More irritating argument? Icetime or quality of teammates?

[daver]

c) People who pretend that neither of them matter, because they obviously do

If we talking the Top 3 forwards in the league, can you provide some examples of them mattering.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Linemates.

Quality of linemates is essentially cancelled out by quality of competition. The best players generally draw the best competition over the course of 82 games and/or playoff series, whatever benefit a player gets by playing further up the lineup is met with the challenge of doing so against the obstacle of stiffer competition facing them every shift.

Which is generally why the guys getting the best linemates are usually also the guys drawing the toughest matchups, with some edge cases made for teams that have so much depth they can spread out matchups and give opposition a catch-22 in trying to contain their best players. Meanwhile, the guys getting softer matchups get worse linemates. Any time a fan complains 'player X always has to make due with trash linemates', they might want to check how much player X is getting sheltered. The guy with the easier job, relatively speaking, generally gets less help to do said job.

Actually, generally the reverse is true. Linemates are more important than QoC, since you play with them every shift with very few exceptions. Although you can generally expect to see the best players playing against the opposition's best players, there is a lot more variance during a game or season. I don't have the exact numbers in front of me, but generally QoT is twice as important as QoC, which is twice as important as zone starts. The only problem I have with QoT is it's too dependent on one coach's opinion, whereas QoC is more reliably based on the opinions of 30 coaches

 

[daver]

A 20% increase in ice time is pretty significant. If a player misses 20% of the season no one is going to say their point totals weren't affected.

You know that a player like McDavid would play significantly less minutes per game if his team was better right? Do you think his point totals would go down if he played 18-19 minutes a game?

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Icetime adjustment is definitely one of the worst arguments a poster can use to boost a great player.

 

[Soliloquy of a Dogge]

Neither icetime or P/60 matter as much as a certain fanbase desperate to put Auston Matthews in the same sentence as Connor McDavid believe they do.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

If we talking the Top 3 forwards in the league, can you provide some examples of them mattering.

yes, but can you say why you're limiting it to the top 3 forwards? If you're talking about the 4th best forward is it okay to look at context, but anyone better than him and it gets annoying?

 

[daver]

yes, but can you say why you're limiting it to the top 3 forwards? If you're talking about the 4th best forward is it okay to look at context, but anyone better than him and it gets annoying?

It is common sense that generational offensive talents like McDavid are going to be getting huge icetime if their team needs them. This in no way opens to the door to the rediculous premise that someone like Matthews could close the gap production-wise if only he was overplayed like McDavid is.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

It is common sense that generational offensive talents like McDavid are going to be getting huge icetime if their team needs them. This in no way opens to the door to the rediculous premise that someone like Matthews could close the gap production-wise if only he was overplayed like McDavid is.

it's ridiculous to say that if Matthews was getting about 600 more minutes over the course of a season, he might pick up an extra couple of points? what a weird thing to be irritated by

 

[talitintti]

it's ridiculous to say that if Matthews was getting about 600 more minutes over the course of a season, he might pick up an extra couple of points? what a weird thing to be irritated by

If Matthews was getting 600 more minutes in a season, that would be seven and a half minutes more per game or roughly 26 minutes average per game.

I don't think that Matthews could handle that. No forward has played that much in decades and probably for a good reason?

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

If Matthews was getting 600 more minutes in a season, that would be seven and a half minutes more per game or roughly 26 minutes average per game.

I don't think that Matthews could handle that. No forward has played that much in decades and probably for a good reason?

I was counting his 20 missed games as well

 

[Ainec]

it's ridiculous to say that if Matthews was getting about 600 more minutes over the course of a season, he might pick up an extra couple of points? what a weird thing to be irritated by

if Matthews played 26min a game he would probably get injured or get rested once Leafs have locked a playoff spot

less games = less points

his point per game might go up but his lauded point per 60 will sink


I think the only argument you can make over Matthews' minutes are his PP time and how it stacks up with other elite players

 

[The Moose is Loose]

A 20% increase in ice time is pretty significant. If a player misses 20% of the season no one is going to say their point totals weren't affected.

It is significant, but it is not beneficial

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

it's ridiculous to say that if Matthews was getting about 600 more minutes over the course of a season, he might pick up an extra couple of points? what a weird thing to be irritated by

Has anyone argued he wouldn't get "an extra couple of points" with more ice time? Honestly curious, because that seems rather dumb.

What I've seen with regards to the argument is whether production would increase to the point where 25 point gaps are closed to within a handful of points.

Ex: Last season, Matthews was on pace for roughly 83-84 points.

Valid argument: Matthews could have scored 90 points or so if he got 20+ minutes a night rather than 18 minutes a night.

Questionable argument: Matthews would have challenged for the Art Ross if he got 20+ minutes a night rather than 18 minutes a night.

 

[Isaac Nootin]

Not all icetime is created equally. Quick example.

Auston Matthews plays 15:04 ES/G

Jack Eichel plays 15:05 ES/G

However, Eichel plays 4:47/G on the PP.

While Matthews plays 2:17/G on the PP.

Would that extra 2:30 every game on the PP not boost Mathews totals?

Now the same can be said for QOT, as Matthews clearly plays with better players.

Both stats are fine, given context.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Has anyone argued he wouldn't get "an extra couple of points" with more ice time? Honestly curious, because that seems rather dumb.

What I've seen with regards to the argument is whether production would increase to the point where 25 point gaps are closed to within a handful of points.

Ex: Last season, Matthews was on pace for roughly 83-84 points.

Valid argument: Matthews could have scored 90 points or so if he got 20+ minutes a night rather than 18 minutes a night.

Questionable argument: Matthews would have challenged for the Art Ross if he got 20+ minutes a night rather than 18 minutes a night.

it depends what you mean by closed the gap. Frankly I think Leafs fans are pretty accurate about how good Matthews is for the most part, but underestimate how good McDavid is. he's simply a level above, and more ice time won't change that. I think it's more valuable when comparing Matthews to other players like MacKinnon or Kucherov though

 

[Not My Tempo]

Neither icetime or P/60 matter as much as a certain fanbase desperate to put Auston Matthews in the same sentence as Connor McDavid believe they do.

I feel like I should address this. 5v5 P/60 is a better indicator of a players offensive output than 5v5 P/G, and using that indicator, Matthews is closer to McDavid in terms of points. But the thing is, if you take even 5 minutes to look at stuff past points you can see that McDavid blows everyone else in the league out of the water, especially in terms of offense generated. I find it so strange how especially Oilers fans always try to downplay things like ice time to “boost” McDavid, when they have so many other tools at their disposal. Only looking at P/60 underrates McDavid, not because he plays so much, but because there are so many aspects to his game besides raw points that don’t get brought up. Like if Leafs fans (which I am) bring up how Matthews is close to McDavid in terms of P/60, rather than trying to come up with stupid reasons as to why per 60 stats are dumb, you can just pull out literally any microstat to show how much better McDavid is.

 

[TopShelfYzerman]

Both have there purpose so neither grinds my gears. What grinds my gears is ppl that discount or ignore facts which can have a large impact on player production.

 

[DJJones]

Seeing players get not enough minutes is annoying while seeing players get stuck with black hole linemates is infuriating.

 

[Taluss]

Give Daniel Sprong 3 more minutes of ice every night but he plays with Cullen or Grant as his center
or
Give Daniel Sprong no extra minutes but during the minutes he's on ice Crosby or Malkin are his centers

Which Sprong produces more?

This^ Worded perfectly