Value of: John Tavares vs. Auston Matthews
- Thread starter BoldNewLettuce
- Start date
- Status
ManofSteel55
Registered User
ManofSteel55
Registered User
By using that one 40 goal rookie season to discuss if he is among the top tier of players in the world (ie, top 5 centre, etc.)
Liferleafer
TSN Scrum Lurker
- Feb 9, 2011
- 39,848
- 13,005
ManofSteel55
Registered User
- Jul 28, 2011
- 15,096
- 9,875
Don't pretend you haven't seen it.
Well the other guy has played what 30 more NHL games and is considered the best already. Lol
Meanwhile, hes managed to double the other's points in those additional '30' (45) games.
Still not as good a goal scorer as dozens ranked below him. Oh well goals aren't everything obviously.
I'm a leafs fan but the just sounds like what have you done for me lately. Never mind that his whole career he has been just under a PPG. Maybe I missed something but what does the playoffs have to do with being an elite player?
Halla
Registered User
- Jan 28, 2016
- 14,727
- 3,779
Mcdavid only has one season of 100pts. by that logic should he not be discussed among the top 5 C in the league?
How is the kid not a top 5 centre even though he was 1st in ES goals ?
Mcdavid,Crosby,Malkin are better. then its a toss up of Backstom,Schiefele,Matthews for 4-5-6. keep in mind Matthews played 2-3 mins less than the highest scorers and he was up among the league leaders in primary pts (60). Take Hyman off the line, considering he didnt put in a single matthews pass through 82 games, and throw Marleau on it and you are looking at 75+ pts just last year.
Yahoo has matthews ranked not only as the 3rd best C, but 4th overall. the score had him as one of the 3 finalists for the hart.
its really hard for people who dislike the leafs to accept he is just that good. shoud be a great season. looking forward to the Matthews Vs Anyone polls intending to prove he isnt elite after he gets 35g/80pts next year @ 20
You responded with little to no supporting evidence. I'd love to see your proof teenagers coming from men's leagues show less improvement, and any evidence saying he's capped. I provided a bunch of statistical evidence, which you just ignored, and reverted to the statement of "I feel." Matthews oiSH% at 5v5 was lower than Tavares's for any year of his career, it is unlikely that he is capped offensively, that alone indicates expected growth if he ends up in the 8.5% to 10% that most elite centers end up in. His expected goals was the highest among any player in the NHL due to where he takes shots from. His shooting percentage may be a touch high, but he is generally shooting from positions that have high conversion rates.Wrote a whole essay responding to you guys, Leafsfan and Ziggie, but I got logged out and lost my post. Even with Marleau on his line, I don't see Matthews hitting 75 points this season. We can make an avatar bet out of this if you'd like and I can drop it to 70 if that makes you more comfortable as well. I have a 50/50 chance at winning the 70pt bet imo and I've always been a gambler. Highly doubt he hits 75, like 90% chance he doesn't hit that. Or/and we can make a goal total bet; I'm confidently saying he won't hit 40 goals next season.
This is literally so wrongNot only was this overly aggressive, but it's just plain and purposeful dishonesty. Utterly shameless.
Ignoring your little... phony frustration/fake tantrum at the end there, I think you're missing the point in the rest of your post. This guy had a lifetime of experience on NA ice and also had a season of experience against men. I don't think any top-10 talent in the past decade has had this kind of advantage transitioning to the NHL. Often, one of the biggest barriers for young players to overcome is adapting to the far more physical nature of the NHL. It's a big jump to go from playing against boys to playing against men. If you guys consider yourselves informed posters, I have no idea how you've missed the fact that adapting to a physical men's game in the NHL is one of the reasons good talent often stays around in the CHL longer than necessary.
I know right, it wasn't like I was insulting his mother by saying he'll be a 65-75 point player. Of course there will be an excuse and I have no doubt it'll be one that will likely contradict the metrics that they used to put other players down.
The guy also didn't have a traditional hockey upbringing. He was raised in a non-traditional market. You can say his situation is unique, but there is no proof players coming from European men's leagues see less growth.
I wasn't ignoring your points, I was just putting forward my own, there is a clear difference in intent there. I also did respond to some of your points as well in my post. However, your post is borderline strawman's considering you just blew past a lot of my points and framed my argument as mere feelings and tried to make this argument about transitioning from Europe rather than about transitioning from a men's league with a lifetime of NA rink size experience. I had plenty of evidence to support my premise, although much of it wasn't statistical and based more on the eye-test admittedly. I did bring up his shot percentage but I think that was about it IIRC. It's hard to judge young players statistically due to a lack of reference seasons and because tools and skills have the ability to top out at any moment. As I said before, comparables are not valid here as Matthews is a very unique case. No top talent in recent history has had the advantage of growing up on NA ice and playing against men prior to entering the NHL. Your post seems hypocritical.
I missed that before but I'm not sure why you're still spouting off about the oISH% thing after our discussion from last time. It's PDO that correlates to overall luck, not oISH% correlating to "offensive luck". Of course in the extremes (12% or below 6%) oISH% and SH% has an impact, there is nothing to suggest it alone correlates to offensive luck. The link between PDO and luck is already fragile even before trying to isolate its variables and trying to correlate it to things that would support your argument.
Responding to your secondary assist argument, I'm actually shocked. Are you under the impression Matthews should have scored more this season?? If anything, I think he should have been in the 60-65 range at best, taking away some goals and adding some assists. As I said before also, if you go back and add up all the "should've" beens, you could cancel them all out with undeserved points. He'll score 70-75 next year.
I definitely gave my assessment of how I view his growth. I think I responded to all your points even in my last post actually.
A lot of people on this board are far too focused on numbers. Advanced stats are great but need to be supplemented with context, logic reasoning, and the eye-test obviously. You can easily be blinded by them, as evident here when people are talking about a consistent 5-10 pt jump in a career being a likely scenario. Scoring is so far down nowadays that a jump like this at the upper echelons of points is massive. Be realistic by accounting for the context.
Yes, if Matthews played this exact same season over again, I would expect him to score more than 69 points. Most elite centers tend to have oiSH% between 8.5% and 10%. He had a ridiculously low amount of secondary assists, which have shown to be historically erratic. Considering Hyman shot 4.4% at 5v5, while shooting from high-percentage positions, it is logical to conclude his shooting percentage if the exact same season was played should be higher. And, if it isn't in Hyman's case, he will eventually be upgraded.
Your claims about Europe are just opinion and have no supporting evidence. So, I don't know how that can be a red flag. It's not a strawman argument, it is simply asking for any supporting evidence. Which you simply haven't or can't provide. You simply haven't provided any evidence. Outside of "feeling" if you do, present your supporting facts. They simply don't exist. Matthews is pretty much the only guy to do it, and there is no logical reason to think it has limited his potential. If anything, maybe improving more at 18, helps his long-term ceiling.
Yes, advanced stats need to be balanced, but you are arguing heavily for a "feeling" that simply lacks statistical or logical support. Why is a 19 year old, who played most of his life in a non-hockey market, and only spent 2 years in USNTP, more likely to be capped by a year in Europe? It simply isn't the logical conclusion to make that his potential is further capped.
I also think your logic about the should have beens is pretty damn faulty, if you take away his undeserved points, considering he was 3rd in the league in primary points. The numbers show he was on the lower end of puck luck, you differing to the eye-test simply flies in the face of statistics, which is why you should use advanced stats in this case because you simply can't quantify every chance over an entire season.
Your argument is simply that he adapted to a men's game, yet that hasn't played out infavor of guys like Tarasenko and Kuznetsov, who took awhile to get accostumed while coming in at an older age and a league of significantly higher level.
Pyrophorus
Registered User
McMetal
Writer of Wrongs
- Sep 29, 2015
- 14,144
- 12,132
By assuming that he is going to continue that pace based on a very small sample size.
CantLoseWithMatthews
Registered User
- Sep 28, 2015
- 49,694
- 59,401
Yikes this is dumb. All his advanced stats point to his goal scoring being sustainable for next year. Give one good reason why he can't continue it
Why are you still bringing up oISH%? The PDO and luck correlation is quite clear but unless it's extreme, oISH% doesn't correlate with poor "offensive luck". For someone so obsessed with stats that you'd call my on-ice observations of him merely "feelings", I'd expect you to have a better understanding of how PDO works. If PDO varies from 100 by more than 2, that generally points to good luck or bad luck. However, for oISH%, 2% is practically meaningless, it's just normal variation. You can have a career year with a 8% oISH% or a career worst with a 10.5%, unlike with PDO where a 2% variation actually correlates to poor years and good years. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, if you can prove the oISH% correlation via an article or such, I'll reconsider my POV.
According to his PDO, which has been proven to be correlated to luck, he had a regular year that wasn't out of the ordinary luck-wise. The points he put up were highly reflective of his abilities, although his shot percentage does clearly indicate he should have scored fewer goals. I see this season as more of a 60-65 point season, taking away some goals and adding some assists.
Not sure how playing in a "non-hockey market" puts you at a disadvantage. If we're talking about development, it's usually just the quality of coaching that affects how players develop. I don't see any indication playing in Arizona growing up was a negative for his development. And once again with the Europe-thing? This is simply a logical connection, a player that has had experience playing against men will definitely have an advantage transitioning to the NHL. You also completely ignored my point that he grew up on NA ice and was familiar with the rink size. Tarasenko and Kuznetsov had very little familiarity with the NA ice. I'd love for you to tell me this familiarity doesn't mean anything; it would really let me know what kind of discussion we're having here.
I also don't think you know how ceilings are projected based on your statements. Developing more at a younger age wouldn't change ceiling, it just gets him there faster. A ceiling is based on tools and IQ, and to me, it looks like Matthews has practically maxed many of his tools.
Give some evidence for this other than a feeling... Also how often have you actually seen him play? I really know get how you can say a 19 year old rookie has already maxed out.
Except his oiSH% was lower than average for an elite center, and you keep on pointing to how he should have had fewer points. Despite the fact, he played fewer minutes than an average 1st line center and the fact his point totals were driven down by a lack of secondary assists, which tend to be erratic, and are heavily influenced by how badly one of his wingers shot. You seem to completely ignore these facts.
You point to the against men thing, and it is far from the logical conclusion. It hasn't benefitted anyone else before. Players from the CHL tend to be better prepared for the NHL grind than European counterparts as teenagers.
You are dramatically underestimating Matthews ceiling. A ceiling has so many variables to say a player maxed them out earlier due to going to Europe for a season is ridiculous. If a player gets better at a younger age, he has more time to improve his skill and physical tools before the inevitable decline caused by age.
Again, you simply have no evidence for your claim. Most elite players have their career seasons when they have high oiSH%'s. So, a 2 percent variation at 5v5 over a full season can be huge. For example, Kane's career year came riding a 10.1% oiSH. You are also arguing that he should have had fewer points, which really isn't supported by anything. For that to of happened, he would have had an oiSH% reflective of a 4th liner.
I'm not obsessed with stats, but they simply provide a context of what I saw over an entire season watching the kid. To come to the conclusion he is close to maxed out and that he should have had fewer points isn't supported by either. Your only argument is a feeling, which simply has no supporting evidence. How many young guys have topped out as teenagers without riding high oiSH%'s. Realize, most examples of rookie forwards who haven't dramatically improved their teenage numbers tended to be guys who had oiSH% over 9.5%, such as RNH, Skinner, and Mackinnon.
HockeyGuruPitka
Registered User
This really isn't a debate considering Matthews is as good at the beginning of his dev curve, while Tavares is already in his prime.
The thread is also about who is more vauable not even who is better right now. Tavares, 1 year from UFA vs ELC Matthews is a rhetorical question. Matthews is worth more easily. Pretty much not debatable
McMetal
Writer of Wrongs
- Sep 29, 2015
- 14,144
- 12,132
I never said he won't. But neither of us can see the future, and one great rookie season does not a superstar make. His future isn't written in stone yet, and until he proves that he can sustain that pace BY ACTUALLY DOING IT nobody should be pretending that he's better than a player who has been a top 10 forward in the league for many years.
- Status
