Mitch Marner is no Patrick Kane and I refuse to believe he would be if only he had "HEAVY" players on the squad giving him space.

Usually love your takes Monkey, but I think you're off on this one.
- mjones242

It's okay. I've made my points. You're free to disagree.

I firmly believe that you can have smaller players on your team and excel as long as you provide them with the right type of players to create time and space. In my opinion, if you put a line of nothing but Kane and two Kane clones, it would get crushed, smushed and smeared along the ice.

Because I believe that I also believe that Marner is wearing a lot of undue criticism because he was rarely put in a position to succeed. I did like when they had him out there with Knies, but of course he was with Captain Milquetoast (they were still even at 1-1) - and they had him on with Domi and Bertuzzi when Matthews was out - that line was +2 (2-0) despite being outplayed.

We'll see what happens, but too often I've seen from a Maple Leaf fan base a stubborn unwillingness to back down from unwarranted criticism; I figure there's too many people who've already written Marner off.

I hypothesize that the qualities they appear to be adding to the D corps will translate to scoring goals in the playoffs.
- Zezel

Yes, both Tanev and OEL are puck movers and the latter should help on PP2. Plus, I think Lilly is going to thrive this year with a better partner.

I'm gonna take the dirt road home with you.
- Zezel

I agree with the time and space thing. Actually wrote a paper on it in university using examples from many sports. My one question though is besides McDavid does anybody else in the NHL create more time and space than Matthews? It would be interesting to have quantifiable data but I think. Kane scores a lot more goals playing with Matthews than Marner does, but that Matthews would score less playing with Kane than Marner. However would not be as easy to shut down in the playoffs.

Something like this

https://www.nytimes.com/a...iam-nylander-maple-leafs/

People seem to be forgetting that:

- physicality has not been an issue for a few years now in the playoffs. Pretty sure we were the hit leaders or whatever last year; year before, probably up there too.

- goaltending has not really been much of an issue since Andersen has left. Clutch moments, sure, but overall, it's not like we've been letting in 4 goals a game to put it out of reach.

- the issue has been scoring. Goals. Pretty pretty big deal to win games. Some say even the most important thing, because there are no ties.
- gravyface

To me physicality isn't exactly the issue, though. When I watch Boston hit guys - it's hard but it's also purposeful. It often created room on the ice that they could exploit, or it was intended to free up the puck or pin a guy who had a specific role in the D-zone - Boston uses physicality intelligently. Going out and just hitting crap? Racks up numbers, does nothing.

The other thing isn't the physicality it's winning battles. Winning pucks. Winning on the wall in both zones. They've added some D that will help with that, I think, but the forward group doesn't have any additional fortitude.

I think last year against Boston you could pin a lot of that on Samsonov. He allowed at least one soft goal a game and in the playoffs where you battle for every inch of ice (and I know it's a platitude, but it's true) just to get off a good shot - and your goalie is allowing an unscreened, untouched floater from 50 feet out? The other guy is making heroic cross-crease saves and we're outshooting them 11-1 and losing 1-0? Thanks for nothing, goalie. It deflates a team. I know they're pros, but we've all played hockey where the goalie allows a stinker and you're working your asses off and it's frustrating. That affects a team huge.

I do agree that the issue is scoring. The team has an overdependence on Matthews and often Matthews likes to find soft areas which are further from the net in the playoffs - the further you go, the easier it is to save or block your shot, even if you're Auston Matthews. He needs to get closer. He needs to pull defenders to him. He is the lynchpin here - and if he's the guy they're worried about, then his linemates - be it Domi, Marner or Nylander or whomever - can get to the net. If they start expanding the ways they drive play, I think everyone gets more successful.

Steal some value before he walks?

Some of us think he sucks in the playoffs now. Why wait for him to prove it for an 8th time and walk for nothing??? Get a fuking 3C and 1-3RHD for him now.


- underhill14

This. You don't need to get a Pronger. You need to fill to fill two glaring holes with good players, and should be able to do so easily with Marners cap space. If the incoming players don't fit, trade them for futures*.
How many top level players have we seen come available the last 5 or so years, that would have been excellent fits, but we were never even in the bidding due to lack of tradable assets* or cap space? We need the flexibility you just cannot get while you have $10M dollar wingers.

*In this context, the same thing. Look at draft and trade deadline days...you can do wonderful things with enough draft picks.

People seem to be forgetting that:

- physicality has not been an issue for a few years now in the playoffs. Pretty sure we were the hit leaders or whatever last year; year before, probably up there too.

- goaltending has not really been much of an issue since Andersen has left. Clutch moments, sure, but overall, it's not like we've been letting in 4 goals a game to put it out of reach.

- the issue has been scoring. Goals. Pretty pretty big deal to win games. Some say even the most important thing, because there are no ties.
- gravyface

Scoring goals has been the problem. How much of that is due to the guy who normally stirs the drink in the O-zone, suddenly not going to the same areas he does in the regular season. When you practice a system all year, then one of your players alters that system when under pressure, what does that do to his line mates?

It's weird though how Marner is still the Leafs' playoff scoring leader during this era.

On Marner - isn't the debate losing focus?

The time to move a big name was last summer (or earlier) if they were going to do it. Tree can't do anything now except pay him ...or don't pay him.

If he's asking for 13M we're probably all on the same page (except 1 guy) and we'd all tell him to (frank) off. If he wants 11.5M we're probably all on the same page (except for a couple of guys) and we'd sign him up.

So really the bulk of us are battling over 1.5M in cap space. Lets see what the numbers sound like when they come out and then we can claw each others eyes out.

On Marner - isn't the debate losing focus?

The time to move a big name was last summer (or earlier) if they were going to do it. Tree can't do anything now except pay him ...or don't pay him.

If he's asking for 13M we're probably all on the same page (except 1 guy) and we'd all tell him to (frank) off. If he wants 11.5M we're probably all on the same page (except for a couple of guys) and we'd sign him up.

So really the bulk of us are battling over 1.5M in cap space. Lets see what the numbers sound like when they come out and then we can claw each others eyes out.
- The Law

I'm gonna go make some graphs.

It's weird though how Marner is still the Leafs' playoff scoring leader during this era.
- Zezel

He gets all the easy points.

Welcome to posting (again).

The thing is, I'm not for trading or losing Marner. I recognize that he has his flaws and is not a physical player but I also say that any team that has a smaller star player gets larger players to insulate that player. The Leafs have done nothing to protect their smaller and less physical players and allowed the fanbase to just verbally assault these guys - like it's fair.

Simply put - like Kane, you're 5'8 and 175 lbs, say, and guys who are 6'4 and 230 lbs are trying to run you into the boards. You should NEVER be expected to engage with that - but someone on your team should be making sure that the other team knows WHO to engage.

Mitch Marner is one of the most talented Leafs to ever wear the uniform and has never had the support he needs to be successful. Matthews is a notably large man who's never once stepped up for his teammate.

And I've mentioned this before, but it's really important to note: Kane was always undersized but his wingers and teammates made sure that he was protected. As such he flourished. Mitch Marner has never been protected on the Leafs and as such he's been injured on a number of occasions in the playoffs.

The first time I ever saw Marner recoil from hits was last year - that was the FIRST time - and he's been hit a lot. He was playing injured and for some reason he's the guy we've decided to villainize for losing to Boston.

I'm asking the Leaf fanbase to recognize that despite his smaller stature, we have a great player in our midst and to please stop trying to push him out.

Marner is not the problem with the core. Tavares is.
- Monkeypunk

I don't think anyone disagrees with any of this, but you can only fix so much at any given time.

To your last point, yes and no. Tavares is only a problem for one more year. Marner, and his eventual new contact, is going to be a problem for a long time. But, like you said, if the team can use Tavares' cap space to insulate Marner, maybe things can work.

On Marner - isn't the debate losing focus?

The time to move a big name was last summer (or earlier) if they were going to do it. Tree can't do anything now except pay him ...or don't pay him.

If he's asking for 13M we're probably all on the same page (except 1 guy) and we'd all tell him to (frank) off. If he wants 11.5M we're probably all on the same page (except for a couple of guys) and we'd sign him up.

So really the bulk of us are battling over 1.5M in cap space. Lets see what the numbers sound like when they come out and then we can claw each others eyes out.
- The Law

its just so (frank)ing annoying Sam Reinhart signs for 8.6 after just scoring 57 goals (and another 10 in the playoffs) ...and Leafs have to pay 12-3 for Marner.

its just so (frank)ing annoying Sam Reinhart signs for 8.6 after just scoring 57 goals (and another 10 in the playoffs) ...and Leafs have to pay 12-3 for Marner.
- senstroll

I've posted this a while ago but teams that keep a controlled internal salary structure tend to have better luck in signing their players for less.

Leafs completely destroyed theirs the day they signed Tavares because Matthews and Marner knew they were already better than him so they wanted more or close to what he had.

They are not the same level of players (at least not yet) but the Habs for example have their current best player signed at roughly 7.9M per season. It made it easier to then sign Caufield and Slaf, more core pieces, to a similar pricetag.

Same goes for Reinhart, he's willing to take a discount because A) He just won with Florida, I heard winning is great and B) he's not even thinking of getting more money than Barkov or Tkachuk.

I've posted this a while ago but teams that keep a controlled internal salary structure tend to have better luck in signing their players for less.

Leafs completely destroyed theirs the day they signed Tavares because Matthews and Marner knew they were already better than him so they wanted more or close to what he had.

They are not the same level of players (at least not yet) but the Habs for example have their current best player signed at roughly 7.9M per season. It made it easier to then sign Caufield and Slaf, more core pieces, to a similar pricetag.

Same goes for Reinhart, he's willing to take a discount because A) He just won with Florida, I heard winning is great and B) he's not even thinking of getting more money than Barkov or Tkachuk.
- Scabeh

oh i dont disagree.
its still extremely (frank)ing annoying.

even if Reinhart signed for the same cap hit % as Tkachuk, it would be 10.13 (on 88mil cap)

If marner just sign the same % hes at 11.77

Name the player as good or better than Pronger whom the Leafs can acquire for Marner.

I'll wait...
- Rare_Jewel

shea theodore

Chris Johnston
@reporterchris
·
1m
Anton Lundell signs a six-year extension with #FlaPanthers carrying a $5M AAV.

its just so (frank)ing annoying Sam Reinhart signs for 8.6 after just scoring 57 goals (and another 10 in the playoffs) ...and Leafs have to pay 12-3 for Marner.
- senstroll

I know it's so (frank)ing annoying. And it's become a cliche but the tax thing is (frank)ing real and it's becoming an increasingly bigger influence as the Cap/salaries increase.

Don't believe all the bullpoop about RCA's and other "tax balances" because they are not meaningful. High income earners like guaranteed cash so you're competing with 50c on the dollar vs. 65c on the dollar in no tax states. It's a massive advantage.

It's okay. I've made my points. You're free to disagree.

I firmly believe that you can have smaller players on your team and excel as long as you provide them with the right type of players to create time and space. In my opinion, if you put a line of nothing but Kane and two Kane clones, it would get crushed, smushed and smeared along the ice.

Because I believe that I also believe that Marner is wearing a lot of undue criticism because he was rarely put in a position to succeed. I did like when they had him out there with Knies, but of course he was with Captain Milquetoast (they were still even at 1-1) - and they had him on with Domi and Bertuzzi when Matthews was out - that line was +2 (2-0) despite being outplayed.

We'll see what happens, but too often I've seen from a Maple Leaf fan base a stubborn unwillingness to back down from unwarranted criticism; I figure there's too many people who've already written Marner off.
- Monkeypunk

Marner has played the majority of his time with elite Cs (Snake and AM34). He's ostensibly a superstar winger - the type of player who should have the capability of elevating the game of players around him but, in reality, has not produced in pressure moments with and without elite talent surrounding him.

When he signed his last contract it made him the highest paid winger in the game. Can anyone say that, at any point in his career, he has shown that he is just that?

He deserves the criticism.

Sure, we can argue that other elite players on the team have also failed to elevate their games in the post-season, but the targeting reticle is squarely on Mitch at this point as his UFA status is imminent.

This team needs to look long and hard at Marner and decide if he is due a raise and a recommitment, or if you let him walk and try to lure in a player like Draisaitl.

I wholeheartedly disagree that he's not been given every chance to succeed nor that he simply doesn't have the "heavy" support players around him to provide him with "space" when the game gets truculent.

Unfortunately, we're stuck with a difficult choice: we need to let a wonderful talent walk because we've overloaded the Core with soft, offensive talent.

shea theodore
- dmnted

I like Shea Theodore - who wouldn't? - but he's not equivalent to Pronger. He's also left handed and we really need a 1RHD.

I know it's so (frank)ing annoying. And it's become a cliche but the tax thing is (frank)ing real and it's becoming an increasingly bigger influence as the Cap/salaries increase.

Don't believe all the bullpoop about RCA's and other "tax balances" because they are not meaningful. High income earners like guaranteed cash so you're competing with 50c on the dollar vs. 65c on the dollar in no tax states. It's a massive advantage.
- The Law

there is probably some disparity but im not convinced thats whats driving the contracts and decisions to sign with certain teams (for less)

but really i dont know poop

Marner has played the majority of his time with elite Cs (Snake and AM34). He's ostensibly a superstar winger - the type of player who should have the capability of elevating the game of players around him but, in reality, has not produced in pressure moments with and without elite talent surrounding him.

When he signed his last contract it made him the highest paid winger in the game. Can anyone say that, at any point in his career, he has shown that he is just that?

He deserves the criticism.

Sure, we can argue that other elite players on the team have also failed to elevate their games in the post-season, but the targeting reticle is squarely on Mitch at this point as his UFA status is imminent.

This team needs to look long and hard at Marner and decide if he is due a raise and a recommitment, or if you let him walk and try to lure in a player like Draisaitl.

I wholeheartedly disagree that he's not been given every chance to succeed nor that he simply doesn't have the "heavy" support players around him to provide him with "space" when the game gets truculent.

Unfortunately, we're stuck with a difficult choice: we need to let a wonderful talent walk because we've overloaded the Core with soft, offensive talent.
- mjones242

So this isn't dismissive of your points - which I do understand, I just don't necessarily agree with entirely. But I made my point and I don't need to belabour them any further - I'm sure the whole board is tired of seeing essays float by.

It's not that I don't think Mitch is soft - I do. I think Mitch, Willy and Auston all play too soft. I don't need them hitting guys, but I do expect them to battle more when there is a battle to be had. That said, I do think with the right type of lineup support pieces in place they wouldn't have to battle as often.

Where he faced 30-40 shots every game against Colorado?

That wasn't on him. They wouldn't have even made the playoffs if he didn't stand on his head the rest of the season. The Jets flopped in front of him, didn't even give him a chance.

Samsonov, by comparison, was facing as low as 17 shots against the Bruins. If the Leafs had Hellebuyck, or a goalie of his caliber, they would have done much better. That was proven when Woll took over...but then got hurt...
- Rare_Jewel

Hellebuyck was (frank)ing terrible in the playoffs, dude. It wasn't because the team in front of him was bad, it was because he sucked.

Literally go watch some highlights.

Long time creeper, love reading the comments, makes me chuckle and/or swear at my computer (I'm somewhat old), this might be be my 6th comment in the last 10 - 15 years. Might get banned for language, don't care. To Retarded Jewel (aka UG) and Alcoholic (frank)tard / Tanooki / Horse Jizz; Marner is very talented. He is also a complete (frank)ing wussy who is scared to death of taking contact in the playoffs. We all saw it multiple times this past year. Anyone who has played this sport knows that you can't have guys who are not willing to give it all when it counts, and little female dog is not not that guy. If little female dog is gone for nothing but cap space this time next year, the Leafs will be better for it. Shout out to Dozzer, Galactic Stone, Skalapy, Monkeypunk, GreatGig, Big23, The Law, hell even Dozzer10. Most people on here get it. A few do not...
- graemet13

I think I've only had, like, 3 posts talking about trading Marner, and I was kinda joking in them. Saying to ship his ass to Winterpeg to learn some humility. And then welcome him back the year after.

Marner is the guy I'd trade, if trading one of the 3 was a thing that should happen, but I've said for a year now that I want to see him (the team, really) with a different coach. This should have happened last year and Brunette should've been the coach.

there is probably some disparity but im not convinced thats whats driving the contracts and decisions to sign with certain teams (for less)

but really i dont know poop
- senstroll

The tax issue is very real. So is the environment - you want to walk out of the arena and enjoy sunshine and warmth - Florida is a fantastic state to be in and you walk away with more of your money. California is beautiful but you may more to live there.

But Scabs also noted a hard truth - internal cost structures set the tone. I've been told it isn't true but I've also been told it is - and I believe that there's some truth to the fact that Mitch was working on an 8x8 deal and then the Leafs signed Tavares and they told the Leafs they'd rather wait until the next year to work out a deal. That's a $3m mistake.

I also had heard that Matthews' first contract talks were in the $10m range but then they signed Tavares and it went up to $11.6m. That's a $1.6m additional burden.

Now in theory if they don't sign JT, that would have been about $15m extra to sign a 2C and improve goaltending and D. When I stab my finger on a timeline and say "that's where it went wrong," that's the spot I point to.

That said Nylander signed after Tavares and his $7.5m contract doesn't seem particularly influenced by JT. I still think Nylander has been pacing himself with Pastrnak's contracts.