Marner haters right now

[zeke]

Not a "fly by" by any stretch, he was looking to pressure a pass and instead bit on a pretty good bit of puck magic, Mitch fell and the Rag took a skate setting up behind the net.

I don't even thing it was puck magic I think the Rag just lost the puck, but Mitch was going where the guy was trying to put the puck.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Listen I'm not trying to nitpick or say Marner played bad, I thought he had a good game. Like I said earlier, made a number of good defensive plays, but also cost us the goal against

How the heck is anybody blaming Marner for the goal against? There were four players back, and the guy that scored wasn't even Marner's man.

 

[LeafSteel]

Anyone else noticing Marner and Matthews avoiding passing the puck to Ritchie at all costs?

Amusing to watch…..

 

[Zybalto]

Im absolutely astonished how some people are viewing this.

It looks like Marner made a good read and may have been off to the races if the Rags player didnt get lucky and flub on his pass.

What the hell am I missing here.

 

[Notsince67]

If Nylander did that, he would hear about it. Since Marner did it, nothing.

There was nothing wrong with it. Now that you mention it though, Nylander was the weakest producing forward with the lowest expected goals last game. Didnt hear anybody getting on his case.

 

[Racer88]

You must have a reading comprehension issue. I was replying to a claim of very few quality chances for. Maybe you should stop getting high on your own farts and pay attention. This level of unawareness really is setting a terrible impression.

Nice deflection but you comment was on Marners ranking on expected goals. I was nearly pointing out that expected goals is total nonsense. I would accept high danger chances as a more meaningful stat but you used the term “expected goals”. If that’s not what you meant that’s ok but just try to be more accurate with your words next

 

[Notsince67]

Nice deflection but you comment was on Marners ranking on expected goals. I was nearly pointing out that expected goals is total nonsense. I would accept high danger chances as a more meaningful stat but you used the term “expected goals”. If that’s not what you meant that’s ok but just try to be more accurate with your words next

Shot quality (including high danger shots) are incorporated into expected goals but thanks for your concern.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I was nearly pointing out that expected goals is total nonsense.

It's not though. It was applicable to the discussion.

 

[zeke]

Nice deflection but you comment was on Marners ranking on expected goals. I was nearly pointing out that expected goals is total nonsense. I would accept high danger chances as a more meaningful stat but you used the term “expected goals”. If that’s not what you meant that’s ok but just try to be more accurate with your words next

expected goals includes not only high danger chances, but actually adjusts each shot based on its danger, using much more nuanced filters than the ones used to get the "high danger chance" stat you are referring to.

 

[Morbo]

Shot quality (including high danger shots) are incorporated into expected goals but thanks for your concern.

Sure, if you believe the only thing important in shot quality is how far from the net it is.

 

[Gabriel426]

MM played good last night, also I really don't see there is anything wrong with that play some here is pointing out.

 

[kb]

Yea, Marner never gets any criticism.

Which never happens to Nylander either.....

 

[kb]

Bad play there but he does that same anticipating the pass for the steal all the time and is more successful at it than not.
Not sure that will ever change.

I'm sure there are tons of video of great defensive plays from that game. I know I saw a bunch.

That's not true at all. Put up or shut up. Let's see the great plays.

And I thought Mitch had a good game, but I did not see a "bunch" of great defensive plays.

It's OK if he makes mistakes and has an off game. I love that we have Mitch. But like all players, no off the hook stuff.

 

[Gabriel426]

Which never happens to Nylander either.....

I think the only Leafs that never get criticism is Ritchie bc whatever we say about Ritchie, we are just pointing out facts, lol.

 

[kb]

I think the only Leafs that never get criticism is Ritchie bc whatever we say about Ritchie, we are just pointing out facts, lol.

Hahahha....and I like Ritchie.

Not much intimidation of the Leafs happening. And Reaves bitched out when Ritchie talked to him......

 

[Gabriel426]

Hahahha....and I like Ritchie.

Not much intimidation of the Leafs happening. And Reaves bitched out when Ritchie talked to him......

Don’t get me wrong, he is pretty much exactly what I expected since the signing. Slower than expected but he is a huge body and presence. I think he will be better off playing with JT and starts the cycle in the ozone.

 

[kb]

Don’t get me wrong, he is pretty much exactly what I expected since the signing. Slower than expected but he is a huge body and presence. I think he will be better off playing with JT and starts the cycle in the ozone.

Oh, I get he has just sucked offensively compared to prior years. But holy hell, he can fight. He's why the Leafs have no one taking runs at people, and why Reaves turned him down last night. That is worth his $$$.

 

[Gabriel426]

Oh, I get he has just sucked offensively compared to prior years. But holy hell, he can fight. He's why the Leafs have no one taking runs at people, and why Reaves turned him down last night. That is worth his $$$.

I agree. I was saying in the Flames games thread where Magnipipe(can't spell his name) was buzzing until Simmonds cross-checked him and after that he had a very quiet game, esp since nobody on the Flames answered Simmonds. Having guys like Simmonds and Ritchie around help prevent other teams from running into our players.

 

[zeke]

Sure, if you believe the only thing important in shot quality is how far from the net it is.

Expected Goals takes more into account than shot distance.

 

[Notsince67]

Sure, if you believe the only thing important in shot quality is how far from the net it is.

Enlighten us all on your insight about what shot quality means.
A 20mph shot from 6 feet out translates to the puck hitting the mesh in about .068 seconds.
You think speed has much to do with goal success from a HD shot?

 

[LeafSteel]

Im absolutely astonished how some people are viewing this.

It looks like Marner made a good read and may have been off to the races if the Rags player didnt get lucky and flub on his pass.

What the hell am I missing here.

The need to be negative at all costs.

Try harder…….

 

[zeke]

Sure, if you believe the only thing important in shot quality is how far from the net it is.

Here are the different variables that one model uses to calculate expected goals, and the amount of statistical significance they've observed in each variable:

 

[Morbo]

So 15 feet from the net, wrist shot.

zeke is shooting on Vasilevsky

Auston Matthews is shooting on a sleeping toddler

what is their expected goals stat?

and if it isn't exactly the same number I would love to hear why?

 

[therealkoho]

There was nothing wrong with it. Now that you mention it though, Nylander was the weakest producing forward with the lowest expected goals last game. Didnt hear anybody getting on his case.

Tbh I really think Willie wants to play with Matthews, but all indications point to Matthews wanting Marner on his wing. Not to get all soap opera but what Auston wants.....

 

[Notsince67]

Tbh I really think Willie wants to play with Matthews, but all indications point to Matthews wanting Marner on his wing. Not to get all soap opera but what Auston wants.....

I think the same thing. Matthews seems to run this team