Player Discussion Marner

[Mess]

The best teams, that play the most consistently in the regular season generally win their division. The best way to be ready for the playoffs is to be the best team in the regular season. Nothing guarantees you playoff success, but being the top team in what is likely the hardest division in hockey, over 82 games preps you pretty well.

Of course, a team like the panthers can squeak it in and make some damage like they did in 2023, but those are the exceptions. Last 3 cup winners all won their divisions.

The Florida Panthers won the President's Trophy as (best regular season team) in 2021-22 with 122 points and lost in round #1.

Then they traded their leading scorer Huberdeau and more for Matthew Tkachuk and finished in WC#2 spot in the East with 92 points lost in the Cup Finals 2022-23 and won the Stanley Cup in 2023-24.

As the saying goes "History has a way of repeating itself".

So similarly the Leafs win their Division in 2024-25 then lose in round #1 because they're in Cap Hell (4 forwards eating up 1/2 their Cap), so they trade their soft small regular season leading scorer BUT non playoff performer Marner for help elsewhere, then have set themselves up to WIN the Cup in the next couple years.

 

[Zybalto]

Making a line like that doesn’t makes much sense with two playmakers on a line together without a pure goal scorer

Considering Hyman had 54 last season (3rd in the NHL), McDavid won the rocket 2 years ago and Marner is a 30 goals a year guy, I don't think that's an issue.

Also considering Hyman has played for years with both McDavid and Marner and Marner has just looked great in summer training with McDavid, chemistry is a much bigger thing here.

 

[francis246]

You all know that debating and arguing about this contract and the next is not about Stanley, right.
We all know that Mitchy is an impact player in points. Many many teams would love to have him. His scoring allows for the development of guys like Hyman, Knies types who score less often as they develop, but impact differently.
The real question is not whether (at this stage of team development) whether MM gets 11 or 14m, it is whether that money can be spent more wisely to win a cup.
Adding a real valued 9m dman and 4m left wing makes us a better team. Paying Mitchy 13m keeps us the same.

Bingo. If you can hit on those two things I think you have a good team. If I’m Toronto I’m targeting Ekblad this off-season. Big RHD and then a guy like Brock Nelson or Frank Vatrano if you’re hell bent on replacing offense

 

[Dekes For Days]

They scored at very similar rates with rantanen scoring more goals in less games. There is nothing to suggest ever That Marner was worth that much more.

They did not produce similarly through their ELCs, as I showed above. The gap in their pay is consistent with the gaps in their production levels and quality, and consistent with how post-ELC contracts are handled historically. Everything suggests Marner was worth that much more.

I don’t know what stats games you are playing but you can’t score less goals in reality but somehow score more goals in every game state.

Rantanen scored more goals on the PP, because he was set up as the trigger man instead of a playmaker. Because the PP is such a high-scoring game state, and because Rantanen got such an inflated amount of PP time, his overall goal totals were higher despite Marner being a better goal scorer in the other game states.

Look at all the players who got more than Marner what do they all have in common? Goals.

Primary points. There is a lot of overlap, but you're looking at the wrong thing. There are also additional factors that impacted some of those contracts.

Matthews was worth his contract because he was a top goal scorer not because he was a 60-70 pt player.

Matthews was one of the best point and primary point producers relative to the history of post-ELC contracts, and that drove his contract amount, though being one of the best young goal scorers in NHL history is also a lot different than putting emphasis on the marginal goal differences between players caused by different PP roles.

 

[arso40]

Considering Hyman had 54 last season (3rd in the NHL), McDavid won the rocket 2 years ago and Marner is a 30 goals a year guy, I don't think that's an issue.

Also considering Hyman has played for years with both McDavid and Marner and Marner has just looked great in summer training with McDavid, chemistry is a much bigger thing here.

Hyman is not a pure goal scorer period I agree they’d have chemistry I just feel like players can be used better but just my opinion anyway

 

[Zybalto]

Hyman is not a pure goal scorer period I agree they’d have chemistry I just feel like players can be used better but just my opinion anyway

All good.

There are a ton different great lines that can be made. Really looking forward to finally seeing so many guys finally putting on international jerseys. MacKinnon also commented along the lines that the US team looks really good too and that's the game I'm most looking forward to seeing myself.

 

[francis246]

Mitch Marner produced 13 less goals in 11 more games. That is not more. That is less.

Marner scored 15 more points playing 11 more games.

He produced at a rate of .92 points per game and .28 goals per game.

Rantanen produced at .90 points per game and .35 goals per game.

That is reality. Marner scored 2% more points and 7% less goal rate than rantanen.

There is no precedent ever for 2 players who scored almost identically over the course of their elcs to have 1.7 million dollar differences.

You making your hypothesis “the only reason that” has no basis in fact. You are just saying it. There are all kinds of hypotheticals (Matthews gets matchups/ Marner got to play with Tavares) etc but the bottom line is.

They scored at very similar rates with rantanen scoring more goals in less games. There is nothing to suggest ever
That Marner was worth that much more.

I don’t know what stats games you are playing but you can’t score less goals in reality but somehow score more goals in every game state.

It’s not that p/60 nonsense is it?

Edit. There absolutely is a premium on goals. Tie goes to goals. Ovy. Nash. Kovy. Vanek. Heatley.


Look at all the players who got more than Marner what do they all have in common? Goals. Actually I think marner was the only player who did not have a 40 goal top 3 finish in goals on that list?

Matthews was worth his contract because he was a top goal scorer not because he was a 60-70 pt player.

I love Marner but he was overpaid at 10.93. Even I have to admit that. He should have been a 9.5. Dubas should have waited till the other guys signed. But he got scared. I get Marner lead the team in scoring but still it was too rich on a medium term contract. I think if we got 8 years at that number it would have been easier to swollow

 

[Dekes For Days]

The Florida Panthers won the President's Trophy as (best regular season team) in 2021-22 with 122 points and lost in round #1.
Then they traded their leading scorer Huberdeau and more for Matthew Tkachuk and finished in WC#2 spot in the East with 92 points lost in the Cup Finals 2022-23 and won the Stanley Cup in 2023-24.
As the saying goes "History has a way of repeating itself".
So similarly the Leafs win their Division in 2024-25 then lose in round #1 because they're in Cap Hell (4 forwards eating up 1/2 their Cap), so they trade their soft small regular season leading scorer BUT non playoff performer Marner for help elsewhere, then have set themselves up to WIN the Cup in the next couple years.

The actual lesson to learn from Florida is that they kept their underperforming core player that the fanbase wanted to purge, and he carried them to a finals and a cup.
But hey, if you really think the solution is to have a mid-20s star winger that's perceived to be bad in the playoffs, then I think I know where we can find one.
Not sure how you think we'd trade a UFA.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Marner was not worth 1.7 more than rantanen.

definitely.

but that's not the issue.

our issue:
- the core doesnt work.
- change is needed.

my fear is goaltending makes us look better than we are.

 

[Legion34]

They did not produce similarly through their ELCs, as I showed above. The gap in their pay is consistent with the gaps in their production levels and quality, and consistent with how post-ELC contracts are handled historically. Everything suggests Marner was worth that much more.

Rantanen scored more goals on the PP, because he was set up as the trigger man instead of a playmaker. Because the PP is such a high-scoring game state, and because Rantanen got such an inflated amount of PP time, his overall goal totals were higher despite Marner being a better goal scorer in the other game states.

Primary points. There is a lot of overlap, but you're looking at the wrong thing. There are also additional factors that impacted some of those contracts.

Matthews was one of the best point and primary point producers relative to the history of post-ELC contracts, and that drove his contract amount, though being one of the best young goal scorers in NHL history is also a lot different than putting emphasis on the marginal goal differences between players caused by different PP roles.

1.) they absolutely did produce similarly. Almost identical with rantenen scoring more goals and slightly less points.

2.) you have presented no evidence at all that “primary points” vs secondary are drivers and make up an 18% contract difference in equal production. None. You have quotes/articles that prove this? You can cite that being a factor in arbitration?

Willy’s comparables to ehlers/forsberg/pasta/JG fit in line based on primary production?
Vanek/heatley/kovy got paid based on primary production?

3.) Marner played with a top 5 goal scorer ever during his ELC. He was stapled to a top 30ish probably goal scorer in his prime. These arguments about coulda shoulda inflated pp stats don’t mean Anything. You are just saying what you want to be true.

Facts are in real world actual production. They were similar.

Facts are that Marner was the only player in that range historically who wasn’t one of the best goal scorers in the league.

you have provided no evidence that primary vs secondary points or “other guy had inflated pp time” are used to determine contracts.

Raw and per game goals and points are for forwards.

The idea that you are suggesting that all the top goal scorers in the game get paid more because of primary points and not goals is just hilarious

 

[notDatsyuk]

Mitch Marner produced 13 less goals in 11 more games. That is not more. That is less.

Marner scored 15 more points playing 11 more games.

He produced at a rate of .92 points per game and .28 goals per game.

Rantanen produced at .90 points per game and .35 goals per game.

That is reality. Marner scored 2% more points and 7% less goal rate than rantanen.

There is no precedent ever for 2 players who scored almost identically over the course of their elcs to have 1.7 million dollar differences.

You making your hypothesis “the only reason that” has no basis in fact. You are just saying it. There are all kinds of hypotheticals (Matthews gets matchups/ Marner got to play with Tavares) etc but the bottom line is.

They scored at very similar rates with rantanen scoring more goals in less games. There is nothing to suggest ever
That Marner was worth that much more.

I don’t know what stats games you are playing but you can’t score less goals in reality but somehow score more goals in every game state.

It’s not that p/60 nonsense is it?

Edit. There absolutely is a premium on goals. Tie goes to goals. Ovy. Nash. Kovy. Vanek. Heatley.


Look at all the players who got more than Marner what do they all have in common? Goals. Actually I think marner was the only player who did not have a 40 goal top 3 finish in goals on that list?

Matthews was worth his contract because he was a top goal scorer not because he was a 60-70 pt player.

You really have to be impressed at the amount of willful blindness it takes to claim that player A's production was an average 20% (or which ever made-up number he's using today) than player B's, even though the numbers clearly show that's not true.

Unfortunately to admit the truth he would also have to admit that his idol wasn't the perfect GM he apparently still believes.

 

[notDatsyuk]

The actual lesson to learn from Florida is that they kept their underperforming core player that the fanbase wanted to purge, and he carried them to a finals and a cup.
But hey, if you really think the solution is to have a mid-20s star winger that's perceived to be bad in the playoffs, then I think I know where we can find one.
Not sure how you think we'd trade a UFA.

That's easy - his contract expires at the end of this season.

 

[Dekes For Days]

That's easy - his contract expires at the end of this season.

That's when he said we'd trade him. The end of 2024-2025. When he's UFA.

 

[Fogelhund]

That's when he said we'd trade him. The end of 2024-2025. When he's UFA.

I'm pretty sure that the suggestion is just letting him walk.

I get that this is another I have a grudge, and I'm mad thread.. people just want to dump their despised player, without any thoughts to the future. I appreciate extending a player, just because there aren't any other options isn't great either.

The reality on this though, is that letting Marner walk, is pretty much precipitated on him going to the Avalanche, and us signing Rantanen. Outside of that, there isn't a lot of quality available to upgrade either the C position, or backfill the RW position in any meaningful manner.

 

[TurgPavs]

That's when he said we'd trade him. The end of 2024-2025. When he's UFA.

Exactly, Marner is not going anywhere until UFA, why would he agree to a trade? With that NMC and being a pending UFA, dude has all the control.
TML fans should not care since his stats are all due to playing with Matthews, and he is a crappy playoff performer.

Dude is going to sign with a new Team on July 1st, and Toronto will get squat in return for one of the highest Point Per Game producers in the Regular and Postseason, in the last 20 years of TML hockey.

 

[thewave]

Exactly, Marner is not going anywhere until UFA, why would he agree to a trade? With that NMC and being a pending UFA, dude has all the control.
TML fans should not care since his stats are all due to playing with Matthews, and he is a crappy playoff performer.

Dude is going to sign with a new Team on July 1st, and Toronto will get squat in return for one of the highest Point Per Game producers in the Regular and Postseason, in the last 20 years of TML hockey.

And if he does walk. It will be a very normal thing for this organization because it's one of the most short sighted teams in the history of the NHL. 50 years running.

They did not produce similarly through their ELCs, as I showed above. The gap in their pay is consistent with the gaps in their production levels and quality, and consistent with how post-ELC contracts are handled historically. Everything suggests Marner was worth that much more.

Rantanen scored more goals on the PP, because he was set up as the trigger man instead of a playmaker. Because the PP is such a high-scoring game state, and because Rantanen got such an inflated amount of PP time, his overall goal totals were higher despite Marner being a better goal scorer in the other game states.

Primary points. There is a lot of overlap, but you're looking at the wrong thing. There are also additional factors that impacted some of those contracts.

Matthews was one of the best point and primary point producers relative to the history of post-ELC contracts, and that drove his contract amount, though being one of the best young goal scorers in NHL history is also a lot different than putting emphasis on the marginal goal differences between players caused by different PP roles.

MM is overpaid. Was overpaid. Wants to get overpaid again. Rantanen plays C. SCORES MORE GOALS. And is paid less on very similar total points.

How can it be?

(((Cheat Answer)))

Toronto constantly overpays for talent.

 

[Roo]

The Florida Panthers won the President's Trophy as (best regular season team) in 2021-22 with 122 points and lost in round #1.

Then they traded their leading scorer Huberdeau and more for Matthew Tkachuk and finished in WC#2 spot in the East with 92 points lost in the Cup Finals 2022-23 and won the Stanley Cup in 2023-24.

As the saying goes "History has a way of repeating itself".

So similarly the Leafs win their Division in 2024-25 then lose in round #1 because they're in Cap Hell (4 forwards eating up 1/2 their Cap), so they trade their soft small regular season leading scorer BUT non playoff performer Marner for help elsewhere, then have set themselves up to WIN the Cup in the next couple years.

If they finish first and lose in the first round, we know that everything is in the table . If we can replace our start with an even better star, doubt anyone will complain. But

But if we follow this then if we win the first round we should definitely keep him, like all the teams that eventually got there?

 

[Dekes For Days]

1.) they absolutely did produce similarly. Almost identical with rantenen scoring more goals and slightly less points.
2.) you have presented no evidence at all that “primary points” vs secondary are drivers and make up an 18% contract difference in equal production. None. You have quotes/articles that prove this? You can cite that being a factor in arbitration?
Willy’s comparables to ehlers/forsberg/pasta/JG fit in line based on primary production?
Vanek/heatley/kovy got paid based on primary production?
3.) Marner played with a top 5 goal scorer ever during his ELC. He was stapled to a top 30ish probably goal scorer in his prime. These arguments about coulda shoulda inflated pp stats don’t mean Anything. You are just saying what you want to be true.
Facts are in real world actual production. They were similar.
Facts are that Marner was the only player in that range historically who wasn’t one of the best goal scorers in the league.
you have provided no evidence that primary vs secondary points or “other guy had inflated pp time” are used to determine contracts.
Raw and per game goals and points are for forwards.
The idea that you are suggesting that all the top goal scorers in the game get paid more because of primary points and not goals is just hilarious

The history of contracts is the evidence. I've done quite a bit of research on the history of contracts (especially post-ELC), and the correlations and the driving factors behind them, which while not perfect, is much more than you are basing your claims on. Goals actually correlate pretty poorly with contracts. Much worse than other forms of production, including primary. It's possible that unique goal-scoring proficiency gave a boost to the very upper tier, but that wouldn't apply to Rantanen and Marner, and there's really no evidence that it's about goals specifically and not overlapping production metrics and the other contributing factors that apply to those players and have way more consistent impacts throughout the data set.

Marner was a better producer and primary producer, both overall and in every game state. Marner was a better goal scorer in every game state except the PP, where Rantanen was the only one of the two to be put in a goal scoring role. Marner also brought additional impacts that Rantanen didn't. The contract range that Marner was in and the gap between them and the tiers above and below them are consistent with his quality and performance relative to them.

Not really sure why you're bringing up linemates when that just makes Marner look even better. Marner did not play with Matthews outside of the PP in the 3rd year (his worst PP year), and only played with Tavares in the 3rd year. Marner was always the best player on his line, while Rantanen was joined at the hip with Mackinnon and always playing second fiddle.

Their PP production levels are not 'coulda woulda shoulda'. It's how they performed. Teams pay for player impacts, not the amount of PP time their team gets.
The principle is no different than per-game, which you admit to using.

 

[thusk]

Nah, it could have been done. We had a ton of leverage, all we had to do was to use it.

Wich one?

He was pts leader at 94... Jt had his best season ever reaching for the 1st time of his career 40 goal ( 47) playing alongside marner. He was already playing against the Bergeron line at 20

Tell me wich leverage leafs had at this moment?!?!?!

In 2019, Marner was probably a better player than Matthews... After Matthews raise some part of his game like the defensive side and became a better all around player but still when both signed, Marner was at least as high than Matthews... People forgot pretty fast here and yes a lot of thing changed last 5...

 

[Legion34]

The history of contracts is the evidence. I've done quite a bit of research on the history of contracts (especially post-ELC), and the correlations and the driving factors behind them, which while not perfect, is much more than you are basing your claims on. Goals actually correlate pretty poorly with contracts. Much worse than other forms of production, including primary. It's possible that unique goal-scoring proficiency gave a boost to the very upper tier, but that wouldn't apply to Rantanen and Marner, and there's really no evidence that it's about goals specifically and not overlapping production metrics and the other contributing factors that apply to those players and have way more consistent impacts throughout the data set.

Marner was a better producer and primary producer, both overall and in every game state. Marner was a better goal scorer in every game state except the PP, where Rantanen was the only one of the two to be put in a goal scoring role. Marner also brought additional impacts that Rantanen didn't. The contract range that Marner was in and the gap between them and the tiers above and below them are consistent with his quality and performance relative to them.

Not really sure why you're bringing up linemates when that just makes Marner look even better. Marner did not play with Matthews outside of the PP in the 3rd year (his worst PP year), and only played with Tavares in the 3rd year. Marner was always the best player on his line, while Rantanen was joined at the hip with Mackinnon and always playing second fiddle.

Their PP production levels are not 'coulda woulda shoulda'. It's how they performed. Teams pay for player impacts, not the amount of PP time their team gets.
The principle is no different than per-game, which you admit to using.

The history of contracts is evidence that forwards get paid based on production not pk. Post Elcs are based all 3 years with actual production (total goals/points) and per game taken into account. Goals are worth more with equal production

There is no evidence anywhere I have seen that teams take into account linemates, primary vs secondary points/pp60 in contracts over actual points.

Bunting outscored McDavid. Robertson was second on the leafs in goals per 60. That didn’t factor in.

It’s simple.
Prove it. You researched contracts right. Show evidence that same age players with equal raw production have 18% contract differences based on primary vs secondary points.

you should clearly have comparables right?

 

[Gary Nylund]

Wich one?

He was pts leader at 94... Jt had his best season ever reaching for the 1st time of his career 40 goal ( 47) playing alongside marner. He was already playing against the Bergeron line at 20

Tell me wich leverage leafs had at this moment?!?!?!

In 2019, Marner was probably a better player than Matthews... After Matthews raise some part of his game like the defensive side and became a better all around player but still when both signed, Marner was at least as high than Matthews... People forgot pretty fast here and yes a lot of thing changed last 5...

Isn't it obvious? Marner's RFA status. Sign and play, or don't sign and don't play.