Why is Auston Matthews considered a top 10 player?

[93LEAFS]

The hardware he has and the numbers related to that say differently: generational two way forward. One more Selke and he will be the undisputed best of all times in that specialty.

He hasn't been nominated for the Hart once. I'd say winning one or two is at least required to be in any generational discussion.

Generational is an overall statement. You don't break it down by play-type.

The numbers related to that, are also dismissed to you as un-important unless it concerns Bergeron, as total points is the best measure. I guess Giroux is better.

 

[BruinLVGA]

It wouldn't apply to Crosby because he has the points as well. You're saying points are what matter expect one player. You don't think that's a strange position to have?

I think Bergeron is a good player but if you're going to bring up his play without the puck you have to do it for everyone.

It applies to everyone who is generational. I used Crosby because it was the first generational player that popped in my mind. Was it so difficult to extrapolate. Really?

Sure. Bring anyone else you deem generational & who doesnt have the high production like a Crosby.

 

[paul pearce]

why is mcdavid considered a top ten player? the guy cant even lead his team to the playoffs i thought he was the greatest

 

[BruinLVGA]

He hasn't been nominated for the Hart once. I'd say winning one or two is at least required to be in any generational discussion.

Generational is an overall statement. You don't break it down by play-type.

Please. You seem very intelligent. Don’t go there. I am sure you didn’t miss the million times I told you that “generational” in relation to Bergeron it’s about his two way play. And the trophy for that is the Selke. Which he has way more than anyone else in his generation.

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

It applies to everyone who is generational. I used Crosby because it was the first generational player that popped in my mind. Was it so difficult to extrapolate. Really?

Sure. Bring anyone else you deem generational & who doesnt have the high production like a Crosby.

Generational is an arbitrary metric. You don't just get to decide who benefits from your clause.

I don't see how my position of you have to judge everyone by the same criteria is the wrong one.

 

[authentic]

why is mcdavid considered a top ten player? the guy cant even lead his team to the playoffs i thought he was the greatest

To be fair his team really sucks.

 

[authentic]

Please. You seem very intelligent. Don’t go there. I am sure you didn’t miss the million times I told you that “generational” in relation to Bergeron it’s about his two way play. And the trophy for that is the Selke. Which he has way more than anyone else in his generation.

It is for defensive forward really. He is likely not the best two way forward in the game, that is probably McDavid or Crosby if he returns to form. Among other elite defensive forwards Kopitar is a better two way forward. Can't ignore the offensive part and Bergeron doesn't really stack up very well there.

 

[93LEAFS]

Please. You seem very intelligent. Don’t go there. I am sure you didn’t miss the million times I told you that “generational” in relation to Bergeron it’s about his two way play. And the trophy for that is the Selke.

Whatever, it's going in circles. We fundamentally disagree on the term. How I view generational, is a term for all players and requires multiple Hart and/or Lindseys with a rare exception for pre-1967 players on the Habs, who appear to be victims of bigoted voting (Richard and Harvey).

I think it's ridiculous to hold different standards on how you evaluate players who play the same position, just because you think a player is generational. The criteria behind evaluations for players based on the position should stay relatively consistent. I don't think one argument comes in for certain players, where total points are most important in all others. You look at players numbers in totality.

 

[BruinLVGA]

Generational is an arbitrary metric. You don't just get to decide who benefits from your clause.

I don't see how my position of you have to judge everyone by the same criteria is the wrong one.

Ah, the arbitrary defense. Fine. He is the best two way forward of this generation: stats show it. The 4 Selke elevate him above anyone else. Objectively “Generational” enough for you?

 

[TMLeafs17]

This is getting ridiculous. Have you left your keyboard yet today?

 

[authentic]

I think you Leaf fans should walk away ...

Maple Leafs is a fitting username for you.

 

[BruinLVGA]

Whatever, it's going in circles. We fundamentally disagree on the term. How I view generational, is a term for all players and requires multiple Hart and/or Lindseys with a rare exception for pre-1967 players on the Habs, who appear to be victims of bigoted voting (Richard and Harvey).

I think it's ridiculous to hold different standards on how you evaluate players who play the same position, just because you think a player is generational. The criteria behind evaluations for players based on the position should stay relatively consistent. I don't think one argument comes in for certain players, where total points are most important in all others. You look at players numbers in totality.

Let me put it this way: if you tell me that from this point on in your life you will never ever say something like “player X was the best <insert one of: “forward”, “power forward”, “two way forward”, “defenseman”, “offensive defenseman”, “defensive defenseman”, etc etc> of his generation”, I think that you are lying through your teeth.
Anytime you will say a phrase like that, remember this exchange where for you there was only one type of generational...

 

[BruinLVGA]

It is for defensive forward really. He is likely not the best two way forward in the game, that is probably McDavid or Crosby if he returns to form. Among other elite defensive forwards Kopitar is a better two way forward. Can't ignore the offensive part and Bergeron doesn't really stack up very well there.

Don’t agree with McDavid or Crosby re two way. Kopitar, probably he has better peak purely for the offense (same goes for Datsyuk). But for career long performance, it’s Bergeron’s. No one has even close to his 4 Selke and how he thoroughly dominates the opposition. No sir.

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

Ah, the arbitrary defense. Fine. He is the best two way forward of this generation: stats show it. The 4 Selke elevate him above anyone else. Objectively “Generational” enough for you?

You're still finding ways to omit a player from a certain criteria. You need to judge everyone by the same criteria or you're just making things up.

What makes Matthews great is his two way play, ignoring that part to demean his accomplishments is wrong, making a clause to omit Bergeron is worse.

This is a thread on why is Matthews considered a top ten player, not why is Matthews one of the ten most likely players to win an Art Ross.

 

[93LEAFS]

Let me put it this way: if you tell me that from this point on in your life you will never ever say something like “player X was the best <insert one of: “forward”, “power forward”, “two way forward”, “defenseman”, “offensive defenseman”, “defensive defenseman”, etc etc> of his generation”, I think that you are lying through your teeth.
Anytime you will say a phrase like that, remember this exchange where for you there was only one type of generational...

If you don't believe me fine. But, I said the exact same thing in the generational thread which had nothing to do with this yesterday, and have said the same thing for years. Here's my post from that thread. Players can be the best at a certain trait for a generation, but I would never label that generational.

Best player of a generation, some times there might be two that can overlap to an extent. A requirement to be in the discussion for me is multiple Harts and/or Lindsey/Pearson's, atleast for players who have played in the modern era (as I think Harvey and Richard who have one Hart between them belong in the discussion, and especially Richard may have been victims of biased voting, Harvey was traded in his prime for trying to start a union to a bottom feeder). I do think team accomplishments do play into it, which hurts Ovi. Conn Smythe's help.

Here is how I'll break it down. Keep in mind the Pearson/Lindsey award wasn't created until 1971-72 season and Conn Smythe in 1964-65. The clear generational guys are Gretzky (9 Harts, 5 Pearsons, 2 Conn Smythes) Mario (3 Harts, 4 Pearsons, 2 Conn Smythes), Howe (6 Harts), and Orr (3 Harts, 1 Pearson). Past that it is debatable. The next group up for discussion would include Crosby (2 Harts, 3 Lindsey/Pearsons, 2 Conn Smythes), Clarke(3 Harts, 1 Pearson), Bobby Hull (2 Harts), Richard (1 Hart), Harvey (none), Beliveau (2 Harts, 1 Conn Smythe), LaFleur (2 Harts, 3 Pearsons, 1 Conn Smythe), Hasek (2 Harts, 2 Pearsons), Mikita (2 Harts), Ovechkin (3 Harts, 3 Pearsons), Phil Esposito (2 Harts, 2 Pearsons), Messier (2 Harts, 2 Pearsons, 1 Smythes) and Jagr (1 Hart, 3 Pearsons).

Realize, there are a hell of a lot of great players left off that list. From Brett Hull (1 Hart, 1 Pearson), Brian Trottier (1 Hart, 1 Pearson, 1 Conn Smythe), Mike Bossy (1 Conn Smythe), Ray Bourque (None), Denis Potvin (None), Lidstrom (1 Conn Smythe), Sawchuk (None), Roy (3 Conn Smythes), Glenn Hall (1 Conn Smythe), Malkin (1 Hart, 1 Lindsey, 1 Conn Smythe), Sakic (1 Hart, 1 Pearson, 1 Conn Smythe), Forsberg (1 Hart), Yzerman (1 Pearson, 1 Conn Smythe), etc.

Now, there is also generational prospects in the modern era, who are by far the best prospects who come along once every 5 to 10 years, and would be the easy number 1 pick in any draft that contained them in that time frame. That list consists of Lemieux, Lindros, Crosby and McDavid. In any draft going forward 5 years in both direction, there is no player who was viewed as a better pick at the day of their draft. Due to being so exceptional, they are viewed as players who without injuries could realistically dominate the league in a generational fashion. Lemieux is clearly a generational player, Crosby probably is, Lindros managed to win a Hart but had his career destroyed by injuries and didn't end up becoming one. McDavid is tracking that way, already possessing one Hart and one Pearson before his 21st Birthday.

 

[BruinLVGA]

If you don't believe me fine. But, I said the exact same thing in the generational thread which had nothing to do with this yesterday, and have said the same thing for years. Here's my post from that thread. Players can be the best at a certain trait for a generation, but I would never label that generational.

Ok, in that case we can only agree to disagree then.

 

[BayStreetBully]

You're still finding ways to omit a player from a certain criteria. You need to judge everyone by the same criteria or you're just making things up.

What makes Matthews great is his two way play, ignoring that part to demean his accomplishments is wrong, making a clause to omit Bergeron is worse.

This is a thread on why is Matthews considered a top ten player, not why is Matthews one of the ten most likely players to win an Art Ross.

It’s time he takes a break. Some people get way too rattled by the hockey Mecca of the world.

 

[BruinLVGA]

You're still finding ways to omit a player from a certain criteria. You need to judge everyone by the same criteria or you're just making things up.

What makes Matthews great is his two way play, ignoring that part to demean his accomplishments is wrong, making a clause to omit Bergeron is worse.

This is a thread on why is Matthews considered a top ten player, not why is Matthews one of the ten most likely players to win an Art Ross.

I see you decided not to answer my question.

I am not going to explain to you why this went into Bergeron. Just know that if Matthews would be doing EXACTLY what Bergeron does, including the same lower production, I would say the exact same thing for Matthews that I am saying for Bergeron.

As things stand, Matthews doesn’t have the production to be a top 5/10 player (and I am not including the top goalies and D in this...) and there’s nothing else that he does that is so much superior in relation to his peers (like Bergeron does when two way play is concerned) to bring him into the top 5/10 players of the league.

Now I got a game to watch. Last reply here for quite a while.

 

[besser]

It’s time he takes a break. Some people get way too rattled by the hockey Mecca of the world.

There should be a website dedicated to just Maple Leaf talk. They can all agree amongst themselves about Matthews > McDavid and how Andersen is a top 3 goalie in the world and the rest of the fan bases can finally breathe a sigh of relief as the first post of any forum won't be about Leafs


One can dream

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

There should be a website dedicated to just Maple Leaf talk. They can all agree amongst themselves about Matthews > McDavid and how Andersen is a top 3 goalie in the world and the rest of the fan bases can finally breathe a sigh of relief as the first post of any forum won't be about Leafs


One can dream

Fans of other teams could also stop talking about the Leafs and trying to pick fights (not saying that some Leaf fans don't also do that). If you post a thread about why think x player of a certain team isn't as good as people are saying that the fans of that team won't say anything?

This place would be a lot easier to read if people stopped the almost blatant trolling at times (not directed at you).

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

I see you decided not to answer my question.

I am not going to explain to you why this went into Bergeron. Just know that if Matthews would be doing EXACTLY what Bergeron does, including the same lower production, I would say the exact same thing for Matthews that I am saying for Bergeron.

As things stand, Matthews doesn’t have the production to be a top 5/10 player (and I am not including the top goalies and D in this...) and there’s nothing else that he does that is so much superior in relation to his peers (like Bergeron does when two way play is concerned) to bring him into the top 5/10 players of the league.

Now I got a game to watch. Last reply here for quite a while.

You're using an arbitrary metric to omit a player on your team. I see no reason to respond to that, generational doesn't mean anything. I really don't see how my position of you need to judge everyone by the same criteria is a radical idea.

 

[BlueBaron]

There should be a website dedicated to just Maple Leaf talk. They can all agree amongst themselves about Matthews > McDavid and how Andersen is a top 3 goalie in the world and the rest of the fan bases can finally breathe a sigh of relief as the first post of any forum won't be about Leafs


One can dream

It would be a dream not having to read the same people constantly disparage our players with feeble arguments and deceptive facts. If people responded rationally to the Leafs it would indeed be a dream. You have with your very own words displayed how an entire fan base gets misrepresented by people who know full what they are saying is bullshit and that they are citing the opinion of a couple of people to try and make a whole group look bad.

Do you consider this responsible, mature behaviour? Sorry pal, you lost your moral high ground with that nonsensical post.

 

[CujosMask]

talk at the end of the season. pace means nothing and is a giant what if

That's literally what I was saying.

 

[Snippit]

McDavid
Crosby
Kucherov
Kane
Malkin
Tavares
Getzlaf
Stamkos
Karlsson
Doughty
Hedman

Here you go. We can all go home now.

 

[BlueBaron]

McDavid
Crosby
Kucherov
Kane
Malkin
Tavares
Stamkos
Karlsson
Doughty
Hedman

Here you go. We can all go home now.

You sure take yourself and your opinion seriously. ROFL