McDavid or Matthews

[daver]

I said goals would be the primary measure if you are classifying things as primary and secondary stats. Because secondary stats are things you can live with altering at the expense of primary stats. The primary stats in hockey would be wins, following that would be Goals for and goals against. Everything else from there is secondary. Therefore everything else is trying to quantify a players value to accomplish these goals. My issue is the constant pointing to point totals as the main gap. It has less to do with McDavid vs Matthews and more to do with that.

It all derived from someone saying he was closer to Tkachuk and Aho, then trying to use total points as the examples. As stated, McDavid leads the league in Primary points per 60 at 5v5 and total points per 60 at 5v5 in that time frame (with the qualifier of 1000 minutes played which removed Stamkos). He is the better player. but I'd respect an argument built more around the fact he's elite also in CF% and XGF% than pointing to point totals. McDavid is the better player, but the gap in point totals isn't the primary reason for it.

So how exactly does one include wins and goals scored by your team in a direct player comparison? You seemed to ignore these "primary stats" in your Matthews stats list a few pages back.

 

[Placid Perspicuity]

I am not entering a dog in this race as I find this entire thread ridiculous (which is perhaps why I poke my head in lol).

But this inherently flawed as a comparative....and you full well know it

No comparison will be perfect. My point is that people are getting offended where there is no need to be. It's a discussion of hockey players, but people act like their religious icons are being desecrated.

 

[Plural]

I think there is much more to player evaluation than looking at the score chart. Crosby was the better possession player, the better goal scorer and better primary point getter.

Why are total points more of a secondary metric than goals? Goals and saves are arguably the least arbitrarily awarded things in the NHL. It is a nuanced discussion to point just to raw points is ridiculous. If you are goals are actually the primary metric by definition for an entire team, alongside goals against. Total points for an individual player would actually be a secondary metric.

It's quite a lot of work, maybe someone has already crunched the numbers, but could be interesting to see how scoring races through NHL history change if we eliminate secondary assists. The thing is, especially regarding decades a go, we tend to look at simplistic statistics such as points and goals to determine forwards value. Not solely, but it's a large part of the picture.

I'd like to see how eliminating secondary assists (or preferably getting a separate column for all three: goals, primary assists and secondary assists but that's even more work) effects the way we view players. I think you're right in that on average secondary assist is not quite as valuable as primary assist or goal, but I also think you're overstating the difference. Especially when it comes to elite offensive players such as Crosby and McDavid.

Edit: Maybe someone already posted it here, but is there a way to check the forwards who had highest amount of secondary assists in the past ten or so seasons?

 

[snag]

No comparison will be perfect. My point is that people are getting offended where there is no need to be. It's a discussion of hockey players, but people act like their religious icons are being desecrated.

Oh I know...comparisons in sport are a sport themselves. I just thought the comparison between two beloved alums of one team vs two from rivaling teams was amusing

 

[bucks_oil]

I said goals would be the primary measure if you are classifying things as primary and secondary stats. Because secondary stats are things you can live with altering at the expense of primary stats. The primary stats in hockey would be wins, following that would be Goals for and goals against. Everything else from there is secondary. Therefore everything else is trying to quantify a players value to accomplish these goals. My issue is the constant pointing to point totals as the main gap. It has less to do with McDavid vs Matthews and more to do with that.

It all derived from someone saying he was closer to Tkachuk and Aho, then trying to use total points as the examples. As stated, McDavid leads the league in Primary points per 60 at 5v5 and total points per 60 at 5v5 in that time frame (with the qualifier of 1000 minutes played which removed Stamkos). He is the better player. but I'd respect an argument built more around the fact he's elite also in CF% and XGF% than pointing to point totals. McDavid is the better player, but the gap in point totals isn't the primary reason for it.

Fine. Other than Goals and derivatives thereof (5v5, /60 etc) is there ANYTHING else that bridges the gap between them. I'm honestly curious, and you seem to have access to a nice sortable database,... I haven't seen a convincing basis that Matthews is significantly better defensively despite the fact that this attribute seems to be used, as an HF Meme to compare him to McDavid... where is this basis? (and provide some context relative to say Bergeron, a known strong defensive C).

 

[snipes]

McDavid presently has more more assists than Matthews does points 27 to 26.

Just like last year.

All the advanced stats cited, which McDavid is still better in across the board for the most can't make up that difference or show that they are comparable.

 

[bucks_oil]

It's quite a lot of work, maybe someone has already crunched the numbers, but could be interesting to see how scoring races through NHL history change if we eliminate secondary assists. The thing is, especially regarding decades a go, we tend to look at simplistic statistics such as points and goals to determine forwards value. Not solely, but it's a large part of the picture.

I'd like to see how eliminating secondary assists (or preferably getting a separate column for all three: goals, primary assists and secondary assists but that's even more work) effects the way we view players. I think you're right in that on average secondary assist is not quite as valuable as primary assist or goal, but I also think you're overstating the difference. Especially when it comes to elite offensive players such as Crosby and McDavid.

Edit: Maybe someone already posted it here, but is there a way to check the forwards who had highest amount of secondary assists in the past ten or so seasons?

This passes only limited logic tests, but I actually don't accept a secondary assist is worse than a primary (at least in today's NHL)...

There are no scoring chances that arise without breaking the neutral zone and that is typically the domain of the secondary assist... or in McDavid's case "skating". (haha, you should almost award him the 1st and 2nd assists in that scenario... and I've just contradicted the value of that secondary from the stagnant D-man, haven't I)

 

[93LEAFS]

Fine. Other than Goals and derivatives thereof (5v5, /60 etc) is there ANYTHING else that bridges the gap between them. I'm honestly curious, and you seem to have access to a nice sortable database,... I haven't seen a convincing basis that Matthews is significantly better defensively despite the fact that this attribute seems to be used, as an HF Meme to compare him to McDavid... where is this basis? (and provide some context relative to say Bergeron, a known strong defensive C).

On this season alone, you could point to xGF relative in Matthews favor, but I believe the sample is way too small to draw too much. There really isn't much of an argument for Matthews being the better two-way player to the extent in closes the gap. If you want to look at these things. Just go to Corsica.Hockey.

 

[Plural]

This passes only limited logic tests, but I actually don't accept a secondary assist is worse than a primary (at least in today's NHL)...

There are no scoring chances that arise without breaking the neutral zone and that is typically the domain of the secondary assist... or in McDavid's case "skating". (haha, you should almost award him the 1st and 2nd assists in that scenario... and I've just contradicted the value of that secondary from the stagnant D-man, haven't I)

I'm inclined to agree with you when we're talking about elite players. I wouldn't be shocked to see some lower quality players having un-usual large amount of points 2nd assists in their career years. Not that I have any data on this.

Regarding the repeatability of 2nd assists among elite players, that should be easily verifiable by looking at the scoring tables. I just don't know where to find a site that separates 2nd assists from 1st assists. But I would wager that there's some predictable names among the top forwards in 2nd assists and I suspect these names consistently come up on yearly basis.

If we see that the forwards getting most 2nd assists are somewhat consistent and they're also considered as better playmakers in the league, then I don't see why we should be attaching less value to them. If (and this is a big if) we see that 2nd assists are not as predictable and consistent and some of the names at the top are questionable then it stands to reason that there is more luck involved in them. As of now, I don't know which is the case.

 

[McClelland]

"McDavid had a flu, and then some strep throat. Then another flu. So he was weak, and unable to get the kind of sleep necessary to run the most efficient hockey skating machine in the word today. He played through it without missing a game — and somehow remained at a point-per-game pace — but only now that we see him reach his familiar level do we realize how far below his best he’s been so far in 2017-18."

Top 3 despite what he has battled!When the team also starts to be healthy he will run away with the Art Ross and not look back!

Healthy Connor McDavid lifting Oilers with return to dominant self - Sportsnet.ca

 

[daver]

I'm inclined to agree with you when we're talking about elite players. I wouldn't be shocked to see some lower quality players having un-usual large amount of points 2nd assists in their career years. Not that I have any data on this.

Regarding the repeatability of 2nd assists among elite players, that should be easily verifiable by looking at the scoring tables. I just don't know where to find a site that separates 2nd assists from 1st assists. But I would wager that there's some predictable names among the top forwards in 2nd assists and I suspect these names consistently come up on yearly basis.

If we see that the forwards getting most 2nd assists are somewhat consistent and they're also considered as better playmakers in the league, then I don't see why we should be attaching less value to them. If (and this is a big if) we see that 2nd assists are not as predictable and consistent and some of the names at the top are questionable then it stands to reason that there is more luck involved in them. As of now, I don't know which is the case.

NHL.com - Stats

 

[McKappa]

@93LEAFS

Just take the L and move on with it, you're not adding anything to this discussion, everytime someone destroys one of your flawed points you stop responding to them, you are making a fool out of yourself.

-Everyone

 

[Placid Perspicuity]

Oh I know...comparisons in sport are a sport themselves. I just thought the comparison between two beloved alums of one team vs two from rivaling teams was amusing

Yeah, that's my point. If two "sides" go into a discussion without the inherent animosity to begin with, it's possible to have conversations about even the most ridiculous topics without it devolving into the garbage we tend to see. I guess I'm just lamenting the fact many people find it more important to disparage others than to actually discuss something that is supposed to be light-hearted.

 

[jbobell98]

Why is this still going on? Mcdavid is clearly the better player. If Matthews didn't play for Toronto these threads would never exist.

 

[McKappa]

Why is this still going on? Mcdavid is clearly the better player. If Matthews didn't play for Toronto these threads would never exist.

Answered your own question.

 

[Plural]

Okay, so looking at the 2nd assist statistics on yearly basis, I do see a pattern of great players at the top-15. Seems like it's just as repeatable stat as goals.

 

[McKappa]

Okay, so looking at the 2nd assist statistics on yearly basis, I do see a pattern of great players at the top-15. Seems like it's just as repeatable stat as goals.

No, we should start questioning how great those players REALLY were.

The true greatest player of all time is Brett Hull cause goals should be worth 3 points and secondary assists should be negative

 

[Plural]

No, we should start questioning how great those players REALLY were.

The true greatest player of all time is Brett Hull cause goals should be worth 3 points and secondary assists should be negative

Yeah. But seriously though, names like Nicklas Backstrom, Sidney Crosby, Henrik Sedin, Jamie Benn, Joe Thornton, Claude Giroux, Anze Kopitar frequently appear among the highest 2nd assist forwards. Those are all guys we consider great playmakers and great offensive players. I think it's clear that 2nd assists are a good indicator of elite offensive abilities.

 

[93LEAFS]

It's quite a lot of work, maybe someone has already crunched the numbers, but could be interesting to see how scoring races through NHL history change if we eliminate secondary assists. The thing is, especially regarding decades a go, we tend to look at simplistic statistics such as points and goals to determine forwards value. Not solely, but it's a large part of the picture.

I'd like to see how eliminating secondary assists (or preferably getting a separate column for all three: goals, primary assists and secondary assists but that's even more work) effects the way we view players. I think you're right in that on average secondary assist is not quite as valuable as primary assist or goal, but I also think you're overstating the difference. Especially when it comes to elite offensive players such as Crosby and McDavid.

You can do it for every year up to 2006/07. Real-time stats didn't exist prior to this. Here is how the top 10 would change if we alter it.

I'll just do this decade (2010/11 on) as an example when we combine them. Here is what we get. I'll break them into 4 categories. All situation primary points, 5v5 Primary Points, All situation Total points and 5v5 total points. I'll list the top 10 for each, and the totals in brackets.

Primary Points
Ovechkin (438 in 556)
Kane (433 in 556)
Tavares (412 in 536)
Crosby (405 in 433)
Stamkos (397 in 455)
Kessel (396 in 572)
Perry (393 in 549)
Pavelski (379 in 559)
Malkin (378 in 425)
Wheeler (373 in 565)

Total Points
Kane (550 in 527)
Crosby (548 in 443)
Ovechkin (538 in 556)
Giroux (533 in 560)
Tavares (516 in 536)
Kessel (504 in 572)
Benn (503 in 535)
Backstrom (492 in 519)
Kopitar (488 in 554)
Thornton (480 in 559)

Primary Points 5v5
Kane (265 in 527)
Tavares (246 in 536)
Crosby (242 in 443)
Perry (234 in 549)
Kessel (234 in 572)
Stamkos (232 in 455)
Seguin (229 in 540)
Wheeler (226 in 565)
Toews (225 in 526)
Ovechkin (224 in 556)

Total Points 5v5
Kane (327 in 527 games)
Crosby (305 in 443)
Benn (301 in 535)
Tavares (295 in 536)
Kessel (290 in 572)
Wheeler (283 in 565)
Toews (279 in 526)
Perry (234 in 549)
Kopitar (277 in 554)
Seguin (277 in 540)

Clearly guys like Ovi and Stamkos benefit from Primary points and PP specialists do in all situations primary points. It also helps someone like Pavelski. Giroux is the most hurt as he only makes any of the lists when evaluating total points in all situation. Toews shows up as a strong 5v5 player, but is not seen on the All-situations list. Guys like Crosby and Kane are elite across the board. It hurts Benn, but improves Tavares's standing, who has always had average linemates and has been asked to drive play himself.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Okay, so looking at the 2nd assist statistics on yearly basis, I do see a pattern of great players at the top-15. Seems like it's just as repeatable stat as goals.

A lot of great playmakers get a lot of 2nd assists. It is rather stupid to dismiss this isn't it? May as well go back and count how many 2nd assists Gretzky and Messier got on those Oilers teams. Doesn't make them any less as players.

 

[t0nedeff]

lmao this kid is still trying to argue in favor of Matthews.

 

[93LEAFS]

Okay, so looking at the 2nd assist statistics on yearly basis, I do see a pattern of great players at the top-15. Seems like it's just as repeatable stat as goals.

The real question though is how does it compare to the repeatability of goals and primary assists. Tulsky who now an analyst for the Canes said they should be outright abolished. I wouldn't go that extreme.

Here is a link to the article

Simplify scoring: drop the pointless secondary assist

Others have stated and found their value closer to 30% (assuming a goal is worth 100%). But I would have to dig through Hockey Abstracts which I don't have on hand.

 

[daver]

The real question though is how does it compare to the repeatability of goals and primary assists. Tulsky who now an analyst for the Canes said they should be outright abolished. I wouldn't go that extreme.

That was just answered wasn't it. The best 1A players tend to be the top 2A players. Cannot believe you are still trying to paint them as being random.

Give it up.

You know what secondary scoring stat I look at after total points? % of team's offense those points accounted for. If you want to differentiate two players with similar stat lines, that's the one I think should be used.

McDavid has scored 139 points since the start of 16/17 which was 100% better than the average point totals for the next five top scorers on the Oilers (69 points).

Before his injury, Matthews had scored 88 points since the start of 16/17 which was 24% better than the average point totals for the next five top scorers on the Leafs (71 points).

Is this fair to compare a rookie Matthews to a sophomore McDavid? Probably not. How about up until his injury this year?

Matthews had scored 19 points which was 53% better than the average point totals for the next five top scorers on the Leafs (12.4 points).

 

[Cup or Bust]

It isn't luck or a coincidence the the most skilled passers in the league consistently get more assists than everyone else. There is a reason for that, they create far more offense for other players and it eventually results in goals. Some goals are weaker then others and some assists are weaker then others, but without question, the guys who create the most offense are the guys who get the most points. whether it be a goal, assist, or secondary assist. To try and discredit that is nonsense. Over 82 games the best offensive players rise to the top for a reason and no biased opinions or stats, will change that. McDavid won the scoring title last season because he created more offense in the league then anyone else and far more then Matthews and anyone else that scored only 69 points, similarly to what he will likely do again this season. McDavid scored 31 more points then Matthews last season and will likely outscore him by a fairly wide margin again whether Matthews is healthy or not. It is because he creates much more offensive opportunities, then just scoring goals himself.

 

[93LEAFS]

That was just answered wasn't it. The best 1A players tend to be the top 2A players. Cannot believe you are still trying to paint them as being random.

Give it up.

You know what secondary scoring stat I look at after total points? % of team's offense those points accounted for. If you want to differentiate two players with similar stat lines, that's the one I think should be used.

McDavid has scored 139 points since the start of 16/17 which was 100% better than the average point totals for the next five top scorers on the Oilers (69 points).

Before his injury, Matthews had scored 88 points since the start of 16/17 which was 24% better than the average point totals for the next five top scorers on the Leafs (71 points).

Is this fair to compare a rookie Matthews to a sophomore McDavid? Probably not. How about up until his injury this year?

Matthews had scored 19 points which was 53% better than the average point totals for the next five top scorers on the Leafs (12.4 points).

Except part of that is fueled again by ice-time distribution. McDavid playing more, takes away ice-time for the other oilers, making them less likely to score.

They aren't random, but they are less indicative of skill than either form of primary points.