News Article: Kane best American player per NHL.com writers

[RememberTheRoar]

Best United States-born player debated by NHL.com writers

While Kane led with five votes, Toronto Maple Leafs forward Auston Matthews received four votes and Winnipeg Jets forward Blake Wheeler had two. Jets goalie Connor Hellebuyck, Calgary Flames forward Johnny Gaudreau and Pittsburgh Penguins forward Phil Kessel each received one vote.

Click to read more...

 

[migi]

It’s between Kane and Matthews for next year, likely Eichel will join the group.

But Matthews, Eichel and everyone else has a lot to do being all-time best American born player which Kane could be if he keeps producing. He has a strong case to be the best even now, over Modano. But most likely needs that +1200 points to be clear numero uno.

 

[piteus]

IMO, Patrick Kane is the greatest American born player EVER. Unfortunately, NBCSN doesn't know how to market to the US audience. If ESPN had NHL coverage, they would be selling Patrick Kane 24/7.

 

[bwana63]

You don't say...

 

[Marotte Marauder]

Chris Chelios is the best US born player thus far

 

[JaegerDice]

Chris Chelios is the best US born player thus far

I agree.

Active right now it's still Kane, though I think by the end of his career Matthews might surpass him. I'm not a huge Eichel fan to be honest.

 

[NoHuman]

Chris Chelios is the best US born player thus far

It’s hard to compare Kane and Chelios because of the difference in position. In terms of team awards they are pretty much equal (3 cups, 1 silver medal). In personal accolades, Chelios has 3 Noris Trophies and a Messier award. Kane has a Hart, Art Ross, Calder, Ted Lindsay, and Conn Smythe. I’d say right now it’s close to an even split in terms of both.

Chelios arguments aside, it’s interesting to me that Kane is already 14th in scoring all time for American born players. He’s played hundreds of games less than most above him. I wonder where he’ll end by the time he retires. Modano leads with 1374. Kane is at 828. He’d have to be pretty lucky in terms of health and longevity to beat him. Still, Kane is 2nd in points per game. (I’ve excluded Brett Hull in these stats btw). If you add in scoring adjustment per era that gets even more impressive.

 

[JaegerDice]

It’s hard to compare Kane and Chelios because of the difference in position. In terms of team awards they are pretty much equal (3 cups, 1 silver medal). In personal accolades, Chelios has 3 Noris Trophies and a Messier award. Kane has a Hart, Art Ross, Calder, Ted Lindsay, and Conn Smythe. I’d say right now it’s close to an even split in terms of both.

Chelios arguments aside, it’s interesting to me that Kane is already 14th in scoring all time for American born players. He’s played hundreds of games less than most above him. I wonder where he’ll end by the time he retires. Modano leads with 1374. Kane is at 828. He’d have to be pretty lucky in terms of health and longevity to beat him. Still, Kane is 2nd in points per game. (I’ve excluded Brett Hull in these stats btw). If you add in scoring adjustment per era that gets even more impressive.

One key difference is that Kane's accolades came in one season that statistically isn't likely to occur again. He had a huge spike in ish% and osh%, and even with the same linemates and deployment the next season, couldn't generate the same point production because his sh% and the sh% of the players he shared the ice with regressed to normal.

Chelios on the other hand, was the best at his position in 3 separate seasons, so there's an arguement to be made his excellence was more sustained. Granted, that's all based on the notion of subjective awards, while at least 1 of Kane's awards was just hard, objective numbers (the art ross).

 

[Blackhawkswincup]

BS

Leaf fans told me plenty of times it was Phil Kessel

 

[NoHuman]

One key difference is that Kane's accolades came in one season that statistically isn't likely to occur again. He had a huge spike in ish% and osh%, and even with the same linemates and deployment the next season, couldn't generate the same point production because his sh% and the sh% of the players he shared the ice with regressed to normal.

Chelios on the other hand, was the best at his position in 3 separate seasons, so there's an arguement to be made his excellence was more sustained. Granted, that's all based on the notion of subjective awards, while at least 1 of Kane's awards was just hard, objective numbers (the art ross).

Technically that's not entirely true. Of the ones I listed, while several came in one year, Kane's personal accolades were spread out over 3 years (2008 Calder, 2013 Smythe, 2016 MVP year). I get your point though that in terms of awards for being best at your respective position - I'd say that's probably Art Ross vs Noris- Chelios had more. I'd argue though that Kane does have sustained excellence. In this decade, only Crobsy (719 in 574) and Ovi (702 in 679) have more points than Kane (686 in 659). My thought was more that their team awards and personal accolades offset each other in my opinion. As you said, awards are objective and a lot of people will probably argue which are more impressive.

 

[JaegerDice]

Technically that's not entirely true. Of the ones I listed, while several came in one year, Kane's personal accolades were spread out over 3 years (2008 Calder, 2013 Smythe, 2016 MVP year). I get your point though that in terms of awards for being best at your respective position - I'd say that's probably Art Ross vs Noris- Chelios had more. I'd argue though that Kane does have sustained excellence. In this decade, only Crobsy (719 in 574) and Ovi (702 in 679) have more points than Kane (686 in 659). My thought was more that their team awards and personal accolades offset each other in my opinion. As you said, awards are objective and a lot of people will probably argue which are more impressive.

Oh, for sure. My point wasn't that Kane was a flash in the pan, simply that as far as individual awards, he racked up quite a few of his most noteworthy in one thus-far anomalous season, whereas Chelios got his over several different seasons.

And while I don't begrudge Kane his Conn Smythe or consider it an invalid mark in his favor, it's hard for me to hold that up as evidence of his excellence when I watched that playoff run, and I know how much he struggled at times, and I know he and his dad were watching footage of himself before games to remind himself he was still a great player, all while Crawford was playing fantastic hockey through 20+ games. It doesn't invalidate Kane's performance, he was the leading scorer on the team after all, I just don't hold that particular Smythe win in the same regard as many others.

As far as raw point production, he's been elite for a long time. But it's rough to compare him to Chelios in that regard, cause there isn't really a 1:1 equivalent stat to PPG for defensive impact.

At the end of the day, the entire 'debate is one best suited to boisterous discussion on bar stools. There's never going to be a clear answer when positions, deployment, usage all vary so wildly.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

I'm of the opinion that you comparing forwards to defensemen to goalies is an apples vs oranges debate. You can only really compare forwards to forwards, and so on.
Question: Do you think it is a lock Kane puts up 550+ points over the rest of his career? Kane has 828 points currently. That is what it would take to pass Modano. Modano has 1374 points in his career. It becomes a lot closer if you normalize for era, but to most raw point totals are what matters for forwards. If Kane finishes with 12-1300 points, the Hart would make a compelling argument in his favor.
Chelios is unquestionably the greatest US born defenseman, and I can't even think of any truly great American goalies. Quick maybe? Other than him, I'm at a loss on that one.

 

[NoHuman]

Oh, for sure. My point wasn't that Kane was a flash in the pan, simply that as far as individual awards, he racked up quite a few of his most noteworthy in one thus-far anomalous season, whereas Chelios got his over several different seasons.

And while I don't begrudge Kane his Conn Smythe or consider it an invalid mark in his favor, it's hard for me to hold that up as evidence of his excellence when I watched that playoff run, and I know how much he struggled at times, and I know he and his dad were watching footage of himself before games to remind himself he was still a great player, all while Crawford was playing fantastic hockey through 20+ games. It doesn't invalidate Kane's performance, he was the leading scorer on the team after all, I just don't hold that particular Smythe win in the same regard as many others.

As far as raw point production, he's been elite for a long time. But it's rough to compare him to Chelios in that regard, cause there isn't really a 1:1 equivalent stat to PPG for defensive impact.

At the end of the day, the entire 'debate is one best suited to boisterous discussion on bar stools. There's never going to be a clear answer when positions, deployment, usage all vary so wildly.

(Hmmm. yeah, I think we're gonna disagree when it comes to that Conn Smythe haha. Even if you don't think he deserved to win it, Kane's play off excellence as a whole speaks for itself to me, much more than getting hung up on the specific dynamics of one year. I consider it a part of his legacy. And I know Hawks fans point out that Kane said Crow could have won it, but that's Kane's M.O. He's said that about pretty much every award he's ever won, from the Hart to the Calder. He probably would have said it about the Art Ross too, but he literally couldn't without sounding like an idiot. Thus is the nature of hockey. But seriously, Kane watching youtube videos to remind himself he's a "good player" is still hilarious to me.)

But yeah, greatest American player is a fun discussion. Thanks for engaging! (Especially as I'm new here ) In my mind, it’s a toss up between him and Chelios this point, but I also wouldn’t be surprised either if by the end of his career, Kane’s claimed the mantel in most people’s minds. Either way, pretty awesome for Hawks fans to have had both play for their team.

I was curious in your discussion of S%- Kane’s highest was actually in the lockout year. Obviously, it makes sense that he’d be more able to sustain that in a shortened season. But it also reinforced how much his s% last year took a nose dive. For all that people talked about Saad and Toews in that department, Kane had a statistically unlucky year too. It’s actually interesting because Kane seems to go through cycles with it- he’s had a few years where he’ll hit 9%, usually followed by a pretty big bounce back statistically. Let’s hope that’s the trend for next year as well.

 

[Marotte Marauder]

I'm of the opinion that you comparing forwards to defensemen to goalies is an apples vs oranges debate. You can only really compare forwards to forwards, and so on.
Question: Do you think it is a lock Kane puts up 550+ points over the rest of his career? Kane has 828 points currently. That is what it would take to pass Modano. Modano has 1374 points in his career. It becomes a lot closer if you normalize for era, but to most raw point totals are what matters for forwards. If Kane finishes with 12-1300 points, the Hart would make a compelling argument in his favor.
Chelios is unquestionably the greatest US born defenseman, and I can't even think of any truly great American goalies. Quick maybe? Other than him, I'm at a loss on that one.

Tom Barrasso

Tom Barrasso Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

...and for peak Jim Craig would be tough to top.

 

[Blackhawks]

Kane is the best imo but still not good enough to captain the Hawks according to HF experts lol

 

[AmericanDream]

I'm of the opinion that you comparing forwards to defensemen to goalies is an apples vs oranges debate. You can only really compare forwards to forwards, and so on.
Question: Do you think it is a lock Kane puts up 550+ points over the rest of his career? Kane has 828 points currently. That is what it would take to pass Modano. Modano has 1374 points in his career. It becomes a lot closer if you normalize for era, but to most raw point totals are what matters for forwards. If Kane finishes with 12-1300 points, the Hart would make a compelling argument in his favor.
Chelios is unquestionably the greatest US born defenseman, and I can't even think of any truly great American goalies. Quick maybe? Other than him, I'm at a loss on that one.

Mike Richter and Ryan Miller

realistically, greatest all-time is Frank Brimsek - one of the greatest goalies of all-time

 

[AmericanDream]

how anyone is putting Matthews in the same conversation as Wheeler and Kane is laughable.

I love the kid, but he has a long way to go before he has the career those do, and nothing is guaranteed.

 

[JaegerDice]

(Hmmm. yeah, I think we're gonna disagree when it comes to that Conn Smythe haha. Even if you don't think he deserved to win it, Kane's play off excellence as a whole speaks for itself to me, much more than getting hung up on the specific dynamics of one year. I consider it a part of his legacy. And I know Hawks fans point out that Kane said Crow could have won it, but that's Kane's M.O. He's said that about pretty much every award he's ever won, from the Hart to the Calder. He probably would have said it about the Art Ross too, but he literally couldn't without sounding like an idiot. Thus is the nature of hockey. But seriously, Kane watching youtube videos to remind himself he's a "good player" is still hilarious to me.)

But yeah, greatest American player is a fun discussion. Thanks for engaging! (Especially as I'm new here ) In my mind, it’s a toss up between him and Chelios this point, but I also wouldn’t be surprised either if by the end of his career, Kane’s claimed the mantel in most people’s minds. Either way, pretty awesome for Hawks fans to have had both play for their team.

I was curious in your discussion of S%- Kane’s highest was actually in the lockout year. Obviously, it makes sense that he’d be more able to sustain that in a shortened season. But it also reinforced how much his s% last year took a nose dive. For all that people talked about Saad and Toews in that department, Kane had a statistically unlucky year too. It’s actually interesting because Kane seems to go through cycles with it- he’s had a few years where he’ll hit 9%, usually followed by a pretty big bounce back statistically. Let’s hope that’s the trend for next year as well.

While Kane saying that Crow deserved it is nice affirmation of the position, it's not what I base my opinion on. He could have said nothing about Crow, and I'd still be firmly in the camp that Crawford deserved the Smythe that year. But like I said, I don't begrudge Kane the award. He's not the guy I would have picked, but he's not some random off-the-board choice either. He was the points leader on the Blackhawks and the most dangerous skater on the ice in the final. The voters deciding that his final was so strong that it overcame some inconsistency in the first 3 rounds isn't that different than the voters deciding that Toews dominance through the first 3 rounds overcame a rough SCF in 2010. At the end of the day it's a subjective award.

And yes, Kane's sh% will likely bounce back next year. He like a lot of players underperformed in that regard this season. That said, I think his bounce back will take him back into the 80-90 point range he's spent most of his career. The 106 points he hit in 2016, I just don't think he's ever going to touch again, even if he still had Panarin. I just think everything went his way that season, and it's not reasonable to expect everything to line up for him like that again.

The lockout year was a magical year as the Blackhawks fan. I've said repeatedly on this board that I've never watched any team, short of perhaps the at-the-time record-setting Bulls, play their sport at that level. The 2013 Blackhawks played as close to perfect hockey as I've ever seen, and on top of that, they had multiple guys delivering career years as far as sh% in the process. I don't think any of us will live to see any Blackhawks roster ever play hockey at that level, for such a sustained period, as we saw that year. The 2010 had more high-end talent, the 2015 Blackhawks had more depth on paper, but neither team reached the level of raw performance as that 2013 team. And the fact that it almost came out of nowhere, after a season that left a ton of doubts in a lot of peoples minds about where this team was going, only made it more special.

 

[JaegerDice]

Kane is the best imo but still not good enough to captain the Hawks according to HF experts lol

At this point your attempted trolls don't even make sense.

Modano was almost certainly the best American player in the world in 1999 (and has put up totals that Kane has yet to reach, though he still may), and yet wasn't a Captain on his own Stanley Cup winning team. He wasn't a Captain of a team period til 2004, when he was in decline along with his team.

Being the best player of X nationality doesn't make you a candidate for captaincy, hell being the best player on your team doesn't automatically make you a candidate for the C.

The C in general is almost entirely a matter of ceremony at this point. You don't become a leader by getting the C, you get the C as a result of being a leader. Nothing has or is stopping Kane from taking control of the locker-room, speaking up, leading by example, etc. Whether he's wearing the C or not, if he's the guy the players are turning to, then he'll have an impact. Giving Kane the C doesn't magically make him a leader, if he's a leader, then he'll be a leader whether he's wearing the C, an A or nothing at all.

Toews got the C at an early age because it was clear he was already taking control of the room. Whether that's not the case anymore, I don't know. None of us are in the room. But even when he wasn't wearing a C, like on the Canadian Olympic team, teammates like Luongo have been on record saying he was a guy that took control of the room. Not having a C didn't remove his leadership, not having a C didn't stop him from speaking up when he felt it necessary or leading by example on the ice.

If you think Kane should have the C, fine. Anything he can do with the C, he's more than capable of doing without it.

 

[Sarava]

Oh, for sure. My point wasn't that Kane was a flash in the pan, simply that as far as individual awards, he racked up quite a few of his most noteworthy in one thus-far anomalous season, whereas Chelios got his over several different seasons.

And while I don't begrudge Kane his Conn Smythe or consider it an invalid mark in his favor, it's hard for me to hold that up as evidence of his excellence when I watched that playoff run, and I know how much he struggled at times, and I know he and his dad were watching footage of himself before games to remind himself he was still a great player, all while Crawford was playing fantastic hockey through 20+ games. It doesn't invalidate Kane's performance, he was the leading scorer on the team after all, I just don't hold that particular Smythe win in the same regard as many others.

As far as raw point production, he's been elite for a long time. But it's rough to compare him to Chelios in that regard, cause there isn't really a 1:1 equivalent stat to PPG for defensive impact.

At the end of the day, the entire 'debate is one best suited to boisterous discussion on bar stools. There's never going to be a clear answer when positions, deployment, usage all vary so wildly.

I think game 4 of the SCF cost Crawford a chance at the Conn Smythe. He was bad that game.

 

[NoHuman]

While Kane saying that Crow deserved it is nice affirmation of the position, it's not what I base my opinion on. He could have said nothing about Crow, and I'd still be firmly in the camp that Crawford deserved the Smythe that year. But like I said, I don't begrudge Kane the award. He's not the guy I would have picked, but he's not some random off-the-board choice either. He was the points leader on the Blackhawks and the most dangerous skater on the ice in the final. The voters deciding that his final was so strong that it overcame some inconsistency in the first 3 rounds isn't that different than the voters deciding that Toews dominance through the first 3 rounds overcame a rough SCF in 2010. At the end of the day it's a subjective award.

And yes, Kane's sh% will likely bounce back next year. He like a lot of players underperformed in that regard this season. That said, I think his bounce back will take him back into the 80-90 point range he's spent most of his career. The 106 points he hit in 2016, I just don't think he's ever going to touch again, even if he still had Panarin. I just think everything went his way that season, and it's not reasonable to expect everything to line up for him like that again.

The lockout year was a magical year as the Blackhawks fan. I've said repeatedly on this board that I've never watched any team, short of perhaps the at-the-time record-setting Bulls, play their sport at that level. The 2013 Blackhawks played as close to perfect hockey as I've ever seen, and on top of that, they had multiple guys delivering career years as far as sh% in the process. I don't think any of us will live to see any Blackhawks roster ever play hockey at that level, for such a sustained period, as we saw that year. The 2010 had more high-end talent, the 2015 Blackhawks had more depth on paper, but neither team reached the level of raw performance as that 2013 team. And the fact that it almost came out of nowhere, after a season that left a ton of doubts in a lot of peoples minds about where this team was going, only made it more special.

That’s fair. Like I said, from my perspective it isn't an award that holds less weight in the debate for best American born player. My view is that whether Crow could have won it, the Kane’s Conn Smythe is representative of his play off excellence over the Hawks’ winning span. And in that way I think it’s well deserved and is persuasive in arguing his position in that conversation. Similarly, I've disagreed with several Conn Smythe winners, especially recently. TBH, I wouldn’t have given it to Crosby either year. But he’s also an amazing play off performer and I count them equally in his accolades. Agree to disagree.

I don’t see Kane rebounding to 100+ points next year either. Those seasons are pretty rare overall nowadays in the league. But I do wonder if scoring will continue to go up like it did last year, with all the penalties being handed out. Not that it would help Kane’s point totals with how dismal the Hawks PP is (tbf he's a part of that system and it's failures too). I’ve mentally got McDavid penciled in as the Ross winner for the next 5-7 years, but I suppose you never know. Anything can happen in hockey.

And yeah, the whole lockout year was something else. From that winning streak to 17 seconds, it was unbelievable. Magic in a bottle.

 

[clydesdale line]

how anyone is putting Matthews in the same conversation as Wheeler and Kane is laughable.

I love the kid, but he has a long way to go before he has the career those do, and nothing is guaranteed.

To be fair, JD has always had a weird vendetta against Kane for years on this site. He'll make good points but is obviously biased.

 

[JaegerDice]

To be fair, JD has always had a weird vendetta against Kane for years on this site. He'll make good points but is obviously biased.

I literally said Kane is the best active American player. I just said that by the time Matthews career is up, he might surpass Kane. He obviously hasn't done it yet, but I think he has the raw talent to do so. He has 132 points in 144 games, and he'd have back-to-back 40 goal seasons in his first two years in the NHL were it not for injuries this past season. And like Kane, he'll have the benefit of playing through his prime on a very good team.

 

[Sarava]

I literally said Kane is the best active American player. I just said that by the time Matthews career is up, he might surpass Kane. He obviously hasn't done it yet, but I think he has the raw talent to do so. He has 132 points in 144 games, and he'd have back-to-back 40 goal seasons in his first two years in the NHL were it not for injuries this past season. And like Kane, he'll have the benefit of playing through his prime on a very good team.

I agree with clydesdale. Anytime there's a discussion of Kane, you've pretty much always take the anti-Kane stance. Most of those were Kane/Toews discussions in the past. And I think we all agree now that Kane has had the better career, and that gap widens with every passing season.

 

[piteus]

Chris Chelios is the best US born player thus far

I'm torn on Chelios. My head says Chelios is best American born player ... then my heart says he's not even the best #7 on the Hawks AND the 2nd greatest Chicago born player after Eddie O. His Red Wing stunt doesn't sit well with me.

Hence, I'll take the first American born player to win the Hart in modern day hockey.