I guess my sarcasm didn't reach through as well as I had hoped it would so I will keep this post far more concise. I believe that age has some bearing, but the extent to which you seem to think it does is crazy. A one year age difference for players with the same time in the NHL more than makes them comparable. Considering that Marner finished with 1 less point than Laine and equivalent ice time, I'd say that makes them very similar. If you want to make the argument that goals are worth more than assists, that's fine, I don't have any problems with that argument. But if you're going to argue for both age and goals as difference makers, I look forward to seeing your thoughts on Matthews versus Sheifele (or Barkov if you're more Finnish than Winnipeg). After all, you "called me out" in your first post about age not mattering for the Leafs, so I want to see how you think age and goals affect that comparison. The point I am making is that you are not even consistent in your own arguments.
I used the Matthews versus Marner comparison because it helps make you look silly when you claim that a 70 point winger is better than Matthews, but a 69 point winger is miles worse. Clearly if Matthews played Marner's minutes (which are Laine's minutes) he would not put up Marner's points (which are Laine's points), right? Is your logic consistent? How can you tell me that Laine's numbers are better than Matthews' but Marner's aren't? If you think that 4 points in 4 games is so much better than 1 point in 4 games, then why is 5 points in 4 games not so much better than 1 point in 4 games?
And just to test your consistency a bit further, James Van Riemsdyk scored 36 goals this year playing 14:54 a game. How do you think he compares to Laine? How does he compare to Marner? Would he have scored 40 if he got Laine's/Marner's ice time? Should the 36 goal winger be worth more than the 69 points winger? It's funny, because I expect you (and any sane person) to think Laine is about 100x better, but I use it to point out how silly I think your arguments are.
Oh boy, for the
"one year doesn't make all that much difference" when referring to players at their teens (since Laine still was one when regular season ended) is just laughable. Enough so that I barely even bothered to respond to this since anyone who truly believes that has pretty twisted and false perspective of hockey at a general level. You should be looking at Marner's 16-17 and compare that to Laine's 17-18 as opposed lets just compare players and fk the age difference. Furthermore to suggest that the two would belong in the same tier is again what I just described earlier. But hey, if you want to believe that Marner of the same caliper of a player one who just finished second in the Rocket Richard race, then by all means do just that.
I've seen these type of discussions before where someone looks at certain category without taking account all the aspects and making rather funny statements at the same time. Nothing new there. Also yes, goals are more highly regarded than assists. For each one goal there can always be two assists where for each assist there can be only one goal. When you have a potential generational goal scorer at hands, you take the guy over elite playmaker all day and on the weekends.
As for Barkov, Scheifele and Matthews, I believe both Barkov and Scheifele are ahead of Matthews for the time being. Matthews has the best natural goal scoring instinct of the punch while Barkov is quite clearly the best two-way forward. Scheifele is like a hybrid. Matthews is ahead of the two in age to age comparison in my opinion (with Barkov and his complete game not that much though). You make a statement that I'm not consistent with my statements, yet you forget to point out why that is so? Quite constructive I'd say. Also should I remind you that it was you who called me out, not the other way around? No problem, I don't mind to debate a one bit.
Again, I've been talking about goals and you've been stuck with your points. I don't know how many times I have to repeat this. We've seen with our own eyes the Laine now and the Matthews now in the playoffs and how does it look again? I'm also taking into account Laine's ceiling and the fact that out of the three players mentioned, he's the most raw physically. If he can score 44 goals while having areas he can improve quite drastically, who's to tell what he can do 3-4 years from today especially when no longer playing in the second line with 16+/mins average. Marner is what he is and isn't getting any taller and will always have a limited strength versus other players in the NHL. Matthews has always seemed like far more polished product when compared to Laine. As for you, you are staring at the points while ignoring other significant factors and claiming a player should look the same on the rink whether he is 19 or 20 (with a year's difference). Furthermore it is not me who absolutely insists bringing Marner into discussion but you are, even though the topic quite clearly states two players. Guess who? Also where again did I claim 4 > 5? If you read back I've mentioned several times now that not only has Laine scored more points than Matthews, but the level and quality of his game at his own end and at the offensive end has been of higher level. Why don't we take Crosby into the discussion by the way. I mean clearly the age has no bearing and he's outscoring everyone with an ease!
Was JVR 19 years old less when he scored the 36 goals? Does 36 equal to 40 or even 44? I don't know the answer to the first question, cause I never cared enough to follow the guy in the begin with. So there's no point for me to even try to analyse his achievement. You'd have to know just a bit more than the raw numbers (the very aspects you've conveniently been ignoring from the get go). It's funny that you question my arguments, question my statements, then present questions to which you could have gotten answers to just by actually reading my previous takes. At the same time you quite clearly state that player development has little to do with how player fairs on the ice. Would 16-17 Laine have scored 44 goals with little to barely any help from Scheifele? No way. He's far better player than he was a year ago and will be far better player at the same time next year. Yet should we follow your logic what I just said would be false statement. Absolutely ludicrous.
Playoffs isn't all about points just as being a better hockey player doesn't always mean you are outscoring the second best player. Anyway I get it, now that you've been so underwhelmed with Matthews, it's time to throw in the next best card so here we go with Marner. Yet since this topic is dedicated to Laine and Matthews, perhaps you should create another one if this troubles you so much?
