The NHL network's top 20 centers

[Oilers Propagandist]

Crosby
McDavid
Malkin
Backstrom
Stamkos
Getzlaf
Seguin
Tavares
Bergeron
Kopitar
Scheifele
Draisaitl
Eichel
Kuznetsov
Matthews
Carter
Toews
Johansen
Barkov
Kesler

No, McDavid is best because NHL.com said so.

 

[Irishguy42]

Please explain the rational behind Matthews being above the likes of Stamkos/Tavares/etc.

If this was about the future, then fine. But it's not.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I will admit though, I find it funny how people are so adamant about Matthews not deserving to be at #4 since he has only played one season, while simultaneously saying nothing about McDavid being #1 while he has only played a season and a half.

 

[Plural]

Matthews is tad high for my liking, I'd like to see him prove himself bit more, but potential added I think it's not outlandish to think he's getting to the spot.

Barkov bit low.

Overall surprisingly decent list.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

I will admit though, I find it funny how people are so adamant about Matthews not deserving to be at #4 since he has only played one season, while simultaneously saying nothing about McDavid being #1 while he has only played a season and a half.

probably has to with McDavid winning the Art Ross and being named MVP of the league by both the media and his peers

 

[Plural]

I will admit though, I find it funny how people are so adamant about Matthews not deserving to be at #4 since he has only played one season, while simultaneously saying nothing about McDavid being #1 while he has only played a season and a half.

Well, McDavid IS the reigning Hart/Art/Lindsay winner. I'd slot Sid ahead of him still but I can get why someone picks McDavid. Matthews was 2nd in goals but he was 10th among centers in points and 14th in PPG. Considering there were more superior overall centers ahead of him in points it's kind of hard to justify him as 4th. I think he's on his way there and in few years Auston will be the best center/player after McDavid but it's bit early to slot him ahead of guys like Getzlaf, Backstrom and few more.

 

[Empoleon8771]

probably has to with McDavid winning the Art Ross and being named MVP of the league by both the media and his peers

And Matthews put up 40 goals as a rookie and won the Calder. You can't have it both ways, you can't say Matthews hasn't played long enough in the NHL while simultaneously saying McDavid is the best center in hockey.

 

[Regal]

I will admit though, I find it funny how people are so adamant about Matthews not deserving to be at #4 since he has only played one season, while simultaneously saying nothing about McDavid being #1 while he has only played a season and a half.

As others have said, it's not in any way the same thing. McDavid just had a year that only Crosby and Malkin have matched or surpassed. Matthews had a year that was in line or below a typical season for a number of those beneath him.

 

[Regal]

And Matthews put up 40 goals as a rookie and won the Calder. You can't have it both ways, you can't say Matthews hasn't played long enough in the NHL while simultaneously saying McDavid is the best center in hockey.

It's not about playing time, it's about what players have shown so far. If Matthews just put up 100 points, no one would question him there.

 

[Empoleon8771]

As others have said, it's not in any way the same thing. McDavid just had a year that only Crosby and Malkin have matched or surpassed. Matthews had a year that was in line or below a typical season for a number of those beneath him.

40 goals is pretty damn good that not many centers on this list have matched though.

It's not about playing time, it's about what players have shown so far. If Matthews just put up 100 points, no one would question him there.

And Matthews put up 40 goals last year, which has only been done by Crosby, Malkin and Stamkos on that list.

I don't think Matthews should be even close to that high yet, but you can't have it both ways. You can't say Matthews doesn't deserve to be there due to a lack of experience while putting McDavid at #1 based on 1 season.

 

[Plural]

And Matthews put up 40 goals as a rookie and won the Calder. You can't have it both ways, you can't say Matthews hasn't played long enough in the NHL while simultaneously saying McDavid is the best center in hockey.

It's not at all same, McDavid does have appearance in two seasons and he's been consistently great. You're making a bad comparison here. If Matthews would have outplayed all centers but McDavid, Sid and Malkin in his first year his ranking would be more justified. But nobody thought he did that. Scheifele and Backstrom were ahead of him in all-star voting, Getzlaf had significantly better PPG AND more points and Stamkos has track record that's pretty strong.

You're not being honest here. Ranking McDavid #1 is way more credible than ranking Matthews 4th. By every optic.

 

[olli]

Mathews is too high.

 

[Regal]

40 goals is pretty damn good that not many centers on this list have matched though.

But 69 points has been surpassed by every player on that list other than Barkov and Monahan. I think the issue isn't so much whether he belongs in the same grouping as a number of these guys, it's that it seems early to place him ahead of them, especially when Eichel and Draisaitl don't get the same benefit or the doubt.

And Matthews put up 40 goals last year, which has only been done by Crosby, Malkin and Stamkos on that list.

I don't think Matthews should be even close to that high yet, but you can't have it both ways. You can't say Matthews doesn't deserve to be there due to a lack of experience while putting McDavid at #1 based on 1 season.

It's not having it both ways. I don't see what you're not getting. If Matthews deserved to be 4th based on last year, then you would have a point. But he doesn't. It's projecting. With McDavid it's not. It's like putting Sid 1st and Malkin 4th on a center list after the '06-07 season. Sid would have deserved it based on his play the past year, while Malkin didn't. Obviously Malkin went on to show he was a top 2 center the following year, but so far Matthews hasn't.

And if you think Matthews is way to high and he and McDavid should be judged equally, where exactly do you have McDavid?

 

[Empoleon8771]

It's not at all same, McDavid does have appearance in two seasons and he's been consistently great. You're making a bad comparison here. If Matthews would have outplayed all centers but McDavid, Sid and Malkin in his first year his ranking would be more justified. But nobody thought he did that. Scheifele and Backstrom were ahead of him in all-star voting, Getzlaf had significantly better PPG AND more points and Stamkos has track record that's pretty strong.

You're not being honest here. Ranking McDavid #1 is way more credible than ranking Matthews 4th. By every optic.

No, I'm being perfectly honest here. I'm seeing a ton of responses elsewhere that are saying Matthews shouldn't be ranked that high because he has only played in 1 season. You're switching the topic to his merits in that position, which I don't even agree with in the first place (that is, he doesn't have the merits to be ranked #4). My original post was saying it's hypocritical to say Matthews doesn't belong there because he has only 1 season while saying nothing about McDavid being there after a season and a half. That is completely irrelevant from the actual merit they have in being in those spots. It's like someone saying Matt Murray isn't a top-5 goalie in hockey because he doesn't have the experience required, but they put John Gibson in their top-5.

 

[Delete99991]

Two pages in and not even a mention of Giroux's name.

The truth hurts

 

[Snowsii]

And Matthews put up 40 goals as a rookie and won the Calder. You can't have it both ways, you can't say Matthews hasn't played long enough in the NHL while simultaneously saying McDavid is the best center in hockey.

You're trying to say: Calder = Hart/Art/Lindsay ?

Matthews is too high.. Still would rank him in top-10, but not above Bäckström, Scheifele and Getlaf.. Atleast for now.. As far i know.. This isnt "to build on" things... If would be, then i wouldnt have problem with Matthews being 4th

 

[Empoleon8771]

You're trying to say: Calder = Hart/Art/Lindsay ?

Matthews is too high.. Still would rank him in top-10, but not above Bäckström, Scheifele and Getlaf.. Atleast for now.. As far i know.. This isnt "to build on" things... If would be, then i wouldnt have problem with Matthews being 4th

Read the second sentence of that post again. Again, I don't think Matthews has the merits to go 4th. I'm saying you can't use the "he has only played in the NHL for one season" to discredit him being in that spot while not using the same thing for McDavid. You can criticize his placement there because it's laughable that he's ranked 4th, it's just hypocritical to say "he only has 1 season, so he shouldn't be ranked 4th" (which I'm seeing a lot on other sites) while not using the same for McDavid.

 

[Plural]

No, I'm being perfectly honest here. I'm seeing a ton of responses elsewhere that are saying Matthews shouldn't be ranked that high because he has only played in 1 season. You're switching the topic to his merits in that position, which I don't even agree with in the first place (that is, he doesn't have the merits to be ranked #4). My original post was saying it's hypocritical to say Matthews doesn't belong there because he has only 1 season while saying nothing about McDavid being there after a season and a half. That is completely irrelevant from the actual merit they have in being in those spots. It's like someone saying Matt Murray isn't a top-5 goalie in hockey because he doesn't have the experience required, but they put John Gibson in their top-5.

No, I don't think you're being objective. McDavid does have the credentials. I'm not going to keep debating this since it's pretty obvious that you're having personal agenda in this (not meant as an attack since I think you're reasonable poster otherwise). It is telling that majority of people here disagree with you on this one.

 

[Regal]

Read the second sentence of that post again. Again, I don't think Matthews has the merits to go 4th. I'm saying you can't use the "he has only played in the NHL for one season" to discredit him being in that spot while not using the same thing for McDavid. You can criticize his placement there because it's laughable that he's ranked 4th, it's just hypocritical to say "he only has 1 season, so he shouldn't be ranked 4th" (which I'm seeing a lot on other sites) while not using the same for McDavid.

Ok, but literally no one here has said that. Also, it technically wouldn't be since McDavid has more than one season.

 

[Aceboogie]

probably has to with McDavid winning the Art Ross and being named MVP of the league by both the media and his peers

This, not hard to comprehend

 

[Empoleon8771]

No, I don't think you're being objective. McDavid does have the credentials. I'm not going to keep debating this since it's pretty obvious that you're having personal agenda in this (not meant as an attack since I think you're reasonable poster otherwise). It is telling that majority of people here disagree with you on this one.

How is this agenda driven? I rag on Matthews a ton on this site. I'm just saying that you can't say Matthews doesn't deserve it because he hasn't been in the league long enough while not applying that same standard to McDavid. I've seen that argument used a ton on this site (a player isn't proven enough to be considered elite, it's used a lot with goalies) and I've seen it applied to a lot of skaters too.

Ok, but literally no one here has said that. Also, it technically wouldn't be since McDavid has more than one season.

That's literally just arguing semantics, it's a 37 game difference between the two.

 

[Snippit]

Here's the top 20 centers from HFBoards Forward Ranking poll series I did this summer.

1. Crosby
2. McDavid
3. Malkin
4. Tavares
5. Backstrom
6. Stamkos
7. Getzlaf
8. Seguin
9. Matthews
10. Eichel
11. Bergeron
12. Scheifele
13. Barkov
14. Kopitar
15. Pavelski
16. Toews
17. ROR
18. Kuznetsov
19. Forsberg
20. Giroux

Way better if you ask me

 

[Plural]

How is this agenda driven? I rag on Matthews a ton on this site. I'm just saying that you can't say Matthews doesn't deserve it because he hasn't been in the league long enough while not applying that same standard to McDavid.

The way it reads to me is that you're not debating Matthews, you're debating McDavid because of Sid. That's what it reads to me and I wager for everyone else too.

 

[Regal]

That's literally just arguing semantics, it's a 37 game difference between the two.

Sure, but the first part still stands. No one is being hypocritical in this thread. And even if people do say it, I think the implication is exactly what people are telling you, that it's not just that it's only one year, it's that it's only one year at a level that's common for the other guys in the top 10. This doesn't apply to McDavid.

 

[Snippit]

How is this agenda driven? I rag on Matthews a ton on this site. I'm just saying that you can't say Matthews doesn't deserve it because he hasn't been in the league long enough while not applying that same standard to McDavid.



That's literally just arguing semantics, it's a 37 game difference between the two.

They shouldn't be held to the same standard. 69 points should not be enough to warrant you a spot as a #4 center, even if 40 of them are goals.

But 100 point season, Hart and Art Ross is enough to make a fair argument for #1 centre.