1. Home
  3. Sport

Maple Leafs report cards: Mitch Marner's commanding performance drives win

25 November 2024Last Update :
Maple Leafs report cards: Mitch Marner's commanding performance drives win

Heading into the Toronto Maple Leafs’ first meeting with the Utah Hockey Club, many of the headlines were dominated by William and Alex Nylander suiting up together plus the Fraser Minten–Nikita Grebenkin duo building off strong season debuts.

By the time the 60-minute battle was over, the novelty of those narratives had been overshadowed by the dominance of one of the team’s longest-tenured and most reliable players: Mitch Marner.

Marner tied the game in the second period by sneaking up ice and finishing a William Nylander-esque break, lit the lamp for a power play that was struggling to finish despite his best efforts to set up teammates, and was the best player on the ice for 21:29 in a 3-2 win. When Brad Treliving says the winger has ‘put the team on his back a little bit’ recently, Sunday’s performance is the type of effort he’s talking about.

The rest of the team wasn’t dead weight, though. The Maple Leafs earned 54.55 percent of shots and 59.39 percent of expected goals at five-on-five against Utah with Joseph Woll’s steady performance ensuring they weren’t stuck with a loss they didn’t deserve.

That’s a ‘B+’ performance.

Unit grades

L1 (McMann–Tavares–Marner): B-plus

This group didn’t consistently keep Utah locked in its own zone outside of one big shift early in the third, but it didn’t allow anything dangerous the other way — and produced a stellar goal in the second period.

The Maple Leafs might’ve hoped the first line would control play better against a team that didn’t have a unit to match them on raw talent, but a singular moment of brilliance in the absence of major defensive blunders is good enough.

L2 (Robertson–Holmberg–W. Nylander): C-plus

Pontus Holmberg was uncharacteristically dangerous — particularly in the first period — and Nylander scored the winning goal, but neither of those things made this group look cohesive or impactful.

This trio doesn’t really work on paper due to Holmberg’s lack of offensive juice and the group’s limited ability on the boards. It wasn’t much better in practice, as they were on the ice for Utah’s only five-on-five goal in the third period, and Nylander’s goal was an unassisted effort.

To give them some credit, Holmberg and Nick Robertson both hit posts, and their night might have felt different with a little more luck.

L3 (Grebenkin–Minten–A. Nylander): C-minus

This group of recent Toronto Marlies didn’t play much and produced little outside a shot off the post from Nylander in the third.

On a night the Maple Leafs dominated the play, this line was out-attempted 4-2 and had an expected goal rate of 40.17 percent. Most of Minten’s best moments came on the power play as he had a couple of chances in tight.

Grebenkin skated just 7:12 overall, the lowest total on the team by more than three minutes.

L4 (Steeves–Dewar–Lorentz): A-minus

The fourth line didn’t affect the box score, but they had a strong night. All three players got more ice time than the nominal third line, and they put three shots on net and delivered an impressive 15 hits.

In their 9:34, Toronto out-attempted Utah 8-6 and produced an 80.99 percent expected goal rate. Steven Lorentz provided the best singular moment, showcasing his speed on a drive to the net in the first.

D1 (Rielly–Ekman-Larsson): C-minus

Morgan Rielly had some effective moments offensively, finishing with four shots on net, but the Maple Leafs’ most offensively gifted pair didn’t have a strong night.

While Toronto controlled the play overall, the team struggled with Rielly and OEL on the ice. During their 12:39 at five-on-five, the Maple Leafs were outshot 11-6 with a 28.40 percent expected goal rate. They were also on the ice for Utah’s only even-strength goal allowed.

D2 (McCabe–Tanev): A-minus

The shutdown pair did their thing to quiet the game and prevent pucks from reaching the twine. In their 14:22 at five-on-five, there were just 10 total shots on net, with the Maple Leafs earning seven.

Jake McCabe’s penalty that resulted in the first goal would be a demerit, but it was a soft call. As a bonus, Chris Tanev produced his first five-on-five point as a Maple Leaf. It may have been a pass to John Tavares in his own zone, but it still counts.

D3 (Benoit–Timmins): B

The third pair struggled early in the game but settled in later on, with Simon Benoit’s holding penalty in the second standing out as their only significant demerit.

Their on-ice numbers were middling, and Conor Timmins didn’t threaten on the offensive end, but the limited minutes they offered were fine. In other words, they had a third-pair kind of night.

After throwing eight hits in a rambunctious effort on Wednesday, Benoit’s presence was felt less physically in this one as he had only had one hit.

Power play: B-

Early in the game, it looked like the Maple Leafs would deserve a dismal grade here, as they produced almost nothing from their first two attempts against a penalty kill that ranked 23rd in the NHL entering the game. To add insult to injury, old friend Alex Kerfoot was instrumental in stifling Toronto’s efforts.

The Maple Leafs turned the corner in the second period. Their third power-play attempt was an inspired effort that included three shots on goal, two off the post. The puck remained stubbornly outside the net, but on their fourth try, the Maple Leafs got a sprinkle of the luck that had eluded them.

This grade gets docked slightly by the team’s inability to convert on a five-on-three chance late in the second. By the night’s end, the team had spent 9:00 with the man advantage — including 1:24 of five-on-three time — and scored just once. It’s tough to be ecstatic about that effort.

Penalty kill: C

The Maple Leafs didn’t spend nearly as much time killing penalties as they did on the power play, so we aren’t grading from a big sample. Even so, the team gave up the game’s first goal on a kill where Utah completely controlled the puck and accomplished its mission in 30 seconds.

That said, Utah wasn’t as successful in its next attempts, with the Maple Leafs conceding just one shot.

Goaltender (Woll): B-plus

Woll came into this one riding high with .937 SV in his previous five games but wasn’t able to meet that standard with 23 saves on 25 shots. Both goals against him were tipped right in front, so it’s tough to fault him too much.

At the same time, he was rarely called on to do anything spectacular, either. Woll’s effort was more workmanlike than outstanding, but that was enough.

Game score

What’s next?

The Maple Leafs hit the road to take on the Florida Panthers at 7:30 p.m. Wednesday on TSN4.

(Photo: Chris Tanouye / Getty Images)

Recent