Mitch Marner (Trade or Keep)?

[supermann_98]

Marner will justifiably get more than a worse player like Pastrnak.

You're too much sometimes bruh

 

[ToneDog]

You're too much sometimes bruh

Mitch has never hit the numbers Pasta has. He can barely hit 60 goals in 2 seasons let alone 60+ in one; has never reached 100 points and has been paid $4+m more for the last 4 seasons. Yeah Mitch deserves more than the worse Pasta. Dekes kills me with some of his hot takes. Wonder if he actually believes some of the stuff he posts.

 

[Racer88]

Mitch has never hit the numbers Pasta has. He can barely hit 60 goals in 2 seasons let alone 60+ in one; has never reached 100 points and has been paid $4+m more for the last 4 seasons. Yeah Mitch deserves more than the worse Pasta. Dekes kills me with some of his hot takes. Wonder if he actually believes some of the stuff he posts.

Ya, to think Marner is better is ludicrous

 

[Dekes For Days]

Mitch has never hit the numbers Pasta has.

Marner hit those numbers in 2021-2022, and has better numbers over the past 3 years. Plus better defensively. Plus elite PKing. It's okay to admit that our great players are great.
Not to mention that in the context of the discussion, part of Pastrnak's big year doesn't even factor into his contract.

 

[Antropovsky]

Marner hit those numbers in 2021-2022, and has better numbers over the past 3 years. Plus better defensively. Plus elite PKing. It's okay to admit that our great players are great.
Not to mention that in the context of the discussion, part of Pastrnak's big year doesn't even factor into his contract.

In 2022 Marner wasn't even leading his team in points. Pastrnak had 46 points more the next Bruin this past season. Linemates play a big part in production.

 

[Menzinger]

The poster I responded to said Marner had "reasonable demands". 11% after a 64 and 69 point seasons isn't anywhere near reasonable. That's Patrick Kane money as an RFA. As I said, Ehlers took 8% after similar first two seasons.

8.5 million is an over payment at that time and certainly not "reasonable".

It definitely would have been a contract based 100% on future potential rather than what the player had actually achieved over a single season

Babs also had Marner playing on that 4th line for a stint too due uneven performances. Something that also gets conveniently forgotten when talking about the merits of the alternative 8 year offer.

 

[Stephen]

The poster I responded to said Marner had "reasonable demands". 11% after a 64 and 69 point seasons isn't anywhere near reasonable. That's Patrick Kane money as an RFA. As I said, Ehlers took 8% after similar first two seasons.

8.5 million is an over payment at that time and certainly not "reasonable".

If you look at the way the Marner negotiations went vs other guys who were up for their second deals (Aho, Barzal, Rantanen, etc.) it seems like Marner's only comparable was Auston Matthews, which is more of an in-house comparison and not a league wide, winger-forward comparison. And having hit 90 points before Matthews, staying healthier than Matthews over their ELCs, there was the case for $11 million.

 

[Dekes For Days]

In 2022 Marner wasn't even leading his team in points. Pastrnak had 46 points more the next Bruin this past season.

It's pretty misleading to state the raw overall point difference between a player who played 82 games and ones that didn't.
Also pretty misleading to dismiss Marner due to linemate quality - especially while he produced at the best 5v5 rate on the team.
It's pretty funny, because Pastrnak benefitted from arguably the best linemate quality in the league for most of his career.
In those very specific seasons (part of which didn't even factor into Pastrnak's contract), Pastrnak had worse linemate quality, but that just helps Pastrnak catch up to Marner.
The difference is smaller over the past 3 years, where Marner outproduces Pastrnak, while bringing better defense and elite PKing on top.

 

[IPS]

Mitch has never hit the numbers Pasta has. He can barely hit 60 goals in 2 seasons let alone 60+ in one; has never reached 100 points and has been paid $4+m more for the last 4 seasons. Yeah Mitch deserves more than the worse Pasta. Dekes kills me with some of his hot takes. Wonder if he actually believes some of the stuff he posts.

Thinking Marner is better than Pastrnak is fine.

Stating it as some unequivocal fact that's not even open for debate borders on illogical fanboy-ism and just plain ignorance.

We've played Pastrnak enough in the playoffs - the guy is a murderer.

because Pastrnak benefitted from arguably the best linemate quality in the league for most of his career.

Oh we're gonna argue linemates? Are Bergeron and Marchand comparable with Matthews all of a sudden now? Because that debate on its own you'd say they're not even in the same stratosphere as Matthews.

 

[ToneDog]

Marner hit those numbers in 2021-2022, and has better numbers over the past 3 years. Plus better defensively. Plus elite PKing. It's okay to admit that our great players are great.
Not to mention that in the context of the discussion, part of Pastrnak's big year doesn't even factor into his contract.

Sure Mitch has been good but I can't take you seriously when you say Mitch is better than Pasta. This guy was the best player on a team that set the single season for points and had a as good or better year than Matty did two years ago and if not for McDavid would have taken the same hardware home.

You think the Bruins would have caved if Pasta did not put up crooked numbers into the time of his signing?? Of course his year factored into his contract. Mitch is good but he is an overpaid, soft, goal scoring challenged winger who disappears when teams take away space. Give me Pasta any day of the week.

 

[Byron Bitz]

Pasta is better than Mitch but not by much and the cap is going up. The time to low-ball Mitch was back when he was an RFA but we didn’t do that and now we’re gonna have to pay him. 12 x 8 should get it done.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Oh we're gonna argue linemates? Are Bergeron and Marchand comparable with Matthews all of a sudden now? Because that debate on its own you'd say they're not even in the same stratosphere as Matthews.

Actually, I was responding to somebody arguing linemates. I just found it funny, since they were looking exclusively at the one season Pastrnak had mediocre linemates, while ignoring the fact that he had among the best linemate quality for top players throughout the rest of his career. As for your question, Bergeron/Marchand were a higher quality combination of linemates than Matthews/Bunting, Matthews/Hyman, Tavares/Hyman, Bozak/JVR, etc. You're also misrepresenting what I'd say again.

Sure Mitch has been good but I can't take you seriously when you say Mitch is better than Pasta. This guy was the best player on a team that set the single season for points and had a as good or better year than Matty did two years ago and if not for McDavid would have taken the same hardware home.

The issue here, aside from the exaggerations of Pastrnak's season and attributing the team success to him, is that you're taking one season and arguing that that is what he is, while ignoring the previous couple of seasons. He needs to prove that this is what he is, and that it's not just a result of a fluke IPP spike. Then he would have more of an argument, but I'm not ready to wildly swing rankings based on the most recent season's result, and the team is obviously not just going to consider that partial season in their valuation and determination of what Pastrnak is. And even if Pastrnak is able to match production, I'm not sure how he makes up for the additional stuff Marner brings.

You think the Bruins would have caved if Pasta did not put up crooked numbers into the time of his signing?? Of course his year factored into his contract.

His year up to the point of signing was part of the consideration. So was him being closer to PPG over the previous 2 years. The 19 goals and 33 points in 22 games he got after signing would not factor into his contract. He did not have this 60-goal status you speak of, and he was not even pacing it.

 

[Antropovsky]

It's pretty misleading to state the raw overall point difference between a player who played 82 games and ones that didn't.
Also pretty misleading to dismiss Marner due to linemate quality - especially while he produced at the best 5v5 rate on the team.
It's pretty funny, because Pastrnak benefitted from arguably the best linemate quality in the league for most of his career.
In those very specific seasons (part of which didn't even factor into Pastrnak's contract), Pastrnak had worse linemate quality, but that just helps Pastrnak catch up to Marner.
The difference is smaller over the past 3 years, where Marner outproduces Pastrnak, while bringing better defense and elite PKing on top.

What are you talking about? Even if Marchand played 82 games, Pastrnak would still have a whopping 38 point lead on him. And one could also argue that Pastrnak woud be even more productive had Marchand been in the lineup. It goes both ways. Also... Pastrnak also was playing with teammate outside their prime. While Marner isn't. But that don't matter does it?

Facts are in 2022 Marner had 97 points, while his linemate Matthews had 106, 9 points more than him.

Pastrnak led his next teammate by 46 points and "had everyone played 82" he would've still led them by a whopping 38.

 

[IPS]

David Pastrnak over the 6 years he was being paid $6.67M before signing his new deal

6th in league scoring with 494 points in 420 games
5th in goals with 242 goals in 420 games
8th best PPG in that span at 1.18, only .1 behind Matthews who has 1.19. Marner sits at 1.15.

But apparantly his production "can't match" Marner's. Imagine believing some of that nonsense.

 

[Dekes For Days]

What are you talking about? Even if Marchand played 82 games, Pastrnak would still have a whopping 38 point lead on him.

Which would be more accurate than what you said, even if it was still pretty irrelevant.

Also... Pastrnak also was playing with teammate outside their prime. While Marner isn't. But that don't matter does it?

I'm not sure what age has to do with anything. Quality is quality. I'd rather play with a 36 year old Crosby than some 3rd liner in their prime, for example.

Facts are in 2022 Marner had 97 points, while his linemate Matthews had 106, 9 points more than him.

Technically correct. Functionally misleading. And doesn't change the end conclusion.

 

[HairyKneel]

Marner hit those numbers in 2021-2022, and has better numbers over the past 3 years. Plus better defensively. Plus elite PKing. It's okay to admit that our great players are great.
Not to mention that in the context of the discussion, part of Pastrnak's big year doesn't even factor into his contract.

 

[Stephen]

I wonder if it’s possible to thread the needle of talking about Marner without going through the same rinse and repeat of dragging every other elite forward in class through the mud and then staking Marner’s superiority on penalty killing?

Marner’s in an elite group with a handful of forwards who are better at some things and worse at others, some at the wing and others at wing center hybrid. Rantanen, Pastrnak, Aho, Point.

 

[francis246]

I wonder if it’s possible to thread the needle of talking about Marner without going through the same rinse and repeat of dragging every other elite forward in class through the mud and then staking Marner’s superiority on penalty killing?

Marner’s in an elite group with a handful of forwards who are better at some things and worse at others, some at the wing and others at wing center hybrid. Rantanen, Pastrnak, Aho, Point.

I think it really comes down to preference and the type of team you want to build. I don’t think one is overly better than the other. Marner has scored 30 goals multiple times so I don’t really get why people say he can’t score. But I do think he fades in the playoffs. Honestly you can’t go wrong with any of the guys you named including Marner.

At the end of the day Marner is the guy we have, he does a lot of great things for our team and has a lot of room to improve.

 

[Arzak]

Thinking Marner is better than Pastrnak is fine.

Stating it as some unequivocal fact that's not even open for debate borders on illogical fanboy-ism and just plain ignorance.

We've played Pastrnak enough in the playoffs - the guy is a murderer.


Oh we're gonna argue linemates? Are Bergeron and Marchand comparable with Matthews all of a sudden now? Because that debate on its own you'd say they're not even in the same stratosphere as Matthews.

The Bergy narrative, after he got the best season playing with Krejci right before retirement and Zacha ...

He got 61 goals and 113 points because Marchand and Bergeron played on the first line and he benefitted greatly, somehow.

Dekes glossed over the fact he got 46 more points than the next Bruin because he played with Bergy in previous seasons. Proper argument!

Marner elite on PK !!!

 

[IPS]

The Bergy narrative, after he got the best season playing with Krejci right before retirement and Zacha ...

He got 61 goals and 113 points because Marchand and Bergeron played on the first line and he benefitted greatly, somehow.

Dekes glossed over the fact he got 46 more points than the next Bruin because he played with Bergy in previous seasons. Proper argument!

Marner elite on PK !!!

Yeah I think he abandoned the linemate argument real quick when he realized that actually favors the Leaf player a lot more.

Pastrnak put up a cracker season with Pavel Zacha has his most played with linemate.

Shitting on him to try to prop up Marner makes absolutely zero sense.

 

[IPS]

Marner’s in an elite group with a handful of forwards who are better at some things and worse at others, some at the wing and others at wing center hybrid. Rantanen, Pastrnak, Aho, Point.

If you're already pre-programmed with certain biases then you need to argue Marner is a tier above these guys because he gets paid a tier above them, otherwise Dubas looks bad.

 

[Dekes For Days]

David Pastrnak over the 6 years he was being paid $6.67M before signing his new deal

Other issues aside, a sneaky way of including a pre-breakout year for one and not the other.

Yeah I think he abandoned the linemate argument real quick when he realized that actually favors the Leaf player a lot more.

Nothing was abandoned, and again, I did not bring up the linemate argument. Antropovsky replied to me with the linemate argument, and then I noted the irony of using that when Pastrnak benefitted from better linemate quality over the bigger sample.

He got 61 goals and 113 points because Marchand and Bergeron played on the first line and he benefitted greatly, somehow.
Dekes glossed over the fact he got 46 more points than the next Bruin because he played with Bergy in previous seasons.

Neither of those arguments were made by me.

 

[34]

Trade him if he is looking for crazy money.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I wonder if it’s possible to thread the needle of talking about Marner without going through the same rinse and repeat of dragging every other elite forward in class through the mud and then staking Marner’s superiority on penalty killing?

I wonder if it's possible to talk about Marner without going through the same rinse and repeat of people dismissing the impacts he brings and dragging him through the mud because he justifiably gets paid more than objectively worse and less valuable players?

 

[IPS]

Other issues aside, a sneaky way of including a pre-breakout year for one and not the other.

What's sneaky about it?

Do you wanna go the 5 years from 2019-2023?

They both got 1.22 PPG over that span.

Your statement of Pastrnak "not matching" Marner's production remains laughable.