Sportsnet top 20 centres

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Sportsnet. As a company. Panders. To the Toronto Market.

Just like TSN does.

It's not hard to understand.

so they hired a habs fan to use a numbers only analysis in order to have a biased slant to appeal to Leafs fans? sure, anything that helps you complain about something

 

[sabremike]

*awakens from 4 month coma*

I'm glad ROR is getting the recognition he deserves. I just hope Botts doesn't do something real stupid like trade him for two total garbage cap dumps who totally suck, a B- prospect and a late first rounder. I mean that would be so amazingly dumb.... oh

 

[kujo31]

so they hired a habs fan to use a numbers only analysis in order to have a biased slant to appeal to Leafs fans? sure, anything that helps you complain about something

I know it’s so ridiculous, people complain when they make lists based off opinions so someone makes one with obviously non biased statistics.
Like he’d know exactly where Matthews would be in the list.
It’s such a joke. You can’t make a thread in here including the leafs honestly it’s becoming ubarable.
I’d think maybe Matthews should be rated along with the 3rd line C’s after all he is only a 60 point centre and he is obviously garbage. What a joke

 

[Placid Perspicuity]

Sure. Here’s my stats. 69 points. Not top 20 in points. Even pro rating his points he just cracks the top 20. Show me a top 5 center who got fewer points and wasn’t one of the top Selke finalists.
Like I said it’s about results.

How’s that for fancy statistical analysis.

So you are using your own set of criteria to criticize a ranking made with an entirely different set of parameters.

No wonder you’re wrong so often.

 

[LeafsNation75]

Sure. Here’s my stats. 69 points. Not top 20 in points. Even pro rating his points he just cracks the top 20. Show me a top 5 center who got fewer points and wasn’t one of the top Selke finalists.
Like I said it’s about results.

How’s that for fancy statistical analysis.

How many elite #1 centres like Matthews have been able to score 40 goals? Maybe that's something else you should focus on.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

So you are using your own set of criteria to criticize a ranking made with an entirely different set of parameters.

No wonder you’re wrong so often.

Exactly. I’m basing my rankings on actual production instead of cherry picked stats. Which means I’m usually right.
Funny, my ranking has worked for every star player over the years. When he cracks the top 20 in points we’ll talk But hey in the meantime push what ever agenda you want.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

How many elite #1 centres like Matthews have been able to score 40 goals? Maybe that's something else you should focus on.

Lots of centers have scored 40. Many have scored 50.
Did you just start watching hockey or was that intended as a serious question?
As for Matthews being an elite number one center you just assumed the answer to the question. He’ll be elite when he has elite production. Crack the top 20 then we’ll talk. In the meantime he’s Avery good young center with tons of potential just like a handful of his peer group.

 

[LeafsNation75]

Lots of centers have scored 40. Many have scored 50.
Did you just start watching hockey or was that intended as a serious question?
As for Matthews being an elite number one center you just assumed the answer to the question. He’ll be elite when he has elite production. Crack the top 20 then we’ll talk.

The fact that Matthews 40 goals as a rookie was the most since Ovechkin's 52 in 2006, I say that makes him an elite #1 centre.

 

[Steeze]

I'd rather read Schindler's List, again.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

The fact that Matthews 40 goals as a rookie was the most since Ovechkin's 52 in 2006, I say that makes him an elite #1 centre.

It makes him a very good rookie goal scorer.

As I’ve said lots of centers have scored more than 40. If he shows the production he’ll be elite. I can’t think of any elite players who haven’t finished in the top 20? Top 10? Top 5? in scoring. Can you?

 

[Placid Perspicuity]

Exactly. I’m basing my rankings on actual production instead of cherry picked stats. Which means I’m usually right.
Funny, my ranking has worked for every star player over the years. When he cracks the top 20 in points we’ll talk But hey in the meantime push what ever agenda you want.

It’s clear that it’s you who is pushing the agenda. (Or you don’t understand how this list was made, despite several people pointing it out to you.) Whether you think Matthews is deserving of praise or not is irrelevant. The same parameters were used for every player; not just Matthews, and he was ranked 5th.

Disagree with the concept of this list if you’d like, but you saying that the list is “wrong” is like saying that you disagree with the alphabetical order of the words in the dictionary because you have your “own alphabet that works for you.”

 

[Nadal On Clay]

Surprised to see Malkin over Sid.

I feel like every list are projecting Matthews production, cause he certainly didn’t do enough to be ahead of some bigger names.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

It’s clear that it’s you who is pushing the agenda. (Or you don’t understand how this list was made, despite several people pointing it out to you.) Whether you think Matthews is deserving of praise or not is irrelevant. The same parameters were used for every player; not just Matthews, and he was ranked 5th.

Disagree with the concept of this list if you’d like, but you saying that the list is “wrong” is like saying that you disagree with the alphabetical order of the words in the dictionary because you have your “own alphabet that works for you.”

That’s what I said. I disagree with the list and the concept of it. I base my opinion on whether a player is elite on production ie results. I have yet to see an elite player who has never cracked the top 20 in points. Heck I’d say you’d have to at least crack the top 5 unless you’re an elite penalty killer like Bergeron or Kopitar. Now Matthews may very well get there. But he’s not there yet.
You can use what ever definition of elite suits your agenda. I’ve made it clear I base mine on actual production.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

The fact that Matthews 40 goals as a rookie was the most since Ovechkin's 52 in 2006, I say that makes him an elite #1 centre.

Does Barzal getting the most points as a rooki since Malkin make him an elite #1 center?

 

[Foppberg]

Schiefele, Kuznetsov, Tavares all too low.

Matthews and ROR way too high.

 

[Cleetus]

Does Barzal getting the most points as a rooki since Malkin make him an elite #1 center?

all u do is post crap about Matthews and the leafs what did they do to u....

 

[WetcoastOrca]

all u do is post crap about Matthews and the leafs what did they do to u....

It’s a simple question. Does Barzal getting the most points as a rookie since Malkin make him elite.
And I’ve never posted crap about Matthews. Saying he is not yet a top 5 center is factually correct imo. If that hurts your feelings I’m sorry.
But I’m just repeating myself at this time. I’ll leave you to it.

 

[Cleetus]

It’s a simple question
And I’ve never posted crap about Matthews. Saying he is not yet a top 5 center is factually correct imo. If that hurts your feelings I’m sorry.

no its all u post is negative all the time about the leafs it dont hurt my feelings, its just really sad, they are finally putting together a good team and u crap on them all the time. must be jealous or something I even read when a leaf fan posted about Boesers point totals right away u call out the leafs players, thats the definition of salt.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

no its all u post is negative all the time about the leafs it dont hurt my feelings, its just really sad, they are finally putting together a good team and u crap on them all the time. must be jealous or something I even read when a leaf fan posted about Boesers point totals right away u call out the leafs players, thats the definition of salt.

Not jealous at all. They have a great young team with great potential. But potential isn’t results. That’s my main disagreement with overrating young players before they have the achievements.
If someone said Eichel was a top five center I’d respond the same way.

 

[Cleetus]

Not jealous at all. They have a great young team with great potential. But potential isn’t results. That’s my main disagreement with overrating young players before they have the achievements.

well hopefully the leafs get achievements this year

 

[WetcoastOrca]

well hopefully the leafs get achievements this year

If they do then I’ll be the first to acknowledge it.

 

[The Podium]

It’s a simple question. Does Barzal getting the most points as a rookie since Malkin make him elite.
And I’ve never posted crap about Matthews. Saying he is not yet a top 5 center is factually correct imo. If that hurts your feelings I’m sorry.
But I’m just repeating myself at this time. I’ll leave you to it.

If he can repeat, or improve than yes, Barzal is elite.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

If he can repeat, or improve than yes, Barzal is elite.

I disagree. He’s not elite yet even though he’s cracked the top 20. He needs to be in the top 5 to get there for me. He could do it. But he’s not there yet. Same with Eichel.
To me elite means more than very good.

 

[Eternal Leaf]

There comes a point where it might be time to accept Matthews is better than HF posters think.

 

[Placid Perspicuity]

That’s what I said. I disagree with the list and the concept of it. I base my opinion on whether a player is elite on production ie results. I have yet to see an elite player who has never cracked the top 20 in points. Heck I’d say you’d have to at least crack the top 5 unless you’re an elite penalty killer like Bergeron or Kopitar. Now Matthews may very well get there. But he’s not there yet.
You can use what ever definition of elite suits your agenda. I’ve made it clear I base mine on actual production.

So you admit to moving the goalposts, but you accuse others of an agenda?

Your arguments are getting worse.