Stats for the Marleau and Thornton bashers
- Thread starter McSorley33
- Start date
- Status
boylerroom
Registered User
I rest well knowing at SOME point this nonsene will end. They can't play forever. And I for one will dance a ****ing jig when they're gone.
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 15,836
- 5,090
You might as well say how they are good fathers and outstanding citizens.
For the most part, those who criticize Thornton and Marleau criticize their playoff production.
For the most part, those who criticize Thornton and Marleau criticize their playoff production.
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
More typical poor analysis, they are great playoff producers as well.
Thornton sits at #21, with an almost identical playoff PPG to Datsyuk, Toews, and Kopitar. Thornton is 6th on the playoff assists/game list.
Marleau sits at #44 in playoff PPG and is ahead of the likes of Marty St Louis, Justin Williams and Steve Stamkos. Marleau is 14th in playoff goals/game and tied for 2nd in playoff GWG. He is also tied for 1st in playoff SHG.
They are elite playoff producers.
I just think it wasn't meant to be. im sure on an alternate universe on different teams they might have been able to get it in good but for some reason despite great numbers they just couldn't do it.
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 15,836
- 5,090
How is #21 on a list considered "elite"? That is a low standard, considering how many players are in the league.
Thornton and Marleau have yet to really have a playoff run as strong as the best runs of Datsyuk, Toews, and Kopitar, though Marleau's 2004 scratches the surface. Over his career, Thornton's playoff PPG is decidedly lower than Toews or Kopitar. The three other players are also far superior to Thornton defensively, especially Thornton pre-2010. The other players also score more goals than Thornton does.
Thornton is also tied for the worst +/- on the list (out of 50 players). His career playoff +/- is the worst in the league among 300+ active NHLers. His +/-/game is in the bottom 10% of the league.
I like how when it favours you, you use PPG, but when it doesn't, you use raw stats. Because if you did SHG and GWG/game, Marleau wouldn't look as stellar.
You can say that Marleau has a higher PPG than St.Louis, Williams, and Stamkos, or say he has a lower PPG than Purcell, Heatley, and Martin Straka. That's called framing.
I think that both players could get it done as the secondary or tertiary stars on a team. Marleau just doesn't have the talent. For most of his career, he's been the #2 forward on the team....other SC winners have players like Kane, Zetterberg, Malkin, Perry, and Carter in that role. Marleau doesn't stack up very favourably compared to those high-end talents.
Thornton is obviously supremely talented, but his style of play and attitude aren't conducive to winning playoff hockey. As a team's premier center, he cannot be counted on, as he will inevitably be neutralized in the playoffs, shutting down his team's entire first line and first PP unit. If a GOOD team is able to match their top players against Thornton, they will very often win.
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
There are about 690 active players in the NHL at any one time, and up to 1500 under NHL contract at any one time. The list in question is a pool of players much larger than that but shows only the top 1000 players.
#21 puts a player in the top 2-3% at worst. In reality that puts the player in the top 1%. That is obviously elite and your standard is obviously biased to delusion. It's not a standard at all, it's typical garbage analysis that has no objective backing.
You really can't illustrate your bias any better than for you to dismiss a player being in the top 1% as not elite.
SHG and GWG/game are still stellar for Marleau. He has a higher playoff GWG/game rate than Crosby, Malkin, Toews, Kane, Hossa, Zetterberg, Datsyuk, and the GWG leader Briere. He has a higher playoff SHG/game rate than all those players as well. (It is worth noting though that other notable players on the SHG list are dave bolland and max talbot -- DEPTH players which other teams deploy in hard defensive situations while the sharks have to deploy their top goalscoring forwards in those situations).
You will have to get over the fact that Marleau and Thornton get it done in the playoffs for the most part. They do, it is objective truth, and nothing you say can change that.
Last edited:
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 15,836
- 5,090
What is means is that there are 20 players better than him. Which means that if he matches up against those other players, he is going to lose. It all depends on your frame of reference.
You are including goaltenders and defensemen in your number. In truth, there are about 400 forwards in the league, putting JT just outside the top 5%.
You could also only look at top-line forwards (player JT is going to match up against). There are only 90 of those. That would put JT outside the top 20%.
You could also only look at #1 centers. There are 30 of those. Thornton is 16 in terms of playoff PPG. So now he is outside the top 50%.
I have provided plenty of objective backing and numbers. You just choose to ignore it, and continue to assert that as long as Thornton has great possession numbers, his play shouldn't be criticized. The fact that the Sharks have continually lost in the playoffs is because James Sheppard and Mike Brown aren't scoring a hat trick every game, and bad luck, because if the Sharks have a playoff shooting percentage of just over 7% in 100+ playoff games, that is just bad luck, and not reality.
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
All of these apply to Datsyuk, Kopitar and Toews as well, because they are basically identical to Thornton in playoff PPG. This just further illustrates how invalid your paper-thin analysis constantly is.
Martin Havlat is higher than all of them and it would be a moron that would take him over any of them. [mod]
Last edited by a moderator:
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 15,836
- 5,090
So is Mike Cammalleri. But you are the one that brought up the idea that PPG is everything.
In any case, Thornton's PPG goes from ~1 in the RS to .76 in the playoffs. That is a massive drop off that the Sharks have to account for. When it comes to games 5, 6, and 7 of a series (ie, critical, important, do-or-die games), Joe Thornton is at a .5ppg rate. That is another drop off the Sharks have to account for.
Datsyuk, Kopitar, and Toews are far superior to Thornton defensively, especially averaged over their careers. The three score more goals, with less ice time, with worse linemates (for the most part), and with harder matchups. They rely less on special teams, are more productive on special teams, and are far, far more productive when it comes to crucial situations. As a series progresses, Kopitar and Toews get better. They settle down, figure out their opponent, and execute beautifully.
weastern bias
worst team in the league
hohosaregood
Banned
- Sep 1, 2011
- 32,405
- 12,612
What're you talking about? I've never seen any type of discussion like this before in my life. I'm sure it'll be a totally productive and fruitful conversation that we can all take part in in a nonbiased fashion. Maybe now we can determine the true magnitude of Marleau's worth. Maybe, we can finally figure out Pavelski's role in the future as well and count the days until when Hertl takes on the mantle as well.
I hate this
VanIslander
A 19-year ATDer on HfBoards
Weastern Bias sounds like a basher of theirs in action!
And,... Top-3 in GWGs (GAME WINNING GOALS) over the last decade:
1 Alexander Ovechkin
2 Daniel Sedin
3 Patrick Marleau
And,... Top-3 in GWGs (GAME WINNING GOALS) over the last decade:
1 Alexander Ovechkin
2 Daniel Sedin
3 Patrick Marleau
hockeyball
Registered User
- Nov 10, 2007
- 21,552
- 886
This thread isn't going to convince the few fully committed Joe and Patty haters, and it's pointless for everyone else. I think Joe and Patty are great players, we likely won't have a player of Joe's caliber for a long time again, I still would prefer to see them both gone as soon as possible. Patty is still my favorite players of all time. It has almost nothing to do with their stats, it's what is best for them, and the team at this point.
I believe many here that prefer to trade Marleau and Thornton say so primarily for trade value, instead of performance stats.
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 15,836
- 5,090
I suspect that both players don't have terribly high trade value. After all, how valuable would a decent prospect and a late-first be?
I want to trade them because:
1) Setting a culture of accountability. DW, JT, Marleau, and Vlasic are the only players left over from the 2008 roster. Three of those guys are key parts of the franchise. You can specifically point to DW's mistakes, and poor play by JT and Marleau at critical times for why this team hasn't achieved more. If you really want a culture of accountability, you have to trade/fire those people.
2) This team, since 2006, has had Thornton, and to a lesser extent, Marleau, at the center of it. That means that the team will always rely heavily on Thornton. His style of play, his strategy will dominate. The offense will go through him. As I've stated before, I think that that is a losing strategy. The only want to get past it is to trade Thornton; diminishing his role at this point won't work.
Alwalys
Phu m.
- May 19, 2010
- 25,894
- 6,140
They have zero trade value, as they can veto any trade.
Last edited by a moderator:
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 15,836
- 5,090
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 15,836
- 5,090
Jarome Iginla, Dany Heatley, Josh Gorges, David Legwand, Ryan Smyth....I can go on and on.
and how many GMs have gone through the revolving door in Calgary since he was traded?
The rest of those players aren't even on the same planet as Thornton & Marleau.
I ask exactly how those GM's traded unwilling players without having grievances filed against them by the nhlpa?
Maybe just maybe those players actually wanted to be traded hence why they waived there rights to the no trade clause that was written into the contracts.
I will again repeat not 1 player has ever been traded with a no trade clause without wanting to be traded.
hockeyball
Registered User
- Nov 10, 2007
- 21,552
- 886
Wanting to trade them, and being able to trade them, are entirely different things.
I am very well aware that they don't want to be traded and thus can not be. That doesn't make me WANT to trade them any less. That also doesn't make me go "Welp, can't trade them, I guess I should be thrilled they are still on the team!" either.
They are not going to win a cup here, and that is a travesty. The Sharks are not going to win a cup this season, or next, and are not likely to re-sign either of them at that point. Even if they do, they will have two aging, declining, players with no one to replace them so a cup is still very unlikely at that point. They should go somewhere else and get a cup ffs, they are both either stubborn or foolish for not reading the writing on the wall and doing so.
I've been mostly keeping my mouth shut because I don't see the point of pissing everyone off by stating that the Sharks have no chance at a cup this season, but they have no chance at a cup this season (barring the sea's parting). Even with the improvements, they just don't have the high-end talent to make a real run yet. They'll make the playoffs, they'll probably even make it to the second round, but I literally can't picture them going farther than that with the roster they have now. It's once a good team, maybe a very good team, but not a great team.
You can keep restating their stat-lines over and over again but it's not going to change the fact that this team as constructed is not going to win a cup and thus them being here is completely pointless. If anything I want them gone because I like them so much.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status
