Mackinnon or Matthews

[Dache]

I haven't insulted you. I have explained it to you very nicely now 3 times.

Wait a minute. All your last post said was

No, it is correct. I have explained this twice to you already; not really sure how you aren't understanding.

So when did this magical 3rd time come up? I was wonder when the second was was as well but I guess you’re just counting all replies?

 

[Dekes For Days]

So when did this magical 3rd time come up?

When I just explained it to you again, in the post you quoted from.

 

[Dache]

When I just explained it to you again, in the post you quoted from.

I showed you the post I quoted. You decided to edit it out again. This is getting hilarious.

 

[YakDavid]

I'd pretty easily go with MacKinnon

 

[Dekes For Days]

I showed you the post I quoted. You decided to edit it out again.

Nothing was edited. Here, I'll help you...

1st time:

He's not lower relative to his peers this year. You see his ranking improve over a bigger sample because it weeds out players having a good run over a small sample. Matthews, in contrast, is consistently among the top, showing that he's an elite PP producer, even through disadvantageous situations.

2nd time:

Once again, you see his ranking improve over a bigger sample because it weeds out players having a good run over a small sample. It does not mean he was higher in the ranking in the previous years and dropped; it means people who may be above him in any given year (like this year) drop significantly in surrounding years and over bigger samples, while Matthews does not. PP time is not a very big sample, even for a full year, so you can see some pretty significant swings from year to year for some people.

He is actually 2 rankings higher in PP P/60 this year compared to last year; funny enough, 2 rankings above Mackinnon this year.

3rd time:

Somebody can, for example, rank exactly 15th in 3 consecutive years, and still be 10th over a bigger sample. The individual player's ranking did not change in that instance; the players around him did. He maintained a consistent elite ranking, while someone who may have placed higher in any individual season was not that level of player and dropped off over bigger samples. There isn't that much PP time, even in a full season, so it tends to be pretty variable, unless you're an elite producer like Matthews.

This is in fact Matthews' highest ranked year in PP P/60 so far.

It should be pretty clear to you that Matthews' ranking did not drop, not that it would be proof of anything even if it had.

 

[Dache]

Nothing was edited. Here, I'll help you...

1st time:


2nd time:


3rd time:

It should be pretty clear to you that Matthews' ranking did not drop, not that it would be proof of anything even if it had.

Ah. I got it. You say you’ve “explained” it 3 times, then “explain it” and it counts as one of the past 3. All good now boss

 

[Michael HOMERUNing]

Two very, very good players. I feel that MacKinnon is just a bit better, and their statistics seem to support that.

Matthews has completely turned it around defensively. I think I'd still have MacKinnon but AM's done a nice job to put himself into the conversation this season

 

[LeafsNation75]

I would like to see Matthews score all these goals in a bad team. Or one that didn’t have a ton of great offensive players.

he’s never been an assist guy hitting the 30 mark just once, and hasn’t even yet as of this post this year while MacKinnon gets both in high numbers, and is far more lethal all around.

In 2017 when Colorado had a historic bad season MacKinnon only had 16 goals, 37 assists, 53 points in 82 games. It wasn't until the next season when MacKinnon started living up to his hype of a 1st overall pick when he finished 2nd for the Hart Trophy.

The Leafs weren't expected to contend in 2017, however they ended up making the playoffs and Matthews playing all season with Zach Hyman and William Nylander/Connor Brown who were also rookies ended up scoring 40 goals and finished tied for 2nd in that category.

 

[missionAvs]

This has been an awesome thread. The fact that this wasn't made in the poll section as to not get locked due to lopsided result is very clever lol. Anyways, MacK over Matthews for now. It can definitely change going forwards but I just don't see it happening given how good MacK is playing.

I see it as this for centers going forwards:
1. McJesus


2. MacK
3. Drai, Eichel, Matthews, Barkov tier (in that order)

 

[koyvoo]

This has been an awesome thread. The fact that this wasn't made in the poll section as to not get locked due to lopsided result is very clever lol. Anyways, MacK over Matthews for now. It can definitely change going forwards but I just don't see it happening given how good MacK is playing.

I see it as this:
1. McJesus


2. MacK
3. Drai, Eichel, Matthews, Barkov tier (in that order)

and the guy who is on track for his 3rd straight 100+ point season, including 128 pts last season is how many tiers below them?

 

[bobbyking]

The one who's last name starts with M

first 2 letters are M and A

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

It was, because you used this unsubstantiated belief to dismiss rate statistics, even when they were necessary for accuracy.

Like I said, if you continue to misrepresent someone else's opinion even after multiple times where they clarify their opinion, then don't cry constantly about people misrepresenting yours.

Lol, you're literally just going through all of his statistics (and then separating them to create even smaller samples) to find ones that dropped with increased ice time, while ignoring all of the ones that rose with increased ice time (and the impact that had on the other rates), and claiming that based on one singular example that you are grossly misrepresenting (while excluding years that counter your claim), all rate statistics are null and void. Despite the fact that both his PP P/60 and ES P/60 stayed within normal variance ranges (one slightly up, one slightly down) with increases in ice time, as I predicted all along.

When you make a big deal about minor changes and isolate things like 5v5 secondary assist rates for a ~55 game sample, it's essentially like saying that points are worthless for judging what a player will do because one month that player had 10 points and the next he had 11. It's, quite frankly, ridiculous.

Once again, you also pick the most convenient time to make this argument. You have tried to make this argument twice this season. Both times were at Matthews' lowest P/60 moments, while you completely ignored it the rest of the time when he was above previous years in pretty much everything.

Matthews has a huge sample of this level of production, and it has stayed within a consistent range throughout, regardless of ice time. There is zero evidence that increases in ice time have a negative effect on production rates. There is evidence to the contrary. Matthews is now substantiating that further, by maintaining his rates.

So in effect, these rate stats are only valid when they suit your argument, but become invalid when they don't.

Zeke, if you move the goal posts any more they'll no longer be on the field.

 

[BertMcDrai]

People don't watch Matthews and it's clear. The narrative that he is a shot and nothing else is laughable to the point it proves people do not watch him.

His game overall has grown so much this year. Defensively he has been a beast. He won't win a Selke because he doesn't PK but he is 2nd in take aways and all underlying defensive stats are amazing.

He plays primarily with playmakers, so his assist totals will always be lower than if he had another goal scorer on his line. And people like to use the team mates argument against him but ignore Colorado has Rantanen (who was better than Marner on here last summer), and their team is right up there with goals for. They play the same run and gun style as the Leafs.

Only difference is Matthews is younger and has blown out every year of Mack's career so far, except this one where is going to roughly tie in points while having more goals.

The answer is Mack only due to his steal of a contract, but as raw players, anyone saying it's not close is out to lunch.

This is totally untrue...Drai has played with McD (obviously the best playmaker) and has 50g and 55assists last year.

Wih the other arguments I can partly agree.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Like I said, if you continue to misrepresent someone else's opinion even after multiple times where they clarify their opinion, then don't cry constantly about people misrepresenting yours.

I didn't misrepresent your position. For more than half of a year you have dismissed rate statistics outright because of personal feelings that you have never proven, while I have supported the exact opposite position extensively, which you have ignored. You can say that you didn't explicitly say that the stats would drop significantly, but even if that were true, there is no other scenario other than that that would make using these statistics more problematic than raw statistics, so your position doesn't make any sense otherwise, and you have never supported it beyond cherry picking singular examples at convenient times. You know exactly what my position is however, and I have explained it and supported it to you countless times, so I don't appreciate you twisting it.

So in effect, these rate stats are only valid when they suit your argument, but become invalid when they don't.

No, the statistics are valid. That said, choosing the most convenient times and then making incorrect conclusions based solely on those times, is problematic. Nobody said that every single statistic and every single statistic within a statistic needs to increase all at the same time, and can never drop by any amount at any point in time. Always rising, forever and ever. Similarly, you don't dismiss points outright because at one point in the season, that one player fell below his usual pace for a couple games, so once again, you keep holding rate statistics to a completely different standard than all other statistics.

I supported, with extensive evidence, that his rate statistics would maintain and not drop out of the expected range of normal variance, and you disagreed. Now, he is doing exactly what I said. Both his ES P/60 and PP P/60 are maintaining with increases in ice time, so now you try to shrink the sample to increase the variance, and use his 5v5 secondary assist rate as some sort of proof, when that has no relevance to our conversations. You were wrong with points, so now you are just picking out any stat that saw any type of drop over this small sample, and applying the cause for normal variance to ice time, which makes no sense.

Zeke

I am not Zeke, you know this, and I will be reporting you to an administrator if you do that again.

 

[missionAvs]

and the guy who is on track for his 3rd straight 100+ point season, including 128 pts last season is how many tiers below them?

Apologies! Should have specified that I was talking about centers.

 

[a mangy Meowth]

if you move the goal posts any more they'll no longer be on the field.

The goal posts are in the Wendy's parking lot across the street from the stadium at this point

 

[ottawa]

MacKinnon but it's getting closer

Yeah it's getting closer for Leafs fans who one upon a time put Matthews at the same level as McDavid.

Mack AINEC (and I literally never use that)

 

[Hockey Crazy]

Yeah it's getting closer for Leafs fans who one upon a time put Matthews at the same level as McDavid.

Mack AINEC (and I literally never use that)

If that's going to be your input then it's tough to take you seriously. Matthews has been driving play at a similar rate and scoring goals at a higher pace than MacKinnon.

I still like MacKinnons all around game more and he has a larger body of work at that level, but when you consider the trajectories and age, the gap is closing. I do expect them to be viewed on a similar tier pretty soon.

 

[Kamiccolo]

This is totally untrue...Drai has played with McD (obviously the best playmaker) and has 50g and 55assists last year.

Wih the other arguments I can partly agree.

McDavid also scored 40 goals. Not like the playmakers he has been with who score ~20 goals.

 

[TruePowerSlave]

What has Matthews done to be considered as good as MacKinnon?

His regular season, playoff and international resume are all worse. MacKinnon is about to have his 3rd season in a row that tops Matthew's best season.

 

[Boxscore]

What has Matthews done to be considered as good as MacKinnon?

The case for Matthews is his ELITE shot and goal scoring ability. Also, his first year, he was a complete puck hound who was relentless on the backcheck--these days not so much. The issue is that MacKinnon is also a high-end goal scorer and at this point plays a more complete game. MacKinnon is also more consistent.

 

[LeafsNation75]

What has Matthews done to be considered as good as MacKinnon?

His regular season, playoff and international resume are all worse. MacKinnon is about to have his 3rd season in a row that tops Matthew's best season.

So far Matthews has scored 40 goals 2x which is something MacKinnon has not done.

In the 2017 playoffs Matthews had 4 goals and 1 assist in six games played, in last years playoffs he had 5 goals and 1 assist in seven games played, so it wasn't his fault that Toronto didn't advance to the 2nd round.

As for international play are you really going to compare their play at non NHL tournament?

 

[TruePowerSlave]

So far Matthews has scored 40 goals 2x which is something MacKinnon has not done.

In the 2017 playoffs Matthews had 4 goals and 1 assist in six games played, in last years playoffs he had 5 goals and 1 assist in seven games played, so it wasn't his fault that Toronto didn't advance to the 2nd round.

As for international play are you really going to compare their play at non NHL tournament?

Yes, Matthews scores more goals.

Now tell us why he is a better player than MacKinnon, or was that it.

 

[Leafidelity]

Yes, Matthews scores more goals.

Now tell us why he is a better player than MacKinnon, or was that it.

Curious, do you think MacKinnon is a better player than Ovechkin?

 

[Master P]

I'll take Mack.

The Great Nate