Here is a hypothetical situation for an off day in Sensland...
Lets say General Managar A - (let's call him Steve Y.) called up Bryan Murray and said that his #1 centre - we will call hims Steven S. - desperately wanted to play in Ottawa and all the team wanted in return was one of Mike Hoffman or Mark Stone, Senators' choice. Which player would you give up in order to get a key #1 centre.
The two rookies are very different players but have also been two of the three most effective forwards on the Senators for the past 30 games or so, if not longer. Stone and Hoffman are 3rd and 4th respectively in rookie scoring, with Hoffman tied for the rookie lead with 20, leading all Senators players.
Lets look at some factors that might come into play:
AGE
Stone is 22, while Hoffman was a late bloomer and is now 25 years old.
ADVANTAGE: STONE
SPEED
Speed kills, and Hoffman is one of the fastest players in the league, with or without the puck. Foot speed has always been the knock on Stone, but his ability to get around the ice has greatly improved and it isn't as much of a liability as it was a couple of years ago, coming out of junior.
ADVANTAGE: HOFFMAN
GOAL SCORING ABILITY
Both Hoffman and Stone have a 15.7% shooting percentage, both ranked in the top 35 in the league. Hoffman is more willing to let the shot go, averaging over 2 shots per game while Stone averages about a shot and a half. Hoffman's goals per 60 minutes of ice time (1.9) is second in the league to only Rick Nash among any players who have played more than 4 games.
Stone's career trend in both the AHL and the NHL is around the 11-19% mark, which is pretty consistent. Hoffman's numbers exploded last season in the AHL and has continued to this season, but prior to that his best shooting percentage equalled Stone's lowest. It will be interesting to see if he can continue to maintain that pace. Both have a proven ability to find the back of the net.
ADVANTAGE: DRAW
PLAYMAKING ABILITY
This is a tougher one to quantify, but I would classify Hoffman as more of a finisher than set-up guy. The fact that it took Hoffman 50 games to finally get a power play point is pretty remarkable, considering he averages about a minute and a half per game with the man advantage. Any time a player has more goals than assists, as Hoffman does, you figure he is shoot-first, not that it is a bad thing. As for Stone, his vision on the ice allows him to find open guys with regularity and demonstrates his all-around game. Both players can be shifty and can stick-handle in a phone booth.
ADVANTAGE: STONE
DEFENSIVE AWARENESS
Mark Stone is, simply put, a thief. He is generally in the right position on the ice and if he isn't, his reach and his stick have proven to be very useful weapons. Stone sits 3rd in the entire NHL in terms of takeaways, and if you have watched him play, you know that stat isn't inflated in the least. Stone have been used in penalty kill situations almost all season and has an almost identical distribution of offensive, neutral and defensive zone starts.
Hoffman leads the Senators with a +20 rating, just outside the top 10 in the NHL, although he has been a little more sheltered than Stone in terms of deployment. Hoffman's offensive zone start is about 57%, and only 26% of his total faceoff starts have been in the defensive end.
ADVANTAGE: STONE
CONCLUSION
Stone probably has better upside and will be a more consistent player through his career. His ability in all facets of the game make him an incredibly valuable asset. Hoffman's speed is a pretty big factor, but if I had to choose between the two, Stone would be my choice to keep, but just by an eyelash.
But then again, during the World Juniors I had more appreciation for the steady reliable Sam Reinhart than the flash and dash of Max Domi, and I was in the minority on that one. This is sort of the same comparison, with Stone being steady and Hoffman being the flash.
WHO WOULD YOU KEEP?