Oh sorry, concidered by anyone but Leafs fans.not considered that by you, you mean.
Oh sorry, concidered by anyone but Leafs fans.not considered that by you, you mean.
That wasn't what was said. And it still makes no sense, because you're ignoring the other provided factors in his production. If he did what was stated originally, he would be a better player, not an equal one.IF he played 82 games, he seems not be able to stay healthy for 82 games.
It has absolutely nothing to do with being able to physically handle it. Matthews has even said that he is willing and fully able to play more minutes. This is a combination of factors based on how Babcock operates. Babcock does not stack lines and never has. Babcock likes playing a grinder with his stars. Babcock currently has a team with great depth and multiple franchise players, and doesn't need to lean on any one particular line. These things hinder individual production, but they don't make the player any less important or valuable.There might be some reason he does not play more minutes? Maybe he can't handle physically more minutes and if he played more his quality of play would drop?
His raw production without intentionally ignoring context does.His raw production warrants no where near 11.6M a year.
Offensively skilled, but young and spread out over the lineup.Edit. And that linemate excuse is just sad. Every Leafs fan is screaming they have deepest and best forward group in the league.
This is incorrect. If you take a look at the top of the point/PPG leaderboard, you will find that almost all players have a linemate up there with them, except Matthews. Matthews had the biggest separation in point pace from his closest line-mate in the league at 40 points, and the separation was even more significant when he signed.And players you are comparing Matthews with have no problem producing with lesser players.
Edit as I reread what you said:If sprinters run 82 races, and a) Sprinter A averages the fastest sprint speed but misses 20 races, and b) Sprinter B finishes with the highest cumultive rank at the end of the season - which sprinter is faster?
He played 82 games as a rookie, but has had a rough time with injury the last two seasons though less than other players like McDavid and Crosby had on their elcs as someone pointed out earlier.IF he played 82 games, he seems not be able to stay healthy for 82 games.
There might be some reason he does not play more minutes? Maybe he can't handle physically more minutes and if he played more his quality of play would drop?
Until those questions are answered he is overpaid. His raw production warrants no where near 11.6M a year.
Edit. And that linemate excuse is just sad. Every Leafs fan is screaming they have deepest and best forward group in the league. And players you are comparing Matthews with have no problem producing with lesser players.
So you think Matthews p/60 numbers are high because of low minutes?
I am showing you that his time of signing was not significant, unless you are suggesting waiting until the end of the season, which would have been a stupid move. His pace didn't slow down anytime soon, and there was just as much if not more reason to believe his pace would increase.Lol, did you just project a 5 game stretch over 82 games?
Of course Matthews' production and pace at the time of signing was included in the negotiations. I have said this all along. Dubas could not have signed Matthews in the previous off-season without messing up other negotiations that would have resulted in a greater total cost for the 3. Waiting until after the season would have been the stupidest move; Matthews could have easily utilized his offer sheet leverage at that point, and Leafs would have been completely frozen and unable to make moves, which could have been team crippling.If you think Matthew’s unsustainable start didnt get included in the negotiations, you’re wrong. Dubas should have negotiated pre-season and if Matthews didnt want that, then negotiate in the offseason. Don’t let the other side dictate the timing, have some balls!
Four 1st offer sheets have been given out in the past for far worse players. Matthews is a special level of player where he can give you that value. Also, Arizona is desperate and it would have been a once in a lifetime opportunity for them to get a star from Arizona. Montreal is also desperate for a #1C, has given out an offer sheet to a #1C, and approached another one, both worse than Matthews. Not to mention a bunch of other teams. It was a legitimate concern that couldn't be ignored.Other GMs are not stupid enough to give four firsts
If sprinters run 82 races, and a) Sprinter A averages the fastest sprint speed but misses 20 races, and b) Sprinter B finishes with the highest cumultive rank at the end of the season - which sprinter is faster?
And if that same sprinter that missed 20 races only ran 80m instead of 100m and was fastest on meters/second basis would you be confident on saying he was the fastest one?
I am not the authority on anything. I have my opinions just like you. Not everyone agrees with me.Oh sorry, concidered by anyone but Leafs fans.
1. You have not proven this.I have already proven with a significant sample size that Matthew’s actual production does not go up in games where he played minutes to the level of McDavid. In fact, it goes down.
We back to mortgages and loans again?The NHL is a marathon not a sprint.
Sprinting is also an awful example because the difference is in the miliseconds. A 10k is better, its obvious that the best 10k times tend to be worse than the best 5k times when you use rates.
You are mixing a bunch of stuff up to make a pretty useless point. Regardless of where you rank Marner as far as best forwards (you might be eating a bit of crow next year), it is hard to imagine that within 3-4 years that Marner won't be among the few best in the league. He just turned 22. What he gets paid will also be a function of where the leafs think he will perform. Marner has already taken a long term contract off the table because he knows they can't afford him, and he is probably right.These pace/per 60 arguments don't just prop up Toronto's 1st overall pick. They prop up their entire team.
Over the past 3 regular seasons, Toronto has scored at a rate of 2.79 5-on-5 goals per 60 minutes. Not only is that the highest 5-on-5 scoring rate over the past 3 regular seasons; it is the highest 5-on-5 scoring rate of any team over a 3-year regular season sample between 2007-2008 and now. Therefore, the G/60 and P/60 of Maple Leafs players over this time frame is generally going to be very high, and thus these statistics will generally favor Maple Leafs players in debates.
However, over the past 3 years, Toronto has also not won one single playoff series. This information alone tells us that regular season 5-on-5 scoring rates are clearly not the be all end all of team or player evaluation when the evaluation is conducted for the sake of determining the level of contributions that said team or player make towards the ultimate goal of winning a Stanley Cup.
I can not say for certain what arguments or metrics anybody would be using in a different situation. But I believe that if the Toronto Maple Leafs were 1st in regulation/overtime wins over the past 3 seasons, and were only 15th in 5-on-5 goals per 60 minutes, we would see their fan base more frequently use metrics such as goals above replacement that correlate with regular season wins, and we would see their fan base less frequently use the metric (5-on-5 points per 60 minutes) that directly correlates with what their team is best at.
As it pertains to this thread - Mitchell Marner is 15th in 5-on-5 points per 60 since he entered the NHL, and was 4th this season. But he is absolutely not the 15th best forward since he entered the league, nor was he the 4th best forward last season. I think a rating like that which Evolving Hockey's Goals Above Replacement model gives him: 22nd best forward since he entered the NHL, 13th best last season is still a bit too high, but much more in line with how he deserves to be paid. His 5-on-5 scoring rate is impressive, but one can't ignore that he is in a position that is extremely favorable for scoring at a high rate in 5-on-5 situations.
These pace/per 60 arguments don't just prop up Toronto's 1st overall pick. They prop up their entire team.
Over the past 3 regular seasons, Toronto has scored at a rate of 2.79 5-on-5 goals per 60 minutes. Not only is that the highest 5-on-5 scoring rate over the past 3 regular seasons; it is the highest 5-on-5 scoring rate of any team over a 3-year regular season sample between 2007-2008 and now. Therefore, the G/60 and P/60 of Maple Leafs players over this time frame is generally going to be very high, and thus these statistics will generally favor Maple Leafs players in debates.
However, over the past 3 years, Toronto has also not won one single playoff series. This information alone tells us that regular season 5-on-5 scoring rates are clearly not the be all end all of team or player evaluation when the evaluation is conducted for the sake of determining the level of contributions that said team or player make towards the ultimate goal of winning a Stanley Cup.
I can not say for certain what arguments or metrics anybody would be using in a different situation. But I believe that if the Toronto Maple Leafs were 1st in regulation/overtime wins over the past 3 seasons, and were only 15th in 5-on-5 goals per 60 minutes, we would see their fan base more frequently use metrics such as goals above replacement that correlate with regular season wins, and we would see their fan base less frequently use the metric (5-on-5 points per 60 minutes) that directly correlates with what their team is best at.
As it pertains to this thread - Mitchell Marner is 15th in 5-on-5 points per 60 since he entered the NHL, and was 4th this season. But he is absolutely not the 15th best forward since he entered the league, nor was he the 4th best forward last season. I think a rating like that which Evolving Hockey's Goals Above Replacement model gives him: 22nd best forward since he entered the NHL, 13th best last season is still a bit too high, but much more in line with how he deserves to be paid. His 5-on-5 scoring rate is impressive, but one can't ignore that he is in a position that is extremely favorable for scoring at a high rate in 5-on-5 situations.
And if that same sprinter that missed 20 races only ran 80m instead of 100m and was fastest on meters/second basis would you be confident on saying he was the fastest one?
Oh sorry, concidered by anyone but Leafs fans.
The NHL is a marathon not a sprint.
Sprinting is also an awful example because the difference is in the miliseconds. A 10k is better, its obvious that the best 10k times tend to be worse than the best 5k times when you use rates.
Edit as I reread what you said:
and this is why stats should only be 1 tool in the tool box and can be totally misleading...there is not enough information in your example to tell you who is actually faster. As sprinter B could actually have the ten fastest times as such is truly the fastest and NOT have the fastest average .
Its why some players and teams are stat darlings but actually suck and some players and teams are statistically bad but are actually significantly better than what the stats say.
So why isn't Martin Marincin on the top defensive pair? Let's not be blinded by the eye testNot only do I not believe your interpretation of past events, but it doesn't change anything I said. Hockey stats and understanding of them have also come a long way in a short period of time. Stajan and White haven't been Leafs for 10 years.
Yes, stats can be used in misleading ways, as we have seen by a certain Sharks fan in this thread, but that doesn't make the stat itself wrong, and even if somebody was doing that, the methods and numbers are out there for everybody to see. You can challenge those stats with additional context and a counterargument. You can't do that with an eye test. It's just flawed personal feelings.
Nobody has challenged Zeke's methodology with any justifiable or supportable argument. They just dismiss it because it doesn't fit their preconceived ideas.
Now here is a stat i totally agree with!In this case, we have a player in Matthews who is loved as super elite by the professional hockey world, by the hockey analytics world, and turned his sadsack team into a contender almost instantly.
Literally the only people who don't appreciate Matthews are a bunch of bitter leaf haters on an internet message board.
This one's easy, it's because he sucks at the game of hockey.So why isn't Martin Marincin on the top defensive pair? Let's not be blinded by the eye test
Agreed but in the game of advanced stats, he looks pretty damn good.This one's easy, it's because he sucks at the game of hockey.
Agreed but in the game of advanced stats, he looks pretty damn good.
What are you even talking about...?So why isn't Martin Marincin on the top defensive pair?
I know what people used to think they showed and the argument of a failed eye test was also used.He drives play against 4th line scrubs in sheltered minutes, that's what his stats show. What do you think they show?
Why Martin Marincin could be a top pair defenceman for the Leafs - Sportsnet.caWhat are you even talking about...?