2017-18 Toronto Maple Leafs - General Discussion

[herman]

Just wanted to compliment your post Herman, very insightful.

Thanks Highlander. I could still be wrong about lots of things though! I have no insider knowledge or whatever. Just what I've gleaned from what those with access have said and what it looks like is happening. Babcock's interview responses are quite consistent with my current view of the situation.

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

Just wanted to compliment your post Herman, very insightful.

Thanks Highlander. I could still be wrong about lots of things though! I have no insider knowledge or whatever. Just what I've gleaned from what those with access have said and what it looks like is happening. Babcock's interview responses are quite consistent with my current view of the situation.

I second Highlander's commendation. 

I think you are bang on Herman. 

 

[ZBBM]

Hahaha I'm not fan of some of Babcock's decisions either but let's not get too myopic.

Quote from: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on Yesterday at 10:37:06 PM

Perhaps you're being a bit myopic yourself.  The main thrust of my comment was not on the particular Matthews question but on why the media is afraid to challenge Babcock directly.  Read through the presser and you see one creampuff after another.

 

[herman]

Perhaps you're being a bit myopic yourself.  The main thrust of my comment was not on the particular Matthews question but on why the media is afraid to challenge Babcock directly.  Read through the presser and you see one creampuff after another.

As someone with myopia, of course I am being myopic. I don't look as good as Carrick or Dubas though. Le sigh.

Maybe the media also see it the way I see it. Bob McKenzie, who isn't even on the beat, has outlined similarly what I've observed. It sounds like you want the coach to be swayed by media pressure. A third of a season of the team struggling against focused opposing pressure is enough of a sample size to grab pitchforks and torches?

What goal is being achieved if the beat reporters were hurling hard hitting questions? Why is their reticence to ask harder questions a cause of anger? It's a bit similar to the Leafs struggles; they're dumping and chasing in the face of tighter checking, rather than holding the puck they want to. Maybe a reporter out there wants to buzz Babcock with a fastball high and inside, but Babcock always kicks off his pressers by pre-steering the conversation deliberately. Maybe it's just me, but I don't see the point in feeling anything about this.

 

[hockeyfan1]

From Mirtle Mailbag (TheAthletic): A question someone posed...

[tweet]951658471015010304[/tweet]


Upon reading the response to the question, this is the summation I garnered (my own words):

Truth is, Babcock was deploying the usage of player minutes during his coaching tenure in Detroit, much in the same way he's doing with the Leafs.

Gardiner has the team's highest minutes players (22) and ranks 40th among defencemen n the league, while Matthews has the team's highest minutes and ranks 62nd among forwards in the league.

The Reilly/Hainsey pairing gets fewer minutes combined than the Gardiner/Zaltsev pairing.  At first this may seem odd, but the Leafs top D gets many more tough minutes at 5v5.

And of special teams?  Again, there is no particular strategy except that it's assigned to an odd mix of one or two lines/units/players. 

All of this points to some sort of the Bettle (Dr. Jeremy Bettle) approach that not only Babcock but the rest of the Leafs management (Science Dept., etc) has embraced.  Babcock has never been a user or distributor of minutes as evident throughout his coaching career.

 

[AvroArrow]

Just wanted to compliment your post Herman, very insightful.

To the mods: I accidentally clicked "report to moderator" on Highlander's post.  His post is clearly fine.  My bad.

 

[ZBBM]

Perhaps you're being a bit myopic yourself.  The main thrust of my comment was not on the particular Matthews question but on why the media is afraid to challenge Babcock directly.  Read through the presser and you see one creampuff after another.

As someone with myopia, of course I am being myopic. I don't look as good as Carrick or Dubas though. Le sigh.

Maybe the media also see it the way I see it. Bob McKenzie, who isn't even on the beat, has outlined similarly what I've observed. It sounds like you want the coach to be swayed by media pressure. A third of a season of the team struggling against focused opposing pressure is enough of a sample size to grab pitchforks and torches?

What goal is being achieved if the beat reporters were hurling hard hitting questions? Why is their reticence to ask harder questions a cause of anger? It's a bit similar to the Leafs struggles; they're dumping and chasing in the face of tighter checking, rather than holding the puck they want to. Maybe a reporter out there wants to buzz Babcock with a fastball high and inside, but Babcock always kicks off his pressers by pre-steering the conversation deliberately. Maybe it's just me, but I don't see the point in feeling anything about this.

No, I don't want him to be swayed by reporters, but I do think as a public figure he ought to expect to be asked, and be willing to address, tough questions.  The reason I feel strongly about it is that I think sports journalism could be a lot better than it is.  Most of it isn't even journalism.  It's just ritualized banter designed to be non-offensive.  It's fake.  It would be much more interesting if there was a real dialogue.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

No, I don't want him to be swayed by reporters, but I do think as a public figure he ought to expect to be asked, and be willing to address, tough questions.  The reason I feel strongly about it is that I think sports journalism could be a lot better than it is.  Most of it isn't even journalism.  It's just ritualized banter designed to be non-offensive.  It's fake.  It would be much more interesting if there was a real dialogue.

Exactly, nobody is asking the reporters to call him an a$$hole.

It's clear a significant portion of the fanbase is frustrated, the media is frustrated amongst themselves and then when they get in front of the one guy who could go a long way to easing those frustrations, they don't even ask him anything that might make him have to pause and answer respectfully. They could politely corner him into offering a layman's explanation to the people who financially support the hockey club.

Nobody is asking him for his entire system breakdown or the reason for every decision, but pointing out the inconsistencies between what he says and what he does (favoring the vet, inexplicable icetime distribution, having a fly swatter on the fourth line that no longer swats flies) and asking for an explanation isn't unreasonable, when every metric the public has to measure these decisions points to them being illogical.

 

[bustaheims]

Credit to @B1rky on twitter for a good little summary of some of what ails the Leafs.

Toronto barely made it into the playoffs last season. They'll get in this year because there is no pressure from the teams below them. But they're probably still the 7th or 8th best team in the East. In a league where slightly more than half of the teams make the playoffs.

mirtle: Leafs have five regulation/overtime wins in their last 20 games.

At this rate, that's not even a certainty. If one of Florida, Montreal, or Detroit go on a stretch where they win 7 or 8 out of 10, and the Leafs keep fumbling around, it's gonna get awfully tight.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

At this rate, that's not even a certainty. If one of Florida, Montreal, or Detroit go on a stretch where they win 7 or 8 out of 10, and the Leafs keep fumbling around, it's gonna get awfully tight.

It's honestly hilarious how far back Detroit/Florida/Montreal are, even after our struggles. Hopefully it's still funny at the end of the season.

 

[Guilt Trip]

At this rate, that's not even a certainty. If one of Florida, Montreal, or Detroit go on a stretch where they win 7 or 8 out of 10, and the Leafs keep fumbling around, it's gonna get awfully tight.

It's honestly hilarious how far back Detroit/Florida/Montreal are, even after our struggles. Hopefully it's still funny at the end of the season.

Exactly. Does anyone seriously see any of those teams going on a big run?

 

[CarltonTheBear]

https://twitter.com/mirtle/status/954209860521881600

 

[bustaheims]

Exactly. Does anyone seriously see any of those teams going on a big run?

All it takes is a goalie to get hot - and two of those teams have goalies very much capable of carrying their team for a stretch.

 

[ZBBM]

Exactly. Does anyone seriously see any of those teams going on a big run?

All it takes is a goalie to get hot - and two of those teams have goalies very much capable of carrying their team for a stretch.

It hardly matters. The team hasn't made any real strides over last year and is no threat to have a long run.

 

[AvroArrow]

I'm starting to think all these questionable decisions are intentional.  It's like Babcock is trying to keep the team and, more importantly, his young players from really breaking out.  Like he needs to prevent them from getting PAID too much too soon.  And he's been able to secretly do it under the guise of teaching them to play "right".  It's a bit of a conspiracy theory, but more and more I believe it to be true.

 

[Zee]

I'm starting to think all these questionable decisions are intentional.  It's like Babcock is trying to keep the team and, more importantly, his young players from really breaking out.  Like he needs to prevent them from getting PAID too much too soon.  And he's been able to secretly do it under the guise of teaching them to play "right".  It's a bit of a conspiracy theory, but more and more I believe it to be true.

I don't buy this at all.  The coach won't care what players get paid or intentionally try to keep stats down to help contracts.  They're paid to produce wins, and right now things aren't going so well.

 

[herman]

I'm starting to think all these questionable decisions are intentional.  It's like Babcock is trying to keep the team and, more importantly, his young players from really breaking out.  Like he needs to prevent them from getting PAID too much too soon.  And he's been able to secretly do it under the guise of teaching them to play "right".  It's a bit of a conspiracy theory, but more and more I believe it to be true.

I don't buy this at all.  The coach won't care what players get paid or intentionally try to keep stats down to help contracts.  They're paid to produce wins, and right now things aren't going so well.

I think (obviously) there is some intention, but the intention isn't to suppress salaries. By the same token, the intention isn't to get Matthews and Nylander and Marner the most goals they can get either.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

By the same token, the intention isn't to get Matthews and Nylander and Marner the most goals they can get either.

At some point he's gotta rethink that:
https://twitter.com/simmonssteve/status/954374620366295042

 

[herman]

By the same token, the intention isn't to get Matthews and Nylander and Marner the most goals they can get either.

At some point he's gotta rethink that

I don't disagree. If it were up to me, I'd play the kids up and down the lineup, but there are some trust issues to sort out with the Coach.

Pittsburgh and Tampa  (and Boston!) hit their strides with their high talent rosters when they bumped up their AHL coach to the NHL. I believe it is largely due to those coaches trusting the younger depth players (Guentzal, Sheary, Point, Johnson, Palat, Kucherov) and letting them elevate the team at pennies on the dollar.

Granted, those three teams have superstar veterans anchoring the top positions aleady, while ours are bordering on middling (Kadri, JvR, Gardiner). I understand where Babcock is coming from, as outlined previously, but it's past time to shelve the likes of Komarov, Polak, Bozak, Martin, even if the Big Three aren't 100% pro-veteran 1000-gamers yet. Vegas is showing that a speedy 4th line can still get the job done. Philly showed obviously that skilled forwards on the PK needs only be feared by the opposing team.

They should've traded the pending UFAs last year or earlier and given more time to the clearly graduated Marlies time to adjust during the gimme season last year, when we only got into the playoffs by virtue of Tampa's injuries.

 

[mr grieves]

Looks like Babcock is subbing in Moore but making no other changes. Nothing - not even an epically bad few months for the second line and a losing streak - will convince Babcock to break that line up. He will continue to give Komarov more ice time than any other forwards, notwithstanding a million reasons why he shouldn't, because he's the decider.

Given the tools at his disposal, I honestly think Babcock could not be making worse decisions regarding line-up management. He is shockingly and irrationally stubborn.

What's clearly obvious is that Babcock is measuring for things other than the stats at the end of the night (attention to detail). If you see his decisions through the lens of wanting to develop a program and player attitude of a) being on the right side of the puck, b) taking care of your assignment, c) taking care of your body/preparation consistently, then it is pretty obvious why Komarov, Hyman, Brown consistently get the playing time and none of the 'punishment' for the missed executions they make.

The greater goal, beyond the score of one regular season game, is building a core of elite two-way talent that never takes nights off, because that's what marches teams deep into the playoffs season after season. He's deliberately providing resistance against the skilled players who have grown up through other teams being gifted ice time and high leverage situations by virtue of their scoring ability, and he wants them to be better everywhere else in their game and break through that ceiling.

I think this is a really charitable, optimistic read of what's going on with the team right now, but I'd find it plausible if:

1. Babcock weren't playing -- game in, game out -- the sort of guys he's always played because he thinks they give his teams the best chance to win (Komarov, Polak, Martin, Andersen), instead of younger, NHL-ready players who have the potential to be developed into two-way players (or giving his goalie a break). All indications coming out of training camp were that Babcock's decisions were keyed to his desire to have the best chance to win every night -- all that's changed is that they're no longer winning, so those favorably disposed toward him (lookit that Team Canada record!) have to connect a mediocre record and relatively poor play with an unchanging line-up. If this were a teaching/development year, we'd see more things like players being tested in different roles for a decent run of games.

and

2. We could actually point to some evidence that, over the 20-30 games that the team's been playing well below their abilities (in terms of 'outputs'), Babcock's development plan is producing any tangible improvements. Marner and Nylander don't look, to me, like they're playing better two-way games. They just look stifled, uncertain, and often without adequate support.  I also don't buy that shot differentials are an 'output' -- positive shot differentials, out-Corsi-ing the opposition, winning the scoring chance battle, etc. are, and have long been understood as, the controllable 'inputs' that can lead to desired outcomes. Redefining the 'inputs' down to the stuff Babcock's 'measuring' -- attention to detail, decision making within the system, ability to 'dig in' -- seems, to me, a lot like what the Carlyle apologists were doing  a few years back, albeit with a narrative appended that justifies frittering away the cost-controlled years of elite talent.