Leafs acquire Michael Grabner

[Redleaf]

Who could genuinely answer that question, without guessing? Edmonton could still be crappy, Buffalo may not improve as much as they'd like. Too many variables and unknowns right now. But every year, out of nowhere, there seem to be a few teams that under achieve and settle lower in the standings than anticipated.

Why is it so inconceivable that this Leafs team could be better than 5 other teams? Surprises happen every year in the NHL. I genuinely think this team could surprise some people.

I honestly don't understand your stance here. You're demanding facts and evidence for why people think that the Leafs are going to be a bottom-5 team. Most of us are using last seasons finish and the fact that our team arguably got worse while teams below us last season got better as that type of evidence. You can point out any roster other than the 3 teams that I've mentioned (2 of which I still think the Leafs can potentially be worse than) and I'd be able to state exactly why I think that they're a better team than Toronto. Your "facts" and "evidence" comes down to well anything can happen!.

But yeah, we're the ones who are out there on this topic.

I'm not demanding facts and evidence, thats what was imposed on me. 'Nobody' has relevant evidence as to how this team will perform. Thats my point. I may be in the minority about 'thinking' they will be better than last year. That shouldn't be outright dismissed. Not understanding my stance, I'm perfectly fine with. Although I've made it pretty clear that I believe coaching and systems along with the departure of Kessel is the reason I believe they could get better. I understand why that may be hard to comprehend for some, because it sort of goes against the kind of 'kool-aid'  thinking that they are going to be worse than last year.

 

[herman]

Mentally going through a list of 1C, 1W, 1D, and 1G across the league... yeah, we're bottom 5. I was thinking earlier that we'd be bottom 10 for sure, but maybe not as bad as bottom 5. Kadri/JvR/Phaneuf/Bernier is a middling group at best, but when you look at the supporting cast, it's built entirely of bottom 6 trade fodder who would have to play out of their minds every day to push for wins.

The coaching and the structure will yield us fewer lopsided losses than last year if the team picks it up quickly enough, but this is not a team built to score (especially without cheating the zone), nor is it a team built to absolutely shut down chances against.

 

[bustaheims]

I understand why that may be hard to comprehend for some, because it sort of goes against the kind of 'kool-aid'  thinking that they are going to be worse than last year.

So, opinions based on talent comparisons to other teams and last year's team, trends, statements by the team's coaching and leadership structure and other evidence is "Kool-Aid" thinking, but opinions based on mostly of media driven narratives is not? I don't think you know what drinking the Kool-Aid really is.

 

[Redleaf]

Mentally going through a list of 1C, 1W, 1D, and 1G across the league... yeah, we're bottom 5. I was thinking earlier that we'd be bottom 10 for sure, but maybe not as bad as bottom 5. Kadri/JvR/Phaneuf/Bernier is a middling group at best, but when you look at the supporting cast, it's built entirely of bottom 6 trade fodder who would have to play out of their minds every day to push for wins.

The coaching and the structure will yield us fewer lopsided losses than last year if the team picks it up quickly enough, but this is not a team built to score (especially without cheating the zone), nor is it a team built to absolutely shut down chances against.

Thanks for the constructive response. Does your scoring problem change a bit if Nylander makes the team at some point and is lights out? I mean, I understand scoring could be a big issue, but there are some guys that could make up some of the loss of Kessel's 25 goals, and Nylander could certainly be one of them.

 

[Redleaf]

I understand why that may be hard to comprehend for some, because it sort of goes against the kind of 'kool-aid'  thinking that they are going to be worse than last year.

So, opinions based on talent comparisons to other teams and last year's team, trends, statements by the team's coaching and leadership structure and other evidence is "Kool-Aid" thinking, but opinions based on mostly of media driven narratives is not? I don't think you know what drinking the Kool-Aid really is.

Of what media driven narratives do you speak? Because I've heard mostly from the media that this team will be horrendous this season.

 

[bustaheims]

Of what media driven narratives do you speak? Because I've heard mostly from the media that this team will be horrendous this season.

That Kessel was a bad influence, that Babcock could be a savior, etc. You are so drunk on the Mike Babcock Kool-Aid, you don't even realize it.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I'm not demanding facts and evidence, thats what was imposed on me. 'Nobody' has relevant evidence as to how this team will perform. Thats my point. I may be in the minority about 'thinking' they will be better than last year. That shouldn't be outright dismissed. Not understanding my stance, I'm perfectly fine with. Although I've made it pretty clear that I believe coaching and systems along with the departure of Kessel is the reason I believe they could get better. I understand why that may be hard to comprehend for some, because it sort of goes against the kind of 'kool-aid'  thinking that they are going to be worse than last year.

When I said I didn't understand your stance, I meant how you were going about arguing your opinion. From what I saw you were dismissing people's opinion because they weren't based on facts and evidence and then turning around and giving your own opinion not based on facts and evidence and acting like that was perfectly fine. Again, that's just how I saw it.

Of course nobody here can definitively say whether or not the Leafs will be a bottom-5 team, but if we're not allowed to make guess and speculate on a fan forum then we may as well shut things down. Is there a chance that the Leafs won't be a bottom-5 team this season? Sure. I don't think anybody here is saying that there's no chance in hell that happens. But I can't understand how someone can say that there's anything but a slim chance. Babcock's a great coach, but he's not a miracle worker. Dave Tippet was generally regarded as one of the best coaches in the entire league and he couldn't stop Arizona from being in the basement last season or again this season.

I really think that you're just not looking at the other teams in the league who will likely be in the bottom-10 and giving them enough thought. You say the Leafs will have improved coaching and structure this season? You know who else added highly regarded coaches this offseason? The two teams you brought up in Edmonton and Buffalo. They'll have improved coaching and structure too AND they've made pretty big improvements to their roster on paper too.

It's completely your right to think that the Leafs won't be a bottom-5 team this season, I just don't think that you're doing a very good job convincing anybody of it.

 

[ZBBM]

Have you considered that losing Kessel and his generally poor attitude, may actually be... wait for it... beneficial to the team?

What a crazy concept huh?

It is a crazy concept. Kessel was well like by his teammates, and players and coaches alike often called him one of the most competitive people on the team/that they knew. The whole "poor attitude" thing is a narrative created by people on the outside, looking in. So, yeah, citing something that those who would have been impacted by have soundly dismissed? Crazy.

I'm not going to get into this debate again, but I can't let this pass, busta, without pointing out a simple fact: if Babcock and Shanahan had wanted to keep Kessel, they would have "soundly dismissed" this supposed bad rap and kept him.  To pretend that his "poor attitude" was simply made up by "outsiders" is simply wrong. 

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I hope Grabner checks in here for some reason and thinks "8 pages?! Holy cow these guys must love me!".

 

[Redleaf]

Of what media driven narratives do you speak? Because I've heard mostly from the media that this team will be horrendous this season.

That Kessel was a bad influence, that Babcock could be a savior, etc. You are so drunk on the Mike Babcock Kool-Aid, you don't even realize it.

See Busta. This is exactly the type of irresponsible, immature response that makes me feel like you can't bend to anyone else's opinions unless you thought of it first. Give me a break.

 

[Bill_Berg]

Have you considered that losing Kessel and his generally poor attitude, may actually be... wait for it... beneficial to the team?

I would agree that other goal scorers at Kessel's level could provide more benefit to a team than Kessel does, but it's tough to show that Kessel's net worth is actually a minus.

 

[rdowdall]

Have you considered that losing Kessel and his generally poor attitude, may actually be... wait for it... beneficial to the team?

What a crazy concept huh?

It is a crazy concept. Kessel was well like by his teammates, and players and coaches alike often called him one of the most competitive people on the team/that they knew. The whole "poor attitude" thing is a narrative created by people on the outside, looking in. So, yeah, citing something that those who would have been impacted by have soundly dismissed? Crazy.

I'm not going to get into this debate again, but I can't let this pass, busta, without pointing out a simple fact: if Babcock and Shanahan had wanted to keep Kessel, they would have "soundly dismissed" this supposed bad rap and kept him.  To pretend that his "poor attitude" was simply made up by "outsiders" is simply wrong.

Unless of course keeping him goes against their plan.  They may not have wanted to have him on the team because they realized that having him on their team hurt their long term goal of trying to rebuild through the draft.

It depends on what you constitute as a poor attitude.  I think Kessel has poor practice habits.  He has poor practice habits because he can get away with it due to his talent level.  I think that irks some general managers and coaches.  As far as his attitude goes, I imagine he was a pleasant guy to be around in the dressing room and that he fit in well with the team.

 

[Redleaf]

I'm not demanding facts and evidence, thats what was imposed on me. 'Nobody' has relevant evidence as to how this team will perform. Thats my point. I may be in the minority about 'thinking' they will be better than last year. That shouldn't be outright dismissed. Not understanding my stance, I'm perfectly fine with. Although I've made it pretty clear that I believe coaching and systems along with the departure of Kessel is the reason I believe they could get better. I understand why that may be hard to comprehend for some, because it sort of goes against the kind of 'kool-aid'  thinking that they are going to be worse than last year.

Of course nobody here can definitively say whether or not the Leafs will be a bottom-5 team, but if we're not allowed to make guess and speculate on a fan forum then we may as well shut things down.

Thank-you CarltonTheBear. Those are my thoughts exactly.

 

[bustaheims]

I'm not going to get into this debate again, but I can't let this pass, busta, without pointing out a simple fact: if Babcock and Shanahan had wanted to keep Kessel, they would have "soundly dismissed" this supposed bad rap and kept him.  To pretend that his "poor attitude" was simply made up by "outsiders" is simply wrong.

Shanahan was firmly committed to changing the core of the team. That started with moving Kessel. Trading away your most talented player is the first step towards bottoming out and rebuilding. It's basically rebuilding 101. To pretend that anyone in the media actually knows anything about what Kessel is like in the dressing room or how he impacted the team is flat out wrong. The "bad rep" had absolutely nothing to do with the fact he was traded. He was traded because that's what rebuilding teams do. Reading anything more into it comes from a place of bias. The Leafs didn't want to keep Kessel because he was more valuable to them as a trade chip than as a player. It's as simple as that. They wanted to make it clear that changes were on the way for this team, and what clearer way to send that message than to trade your most talented player? Everything about his attitude, his locker room presence, etc, that comes from the media is entirely speculative and goes against what those who actually have seen Kessel in those situations say about him. Even Ron Wilson, who is often misquoted as saying that the Leafs couldn't win with Kessel (when what he really said was they couldn't win with Kessel as their best player) acknowledged how competitive he is.

 

[bustaheims]

Of what media driven narratives do you speak? Because I've heard mostly from the media that this team will be horrendous this season.

That Kessel was a bad influence, that Babcock could be a savior, etc. You are so drunk on the Mike Babcock Kool-Aid, you don't even realize it.

See Busta. This is exactly the type of irresponsible, immature response that makes me feel like you can't bend to anyone else's opinions unless you thought of it first. Give me a break.

I'm perfectly happy to acquiesce to an opinion that is based on facts, evidence and tangible proof. I'm unwilling to do so on those driven by speculation, hearsay and fantasy.

 

[herman]

Mentally going through a list of 1C, 1W, 1D, and 1G across the league... yeah, we're bottom 5. I was thinking earlier that we'd be bottom 10 for sure, but maybe not as bad as bottom 5. Kadri/JvR/Phaneuf/Bernier is a middling group at best, but when you look at the supporting cast, it's built entirely of bottom 6 trade fodder who would have to play out of their minds every day to push for wins.

The coaching and the structure will yield us fewer lopsided losses than last year if the team picks it up quickly enough, but this is not a team built to score (especially without cheating the zone), nor is it a team built to absolutely shut down chances against.

Thanks for the constructive response. Does your scoring problem change a bit if Nylander makes the team at some point and is lights out? I mean, I understand scoring could be a big issue, but there are some guys that could make up some of the loss of Kessel's 25 goals, and Nylander could certainly be one of them.

Nylander is good, so I don't think management is too interested in adding him to the mix for merely a part of a lost season. It would be better to hold him off until next year after he has proven he can dominate the AHL thoroughly and preserve his ELC. Every move they've made this off season has pointed to sheltering Nylander, Kapanen, Marner and loading up on draft picks (see UFAs, PTO options).

The players threatening to score 20 goals this year are JvR and maybe Kadri; both of them are prime trade targets in my mind for their age, cap hit, and talent. I understand that Babcock has worked teams to become greater than the sum of their parts in the past, but they weren't miracles. We might catch some teams flat-footed early in the season with our players gunning for contracts, but that's unsustainable, and they'll be traded away anyway.

 

[Redleaf]

Have you considered that losing Kessel and his generally poor attitude, may actually be... wait for it... beneficial to the team?

I would agree that other goal scorers at Kessel's level could provide more benefit to a team than Kessel does, but it's tough to show that Kessel's net worth is actually a minus.

It is tough, and I don't expect people to buy that. But the fact of the matter is the Leafs no longer wanted a top 5 NHL superstar who had more points than anyone at the last winter olympics playing against the worlds best players, and who is in the 'prime of his career'. If that doesn't scream 'problem player', I honestly don't know what does.

 

[louisstamos]

It is tough, and I don't expect people to buy that. But the fact of the matter is the Leafs no longer wanted a top 5 NHL superstar who had more points than anyone at the last winter olympics playing against the worlds best players, and who is in the 'prime of his career'. If that does scream 'problem player', I honestly don't know what does.

I'm going out a limb here - or, he was the player that would yield the highest return in terms of assets, and by the time was team was ready to complete again he would be on the downswing of his career, and so it would be better to trade him this summer when his value is somewhat high and use those assets to build for the future.

Note that other than the trade for Grabner, Kessel was the only Leaf trade during the off season, and I'm sure he wasn't the only "problem" player on the team.  It just that he was the only Leaf player that other teams really wanted.

 

[Redleaf]

Of what media driven narratives do you speak? Because I've heard mostly from the media that this team will be horrendous this season.

That Kessel was a bad influence, that Babcock could be a savior, etc. You are so drunk on the Mike Babcock Kool-Aid, you don't even realize it.

See Busta. This is exactly the type of irresponsible, immature response that makes me feel like you can't bend to anyone else's opinions unless you thought of it first. Give me a break.

I'm perfectly happy to acquiesce to an opinion that is based on facts, evidence and tangible proof. I'm unwilling to do so on those driven by speculation, hearsay and fantasy.

But is there any real tangible, relevant evidence to build a case based on what we saw last year that this team is really the same group? I mean, you have to be blind not to notice all the chances from last season.

 

[rdowdall]

Have you considered that losing Kessel and his generally poor attitude, may actually be... wait for it... beneficial to the team?

I would agree that other goal scorers at Kessel's level could provide more benefit to a team than Kessel does, but it's tough to show that Kessel's net worth is actually a minus.

It is tough, and I don't expect people to buy that. But the fact of the matter is the Leafs no longer wanted a top 5 NHL superstar who had more points than anyone at the last winter olympics playing against the worlds best players, and who is in the 'prime of his career'. If that does scream 'problem player', I honestly don't know what does.

Because that top 5 NHL superstar was good enough to get them to 17th or 15th in the league, but not good enough to get them to 10th or 8th.  The top 5 NHL superstar didn't have the supporting cast that he needed in order to reach the playoffs, so they traded him for picks and prospects in an effort to build a team that has the necessary pieces to compete for the cup.  The plan is to be bad so at some point in the future they are really good.  The top 5 NHL superstar can be good enough to hamper that plan.