Mitch Marner, Yet Again

[IPS]

I have consistently not liked his game from before the draft. I never thought his game would translate into success and I was right. He can flip pucks out of the rink all he wants but he hasn't had a good game 5 6 7 that elevated us since getting here. I hear more dumbass excuses out of his own mouth in the media than actual accountability and success from his person.

Waaaaaagh I am as good as Matthews and I waaaaaagh I didnt get bonuses from Lou and Waaaaaagh Babsocks made my little ego go to shambles.

Look deep inside, you know it be true. Join me, liberate your mind from the Marner cult.

Too soft. Terrible leader gloves chucker. It's no surprise we don't win in the playoffs.

Contrary to your opinion - I actually loved his game before and after the draft. So many similarities to Patrick Kane, and with a lot of clutch moments in the OHL too. I always thought Marner would eventually develop his shooting ability to be comparable to Kane's, but that never really happened. He's still improved it to a degree but there's a pretty clear ceiling on his goal scoring ability. Too many postseasons have gone by and Marner just hasn't done anything comparable to Kane.

 

[666]

You have this weird agenda that you try to change everything what people say. I've never said Domi is better than Nylander and Tavares.

Don't you have something better to do?

At least other Marner fans have made attempts to prove their points with advanced stats and it's interesting for readers.

Reading someone say "you don't even watch all the games", or intentional change qhat others say is just a total waste of people's time and destroys the quality of this board.

Your misleading stats that say Domi is almost as good as Marner also say that Domi is better than Nylander and J.T. Pay attention.

 

[666]

Did it occur to you that Marner was the one helping to create those high danger scoring chances for Matty and Knies? He's by far the primary assist guy / creating time and space guy on a line with (2) 30+ goal scorers this year (one of who can score 50-69 btw) . . . so tell me, what relevance does Marner's high danger scoring chances have to do with his line?

Anyone? Anyone?

Nothing.
The answer is . . . nothing.

This is what @Antropovsky does. He goes to that site and sorts the columns until he finds a column that Marner isn't near the top. He then humiliates himself and posts usually / 60 numbers without showing the TOI. He then humiliates himself again by saying that 8 minutes per game Dewar (with a too small sample size) is better at this than Marner. He then ignores that Dewar is better than Nylander (Marners best comparable) too and humiliates himself again. This time he actually posted that Dewar was better than Nylander so he's slipping.

Of course all of this completely ignores the context that you excellently provided that he'll certainly also ignore. He basically posts spam stats.

 

[TMLBlueandWhite]

Losing Marner means the key players of the entire decade from 2016-2025 failed to become a winning core.

Losing Marner means going out in the first round is no longer acceptable. Every single player who was deemed untouchable within that span is now touchable. From now on everyone is accountable for their play.

The problems with Marner are multiple.

He's scrawny and weak so avoids physical contact and gets muscled off the puck easily. He plays on the perimeter but has a weak shot and can't skate fast. You'll almost never see Marner score a goal off the rush.

You score goals off the rush by shooting the puck as a sniper and crashing the net for rebounds.

Or you cycle off the boards in the offensive zone and crash the net from the corner. Or you pass it to the far winger and crash the net for a tip. Even if Marner was capable of playing a physically aggressive game crashing the net, which he is not, he would still refuse.

I can't wait til he's gone.

 

[Dekes For Days]

They did know.

They didn't know anything, and both speculation and the maximum possible increase at the time were well below where it ended up.

Draisatl could've easily done what Marner did and wait until they knew the exact number and got more money but didn't. He signed because he wanted to stay.

They both want to stay. Draisaitl could have waited, but he chose to sign early, because his team worked hard to sign him and offered him 14m, and he wanted to lock that in and not take any risks. Also probably easier to do when you don't have a barrage of toxic, irrational fans blaming you for everything.

Easy assumption to make when this has become the norm for him during contract negotiations.

It's not an easy assumption to make. Not signing early =/= only caring about money. That's such a massive logical leap.

He's a player with an agent that negotiates his contract. He's one of the teams top players and he thinks his contract isn't gonna be an issue during the season in Toronto of all places? Give me a break with all that crap. Just has to sign his name on a piece of paper after the agent and GM agree to a deal so this whole I'm not gonna sign during the season is obviously an agent playing games trying to pressure a GM to give them everything they want.

Agents still need to communicate with players to properly represent them, and players are allowed to not want those distractions while they're working. The team was aware of this and could have done something last offseason. The contract wasn't even dominating discussion until the GM started playing stupid, pointless games at the deadline and put it into the spotlight.

The round you've exited from the playoffs in the past is not a poor measure of how close you are to a cup when they get eliminated in the same round and same game every year.

Round number is meaningless in our current system. It provides no insight into the quality of your team, what you faced, what happened, and why. 1st round often features some of the toughest matchups, and the outcome of a series has nothing to do with what happened in past years.

Maybe you'd be right if a team had a good team and they were missing half their roster due to injury but that isn't the case here.

We've actually dealt with quite a few injuries and losses over the years. Kadri in 2018. Kadri, Hyman, and Gardiner in 2019. Muzzin and Johnsson in 2020, plus Mikheyev playing his first games after his sliced wrist. Tavares, Matthews, Muzzin, and Foligno in 2021, plus Hyman playing his first games after another big knee injury. Bunting in 2022. Knies, Bunting, and Samsonov in 2023, plus the permanent loss of Muzzin. Matthews, Nylander, McMann, and Woll in 2024. It's possible to win despite injuries, but let's not pretend that injuries haven't been one of the contributing factors here, especially with the margins so tiny.

According to you this core is the best we've ever had, Dubas was one of the best GMs we've ever had and put together the best Leafs teams ever in 2020-22 years I believe and Keefe was one of the best coaches in Leafs history. All of this and still 1st round exits only.

Well aside from you putting words in my mouth, and aside from the fact that it wasn't only 1st round exits, the series outcomes don't erase what we were. Some of the best teams in modern history lost in the first round; some in much worse ways than anything we've done. Losing to Cup finalists by the margins we did in the circumstances we had doesn't make us and everybody associated with us bad. Crazy enough, from 2019-2020 to 2022-2023, we actually had a positive playoff goal differential. I know you'll say who cares, but it's a good example of how the narrative born out of looking exclusively at playoff series record doesn't reflect how we actually performed or the miniscule change required to flip the outcome.

Taking up all that cap hit on 4 forwards though isn't the problem and we should continue doing it though, right?

Blaming our outcomes on the cap hits of those forwards is such a lazy argument. They aren't the reason we've lost. Their cap hits aren't the reason we've lost. Getting rid of them isn't going to help us win. We had an even worse playoff record when these guys gave us more surplus value than anything we could ever dream of, and the rising cap environment really changes what "continue doing it" even means.

Since he signed his big deal he has played in 37 playoff games and has 6 goals and 33 points in that stretch.

There's more to hockey than points, and not only is that playoff production not even bad, it's even more understandable when you don't intentionally ignore all context.

What's even worse is that a majority of those points come in games 1-4

Every playoff game is important. Nitpicking when points come is ridiculous. Especially when his late series production has been more so a result of abnormally low point credit for goals he contributes to, and conversion struggles by others, more than him changing.

Maybe it's time you start to look at your analytics and begin to realize how flawed a lot of them are and the ones that are useful and helpful are probably behind closed doors that teams analytics departments pay a lot of money to keep secret.

Maybe it's time you start to look at your eye test and overreliance on series outcomes and points in small samples without context, and begin to realize how flawed they are. The analytics that teams use are more detailed and in depth, but are based on similar fundamentals and methodology.

You're right, the cup is the main goal. Clearly it's not our teams main goal though because they still take every penny they can all while getting the most endorsement money in the entire league.

It is our team's main goal. Wanting to be paid properly for your work like everybody else does not mean you aren't trying to win. Matthews, Tavares, and Marner all could have gotten a decent amount more pennies if they really wanted to push it and use their leverage.

We've already damaged our teams future and have been for years. What are you talking about? Our prospect pool is not that amazing. We barely have any picks and it's been like that for a while now. Moving a piece of this core opens up so much that we could do either via free agency or trades.

There is a difference between drawing from one aspect of futures during a competitive phase to improve the present, and just outright making yourself worse in both the present and future for no reason. You're underrating Marner's impact on all aspects of this team (offense, defense, transition, etc. in every game state and situation, not to even mention off-ice in the room), while overrating the alternative options that actually exist, and how much is actually accomplished with ~13m in UFA under a 95.5m cap. And if our pool is so trash, and our draft picks are so depleted, what are we trading?

Look what Washington was able to do after getting to use Backstrom and Kuznetsov cap to add to their teams depth and blueline.

First off, there's a big difference between getting that cap space from losing what is essentially dead cap vs. losing one of the best players in the world. And second, you're pointing at an outlier that wasn't even really about cap. It was a mixture of some good moves working out, improvements in existing players, and some overachievment.

Protas and McMichael exploding isn't about cap. Ovechkin's last gasp isn't about cap. Logan Thompson putting up the 2nd best GSAx in the league for 767k isn't about cap. We could have signed Roy. Even Chychrun is only 4.6m. Making good moves doesn't mean or require getting rid of your best players to throw cap at stuff in UFA.

A majority of our losses without Marner in the lineup came during the Babcock era, especially the time when the team gave up on him and got him fired. After Babcock got fired they literally went on to win 4/6 games. Team went 2-8 without Marner while Babcock was the coach. So since he got fired we went 19-9 if that 21-17-5 record is correct. Idk what games went to OT so the records I put for Babcock and Keefe aren't 100% accurate but close enough and gives a little more context to that record without him. Not only is the core better at this point in their career the team is as well.

So if we arbitrarily remove the times when the team lost without Marner, we can pretend that the team is good without Marner? Come on man. Yes, these "without X" records are meaningless. No, the solution is not to manipulate them until they work for your argument. Nobody "gave up" on Babcock. Babcock just sucked.

You've made the point that the best teams we had with this core had these depth players who we couldn't afford to keep. So going off of your own argument don't you think we have a better chance of winning keeping those pieces that helped the team supposedly be so good?

The point is, we've already had the kind of depth that costs that amount in UFA. Paying more for them doesn't improve anything. What made us good was having both our core pieces AND those depth pieces. Trading the better core pieces that can't be replaced for cheaper for the worse depth pieces that can be obtained for cheaper doesn't give you a better chance of winning.

Our best discount contracts were players who got to play more minutes and be in the top 6 and on the PP. But but but losing Marner would hurt the top 6 and the PP. If having Matthews, Nylander and Tavares in our top 6 slows down the top 6 and PP then I think a lot of the people who said this entire core needs to go is right. Apparently only Toronto can have this many top players and their offence dry up because of 1 player while other top players play with anyone and still put up 90+ points.

Not even sure what you're attempting to argue here. We've had cheap and effective depth in all positions and roles throughout the lineup. And being able to play with players like Marner really helps elevate and shelter the ones playing in our top 6, and boost the surplus value they bring. Nobody has said that our offense would "dry up". But it's pretty silly to think that it wouldn't be affected by losing one of the best offensive players in the league. Not to mention all of the other things that would be impacted.

We got our top 4 on defence locked up and our 2 goalies. The core 4 and the top 4 d and 2 goalies is gonna cost us 75 mil of the 95 mil cap. Add Knies extension and it's over 80 mil. The rest of the players under contract probably take up around 10 mil as well. So what cap are you talking about? This is going off Marner signing for 13.5 mil and Tavares for 7. Kampf and Jarnkrok I could easily see gone so that's 4.5 mil right there. Robertson a RFA also. So again, just because the cap is going up it doesn't mean we are getting more cap space to make moves even if we sign Marner. It'll be the same damn thing.

With Tavares at 7 and Marner at 13.5, that would be 71.5m for the core 4 + top 4 + 2G, not 75m. Knies and McMann finish off our top six for what, 7m? If we keep Domi, Laughton, and Jarnkrok, that's another 7m. Which leaves 10m, and only 4th line and bottom pairing to fill. And then an extra 9m the next year with our main pieces already signed. Same the year after that. Where's the crisis?

Again, a majority of those depth contracts on Florida that made less than 5 mil played in their top 6 and on special teams or played defence. They were also able to afford to keep all of them by giving them good pay raises. We don't have that luxury because apparently spreading that money out to more players makes us worse.

Not sure what you're talking about. Florida had depth players on depth contracts in depth roles. They haven't been able to keep everybody. 9 of the 22 players Florida used on their way to the cup weren't there the year before, and 9 of those 22 players are gone this year, including the likes of Montour. They're likely looking at more losses - potentially Bennett - this offseason. That's the cap world. What Florida actually did is re-sign their most important players, which is what I am advocating for with the likes of Marner/Tavares/Knies.

That 10 million dollar was an over rated goalie who only went on a generational run remember. Stupid GM could've used that money on 1 forward.

That 10m goalie went on an amazing run... and a couple months prior, he had lost his net to a fringe backup, and that GM was rumoured to be looking to retain millions for years to dump his ass. Just goes to show how fast things can change in the NHL.

What available goalie would you like to spend 10m on? It's great for Florida that Bobrovsky went on a run at the right time, but even if you get the opportunity for a signing like that, there is a big risk involved in spending so much on such a volatile position where cost has such a weak correlation with performance. It can carry your team, or absolutely sink it. Heck, at the same time, Florida was paying another goalie who didn't even play for them more than our entire goalie budget this year.

 

[GoonieFace]

They didn't know anything, and both speculation and the maximum possible increase at the time were well below where it ended up.

They both want to stay. Draisaitl could have waited, but he chose to sign early, because his team worked hard to sign him and offered him 14m, and he wanted to lock that in and not take any risks. Also probably easier to do when you don't have a barrage of toxic, irrational fans blaming you for everything.

It's not an easy assumption to make. Not signing early =/= only caring about money. That's such a massive logical leap.

Agents still need to communicate with players to properly represent them, and players are allowed to not want those distractions while they're working. The team was aware of this and could have done something last offseason. The contract wasn't even dominating discussion until the GM started playing stupid, pointless games at the deadline and put it into the spotlight.

Round number is meaningless in our current system. It provides no insight into the quality of your team, what you faced, what happened, and why. 1st round often features some of the toughest matchups, and the outcome of a series has nothing to do with what happened in past years.

We've actually dealt with quite a few injuries and losses over the years. Kadri in 2018. Kadri, Hyman, and Gardiner in 2019. Muzzin and Johnsson in 2020, plus Mikheyev playing his first games after his sliced wrist. Tavares, Matthews, Muzzin, and Foligno in 2021, plus Hyman playing his first games after another big knee injury. Bunting in 2022. Knies, Bunting, and Samsonov in 2023, plus the permanent loss of Muzzin. Matthews, Nylander, McMann, and Woll in 2024. It's possible to win despite injuries, but let's not pretend that injuries haven't been one of the contributing factors here, especially with the margins so tiny.

Well aside from you putting words in my mouth, and aside from the fact that it wasn't only 1st round exits, the series outcomes don't erase what we were. Some of the best teams in modern history lost in the first round; some in much worse ways than anything we've done. Losing to Cup finalists by the margins we did in the circumstances we had doesn't make us and everybody associated with us bad. Crazy enough, from 2019-2020 to 2022-2023, we actually had a positive playoff goal differential. I know you'll say who cares, but it's a good example of how the narrative born out of looking exclusively at playoff series record doesn't reflect how we actually performed or the miniscule change required to flip the outcome.

Blaming our outcomes on the cap hits of those forwards is such a lazy argument. They aren't the reason we've lost. Their cap hits aren't the reason we've lost. Getting rid of them isn't going to help us win. We had an even worse playoff record when these guys gave us more surplus value than anything we could ever dream of, and the rising cap environment really changes what "continue doing it" even means.

There's more to hockey than points, and not only is that playoff production not even bad, it's even more understandable when you don't intentionally ignore all context.

Every playoff game is important. Nitpicking when points come is ridiculous. Especially when his late series production has been more so a result of abnormally low point credit for goals he contributes to, and conversion struggles by others, more than him changing.

Maybe it's time you start to look at your eye test and overreliance on series outcomes and points in small samples without context, and begin to realize how flawed they are. The analytics that teams use are more detailed and in depth, but are based on similar fundamentals and methodology.

It is our team's main goal. Wanting to be paid properly for your work like everybody else does not mean you aren't trying to win. Matthews, Tavares, and Marner all could have gotten a decent amount more pennies if they really wanted to push it and use their leverage.

There is a difference between drawing from one aspect of futures during a competitive phase to improve the present, and just outright making yourself worse in both the present and future for no reason. You're underrating Marner's impact on all aspects of this team (offense, defense, transition, etc. in every game state and situation, not to even mention off-ice in the room), while overrating the alternative options that actually exist, and how much is actually accomplished with ~13m in UFA under a 95.5m cap. And if our pool is so trash, and our draft picks are so depleted, what are we trading?

First off, there's a big difference between getting that cap space from losing what is essentially dead cap vs. losing one of the best players in the world. And second, you're pointing at an outlier that wasn't even really about cap. It was a mixture of some good moves working out, improvements in existing players, and some overachievment.

Protas and McMichael exploding isn't about cap. Ovechkin's last gasp isn't about cap. Logan Thompson putting up the 2nd best GSAx in the league for 767k isn't about cap. We could have signed Roy. Even Chychrun is only 4.6m. Making good moves doesn't mean or require getting rid of your best players to throw cap at stuff in UFA.

So if we arbitrarily remove the times when the team lost without Marner, we can pretend that the team is good without Marner? Come on man. Yes, these "without X" records are meaningless. No, the solution is not to manipulate them until they work for your argument. Nobody "gave up" on Babcock. Babcock just sucked.

The point is, we've already had the kind of depth that costs that amount in UFA. Paying more for them doesn't improve anything. What made us good was having both our core pieces AND those depth pieces. Trading the better core pieces that can't be replaced for cheaper for the worse depth pieces that can be obtained for cheaper doesn't give you a better chance of winning.

Not even sure what you're attempting to argue here. We've had cheap and effective depth in all positions and roles throughout the lineup. And being able to play with players like Marner really helps elevate and shelter the ones playing in our top 6, and boost the surplus value they bring. Nobody has said that our offense would "dry up". But it's pretty silly to think that it wouldn't be affected by losing one of the best offensive players in the league. Not to mention all of the other things that would be impacted.

With Tavares at 7 and Marner at 13.5, that would be 71.5m for the core 4 + top 4 + 2G, not 75m. Knies and McMann finish off our top six for what, 7m? If we keep Domi, Laughton, and Jarnkrok, that's another 7m. Which leaves 10m, and only 4th line and bottom pairing to fill. And then an extra 9m the next year with our main pieces already signed. Same the year after that. Where's the crisis?

Not sure what you're talking about. Florida had depth players on depth contracts in depth roles. They haven't been able to keep everybody. 9 of the 22 players Florida used on their way to the cup weren't there the year before, and 9 of those 22 players are gone this year, including the likes of Montour. They're likely looking at more losses - potentially Bennett - this offseason. That's the cap world. What Florida actually did is re-sign their most important players, which is what I am advocating for with the likes of Marner/Tavares/Knies.

That 10m goalie went on an amazing run... and a couple months prior, he had lost his net to a fringe backup, and that GM was rumoured to be looking to retain millions for years to dump his ass. Just goes to show how fast things can change in the NHL.

What available goalie would you like to spend 10m on? It's great for Florida that Bobrovsky went on a run at the right time, but even if you get the opportunity for a signing like that, there is a big risk involved in spending so much on such a volatile position where cost has such a weak correlation with performance. It can carry your team, or absolutely sink it. Heck, at the same time, Florida was paying another goalie who didn't even play for them more than our entire goalie budget this year.

No wonder they needed to do server maintenance

 

[IPS]

No wonder they needed to do server maintenance

No kidding my finger almost got sore scrolling past all of that

 

[Confucius]

Draisaityl last 2 plus seasons —-145 goals —-339 points 14 million
Rantanen last 2 plus years——— 128 goals —- 290 points —12 million
Marner last 2 plus years————- 70 goals —- 275 points—- anything more than 11 million is an overpayment

 

[ACC1224]

Draisaityl last 2 plus seasons —-145 goals —-339 points 14 million
Rantanen last 2 plus years——— 128 goals —- 290 points —12 million
Marner last 2 plus years————- 70 goals —- 275 points—- anything more than 11 million is an overpayment

Rantanan played more games of course, guessing that's why you didn't list it.

Nylander is more of a direct comparable anyway.

 

[Confucius]

Rantanan played more games of course, guessing that's why you didn't list it.

Nylander is more of a direct comparable anyway.

I prefer William 122 goals last 2 plus seasons but yeah they are closer, Mitch just 1/2 a million less.

 

[ToneDog]

Draisaityl last 2 plus seasons —-145 goals —-339 points 14 million
Rantanen last 2 plus years——— 128 goals —- 290 points —12 million
Marner last 2 plus years————- 70 goals —- 275 points—- anything more than 11 million is an overpayment

You forgot to add the TML 20% stupidity tax and that Marner assists trump goals.

 

[ACC1224]

I prefer William 122 goals last 2 plus seasons but yeah they are closer, Mitch just 1/2 a million less.

You should try a real world look at things.

Noticed you ignored the games played

People would take the froth brigade a little more seriously if you'd all just be honest.

 

[Dekes For Days]

It is arrogant to wanting to paid MacKinnon money when, Mac, McDavid, kucherov and Drai have had 128 point plus seasons and all are better goal scorers, when Mitch has had 99 as his best.

Mackinnon's best season when he signed was the same 99 points. So using your logic, where pay is exclusively about your best raw point season, Marner should get MacKinnon money.

 

[ToneDog]

Last 3 seasons.

 

[Confucius]

You forgot to add the TML 20% stupidity tax and that Marner assists trump goals.

Probably what will end up happening

 

[Hellcat]

Aren't you getting tired of humiliating yourself?

Why are you ignoring post #4,925 and the many many other rebuttals to your nonsense.

The big mistake that you're making is that by misusing stats (bad samples sizes, missing context, etc) to make Marner look bad you also drag down other top players giving you cognitive dissonance so you just ignore those and hope we don't notice. You've been told many many times to include Nylander in your stats as he is Marners closest comparable.

If you were to post stats properly then people wouldn't have to do research to rebut you. The stats would tell the complete story within their context or else they would show the holes in your argument. How can you not see this simple fundamental truth?

How can you possibly think that Domi is better than Nylander and JT? If you watched the games you would realize when the numbers don't match what you see and then you wouldn't constantly embarrass yourself. That's one really big reason for you to watch the games.

Your Domi obsession has shown your lack of integrity, your complete lack of credibility and now you're the laughing stock of the community. No one. And I repeat no one thinks that Domi is even close to Marner (or Nylander). You should be ashamed.

As for small sample sizes, I've told you many times, plot out the stats over time and see how long it takes them to settle. It literally takes 2 minutes per stat type. Instead of wasting your time with your nonsense put the time into learning how to do things properly.

"He's" a bot... there is no other explanation for it's inability to connect specific metrics and how those metrics impacts the game. Player A plays one game, scores one go, he is on pace to score 82 goals, player B plays 41 games, scores 20 goals, he is on pace for 40 goals, there for 82 greater than 40 ..... *** bleep bop **** ... computation **** beep beep beep **** ... player A is the better ***beep*** player ... numbers are irrefutable.....

 

[Hellcat]

You forgot to add the TML 20% stupidity tax and that Marner assists trump goals.

Which is what no one has said ever... bravo ...

 

[GoonieFace]

Playing games is also a skill, so to point out he played less games is more of an indictment on Marner not being able to stay as healthy.

Anyway you slice it, they haven’t won a thing with him. Some guys just aren’t winners. Yes, there are other players on the team, but he was one of the highest paid for years. Hope he proves us wrong this playoff. I for one will be glad he did, but I’m not holding my breath.

 

[Confucius]

You should try a real world look at things.

Noticed you ignored the games played

People would take the froth brigade a little more seriously if you'd all just be honest.

13 games less played than rantanen over 2 plus years. Still 58 goals less and 15 points less. I guess that made all the difference in the world. Mitch certainly isn’t worth more.

 

[mclaren55]

Mackinnon's best season when he signed was the same 99 points. So using your logic, where pay is exclusively about your best raw point season, Marner should get MacKinnon money.

Ok, but lest we forget that Marner is a winger. Comparing him to generational centres is a bit disingenuous, no? Centre position typically commands a premium vs. winger, add in the fact they (Drai and Mac) are both significantly better goal scorers, it's easy to see why people don't think Marner deserves that kind of pay.

 

[ToneDog]

Which is what no one has said ever... bravo ...

Well that is why Marner thinks he is worth more than players like Nylander who have 50% more goals. Why does he think he is worth more than Pasta, Ranta and Willie if not for goals?

 

[ACC1224]

13 games less played than rantanen over 2 plus years. Still 58 goals less and 15 points less. I guess that made all the difference in the world. Mitch certainly isn’t worth more.

14 more games, 15 more points.
Better all situation player with a greater ppg should earn him more money.

 

[ACC1224]

Ok, but lest we forget that Marner is a winger. Comparing him to generational centres is a bit disingenuous, no? Centre position typically commands a premium vs. winger, add in the fact they (Drai and Mac) are both significantly better goal scorers, it's easy to see why people don't think Marner deserves that kind of pay.

I don't think anyone believes Draisaitl or Mackinnon are his comparables.

 

[Confucius]

14 more games, 15 more points.
Better all situation player with a greater ppg should earn him more money.

Rantanen 58 goals more, total 15 points more, played 14 games more over the last 2 plus seasons.

 

[ToneDog]

Rantanen 58 goals more, total 15 points more, played 14 games more over the last 2 plus seasons.

No GM in his right mind is chosing the small, soft, goal challenged Marner over the big, goal scorer Rantanen. Just ask Treliving. Some have quite the imagination.