Auston Matthews or Jack Eichel?

[Hockeyholic]

I'm not all that sure Eichel helps the Leafs win any more than they do with Matthews so I don't think the "he won a cup" argument is all too valid. Matthews is definitely the better player between the two, so the only real question is whether that extra cap space can be the difference maker in building a cup-winning team considering they're both #1 centers. I don't really know the answer to that either. If you have a team with a lot of depth and don't necessarily need top-end talent to push them over the hump, Eichel should be a good selection. If you need a dynamic game-breaker that can steal you some games, maybe Matthews. Really depends on the build of your team.

Good point too.

 

[canuckking1]

Eichel is the most overrated player in hockey.

 

[34]

This will be a fun poll to bump when Matthews wins his 3rd rocket this season.

This is not even close, and I am a fan of Eichel.

 

[ole ole]

Eichel is good, but they’re in different tiers.

They sure are when it comes to playoffs.

 

[hamzarocks]

Until Eichel shows a reg season comeback its Matthias

 

[Adam da bomb]

This will be a fun poll to bump when Matthews wins his 3rd rocket this season.

This is not even close, and I am a fan of Eichel.

Yes, but, then it will be bumped again if leaf’s lose in 1st rd.

 

[Empoleon8771]

The only justification for picking Eichel here is if he was signed for longer than Matthews. Which he isn't.

 

[Voight]

Eichel just lead his team to the Cup but you have to look at their complete body of work and take Matthews. Playoff struggles aside, he’s been the better player to date by a fair margin.

Eichel also bitched & moaned his way to a stacked team.

Now yes, the Leafs have some very talented players but Eichel walked on to one of the leagues best teams. Not to mention he has one of the best coaches in the league and one of the best management teams (McCrimmon & GMGM)

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Thing is, nobody on the planet would ever consider taking 4th line grinders from a dynasty over McDavid. They aren't comparable players. Not even if they had won ten straight cups. You need someone comparable, IE Crosby, to really make the cup argument come into play.

Fair or not, and it will especially come into play even more if the 2024 postseason is similar to last year's, there are people who would take Eichel over Matthews when it comes to postseason play and who suits a team better.

Is Matthews better? Yes. Would I take him for certain over Eichel once the postseason starts? I would need to really think about that one.

That's my point the cup argument is stupid for that very reason of course nobody would try to use cups to try and argue that Draper and Maltby are better than Mcdavid, Mcdavid is better than both and cups don't change that fact.

Matthews is better than Eichel and a cup doesn't change that fact.

 

[34]

Yes, but, then it will be bumped again if leaf’s lose in 1st rd.

Hey, best goal scorer in the NHL.

 

[Voight]

I'm not all that sure Eichel helps the Leafs win any more than they do with Matthews so I don't think the "he won a cup" argument is all too valid. Matthews is definitely the better player between the two, so the only real question is whether that extra cap space can be the difference maker in building a cup-winning team considering they're both #1 centers. I don't really know the answer to that either. If you have a team with a lot of depth and don't necessarily need top-end talent to push them over the hump, Eichel should be a good selection. If you need a dynamic game-breaker that can steal you some games, maybe Matthews. Really depends on the build of your team.

That extra cap space could get you a Jay Beagle after all.

(damn near close anyways)

 

[Hockeyholic]

That's my point the cup argument is stupid for that very reason of course nobody would try to use cups to try and argue that Draper and Maltby are better than Mcdavid, Mcdavid is better than both and cups don't change that fact.

Matthews is better than Eichel and a cup doesn't change that fact.

Yes but my point is the difference between AM/JE isn't remotely close to the ocean sized gap between McDavid/grinders.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Matthews is the far better player, and Eichel having a cup doesn't change that.

If that's all it took Kris Draper and Kirk Maltby would both be better than Mcdavid.

They aren't, not even close

While I agree the "Cups argument" is faulty on its own, I don't think this type of example is good at proving it because you're not comparing two players who are otherwise on equal ground.

It's like if there's a discussion about who was better between Bryan Trottier and Marcel Dionne, Trottier likely gets a "Cup boost" versus Dionne's lack of Cup success. It's a valid thing to mention in that case because the two players being compared are otherwise on a similar tier. On the other hand, sarcastically saying "I guess Bob Nystrom is also better than Dionne because of Cups" falls short of proving the point because Nystrom and Dionne aren't considered similar tier of players.

Sorry. Just a bit of a pet peeve when folks use exaggerated examples to dismiss Cups in any sort of player to player comparisons.

 

[EverTheCynic]

Easily Eichel.

Led his team to a cup win and put on a Conn Smythe worthy performance.

What has Matthews done? Float around in the playoffs and look completely disinterested?

 

[TS Quint]

I literally can’t chase 45+ posts man. How many ppg players are there in the playoffs? Not many.

Has his ppg dipped in the playoffs? Yes. Is he still basically ppg? Also yes. He had 1 year that craters his stats, but is lifetime .88 ppg. And is 1 point per game in his last 5 years. He’d quite literally be the ~15th -17th highest active ppg playoff player. Quant hockey uses 50 games as a minimum sample so he’s not included but that’s the rough answer.

You’re for some odd reason so fixated on it, that you’re devoting a weird amount of time to a player you’re not even a fan of. Weird stuff.

Weird stuff a hockey fan is talking about hockey? What's weird is you chasing me around and adding little to the conversation other than to complain that im talking about hockey. It shouldn't hurt your feelings.

But I'm happy to talk about your playoffs stats.

1st, he is not a point per game player. He is at .88 points per game. That's 42nd in the league since he got into the league. Fun fact Kadri is 41st in the same period.

He was a PPG player only 3/7years.

Do you really think that PPG stat is a good one for the highest paid player in the league? It's good but not great or befitting his salary. Even if we just look at his pace do you know where that places him in PPG in the playoffs?

2023- 25th
2022- 8th
2021- 44th
2020- 14th
2019- 20th
2018- 171st
2017- 21st

Welcome to The Hall of Pretty Good Auston.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

I'll take EIchel's cup over anything Matthews has accomplished in the regular season.

Eichel turned Marchessault into a Conn Smythe winner, has Matthews ever lifted a teammate in the playoffs?

 

[The90]

Weird stuff a hockey fan is talking about hockey? What's weird is you chasing me around and adding little to the conversation other than to complain that im talking about hockey. It shouldn't hurt your feelings.

But I'm happy to talk about your playoffs stats.

1st, he is not a point per game player. He is at .88 points per game. That's 42nd in the league since he got into the league. Fun fact Kadri is 41st in the same period.

He was a PPG player only 3/7years.

Do you really think that PPG stat is a good one for the highest paid player in the league? It's good but not great or befitting his salary. Even if we just look at his pace do you know where that places him in PPG in the playoffs?

2023- 25th
2022- 8th
2021- 44th
2020- 14th
2019- 20th
2018- 171st
2017- 21st

Welcome to The Hall of Pretty Good Auston.

I’ve made a couple comments to dump on your emotional tirades about Matthews, yes. You posted over 45 times in the Matthews signing thread as a Red Wings fan and are continuing in this thread thinking your owning leaf fans. That’s weird no question about it. My feelings aren’t hurt, but for some reason, yours are lol

Hey let us know where Auston comes in when you average out his .88 ppg for active players. Thanks. Nice homework.

Last 5 years = PPG. Still waiting on the breakout year where he explodes, but not nearly as bad as the garbage you’re trying to sell.

Polls working out awful nice for your argument too haha

 

[TS Quint]

I’ve made a couple comments to dump on your emotional tirades about Matthews, yes. You posted over 45 times in the Matthews signing thread as a Red Wings fan and are continuing in this thread thinking your owning leaf fans. That’s weird no question about it. My feelings aren’t hurt, but for some reason, yours are lol

Hey let us know where Auston comes in when you average out his .88 ppg for active players. Thanks. Nice homework.

Last 5 years = PPG. Still waiting on the breakout year where he explodes, but not nearly as bad as the garbage you’re trying to sell.

Polls working out awful nice for your argument too haha

Lol, your comeback is to cherry pick your timeline? Good one.

So you got nothing. Good job. Keep being mad at people for talking hockey on a HOCKEY BOARD. Keep stalking me.

Do you have a point to all this stalking you are doing? If your point is that Matthews is pretty good, I've already said that.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

While I agree the "Cups argument" is faulty on its own, I don't think this type of example is good at proving it because you're not comparing two players who are otherwise on equal ground.

It's like if there's a discussion about who was better between Bryan Trottier and Marcel Dionne, Trottier likely gets a "Cup boost" versus Dionne's lack of Cup success. It's a valid thing to mention in that case because the two players being compared are otherwise on a similar tier. On the other hand, sarcastically saying "I guess Bob Nystrom is also better than Dionne because of Cups" falls short of proving the point because Nystrom and Dionne aren't considered similar tier of players.

Sorry. Just a bit of a pet peeve when folks use exaggerated examples to dismiss Cups in any sort of player to player comparisons.

There should always be context in the Cups argument. Especially when comparing top tier players of teams. You don't blame a 4th line player for not winning the cup nor do you credit a 4th line player in winning a cup. As your top players go, so do your playoff chances. There is a weighting to top players getting credit for winning in the playoffs, and conversely not winning. Marcel Dionne and Joe Thornton are good examples of top players not being able to get it done. Then there are the Eichel's and Mackinnon's getting it done. Trottier, Crosby over Dionne and Thornton. Your star players drive the bus for the cup. Right now Matthews is in the Thornton-Dionne camp. He is still young enough to do better than his first 7 tries in the playoffs. As the best player on his team, he will always get the most praise if the team does well or the most blame if it does not. This was Eichel's year, he did it. Doing it, beats what if, 7 days a week and twice on Sundays.

 

[TS Quint]

Matthews is the far better player, and Eichel having a cup doesn't change that.

If that's all it took Kris Draper and Kirk Maltby would both be better than Mcdavid.

They aren't, not even close

Do Maltby or Draper out score McDavid in the playoffs? Because Eichel outscored Matthews past 3 playoffs in one year.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

While I agree the "Cups argument" is faulty on its own, I don't think this type of example is good at proving it because you're not comparing two players who are otherwise on equal ground.

It's like if there's a discussion about who was better between Bryan Trottier and Marcel Dionne, Trottier likely gets a "Cup boost" versus Dionne's lack of Cup success. It's a valid thing to mention in that case because the two players being compared are otherwise on a similar tier. On the other hand, sarcastically saying "I guess Bob Nystrom is also better than Dionne because of Cups" falls short of proving the point because Nystrom and Dionne aren't considered similar tier of players.

Sorry. Just a bit of a pet peeve when folks use exaggerated examples to dismiss Cups in any sort of player to player comparisons.

But that's why I did it, I wanted to show that having a Stanley cup doesn't automatically make one player better than another

 

[PensandCaps]

Easily Matthews. Just a clear superior player.

People are for sure going to bring up Eichel's playoff run being better than anything Matthews has done in the postseason.

While that's probably true, It doesnt at all make up for Matthews being better when you compare his seasons from 19 to 25 to Eichel's. Matthews outproduced him in 5 out of those 7 seasons, and the other 2 he still outpaced Eichel. That's not even considering the edge in defensive play and the massive gap in goalscoring. 400+ game sample size > 22 game sample size.

Eichel is a better player there.

 

[Dion TheFluff]

I'll take EIchel's cup over anything Matthews has accomplished in the regular season.

Eichel turned Marchessault into a Conn Smythe winner, has Matthews ever lifted a teammate in the playoffs?

Marchessault was over a PPG during the Knights cup run in their inaugural season so I would say that's definitely not the case.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Marchessault was over a PPG during the Knights cup run in their inaugural season so I would say that's definitely not the case.

What was his PPG combined in 19-20-21. .54PPG? Then what happened in 22, Eichel shows up and he scores a career high with 13 PP goals and 25 PPG just one pt behind Eichel.

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

Gotta go with my boy AM34 here