Auston Matthews: Closer to Joe Sakic or Dany Heatley?

[Oddbob]

HUH? Matthews and Sakic are nothing alike as players.

 

[BlueSeal]

HUH? Matthews and Sakic are nothing alike as players.

I think the OP means more in accomplishments and stats than style of play or character.

 

[Oddbob]

I think the OP means more in accomplishments and stats than style of play or character.

Ok, but then why pick these two guys in particular?

 

[North Cole]

This is honestly difficult. I think he is closer to Sakic, and that's no disrespect to Heatley, but the Rocket and Hart nomination helps. Heatley, as evidenced by some of the replies in this thread is underrated.

Sakic and Matthews game's are considerably different and I would be more inclined to measure Matthews against Heatley since they are both goal scorers. Sakic had higher production in the latter part of his first five years and their point finishes are near enough identical in the first 5 years - 9+5 for Matthews and 10+6 for Sakic. This year will be a big one for Matthews because Sakic finished 4th in points and 3rd in assists, would ideally like to see a top 5 point finish again with top 3 in goals to remain on track. We are also fast approaching Sakic's Conn Smythe, so at some point Matthews will need to take another step because Sakic has the later career trophies and longevity to eventually make Matthews closer to Heatley, IMO.

 

[CanadienShark]

Yeah well it's a little harder to score 100 points while playing for the Toronto Maple Leafs than it is to score 100 points while playing for the Colorado Avalache. 100 points or more has only been done 4 times in NHL history by somebody playing for Toronto, while it's been done 21 times in Colorado Avalanche history. So it's basically more than 5 times harder to score 100 points in Toronto than it is to score it in Colorado...

I don't think you understand the very simple concept of probability.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Only other player that comes close to his physicality and goal scoring in the league right now is Ovi, except Matthews pays center, is actually good at it and a good two way center. Matthews is the definition of a playoff performer in that, his game will translate to it perfectly. Like Sakic, it takes time. Like Ovi, it took time. I truly hope he stays with the Leafs another 8 years at whatever the cost. Best player I have ever seen in a Leafs jersey in 30 years.

Matthews might very well become a "playoff performer", but I'm not sure why you think it took time for both Sakic and Ovechkin to become playoff performers.

Sakic was pretty much a point per game with 11 points in his first 12 playoff games, then went completely NUTS in his third playoffs, scoring 18 goals and 34 points in 22 games. So after 34 career playoff games, Sakic had 45 points.

Ovechkin had 51 points in his first 37 playoff games. He was very productive in the playoffs right from the start.

Their team success wasn't instantaneous, but I'm not sure how you can say their individual performances in the playoffs "took time".

 

[HockeyVirus]

Matthews might very well become a "playoff performer", but I'm not sure why you think it took time for both Sakic and Ovechkin to become playoff performers.

Sakic was pretty much a point per game with 11 points in his first 12 playoff games, then went completely NUTS in his third playoffs, scoring 18 goals and 34 points in 22 games. So after 34 career playoff games, Sakic had 45 points.

Ovechkin had 51 points in his first 37 playoff games. He was very productive in the playoffs right from the start.

Their team success wasn't instantaneous, but I'm not sure how you can say their individual performances in the playoffs "took time".

Depends if all you measure in points. Matthews really was good this series for example. It's why Leaf fans aren't as hard on him. He has insane shot attempts and generation. He was physical and played well defensively. Scoring will come, success will come.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Depends if all you measure in points. Matthews really was good this series for example. It's why Leaf fans aren't as hard on him. He has insane shot attempts and generation. He was physical and played well defensively. Scoring will come, success will come.

I'm not sure I'd consider him "really good". He was probably better than his goal totals suggest, but he certainly didn't look consistently dangerous enough, especially in the last 2 or 3 games.

In any case, production matters when that's what leads to wins. You don't win games by "generating" chances but not converting on them. And thus far, Matthews hasn't produced enough, while the two guys you mentioned above had at that point in their careers.

 

[Juxta Position]

Some weird takes in this thread.

Comparing AM's career so far to Sakic's first 5 years or Heatley's first 5 years has its issues. Mainly in that Sakic was a star player in his first 5 years but nowhere near as great as he would become in the following 10 years or so. Heatley on the other hand looked like a superstar in his first 5 full seasons and then it all fell apart soon thereafter.

Auston Matthew's first 5 years are better than Joe Sakic's first 5 years by a fair bit and better than Heatley as well (but by a bit less). So if we just want to draw trends we say he's on a Heatley-eque trajectory, right?

In reality Sakic and Heatley are pretty much on the opposite ends of how a star player's career could play out after their first 5 seasons in the league.

For this poll, I voted that AM will end up closer to Sakic because I think he's got the talent and he's an exciting player to watch (I don't particularly like the Leafs, and Sakic is still my favorite player if that matters at all).

Maybe I'm just an optimist, but AM's level of play would have to take a nosedive in the next few years for him to have a Heatley-like career. If he maintains his current level of play until he's 30 or so (i.e., about a normal superstar forward prime), I think he ends up closer to Sakic's career than Heatley's career. For him to actually surpass Sakic (as opposed to just be closer to Sakic than to Heatley), he's got a fair bit of work to do, but it's certainly in the realm of possibility.

There is literally zero chance Matthews approaches the 1650 points in his career to surpass Sakic. ZERO. The 626 goals it would take to surpass Sakic? yes that's a possibilty for Matthews. Sakic is literally one of the all-time greats and Matthews is the best goal scorer in the game right now, but he's got ALOT of work to do in the other offensive aspects of his game to even sniff what Sakic did in his career. add to that Matthews career high in points to date is 80.

If Matthews plays till he's 38 years old, he'd have to average 92 points a season for 14 straight years to pass Sakic. Even if he plays until he's 40, that's still 80 points a year for 16 straight years. No offense to Matthews fans out there, but that ain't happening.

Using the same time frames Matthews would need to average 30 goals a season for 14 years to pass Sakics goals scored number. That is definately something i think he could accomplish if he stays remarkably healthy.(which he already has shown he's not be able to do)

But when it comes to overall points, Matthews is not in the same conversation as Sakic, he's just not.

 

[The90]

There is literally zero chance Matthews approaches the 1650 points in his career to surpass Sakic. ZERO. The 626 goals it would take to surpass Sakic? yes that's a possibilty for Matthews. Sakic is literally one of the all-time greats and Matthews is the best goal scorer in the game right now, but he's got ALOT of work to do in the other offensive aspects of his game to even sniff what Sakic did in his career. add to that Matthews career high in points to date is 80.

If Matthews plays till he's 38 years old, he'd have to average 92 points a season for 14 straight years to pass Sakic. Even if he plays until he's 40, that's still 80 points a year for 16 straight years. No offense to Matthews fans out there, but that ain't happening.

Using the same time frames Matthews would need to average 30 goals a season for 14 years to pass Sakics goals scored number. That is definately something i think he could accomplish if he stays remarkably healthy.(which he already has shown he's not be able to do)

But when it comes to overall points, Matthews is not in the same conversation as Sakic, he's just not.

Not sure I’d say he’s as good as sakic because he has a long way to go, but you also have to take into consideration the era’s they played in. I’m too lazy to cross reference and find a way to adjust every stat, but your argument isn’t great in that sense

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Not sure I’d say he’s as good as sakic because he has a long way to go, but you also have to take into consideration the era’s they played in. I’m too lazy to cross reference and find a way to adjust every stat, but your argument isn’t great in that sense

Hockey-reference does era adjustments, though it depends on how much faith you have in their methodology.

Like I said earlier in the thread, their "adjusted" stats are similar, but Sakic did so with a weaker supporting cast his first 5 seasons.

 

[Juxta Position]

Not sure I’d say he’s as good as sakic because he has a long way to go, but you also have to take into consideration the era’s they played in. I’m too lazy to cross reference and find a way to adjust every stat, but your argument isn’t great in that sense

regardless of era (which, by the way, Sakic played through the ENTIRE dead puck era) putting up 1600+ points in a career is a monumental achievement for any player, one Matthews just will not do.

 

[The90]

Hockey-reference does era adjustments, though it depends on how much faith you have in their methodology.

Like I said earlier in the thread, their "adjusted" stats are similar, but Sakic did so with a weaker supporting cast his first 5 seasons.

I just skimmed it so I missed that. Thanks

 

[The90]

regardless of era (which, by the way, Sakic played through the ENTIRE dead puck era) putting up 1600+ points in a career is a monumental achievement for any player, one Matthews just will not do.

1600 points isn’t the same now as then, thus the point of era adjusted even with the dead puck era.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I just skimmed it so I missed that. Thanks

For reference, just skim down to the "NHL Miscellaneous" section for the era adjustment totals.

Joe Sakic Stats | Hockey-Reference.com

Note: they seem to have adjusted stats based on the player's games played, not based on automatically using 82 games. For instance, Sakic only played 69 games in 1991-92, so his "era adjusted" stats of 83 points are assuming 69 games played, not based on a full 80 games.

1600 points isn’t the same now as then, thus the point of era adjusted even with the dead puck era.

Ironically enough, Sakic's era adjustment career stats are *higher* than his actual stats because he played so much of his career in the dead puck era, and they *really* boost stats for that era.

His actual career points are 1641. His era adjusted career points calculate to 1679.

 

[HockeyVirus]

I'm not sure I'd consider him "really good". He was probably better than his goal totals suggest, but he certainly didn't look consistently dangerous enough, especially in the last 2 or 3 games.

In any case, production matters when that's what leads to wins. You don't win games by "generating" chances but not converting on them. And thus far, Matthews hasn't produced enough, while the two guys you mentioned above had at that point in their careers.

IDK. To me, Matthews has it. He has ice in his veins. It's a matter of time for him. Marner.. IDK. He has his OHL days to show he can do it, but he also isn't Matthews. I think you are a fool to think he never figures it out. Matthews will go down as an all time great.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

IDK. To me, Matthews has it. He has ice in his veins. It's a matter of time for him. Marner.. IDK. He has his OHL days to show he can do it, but he also isn't Matthews. I think you are a fool to think he never figures it out. Matthews will go down as an all time great.

He definitely has the talent and makeup of an all time great. I think that narrative about Matthews will go away when (if?) the Leafs (or his next team) advance in the playoffs and he has a chance to put up some better numbers.

 

[BlueMed]

HUH? Matthews and Sakic are nothing alike as players.

Well, they both have awesome wrist shots due to a fast release. That's not actually that common.

 

[HockeyVirus]

He definitely has the talent and makeup of an all time great. I think that narrative about Matthews will go away when (if?) the Leafs (or his next team) advance in the playoffs and he has a chance to put up some better numbers.

I agree. Some fans are about results only. He needs to do it. I just think he will.. Even if it's not in TO.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

I agree. b]Some fans are about results only[/b]. He needs to do it. I just think he will.. Even if it's not in TO.

That's because that's what leads to winning? I mean, I'm not sure why anyone wouldn't be about results.

"Results" is the difference between why Joe Thornton gets criticized for his playoff resume and why guys like Crosby and Kane are thought of as playoff performers. The latter two get results, the former too often didn't.