Rumor: Nylander like Matthews unextended. Nothing to see here.

[Niagara Bill]

Willie will not sign for a haircut so the Leafs can just give it to AM, I cannot blame him.
I don't see much of a relationship between Willie and AM, likely some jealousy.

 

[Stephen]

What does that have to do with the contract he signed 4 years ago?

For Marner, 34 seconds of PP time per game is worth about 6 more points a season.

Marner actually produces better on the PP throughout his career (6.97 > 6.27). The reason Rantanen gets more time has absolutely nothing to do with their quality on the PP.

Matthews is one of the best PP goal-scorers in the league.

Over the past 3 years, Marner has produced better at 5v5 (3.09 > 2.41) and similarly on the PP (6.60 vs. 6.84), while also bringing top tier PK impacts and massively better defense.

You gotta come off the Marner vs Rantanen angle man. You’ve been banging this drum for a good number of years and all Rantanen’s done since then is win a Stanley Cup, score 50 goals, score 100 points before Marner, and we’re still isolating for 5 on 5 scoring and PK time? We’re talking check marks on a Hall of Fame resume. Rantanen is out pointing Marner 87 to 47 in career playoffs. Also final note. The Leafs are in no position to poo poo another team that feasts on the PP. If only that special teams came through for us when we needed it.

Final final note, 5 on 5 production doesn’t inherently mean more than PP production. People only like to point to it to suggest room for additional production should PP play time and opportunities increase. It’s used to talk around why so many stars are always out pointing Leafs but if you isolated this and that they’re more similar than you think.

 

[IPS]

For Marner, 34 seconds of PP time per game is worth about 6 more points a season

And this is one of your key arguments for Rantanen being significantly worse than Marner? So you equalize PP time and their production is basically equal?

So we're essentially paying Marner $1.6M more for playing on the PK? Unreal how people still go along with this garbage.

Not what was said. It's like some here just take turns making the most unsubstantiated claims to take shots. Not the action of a fan imo. Was it your turn?

Sure whatever. Doesn't take away the fact that people like you and Dekes have beat the PP TOI angle for so long and when you actually put it into perspective it doesn't actually equal out to much.

The more info that gets put out there the more you realize just how shitty and useless these /60 stats are.

 

[New Liskeard]

Willie will not sign for a haircut so the Leafs can just give it to AM, I cannot blame him.
I don't see much of a relationship between Willie and AM, likely some jealousy.

Yet Reilly will take a haircut so AM/WN/MM can all get larger pieces of the pie? Is this about what the player is foregoing or what their teammates will get. Two completely different concepts

 

[IPS]

You gotta come off the Marner vs Rantanen angle man. You’ve been banging this drum for a good number of years and all Rantanen’s done since then is win a Stanley Cup, score 50 goals, score 100 points before Marner, and we’re still isolating for 5 on 5 scoring and PK time? We’re talking check marks on a Hall of Fame resume. Rantanen is out pointing Marner 87 to 47 in career playoffs. Also final note. The Leafs are in no position to poo poo another team that feasts on the PP. If only that special teams came through for us when we needed it.

Final final note, 5 on 5 production doesn’t inherently mean more than PP production. People only like to point to it to suggest room for additional production should PP play time and opportunities increase. It’s used to talk around why so many stars are always out pointing Leafs but if you isolated this and that they’re more similar than you think.

I already pointed out earlier in the thread: Mitch averaged about a minute less PP time in 18/19 his contract year and when you compared it to his year this year, it resulted in about 5 more points.

Mitch RUNS this PP and is given the full reigns for everything from zone entries to basically QB'ing the PP most of the time.

If Mitch wants to produce more on the PP like Rantanen he just needs to be better at it.

I'd love to bring up playoffs too but the Mitch fanboy crowd is absolutely adamant that playoffs don't count for some bizarre reason.

 

[Stephen]

I already pointed out earlier in the thread: Mitch averaged about a minute less PP time in 18/19 his contract year and when you compared it to his year this year, it resulted in about 5 more points.

Mitch RUNS this PP and is given the full reigns for everything from zone entries to basically QB'ing the PP most of the time.

If Mitch wants to produce more on the PP like Rantanen he just needs to be better at it.

No one needs to post rationalize the Marner contract negotiations. We’ve covered every angle over the years and despite well entrenched beliefs many of Marner’s cheaper comparables have gone on to have excellent careers, superior careers in some cases.

Marner’s contract was an obvious overpay based on a Leaf salary structure and not league precedent, made by a guy who is now running another organization.

Like the guy with the glasses says. Onwards.

 

[Niagara Bill]

Yet Reilly will take a haircut so AM/WN/MM can all get larger pieces of the pie? Is this about what the player is foregoing or what their teammates will get. Two completely different concepts

In Willie case he believes he needs more, but will not give it up for AM or MM, IMHO.
WN is not a team first guy, Reilly is.
AM has taken control of our cap with his no trade clause. AM can get what ever he wants now, either from the Leafs or someone else next July.
I can see WN's point.

 

[Punch Drunk Loov]

In the playoffs, Marner has outplayed the opposing team's top line for 5 straight years, and has outscored them for 3 straight years.

Just going off the top of my head, but I'm having a hard time imaging how Mitch has outplayed the other teams top players when we're always losing series? Are you basing this off of raw production? Yes Mitch picks up a lot of points but has he outplayed:
-Ovie/Backstrom
-Bergeron/Marchand
-Pasta/Bergeron
-Dubois
-Caulfield/whomever
-Point/Stamkos
-Tkachuk

I have a very hard time understanding how Marner has been better than these players in the series we've all watched

 

[Notsince67]

And this is one of your key arguments for Rantanen being significantly worse than Marner? So you equalize PP time and their production is basically equal?

So we're essentially paying Marner $1.6M more for playing on the PK? Unreal how people still go along with this garbage.


Sure whatever. Doesn't take away the fact that people like you and Dekes have beat the PP TOI angle for so long and when you actually put it into perspective it doesn't actually equal out to much.

The more info that gets put out there the more you realize just how shitty and useless these /60 stats are.

Wrong
In the 2 years leading up to their contracts, Rantanen had a PP TOI of 612.9 compared to Marner at 402.9
Applying Mitch's p/60 on the PP
year 1 at MR minutes....18 more points
year 2 at MK minutes...8 more points.

To put in perspective...year 1 Marner had a 68 pt season and year 2... a 93 pt season vs MK at 84 and 87 respectively.

 

[Stephen]

Just going off the top of my head, but I'm having a hard time imaging how Mitch has outplayed the other teams top players when we're always losing series? Are you basing this off of raw production? Yes Mitch picks up a lot of points but has he outplayed:
-Ovie/Backstrom
-Bergeron/Marchand
-Pasta/Bergeron
-Dubois
-Caulfield/whomever
-Point/Stamkos
-Tkachuk

I have a very hard time understanding how Marner has been better than these players in the series we've all watched

If you were an opposition team going into a series vs Mitch Marner… would you really be that worried or just roll out the combo of clogging up the slot, with liberal physical play and auto pilot to victory? He certainly won’t make your life too difficult.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Marner is what, 25, 26 years old? Writing him off at this point is simply laughable. It's a joke. Any team, if they could afford his salary cap, would love to have Marner.

Nice strawman. Nobody's "writing him off", the question whether or not he's worth his cap hit. He's only got a couple of prime years left though before he starts to decline so he better get going soon.

 

[Tufted Titmouse]

If you were an opposition team going into a series vs Mitch Marner… would you really be that worried or just roll out the combo of clogging up the slot, with liberal physical play and auto pilot to victory? He certainly won’t make your life too difficult.

I get what you are saying, but I think this could be very different with Knies and Matthews on the line.

Much harder to clog the slot when you have 2 giant dudes who can skate and have skill on the line with Mitch. Bunting to Knies or Bert will be a pretty huge boost for Mitch.

He needs to be put in that Kucherov/Kane spot where he has a couple of dogged mules on his line who are a handful to handle, opening up ice for him.

Lost in all of this is how adding some skill to our D will also open up a lot of ice for a player like Mitch. Pretty easy to defend him when no cavalry is coming behind him to open up ice.

 

[Dekes For Days]

You gotta come off the Marner vs Rantanen angle man. You’ve been banging this drum for a good number of years and all Rantanen’s done since then is win a Stanley Cup, score 50 goals, score 100 points before Marner, and we’re still isolating for 5 on 5 scoring and PK time? We’re talking check marks on a Hall of Fame resume.

You're the one pushing this Marner vs. Rantanen angle. If it were up to me, we'd just be enjoying the Hall of Fame player on our team, not trying to exaggerate the quality and impact of a worse player on another team. If we're going to discuss players, we should discuss them accurately.

Rantanen is out pointing Marner 87 to 47 in career playoffs.

Yes, Colorado has played more playoff games, and experienced massively easier situations to produce; not to mention the fact that Rantanen doesn't concern himself much with defensive play. That doesn't make Rantanen a better player, and it doesn't mean that we can ignore the way bigger and way more representative sample, or the context behind that playoff production.

Also final note. The Leafs are in no position to poo poo another team that feasts on the PP.

Nobody is "poo pooing" a team that is good on the PP. People are correctly acknowledging that a team getting more PP time does not make a player better.

Final final note, 5 on 5 production doesn’t inherently mean more than PP production.

I mean, the ability to produce 5v5 is most valuable, as it's the most common game state by far, and not dependent on external influences, but that's not even what's being argued.
Because of how abundant scoring is on the PP relative to other game states, opportunity differences in that game state that have nothing to do with the player can have significant impacts on end raw production, and so people that look exclusively at end raw production with zero context or other considerations to draw their conclusions often come to incorrect conclusions about the actual quality and impact of a player.

And unfortunately over the past half decade, those incorrect conclusions have then been combined with a misunderstanding of how contract valuation works in the NHL, and it's led to a lot of toxicity in our fanbase, and pressure on our franchise to make the same kind of stupid decisions that kept us from winning a cup for half a century.

 

[andora]

I get what you are saying, but I think this could be very different with Knies and Matthews on the line.

Much harder to clog the slot when you have 2 giant dudes who can skate and have skill on the line with Mitch. Bunting to Knies or Bert will be a pretty huge boost for Mitch.

He needs to be put in that Kucherov/Kane spot where he has a couple of dogged mules on his line who are a handful to handle, opening up ice for him.

Lost in all of this is how adding some skill to our D will also open up a lot of ice for a player like Mitch. Pretty easy to defend him when no cavalry is coming behind him to open up ice.

Well with adding klingberg mitchy better get that selke calibre defence in high gear

With the concept of giveaways i cant wait to see what new creative ways we cough up the puck near the blueline if they are on the ice together

 

[Punch Drunk Loov]

If you were an opposition team going into a series vs Mitch Marner… would you really be that worried or just roll out the combo of clogging up the slot, with liberal physical play and auto pilot to victory? He certainly won’t make your life too difficult.

Yeah, without looking it up I wouldn't be shocked if Marner had the same or more points than Tkachuk in the Florida series.

I don't really care it's obvious that Tkachuk dummied us.

 

[LeafSteel]

You gotta come off the Marner vs Rantanen angle man. You’ve been banging this drum for a good number of years and all Rantanen’s done since then is win a Stanley Cup, score 50 goals, score 100 points before Marner, and we’re still isolating for 5 on 5 scoring and PK time? We’re talking check marks on a Hall of Fame resume. Rantanen is out pointing Marner 87 to 47 in career playoffs. Also final note. The Leafs are in no position to poo poo another team that feasts on the PP. If only that special teams came through for us when we needed it.

Final final note, 5 on 5 production doesn’t inherently mean more than PP production. People only like to point to it to suggest room for additional production should PP play time and opportunities increase. It’s used to talk around why so many stars are always out pointing Leafs but if you isolated this and that they’re more similar than you think.

<DROPS MIC>​

 

[Notsince67]

Well with adding klingberg mitchy better get that selke calibre defence in high gear

With the concept of giveaways i cant wait to see what new creative ways we cough up the puck near the blueline if they are on the ice together

Klingberg doesn't really need any help from Mitch to give away the puck unfortunately. Better if he just blows the zone

 

[andora]

Klingberg doesn't really need any help from Mitch to give away the puck unfortunately. Better if he just blows the zone

I meant the opposition blueline

Unless you meant marner blows the o-zone to be back already

 

[Dekes For Days]

And this is one of your key arguments for Rantanen being significantly worse than Marner?

Well, first off, you're taking a comment about them 5 and 7 years ago and trying to apply it to now for some reason.
But also no, I was just answering your question about the impact of PP time discrepancies on production for a player like this.

So you equalize PP time and their production is basically equal?

No. Over the past 3 years, at the rate Marner produces on the PP, he'd add about 18 points if he had Rantanen's PP time, which would put Marner at a 1.36 P/GP relative to Rantanen's 1.26, before even getting to other considerations.

Over their ELCs, which is what this discussion spawned out of, it would have added in the range of 28 points, which would have put Marner at 1.05 relative to Rantanen's 0.87.

 

[geo25]

In Willie case he believes he needs more, but will not give it up for AM or MM, IMHO.
WN is not a team first guy, Reilly is.
AM has taken control of our cap with his no trade clause. AM can get what ever he wants now, either from the Leafs or someone else next July.
I can see WN's point.

We missed out of the opportunity...
I will only believe AM remains a Leaf once he actually signs. Am sick of these ME first players...

 

[Throw More Waffles]

You gotta come off the Marner vs Rantanen angle man. You’ve been banging this drum for a good number of years and all Rantanen’s done since then is win a Stanley Cup, score 50 goals, score 100 points before Marner, and we’re still isolating for 5 on 5 scoring and PK time? We’re talking check marks on a Hall of Fame resume. Rantanen is out pointing Marner 87 to 47 in career playoffs. Also final note. The Leafs are in no position to poo poo another team that feasts on the PP. If only that special teams came through for us when we needed it.

Final final note, 5 on 5 production doesn’t inherently mean more than PP production. People only like to point to it to suggest room for additional production should PP play time and opportunities increase. It’s used to talk around why so many stars are always out pointing Leafs but if you isolated this and that they’re more similar than you think.

Notice this would never EVER happen in reverse.

Could you ever in your wildest dreams see Dekes taking a 70 point player on an opposing team and using a ton of mental gymnastics and stat mined insanity to claim they are better than a 90 point leaf player?

That would NEVER happen. The goals/points speak for themselves whenever we look at such examples in reverse.

And it shows just how strong the bias and agenda is with that group.

 

[DarkKnight]

Why is this thread 90 percent Marner lol.

 

[Stephen]

You're the one pushing this Marner vs. Rantanen angle. If it were up to me, we'd just be enjoying the Hall of Fame player on our team, not trying to exaggerate the quality and impact of a worse player on another team. If we're going to discuss players, we should discuss them accurately.

Yes, Colorado has played more playoff games, and experienced massively easier situations to produce; not to mention the fact that Rantanen doesn't concern himself much with defensive play. That doesn't make Rantanen a better player, and it doesn't mean that we can ignore the way bigger and way more representative sample, or the context behind that playoff production.

Nobody is "poo pooing" a team that is good on the PP. People are correctly acknowledging that a team getting more PP time does not make a player better.

I mean, the ability to produce 5v5 is most valuable, as it's the most common game state by far, and not dependent on external influences, but that's not even what's being argued.
Because of how abundant scoring is on the PP relative to other game states, opportunity differences in that game state that have nothing to do with the player can have significant impacts on end raw production, and so people that look exclusively at end raw production with zero context or other considerations to draw their conclusions often come to incorrect conclusions about the actual quality and impact of a player.

And unfortunately over the past half decade, those incorrect conclusions have then been combined with a misunderstanding of how contract valuation works in the NHL, and it's led to a lot of toxicity in our fanbase, and pressure on our franchise to make the same kind of stupid decisions that kept us from winning a cup for half a century.

You can choose to see the game, contracts, cap management, special teams, production, rank various players, and form whatever opinions any way you like.

Where you seem to consistently lose the room on those items above is you spent quite a bit of time and energy post-rationalizing what the Leafs did as the most correct course of action, couldn’t have done it another way, the Leaf player is the better player, etc. like there is no option for an alternate solution. Everything we have is the best.

Then you sum up everything and the result is we don’t have championship results… because the fanbase is toxic. Such a strange conclusion to come to after spending so much time and energy defending everything the franchise does.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

Why is it surprising that someone's playoff stats are worse? Literally the worst 16 teams in the league aren't involved. It's an entirely different ball game. If you look at most players, their playoffs stats are worse than their regular season stats. Why is this surprising?

Here's a few players, comparing their regular season PPG vs playoffs PPG:

Gretzky: 1.92 reg, 1.84 post (0.08 drop)
Lemieux: 1.88 reg, 1.61 post (0.27 drop)
Yzerman: 1.16 reg, 0.94 post (0.20 drop)
Sakic: 1.19 reg, 1.09 post (0.10 drop)
Crosby: 1.26 reg, 1.12 post (0.14 drop)

Tkachuk: 0.96 reg, 0.83 post (0.13 drop)
Marner: 1.09 reg, 0.94 post (0.15 drop)

Expecting a player to put up the same production, on average, in the playoffs is not warranted. A player may get hot in a particular post season and beat his career regular season PPG - and that's usually a year where you have a good chance to win it all. But overall, don't expect a player to put up as many points in the playoffs. It simply doesn't work out that way.

Marner is what, 25, 26 years old? Writing him off at this point is simply laughable. It's a joke. Any team, if they could afford his salary cap, would love to have Marner.

The point is that "comparable players" in the regular season (that our stars all get paid way more than) have significantly better playoff stats.

Look at the playoff gpg and ppg of McDavid, Drai, MacKinnon, Rantanen, Pastrnak, etc. and compare them to the core 4.

Have a barf bucket ready, or else you'll likely vomit all over yourself.

 

[Dekes For Days]

You can choose to see the game, contracts, cap management, special teams, production, rank various players, and form whatever opinions any way you like.

Where you seem to consistently lose the room on those items above is you spent quite a bit of time and energy post-rationalizing what the Leafs did as the most correct course of action, couldn’t have done it another way, the Leaf player is the better player, etc. like there is no option for an alternate solution. Everything we have is the best.

Then you sum up everything and the result is we don’t have championship results… because the fanbase is toxic. Such a strange conclusion to come to after spending so much time and energy defending everything the franchise does.

Yeah, you can choose to see things any way you like - it's a free country - but don't be surprised when people on a message board are trying to discuss things the way they factually are, with receipts. Nothing you said about me here is accurate, and I'm not sure why you're spending all of this time and energy trying to mislabel and misrepresent me, instead of spending that time and energy addressing the discussion that you seemed all too happy to enter into until the facts disproved your claim.

No, I don't think the Leafs always take the correct course of action. No, I don't think that what we do is the only way things can be done and there are no alternate solutions. No, I don't think that the Leafs player is always better, or that everything we have is the best. But, unlike many on this board, I also don't think the Leafs always take the wrong course of action. I don't think the alternate solution is always the better one. I don't think that our players are always worse than opposing players, and everything we have is the worst. But apparently, following the facts and taking a more balanced and nuanced approach than dumping on everything Leaf-related means that somebody "defends everything the franchise does".

If we make a good move, I will say it and explain why.
If we make a bad move, I will say it and explain why.
If our team is better than another team, I will say it and explain why.
If our team is worse than another team, I will say it and explain why.
If our player is better than another player, I will say it and explain why.
If our player is worse than another player, I will say it and explain why.
Etc.

That is how everybody should operate. It's not outrageous to want to discuss things accurately and honestly.

I'm not sure how you got "we don't have championship results because the fanbase is toxic" from anything I said.
Toxicity in our market certainly doesn't help (I mean, ROR is just the latest example of not wanting to deal with it), but what I was actually referencing was the decades this franchise wasted making bad, impatient, short-sighted decisions. Throwing away some of the best players this franchise has ever seen over squabbles about how much we get to underpay them relative to their impact would be very reminiscent of that.