Top 5 (22 and under): NJD vs MTL vs DET vs OTT vs BUF vs ANA

[Mrb1p]

I was trying to be nice about it but those rankings were brutal, showing significant bias towards draft position and Habs players. Suzuki and Caufield are nowhere near Stutzle's level, and they are both below Zegras as well. And you had Slafkovsky over Tkachuk lol.

I also don't understand why Suzuki is allowed on this list but you didn't include Hischier? Or Norris? Habs bias... Seriously just be a man and take the L.

Read the tile and check the date.

Stutzle is better than Suzuki, but its closer than people thuink.

 

[bert]

Read the tile and check the date.

Stutzle is better than Suzuki, but its closer than people thuink.

No it's not.

 

[TBF1972]

I had Patrick over Nico by a lot, Marner being a bust, and Lafreniere/Byfield/Kakko being studs

But to be fair to myself I think most had Lafreniere and Kakko being studs lol. Thought Kakko had 40G potential and Lafreniere would rival Jack Hughes for a decade

kakko has surpassed your expectations. he has now consecutive seasons of
66 g
48 g
43 g
77 games

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Voters did pretty well overall. NJD much better, BUF and OTT trailing 2nd/3rd. DET somewhat off that pace; while ANA and MTL have some things to sort out.

 

[Cenzo_]

MTL sticks out like a sore thumb on this list.

Definitely a lack of superstar in the group, but with Bedard next year it's all going to change....

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Read the tile and check the date.

Stutzle is better than Suzuki, but its closer than people thuink.

Stutzle ('02)
73gp 37g 84p (41g 94p pace)
Factored in on 34.7% of Sens goals (despite missing 3 games)

Suzuki ('99)
77gp 23g 61p - 24g 65p pace
Factored in on 28.5% of Habs goals

That's a gigantic difference. Yeah, Stutzle has more offensive support, but Stuzle is still outproducing the Sens next best scorer by 15% and is a bigger part of a better offensive team.... all while being 3 years younger. He's already lapped Suzuki's career high as a 20-21 year old, pacing for 94 points. At the same age Suzuki paced for 47 points - Stutzle has literally doubled Suzuki's draft+3 production...

It's not close, and it will never be close.

 

[Mrb1p]

Stutzle ('02)
73gp 37g 84p (41g 94p pace)
Factored in on 34.7% of Sens goals (despite missing 3 games)

Suzuki ('99)
77gp 23g 61p - 24g 65p pace
Factored in on 28.5% of Habs goals

That's a gigantic difference. Yeah, Stutzle has more offensive support, but Stuzle is still outproducing the Sens next best scorer by 15% and is a bigger part of a better offensive team.... all while being 3 years younger. He's already lapped Suzuki's career high as a 20-21 year old, pacing for 94 points. At the same age Suzuki paced for 47 points - Stutzle has literally doubled Suzuki's draft+3 production...

It's not close, and it will never be close.

They have a 5 pts difference at 5v5, 4 if you bias for primary points.

Stutzle outproduces Suzuki by like 40% on the PP and others, thats where the big swing is. Basically, yes, Stutzle is better and obviously much more valuable, but the numbers are skewed because Suzuki plays on such a tire fire team, his most common linemate is RHP, whom I love and think he can be a mid 6 kind of guy, but isnt exactly a world beater, right?

Stutzle was 4 points ahead of Nick when the injuries to Dach, Caufield, Xhekaj and Guhle happened. Suzuki actually had more points at 5v5. You can make the sample size bigger from Stlouis hire to Caufields injury, and thats 7 points.

Now, I think that 4 points isn't big enough of a difference, Stutzles better than that, its just not 100-60 difference. Hence, closer.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

They have a 5 pts difference at 5v5, 4 if you bias for primary points.

Stutzle outproduces Suzuki by like 40% on the PP and others, thats where the big swing is. Basically, yes, Stutzle is better and obviously much more valuable, but the numbers are skewed because Suzuki plays on such a tire fire team, his most common linemate is RHP, whom I love and think he can be a mid 6 kind of guy, but isnt exactly a world beater, right?

Stutzle was 4 points ahead of Nick when the injuries to Dach, Caufield, Xhekaj and Guhle happened. Suzuki actually had more points at 5v5. You can make the sample size bigger from Stlouis hire to Caufields injury, and thats 7 points.

Now, I think that 4 points isn't big enough of a difference, Stutzles better than that, its just not 100-60 difference. Hence, closer.

Suzuki
11.6% 5v5 on ice sh% vs prior career avg of 7.6%...

Stutzle
9.3% 5v5 on ice sh% vs prior career avg of 8.2%...

Geeze I wonder why Suzuki's 5v5 numbers look so good??? Maybe it has something to do with his on ice shooting percentage jumping 53% above his career average...

But even with that unsustainably high on ice shooting percentage, his 5v5 production is still far below that of the much younger Stutzle:

Suzuki
0.73 g/60
2.02 p/60
1.50 primary p/60

Stutzle
1.05 g/60
2.37 p/60
1.87 primary p/60

And Stutzle's possession numbers are FAAAR better.

Suzuki
43.3% xGF%
-0.8 rel xGF%

Stutzle
55.0% xGF%
6.3 rel xGF%

Stutzle is multiple tiers ahead of Suzuki. This is like comparing Nathan Mackinnon to Logan Couture. They aren't comparable players lol.

 

[Mrb1p]

Suzuki
11.6% 5v5 on ice sh% vs prior career avg of 7.6%...

Stutzle
9.3% 5v5 on ice sh% vs prior career avg of 8.2%...

Geeze I wonder why Suzuki's 5v5 numbers look so good??? Maybe it has something to do with his on ice shooting percentage jumping 53% above his career average...

But even with that unsustainably high on ice shooting percentage, his 5v5 production is still far below that of the much younger Stutzle:

Suzuki
0.73 g/60
2.02 p/60
1.50 primary p/60

Stutzle
1.05 g/60
2.37 p/60
1.87 primary p/60

And Stutzle's possession numbers are FAAAR better.

Suzuki
55.0% xGF%
6.3 rel xGF%

Stutzle
43.3% xGF%
-0.8 rel xGF%

Stutzle is multiple tiers ahead of Suzuki. This is like comparing Nathan Mackinnon to Logan Couture. They aren't comparable players lol.

Yeah except Stutzle isnt Mackinnon and Suzuki may very well be Couture. Its more like Couture to Eichel. Happy to see we agree.

Suzuki's results speak for themselves and bias'ing the stats in a season where hes not even playing at half his capacity because he doesnt care is pretty asinine.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Yeah except Stutzle isnt Mackinnon and Suzuki may very well be Couture. Its more like Couture to Eichel. Happy to see we agree.

We don't agree. Stutzle is way ahead of Mackinnon at the same age, and is also far outproducing Eichel this year.

Also, Eichel is way better than Couture. And a healthy Eichel is light years ahead of Couture.

Suzuki's results speak for themselves and bias'ing the stats in a season where hes not even playing at half his capacity because he doesnt care is pretty asinine.

What results? His career high 61 points? His career high 23 goals? This has been the most productive season of his career, so you'll have to explain how using his numbers from this season is "biased" against Suzuki. It's also been the luckiest season of his career, as evidenced by his on ice shooting percentage.

Please pick a season that would make him look more comparable to what Stutzle is doing. His possession numbers (both relative and absolute) were just as bad or worse last year, and his 5v5 scoring rates were far worse:

No matter how you swing it, you are never not going to be incredibly wrong on this. Nothing Suzuki has done through his 4 years in the league is remotely close to Stutzle.

They aren't close and they'll never be close. Just admit it and move on.

 

[Mrb1p]

We don't agree. Stutzle is way ahead of Mackinnon at the same age, and is also far outproducing Eichel this year.

Also, Eichel is way better than Couture. And a healthy Eichel is light years ahead of Couture.

What results? His career high 61 points? His career high 23 goals? This has been the most productive season of his career, so you'll have to explain how using his numbers from this season is "biased" against Suzuki. It's also been the luckiest season of his career, as evidenced by his on ice shooting percentage.

Please pick a season that would make him look more comparable to what Stutzle is doing. His possession numbers (both relative and absolute) were just as bad or worse last year, and his 5v5 scoring rates were far worse:

View attachment 681472

No matter how you swing it, you are never not going to be incredibly wrong on this. Nothing Suzuki has done through his 4 years in the league is remotely close to Stutzle.

They aren't close and they'll never be close. Just admit it and move on.

a) Suzuki is a 61 points player, you may need to watch him a little more, and have more context about his time on the Habs.
b) if you think Stutzle's as good as Mackinnon, okay, well just have to stop arguing, you don't see Stutzle in the same light as I do. I assume you voted for Stutzle in the Hughes vs Stutzle thread?
c) I said they were "close", as in "Its closer than one would think" =/= "it's close" as in "They're similar players". I opened up the debate saying "Tim is better than Suzuki", thats a pretty categorical statement.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

a) Suzuki is a 61 points player, you may need to watch him a little more, and have more context about his time on the Habs.

But he literally has never scored more than 61 points. Its not like Stutzle is playing on a great team either.

BTW - Still waiting for you tell me which season of Suzuki's I should be using in this comparison, or for you to explain to how using this year's numbers is somehow biased against Suzuki.

b) if you think Stutzle's as good as Mackinnon, okay, well just have to stop arguing, you don't see Stutzle in the same light as I do. I assume you voted for Stutzle in the Hughes vs Stutzle thread?

If you think I said Stutzle was as good as Mackinnon is right now, you need reading lessons.

I said he was ahead of where Mackinnon was at 20/21, are you disagreeing with that?

Stutzle has all the tools to be just as good as Mackinnon in a few years.

I assume you voted for Stutzle in the Hughes vs Stutzle thread?

It's a coinflip between the two, but yes I voted for Stutzle. I've had Stutzle (ever so slightly) ahead of Hughes for years now. Before Hughes' injury, I was ready to lean back towards him. It's as close to a draw as possible IMO.

c) I said they were "close", as in "Its closer than one would think" =/= "it's close" as in "They're similar players".

One would think that they aren't close at all. Saying "it's closer than one would think" means you think it's closer than "not close at all", but it's not. Stutzle is at least 2-3 tiers ahead of Suzuki despite the age difference. These two players are in no way comparable, and pretending that it's anything but "not close at all" is disingenuous at best.

 

[Mrb1p]

But he literally has never scored more than 61 points. Its not like Stutzle is playing on a great team either.

BTW - Still waiting for you tell me which season of Suzuki's I should be using in this comparison, or for you to explain to how using this year's numbers is somehow biased against Suzuki.

If you think I said Stutzle was as good as Mackinnon is right now, you need reading lessons.

I said he was ahead of where Mackinnon was at 20/21, are you disagreeing with that?

View attachment 681527

Stutzle has all the tools to be just as good as Mackinnon in a few years.

It's a coinflip between the two, but yes I voted for Stutzle. I've had Stutzle (ever so slightly) ahead of Hughes for years now. Before Hughes' injury, I was ready to lean back towards him. It's as close to a draw as possible IMO.

One would think that they aren't close at all. Saying "it's closer than one would think" means you think it's closer than "not close at all", but it's not. Stutzle is at least 2-3 tiers ahead of Suzuki despite the age difference. These two players are in no way comparable, and pretending that it's anything but "not close at all" is disingenuous at best.

Well, if your whole argument is centered around a stats sheet, I can agree. Suzuki is a mere 60 points center, probably not even a good 2C, by the looks of his numbers.

Let's ignore the PPG stretch of 80 games he had before everything started to come down on the Habs, and when brought up, let's just mention scoring luck.

You've boxed me in a corner because you only believe in raw statistics, it seems. Why even post here, if so ? You can just open up a page and have all the information available to you in an instant.

 

[King Karl]

And Stutzle's possession numbers are FAAAR better.

Suzuki
55.0% xGF%
6.3 rel xGF%

Stutzle
43.3% xGF%
-0.8 rel xGF%

Stutzle is multiple tiers ahead of Suzuki. This is like comparing Nathan Mackinnon to Logan Couture. They aren't comparable players lol.

Hang on - doesn't that show Suzuki has better possession number? Or am I completely misunderstanding what xGF% means.

 

[HarrisonFord]

#1 NJ
#2 Buffalo
#3 Detroit

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Hang on - doesn't that show Suzuki has better possession number? Or am I completely misunderstanding what xGF% means.

Whoops had the names reversed

 

[Korpse]

They have a 5 pts difference at 5v5, 4 if you bias for primary points.

Stutzle also has an 8 point difference at 4v4, 3v3 and shorthanded. Really interesting that along with PP you exclude those instances. Is it becuase Suzuki hasn’t produced in those situations?

 

[Mrb1p]

Stutzle also has an 8 point difference at 4v4, 3v3 and shorthanded. Really interesting that along with PP you exclude those instances. Is it becuase Suzuki hasn’t produced in those situations?

Its because it doesn't have the same replicability. I can't find a suitable statistical model that could work with 4v4, because it is so sparse, and 3v3, because it is so random.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Its because it doesn't have the same replicability. I can't find a suitable statistical model that could work with 4v4, because it is so sparse, and 3v3, because it is so random.

You know what's also not replicable? An 11.6% on ice shooting percentage at 5v5...

 

[Mrb1p]

You know what's also not replicable? An 11.6% on ice shooting percentage at 5v5...

Damn, right. Probably a bit less than 18% sh% at es?

Is suzuki a 40 points player when he stops being so lucky, or what?

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Damn, right. Probably a bit less than 18% sh% at es?

Is suzuki a 40 points player when he stops being so lucky, or what?

Who is shooting 18% at ES? Stutzle's 5v5 goal scoring isn't all that much above his ixG, like you'd expect from most star players (who generate so many chances in tight).

Is suzuki a 40 points player when he stops being so lucky, or what?

No, but he should probably have closer to 28-32 5v5 points instead of 39. That would put him on a 52-56 point pace playing on a terrible team with minimal offensive support.

He's probably anywhere from a ~55-70 point player, depending on how much help he's got.

 

[danisonfire]

Who is shooting 18% at ES? Stutzle's 5v5 goal scoring isn't all that much above his ixG, like you'd expect from most star players (who generate so many chances in tight).



No, but he should probably have closer to 28-32 5v5 points instead of 39. That would put him on a 52-56 point pace playing on a terrible team with minimal offensive support.

He's probably anywhere from a ~55-70 point player, depending on how much help he's got.

Suzuki's shooting % fell off a cliff when Caufield got injured.

Wouldn't his shooting percent increase if a higher % of his shots were coming from higher danger areas? The goalies also start to cheat to Caufield's size which increases the time to react to other shooters.

I can't see him at 55 points with Caufield on his line. He is at 61 already playing with an AHL team getting all the focus from the other teams. His point totals fell off a cliff once the injuries piled up.

 

[Mrb1p]

Who is shooting 18% at ES? Stutzle's 5v5 goal scoring isn't all that much above his ixG, like you'd expect from most star players (who generate so many chances in tight).



No, but he should probably have closer to 28-32 5v5 points instead of 39. That would put him on a 52-56 point pace playing on a terrible team with minimal offensive support.

He's probably anywhere from a ~55-70 point player, depending on how much help he's got.

And we somehow ignore that his PP production is going to go up if he plays on a better team ? Or that his production is bound to go up at ES with better players ?

Anyway, if you think Suzuki is going to average 62 points a year, you might do good to actually watch the player, because it's actually your understanding of the player that is flawed.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

And we somehow ignore that his PP production is going to go up if he plays on a better team ? Or that his production is bound to go up at ES with better players ?

How do you think he gets to 70 points? His 5v5 raw numbers aren't likely to increase even while playing with more talent because he's going to see some significant regression in his on ice sh% (they will actually probably drop), then add ~5-10 more PP points to get to 70...

Anyway, if you think Suzuki is going to average 62 points a year, you might do good to actually watch the player, because it's actually your understanding of the player that is flawed.

I didn't say he was going to average 62 points a year. Please read more carefully.

But sure, it's my understanding of the player that is flawed, not the biased Habs fan who had him ahead of Tim Stutzle and Brady Tkachuk less than a year ago lol.

Suzuki's shooting % fell off a cliff when Caufield got injured.

Wouldn't his shooting percent increase if a higher % of his shots were coming from higher danger areas? The goalies also start to cheat to Caufield's size which increases the time to react to other shooters.

I can't see him at 55 points with Caufield on his line. He is at 61 already playing with an AHL team getting all the focus from the other teams. His point totals fell off a cliff once the injuries piled up.

It would, but it's not likely to remain anywhere near as elevated as it has been. He's definitely benefited from a very high shooting percentage early in the season, and has been regressing to the mean since then.

 

[Mrb1p]

How do you think he gets to 70 points? His 5v5 raw numbers aren't likely to increase even while playing with more talent because he's going to see some significant regression in his on ice sh% (they will actually probably drop), then add ~5-10 more PP points to get to 70...


I didn't say he was going to average 62 points a year. Please read more carefully.

But sure, it's my understanding of the player that is flawed, not the biased Habs fan who had him ahead of Tim Stutzle and Brady Tkachuk less than a year ago lol.



It would, but it's not likely to remain anywhere near as elevated as it has been. He's definitely benefited from a very high shooting percentage early in the season, and has been regressing to the mean since then.

We wont agree, as usual you have a very skewed vew of players. I know for a fact you are wrong about Suzuki, he is not a 55 points player, lol.