Agree or Disagree - Marchand Has Been A Top 3 Offensive Player The Last 3 Calendar Years

[GreatGonzo]

Yes he has. He’s been one of the best all around players in the league for the last few years but no one, including myself, likes to admit that because he’s a POS.

 

[North Cole]

If you remove PK points (absurd, but OK), you're still looking at Marchand outpacing Kane for ES + PP points (1.19 vs. 1.19). Not to mention with Kane averaging 17:43 ES per game and 3:26 PP per game, he's way ahead of Marchand's 14:52 ES and 3:07 PP time per game. I can't believe Marchand killing penalties is used as something against him. DOes this not count for offense?

I'm not using it against him, no need to be so defensive. I'm confused how 1.19 vs 1.19 is out pacing. Scoring on the PK generally is more defensive than offensive in my mind. Any of these guys would score with the break away that you get when you gain possession on the PK.

Obviously they have more PP/ES toi. Kane plays on a much worse team and isnt relied on defensively. Hes a worse two way player but a better offensive player, in my opinion.

 

[Trap Jesus]

I'm not using it against him, no need to be so defensive. I'm confused how 1.19 vs 1.19 is out pacing. Scoring on the PK generally is more defensive than offensive in my mind. Any of these guys would score with the break away that you get when you gain possession on the PK.

Obviously they have more PP/ES toi. Kane plays on a much worse team and isnt relied on defensively. Hes a worse two way player but a better offensive player, in my opinion.

I meant 1.19 to 1.17. If you start getting into points/60 it gets crazy. They're both top-line wingers, I don't see how there's that much of a difference for role.

 

[North Cole]

I meant 1.19 to 1.17. If you start getting into points/60 it gets crazy. They're both top-line wingers, I don't see how there's that much of a difference for role.

If you start getting into P/60, matthews climbs the ladder too. Well considering those guys dont step on the ice at all for PK, I'd say the role is different. It's close offensively because of how poor kane did in comparison to Marchand in 2017. PPG wise, marchand is ahead, and it's not close for two way play. I think Kane provides more offensively with fairly poor linemates. Do you think Marchand is a better offensive player than Pasta?

I just lean for Kane, but not by much. It seems to offend you on a personal level that I have Marchand fourth.

 

[Trap Jesus]

If you start getting into P/60, matthews climbs the ladder too. Well considering those guys dont step on the ice at all for PK, I'd say the role is different. It's close offensively because of how poor kane did in comparison to Marchand in 2017. PPG wise, marchand is ahead, and it's not close for two way play. I think Kane provides more offensively with fairly poor linemates. Do you think Marchand is a better offensive player than Pasta?

I just lean for Kane, but not by much. It seems to offend you on a personal level that I have Marchand fourth.

I don't have an exact way to sort for this timeframe, but Marchand is 2nd for points/60 behind Kucherov starting from 2017/18 and 3rd behind Kucherov and McDavid starting in 2016/17, and once again, that's overall, so I'm not even taking Marchand's PK time out of the equation. Like you can skew things any way you want, Marchand is always top 3.

Marchand is 100% a better offensive player than Pasta. He's just so much more versatile. Pastrnak has a better one-timer (and it's considerably better), but that's it. There isn't another area of the game that Pastrnak is better than Marchand at. Pastrnak pulls off crazy dangles on people, which is probably his next best element (there are numerous times where he'll take the puck up the ice himself and split the D) but Marchand does that as well, and is less prone to turn it over when he does it. Marchand snipes with regularity, he's an incredible playmaker, and he has ridiculous puck control whether it's slicing through the D or pivoting back and forth down low.

 

[Regal]

Is this not a massive gap to you?

McDavid - 1.43 points per game
Kucherov - 1.33
Marchand - 1.31
Malkin - 1.17
Kane - 1.17
Draisaitl - 1.15
Crosby, MacKinnon, Stamkos - 1.14
Pastrnak - 1.13

Even if you take out the guys that have played fewer games like Malkin and Stamkos, we're talking about 11-18 less games over a sample size of 228 at the top end. How much does that even matter?

Why are we starting January 2017? Yea, yea, Cassidy. But the problem with picking samples with starting points that benefit the player we're analyzing is they don't necessarily benefit the guys we're comparing him to.

To be honest I didn't really look at the stats you used initially, because I was thinking of the three seasons prior to this one just based on memory, and looking it up, this is what we end up with:

McDavid: 1.34
Kucherov: 1.33
Marchand: 1.19
Crosby: 1.18
Malkin: 1.16
Stamkos: 1.15
Kane: 1.12

I'm not a fan of cutting off parts of seasons in comparisons because every one has their hot streak at different times, and while Marchand has been lights out this year, his line is hot and will cool down with others balancing things out.

The thing is, his separation has mainly come about from a down year from the rest of the competition at various points, instead of actually being consistently better or better at his best. So kudos for consistency I guess, and if we want to talk about a very specific time frame where his production places him in the top three, then sure, he's produced like one, but it's very clear he's not on another level than several other guys in terms of ability.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Why are we starting January 2017? Yea, yea, Cassidy. But the problem with picking samples with starting points that benefit the player we're analyzing is they don't necessarily benefit the guys we're comparing him to.

To be honest I didn't really look at the stats you used initially, because I was thinking of the three seasons prior to this one just based on memory, and looking it up, this is what we end up with:

McDavid: 1.34
Kucherov: 1.33
Marchand: 1.19
Crosby: 1.18
Malkin: 1.16
Stamkos: 1.15
Kane: 1.12

I'm not a fan of cutting off parts of seasons in comparisons because every one has their hot streak at different times, and while Marchand has been lights out this year, his line is hot and will cool down with others balancing things out.

The thing is, his separation has mainly come about from a down year from the rest of the competition at various points, instead of actually being consistently better or better at his best. So kudos for consistency I guess, and if we want to talk about a very specific time frame where his production places him in the top three, then sure, he's produced like one, but it's very clear he's not on another level than several other guys in terms of ability.

I can take it all the way back to February of 2016 to present and still have Marchand top 3 if you want.

NHL.com - Stats

The point is that he's hit a completely new gear since the second half of the 2016/17 season and has been insanely consistent at upholding those numbers. I mean, you're taking away his 37 in 22 and he's still top 3. You can cherry pick different things, and he's still there. At what point do you not just say that's where he belongs? This isn't some tiny sample size, this has been years.

Also, Cassidy can't just be glossed over like it's nothing. Do you have any idea how much of an effect Marchand actually being used like a top line player has had? For years it was always "the Bergeron/Marchand duo is sacrificing offense due to role" and wouldn't you know it, it was actually right. Must be nice to play an entire career with that kind of freedom like all of these other players have always had.

 

[Regal]

I can take it all the way back to February of 2016 to present and still have Marchand top 3 if you want.

NHL.com - Stats

The point is that he's hit a completely new gear since the second half of the 2016/17 season and has been insanely consistent at upholding those numbers. I mean, you're taking away his 37 in 22 and he's still top 3. You can cherry pick different things, and he's still there at what point do you not just say that's where he belongs? This isn't some tiny sample size, this has been years.

Also, Cassidy can't just be glossed over like it's nothing. Do you have any idea how much of an effect Marchand actually being used like a top line player has had? For years it was always "the Bergeron/Marchand duo is sacrificing offense due to role" and wouldn't you know it, it was actually right. Must be nice to play an entire career with that kind of freedom.

Again, his lead is almost solely due to consistency. He's never actually been top 3 in any single season except for tbe quarter pole of this one. If we compare him to, say Kane, Kane outscored him in '17 and '19, and is having a great year himself without the insanely unsustainable numbers Marchand currently has. I would bet that Marchand doesn't finish the season with a significant edge. The big difference between them is that Kane just happened to have his worst year of his past 8 seasons during the sample.

Or take MacKinnon, who didn't break out until 17-18. Your January sample adds the extra games that gives them the gap, but start the sample in that 17-18 season instead, and MacKinnon has a 1.28 PPG and Marchand a 1.31. An insignificant difference. Again, one season is what changes things.

So, sure, Marchand has been a top 3 offensive player during that time period because his lows are higher than everyone but the top 2, so his production over that time is the third best. But I'm not sure how meaningful that is when he's never been a top 3 offensive player in either points or PPG in any season during that time. I'm not saying that the sample size is small. Marchand has obviously proven to be an elite offensive player. I'm saying that having a higher floor in a random sample doesn't prove someone is necessarily better, especially when they haven't had higher peaks.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Again, his lead is almost solely due to consistency. He's never actually been top 3 in any single season except for tbe quarter pole of this one. If we compare him to, say Kane, Kane outscored him in '17 and '19, and is having a great year himself without the insanely unsustainable numbers Marchand currently has. I would bet that Marchand doesn't finish the season with a significant edge. The big difference between them is that Kane just happened to have his worst year of his past 8 seasons during the sample.

Or take MacKinnon, who didn't break out until 17-18. Your January sample adds the extra games that gives them the gap, but start the sample in that 17-18 season instead, and MacKinnon has a 1.28 PPG and Marchand a 1.31. An insignificant difference. Again, one season is what changes things.

So, sure, Marchand has been a top 3 offensive player during that time period because his lows are higher than everyone but the top 2, so his production over that time is the third best. But I'm not sure how meaningful that is when he's never been a top 3 offensive player in either points or PPG in any season during that time. I'm not saying that the sample size is small. Marchand has obviously proven to be an elite offensive player. I'm saying that having a higher floor in a random sample doesn't prove someone is necessarily better, especially when they haven't had higher peaks.

Trying to use consistency against someone is absurd. It's not like he doesn't have gamebreaking ability, he puts up more multi-point games than anyone. He's never dipped below 1.25 points in any of these years, McDavid is the only other one to do that.

 

[Regal]

Trying to use consistency against someone is absurd. It's not like he doesn't have gamebreaking ability, he puts up more multi-point games than anyone. He's never dipped below 1.25 points in any of these years, McDavid is the only other one to do that.

I'm not using it against him. He can be called the third best for that time period based on the production that actually happened. But when his advantage is solely due to a player with more sustained offensive success in their career having an off season within the sample, I find it hard to call him actually a better offensive player. Both Kane and Crosby were better in one, on par in one and worse in another out of the past three years coming into this season, and MacKinnon was on par the past two. Kane and MacKinnon are having similarly elite starts to this season, while Crosby was hampered by injury. All of them had better top end seasons in those years than Marchand has ever had and for most of this time frame, no one would consider Marchand clearly better offensively outside of MacKinnon before his breakout. So I guess I just don't really see what his total production over this period really means other than that he's elite offensively. He managed to produce a little better than similar offensive talents in the same period. So what?

 

[Trap Jesus]

I'm not using it against him. He can be called the third best for that time period based on the production that actually happened. But when his advantage is solely due to a player with more sustained offensive success in their career having an off season within the sample, I find it hard to call him actually a better offensive player. Both Kane and Crosby were better in one, on par in one and worse in another out of the past three years coming into this season, and MacKinnon was on par the past two. Kane and MacKinnon are having similarly elite starts to this season, while Crosby was hampered by injury. All of them had better top end seasons in those years than Marchand has ever had and for most of this time frame, no one would consider Marchand clearly better offensively outside of MacKinnon before his breakout. So I guess I just don't really see what his total production over this period really means other than that he's elite offensively. He managed to produce a little better than similar offensive talents in the same period. So what?

The consistency has made him produce significantly more than all the others. It's the total period I'm looking at.

 

[Regal]

The consistency has made him produce significantly more than all the others. It's the total period I'm looking at.

That's why I said for the period in total, sure he's been top 3. But it's more because of happenstance for the other top players than his ability. He's not a clearly better offensive player than Crosby, Kane or MacKinnon despite those numbers. He's among that group though.

 

[Trap Jesus]

That's why I said for the period in total, sure he's been top 3. But it's more because of happenstance for the other top players than his ability. He's not a clearly better offensive player than Crosby, Kane or MacKinnon despite those numbers. He's in that grouping though.

So why vote no? Edit: nvm you didn't.

 

[Regal]

So why vote no? Edit: nvm you didn't.

Yea, in my initial post I was thinking the numbers were closer (the ones I posted in the second) which was why I was thinking it was too close to say for certain. If we use your sample though then I would say he has been.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Yea, in my initial post I was thinking the numbers were closer (the ones I posted in the second) which was why I was thinking it was too close to say for certain. If we use your sample though then I would say he has been.

Yeah, I mean I understand the concept of cherry picking sample sizes, but I thought 3 years is a pretty reasonable thing to go off of. I could have done 2016/17-present as well, the point is he's turned a corner in his career the last 3 or so years, and it's a unique thing because most players he's competing against were seen as star offensive players from day 1, or at least that was their role and expectation.

People can create any sample they want, it just doesn't make sense to me to vote against numbers that are this clear.

 

[Taluss]

Regular Season

NHL.com - Stats

Playoffs

NHL.com - Stats

Since January 1 of 2017-present

Aha finally a fun thread creater who has balls. I like it. I'd assume no... I'd think McDavid, Drai, Kutch and Crosby would be better offensively just to name a few but I have nothing to back it so I wont vote.

 

[North Cole]

I don't have an exact way to sort for this timeframe, but Marchand is 2nd for points/60 behind Kucherov starting from 2017/18 and 3rd behind Kucherov and McDavid starting in 2016/17, and once again, that's overall, so I'm not even taking Marchand's PK time out of the equation. Like you can skew things any way you want, Marchand is always top 3.

Marchand is 100% a better offensive player than Pasta. He's just so much more versatile. Pastrnak has a better one-timer (and it's considerably better), but that's it. There isn't another area of the game that Pastrnak is better than Marchand at. Pastrnak pulls off crazy dangles on people, which is probably his next best element (there are numerous times where he'll take the puck up the ice himself and split the D) but Marchand does that as well, and is less prone to turn it over when he does it. Marchand snipes with regularity, he's an incredible playmaker, and he has ridiculous puck control whether it's slicing through the D or pivoting back and forth down low.

And yet that confuses me, because if you take only the sample that is this year into consideration, the numbers show their production is similar but pasta scores way more goals. Like I said earlier, p/60 doesnt do a whole lot for me on it's own, I find it gets used to much as a handicap to bridge the gap in offense between someone who plays 18 minutes vs someone who plays 21. Its always automatically assumed that given the extra 3 minutes, p/60 stays linear and the total points are higher. Which isnt provable.

People can create any sample they want, it just doesn't make sense to me to vote against numbers that are this clear.

Should we just close the thread then? If it doesnt make sense and it's so clear cut, I'm not sure why you bothered to make the poll. Wouldnt it also be extremely clear that Draisaitl the better offensive player since Oct 2018? Seems like you think any other opinion on the matter is blasphemy, even though I've given Marchand a bunch of credit in this thread.

 

[Trap Jesus]

And yet that confuses me, because if you take only the sample that is this year into consideration, the numbers show their production is similar but pasta scores way more goals. Like I said earlier, p/60 doesnt do a whole lot for me on it's own, I find it gets used to much as a handicap to bridge the gap in offense between someone who plays 18 minutes vs someone who plays 21. Its always automatically assumed that given the extra 3 minutes, p/60 stays linear and the total points are higher. Which isnt provable.



Should we just close the thread then? If it doesnt make sense and it's so clear cut, I'm not sure why you bothered to make the poll. Wouldnt it also be extremely clear that Draisaitl the better offensive player since Oct 2018? Seems like you think any other opinion on the matter is blasphemy, even though I've given Marchand a bunch of credit in this thread.

Yet the results are divided and in favor of him not being top 3 despite the clear cut numbers. This is a poll to encourage discussion as to why rather than throwing out baseless answers.

Goals doesn't mean better player. Marchand is extremely versatile. He's selective with his shots but is deadly when he does shoot. His shooting percentage has always spoken for itself. Points/60, points/game, total points. None of it matters, Marchand is always going to be in that top 3.

 

[ruaware41]

Look at the games played.

McDavid - 1.43 points per game
Kucherov - 1.33
Marchand - 1.31
Malkin - 1.17
Kane - 1.17
Draisaitl - 1.15
Crosby, MacKinnon, Stamkos - 1.14
Pastrnak - 1.13

And even if you want to say points matter and points per game doesn't with this massive sample size, Marchand is still top 3. If you want to use Crosby's playoffs to overcome the regular season gap, you have to use that against Kucherov. There's no legit argument that can be made to put Marchand out of the top 3.

holy shit, if you're so sure of yourself why even bother making this poll, since you already are so sure there's no justifiable difference of opinion. Just to validate the ego that comes with vicariously living through grown men who get paid to hit puck with stick?

Just be patient and wait until people start discussing instead of calling out everyone that didn't vote how you wanted them to

 

[Trap Jesus]

holy ****, if you're so sure of yourself why even bother making this poll, since you already are so sure there's no justifiable difference of opinion. Just to validate the ego that comes with vicariously living through grown men who get paid to hit puck with stick?

Just be patient and wait until people start discussing instead of calling out everyone that didn't vote how you wanted them to

Lol we're on a forum to discuss hockey. No one needs to do anything, it's just lazy to throw out a no with no reasoning in the face of numbers that look this convincing. Some have attempted to back it up, most haven't.

This poll was obviously a good one, look how close the results are. I'm just delving into why they're so close.

 

[ruaware41]

Lol we're on a forum to discuss hockey. No one needs to do anything, it's just lazy to throw out a no with no reasoning in the face of numbers that look this convincing. Some have attempted to back it up, most haven't.

This poll was obviously a good one, look how close the results are. I'm just delving into why they're so close.

that's ridiculous logic. Why should people have to explain themselves for one poll option but not the other? If anything, the person making the claim of one being outside the norm (top/top 3 something, or worst/best, etc.) has the onus fall on them to explain why they think that way, not the person voting no.

People voting no should have to explain themselves because that's the opinion you don't like? Or else it's lazy? lol. In your eyes the numbers are very convincing, clearly not in the eyes of everyone. He's certainly up there but top 5 are probably interchangeable to a lot of people. The poll is a good one.

 

[Trap Jesus]

that's ridiculous logic. Why should people have to explain themselves for one poll option but not the other? If anything, the person making the claim of one being outside the norm (top/top 3 something, or worst/best, etc.) has the onus fall on them to explain why they think that way, not the person voting no.

People voting no should have to explain themselves because that's the opinion you don't like? Or else it's lazy? lol. In your eyes the numbers are very convincing, clearly not in the eyes of everyone. He's certainly up there but top 5 are probably interchangeable to a lot of people. The poll is a good one.

There's no onus for anything. People can vote and leave or not vote and leave. I can also inquire as to why people voted the way they did. They can respond or not respond, that's on them.

It's pretty obvious no matter what way you swing it that Marchand is very clearly in the top 3 statistically. It's not just a matter of being in the top 3, but there being a significant gap there. Even though I've argued the yes side all throughout this thread, the numbers do speak for themselves. They were listed in the OP with no bias attached, sorted by total points (not the more favorable case of points per game for Marchand).

 

[ruaware41]

There's no onus for anything. People can vote and leave or not vote and leave. I can also inquire as to why people voted the way they did. They can respond or not respond, that's on them.

It's pretty obvious no matter what way you swing it that Marchand is very clearly in the top 3 statistically. It's not just a matter of being in the top 3, but there being a significant gap there. Even though I've argued the yes side all throughout this thread, the numbers do speak for themselves. They were listed in the OP with no bias attached, sorted by total points (not the more favorable case of points per game for Marchand).

Yes maybe it's obvious to you but not to everyone, despite ppg or total points. Your attitude itself has made people vote no by their own admission. You make a poll with your mind made up and from your replies it is obvious you take it personally/feel defensive if someone doesn't validate your thoughts. Earlier you just said it's lazy for people to vote no and not explain but didn't say the same thing for people who voted yes. Now I know what you're going to say... Because it is obvious he is a top 3 forward over the last 3 years... Yes, obvious to YOU, not necessarily everyone agrees. Imagine if everyone operated from this viewpoint. "I think this way and it's obvious why I do so if you don't vote how I want it's lazy if there's no explanation."

 

[Chef de Cuisine]

If I'm adding a forward to my team for Game 7 there are >10 I pick over Marchand lmao.

 

[Trap Jesus]

Yes maybe it's obvious to you but not to everyone, despite ppg or total points. Your attitude itself has made people vote no by their own admission. You make a poll with your mind made up and from your replies it is obvious you take it personally/feel defensive if someone doesn't validate your thoughts. Earlier you just said it's lazy for people to vote no and not explain but didn't say the same thing for people who voted yes. Now I know what you're going to say... Because it is obvious he is a top 3 forward over the last 3 years... Yes, obvious to YOU, not necessarily everyone agrees. Imagine if everyone operated from this viewpoint. "I think this way and it's obvious why I do so if you don't vote how I want it's lazy if there's no explanation."

I'm not taking anything personally, I like getting into these arguments. There's so much baggage with Marchand, I think a lot of people are letting that cloud their judgement so it's fun to challenge them on that.