Malkin vs Kane

[TheDoorDoctor]

We all know that Crosby and Mcdavid are considered generational talents but what about the step just below..

Who do you think is better (lets get rid of contracts)

Click to read more...

 

[Filthy Dangles]

This isn't close.

 

[Plural]

Better right now or better all-time? I think there's a case to be made that Kane and Malkin are very close to equal now and Malkin's injury history might be enough to sway me picking Kane.

All-time? It's easy choice. One is top-100 player and the other is not. Just kidding, it's obviously Malkin in all-time sense.

 

[CokenoPepsi]

Neither are generational... That is the most overused word in hockey

 

[Incognito]

A healthy Malkin is still the best player (or forward, if you want to make a case for Karlsson) in the world not named Crosby or McDavid.

 

[Plural]

A healthy Malkin is still the best player (or forward, if you want to make a case for Karlsson) in the world not named Crosby or McDavid.

That's the caveat. He's not healthy for a full season.

Jut for fun, I'll list both Malkin and Kane stats here for the past 5 seasons. After Malkin's marvelous Hart/Art campaign.

12-13:

Malkin: 31GP 9G 24A 33P 1.06PPG
Kane: 47GP 23G 32A 55P 1.17PPG

13-14:

Malkin: 60GP 23G 49A 72P 1.20PPG
Kane: 69GP 29G 40A 69P 1.00PPG

14-15:

Malkin: 69GP 28G 42A 70P 1.01PPG
Kane: 61GP 27G 37A 64P 1.05PPG

15-16:

Malkin: 57GP 27G 31A 58P 1.02PPG
Kane: 82GP 46G 60A 106P 1.29PPG

16-17:

Malkin: 62GP 33G 39A 72P 1.16PPG
Kane: 82GP 34G 55A 89P 1.09PPG

Overall for the past 5 seasons:

Malkin: 279GP 120G 185A 305P 1.09PPG
Kane: 341GP 159G 224A 383P 1.12PPG

Overall for the past 3 seasons:

Malkin: 188GP 88G 112A 200P 1.06PPG
Kane: 225GP 107G 152A 259P 1.15PPG

So, in the recent years Kane has been more healthy AND produced better on average. There's a very good argument to be made that over the past 3 season Kane has been both better and more healthy player than Malkin.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Malkin pretty easily, Kane is an 85 point winger who had an unsustainable season in 2015-2016. Malkin in a down year for him is basically equal to Kane. That doesn't include positions either, where in reality a center is usually better than a winger when production is the same.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

A healthy Malkin is still the best player (or forward, if you want to make a case for Karlsson) in the world not named Crosby or McDavid.

He's better than McDavid when he's on.

 

[Plural]

Malkin pretty easily, Kane is an 85 point winger who had an unsustainable season in 2015-2016. Malkin in a down year for him is basically equal to Kane. That doesn't include positions either, where in reality a center is usually better than a winger when production is the same.

I think I'm about to retract my words from few days back. You might not be as objective poster as I've thought.

In the past years, Kane has been producing better than Malkin in larger amount of games. Your argument doesn't really hold water.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Malkin was fantastic this past postseason, but as others have pointed out Kane has been consistently a bit better for the last few seasons.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I think I'm about to retract my words from few days back. You might not be as objective poster as I've thought.

In the past years, Kane has been producing better than Malkin in larger amount of games. Your argument doesn't really hold water.

Take out his 2015-2016 season and look at what his production is. He's around an 85 point winger. Malkin is usually an 85 point center in a down year for him.

 

[Plural]

Take out his 2015-2016 season and look at what his production is. He's around an 85 point winger. Malkin is usually an 85 point center in a down year for him.

But that's not been the case in recent years. If we remove his one superb season Kane still has 2 seasons in the past 4 where he has higher PPG than Malkin . I'm not necessarily contesting the idea that Kane is 85 point winger but more contesting the idea that Malkin is 85 point center in his down year. Also, I don't think we can completely disregard his best season. It's a major part of his resume especially considering it happened only two season a go.

I guess I do agree with you on the idea that I'd expect Malkin more likely to push for 100 points than I'd expect Kane to do it again. But then again, I'd expect Kane to more likely to play 75+ games next season at PPG+ clip than I'd expect Malkin to. So the question becomes, which hold more value.

 

[Empoleon8771]

But that's not been the case in recent years. If we remove his one superb season Kane still has 2 seasons in the past 4 where he has higher PPG than Malkin . I'm not necessarily contesting the idea that Kane is 85 point winger but more contesting the idea that Malkin is 85 point center in his down year.

And the difference isn't significant, it's only like a 5 point difference per 82 games. Their production outside of the obvious outlier season for Kane is roughly equal (they're both around 87 points/82 games, I'm taking out Malkin's best season in 13-14 of a 99 point pace in that too), but a center is usually better than a winger when production is the same.

 

[Plural]

And the difference isn't significant, it's only like a 5 point difference per 82 games. Their production outside of the obvious outlier season for Kane is roughly equal (they're both around 87 points/82 games, I'm taking out Malkin's best season in 13-14 of a 99 point pace in that too), but a center is usually better than a winger when production is the same.

So you're basing this "easily" analysis purely on the idea that cause Malkin is center he's significantly better. Even though Kane has slightly outpaced him in the past years? That seems bit steep for me. I get picking Malkin though here though, at his best he's the best player in the world. But in the recent years, Kane has outpaced and outproduced Malkin. Ever so slightly if we remove their best seasons (which I'm not sure I agree with) but nevertheless, he's produced better.

 

[SB84]

Malkin is better when he wants to be. His combination of skill and size is unmatched. Kane is a lot more consistent but does not have the peak Malkin does. All in all, both being healthy I take Kane in the regular season and Malkin in the playoffs. Slight edge to Malkin overall

 

[TheGoldenJet]

That's the caveat. He's not healthy for a full season.

Jut for fun, I'll list both Malkin and Kane stats here for the past 5 seasons. After Malkin's marvelous Hart/Art campaign.

12-13:

Malkin: 31GP 9G 24A 33P 1.06PPG
Kane: 47GP 23G 32A 55P 1.17PPG

13-14:

Malkin: 60GP 23G 49A 72P 1.20PPG
Kane: 69GP 29G 40A 69P 1.00PPG

14-15:

Malkin: 69GP 28G 42A 70P 1.01PPG
Kane: 61GP 27G 37A 64P 1.05PPG

15-16:

Malkin: 57GP 27G 31A 58P 1.02PPG
Kane: 82GP 46G 60A 106P 1.29PPG

16-17:

Malkin: 62GP 33G 39A 72P 1.16PPG
Kane: 82GP 34G 55A 89P 1.09PPG

Overall for the past 5 seasons:

Malkin: 279GP 120G 185A 305P 1.09PPG
Kane: 341GP 159G 224A 383P 1.12PPG

Overall for the past 3 seasons:

Malkin: 188GP 88G 112A 200P 1.06PPG
Kane: 225GP 107G 152A 259P 1.15PPG

So, in the recent years Kane has been more healthy AND produced better on average. There's a very good argument to be made that over the past 3 season Kane has been both better and more healthy player than Malkin.

Last 5 seasons is a pretty convenient number. If we look at the last 6 seasons, Malkin wins. Last 4 seasons? Malkin wins. Just last season? Malkin wins.

Malkin's been the better player recently, as well as over their careers.

 

[Plural]

Last 5 seasons is a pretty convenient number. If we look at the last 6 seasons, Malkin wins. Last 4 seasons? Malkin wins. Just last season? Malkin wins.

Malkin's been the better player recently, as well as over their careers.

So, in the past 6 seasons Malkin wins. 5 seasons and Kane wins. 4 Seasons and Malkin wins. 3 seasons and Kane wins. 2 seasons and Kane wins. 1 season and Malkin wins. It's superbly close in terms of per game production. Kane has been more healthy though.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

Neither are generational... That is the most overused word in hockey

Kane definitely isn't. Malkin has a case.

Malkin has all the tools you dream of and that you literally don't see more than 'once in a generation'.

Besides McDavid, we have not seen a better or equal player come up since Evgeni Malkin did after Ovechkin/Crosby.

 

[authentic]

So, in the past 6 seasons Malkin wins. 5 seasons and Kane wins. 4 Seasons and Malkin wins. 3 seasons and Kane wins. 2 seasons and Kane wins. 1 season and Malkin wins. It's superbly close in terms of per game production. Kane has been more healthy though.

Apparently people still aren't getting it, but I'm with you on this one. I didn't realize how close they were since Malkin's last monster season in 11/12, and I didn't realize Kane actually has the edge in points and points per game since then. If you watch them play too it's not a hard case to make either, him and Malkin are the clear best offensive players in the league besides Crosby and McDavid and really they aren't too far behind if at all, this next season will add to the comparison and give us an even better picture of where the 4 of them stand. I suspect it will go McDavid> Crosby> Malkin> Kane in terms of points per game this year, but the gap may be a little higher from McDavid to the rest I'm guessing.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

That's the caveat. He's not healthy for a full season.

Jut for fun, I'll list both Malkin and Kane stats here for the past 5 seasons. After Malkin's marvelous Hart/Art campaign.

12-13:

Malkin: 31GP 9G 24A 33P 1.06PPG
Kane: 47GP 23G 32A 55P 1.17PPG

13-14:

Malkin: 60GP 23G 49A 72P 1.20PPG
Kane: 69GP 29G 40A 69P 1.00PPG

14-15:

Malkin: 69GP 28G 42A 70P 1.01PPG
Kane: 61GP 27G 37A 64P 1.05PPG

15-16:

Malkin: 57GP 27G 31A 58P 1.02PPG
Kane: 82GP 46G 60A 106P 1.29PPG

16-17:

Malkin: 62GP 33G 39A 72P 1.16PPG
Kane: 82GP 34G 55A 89P 1.09PPG

Overall for the past 5 seasons:

Malkin: 279GP 120G 185A 305P 1.09PPG
Kane: 341GP 159G 224A 383P 1.12PPG

Overall for the past 3 seasons:

Malkin: 188GP 88G 112A 200P 1.06PPG
Kane: 225GP 107G 152A 259P 1.15PPG

So, in the recent years Kane has been more healthy AND produced better on average. There's a very good argument to be made that over the past 3 season Kane has been both better and more healthy player than Malkin.

Just curious why you decided to start the comparison *after* Malkin's MVP season in 2011-12? Kane's career year was included, but Malkin's wasn't.

You don't think omitting Malkin's best year and including Kane's best year *by far* will skew the results a bit?

 

[Plural]

Just curious why you decided to start the comparison *after* Malkin's MVP season in 2011-12? Kane's career year was included, but Malkin's wasn't.

You don't think omitting Malkin's best year and including Kane's best year *by far* will skew the results a bit?

There really was no reason for it. I didn't check it before hand or anything, I just thought that 5 years would be a good time-frame to look at. When I started looking at it I saw that it cut off Malkin's best year. To be fair, 6 years is kind of a long time and I think the past 3 years are the most important here. If someone want's to add Malkin's amazing Ross year that's fine too.

But you're right in the sense that Kane's great Hart/Ross season does skew the averages a tad but it's very recent. I think it's more accurate to include it and just remember to put context on it than it is to remove it.

My point was that their offensive productions have been surprisingly close in the past 5 years and Kane actually has a small edge in regular season production in that time-frame. Both per game and raw totals. I'd wager most people would have not guessed it so I thought it was interesting to put it out there.

 

[Regal]

Last 5 seasons is a pretty convenient number. If we look at the last 6 seasons, Malkin wins. Last 4 seasons? Malkin wins. Just last season? Malkin wins.

Malkin's been the better player recently, as well as over their careers.

"Pretty convenient to pick the years that work for Kane"

*Proceeds to list only the years that work for Malkin*

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Just curious why you decided to start the comparison *after* Malkin's MVP season in 2011-12? Kane's career year was included, but Malkin's wasn't.

You don't think omitting Malkin's best year and including Kane's best year *by far* will skew the results a bit?

Maybe because Malkin's mvp season was 5+ years ago and has zero relevance to today? Or the fact that he hasn't played 70 games in a season since then? Kane's hart season was a year ago, obviously it's going to be included.

 

[KoozNetsOff 92]

Kane's been producing more the last couple years. Add in that Malkin hasn't played 70 games in 5+ years and this is Kane but it's close.

 

[Regal]

Its certainly close, as Plural has made the case for here, but I still go with Malkin. Both are similar offensively and can produce no matter who is on their wing, but I still believe that Malkin has the higher top gear despite Kane's '16. I think Malkin is also somewhat underrated defensively. He can be very good when he wants to be and can tilt the ice more than Kane in that regard. Kane also tends to get highly skewed offensive starts. Malkin isn't used much defensively but at least gets the more mixed minutes of the typical star. He also has to share offensive minutes with Crosby's line and has shown when being the go to player on offense he can actually produce more.