Mitch Marner (Trade or Keep)?

[Arzak]

Nylander has to outplay Marner by a lot to even be as good?

Obviously in your opinion. Maybe that's the problem.

The team with more goals wins, yet goals, secondary assists or PK, all equal in the eyes of some.

If you could at least make an argument our PK is elite winning us games or allowing us to play aggressively in O zone.

No, you have to repeat Mitch is the best PK player to ever lace them just so you can watch an average af PK and no bite team.

 

[Jimmy Firecracker]

 

[sunstersun]

He's a great player most of the time. I watch most of the games and don't need any stats for that, literally my only problem with him is that small handful of games where he has faded away so often. Someone posted the numbers - his production in games 5-7 in a playoff series falls off a cliff. And I'd put game 3 against Florida in that "clutch game" category as well - lost that one and the season is as good as over and he played so badly, it's hard to even put into words.

I know it's a small sample size, like about 20 games or so over the last 6 years. Like literally if he played like the superstar that he's paid to be instead of a passenger for like even say 10 out of those 20 at key times, I'd have no problem with him whatsoever and I also believe that would have made enough of a difference that we'd have won a couple more playoff series by now.

Maybe it's just co-incidence that it's the biggest games where he falls off, I don't think so though. I think the problem is between the ears and to be fair, he's not the only one, the whole team has a history of coming up way short in the biggest moments. Anyhow, it is what it is, we can't trade him, I'm sure we'll resign him, nothing to do but hope that he and the rest of them (I'm looking at you Auston) figure it out at some point but I also fear this year might be our last shot - I wouldn't be shocked it Nylander took his talents elsewhere next summer and it's hard to see a path to the cup without him and whatever assets we invest in trying to win this season.

Yes, Marner in the playoff scores lucky ass goals from the point.



Someone create a highlight reel of Marner's top 10 playoff goals. They're all soft.

Meanwhile Nylander is doing game breaking things like this.



Utterly dominant, unstoppable at the most key point.

It's a good reminder that not all points are created equally.

 

[Gary Nylund]

He's also doing a very good job of using isolated statistics with no context, but he's been a huge anti-Nylander poster for a long time.

How about comparing regular season to playoff ppg, using his criterion of 21-23?

Matty regular 1.29 playoff 1.00 drop of .29
Mitch regular 1.27 playoff 1.04 drop of .23
Willy regular 0.98 playoff 1.00 increase of .02
JT regular 0.96 playoff 0.74 drop of .22

This is what I'm most concerned about.

Games 1-4 - 1.19 PPG
Games 5-7 - 0.47 PPG

 

[nsleaf]

Keep.

 

[Dekes For Days]

The team with more goals wins, yet goals, secondary assists or PK, all equal in the eyes of some.

No, some just want to arbitrarily dismiss important types of impact because it destroys their narrative.
Goals are important. So is playmaking to generate goals. So is defense and PKing to prevent goals against.
They all help you win.

 

[notDatsyuk]

No, some just want to arbitrarily dismiss important types of impact because it destroys their narrative.
Goals are important. So is playmaking to generate goals. So is defense and PKing to prevent goals against.
They all help you win.

The problem is that not all goals, assists, +/-, and other stats are the same.

Two fairly recent examples:

Player X steals the puck, carries it into the zone, draws both D to him, and passes the puck into the slot to open player Y, who taps it to open player Z, who tips it into the wide open net.

Player A takes a shot which deflects off a defenceman and player B, to player C, who does a give-and-go with A before scoring.

Which is more noteworthy: second assist, first assist, or goal?

 

[ACC1224]

The problem is that not all goals, assists, +/-, and other stats are the same.

Two fairly recent examples:

Player X steals the puck, carries it into the zone, draws both D to him, and passes the puck into the slot to open player Y, who taps it to open player Z, who tips it into the wide open net.

Player A takes a shot which deflects off a defenceman and player B, to player C, who does a give-and-go with A before scoring.

Which is more noteworthy: second assist, first assist, or goal?

Whichever one wasn't Marner? (I think he's X)

 

[Gary Nylund]

Whichever one wasn't Marner? (I think he's X)

Deeply entrenched victim complex.

 

[BlueBaron]

I feel like a home grown home town elite playmaking winger is a natural compliment to our goal scoring Cs. When JT expires this will all be less stressful.

 

[Antropovsky]

The problem is that not all goals, assists, +/-, and other stats are the same.

Two fairly recent examples:

Player X steals the puck, carries it into the zone, draws both D to him, and passes the puck into the slot to open player Y, who taps it to open player Z, who tips it into the wide open net.

Player A takes a shot which deflects off a defenceman and player B, to player C, who does a give-and-go with A before scoring.

Which is more noteworthy: second assist, first assist, or goal?

You won't get the Marner fans (we are Leaf fans btw), to discuss these plays...they will just give smart ass comments because they know they can't win the discussion. It's obvious that the play drivers aren't Marner. They know it, which is why they avoid the questions.


It's like judging a goalie exclusively on G.A.A. People became wise to how that doesn't work that way. Quality of linemates is something the analytic community is tracking now.

Christian Hanson got a point on his very first game and I remember reporters asking him to describe the play. He said something to the effect of how Kessel stole the puck from him in their zone and scored... It wasn't difficult.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Whichever one wasn't Marner? (I think he's X)

X is Willy
Y is Mitch
Z is Matty (playoffs)

A is Mitch
B is Willy
C is JT (Willy's record-breaking point)

Matty's goal was an easy tip-in to an empty net, but JT made two good passes and a good shot to beat the goalie.

Two primary assists by Mitch, but one was a lot more 'earned' than the other.

Two secondary assists for Willy, but one was all his work and the other was pure luck.

The point is that if you look at just the stats: 2 goals, 2 primary assists, and 2 secondary assists. You have to watch the games to see the difference.

 

[ACC1224]

X is Willy
Y is Mitch
Z is Matty (playoffs)

A is Mitch
B is Willy
C is JT (Willy's record-breaking point)

Matty's goal was an easy tip-in to an empty net, but JT made two good passes and a good shot to beat the goalie.

Two primary assists by Mitch, but one was a lot more 'earned' than the other.

Two secondary assists for Willy, but one was all his work and the other was pure luck.

The point is that if you look at just the stats: 2 goals, 2 primary assists, and 2 secondary assists. You have to watch the games to see the difference.

Marner gets many secondary assists that were the primary reason for the goal.

The type of points argument has always seemed pretty dumb.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Marner gets many secondary assists that were the primary reason for the goal.

The type of points argument has always seemed pretty dumb.

Absolutely. And many that weren't, just like Willy in those examples, and the same as every other player.

 

[ACC1224]

Absolutely. And many that weren't, just like Willy in those examples, and the same as every other player.

Yep, it's not exclusive to Marner for sure.

 

[Dekes For Days]

The problem is that not all goals, assists, +/-, and other stats are the same.

Two fairly recent examples:
Player X steals the puck, carries it into the zone, draws both D to him, and passes the puck into the slot to open player Y, who taps it to open player Z, who tips it into the wide open net.
Player A takes a shot which deflects off a defenceman and player B, to player C, who does a give-and-go with A before scoring.

The problem is that people use that theory with isolated clips to make different, targeted arguments that often don't hold up.
You can find examples of plays where you could diminish the impact of the goal, primary assist, or secondary assist. Heck, you could probably find examples where a tertiary play is the biggest contributor to a goal and they get nothing. Points are far from perfect. That's one reason why it's so important to use significant sample sizes, to diminish some of that noise.

But I'm not sure how this relates to Marner. Even in evaluations that attempt to diminish the value of secondary assists, the average value of goals and primary assists are always found to be similar, and Marner has been an excellent primary point producer.

 

[Gabriel426]

Marner gets many secondary assists that were the primary reason for the goal.

The type of points argument has always seemed pretty dumb.

Absolutely. And many that weren't, just like Willy in those examples, and the same as every other player.

I think it is quite fruitless or just discussing for the sake of argument if we are going to break down every assist of players to see if he is worth it or not.

To say that MM doesn't drive the team or he is a product of playing with AM or JT is just wrong. He is a great player and got great talents. However, he does seem to tense up or choke when the pressure is high, ie elimination games. Now but thats not just him as it seemed like only Reilly turned on that playoff switch among our top guys. Even Willie needed something to fire him up, often a horrible play by him, in the series before he started to play better.

 

[notDatsyuk]

The problem is that people use that theory with isolated clips to make different, targeted arguments that often don't hold up.
You can find examples of plays where you could diminish the impact of the goal, primary assist, or secondary assist. Heck, you could probably find examples where a tertiary play is the biggest contributor to a goal and they get nothing. Points are far from perfect. That's one reason why it's so important to use significant sample sizes, to diminish some of that noise.

But I'm not sure how this relates to Marner. Even in evaluations that attempt to diminish the value of secondary assists, the average value of goals and primary assists are always found to be similar, and Marner has been an excellent primary point producer.

I didn't say it related specifically to Marner, and my examples didn't either.

Only people who are excessively defensive of him seem to see that.

I think it is quite fruitless or just discussing for the sake of argument if we are going to break down every assist of players to see if he is worth it or not.

To say that MM doesn't drive the team or he is a product of playing with AM or JT is just wrong. He is a great player and got great talents. However, he does seem to tense up or choke when the pressure is high, ie elimination games. Now but thats not just him as it seemed like only Reilly turned on that playoff switch among our top guys. Even Willie needed something to fire him up, often a horrible play by him, in the series before he started to play better.

Of course, and that's the point.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I didn't say it related specifically to Marner, and my examples didn't either.
Only people who are excessively defensive of him seem to see that.

I know right. Who could ever think that arguments and examples that you subsequently revealed involved Marner in response to a discussion about Marner and the attempted devaluating of point types and non-goal impacts in the Marner thread could in any way relate to Marner.

 

[Antropovsky]

I know right. Who could ever think that arguments and examples that you subsequently revealed involved Marner in response to a discussion about Marner and the attempted devaluating of point types and non-goal impacts in the Marner thread could in any way relate to Marner.

@Dekes For Days, Marner had 14 points in the playoffs. I've seen many posters, who don't feel like he was the play driver, break down numerous and sometimes all his points (I did). Why don't you give us a handful of examples of plays that Marner was the play driver on. Tell us how many you think he was the play driver on.

Since you feel so strongly that his contributions are being undervalued, you must have went through all of them to come up with your very strong opinion.

I'm looking forward to see these examples and your breakdowns.

But as you've done numerous times on the past, I assume you will skirt this request.

 

[notDatsyuk]

I know right. Who could ever think that arguments and examples that you subsequently revealed involved Marner in response to a discussion about Marner and the attempted devaluating of point types and non-goal impacts in the Marner thread could in any way relate to Marner.

If you actually look at the examples, they were obviously much more about Nylander, if anyone. And I only revealed the names because someone made the incorrect assumption that they were about Marner.

I guess you just proved my point - thanks.

 

[Dekes For Days]

If you actually look at the examples, they were obviously much more about Nylander, if anyone.

Yes, I realize that the isolated examples were being used to prop up Nylander, but that doesn't change that it involved Marner and was in response to a discussion involving Marner in the Marner thread. People are justifiably going to ask how your overarching argument relates to Marner.

 

[Antropovsky]

I think it is quite fruitless or just discussing for the sake of argument if we are going to break down every assist of players to see if he is worth it or not.

To say that MM doesn't drive the team or he is a product of playing with AM or JT is just wrong. He is a great player and got great talents. However, he does seem to tense up or choke when the pressure is high, ie elimination games. Now but thats not just him as it seemed like only Reilly turned on that playoff switch among our top guys. Even Willie needed something to fire him up, often a horrible play by him, in the series before he started to play better.

If William was making 11 and not 7... I think some wouldn't be as ecstatic about his recent playoff contributions. However, his play relative to his cap% was great. The fact he gets grouped into Marner/Matthews and Tavares talk is completely unfair to him. Probably part of the reason he isn't going to take less if they don't.

As stated though, I don't think either Marner and Nylander have shown to be worth 11 million. At least Nylander has show the ability to raise his level up in high pressure series vs men (world championship).

 

[Fogelhund]

Our fanbase has a very short memory. Marner was our best player, most of last year. A bad series against Florida, and a bad start to this year, doesn't change that.

This Marner vs. Nylander is BS.... ideally, we want the best from both, at the same time. It doesn't matter who you trade for, in this mission to open up cap space... the team isn't getting immediately better for such a trade.

 

[Antropovsky]

Here's a thread on the main boards about goals vs assists. I already read a couple pages, but goals generally are valued higher. But most recognize that you have to break down each play to determine what the most important play leading to the goal was.

It doesn't make sense to point to Marners 14 points and try to use that as evidence he had an excellent playoff or he's better than other players who produce a little less than he does. He is playing with 11 million dollar players and on the PP even more of them.

Ryan Nugent-Hopkins had 104 points last year. Is he better than Marner and Matthews? Why not... He had more points!

Read the thread, with many knowledgeable hockey fans and they all agree.... Yet certain posters on this board don't get it.

Break down some goals... Let's go Marner supporters (specifically because those who have been critical of Marners play have been more than willing to post goals and break them down). Let have a discussion about each goal.

How much more valuable are goals compared to assists?

I think most on here would agree that scoring goals is more difficult than putting up assist (and thus more valuable) but how much more valuable would a goal be compared to an assist? I think I seen somewhere that on average for every goal there is 1.7 assist but I'm not sure how accurate that was?

forums.hfboards.com