No first overall pick has recorded 70 points since Connor McDavid....I think that's a real tall order for McKenna, even with his supporting cast he's going to need time to adapt.
50 points would be a very good rookie season.
Confirmed with Link: LEAFS WIN #1 PICK IN 2026 NHL DRAFT
- Thread starter The Masters
- Start date
No first overall pick has recorded 70 points since Connor McDavid....I think that's a real tall order for McKenna, even with his supporting cast he's going to need time to adapt.
50 points would be a very good rookie season.
I don’t know how many different ways it can be explained to you……
Because at that point they had the best odds at having their combinations of lottery balls winning the second draw. But as they had already won the first draw it just would have meant it would have been a redraw.
Someone even posted a video of this exact scenario happening 2 years ago.
Because they had the highest odds of winning the draw, which would've resulted in a re-draw.
You need the Leafs to remain as an option so that odds remain the same for both draws, but in the result they hypothetically won draw #2 it would've just resulted in a do over.
Mckenna will get 41 assists and 17 goals.
Antropovsky
Registered User
- Jun 2, 2007
- 17,734
- 14,065
Yea, he admitted that he figured it out in the 2nd half. He was playing against 18-25 year olds after previously playing against 16-20 year olds. And likely was heavily targetted in games because of the amount of attention on him, buzz about being #1 and being the first CHL player to make that transition and making big money on his likeness deal. Thats alot of pressure. Also playing alot less hockey too in college. so I could understand it was a huge adjustment. Also, I read an article where the writer said Penn State is a bad hockey program with a not so good coach and they think Mckenna made a poor choice to go there and suffered because of it.
He could certainly just not be as good as he was touted...we will see.
Please don't share this guy's videos in here again.
Stephen
Moderator
- Feb 28, 2002
- 87,682
- 83,354
Connor McDavid didn't have a 70 point rookie season.
Even better, I forgot he battled a significant injury in his rookie season.
That means you'll have to go back to Patrick Kane nearly two decades ago.
Stephen
Moderator
- Feb 28, 2002
- 87,682
- 83,354
I could see McKenna with a 63 point rookie season to match Michael Bunting...
I agree I see him easily hitting 60+ and 70 is not a stretch if the PP gets hot
Stephen
Moderator
- Feb 28, 2002
- 87,682
- 83,354
I think his capacity to pile up points is going to be different than a typical 1OA because he could be slotted into different top six combinations and be supported by veterans everywhere. Plus special teams time.
It’s stats to show that he was a complete stud in Junior and using historical comparisons. What exactly is your issue with facts and data? Did anyone say he was Crosby or Lemieux? Or do you have problems conceptualizing using supporting information?
Matthews in fact is not a puck carrier. Marner was on that line. Nylander on the other hand definitely needs the puck on his stick. Mckenna is much better suited to playing with a shooter like Matthews.
Artemi Panarin was a 24 year old rookie, not a first overall in his D+1.
Barzal was 20 years old in his D+3 and also not a #1 pick.
We were talking about #1 overall draft picks in their D+1.
BertCorbeau
F*ck cancer - RIP Fugu and Buffaloed
It would be important thought for McKenna to ensure he doesn’t get that pass first mentality and to not be afraid to shoot
McDavid only played 45 games in his rookie season with 48 points. Which was good for 3rd in the NHL in points per game that season.
Patrick Kane had 72 points in a lower scoring league, at 155 pounds and with less talent to work with in his rookie season.
Not saying I expect 70 points, but given the rise in league scoring he would have to score atleast 80+ to be on par with rookie Kane.
I think 60-70 is a safe bet. But if I’m being honest I think he could get close to 80 or more in a full season where he really starts to pick it up in the 2nd half.
I won’t write him off as a bust if he only gets 50 points or something either, I just truly believe he’ll be better than many think right out the gate and will post points on the powerplay pretty quickly.
He is not a McDavid/Crosby level talent, no matter what his points in junior are, similar to Bedard (I mean who wants to put those expectations on him anyway), but my gut tells me he is going to be a fairly special player in his own right.
Stephen
Moderator
- Feb 28, 2002
- 87,682
- 83,354
Why? We have many other topics to appear to be reasonable and joyless about.
Stephen
Moderator
- Feb 28, 2002
- 87,682
- 83,354
I feel like he'd almost be better off on a Nylander-Tavares line, reprising the Easton Cowan role and he can make miracle dishes with less defensive coverage to start his career. Almost like Marner on the Bozak-JVR unit.
He will learn to make his shot a threat in the way Kucherov does. You can see a lot of that in his game and he will work to improve on it in the NHL as much as possible. This is not someone like Marner who has a muffin for a shot.
Completely different game, I wouldn't even go back that far as a comparison.
I see almost zero chance he puts up anywhere near 80 points, he isn't as NHL ready as some other #1 picks and as I've listed, #1 overall forwards Post Matthews era have averaged just 46 points, 32 on average if you discount Celebrini and Bedard.
50 points would be an excellent rookie season.
I don’t know, I guess we’ll have to wait and see. You could be right. But I think he’s also coming into a position where he has established elite talent surrounding him right off the bat. Most other recent 1st overalls haven’t had that advantage.
I’ll throw this out there for fun. If he plays a full season he scores 72 points. His 2nd half he’ll start scoring around a point per game or more. Call those high expectations, I’m sure he’s expecting something like that of himself anyway.
ZEBROA
Registered User
- Dec 21, 2017
- 4,321
- 3,464
1. The lack of context, at times.
2. So the facts and data say nothing - everything. He can be from nothing to between Crosby Lemieux. Why use them? To value ceiling?
3. Sometimes. Thank you for asking , so very kind of you.
Comparing is nice. But silly sometimes. Looking at the "same" stats Stenberg will be better then P. Forsberg and better then McKenna by their advanced stats at Junior worlds. And Bjorck with his 74p in 42g in J20 would eclipse them both.
The problem i got is just that. People take these isolated stats and run with it.
I want us to get McKenna, but not the hype.
