TruePowerSlave
Registered User
- Jun 27, 2015
- 7,024
- 8,501
Rantanen sucks in rel xgf% and is the worst possession player on the team tough
Mikko Rantanen is the most underrated player in the league (by far)
- Thread starter Agent Zub
- Start date
- Status
Foppberg
Registered User
He's underrated by the fact that up until very recently people thought he was just a byproduct of MacKinnon, and got basically zero attention last season despite putting up 84 points. I'm sure there are other very underrated guys, so the " Most underrated player in the league by far" title is a bit hyperbolic, but he is very very special.
And I fully stand by my assertion that he's a franchise player. If we're going to go down the subjective label game, for me it's Generational>Franchise>Elite. With generational being reserved for guys like McDavid, Crosby, Ovi.
The label of franchise player to me is a player that is the core of your team and is good enough to be in contention.
I said his shot is a strength. I said that would be the one thing that’s really underrated about him. Reread my last post, I’m sorry it’s long, but you’re contradicting one of my posts.
He may be playing better than Mackinnon, but the NHL and armchair analysts will always talk about Mackinnon first. In the limelight, Mackinnon will usually have the first go.
That’s very fair.
I’ve never really heard the assumption that Rantanen is a byproduct of Mackinnon. Idk if that’s predominately an assertion to your board, but I may just be out of touch with that. I didn’t realize you were arguing from that standpoint, which would be fair to call someone underrated. To the point of being paid no attention to- that’s what I mean by a difference of underrated and not being talked about. Giroux had 102 points and everyone was talking about Mackinnon, Hall, and McDavid.
I don’t agree with the distinction of a “franchise” player, but to each is their own. You’ll rarely find somemone who has an equal thought on that so there really isn’t a point in a rebuttal since there’s really no clear cut definition for hockey.
haulinbass
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2014
- 1,425
- 1,088
Hot takes? I've watched him play a good 40 games. I watch atleast 200 regular season games per year + playoffs. With that said, I have seen him plenty, recently and many times on a focused shift-to-shift basis. 97% of the games I watch are to purely evaluate talent.
But thanks for your concern. So it seems as if you support the idea that Rantanen is as good as Matthews? If so how often do you watch Matthews or other players around the league? After all you are calling people out claiming they don't have the credentials to evaluate your player. I have seen Matthews a good 60+ games just in the NHL and I am not a Toronto fan. I suppose you have seen both of these players more than me and are better qualified to compare their talent levels?
BB88
Registered User
- Jan 19, 2015
- 40,884
- 20,508
Yes he's on a good line but he scored 22 more points than Landeskog.
Is it possible that Rants played a part on Mackinnon having a career year? They both made each other better.
haulinbass
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2014
- 1,425
- 1,088
Absolutely he did have an impact, after all I did say that he is a 1st line caliber player in the NHL. Landeskog is also a 1st line caliber player although maybe doesn't bring an elite offensive game, he has a big impact on the ice. Actually Landeskog is one of my favorite players. This line is also possibly my favorite in the NHL. I really like Wheeler, Scheifele and Connor line as well. Anyway, I expect big numbers from all of them. Not many teams ice 3 true 1st liners on the top line. Typically they spread that talent to the second line.
So how is saying Rantanen is a 1st line player knocking him? He is just not quite as great of a player as Austin Matthews. Again, imagine Mack and Landeskog on Matthews line. Do you even realize how much lesser talent Matthews has been working with on his line since he entered the league? Rantanen is very good and I would love to have him on my team, but Austin Matthews is a very special player.
BB88
Registered User
- Jan 19, 2015
- 40,884
- 20,508
Your post makes it sound like he's an average 1st liner when he's putting himself into conversation for one of the best Rw's in the game.
6'4 +200lbs kid who can go +ppg.
He's no Matthews but he's one of the best young players in the league.
haulinbass
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2014
- 1,425
- 1,088
I would agree Rantanen is currently better than Laine, but Laine isn't currently anywhere close to as good at Matthews. Although Laine has some exceptional talent, he has a long way to go in finding his game. Outside of that highly effective shot, he is a turnover machine and doesn't contribute to much of anything 5 on 5. Mostly just turnovers. But if Laine does reach his potential, he is going to be great.
haulinbass
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2014
- 1,425
- 1,088
The thread creator compared him to Austin Matthews and claimed he is in the same tier with Matthews and company. Which is why I specifically identified Matthews and mentioned other elite centers such as Barzal. I have no problems considering Rants as one of the best young players in the game and can agree he is beginning to make a case for being one of the better wingers in the league. Rantanen is very good but I would already consider Matthews a top 5 forward in the NHL.
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,152
- 37,330
GirardSpinorama
Registered User
- Aug 20, 2004
- 21,196
- 9,913
Rantenen will be passing matthews soon when the Avs get home and they start line matching against 4th lines.
Tralfamadore
Don't Panic.
- Sep 25, 2011
- 8,705
- 7,343
42
Registered User
So in this thread Rantanen went from most underrated to most overrated.
PDO of 113 is screaming regression. He is still a pretty damn good player but man, this thread ...
Since Matthews was mentioned for comparison, Matthews's PDO is 100, which says that his production is not attributed to great luck, unlike Rantanen's, which says he's been extremely lucky to have the production he has. PDO of 113 is way off the charts.
PDO of 113 is screaming regression. He is still a pretty damn good player but man, this thread ...
Since Matthews was mentioned for comparison, Matthews's PDO is 100, which says that his production is not attributed to great luck, unlike Rantanen's, which says he's been extremely lucky to have the production he has. PDO of 113 is way off the charts.
Last edited:
He’s on pace for 137 points and currently tied for the league lead. He could regress a lot and still be much better than people are aware.
42
Registered User
I see him as a near PPG player. 75-80 points, which is in the near elite territory.
Cousin Eddie
You Serious Clark?
- Nov 3, 2006
- 40,152
- 37,330
[MOD]
PDO is a stat to use (carefully) on teams, not individuals. What does the save percentage of Mikko’s goaltender have to do with his production?
If you want to argue shot percentage that’s fine. Arguing PDO is just plain stupid.
Last edited by a moderator:
42
Registered User
Which has me thinking, incidentally, what his next contract will be. I would think the Avs would want to sign him long-term and not to a bridge deal. Given his production last year and the high likelihood he finishes with around 80 points this year, I would think an AAV of at least $8 million, perhaps a bit higher.
- Status
