He definitely resorts to bodying guys off pucks rather than stick lifts.
Brady Tkachuk vs Mitch Marner
- Thread starter The Professional
- Start date
-
HF Sportsbook has been reset for the new season - Click here to play.
- Status
He definitely resorts to bodying guys off pucks rather than stick lifts.
bert
Registered User
I dont think you'll see anyone argue that. Atleast the sens fanbase can admit when they have been futile. Or understand that Marner and Tkachuk while both very effective are very different stylistically and impact the game positively in different ways.
Except he is. At least everything with meaningful impact on a team winning.
Physicality is one of many different attributes that a player can utilize to assist in their performance, but just like every other attribute, they do not get bonus points on top of what they accomplish with it.
He's below 50%... That's not a plus...
Which stat exactly are you referring to? If you mean ixG, of course Tkachuk (a shooter) is going to be higher than Marner (a playmaker). That's not about being a better player. That's just about role. That was rarely discussed with Matthews, and really only to support the sustainability of his goal production within a relatively smaller sample, not to claim he's better than people. Tkachuk runs into an additional issue where he's consistently scored below his ixG. It's good that he can get good shots off, but through 5 years, he hasn't shown to be a very talented converter.
Elite PKing.
Most things aren't black and white in this world, but word definitions are pretty black and white. You seem to be claiming that there's this magic in between word that you refuse to say.
What do you mean in between? If one player is better at everything, they are better. There is really no gray there.
No, it hasn't. The defensive gap is massive, and that hasn't changed. Tkachuk has closed a bit of the offensive gap, but still, in a career year, is pacing a significant amount behind Marner's worst pace in years.
PK has a meaningful impact on the outcomes of games. I haven't ignored anything that Tkachuk brings to the table. You're just trying to give him bonus points for certain attributes you like, instead of looking at what he actually does with it that helps the team win.
Nothing there is twisting any words. You said something wasn't insignificant. Thus, it is significant. You also said that if Tkachuk doesn't keep up with Marner's production, then it's still Marner by a significant margin. Now that he hasn't kept up with Marner, you're trying to backstep and blame me for quoting your own words. You also repeatedly dismissed and diminished the defensive gap by defaulting to blaming coaching. You've talked about it like 10 times by now. You literally did it again in this very post I'm replying to. Own your words.
Except it's not paying "33% more for a marginal additional overall impact/contribution". As you've been shown, it's paying 33% more for a significant offensive, defensive, and overall impact upgrade. I don't know why you're surprised that better players get paid more.
Hopefully.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
Well, that's not something I will ever agree with. Moving on.
So, it's the end result that matters, not the actual execution of those attributes? I'll save this one for later.
It's pretty good for a winger and better than quite a few centres.
I see, so the only reason Marner has more assists than Tkachuk does is because of role.
Of course he's going to have more points, because they give up to two assists for every goal, and Marner is a playmaker while Tkachuk is a shooter.
The majority of that offensive discrepancy you are referring to must therefore largely be due to their utilization, and not because Marner is a better player.
Toronto is 16th in PK% in the NHL. That's not a plus. How is that elite?
Marner doesn't get bonus points for PKing if the PK is at best, average. (in fact, it's lower than Ottawa's)
It's what you do with attributes that matters, not the fact that you have them.
It's not like we're out here giving bonus points to Mackinnon because he's fast, or to Marner because of his high hockey IQ and elite edgework.
He literally loses more than he wins. That's not a plus.
You're trying to draw a false equivalency here.
Point production is generated through the creation of goals. That is not role dependent. ixG is generated through taking shots. That is role dependent.
That's illogical. You can only get one point per goal, and everybody is capable of picking up any kind of point.
Team PK% =/= an individual skater's PK impact.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
How is that illogical?
If you are a puck handling playmaker, you can get a point if two other players create a goal long after you've touched it.
If you are a shooter, you only get a point if you are the last person to touch the puck before it goes into the net.
Primary and secondary assists are tracked for that very reason and it benefits players who play a specific role.
Mitch Marner has 19 goals, 19 primary assists and a whopping 22 secondary assists.
Meanwhile, Brady Tkachuk has 20 goals, 22 primary assists and 11 secondary assists.
Brady actually outproduces Marner in both goals and primary assists.
This offensive discrepancy is almost entirely encapsulated by Marner's secondary assist numbers which is undoubtedly the result of the role that he occupies.
Dekes for Days said:
How is the creation of goals not role dependent?
You're arguing that a defensive defenceman has an equal opportunity to create goals as a playmaking centre?
ACC1224
Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
- Aug 19, 2002
- 76,129
- 42,380
Yeah, pretty dumb to bring that up.
Not surprising it's come to that.
They have the same opportunity to pick up points. Marner is not getting more points because he's a playmaker getting multiple points per goal. He's getting more points because he's contributing to the creation of more goals. You're trying to draw a false equivalency with a stat that specifically measures one aspect of an individual's play (shooting) that is very role dependent. It's essentially arguing that he's better because he has more shots, which would be like if I said Marner was better because he has more passes.
We're not talking about defenseman vs. forward - entirely different positions with contrasting purpose. We're talking about 2 forwards with the identical objective of getting the puck in the net.
Last edited:
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
First, there's the awkward proxy that assumes that puck possession is the only way to create a goal.
Points are already a pretty flawed measure for "goal creation". How is a secondary assist more valuable than a player actively screening the goalie? But I digress.
The false equivalency is that you are assuming that a shooter and a puck possession playmaker have the same opportunity to tally points on a goal.
They do not.
Assists emphasize one aspect of an individual's play, namely puck possession and/or passing, while minimizing another aspect of an individual's play, namely getting open for shots and shooting. Depending on the role that forward plays, they will get more opportunities for assists simply because there are potentially two assists to every goal.
Unlike the KHL, where a player does not get a secondary assist if puck possession is traded back and forth between two other players, Marner can send a puck up the ice and two players can pass it back and forth to each other an unlimited amount of times and he will earn that assist.
The fact that you think assist generation is completely independent of the role a forward plays is a very bizarre assertion.
Case in point, what roles do they play on the PP? Tkachuk is standing in front of the net. Marner is moving the puck around to other players.
Marner has 6 PP goals and only 3 primary PP assists on the PP, compared with 16 of 22 total secondary assists.
Meanwhile, Tkachuk has 5 of 11 secondary assists on the PP, but 5 PP goals and 11 primary PP assists.
64% of Marner's production on the PP is when someone else has passed the puck to the goal scorer, compared with 31% of Tkachuk's production on the PP.
As a team, Ottawa scores more goals per minute in with the 5 on 4 advantage and allows fewer than Toronto, with a 9.65 goals differential per 60 minutes of 5 on 4 PP time compared with an 8.2.
So who is actually contributing more here? It's not as simple as just counting the assists.
Dekes for Days said:
How they go about doing that is vastly different, and those roles are rewarded differently.
Again, a player with the puck frequently on their stick, because that is their role, has an increased opportunity to gain a point on a goal because they generate a point even if they are an additional step removed from the creation of the goal.
If you're arguing that Marner is a better puck possession player than Tkachuk, I heartily agree, and it definitely shows up in the secondary assist column.
Does that automatically mean that he creates more goals? I think it's a much more dubious assertion based on using assists as your metric.
Certainly, based on the primary goal and primary assist numbers, he's no better than Tkachuk.
It appears as if you think "Marner is better at literally everything" really just means "Marner is better at accumulating points.", or more accurately, "...better at accumulating secondary assists."
Last edited:
You keep talking about assists, but nobody is comparing them on assists. We're comparing them offensively on overall point production. Both playstyles are represented and rewarded in that.
Tkachuk could do the same. Also, sending a puck up-ice to generate an odd man rush sounds like a pretty important part of a goal.
No, it means he's better offensively, better defensively, and brings more impacts outside of that.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
This season, the only distinction between them is with respect to secondary assists.
Their overall point production this season is the same, if you take secondary assists out of the equation.
You're avoiding the only thing that differentiates them in terms of overall point production, and it reflects the different roles that they occupy.
Dekes for Days said:
As would screening the goalie so he can't see the shooter. Only one of them awards a a secondary assist though.
Marner is certainly very good at setting someone up to set someone up.
Whoever that other someone is must also be pretty good I imagine.
Secondary assists are not worthless, and you seem to have no clue what they often look like. Marner has also consistently been one of the best primary point producers in the league.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
I also know what they could look like.
We'll never know, because there's no qualitative assessment of each secondary assist.
You're the one who brought up "goal creation" and I don't think all points are created equal, and that the roles that forwards occupy will necessarily impact on the accumulation of those shares in goal creation.
Some of those assists are more removed from the act of scoring than others, like in the area where Marner has a sizeable lead on Tkachuk.
You've argued that the role a forward plays is completely independent from the accumulation of points, whereas I've shown that, for example, on the PP, the role that a player plays can have a dramatic effect on the categorization of points that they get.
Not to mention, some contributions to goals are not measured with points, and they certainly aren't worthless, and some of these are in areas of the game where Brady is the superior player to Marner.
No doubt, he's a great producer. He's terrific at puck possession and he's an excellent distributor. I've never argued otherwise.
For the record, I've never even said that Brady Tkachuk is clearly the superior player, because clearly he isn't.
But he's not better at literally everything than Brady Tkachuk.
Every time I read it, it seems that much more stupid. The fact that you are willing to die on this absurd hill is strange to say the least.
Goal generation was referenced because you essentially attempted to argue that Tkachuk was a better offensive player because he shoots more, even if that doesn't translate to goals. And then when it was shown how ridiculous and insanely biased that was towards Tkachuk, you started arbitrarily dismissing parts of production to make Tkachuk look better, dismissing the value of production altogether, and making unsupported claims about Tkachuk making more unrewarded plays resulting in goals, based on absolutely zero evidence at all.
Even under the belief system that all points aren't created equal, there's really no way to end up with anything other than Marner as the superior offensive player. Add that on to the fact that Marner is the superior defensive player and brings more impacts than Tkachuk outside of that, and there's really no argument.
Agreed. Marner is clearly better. That should be the end of it then.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
No, I was arguing that there were aspects to his game that are better than Marner.
I never said he was the better offensive player, I said that he has a stronger net presence than Marner, and this is what leads to his high xG numbers. He plays a different role which requires a different skill set.
You are the one suggesting that the only way to assess a player is through production, which is what led to you putting forward the concept of assessment of goals and assist as a barometer for "goal generation".
Regardless of the effectiveness of goals and assists in terms of assessing goal generation, when we actually delved into the details of production, you argued that goals and assists are completely independent of the role that a forward plays on the team.
When we found out that Marner's edge in offensive production this season is the exclusive province of his secondary assists, and that Tkachuk has more primary goals and primary assists, we looked further at their respective roles with the man advantage.
The vast majority of Marner's PP points are secondary assists, and the vast majority of his secondary assists are on the PP, owing to his role as a puck possessor.
Meanwhile, the vast majority of Tkachuk's PP points are primary goals and assists, owing to the fact that he does not play a puck possession role on the PP but rather a net front presence who screens the goalie, tips pucks and makes quick passes for tap ins.
We discovered that Marner's edge in production this year is due to the fact that he has the puck a lot, and other players on the ice with him set up and score goals after he's given it up more often than Tkachuk.
This is a fact.
That's quite a leap. Show your work please.
As of right now, that statistical superiority lies in the 11 more secondary assists that he's accumulated, despite having fewer primary goals and primary assists.
Is that your contention? And again, this has nothing to do with the role that he plays on the team?
Aside from apparently elite PK (on a team with an average PK), what does Marner bring in terms of other impacts? You keep repeating this again and again, but show no work.
You dismiss any statistic other than production as contributing in any way (e.g. hits) so how are you going to statistically assess these "other impacts" outside of offence and defence?
Repeating "Marner is the better player and brings more to the table" over and over again isn't doing you any favours.
How hard is it to admit that there positive contributing aspects to the sport of hockey that Tkachuk is better than Marner at?
Come on, you can do it!
I certainly don't have a problem admitting the opposite, but maybe that's because I'm a grown-up.
Statistically, Marner can't be better at "literally everything" if he has fewer goals and fewer primary assists than Tkachuk in more games played.
Last edited:
LeafsNation75
Registered User
Last season Toronto lead the NHL with 13 goals while on the PK and Marner scored 3 of them shorthanded.
So far this season Marner has scored 2 goals shorthanded.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
Even with those shorthanded goals, their shorthanded goal differential per 60 minutes shorthanded is good for 13th.
So slightly above average.
LeafsNation75
Registered User
Among Marner's point that happened because of the power play, he's had 16 secondary assists.
Among his 19 goals he's had 11 5v5, 6 on the power play and 2 short-handed.
Mitch Marner 2022-23 Scoring Log | Hockey-Reference.com
Scoring for Mitch Marner for 2022-23
www.hockey-reference.com
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
This is literally what I said earlier in the thread.
Brady Tkachuk vs Mitch Marner
Yet he has only managed 17 takeaways this season. Does he even try to play the game for the puck? He definitely resorts to bodying guys off pucks rather than stick lifts.
LeafsNation75
Registered User
Except you only focused on his secondary assists, when he also has 6 goals scored on the power play.
LeafsNation75
Registered User
Marner also has 15 primary assists this season for goals scored at 5v5. So, wouldn't that mean this notion about him getting a lot of secondary assists because of the power play is overblown?
If your argument isn't that he's a better offensive player, then this whole discussion is irrelevant, and essentially boils down to you being upset that people aren't overrating aspects of Tkachuk's play that don't lead to actual value for his team. There are individual things that Tkachuk is probably better at than Marner, but I am discussing offensive impact, defensive impact, and additional impact, not every single possible skill. High ixG is great, but the objective is to create goals. High ixG isn't much benefit if you've shown to consistently underperform your ixG, because you don't have the shot or skills to make use of the positions and shot opportunities that you can get yourself into.
Both of these are incorrect. When discussing specifically offensive impacts...
1. I pushed back on your unsupported claim that looking at point production benefitted Marner.
2. I pushed back on your attempt to completely dismiss parts of production to make Tkachuk look better.
3. I pushed back on your attempt to dismiss the value of production altogether.
4. I pushed back on your unsupported claims about Tkachuk making more unrewarded plays resulting in goals, based on absolutely zero evidence at all.
It's funny, because you kind of just destroyed your whole primary point argument by acknowledging that Marner's secondary assists are mostly coming from a game state where there's less of a representative difference between point type.
You're acting like Marner is some nobody who just happened to pick up some extra secondary assists to boost his totals, when the truth is that Marner has been a consistently elite PP player who has happened to have his PP production skew more to secondary assists for the first time this year, for reasons that have nothing to do with him providing less offensive contribution to the goals. He's been positioned to QB from the point more with Rielly's injury, and we've worked a lot more off tic tac plays/rebounds than conversion off of initial shots this year. Marner's still doing all his usual stuff - drawing defenders, opening up lanes, making beautiful passes, etc. to generate these situations that result in goals.
Marner has an edge in production, as he always has, because Marner is a better offensive player.
Elite PKing. That's really the only other meaningful impact one can have that wouldn't fall under general offensive or defensive impact.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
Read:
NyQuil said:
I focused on secondary assists because it's a point of differentiation between the two players.
Marner and Tkachuk has roughly the same number of PP goals, Tkachuk has many more primary PP assists than Marner, and Marner has many more secondary PP assists than Tkachuk.
I never omitted anything.
Last edited:
LeafsNation75
Registered User
How many other players besides Marner would try this type of pass while on a breakaway and playing on the penalty kill.
- Status
