Kucherov now vs Peak Kane

[illpucks]

who is better

Click to read more...

 

[shelf]

'15-'16 Kane had a 19% lead on the next point getter and factored in on 45% of his teams goals. Kucherov has a %14 lead on Mackinnon. Kucherov factors in on 40% of his teams goals.

 

[Breakers]

An argument could be made for Kane still being in his peak

What he is doing this year on THIS Chicago team is pretty amazing.

 

[Ace of Hades]

Peak Kane > Current Kucherov > Current Kane

 

[EXTRAS]

An argument could be made for Kane still being in his peak

What he is doing this year on THIS Chicago team is pretty amazing.

Not really. Players do well on bad teams all the time. Mcdavid anyone?

 

[Breakers]

Not really. Players do well on bad teams all the time. Mcdavid anyone?

That doesnt dispute anything I just about a player still being in his peak.

You're mistaking team success and individual success.

 

[bathdog]

Peak Kane > Current Kucherov > Current Kane

This. But they're reasonably close atm.

 

[Ainec]

Kucherov

easily

a lot of Kane's prestige came from being a young too 3 winger on a dynasty

meanwhile Kucherov has been battling league mvp b2b

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

Kucherov

easily

a lot of Kane's prestige came from being a young too 3 winger on a dynasty

meanwhile Kucherov has been battling league mvp b2b

Tampa is still a playoff team without Kucherov.

 

[Regal]

Kucherov

easily

a lot of Kane's prestige came from being a young too 3 winger on a dynasty

meanwhile Kucherov has been battling league mvp b2b

Kane dominated an Art Ross and Hart one year and finished 2nd in scoring the next...

 

[Regal]

'15-'16 Kane had a 19% lead on the next point getter and factored in on 45% of his teams goals. Kucherov has a %14 lead on Mackinnon. Kucherov factors in on 40% of his teams goals.

I would say Kucherov has better competition though. League scoring is up, so the difference isn't as large as the point totals suggest, but I think there was also a clear lull among top talent from '13-14 to 16-17 outside of Crosby, Kane and McDavid's Art Ross wins

 

[daver]

That doesnt dispute anything I just about a player still being in his peak.

You're mistaking team success and individual success.

Sure it does. Kane is 6th in points and 6th in PPG. That is nowhere close to what he did in his peak season. That his team is not as high in the standings as they were in 15/16 should have no relevance on qualifying this as being close to his peak.

Getting back to the OP, I think Kucherov's run since 16/17 to now is on par with Kane's run from 14/15 to 16/17 and Kucherov's 18/19 season is pacing towards matching Kane's 15/16 season.

 

[ref19]

Kane no question about it.

 

[alexgreeen]

Kucherov

 

[Regal]

Sure it does. Kane is 6th in points and 6th in PPG. That is nowhere close to what he did in his peak season. That his team is not as high in the standings as they were in 15/16 should have no relevance on qualifying this as being close to his peak.

Getting back to the OP, I think Kucherov's run since 16/17 to now is on par with Kane's run from 14/15 to 16/17 and Kucherov's 18/19 season is pacing towards matching Kane's 15/16 season.

It's not as good, but the 5 in front of him are also having ridiculous seasons. The quality of competition is up right now.

And while playing on a bad team doesn't necessarily make it harder to score, losing Panarin and Keith regressing does.

 

[daver]

It's not as good, but the 5 in front of him are also having ridiculous seasons. The quality of competition is up right now.

And while playing on a bad team doesn't necessarily make it harder to score, losing Panarin and Keith regressing does.

I would say that there are 4 to 5 players who are having better seasons than Kane's competition in 16/17. That Kucherov is clear of that group puts his season on par with Kane's.

I would bet that their respective points/PPG's vs. the average points/PPG's of the next 20 scorers is close.

As for your comment on Panarin and Keith, I agree that Kane's peak season was an anomaly which is why it needs to be qualified that it should be referred to as a peak season, rather than anything that was sustainable.

Kane's 3 year peak sees him as a Top 3 point producer, meaning he could challenge for an Art Ross in any given year (obviously sans Wayne and Mario).

If Kucherov can win the Ross this year, I would say the same about his last three seasons.

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Kucherov

easily

a lot of Kane's prestige came from being a young too 3 winger on a dynasty

meanwhile Kucherov has been battling league mvp b2b

Kane has been league mvp lol. Also has a playoff mvp. This is Kane easily. Last year Kucherov was third in scoring and he will not hold on too the scoring lead. This year

 

[Nathaniel Skywalker]

Kane dominated an Art Ross and Hart one year and finished 2nd in scoring the next...

Exactly all kuch has done is finished third in scoring and this year will probably finish second.

 

[Peggy]

Not really. Players do well on bad teams all the time. Mcdavid anyone?

"All the time"

"Best player in the league anyone?"

 

[JoVel]

'15-'16 Kane had a 19% lead on the next point getter and factored in on 45% of his teams goals. Kucherov has a %14 lead on Mackinnon. Kucherov factors in on 40% of his teams goals.

It does make Kane's 2015-16 look better but it's really not that good of an argument. Say Crosby gets 100 points as well that season. Is Kane then somehow a worse player than he would be if Crosby didn't have a good season as well?

 

[JoVel]

Kane has been league mvp lol. Also has a playoff mvp. This is Kane easily. Last year Kucherov was third in scoring and he will not hold on too the scoring lead. This year

And Hedman was better the season he was 3rd in the Norris voting than the season he actually won it. It's not as simple as 1st > 2nd no matter what.

 

[Hattrick Kane]

'15-'16 Kane had a 19% lead on the next point getter and factored in on 45% of his teams goals. Kucherov has a %14 lead on Mackinnon. Kucherov factors in on 40% of his teams goals.

I think currently Kane is factoring in on like 48% of the teams goals.

 

[The Macho King]

Why is the quality of a team's 2nd - 4th lines relevant in comparing players on the first line? Does anyone think that, since Kucherov only factors in on (idontknow, 35%) of Tampa's goals, teams decide "f*** it, let's make sure we shut down that Anthony Cirelli line". They are the focus of the team's shutdown efforts and they produce. The fact that players also produce behind one of them and not the other is irrelevant.

 

[GreeningOil]

Why is the quality of a team's 2nd - 4th lines relevant in comparing players on the first line? Does anyone think that, since Kucherov only factors in on (idontknow, 35%) of Tampa's goals, teams decide "**** it, let's make sure we shut down that Anthony Cirelli line". They are the focus of the team's shutdown efforts and they produce. The fact that players also produce behind one of them and not the other is irrelevant.

Absolutely it helps, it also helps having a second line center that is top 10 in scoring. The team is an absolute monster and no doubt teams decide to shut down Point or Kucherov! Not to mention the great defense that can also pass and score....

 

[The Macho King]

Absolutely it helps, it also helps having a second line center that is top 10 in scoring. The team is an absolute monster and no doubt teams decide to shut down Point or Kucherov! Not to mention the great defense that can also pass and score....

Point has played about 2/3rds of the season with Kucherov, so I'm guessing you confused him with Stamkos.

And teams absolutely focus on Kucherov as the primary threat. It is absolutely stupid to think otherwise. Shutting down lines 2-4 are no doubt also a concern, but the primary concern is "don't let the guy who's putting up totals last seen by Mario Lemieux get 5 points" rather than gameplanning around the kid who has 11 goals on the 4th line.

Depth helps the team win, absolutely. It doesn't help Kucherov rack up more points.