Does Marner get Boo’d?

[Racer88]

Agreed but he played on the 2nd line. The money could have been spent wiser and brought in a decent 2nd line center less than JT signed for. Naz was a perfect 2nd liner but the media ran him out of town after his Sideshow Bob routines in the playoffs.

Yup, we already had a first line centre. Dubas just wanted to make a big splash in his new gig

 

[Hellcat]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1820855732540952900

The funniest comment was , I wonder he rides around the perimeter on the Lake too.. ... LOL

 

[Hellcat]

Yep, exactly, look at Pittsburgh for example, drafting Malkin was dumb, if you have two first-line Cs you are guaranteed to lose.

That analogy makes no sense... backups don't play... Tavares gets 1st line C minutes.

Not sure how you could miss such an obvious reality and the point, if you are paying AM/MM/WN about 30 mil, you cant pay another player 11 mil, what were Malkin and Crosby making 16 mil combined?

 

[Antropovsky]

Matthews has never had a season above 107 points, is Tkachuk better than Matty?

Cant put up alot of points if your linemates dont score. He was producing at a league leading pace with Domi and Bertuzzi. His stats with Marner were dreadful...

 

[Craig Button]

On ice performance, playoff performances, this is where you live up to your contract. But the Leafs org and star players prioritize dollars and that is their idea of success. Not so much to the fans.

You’ve explained Why he’s worth his money to the Leafs org, how much will he be worth to less profitable teams?

Do less profitable teams underpay players or overpay players to attract them?

 

[LeafEgo]

Do less profitable teams underpay players or overpay players to attract them?

Depends, but Leafs pay the difference anyway.

 

[Hellcat]

Cant put up alot of points if your linemates dont score. He was producing at a league leading pace with Domi and Bertuzzi. His stats with Marner were dreadful...

This guy again, since when is 100+ points not "a lot of points"? another nugget of wisdom from Antropovsky ...

Do less profitable teams underpay players or overpay players to attract them?

If they have an internal cap, they would pay less. If you underpay players, I doubt you would attract them.

 

[Confucius]

Do less profitable teams underpay players or overpay players to attract them?

If the welfare payments are high enough there may be little incentive to work.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I don’t think there is some secret magical intangible - its very clear what he brings and what Marner doesn’t. I agree that Marner can also prop up his teammates, he doesn’t have to be physical or get in anyone’s face as long as he makes big plays at important times. He just hasn’t, and Tkachuk can brings things when he’s not scoring.

They both bring things when not scoring. They both make big plays at important times. They both have intangibles. You are overrating particular player attributes and playstyles because you enjoy them, but they are not more beneficial to the team than the things you're failing to recognize in Marner. It is very clear what Tkachuk actually brings that Marner doesn't. Poor defensive play and bad penalties.

Sure, Marner can play some defence but our consistent problem is offence, in which he continues to fail.

Marner outproduces Tkachuk, and everybody on the Leafs since he's entered the league, through more difficult situations, and generates even more that has gone unconverted by others. Also, us being strong defensively in past years, in part because of Marner, doesn't devalue defensive play. Also, while we've had strong defenses in the past, our defense was an issue last year. A lot of people just can't tell the difference between defense and Woll playing like the goalies we usually face and bailing us out.

And don’t forget what happened when we went head to head.

You mean when we outplayed them through injuries and refs being blind, but Bobrovsky stole the series, just like he did against Carolina after us?

Playoff performances are typically small sample size and I defended Marner and Matthews for years for exactly that reason. But it’s getting to be not a small sample size anymore. They both continue to fail, and I fully believe it’s mental.

It's still a small sample size, and they have had both ups and downs throughout it. The playoffs create a dilemma, as the samples are inherently small and we put so much emphasis on them, but disparate external factors impact things so much more than the regular season, that drawing conclusions really requires either breaking down a ton of context or using samples even bigger than the multi-year samples we use in the regular season - which is just often not possible.

How they play is pretty consistently strong. How they have converted has had ups and downs. There is a lot of debate about why that is, but while it is likely a combination of things, one thing is certain. This is a team phenomenon, that happens to coincide with top tier goalies standing on their heads, not an individual phenomenon, and it's problematic when blame is so heavily focused on one individual who actually produces the most, and isn't primarily tasked with conversion.

Who’s more to blame? I think Marner but they both have not been worth their massive contracts. Can you honestly say that they have been?

Yes, they objectively have been worth their contracts. The perception of what cap space is worth has been really skewed for some, as they look only to the biggest surplus value contracts in the league and the best playoff production performances in league history to try to set the standard of what they expect.

I think it’s possible he can turn it around, but we can not afford to wait and risk it any longer. We need to make a change to the core.

We don't need to make a change to the core. That is an emotional response that desires change for change's sake. Change doesn't mean better. Not changing doesn't mean the same outcome. There is very little chance of improving through losing Marner, especially with Treliving now at the helm. Every path and choice is a risk. The question is what's a greater risk, and balancing that with potential rewards. There is less risk and greater potential reward with keeping Marner, compared to any realistic alternative.

 

[Arzak]

We don't need to make a change to the core. That is an emotional response that desires change for change's sake. Change doesn't mean better. Not changing doesn't mean the same outcome. There is very little chance of improving through losing Marner, especially with Treliving now at the helm. Every path and choice is a risk. The question is what's a greater risk, and balancing that with potential rewards. There is less risk and greater potential reward with keeping Marner, compared to any realistic alternative.

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. No kidding this would be great Netflix comedy special. The biggest joker around here !

 

[Punch Drunk Loov]

Would anyone here prefer 2024 Taylor Hall over 2024 Adam Larsson? Other than that one MVP season, (Marner will never win an mvp award btw) Larsson is the more useful and valuable player

 

[Confucius]

Would anyone here prefer 2024 Taylor Hall over 2024 Adam Larsson? Other than that one MVP season, (Marner will never win an mvp award btw) Larsson is the more useful and valuable player

Oh he easily has the talent to dominate a playoff series the way McDavid did, but rather than focus on the whole series this fan base would regurgitate zero points in games 6 and and zero points in game 7….

 

[Nineteen67]

Oh he easily has the talent to dominate a playoff series the way McDavid did, but rather than focus on the whole series this fan base would regurgitate zero points in games 6 and and zero points in game 7….

Marner has really never shown the ability to dominate a playoff series. He’s a perimeter players that looks to pass first and when teams concentrate on defending the shooters he’s limited in what he can do. He’s not very strong, not fast, has a below average shot and has played timid.

 

[Confucius]

Marner has really never shown the ability to dominate a playoff series. He’s a perimeter players that looks to pass first and when teams concentrate on defending the shooters he’s limited in what he can do. He’s not very strong, not fast, has a below average shot and has played timid.

Well everything would have to align, all I’m saying he has the talent to put up 32 assists in 25 games. There are indeed some players on the roster you could bet your house that isn’t possible.

 

[Sundinisagod]

They both bring things when not scoring. They both make big plays at important times. They both have intangibles. You are overrating particular player attributes and playstyles because you enjoy them, but they are not more beneficial to the team than the things you're failing to recognize in Marner. It is very clear what Tkachuk actually brings that Marner doesn't. Poor defensive play and bad penalties.

Marner outproduces Tkachuk, and everybody on the Leafs since he's entered the league, through more difficult situations, and generates even more that has gone unconverted by others. Also, us being strong defensively in past years, in part because of Marner, doesn't devalue defensive play. Also, while we've had strong defenses in the past, our defense was an issue last year. A lot of people just can't tell the difference between defense and Woll playing like the goalies we usually face and bailing us out.

You mean when we outplayed them through injuries and refs being blind, but Bobrovsky stole the series, just like he did against Carolina after us?

It's still a small sample size, and they have had both ups and downs throughout it. The playoffs create a dilemma, as the samples are inherently small and we put so much emphasis on them, but disparate external factors impact things so much more than the regular season, that drawing conclusions really requires either breaking down a ton of context or using samples even bigger than the multi-year samples we use in the regular season - which is just often not possible.

How they play is pretty consistently strong. How they have converted has had ups and downs. There is a lot of debate about why that is, but while it is likely a combination of things, one thing is certain. This is a team phenomenon, that happens to coincide with top tier goalies standing on their heads, not an individual phenomenon, and it's problematic when blame is so heavily focused on one individual who actually produces the most, and isn't primarily tasked with conversion.

Yes, they objectively have been worth their contracts. The perception of what cap space is worth has been really skewed for some, as they look only to the biggest surplus value contracts in the league and the best playoff production performances in league history to try to set the standard of what they expect.

We don't need to make a change to the core. That is an emotional response that desires change for change's sake. Change doesn't mean better. Not changing doesn't mean the same outcome. There is very little chance of improving through losing Marner, especially with Treliving now at the helm. Every path and choice is a risk. The question is what's a greater risk, and balancing that with potential rewards. There is less risk and greater potential reward with keeping Marner, compared to any realistic alternative.

Do the Leafs pay you per word typed or are you salaried ??

 

[notbias]

Cant put up alot of points if your linemates dont score. He was producing at a league leading pace with Domi and Bertuzzi. His stats with Marner were dreadful...

Domi scores less than Marner...

I also think Matthews and Marner put up a lot of primary points and less secondary points...

Really Matthews isn't top 3 every year because the Leafs don't get a lot of PP opportunities and secondary assists exist.

I also don't think Marner was good last year... but I don't think he is the reason Matthews doesn't put up insane numbers.

 

[Arzak]

Do the Leafs pay you per word typed or are you salaried ??

I love his 10 000 word essay on choice and risk !

3rd in division, sucking ass in playoffs. We are not risking sh*t getting rid of our playoff anchor.

You'd think the earth will get hit by a meteor if we trade Mitch based on "Choice is a risky" by Dekes, novel!

 

[Dekes For Days]

Do the Leafs pay you per word typed or are you salaried ??

Neither, obviously, but thank you for acknowledging both that you have no response or counter, and that my posts are so good and accurate that they're worth money.

 

[notbias]

I love his 10 000 word essay on choice and risk !

3rd in division, sucking ass in playoffs. We are not risking sh*t getting rid of our playoff anchor.

You'd think the earth will get hit by a meteor if we trade Mitch based on "Choice is a risky" by Dekes, novel!

Tkachuk was considered a playoff bust before Florida. Do you want the guy who made that trade to do more of them?

I don't care if any of the players are traded (minus Matthews), but pretending like there isn't a risk to trading players is foolish.

I remember the years before Matthews, it wasn't fun.

 

[Sundinisagod]

Neither, obviously, but thank you for acknowledging both that you have no response or counter, and that my posts are so good and accurate that they're worth money.

I hope you are paid for your efforts, even though nobody is buying what you're selling.

 

[Racer88]

The funniest comment was , I wonder he rides around the perimeter on the Lake too.. ... LOL

A valid question

 

[Racer88]

They both bring things when not scoring. They both make big plays at important times. They both have intangibles. You are overrating particular player attributes and playstyles because you enjoy them, but they are not more beneficial to the team than the things you're failing to recognize in Marner. It is very clear what Tkachuk actually brings that Marner doesn't. Poor defensive play and bad penalties.

Marner outproduces Tkachuk, and everybody on the Leafs since he's entered the league, through more difficult situations, and generates even more that has gone unconverted by others. Also, us being strong defensively in past years, in part because of Marner, doesn't devalue defensive play. Also, while we've had strong defenses in the past, our defense was an issue last year. A lot of people just can't tell the difference between defense and Woll playing like the goalies we usually face and bailing us out.

You mean when we outplayed them through injuries and refs being blind, but Bobrovsky stole the series, just like he did against Carolina after us?

It's still a small sample size, and they have had both ups and downs throughout it. The playoffs create a dilemma, as the samples are inherently small and we put so much emphasis on them, but disparate external factors impact things so much more than the regular season, that drawing conclusions really requires either breaking down a ton of context or using samples even bigger than the multi-year samples we use in the regular season - which is just often not possible.

How they play is pretty consistently strong. How they have converted has had ups and downs. There is a lot of debate about why that is, but while it is likely a combination of things, one thing is certain. This is a team phenomenon, that happens to coincide with top tier goalies standing on their heads, not an individual phenomenon, and it's problematic when blame is so heavily focused on one individual who actually produces the most, and isn't primarily tasked with conversion.

Yes, they objectively have been worth their contracts. The perception of what cap space is worth has been really skewed for some, as they look only to the biggest surplus value contracts in the league and the best playoff production performances in league history to try to set the standard of what they expect.

We don't need to make a change to the core. That is an emotional response that desires change for change's sake. Change doesn't mean better. Not changing doesn't mean the same outcome. There is very little chance of improving through losing Marner, especially with Treliving now at the helm. Every path and choice is a risk. The question is what's a greater risk, and balancing that with potential rewards. There is less risk and greater potential reward with keeping Marner, compared to any realistic alternative.

And yet with all this Leaf core awesomeness we still keep losing. The common denominator is the core 5.
Must be just bad luck

 

[Apex Predator]

Do the Leafs pay you per word typed or are you salaried ??

Leafs don’t pay him rocket security does.

And yet with all this Leaf core awesomeness we still keep losing. The common denominator is the core 5.
Must be just bad luck

Ran into a hot goalie

 

[Maple Leaf]

And yet with all this Leaf core awesomeness we still keep losing. The common denominator is the core 5.
Must be just bad luck

No leaf core cannot get the job done it is over have you ever heard of opportunity cost time for marner and tavares to pa ck their lunch

 

[ToneDog]

Leafs don’t pay him rocket security does.


Ran into a hot goalie

1. Bad or no luck
2. Hot goalie
3. Biased referees
4. Keefe/Babs
5. Different rules in playoffs
6. Injuries to key player(s)
7. COVID
8. Taxes (LOL)
9. Bullied by Tkachuk, Bennett, Marchand, Debrusk and Chariot
10. Playoff format
11. Cap circumvention
12. goal posts kept getting in the way -LeafSteel
13. defense collapse in front of their goalie