Will Mitch Marner become star?

[ToneDog]

I said it before but I think he's got a legit chance to be better than eichel

Not likely. Eichel probably needs to mature a little and become a complete player. If he does, no chance Marner is better.

 

[ToneDog]

Marner has a high hockey IQ - like a poor man's version of Wayne Gretzky. Not the skill level of Gretzky - the IQ and most of all heart

Marner needs to get stronger, be more responsible with the puck (i.e stop pushing the envelope as this is not the OHL) and work on his shot.

 

[Mess]

Could this be a better question?

Of course Marner has proven to not have been a bad selection, he's been fantastic. However...rumors were strong that Hunter and Babcock were at a disagreement on the Marner selection, apparently Babcock really wanted a big defensemen (rumoured to be Hanifin).

Hunter perhaps played it safe and went with the known commodity in Marner, someone he knew would at least be a impact player in the NHL. Or maybe some will argue, he made the choice with the idea that Marner will be the best player/period at #5. Lets not forget that their were rumours that a few teams were interested in trading up to acquire Hanifin, obviously one being Columbus. I don't recall hearing about teams wanting to trade up for Marner. Heck, Columbus almost traded 3 2nd rnd picks, just to move up and draft Hanifin at 4.

In knowing the value of a top pairing defenseman in the NHL, and the cost to acquire one... ex. #1 overall pick Hall, for Larsson (can we use Chia trades to set standards?), and the #1 Centre with size in Ryan Johansen for the unproven young defenseman Seth Jones (who obviously was highly touted)...

Was going with a small winger the right choice?
.

Hunter more than anyone understands the value of players by position and that #1C and Top pairing Dmen >>> Wingers as Vital/Key team building blocks.

When Hunter drafted Marner, he also premised and defended his pick by suggesting Marner (a winger in OHL) would be a future C in the NHL and would be developed into one down the road. Also Marner's old brother (Christopher) had a late growth spurt shooting him from 5-11 to 6-3 in size at age 18-19, and Hunter crossed his fingers telling Leaf Nation that he hoped the same would happen for Mitch.

So it was a calculated gamble by Hunter, banking on a position change and a potential late growth spurt by Marner moving him to C position and hoping for 6-2/6-3 in size. As we find out now that neither of those Hunter gambles came to fruition and so Leafs ended up with a small highly skilled winger as a top 5 pick in a strong draft class. So drafting a non vital building block positional player will be questioned no doubt in that regard .... but had Hunter's calculated risk actually happened and Marner seen that 4" growth spurt and successfully transitioned to C position then he would had a player to potentially rival Eichel #2 OA as a big #1C and Hunter would have looked like a genius.

You're 100% correct Babcock wanted a big Dman as a building block with the Leafs pick either by drafting one at #4 or trading back to #8OA and taking one there. Whether there will be any Coach vs Marner long term impact in terms of resentment or regrets that he didn't get the player he wanted at the draft remains to be seen. As we have seen the coach does prefer size in his players and ones that can win puck battles and use that size and drive possession.

At present Marner is being used as a 3rd line RW to drive Leafs #3 line offensively (with JVR and Bozak) and giving the Leafs a mismatch QofC against the oppositions 3rd and 4th lines on skill to allow them statistically to provide secondary attack behind Leafs top 2 lines on Matthews and Kadri. Leafs depth at forward is now a team strength and Marner drives that by the coach usage and matchups.

PS. However Hunter and the Leafs lucked out in the big picture, because Leafs successfully tanked and got their big #1C Matthews the following year, and also Nylander (a winger) taken before Hunter arrived also potentially is viewed as a centre down the road. So now having Marner a highly skilled winger is not a bad thing as other pieces fell into place for the Leafs. So this could all work out in the long run if the Leafs successfully win a Cup down the road.

 

[DarkKnight]

Good to see the results of this poll, shows it's just a small minority of wigged out posters who can't see what we have in Marner.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I very much doubt Hunter pushed for that pick because he gambled on a potential late growth spurt. That happens extremely rarely at that age, not to the degree that it matters. If it did, it would be gross incompetence.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Hunter more than anyone understands the value of players by position and that #1C and Top pairing Dmen >>> Wingers as Vital/Key team building blocks.

When Hunter drafted Marner, he also premised and defended his pick by suggesting Marner (a winger in OHL) would be a future C in the NHL and would be developed into one down the road. Also Marner's old brother (Christopher) had a late growth spurt shooting him from 5-11 to 6-3 in size at age 18-19, and Hunter crossed his fingers telling Leaf Nation that he hoped the same would happen for Mitch.

So it was a calculated gamble by Hunter, banking on a position change and a potential late growth spurt by Marner moving him to C position and hoping for 6-2/6-3 in size. As we find out now that neither of those Hunter gambles came to fruition and so Leafs ended up with a small highly skilled winger as a top 5 pick in a strong draft class. So drafting a non vital building block positional player will be questioned no doubt in that regard .... but had Hunter's calculated risk actually happened and Marner seen that 4" growth spurt and successfully transitioned to C position then he would had a player to potentially rival Eichel #2 OA as a big #1C and Hunter would have looked like a genius.

You're 100% correct Babcock wanted a big Dman as a building block with the Leafs pick either by drafting one at #4 or trading back to #8OA and taking one there. Whether there will be any Coach vs Marner long term impact in terms of resentment or regrets that he didn't get the player he wanted at the draft remains to be seen. As we have seen the coach does prefer size in his players and ones that can win puck battles and use that size and drive possession.

At present Marner is being used as a 3rd line RW to drive Leafs #3 line offensively (with JVR and Bozak) and giving the Leafs a mismatch QofC against the oppositions 3rd and 4th lines mismatch on skill to allow them statistically to provide secondary attack behind Leafs top 2 lines on Matthews and Kadri.

PS. However Hunter and the Leafs lucked out in the big picture, because Leafs successfully tanked and got their big #1C Matthews the following year, and also Nylander (a winger) taken before Hunter arrived also potentially is viewed as a centre down the road. So now having Marner a highly skilled winger is not a bad thing as other pieces fell into place for the Leafs.

I believe Marner can play centre, whether he does or not, that's up to the coach. I'm also pretty sure Hunter thought Marner would be a fantastic player regardless of his height, so far he doesn't look to be wrong. Hunter thought Marner was the BPA, that's why he was drafted, plain and simple. That's the only logical reason and it applies to most picks made in the draft by all teams in all rounds. So far it looks like a pretty good decision and we should give Hunter credit for having the balls to stand behind his opinion. The easiest thing in the world would have been for him to say OK, take Hanifin if you want, that way he wouldn't risk being accused of nepotism. Hanifin was ranked higher by most so he'd basically be exempt from criticism. Instead of playing it safe, he was willing to fight for what he thought was best for the Toronto Maple Leafs and in doing so, he put his own reputation on the line. That's the kind of person that you need in a winning organization!

 

[Gary Nylund]

I very much doubt Hunter pushed for that pick because he gambled on a potential late growth spurt. That happens extremely rarely at that age, not to the degree that it matters. If it did, it would be gross incompetence.

Absolutely. How can anyone believe that this was Hunter's thinking:

If Marner grows, he'll be great. If he doesn't, oops.

 

[ACC1224]

Not likely. Eichel probably needs to mature a little and become a complete player. If he does, no chance Marner is better.

Better will always be subjective, Marner could have a bigger impact over his career though.

 

[Menzinger]

Could this be a better question?

Of course Marner has proven to not have been a bad selection, he's been fantastic. However...rumors were strong that Hunter and Babcock were at a disagreement on the Marner selection, apparently Babcock really wanted a big defensemen (rumoured to be Hanifin).

Hunter perhaps played it safe and went with the known commodity in Marner, someone he knew would at least be a impact player in the NHL. Or maybe some will argue, he made the choice with the idea that Marner will be the best player/period at #5. Lets not forget that their were rumours that a few teams were interested in trading up to acquire Hanifin, obviously one being Columbus. I don't recall hearing about teams wanting to trade up for Marner. Heck, Columbus almost traded 3 2nd rnd picks, just to move up and draft Hanifin at 4.

In knowing the value of a top pairing defenseman in the NHL, and the cost to acquire one... ex. #1 overall pick Hall, for Larsson (can we use Chia trades to set standards?), and the #1 Centre with size in Ryan Johansen for the unproven young defenseman Seth Jones (who obviously was highly touted)...

Was going with a small winger the right choice?
.

Hanifin would have been a mistake to take at #4 too, he’s looking to be a #4-3 D man. Now if we were talking about a guy like Werenski t would have been another story, but as you suggest there’s more risk in a pick like that since D men’s development is so hard to predict.

 

[Menzinger]

I very much doubt Hunter pushed for that pick because he gambled on a potential late growth spurt. That happens extremely rarely at that age, not to the degree that it matters. If it did, it would be gross incompetence.

Yep.

And anyways, I really hate the idea of drafting inside the first round for need above all else. Development is never a guarantee

 

[ToneDog]

Better will always be subjective, Marner could have a bigger impact over his career though.

Agreed but Mitch does not have the pressure of being "the man" here as Eichel does in Buffalo. In addition Mitch has a more stable environment here with our management team. Buffalo appears to be a tire fire and it could consume Eichel.

 

[ACC1224]

Agreed but Mitch does not have the pressure of being "the man" here as Eichel does in Buffalo. In addition Mitch has a more stable environment here with our management team. Buffalo appears to be a tire fire and it could consume Eichel.

If a player can't handle the pressure, can they really be considered a "special player"?

 

[Gary Nylund]

If a player can't handle the pressure, can they really be considered a "special player"?

I was thinking the same thing. Not sure if that's completely fair as circumstances can pretty tough sometimes but still, I'd say there's some truth to this.

 

[ToneDog]

If a player can't handle the pressure, can they really be considered a "special player"?

Not saying Jack can't but he will have the burden that Mitch won't given that Matthews will do all the heavy lifting here.

Personally I would take a combo of AM and JE over any combination we have now.

 

[ACC1224]

Not saying Jack can't but he will have the burden that Mitch won't given that Matthews will do all the heavy lifting here.

Personally I would take a combo of AM and JE over any combination we have now.

Marner helps ease Matthews burden, that's not really fair to either of them though.

Today, I'm sure most would take Eichel over Marner/Nylander.
We need to revisit this in 15 years!

 

[Mess]

Better will always be subjective, Marner could have a bigger impact over his career though.

Agreed, in order to take subjectivity out of the equation of words such as "better" or "bigger impact" than it would need to be statistically based that can than be verified and compared.

If one said they believed Marner would end his NHL career with the 2nd most points behind only McDavid from his draft class, then that opinion can be proven and a valid argument exists to base "better" meaning most points scored.

 

[Mr Hockey]

Stop with the comparing Marner to Eichel, ANEC ... Mitch would drop 5+ spots in a redraft, smh.

 

[ACC1224]

Agreed, in order to take subjectivity out of the equation of words such as "better" or "bigger impact" than it would need to be statistically based that can than be verified and compared.

If one said they believed Marner would end his NHL career with the 2nd most points behind only McDavid from his draft class, then that opinion can be proven and a valid argument exists to base "better" meaning most points scored.

In this scenario who had the better impact?

Eichel has more career points than Marner.
Marner wins 3 cups and leads the Leafs in assists every season.

I know who I pick.

 

[LeafGrief]

It is much simpler to think that Hunter believed Marner would be the best player out of all players left in the draft when he was selected at 4th overall, instead of a whole lot of "what if's" and gambling. In his first draft at the helm of an NHL organization, is Mark Hunter really going to stake his dream job on a kid growing four inches? Occam's Razor to that one. Werenski and Provorov have done well since the draft, but everybody and their brother at the time was expecting Marner to be taken before them. Hanifin was far more highly touted than either of them and he's clearly behind Marner in a redraft at this point.

Marner is already a star.

Mitch would drop 5+ spots in a redraft, smh.

5 spots??? I understand Werenski, Provorov, and maybe, maybe, MAYBE Boeser. Who else? And that's not even counting passing Strome.

 

[FreeBird]

Marner needs to get stronger, be more responsible with the puck (i.e stop pushing the envelope as this is not the OHL) and work on his shot.

Spends more time on his Belly than a Navy Seal

 

[Mess]

In this scenario who had the better impact?

Eichel has more career points than Marner.
Marner wins 3 cups and leads the Leafs in assists every season.

I know who I pick.

But its still subjective..

Case in point .. Mats Sundin had the most All-time points as a Leaf player with zero Stanley Cups, while lots former Leafs had less points but were parts of multiple Cups for the Leafs. Would Eichel be the Sundin reference similarity in this "better impact" debate, and the player individual accomplishments be passed by team accomplishments of others drafted later?

Sundin went #1OA in his draft year recording 1349 career points, Sergei Fedorov was drafted 4th round, put up 1179 points and won 3 Stanley Cups, multiple Selkes and even a Hart, and Nik Lidstrom was drafted 3 round recorded 1142 points and won 3 Stanley Cups and 7 Norris trophies.. So do Federov and Lidstrom pass the "greater impact" subjective standard based on individual and team achievements?

Eichel is alone while Marner has Auston Matthews and so his chances for more team success is greater in that respect but it will likely be based on how much Auston contributes to those Cups. Does that make Marner >> bigger impact than Eichel?

If the Leafs had drafted someone other than Marner at #4 (ie Hanifin, Werenski, Provorov) and taken a Dman instead and Leafs still win Cups and Eichel doesn't, do you adjust for position when comparing points scored and would the same bigger impact still apply if that Dman was a top pairing guy and leading the Leafs Dmen in points?

 

[diceman934]

Better will always be subjective, Marner could have a bigger impact over his career though.

Eichel simply put is a spoiled brat who is killing Buffalo. He got his coach last year fired and look at the result thus far this year. I take Marner every day every time over Eichel...I also believe Marner is the better player. If Marner was the only young star on the Leafs he would have more points and see more quality ice time.

 

[diceman934]

But its still subjective..

Case in point .. Mats Sundin had the most All-time points as a Leaf player with zero Stanley Cups, while lots former Leafs had less points but were parts on multiple Cups for the Leafs. Would Eichel be the Sundin reference similarity in this "better impact" debate?

Eichel is alone while Marner has Auston Matthews and so his chances for more team success is greater in that respect but it will likely be based on how much Auston contributes to those Cups. Does that make Marner >> bigger impact than Eichel?

If the Leafs had drafted someone other than Marner at #4 (ie Hanifin, Werenski, Provorov) and taken a Dman instead and Leafs still win Cups and Eichel doesn't, do you adjust for position when comparing points scored and would the same bigger impact still apply if that Dman was a top pairing guy and leading the Leafs Dmen in points?

Buffalo if they have not yet already will look back at the draft and wish they took another player in the draft. The kid accepts no blame for anything blames teammates and others and is a big part of the problem that is Buffalo...coach gets fired and new coach hired and still the same results...I guess it was not the coach after all leave the blame squarely on the shoulders of the prima donna.

I say you adjust for idiot teammate affect and this puts Marner so far ahead it is laughable.

 

[IPS]

Hunter more than anyone understands the value of players by position and that #1C and Top pairing Dmen >>> Wingers as Vital/Key team building blocks.

When Hunter drafted Marner, he also premised and defended his pick by suggesting Marner (a winger in OHL) would be a future C in the NHL and would be developed into one down the road. Also Marner's old brother (Christopher) had a late growth spurt shooting him from 5-11 to 6-3 in size at age 18-19, and Hunter crossed his fingers telling Leaf Nation that he hoped the same would happen for Mitch.

So it was a calculated gamble by Hunter, banking on a position change and a potential late growth spurt by Marner moving him to C position and hoping for 6-2/6-3 in size. As we find out now that neither of those Hunter gambles came to fruition and so Leafs ended up with a small highly skilled winger as a top 5 pick in a strong draft class. So drafting a non vital building block positional player will be questioned no doubt in that regard .... but had Hunter's calculated risk actually happened and Marner seen that 4" growth spurt and successfully transitioned to C position then he would had a player to potentially rival Eichel #2 OA as a big #1C and Hunter would have looked like a genius.

You're 100% correct Babcock wanted a big Dman as a building block with the Leafs pick either by drafting one at #4 or trading back to #8OA and taking one there. Whether there will be any Coach vs Marner long term impact in terms of resentment or regrets that he didn't get the player he wanted at the draft remains to be seen. As we have seen the coach does prefer size in his players and ones that can win puck battles and use that size and drive possession.

At present Marner is being used as a 3rd line RW to drive Leafs #3 line offensively (with JVR and Bozak) and giving the Leafs a mismatch QofC against the oppositions 3rd and 4th lines on skill to allow them statistically to provide secondary attack behind Leafs top 2 lines on Matthews and Kadri. Leafs depth at forward is now a team strength and Marner drives that by the coach usage and matchups.

PS. However Hunter and the Leafs lucked out in the big picture, because Leafs successfully tanked and got their big #1C Matthews the following year, and also Nylander (a winger) taken before Hunter arrived also potentially is viewed as a centre down the road. So now having Marner a highly skilled winger is not a bad thing as other pieces fell into place for the Leafs. So this could all work out in the long run if the Leafs successfully win a Cup down the road.

Any evidence of this? Banking on a potential growth suport? Fabricated nonsense.

Non vital building block. So wingers are unable to be "vital building blocks" to cup winners. Patrick Kane was not vital to the Hawks' monumental success?

No idea why I even read your posts on Marner. Fabricating nonsense to back up your position says it all.

 

[ACC1224]

But its still subjective..

Case in point .. Mats Sundin had the most All-time points as a Leaf player with zero Stanley Cups, while lots former Leafs had less points but were parts of multiple Cups for the Leafs. Would Eichel be the Sundin reference similarity in this "better impact" debate, and the player individual accomplishments be passed by team accomplishments of others drafted later?

Sundin went #1OA in his draft year recording 1349 career points, Sergei Fedorov was drafted 4th round, put up 1179 points and won 3 Stanley Cups, multiple Selkes and even a Hart, and Nik Lidstrom was drafted 3 round recorded 1142 points and won 3 Stanley Cups and 7 Norris trophies.. So do Federov and Lidstrom pass the "greater impact" subjective standard based on individual and team achievements?

Eichel is alone while Marner has Auston Matthews and so his chances for more team success is greater in that respect but it will likely be based on how much Auston contributes to those Cups. Does that make Marner >> bigger impact than Eichel?

If the Leafs had drafted someone other than Marner at #4 (ie Hanifin, Werenski, Provorov) and taken a Dman instead and Leafs still win Cups and Eichel doesn't, do you adjust for position when comparing points scored and would the same bigger impact still apply if that Dman was a top pairing guy and leading the Leafs Dmen in points?

Yes, Federov and Lidstrom are good examples.