Are Matthews and Tavares Franchise #1 C's

[Joey Hoser]

Yeah, calling Strome a bust is a little disingenuous, Marner is still way better though of course. Leafs are very lucky Chayka wasn't the GM at the time... I think if he was he would've taken Marner. Maloney was the GM at the time and I think they were hurting for a 1C especially after getting shafted in the McDavid/Eichel sweepstakes the prior year, and Strome had the stereotypical big 1C thing going on.

At the time I didn't even have a favorite between Marner, Strome and Hanifin. If you held a gun to my head, I probably would have said Strome.

He was a 6'3 center who got 128 points in his draft year. That's insane. Noone would have been a fool to make that choice.

Thankfully, things worked out the way they did.

 

[Tavares to Marner]

I tell you what

their both good

 

[Jack Bauer]

people who use analytics do both. There's no such thing as a hockey fan who follows the sport by looking at the numbers only. People who rely on the eye-test are generally completely dismissive of any information that disagrees with what they've seen, like is happening now

But not ALL analytics point to Nylander being better.

I could cherry pick 4 or 5 that make Marner look like the obvious pick. There's many variables that go into it. Including who you start with, where, and who you play against.

That you can't see past the fact that there's many variables in general, never mind the many that go into certain analytics, is somewhat hilarious to me.

The people preaching Nylanders better analytics ignoring contract status, home town, Marner's better 2nd half, Marner's better playoff, Marner's higher draft ranking...that's as dismissive as just responding with Nylanders better analytics.

It's only a certain minority wondering how anyone could possibly view Nylander as the expendable one among the 2 of them and they can't seem to comprehend that picking between 2 great players doesn't mean anyone is viewed as anything less then simply not quite as great as someone else in a sport where there's literally no 2 direct comparables and everyone brings some aspect that is unique that doesn't show up on an eye test or on an analytical graph.

Start trying to trade Marner and you'll have about 5 times the people wondering why you'd move him over Nylander.

And in 6 months time both sides could flop/flop like has happened now from last summer into the fall where most had Nylander a step above.

 

[Jack Bauer]

I tell you what

their both good

Absolutely. And I don't think anyone has questioned that.

 

[Morgs]

You said everything else. CF% at EV has Marner at 51.8% and Nylander at 50.2%
Looking at QoC, it is clear that Nylander plays with more difficult competition at 29.44 vs 29.05. It is largely mitigated by 1 thing...QoT. Nylander played with great team mates 31.28 while Marner played with 29.92 QoT team mates.
In short, at EV, Nylander was in far more favourable situations to generate points. "Better at" does not look at situational variables.

Not really though. Marner had 5% more offensive draws than he did defensive. Nylander had 3% more defensive than offensive. Zone starts are very clear on the effects of Corsi.

Also, QoT imo is very useless. Even though Nylander played with Matthews more, I'd say Marner's situation was much better due to comp, and it's not like his main linemates are slouches (Kadri, Marleau, Bozak, and JVR) at getting shots/chances/points.

 

[Morgs]

Give us a top pairing RD somewhere else and everyone would view both as potential franchise-level and untouchable.

Basing only on analytics and ignoring the eye test would be laughed out of any front office in the NHL.

Taking both into account, with everything else...age, contract, home town, etc...it's easy to see why Nylander is views as the expendable one among he and Marner.

In 6 months time it might be different. And in a years time different again.

Not sure why this is so difficult for you to accept. We've likely all watched virtually every game they've played. It's 2018 and watching sports is about as easy as it's ever been and ever going to be. That doesn't make your analytical based opinion any more valuable then the eye tests.

An elite NHL center basically admitted to coming to Toronto...a situation that has never happened before...was because of the chance to play with Marner.

If that is ignored for your graphs then maybe you need to reset your feelings a bit and remove some of your own bias as it would appear to be an unhealthy one that you're taking way too seriously.

The eye test is riddled with bias, and you can only pay attention to so much at a time. Numbers don't lie, and can tell you the whole picture along with years of seeing how these statistics predict future success.

I watch the game and come away with biases as much as the next person. I just try not to let it influence the way I evaluate players.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Not really though. Marner had 5% more offensive draws than he did defensive. Nylander had 3% more defensive than offensive. Zone starts are very clear on the effects of Corsi.

Also, QoT imo is very useless. Even though Nylander played with Matthews more, I'd say Marner's situation was much better due to comp, and it's not like his main linemates are slouches (Kadri, Marleau, Bozak, and JVR) at getting shots/chances/points.

And how does the Corsi data break down if looking at the season in 3 parts:
part 1 being the regular seasons first half
part 2 being the second half
part 3 being the 7 games vs Boston

Even within Corsi it can be broken down to identify trends and how certain players, for no logical reason whatsoever, simply take off and become better then someone they were not better then in part 1 of the 3 part break down.

And while it's not factored into Corsi the opinion of the coach and front office will also go a long way to determining who is the better option to keep long term or who is the one to pay more then the other. It can't only be about any 1 thing...whether it's Corsi, eye tests, or point per game averages.

And it's ok for 2 groups to disagree on that outcome without 1 side needing to feel ignored or slighted at the other sides opinion.

 

[Jack Bauer]

The eye test is riddled with bias, and you can only pay attention to so much at a time. Numbers don't lie, and can tell you the whole picture along with years of seeing how these statistics predict future success.

I watch the game and come away with biases as much as the next person. I just try not to let it influence the way I evaluate players.

Numbers like simply black and white overall goals and points? Is it ok if that's what I choose to base the main part of my evaluation on even while agreeing the guy coming 2nd in that 2 horse race is better in 2 of the other 3 zones on the ice but i'm willing to forego that for the more skilled player due to the dominance I have down the middle for the next 3-5 years if moving that slightly better 3 zone player is what it takes to fill the hole on the blueline?

 

[Mr Hockey]

Tavares is for sure and Matthews should be very soon.

 

[Morgs]

And how does the Corsi data break down if looking at the season in 3 parts:
part 1 being the regular seasons first half
part 2 being the second half
part 3 being the 7 games vs Boston

Even within Corsi it can be broken down to identify trends and how certain players, for no logical reason whatsoever, simply take off and become better then someone they were not better then in part 1 of the 3 part break down.

And while it's not factored into Corsi the opinion of the coach and front office will also go a long way to determining who is the better option to keep long term or who is the one to pay more then the other. It can't only be about any 1 thing...whether it's Corsi, eye tests, or point per game averages.

And it's ok for 2 groups to disagree on that outcome without 1 side needing to feel ignored or slighted at the other sides opinion.

Yup. We can agree to disagree.

 

[DopeyFish]

Nylander is a play driver, Marner is a catalyst.

They are both elite in their own way. Nylander is more complete top to bottom. But Marner has basically league best IQ.

Nylander is more like Patrick Kane, Marner is harder to find an equivalence for because those high IQ players don't come around often.

I would never trade Nylander or Marner. I would trade everyone but our core four. As far as I'm concerned, soon they'll all basically be top 5 in their positions. That's something you can't let go because you'll likely never get it back.

We've gone through 2 decades where we've either had a couple great Cs or a couple great Ws but never the combination that we have now, at the ages they are and the talent level as high as they are.

Sundin and Gilmour basically being our best at C and Mogilny, Kessel, and Clark as our best at W.

Our 4 players are basically as good or better than they were when we had them, with the exception of Gilmour for a brief moment. Mogilny was incredibly good but mainly before he was with us where he battled with injury.

We need to let this sink in and allow ourselves to enjoy this for once. This is the most stacked team we have ever iced. Finally all the problems we had in the prior eras are a memory with instead of 1 top C not having a 1 top W or vice versa, we now have 2 of each.

Yes, our defence isn't perfect but I'm not willing to let any of those 4 go because of it. We don't have a good history with D and those 4 are going to be better than any one piece we'll get back. Just because we're rich doesn't mean we should give away our riches.

No. It's time to be greedy. Let's give Dermott and Liljegren and Rielly and maybe Gardiner their opportunity to take full command. No more polaks. No more lebdas. No more Liles, no more gleasons, No more kubinas or beauchemins or komisareks or phaneufs. Let every guy we play be ours and ours alone. I don't want to continue chasing this elusive D that never ever seems to work. The price is too rich for my taste.

 

[Morgs]

Marner = Kane-lite
Nylander = Panarin-lite

 

[crump]

Both are #1 centres. At different stages of their careers. We are very lucky.

 

[34]

Marner = Kane-lite
Nylander = Panarin-lite

May not be “lite” for much longer. Both Marner and Nylander are only going to get better.

 

[Kurisu]

thought this thread was about tavares and matthews, why are we talking about Marner and Nylander.

 

[Puckstuff]

thought this thread was about tavares and matthews, why are we talking about Marner and Nylander.

Because the thread was so obvious that Tavares and Matthews are franchise players that can cary an entire team; it was better to discuss if Marner is a franchise player; and then Nylander came up

 

[Obliviate]

I don’t think that McDavid is that great. Yes, He is highly skilled but I don’t have him as the next coming of Christ, sorry.

He's only the best hockey player on the planet.

 

[LeafingTheWay]

The fact that Matthews has played LW with stars when playing on Team NA is interesting.

Late game situations:

Matthews - Tavares - Marner
Gardiner - Rielly
Extra F: Nylander

 

[Atomos2]

Tavares is now. Matthews isn't YET but if he starts to show a little more leadership and heart he will be.

You're telling me you wouldn't build a franchise around a big 40 goal nineteen year old centre?

 

[Morbo]

Absolutely yes on both.

Don’t pay attention to main board polls.

Mod Edit

 

[Raymoondo]

@Drakon lmao

 

[34]

He's only the best hockey player on the planet.

I disagree. Most overrated player on the planet.

 

[Goleafsgo95]

The only centers clearly ahead of them are Crosby, Malkin and McDavid. So yes.

 

[Obliviate]

I disagree. Most overrated player on the planet.

wow.

 

[Jimmy Firecracker]

Of course they are. Don’t listen to dorks on the main board trying to make themselves feel better about the Leafs incoming success.