Training Camp continued

[Dekes For Days]

Well, in this case the grass IS greener because Nathan Mackinnon and his team are defending a Stanley Cup title.

The grass is not greener. Matthews is a better player than Mackinnon, and a more physical presence to boot. The fact that the Colorado team won a Cup has zero relevance to the individual player comparisons.

It would be completely disingenuous to suggest his normal play style resembles that of “the best power forward in the game.”

What do you think a power forward is? Because Matthews is the literal definition. A 6'3", 210+ pound beast, who can barrel through anything and physically overpower anybody. Lays crushing hits. Uses his body to protect the puck. Goes to the dirty areas. What would be disingenuous would be suggesting that that player who is also the reigning Hart trophy winner is not the best power forward in the game.

 

[ACC1224]

Well, in this case the grass IS greener because Nathan Mackinnon and his team are defending a Stanley Cup title.

But the point of this is only to say Matthews could incorporate elements from other elite players such as a more fiery physical game.

It would be completely disingenuous to suggest his normal play style resembles that of “the best power forward in the game.” We only get glimpses of that from time to time.

Yep showed a bit last night but it tends to be a rare occurrence.
He needs far more of that consistent effort to be truly all around elite. We know he's an elite scorer.
Was fun watching Ovechkin last night still hitting everything in sight.

 

[aingefan]

Nah too early to touch. If the line looks amazing have to assume Malgins presence is a factor for now. For example maybe his poise and calm, risk free game so far allows Nylander to buzz around everywhere. Some of those defensive displays from Nylander have been solo missions where he abandons position to track a guy down and get the puck, so have to assume Malgins presence is allowing that. Him and JT know how to re calibrate on the fly when you have someone dynamic like Nylander on the line.

Yup, and maybe NickRob provides that weapon on the 3rd line when the inevitable trade is made in a few weeks.
Spread out the offence.

 

[kb]

Malgin didn't do anything to be on the hot seat or be spoken about negatively, but I also didn't expect JT and Nylander to find a groove so early. With Nylander also being all over the defensive zone with JT in the first 2 games I'm wondering if Robertson hovering around waiting to unleash his shot is the better play.

JT had 3 guys on him on a play and he fed Nylander a perfect pass. No longer need another zone entry threat to open Nylander up. JT in elite mode, Nylander buzzing literally every where....that shot Robertson possesses looking real good right now to finish the line off.

Or conversely, perhaps they (JT/Nylander) look this good because they have a third player on their line who complements both players and let's them do their thing? I mean Malgin had a goal on Wednesday and hit the post yesterday.

If a line looks good, let it be.

And we all need to remember.....you can't call up Robertson to replace Malgin without waiving or trading Malgin, and more importantly, the Leafs would also have to make another trade to fit Robertson under the cap because Robertson has a higher cap hit than Malgin.

I say don't mess with success - let's give it some runway. It's the best the line has looked in years.

Well, in this case the grass IS greener because Nathan Mackinnon and his team are defending a Stanley Cup title.

But the point of this is only to say Matthews could incorporate elements from other elite players such as a more fiery physical game.

It would be completely disingenuous to suggest his normal play style resembles that of “the best power forward in the game.” We only get glimpses of that from time to time.

Did you not watch the game last night? Or are you being willfully obtuse in order to try to win an internet argument?

Matthews had more hits/gm than Mack, and is leading the Leafs in that category so far.

Matthews has also outhit Mackinnon every year since he joined the Leafs (1 less last season in many fewer games).

 

[Stephen]

Or conversely, perhaps they (JT/Nylander) look this good because they have a third player on their line who complements both players and let's them do their thing? I mean Malgin had a goal on Wednesday and hit the post yesterday.

If a line looks good, let it be.

And we all need to remember.....you can't call up Robertson to replace Malgin without waiving or trading Malgin, and more importantly, the Leafs would also have to make another trade to fit Robertson under the cap because Robertson has a higher cap hit than Malgin.

I say don't mess with success - let's give it some runway. It's the best the line has looked in years.


Did you not watch the game last night? Or are you being willfully obtuse in order to try to win an internet argument?

Matthews had more hits/gm than Mack, and is leading the Leafs in that category so far.

Matthews has also outhit Mackinnon every year since he joined the Leafs (1 less last season in many fewer games).

The issue isn’t whether Matthews hits or doesn’t hit on any given night or what the aggregate volume of hits is, but people don’t actually watch a lot of Nathan Mackinnon and how he weaponizes speed, play the physical game like a young Ovechkin. And he has won a Stanley Cup. These are traits I want to see more of in Matthews. But if you’re happy with what you see and don’t think there’s any room for improvement, that’s your opinion.

 

[Stephen]

Yep showed a bit last night but it tends to be a rare occurrence.
He needs far more of that consistent effort to be truly all around elite. We know he's an elite scorer.
Was fun watching Ovechkin last night still hitting everything in sight.

Kinda funny when some aspect of Matthews’ game is compared to other greats like Ovechkin and Mackinnon and that stirs up controversy.

 

[ULF_55]

The issue isn’t whether Matthews hits or doesn’t hit on any given night or what the aggregate volume of hits is, but people don’t actually watch a lot of Nathan Mackinnon and how he weaponizes speed, play the physical game like a young Ovechkin. And he has won a Stanley Cup. These are traits I want to see more of in Matthews. But if you’re happy with what you see and don’t think there’s any room for improvement, that’s your opinion.

Matthews cannot play like MacKinnon without his speed.

It doesn't make MacKinnon better nor worse, just a different player.

But now that we're discussing it, I wonder how the percentage of rush goals versus zone possession goals compare.

For excitement, you go with MacKinnon, but excitement doesn't mean wins.

 

[Stephen]

Matthews cannot play like MacKinnon without his speed.

It doesn't make MacKinnon better nor worse, just a different player.

But now that we're discussing it, I wonder how the percentage of rush goals versus zone possession goals compare.

For excitement, you go with MacKinnon, but excitement doesn't mean wins.

Mackinnon also has a “snap show” quality you see in Draisaitl as well. Which is an unpredictable mean streak that can result in disproportionate retaliation at any given point and just enough dirtiness in elbows, high sticks and slashes and cross checks. I like this approach especially early in a game since it creates more room for later.

Matthews has noticeably battled back vs Weber, in the Tampa series etc. but I wouldn’t say it’s a normal part of his game.

 

[andora]

I would love matthews to have a f*** off moment and make whomever pay as much as anyone.. but one thing i came away with from last night is the overall theme of emotion and how little there seemed to be

 

[ULF_55]

Mackinnon also has a “snap show” quality you see in Draisaitl as well. Which is an unpredictable mean streak that can result in disproportionate retaliation at any given point and just enough dirtiness in elbows, high sticks and slashes and cross checks. I like this approach especially early in a game since it creates more room for later.

Matthews has noticeably battled back vs Weber, in the Tampa series etc. but I wouldn’t say it’s a normal part of his game.

I guess, contracts being equal (which they aren't right now due to expiry dates) would you rather MacKinnon or Matthews?

I might lean towards MacKinnon but that's probably because Matthews lack of success in the post season, and how he hasn't really elevated his game in the post-season. Though MacKinnon has only succeeded once.

 

[ACC1224]

I guess, contracts being equal (which they aren't right now due to expiry dates) would you rather MacKinnon or Matthews?

I might lean towards MacKinnon but that's probably because Matthews lack of success in the post season, and how he hasn't really elevated his game in the post-season. Though MacKinnon has only succeeded once.

All things being equal I think most take Mackinnon, can't really go wrong with either though.

Weird topic for a training camp thread.

 

[kb]

The issue isn’t whether Matthews hits or doesn’t hit on any given night or what the aggregate volume of hits is, but people don’t actually watch a lot of Nathan Mackinnon and how he weaponizes speed, play the physical game like a young Ovechkin. And he has won a Stanley Cup. These are traits I want to see more of in Matthews. But if you’re happy with what you see and don’t think there’s any room for improvement, that’s your opinion.

You are focusing in on one specific element of his game at the exclusion of all others and putting that on a pedestal as your sole reasoning? Impressive. If we are doing that, how many 1st team all-star selections does Mackinnon have? How many Hart trophies? How many Richard trophies? How many Lindsay awards? How many 100 point seasons?

Saying he's physical like Ovechkin is so far out of realty I don't even know how you can type that with a straight face....it's your imagination of who he is, not the reality. Look up how many hits Ovechkin has, and get back to us.

More importantly, how does a collective team accomplishment elevate one singular player above an other? So NAK > Matthews because.....cup? And remember.....a team is only as strong as it's weakest link. That's neither Matthews nor MacKinnon.

Those are very interesting takes. And by interesting I mean.....flat out ridiculous.

 

[ULF_55]

All things being equal I think most take Mackinnon, can't really go wrong with either though.

Weird topic for a training camp thread.

Especially, considering training camp is well over ...

 

[ACC1224]

Especially, considering training camp is well over ...

Exactly, shut it down..

 

[Stephen]

You are focusing in on one specific element of his game at the exclusion of all others and putting that on a pedestal as your sole reasoning? Impressive. If we are doing that, how many 1st team all-star selections does Mackinnon have? How many Hart trophies? How many Richard trophies? How many Lindsay awards? How many 100 point seasons?

Saying he's physical like Ovechkin is so far out of realty I don't even know how you can type that with a straight face....it's your imagination of who he is, not the reality. Look up how many hits Ovechkin has, and get back to us.

More importantly, how does a collective team accomplishment elevate one singular player above an other? So NAK > Matthews because.....cup? And remember.....a team is only as strong as it's weakest link. That's neither Matthews nor MacKinnon.

Those are very interesting takes. And by interesting I mean.....flat out ridiculous.

I take Matthews over Mackinnon going forward as overall hockey players but there are elements of Mackinnon’s game that I would want to see incorporated into Matthews approach as it would make him harder to play against.

I think that’s a fairly vanilla statement which doesn’t need defending.

 

[Stephen]

Exactly, shut it down..

Done.