Oh okay. So as predicted, continue to lie to make your point. LOL. I guess those leafs fans crying in that video and on Hfboards didn't really happen.
And lol at "not too far behind," maybe that's how it is in Leafs fans heads but it's not the case when you look at something objective likes stats, awards, and the scoring leaders chart.
Oh it is objectivity you want.
OK first off it would be good if you learned that the Hart trophy is not awarded as follows: "newsflash for you guys' when the entire league votes him as MVP, you know, like the Hart trophy McDavid won". That's voted on by the Professional Hockey Writers' Association. If you want to play the champion of objectivity card, you should at least get your facts straight.
With that out of the way, let's delve. We are currently witnessing McDavid's third season and Matthews second. Their 82 game pace has them finishing with 91 and 82 points. A whole 9 point spread. I suppose in your mind that's a huge distance and must be all "in Leaf fans heads" despite that seeming like YOUR OPINION and flying quite directly in the face of the objectivity you so crave.
Now if we were talking some 20 or 30 point difference, there might be an argument to be made that it is too big of a gap to make up with other parts of your game but 9 points? The conversation sure gets a lot more interesting. There are a lot of numbers to go through where you will find Matthews comes out ahead and those are objective numbers but I am sure when brought up, you will toss them aside in favour of something non-objective.
See I have heard very few people attempt to portray Matthews as better but many who have said the separation between them is not that great. 9 points plus analysis of all the other factors would seem to OBJECTIVELY lean in their favour. What we do get around here is a lot of people throwing stuff out without the context. Like for instance the insistence on comparing Matthews rookie year to McDavid's sophomore one. That's inherently biased and avoids context like playing on an all rookie line and 7 rookie team. When you compare year to year, McDavid still had far more production in his rookie year, though again, context is important in noting he spent the year stapled to a player who was a top 5 scorer in the entire league over the previous half decade (not Hyman/Nylander/Brown). Then it will be "my god...trophies". OK. Comparing rookie years Matthews won one trophy and finished 4 goals short of a second one. McDavid? That's a little tongue in cheek in that I realize Connor would have won the Calder if not injured but objectively speaking, that's how it played out. I don't expect Matthews will rack up the Hart and such this year. I do expect he'll be in the running for it for years to come. If not for injury, his G/GP pace has him once again in the hunt for that trophy.
Another objective measure you won't like is team winning percentages since they both entered the league. For the Leafs it is .516 and for the Oilers .468. Of course the first thing you are going to do is run to "you can't penalize Connor because he plays on a worse team". Here's the thing. Matthews walked onto the last place team in the league....a team that featured 7 rookies, which is literally 1/3 of the entire team, and you would want to make the argument he walked into a better situation? Moreover, Leaf fans have been told ad nauseum that every single player or person in their organization is inferior to what Edmonton has. Somewhere along the line you guys - if you are being objective - need to reconcile that something is not right. Whether that is that maybe the total package Matthews brings really IS more important than just points or whether it is your assessment of many of the other players. Regardless, the OBJECTIVE results tell you you need to rethink your analysis. The alternative of course is to continue onward with your heads implanted up your posteriors.
Lastly is this business of "generational". Since you want to be the champion of objectivity, I would suggest you look at how the actual generational talents (Gretzky, Lemieux, Orr) stacked up versus their peers three years into the league. Note when examining goals, assists and points how big the percentage gaps was between them and their peers as well as the names of the others involved. Do this and you will quickly realize that OBJECTIVELY McDavid has no business being mentioned in the same breath as the generational ones. Not to date anyways. He hasn't created the gap and in many cases is behind guys that wouldn't come within miles of the generational ones.
