Does Marner get Boo’d?

[Racer88]

One can hope, but they’ll most likely spend on more overpriced forwards while ignoring the Swiss cheese D and questionable goaltending, book it………

That’s seems to be leaf’s management in a nut shell

 

[ToneDog]

Marner has moments, while they may not be the game breaking stats moments he has moments that have solidified wins.

Against Tampa where we were down 5 on 3 in game one, honest to God, without Marner on the PK we probably get dummied. But he blocked a bunch of shots, cleared the puck and we ended up winning that game despite having to be down early to Clifford.

People say that Marner was the reason why we lost against Florida but he was literally the reason why we won game 4 against Florida two seasons ago. Scored a huge even strength game winner to give us a chance to stay alive in that series. Matthews had ZERO goals. You wanna talk about why we lost that series, Matthews was ass against Florida. IMO he was worse than Marner that series.

I forget which game against Boston but him, Marleau and Kadri went crazy in a game 5 i believe that also saved Mike Babcocks job.

Also had the big blocks against Boston to solidify a win.

We can all agree when it comes to goal scoring he hasn’t had those big moments but we gotta stop acting like he hasn’t had moments to help this team win the games they have won in the playoffs. He isn’t some playoff hero atm but he’s also not a dud



There is pressure to win every game. If you ask any player they are trying to win every game. The pressure isn’t any less in game 1 than it is in game 5. The goal is to be the first team to win 4 games. That pursuit doesn’t just magically appear in games 5-7. It starts from game 1. So I have no idea what you’re talking about.

So game 1 is the same as a winner take all game #7? Lose game 1 and you still can lose 2 and win the series. Lose game 7 and you are out. Pressure is not even close. That is why Marner shrivels in game #7s and not the early games. Just ask Freddie. He falls apart in game 7s.

Then again, if you are looking forward to the cottage, there is no pressure in any game of the series.

 

[Gallagbi]

leafs won game 5 to 7 2 to 1, but lost the series... So yeah they lost tje series between game 1 to 4. If they they didn't lost the series between gm 1 to 4, they would won the series and the fact they been able to comeback and play a gm 7 OT doesn't change anything.

It does. If they score in OT they win the series. We know that. If they win a game earlier, we don't know how the series plays out.

 

[francis246]

The focus on games 5-7 is because you win/lose series there. Every series in the new core's era has been determined in this period. All 8 series determined in those games.

Given we've choked a number of series leads over this span and only held onto 1, I actually don't think increased production in Games 1-4 moves the needle. Getting series leads hasn't been an issue, closing out has

Wrong, series is won in games 1-4. The more games you win in the first 4 games the better advantage you have in the series. Games 5-7 is only relevant if the series needs those games.

Like others have said, a few of these series were over after games 1-4, with the leafs being down 3-1 or 3-0, you’re dead in the water anyways.

 

[Gallagbi]

Wrong, series is won in games 1-4. The more games you win in the first 4 games the better advantage you have in the series. Games 5-7 is only relevant if the series needs those games.

Like others have said, a few of these series were over after games 1-4, with the leafs being down 3-1 or 3-0, you’re dead in the water anyways.

Listen, I'm open to discussion and alternative points of view, but I need you to actually make a point. The Leafs haven't won or lost a single series in those games. That's a fact.

 

[ToneDog]

Listen, I'm open to discussion and alternative points of view, but I need you to actually make a point. The Leafs haven't won or lost a single series in those games. That's a fact.

Interesting that many trying to sell that games 1-4 have the same pressure as 5-7 today. The lengths so will go to defend Marner in the playoffs.

 

[francis246]

So game 1 is the same as a winner take all game #7? Lose game 1 and you still can lose 2 and win the series. Lose game 7 and you are out. Pressure is not even close. That is why Marner shrivels in game #7s and not the early games. Just ask Freddie. He falls apart in game 7s.

Then again, if you are looking forward to the cottage, there is no pressure in any game of the series.

I won’t speak for these guys. I can only tell you from my experience playing pro, being in tough series. I did not feel a dramatic shift in pressure from game 1 to game 5 in my case. We had 5 game series. If the pressure to win was there from the coaches or our managers you bet we felt it every game. It didn’t change just because it was a deciding game. We had a goal for our team to 3-0, so personally I felt a lot of pressure to perform throughout. Even more so at the start because of the expectations we set together as a team.

But there are probably athletes who do feel a ton of a lot more pressure in a deciding game. Personally I feel most games are even pressure, you’re trying to win out, you don’t want to drop any games.

And truthfully I think that’s why the leafs always shit the bed. Because of this narrative they probably have inside the locker room. That they can chill in games 1-4. You felt that was the vibe every time keefe spoke to the media. You’ve got to attack a series

 

[francis246]

Listen, I'm open to discussion and alternative points of view, but I need you to actually make a point. The Leafs haven't won or lost a single series in those games. That's a fact.

Simple.

Out of 211 times when a team is down 0-3 after the first three games in an NHL playoff series, only 4 times a team has won. Which means that if you go down 0-3 in a series you have about a 1.9% chance of winning the series. So yes if you lose 3 games from games 1-4 you are dead in the water. From a statistical point the series is over or the team has “lost” the series.


When a team is up 3-1, 90.8% of teams have won the series. So slightly better odds if you’re down 3-1.

Now how many game 7’s have the leafs had to come back from down 3-0 or 3-1 in the Matthews/Tavares era? With the numbers I outlined their odds to win are dog shit. So yes in theory they have lost those series in the first 4 games by going down by a wide margin early in the series.

 

[Confucius]

Simple.

Out of 211 times when a team is down 0-3 after the first three games in an NHL playoff series, only 4 times a team has won. Which means that if you go down 0-3 in a series you have about a 1.9% chance of winning the series. So yes if you lose 3 games from games 1-4 you are dead in the water. From a statistical point the series is over or the team has “lost” the series.


When a team is up 3-1, 90.8% of teams have won the series. So slightly better odds if you’re down 3-1.

Now how many game 7’s have the leafs had to come back from down 3-0 or 3-1 in the Matthews/Tavares era? With the numbers I outlined their odds to win are dog shit. So yes in theory they have lost those series in the first 4 games by going down by a wide margin early in the series.

It’s the ole, you can’t win a Cup in the regular season but you can sure lose one. Or something like that. lol!

 

[Gallagbi]

Simple.

Out of 211 times when a team is down 0-3 after the first three games in an NHL playoff series, only 4 times a team has won. Which means that if you go down 0-3 in a series you have about a 1.9% chance of winning the series. So yes if you lose 3 games from games 1-4 you are dead in the water. From a statistical point the series is over or the team has “lost” the series.


When a team is up 3-1, 90.8% of teams have won the series. So slightly better odds if you’re down 3-1.

Now how many game 7’s have the leafs had to come back from down 3-0 or 3-1 in the Matthews/Tavares era? With the numbers I outlined their odds to win are dog shit. So yes in theory they have lost those series in the first 4 games by going down by a wide margin early in the series.

They went up 3-1 twice and down 3-1 twice. 3 of those series went 7 games, 4 were extended. The Leafs have never been swept with this core.

Do you think their issue is getting series leads or closing out?

 

[thusk]

It does. If they score in OT they win the series. We know that. If they win a game earlier, we don't know how the series plays out.

Trailing 3-1 after 4 game... odd to win the serie is at 9,2%

since 2016, 65 team trailing 3-1 after 4, only 4 team won it, 6% of the time.

 

[francis246]

They went up 3-1 twice and down 3-1 twice. 3 of those series went 7 games, 4 were extended. The Leafs have never been swept with this core.

Do you think their issue is getting series leads or closing out?

They went down 3-0 against Florida as well. Never said they were swept and I have no idea. If I did I’d probably be the GM haha. I don’t have the answers. Just providing the stats. I guess it’s pretty shitty that we were in the 10% that loses a series up 3-1 and pretty shitty we were in the 1.9% that loses when down 3-0.

Honestly I think it’s just mental. They are too relaxed in both situations. They relax their game when they are up in a series and they relax in the first couple games at times and turn it up in the last few. You have to have intensity throughout.

 

[Gallagbi]

Trailing 3-1 after 4 game... odd to win the serie is at 9,2%

since 2016, 65 team trailing 3-1 after 4, only 4 team won it, 6% of the time.

Damn shame we're one of those 4 blown 3-1 leads.

What percentage of teams win when they score in OT Game 7?

 

[Notsince67]

Ideally, yes.

Nobody wanted him.

But you were so certain. No caveats at all in your past statements. How could you have been so embarrasingly wrong? You are known around here for your tremendous insight and fantastic predictions. It's really a head scratcher. I'm not certain what I can believe anymore.

 

[Gallagbi]

They went down 3-0 against Florida as well. Never said they were swept and I have no idea. If I did I’d probably be the GM haha. I don’t have the answers. Just providing the stats. I guess it’s pretty shitty that we were in the 10% that loses a series up 3-1 and pretty shitty we were in the 1.9% that loses when down 3-0.

Honestly I think it’s just mental. They are too relaxed in both situations. They relax their game when they are up in a series and they relax in the first couple games at times and turn it up in the last few. You have to have intensity throughout.

I agree that it's mental and my argument is that mental block shows late in series. Id argue clinching games the most, which is why I'm open to numbers beyond just game 5-7.

But the Marner numbers, plus visual struggles are pretty telling and shot that mental block.

 

[BrannigansLaw]

I thought I had heard all of the lamest excuses possible already but this new Games 1-4 thing really takes the cake.

 

[notbias]

I agree that it's mental and my argument is that mental block shows late in series. Id argue clinching games the most, which is why I'm open to numbers beyond just game 5-7.

But the Marner numbers, plus visual struggles are pretty telling and shot that mental block.

Kucherov has 0 points in game 7, at least Marner is mentally tougher than him... right?

 

[Gallagbi]

Kucherov has 0 points in game 7, at least Marner is mentally tougher than him... right?

Maybe. Did he cough up the puck for a 1-0 lead like Marner did vs. MTL? Did he fail the cut the lane in OT leading to the GWG?

Don't get caught in so much singularity. Your focus is too narrow

 

[francis246]

I thought I had heard all of the lamest excuses possible already but this new Games 1-4 thing really takes the cake.

Who is saying it’s an excuse?! No one is saying that at all. What myself and others are arguing is that games 5-7 aren’t necessarily more important than games 1-4. There is statistical data that proves winning at least 3 games in the first 4 games gives you anywhere from a 90-99% chance to win a series. That is a significant advantage.

Winning early in the series is just as important as winning late in a series.

No one is saying it’s an excuse. But go off claiming people are lmao.

 

[BrannigansLaw]

Who is saying it’s an excuse?! No one is saying that at all. What myself and others are arguing is that games 5-7 aren’t necessarily more important than games 1-4. There is statistical data that proves winning at least 3 games in the first 4 games gives you anywhere from a 90-99% chance to win a series. That is a significant advantage.

Winning early in the series is just as important as winning late in a series.

No one is saying it’s an excuse. But go off claiming people are lmao.

Ok lamest argument then.

Also, I never argued winning later is more important. I said there is much more pressure in elimination games which tend to be Games 5-7 which is where Marner happens to play his shittiest hockey. Maybe learn how to read.

 

[francis246]

Ok lamest argument then.

How is that lame when it’s a statistical fact?

Now just pointing out NHL history is a lame argument? Make it make sense man.

Winning 3 games in the NHL is pretty much a lock to win a series. A bigger kick in the balls is that this leafs core is one of teams that lost to one of the 4 teams that beat the statistical odds. Sucks to be us.

 

[BrannigansLaw]

How is that lame when it’s a statistical fact?

Now just pointing out NHL history is a lame argument? Make it make sense man.

Winning 3 games in the NHL is pretty much a lock to win a series. A bigger kick in the balls is that this leafs core is one of teams that lost to one of the 4 teams that beat the statistical odds. Sucks to be us.

I don’t know what point you’re even trying to make. What you’re stating is completely obvious. You don’t even need statistical data to back that up.

What people are saying is Marner sucks the most out of the core when the stakes are highest. Then you and Hellcat come along with some irrelevant stats about Games 1-4 where stakes aren’t as high since they have never been elimination games for us and here we are.

 

[notbias]

Maybe. Did he cough up the puck for a 1-0 lead like Marner did vs. MTL? Did he fail the cut the lane in OT leading to the GWG?

Don't get caught in so much singularity. Your focus is too narrow

This irony is hilarious.

This whole thread is nitpicking small sample sizes and now we want to stop because the narrative isn't something you like? Okay.

 

[Gallagbi]

This irony is hilarious.

This whole thread is nitpicking small sample sizes and now we want to stop because the narrative isn't something you like? Okay.

I get it, sometimes you get stuck in a narrative. Its tough sometimes when we're discussing players you're passionate about.

Why do you think Marner is so far behind the core in these games? Why do you think he's been involved in so many major gaffes in key moments.

My theory is Marner struggles as pressure mounts. I think we've seen it a number of times during his tenure and this sample reflects it. There's other supports, like the struggles after signing his big deal, the tears in the box, etc..

What's your theory why the numbers are different from others? We know there is a discrepancy, so why?

 

[Dekes For Days]

And id definitely say he's struggled more than others in those key moments. Looking at individual play you have plays like the MTL turnover in Game 7, the tears and delay PIM in game 6, the botched defensive coverage closing the boards on Point in game 6 v. TB1, then the missed angle on Pasta's game 7 goal this year.

I haven't seen him struggle more than others in key moments. He's not perfect, he has bad games, and he makes mistakes like anybody else, but these moments only stand out because a select few have spent 8 years microanalyzing Marner and building a collection that they repost in every thread to misrepresent what happened and who is to blame.

Puck over glass penalties suck, but they happen. It's only notable because it happened after a bench penalty (which can only happen to Marner since he's the only one of the core 4 trusted on the PK) and they scored. But Keefe made the bad call for the other penalty. The PKers and goalie allowed the goal. And if we're so worried about penalties, why are we going after our best net penalty player through this era and not the 46 players that averaged more penalties taken?

Some of these things aren't even Marner's fault, and we need Hall of Famers to teach people hockey. "“The game-winning goal, Pastrnak's goal, they're blaming him and it's like, if anybody knows anything about hockey, they were in a neutral zone regroup. So F1 changed and he jumped over for F1, Pastrnak's not his responsibility at all,” Oates argued."

Sometimes he does make mistakes, or a play isn't executed perfectly for whatever reason, and it directly or indirectly contributes to a goal, but that happens all the time, and if somebody is contributing 15% to a goal against, they shouldn't get 100% of the blame. If we're so worried about defensive miscues, why are we going after one of our best defensive players who rarely gets goals scored against them, instead of the many worse defensive players who bleed goals against?

Because it's not actually about any of that stuff. It's just about finding any way to blame Marner. And it blocks any actual productive discussion about Marner; ways he could improve, and ways we could better utilize him.

If this is just bad luck, which seems to be what you're alluding to when does it turn around? Because he wasn't good this playoffs. He wasn't good vs. FLA. He wasn't good vs. MTL or CBJ.

I mean, that's not true. Some people just like to equate production levels and play quality. As for the weird plummeting IPP in that specific sample, I don't know whether it is random variance in a tiny sample of low scoring series or there's an underlying reason it distributed like that, but the reason is not what many here are pretending, or something worth throwing away a top tier player over, especially when he produces so strongly in the other games and his underlying play remains strong.