Why is Auston Matthews considered a top 10 player?

[BruinLVGA]

LOL, have to dig to find something to make AM a top 5 player eh?

I didn’t want to say anything, but I was surprised that there’s even a stat for puck battles.

 

[Mr Hockey]

LOL, have to dig to find something to make AM a top 5 player eh?

It came across my hockey TL, today, impressive stat, no? thought I would share...

 

[besser]

You do not, and I mean absolutely do not trade a 15 point in 20 AHL game breaking forward in Kapanen for Drew Doughty, who's a UFA at seasons end?

 

[BruinLVGA]

Hmmm, can't think of any... cause Marner has been penciled in for 80-100 points this year, Matthews will get 50+ goals, Nylander is a lock for 85-90 points, Kapanen will get 60 points at least and Liljegren is the future top pairing D man of the Maple Leafs for the next 10 years starting next season, he's going to make anyone regret not taking him sooner in the draft

I was tarred and feathered before the season began for suggesting that any of the three rookies might not reach the same totals as last year...

 

[besser]

I was tarred and feathered before the season began for suggesting that any of the three rookies might not reach the same totals as last year...

I know, it's awful. Ive been reading HF Boards for 5+years and I've never seen a fanbase severely overrate their players as bad as Toronto does.

 

[Phion Keneuf]

Because he is.

 

[93LEAFS]

Please. It’s not only the 4 Selke. You are an advanced stats geek, you dont need me to tell you how dominating of a two way forward Bergeron was/is, do you?

I don’t follow you about that “more than 50% of weight...”. Could you clarify what you mean? I kinda lost you there.

I have not said that Giroux and Bergeron production is close. I said that if you want to ask your “Giroux vs Bergeron” question, you ought to substitute Bergeron with another strong two way forward with a similar production to BERGERON’S.

I tried to explain to you that that’s because Bergeron is a GENERATIONAL two way forward, possibly even the best of all times, and therefore it makes him such a niche example of a player to ask that question of yours. Meaning... how exceptional he is in what he does vs his peers <- that in my opinion makes him rise above the purely points production argument. He is just THAT special.

Now... If Bergeron was just a top 5-8 two way forward, then I would pick Giroux over him. Being Mr Selke / generational (or all time best) two way forward makes him overcome the lesser production in comparison to Giroux.

I know how dominating Bergeron is, which is why I use him as an example.

My point is, if you are going to say that a player is more valuable because of PPG or total points, and you think that is worth more than 50% of your evaluation, I think people are being deluded. That and draft position (shortly after a draft), seem to be the things always constantly pointed to, and are used as arguments that are above reproach.

We have a bunch of new measures that are now available since the NHL since 2007/08 due to the creation of real-time stats. I also pointed out, even during 2 of the seasons Bergeron won the Selke (which you point heavily to in your case for Bergeron), the same group of voters voted Giroux as the more valuable player. Which, I think should cancel out some of the luster in pointing directly to that award. Despite being viewed as the best 2-way forward in the league, they deemed Giroux more valuable.

Let's look at some of the things that makes Bergeron elite, such as his possession stats and primary scoring. Here is how Matthews ranks in those among the 8 centers who finish above him in total points since the start of the 2016/17 season (McDavid, Crosby, Giroux, Tavares, Scheifele, Seguin, Malkin, and Backstrom).

CF%: 7th
CF% Rel: 6th
xGF%: 3rd
xGF% Rel: 5th
5v5 p1 points: 2nd
5v5 p1/60: 3rd

I'm not saying Matthews is clearly better than any of those guys. I'd put McDavid, Crosby, and Malkin still clearly ahead. But, he's in the discussion with the rest at this point in his career. To just point to total points as the best measure I find ridiculous. The Leafs have an elite PP and he's highly efficient on it. It's coaches deployment that brings down his numbers. Most of these guys play on PP's that leave them out for 1:30 every time. The only ones who play on a team with a more efficient powerplay is Pittsburgh.

 

[BruinLVGA]

I know, it's awful. Ive been reading HF Boards for 5+years and I've never seen a fanbase severely overrate their players as bad as Toronto does.

I will say something positive: I love their passion...

 

[besser]

Because he is.

His argument is totally on point. Must be a top 5 player then.

 

[besser]

I will say something positive: I love their passion...

Thats true, and some of my favourite players have played for Toronto before, Gilmour, CuJo, Clark...

 

[ImpartialNHLfan]

I was tarred and feathered before the season began for suggesting that any of the three rookies might not reach the same totals as last year...

Seems like you will be wrong. They all will surpass there previous point totals.

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

Because he isn’t remotely close to being generational and/or all time best. Bergeron is there or nearly there as far as two way forwards are concerned.

PS: and it’s not “only Matthews”. Replace him with any forward who isn't generational or close to it and that’s the same treatment.

Using just points except when it's Bergeron seems really convenient. I think what makes Matthews elite is that he's equally strong on and off the puck, just using points ignores that.

I've always liked Kessel but just using the points he scores ignores the weaker aspects of his game.

 

[TheFinalWord]

I know, it's awful. Ive been reading HF Boards for 5+years and I've never seen a fanbase severely overrate their players as bad as Toronto does.

At least you're smitten with the Leafs. You have 35 posts in your history and 30 are about Leaf players. We appreciate your support.

 

[authentic]

[mod]

Matthews has 15 goals and 25 points at even strength in 30 games. Stamkos has 5 goals and 25 points at even strength in 38 games. Matthews is a much better defensive player, wins more puck battles, is a stronger backchecker, forechecker, better in the defensive zone, stronger on the puck, etc., figure it out.

I found it ridiculous that you were asking for simple even strength stats that are readily available, does that clear up the confusion here? You can find these stats on nhl.com where you look up the point leaders btw...

 

[BruinLVGA]

Seems like you will be wrong. They all will surpass there previous point totals.

I hope you are aware that both Marner and Nylander have worse ppg than last year...

 

[Morbo]

I was tarred and feathered before the season began for suggesting that any of the three rookies might not reach the same totals as last year...

bit early for back-patting on that one.

 

[93LEAFS]

I was tarred and feathered before the season began for suggesting that any of the three rookies might not reach the same totals as last year...

Your argument at that point heavily relied on the theory of a sophomore slump. Which is a faulty argument for high-end young forwards. At the time, I said Marner was a likely regression candidate (as was Laine and Werenski) to reach their point totals or PPG of last year, given their underlying numbers. This could be offset by more minutes. Considering we are at game 41, and they are only off their totals by about 2 to 4 points, I'd say its a bit early to claim victory on that one, as I would be if I claimed it on my points on which sophomores were likely to regress.

Players, especially forwards don't disproportionally slump in year 2. Players slump pretty much equally from year to year regardless of age. There are fall-offs at certain ages which are more predictable, but that doesn't apply to young players.

The sophomore slump has no real basis. Its mostly a symptom of rookies who put up numbers they have trouble ever matching again (therefore they had an aberration of a year) and people expecting too much growth with the players not living up to it.

 

[BruinLVGA]

Using just points except when it's Bergeron seems really convenient. I think what makes Matthews elite is that he's equally strong on and off the puck, just using points ignores that.

I've always liked Kessel but just using the points he scores ignores the weaker aspects of his game.

So, you are inferring that Bergeron is not generational as a two way forward, nor that being tied for first for Selke trophies could be a good beginning to start the discussion for him being the best two way forward ever?

Next question: do you see Matthews having elevated himself above his peers the same way Bergeron elevated himself above the other two way forwards? Does it look similar to you?

 

[93LEAFS]

So, you are inferring that Bergeron is not generational as a two way forward, nor that being tied for first for Selke trophies could be a good beginning to start the discussion for him being the best two way forward ever?

Next question: do you see Matthews having elevated himself above his peers the same way Bergeron elevated himself above the other two way forwards? Does it look similar to you?

I don't think you can group players as generational by play-type to be honest. You are either the best player of your generation with the hardware to support it (Harts and Pearsons) or you aren't.

 

[BruinLVGA]

Your argument at that point heavily relied on the theory of a sophomore slump. Which is a faulty argument for high-end young forwards. At the time, I said Marner was a likely regression candidate (as was Laine and Werenski) to reach their point totals or PPG of last year, given their underlying numbers. This could be offset by more minutes. Considering we are at game 41, and they are only off their totals by about 2 to 4 points, I'd say its a bit early to claim victory on that one, as I would be if I claimed it on my points on which sophomores were likely to regress.

Players, especially forwards don't disproportionally slump in year 2. Players slump pretty much equally from year to year regardless of age. There are fall-offs at certain ages which are more predictable, but that doesn't apply to young players.

The sophomore slump has no real basis. Its mostly a symptom of rookies who put up numbers they have trouble ever matching again (therefore they had an aberration of a year) and people expecting too much growth with the players not living up to it.

Call it whatever you want, splice it any way you like. Bottom line, I said that there was a strong possibility that 1, maybe 2 of the 3 rookies (I didn’t think Matthews would regress: I was right) would regress. The wave of Leafs fans outrage at that was intense. Fast forward half a season later and it looks like they should have been tarred & feathered.

 

[93LEAFS]

Call it whatever you want, splice it any way you like. Bottom line, I said that there was a strong possibility that 1, maybe 2 of the 3 rookies (I didn’t think Matthews would regress: I was right) would regress. The wave of Leafs fans outrage at that was intense. Fast forward half a season later and it looks like they should have been tarred & feathered.

Didn't you also call for the Leafs to fall out of the playoffs in those same threads, which doesn't look likely at the moment.

 

[Halla]

Why is Auston Matthews considered a top-ten, even top-five player already? Obviously he had an incredible rookie season, but having him rated above guys like Stamkos, Schiefele, etc is unjustified imo. I will name all the forwards I think are better than him.

(In no order)

McDavid
Stamkos
Kucherov
Crosby
Malkin
Ovechkin
Tarasenko
Tavares
Benn
Backstrom
Kane
Gaudreau
Schiefele
Wheeler

Just of the top of my head. In the future Matthews could pass most of these guys, but why is he already considered so great? Toronto Bias?

SO Mcdavid gets to leapfrog all of these guys but there is no possible way Matthews can be top 10?

Matthews had the same amount of pts and more goals than Ovechkin and Benn last year. He beat Gaudreau by 22g/8pts. Stamkos was hurt most of the year, but the year before that was pretty meh by his standards with 36g/64pts. Tarasenko is a winger with the exact same number of goals as AM34 since last season, despite playing 11 more games. how is a goal scoring winger > goal scoring C who is more productive


by the way just for fun

Schiefele (draft+7) 15g,38pts, +8 in 38 games (1.00ppg)
Matthews (draft+2) 17g,31pts,+16 in 30 games (1.03ppg)


maybe look a bit further into it too. Matthews has 15g/25pts in 30 games at ES. thats incredible. thats a 41g/68pt full season pace at ES only, which easily tops what several guys on your list did last year in all situations. do those guys all split PP time as well? nope

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

So, you are inferring that Bergeron is not generational as a two way forward, nor that being tied for first for Selke trophies could be a good beginning to start the discussion for him being the best two way forward ever?

Next question: do you see Matthews having elevated himself above his peers the same way Bergeron elevated himself above the other two way forwards? Does it look similar to you?

No you're inferring that. I think using a criteria but omitting a player is questionable, even if he's the best at it. Either points are what matters most or you need to look at all aspects of play for each player.

What makes Matthews special is how good he is without the puck, he'd still be a good player if all he had was the offense but it's the full package he offers that's getting him the rave reviews.

 

[BruinLVGA]

I don't think you can group players as generational by play-type to be honest. You are either the best player of your generation with the hardware to support it (Harts and Pearsons) or you aren't.

You really don’t believe this, do you? If Orr and Gretzky were to play at their best during the same years, you would say that only one was generational? Lemieux and Gretzky did overlap. Only one was generational then?
I don’t agree with that. But I agree with the hardware thing. And Bergeron has the hardware for two way forwards. More than anyone not named Gainey.

 

[CujosMask]

Call it whatever you want, splice it any way you like. Bottom line, I said that there was a strong possibility that 1, maybe 2 of the 3 rookies (I didn’t think Matthews would regress: I was right) would regress. The wave of Leafs fans outrage at that was intense. Fast forward half a season later and it looks like they should have been tarred & feathered.

Neither of them are regressing, so you just sort of sound real dumb here.