westc2
Registered User
Points aren't everything. Mackinnon has been on a weak team his whole career so that's going to hurt his point totals.
These lists are present-tense. It is based off of the most recent data (except for Ovechkin, who is strangely ranked out of the top five for TSN). There is no reason to not rate MacKinnon as top five (top three in my books) based on last season. I actually felt that he deserved the Hart just as much as Hall.A lot of people seem to be putting him on top five or top ten lists. He was incredible last season, but it's the first truly elite season he has had.
Giroux has more elite seasons than MacKinnon and he outscored him even last season. What is the rationale for putting him in the top five or ten and not also considering Hall and Giroux to be top five or top ten players? That Giroux is older and less likely to replicate his performance from last season? Hall beat MacK for the Hart last season and was as good or better in each of the previous four seasons.
Is it too soon to call MacK a top five or top ten player in the NHL?
Exactly basically you whole stats are dropping when you’re playing for a bottom feeder team. Imagine a guy like Eichel how good he would be if he actually had a team with him. I’ve never seen an Avs fan give up on him, we always knew how good and unlucky he was. For most of us it was just a matter of time I guess.Points aren't everything. Mackinnon has been on a weak team his whole career so that's going to hurt his point totals.
Prior to last season Matthews had scored more total goals and points in his rookie season than McKinnon did in his rookie season.
If we look at last year in a vacuum, absolutely. Obviously his previous seasons add reasonable doubt. If he repeats his performance, I cant see any reason to object.
if he repeats his last season then he's like top 5. im sure there are many players in other people's top 10s who havent had a season close to as good as mackinnon's last year
Exactly basically you whole stats are dropping when you’re playing for a bottom feeder team. Imagine a guy like Eichel how good he would be if he actually had a team with him. I’ve never seen an Avs fan give up on him, we always knew how good and unlucky he was. For most of us it was just a matter of time I guess.
Nah, just top ten. You also have to consider the other names in the mix, who were similarly great last year, and presumably will be this year, without the inconsitant history.
What about his previous seasons bring reasonable doubt?If we look at last year in a vacuum, absolutely. Obviously his previous seasons add reasonable doubt. If he repeats his performance, I cant see any reason to object.
Kessel was around Mackinnon’s age when he was PPG in Toronto. As for Hall I don’t know man he was the exception? He still got traded though maybe he didn’t bring enough? I know he was expendable when McDavid came in but for what EDM got for him looks to be a hell of steal for NJ. I also can tell you that development isn’t linear maybe Mackinnon broke out for good or could also be a fluke but there is a good chance that he keeps being PPG after having a sophomore Rantanen put up 84pts. Each other compliment very well.Phil Kessel and Taylor Hall managed to hit great point totals consistantly on famously poor teams.
if he repeats his last season then he's like top 5. im sure there are many players in other people's top 10s who havent had a season close to as good as mackinnon's last year
Mackinnon was 22 last year. A lot of posts that talk about inconsistent history make it sound like he was 28. 22 is early prime age for a forward and a completely normal time to break out.
Mackinnon was 22 last year. A lot of posts that talk about inconsistent history make it sound like he was 28. 22 is early prime age for a forward and a completely normal time to break out.
I’m sorry what? I understand people not having him in their top 10 but he’s a top 5 guy without a doubt if he repeats what he did last year. He was the second best player in the league last yearNah, just top ten. You also have to consider the other names in the mix, who were similarly great last year, and presumably will be this year, without the inconsitant history.