Both Trouba and Lindholm will likely put up 1st line numbers this upcoming season. If you believe things like analytics you can look at things like Hero charts to see believed progression based on past performance. Yes Lindholm is still better, but both deserve to be on the 1st line.
There is a way to compare NCAA points to AHL points. Believe it is called NHL Equivalencies and it compares AHL, NCAA, QMJHL points and translates it to believed possible NHL point production.
If you use NHL Equivalencies, you can compare Connor to Ritchie. But don't take my word on it. You can research it yourself and reach your own conclusions.
Now there seems to be flaws in this system as far as projected compared to actual point put up based in the NHL, but as far as I know it's the only thing available for comparison. Someone much more involved in analytics (anybody with a pulse ) could explain it or recommend a better system ?
On a side note Nic Petan played 26 NHL games last season partly due to injury and put up 6 points while playing with some pretty horrible players some games.
Nick Ritchie played 33 games and only put up 4 points, I'm assuming he had a few bad line mates as well during that time, but again, there is a difference.
If Nick Ritchie is putting up less points than Petan after playing more games, why would you think Kyle Connor and Nick Ritchie would even be close comparables?