Speculation: Nylander, I'm calling you out.

[Dekes For Days]

Matthews and marner were failures in that series.
Results are all that matter, not advanced stats, not pretty stickwork, not being idolized by the fanbase.

Results matter, but you seem to incorrectly think point totals with zero context are the only results that matter, and they're not.

Funny enough, the Matthews/Marner line in that series was +2 at 5v5, and the Nylander line was +1. Nylander's line scored twice as many goals (mainly because the Matthews line hit a league leading number of posts), but also allowed 5 times as many goals. Nylander had worse linemates, but he also had easier quality of competition, going primarily up against secondary defensive units and the young offensively-minded Suzuki, instead of the likes of Weber and one of the best defensive centers in the league in Danault. His line was also healthy, while the top line had two injured players on it.

Is better offensive play, better defensive play, and better net results, with better, injured linemates against tougher competition better, or is worse offensive play, worse defensive play, worse net results, with worse, healthy linemates against easier competition better because they picked up a few more points?

In man-advantage situations, Matthews picked up 3 points, Nylander picked up 2, and Marner picked up 1, but they all played together in those situations, contributing to the result. I'm not sure how much you can allocate impact based entirely on points picked up in that small sample, and Marner also brought elite PK impacts that the others did not, so either way, Nylander doesn't really have anything on them in regards to special teams play.

And then Nylander picked up one extra point into an empty net, which doesn't really mean anything.

Nylander has a case as the more impactful player in that series, and that series alone, but it's not a slam dunk by any means.

 

[ToneDog]

Marner - 3 assists in 9 closeout games.

Looking forward to Boston-Toronto in round two where we will see whether Matthews, Marner, Nylander or Pasta is the better player.

 

[Willchel Marlynder]

That is a bit of a diversionary argument
He was either better or he wasn't
They got the tougher match ups and held to only 1 goal against and 3 GF
Willy's line held to 5 ga and 6 GF
I'm really dumbing it down with the use of goals as evidence but clearly, it doesnt register that by your own standards the premise of Nylanders superiority doesn't hold up to scrutiny. At the end of the day, he wasn't carrying the team as so many here choose to present things.
I am not a Nylander hater but the truth is the truth and it isn't me who is spinning things. Just because you might not like it doesn't make it any less true.

So are you trying to say that Marner and Mathews were better than Nylander because even with far (and I mean FAR) superior line mates they account for a net 2 ESG and held Montreal's elite 1st line lead by scoring dynamo Denault to one goal?

Everyone knows Mathews and Marner are a step above Nylander, but I think it's pretty obvious Nylander had a better series than those two. He almost match them point for point for goodness sake.

Sure he didn't carry the team. They lost in the first round afterall, but M&M shouldn't even be in the discussion for carrying anyone that series.

Marner and Matthews line generated 3 5x5 goals...or do you believe they didn't have anything to do with it? Taking it a step further, do you believe that Nylander's reputation of solid defense absolves him of the responsibility for any of the 5 goals against? Probably not...and what solid defense?
Being obtuse isnt an argument btw.

It's crazy that to argue Mathews and Marner had a better series we're using the fact that they generated 3 5x5 goals in a 7 game series against a non playoff team as their redeeming quality. Come on now 67 how does that not sound like lunacy for guys of their caliber.

 

[ACC1224]

Marner - 3 assists in 9 closeout games.

Looking forward to Boston-Toronto in round two where we will see whether Matthews, Marner, Nylander or Pasta is the better player.

or who plays on the better team?

 

[ULF_55]

or who plays on the better team?

Rhetorical question.

I think many would be happy to see Leafs playing the Bruins ... it would mean at least some progress.

 

[IPS]

Marner's 0 goal 4 point performance against Montreal was utterly elite and we need to appreciate it.

 

[Notsince67]

So are you trying to say that Marner and Mathews were better than Nylander because even with far (and I mean FAR) superior line mates they account for a net 2 ESG and held Montreal's elite 1st line lead by scoring dynamo Denault to one goal?

Everyone knows Mathews and Marner are a step above Nylander, but I think it's pretty obvious Nylander had a better series than those two. He almost match them point for point for goodness sake.

Sure he didn't carry the team. They lost in the first round afterall, but M&M shouldn't even be in the discussion for carrying anyone that series.



It's crazy that to argue Mathews and Marner had a better series we're using the fact that they generated 3 5x5 goals in a 7 game series against a non playoff team as their redeeming quality. Come on now 67 how does that not sound like lunacy for guys of their caliber.

I am refuting the nonsense playing out here that Nylander was a playoff superstar and Marner and Matthews were bums. Matthews and Marner are better players. Should they have been better than they were?....sure, they lost the series. Laying the loss on their feet while elevating Nylander as the best forward on the team is kind of kooky. Make the argument that he delivered value for money if you want but that isn't pertinent to the claims made here. He really wasnt the standout everyone claims. I chose xgf% as a metric to demonstrate it clearly due to the noise associated with low frequency events such as goals. I subsequently went to goals to prove that didn't cut the mustard either.

My original post looked at scoring chances generated weighted by quality in contrast to the Canadiens that were matched up against them. On that the differential as it relates to the marginal contribution to the team, it showed Willy as a negative contributor. A negative contributor against lower quality opposition. He already got credit for his salary contribution by the very nature of opposition he was facing, btw. And btw....Willy lost too.

 

[Notsince67]

Marner's 0 goal 4 point performance against Montreal was utterly elite and we need to appreciate it.

Clearly not as much as your infatuation with a player who is shown to have played the game worse yet need to be elevated through exaggeration, bullying and failing that, glib negotiation with the mob to provide support you can't articulate yourself.

 

[IPS]

Funny enough, the Matthews/Marner line in that series was +2 at 5v5, and the Nylander line was +1. Nylander's line scored twice as many goals

Could have sworn I've seen you posting several paragraphs lately about how useless +/- is

Clearly not as much as your infatuation with a player who is shown to have played the game worse yet need to be elevated through exaggeration, bullying and failing that, glib negotiation with the mob to provide support you can't articulate yourself.

No really if I ever get the guts to do it one day, I'll rewatch some more of that series. Maybe I am misremembering things badly.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Could have sworn I've seen you posting several paragraphs lately about how useless +/- is

Plus minus is different from 5v5 goal differential. That was kind of the whole point of the prior discussions, if you actually read it.

Also, instead of using exclusively plus minus to evaluate a player and make claims about things that it does not measure, I in contrast incorporated 5v5 goal differential into a bigger discussion about what kind of impact they had over a certain sample. And I looked at a lot more than just that.

5v5 goal differential can also be impacted by factors outside of the individual, but a big part of the reason it was used was because the individual I responded to initiated the discussion by already declaring that they would ignore any representative metrics that weren't specifically the goals that were scored. Under those restrictive criteria, it was a quick way to illustrate that even by those standards, they were only looking at half the story.

 

[ULF_55]

Be nice to see another good playoffs by the top players.

Curious, who line-mates will be.

With the addition of O'Rielly, it could impact who are the top 6.

Nylander might be playing his last series for the Leafs.

I'd completely understand if he doesn't re-sign in July.

 

[ToneDog]

Be nice to see another good playoffs by the top players.

Curious, who line-mates will be.

With the addition of O'Rielly, it could impact who are the top 6.

Nylander might be playing his last series for the Leafs.

I'd completely understand if he doesn't re-sign in July.

He should not be a Leaf by July 1st if he is not resigning July 1st.

 

[ULF_55]

He should not be a Leaf by July 1st if he is not resigning July 1st.

Catch-22

My understanding, he can't sign before July 1st.

CLAUSE DETAILS: Player submits a 10 team no trade list.

 

[Willchel Marlynder]

I am refuting the nonsense playing out here that Nylander was a playoff superstar and Marner and Matthews were bums. Matthews and Marner are better players. Should they have been better than they were?....sure, they lost the series. Laying the loss on their feet while elevating Nylander as the best forward on the team is kind of kooky. Make the argument that he delivered value for money if you want but that isn't pertinent to the claims made here. He really wasnt the standout everyone claims. I chose xgf% as a metric to demonstrate it clearly due to the noise associated with low frequency events such as goals. I subsequently went to goals to prove that didn't cut the mustard either.

My original post looked at scoring chances generated weighted by quality in contrast to the Canadiens that were matched up against them. On that the differential as it relates to the marginal contribution to the team, it showed Willy as a negative contributor. A negative contributor against lower quality opposition. He already got credit for his salary contribution by the very nature of opposition he was facing, btw. And btw....Willy lost too.

I see what you're saying. Yeah he wasn't a superstar that series or anything, but in my opinion be was the best Leaf forward (probably Leafs but I don't remember if any Dman played great). It's a team game so the series loss falls on everyone's feet, but I think we can agree there are varying degrees of blame to go around.

Anyway I guess it's just a difference in fundamental beliefs here. While xgf% is a great metric to look at with a large enough sample size, the team with the highest xgf% doesn't win the game the team with the most goals does. For one series I place more weight on who has the most goals/points than I do on who has the best xgf% because the team that scores the most goals is probably wining the series. That's just me though.

It is funny though that you don't want us to look at absolute points in a vacuum, meanwhile you aren't acknowledging that linemates of Marner and Hyman (or Mathews and Hyman, regardless a line with two players lauded as some of the best 2 way players in their respective positions/in the game) is infinitely better than linemates of Kerfoot and Galchenyuk. Yes Nylander wasn't McDavid or Crosby in the series, However what he did with what he had was impressive to say the Leafs. Would you have expected Nylander to put up 8 points in 7 games with Kerfoot and Galchenyuk before the series started?

Also saying the Mathews line "held" Montreal's first line to just 1 ESG is interesting given Denault had 4 points in 22 games, Tatar had 1 points in 5 games, Gallagher had 6 points in 22 and Anderson had 6 points in 22 games. Meanwhile Toffoli had 14 in 22, Suzuki had 16 in 22 and Caufield had 12 in 20. I wonder how much that 1st line actually "held" them to 1 ESG vs that Montreal line just can't score at all. They didn't score against the Matthews line and they didn't score against anyone throughout the whole playoffs.

Who do you think was the best forward in that series?

 

[Menzinger]

Marner is better than Nylander. But it's up to Marner to show when the games count the most there shouldn't be a debate between the two - which hasn't happened yet. That's not a bash of Marner, he's been given very difficult job during these recent playoff series - but to be considered to be among the best in the role you're expected to fight through those challenges (that's why the top guys, are the top guys)

Imo theres a fair argument to be made that Nylander has been among the best forwards on the team during the last few playoff series. You can do the same for Marner too - but imo there's no decisive answer

 

[Hoglund4MvP]

Refreshing to see people still value results over consolation prize stats. Shut that talk down quick please and thank you

 

[Notsince67]

I see what you're saying. Yeah he wasn't a superstar that series or anything, but in my opinion be was the best Leaf forward (probably Leafs but I don't remember if any Dman played great). It's a team game so the series loss falls on everyone's feet, but I think we can agree there are varying degrees of blame to go around.

Anyway I guess it's just a difference in fundamental beliefs here. While xgf% is a great metric to look at with a large enough sample size, the team with the highest xgf% doesn't win the game the team with the most goals does. For one series I place more weight on who has the most goals/points than I do on who has the best xgf% because the team that scores the most goals is probably wining the series. That's just me though.

It is funny though that you don't want us to look at absolute points in a vacuum, meanwhile you aren't acknowledging that linemates of Marner and Hyman (or Mathews and Hyman, regardless a line with two players lauded as some of the best 2 way players in their respective positions/in the game) is infinitely better than linemates of Kerfoot and Galchenyuk. Yes Nylander wasn't McDavid or Crosby in the series, However what he did with what he had was impressive to say the Leafs. Would you have expected Nylander to put up 8 points in 7 games with Kerfoot and Galchenyuk before the series started?

Also saying the Mathews line "held" Montreal's first line to just 1 ESG is interesting given Denault had 4 points in 22 games, Tatar had 1 points in 5 games, Gallagher had 6 points in 22 and Anderson had 6 points in 22 games. Meanwhile Toffoli had 14 in 22, Suzuki had 16 in 22 and Caufield had 12 in 20. I wonder how much that 1st line actually "held" them to 1 ESG vs that Montreal line just can't score at all. They didn't score against the Matthews line and they didn't score against anyone throughout the whole playoffs.

Who do you think was the best forward in that series?

Honestly...Matthews shooting percentage was something like 2% on 35 shots. Really anomalous and nobody came close to what he was generating while playing like a defensive beast

 

[ZEBROA]

Those who dont like Nylander dont have to worry. He will suck this play off because Tavares and something else is off.

 

[Yorkshire Leaf]

Why do so many people seem to want the team they cheer for to fail or at least some of the players playing for the team they cheer for to fail?

The Leafs have some very good players, they have put up over 100 points or equivalent in 5 of the last 6 years, made the playoffs 7 years straight, personally I’m looking for them all to succeed rather than to fail so I can say ‘I told you so’ if they do.