Speculation: Mitch Marner Mega Thread Part 7 (Mod warning OP)

[tucker3434]

You do realize that Matthews outscored mackinnon by 60 goals at this point in their careers right?

60 goals.

These guys are going to be in their 30’s and you guys will still be telling us about how Matthews started his career better.

It’s irrelevant.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Or you can not blindly ignore context until very specific and arbitrary conditions are met.


This doesn't make any sense. You've just arbitrarily decided that absolute points are the only thing that matters. I'm glad my GM disagrees.


There are no excuses. There is context to explain why absolute number rankings may not match rate rankings, because you came in and started having a problem.

How is comparing two player’s total points an “arbitrary” condition?

By not using total points and jumping to rates, you automatically assign zero value to actual production.

I’m not sure why your GM is so bad at negotiating with star RFAs. I doubt it has much to do with per 60s.

 

[DANTHEMAN1967]

Leafs fans are angry because they can see the writing on the wall. Somethings gotta give. You can't have a potential 8 figure free agent with just under $4M in cap space. This isn't going to end well. They essentially have to choose between Willie and Mitchell

I guess you don't understand how LTIR works?
I sure am glad our GM and his team (Brandon Pridham etc...) do though!

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Numbers that definitely do not determine how smart hockey people see those players.

Smart hockey people do not ignore total points in their negotiations either. Matthews just had Dubas over a barrel for whatever reason. Dubas was too cowardly to push back.

 

[NinjaKick]

These guys are going to be in their 30’s and you guys will still be telling us about how Matthews started his career better.

It’s irrelevant.

the problem is someone went OT and said Matthews is not on the same level as Mack when Matthews has had arguably an equal start to his career or an even better start
the best part... Matthews is still a kid and he's still developing

 

[zeke]

Smart hockey people do not ignore total points in their negotiations either. Matthews just had Dubas over a barrel for whatever reason. Dubas was too cowardly to push back.

Dubas correctly evaluated that Matthews is the 2nd best player in hockey, and got him at excellent value as a result.

Dubas is really, really good at this stuff. It's pretty amazing how efficient the current roster is given what he inherited: By the numbers: Grading every team's contract efficiency

You arguing that he's dumb for not bothering to look at a century plus old stat with no context to evaluate his players doesn't make him look dumb, but it does make somebody look dumb.

 

[WiLBoY]

Matthews second best player in hockey lol. What a joke

 

[Dekes For Days]

How is comparing two player’s total points an “arbitrary” condition?

You said we can't look at further context unless they have the same absolute points for some arbitrary reason.

By not using total points and jumping to rates, you automatically assign zero value to actual production.

That's not true at all. Rates are actual production; just represented in a different form to include additional context.

I’m not sure why your GM is so bad at negotiating with star RFAs.

He's not. He just doesn't use bad, outdated methods.

 

[Randy Randerson]

These guys are going to be in their 30’s and you guys will still be telling us about how Matthews started his career better.

It’s irrelevant.

Well, you don't know if it's relevant yet. If Matthews puts up 50+50 next year it's not irrelevant at all, and that's not a huge stretch for a guy who's averaged 43+36 per 82 for his 19, 20 and 21yo seasons

 

[Legion34]

Smart hockey people do not ignore total points in their negotiations either. Matthews just had Dubas over a barrel for whatever reason. Dubas was too cowardly to push back.

Not every team has no 1 overall who looks like a bust for 4 years. And then he turns into a 90 pt player with 4 min of pp. time a game.

Some players actually look good from day 1.
We will see what happens with rantanen

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Dubas correctly evaluated that Matthews is the 2nd best player in hockey, and got him at excellent value as a result.

Dubas is really, really good at this stuff. It's pretty amazing how efficient the current roster is given what he inherited: By the numbers: Grading every team's contract efficiency

You arguing that he's dumb for not bothering to look at a century plus old stat with no context to evaluate his players doesn't make him look dumb, but it does make somebody look dumb.

It looks more like to me that Matthews had a very good agent that managed to get his player top tier money for non top tier production. Also that Dubas didn't apply any pressure to get him to sign to a less contract (and he couldn't even get term!).

 

[Legion34]

These guys are going to be in their 30’s and you guys will still be telling us about how Matthews started his career better.

It’s irrelevant.

You think comparing 2 players on the total season they have had to this point is irrelevant?

Their first 3 seasons they each played 212 games.

Matthews scored 60 more goals. He could not play for 2 years and would still be tied with mackinnon in goals.

I’m pretty sure that’s relevant.

 

[Legion34]

It looks more like to me that Matthews had a very good agent that managed to get his player top tier money for non top tier production. Also that Dubas didn't apply any pressure to get him to sign to a less contract (and he couldn't even get term!).

He has scored the same Ammount if goals per game as the best goal scorer in the league. Since he started.

How much more elite do you need?

Ovy hasn’t been top 10 in points over the last 3 years..... was his production not elite?

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Not every team has no 1 overall who looks like a bust for 4 years. And then he turns into a 90 pt player with 4 min of pp. time a game.

Some players actually look good from day 1.
We will see what happens with rantanen

Mack was the youngest Calder winner in the history of the NHL. I assure you, he looked good from day 1.

 

[Legion34]

Mack was the youngest Calder winner in the history of the NHL. I assure you, he looked good from day 1.

Then what does Matthews look like. Considering he has outscored him by 60 goals over 3 seasons?

 

[GirardSpinorama]

He has scored the same Ammount if goals per game as the best goal scorer in the league. Since he started.

How much more elite do you need?

Ovy hasn’t been top 10 in points over the last 3 years..... was his production not elite?

1.) What does Ovechkin have to do with this?
2.) Ovechkin's last Lindsay was in 2009-10, when he put up 109 points.

 

[webdev]

Let's compare apples to apples.

Matthews at age 19 (2016-17) scored 40 goals 69 points in 82 games
Mackinnon at age 19 (2015-15) scored 14 goals 38 points in 64 games

Matthews at age 20 (2017-18) scored 34 goals 63 points in 62 games
Mackinnon at age 20 (2015-16) scored 21 goals 52 points in 72 games

Matthews at age 21 (2018-19) scored 37 goals 73 points in 68 games
Mackinnon at age 21 (2016-17) scored 16 goals 53 points in 82 games

Over his 19 - 21 years Matthews scored 111 goals 205 points in 212 games
Over his 19 - 21 years Mackinnon scored 51 goals 143 points in 218 games

I agree with you that there is a large difference between these two players.

Insert the old Laine excuse of linemates. Oh wait.....

 

[GirardSpinorama]

Then what does Matthews look like. Considering he has outscored him by 60 goals over 3 seasons?

He was better than Mack's first 3 seasons and NO WHERE NEAR the last 2. I never disputed he WAS (past tense) than Mack to start their careers.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

He clearly stated the last two years, not just last year.

But not surprised you're being disingenuous, you're the same guy that backed out of the avatar bet after talking a big game.

Can't take you for your word.

He used a two year sample size of simply one statistic to say Matthews was better than MacKinnon. I just wanted to see if he would use a one year sample size to say that one player was better this year.

 

[Randy Randerson]

He was better than Mack's first 3 seasons and NO WHERE NEAR the last 2. I never disputed he WAS (past tense) than Mack to start their careers.

well again, you don't know that, Matthews hasn't had those seasons yet

 

[Dekes For Days]

He used a two year sample size of simply one statistic to say Matthews was better than MacKinnon. I just wanted to see if he would use a one year sample size to say that one player was better this year.

He used much more than one statistic. You just cherry-picked that one statistic, and then posted incorrect information for your out-of-context examples. And then he wrecked your position in a detailed breakdown, which you failed to address (like everything else).

 

[GirardSpinorama]

well again, you don't know that, Matthews hasn't had those seasons yet

How about we place a bet then?

Matthews' age 22 season is next year. Mack's Age 22 season, he scored 97 points in 74 games. Thats a 107 point per season pace. If Matthews outscore 107 points or 97 in 74 games. I will say he is on Mack's level.

The point is, he hasn't had those seasons but he always hasn't done it yet.

Makar can outscore Karlsson's rookie season next year and I'm not going to be calling him Karlsson level.

 

[Randy Randerson]

How about we place a bet then?

Matthews' age 22 season is next year. Mack's Age 22 season, he scored 97 points in 74 games. Thats a 107 point per season pace. If Matthews outscore 107 points or 97 in 74 games. I will say he is on Mack's level.

I think that's too specific, Matthews is a more of a goal scorer than point producer. If Matthews goes on a 50+50 pace for like likt 65+ games I don't think you can say they aren't on the same tier, I think you'd find that most people would take 50 goals and high 90's points over 10 less goals and 10 more points, especially given the inequity in the PP time between them. I do agree that Matthews has some work to do to get to MacKinnon's level, but it's also not typical that players peak in their ELC's, so he would be a good bet to get there.

 

[GirardSpinorama]

I think that's too specific, Matthews is a more of a goal scorer than point producer. If Matthews goes on a 50+50 pace for like likt 65+ games I don't think you can say they aren't on the same tier, I think you'd find that most people would take 50 goals and high 90's points over 10 less goals and 10 more points, especially given the inequity in the PP time between them. I do agree that Matthews has some work to do to get to MacKinnon's level, but it's also not typical that players peak in their ELC's, so he would be a good bet to get there.

Mack was on a 43 goal/107 point pace. Matthews and Mack are not such extremes that one is a pure playmaker/pure goal scorer

Also a 50-50 guy versus a 40-70 guy, I believe the consensus on this board was that people will go with the 40-70.

These are not unfair conditions. If leaf fans are so confident he is at least on Mack's level, they should think he can exceed them, so matching it should not be a problem.

 

[Nervousbreakdown]

Mack was the youngest Calder winner in the history of the NHL. I assure you, he looked good from day 1.

From day 1 - some point early in his second season then he was good again in year 5. Lets all be super honest here, we were all at least a bit worried when he was coming out of his ELC. He was so dominant in junior and in his rookie year I just remember being upset because I had to watch him absolutely blow by the entire group of maple leafs on the ice against him. But his year 2,3 and 4 weren't very good. Giving him some better line mates sure helped him turn everything around.

 

[ToDavid]

I see I've stumbled upon the Auston Matthews and Nate MacKinnon megathread.