Is McDavid, Matthews, MacKinnon the new Big Three?

[Bank Shot]

The point was, coaches don't do it because generally, it isn't in the best interest of the team. Very few winning teams actually allocate ice-time like that. The original point was also about cherry picking stats. For example, using a team that has played the most games played of NHL teams, and the number of players they had top 10 in scoring (3), to a team that has played the least games, and how few players they have in the top 50 (0).

Does Matthews have better support? Yes. Is McDavid better? Yes. But, you can selectively choose a bunch of stats to make your point or in an attempt to diminish one or the other. And, while the Oilers secondary lines are bad, they tend to put a lot of talent on the McDavid line. Matthews only real advantage with who he plays with is on the PP, or if you think he's getting easier minutes and benefitting from the wear and tear the leafs other two top 9 lines create. RNH is currently a better player than Marleau and Kapanen, and I have no idea of what to make of Rattie, although, he is the worst of the 4 (but prolly better than Tyler Ennis currently is).

Linemates and icetime don't matter for the best.

You see that the top players score the most points regardless of their circumstances. And that is why McDavid just crushed Matthews in production despite being on a worse team last season.

 

[swiftwin]

There is no big 3, there's just a big 1.

 

[93LEAFS]

That’s not “big 3” worthy at all. Let him break the 70 point mark before claiming he has a case to be in McDavids tier.

Yes, being the best goal scorer at 5v5 in the league and being 2nd in primary points at 5v5 over 2 seasons and the start of this year (still first in goals if you just look at 2016/17 and 2017/18, and 4th in primary points). The hold up in elite point production has been that he wasn't getting the type of powerplay time most elite NHLers do.

I never said he was in McDavid's tier. What I did say is there is much more than 7 games of evidence he deserves to be in the discussion of the top 3 to 5 players in the league. Here is what the other top 10 players in points at 5v5 between 2016/17 and the end of 2017/18 got in ice-time on the PP. I'll also put their efficency in those situations next to it. If you don't think Matthews numbers were deflated by not playing top PP minutes, I don't know what to say, and its why you are trying to dismiss his consideration among the elite.

Connor McDavid: (164 games, 483 minutes, P/60: 5.72)
Nikita Kucherov: (154 games, 518 minutes, P/60: 7.63)
Patrick Kane (164 games, 548 minutes, p/60: 4.92)
Artemi Panarin (163 games, 488 minutes, p/60 4.67)
Brad Marchand (148 games, 415 minutes, p/60 6.64)
Alex Ovechkin (164 games, 641 minutes, P/60 5.24)
Auston Matthews (144 games, 334 minutes, p/60 6.29)
Jonny Gaudreau (152 games, 505 minutes, p/60 4.39)
Nathan MacKinnon (155 games, 483 minutes, p/60 5.71)
David Pastrnak (157 games, 446 minutes, P/60 6.72)

While he's played the least games, it doesn't really accound for the massive difference's in PP ice-time in most cases. Even people like Marchand who have played only 4 more games has about 81 more PP minutes. The only people to be more efficent on the PP were Kucherov, Pastrnak and Marchand, with only Kucherov being by a significant margin.

 

[zeke]

amazing how the mods just allow non stop trashing of leafs and leaf fans on the main board.

non stop.

 

[Puckstuff]

Okay. I’ll bite. What makes Matthews the clear cut number 2 and with McDavid?

It’s really comical how some (and I mean some) were so hard on Mackinnon and said he needs to prove himself for more than 30, 40 games to be considered better than guys like Draisaitl, Marner, Nylander etc... but are shoving the notion that Matthews is already on the level of McDavid and is better than the Crosbys, Malkins, Mackinnons, Barkovs etc... after less than 10 games

Maybe it's comical because you aren't reviewing the data, it's not 10 games.

Right now we are discussing this era of players (to answer the OP'S question.)

If Crosby, Ovechkin and Malkin are the top 3 drafted players from 2000-2010; let's evaluate players drafted from the next decade, 2010-2020.

If you scroll through every single player drafted from 2010-2018; Matthews has a higher PPG average then every single player except McDavid with 100 + games played.

It is literally:

1) McDavid
2) Matthews.

It's not some outrageous claim. We are just reading the data.

The data we have right now suggests Matthews is the 2nd best player from his his era so far. Mackinnon and Kucherov are close; but we must factor in their entire career; which was pretty subpar in the age 18,19,20,21,22.

Right now it's

1) McDavid
2) Matthews
3) TBD.

I honestly think Petterssen or Barzal could be that third guy; not Kucherov or Mackinnon. But we'll see.

I'd personally like a little more data on Matthews my self (200 games) but 150 games is probably a large enough sample size to make an informed decision.

OTR; I simply just don't care if Matthews is the second best player or not. He's another man... I have my own life. I'm just reviewing data.

 

[Bank Shot]

Yeah, because if he somehow ends up with 187 points this year he won't be declared the best player in the world.........He'll have to do it next year too. Yes, I get the highly unlikely odds that he will do that, but your statement is ridiculous.

Your example is the only thing that is ridiculous. If a guy is lapping the field then it's obvious that he is the best.

Otherwise, it's normal to want to see sustained success. You kind of have to wait a second year to see if the first year was a fluke.

Anyone announcing Patrick Kane as the best player in the world after his Art Ross would look pretty silly now. If Kane had been able to do it two seasons in a row, well he would have had an argument for being the best.

Just use common sense and you'll be alright.

 

[93LEAFS]

Linemates and icetime don't matter for the best.

You see that the top players score the most points regardless of their circumstances. And that is why McDavid just crushed Matthews in production despite being on a worse team last season.

They absolutely do. If the best player in the world gets 0 minutes of PP all-time, he still won't lead the league in points. The bolded may sound nice and have some truth in it, but it is not concretely true or always applicable.

 

[zeke]

They absolutely do. If the best player in the world gets 0 minutes of PP all-time, he still won't lead the league in points. The bolded may sound nice and have some truth in it, but it is not concretely true or always applicable.

just let him pretend mcdavid getting 5 more minutes of ice per game somehow doesn't matter if it makes him feel better.

 

[93LEAFS]

Your example is the only thing that is ridiculous. If a guy is lapping the field then it's obvious that he is the best.

Otherwise, it's normal to want to see sustained success. You kind of have to wait a second year to see if the first year was a fluke.

Anyone announcing Patrick Kane as the best player in the world after his Art Ross would look pretty silly now. If Kane had been able to do it two seasons in a row, well he would have had an argument for being the best.

Just use common sense and you'll be alright.

My example was litterally extrapolating what he did over the 7 games and applying it to 82 games. Because you said he had to do what he did over these 7 games over 2 years. Maybe if you don't make such ridiculously hyperbolic statements you won't be mocked for them.

 

[Coffey]

amazing how the mods just allow non stop trashing of leafs and leaf fans on the main board.

non stop.

This will be a fun one to repost in the future.

 

[hector morrison]

Linemates and icetime don't matter for the best.

You see that the top players score the most points regardless of their circumstances. And that is why McDavid just crushed Matthews in production despite being on a worse team last season.

By production,you don't mean goals right? Especially 5x5 !

 

[Pia8988]

amazing how the mods just allow non stop trashing of leafs and leaf fans on the main board.

non stop.

 

[Bank Shot]

My example was litterally extrapolating what he did over the 7 games and applying it to 82 games. Because you said he had to do what he did over these 7 games over 2 years. Maybe if you don't make such ridiculously hyperbolic statements you won't be mocked for them.

They absolutely do. If the best player in the world gets 0 minutes of PP all-time, he still won't lead the league in points. The bolded may sound nice and have some truth in it, but it is not concretely true or always applicable.

Yeah. I'm the one making hyperbolic statements....

Your two examples are talking about a player scoring 180+ points, and the best player getting zero minutes of PP time.

Hey what if the best player played with rubber ducks strapped to his feet instead of skates?

What if the best player had to wear an eye patch?

You are throwing out some real fantasy island scenarios here.

When you look at real world scenarios a guy like Ovechkin scored about the same playing with Zubrus and Clark as he did playing with Backstrom. It's a pretty common theme and not hard to research. The best players just produce.

 

[OilCanada92]

I think Eichel could make it a big 4.

 

[McJC]

I think Eichel could make it a big 4.

The gap between Matthews, Mackinnon, and Eichel is a lot closer than McDavid vs. anyone. McDavid truly is in a league of his own.

 

[OilCanada92]

They absolutely do. If the best player in the world gets 0 minutes of PP all-time, he still won't lead the league in points. The bolded may sound nice and have some truth in it, but it is not concretely true or always applicable.

True but he's still have a better career high than Matthews

 

[93LEAFS]

Yeah. I'm the one making hyperbolic statements....

Your two examples are talking about a player scoring 180+ points, and the best player getting zero minutes of PP time.

Hey what if the best player played with rubber ducks strapped to his feet instead of skates?

What if the best player had to wear an eye patch?

You are throwing out some real fantasy island scenarios here.

When you look at real world scenarios a guy like Ovechkin scored about the same playing with Zubrus and Clark as he did playing with Backstrom. It's a pretty common theme and not hard to research. The best players just produce.

You said ice-time. Your Ovechkin example has no example of ice-time. Which you convienently ignore. How about they take his away a minute a game of his PP time? I think that would have a massive effect. You said ice-time doesn't matter. Show me a player who loses 82 minutes of PP time in a season, and show me how that doesn't effect their point totals.

I literally showed you what happens if Matthews plays at the 7 game pace. He doesn't need to play at that to be in the discussion, which is why your statement was ridiculous. I point to PP usage, because that is why Matthews is a significant reason his numbers aren't as elite as they should be.

 

[zeke]

Yeah. I'm the one making hyperbolic statements....

Your two examples are talking about a player scoring 180+ points, and the best player getting zero minutes of PP time.

Hey what if the best player played with rubber ducks strapped to his feet instead of skates?

What if the best player had to wear an eye patch?

You are throwing out some real fantasy island scenarios here.

When you look at real world scenarios a guy like Ovechkin scored about the same playing with Zubrus and Clark as he did playing with Backstrom. It's a pretty common theme and not hard to research. The best players just produce.

they do?

Ovechkin averaged less than 20mpg twice in his career.

both times he failed to hit 70pts.

 

[Battle Lin]

mcdavid still better but hes not on another planet compared to the other two anymore, matthews and mackinnon are really really good now

 

[Bank Shot]

You said ice-time. Your Ovechkin example has no example of ice-time. Which you convienently ignore. How about they take his away a minute a game of his PP time? I think that would have a massive effect. You said ice-time doesn't matter. Show me a player who loses 82 minutes of PP time in a season, and show me how that doesn't effect their point totals.

I literally showed you what happens if Matthews plays at the 7 game pace. He doesn't need to play at that to be in the discussion, which is why your statement was ridiculous. I point to PP usage, because that is why Matthews is a significant reason his numbers aren't as elite as they should be.

He would have to do something like that to be undisputed top player in the league after only one season.

As of now shouldn't Taylor Hall be ahead of Mattthews by your logic? He just won the Hart Trophy. He should be at least the second best player in the league right?

And no icetime doesn't matter as much as you think it does. Matthews gets all the icetime he needs to produce. Points/60 goes down as icetime increases anyway. You get minimal gains after a certain point and Matthews is already getting plenty of icetime.

 

[Bank Shot]

they do?

Ovechkin averaged less than 20mpg twice in his career.

both times he failed to hit 70pts.

Shows that you get the ice time that you deserve. NHL coaches are pretty fair. They are always a few bad weeks of poor results from getting fired.

 

[zeke]

And no icetime doesn't matter as much as you think it does. Matthews gets all the icetime he needs to produce. Points/60 goes down as icetime increases anyway. You get minimal gains after a certain point and Matthews is already getting plenty of icetime.

name the last player who challenged for a scoring title playing 18 minutes a game.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

McDavid is better, but he also plays on average 5 minutes more a game than Matthews. They are playing him like 23:30 minutes per game. and only about 30 seconds on average is on the PK.

I know. It just shows how great McDavid is to play so many more minutes and still play at such a high level. It’s anazing what he’s done with so much less support than most of the other top players. That’s what separates him from the rest in addition to the Art Rosses.

 

[93LEAFS]

He would have to do something like that to be undisputed top player in the league after only one season.

As of now shouldn't Taylor Hall be ahead of Mattthews by your logic? He just won the Hart Trophy. He should be at least the second best player in the league right?

And no icetime doesn't matter as much as you think it does. Matthews gets all the icetime he needs to produce. Points/60 goes down as icetime increases anyway. You get minimal gains after a certain point and Matthews is already getting plenty of icetime.

Except the point is about PP ice-time specifically. Again, show me how PP ice-time doesn't dramatically alter point production if dramatically reduced. If you don't think PP ice-time has a significant effect on point totals, I don't know what to tell you. All ice-time isn't equal. Playing in situations where scoring chances are significantly higher, will dramatically alter point totals.

 

[Bank Shot]

name the last player who challenged for a scoring title playing 18 minutes a game.

The best players get more ice time. Matthews wasn't there yet last season.

Long odds for him to get close to Mcdavid this season too.