McDavid or Matthews

[nabob]

Again, I'm not comparing Giroux to Bergeron. Bergeron is just a player who best exemplifies factoring in the things I am talking about as valuing over looking at primarily total points.

Oh my bad, didn't realize you've gone of on another off topic tangent.

Doesn't really apply to the Matthews/McDavid debate (you know, the point of the thread) because McDavid is a better 2 way player.

 

[93LEAFS]

Oh my bad, didn't realize you've gone of on another off topic tangent.

Doesn't really apply to the Matthews/McDavid debate (you know, the point of the thread) because McDavid is a better 2 way player.

Well, it has to do with the underlying point Matthews and McDavid are closer than a bunch of people in this thread let on. And, considering I am directly asked about something I am responding.

Similar to yesterday when talking about score effects and how it riddles inherent bias into McDavid's sample size of over and under 21 minutes, but you thought it was off-topic because of how wrong you were proven to be. And never explained why it was consistent over 158 games, then called it Off-topic to avoid the discussion. Apparently the concept of supporting evidence if off-topic to you.

 

[nabob]

Well, it has to do with the underlying point Matthews and McDavid are closer than a bunch of people in this thread let on. And, considering I am directly asked about something I am responding.

Similar to yesterday when talking about score effects and how it riddles inherent bias into McDavid's sample size of over and under 21 minutes, but you thought it was off-topic because of how wrong you were proven to be. And never explained why it was consistent over 158 games, then called it Off-topic to avoid the discussion. Apparently the concept of supporting evidence if off-topic to you.

It has nothing to do with that at all actually. McDavid is the better player in every aspect of the game.

 

[93LEAFS]

It has nothing to do with that at all actually. McDavid is the better player in every aspect of the game.

Every aspect? Remind me when he scores 40 goals. At least concede that one.

 

[Quiet Jack]

It has nothing to do with that at all actually. McDavid is the better player in every aspect of the game.

Agreed. Especially with the illnesses 97 has overcome

 

[biotk]

Matthews is a good player, but it's pretty clear to me they are a decent/good team without him. They are what 5-1 without him?

Take McDavid off the Oilers and there's no question they are the worst team in the league probably

That is what happens when you don't watch the games. The Leafs are a complete garbage team without Matthews. When a star player gets injured often others step up. In the case of the Leafs it was their goalies. In the Leaf's first 5 games without Matthews (all wins) they allowed an average of 39 shots against a game (being outshot an average of 14 shots per game), but their goalies posted a 0.974 SV. They were outplayed every game, usually badly outplayed. After their goaltending returned back to earth, they have since lost their next two games without Matthews (again outplayed in both games), and are currently losing to Detroit. Unusual luck is the only thing that has prevented the Leafs from being 0-7 without Matthews (with loss number 8 coming tonight).

 

[McFlyingV]

Jesus, take it down a notch. I was mostly kidding. Holy cow you are taking this seriously.

You're right, I should remember the age of the average mainboard poster is probably around 13. I shouldn't expect anything resembling intelligent discussion.

 

[lawrence]

Agreed someone is being ridiculous here.

Mcdavid with 7 illnesses >>>>> Healthy Matthews.

 

[Quiet Jack]

You're right, I should remember the age of the average mainboard poster is probably around 13. I shouldn't expect anything resembling intelligent discussion.

Exactly

 

[Hunter368]

McDavid by a fairly wide margin.

 

[1972]

How does this have 194 pages when their isn’t even a debate whose better?

 

[Snippit]

Well, it has to do with the underlying point Matthews and McDavid are closer than a bunch of people in this thread let on. And, considering I am directly asked about something I am responding.

Similar to yesterday when talking about score effects and how it riddles inherent bias into McDavid's sample size of over and under 21 minutes, but you thought it was off-topic because of how wrong you were proven to be. And never explained why it was consistent over 158 games, then called it Off-topic to avoid the discussion. Apparently the concept of supporting evidence if off-topic to you.

I've missed the last 20 or so pages, so fill me in.

Which metric suggests McDavid and Matthews are close as players? P/60?

 

[OilCanada92]

How does this have 194 pages when their isn’t even a debate whose better?

I assume the mods want to contain it to one thread instead of having countless polls.

 

[53or8]

The maple leafs are not a very good team without matthews.

 

[nabob]

Every aspect? Remind me when he scores 40 goals. At least concede that one.

Wait thought you weren't talking about primarily getting points? Or are you moving the goal post to include goal scoring? Because if your pointless Giroux/Bergeron example still applies Giroux is the better goal scorer.

McDavid could score 40 if he wanted to. But he'd rather set up a linemate with one of his league leading primary assists 4 times than score 2 goals himself. Matthews best attribute is his goal scoring ability though, he has excellent hands and a great shot. Not too many players who's best skill is goal scoring have ever been considered the best player in the game.

 

[93LEAFS]

I've missed the last 20 or so pages, so fill me in.

Which metric suggests McDavid and Matthews are close as players? P/60?

Primary points in general. Especially p1/60

 

[nabob]

Mcdavid with 7 illnesses >>>>> Healthy Matthews.

Best part of that pic is that Puljujarvi's head looks like it's 3x as big as McDavid's.

 

[nabob]

Primary points in general. Especially p1/60

Thought it had changed to "not primarily points" according to your Bergeron/Giroux comparison.

 

[Snippit]

Primary points in general. Especially p1/60

Primary points in all situations per 60 minutes. You're right - Matthews edges out McDavid 2.49 to 2.48 since 15-16.

That's quite specific though and also the only stat that supports Matthews. Out of all the combinations you can put together (ES vs All, P/60 vs total points, Primary vs primary+secondary) Matthews comes out on top in 1 out of 8. You said it yourself - we need to use a nuanced approach and consider all of the stats. In the other 7 McDavid comes out on top quite handily.

Also, P1/60 is kind of a random stat. In particular, secondary assists are ignored but powerplay production is not. But powerplay points are arguably more prone to variation from season to season.

I would argue that raw point totals are much better indicators of talent than points/60. Per 60 stats produce questionable rankings even when taken over a large sample size. For example, since 15-16 JvR has higher P1/60 than Mark Scheifele, but the two are several tiers apart.

Ice time increase is not proportional to points (factors like fatigue probably play a role?), so per 60 stats are unreliable.

 

[wildandwoolly]

amazing thead. Matthews AINEC

like asking if you'd rather Crosby or Seguin. Obviously you want Seguin because of the 4.9M in cap savings. And Seguin can score just as much as ol Sid anyway.

 

[Sky04]

A bunch of guys told me Matthews was elite cause he was scoring at 100 pt pace through 15 games, what happened?

Oh right, sample size.

 

[Strait2thecup]

I can’t believe a question with such a clear answer has 190+ pages well done guys

 

[nabob]

Primary points in all situations per 60 minutes. You're right - Matthews edges out McDavid 2.49 to 2.48 since 15-16.

That's quite specific though and also the only stat that supports Matthews. Out of all the combinations you can put together (ES vs All, P/60 vs total points, Primary vs primary+secondary) Matthews comes out on top in 1 out of 8. You said it yourself - we need to use a nuanced approach and consider all of the stats. In the other 7 McDavid comes out on top quite handily.

Also, P1/60 is kind of a random stat. In particular, secondary assists are ignored but powerplay production is not. But powerplay points are arguably more prone to variation from season to season.

I would argue that raw point totals are much better indicators of talent than points/60. Per 60 stats produce questionable rankings even when taken over a large sample size. For example, since 15-16 JvR has higher P1/60 than Mark Scheifele, but the two are several tiers apart.

Ice time increase is not proportional to points (factors like fatigue probably play a role?), so per 60 stats are unreliable.

2.49 primary points /60 >>>>>>>>>> 2.48 primary points /60

AINEC!

 

[93LEAFS]

Primary points in all situations per 60 minutes. You're right - Matthews edges out McDavid 2.49 to 2.48 since 15-16.

That's quite specific though and also the only stat that supports Matthews. Out of all the combinations you can put together (ES vs All, P/60 vs total points, Primary vs primary+secondary) Matthews comes out on top in 1 out of 8. You said it yourself - we need to use a nuanced approach and consider all of the stats. In the other 7 McDavid comes out on top quite handily.

Also, P1/60 is kind of a random stat. In particular, secondary assists are ignored but powerplay production is not. But powerplay points are arguably more prone to variation from season to season.

I would argue that raw point totals are much better indicators of talent than points/60. Per 60 stats produce questionable rankings even when taken over a large sample size. For example, since 15-16 JvR has higher P1/60 than Mark Scheifele, but the two are several tiers apart.

Ice time increase is not proportional to points (factors like fatigue probably play a role?), so per 60 stats are unreliable.

Have I ever said McDavid isn't superior in those stats? I said they are closer than looking at total points. You asked me if any stats made them seem closer than the stats some here are pushing, not what Matthews was better at. I've admitted multiple times McDavid is the better player, according to the metrics I value. Apparently, that isn't enough to some, I need to accept total points as the best measure between the two. I love how much the argument gets taken out of context. I honestly would use P1/60 at 5v5 if you want to limit it to one stat using the last season and a half (with a minimum of 1000 minutes played). Of players who played more than 1000 minutes McDavid is 1st in P1/60 at 5v5, and Matthews is 7th. McDavid is still better but that is closer than if you just looked at total points. Clearly P1/60 has its flaws, Anders Lee is the 5th best player by that one metric.

If anyone thinks I'm trying to make the argument McDavid isn't better than Matthews, they are sorely mistaken. He wins on possession metrics (Matthews wins on XGF relative this year, but I honestly will discard that due to the small sample size). My main point was, if you look at these stats together and look at Matthews, he scores out better than he would on just looking at total points. I don't understand why people have such a dogmatic fixation with a stats system created in the 1940's. How many things do you use on a daily basis that have been significantly improved that were used in a more primitive form in the 1950's?.

People seem to think this is some vendetta against McDavid, when most of the things I am pushing for over total points proves he is top 2 center in the league. I don't understand why bringing these stats to attention is controversial outside of me being a Leafs fan and being used in support of Matthews.

 

[Snippit]

Have I ever said McDavid isn't superior in those stats? I said they are closer than looking at total points. You asked me if any stats made them seem closer than the stats some here are pushing, not what Matthews was better at. I've admitted multiple times McDavid is the better player, according to the metrics I value. Apparently, that isn't enough to some, I need to accept total points as the best measure between the two. I love how much the argument gets taken out of context. I honestly would use P1/60 at 5v5 if you want to limit it to one stat using the last season and a half (with a minimum of 1000 minutes played). Of players who played more than 1000 minutes McDavid is 1st in P1/60 at 5v5, and Matthews is 7th. McDavid is still better but that is closer than if you just looked at total points. Clearly P1/60 has its flaws, Anders Lee is the 5th best player by that one metric.

If anyone thinks I'm trying to make the argument McDavid isn't better than Matthews, they are sorely mistaken. He wins on possession metrics (Matthews wins on XGF relative this year, but I honestly will discard that due to the small sample size). My main point was, if you look at these stats together and look at Matthews, he scores out better than he would on just looking at total points. I don't understand why people have such a dogmatic fixation with a stats system created in the 1940's. How many things do you use on a daily basis that have been significantly improved that were used in a more primitive form in the 1950's?.

People seem to think this is some vendetta against McDavid, when most of the things I am pushing for over total points proves he is top 2 center in the league. I don't understand why bringing these stats to attention is controversial outside of me being a Leafs fan and being used in support of Matthews.

I know where you stand and I don't think it's a vendetta, lol.

You're trying to say that the two are closer than they appear if you just looked at raw points. I'm just saying "not that much closer".