Well, you sort of have more elite players to benchmark what elite performance by a top prospect who turned into stars looks like at that level, USNDP team also plays a lot of games vs top NCAA teams, they don't only play USHL teams. For Finland in recent years the only guy to really compare it to is Barkov and possibly Granlund. For Matthews you have guys like Eichel, Kessel and Kane to compare it to. The fact many within the program think he's the most talented player to come out of it, speaks volumes about how people view his potential. To say Laine is clearly the BPA available and that Matthews is being drafted by Toronto due to an NA bias and his position is ridiculous. If anything they are on similar tiers.I don't exactly understand how having a dominant season in a junior "league" compares to winning the MVP of the playoffs of one of the toughest leagues in the world?
Auston Matthews vs Patrik Laine - Round III
- Thread starter JawandaPuck
- Start date
- Status
Disagree somewhat. If both Matthews and Laine were centers, I'd think the debate would still rage on. They have different skillsets, Laine is the more offensive player while not being bad defensively, but Matthews projects to be and elite two-way center with offensive upside. I think Matthews is also a bit faster than Laine.
Still, right now, the position certainly favors Matthews. However, he has been impressive at every level he has played as well, so it's not JUST the position.
And thats why Kovy went ahead of Jason Spezza.......... Bias against Euro wingers, and favouritism towards NA Centers. And if Laine could play center he'd have a different skill set or game, which makes that comparison a bit ridiculous.
Well, he could be like Stammer as well in terms of style. A center who really, in my opinion, should play on the wing.
Matthews' game is extremely unique. He has elements to his game that compare to a bunch of different star players in the NHL, the most common that I've seen are Benn, Kopitar and Malkin. If the Leafs decide to pass over a talent as unique as Matthews, the entire scouting staff should be terminated
I saw him playing against Mikko Koivu. He was matched against him and dominated him in all 3 zones. Erik Karlsson and bunch of NHL players.
Maybe, you could say the same about Seguin, but both guys are very high-end skaters which allows them to cover some things up. I don't think Laine has the skating to play that type of style.
You used top line centers, you've listed one, and not one other top defender. Most of the elite NHL talent went to either the KHL or NLA. So it wasn't like he was matching up against high-end NHL players nightly, which your first post implied.
I'm not saying either of them is BPA at this moment, just comparing their merits. I'm not saying Matthews' junior years and NLA stats are not impressive. But if you look at Laine's 2 golds already and the way he got them, playoff MVP award and development curve this year - there is no other prospect to compare him to, to have done that in any league in Europe ever.
And yeah Matthews was getting much more recognition before Laine due to his major success in USNDP and obviously showed that he can play his game in a professional league as well. But if you argue that his draft year has been more impressive than Laine's, I don't know what to tell you anymore.
Now you're forgetting what kind of a league FEL is already without the NHL players. It's not NLA, it's better.
edit. nvm, misread
Last edited:
Kovy was clearly more talented than Spezza at time. There was difference of day and night that Kovy was in the next tier compared to Spezza. Barkov to me wasn't next tier prospect compared to MacKinnon, Jones and Drouin. NA media and scouting agencies liked to state that there was CLEAR big 3 in the draft and Barkov wasn't player in that group. Even when Barkov broke several records outplaying NHL 1st and 2nd C's few times. Kari Lehtonen was back then maybe one of the best if not the best goaltending prospect ever at his age. He destroyed FEL, WJC's and basically every competition he played. After that he got some injuries and lost his confidence but Lehtonen to me was best goaltending prospect ever i've seen in modern hockey. Atlanta needed goalie too back then so it was obvious choice.
That we fundamentally disagree, people can have separate opinions that are valid. I believe what Matthews did statistically in his league was more impressive than Laine's team based accomplishments that are constantly cited. Matthews has won at the international prior to this. Finishing top 2 in ppg, and 1st in gpg among players with more than 15 games in league where the top talent is comparable to SM-Liiga (that is not very disputable, they have less overall depth) is more impressive than finishing 23rd in PPG and 5th in GPG of players who played more than 15 games, even when accounting for the age difference. You believe his playoff and WJC performance makes his season better, I don't. No one is necessarily wrong here, people have just chosen to value different accomplishments and skills. There is no point in discussing this argument further, because neither of us are going to change our value system. I thought Matthews was better before the lottery, and stated as much.
Semantics had a really good post about how GM's get into trouble when they specifically look at recency bias. I'm not sure which thread I saw it in, but it was Kyle Dubas explaining why its important to look at the big picture and not the small things. Matthews has the longest and best track record of any prospect this year by far and nothing has changed it. Matthews put up numbers this year comparable to elite NHL level talent that went to the NLA during the lockout. That speaks for itself when GM's look at the big picture.
Read again please? I said he played against NHLers nearly every game. I stated him playing against #1 C's and dominating against them(Koivu and Turris was #1 back then). Top 6 D's but never top line D's. Where do i say him dominating top line C's and D's every night? I thought so. It's frustrating when other posters like you try to claim and say things what i didn't even say. It's not very intelligent.
I have been debating you for couple of days. There is alot of holes and wrong infos in your posts. Stating things that you don't even know or have any picture of it. I wouldn't call you a trustworthy poster. I'm not saying you do it on purpose but you need to have better picture of things if you don't know don't try to act knowing those things. You will get caught.
Last edited:
The difference wasn't day and night, Spezza was one of the biggest prospects in the history of the OHL, he played in the league at 15 and made the Canadian WJC team at 16. And also you are basically admitting they are at the very least Matthews and Laine are on the same tier, because teams take the better player if the difference is that large they will take the foreign winger over the NA Center, which basically shows their isn't a bias.
In regards to Barkov, while he looks like the best player from that draft right now, strong arguments can still be made to place Mackinnon, Monahan or Jones above him, that one is far from settled.
You stated he played against them over and over again, that would imply it was a consistent occurance. Not that he played Mikko Koivu once and Kyle Turris a couple times. That is not doing it over and over again. Outplaying a number 1 center once is not a consistent occurrence or as you said "over and over", how many times did he actually play against legitimate NHLers? Considering it wasn't that big a list and the lockout was over by January.
No, I know what i'm talking about, you are over inflating the number of NHLers in Barkov's year in SM-Liiga. He played against 1 top line centre. Your bias towards Finnish players has robbed you of any attempt of being objective.
My team has the first pick, I know who I think they should take, and I should probably want them to take the best player. I have no reason to be biased. You are completely unreliable, repeatedly going back to biases against Euros, when there is no proof of this its actually ridiculous.
I think the problem is that you can't really compare Matthews' success in NLA to anything because he is the first one to go there. You can only compare him to older centers who have played there. I mentioned earlier how d-man Petteri Nummelin scored 60pts at the age of 36 and almost ppg at age 40 in NLA. Also I have a hard time believing that there are no recent center prospects from for example Sweden and Finland who couldn't have had the same kind of success as Matthews in NLA.
Not trying to exactly prove anything with this, just trying to show that it's difficult to compare and rank especially when looking at stats. And yeah like you said, no point arguing.
Last edited:
For me the difference was day and night when i watched them in WJC. Kovy was just so much more skilled and naturally talented. Difference is bigger than Laine and Matthews have now. Spezza was overhyped prospect for me. Barkov never got his hype when he was 2nd youngest and youngest by current IIHF rules to score WJC goal over Crosby, youngest ever to play for team Finland in WJC, youngest ever to score point and goal in Liiga. Those was his records being 16 year old. He broke several records at 17 year old too. Barkov scored at rate which is best ever for draft eligible player from europe since Peter Forsberg even over players like Sedins, Näslund, Bäckström.
http://edmontonjournal.com/sports/h...promising-nordic-forward-since-peter-forsberg
I'm not saying that NHL teams would prefer players over others by where they play but NA based scouting agencies and rankings do. They always have better picture of players that grow up playing in NA and prefer them vs less known european prospects. That is for certain and Barkov is really good example of that. What Barkov did was special that people and "pros" didn't even realize. Other good example is Tarasenko. He was just phenomenal in KHL.
I think it's pretty clear and obvious that generally NA prospect are more hyped than EU ones. But that's not true anymore in case of NHL scouts and people who make the decisions at the draft. That's why we saw for example Barkov go nr.2 although he was generally considered to be behind all the NA prospects.
Yeah, benchmarking what Matthews is doing in the NLA is a near impossible task, but we can only go on the information we have. I'd be surprised if there was another center who could do this though, the only center prospect out of Europe who may be close to Matthews is Barkov, and I'm a fan of a team that landed one of the best Swedish center prospects in years. There was a reason before he put on a Zurich jersey he was viewed as a center prospect on par with Stamkos, Tavares and Eichel, he did absolutely nothing in the NLA to dispel this notion.
The only thing we can really use is what Seguin did in the NLA at 20, although the overall league quality was improved by the influx of NHL talent (that and the KHL seemed to be the preferred destinations for big names). Some of the other stars can be used such as Tavares and Kane, but I'd say Seguin is probably the best one to look at, just due to the fact he was a highly regarded young center who was only slightly older than Matthews. Also realize how many players jumping from Europe have trouble adapting to small ice, while Matthews had to adapt to international ice surfaces (while he did have a decent amount of experience on it due to IIHF events).
teravaineSAROS
Registered User
- Jul 29, 2015
- 3,814
- 1,482
Yea I agree, people need to stop saying "x is better than y and it's not even close", if it wasnt close it wouldn't be such a heated debate.
I feel like both prospects would've been selected 1st overall in most drafts outside of 2015.
This is going to be debated for years anyways
kelsier
Registered User
- Aug 17, 2013
- 4,280
- 1,741
Have you noticed, that you've said the same things in a different format for about hundred times now, all the while ignoring some, if not all factors surrounding Laine's regular season in each post.
- He had to earn the ice time
- Played 2nd or 3rd line (due to lack of roster depth)
- Only got lifted up to first unit at the end of the playoffs
Laine's and Matthew's regular seasons are not comparable due to circumstances involved. Had Laine been in NLA and having 1st line caliber guys on the wing while not actually having to start the season in lower lines, we can only imagine his goal and point totals. In the end, their regular seasons cannot be compared by ppg or the usual stats. It's not black on white as you like to paint it while throwing the same numbers in over and over. Doesn't it strike you one bit when you hear that some, if not most European scouts who have followed these guys throughout the season (and who actually are aware of their situations while being capable of viewing the whole picture) prefer Laine over Matthews?
Now, no one here is dismissing the fact that Matthews had in fact a great season for an undrafted player. However, all things considered that doesn't even come that close compared to a double gold winner and playoff MVP in one of the hardest leagues in the world. What Laine has accomplished this year has never been seen before throughout the Europe. Nothing Matthews' has on the plate compares to that.
You are going circles and repeating things to no end like a broken record.
You just read my post how you want to read by yourself. Turris and Koivu was #1 C's back then, Derek Stepan was also #2 C back then for Rags. He also played against NHL top 6 D's. But the message from my posts are 17 year old should not even play against games against NHL regulars that are key players for their teams. To do it is great chance to measure where he stacks against them. But him dominating the games against them is northing short of special. What Barkov did that year was in european standpoint much better what "big 3" did in NA. MacKinnon had excellent Memorial Cup run. Barkov had exceptional year in europe that happens once in 15-20 years. To me NA media and scouting agencies were really biased to not include Barkov in the same group of players. You don't agree? What is so wrong in my posts in this regard?
I have also stated that Leafs will most likely pick Matthews with their #1 pick, stated that Matthews was better in the game yesterday, stated and fought hard that Nylander has better offensive potential than Mikko Rantanen. If you think i have biased opinion towards finnish prospects then put some facts here. I have only stated that i like Laine more than Matthews and i have posted my arguments here. You like Matthews better and you have your arguments. Do i have to call you biased? No i have not called you biased even once. You calling me biased is your only pathethic weapon against my arguments. If you are not capable of intelligent debate i will stop messaging with you. It's like debating with a guy who have no skill to debate but only thing to answer arguments is to put words in my mouth or call me biased.
I was just saying stop posting wrong infos. Like Turris being only borderline 1# C to play against Barkov, or Laine putting 2 points in 5 games to start his playoffs. Who really even cares if he played only against 2 #1 C's and 1 #2 C from NHL? He dominated against them at 17 year of age multiple times. That is not special? In your opinion he had to dominate against high end NHL every night and out to make himself including into "Big 3" in NA media and scouting agencies? Gimme
a break...
Okay, I think we may of found some middle ground. I do think the prospect lists by certain NA media outlets can have bias, but I don't think that extends to the actual NHL teams unless they decide to be xenophobic like Brian Burke towards Russians.
About Tarasenko, he had some of what happened to Barkov happened to him, where teams started to have a lack of faith in the Russian development after a dry spell of talent between the 2004-2010 draft. But even factoring that in, he was still viewed as a consensus top 5 prospect. This was shortly after Radulov got poached, and the fears of the KHL were in full effect. So without a transfer agreement, teams were very sceptical. At that draft, the Blues actually picked Schwartz above Tarasenko, but then were able to trade Rundblad for another 1st, because they felt Tarasenko was too talented to take that gamble. In the case of both Barkov and Laine, both are or were able to come over relatively easy due to the agreement between the NHL and the IIHF.
And finally, this is just my opinion, maybe I'm wrong, and Leafs take Laine. And if they do, I hope people will bump this tread to prove me wrong because he's that much better than Matthews. I just don't see it as likely.
The final thing though, is that NHL central scouting has a euro branch of scouting, and Matthews has stayed atop that all year, so it isn't only NA scouts seeing it this way. Laine is an amazing player, but as pointed out in a previous post I have my reasons for picking Matthews, I think they are fairly valid. On the other hand, I believe that you have some valid points on why you think Laine is better.
The only arguments I have a problem with is when people say Matthews will go one because he's a North American, or when people try to say Matthews can't play well under pressure when we are using an insanely small sample size. Laine amazed me in the Liiga playoffs, but I don't value it higher because it was the playoffs, the more impressive thing is he was able to do it against top teams, not when it happened. This is because I believe being clutch doesn't carry over year to year, let alone across leagues, unless a player has a delicate psyche and melts down, which there is no evidence of that happening with Matthews. Winnipeg should be getting a hell of a player, and as ecstatic as I am about winning and likely getting Matthews, I'm also happy my team doesn't have to face a pissed off Laine anymore than 2 times a year. He will clearly use this as motivation if he slips to 2.
- Status
