Matthews vs Boeser?

[Addison Rae]

Maybe the better comparison is Boeser vs. Kadri.

Kadri has scored 32 and gotten 61 points..........a feat Boeser will be hard pressed to do.

Auston Matthews will never score 112 points in a season, and by your logic will never be a superstar.

Sedin >> Matthews

 

[Addison Rae]

Calling Boeser a one-way winger shows how little you people watch him play, his defensive game has been very good for a rookie winger.

It's funny that despite Matthews being better you guys have constantly made up garbage about Boeser to make him look bad, don't think some of you are even allowed to stay up late enough to watch him.

 

[eviohh26]

Anyone that calls Brock One Dimensional clearly hasn't watched him play. Then i take a look at the users names saying that.... Then all i can do is laugh.

 

[DatSnipeMatthews]

Anyone that calls Brock One Dimensional clearly hasn't watched him play. Then i take a look at the users names saying that.... Then all i can do is laugh.

Boeser is a one-dimensional winger who is riding an unsustainable high shooting percentage. He will come back down to earth and Canucks fans will not have anything to look forward to.

 

[eviohh26]

Boeser is a one-dimensional winger who is riding an unsustainable high shooting percentage. He will come back down to earth and Canucks fans will not have anything to look forward to.

You are one of them that i'm talking about. I disregard literally anything you've got to say.

 

[DatSnipeMatthews]

You are one of them that i'm talking about. I disregard literally anything you've got to say.

The word 'literal' or 'literally' is one of the most useless words in the English language.

 

[Regal]

Boeser is a one-dimensional winger who is riding an unsustainable high shooting percentage. He will come back down to earth and Canucks fans will not have anything to look forward to.

It's amusing when people are so confident in their terrible opinions

 

[FlyTimmo]

Matthews AINEC

 

[Holymakinaw]

Boeser is a one-dimensional winger who is riding an unsustainable high shooting percentage. He will come back down to earth and Canucks fans will not have anything to look forward to.

His shooting percentage IS too high, and he will come back down to earth, no doubt. But I see him as a decent 20-25 goal, 50 point a year player for them. Not a bust by any means, and nowhere near the "star" some of them think they have. A good 2nd liner.

 

[Sojourn]

Seems kind of hypocritical to call out Boeser on his shooting percentage when Matthews was riding a 30% for a time, and even recently was in the 20% range.

Even his current % is high.

Between this and the rate argument, the attempts to pick and choose your battles to hype up your own players are kind of transparent.

 

[Regal]

His shooting percentage IS too high, and he will come back down to earth, no doubt. But I see him as a decent 20-25 goal, 50 point a year player for them. Not a bust by any means, and nowhere near the "star" some of them think they have. A good 2nd liner.

Pretty terrible assessment when even bringing his shooting percentage to average levels wouldn't see him at that level

 

[CherryToke]

Leafs fans have the worst trolls. They don't even make sense most of the time.

 

[Addison Rae]

Leafs fans have the worst trolls. They don't even make sense most of the time.

It's actually disgusting, every fan base has their bad apples but some of these posters are just laughable.

 

[Ace of Hades]

What about everything else I said. People can't seriously think Boeser is better right?

Ofcourse not, voted out of spite since some certain Leafs fans are so insecure about their own players that they have to chest bump themselves to feel better. Pathetic.

About as equally as pathetic as referring to Boeser as "one dimensional" or being a good "second liner" as certain useless users would say.

Seems kind of hypocritical to call out Boeser on his shooting percentage when Matthews was riding a 30% for a time, and even recently was in the 20% range.

Even his current % is high.

Between this and the rate argument, the attempts to pick and choose your battles to hype up your own players are kind of transparent.

This.

 

[LaVar]

Seems kind of hypocritical to call out Boeser on his shooting percentage when Matthews was riding a 30% for a time, and even recently was in the 20% range.

Even his current % is high.

Between this and the rate argument, the attempts to pick and choose your battles to hype up your own players are kind of transparent.

i wonder why this post was ignored

 

[hockeyguy1967]

Currently Boeser, Matthews maybe in the future, who knows but right now it is Boeser.

 

[Sojourn]

i wonder why this post was ignored

Sayonara liked it.

 

[authentic]

Currently Boeser, Matthews maybe in the future, who knows but right now it is Boeser.

Incorrect.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Seems kind of hypocritical to call out Boeser on his shooting percentage when Matthews was riding a 30% for a time, and even recently was in the 20% range.

Even his current % is high.

Between this and the rate argument, the attempts to pick and choose your battles to hype up your own players are kind of transparent.

ixgf is a thing that tracks quality of scoring chances. outperforming your ixgf is possibly a better indicator of regression, and Matthews simply gets way better scoring opportunities. I get that Boeser has a good shot, but he doesn't get grade A scoring chances the same way that Matthews does. not even close really

 

[Romang67]

Well, hopefully OP got a kick out of this. Closed.

 

[Romang67]

And don't do it again.