Mat Barzal WILL take a huge step back next season

[CupsOverCash]

Ya, I'm sure Lou's thrilled he was unable to keep his franchise player.

Not saying hes thrilled about it. Just saying arguably Lou can find better use of that money down the road. Tavares choosing to leave could be better for the Isles in the long run.

 

[PatriceBergeronFan]

And just like that, the burden of proof fell onto Islander fans to get in touch with all 31 general managers and see if any of them would prefer a career-high 85 point player to a career-high 69 point player.

Are you suggesting a team WOULD choose Barzal over Matthews?

Barzal makes me think of Samsonov. Flashy offensive player who dances around the perimeter. Fun to watch but at the end of the day the Matthews type is more likely to lead to playoff success.

 

[TDK67]

Are you suggesting a team WOULD choose Barzal over Matthews?

Barzal makes me think of Samsonov. Flashy offensive player who dances around the perimeter. Fun to watch but at the end of the day the Matthews type is more likely to lead to playoff success.

When someone's argument revolves around "career high point totals" for two guys who have played a combined total of less than 3 full seasons in the NHL (not to mention one of those guys isn't even 21 yet), you automatically know its a pretty worthless opinion.

 

[Gary Nylund]

And just like that, the burden of proof fell onto Islander fans to get in touch with all 31 general managers and see if any of them would prefer a career-high 85 point player to a career-high 69 point player.

What proof, he was just stating the obvious. Or do you really think there are GM's out there that would choose Barzal over Matthews?

Not saying hes thrilled about it. Just saying arguably Lou can find better use of that money down the road. Tavares choosing to leave could be better for the Isles in the long run.

You can argue anything and say "could be" about anything but let's get real here. Close to 100% of NYI fans wanted Tavares to stay with NYI and now that he's gone, the narrative has changed. Or perhaps you can share a post of yours saying in the long run the Islanders would be better off without him BEFORE he actually left? I didn't think so.

 

[IPS]

Step 1) Complain about Matthews being brought up all the time

Step 2) Bring up Matthews all the time in threads where you can sledge him at will

Step 3) Complain about an alleged victim complex when you're confronted with your hypocrisy.

 

[IPS]

You’re one to talk about changing hoops.

In terms of shutting down the opposition lines offensively Kadri’s line is the better option. It’s no different than a team like Winnipeg who uses Lowry as their shutdown centreman. Yes Scheifele is the better player when compared straight across, but it’s not his role or focus to shutdown the other teams top line. Obviously that doesn’t mean Scheifele is going to ignore defence, but when the opposition throws out their top line you know who Maurice counters with? Lowry, much like how Babs counters with Kadri.



Don’t see why his Avatar matters at all. Tavares is on the Leafs now, it’s not like he’s still Islanders property. But this thread isn’t about Tavares being on the Leafs. It is kind of about Tavares and his final year with the Islanders.

It's the same way Chicago used Markus Kruger as a shutdown guy. Did this somehow take away Toews' status as Chicago's matchup guy? Obviously not, you'll want to utilize your #1C's offensive ability somehow.

Like how f***ing hard is this to understand?

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Are you suggesting a team WOULD choose Barzal over Matthews?

Barzal makes me think of Samsonov. Flashy offensive player who dances around the perimeter. Fun to watch but at the end of the day the Matthews type is more likely to lead to playoff success.

I think they are similar talents. This is going off topic but players that fly around did better than Matthews did in the playoffs last year. where Matthews stumbled to 2 pts while basically being invisible. Look at Pastanak, he was flying around Matthews against Boston all series. That's the difference of winning and losing the series right there.

I also don't know what Matthews is going to make his next contract. But I can see it being more than Barzal. With this consideration I think some teams would prefer a points producing center who can also be an elite playmaker over a goal scoring center who has little impact on his wingers or certainly less than Barzal can make his wingers better.

Listen, I never blamed the Bruins for passing on Barzal. A lot of teams passed on him. Bruins take a lot of unwarranted heat for this, you guys have made some great picks. Pasta, Debrusk and McAvoy.

But I think it is a lot closer than people are portraying here. Barzal does not have the Toronto Media machine backing him. I I know of only one player that was compared to McDavid, and it wasn't Barzal. So one must factor in the hype. All I know is we have 2 great talents here. Barzal is a proven 85 pts Center, Matthews a proven 40 goal Center. Let the chips fall where they fall in the future. But if Barzal is making significantly less than Matthews will be, the choice will be easier for some.

 

[Artorius Horus T]

100 points is my prediction for Barzal.
85 points last season, FYI that's only 15 point addition.

More ice time because of Tavares,.
He is still improving his game.
Beauvilier, Lee, Bailey, Eberle remain his team mates.
Great coaching.

 

[CodeE]

Are you suggesting a team WOULD choose Barzal over Matthews?

What proof, he was just stating the obvious. Or do you really think there are GM's out there that would choose Barzal over Matthews?

Google "False Consensus Effect".

GMs take Hayton over Zadina, they trade Hall for Larsson and Subban for Weber. The idea that some GMs might rather have Barzal over Matthews if given the choice is not an outlandish one.

But hey, in Leaf land literally every single person thinks Matthews is so much better than Barzal and zero proof is required because it's just so obvious.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Google "False Consensus Effect".

GMs take Hayton over Zadina, they trade Hall for Larsson and Subban for Weber. The idea that some GMs might rather have Barzal over Matthews if given the choice is not an outlandish one.

But hey, in Leaf land literally every single person thinks Matthews is so much better than Barzal and zero proof is required because it's just so obvious.

Well if you really insist on being such a nit, fine you're right. We can't know for sure what GM's around the league would do and they do sometimes do dumb things so I'll rephrase: It's highly doubtful that there would be even one NHL GM foolish enough to choose Barzal over Matthews if given that choice but you never know. Better?

In the context of this choice you have given examples of some dumb things GM's have done, is it fair to assume that in your opinion, choosing Barzal over Matthews would be dumb? If so then we're in complete agreement.

 

[IPS]

Google "False Consensus Effect".

GMs take Hayton over Zadina, they trade Hall for Larsson and Subban for Weber. The idea that some GMs might rather have Barzal over Matthews if given the choice is not an outlandish one.

But hey, in Leaf land literally every single person thinks Matthews is so much better than Barzal and zero proof is required because it's just so obvious.

So do you just close your eyes, plug your ears and yell "la la la la" when the actual arguments for Matthews being brought up? Legitimate experts have voted Matthews as the 4th best center in the league 2 years running, where was Barzal?

 

[TDK67]

Just to get the full facts out there since one particular poster seems to be trying to twist and contort stuff as usual. Everything is from naturalstattrick.com and is data from their actual head-to-head shifts when playing against each other.

Matthews vs Barzal - last year in 20:03 of head-to-head 5v5 TOI

Matthews
CF% - 47%
SCF% - 55%
HDCF% - 60%
GF% - 57%
3 G + 2 A1 = 5pts

Barzal
CF% - 53%
SCF% - 45%
HDCF% - 40%
GF% - 43%
1 G + 1 A1 + 1 A2 = 3pts

Small sample and all but at least its a more complete picture than a couple of video clips and spouting random numbers from one game.

 

[Leafslet]

I don’t think a small drop in points is automatically a “regression” for barzal.

I’m not making a prediction, but I could see a small drop in scoresheet production for him. With the inevitable change in focus of the system the new coach will implement, I could see it. On the other hand he’ll now be ‘the guy,’ and while yes that does add new pressures and match ups, it also allows more opportunity through the course of a typical game. (first pp time, more offensive zone starts as the go-to, etc).

If I HAD to guess, I do think his point total will fall abit, but that it won’t be overly significant, and won’t change what he is as a player, but we’ll see.

 

[IPS]

Just to get the full facts out there since one particular poster seems to be trying to twist and contort stuff as usual. Everything is from naturalstattrick.com and is data from their actual head-to-head shifts when playing against each other.

Matthews vs Barzal - last year in 20:03 of head-to-head 5v5 TOI

Matthews
CF% - 47%
SCF% - 55%
HDCF% - 60%
GF% - 57%
3 G + 2 A1 = 5pts

Barzal
CF% - 53%
SCF% - 45%
HDCF% - 40%
GF% - 43%
1 G + 1 A1 + 1 A2 = 3pts

It's a lot more entertaining when you can just make shit up and then demand accountability from other people.

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

And just like that, the burden of proof fell onto Islander fans to get in touch with all 31 general managers and see if any of them would prefer a career-high 85 point player to a career-high 69 point player.

Please don't twist my words, that's obviously an opinion. That poster has no way they could prove that claim. I think a GM would potentially pick Barzal if they had a team that was heavy with good shooters but I do think the majority would take Matthews.

 

[CodeE]

It's a lot more entertaining when you can just make **** up and then demand accountability from other people.

So "legitimate experts say Matthews is great" and a small sampling of numbers from when Matthews and Barzal played head-to-head against each other.

Matthews scored 5 points when Barzal was on the ice, Barzal only scored 3 points when Matthews was on the ice. Which is apparently much more important than Barzal scoring 85 and Matthews not reaching that elusive 70-point club.

Love to know what I'm making up though.

 

[CodeE]

Please don't twist my words, that's obviously an opinion. That poster has no way they could prove that claim. I think a GM would potentially pick Barzal if they had a team that was heavy with good shooters but I do think the majority would take Matthews.

The point is the difference between:

1. "The burden of proof is on you to provide stats! Without stats you're saying nothing!"

vs.

2. "Literally every GM would take Matthews over Barzal, it's just obvious."

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

The point is the difference between:

1. "The burden of proof is on you to provide stats! Without stats you're saying nothing!"

vs.

2. "Literally every GM would take Matthews over Barzal, it's just obvious."

I'd hope that people would look at the statement and realize the second is literally impossible to prove so it must be an opinion.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Just to get the full facts out there since one particular poster seems to be trying to twist and contort stuff as usual. Everything is from naturalstattrick.com and is data from their actual head-to-head shifts when playing against each other.

Matthews vs Barzal - last year in 20:03 of head-to-head 5v5 TOI

Matthews
CF% - 47%
SCF% - 55%
HDCF% - 60%
GF% - 57%
3 G + 2 A1 = 5pts

Barzal
CF% - 53%
SCF% - 45%
HDCF% - 40%
GF% - 43%
1 G + 1 A1 + 1 A2 = 3pts

Small sample and all but at least its a more complete picture than a couple of video clips and spouting random numbers from one game.

I think the inherent flaw with this is it is affected by the quality of team each player plays on. Barzal played on a team who had literally one of the worst defenses (team defense/goals against) since the 2005 lockout. There will be head to head match-ups against players who played on strong teams where Barzal gets absolutely creamed because of that, through no fault of Barzal's.

 

[TDK67]

I think the inherent flaw with this is it is affected by the quality of team each player plays on. Barzal played on a team who had literally one of the worst defenses (team defense/goals against) since the 2005 lockout. There will be head to head match-ups against players who played on strong teams where Barzal gets absolutely creamed because of that, through no fault of Barzal's.

Sure, but either way this is way more honest/objective than taking one game and a couple of video clips and going "SeEEe LoOk at HoW BArZAl BeaT MAtthEWSSSS!!!". I guess we should expect nothing less of that poster but I'll still call out the BS when I see it.

 

[CodeE]

I'd hope that people would look at the statement and realize the second is literally impossible to prove so it must be an opinion.

Literally impossible to prove?

If I run into Rob Blake at Whole Foods, go "hey Rob, who'd you rather have on the Kings: Barzal or Matthews?" and he answers "I think Barzal", well then I've accomplished the impossible.

 

[Pure Slaughter Value]

There are threads that go off the rails and then there's this one.

/LOCKED

Wait, I'm not a mod. Please continue

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

Literally impossible to prove?

If I run into Rob Blake at Whole Foods, go "hey Rob, who'd you rather have on the Kings: Barzal or Matthews?" and he answers "I think Barzal", well then I've accomplished the impossible.

I suppose yes if you hunted down all the GM's you could get an answer, but did you seriously think that statement was anything other than an opinion?

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

So "legitimate experts say Matthews is great" and a small sampling of numbers from when Matthews and Barzal played head-to-head against each other.

Matthews scored 5 points when Barzal was on the ice, Barzal only scored 3 points when Matthews was on the ice. Which is apparently much more important than Barzal scoring 85 and Matthews not reaching that elusive 70-point club.

Love to know what I'm making up though.

I notice you didn't mention their P1/60, CodeE. What are you trying to hide?

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Just to get the full facts out there since one particular poster seems to be trying to twist and contort stuff as usual. Everything is from naturalstattrick.com and is data from their actual head-to-head shifts when playing against each other.

Matthews vs Barzal - last year in 20:03 of head-to-head 5v5 TOI

Matthews
CF% - 47%
SCF% - 55%
HDCF% - 60%
GF% - 57%
3 G + 2 A1 = 5pts

Barzal
CF% - 53%
SCF% - 45%
HDCF% - 40%
GF% - 43%
1 G + 1 A1 + 1 A2 = 3pts

Small sample and all but at least its a more complete picture than a couple of video clips and spouting random numbers from one game.

You left out Rel Corsi. As this takes out the cloudiness of one team being superior to the other team on an entire year's sample. I often read how good Matthews is at ES, then Barzal must be very good then when you look at the underlying numbers. These are the facts according to Corisca hockey

ES REL Corsi

Barzal 6.83
Matthews 0.52
(Barzal with a + 6.31 superior differential)

Even strength production.
Barzal 63 assists. 2nd to arguably only the best center in the game McDavid.
Even strength points 3rd on the list of the NHL Networks top 20 Centers to only McDavid and Mackinnon 1000TOI.

Barzal 27 PPP last year. The PP is a vital component in deciding games. An area Barzal can still improve on.

But he is very balanced in his overall production. Not overly dependent on either ES scoring or PP production for overall effectiveness and he has one of the NHL's best ES REL Corsi's to boot.