NHL mailbag: Kuznetsov, the real McDavid debate and the next best top line

You don’t want to draw too many conclusions from four, six, even 10 games.

People are going to try to draw conclusions — “The Devils might be for real!” “Arizona’s offense sucks!” — even at this time of year because we only have so much available for analysis and it’s no fun to say, “Well let’s see how all this plays out over the next month.”

There’s a middle ground, though. You can say the Leafs are just crushing everyone these days and also say that their process at 5-on-5 (with only a 51.4 xGF%, somehow) needs a bit of work. You can say it’s good for the Devils to bank these points even if you expect they’re not gonna get .960 goaltending from Keith Kinkaid forever. You can say Vegas is playing really well even if they couldn’t get a save. And you can talk about all the whys and hows of that stuff until you’re blue in the face.

But for right now, let’s just work on some stuff together.

Marc asks: “Forget McDavid vs. Matthews. The real debate: Is Connor McDavid better than peak Sidney Crosby? Peak Jagr? Best player since Lemieux?”

The problem with comparing McDavid to, well this just looks like a list of really good Penguins, is that Lemieux and Jagr had each other, and Crosby had Malkin. Connor McDavid has almost nobody, OT game-winner on Tuesday aside.

But let’s just go with the broader premise. Is Connor McDavid, who’s still improving as a hockey player, better than three of the, say, six best forwards ever? Because of historical contexts and lack of data, we can really only compare production.

McDavid has, in the first 213 games of his career, posted 265 points. Crosby netted 294. Lemieux had 346. Jagr had just 204 (pathetic).

But in their primes? Jagr scored 344 points in a three-year stretch in his late 20s, and that was with missing a quarter of one of those seasons. Mario had a two-year stretch when he was around McDavid’s age of 367 points in 153 games (including 155 goals, which is inconceivable). Crosby was hurt for a good chunk of his prime scoring years but from age 23 to 25, he put up 55-104-159 in just 99 games.

And look, obviously it was easier to score back then, but probably not THAT much easier. So I’m comfortable saying that Connor McDavid, who won’t be 22 until mid-January, isn’t as good as all those players were in their absolute primes. But we’re still FOUR years of him improving away from his reaching the same point. By then, well, anything’s possible.

Chris asks: “Obviously you’d prefer to be a good Corsi team and a good expected-goals team but is there any tangible benefit to being a good Corsi team but a bad xG team?”

I feel like maybe this is a trick question (depending on how we’re defining “bad”) but I would think it’s better than being middling in both. A good possession team that can’t generate a lot of high-danger scoring chances is probably just getting off a bunch of shots but not troubling a goaltender too much.

The late-era Darryl Sutter Kings are a decent example. Dominant in possession but a reliably low shooting percentage meant that unless Jonathan Quick was standing on his head, they were going to win by a narrow margin or not at all. It perhaps becomes the equivalent of white-knuckling in the low 50s and high 40s, percentage-wise.

But if you mean “Would there be a benefit to having a 52 CF% and a 47 xGF%?” I would say no.

Ned asks: “All this ‘Kuznetsov is a top 5 player’ talk is crazy right?”

This is the kind of thing that you can get in trouble for saying because I think he’s awesome, but he’s not even a top-five center, let alone top-five all-positions player. Would you not take any five — I’ll let you pick ’em! — McDavid, Crosby, Matthews, Bergeron, Tavares, Kopitar, MacKinnon, and Barkov ahead of him? I’d think most people would say no to that.

I mean, that still puts him way up in the conversation for best players in the league overall, and if we’re talking about the most talented on the puck, he’s probably in that top-five range. So it’s not crazy, but it’s also wrong.

Reed asks: “What’s worse for the Senators: Having a good enough record in February where Melnyk thinks he has a chance at playoff revenue and keeps Duchene/Stone around, only to lose them for nothing? Or, having Colorado win the lottery with their pick?”

Definitely the former.

Colorado winning the lottery with that pick would be a kick in the nuts for sure but that’s not up to you anymore unless you make the playoffs, which you won’t.

But if you TRY to make the playoffs? With this team? Ah, that’s a no thanks from me.

Kyle asks: “What is Ryan Donato for the Bruins? Does he project to be anything better than what he is being used as now?”

For those who aren’t keeping up with the Ryan Donato saga: He was a finalist for the Hobey Baker last year, played in the Olympics when the NHL didn’t go and scored a goal a game, then scored 5-4-9 in his first 12 NHL games. That had people insanely excited. But then he went 0-0-0 in three postseason games and wasn’t much of a factor.

This year, the playoff version of the player seems to have showed up. Only one goal in four games so far, a healthy scratch, and now a third-line role. So the question is, “Is this 22-year-old rookie a third-line/occasional scratch guy forever?”

And the answer obviously is no. The pedigree is there to suggest this is a kid who’s gonna figure it out. He was a kinda-young college hockey player to begin with (completing his junior season before he turned 22) and the Bruins are a deep, good team that aren’t gonna have the time or patience to let a kid play through “figuring it out.”

But yeah, I suspect that when he does figure it out, Donato’s a decent second-line guy.

Segs asks: “Which teams have the most and least enviable cap situation taking into consideration quality of the roster, current contracts, future considerations and actual internal budget?”

I’m gonna give you only one here: Colorado.

Nathan MacKinnon is locked up for four seasons after this one at just $6.3 million, they really only need to pay Mikko Rantanen a bunch when his contract is up, and the team overall looks pretty good the last two seasons. Most important, they have $11.3 million in cap space right this second, meaning they can theoretically go out and add just about anyone they want this summer without sweating it too much.
The question, I guess, is whether they’re a budget team or a cap-team-if-they-wanna-be. They have a below-average prospect pool but if things go as expected they’ll get a top-three pick in a deep draft out of Ottawa. They’re also an actual smart team that will make good decisions going forward and overall I like Jared Bednar as a coach pretty good.

Not that this team is elite or anything, because they’re not Nashville (speaking of teams with good long-term cap situations) but I can see a scenario where they could be while MacKinnon is still in his prime.

Robbie asks: “Obviously Marchand-Bergeron-Pasta is the best line in hockey, what lines do you see giving them a run for the top spot if any?”

Obviously we’re gonna want to talk about Vegas’s top line from last year, even if the scoring slows down a little. We’re gonna want to talk about the Matthews line, especially if Nylander comes back soon. We’re gonna want to talk about Florida’s top line. Or Dallas’s. Or Colorado’s. Or Winnipeg’s.

Wow, there’s a lot of great top lines out there. Fun time to be a fan.

Teej asks: “The Panthers and Coyotes both came into the year with enhanced expectations and both have yet again started out slow… Which one do you have more faith in to turn it around like the Panthers did last year?”

Florida, as long as they keep Troy Brouwer on the second line and Jonathan Huberdeau on the fourth.

—

Ryan Lambert is a Yahoo! Sports hockey columnist. His email is here and his Twitter is here.

All stats via Corsica unless noted otherwise. Some questions in the mailbag are edited for clarity or to remove swear words, which are illegal to use.

More NHL coverage from Yahoo Sports