Mitch Marner, Yet Again

[thewave]

Marner has 70 assists. Matthews has 71 points.

I think he'll be ok.

1 year! Matthews and Knies do all the work while he plays quick pass McGraw in his scaredy cat high ass position

 

[IPS]

Rantanen has 6 goals in 28 games since leaving MacKinnon's wing. That translates to less goals than Marner over an 82 game season AND he's not even PPG.

I assume this is the part where sample size immediately turns irrelevant?

 

[Smif]

1 year! Matthews and Knies do all the work while he plays quick pass McGraw in his scaredy cat high ass position

Repitition is not a sign of intelligence, fyi.

 

[Smif]

I assume this is the part where sample size immediately turns irrelevant?

I would probably wait to see more games without MacKinnon myself before declaring him better than Marner. I didn't make the claim.

If his stats without MacKinnon don't raise an eyebrow I'm not sure what would.

 

[leafs in five]

I won't copy and paste the whole conversation because it's a very long and extensive one ( the deep research function adds a whole lot of depth too).

 

[leafs in five]

What if Marner leaves and has half the assists without Matthews as C. Wouldn't that be hilarious?

MAybe? Maybe it would be hilarious. If the thing that happened with r1 deep research confirmed superior player in Rantanen happened with Marner as well.

 

[mclaren55]

Rantanen has 6 goals in 28 games since leaving MacKinnon's wing. That translates to less goals than Marner over an 82 game season AND he's not even PPG.

He is almost a PPG (14 in 15 games) since going to Dallas while playing 3 minutes less per game on average. He's fine considering he has been shifted to his third team this season. He is still sitting at over a PPG in totality for the year. I predict he is going to do just fine this playoffs as well.

People saying he is a product of MacKinnon, yet credit Marner as being a line driver despite him playing with two 40+ goal centres his (almost) entire career is peak comedy.

You can argue other aspects (defensive acumen), but points/goals wise let's not get ahead of ourselves.

 

[hullsy47]

MAybe? Maybe it would be hilarious. If the thing that happened with r1 deep research confirmed superior player in Rantanen happened with Marner as well.

If there is a chance mcdavid walks
Ted rogers will bring him home
He likes his stars

 

[Dekes For Days]

80-67 pre contract. Thats the full picture.

Cherry picking goal totals is not even close to the full picture.

 

[thewave]

With all the craze about AI and how fascinated people are about using it for hockey analysis I prompted chatGPT as accurately as I could to get objective comparisons on Pastrnak, Rantanen, and Marner.

I won't copy and paste the whole conversation because it's a very long and extensive one ( the deep research function adds a whole lot of depth too) But essentially what it said - when you have the foundational pieces in place (goalie, strong centers, defensemen, all defensively responsible) the most efficient thing you can add to your lineup is an elite goal-scoring winger. With the Pastrnak vs Marner comparison, it seems ChatGPT favoured adding Pastrnak to a complete team far more than Marner.

It probably would have added Nylander over Marner as well

 

[Dekes For Days]

Best players play centre, get paid more, because it is a higher impact position, I'm glad we can agree.

No. Center offers a player slightly more opportunity to bring impact, and this is one of the reasons that many of the best players gravitate towards the position, but compensation relative to the impact they end up at is the same. Better players get paid more, but they are getting paid for their impact, not their position. Wingers are capable of being just as impactful, and they get compensated appropriately when they are.

I'm guessing you've never used ChatGPT Pro Deep Research before, or I doubt you would be criticizing it like it's some free access tool AI.

Using AI should make you less confident in relying on AI for stuff like this.

Either way, I factored in dual positions to default to winger assignment, which would skew the numbers more in favour of wingers vs. centres.

That just means the samples aren't accurate. And the bigger issue than dual is that a lot are just outright listed incorrectly.

Centres are paid more because they do impact the game more, they have to be more responsible defensively, have to take face-offs, and are, as you've admitted, "best potential for impact" on their line due to the positional advantage. You contradict yourself in your own argument.

It's not contradictory. The opportunity a position provides is different from the impact a player brings, and the impact is what is important. Marner manages to distribute from the wing better than most of the top centers, and he is better defensively than most of the top centers. Centers do impact faceoffs more than wingers, but there's very limited impact to faceoffs in the first place.

Marner does not impact the game equally to McDavid, Matthews, MacKinnon.

That's a strawman. That's not the argument, and he doesn't need to to get more than you're suggesting in this new cap environment. Their contracts are the equivalent of 14.5m to 16m (after an offer of almost 17m), and both McDavid and MacKinnon have improved since signing.

 

[mclaren55]

No. Center offers a player slightly more opportunity to bring impact, and this is one of the reasons that many of the best players gravitate towards the position, but compensation relative to the impact they end up at is the same. Better players get paid more, but they are getting paid for their impact, not their position. Wingers are capable of being just as impactful, and they get compensated appropriately when they are.

Using AI should make you less confident in relying on AI for stuff like this.

That just means the samples aren't accurate. And the bigger issue than dual is that a lot are just outright listed incorrectly.

It's not contradictory. The opportunity a position provides is different from the impact a player brings, and the impact is what is important. Marner manages to distribute from the wing better than most of the top centers, and he is better defensively than most of the top centers. Centers do impact faceoffs more than wingers, but there's very limited impact to faceoffs in the first place.

That's a strawman. That's not the argument, and he doesn't need to to get more than you're suggesting in this new cap environment. Their contracts are the equivalent of 14.5m to 16m (after an offer of almost 17m), and both McDavid and MacKinnon have improved since signing.

So once again you’re just providing lip service with zero data or factual information to back it up.

I’m going to bow out of this now as you just keep repeating your feelings about impact instead of providing any supporting evidence.

It’s not a strawman, you are saying he impacts the game as much as top centers do. I’m arguing he doesn’t, and listed arguably the top centers. Good talk Dekes, always enjoy debating you.

In regards to AI, I use it for a lot more important stuff than NHL related debates. Usually fibonacci retracements, probability outcomes, advanced strangle setups, etc. It proves very reliable in those aspects, I'm sure it can crunch some salary data from the NHL.

 

[Jojalu]

I'm a big Marner critic, especially when it comes to his physicality, but this is nice to see...I must admit.

It's very pleasant to see bot Marner and Matthews involved.

When was the last time Matthews pushed back at someone?

Marner has been 3rd man in a few times this year.

 

[IPS]

I'm guessing you've never used ChatGPT Pro Deep Research before, or I doubt you would be criticizing it like it's some free access tool AI. I'm betting most peoples PCs can't even run it efficiently. Either way, I factored in dual positions to default to winger assignment, which would skew the numbers more in favour of wingers vs. centres.

Yeah it's a crazy thing. Even if you don't agree with the conclusions it's giving, the way it can retrieve and process data is extremely convenient.

 

[Gary Nylund]

It's very pleasant to see bot Marner and Matthews involved.

Marner's a bot? I have to say, that would explain a thing or two.

When was the last time Matthews pushed back at someone?

Marner has been 3rd man in a few times this year.

I once even saw him as 6th man in, he's scary!

 

[Jojalu]

Marner's a bot? I have to say, that would explain a thing or two.

I once even saw him as 6th man in, he's scary!

Lol.

I will take him learning to get involved the odd time. Now I want to see him get angry at anyone on the other team.

 

[TMLBlueandWhite]

Many leaf fans enjoy watching him play. U don't speak for all of us.

I never said I did.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Lol.

I will take him learning to get involved the odd time. Now I want to see him get angry at anyone on the other team.

I don't care about him being angry, I'd settle for quiet control and effectiveness and him not turning into a pumpkin after game 86.

 

[Smif]

He is almost a PPG (14 in 15 games) since going to Dallas while playing 3 minutes less per game on average. He's fine considering he has been shifted to his third team this season. He is still sitting at over a PPG in totality for the year. I predict he is going to do just fine this playoffs as well.

People saying he is a product of MacKinnon, yet credit Marner as being a line driver despite him playing with two 40+ goal centres his (almost) entire career is peak comedy.

You can argue other aspects (defensive acumen), but points/goals wise let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Not a line driver...

90+ points in a season (past 30 years)

Marner - 4
Matthews - 2
Nylander - 1
Sundin - 1

No big deal. We'll be better off without him for sure.

 

[Dekes For Days]

So once again you’re just providing lip service with zero data or factual information to back it up.

You're the one making the unsupported claim that centers are getting overcompensated relative to their impact, and the only thing you've brought is data you had AI spit out, that is not only built on incorrect positional inputs, but is completely unrelated to the claim in the first place. At least in terms of mid to high end post-ELC and UFA contracts throughout the cap era, there was no significant difference in compensation relative to recent production levels prior to signing, and it would be pretty illogical to attribute any difference that did exist to some imaginary positional boost rather than centers, on average, being better defensively.

It’s not a strawman, you are saying he impacts the game as much as top centers do. I’m arguing he doesn’t, and listed arguably the top centers.

I said most top centers. Not every single top center. No, he doesn't impact the game as much as McDavid, but unless you think Marner is going to get 14.5m-17m+, the select few centers you picked out aren't all that relevant.

In regards to AI, I use it for a lot more important stuff than NHL related debates.

The effectiveness and accuracy of AI is not determined by the importance of the thing it is being used for. You seem to have gained an overconfidence in it, even for things that it doesn't have accurate inputs for, and even when you're not asking it the right question in the first place.

 

[IPS]

You're the one making the unsupported claim that centers are getting overcompensated relative to their impact, and the only thing you've brought is data you had AI spit out, that is not only built on incorrect positional inputs, but is completely unrelated to the claim in the first place. At least in terms of mid to high end post-ELC and UFA contracts throughout the cap era, there was no significant difference in compensation relative to recent production levels prior to signing, and it would be pretty illogical to attribute any difference that did exist to some imaginary positional boost rather than centers, on average, being better defensively.

I said most top centers. Not every single top center. No, he doesn't impact the game as much as McDavid, but unless you think Marner is going to get 14.5m-17m+, the select few centers you picked out aren't all that relevant.

The effectiveness and accuracy of AI is not determined by the importance of the thing it is being used for. You seem to have gained an overconfidence in it, even for things that it doesn't have accurate inputs for, and even when you're not asking it the right question in the first place.

Your feelings about something isn't evidence - just FYI.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Your feelings about something isn't evidence - just FYI.

Never said it was, but that's good advice for you to remember.

 

[IPS]

Never said it was, but that's good advice for you to remember.

Well we're all interested to see your grand response how top wingers can effect the game like top centers Been common knowledge pretty much since day 1 that centers always inherently have more value due to position. If once again you're gonna claim you're smarter than the entire hockey world - show an argument then. 2 novels of fluff is all you've responded to McLaren55 with.

 

[mclaren55]

You're the one making the unsupported claim that centers are getting overcompensated relative to their impact, and the only thing you've brought is data you had AI spit out, that is not only built on incorrect positional inputs, but is completely unrelated to the claim in the first place. At least in terms of mid to high end post-ELC and UFA contracts throughout the cap era, there was no significant difference in compensation relative to recent production levels prior to signing, and it would be pretty illogical to attribute any difference that did exist to some imaginary positional boost rather than centers, on average, being better defensively.

I said most top centers. Not every single top center. No, he doesn't impact the game as much as McDavid, but unless you think Marner is going to get 14.5m-17m+, the select few centers you picked out aren't all that relevant.

The effectiveness and accuracy of AI is not determined by the importance of the thing it is being used for. You seem to have gained an overconfidence in it, even for things that it doesn't have accurate inputs for, and even when you're not asking it the right question in the first place.

I never said they were "overcompensated", I said they were compensated at a higher rate vs. wingers. Which when you look at all of the data, is true.

So what "top" centres are you referring to Dekes? Where is the cutoff for "top"? You once again haven't said anything that is factual, you're just spewing your perspective.

It is determined by the prompts and data access. Given that most of the NHL data I prompted it to acquire is readily available, it should "spew" out a fairly accurate picture of the salary landscape in the NHL as relative to position. How have I seemed to have "gained an overconfidence" in it? I use it to quickly do calculations on the fly for my work, which I spontaneously backcheck through manual calculation. Seems you have a lot of assumptions on my use of AI.

Just throw up examples and data of what you're claiming, it's that easy. You know I capitulate when a good argument is made, I have no problem in admitting error. You have yet to prove anything. You're just trying to misdirect.

 

[Mess]

Not a line driver...

90+ points in a season (past 30 years)

Marner - 4
Matthews - 2
Nylander - 1
Sundin - 1

No big deal. We'll be better off without him for sure.

As long as Marner's teammates keep scoring vital goals that help Leafs win games, Marner can keep padding his assist and thus point totals.

Willy has 3 straight 40 or more goal season, Matthews won the Rocket 2 X as league's top goal scorer and Marner lives off their goal scoring success padding his personal stats.

No Goal = No Assist

Relative Scoring Values Adjusted

Since there is only 1 goal on every scoring play, but potentially 2 assists awarded perhaps a goal should be worth 1 point and an assist = .5 point each.

Marner's 24 goal 70 assists 94 point season adjusted point total = 24+35= 59 points when Goals 2 X > Assists in value.

Nylander's 44 goal and 38 assists 82 point season adjusted point total = 44+ 19 = 63 points,
[Previous season Willy had 40 goals 58 assists 98 points = 40+29 = 69 points]

Do you think Leafs have won more games on Willy's +20 more actual goals or Marner's +12 more points?
[If you answered, of course the Leafs have won more games this year as a result of Willy's goals you would be correct. ]

PS. That holds true for the entire Core 4 in fact as GOALS win games and Goals >> Personal Player Points. The object of each game is to WIN and not pile up pretty Player Points, which often gets lost in the big picture as to why you play the games in the first place..

PPS. Last year Kucherov lead the NHL with 44 goals 100 assists 144 points adjusted = 44+50 = 94 point season. That is what feels like a TRUE 90+ point season in value and impact on the results of an NHL game.