That's the thing, there is no way to know, but we do have predictors. It's pretty crazy to say a top player getting more TOI isn't helpful. It is also crazy to say putting a top player against weaker competition isn't beneficial. It seems your issue here is Matthews, which is crazy to me, he is praised across the league for his skill.
Its not only against Matthews. It's just an obvious hypothetical to test at least the offensive part of the rankings.
If matthews got the same "cushy" minutes as Malkin, does anybody besides Zeke think he'd pace for 45g and 100pts or more during his rookie and sophomore years?
Its not just leaf players though. Couturier at 6? Over guys like bergeron and kopitar?
As for the ice time, do the numbers really tell a story? Does the coach use said player to protect a lead? That would add minutes with limited offensive potential. Does the player benefit from playing on a team with great depth that the coach doesn't have to use them as much as other top line players?
Op complains about ranking players solely by scoring stats, then proceeds to rank players on secondary stats.
Hockey will never be science. Sometimes it's just scouting instinct backed by experience.
Who would be a better fit for Montreal who desperately need a number 1 center: Nazim Kadri (who by all accounts is one of the best 2cs in the league) or Tyler Seguin, who has proven to be a top ten center for the past 5 or so years?
When the results are not only surprising but shocking, the methodology has to be questioned.
In my opinion, to much weight was given to the soft stats, especially corsi. Tough to have good corsi with brutal linemates.
