Mitch Marner
A review of the Maple Leafs options, and how they can use Marner's ego for positive change
It’s been almost a month since the great collapse of the Maple Leafs but conversations about Mitch Marner continue.
His contract figures, playoff performances, and his over-use of the term “we” in his post-game comments are to blame.
The theme of the Marner discourse is whether or not the Leafs should trade their $10-million man. This is round two of such debates, actually, as his performance in the five-game series against the Blue Jackets begged the question. This year, however, there seems to be greater merit to the idea and the fire it’s started is spreading further every time the Habs win a playoff game - and they’re in the finals.
So, we need to keep talking this fire out. Emotions are high, rightfully so, but if we want to put ourselves in the shoes of Leafs’ management, we have to set them aside. A case can be made to keep or trade the former fourth-overall pick. This article will look at both.
The Case for Trading Mitch Marner
Mitch Marner has not proven he can perform in the playoffs.
Four points in each of the last three series (seven, five, and seven games, respectively) are far below the standard he sets in the regular season as a 90-point player.
Marner’s results are not outliers to the rest of the team’s in the playoffs but the same cannot be said for his effort. He dodged contact, lost puck battles, consistently attacked from the outside, turned pucks over, and did not show signs of creativity to adjust to the circumstances.
Maybe Matthews’ challenges rubbed off on Marner. The former’s shooting percentage was low, but Matthews at least looked like a threat throughout the series. He managed 11 takeaways in the series while only turning the puck over once, compared to Marner’s four takeaways and four giveaways. These ratios are consistent with the previous three series, too, in which Matthews’ giveaways to takeaways were 24-4 to Marner’s 14-13.
His powerplay efforts only amplified his struggles, constantly making passes where there weren’t any and shooting pucks into shin pads. I disagree with the idea of Marner shooting more - he’s not a strength to the powerplay as a shooter. Perhaps a change in powerplay positions would suit him well.
Evidentally Marner lacks ability in the playoffs, so it’s worth asking - can the Leafs do well without him? Results from the last few seasons suggest trading him without loss is possible.
The following graphs developed by Micah Blake McCurdy paint a picture in which Marner is not the driving force of the team’s offence. He’s a gifted player who can make players better, don’t get me wrong, but it looks like he hasn’t elevated his common linemates. Hyman and Matthews were better off without Marner than Marner was without them this season. Most notably, Marner’s xGA and xGF per 60 minutes were relatively awful playing without Matthews.
The 2018-19 season further illustrates this narrative - Tavares’s career year, with Marner on his wing. Many attributed much of Tavares’s success to Marner’s playmaking ability, but Marner performed poorly without him while Tavares's impacts remained consistent, independent from Marner.
Add this to the reality of Tavares being a model of consistency (and the captain), Nylander providing the most value relative to his contract, and Matthews being Matthews, and it seems Marner is the expendable one.
The Maple Leafs would be parting ways with one of the most talented wingers in the league, but one whose talents are not serving as an advantage in the playoffs, and they would be adding cap flexibility in the process. When your best two players don’t perform, it doesn't disprove the top-heavy strategy, but it’s worth considering the advantages of freeing money to adjust the dynamic of the team and what they’re capable of doing.
The Montreal Canadiens aggressively forechecked the Leafs with four lines. The Leafs had four good lines too, but they naturally allocated more ice-time to the best goal scorer in the league and Marner, especially since Tavares was out.
The Canadiens had an answer for Marner in all three zones. He was forced to the outside in the o-zone, stopped at the blue line and forced to dump in the neutral zone, and under pressure on his puck-touches in the d-zone.
We can assume in a Marner trade that the Leafs could bring in one elite player who provides a different aspect to the game, or two less-elite but strong players (through the trade, in free agency, or both). Sacrificing quality for quantity could help the top six create scoring chances and avoid scenarios like in the Habs series, where Hyman got the bulk of the high danger chances - no slight on Hyman but this does not optimize the first line.
So, instead of running it back, the Leafs could seek what they could’ve had instead of Foligno (without mentioning names) - an additional scoring threat on the wing to make up for the Habs’ relentless coverage of 16 and 34.
Alternatively, the Leafs could use the flexibility to address the issues in transition. Marner’s playmaking abilities come from his creativity and ability to see the ice. When his space is limited on breakouts and he cannot escape pressure with clever passes, he cannot escape with speed - he doesn’t transition with pace. Perhaps they use the acquired cap space on top-nine forwards with greater ability to break out using speed. In addition, coveted Toronto-born free agent Dougie Hamilton can effectively create pace and space in transition.
Of course, these flaws could be addressed without trading Marner - but even then, questions must be asked about his ego rumoured to be interfering with change. Might his ego be the toughest obstacle for the Leafs to overcome in trying to get the most of him? More on this below.
The Case for Keeping Mitch Marner
There is a simple point to the other side of the debate. He is an elite, uniquely talented player often not found by other teams. He is the type of player you try to build around. His consistent playoff failures have revealed flaws, but at the young age of 24, I am not convinced these flaws can’t be addressed.
Besides, his flaws were in line with the team’s playoff woes. The group as a whole struggled under the pressure of Montreal’s forecheck. This was enabled by the Leafs 1-1-3 formation in the neutral zone, as Jack Han has noted, making the Leafs susceptible to an aggressive forecheck, which in turn made it difficult to break out and develop rush opportunities. When the Leafs did find their way into the o-zone, their best players had trouble finding space in the slot.
In particular, Marner’s struggles need to be viewed in relation to Matthews’. Marner is a natural playmaker, and the guy he helped score 41 goals in 52 games had a shooting percentage below four in the series. If Matthews could have found ways to score, Marner would have enjoyed as much success.
The same goes for the previous playoff disappointments. In the last three playoffs, the team’s shooting percentage with Marner on the ice was 3.85 while Matthews’ was 3.76.
This extends to the powerplay, too. Marner might have been the name I yelled at the TV most when watching the powerplay, but he was only part of a dysfunctional special team. If the team did a better job working as a unit, on entries and in player movement once set-up, they would have got more out of Marner.
And it’s hard to believe this fix is impossible. Many of the problems in the playoff series were unexpected given Marner’s career so far.
Here’s an example from the 2019-20 season of the Leafs’ PP unit-making plays with greater structure. The players up top move the puck intending a return to Marner, who has a pass in mind before he can make it. The quick work also opens the bumper. Clearly in this scenario, the Leafs, and Marner, are a step ahead of the opponent.
In this next frame, Marner shows movement and patience. There is no play to the net on the first look, but he finds an open Tavares on the second look. More recently, he took his first look with no success.
“This doesn’t prove he can make the same plays in the playoffs,” you might be thinking. Below, you can see Marner - in a different location in the o-zone set-up - swiftly find Nylander drifting in front of an unguarded net from behind the goal-line. The Maple Leafs are doing a much better job here spacing the penalty killers and keeping them guessing by swapping positions.
All three powerplay examples above display playmaking unseen against Montreal and throughout the 2021 regular season. Why they couldn’t replicate this creativity is a mystery.
Another issue Marner and the team had was creating rush chances. But this is another aspect of the game in which he can excel. In this frame, Marner intercepts a neutral zone pass, creates a gap on entry, then passes it to the forward entering the zone with the most speed - key to transition plays.
Here’s another example of Marner intercepting a play in the neutral zone and counter-attacking. This time he proves it’s possible to make plays from the outside, taking it himself and scoring on a wrap-around.
So as agonizing as it was to watch Marner’s effort in the playoffs, the coaching staff has blame to absorb and opportunity to improve.
Will improvement, however, be impaired by Marner’s ego? His teammates defended him and raved about the energy he brings to the locker room, and Marner himself denies the idea he wouldn't move to another spot in the lineup, but the rumours persist.
Regardless, as harmful as an ego can be, the Leafs could also use it for positive change. Everyone has an ego, it’s just a matter of whether it’s healthy or toxic. A healthy ego means you understand and trust yourself. Marner shows signs of a healthy ego but needs to manage it so it doesn’t become toxic - when the definition of ourselves is not in line with reality.
He may believe he is as important as Matthews (or anyone for that matter). A healthier ego would simply believe in their talents exclusively and not compare themselves to others. This way, a lineup demotion (or simple adjustment) would not impede his confidence and awareness of himself.
If there is anything the Leafs need to advance in the playoffs it’s a better collective ego. Harnessing the “killer instinct” management was talking about will rely on them having greater belief in their strengths. Then, moments of pushback from opponents won’t cause doubt and send the Leafs in a downward spiral.
Sorting out Marner’s ego, along with the team’s, could accomplish the change this team is looking for without trading away one of the league’s few 90-point players.
Conclusion
Both sides of the Marner debate have merit and should be thoroughly explored by the Leafs’ front office.
Either path, trade or fix in-house, could bring about the progress waited on for five years. A new look Leafs core, with new skills, might be the answer. Addressing Marner’s flaws and fit within the team could have less risk and greater rewards.
Dubas and co. have the most information at hand so they will know best. They understand the capabilities of their players and staff and, after a review, will know how likely Marner is to correct his flaws. They are also the only ones who will know what actual trade opportunities exist - fans and media can only hypothesize.
Marner may be difficult to root for at the moment - and if he returns, doubt is acceptable - but I think most would rather see Marner figure it and become a hometown hero.
Stats courtesy of naturalstattrick.com and Mich Black McCurdy
Top photo courtesy of Steve Russel / Toronto Star