Is this the turning point???

[moon111]

Might of helped to distribute the ice-time a little more evenly in these back-to-back games.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

At least we're not Washington?  :-\

 

[nutman]

Well tonight will be a big test to see if the boys can prove there turning the corner. After that stinker with the Isles, they had better bring it against the Rangers.

 

[Zee]

Well tonight will be a big test to see if the boys can prove there turning the corner. After that stinker with the Isles, they had better bring it against the Rangers.

Totally agree. It's still early but the compete level tonight will tell a lot about where this team is.

 

[nutman]

well we got the goaltending, its to bad the forwards stayed home. me thinks we need the whole team to come out to win.

 

[moon111]

I felt the Ranger game would be a good indicator of how good the Leafs are.  My gut feeling was telling me it would be a huge disappointment.  Didn't watch the game.

 

[ZBBM]

I felt the Ranger game would be a good indicator of how good the Leafs are.  My gut feeling was telling me it would be a huge disappointment.  Didn't watch the game.

And yet we led for more than half the game.  I think cw was right in the GDT: RC got outcoached.  That's got to be part of the assessment.

 

[cw]

I felt the Ranger game would be a good indicator of how good the Leafs are.  My gut feeling was telling me it would be a huge disappointment.  Didn't watch the game.

And yet we led for more than half the game.  I think cw was right in the GDT: RC got outcoached.  That's got to be part of the assessment.

I just remember Tortorella going off on it during the media scrums after the games they lost. Toronto's speed was giving them fits. Now to Tortorella's credit, he had his team head manning/Hail Mary's going all night to spring his big forwards and help counter what I think he expected was going to be a speed game. But when the Leafs didn't counter with firewagon hockey/quick transitions, they were easy prey for the big Rangers in the dump in & chase puck battles - which the Rangers would dominate with their size.

It's a bit of a deja vu for me because I remember Wilson trying Carlyle's approach used in last night's game for a while. The Leafs goaltending wasn't good enough to keep it tight and the Leafs couldn't get any offence going when they played that way because as much as those coaches can request the players battle harder along the boards - the size mismatch is too  much to expect an advantage for the Leafs. For smaller guys like Kadri, Kessel & Grabbo (3 of their best forwards), they score best on the move.

The key thing with that is they have to strike, get their shot away and then get the heck back - don't get caught deep. And then the defensive risk/exposure of an odd man rush coming the other way is significantly reduced - which is the risk with run & gun. I think that's the best risk-reward approach for this group - particularly against the big teams. And when you make those big guys skate, they get tuckered out by the third period - compared to the smaller forwards.

It's not going to work out every night but I think it will work better for this group against those big teams than trying what they did last night. And I think we've seen that in games gone by - particularly against the Rangers.

 

[Erndog]

Well tonight will be a big test to see if the boys can prove there turning the corner. After that stinker with the Isles, they had better bring it against the Rangers.

So I guess they absolutely failed miserably on the test?

 

[Kessel Run]

Well tonight will be a big test to see if the boys can prove there turning the corner. After that stinker with the Isles, they had better bring it against the Rangers.

So I guess they absolutely failed miserably on the test?

Pretty much. First half of the game again was decent, second half was disaster. This was a problem with Wilson as well, not being able to put together 60 minutes.

If they had been more competitive in the third and lost in overtime/shootout I would be OK with it.

 

[nutman]

Well tonight will be a big test to see if the boys can prove there turning the corner. After that stinker with the Isles, they had better bring it against the Rangers.

So I guess they absolutely failed miserably on the test?

Looks lke it, and things dont look like they will get any better anytime soon.

 

[Leaflifer]

I felt the Ranger game would be a good indicator of how good the Leafs are.  My gut feeling was telling me it would be a huge disappointment.  Didn't watch the game.

And yet we led for more than half the game.  I think cw was right in the GDT: RC got outcoached.  That's got to be part of the assessment.

I just remember Tortorella going off on it during the media scrums after the games they lost. Toronto's speed was giving them fits. Now to Tortorella's credit, he had his team head manning/Hail Mary's going all night to spring his big forwards and help counter what I think he expected was going to be a speed game. But when the Leafs didn't counter with firewagon hockey/quick transitions, they were easy prey for the big Rangers in the dump in & chase puck battles - which the Rangers would dominate with their size.

It's a bit of a deja vu for me because I remember Wilson trying Carlyle's approach used in last night's game for a while. The Leafs goaltending wasn't good enough to keep it tight and the Leafs couldn't get any offence going when they played that way because as much as those coaches can request the players battle harder along the boards - the size mismatch is too  much to expect an advantage for the Leafs. For smaller guys like Kadri, Kessel & Grabbo (3 of their best forwards), they score best on the move.

The key thing with that is they have to strike, get their shot away and then get the heck back - don't get caught deep. And then the defensive risk/exposure of an odd man rush coming the other way is significantly reduced - which is the risk with run & gun. I think that's the best risk-reward approach for this group - particularly against the big teams. And when you make those big guys skate, they get tuckered out by the third period - compared to the smaller forwards.

It's not going to work out every night but I think it will work better for this group against those big teams than trying what they did last night. And I think we've seen that in games gone by - particularly against the Rangers.

True, this team doesn't look like a bruising tight checking defensive team.

Its possible that the Leafs don't feel they have the goaltending needed for high risk/high reward hockey.

 

[cw]

I felt the Ranger game would be a good indicator of how good the Leafs are.  My gut feeling was telling me it would be a huge disappointment.  Didn't watch the game.

And yet we led for more than half the game.  I think cw was right in the GDT: RC got outcoached.  That's got to be part of the assessment.

I just remember Tortorella going off on it during the media scrums after the games they lost. Toronto's speed was giving them fits. Now to Tortorella's credit, he had his team head manning/Hail Mary's going all night to spring his big forwards and help counter what I think he expected was going to be a speed game. But when the Leafs didn't counter with firewagon hockey/quick transitions, they were easy prey for the big Rangers in the dump in & chase puck battles - which the Rangers would dominate with their size.

It's a bit of a deja vu for me because I remember Wilson trying Carlyle's approach used in last night's game for a while. The Leafs goaltending wasn't good enough to keep it tight and the Leafs couldn't get any offence going when they played that way because as much as those coaches can request the players battle harder along the boards - the size mismatch is too  much to expect an advantage for the Leafs. For smaller guys like Kadri, Kessel & Grabbo (3 of their best forwards), they score best on the move.

The key thing with that is they have to strike, get their shot away and then get the heck back - don't get caught deep. And then the defensive risk/exposure of an odd man rush coming the other way is significantly reduced - which is the risk with run & gun. I think that's the best risk-reward approach for this group - particularly against the big teams. And when you make those big guys skate, they get tuckered out by the third period - compared to the smaller forwards.

It's not going to work out every night but I think it will work better for this group against those big teams than trying what they did last night. And I think we've seen that in games gone by - particularly against the Rangers.

True, this team doesn't look like a bruising tight checking defensive team.

Its possible that the Leafs don't feel they have the goaltending needed for high risk/high reward hockey.

They could be looser when they had Cujo and played it in 1999. Good goaltending sure helps a team get away with it more.

And even that team ran into trouble in the Conf finals against the Sabres who were a big club at that time and basically out muscled the Leafs to the finals.

But having said that, the object is to get the most out of the talent you have to win as many games as possible. I don't see this roster able to play the way they tried to play against the Rangers and get anywhere. When they face big guys, they should use their speed and make those big lugs skate and try to keep up with them. They'll win more races to the puck and as a result, have fewer puck battles to lose that way in my opinion.

As I mentioned above, they can probably compromise with the 1999 Cujo team to help Reimer by being more responsible about not getting caught deep as much. Take their shot/scoring chance and skate back kind of idea - maybe bail out on higher risk second and third chances.

Carlyle wants more "compete" out of his players in the puck battles. That's fine to encourage and it can help some.  But when David fought Goliath, he didn't beat him with brawn.  They need to sling the waterbugs at these giants to give themselves the best chance. Some nights, like they have against the Rangers in the recent past, they'll steal a few games.

 

[nutman]

They seem to just quit when things go bad, this is something Carlyle needs to get them past. I also  think they can win using the speed game. one thing I would try is beefing up Kessels line to get him going, our offence has been no where in sight.

 

[crowlster]

I was thinking maybe when they are not able to handle another teams top line why not put the fourth line of orr, mcclement, and brown out there and just get them to bruise up the top line as much as possible everytime they touch the puck... its not like the rest of the lines were able to handle them in the first place

 

[nutman]

No. I am not even sure that it is a transition year. They simply do not have enough talent to do anything yet. The higher the draft pick the better.

Its a solid draft year, a good sign that we will do well. ;D

This.... is a surprisingly good point.  ;D

We wont finish low because it is a good draft year, and that is a fact all Leaf fans should know by now. if we miss the playoffs we will be close to 8th.

 

[pmrules]

No. I am not even sure that it is a transition year. They simply do not have enough talent to do anything yet. The higher the draft pick the better.

Its a solid draft year, a good sign that we will do well. ;D

This.... is a surprisingly good point.  ;D

We wont finish low because it is a good draft year, and that is a fact all Leaf fans should know by now. if we miss the playoffs we will be close to 8th.

The curse of the Leafs! 

 

[Erndog]

No. I am not even sure that it is a transition year. They simply do not have enough talent to do anything yet. The higher the draft pick the better.

Its a solid draft year, a good sign that we will do well. ;D

This.... is a surprisingly good point.  ;D

We wont finish low because it is a good draft year, and that is a fact all Leaf fans should know by now. if we miss the playoffs we will be close to 8th.

8th pick overall? 

That's still to high for us.

Top 4-5 pick guaranteed.

 

[Redleaf]

No. I am not even sure that it is a transition year. They simply do not have enough talent to do anything yet. The higher the draft pick the better.

Its a solid draft year, a good sign that we will do well. ;D

This.... is a surprisingly good point.  ;D

We wont finish low because it is a good draft year, and that is a fact all Leaf fans should know by now. if we miss the playoffs we will be close to 8th.

8th pick overall? 

That's still to high for us.

Top 4-5 pick guaranteed.

Unless Reimer gets hurt again, we won't get a top 5 pick. Book it.

 

[Zee]

No. I am not even sure that it is a transition year. They simply do not have enough talent to do anything yet. The higher the draft pick the better.

Its a solid draft year, a good sign that we will do well. ;D

This.... is a surprisingly good point.  ;D

We wont finish low because it is a good draft year, and that is a fact all Leaf fans should know by now. if we miss the playoffs we will be close to 8th.

8th pick overall? 

That's still to high for us.

Top 4-5 pick guaranteed.

Unless Reimer gets hurt again, we won't get a top 5 pick. Book it.

Yeah I have to admit Reimer looked pretty good in his 2 games.  If he gives that type of competent goaltending no way the Leafs are a top 5 pick team.