34
Registered User
- Mar 26, 2010
- 22,145
- 10,039
So you came to the Leaf board to say that. Cool.Great goal scorer, not generational. Ovechkin is generational. Matthews is not even close yet.
So you came to the Leaf board to say that. Cool.Great goal scorer, not generational. Ovechkin is generational. Matthews is not even close yet.
The crazy thing about Matthews was that prior to the draft, many were saying that Laine was to Matthews what OV was to Crosby. While not 1-for-1 comparisons, the idea behind it was that Laine was the better goal scorer, while Matthews was the better all around player. I think because of these comparisons, I, and many around here, completely underestimated Matthews goal scoring ability.Matthews will be the Ovie of his generation.
Matthews is NOT Ovie. But he is the Ovie of his generation, since Matthews generation has no 60 goal scorers in it.
How much of that was because Laine got drafted to Winnipeg? If Columbus had got the 2nd overall pick instead of 3rd overall in 2016 would those Matthews vs Laine debates been the same like we saw?The crazy thing about Matthews was that prior to the draft, many were saying that Laine was to Matthews what OV was to Crosby. While not 1-for-1 comparisons, the idea behind it was that Laine was the better goal scorer, while Matthews was the better all around player. I think because of these comparisons, I, and many around here, completely underestimated Matthews goal scoring ability.
It is quite possible that at the end of their careers, Laine may be the better goal scorer. However, at this point in time there is zero doubt that not only is Auston Matthews a better all around player than Laine, he is a better goal scorer too.
Being a Jet/Finn certainly had something to do with the hype. The media were really hyping it up at the time too. If he were to go to Columbus, then the debates likely would have simmered down.How much of that was because Laine got drafted to Winnipeg? If Columbus had got the 2nd overall pick instead of 3rd overall in 2016 would those Matthews vs Laine debates been the same like we saw?
Generational doesn't apply to an individual skill-set or position. Either you have the ability to be the best player in the league for a substantial period of time or you don't. Until Matthews wins a couple scoring titles, this isn't even a serious discussion.
Great player, but two things. He wasn't the best prospect of the 2010's (it was McDavid), and he hasn't put himself in serious Hart Trophy discussion yet in his career. So, in my books he isn't generational. If he can win multiple Harts or Lindsay awards I'll change my tune, but that isn't even a realistic discussion at this point. He's an absolutely amazing player. Probably the most talented player I've seen put on a Leafs jersey, but he isn't generational. But, neither were guys like Yzerman or Sakic, and I think we would all be ecstatic if he has a career that mirrors those guys.
So you came to the Leaf board to say that. Cool.
You are clearly talking about me, and what a gross misrepresentation of what I do. I post facts, not "hostile/angry opinions". I am always open to people questioning anything, and am consistently friendly and informative to those who wish to learn. I have done a ton of work to substantiate my position against anything people have brought forth. What I do not welcome is people outright dismissing and mocking reality as they provide no evidence or substantiation of their own.There is another poster who has a similarish style to yours in terms of posting (actually thought you had made a 2nd account but one that was giving more hostile/angry opinions). The difference b/w these you and the other poster who also loves to mention /60 stats and EV stars is you made your thread seem much more open to discussion and are okay with people questioning some points/phrasing you used.
Yet...Matthews generation has no 60 goal scorers in it.
The crazy thing about Matthews was that prior to the draft, many were saying that Laine was to Matthews what OV was to Crosby. While not 1-for-1 comparisons, the idea behind it was that Laine was the better goal scorer, while Matthews was the better all around player. I think because of these comparisons, I, and many around here, completely underestimated Matthews goal scoring ability.
It is quite possible that at the end of their careers, Laine may be the better goal scorer. However, at this point in time there is zero doubt that not only is Auston Matthews a better all around player than Laine, he is a better goal scorer too.
Yes, it was fueled by the Finns. Just look at how they went after Hughes this year.How much of that was because Laine got drafted to Winnipeg? If Columbus had got the 2nd overall pick instead of 3rd overall in 2016 would those Matthews vs Laine debates been the same like we saw?
Ovechkin has become one of the best goal scoring players in the NHL, however at the time he was drafted I don't remember anyone calling him generational the way it said about Crosby and McDavid.Great goal scorer, not generational. Ovechkin is generational. Matthews is not even close yet.
I have said this stat before and I will say it again. When Matthews scored 40 goals in his rookie season, those were the most goals scored by any rookie since Ovechkin had 52 goals during his rookie year in the 2005-2006 season.I see Matthews as the best goal scorer in the league since Ovechkin.
I think he has the capability to score 50 goals every year and be a true, superstar #1 C with all the tools of Malkin and Kopitar rolled into a guy with the scoring prowess of Stamkos/Ovechkin.
Having said that, Laine has a superior shot and possibly so does Pettersson.
Not that I believe they will score more goals, they don't get into the danger areas that Matthews does nearly enough to maximize their goal scoring. EP will never do that as he's far too small.
Honestly, once Ovechkin is gone, Matthews, Laine, Pettersson, Pastrnak will compete for the Rocket.
I would be shocked if between those guys, there aren't 6 or more seasons of 55- 60 goals in their careers. Shocked.
I have said this stat before and I will say it again. When Matthews scored 40 goals in his rookie season, those were the most goals scored by any rookie since Ovechkin had 52 goals during his rookie year in the 2005-2006 season.
Matthews scoring is elite, but in my eyes, there are 4 guys who are clearly generational, and that is Gretzky, Lemieux, Howe and Orr. Past that it is debatable. I think you need to win multiple Harts/Lindsay's regardless of outside factors. The only guys of my lifetime, I would put in the discussion as generational are Gretzky and Lemieux, who are obvious. Then, I'd add Hasek, Jagr, Crosby and Ovi. McDavid has a shot to get there. Then, there are generational prospects, who are the best prospects to come along and happen every 5 to 10 years. That's Lemieux (although drafted slightly before I was born), Lindros (who was drafted when I was in preschool), Crosby and McDavid. For that, I think there has to be a clear and realistic expectation that the player is going to win multiple Harts. All have won atleast one. You'll notice, a lot of clear first ballot hall of famers are off my list, including Lidstrom, Yzerman, Roy, Brodeur, Sakic and Ray Bourque. All absolutely unreal players, but never seriously competed for multiple Harts. Matthews is an absolutely ridiculously talented player, if he stays healthy he will accomplish a lot of great things. He has the chance to be the best goal scorer in the league, but if we are throwing around the term generational, I think there should be a realistic expectation that the player will win multiple Harts and/or Lindsay's. To be generational you have to have such a level of dominance over your peers it is blatantly obvious to the writers and players you play against.I'm glad you at least have this (important) qualifier here. Too many times people present their opinions as facts, so thank you.
People are welcome to call/label Matthews whatever they want. Totally on board with that.
The lack of trophies and high goal totals in a single season are super valid concerns but I think Leafs fans--more than anybody--can appreciate that Matthews' usage under Babcock was far from what normal superstars get. Ovi was averaging nearly 4 minutes more per game in his first 4 years than Matthews has (and 6 mins of PP time vs 2.5 mins for Matthews). Is that because Matthews couldn't "handle" more minutes or because Babcock was a rigid egomaniac? I'm leaning more towards the latter but I guess Keefe will help answer a lot of that moving forward. Combine Matthews' poor usage with games missed from injuries and suddenly the goal total/trophy situation becomes a bit clearer. That's why I think there's genuine value in looking at rate stats--especially when we're talking about a sample size of over 250 games--as it helps even out those discrepancies (player-to-player and/or team-to-team).
Anyway. I think I was hoping that at most (if people actually read the entire OP) I could illustrate how abnormal Matthews' scoring rate is relative to his peers. So abnormal that it hasn't been seen since Ovechkin joined the league and in the case of 5v5 scoring even further back. In that regard the data we have is almost literally a once-in-a-generation phenomenon but again, people are free to label it however they want.
It's the most goals scored by a D+1 rookie since Lemieux.I have said this stat before and I will say it again. When Matthews scored 40 goals in his rookie season, those were the most goals scored by any rookie since Ovechkin had 52 goals during his rookie year in the 2005-2006 season.
I can honestly say I did not know that.It's the most goals scored by a D+1 rookie since Lemieux.
On the main boards I asked in a poll if Hughes and Kakko would have a similar "rivarly" like Matthews and Laine, since we had an American go 1st overall and a Finn go 2nd overall just like in 2016. The only difference between Matthews and Laine is that Hughes and Kakko would be playing in the division. However I was told it wasn't the same comparison and etc. Anyway I had no idea they went after Hughes, although it doesn't surprise me considering what they thought of Matthews in his rookie season.Yes, it was fueled by the Finns. Just look at how they went after Hughes this year.
The funny thing about Matthews only empty net goal is that it was his 40th goal in his rookie season. Although it did clinch their win over Pittsburgh and their playoff spot and what a better time to get it.Heres a quick list of empty net goals since AM entered the league
Ovi 12
Pasta 6
Kane 14
Mackinnon 9
Marchand 14
laine 8
Bergeron 11
Eichel 13
Auston Matthews 1
Only 1 cheapie from him..
Very few Jets fans actually drove that argument. It was a group of about 5 or so absurd Finnish posters who went nuts. I was arguing with them pre-draft lottery. Some Jets fans latched on to these peoples ridiculous takes, but they were in the minority. Rookie season it obviously got hectic with both having elite seasons. Obviously over the last 18 or so months, Matthews has created significant distance between the two.The funny thing about that is on the main boards I asked if Hughes and Kakko would have a similar "rivarly" like Matthews and Laine, since we had an American go 1st overall and a Finn go 2nd overall just like in 2016. The only difference between Matthews and Laine is that Hughes and Kakko would be playing in the division. However I was told it wasn't the same comparison and etc. Anyway I had no idea they went after Hughes, although it doesn't surprise me considering what they thought of Matthews in his rookie season.
The funny thing about Matthews only empty net goal is that it was his 40th goal in his rookie season. Although it did clinch their win over Pittsburgh and their playoff spot and what a better time to get it.
Also if you watch the replay and the clock on that goal, after the puck went into the net it says 3.4 seconds and Matthews wears #34.
I remember having my own debate during their rookie seasons with some Finnish posters and a few Jets fans as well. I also remember after the first time Matthews played Laine when Toronto blew that 4-0 lead and Laine got his first hat trick in overtime, I avoided the boards that night. So later on that season when they played for a second time in Toronto and with the Leafs winning that game in overtime, I was relived because Laine had 2 goals and I thought to myself oh no not again.Very few Jets fans actually drove that argument. It was a group of about 5 or so absurd Finnish posters who went nuts. I was arguing with them pre-draft lottery. Some Jets fans latched on to these peoples ridiculous takes, but they were in the minority. Rookie season it obviously got hectic with both having elite seasons. Obviously over the last 18 or so months, Matthews has created significant distance between the two.
I'm sure if Kakko and Hughes were competing for the Calder, there would be a huge pissing match between Devils fans and Rangers/Fins fans. Obviously, anything that involves the Leafs gets pushed into overdrive here, because of the size and how active our fanbase is, combined with some resentment towards our media coverage in general. Certain teams will always create that type of divide.
That clip and also this one is something I still watch today because of how big a moment it was for the Maple Leafs.I can never not watch this clip when it's posted. What a great moment.
You are definately a knowledgeable poster who knows his way around the analytical parts of the game. But I'm not the only one who finds your posts come across as angry/condensing.You are clearly talking about me, and what a gross misrepresentation of what I do. I post facts, not "hostile/angry opinions". I am always open to people questioning anything, and am consistently friendly and informative to those who wish to learn. I have done a ton of work to substantiate my position against anything people have brought forth. What I do not welcome is people outright dismissing and mocking reality as they provide no evidence or substantiation of their own.
It's easy to come in when he's doing well and has the flashy goal totals and get people to understand the special player we have in front of us. Maybe you forget how long I've been saying exactly this. Wasn't so simple when people were freaking out about his contract or a cold streak.