Salary Cap: Marner contract discussion XVII (continued)

[Gabriel426]

There is absolutely no point comparing Matthews Marner at this point. The fact that Marner has not sign any offer sheet just shows that teams are not willing to even test the Leafs and see if Leafs will match if the offer is just under the 4 1st area.
If Matthews is available I think teams will offer Matthews 12mil or more on July 1st.

 

[sittler rules!!!]

Former thread: Salary Cap: - Marner contract discussion XVI (continued)

Continue on.

OH GOD, Not more!!!

 

[bentharbs]

Daily reminder: Marner and Matthews are Maple Leafs.

 

[Walshy7]

Daily reminder: Marner and Matthews are Maple Leafs.

technically Matthews is a leaf, and marner is in talks to stay a leaf. Yeah we own his right but if the season started today he wouldn't be a leaf.

 

[TML Dynasty]

If there's been one failure, Nylander to Matthews, Marner to Tavares is predictable and makes it easier to defend against.
So the question going forward, who's going to diversify their game?
Will Matthews become a better playmaker or will Marner become a better goal-scorer?

Or will they get a third person on their line giving more legit options? If Hyman was better (and I really love his game) for example then team would need to be worried about that path too.

 

[MyBudJT]

Marner's 5v5 goals by season:

2016/17 - 15
2017/18 - 14
2018/19 - 16

Nope.

And this is supposed to illustrate that Marner has no room for improvement?

Marner’s EVG by season:
16/17: 15
17/18: 14
18/19: 22

Draisatl’s EVG by season:
14/15: 1
15/16: 14
16/17: 19
17/18: 16
17/19: 31

 

[HomerJLeafs]

Tavares Nylander Matthews Rielly Barrie Muzzin Kapanen Johnsson Dermott are all Leafs and we have a great Ahl team, awesome prospects in the system, great scouting staff, we also have SHANNY!!! and pretty much the best capologists in the Nhl.
So we good w or wo mar$$er

 

[ACC1224]

There is absolutely no point comparing Matthews Marner at this point. The fact that Marner has not sign any offer sheet just shows that teams are not willing to even test the Leafs and see if Leafs will match if the offer is just under the 4 1st area.
If Matthews is available I think teams will offer Matthews 12mil or more on July 1st.

You do realize that the player has the option to sign or not sign an Offer Sheet?
The fact that he hasn't signed one doesn't necessarily mean what you think it means.
Need to change fact with I think, like you did with your Matthews guess.

 

[zeke]

I really don't care about these claims. Most examples show that good players produce more when a star is out of the lineup - perhaps because of motivation - perhaps because of a different role, or more ice time. And while quality of competition is worthwhile in minds of posters it is simply an almost completely useless stat in the real world. QoT counts for about 6 times more. It is why I only look at (and I have to do manually) the percentage of time specific forwards go up against the top D (there was very little difference between Tavares and Matthews here, as I have posted before), and the percentage of time specific D go up against top forwards (like McDavid, MacKinnon, Matthews etc). But even that only tells you how much a coach relies on a player in tough situations, but not much more.

Simply put if you are going up against the toughest matchup, say Jack Eichel, your QoC is really high, but it has zero effect on your how hard it is for you to get shot attempts or score goals - actually it is probably easier than if are going up against the second line players who are more focused on defense than the first line in this case. But even then it doesn't really matter, because most games there is very little difference between who the first and second line faces, with the exception of a few games where a coach hard matches.

For the record, imo it makes little sense to use TOI as a proxy for QOT. This leads to your model telling you that playing with Zach Hyman is a higher QOT than playing with Nylander, just because one single coach in the league has a preferred way of distributing ice time amongst one specific roster of players. And that one single decision then makes up a massive part of that qot stat. It's actually pretty useless as a descriptor of QOT.

It makes plenty of sense to use TOI as a proxy for QOC, though, because that uses 30 different coaches' TOI distribution choices amongst 700+ players and all sorts of different systems to measure a player's QOC, which while still not perfect is at least useful, as specific one coach one roster decisions like Hyman vs Nylander make up only a tiny fraction of each player's QOC measurement.

And then he (and others) make the mistake of forgetting that toi% is not an actual descriptor of exactly how good players are, but only a proxy - and as all the experiments they have run on qoc have used only the specific numbers as a literal quality measurements, they have likely undermeasurrd the actual difference in qoc that might better be shown by something like a TOI-relative to team stat, which use a player's standard deviations of TOI from league average to measure qoc and not just the small gap in actual ice time as a literal description of quality.

In addition, he is forgetting that we already have QOT factored in quite well with the relative to team stats.

So imo mccurdy and others are making a huge mistake of comparing apples to oranges there and dismissing something that I am very sure that in-house analytics teams no longer dismiss (and it's something we've heard dubas specifically mention, for example).

 

[Mess]

Boy I'm full ..

Lets move on to the next thread.

/Closed