Player Discussion Mitch Marner, Part 3758391849

[Dreakmur]

Giving possibly the worst defensive player on the roster a larger defensive role wouldn't be considered strengthening the team.

The idea wouldn’t be to give Domi more defensive responsibilities - it would be to give that line less.

It's all about winning, score more than you give up.

You can do that by either scoring more or allowing less.

Like I said moot anyway, no chance Berube does this. I'm sure he's quite happy with the top 2 lines dominating their matchups.

It’s fine at home. I’m the road, it may be problematic.

*** anyway, this is off topic for this thread anyway.

Marner’s deployment in the lineup isn’t off topic.

 

[ashs]

Have a big day mitchy

 

[francis246]

Watch the shot ticker on the game and see if it goes up with a goal. If it does it's gotta be the Mandela effect.

It does. I’ve never heard of a goal not counting as a SOG. So are you right or the NHL? Cause the NHL site says it counts as a shot on goal if a goal is scored or if a goalie makes a save.

 

[ACC1224]

It does. I’ve never heard of a goal not counting as a SOG. So are you right or the NHL? Cause the NHL site says it counts as a shot on goal if a goal is scored or if a goalie makes a save.

Of course it's a shot on net, just more willful ignorance.

If a goal didn't count as a shot what would the goalies save percentage be?

 

[uncleben]

Watch the shot ticker on the game and see if it goes up with a goal. If it does it's gotta be the Mandela effect.

Logically, why would a shot on goal that goes in not count as a shot on goal???

If you are saying not all goals count as shots, sure. Like if it deflects off your butt and goes in, you get the goal, but you won't get a shot added for that deflection.

But a shot that is directed at the net, is on target, and beats the goalie counts just as much as a shot as one that is directed at the net, is on target, and the goalie stops it.

 

[thusk]

I think swapping Marner and domi is more so trying to maximize Marner a bit more

You see correct in Matthews not scoring is not marners fault, but Marner keeps finding a guy who won’t score.

I’d try Marner in a different line only because he should have someone on his line that can finish his setups even if they aren’t an empty net

Also it isn’t sustainable to expect the second line, specifically nylander and patches, to look like Mcdavid and Hyman every game.

It’s a shame Laughton isn’t a 20ish goal scorer as I would’ve tried mcmann/jarnkrok with Laughton and Marner. The Laughton line got torched so I wouldn’t mind switching it up.

I wouldn’t be opposed to swapping around Marner if we had the right personelle, but I don’t think we have the goal scoring C currently.

Toronto scored 17 5v5 goal

1st line 7 goal
2nd line 7
3rd line 3
4th line 1

yeah some of those goal had been made by D but doesn't mean the line didn't had an impact... Exemple benoit goal wqs a direct shot from blueline but if Toronto didn't rush the net creating an amaizing screen, that puck just never goes in.

goal allowed by line
1st 1
2nd 2
3rd 3
4th 4

leafs top 6 line who should made the difference did it...

 

[Leaf Fans]

Never noticed people doing what you claim. I have seen people argue players being overpaid, not worth a contract. Not performing on a line or in certain situations but not actively against them.

Besides it's HFBoards not Tucker Carlson

I have noticed it a couple of times.

 

[francis246]

Of course it's a shot on net, just more willful ignorance.

If a goal didn't count as a shot what would the goalies save percentage be?

Was literally thinking that. If it’s not a shot on goal, how would they calculate shooting percentage or save percentage?

 

[thewave]

Logically, why would a shot on goal that goes in not count as a shot on goal???

If you are saying not all goals count as shots, sure. Like if it deflects off your butt and goes in, you get the goal, but you won't get a shot added for that deflection.

But a shot that is directed at the net, is on target, and beats the goalie counts just as much as a shot as one that is directed at the net, is on target, and the goalie stops it.

Logically why is hitting the post not a shot on goal?

 

[ToneDog]

Logically why is hitting the post not a shot on goal?

Good question. My guess is because it is not a goal or a save.

 

[notDatsyuk]

I mean, if you want to claim that the people who go online and/or publicly state that they hate Mitch Marner - don't actually hate Mitch Marner - then fine I guess, but there is undeniable hatred thrown his way (as well as towards Willy and Auston, TBF). I do tend to agree that it's ridiculous to actually hate a player, but it's certainly not something I haven't witnessed from friends and acquaintances.

At least on these boards I don't recall seeing anyone "publicly state that they hate" any player. I have seen a number of posters accuse other posters of being 'haters', but that's entirely different, and seems to be purely ad hominem.

If you have "friends and acquaintances" who actually say they hate someone they have only seen on tv, all I can do is offer my condolences.

 

[notDatsyuk]

You are disappointed in the players on this team currently?

I didn't say I was myself, but yes, there are a couple of players who I wish were performing better, or at least producing better results.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Believe the word is oblivious.

There are some here who have dedicated their lives to making stuff up about a player in hopes of ___________. Never really been sure what they are hoping to accomplish.
So sad.

I think it's mainly attempting to bolster their personal favourite player(s) by downplaying the accomplishments of others, rather than an extreme dislike (which is still far short of 'hate').

 

[uncleben]

Logically why is hitting the post not a shot on goal?

Because it wasn't "on goal". Take away the goalie, the puck is still not going in (for deflections out, pucks that hit the post or crossbar and deflect in do count as SOG)

The weirder one is a wide or high shot that would not go in, but that the goal still stops do count as a SOG, but for those ones I guess that's just to remove subjectivity from the shot counter. "If the goalie thought it was worth stopping, count it."


We're veering well off topic here, though lol

 

[Gary Nylund]

Game winning goal stats are such a stupid stat. Pretty much meaningless when the data points are so few.
Clutch goals maybe hard to quantify . Ot winners , go ahead goals, tying goals easy enough but lots of other important scenarios . Probably easier just to count stats padding goals in blowouts as not as important . Fewer to count.

Yup.

Baseball definitely does it that way. If hockey did it would have been Nylander in this game.

It can be pretty arbitrary. Unless it's 4-4 and you score the 5th, which is the most important goal in a 5-4 win?

I prefer the MLB way.

Baseball's way is definitely better, and I agree with the poster above, it's a stupid stat anyway. Any time you score in a tie game, a one goal game, a two goal game is almost always important for starters, and I think that covers 90% of the goals right there.

 

[Gary Nylund]

At least on these boards I don't recall seeing anyone "publicly state that they hate" any player. I have seen a number of posters accuse other posters of being 'haters', but that's entirely different, and seems to be purely ad hominem.

If you have "friends and acquaintances" who actually say they hate someone they have only seen on tv, all I can do is offer my condolences.

It's such a stupid term. I feel like it's most often used by people who are out of arguments so name calling is all they have left.

 

[Tak7]

Would it make more sense to put Tanev or McCabe or even OEL there instead of Reilly, if the goal is to prevent giving up SH goal?

I think it makes most sense just to play PP1 with your 5 forwards at all times other than late in games - coach to win games, don't coach not to lose games.

The 5F powerplay hasn't given up more shorthanded opportunities than any other PP in the league. If it was giving up shorty chances consistently, then I'd consider a re-shift, but it isn't.

A PP goal in the 3rd period of game 1 would have killed that game off.

 

[Delete1]

It's such a stupid term. I feel like it's most often used by people who are out of arguments so name calling is all they have left.

You're a boogerhead!

 

[francis246]

Good question. My guess is because it is not a goal or a save.

I laughed way too hard at this lol

 

[Antropovsky]

5v5 Marner doubled the next player in secondary assists. He had 16, next best was 9.

5v5 Goals and primary assists only from this past season and how much they'd produce at their rate in 1400 mins.



Nylander and Tavares always had a 3rd liner on their line. Nylander played large chunks with two 3rd liners on his line. Marner played the entire year with Matthews or Tavares as his center and mostly Knies his winger.

 

[ToneDog]

I laughed way too hard at this lol

I thought the whole conversation was strange.

 

[TMLAM34]

Let’s say Marner himself wants to move on from this franchise and continue his career somewhere else more quiet and with less media pressure and attention now having a small family…

If he is willing to do a sign and trade, get that 8th year in his contract, do you think we’d be able to get a good return? Seeing what Carolina paid and then Dallas for Rantanen without a guarantee, makes me thinks we’d be able to fetch a pretty good return.

You know if Marner hits the open market, there will be quite a few teams willing to pay him. Not often does one of the games best two-way players become available for just a blank cheque.

Utah is the team I can see a sign and trade work with. If Marner hits the open market, I’d expect Chicago to be all over him with a blank cheque.

 

[ToneDog]

Let’s say Marner himself wants to move on from this franchise and continue his career somewhere else more quiet and with less media pressure and attention now having a small family…

If he is willing to do a sign and trade, get that 8th year in his contract, do you think we’d be able to get a good return? Seeing what Carolina paid and then Dallas for Rantanen without a guarantee, makes me thinks we’d be able to fetch a pretty good return.

You know if Marner hits the open market, there will be quite a few teams willing to pay him. Not often does one of the games best two-way players become available for just a blank cheque.

Utah is the team I can see a sign and trade work with. If Marner hits the open market, I’d expect Chicago to be all over him with a blank cheque.

Marner and Kerfoot as Mamoths would be pretty funny. Why would anybody give up much when they can sign him for free on July 1? Oilers would not give up more than a 6th for an 8th year for Hyman.

 

[TMLAM34]

Marner and Kerfoot as Mamoths would be pretty funny. Why would anybody give up much when they can sign him for free on July 1? Oilers would not give up more than a 6th for an 8th year for Hyman.

I guess it’s more so knowing you have him signed opposed to having to compete with who knows how many other teams on July 1st…

Like from Utah, can we get Crouse in exchange for a signed Marner.

 

[Dreakmur]

Of course it's a shot on net, just more willful ignorance.

If a goal didn't count as a shot what would the goalies save percentage be?

You’ve never seen 4 goals on 2 shots before?