Firstly does a win against Boston count for more points in the standings than a win against Montreal? No it does not, they're both worth 2 points. Furthermore if the argument is that MacKinnon padded his point totals only against weak defensive teams
that's completely FALSE.
Not all the top teams are great defensively - Toronto is 10th overall in points but 21st overall on defense. Kucherov put up a lot of points against Toronto; 12 the most he scored against any team and while that's points against a
good team, that's not points against a
good defense. Toronto won largely by outscoring their opposition, not by playing great defense. No, I'm not saying Kucherov wasn't good against good defensive teams at all, I'm just using that as an example. We need to look deeper into the numbers to find out the truth behind them.
Here's the splits of the top 3 against all teams at
even strength;
| | MacKinnon | | | | | | Kucherov | | | | | | McDavid | | | | |
Rk | EV goals against | Team | GP | EVG | EVA | EVP | | Team | GP | EVG | EVA | EVP | | Team | GP | EVG | EVA | EVP |
1 | 138 | Florida | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Florida | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | | Florida | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
2 | 141 | Winnipeg | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | | Winnipeg | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Winnipeg | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
3 | 161 | Vancouver | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | | Vancouver | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | | Vancouver | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
4 | 165 | Los Angeles | 3 | 2 | 2 | 4 | | Los Angeles | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Los Angeles | 4 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
5 | 168 | Carolina | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | | Carolina | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | | Carolina | 2 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
^ | 168 | Boston | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | | Boston | 4 | 2 | 3 | 5 | | Boston | 2 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
7 | 179 | Edmonton | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3 | | Edmonton | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | | Edmonton | na | - | - | - |
8 | 178 | Seattle | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5 | | Seattle | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | | Seattle | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
9 | 184 | NY Rangers | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | | NY Rangers | 3 | 1 | 5 | 6 | | NY Rangers | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
^ | 184 | Buffalo | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Buffalo | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Buffalo | 2 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
11 | 185 | Minnesota | 4 | 4 | 2 | 6 | | Minnesota | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | | Minnesota | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
^ | 185 | Dallas | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5 | | Dallas | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | | Dallas | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
13 | 186 | Nashville | 3 | 3 | 2 | 5 | | Nashville | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | | Nashville | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 |
14 | 189 | Pittsburgh | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | | Pittsburgh | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | | Pittsburgh | 2 | 2 | 3 | 5 |
15 | 192 | NY Islanders | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | | NY Islanders | 3 | 2 | 2 | 4 | | NY Islanders | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
16 | 193 | Vegas | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Vegas | 2 | 1 | 3 | 4 | | Vegas | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
17 | 194 | Colorado | na | - | - | - | | Colorado | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | | Colorado | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
18 | 195 | St. Louis | 4 | 0 | 3 | 3 | | St. Louis | 2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | | St. Louis | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
19 | 198 | Washington | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | | Washington | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Washington | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
20 | 197 | Toronto | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | | Toronto | 3 | 1 | 5 | 6 | | Toronto | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
21 | 198 | Anaheim | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5 | | Anaheim | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Anaheim | 4 | 2 | 7 | 9 |
22 | 204 | Arizona | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 | | Arizona | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | | Arizona | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
^ | 204 | Montreal | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | | Montreal | 4 | 2 | 3 | 5 | | Montreal | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
24 | 210 | Calgary | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | | Calgary | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | | Calgary | 4 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
25 | 214 | Philadelphia | 2 | 3 | 2 | 5 | | Philadelphia | 3 | 2 | 2 | 4 | | Philadelphia | 2 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
^ | 214 | Detroit | 2 | 1 | 3 | 4 | | Detroit | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | | Detroit | 2 | 1 | 6 | 7 |
^ | 214 | Ottawa | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 | | Ottawa | 4 | 1 | 5 | 6 | | Ottawa | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
28 | 222 | Tampa Bay | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | | Tampa Bay | na | - | - | - | | Tampa Bay | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
29 | 225 | New Jersey | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | | New Jersey | 3 | 1 | 7 | 8 | | New Jersey | 2 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
30 | 227 | Chicago | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5 | | Chicago | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | | Chicago | 3 | 2 | 2 | 4 |
31 | 236 | Columbus | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | | Columbus | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3 | | Columbus | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
32 | 251 | San Jose | 3 | 2 | 1 | 3 | | San Jose | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | | San Jose | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
And here's their
powerplay numbers;
Rk | PK% | MacKinnon | GP | PPG | PPA | Pts | | Kucherov | GP | PPG | PPA | Pts | McDavid | GP | PPG | PPA | Pts |
1 | 86.43 | Carolina | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Carolina | 2 | 1 | 4 | 5 | Carolina | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2 | 84.92 | Los Angeles | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | | Los Angeles | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Los Angeles | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
3 | 84.48 | NY Rangers | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | NY Rangers | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | NY Rangers | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
4 | 83.40 | Philadelphia | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Philadelphia | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | Philadelphia | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
5 | 83.33 | Tampa Bay | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | | Tampa Bay | na | - | - | - | Tampa Bay | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
6 | 82.47 | Florida | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Florida | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | Florida | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
7 | 82.46 | Boston | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Boston | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | Boston | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
8 | 82.01 | Dallas | 4 | 0 | 2 | 2 | | Dallas | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | Dallas | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
9 | 81.07 | Calgary | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3 | | Calgary | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | Calgary | 4 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
10 | 80.66 | New Jersey | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | New Jersey | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | New Jersey | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
11 | 80.66 | Pittsburgh | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Pittsburgh | 3 | 1 | 4 | 5 | Pittsburgh | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
12 | 80.15 | Colorado | na | - | - | - | | Colorado | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Colorado | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
13 | 79.84 | Buffalo | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Buffalo | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | Buffalo | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
14 | 79.72 | Vegas | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Vegas | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | Vegas | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
15 | 79.58 | Detroit | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | | Detroit | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | Detroit | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
16 | 79.53 | Edmonton | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | | Edmonton | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | Edmonton | na | - | - | - |
17 | 79.36 | Seattle | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Seattle | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Seattle | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
18 | 78.97 | Washington | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | | Washington | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Washington | 2 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
19 | 78.80 | Vancouver | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | | Vancouver | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | Vancouver | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
20 | 78.60 | St. Louis | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | St. Louis | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | St. Louis | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
21 | 77.27 | Winnipeg | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Winnipeg | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | Winnipeg | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
22 | 76.92 | Nashville | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | | Nashville | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | Nashville | 3 | 0 | 4 | 4 |
23 | 76.89 | Toronto | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | | Toronto | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5 | Toronto | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
24 | 76.53 | Montreal | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | | Montreal | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 | Montreal | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
25 | 76.32 | Arizona | 4 | 2 | 1 | 3 | | Arizona | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | Arizona | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
26 | 76.27 | Columbus | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Columbus | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | Columbus | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
27 | 76.21 | Chicago | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 | | Chicago | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | Chicago | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
28 | 75.30 | San | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3 | | San | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | San | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
29 | 75.10 | Ottawa | 2 | 2 | 1 | 3 | | Ottawa | 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | Ottawa | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
30 | 74.62 | Minnesota | 4 | 0 | 4 | 4 | | Minnesota | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2 | Minnesota | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
31 | 72.48 | Anaheim | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | | Anaheim | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | Anaheim | 4 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
32 | 71.49 | NY Islanders | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | | NY Islanders | 3 | 0 | 2 | 2 | NY Islanders | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
Out of that we get;
Even Strength
Vs Top 2 teams
| Gm | G | A | Pt | ppg |
McDavid | 5 | 2 | 3 | 5 | 1.00 |
MacKinnon | 5 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 0.80 |
Kucherov | 5 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0.40 |
Vs Top 6 teams
| Gm | G | A | Pt | ppg |
McDavid | 16 | 3 | 15 | 18 | 1.13 |
MacKinnon | 15 | 5 | 7 | 12 | 0.80 |
Kucherov | 15 | 6 | 5 | 11 | 0.73 |
Vs Top 12 teams
| Gm | G | A | Pt | ppg |
MacKinnon | 33 | 14 | 19 | 33 | 1.00 |
Kucherov | 30 | 12 | 16 | 28 | 0.93 |
McDavid | 28 | 5 | 22 | 27 | 0.96 |
Vs the entire
top & bottom halves of the league
Mackinnon | Gm | G | A | Pts | ppg |
Top Half | 43 | 19 | 25 | 44 | 1.02 |
Bottom half | 39 | 22 | 26 | 48 | 1.23 |
Kucherov | Gm | G | A | Pts | ppg |
Top Half | 40 | 17 | 23 | 40 | 1.00 |
Bottom half | 41 | 14 | 37 | 51 | 1.28 |
McDavid | Gm | G | A | Pts | ppg |
Top Half | 37 | 10 | 27 | 37 | 1.00 |
Bottom half | 38 | 14 | 36 | 50 | 1.32 |
Vs Bottom 5 teams
| Gm | G | A | Pts | ppg |
MacKinnon | 13 | 7 | 5 | 12 | 0.92 |
McDavid | 12 | 6 | 8 | 14 | 1.17 |
Kucherov | 10 | 2 | 13 | 15 | 1.50 |
McDavid did the best against the very best teams in the league, but he also racked up a lot of points against weaker teams, specifically in the 18 to 25 range. But when we consider a larger selection of teams and compare each players performance against the entire top and bottom half's MacKinnon did in fact perform the best while having to play more games against teams with better defense. Kucherov meanwhile did the worst against the very best, top 2 or top 6 and when it came to the bottom dwellers he feasted the most against them at ES.
The powerplay is where Kucherov excelled at this season;
Kucherov | Gm | G | A | Pt | ppg |
Top half | 40 | 7 | 20 | 27 | 0.68 |
Bottom half | 41 | 6 | 20 | 26 | 0.63 |
MacKinnon | Gm | G | A | Pt | ppg |
Top half | 36 | 2 | 16 | 18 | 0.50 |
Bottom half | 46 | 9 | 21 | 30 | 0.65 |
McDavid | Gm | G | A | Pt | ppg |
Top half | 34 | 2 | 6 | 8 | 0.24 |
Bottom half | 42 | 5 | 31 | 36 | 0.86 |
The conclusion here is clear - while it's not by a huge amount MacKinnon was in fact slightly better than Kucherov during even strength play against the best defensive teams. Kucherov in turn was better than MacKinnon on the powerplay but the difference isn't as great as people presume. And he certainly didn't fest on the weak PK teams by any significant amount, only McDavid did. McDavid also had 1 short handed point this year which is why his numbers are off by one, which obviously is inconsequential overall.