The thing about both Subban and Kane, and why they're as direct of comparables as a forward and defenceman can get is due to one thing:
Game breaking ability
Kane has an intangible ability to change games and create offensive opportunity unlike almost anyone else in the league. Every time he's on the ice, he's extremely dangerous. Guys like Kessel (and even Toews) out score him, but he is still on another level offensively. It's the reason he was even in the same ballpark as Toews when it came to dollars.
Subban is the same way. When Montreal is without him, they're worse. When he's on the ice, he can change the game in a way that nobody else on that roster can. He makes mistakes, and his zone coverage could be better, but the way he plays the game and effect he has is almost immeasurable.
I think they're absolutely close. I don't think you can definitively say one is better than the other because they're good for nearly the exact same reason. Subban deserves 8+, minimum, no question.
|