. It's just a coincidence that every stat he uses favours the Leafs player.

 

[Stamkos4life]

Jesus Christ, is this what hockey has become?

According to dekes and dubas it has.

 

[Dekes For Days]

You just told me that using RAPM xGA is “a highly problematic way” to measure defense, and then used raw on-ice xGA rates to compare a player on the New York Rangers to a player on the Toronto Maple Leafs.

No, unlike you, I am not comparing their individual defensive ability using xGA, because I understand how incredibly flawed that is. I posted those numbers because you falsely stated that they were even this year, which was untrue, and you falsely stated that Matthews was experiencing a complete 180 from results he has gotten in the past, which was also untrue.

you have no right to call anybody out for any sort of agenda.

Yeah, I do, when you come at me out of nowhere with hostility, when you're using a stat in a problematic way that misrepresents reality, when you're ignoring critical context while doing it, when you're suggesting things that have no logical basis, and when you're picking and choosing different samples for different things based on what makes Panarin look best.

https://hockeyviz.com/static/pdf/ritsac19.pdf

So let's put aside the numerous issues with this for a second, because I'm curious about your answer. Is it your belief that players are at their best defensively at the ages of 18 and 40, as this suggests?

The funniest part of this is that you essentially just showed what I've been saying - how forwards impact defensive metrics so much less, especially compared to defensemen. Your so-called adjustments also have negligible impact; should be much more if they were accurate.

 

[Dekes For Days]

The Leafs are just a really stacked team at every position similar to the Oiler dynasty teams. It's just a coincidence that every stat he uses favours the Leafs player.

The Leafs are really stacked at forward. They have quality pieces on defense and goaltending, but are not "stacked" there, as they don't have the same level of depth beyond the main roster. Their quality piece in goal has not played well this year, which can happen over smaller samples in a position primarily taken up by one individual.

I use the same set of stats for everybody. They are better than the alternative, and I have explained why and supported their use with evidence. I have also provided you with those same stats when you requested it. Some of the best players in offensive ability doing well in a stat that measures offensive ability should not come as a surprise to you.

According to dekes and dubas it has.

No, incorrectly using stats is not how Dubas or I operate. Quite the contrary.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

The Leafs are really stacked at forward. They have quality pieces on defense and goaltending, but are not "stacked" there, as they don't have the same level of depth beyond the main roster. Their quality piece in goal has not played well this year, which can happen over smaller samples in a position primarily taken up by one individual.

I use the same set of stats for everybody. They are better than the alternative, and I have explained why and supported their use with evidence. I have also provided you with those same stats when you requested it. Some of the best players in offensive ability doing well in a stat that measures offensive ability should not come as a surprise to you.

No, incorrectly using stats is not how Dubas or I operate. Quite the contrary.

Yes. Their cherry picked stats are quite impressive for a team currently out of a playoff spot!
BuT PosT KeEfe theY are GoOd.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Their cherry picked stats are quite impressive for a team currently out of a playoff spot!

The stats you are referencing are not cherry picked, and are not what is being discussed. They are a measure of offensive ability, and since their core players have entered the league, the Leafs are 2nd in the league in scoring, just behind Tampa. This has driven them to two consecutive 7th in the league finishes, and highly competitive series against the league's very best teams. What I have suggested all along is very consistent with the results. They are currently out of a playoff spot because of slightly below average defense, and in contrast to previous years, well below average goaltending.

I find it interesting that when others manipulate stats in very convoluted ways, or use per 60 measures, it doesn't seem to bother you, and sometimes you even like their posts. Yet when I apply very simple and easy to understand per 60 measures to include more context in production statistics, suddenly everything is cherry picked.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

The stats you are referencing are not cherry picked, and are not what is being discussed. They are a measure of offensive ability, and since their core players have entered the league, the Leafs are 2nd in the league in scoring, just behind Tampa. This has driven them to two consecutive 7th in the league finishes, and highly competitive series against the league's very best teams. What I have suggested all along is very consistent with the results. They are currently out of a playoff spot because of slightly below average defense, and in contrast to previous years, well below average goaltending.

I find it interesting that when others manipulate stats in very convoluted ways, or use per 60 measures, it doesn't seem to bother you, and sometimes you even like their posts. Yet when I apply very simple and easy to understand per 60 measures to include more context in production statistics, suddenly everything is cherry picked.

I think we have finally found some common ground. They are a good but not elite team compared to the top 5 or so teams that occupy that rank. In that second tier of good teams.
And that’s pretty good. No need to cherry pick stats to make them appear better than they are.

 

[Dekes For Days]

They are a good but not elite team compared to the top 5 or so teams that occupy that rank. In that second tier of good teams.

Assuming that Andersen's 3+ years is more representative of who he is than this half-year, then the Leafs are an elite team.

No need to cherry pick stats to make them appear better than they are.

Looking at ES and PP (two separate game situations with extremely different scoring rates) separately and including the context of ice time is not cherry picking stats. It is looking at stats in a proper way. Looking at ES and PP production combined with no context offers limited information that is less representative of offensive ability.

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with Matthews or Panarin. Please stick to the topic.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Assuming that Andersen's 3+ years is more representative of who he is than this half-year, then the Leafs are an elite team.

Looking at ES and PP (two separate game situations with extremely different scoring rates) separately and including the context of ice time is not cherry picking stats. It is looking at stats in a proper way. Looking at ES and PP production combined with no context offers limited information that is less representative of offensive ability.

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with Matthews or Panarin. Please stick to the topic.

Me stay on topic? I’m responding to your post. You detailed the thread a long time ago by cherry picking Leaf friendly stats as you do in every thread.
I think you can come up with good arguments both ways on these two players.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I’m responding to your post.

This back and forth started with you mocking/making a statement about me, going off topic and misrepresenting the situation.

You detailed the thread a long time ago by cherry picking Leaf friendly stats as you do in every thread.

Once again, I do not cherry pick stats in this or any thread. I am consistent and constantly support the stats that I use with evidence.
More importantly, those referenced stats were not even the discussion point, and haven't been used here any time recently. What was being discussed were actual cherry picked defensive stats (that are also using per 60 measures FYI), used in highly problematic ways by another poster.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

This back and forth started with you mocking/making a statement about me, going off topic and misrepresenting the situation.

Once again, I do not cherry pick stats in this or any thread. I am consistent and constantly support the stats that I use with evidence.
More importantly, those referenced stats were not even the discussion point, and haven't been used here any time recently. What was being discussed were actual cherry picked defensive stats (that are also using per 60 measures FYI), used in highly problematic ways by another poster.

No. I called you out for cherry picking stats that always support the Leafs player. Now why don’t you prove me wrong and show me some posts where you have picked a non Leaf player and posted stats to support that.
Or do the stats you pick just always support the Leafs player every time?
Is every Leaf player really just that good? Or are you selective in your cherry picking?
Rather than continuing the back and forth I’ll leave you to hopefully reflect on what I’ve pointed out.

 

[Tad Mikowsky]

View attachment 314341

I agree. Dekes gets destroyed pretty often on here.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I called you out for cherry picking stats that always support the Leafs player.

I do not cherry pick stats that support the Leaf player, and once again, those stats were not even part of the discussion. I use the same stats all the time, in the proper form that represents the best measure of offensive ability, and a select few Leaf players that are discussed a lot look very good in them because they are amazing players.

Or do the stats you pick just always support the Leafs player every time?

No. I do tend to post in threads related to Leaf players the most, as (almost) everybody does with their team, but I have used these same stats for other players. Leaf players tend to have the better stats in these comparisons, because the players they are compared against are usually inferior players, as a result of Matthews/Marner/Nylander being considerably underrated by much of this board throughout their ELCs. Panarin is at least closer in ability than most comparisons have been.