Toronto has scored 11PPGs since Marner injury

[Racer88]

What has Marner done on the PP the last few year…….not much.
Sport as well as most things in life distill down to “what have you done lately”

 

[HamiltonNHL]

What has Marner done on the PP the last few year…….not much.

He’s done poorly on the PP.
Someone else deserves a shot

Nylander is a PP1 player for sure

 

[Racer88]

He’s done poorly on the PP.
Someone else deserves a shot

Nylander is a PP1 player for sure

Agreed 100%

 

[zeke]

You seem to have missed the point of those splits. You were attempting to use the primary production of Marner relative to secondary players to downplay Marner's PP effectiveness, despite the fact that Marner still has good PP and primary PP production, and everything points to Marner being the primary reason for those secondary players having primary production significantly higher than their normal during those samples here in the first place.

As for the small samples we have to compare a Matthews-Tavares-Nylander-Rielly-Spezza unit with a Matthews-Tavares-Nylander-Rielly-Marner unit since 2019, we see that the unit with Spezza generates less shots, less scoring chances, less high danger chances, and a lower expected goals, while being leaky defensively, but has generated a higher goals per 60 over a tiny sample a result of a wildly unsustainable shooting percentage.

I'm open to riding hot streaks, or considering different roles and make-ups, but all data supports Marner being an excellent PP player, and I'm going to need to see more than some cherry picked recency bias to permanently move one of the better PP players in the league and our best playmaker off a top PP unit with the league's best goal scorer.

All due respect but I think you missed the point of the splits I posted. And they also certainly weren't cherry picked or recency biased.

Even if we look at the last 3yrs in the post-Kadri/JVR era we can see there that Marner has worryingly been the lowest p/60 on the top unit....and looks even worse by p1/60. That might be something to be concerned about, especially given how big a role we give him on the PP.

You seem to be relying on the small samples of specific 5-man units but I'm not looking at those.

And we already discussed earlier in the thread how xgf on the PP in particular may struggle to differentiate between very good chances and super duper great chances - I.e. if they don't worry about Mitch's shot, then even a pass to Tavares in the crease is easier for the goalie to save, and xgf will count that as more dangerous than a shot from mitch's location. At evens this is less of a problem but on highly structured special teams this difference might become more glaring. Or it might just be simpler to say that Mitch is much more predictable on the PP than at EV.

I'm just not sure that we can dismiss that the goalies seem suddenly more out of position now on a PP dominated by more shooters since Mitch went out.

And remember - I'm a guy who thinks Mitch should absolutely be part of our top unit - I just have some misgivings about the rut he seems to have fallen into on the PP. It's why I was so excited about his bumper play in preseason - suddenly the PP looked active and unpredictable again.

And as for Spezza - he's been making the 2nd unit productive all by himself the past few years and his skill and vision is undeniable. IMO it would be no surprise if he continued being part of a dominant top PP unit.

 

[ACC1224]

What has Marner done on the PP the last few year…….not much.
Sport as well as most things in life distill down to “what have you done lately”

Maybe someone can list the Leafs PP points over the last few years for reference.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Even if we look at the last 3yrs in the post-Kadri/JVR era we can see there that Marner has worryingly been the lowest p/60 on the top unit.

That's not even true. Marner is 2nd in PP P/60 since the 2019-2020 season, behind only Matthews.
NHL Stats

You seem to be relying on the small samples of specific 5-man units but I'm not looking at those.

I'm not relying on them. I've noted how Marner is among the league leaders in PP production since he stepped foot in the league. I posted the unit splits because you're suggesting that a different combination without Marner would be better, but when we look at how that unit has performed in their small sample together, nothing in the data supports that. It's a mirage caused by things that won't sustain.

And we already discussed earlier in the thread how xgf on the PP in particular may struggle to differentiate between very good chances and super duper great chances

Except you don't actually have any evidence of this random speculation regarding "super duper chances". And it's not just xGF, as I noted.

I'm just not sure that we can dismiss that the goalies seem suddenly more out of position now on a PP dominated by more shooters since Mitch went out.

And I'm not sure that we can dismiss what Marner brings to the PP because Matthews got hot and we got some bounces against some pretty mediocre PK teams over a couple week period, resulting in a wildly unsustainable shooting percentage.

And remember - I'm a guy who thinks Mitch should absolutely be part of our top unit

Then I'm not sure why you replied to me in the first place.

It's why I was so excited about his bumper play in preseason - suddenly the PP looked active and unpredictable again.

I think it's pretty ridiculous to blame the stagnation our PP went through for a period on just Marner. Our PP has looked active and unpredictable countless times with Marner there, including the month prior to Marner's injury where we had a 30% PP.

And as for Spezza - he's been making the 2nd unit productive all by himself the past few years and his skill and vision is undeniable.

I never denied that Spezza is a very good PP player. He has been for pretty much his whole career. But like you said - he's been making the 2nd unit productive, so why do we want to change that, and simultaenously separate our best playmaker and goal scorer on the PP?

 

[darrylsittler27]

I think the Leafs have played just fine since Marner got injured.

 

[Doublerum1975]

I think the Leafs have played just fine since Marner got injured.

The pk has been bad really miss him one of the greatest at two way forwards in hockey

 

[zeke]

That's not even true. Marner is 2nd in PP P/60 since the 2019-2020 season, behind only Matthews.
NHL Stats

Minimum 100min:

5th in p/60, and much more 2nd-assist heavy than the others.

I'm not relying on them. I've noted how Marner is among the league leaders in PP production since he stepped foot in the league. I posted the unit splits because you're suggesting that a different combination without Marner would be better, but when we look at how that unit has performed in their small sample together, nothing in the data supports that. It's a mirage caused by things that won't sustain.

Trying to use complete 5 man unit splits is unecessarily limiting yourself to tiny sample sizes.

Except you don't actually have any evidence of this random speculation regarding "super duper chances". And it's not just xGF, as I noted.

Well, you can act like xgf is perfect or we can discuss other possibilities.

And I'm not sure that we can dismiss what Marner brings to the PP because Matthews got hot and we got some bounces against some pretty mediocre PK teams over a couple week period, resulting in a wildly unsustainable shooting percentage.

That's not the only thing mentioned. The above stats are based on more than just the past couple weeks, and let's be honest- Mitch's lack of PP goals is pretty astonishing and worrying.

Then I'm not sure why you replied to me in the first place.

I thought there were flaws in your argument.

I think it's pretty ridiculous to blame the stagnation our PP went through for a period on just Marner. Our PP has looked active and unpredictable countless times with Marner there, including the month prior to Marner's injury where we had a 30% PP.

And I think it's a theory worth testing. Especially since the PP has been so useless in the playoffs when we need it most.

I never denied that Spezza is a very good PP player. He has been for pretty much his whole career. But like you said - he's been making the 2nd unit productive, so why do we want to change that, and simultaenously separate our best playmaker and goal scorer on the PP?

Anything that might help the team is worth testing imo.

This is not something new - Marner's PP goal drought is tough to look at, and the PP has been useless come playoffs. There are eye test and stats reasons for maybe looking closer at his role on the PP.[/QUOTE]

 

[therealkoho]

The bottom line is the PP has been better since Marner has been injured and no amount of twisting or spin can show otherwise

no one is twisting or spinning

but if you're up 10PP G's

down 11 5v5 G's and have allowed 3 extra PK G's

does it really matter that the PP is better, you're still -4 without him?

 

[Dekes For Days]

5th in p/60

You're wrong. I provided the link from NHL.com itself. He's 2nd.
NHL Stats

Trying to use complete 5 man unit splits is unecessarily limiting yourself to tiny sample sizes.

This whole thread and discussion started in the first place by overemphasizing the small sample size of the past couple weeks, without considering the underlying data. If you're going to make claims about units that aren't supported by the data, expect that to be pointed out.

Well, you can act like xgf is perfect or we can discuss other possibilities.

I didn't say xGF is perfect, but it's a valuable and proven metric, and one that you use quite a bit. Now suddenly you want to completely abandon it, based on random speculation about "super duper chances" that you've provided no evidence for. And again, as I noted, it's a lot more than just xGF.

let's be honest- Mitch's lack of PP goals is pretty astonishing and worrying.

It's not nearly as astonishing or worrying as people make it out to be.

I thought there were flaws in your argument.

What exactly in my original post that you responded to do you disagree with? Because so far, you haven't actually addressed anything I said in that post.

Anything that might help the team is worth testing imo.

I never disagreed with riding hot streaks or testing out different combinations, but there's nothing to suggest that moving Marner off the top unit would be beneficial to the team in the long term.

the PP has been useless come playoffs.

Our 5v5 scoring has dropped more than our PP scoring (without even including the 6v5 goals we've gotten in the playoffs, that are similar to the being on the PP), so I'm not sure how you're concluding that our PP has been the problem, or that taking our best playmaker and 2nd best player off of it is the solution.

 

[Racer88]

Maybe someone can list the Leafs PP points over the last few years for reference.

That would be awesome.

 

[ACC1224]

That would be awesome.

Thought you'd have that handy. What criteria did you use to determine his contribution is/was 'not much'?

 

[Racer88]

Thought you'd have that handy. What criteria did you use to determine his contribution is/was 'not much'?

The eye test of course and the fact that the PP has been better since he has been injured and his record as far as contributing goals on the PP the last year and a half has been awful for an almost 11 million dollar player.
I don’t think there can be any debate that the PP last year was awful the second half of the season last year and Marner was a huge part of that PP.

Are you implying that the PP has been better the last 1 1/2 years when Marner is on it or are you trying to make a different point

did you forget that Marner was so bad on the PP lately that sports writers were questioning if he was at offs with the coach over his roll on the PP.
I think they were grasping at straws but it sure indicates that he was struggling on the PP for them to even think that up

 

[Leaf Fans]

Happy the team has been good on the powerplay since Marner got injured. I am looking forward to him coming back!

 

[zeke]

You're wrong. I provided the link from NHL.com itself. He's 2nd.
NHL Stats

Here's where i trot out your "you can do better" line back at you. You know when there's a discrepancy between nhl.com and he other sites its usually due to the inclusion of empty-net situations, which is the case here of course.

But that's fine - we really should be being more precise anyways and comparing apples to apples - so in this case, we should be looking strictly at 5v4 PPs, as Mitch gets an inordinate advantage from getting all the time on 5v3 4v3 and 6v4 PPs too, whereas Spezza gets none of that time.

So let's look just at 5v4 PPs last 3yrs minimum 100min:

p/60

1. Spezza 6.40
2. Matthews 6.07
3. Nylander 6.04
4. Tavares 5.91
5. Marner 5.75
6. Hyman 5.15
7. Rielly 4.76
8. Barrie 4.13
9. Kerfoot 2.54

p1/60

1. Spezza 5.39
2. Matthews 4.97
3. Tavares 4.67
4. Nylander 4.47
5. Marner 3.33
6. Hyman 3.09
7. Rielly 2.29
8. Barrie 1.72
9. Kerfoot 0.51

So when looking at apples to apples, we see again that Mitch has been the least productive on the top unit, and by far the most reliant on secondary assists.

This whole thread and discussion started in the first place by overemphasizing the small sample size of the past couple weeks, without considering the underlying data.

That's fine - but we can move beyond that, can't we?

For me, the production since he went down is just a cherry on top. And i expect much of that is just catching other teams by surprise because the PP suddenly looks much different without Mitch dominating it.

For me, this was something we were talking about all of last year, and that I was focussing on particularly during preseason, when we were discussing Marner's move to the bumper spot. There's an adjustment here to Mitch's role that I've been wanting to see for a while now - its just a shame that it took him getting injured for us to see it.

If you're going to make claims about units that aren't supported by the data, expect that to be pointed out.

All due respect, but you seem to be dismissing a whole bunch of data here.

I didn't say xGF is perfect, but it's a valuable and proven metric, and one that you use quite a bit. Now suddenly you want to completely abandon it, based on random speculation about "super duper chances" that you've provided no evidence for. And again, as I noted, it's a lot more than just xGF.

Again I have to bring out your "you can do better" line here - we both know that while xGF's usefulness is well established at even strength, its clarity on special teams is much more open to debate. And all due respect, I have provided evidence, you have just dismissed it.

It's not nearly as astonishing or worrying as people make it out to be.

c'mon man - he has gone 109 games without a PP goal. That's astonishing and worrying.

What exactly in my original post that you responded to do you disagree with? Because so far, you haven't actually addressed anything I said in that post.

I never disagreed with riding hot streaks or testing out different combinations, but there's nothing to suggest that moving Marner off the top unit would be beneficial to the team in the long term.

Our 5v5 scoring has dropped more than our PP scoring (without even including the 6v5 goals we've gotten in the playoffs, that are similar to the being on the PP), so I'm not sure how you're concluding that our PP has been the problem, or that taking our best playmaker and 2nd best player off of it is the solution.

Again since you dismissed my numbers above, 0nce we look at the 5v4 data alone imo it seems clear that we might want try something other than letting Mitch dominate the puck on every PP like he has for years now.

Personally I was hyped at his move to the bumper because I don't want a super skilled player off the PP, but for whatever reason Mitch went right back to being the main entry and main puck holder on the PP again, despite a significant lack of primary PP points.

I think it's well worth our while to see what a PP built around the twin shot/pass wings Auston and Willy would look like, with Mitch relgated to a more secondary role out there instead of dominating all the touches on every PP. I think Willy in particular has been criminally underused and overlooked on the PP, when he might be our 2nd best PP weapon.

I would have liked to see what this would have looked like without taking Mitch off the unit, but unfortunately it took an injury to Mitch for us to finally see something new out there. But I'm not shocked that the PP has kept humming even after the Mitch injury, and even after the Spezza suspension - I am very optimistic that the Auston/Willy twin pp engine is our best bet to give us our most dangerous PP, and that we'll be better off when Mitch takes a bit of a back seat (or at least a more co-equal seat) on the PP, and especially moves into a more central role closer to the crease.

I'll be frustrated if we go right back to a Mitch-dominated PP again when he comes back - imo it's become too predictable, and the great xGF it creates is mitigated by the fact that goalies are expecting the pass into the slot and are ready for it even when it gets there. And what you call high shooting percentage in this recent sample does seem to be at least partly due to goalies being way out of position as they are deseprately scrambling to keep up with and guess where the puck is going to be shot from now.

 

[Dekes For Days]

You know when there's a discrepancy between nhl.com and he other sites its usually due to the inclusion of empty-net situations, which is the case here of course.

While discrepancies between NHL.com and other sites are sometimes caused by empty net situations, that is not always the case, and that seems to be a particularly questionable cause when discussing the PP, especially when your 5v4 numbers are inconsistent with other sites as well.

Looking at Spezza for example, and his per-60 production and listed TOI, we can test this, and can easily see that the site you are using has credited Spezza with a higher number of PP points that he does not actually have. This is not just empty net issues.

Since we're talking about a game state with inherently small samples, and Spezza in particular has such low PP ice time overall, small mistakes in the inputs has a significant impact on his per-60 rates. Also, you talk about role and QOC impacts quite a bit, but seem to have dismissed these in a discussion where role and QOC differences are quite substantial.

You also say how this isn't just about the past couple weeks, but Marner was even higher than his 2nd place rank - sitting at #1 in PP P/60 over that same time period at the time of his injury, so yeah, it is kinda all about the hot streak the past couple weeks that Marner hasn't been able to benefit from like everybody else.

And all due respect, I have provided evidence, you have just dismissed it.

I haven't dismissed anything, and you haven't provided evidence of the claim. On the contrary, you attempted to dismiss the evidence provided to you by making vague, unsupported comments about "super duper chances" and putting down the stat (and a bunch of additional complimentary stats) that you constantly use.

we might want try something other than letting Mitch dominate the puck on every PP like he has for years now.

Marner has not "dominated the puck on every PP for years now". Good lord.

You certainly want your best playmaker handling the puck more than your goal-scorers, but if anything, he's been controlling the puck on the PP less and less as the unit has become more and more stacked. This whole "PKs leave him open!" and "goalies know what's coming" and "every time the PP isn't on fire is Marner's fault!" stuff is pure garbage.

Again, I never suggested that different roles shouldn't be tested, and I specifically agreed with riding hot streaks (which we were on with Marner as well, for the record), so I'm not really sure what you're even arguing, or what in my original post you disagreed with, especially since you seem to agree with my main point that Marner should be kept on the top unit.

 

[zeke]

While discrepancies between NHL.com and other sites are sometimes caused by empty net situations, that is not always the case, and that seems to be a particularly questionable cause when discussing the PP, especially when your 5v4 numbers are inconsistent with other sites as well.

Looking at Spezza for example, and his per-60 production and listed TOI, we can test this, and can easily see that the site you are using has credited Spezza with a higher number of PP points that he does not actually have. This is not just empty net issues.

Since we're talking about a game state with inherently small samples, and Spezza in particular has such low PP ice time overall, small mistakes in the inputs has a significant impact on his per-60 rates. Also, you talk about role and QOC impacts quite a bit, but seem to have dismissed these in a discussion where role and QOC differences are quite substantial.

You also say how this isn't just about the past couple weeks, but Marner was even higher than his 2nd place rank - sitting at #1 in PP P/60 over that same time period at the time of his injury, so yeah, it is kinda all about the hot streak the past couple weeks that Marner hasn't been able to benefit from like everybody else.

you're right there are a couple point discrepancies. unfortunately nhl.com still doesn't isolate for 5v4 situations so let's see if i can hack the difference.

I'll look at isolated 5v4 PP numbers from both E-H and NST and use the numbers which make Mitch look best and the others worst.

Mitch

EH: 396.68, 3 g, 19 a1, 16 a2 = 22 p1, 38 p = 3.33 p1/60, 5.75 p/60
NST: 398.80, 3 g, 19 a1, 16 a2 = 22 p1, 38 p = 3.31 p1/60, 5.72 p/60

Matthews

EH: 434.85, 27 g, 9 a1, 8 a2 = 36 p1, 44 p = 4.97 p1/60, 6.07 p/60
NST: 438.67, 27 g, 9 a1, 8 a2 = 36 p1, 44 p = 4.92 p1/60, 6.02 p/60

Tavares

EH: 385.85, 16 g, 14 a1, 8 a2 = 30 p1, 38 p = 4.67 p1/60, 5.91 p/60
NST: 385.51, 16 g, 13 a1, 8 a2 = 29 p1, 37 p1 = 4.51 p1/60, 5.76 p/60

Nylander

EH: 376.29, 17 g, 11 a1, 10 a2 = 28 p1, 38 p = 4.47 p1/60, 6.06 p/60
NST: 378.76, 16 g, 11 a1, 10 a2 = 27 p1, 37 p = 4.27 p1/60, 5.86 p/60

Spezza

EH: 178.12, 6 g, 10 a1, 3 a2 = 16 p1, 19 p = 5.39 p1/60, 6.40 p/60
NST: 178.50, 6 g, 10 a1, 2 a2 = 16 p1, 18 p = 5.38 p1/60, 6.05 p/60

So using the best for Mitch and the worst for the others:

P/60

1. Spezza 6.05
2. Matthews 6.02
3. Nylander 5.86
4. Tavares 5.76
5. Marner 5.75

P1/60

1. Spezza 5.38
2. Matthews 4.92
3. Tavares 4.51
4. Nylander 4.27
5. Marner 3.33

So when looking at an apples to apples comparison, at 5v4 only, we again see that Mitch's overall production is at best close to the others, but that his primary point production is we behind them.

I haven't dismissed anything, and you haven't provided evidence of the claim. On the contrary, you attempted to dismiss the evidence provided to you by making vague, unsupported comments about "super duper chances" and putting down the stat (and a bunch of additional complimentary stats) that you constantly use.

you have dismissed all of:

1. actual goals
2. the relevance of primary vs. secondary points
3. potential issues with xgf on the PP specificially

You have also relied on complete-5-man-unit splits to dismiss the much larger sample stats we have.

Marner has not "dominated the puck on every PP for years now". Good lord.

Gotta be honest - not sure how anyone who watches the team could disagree with this.

You certainly want your best playmaker handling the puck more than your goal-scorers, but if anything, he's been controlling the puck on the PP less and less as the unit has become more and more stacked. This whole "PKs leave him open!" and "goalies know what's coming" and "every time the PP isn't on fire is Marner's fault!" stuff is pure garbage.

I think you might want to consider that there's truth to it. Otherwise it's hard to understand why "our best playmaker" is so far behind the others in primary point production.

Again, I never suggested that different roles shouldn't be tested, and I specifically agreed with riding hot streaks (which we were on with Marner as well, for the record), so I'm not really sure what you're even arguing, or what in my original post you disagreed with, especially since you seem to agree with my main point that Marner should be kept on the top unit.

Well ok if you don't want to discuss it that's fine.

Myself, I think it's unfortunate that it has taken mitch being forced off the top unit due to injury for us to finally see something a little bit different on the PP - and I'm not surprised at all that the PP has kept clicking right along without him, and has arguably looked faster, more decisive, and created more wide open goalie-way-out-of-position bang in chances (yes, super duper chances) than we've seen in a while.

 

[darrylsittler27]

You take out that Winnipeg game and they have been scoring a lot of goals minus Marner.

 

[ShaneFalco]

Why is it such a terrible thing to some, to even mention that maybe the #1PP is better off without 16 when replaced with a player who can pass AND score!?
I won't be surprised if they put him right back in there though - kind of disgusted but not surprised

 

[Zybalto]

This is by far the most fun and interesting discussion about Marner as both sides have such solid ground to stand on.

The one thing I will say is that just having him on the ice during the powerplay makes it incredibly more effective.

Let's look at rankings for shots, scoring chances, expected goals and straight up goals scored with the top 5 on the ice since the start of 2019 among the top 5 PP forwards on the Leafs:

Shots/60:
1. Tavares
2. Marner
3. Nylander
4. Matthews
5. Spezza

Shots/60 REL:
1. Marner
2. Tavares
3. Matthews
4. Nylander
5. Spezza

Scoring Chances/60:
1. Tavares
2. Marner
3. Nylander
4. Matthews
5. Spezza

Scoring Chances/60 REL:
1. Marner
2. Matthews
3. Tavares
4. Nylander
5. Spezza

Expected goals/60:
1. Tavares
2. Marner
3. Nylander
4. Matthews
5. Spezza

Expected goals/60 REL:
1. Marner
2. Tavares
3. Matthews
4. Nylander
5. Spezza

Goals/60:
1. Tavares
2. Nylander
3. Matthews
4. Marner
5. Spezza

Goals/60 REL:
1. Tavares
2. Marner
3. Matthews
4. Nylander
5. Spezza

Spezza can certainly be excused from being at the bottom of every list as he's a mainly second unit guy that has played admirably when put up on the first unit. The effectiveness of the Marner on the PP seems apparent and his numbers are certainly above average for first unit PP forwards in the league. With so many points banked, I'm not against the Leafs tinkering with the PP1 when he gets back but I would prefer he stay on it right now considering it was already pretty hot when he went down with him on it.

 

[ToneDog]

This is by far the most fun and interesting discussion about Marner as both sides have such solid ground to stand on.

The one thing I will say is that just having him on the ice during the powerplay makes it incredibly more effective.

Let's look at rankings for shots, scoring chances, expected goals and straight up goals scored with the top 5 on the ice since the start of 2019 among the top 5 PP forwards on the Leafs:

Shots/60:
1. Tavares
2. Marner
3. Nylander
4. Matthews
5. Spezza

Shots/60 REL:
1. Marner
2. Tavares
3. Matthews
4. Nylander
5. Spezza

Scoring Chances/60:
1. Tavares
2. Marner
3. Nylander
4. Matthews
5. Spezza

Scoring Chances/60 REL:
1. Marner
2. Matthews
3. Tavares
4. Nylander
5. Spezza

Expected goals/60:
1. Tavares
2. Marner
3. Nylander
4. Matthews
5. Spezza

Expected goals/60 REL:
1. Marner
2. Tavares
3. Matthews
4. Nylander
5. Spezza

Goals/60:
1. Tavares
2. Nylander
3. Matthews
4. Marner
5. Spezza

Goals/60 REL:
1. Tavares
2. Marner
3. Matthews
4. Nylander
5. Spezza

Spezza can certainly be excused from being at the bottom of every list as he's a mainly second unit guy that has played admirably when put up on the first unit. The effectiveness of the Marner on the PP seems apparent and his numbers are certainly above average for first unit PP forwards in the league. With so many points banked, I'm not against the Leafs tinkering with the PP1 when he gets back but I would prefer he stay on it right now considering it was already pretty hot when he went down with him on it.

That is all fine and dandy but unless I am forgetting, wasn't our PP terrible last year and most of this year until Mitch was injured ?? My guess is that he does not lose his spot on the PP when he gets back but if it sputters again, he should be moved off it.

 

[Dekes For Days]

you're right there are a couple point discrepancies.

Which means I was correct posts ago when I said he was 2nd. Glad we could clear that up.

PP P/60, past 3 seasons

1. Matthews: 6.73
2. Marner: 6.22
3. Nylander: 6.18
4. Tavares: 6.12
5. Spezza: 5.84

And at the time of his injury, before everybody else benefitted from a hot streak that Marner could not benefit from, Marner was even higher:

1. Marner: 6.22
2. Matthews: 5.94
3. Tavares: 5.65
4. Nylander: 5.51
5. Spezza: 5.48

And to satisfy you, the above but 5v4 only:

1. Marner: 5.72
2. Spezza: 5.66
3. Tavares: 5.36
4. Nylander: 5.27
5. Matthews: 5.25

And since Marner entered the league...

1. Marner: 6.77
2. Matthews: 6.54
3. Nylander: 5.97
4. Tavares: 5.79
5. Spezza: 5.22

Clearly an excellent PP player, and an important part of our PP.

you have dismissed all of:

1. actual goals
2. the relevance of primary vs. secondary points
3. potential issues with xgf on the PP specificially

I haven't dismissed any of those things. I'm just not:

1. Overemphasizing goals in a 2 week hot streak driven by unsustainable shooting percentages, and attempting to punish a player with years of excellent PP play who wasn't there to benefit from it.
2. Overemphasizing primary points while ignoring overall production and everything else.
3. Suddenly dismissing a whole host of valuable metrics that both of us consistently use, that are valuable in helping us understand how PPs are performing, all because of some unsupported theory you've created about "super duper chances".

You have also relied on complete-5-man-unit splits to dismiss the much larger sample stats we have.

No, I've relied on far more than that, but in a discussion about how certain units performed, I looked at how those units performed. Pretty simple. You're the one shrinking the sample size and data points to exclude types of PPs, types of production, etc., on top of ignoring all underlying data.

Gotta be honest - not sure how anyone who watches the team could disagree with this.

Gotta be honest - not sure how anyone who watches the team could make that statement in the first place. It's actually quite amusing, because Spezza "dominates" the puck on his unit more than Marner does on his, which is why he picks up points on such a crazy high percentage of his unit's goals.

Otherwise it's hard to understand why "our best playmaker" is so far behind the others in primary point production.

Not really. Production type distribution is so dependent on role on the PP. Marner is an initiator, not a finisher, so his production will tend to skew less primary than goal scorers. His primary role is to draw defenders out of position, open up space and lanes, and then distribute the puck. Sometimes it's for a great shot directly off the pass (leading to him being the 4th best primary assist producer on the PP since he entered the league), but sometimes it's to isolate the numbers advantage he's created down low for a tic-tac play or a rebound, where he only gets secondary or no credit for his contributions.

Well ok if you don't want to discuss it that's fine.

Discuss what? Again, you haven't actually addressed anything from my original post, and you've explicitly stated that you agree with my main point that Marner should be kept on the top unit.

Myself, I think it's unfortunate that it has taken mitch being forced off the top unit due to injury for us to finally see something a little bit different on the PP

Except that's not true at all. We've seen different looks and roles, and the PP was rolling and looking fast and decisive with Marner through the month before his injury as well.

Also, I'm not sure what you're even talking about in terms of "wide open goalie-way-out-of-position bang in chances". I think you need to go and actually take a look at the PP goals we've scored since Marner, because that's not an accurate description of what's happened.

 

[Zybalto]

That is all fine and dandy but unless I am forgetting, wasn't our PP terrible last year and most of this year until Mitch was injured ?? My guess is that he does not lose his spot on the PP when he gets back but if it sputters again, he should be moved off it.

The PP was insanely good the first 1/4 of last season and then amazingly awful the rest of the way. Malhotra was removed from the PP to start the year and Matthews was hurt to start the season and the PP didnt look that great to start the year but once they started getting used to the new system and Matthews was up and running, The Leafs had the 3rd best PP in the league from the last weekend of October until Marner went down earlier this month.

 

[Doublerum1975]

Mitch would do better on the second unit wouldn’t be looking for pass all the time