All Purpose Mitch Marner Talk

[Leaf Fans]

Some can’t separate one from the other.
It’s unanimous he’s overpaid, nothing really to discuss there.

It is only unanimous if you don't count the people who disagree with that notion.

 

[Dekes For Days]

It does if you're the first overall franchise player that took your team there and then followed up with a Hall of Fame career.

No, it doesn't. The career trajectory of individual players doesn't change from cup wins. They don't suddenly become better players. It's not a power-up.

Their legacy? Sure, that can be affected. HHOF chances? Probably. Career trajectory? No, it has nothing to do with that.

 

[Stephen]

No, it doesn't. The career trajectory of individual players doesn't change from cup wins. They don't suddenly become better players. It's not a power-up.

Their legacy? Sure, that can be affected. HHOF chances? Probably. Career trajectory? No, it has nothing to do with that.

If you lead your team to a Stanley Cup, that is indeed a power-up for your career. Look at Brayden Point. He led the Lightning to the Stanley Cup and is pretty comfortably a better player than Mitch Marner.

 

[ACC1224]

It is only unanimous if you don't count the people who disagree with that notion.

They exist?

 

[Leaf Fans]

They exist?

Of course.

 

[Leaf Fans]

If you lead your team to a Stanley Cup, that is indeed a power-up for your career. Look at Brayden Point. He led the Lightning to the Stanley Cup and is pretty comfortably a better player than Mitch Marner.

A lot of people argued that before he won the Cup. Mackinnion and Mcdavid are superstars without having won the cup. Luke Schenn is a middling defenceman despite having won the cup. Niemi was a mediocre goalie despite winning 2 cups. Obviously, winning the cup is the goal, but winning one doesn't make you make you better. In fact for some, it is just a matter of time before they win one. For others they have to be better before they win one. Others are just run of the mill players who fit a roll and get their name on the cup.

 

[Stephen]

A lot of people argued that before he won the Cup. Mackinnion and Mcdavid are superstars without having won the cup. Luke Schenn is a middling defenceman despite having won the cup. Niemi was a mediocre goalie despite winning 2 cups. Obviously, winning the cup is the goal, but winning one doesn't make you make you better. In fact for some, it is just a matter of time before they win one. For others they have to be better before they win one. Others are just run of the mill players who fit a roll and get their name on the cup.

If you're playing a leading role in the cup win like Kane did in 2010, it's absolutely a feather in your cap. 28 points in 22 games in the first run, including the cup clinching goal, and Conn Smythe in 2013.

 

[Leaf Fans]

If you're playing a leading role in the cup win like Kane did in 2010, it's absolutely a feather in your cap. 28 points in 22 games in the first run, including the cup clinching goal, and Conn Smythe in 2013.

I never mentioned Keane, but he was excellent no doubt. Still is. He was already an excellent player before he won the Cup.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

I just used Olympic because that is obviously highest level of play and he was great. For NHL he had 28 points in 22 games as the hawks won the cup. Of course because both team USA and the hawks were great some folks may lean on that to diminish Kane’s ability, should they feel so inclined.

Are you sure you don’t want to cherry pick some Wayne Gretzky best moments of the 80,s to prove your point too. 10 years ago get real.

 

[Dekes For Days]

If you lead your team to a Stanley Cup, that is indeed a power-up for your career. Look at Brayden Point. He led the Lightning to the Stanley Cup and is pretty comfortably a better player than Mitch Marner.

It is not a power up, and does not change a player's trajectory. They are still the same player. The actual cup-winning part is a team accomplishment. Is Stamkos a better player because he's now a cup-winner? No. If Tampa had lost in the finals, would the quality of player that Point is change? No.

Even if, as an individual, you are a significant part of a playoff run, that's great, but you don't instantly become a better player than those who have been better than you for a way more significant sample. There is a difference between being a better player and having a better playoff run. Anybody can have a hot streak. Until Point proves this over a much bigger sample size, he is not a better player than Marner. Keep in mind that at Marner's age, Point was putting up 1 point in 4 games as his team got swept.

Even after Kane's Cup win, he didn't take any steps forward in the following two seasons. He had one of his worst regular seasons in that time, and he put up 1 goal and 10 points in 13 games over the next two playoffs.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Kane had 303 pts in his first 4 seasons. Played in 316 games. .96pts per game
Marner has 291 in 300 games over first 4 seasons. .97 pts per game. Kane had a crap 5th year and Marner should easily pass him points per by next seasons end and a 5 year comparable.

To bad if people don’t like what he makes. He is turning into a elite player potentially a hof’er

haha almost identical i like it

Kane has been making $10,500,000 for 5 seasons now. It took 15.22% of the cap at the time.
Marners cap % at signing was 13.37%

If you don’t like your own teams players because of contract go away. We don’t need the complaints really. Produces more than kane first 4 years,will pass him hext season takes less cap% On signing than the comparable.

So you’s complaining constantly about this have run your course

Compare Eichel the Generational center and he is a better cap % hit and better producer than him too. See a trend here. I f***** do. You’s are wrong.

Matthews has the highest cap % hit of all but has out produced all. This crap has now gone to far.

 

[Duffman955]

Marner looked crushed under the weight of his own contract this year.

Hopefully he can be free from that mental block and show us what hes made of.

Hes a player that ca do it all.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Marner looked crushed under the weight of his own contract this year.

Hopefully he can be free from that mental block and show us what hes made of.

Hes a player that ca do it all.

There are some fans that don’t deserve this talent and abuse it online. Disgusting actually. They got to him. I said this same as you are a bit back. This year crushed him. I hope he comes back having fun like usual. He’s worth his money. I just posted why right above this post

 

[ACC1224]

Of course.

I guess there’s always one a

 

[Leaf Fans]

I guess there’s always one a

To break unanimity, one is all it takes. Seriously though you would figure a majority of people believe the same as the one.

 

[BAM]

Kane had 303 pts in his first 4 seasons. Played in 316 games. .96pts per game
Marner has 291 in 300 games over first 4 seasons. .97 pts per game. Kane had a crap 5th year and Marner should easily pass him points per by next seasons end and a 5 year comparable.

To bad if people don’t like what he makes. He is turning into a elite player potentially a hof’er

haha almost identical i like it

Kane has been making $10,500,000 for 5 seasons now. It took 15.22% of the cap at the time.
Marners cap % at signing was 13.37%

If you don’t like your own teams players because of contract go away. We don’t need the complaints really. Produces more than kane first 4 years,will pass him hext season takes less cap% On signing than the comparable.

So you’s complaining constantly about this have run your course

Compare Eichel the Generational center and he is a better cap % hit and better producer than him too. See a trend here. I f***** do. You’s are wrong.

Matthews has the highest cap % hit of all but has out produced all. This crap has now gone to far.

Kane didn't skip a year post draft playing in the OHL, he went straight to the NHL. If you're going to compare the two, at least be consistent.

Marner and Kane are both elite wingers but Kane is the more complete offensive talent. If Marner had Nylander's shot, he'd be a Patty Kane clone.

 

[gabeliscious]

A lot of people argued that before he won the Cup. Mackinnion and Mcdavid are superstars without having won the cup. Luke Schenn is a middling defenceman despite having won the cup. Niemi was a mediocre goalie despite winning 2 cups. Obviously, winning the cup is the goal, but winning one doesn't make you make you better. In fact for some, it is just a matter of time before they win one. For others they have to be better before they win one. Others are just run of the mill players who fit a roll and get their name on the cup.

When you look back at players careers, the cups factor in. Look at someone like Sundin who we all probably have a great deal if respect for, if he had a cup or two his legacy would be greater imo.

As a teak sport there will always be players fortunate to come along for the ride like schenn but there are the key players that make it go. When comparing marner to point, the fact that point has a cup will always be relevant. Playoff performance is also important imo.

 

[ACC1224]

To break unanimity, one is all it takes. Seriously though you would figure a majority of people believe the same as the one.

Be interesting to see who the one is.
@Mess can we add a poll here?
Are you happy with Marners contract?

 

[Leaf Fans]

Be interesting to see who the one is.
@Mess can we add a poll here?
Are you happy with Marners contract?

I think it is you

 

[Leaf Fans]

When you look back at players careers, the cups factor in. Look at someone like Sundin who we all probably have a great deal if respect for, if he had a cup or two his legacy would be greater imo.

As a teak sport there will always be players fortunate to come along for the ride like schenn but there are the key players that make it go. When comparing marner to point, the fact that point has a cup will always be relevant. Playoff performance is also important imo.

Sure he would have a greater legacy. It is totally relevent.

 

[Notsince67]

Be interesting to see who the one is.
@Mess can we add a poll here?
Are you happy with Marners contract?

There is a nuance to this question that people conveniently escape.
There are 2 issues related to Marners contract.
1. Did the leafs get full value given they had RFA control.
I think the answer to this is no, pretty clearly. They had leverage and he wanted to stay on the leafs.

2. Forgetting the leverage that the leafs "HAD", is marner currently commanding a price for 5 more years that is a clear overpayment given his 5 year projection and relative talent as an average against the rest of the league?
Well here it gets interesting. Panarin signed for a longer deal that stretches out beyond prime years for more money. Had Panarin signed for 1 year less term, he would have been paid even more. Without a doubt, through the next 5 years Marner will outproducing Panarin on an average...accentuated by the tail of that period, when Marner hits his prime and Panarin is in his waning years. In short, the leafs will have better value with Marner than the Rangers with Panarin.

 

[egd27]

Let’s put it this way:
What is the value of Marner in the trade market one for one? Cap aside would you make the following trade?
If the answer is a quick yes, that’s mean Marner is an inferior player compare to the other player.
If the answer is no, it means Marner is a superior player.
But if the answer is maybe and then become a yes due to cap, that’s Marner’s value.
For example, I believe Marner is a much better player than any players in the draft. But if Rangers calls and offer 1OA. The answer might lean toward yes due to freeing up cap space esp since Pietra is available as a UFA. That’s not saying Marner sucks....but Laf and Pietra for Marner is a really good deal.
Same can be applied to AM or WN or even Reilly.
Anyhow, Marner is a Leafs, let’s just hope he performs to his potential next season.

If the premise is supposed to exclude cap implications, then you can't very well make the decision using cap implications as a crucial factor.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

Cap friendly slightly missreports cap hit% on contracts signed a season before they kick in. As a result Kane actually cap hit % is lower on his first post ELC.

For the Kane vs Marner debate there is really only 1 thing to consider, did Marner deserve to get paid like 23% more per year than Kane?
That answer should be pretty obvious

 

[Dekes For Days]

For the Kane vs Marner debate there is really only 1 thing to consider, did Marner deserve to get paid like 23% more per year than Kane? That answer should be pretty obvious

It's 20.5% more, and Marner is 6 years instead of 5. And the answer is very obvious. Yes, Marner deserved that much more than Kane. He was a much better player at time of signing.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

It's 20.5% more, and Marner is 6 years instead of 5. And the answer is very obvious. Yes, Marner deserved that much more than Kane. He was a much better player at time of signing.

Kane was paid 10.6% of the cap while Marner was paid 13.37% of the cap. That is a percent difference of 23.12%, if you read the part you decided to cut off in your reply you would know why your 20.5% is incorrect.

Kane was a recent 1st overall, had a 72 point season while Marner was still playing in the OHL and then lead his team to a conference final i believe before his team locked him up early. There is no way Marner deserved 23% more than Kane, that is just silly.