Hall and McDavid played 75 minutes together at 5v5. You cannot draw any conclusion based on that sample size. Anyway, if you really want to use that sample, most of the other stats, like CF%, SF%, SCF%, xGF%, suggest Hall and McDavid were better together than without each other. They probably would have started scoring more if the Oilers let them play more than 75 minutes together.
Even if you could draw from a large sample, all you would have shown is that inductive arguments, sometimes, cannot be proven, and they can be wrong in certain situations. These are two reasons why people use the word PROBABLY when using inductive arguments. Telling me that Hall does not improve with McDavid does nothing to diminish the truth that Stone would probably see a spike in scoring rate next to McDavid.
If you want to show it is probably not the case, maybe show me a list of players that actually play significant minutes with McDavid and not improve point production rate. After that, show me that that list is longer than the one of the players that McDavid does improve. Since McDavid is generally considered a top 3 offensive player in the world, the burden of proof is on you to show that Stone would probably not improve point production playing with him.
In any event, Stone really does not need to show his production would increase with McDavid. Much of the difference in production over the last two years can be explained by Draisaitl playing more minutes, and it can be explained the fact that Draisaitl ran a near 20% shooting rate this year, which is well above his norm.
A tip, if you are going to be condescending, which I love, truly, come up with some better arguments.
In the end, this thread is pretty simple. If you value the "advanced stats" approach, you will probably prefer Stone. If you prefer the "points scored" approach, you will probably prefer Drasiaitl.
