The better 2-way player: Mark Stone or Mitch Marner?

[Regal]

Maybe if this was four years ago

Stone has had a ridiculous reputation on this site however; the guy was PPG a single time in his career over 55 games and has been useless for Vegas the last three years running

Marner runs laps around Stone in every category in 2023


Because people seriously thought he was a ppg two way beast when he was traded to Vegas when he never was

Injuries and Covid shortened seasons did this to a lot of players, but he was over PPG over 4 consecutive seasons and 255 games.

 

[loosemoose]

They are probably the 2 best 2 way wingers of the past 5 years. Maybe Marchand has a case to beat them, but not over rated at all.

Nichushkin for one is miles better defensively than either of them. Also guys like Lehkonen and perhaps Zach Aston-Reese as a niche role player.

 

[LemonSauceD]

Marner easily

 

[Sheppy]

I went with Marner.

While I think if you're strictly talking defensive play, Stone is better.

That said, the offensive gap is too huge.

They are probably the 2 best 2 way wingers of the past 5 years. Maybe Marchand has a case to beat them, but not over rated at all.

Marchand was better than both of them over the past 5 years.

 

[Pyrophorus]

Nichushkin for one is miles better defensively than either of them. Also guys like Lehkonen and perhaps Zach Aston-Reese as a niche role player.

Then we go back the OP who said 2-way...

 

[Pyrophorus]

Marchand was better than both of them over the past 5 years.

Pretty negligible with Marner
This year, you have that aforementioned offensive gap

 

[QJL]

This is not 2017. It’s easily Marner. I am not a Leafs fan either.

 

[AvroArrow]

Nichushkin for one is miles better defensively than either of them. Also guys like Lehkonen and perhaps Zach Aston-Reese as a niche role player.

Not even close.

 

[Breakers]

Nichushkin for one is miles better defensively than either of them. Also guys like Lehkonen and perhaps Zach Aston-Reese as a niche role player.

what the hell did I just read.

 

[AvroArrow]

I went with Marner.

While I think if you're strictly talking defensive play, Stone is better.

That said, the offensive gap is too huge.


Marchand was better than both of them over the past 5 years.

Fair

 

[NHL Fanatik]

Injuries and Covid shortened seasons did this to a lot of players, but he was over PPG over 4 consecutive seasons and 255 games.

He isnt some young prospect - he gets credit for seasons not random sample sizes. The guys only two (not four so lets not make stuff up okay?) PPG seasons are under 60 games played

But that just about sums up Stone's career - fans putting together random parameters to make him shine

 

[Tufted Titmouse]

It's too bad OP let the cowards hide their votes, I would love to see the usual suspects all voting for Stone on this one.

 

[Breakers]

I mean the question isn’t the best defensively
Which stone is still a beast at looking at his defensive zone puck recoveries, neutral zone breakups etc

But two-way. Like how can you not go Marner.

 

[Sheppy]

Pretty negligible with Marner
This year, you have that aforementioned offensive gap

I would agree with this year for sure.

 

[Notsince67]

Nichushkin for one is miles better defensively than either of them. Also guys like Lehkonen and perhaps Zach Aston-Reese as a niche role player.

LOL.
A 50 percentile player this year defensively is not better. John Tavares has better numbers and he really is not a poster boy for defense.

 

[Notsince67]

I went with Marner.

While I think if you're strictly talking defensive play, Stone is better.

That said, the offensive gap is too huge.


Marchand was better than both of them over the past 5 years.

Marner was 20 years old 5 years ago. A wee bit biased at the timeline.

 

[Sheppy]

Marner was 20 years old 5 years ago. A wee bit biased at the timeline.

Ok. I'm not the one who brought it up.

I was simply saying Marchand has been the better 2 way player over those 5 years. It's OK, it's not a big deal. Marchand is elite two way.

 

[Notsince67]

Ok. I'm not the one who brought it up.

I was simply saying Marchand has been the better 2 way player over those 5 years. It's OK, it's not a big deal. Marchand is elite two way.

That we can agree on

 

[Ivo]

This is always a weird question because Stone is better defensively (or has been historically at least) but Marner is so good offensively that he's better overall so does that make him a better 2-way player?

Yeah, never quite got this “better two-way player” thing. Isn’t it the same as asking who is the better player, period?

Two-way player is one that is good at both offense and defense. But how do you compare who is a better two-way player? By definition you have to take both offense and defense into account, so if a player has Gretzky-like offense and no defense, he would still be better than some 50-point guy with great defense (although this guy you could call a two-way player and the first one not, bit of a paradox).

 

[TGWL]

I has to be Marner. 2-way means both side of the team. The entire rink. The gap on offense is a lot higher than the gap on defense, especially when you consider that Marner is a really good 2-way player.

 

[cg98]

I’d say Marner

 

[biturbo19]

Advanced metrics and actually applying the eye test would help with this. I'm not going to sit here and campaign for Stone being the best defensive forward in the league but he's absolutely in the conversation. His defensive impact is as obvious as the sky is blue when comparing how well the Knights suppress teams transitions vs. When he's out of the lineup, which has been the case for a fair bit the last two seasons.

I'll admit that when the puck is in our defensive zone, he's not as much of a specialist but I'd still expect him to be one of the more likely players to get it out of our zone not named Martinez or Pietrangelo. What has him operating at such a high level is puck recoveries while forechecking in the offensive and neutral zones. And there aren't many forwards that do it as well or better than him.

I mean...isn't this the crux of the issue with Stone as "defensive ace"? He's kind of the epitome of "the best defence in a good offense". He posts good numbers in a lot of categories, by doing well offensively and stealing pucks, etc. He does most of his best work in transitioning to offense.


It's that age old question that gets debated over defencemen. Is being a really good offensive defenceman actually being good defensively? I'd argue it's not the same thing. But i can understand the argument the other way i guess.

 

[NyQuil]

It's that age old question that gets debated over defencemen. Is being a really good offensive defenceman actually being good defensively? I'd argue it's not the same thing. But i can understand the argument the other way i guess.

I think there's an issue where people conflate skill sets with actual on-ice impact.

I would think that one of the best defencemen in the league at zone exits and zone entries would have a positive impact on team defence.

This article speaks a little bit to what puck possession can do from a defensive point of view, back from EK's run in 2017:

Consider the shot differentials with the Bergeron line and Karlsson both on and off of the ice. You can see the clear divide I’m talking about in both instances:

From a pure territorial advantage, both units are picking apart the opposition (note: scoring chances are strikingly similar from a percentage basis). But the disparity on the Karlsson side is the clear takeaway here. Boston is getting absolutely caved in whenever he’s on the ice, and that’s close to half of the game (he’s averaging close to 28 minutes a night). That puts an incredible amount of pressure on the Bruins to try to win the minutes he’s not out there. If the goals aren’t coming – and they aren’t right now for Boston – you’re in a bad spot.

A lot has been made about Karlsson’s scoring (he already has five assists in the series, a few of which have been of the highlight-reel variety), but the real hallmark of this series is in the data above. Boston simply can’t sustain offensive zone pressure when he’s out there. If they lose the puck, he recovers it and instantly breaks out – something the rest of the Ottawa defensive corps struggles with. Far too frequently he takes a high-pressure situation in the defensive zone and turns it into offensive zone time.

Karlsson is dominating the Bruins - TSN.ca

The ice is tilting toward Ottawa every time the Senators captain comes over the boards in the first-round series, Travis Yost writes.

www.tsn.ca

A lot of the "defensive skills" have to do with not having the puck on your stick - positioning, gap control, physicality, separation of man from the puck, blocking shots, etc.

However, you're in a vulnerable position in that case - unlike say a Mark Stone who has stolen possession in the offensive zone and kept the puck as far away from his own net as possible.

Anton Volchenkov was a legend when it came to blocking shots (he blocked 12 against the Capitals back in 2011 and was first star, including 5 of Alexander Ovechkin), but it also meant that he was passive in his own zone in a lot of cases, and a blocked shot doesn't necessarily mean a turnover.

Obviously the most well-rounded players and best defencemen have that broad skill set that encompasses both puck skills and play without the puck.

But that doesn't necessarily mean that they will have a greater on-ice impact than a specialist.

For this particular poll, I can’t think of anything Stone does better than Marner sufficiently to offset Marner’s overal offensive advantage. Marner is quite adept at takeaways himself.

 

[HanSolo]

I mean...isn't this the crux of the issue with Stone as "defensive ace"? He's kind of the epitome of "the best defence in a good offense". He posts good numbers in a lot of categories, by doing well offensively and stealing pucks, etc. He does most of his best work in transitioning to offense.


It's that age old question that gets debated over defencemen. Is being a really good offensive defenceman actually being good defensively? I'd argue it's not the same thing. But i can understand the argument the other way i guess.

You're going to have to explain the bolded to me. He does his best work suppressing counter attacks in the offensive and neutral zones. If we're talking about play generators in transition, I'd argue that Theodore is in a tier of his own whether he's rushing the puck or making a stretch pass then you have Eichel, Pietrangelo in the next tier. Stone is adept at gaining zone entries when the puck is on his stick but I wouldn't say he's an all encompassing transition driver. On occasion you see him make the smart pass to continue the transition but he's typically not the one ensuring the puck gets from the defensive zone to the offensive zone.

The point is that relative to his position, yeah he's just strong at suppressing offense in his own zone. He works best in his own zone at man defense to the players on the point or the perimeter and he can muscle guys off the puck or strip them with good stick work, but it's not consistent to call him elite in that zone and he admittedly could be better about cutting off passing lanes and recovering pucks when they get down low. But he is elite when it comes to neutral zone and offensive zone defensive pressure. Which means, with his defensive contributions, he's preventing offense before said offense can even get to his defensive zone. Which, again, is more than you can say for most forwards and certainly for most wingers. He doesn't quite stack up to the Bergerons, Barkovs, and Kopitars of the league because he doesn't take face offs and that doesn't factor into the equation. But for his position he's a high impact player on the defensive side of the game. I'd argue elite but maybe you see it differently because he's not elite in one of three zones.

 

[HockeyVirus]

Very similar players in that both are overrated defensively because they intercept and steal a lot of pucks. To the untrained eye that looks like great defensive play but real great defensive play is about great positioning.

Of the two, I take Marner especially since it's starting to look like Stone could be cooked.

For the slow of us out there, if they are consistently intercepting and stealing a lot of pucks, wouldn't that imply they have great positioning?