Matt Barzal vs Mitch Marner

[firstemperor]

Relative to his rookie season, you don't think Marner has struggled? He scored at a 64 point pace at 19. He's on pace for 9 goals and 56 points as a 20 year old despite 2g 3a in his last 2 games.

He has struggled at times but he's a better player now than he was last year. Teams are game planning him more, he's adjusted slowly, and he's better in areas he was always bad in before going back to junior (1 on 1 battles, board play). Though I understand where your coming from if your talking about pure productivity.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

He has struggled at times but he's a better player now than he was last year. Teams are game planning him more, he's adjusted slowly, and he's better in areas he was always bad in before going back to junior (1 on 1 battles, board play). Though I understand where your coming from if your talking about pure productivity.

He’s had a few rough gamers (relatively speaking) during the season, no argument there, but he’s still performing like a first line player.

And with over half a season remaining I expect he’ll finish at a higher scoring rate than last year too. At this point all it takes is a few hot games.

Agree with both you guys. He seemed to really start coming out of his shell about 15 games ago or so and it seems like he's likely to finish the season off at a ~70 point pace.

I think we'll see him end up right around last season's totals, which means he's proven to be a better player. This was a point I tried to desperately emphasize over the last year with young super rookies like Marner, Nylander, Laine etc - just because a young player may struggle to significantly out produce an impressive rookie year doesn't mean he's stagnated. But the league adjusts and teams begin to game plan. Being able to maintain that sort of production implies non-trivial levels of improvement IMO.

 

[Lampedampe]

Sample size is only a thing if the Leaf player is the one with the body of work. Got it. Rookie vs Leaf player? Sample size ain’t a thing.

Shoutout to the shameless posters who show up in every Leaf thread - You’re consistently inconsistent, and it’s ****** hilarious.

Man shoutout to you aswell! It was great when small sample size didn't matter too much to you in the Matthews vs Mcdavid debate!

But for the sake of no misunderstanding, I'd choose Marner above barzal untill proven otherwise.

I just stumbled upon this thread and found it hilarious when shameless leafs fans complain about sample size whilst ignoring it completely when it happened to fit their agenda

Are you keeping a straight face while writing this garbage?

You keep referring to last years numbers and still can’t grasp that it isn’t the most effective way to measure a players game today.

Others bias is obvious, but your username and complete disregard for every point made to you, going as far as saying ‘I don’t care about the content of his game’ makes yours what, exactly? Isn’t refusing to hear one side the mere definition of bias?

You should get into politics when you grow up. Your ability to disregard everything in front of you and cling to only what favours your agenda is impressive.

This is a gem

 

[Holymakinaw]

Marner, by a fair margin.

 

[sparxx87]

Man shoutout to you aswell! It was great when small sample size didn't matter too much to you in the Matthews vs Mcdavid debate!

But for the sake of no misunderstanding, I'd choose Marner above barzal untill proven otherwise.

I just stumbled upon this thread and found it hilarious when shameless leafs fans complain about sample size whilst ignoring it completely when it happened to fit their agenda



This is a gem

You’re making the assumption that I’ve voted, or that I haven’t been consistent. This isn’t true. I don’t even know who I’d pick, it may very well be Matt Barzal, but I had to laugh at the varying formulas and measures used by the same handful of individuals.

Nice try though - I’m sorry you have nothing better to do than comb through my posts from months ago. Try harder next time!

 

[Ainec]

so let's get back to the real discussion

Barzal's current season (ranking placement on team)
CF% 53.67 (3rd) RELCF% 5.38 (3rd) GF% 59.46 (3rd) RELGF% 9.46 (3rd) XGF% 51.81 (7th) RELXGF 2.83 (8th) PDO 101.83 iSH% 9.09

Marner's most productive season (ranking placement on team)
CF% 50.19 (11th) REL -0.22 (11th) GF% 53.4 (8th) RELGF% 4.36 (11th) XGF% 49.22 (20th) RELXGF -1.79 (19th) PDO 102.19 iSH% 12.04

Barzal 8/8 categories

 

[Mugzy97]

so let's get back to the real discussion

Barzal's current season (ranking placement on team)
CF% 53.67 (3rd) RELCF% 5.38 (3rd) GF% 59.46 (3rd) RELGF% 9.46 (3rd) XGF% 51.81 (7th) RELXGF 2.83 (8th) PDO 101.83 iSH% 9.09

Marner's most productive season (ranking placement on team)
CF% 50.19 (11th) REL -0.22 (11th) GF% 53.4 (8th) RELGF% 4.36 (11th) XGF% 49.22 (20th) RELXGF -1.79 (19th) PDO 102.19 iSH% 12.04

Barzal 8/8 categories

Fancy

 

[Lampedampe]

You’re making the assumption that I’ve voted, or that I haven’t been consistent. This isn’t true. I don’t even know who I’d pick, it may very well be Matt Barzal, but I had to laugh at the varying formulas and measures used by the same handful of individuals.

Nice try though - I’m sorry you have nothing better to do than comb through my posts from months ago. Try harder next time!

No i made the assumption that you complained about people not acknowledging sample size, maybe your memory fails you, but take a look at your grand post again. My reply really flew over your head didn't it?

I actually can't even look through your profile, i've been amused by your highly biased and funny posts in the matthews vs mcdavid thread, and i remember how you and many other leafs fans disregarded sample size in that thread but are very keen to bring up sample size in this thread. So don't worry one bit about me, i didn't spend more than one minute to find that post.

 

[Ainec]

No i made the assumption that you complained about people not acknowledging sample size, maybe your memory fails you, but take a look at your grand post again. My reply really flew over your head didn't it?

I actually can't even look through your profile, i've been amused by your highly biased and funny posts in the matthews vs mcdavid thread, and i remember how you and many other leafs fans disregarded sample size in that thread but are very keen to bring up sample size in this thread. So don't worry one bit about me, i didn't spend more than one minute to find that post.

if you looked through his posts there will be a lot of Leafs and a lot of emoji

 

[sparxx87]

No i made the assumption that you complained about people not acknowledging sample size, maybe your memory fails you, but take a look at your grand post again. My reply really flew over your head didn't it?

I actually can't even look through your profile, i've been amused by your highly biased and funny posts in the matthews vs mcdavid thread, and i remember how you and many other leafs fans disregarded sample size in that thread but are very keen to bring up sample size in this thread. So don't worry one bit about me, i didn't spend more than one minute to find that post.

No, I know exactly what you were trying to do. You’ve clearly made an assumption about my stance on the matter and you’re very much incorrect. Again, this may very well be Barzal, I only laughed at those who pick and choose when to apply certain rules and measures. Unless otherwise stated, I’m often choosing a player for an imaginary tournament that starts tomorrow as well. Current level of play is what I’m most interested in - I can only ever recall using the sample size as my argument in the Sergachev debate after like 12 games. Aside from that, I challenged you to show me some inconsistency in my logic? Make sure you read carefully.

Again, I’m sorry you have nothing better to do, but you should probably do some research into what I’m referencing before you try and clap back. Clearly you’re unaware of the individuals I was referring to, and their work in previous threads.

 

[Lampedampe]

No, I know exactly what you were trying to do. You’ve clearly made an assumption about my stance on the matter and you’re very much incorrect. Again, this may very well be Barzal, I only laughed at those who pick and choose when to apply certain rules and measures. Unless otherwise stated, I’m often choosing a player for an imaginary tournament that starts tomorrow as well. Current level of play is what I’m most interested in - I can only ever recall using the sample size as my argument in the Sergachev debate after like 12 games. Aside from that, I challenged you to show me some inconsistency in my logic? Make sure you read carefully.

Again, I’m sorry you have nothing better to do, but you should probably do some research into what I’m referencing before you try and clap back. Clearly you’re unaware of the individuals I was referring to, and their work in previous threads.

" Sample size is only a thing if the Leaf player is the one with the body of work. Got it. Rookie vs Leaf player? Sample size ain’t a thing." - Spaxx

Your stance on the specific matter is the above, correct? And this is what i'm replying to, and the reason i reply to this is because i know very well that you yourself have choosen to ignore sample size to favour your precious leaf players, as posted above. I called you out on your hypocrasy, and i'm very sorry i have to do this again but.....

You should get into politics when you grow up. Your ability to disregard everything in front of you and cling to only what favours your agenda is impressive.

Are you keeping a straight face while writing this garbage?

You keep referring to last years numbers and still can’t grasp that it isn’t the most effective way to measure a players game today.

Others bias is obvious, but your username and complete disregard for every point made to you, going as far as saying ‘I don’t care about the content of his game’ makes yours what, exactly? Isn’t refusing to hear one side the mere definition of bias?

You should get into politics when you grow up. Your ability to disregard everything in front of you and cling to only what favours your agenda is impressive.

You laughed at those who pick and choose when to apply certain rules and measures, when you yourself infact do the same thing, and that is the only reason i replied.

 

[sparxx87]

" Sample size is only a thing if the Leaf player is the one with the body of work. Got it. Rookie vs Leaf player? Sample size ain’t a thing." - Spaxx

Your stance on the specific matter is the above, correct? And this is what i'm replying to, and the reason i reply to this is because i know very well that you yourself have choosen to ignore sample size to favour your precious leaf players, as posted above. I called you out on your hypocrasy, and i'm very sorry i have to do this again but.....

You should get into politics when you grow up. Your ability to disregard everything in front of you and cling to only what favours your agenda is impressive.



You laughed at those who pick and choose when to apply certain rules and measures, when you yourself infact do the same thing, and that is the only reason i replied.

I’m not sure why you’ve interpreted a comment directed at reasoning, not conclusion, as an endorsement for either player?

Comprehension is key.

 

[Strait2thecup]

Fancy

Don’t forget goals assists + -! Barzal has been better than marner by virtually every metric this year.

 

[Mugzy97]

Don’t forget goals assists + -! Barzal has been better than marner In virtually every statistic this year.

Well I guess we can conclude he is the better NHL player in the 35 games or so this year.

Career-wise I would still take Marner.

 

[Strait2thecup]

Well I guess we can conclude he is the better NHL player in the 35 games or so this year.

Career-wise I would still take Marner.

I didn’t say that. But 35 games for two young players is far from insignificant. Would you disagree?

Personally I wouldn’t even think about giving up Barzal for marner as we need the C but I still think they will have similar numbers most years.

 

[Mugzy97]

I didn’t say that. But 35 games for two young players is far from insignificant. Would you disagree?

Well the poll is about who is the better NHL player, and since Barzal only played 34 games, it is all we can use as evidence, and in those 34 games he has done really well. I wouldn't say it is insignificant but I wouldn't carve out a career path for him on 34 games either. It's not enough games to know if he can consistently do it.

So as I already said, Barzal is the better NHL player through 34 games, but I would still choose Marner to have a better career. This is just my opinion though as there is no way to factually prove who's career will be better.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

I didn’t say that. But 35 games for two young players is far from insignificant. Would you disagree?

Personally I wouldn’t even think about giving up Barzal for marner as we need the C but I still think they will have similar numbers most years.

You nailed it there. Both are destined to be play making producing fwds. But The Isles need a Center. With JT's contract situation unknown. Barzal could find himself as the #1C on the Isles next season. He's passed every test thrown at him thus far. The only way I would take a winger over Barzal at this moment, is for a rocket richard potential winger in Boeser or Laine. I would never trade for a playmaking winger for a playmaking Center in the Barzal caliber. Barzal easily for me.

 

[Lampedampe]

I’m not sure why you’ve interpreted a comment directed at reasoning, not conclusion, as an endorsement for either player?

Comprehension is key.

I'm not sure if I can even reach through to you tbh, this will be my last try because I don't care what you might think I'm implying here.

I do not care about who you voted for in this specific thread, not one bit. I personally would go with Marner, there's no doubt in my mind about that.

What I am getting at is the fact that you are 'laughing' (your own words) at people who are ignoring sample size while you yourself have in the past happily ignored sample size, which I pointed out. The sole reason I replied to you when you wrote that, is because I remembered when you've ignored sample size to favour leafs players. You specifically even said that people didn't care about sample size if they could use it as a agenda to hate on leafs players, when you yourself have ignored sample size to favour leaf players.

Do you see the irony in all this? Oh and yeah, comphrension is key, and if you are capable of comphrension which I'm sure you are then you should realize that my comments are about what you just called yourself as a comment directed at reasoning.

 

[Strait2thecup]

Well the poll is about who is the better NHL player, and since Barzal only played 34 games, it is all we can use as evidence, and in those 34 games he has done really well. I wouldn't say it is insignificant but I wouldn't carve out a career path for him on 34 games either. It's not enough games to know if he can consistently do it.

So as I already said, Barzal is the better NHL player through 34 games, but I would still choose Marner to have a better career. This is just my opinion though as there is no way to factually prove who's career will be better.

Fair enough, can’t argue with opinions. We’ll have to wait and see

 

[sparxx87]

I'm not sure if I can even reach through to you tbh, this will be my last try because I don't care what you might think I'm implying here.

I do not care about who you voted for in this specific thread, not one bit. I personally would go with Marner, there's no doubt in my mind about that.

What I am getting at is the fact that you are 'laughing' (your own words) at people who are ignoring sample size while you yourself have in the past happily ignored sample size, which I pointed out. The sole reason I replied to you when you wrote that, is because I remembered when you've ignored sample size to favour leafs players. You specifically even said that people didn't care about sample size if they could use it as a agenda to hate on leafs players, when you yourself have ignored sample size to favour leaf players.

Do you see the irony in all this? Oh and yeah, comphrension is key, and if you are capable of comphrension which I'm sure you are then you should realize that my comments are about what you just called yourself as a comment directed at reasoning.

This one is pretty simple, not sure why you still don’t get it? I already explained to you that I wasn’t saying the sample size is a bad argument - there’s a bunch of different angles I look at here, and most actually lead to Barzal. I’ve also explained many times that I don’t care about sample size with special talents, which both players are.

The only reason I entered is due to the fact that certain individuals go back and fourth on a day to day, week to week basis. My criteria doesn’t vary like that, and I challenge you to show me otherwise. The one instance you’ll find was not declaring Sergachev a top d man after 12 games.

Aside from that, most polls between two U24 players, I’m evaluating where they’re at and where they might go. I’ve seen enough of both to know they both have elite potential and I think they’ll be similar in production. If that’s how it goes, and both become above average at their position, I favour the centreman.

I’ve been nothing but consistent, despite your interpretations.

 

[garyturner3]

Barzal's having a better year for sure. But they're both still very young with endless talent so nobody knows who's going to end up better going forward. Personally, not a chance I'd move Marner for Barzal right now. His slow start hasn't lessened the sky high hopes I have for him. I still think he's got top 10 scoring talent written all over him in the future.

 

[The Winter Soldier]

Barzal with 2 more points tonight, 1 goal 1 assist after 2 periods. For those hoping that he is slowing down towards that mythical sample size barrier of 60 points. He is not.

 

[Menzinger]

Barzal also happens to have a 12% sh% which ain’t going to last.

What’ll be interesting is to see if Barzal can sustain this type of shooting and scoring. Even in Juniors he only had one season of notable goal scoring.

 

[Ainec]

Barzal also happens to have a 12% sh% which ain’t going to last.

lol..

 

[Menzinger]

lol..

Difficult for any player to sustain that, let alone a rookie.