Development of the Youth

[Bender]

Stephen Burtch posted this on twitter the other day, but kind of a sobering reminder of the value of holding onto prospects, as this would be a really solid team.

http://capgeek.com/fantasy-calculator/roster/1330

I don't know how you did it but you managed to build a team worse than the Leafs.

edit: Also, I don't get it. It seems like it's a list of players the Leafs drafted but with Phil Kessel to make it look a little less sad.

Except it's based on advanced stats.  As Stephen Burtch said, Steen is arguably the best C from a Corsi perspective in the NHL, and Stalberg outperforms Kane/Toews from a Corsi perspective.  The rest is very solid depth scoring.

And I think the point is that that team would probably be just as good as this team, but with a lot more cap space to work with.

The stats may be positive based on the teams they currently play with, but together I don't think these players stand a chance and is not greater than the sum of their parts.

 

[Bender]

with the development of youth as the topic im surprised no one has mentioned the biggest surprise thus far in Mike Kostka. Playing huge minutes.

He isn't young at 27, that's why.

We also had essentially no stake in his development.

 

[Rebel_1812]

with the development of youth as the topic im surprised no one has mentioned the biggest surprise thus far in Mike Kostka. Playing huge minutes.

He isn't young at 27, that's why.

We also had essentially no stake in his development.

Sure we did.  We were the one team that didn't bury him in the minors.

 

[Bender]

with the development of youth as the topic im surprised no one has mentioned the biggest surprise thus far in Mike Kostka. Playing huge minutes.

He isn't young at 27, that's why.

We also had essentially no stake in his development.

Sure we did.  We were the one team that didn't bury him in the minors.

I meant beforehand. Its not like we did the heavy lifting developing him into who he is as a player today, he just kinda fell into our lap and we gave him a chance.

 

[slapshot]

He had great start, then a concussion plagued season, and has played pretty solid so far. If he ends the year, where he is now, 2.47 GAA and .922 Save Percentage, he'll be fine. Those number would look better historically at the end of the year.

Reimer is just a handful of games in and already people are predicting his future. He's only 24, younger than most goalies in the league, and hasn't yet had a full season under his belt. Give him the rest of this year, and let's see how he makes out.

Instead, people are expecting him to either prove himself elite or otherwise he's a bum. Go figure.

 

[Fanatic]

Reimer is just a handful of games in and already people are predicting his future.

Instead, people are expecting him to either prove himself elite or otherwise he's a bum. Go figure.

I have not found that to be the case.

 

[slapshot]

Not quite sure what qualifies as a moment of brilliance, but he's making some pretty big saves that look rather ordinary at times but are actually pretty tough stops. 

I'd say that in the context I was meaning it it's less about any particular save than it is playing at least the length of an entire game at the level of the goalie that you'd eventually want him to be on a full-time basis. I haven't seen that from Reimer in a long while.

I'd argue that in back-to-back games this week, Reimer played opposite two of the best goalies in the world (Lundqvist and Miller), and was the better goalie in both games.  Argue it if you will, but if that statement is true, then it speaks to Reimer's ability and/or conversely to the sometimes overlooked imperfections of even the best goalies in the world.

All goalies give up both questionable and bad goals.  The best goalies just give up fewer of them.  I'm not arguing that Reimer is a world-class goalie, but if he can hold his own head-to-head like that, he's pulling his weight, at least so far this season.

I agree, but you know its going to rain down on you now, for saying something positive.  ;D

Agreed. Kind of like all we hear about is Kessel trade (100 times as much) versus the Gardiner/Lupul or Phanuef deals. Or maybe, 1000 times as much. Negativity is so much more fun, right?

 

[rdowdall]

Not quite sure what qualifies as a moment of brilliance, but he's making some pretty big saves that look rather ordinary at times but are actually pretty tough stops. 

I'd say that in the context I was meaning it it's less about any particular save than it is playing at least the length of an entire game at the level of the goalie that you'd eventually want him to be on a full-time basis. I haven't seen that from Reimer in a long while.

I'd argue that in back-to-back games this week, Reimer played opposite two of the best goalies in the world (Lundqvist and Miller), and was the better goalie in both games.  Argue it if you will, but if that statement is true, then it speaks to Reimer's ability and/or conversely to the sometimes overlooked imperfections of even the best goalies in the world.

All goalies give up both questionable and bad goals.  The best goalies just give up fewer of them.  I'm not arguing that Reimer is a world-class goalie, but if he can hold his own head-to-head like that, he's pulling his weight, at least so far this season.

I agree, but you know its going to rain down on you now, for saying something positive.  ;D

Agreed. Kind of like all we hear about is Kessel trade (100 times as much) versus the Gardiner/Lupul or Phanuef deals. Or maybe, 1000 times as much. Negativity is so much more fun, right?

Yeah, only stupid people want to look at things objectively and call a spade a spade.

 

[Kin]

Agreed. Kind of like all we hear about is Kessel trade (100 times as much) versus the Gardiner/Lupul or Phanuef deals. Or maybe, 1000 times as much. Negativity is so much more fun, right?

I think it's more a pragmatic reaction to the state the team is in. If a house burns down you're more likely to talk about the defective furnace than you are the beautiful bay windows.

 

[slapshot]

Agreed. Kind of like all we hear about is Kessel trade (100 times as much) versus the Gardiner/Lupul or Phanuef deals. Or maybe, 1000 times as much. Negativity is so much more fun, right?

I think it's more a pragmatic reaction to the state the team is in. If a house burns down you're more likely to talk about the defective furnace than you are the beautiful bay windows.

House is burning down? I thought it was being built up...that is exactly my point. I actually don't see anything pragmatic about beating the Kessel deal to death.

 

[Bender]

Agreed. Kind of like all we hear about is Kessel trade (100 times as much) versus the Gardiner/Lupul or Phanuef deals. Or maybe, 1000 times as much. Negativity is so much more fun, right?

I think it's more a pragmatic reaction to the state the team is in. If a house burns down you're more likely to talk about the defective furnace than you are the beautiful bay windows.

If we use this analogy we could really go down the rabbit hole, but...

I just dont think it's really useful to complain about the furnace five years later. Instead wouldn't it be better to discuss where we go from here now that it happened? How to ensure that the fire doesn't happen again and what kind of value we can get from the new house?

 

[Kin]

If we use this analogy we could really go down the rabbit hole, but...

I just dont think it's really useful to complain about the furnace five years later. Instead wouldn't it be better to discuss where we go from here now that it happened? How to ensure that the fire doesn't happen again and what kind of value we can get from the new house?

Well, two things. One, in a way you're right. It's not particularly useful to complain about anything. That said, if you're going to spend your time on a sports website scanning the discussions for signs of utility I think you're in for a long haul. I've engaged in some pretty good long form yammerings back and forth here full of number crunching and analysis with some people who I consider to be pretty smart but even at the very heights of these Leafs-related discussions I don't know how useful they are. They're engaging and enlightening, to me anyway, and I like discussing the team very much but I don't think they solve much. Does saying "Man, the Kessel trade sucked" provide anything to the person who says it? I don't know. Maybe it's cathartic somehow. Not every post, however, can be "we rule man" or "we suck dudes" which does provide a pretty good degree of utility to people who can't watch the game but are watching the board to see who scores.

Regardless, again, it's just a natural state of life regardless of what analogy you want to use. If you blow a tire on your car, do you talk about the all of the parts of your car that did work? Even if it's a discussion concerning the future and the lessons you can learn from failed efforts, again, you're going to spend more time analyzing what went wrong than what went right because what went right is largely self-evident and doesn't need repeating.

I like to think I consume a pretty good amount of Leafs related media and I'd say that most of what I hear about the Kessel trade doesn't qualify as simply "complaining" but rather how it factors into both what went wrong and what's continuing to go wrong for the team.

 

[Kin]

House is burning down? I thought it was being built up.

That's a lovely outlook to have and kudos to you for having it but the reality of the situation is that your opinion on that matter is intrinsically no more or less valid than someone who thinks that the Leafs aren't particularly well positioned for the future and that they're continuing down a path that has proven unsuccessful in the past.

I actually don't see anything pragmatic about beating the Kessel deal to death.

It's a question of context and, as I said above to Bender, I don't think that's an accurate depiction of the usual context of people mentioning the Kessel trade.

Personally, I'd love to stop talking about the Kessel trade. The reason that it looks like that doing so is largely impossible is because it doesn't seem as though the actual lesson of the Kessel trade's failure has actually sunk in with the people who are running the team. As long as that continues to be the case the Kessel trade is going to be brought up by people who are looking for the latest example of the folly of the team's desire to short-cut the rebuilding process.

 

[Bender]

If we use this analogy we could really go down the rabbit hole, but...

I just dont think it's really useful to complain about the furnace five years later. Instead wouldn't it be better to discuss where we go from here now that it happened? How to ensure that the fire doesn't happen again and what kind of value we can get from the new house?

Well, two things. One, in a way you're right. It's not particularly useful to complain about anything. That said, if you're going to spend your time on a sports website scanning the discussions for signs of utility I think you're in for a long haul. I've engaged in some pretty good long form yammerings back and forth here full of number crunching and analysis with some people who I consider to be pretty smart but even at the very heights of these Leafs-related discussions I don't know how useful they are. They're engaging and enlightening, to me anyway, and I like discussing the team very much but I don't think they solve much. Does saying "Man, the Kessel trade sucked" provide anything to the person who says it? I don't know. Maybe it's cathartic somehow. Not every post, however, can be "we rule man" or "we suck dudes" which does provide a pretty good degree of utility to people who can't watch the game but are watching the board to see who scores.

Regardless, again, it's just a natural state of life regardless of what analogy you want to use. If you blow a tire on your car, do you talk about the all of the parts of your car that did work? Even if it's a discussion concerning the future and the lessons you can learn from failed efforts, again, you're going to spend more time analyzing what went wrong than what went right because what went right is largely self-evident and doesn't need repeating.

I like to think I consume a pretty good amount of Leafs related media and I'd say that most of what I hear about the Kessel trade doesn't qualify as simply "complaining" but rather how it factors into both what went wrong and what's continuing to go wrong for the team.

Well the main reason it's a rabbit hole for me is I work in insurance

 

[Kin]

Well the main reason it's a rabbit hole for me is I work in insurance

Well there you go. You work in insurance so you look at it one way, I love terrible analogies so I look at it another.

 

[ZBBM]

Well the main reason it's a rabbit hole for me is I work in insurance

Well there you go. You work in insurance so you look at it one way, I love terrible analogies so I look at it another.

There are policies that cover that condition, you know.