The Los Angeles Kings rarely get much love on national lists ranking the best players, so it was good to see both Anze Kopitar and Jonathan Quick feature on ESPN’s top-25 NHL players of the 21st century, but Kopitar is too low.
Drew Doughty doesn’t feature in the top 25, but that’s another conversation for another article, we’re focusing on Kopitar for now.
Kopitar ranked 21st on the list, sandwiched between Jarome Iginla at 20 and Pavel Datsyuk at 22.
First, let’s look at the players above Kopitar who no doubt deserve to be above him.
Sidney Crosby, Alex Ovechkin, Connor McDavid, Niklas Lidstrom, Patrick Kane, Evgeni Malkin, Zdeno Chara and Erik Karlson are all no doubters in my eyes. Goalies are also too difficult for me to compare against skaters so I’ll avoid discussing them.
Jarome Iginla:
So, now we’ll get into the players above Kopitar who are questionable, starting right in front of him with Iginla.
Iginla was the premier goal scorer and power forward in the league at the start of the 2000s.
He also has a lower points per game total and likely won’t retire with more points than Kopitar. He does have a more illustrious individual trophy cabinet with two Rocket Richards, an Art Ross and a Ted Lindsay trophy.
While some people might not agree, Kopitar playing center also helps him in this argument. Center is just a more valuable position and being elite up the middle is more impactful than on the wing.
Iginla was brilliant and a far superior goal scorer, but Kopitar is a far more complete player who will finish with similar, if not better, total production.
Nikita Kucherov:
In a similar situation to Iginla, Nikita Kucherov is one of the most gifted offensive players of this generation, and two scoring titles and an MVP reflect that. If the argument is that he has an MVP and Kopitar doesn’t, justifying his higher place, I disagree, but I get it.
What Kucherov does have that Iginla doesn’t is an incredible playoff record. Over a point per game in the playoffs, leading his team to two Stanley Cups, Kucherov is the kind of winger who can become more valuable than a center.
His raw production in both the regular season and playoffs is nearly unparalleled. I’d get it if Kings fans argued Kopitar is a far superior 200-foot player making him deserving of being higher on the list. But Kucherov’s most productive season saw him score 52 more points than Kopitar’s most productive season.
Kucherov also has similar team success. I think this could go either way because of Koptiar’s more complete game, but I’ve got no issue with Kucherov above Kopitar.
Auston Matthews:
When both careers are over, Auston Matthews will likely rank above Kopitar, but it’s way too early for that.
Matthews is the best goal scorer in hockey and a fantastic 200-foot player, but he’s also never made it past the second round and doesn’t have the longevity to jump someone like Kopitar.
If you want to argue that, because Matthews is on a trajectory to clearly have a better career than Kopitar, at least on an individual level, I get it, but I disagree.
Joe Thornton:
This is a very interesting one. Joe Thornton is maybe the best pure playmaker of the 21st century and has a scoring title and MVP over Kopitar.
His peak was definitely better. However, he barely edges Kopitar in career points per game and is below Kopitar in playoff points per game.
Not only is his playoff production worse, he’s a career -36 in the playoffs compared to Kopitar’s +15. Say what you will about +/- as a stat, it’s imperfect, but a 50-point swing there between the two is massive.
Just looking at the regular season Thornton is better, but when you factor in the playoffs I’d give Kopitar the edge pretty comfortably. When the games mattered most Kopitar was much better and that’s important.
Leon Draisaitl:
At first glance this felt like Matthews, just too early to have Leon Draisaitl above Kopitar but five 100-point seasons and three 50-goal seasons plus a scoring title and MVP probably does edge Draisaitl above Kopitar.
The raw production is just too much even if Kopitar is a far more complete player and has the team success.
Draisaitl is also an absurdly productive playoff performer, just shy of 1.50 points per game in the postseason, even if the team success hasn’t come yet.
Steven Stamkos:
Steven Stamkos has had a very interesting career. Only Ovechkin has scored more goals since Stamkos was drafted in 2008 and he’s sixth in the same period for total points.
Injuries plagued the middle part of his career though and he was more of a complementary player in his team’s best, and Cup-winning, seasons.
Still the raw production, and particularly goal scoring, he’s shown in his career is hard to argue against. He’s never been a great 200-foot player, but 7 40+-goal seasons, two above 50 and a 60-goal season is incredible.
His only individual award is two Rocket Richards as well.
This is another one that could go either way, Stamkos’ production has been nearly unmatched since he entered the league but Kopitar is a far more complete player and was a bigger part of his team’s two Cup wins.
Patrice Bergeron:
This is where there will be the most fights. Patrice Bergeron should not be above Kopitar and certainly should not be 11 spots above him.
The argument for Bergeron is that he’s the best defensive forward of this generation, maybe ever, and has six Selke’s to show that.
A fair point, but Kopitar is right behind Bergeron in defensive prowess with two Selke’s of his own. He was also a top-three finalist in two of the years Bergeron won.
The big thing is, the production isn’t particularly close. Kopitar has 171 more points currently and will finish his career with over 200 more points, has a better points per game ratio and has scored more efficiently in the playoffs.
If the argument is, Bergeron is a better defensive player so he deserves to be above Kopitar, then Kopitar needs to jump a lot of players. If the justification for having players like Kucherov, Draisaitl, Stamkos, etc over Kopitar is raw production, then he has to be ahead of Bergeron.
The criteria here seems to be changing and it shouldn’t. Kopitar’s peak was better than Bergeron’s, Kopitar has a top-three MVP finish Bergeron doesn’t, and his longevity has been better.
Other than the better defensive play, which didn’t allow Kopitar to jump other more productive players, there’s no argument for Bergeron being better. Not to mention Bergeron has had a better supporting cast for most of his career.
Nathan MacKinnon:
I’m fine with Nathan MacKinnon being above Kopitar, he’s been so incredibly electric and is probably the second-best player in the league right now, but I’d get it if people wanted to argue that Kopitar’s longevity should put him above or around MacKinnon.
The peak for MacKinnon has just been too good though.
Source Agencies
