Tribute Marner Appreciation Thread

[ACC1224]

Draisaitl, Vas, Makar, McDavid, Kaprizov, Panarin, Kucherov .. off the top of my head and I'm a big fan of Marner's game.

No to the bolded.
Goalie would be great to have but too much risk to trade a player like Marner for.

 

[Notsince67]

No to the bolded.
Goalie would be great to have but too much risk to trade a player like Marner for.

maybe Vas + kucherov

 

[Gary Nylund]

I'm saying no to half of those but also adding MacKinnon and 2023's 1st OV pick.

+1

Having digested this a bit more, I'm saying no to all the others. I can't say to to Makar, Bedard and probably MacKinnon as well but other than that, just no. Might be a bit of a homer POV but I don't care, Marner's just too good now and it doesn't feel like some hot streak, if feels like a superstar coming into his own.

No disrespect to the rest of them, I'm sure there there are a number of players who's teams wouldn't trade them for Marner either like Drai, Pasta, Thompson etc., everyone likes their own players and that's fine.

 

[Yall are crazy]

What data are you using?

What data are you using is what we should be asking

 

[thewave]

No to the bolded.
Goalie would be great to have but too much risk to trade a player like Marner for.

History speaks volumes about tenders. I think of the past 22 cups there have only been 2 tenders that won without being drafted by the Cup winning team. Colorado is the most recent.

So if you're a betting man you go back in time and hire the absolute best scouts money can buy or poach them from another team that has great success. We were supposed to do a net out rebuild but we got sidetracked with Dubas' NuHockey..

In short, you are correct, getting a tender for Marner or any big 4 player that is going out is a bad move. Worse is the situation that we have now where we may actually need to blow it up and get someone in that follows paragraph 2.

 

[Gary Nylund]

What data are you using is what we should be asking

I'm not the one making any claims so that makes no sense. I just asked because I'm curious what metrics people are using to measure defensive play (I'm not aware of any good ones).

 

[Zybalto]

I'm not the one making any claims so that makes no sense. I just asked because I'm curious what metrics people are using to measure defensive play (I'm not aware of any good ones).

Start at the Macro level.

How do you measure team defensive play?

 

[Gary Nylund]

Start at the Macro level.

How do you measure team defensive play?

Um, goals against? But in this case we were discussing individual players, that's trickier.

 

[Zybalto]

Um, goals against? But in this case we were discussing individual players, that's trickier.

Considering shots against rankings track very closely with goals against and removes the goalies variable, would you be cool with using it as a measure of team defensive play?

(Bear with me, just trying to find a compromise)

 

[Gary Nylund]

Considering shots against rankings track very closely with goals against and removes the goalies variable, would you be cool with using it as a measure of team defensive play?

(Bear with me, just trying to find a compromise)

That's where it starts getting murky for me. I'm guessing how closely shots tracks with goals against depends a lot on the goaltending so that has an impact on how reliable it is. So yeah OK shots against makes sense, but how reliable a measure it is, that I don't know. And of course, not all shots are equal either (though in a big enough sample size might not be that big a deal).

 

[Zybalto]

That's where it starts getting murky for me. I'm guessing how closely shots tracks with goals against depends a lot on the goaltending so that has an impact on how reliable it is. So yeah OK shots against makes sense, but how reliable a measure it is, that I don't know. And of course, not all shots are equal either (though in a big enough sample size might not be that big a deal).

Yea, the larger sample size of a full season seems to smooth things out a lot.

What we are talking about here is what all the eggheads who do player analysis for a living are trying to figure out as well. It isn't perfect but they have made progress.

Sticking with the shots, just look at the players on each team and look at their shot supression numbers and compare them relative one another while factoring in usage.

That should give a decent snapshot into how good a player is defensively. All of the xGA and high danger stuff are just trying to figure out how to separate the weak shots from the tough ones really. Bergeron, for example, is near the top of all these lists all the time.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Thats something I have been taking note of the last couple of years. Matthews , Marner, and Nylander (Edit) will go down as all time Leaf players relatively early in their career, which is actually kind of embarrassing for an Original 6 team that we don't keep good players around long enough to put up these kind of numbers lol.

Mitch would also be 10th all-time on the Rangers, 13th on Detroit and Chicago, 16th on Boston, and 21st on Montreal.

On all those teams most of the players ahead of him are ones who played virtually their whole career on one team, and mostly in the low-scoring 50s and 60s.

Yes, bad ownership/management through the 70s, 80s, and 90s meant there wasn't a single player other than BJ who lasted 900 games with us, and mainly played with mediocre teammates.

 

[ULF_55]

Yea, the larger sample size of a full season seems to smooth things out a lot.

What we are talking about here is what all the eggheads who do player analysis for a living are trying to figure out as well. It isn't perfect but they have made progress.

Sticking with the shots, just look at the players on each team and look at their shot supression numbers and compare them relative one another while factoring in usage.

That should give a decent snapshot into how good a player is defensively. All of the xGA and high danger stuff are just trying to figure out how to separate the weak shots from the tough ones really. Bergeron, for example, is near the top of all these lists all the time.

Trouble is for individual stats, there are almost no individual stats even goals and assists are determined by line-mates.

Lines are mostly set, with certain players playing with certain other players.

With and without is perhaps good but it isn't reliable, as again, comfort level over time would change the without and the with.

Eyeball test does however cut through much of the hooey.

 

[TheTotalPackage]

Marner is an absolute magician.

I've said it many times that I think he is the most naturally gifted offensive player on the team. Yes, even more than Matthews. I suggested that over a decade span, it would not surprise me if he and Matthews split/flipped being the team's leading scorer for roughly half the time. He's that good.

And yeah, I have a soft spot too for a homegrown talent (drafted by the team) who is also a hometown boy.

 

[Zybalto]

Trouble is for individual stats, there are almost no individual stats even goals and assists are determined by line-mates.

Lines are mostly set, with certain players playing with certain other players.

With and without is perhaps good but it isn't reliable, as again, comfort level over time would change the without and the with.

Eyeball test does however cut through much of the hooey.

Yup, it takes an insane amount of analysis to try to put a number to this for sure. Blocked shots and takeaways I'm sure have their place as well.

I think most folks can see Marner is an excellent defensive player though.

Barkov is perhaps the most interesting case of a forwards stats not matching perceptions though so the eye test has its flaws as well.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Yea, the larger sample size of a full season seems to smooth things out a lot.

What we are talking about here is what all the eggheads who do player analysis for a living are trying to figure out as well. It isn't perfect but they have made progress.

Sticking with the shots, just look at the players on each team and look at their shot supression numbers and compare them relative one another while factoring in usage.

That should give a decent snapshot into how good a player is defensively. All of the xGA and high danger stuff are just trying to figure out how to separate the weak shots from the tough ones really. Bergeron, for example, is near the top of all these lists all the time.

Yeah I think they still have a long way to go. Like you mention usage, but not sure what that measures, QOC? Zone starts? Line mates? So many variables, such a fluid game, such an enormous challenge to measure Defence for individuals.

There was a lengthy post on the main boards a couple of years ago that I'll admit I didn't fully understand but it seemed logical and it basically said that advanced stats really suck for measuring individual players. It made sense to me anyway and I've been skeptical ever since. Now they probably aren't 100% useless, and they've probably improved since I read that post but still, I take it all with a grain of salt and when I read someone saying player A>player B both offensively and defensively and there are stats to prove it, I was just curious (and skeptical). It's an interesting challenge though, I work with data and trying to improve these algos would be a lot more interesting then the stuff I work with LOL.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Yup, it takes an insane amount of analysis to try to put a number to this for sure. Blocked shots and takeaways I'm sure have their place as well.

I think most folks can see Marner is an excellent defensive player though.

Barkov is perhaps the most interesting case of a forwards stats not matching perceptions though so the eye test has its flaws as well.

Yeah I think we can all agree on that one and we don't need any stats for it either.

I almost never listen to the radio these days but listened for a couple of minutes this morning and they were discussing Marner and the Selke, how centres always win but it would be nice to see someone like Marner at least finish top 5 or WE. Good to hear people talk about it, I don't care much for individual awards as long as the team keeps losing in the playoffs but still, Marner deserves more recegnition on that count.

More interesting to me is the Hart and Lindsay voting, IIRC Marner at this point in his career has one 3rd place Hart vote and that's it. I think he gets a bunch of votes this year though, not 1st place votes but still.

 

[Willchel Marlynder]

Not everyone. A few vocal supporters and a bunch of people who stayed silent in the face of a mob.

Another first round exit and no one in the core 4 is safe imo. If we see this version of Marner I have no doubt we can beat Tampa even if we have the current version of Matthews. When Mitch is playing like this he's just so good in all three zones. As long as guys at a minimum pull their weight you're probably coming out at a net positive with Marner on the ice.

 

[Notsince67]

Trouble is for individual stats, there are almost no individual stats even goals and assists are determined by line-mates.

Lines are mostly set, with certain players playing with certain other players.

With and without is perhaps good but it isn't reliable, as again, comfort level over time would change the without and the with.

Eyeball test does however cut through much of the hooey.

While I agree with you to a certain degree, the numbers do get into the ball park

Another first round exit and no one in the core 4 is safe imo. If we see this version of Marner I have no doubt we can beat Tampa even if we have the current version of Matthews. When Mitch is playing like this he's just so good in all three zones. As long as guys at a minimum pull their weight you're probably coming out at a net positive with Marner on the ice.

Willy is completely on a different level this year as well. He can be a huge game changer. Matthews showed last night he can play great hockey as well.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Another first round exit and no one in the core 4 is safe imo. If we see this version of Marner I have no doubt we can beat Tampa even if we have the current version of Matthews. When Mitch is playing like this he's just so good in all three zones. As long as guys at a minimum pull their weight you're probably coming out at a net positive with Marner on the ice.

The goaltending needs to hold up as well.

 

[DarkKnight]

 

[Puckstuff]

Interesting stat

Mitch Marner PPG last 2 years: 1.32
Auston Matthews PPG last 2 years: 1.31.

 

[diceman934]

Like I said before his first NHL game. A generational player. There has not been a player like him in the NHL who has done the same things as him at the level he does it.

Marner is a Leaf for life. As he has gotten stronger his game has become more polished.

He should be a no brain selection for the selke this year. A close second in the Hart as to me he has been every bit as good as any other player this year.

He is so special and we have him.

 

[Gabriel426]

No to the bolded.
Goalie would be great to have but too much risk to trade a player like Marner for.

Only 4 players I would trade MM,
McD, Makar, Vas and Shek.
Mainly bc Leafs doesn’t have a clear cut No.1 Goalie, if they have someone more reliable, then the list will be down to two, McD and Makar.

 

[Gabriel426]

Yea, the larger sample size of a full season seems to smooth things out a lot.

What we are talking about here is what all the eggheads who do player analysis for a living are trying to figure out as well. It isn't perfect but they have made progress.

Sticking with the shots, just look at the players on each team and look at their shot supression numbers and compare them relative one another while factoring in usage.

That should give a decent snapshot into how good a player is defensively. All of the xGA and high danger stuff are just trying to figure out how to separate the weak shots from the tough ones really. Bergeron, for example, is near the top of all these lists all the time.

Just jumping in and want to make a comment that, when it comes to shot against, do they rank consecutive shots differently? Like say Goalie A made 5 shots in the period but all 5 shots are spread out in the period while Goalie B made 4 shots in the period while all 4 shots happened within 25secs. Hope you understand what I am asking.