Who will score more points in the next 5 years? Matthews vs Marner vs Eichel vs EP vs Pastrnak

[LeafsNation75]

And while Marners best assist season is 21 more than Pastas, Pastas best goal season is 22 more than Marners

Marner is know to be a better playmaker than goal scorer, which reflects that when you see his goals and assists totals during his first four seasons.

 

[danpantz]

But you're talking about their rates of production. ES, PP, and PK obviously don't offer equal situations to produce, yet you lumped them all together to give Marner a disadvantage.

We're counting all points correct?

That doesn't change the fact that Pasta scores at a better rate 5v5, and on the PP. Marner also gets almost double the amount of time against empty nets that Pasta does but I'm not excluding that because the thread is about total points which Pasta also leads in over the last 3 or 2 seasons depending on what time frame you're using.

 

[LeafsNation75]

We're counting all points correct?

That doesn't change the fact that Pasta scores at a better rate 5v5, and on the PP. Marner also gets almost double the amount of time against empty nets that Pasta does but I'm not excluding that because the thread is about total points which Pasta also leads in over the last 3 or 2 seasons depending on what time frame you're using.

I'm not saying Marner's empty net goals shouldn't count because I agree that points are all the same no matter if they are scored 5v5, on the power play, short handed and into the empty net.

However so far this season I know Marner has two empty net goals and I have to look at his goals scored during his first four seasons, because I can not remember if he scored any other empty net goals during those years.

 

[danpantz]

I'm not saying Marner's empty net goals shouldn't count because I agree that points are all the same no matter if they are scored 5v5, on the power play, short handed and into the empty net.

However so far this season I know Marner has two empty net goals and I have to look at his goals scored during his first four seasons, because I can not remember if he scored any other empty net goals during those years.

I'm just trying to show why I used all strengths. But it doesn't matter if you eliminate Marners PK, Pasta scores more at 5v5 and on the PP. You'd actually be taking points away from Marner and the gap in totals would just grow while Pasta would still be leading in rates.

 

[Dekes For Days]

We're counting all points correct?

We can evaluate their overall level of production without pretending that ES, PP, and PK time are the same thing, and offer the same opportunity for production. That was highly misleading.

 

[McVespa99]

Points?
Pasta
Marner
Eichel
Matthews
Pettersson

Goals?
Matthews
Pasta
Eichel
Pettersson
Marner
A lot of these will be close though.

 

[danpantz]

We can evaluate their overall level of production without pretending that ES, PP, and PK time are the same thing, and offer the same opportunity for production. That was highly misleading.

Me: Pasta scores more when you take into consideration all ice time
Also Me: Pasta still scores more when you take away Penalty killing
You: That's misleading

 

[Dekes For Days]

Me: Pasta scores more when you take into consideration all ice time
Also Me: Pasta still scores more when you take away Penalty killing
You: That's misleading

What was misleading was looking at rate statistics while lumping ES, PP, and PK time together, knowing that unlike Pastrnak, Marner played significant time in the least productive game state, and Pastrnak played considerably more in the most productive game state. I haven't said anything about Pastrnak's rates in the individual game states; you're just trying to sidestep what you did wrong.

 

[danpantz]

What was misleading was looking at rate statistics while lumping ES, PP, and PK time together, knowing that unlike Pastrnak, Marner played significant time in the least productive game state, and Pastrnak played considerably more in the most productive game state. I haven't said anything about Pastrnak's rates in the individual game states; you're just trying to sidestep what you did wrong.

But when you look at them separately it tells the same story. If both players played the same amount of PP and 5v5, and neither Killed penalties, based on the rates, Pasta would score more points.

What's misleading in this thread is people saying that Marner gets more assists and therefore should outscore Pasta while completely ignoring that the gap in Pasta's goal scoring vs. Marner is much bigger than the gap in assists.

And Pasta gets 37 seconds more pp time per game over the last two seasons and gets 1:05 minutes less of 5v5. And that includes time with Babcock as coach where you guys complained about his usage.

 

[Dekes For Days]

But when you look at them separately it tells the same story.

It does not. It may lead you to the same conclusion, and there are arguments for that conclusion, but it does not tell the same story.

 

[danpantz]

It does not. It may lead you to the same conclusion, and there are arguments for that conclusion, but it does not tell the same story.

Okay then what story does it tell?

If a player has a higher 5v5 p/60 and a higher PP P/60 does that not mean he is a better scorer even when the actual counts ignoring ice time show that as well?

 

[Dekes For Days]

Okay then what story does it tell?

The original story you were telling by lumping ES, PP, and PK time together and treating them as equal, was that the gap in their production rates was much bigger than it actually was.

 

[LeafsNation75]

What's misleading in this thread is people saying that Marner gets more assists and therefore should outscore Pasta while completely ignoring that the gap in Pasta's goal scoring vs. Marner is much bigger than the gap in assists.

For the record I never said Marner should outscore Pastrnak because he gets more assists. I just said he's had more assists than him and nothing more.

 

[danpantz]

The original story you were telling by lumping ES, PP, and PK time together and treating them as equal, was that the gap in their production rates was much bigger than it actually was.

Okay then lets ignore rates entirely. Over the last two seasons if you only count PP and 5v5 scoring Pasta has 22 more points than Marner.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Okay then lets ignore rates entirely.

Or we could just like... use them properly.

 

[danpantz]

For the record I never said Marner should outscore Pastrnak because he gets more assists. I just said he's had more assists than him and nothing more.

There's other posts in here saying that though.

 

[danpantz]

Or we could just like... use them properly.

But Pasta leads in rate stats as well as actual counts.

 

[Dekes For Days]

But Pasta leads in rate stats

Then it sounds like there was no reason for you to use them incorrectly.

 

[LeafsNation75]

There's other posts in here saying that though.

Unless I missed them this was the only response I see that mentions Marner's assists saying they are easier to get, however it doesn't say he should be ahead of Pastrnak in scoring because of that.

Marner probably. Assists are easier to come by and he's the best playmaker in the group, in addition to being the most durable of those listed thusfar in their careers. Plus age of the core lines up.

 

[danpantz]

Unless I missed them this was the only response I see that mentions Marner's assists saying they are easier to get, however it doesn't say he should be ahead of Pastrnak in scoring because of that.

like 3 posts down from that one, and by saying "marner probably" it means he thinks Marner should be ahead in scoring lol

 

[danpantz]

Then it sounds like there was no reason for you to use them incorrectly.

Must not have used them too incorrectly if no matter how they get sliced it leads to the same conclusion.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Must not have used them too incorrectly if no matter how they get sliced it leads to the same conclusion.

It may have led you personally to the same end conclusion here, but your misuse made a significant difference, which is relevant in consideration of this thread question.

 

[CanadienShark]

I think I'll vote Marner here, accounting for injuries. If not for injuries, I'd say Pastrnak. Matthews wouldn't be a bad choice, but I think Marner can consistently outproduce him. Eichel and Pettersson are good choices as well.

Good poll. Any one could end up the highest point producer long term.

 

[danpantz]

It may have led you personally to the same end conclusion here, but your misuse made a significant difference, which is relevant in consideration of this thread question.

No the only reason people aren't choosing Pasta as the answer to this question has nothing to do with stats. All of the stats, no matter how they are sliced put Pasta ahead. Whether it be rates or counts, ignoring PK or including Pk, Pasta comes out ahead.

Literally the only argument against Pasta is Bergeron and Marchand falling off a cliff and the Bruins being unable to find someone to play with Pasta when that happens which there are no stats to quantify that and no guarantee it will happen over the next 5 years. Or he gets hurt, which could happen to anyone on this list which is also unquantifiable.

 

[Dekes For Days]

No the only reason people aren't choosing Pasta as the answer to this question has nothing to do with stats. All of the stats, no matter how they are sliced put Pasta ahead.

The extent of the difference of those stats is relevant when there are other considerations for the question being asked. You're attempting to claim that your misuse of stats was okay because you personally came to the same conclusion either way. That's ridiculous.