To give him the benefit of the doubt english is boring af

Well if you could have either player to build a team around you can’t really go wrong. I wouldn’t say either is better but both deserve to be considered in the same class.

matthews> point

hahahahahahahahahaha
your embarrassing me WRONG! try again

How did you do your math?? You say, "this year Point had 64 points 66 games played. Matthews had 80 points in 70 games played. Points this year was headed for 112 points, and Matthews was headed for 114 points."

Over 82 games, Point was on pace for 80 points (not 112) and Matthews was on pace for 94 (not 114).

Then you say, "Point was carrying his team to the cup and had 33 points in only 23 games played, While Matthews only had 6 points in 5 games played"

But if you look at their first 5 playoff games each (not counting TBL play-ins), Point had 7 points in his first 5 games and Matthews had 6 points in his first 5 games. Only one point separating them -- Matthews just had a smaller sample size. You say the amount of points was why Point led his team - but Matthews only had one less point -- so now 7 points in 5 games is leading but 6 points in 5 games isn't good enough? It just doesn't make sense. And the supporting cast in TBL is so much stronger than TOR, especially in goal and on defense. Maybe if TOR had a defenseman who put up 10 goals (3rd most in a playoffs in NHL history), or a goalie with a 92.7 SV% and <2.00 GAA, or another forward that put up more points than Point in the playoffs (2 less games, but still stands).

I understand the argument you're trying to make, but the way you're going about it is doesn't work. The math doesn't make sense and you picking small sample sizes while ignoring other TBL teammates having historically good post-seasons as well.

It's almost as if they are two different players, playing in two different systems for two different teams with completely different teammates.

Both players have roles and playstyles that fit their teams needs.

maybe he needs to pay attention in math as well

im in 8th grade i've had enough im SURE you were the EXACT same way. what grade are you in or are you gonna lie and say 12th

i'm in grade 5 my man

I mean... you could say that Point at his contract in more valuable than Mathews at his(which isn’t a bad contract by any means). I would take Mathews over point all day unless I already had 3 snipers on the PP. But I do like the take and it’s very controversial! All TML fans will be attacking and no TB fans will agree so I think that will be telling. But Salary would certainly need to be addressed

really? youre really gonna pull that one on me? really?

To get their projected, 82-game point total - you take their current point total (Point's 64 points) and divide it by the total number of games played so far (66). Once you have that number you multiply it by the total number of games in a season (82). So for Point, 64*66 = 0.97 --> 0.97*82 = ~80 --- not sure how you were doing it before, but that's the way to get their expected point total over an 82-game season.

I know i hit the wrong number when I was claculating

Twice.

Just trying to help.

yeah I know thanks for the heads up.

See the problem is not with your opinion, the problem is that the arguments u made are bad. Point plays on a better line and team you cannot argue he doesn’t. Point is not the best player on his team or his line. He is the 3rd/4th valuable player on his team.

I like your take, Point is good I'd say this though you should probably look at some basic stats, or maybe use the right ones? Because you said point had 64 pts in 66 games on pace for 112?

Next I don't think point "led" his team to the playoffs. I do think he was important to the success but when you are talking leading your team look at what MacKinnon was doing. Point was a dang good player but he didn't lead his team, Hedman Vasilevski and Kucherov where arguably all close to or more important. I'd agree if you said point over Kucherov.


IMHO I think Point is a top 5/10 C. Point is set up to score in the playoffs. With a lines on your team like the Coleman one or the Cirelli one point doesn't have to start in the Dzone and pretty much never does. Looking at it this way you are now relying on Point and Kucherov for pretty much 1 thing, scoring goals. He had 60%+ ozone start. Matthews was 58%. I do believe Matthews is the lesser player at this current time Matthews played 25% of the time with Marner and Tavares and 40% with Marner and Hyman. I just don't think Point is the #3 C as you said above. Point would be behind Crosby, Mack, McDavid, Eichel, maybe Malkin and Barkov as well for Centers.

Yes for sure. Both of them had a 'coming out' party that year.

Intriguing way to put it, but yeah I agree.

Leading a team, I'd say Killorn and Ryan Mcd are better leaders. Ryan would be almost as important as Hedman.

That was the year I realized point was good at defense as well as he was a stud offensively. I wonder if he was needed if he could be used in the Dzone consistently.

I think he can do pretty much anything. I'm still mesmerized by that playoff performance lol

Yea, I was shocked at him and then I looked at the stats and it took him like an extra round to catch MacKinnon 😑

This is not really on topic but is Dubois a top 15 Center now? He kind of carried the Jackets

Don't think so. TOP30 sure, but TOP15 is just too tall order imo.