A motivated Petry will make you forget about him.
And Poehling, when on his game, is capable of scoring 4 goals in a game
Mike Matheson is a good top 4 defenseman?
- Thread starter KevSkillz4
- Start date
And Poehling, when on his game, is capable of scoring 4 goals in a game
Good top-4 Dman indicates he's above average in that group. I'm pretty confident he's not a first pairing guy.
KrisLetAngry
MrJukeBoy
I'm a Petry fan. When Edmonton traded him to Montreal I told my brother that was a mistake.
Just a bigger Matheson fan. Hope Petey bounces back his Stats at the end of the year with MSL look good like everyone else's.
Breakers
Make Mirrored Visors Legal Again
They'll flip him for a pretty good asset at the the deadline and use the cap space that offseason to get another asset
Empoleon8771
Registered User
I feel like "maybe" should be an answer here. Matheson is an absolute wildcard. If you use him right, he can give you terrific results. If you use him wrong, he will be a trainwreck.
He's a "good top-4 D" if you give him #4 usage, put him with a partner who is good defensively and make sure to not overwhelm him with matchups. But if you need to do so much to get good results out of him, is he actually good? I just don't know.
I loved Matheson in Pittsburgh and thought he was incredible last year, but I have problems saying such a flawed player that needs to be protected would be a "good top-4 defenseman".
He's a "good top-4 D" if you give him #4 usage, put him with a partner who is good defensively and make sure to not overwhelm him with matchups. But if you need to do so much to get good results out of him, is he actually good? I just don't know.
I loved Matheson in Pittsburgh and thought he was incredible last year, but I have problems saying such a flawed player that needs to be protected would be a "good top-4 defenseman".
Sidney the Kidney
One last time
- Jun 29, 2009
- 55,722
- 46,702
IMO, Matheson doesn't have the hockey IQ or passing skills to be a PPQB. It's why I think he's good in transition and when joining the rush because he can use his physical tools to his advantage, but the PP is more about smart decisions with the puck and a lot of stationary "chess".
Panthaz89
Buffalo Sabres, Carolina Panthers fan
Not even close he didn't even look particularly good in the playoffs either. Some good some bad.
Lays
Registered User
- Jan 22, 2017
- 13,559
- 12,630
KrisLeturnover
Registered User
- Jan 17, 2021
- 232
- 240
MartinS82
Registered User
- May 26, 2016
- 1,066
- 997
I think he is definitely a top-4 D. He was great for the Pens last year, had a number of plays where he looked like Cale Makar in transition. He would then have a play that looks like a PeeWee B player in coverage. I actually liked him a lot, and if you can figure out a way to get him out and skating in transition he can be a good player. I just don't think I would put him as a "better than average" top 4 dman.
ole ole
Registered User
- Oct 7, 2017
- 11,937
- 6,021
Sidney the Kidney
One last time
- Jun 29, 2009
- 55,722
- 46,702
I think pairing him with a steady defensive guy is the key. IMO, he actually looked at his best when he was with Ruhwedel because even though Ruhwedel is nothing more than a #6/7 defenseman, he's as safe as they come and his entire game is built around being solid in his own zone (ie. zero risk taking type).
PensandCaps
Beddy Tlueger
- May 22, 2015
- 27,648
- 18,021
ReginKarlssonLehner
Let's Win It All
Underrated as hell.
For sure a top 4. Closer to number 4 than number 3, but a solid top 4 nonetheless.
For sure a top 4. Closer to number 4 than number 3, but a solid top 4 nonetheless.
Bounces R Way
Registered User
Good top 4 defenseman are consistent. Mike Matheson is anything but. He certainly can be on his good days though, impressive player when he's on. His off days.. woof.
teravaineSAROS
Registered User
- Jul 29, 2015
- 3,814
- 1,482
I can't wait for all the threads about Matheson being the worst defenseman in the NHL because he can't single-handedly carry a top pairing
