Prime Jonathan Toews or Current Auston Matthews

[Rants Mulliniks]

Relative to his peers, Keith at his best is a level Matthews hasn't reached. He was legitimately a top 2, top 3 defenseman for quite a few numbers of his prime years, including twice winning the Norris and once winning the Smythe.

Unless/until Matthews starts winning some Harts/Smythes/Art Rosses, it'll be hard for him to be on level with Keith in his prime.

It took Keith 8 years to get there. By the time he was playing his first NHL season, Matthews was flirting with the Rocket for the second time. Point being, he has time.

 

[LeafsNation75]

It took Keith 8 years to get there. By the time he was playing his first NHL season, Matthews was flirting with the Rocket for the second time. Point being, he has time.

Don't you mean Matthews finished T-2 in his rookie season for goals scored with 40, when Sidney Crosby won it with 44 goals that year.

 

[BlueMed]

I've always thought Toews was overrated and always second, third, or fourth in importance depending on the year.
I'd pick Matthews.

That's pretty surprising coming from a Bergeron fan. Toews and Bergeron are basically the same player too.

 

[tapi]

Easy Matthews. Toews was good but nowhere near the prowess of Austin. It's similar to comparing Fedorov and Forsberg, even if Toews and Austin are half a tier below those guys

 

[34]

Easy Matthews. Toews was good but nowhere near the prowess of Austin. It's similar to comparing Fedorov and Forsberg, even if Toews and Austin are half a tier below those guys

Give me Matthews. Best young goal scorer in the NHL.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Nobody on hfboards actually realizes this.

We realize that it's not true. Toews didn't choose to limit his offense. That was the best he could do.

Yeah, but switch Matthews with Toews, and the Hawks dont win any cups.

They'd likely have the same cups, and Matthews would be the one viewed as some defensive god.

 

[ClydeLee]

We realize that it's not true. Toews didn't choose to limit his offense. That was the best he could do.

They'd likely have the same cups, and Matthews would be the one viewed as some defensive god.

Coaching and buying into roles does change the way teams play.

Did Matt Barzal not want to be an above point per game player anymore? Did he get worse? Is that just the best he can do somehow?

 

[Dekes For Days]

Did Matt Barzal not want to be an above point per game player anymore? Did he get worse?

It's not that he got worse. It's that he wasn't as good as his raw points in his rookie year suggested. That year was driven by a lot of secondary assists, and career high OISH%s and PP TOI.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

It took Keith 8 years to get there. By the time he was playing his first NHL season, Matthews was flirting with the Rocket for the second time. Point being, he has time.

Right, and? I said that *right now* Matthews hasn't reached a level Keith played at in his prime. Whether it took Keith forever to get to that level, or whether Matthews eventually gets there is irrelevant to the fact that *as of now* Keith's prime was better than what Matthews has done, relative to his peers.

For the record, Keith won his first Norris in his 5th season. So I'm not entirely sure where you're getting the "took 8 years to get there" thing since by his 5th season he'd already won something for being the "best" at his position.

 

[ClydeLee]

It's not that he got worse. It's that he wasn't as good as his raw points in his rookie year suggested. That year was driven by a lot of secondary assists, and career high OISH%s and PP TOI.

Why did he choose to play less on the PP?

 

[ClydeLee]

Right, and? I said that *right now* Matthews hasn't reached a level Keith played at in his prime. Whether it took Keith forever to get to that level, or whether Matthews eventually gets there is irrelevant to the fact that *as of now* Keith's prime was better than what Matthews has done, relative to his peers.

For the record, Keith won his first Norris in his 5th season. So I'm not entirely sure where you're getting the "took 8 years to get there" thing since by his 5th season he'd already won something for being the "best" at his position.

8 years from drafted vs 5 years of NHL playing.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Why did he choose to play less on the PP?

Uhh... what? He didn't.

 

[BlueMed]

We realize that it's not true. Toews didn't choose to limit his offense. That was the best he could do.

They'd likely have the same cups, and Matthews would be the one viewed as some defensive god.

You sir have never played hockey in your life. Emphasizing defense significantly decreases your point totals.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

Toews easily here.
The guy at his peak was an amazing two way player and showed up big time when it mattered in the playoffs and for Team Canada. Too many people rank players purely by offensive stats but there’s a reason so many Cup winners have had great two way Selke level centers like Toews, Kopitar, O’Reilly and Bergeron to name just a few.

 

[ClydeLee]

Uhh... what? He didn't.

Yeah coaches do. Beacuse how you are used in a role can depend on if you play like your coaches are asking you to.

It won't turn you into a 100pt player 60, but coaching with a defensive minded structured coach vs one letting your offense more open will have impacts. Even with some of these defensive two-way centers like Toews and Bergeron or a case like Barzal the otherway.

Like if Quenneville never took over and Dennis Savard kept coaching the Blackhawks Toews probably is a ppg player those early years but their likelihood of cup success was far less.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Yeah coaches do.

To some extent, coaches determine PP time, which impacts raw scoring. But that's a different thing from what was being suggested/discussed. PP time is not something that Toews is disadvantaged by in a comparison with Matthews.

You sir have never played hockey in your life. Emphasizing defense significantly decreases your point totals.

Wrong on both counts, and I don't think you're in any position to be talking about the hockey knowledge of others.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Don't you mean Matthews finished T-2 in his rookie season for goals scored with 40, when Sidney Crosby won it with 44 goals that year.

I mean he has twice flirted with the award.

 

[LeafsNation75]

Why did he choose to play less on the PP?

During Matthews first two seasons Mike Babcock would split up the power play lines giving them each 1:00 minute.

It wasn't until the John Tavares signing that Babcock put Matthews on a power play line with Tavares, Marner, Kadri, and Rielly, along with giving them more offense zone time and not changing them up after 1:00 minute.

 

[LeafsNation75]

I mean he has twice flirted with the award.

It's too bad how last season ended because will never know what would have happened if all 82 games were played and where Matthews would have finished in the goal scoring race for the Rocket Richard.

 

[JaegerDice]

That's pretty surprising coming from a Bergeron fan. Toews and Bergeron are basically the same player too.

Bergeron has always been better than Toews defensively. His peak as an all-around player is lower than Toews, though he's been more consistent longer.

Toews was generally the most important or second-most important player on the Blackhawks during the dynasty period. It was either him or Keith.

As far as individual talent, I don't think anybody would argue that Kane was the best player. But as far as raw on-ice impact, he was clearly behind Toews and Keith. I'd put Kane above Hossa though, as Kane generally out-performed Hossa in the playoffs.

To some extent, coaches determine PP time, which impacts raw scoring. But that's a different thing from what was being suggested/discussed. PP time is not something that Toews is disadvantaged by in a comparison with Matthews.

Wrong on both counts, and I don't think you're in any position to be talking about the hockey knowledge of others.

PP TOI is not as directly correlated to PP production as many people think.

Role in the system and efficacy of the system have more bearing on PP production than raw TOI.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

Toews easily here.
The guy at his peak was an amazing two way player and showed up big time when it mattered in the playoffs and for Team Canada. Too many people rank players purely by offensive stats but there’s a reason so many Cup winners have had great two way Selke level centers like Toews, Kopitar, O’Reilly and Bergeron to name just a few.

This.
Matthews and Toews are not comparable. Matthews is closer to a young Stamkos than Toews.

 

[Dekes For Days]

PP TOI is not as directly correlated to PP production as many people think.

That is incorrect. PP TOI and raw PP production actually have an insanely high correlation.

 

[JaegerDice]

That is incorrect. PP TOI and raw PP production actually have an insanely high correlation.

Somebody should really tell Alex Ovechkin, who led all forwards in PP TOI and was 68th in PP production last season.

Or Nathan Mackinnon, who played 9 more minutes on the PP than Leon Draisaitl and scored 13 points fewer than him.

Never mind the fact that Patrick Hornquvist, he of 88th highest TOI among forwards last season, had the league leading ixG at 5v4, understandable so, given his position in front of the net on the PP as compared to the litany of talent around him with more TOI but nowhere near as dangerous a position.

And that ignores the obvious idiocy of suggesting that because a Dman plays more minutes than a forward, he should be expected to have more points than the guy running the PP off the half-wall, or receiving the one-timer pass.

TOI obviously matters. More time is more opportunity for goals to be scored. It's obscene to suggest that a player given equal time in every role would score or collect points at the same rate in every role. Its obscene to suggest that any player would score or collect points at the same rate in every role, in any system.

Role and system are huge influences as STs are the area of hockey most directly impacted by coaching systems. It's much more rigid and much lest fluid than 5v5. This is one of many reasons why 5v5 production is so much more important in evaluating a player than PP production.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Somebody should really tell Alex Ovechkin, who led all forwards in PP TOI (all first unit of course) and was 68th in PP production last season.

Or Nathan Mackinnon, who played 9 more minutes on the PP than Leon Draisaitl and scored 13 points fewer than him.

Never mind the fact that Patrick Hornquvist, he of 88th highest TOI among forwards last season, had the league leading ixG.

And that ignores the obvious idiocy of suggesting that because a Dman plays more minutes than a forward, he should be expected to have more points than the guy running the PP off the half-wall, or receiving the one-timer pass.

Where to even start... for the record, Ovechkin was not good on the PP last year, and Draisaitl just had one of the best PP seasons in the entire cap era, which is a big reason why he scored so many points and took awards. You're looking at two of the most extreme examples possible, and don't seem to understand what is actually being said. I also don't know why you're talking about ixg and defenseman here, but not even going to get into that...

Nobody said that individual ability doesn't enter it at all. There is variation within all levels of the scale, but for the top 6000 player seasons in PP TOI in the cap era, the correlation coefficient of PP Points vs. PP Time On Ice is +0.92. That is a very high correlation. The top 10 player seasons in PP points in the cap era are all from 2005-2006 or 2006-2007. Almost 80% of the top-50 in PP points took place between 2005-2008, when league-wide PP TOI was at it's highest. PP TOI plays a massive role in raw PP production.

 

[beachcomber]

If you want to win cups then it is Toews. If you just care about stats then it is Auston.