I hate the whole "This guy is good with McDavid therefore not good"
If thats the case then Draisaitl is a bad player?
Maroon is good because of McDavid but thats a completely different style of player. Maroon works with McDavid because he plays a simple physical game and they click.
Skilled guys don't always work with skilled guys.
I guess Panarin was a product of Kane. Oh wait, he has 8 points in 8 games with CLB so far, and when he played on a different line than Kane in CHI he was still producing. I just find these arguments quite insane. It's like saying Kurri is/was a product of Gretzky. Except after Gretzky left, Kurri remained for 2 more seasons with the Oilers, and he lead our team in points the first season after Gretz left scoring 102 points -- more points than he had playing WITH Gretzky the season before (Gretzky must've been 'carrying' him with psychic thoughts!), and in the 2nd season after Gretz left, Kurri scored a still very impressive 93 points (just 3 points less than his last season playing with Gretzky on the Oilers), and was 2nd in team scoring only behind Messier, who was an absolute beast that year. So Kurri put up similar point totals without Gretzky that he did away from him. So wait. Hmmmm... Kurri still put up huge numbers without playing with the player that he played so much with in the past. It's almost like skilled players will still produce as long as their with other skilled players who complement each other in a positive enough way. And yes, that was the case. Jimmy Carson came in, and although he was an 'interesting' one, but although he was a tad flaky he was still very talented, and what do you know, our skilled players had success playing with him, just as Carson did with them. Again, it's almost like skilled players produce as long as they're playing with skilled players and in a position to succeed. It's shocking to me that anyone would think otherwise. So yeah, I don't think the argument holds up in any way, shape or form...unless we're talking about grinders. More on that later. But just to sum it up: If a player is highly skilled, that inherent skill will allow him to produce as long as he's not playing with plugs and is put in a position to succeed -- but they're both obviously connected. It's as simple as that.
The main thing is that you obviously have to put your skill position players in a position to succeed as best as you can, which is usually done by making at least 2 scoring lines, as good teams generally have more than 3 skilled players, and our team is no exception. It's why I'm on a huge crusade to get Drai on the 2nd line when he's back and healthy. But former is all a given when you really look into it, and every team does it and has done it throughout NHL history -- at least the successful ones. One thing that makes terrible coaches terrible is that they don't have the mental faculties to build a team that's highly efficient at getting the most out of its players. Obviously not ever one can play with McDavid -- and that's the ultimate place and chance to succeed. But you try to build lines that work and that complement each other -- not only skill wise, but that work as a defensive unit, as well. It's more complicated than probably most think.
Now for grinders, that can be a bit different. A guy like Maroon probably is mostly a product of McDavid. But he's not putting up huge numbers. He put up 42 points total last season. Now imagine replacing him with Saad. Do you think Saad scores more points? Most definitely: he's a higher skilled player who would be playing with other highly skilled players, and likely scores 60-70 points in Maroon's spot. So I really think people are looking at this in the opposite way: when a player like Drai put ups a huge number of points playing with McDavid, I think it clearly shows that Drai is very skilled in his own right, and maybe McDavid helped him pad his points a bit, but he's still probably a 70+ point 2nd line C or RW if he's playing with decent 2nd line talent, like Nuge and maybe Lucic or someone else on LW. Maroon on the other case has never produced much of anything in his time in the NHL, and was mostly looked at as a plug with SOME untapped potential, but not a superstar in there. All of a sudden he has a 27 goal season. I think there's only a few players in the league that can make Maroon into a near 30 goal scorer. That's the guy you should be looking at as probably being a product of a much higher talent (read: McDavid); it's not the same situation with already very talented guys like Drai and Yam's. Skilled players playing with other skilled players are almost always going to produce, as long as the chemistry isn't complete crap and they complement each other well enough. Just think of the days when Gretzky would regularly play with a meat-head, and that meat-head would finish with about 20-30 goals on the season, and it's not like that meat-head would play usually play entire games with Gretzky; mostly just shifts here and there. But would that meat-head ever come close to scoring 25-30 goals without having those chances to play with Gretzky and have a lot of easy tap-in goals? Of course not. So in that case, his production is indeed a creation of Gretz; if that player only played on the 4th line with 2 other meat-heads, he'd be VERY lucky to get 10 goals a season.
I also think we really have to look more as the lines as a unit instead of just focusing on an individual play in the grand scheme of things -- unless there's one guy who's obviously bringing down the line; then that's obviously a problem. But if some grinder type player is 'leeching' off McDavid and playing beyond his potential, scoring 25+ goals with regularity, then yeah, I'll take that; I'll have more of that, thanks. What's the problem? It's a team game, and the players on the ice have to try to play as a unit as best as possible to get the best results; optimally, everyone has a role and are good at the role, and the team is successful by having the right pieces and the right chemistry to make their lines work. Not an easy thing, though. Lots of coaching are always mixing and matching, and what they are looking for is what I just mentioned. They're not looking for one guy to take the game over (though they'd take that; but not realistic), they're hoping that the team is better pieced together and thus is a more effective unit.
Actually, I just thought of a new way of thinking of it: when skilled players are put together in a position to succeed and indeed do end up succeeding, you're allowing the player to play to his potential. For the most part, there is no 'carrying'. It's a player playing to his potential, and of course playing with other skilled players will help do that. It's not even close to being a bad thing. Just think of it: How can a highly skilled play-maker play to his potential playing with two meat-heads? Not likely to happen. You need to give him the chance to play with two guys who can shoot the puck, and then they all have a chance to play to their potential (in general terms).
Also, when skilled players are playing and succeeding together, they are 'complementing' each other. No one is carrying anyone. On the other hand, if there's a grinder on a top line (Maroon) and he's scoring a lot more points than is generally accepted that he would otherwise, then that is 'carrying' a player.
