Player Discussion Marner

[Antropovsky]

Are you winging it for days now?

Can explain what this means and show examples of comparables and rationale?

They measure Marner’s greatness by points, ntil you point out that Domi had more 5v5 points per 60 than Marner. Then they say Marner boosts his linemates goal scoring, until you mention that Matthews was twice as productive with Domi than with Marner. Or that Matthews scored 1.8 goals/60 with 40-year-old Marleau, while he's produced 1.5 and 1.3 goals/60 with Marner over the last two seasons. Then they pivot to GF%. But when you show that Aho had a better GF% in 2019 (even though they claimed Marner was much better), they circle back to points and hope everyone forgets. Then it’s, “I’ve explained this countless times,” because they know their reasoning is flawed and don't want to be called out on it.

 

[sena]

Marner did not. There is nothing to suggest that the was worth than rantanen. Even considering the bonuses that Lou cheated him out of.

Willy was right In line with multiple comparables (forsberg/pasta/ehlers/gaudreau) considering total body of work and taxes.

Matthews was right in line with 5 year contracts although from a while ago. (Nash/kovy/malkin/crosby). Save stamkos signing in a no tax market.

Mitch was overpaid. Not by a ton but he was the only sub 30 g 90 pt winger to get 10.93.

He should have been around 9.75. Marner has no comparables that got what he got.
Rantanen had similar pace and had about 15 more goals and 15 less points in less
Games.

Rantanen got 9.25. Marner got 10.93 There is not a 1.7 million dollar difference at the time. There probably is now a difference with rantanen deserving more.

Willy is at 13% of aav. I think we paid right at the top of his market. He probably could ask for 14% aav as a ufa based on his performance last year….. but that wasn’t what he was before.He has to be a 40 g 95-100 pt player.

Marner is better and has an argument for more. Unless he has an off year then they have 2 years as similar players

Didn't Marner lead the leafers in points? Because that makes a large difference when signing contracts

 

[bax]

Was he booed in the home opener?

I was there. From where I was sitting it was loud and fans were engaged. He got the second loudest cheer of the night after matthews

 

[thusk]

Salary collapse started with tavares... Considerating it was an overpay or not at this moment changing absolutly nothing, the fact leafs sign tavares at 11M etablish team salary ladder at 11M

When it was time to resign Matthews, unstead to resign him at 10M, with jt already at 11M they signed him over tavares contract.

With jt at 11 and matthews over 11M, it was basically impossible to resign marner around 9M.

1 contract just broke the entire organisation salary ladder

 

[thewave]

Salary collapse started with tavares... Considerating it was an overpay or not at this moment changing absolutly nothing, the fact leafs sign tavares at 11M etablish team salary ladder at 11M

When it was time to resign Matthews, unstead to resign him at 10M, with jt already at 11M they signed him over tavares contract.

With jt at 11 and matthews over 11M, it was basically impossible to resign marner around 9M.

1 contract just broke the entire organisation salary ladder

And that falls on Shanny and Dubas or anyone on the board that wanted JT.
None of us truly know but we assume Shanny and Dubas were the guys.

MM and WN arent worth the money they make today. 10m would probably be most teams absolute max.

 

[Leaf Rocket]

I was there. From where I was sitting it was loud and fans were engaged. He got the second loudest cheer of the night after matthews

I watched it and no one was booed and no one was really cheered. Many of the podcasters mention the lack of enthusiasm by the fans on their shows over the weekend and today

Those in attendance said he and Matthews received a tremendous ovation as you’d expect.

so no one was doing boo-urns as we had previously though and not surprised at all lol

 

[Legion34]

Didn't Marner lead the leafers in points? Because that makes a large difference when signing contracts

Why does that make a difference? There nothing to suggest that makes up for 1.7 million.

its Generally raw points (total goals/points over ELC) and per game.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Who were the other 5, who were the other 9 from your indicated stats?

The 5 players who earned more were Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, McDavid, and Matthews.
The 9 players that were compensated with higher valuations were Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, McDavid, Matthews, Kovalchuk, Vanek, Nash, and Heatley.

Then it’s, “I’ve explained this countless times,” because they know their reasoning is flawed and don't want to be called out on it.

It has been explained to you. The reasoning is not flawed. You just don't know how to use these metrics correctly.

There is nothing to suggest that he was worth more than rantanen.

In worse situations, Marner produced 28% better than Rantanen at 5v5 and 24% better on the PP, while also bringing some PK impacts.
Early career perceptions of Rantanen got skewed because he got inflated by piles of PP time. Even with that, Marner still outproduced him overall through their ELCs.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

1 contract just broke the entire organization salary ladder

acquiring JT was Dubas' first move.

 

[Gary Nylund]

When it was time to resign Matthews, unstead to resign him at 10M, with jt already at 11M they signed him over tavares contract.

With jt at 11 and matthews over 11M, it was basically impossible to resign marner around 9M.

1 contract just broke the entire organisation salary ladder

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

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Marner is NOT due a raise. He's underperforming his current contract.

 

[Legion34]

The 5 players who earned more were Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, McDavid, and Matthews.
The 9 players that were compensated with higher valuations were Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, McDavid, Matthews, Kovalchuk, Vanek, Nash, and Heatley.

It has been explained to you. The reasoning is not flawed. You just don't know how to use these metrics correctly.

In worse situations, Marner produced 28% better than Rantanen at 5v5 and 24% better on the PP, while also bringing some PK impacts.
Early career perceptions of Rantanen got skewed because he got inflated by piles of PP time. Even with that, Marner still outproduced him overall through their ELCs.

1.) There is no evidence at all that any of these metrics have a tangible impact on contracts. Players don’t get paid more for even strength vs pp or pk. We literally brought in Lorentz for our pk at league min.

You may argue that in your opinion you would rather even strength than pp scoring (I have and do) but that has nothing to do with Marner getting 1.7 more

2.) Marner did not blanket out produce. He scored 13 less goals in 11 more games. Goals are worth more. Marner was slightly more healthy and had a slightly better pp/82 but he had worse goals.

Marner was not worth 1.7 more than rantanen. There is no comparable for him.

The other players who got Matthews level were goal scorers/centers

 

[mapleleaf979]

Marner should not be paid more than Nylander. Nylander should be at 9.5 million, not 11.5.
Marner and Nylander are somewhat equals on this team. Matthews is the top player and those 2 guys slot in under that. Nylander is better at some things, Marner has a better compete level.

Marner and Nylander should not be making more than 9.5 million US each, poor guys want 11.5 and that creates the a revolving door of bottom 6 players or mid level guys like HYman forced out.

 

[Confucius]

Marner should not be paid more than Nylander. Nylander should be at 9.5 million, not 11.5.
Marner and Nylander are somewhat equals on this team. Matthews is the top player and those 2 guys slot in under that. Nylander is better at some things, Marner has a better compete level.

Marner and Nylander should not be making more than 9.5 million US each, poor guys want 11.5 and that creates the a revolving door of bottom 6 players or mid level guys like HYman forced out.

I agree he made too much in the past but 11 is fair moving forward. Like most deals it seems like an overpay in years 1 and 2 but is more than fair the following years.

 

[Niagara Bill]

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.

 

[Dekes For Days]

There is no evidence at all that any of these metrics have a tangible impact on contracts. Players don’t get paid more for even strength vs pp or pk.

All evidence supports production levels impacting contracts. It's literally the primary driver of forward contracts. Historically, ES is actually given more weight, but that's not what's even being discussed here. Marner outproduced Rantanen in every game state and overall, despite worse situations to do so, and while providing additional impacts. What players don't get paid for, is the PP time their team got.

Goals are worth more.

If there is any distinction in production, it has historically been primary and secondary production, not goals. And if we consider primary production, Marner still produced better than Rantanen in all game states, and the gap just widens overall. Interestingly, Marner even scored goals better than Rantanen at 5v5. They just had very different roles on the PP.

 

[Confucius]

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.

13 is too much...

 

[Legion34]

All evidence supports production levels impacting contracts. It's literally the primary driver of forward contracts. Historically, ES is actually given more weight, but that's not what's even being discussed here. Marner outproduced Rantanen in every game state and overall, despite worse situations to do so, and while providing additional impacts. What players don't get paid for, is the PP time their team got.

If there is any distinction in production, it has historically been primary and secondary production, not goals. And if we consider primary production, Marner still produced better than Rantanen in all game states, and the gap just widens overall. Interestingly, Marner even scored goals better than Rantanen at 5v5. They just had very different roles on the PP.

All evidence supports production levels impacting contracts. It's literally the primary driver of forward contracts. Historically, ES is actually given more weight, but that's not what's even being discussed here. Marner outproduced Rantanen in every game state and overall, despite worse situations to do so, and while providing additional impacts. What players don't get paid for, is the PP time their team got.

If there is any distinction in production, it has historically been primary and secondary production, not goals. And if we consider primary production, Marner still produced better than Rantanen in all game states, and the gap just widens overall. Interestingly, Marner even scored goals better than Rantanen at 5v5. They just had very different roles on the PP.

Yes. All evidence supports that production impacts and is the primary driver of forward contracts. Agreed. Goals also get paid more.

Marner and rantanen had similar production. Rantanen probably had slightly more due to his goals but ok let’s call it even. There is nothing to suggest that among players who score similarly in terms of points per game and raw totals, those who score a higher proportion of even strength points get paid 18% more.

None.

you can’t outproduce someone in every game state and score 13 less goals in 11 more games. That’s silly.

He had 15 more points and 13 less goals in 11 more games over 3 seasons.

That is not worth 18% or 1.7 million dollars per year for 6 years.

Take out the injuries. Sure pretend they played the same amount of games. You think that 5 points a year for 3 years is worth 10.2 million dollars?

 

[notDatsyuk]

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

Plus have a GM who was willing and able to do it

 

[Gary Nylund]

Plus have a GM who was willing and able to do it

Yeah, unfortunately that's what we didn't have.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Marner and rantanen had similar production.

They didn't though.
Marner produced 7% better in overall production (10% no EN).
Marner produced 11% better in overall primary production (15% no EN).
Marner produced 28% better at 5v5.
Marner produced 46% better at 5v5 primary production.
Marner produced 24% better on the PP.
Marner produced 13% better on the PP in primary production.
Marner also brought PK impacts, while Rantanen didn't.
You're making a distinction on goals that historically doesn't exist, and the only reason Rantanen even has more goals is because he was set up as the triggerman on Mackinnon's PP, while Marner was the playmaker of his. Marner scored goals better than Rantanen in every other game state.
A 17.8% bigger contract is certainly reasonable.

 

[IPS]

They didn't though.
Marner produced 7% better in overall production (10% no EN).
Marner produced 11% better in overall primary production (15% no EN).
Marner produced 28% better at 5v5.
Marner produced 46% better at 5v5 primary production.
Marner produced 24% better on the PP.
Marner produced 13% better on the PP in primary production.
Marner also brought PK impacts, while Rantanen didn't.
You're making a distinction on goals that historically doesn't exist, and the only reason Rantanen even has more goals is because he was set up as the triggerman on Mackinnon's PP, while Marner was the playmaker of his. Marner scored goals better than Rantanen in every other game state.
A 17.8% bigger contract is certainly reasonable.

 

[Legion34]

They didn't though.
Marner produced 7% better in overall production (10% no EN).
Marner produced 11% better in overall primary production (15% no EN).
Marner produced 28% better at 5v5.
Marner produced 46% better at 5v5 primary production.
Marner produced 24% better on the PP.
Marner produced 13% better on the PP in primary production.
Marner also brought PK impacts, while Rantanen didn't.
You're making a distinction on goals that historically doesn't exist, and the only reason Rantanen even has more goals is because he was set up as the triggerman on Mackinnon's PP, while Marner was the playmaker of his. Marner scored goals better than Rantanen in every other game state.
A 17.8% bigger contract is certainly reasonable.

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.

 

[Zybalto]

Staying out of the muck around here but it was interesting listening to MacKinnon talk about Marner on the Spittin Chicklets podcast. After talking up himself being on an all Nova Scotia line for Canada (with Crosby and Marchand), he's was talking about how incredible Marner was playing with McDavid at the summer training they all were at.

Hyman/McDavid/Marner Canada line is a strong possibility at the 4 nations coming up IMO.

 

[arso40]

Staying out of the muck around here but it was interesting listening to MacKinnon talk about Marner on the Spittin Chicklets podcast. After talking up himself being on an all Nova Scotia line for Canada (with Crosby and Marchand), he's was talking about how incredible Marner was playing with McDavid at the summer training they all were at.

Hyman/McDavid/Marner Canada line is a strong possibility at the 4 nations coming up IMO.

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