How can Matthews put himself in the convo with McDavid as “Best young player”?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Flair Hay

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jun 22, 2010
12,091
4,620
Winnipeg
Matthews can become as valuable, kind of, in the way Bergeron is arguably as valuable as Crosby. Become a very good defensive center and keep his offensive numbers up. They definitely have a good coach there to help him get there.
 

tucker3434

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 7, 2007
19,794
10,544
Atlanta, GA
what do you mean by "a bunch"?

matthews gets crucially less ice time than McDavid.

that's not "a bunch".

You’re having to extrapolate the hell out of Matthews pace to get close, but not quite equal to, to McDavids actual numbers. You can’t possibly think that makes your guy look remotely comparable.
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
55,519
46,242
what do you mean by "a bunch"?

matthews gets crucially less ice time than McDavid.

that's not "a bunch".

You're assuming Matthews would keep up his pace with extra minutes (without even knowing whether those extra minutes would even be favorable "offensive" minutes).

Conor Sheary lead the NHL a couple of seasons ago in P/60, I believe. Should we extrapolate that if he played 20 minutes per game instead of the 14 or 15 he played, he would have been close to a 100 point winger?
 

Battle Lin

Registered User
Dec 18, 2015
4,412
744
if mcdavid stays around 100 points this season and matthews has a 50 goals 90ish point season, there should be a little convo stirring, hes a year behind too

but a 50 goals over ppg season aint no easy task

i dont think matthews can ever in a full season score more points than mcdavid, but i think matthews can be best goal scorer in the game and 2nd best player
 

teleman

Registered User
Dec 26, 2006
916
33
Matthews is in the conversation with McDavid as “Best young player”.
The conversation basically goes "Who is the best young player?"
"It isn't Matthews it's McDavid"
Doesn't matter if it is Leaf fans or not the vast majority know this.
A small and very vocal minority push Matthews as being McDavids equal and an even smaller and more vocal group push Matthews as being McDavid's superior.
I'd be willing to bet that some of those posters are being disingenuous and have an agenda(getting a reaction, getting the most replies to the thread they started, arguing for the sake of arguing... catching the biggest fish)
The conversation Matthews belongs in is "Which players are among the best of the young players?" and for many he may not even belong in that one.
The vast majority of fans know McDavid is at the top of the list.(even with Leafs fans)
 

North Cole

♧ Lem
Jan 22, 2017
11,351
12,585
It would be nice if Edmonton fans stopped making or asked other fans to stop making these threads.

Matthews isn't as good as McDavid. Anybody with a brain, so maybe half the users here, know that.

Your best player is better than our best player.

Congratulations...thats literally all you have.

'McDavid won a playoff series two years ago!'

That doesn't mean anything, and if I recall correctly it was Draisaitl who was running that show.

I mean, no idea which team the OP is a fan of, but his location is literally "Toronto, Ontatio"........

Edmonton fans trying to police the main boards isn't going to work out well, since we are hated just as much if not more then you guys.

On the other hand, your post seemed sincere so thanks for your congratulations... means a lot to us. No, Draisaitl was pretty useless in the Sharks series which is the series we won. His numbers were inflated from his 5 point game against Anaheim.
 

TDotMassive

Registered User
Jul 13, 2018
786
509
6ix
McD is clearly generational... Matthews is near-generational as well, time will tell. If he starts putting up multiple seasons of 50+50 or around there, and has such an incredible 2-way game, and leads the Leafs to multiple cups... then he will go down as generational as well. Alot of IF's... but he just turned 20 and already is averaging more 5v5 goals than anyone else in hockey.
 

leaffaninvancouver

formerly in Victoria
Jan 11, 2012
13,819
8,327
A hundred point or 50-60 goal season would help, he either has to increase his points or McDavid has to regress slightly.

McDavid is the better player, there is a reason he was so hyped.
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
55,519
46,242
A hundred point or 50-60 goal season would help, he either has to increase his points or McDavid has to regress slightly.

McDavid is the better player, there is a reason he was so hyped.

I think it would take Matthews having an Ovechkin-like peak in order to compete with McDavid. In that I mean regularly scoring 50+ goals, 100+ points, and maybe getting Top 5 Selke voting finishes (this last part has nothing to do with the Ovi comparison).
 

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
You’re having to extrapolate the hell out of Matthews pace to get close, but not quite equal to, to McDavids actual numbers. You can’t possibly think that makes your guy look remotely comparable.

like hell?

it's a simple extrapolation using more minutes.
 

leaffaninvancouver

formerly in Victoria
Jan 11, 2012
13,819
8,327
I think it would take Matthews having an Ovechkin-like peak in order to compete with McDavid. In that I mean regularly scoring 50+ goals, 100+ points, and maybe getting Top 5 Selke voting finishes (this last part has nothing to do with the Ovi comparison).

If he somehow won the Hart and Maurice Richard trophy next year I think that would make it a lot closer.

I’m not suggesting he will but if he did, you could make a case they are a lot closer.
 

tucker3434

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Apr 7, 2007
19,794
10,544
Atlanta, GA
like hell?

it's a simple extrapolation using more minutes.

It’s minutes AND games. He only just barely broke ppg last year and he hasn’t broken 70 points in either season. To just kinda call it an even 100 is a pretty big leap.
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
55,519
46,242
If he somehow won the Hart and Maurice Richard trophy next year I think that would make it a lot closer.

I’m not suggesting he will but if he did, you could make a case they are a lot closer.

Eh... the way they vote on the Hart, I'm not sure that's a good argument. Look who won it this year. Taylor Hall. Would anyone argue Hall's on par with McDavid because of his Hart?

The Hart can sometimes go to "the best player on a mediocre team who squeaked into the playoffs" rather than to who the best player was that season, so I'm not sure that's a good measuring stick.

And I'm not sure about the Rocket. Ovechkin basically owns that award the past half dozen seasons, but I don't think people see him as the best or second best player in the NHL.
 

leaffaninvancouver

formerly in Victoria
Jan 11, 2012
13,819
8,327
Eh... the way they vote on the Hart, I'm not sure that's a good argument. Look who won it this year. Taylor Hall. Would anyone argue Hall's on par with McDavid because of his Hart?

The Hart can sometimes go to "the best player on a mediocre team who squeaked into the playoffs" rather than to who the best player was that season, so I'm not sure that's a good measuring stick.

And I'm not sure about the Rocket. Ovechkin basically owns that award the past half dozen seasons, but I don't think people see him as the best or second best player in the NHL.

I think if Matthews scored something like 60 goals and 100 plus points, you could argue it’s close.

The real question is what does McDavid do, he’s setting the pace so until we see his pace it’s impossible to judge what Matthews needs.

I really could care less about Matthews stats though, all I want are wins.
 

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
You're assuming Matthews would keep up his pace with extra minutes (without even knowing whether those extra minutes would even be favorable "offensive" minutes).

Conor Sheary lead the NHL a couple of seasons ago in P/60, I believe. Should we extrapolate that if he played 20 minutes per game instead of the 14 or 15 he played, he would have been close to a 100 point winger?

yes, as I clearly stated in that post, it is entirely projected on the premise of "what if matthews didn't see his p/60 drop with more minutes". obviously.

It's an interesting question. This year, for example, we saw Matthews dramatically INCREASE his p/60 as his minutes rose. The other guy in this thread, McDavid, has also increased his p/60 every year as his minutes increase. Based on the data, there doesn't seem to be any reason to assume a decrease.

It's a very interesting question, something which you seem to be assuming the answer to. But not based on actual facts, but seemingly just on hope. Do you really think Matthews' would see his p/60 decrease with an extra minute at even strength and on the pp? why, exactly?

and how long are you going to ride this Conor Sheary playing with Sidney Crosby tiny sample outlier, though? In what way do you think a 24yr old Conor Sheary producing in a cushy role for half a season alongside the best player in hockey is a good example to draw conclusions about Auston Matthews' first 2yrs of his career at ages 19 and 20 playing with zach hyman? Is this something you think is a smart or relevant comparison? Or do you think it just means that all p/60 is meaningless? Conor also posted a .9ppg - does that mean Sheary has now rendered all ppg useless as well?
 
  • Like
Reactions: bionic

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
55,519
46,242
yes, as I clearly stated in that post, it is entirely projected on the premise of "what if matthews didn't see his p/60 drop with more minutes". obviously.

It's an interesting question. This year, for example, we saw Matthews dramatically INCREASE his p/60 as his minutes rose. The other guy in this thread, McDavid, has also increased his p/60 every year as his minutes increase. Based on the data, there doesn't seem to be any reason to assume a decrease.

It's a very interesting question, something which you seem to be assuming the answer to. But not based on actual facts, but seemingly just on hope. Do you really think Matthews' would see his p/60 decrease with an extra minute at even strength and on the pp? why, exactly?

But why would all those extra minutes he receives be on the PP or in favorable ES situations? What if Babcock starts playing him 20 minutes per night, but those extra 2 minutes consist of about 30 seconds of PK time and 1:30 extra ES minutes in defensive situations (ie. taking key faceoffs in the D-zone and tasked with shutting down the other team's top offensive line)?

and how long are you going to ride this Conor Sheary playing with Sidney Crosby tiny sample outlier, though? In what way do you think a 24yr old Conor Sheary producing in a cushy role for half a season alongside the best player in hockey is a good example to draw conclusions about Auston Matthews' first 2yrs of his career at ages 19 and 20 playing with zach hyman? Is this something you think is a smart or relevant comparison? Or do you think it just means that all p/60 is meaningless? Conor also posted a .9ppg - does that mean Sheary has now rendered all ppg useless as well?

It's an exaggerated example to highlight how just because a player produces X amount in 18 minutes of ice time, doesn't mean you can just assume they'd produce at the exact same rate in 20+ minutes of ice time.

You're being way too simplistic about your extrapolations because you're assuming all ice time is the same. Look at the Pens with Crosby and Malkin. Crosby gets more minutes than him, but they're not in offensive situations that will help his stats. Crosby gets about a minute or so extra minutes because he takes defensive zone draws, which Malkin is horrible at. So his extra minute or so actually *hurts* his P/60 compared to Malkin because of where those minutes are spent. The same could very well be the case if Matthews starts getting 2 extra minutes per game. It could be the majority spent in defensive situations that don't lend themselves to more offense.
 

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
But why would all those extra minutes he receives be on the PP or in favorable ES situations? What if Babcock starts playing him 20 minutes per night, but those extra 2 minutes consist of about 30 seconds of PK time and 1:30 extra ES minutes in defensive situations (ie. taking key faceoffs in the D-zone and tasked with shutting down the other team's top offensive line)?

I already split their numbers in to ES, PP, and PK, so that's already taken care of.

as for situationally, Auston played elite quality of competition minutes last year. so there's no worries about him producing due to easier opposition.

as for d-zone and o-zone - well, that only works in Matthews' favour - matthews was at 50.8% oz / 49.2% dz last year, while McDavid was well over 55/45 (and has been every year).



It's an exaggerated example to highlight how just because a player produces X amount in 18 minutes of ice time, doesn't mean you can just assume they'd produce at the exact same rate in 20+ minutes of ice time.

Yes, we all know every stat has outliers. like every single one. We know this. You aren't adding anything to the conversation by pointing this out.

and again, do you actually think a 24yr old conor sheary producing on crosby's wing for half a season is a useful example here?

You're being way too simplistic about your extrapolations because you're assuming all ice time is the same. Look at the Pens with Crosby and Malkin. Crosby gets more minutes than him, but they're not in offensive situations that will help his stats. Crosby gets about a minute or so extra minutes because he takes defensive zone draws, which Malkin is horrible at. So his extra minute or so actually *hurts* his P/60 compared to Malkin because of where those minutes are spent. The same could very well be the case if Matthews starts getting 2 extra minutes per game. It could be the majority spent in defensive situations that don't lend themselves to more offense.

I am very glad you brought this up - this is a VERY VERY important point, and speaks exactly to why you (if you're being honest) would tend to think Matthews' p60 is sustainable.

Would you agree, as an objective and impartial observer, that if we could show that Matthews' already gets tougher usage than the guys who outscore him, that this would be a very good reason to think that Matthews would not only be able to sustain his p60 numbers, but INCREASE them, given that further minutes would almost certainly lead to more favorable usage, not tougher usage?
 

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
looking at corsica's zone starts breakdown:

Last year:

McDavid: 34.92ozs%, 35.79nzs%, 29.29dzs%
Matthews: 32.30ozs%, 34.85nzs%, 32.83dzs%

and the 3rd guy that perennially posts super-elite p60 numbers:

Malkin: 42.27ozs%, 35.06nzs%, 22.67dzs%

now there's a guy who gets cushy, stats-padding usage.
 
Feb 24, 2017
5,094
2,865
but hey, for fun:

1st 2yrs:

McDavid: ES 2.90p/60, 2.30p1/60, 11.2oish% ---- PP 6.39p/60, 3.51p1/60, 9.8oish%
Matthews: ES 2.59p/60, 2.34p1/60, 10.5oish% --- PP 6.29p/60, 4.49p1/60, 9.2oish%


now maybe you guys are right that Matthews' per minute production would drop off a cliff with more minutes, but.....

....what if it didn't?
Can Matthews’ body handle more ice time? Or is he only capable of playing 75% of his games, at his current workload?
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
55,519
46,242
I already split their numbers in to ES, PP, and PK, so that's already taken care of.

as for situationally, Auston played elite quality of competition minutes last year. so there's no worries about him producing due to easier opposition.

as for d-zone and o-zone - well, that only works in Matthews' favour - matthews was at 50.8% oz / 49.2% dz last year, while McDavid was well over 55/45 (and has been every year).

Yes, we all know every stat has outliers. like every single one. We know this. You aren't adding anything to the conversation by pointing this out.

and again, do you actually think a 24yr old conor sheary producing on crosby's wing for half a season is a useful example here?



I am very glad you brought this up - this is a VERY VERY important point, and speaks exactly to why you (if you're being honest) would tend to think Matthews' p60 is sustainable.

Would you agree, as an objective and impartial observer, that if we could show that Matthews' already gets tougher usage than the guys who outscore him, that this would be a very good reason to think that Matthews would not only be able to sustain his p60 numbers, but INCREASE them, given that further minutes would almost certainly lead to more favorable usage, not tougher usage?

Again, though, you're assuming that the breakdown of ice time would also be the exact same among the extra 2 minutes he got. I'm saying you don't know what those extra two minutes might entail.

It would be like comparing Crosby and Malkin and saying "if Malkin's current O-zone/D-zone ration was kept the same, but he got as much minutes as Crosby, he'd produce even more" ignoring the fact if he got Crosby's minutes, it's because he'd be getting about a minute or so extra D-zone starts per game. Those minute or so extra ice time wouldn't be broken up into following his same 70/30 (or whatever it is) O-zone/D-zone that he currently gets.

I'm saying that *if* Babcock starts playing Matthews 20 minutes a night, how many of those extra minutes will be D-zone starts? There's no guarantee that Matthews getting 20 minutes a night will still see him with the same O-zone/D-zone ratio as he currently gets with 18 minutes. It could mean that those extra minutes are Babcock RAISING his overall D-zone% because he's using him in more defensive (or neutral zone) situations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: North Cole

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
Again, though, you're assuming that the breakdown of ice time would also be the exact same among the extra 2 minutes he got. I'm saying you don't know what those extra two minutes might entail.

It would be like comparing Crosby and Malkin and saying "if Malkin's current O-zone/D-zone ration was kept the same, but he got as much minutes as Crosby, he'd produce even more" ignoring the fact if he got Crosby's minutes, it's because he'd be getting about a minute or so extra D-zone starts per game. Those minute or so extra ice time wouldn't be broken up into following his same 70/30 (or whatever it is) O-zone/D-zone that he currently gets.

I'm saying that *if* Babcock starts playing Matthews 20 minutes a night, how many of those extra minutes will be D-zone starts? There's no guarantee that Matthews getting 20 minutes a night will still see him with the same O-zone/D-zone ratio as he currently gets with 18 minutes. It could mean that those extra minutes are Babcock RAISING his overall D-zone% because he's using him in more defensive (or neutral zone) situations.

um, I think I already answered all of this pretty clearly in the post you were responding too.
 

bionic

Registered User
Sep 5, 2009
3,271
1,020
markham
You're assuming Matthews would keep up his pace with extra minutes (without even knowing whether those extra minutes would even be favorable "offensive" minutes).

Conor Sheary lead the NHL a couple of seasons ago in P/60, I believe. Should we extrapolate that if he played 20 minutes per game instead of the 14 or 15 he played, he would have been close to a 100 point winger?
While I agree that no one knows what will happen if Matthews gets the same min that McDavid gets, let's get a little serious here. Conar Sheary is Not MATTHEWS.
 

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
55,519
46,242
um, I think I already answered all of this pretty clearly in the post you were responding too.

I'm assuming these two paragraphs are what you're referring to as "already answered"?

as for d-zone and o-zone - well, that only works in Matthews' favour - matthews was at 50.8% oz / 49.2% dz last year, while McDavid was well over 55/45 (and has been every year).

-----

I am very glad you brought this up - this is a VERY VERY important point, and speaks exactly to why you (if you're being honest) would tend to think Matthews' p60 is sustainable.

Would you agree, as an objective and impartial observer, that if we could show that Matthews' already gets tougher usage than the guys who outscore him, that this would be a very good reason to think that Matthews would not only be able to sustain his p60 numbers, but INCREASE them, given that further minutes would almost certainly lead to more favorable usage, not tougher usage?

Again, the bolded is you assuming the extra minutes would be favorable minutes. Why? Because he gets tough minutes now? Kadri gets matched up against the best on the other team if Babcock can get his way, so if Matthews took some of those tough minutes on top of what he already gets, why would that result in favorable?

The bolded is what I mean. Your entire argument is based on assuming Matthews' extra minutes would either be favorable or at least on par with his current O-zone/D-zone ratio. I'm saying you don't know that for certain.

And that's why I keep mentioning Malkin as an example of how extra minutes doesn't automatically mean easier minutes. Yes, I know he gets soft minutes so that part isn't my point. My point is if we assume that Crosby got hurt and Malkin suddenly took his extra minute or two of ice time, it would consist of HARDER minutes, not more softer minutes. Malkin's D-zone percentage would go UP because the minutes he'd be taking would be a lot of the D-zone and N-zone draws Crosby currently takes. Yet, if we used your assumption, we'd just assume Malkin continues to get about 70% O-zone, but with 20 minutes instead of 18.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->