Toggle sidebar

Nathan Mackinnon - the best player in the league

Video Nasty

Video Nasty

Registered User
Mar 12, 2017
5,825
10,240
McDavid has 38 points in his past 19 games (2.00 PPG).

Other key McDavid numbers.

He has 333 points in his past 188 games since the start of 2022-2023 (1.77 PPG), the beginning of his 153 symphony.

He has 561 points in his past 324 games since the start of 2020-2021 (1.73 PPG), the beginning of proving to people that scoring 100+ points in a 56 game season was not impossible and that 150 over a full year could be in play.

He has 836 points in his last 507 games since the start of the second half of the 2017-2018 season (1.65 PPG), the beginning of a run where he basically cleared 1.5+ PPG in every single half of every season.

He’s averaging 1.526 PPG over the 675 games of his career he has played thus far.

People get excited over much shorter and lesser stretches of point production while clamoring to crown said lesser players, but are quick to dismiss McDavid any time there’s a minor hiccup due to injury.

He’s very clearly the best in the world and has been a long time now. Unlikely to change any time in the near future. MacKinnon can settle for his reasonable solidifying of the #3 spot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grate n Colorful Oz, Kerberos, PatriceBergeronFan and 4 others
Goose

Goose

Registered User
Apr 18, 2006
3,328
3,231
Rschmitz said:
Over the past 4 seasons, Kucherov and McDavid's points/60 are almost identical. I think that's a better barometer of who the current best player is.
Click to expand...

Using a /60 stat as the defining metric seems pretty suspect.

You're aware that the metric hurts players who play on the PK and rewards those who don't? McDavid has a better /60 than Kuch (4.65 v 4.55) in spite of that fact, all while seeing less power play time per game.

Reality over the past 4 seasons:

McDavid has 2 Hart, 3 Art Ross, and 3 Ted Lindsay
Kucherov has nothing (I know I know, probably robbed v MacK)

McDavid 453 points to 375 points (more games, yes, but doing it consistently for longer counts for something)
McDavid 1.7 v 1.58 point per game (reality, not a /60 metric)
More goals for McDavid.
McDavid plays the tougher position, with more overall responsibilities and better defensive stats on things like CA/60, xGA/60 etc.
McDavid drives offensive plays, zone entries, and possession better than Kuch.
McDavid's CF% and xGF% are consistently stronger.

What does Kucherov do better than McDavid other than his powerplay production by a small margin on a point per game basis, but not in actual points at the end of the day? I'm not being sarcastic, it's just hard to list real things that he's clearly better at and not just close.

Boardwork? Maybe.
High-traffic areas without speed? Okay I'd give this one probably, but even then, that's a tough call.
One-timers, yes.

I agree Kuch is right there at the top of the league, absolutely, and not THAT far off McDavid, but I really don't understand how anyone can argue there's not a seperation between McDavid and the next tier.

I think it's too hard to pick between him, MacK, and Drai on any given day, but if you put a gun to my head, I probably go Kuch/MacK/Drai in that order, though I really don't like doing it.

Anyone arguing Kuch is in McDavid's tier though, it says a lot that the best argument you have is that on P/60 Kuch is CLOSE to McDavid, in spite of seeing more PP time, no SH time, and less real world production.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grate n Colorful Oz
Rschmitz

Rschmitz

Finding new ways to cheat
Feb 27, 2002
17,463
9,975
Tampa Bay
Goose said:
Using a /60 stat as the defining metric seems pretty suspect.

You're aware that the metric hurts players who play on the PK and rewards those who don't? McDavid has a better /60 than Kuch (4.65 v 4.55) in spite of that fact, all while seeing less power play time per game.

Reality over the past 4 seasons:

McDavid has 2 Hart, 3 Art Ross, and 3 Ted Lindsay
Kucherov has nothing (I know I know, probably robbed v MacK)

McDavid 453 points to 375 points (more games, yes, but doing it consistently for longer counts for something)
McDavid 1.7 v 1.58 point per game (reality, not a /60 metric)
More goals for McDavid.
McDavid plays the tougher position, with more overall responsibilities and better defensive stats on things like CA/60, xGA/60 etc.
McDavid drives offensive plays, zone entries, and possession better than Kuch.
McDavid's CF% and xGF% are consistently stronger.

What does Kucherov do better than McDavid other than his powerplay production by a small margin on a point per game basis, but not in actual points at the end of the day? I'm not being sarcastic, it's just hard to list real things that he's clearly better at and not just close.

Boardwork? Maybe.
High-traffic areas without speed? Okay I'd give this one probably, but even then, that's a tough call.
One-timers, yes.

I agree Kuch is right there at the top of the league, absolutely, and not THAT far off McDavid, but I really don't understand how anyone can argue there's not a seperation between McDavid and the next tier.

I think it's too hard to pick between him, MacK, and Drai on any given day, but if you put a gun to my head, I probably go Kuch/MacK/Drai in that order, though I really don't like doing it.

Anyone arguing Kuch is in McDavid's tier though, it says a lot that the best argument you have is that on P/60 Kuch is CLOSE to McDavid, in spite of seeing more PP time, no SH time, and less real world production.
Click to expand...

I wasn't looking to take over a Mackinnon thread with a full blown analysis or McDavid vs Kucherov, geez. I was simply stating that I like points/60 as a metric over points per game, but obviously neither should be looked at alone and the convention is to look at total points and not per 60.

Yes, points per 60 unfairly punishes players who play on the PK, which is something that neither Kucherov or McDavid do a lot of. Players 5v5 stats also should count for something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: T REX
T REX

T REX

Registered User
Feb 28, 2013
12,299
9,858
Kennedys said:
Who do you take between Eric Lindros and Doug Weight if pace is fake ?
Click to expand...
Huh? Pace is fake - average points per game is real.

Is that what you mean?

Goose said:
Using a /60 stat as the defining metric seems pretty suspect.

You're aware that the metric hurts players who play on the PK and rewards those who don't? McDavid has a better /60 than Kuch (4.65 v 4.55) in spite of that fact, all while seeing less power play time per game.

Reality over the past 4 seasons:

McDavid has 2 Hart, 3 Art Ross, and 3 Ted Lindsay
Kucherov has nothing (I know I know, probably robbed v MacK)

McDavid 453 points to 375 points (more games, yes, but doing it consistently for longer counts for something)
McDavid 1.7 v 1.58 point per game (reality, not a /60 metric)
More goals for McDavid.
McDavid plays the tougher position, with more overall responsibilities and better defensive stats on things like CA/60, xGA/60 etc.
McDavid drives offensive plays, zone entries, and possession better than Kuch.
McDavid's CF% and xGF% are consistently stronger.

What does Kucherov do better than McDavid other than his powerplay production by a small margin on a point per game basis, but not in actual points at the end of the day? I'm not being sarcastic, it's just hard to list real things that he's clearly better at and not just close.

Boardwork? Maybe.
High-traffic areas without speed? Okay I'd give this one probably, but even then, that's a tough call.
One-timers, yes.

I agree Kuch is right there at the top of the league, absolutely, and not THAT far off McDavid, but I really don't understand how anyone can argue there's not a seperation between McDavid and the next tier.

I think it's too hard to pick between him, MacK, and Drai on any given day, but if you put a gun to my head, I probably go Kuch/MacK/Drai in that order, though I really don't like doing it.

Anyone arguing Kuch is in McDavid's tier though, it says a lot that the best argument you have is that on P/60 Kuch is CLOSE to McDavid, in spite of seeing more PP time, no SH time, and less real world production.
Click to expand...
Stopped reading right there...last year's art Ross is NOTHING? Your credibility was gone after this screw up.

Please do not respond to this post. Move along.

We're done here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rschmitz
Kairi Zaide

Kairi Zaide

Unforgiven
Aug 11, 2009
105,359
12,902
Quebec City
crowfish said:
2) He has played around 1.6 hours of extra powerplay ice time, which statistically would equal around 16 additional points for McDavid
Click to expand...
While the conclusion would remain true, as the Avs have been awarded a lot more PPs since last season, I would still highly recommend looking at PP opportunities rather than PP ice time for that sort of analysis. That allows to isolate PP efficiency (not perfectly still obviously) - both in terms of both "time to score" and PP%... though there's likely a very close correlation between the two due to the sheer number of PP opps normalizing everything.
 
T REX

T REX

Registered User
Feb 28, 2013
12,299
9,858
PatriceBergeronFan said:
Still McDavid.
Click to expand...
Agreed. When you start creating arbitrary windows for stats, it usually means there's a larger picture involved.

You take a snapshot of anyone's career and argue something with it.

Mack is a stud. A superstar. But this is McDavid's world and we're all just living in it.

That takes NOTHING away from Kuch or Mack. They are superstars too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KlefDown, Grate n Colorful Oz, Frank Drebin and 3 others

cupface52

Registered User
Jan 12, 2008
4,448
687
Burlington, On
Rschmitz said:
I wasn't looking to take over a Mackinnon thread with a full blown analysis or McDavid vs Kucherov, geez. I was simply stating that I like points/60 as a metric over points per game, but obviously neither should be looked at alone and the convention is to look at total points and not per 60.

Yes, points per 60 unfairly punishes players who play on the PK, which is something that neither Kucherov or McDavid do a lot of. Players 5v5 stats also should count for something.
Click to expand...

P/60 means nothing without context, while ppg, the only context you need is to not compare a 20 game season to an 80 game season.

Over the last 4 years(your chosen years) McDavid, has averaged an extra 1:12 TOI, however, has also averaged 28 more seconds SH. So that's 44 seconds ice time difference.

Both players averaged exactly 21.9 shifts per game. However, some of these shifts also include SH shifts for McDavid.

McDavid plays an extra ~2 seconds per shift, while Kucherov gets about an extra pp/es shift every other game. Which do you think is more advantageous for scoring?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Breakfast of Champs
TheLegend27

TheLegend27

Registered User
May 11, 2024
24
57
Seattle
Jordan Belfort said:
And Mack sending a message once again. Playing “bad” but still out playing mcdust and Nikita.

1 G 2 A tonight
Click to expand...
McDavid(30 games): 15G-33A-48P
Mackinnon(35 game):14G-41A-55P


PPG:

McDavid: 48/30=1.6
Mackinnon: 55/35=1.57


Excluding empty net:

McDavid: 48p/30games=1.6 ppg
Mackinnon 46p/35 games=1.31 ppg


Secondary assists:

McDavid: 10
Mackinnon: 19


Power play ice time:

Mcdavid: 3:19
Mackinnon: 3:51


Giveaways:

Mcdavid: 36
Mackinnon: 61


“Outplaying” how exactly?. By putting up 9 more ENP, less ppg, more pp time, over double the secondary assists, and almost double the giveaways?.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: KlefDown, Video Nasty, Kerberos and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom
X