Leafs @ Panthers - Dec. 28th, 7:00pm - SN, TSN 1050

[ZBBM]

It seems to be the Habs' single and only recipe.

Which is why no non-Hab fan considers them to be a real Cup contender.

But, but ... their fans seem so self-assured!

Wait a minute.  There's a pattern here, I just know it....

 

[freer]

A non-3 point game would have been nice, but still this means a win against Tampa tomorrow night puts us right in the playoff picture.

4 game in a row on the road is quite good.



4 wins in a row on the road. 

 

[ZBBM]

Something not quite right there?

I saw that flit by, good catch Arn.

 

[McGarnagle]

Ah Tampa won tonight in OT. Stupid Habs.

Yeah, but it's hard to be tooooo upset.

 

[ZBBM]

Can anyone remember the last goal Andersen has let in that you could really side-eye? This team right now is living and dying by him playing at a Vezina level. That's not a good long term recipe for success.

It'll definitely be a major concern - especially if they continue to give up shots at this rate. 30 or more shots against in 7 of Andersen's last 8 starts. He faces roughly 32.4 shots per 60 minutes.

And this is why no non-Leafs fan considers us a playoff contender.

 

[McGarnagle]

Last year it seemed that either Bernier or Reimer let in a weak goal every game that just sucked the air out. Leafs would be in the basement without question if not for Andersen. Which might have been preferential for some, but I can see why they got him.

 

[herman]

No one said anything about Griffith being better than Nylander, either. But if we're going to bring that up, Griffith is more skilled than Smith, Martin, Hyman, Soshnikov, Komarov, Holland, Leivo, Froese, Gauthier, and Leipsic, and might be comparable to Brown. Picking him up on waivers was a coup. Letting him go because he did not fit our preconceived requirement that our fourth line had to be a certain way is a missed opportunity.

Is there a single team in the league, or even historically ever, that hasn't deployed role players? Are all of them wrong?

Let me preface this with, I know where you're coming from re: role players, and that is why I phrased this statement deliberately as 'more skilled'.

You know how teams should draft for best player available and not for need? This is just the same concept played out in the lineup.

Griffith appears pretty comparable to Connor Brown, who in turn appears to be pretty similar to another player on the ice tonight: Jonathan Marchessault. Smaller, skilled guys, who were coming up through the ranks as the metagame of the league shifted from the traditional eyeballs-only talent evaluation, to more substantiative numerical evidence-based evaluation. Of course the three of them have different flavours to their game.

So my contention with the decision was largely not that I despise role players, but that these freebie/cheap skilled guys who drive play in general shouldn't be passed over for the sake of icing a gritty PK-specialist fourth line, especially if they get overrun at even strength regularly. Skilled guys generally can be taught those 'roles' and bring additional tools to the table.

What would've been the harm of running Holland, Griffith, and Martin (meh, but understandable) for the year on the fourth line and developing your PK during what is still clearly a rebuild season? These are players who drive play in the right direction and can actually make plays, and can move up the lineup for short spells without missing much of a beat.

If they're too good for the fourth line, that is a great problem. If they're getting killed at evens, swap them for Soshnikov, or Brown, or Hyman who can also play up and down the lineup. Clinging to Smith basically restricted us to playing plugs on the bottom line (see Soshnikov valiantly making plays happen alone, only to watch them die pitifully).

 

[bustaheims]

Can anyone remember the last goal Andersen has let in that you could really side-eye? This team right now is living and dying by him playing at a Vezina level. That's not a good long term recipe for success.

It'll definitely be a major concern - especially if they continue to give up shots at this rate. 30 or more shots against in 7 of Andersen's last 8 starts. He faces roughly 32.4 shots per 60 minutes.

And this is why no non-Leafs fan considers us a playoff contender.

Also why a lot of Leaf fans don't, either.

 

[Kin]

You know how teams should draft for best player available and not for need?

No. I know that's a theory though.

 

[herman]

Let me also add that the 'traditional, gritty, good PK' fourth liner/bottom pair defender who spends a lot of time in the defensive zone tends to also be the type of player that incurs a lot of penalties due to chasing the play repeatedly in his own zone. So even if he's good at PK, he can't be very effective from the box.

What you want on the PK are fast and tenacious players who can work their sticks and get into lanes (Hyman, Soshnikov, Brown, Komarov, Zaitsev, Gardiner). Hitters and blockers are pretty much always out of position once they make their move.

 

[TBLeafer]

I'm a very happy man right now.

GO LEAFS GO!!!

But yeah, tanking for another high draft pick is so much better for team development, right?

They blew a 2 goal lead and fought out a win. They're learning resilience.

That is sooooooo much better than tanking.

MMMMMARRRRRRRRRRRNERRRRRRRRRRR!

 

[Kin]

But yeah, tanking for another high draft pick is so much better for team development, right?

It's pretty impressive how often you win the arguments you have with yourself. 

 

[Zee]

Yeah the shots against are a concern for the Leafs. Andersen has been fantastic, but they have to cut down on the chances against

 

[bustaheims]

But yeah, tanking for another high draft pick is so much better for team development, right?

It's pretty impressive how often you win the arguments you have with yourself.

Also, proclaiming victory before the season is even half over. Just wonderful, all around.

 

[herman]

Straight from Babcock's mouth:

Coach Mike Babcock?s message was: ?You can ask guys to work hard. You can teach guys to block shots. Who?s going to score? Who?s going to bring the offence?? It?s now the mantra for all of Hockey Canada.

...

"To me you take the best players, that?s what you do, and you can always get them to do whatever you want them to do, you just tell them what you want.?

The context is player selection for tournaments like the Olympics or WJHC.

So the Leafs don't have Team Canada's depth. No team does. What is it about the NHL regular season that changes this philosophy then? Could just be that Babcock doesn't believe we have the depth yet and put a hard cut off on the 9.

Teams that are pushing to go top-12 instead of top-6/9 (with varying degrees of efficacy): Pittsburgh, Montreal, New York Rangers, Boston, Tampa Bay, Columbus, Calgary, Winnipeg.

 

[Andy007]

But yeah, tanking for another high draft pick is so much better for team development, right?

It's pretty impressive how often you win the arguments you have with yourself.

Also, proclaiming victory before the season is even half over. Just wonderful, all around.

I'm just trying to figure out who Leafer is rallying against. Has anyone championed the idea of a full-out tank to further player development? Or is he mistaking the people who acknowledge the fact that this team is young and full of flaws and isn't near contending yet for ardent "tankers"?  And why would a win against a mid-range team at game 34 of the season prove anything to anyone on either of these two potential sides?

 

[McGarnagle]

But yeah, tanking for another high draft pick is so much better for team development, right?

It's pretty impressive how often you win the arguments you have with yourself.

Also, proclaiming victory before the season is even half over. Just wonderful, all around.

I'm just trying to figure out who Leafer is rallying against. Has anyone championed the idea of a full-out tank to further player development? Or is he mistaking the people who acknowledge the fact that this team is young and full of flaws and isn't near contending yet for ardent "tankers"?  And why would a win against a mid-range team at game 34 of the season prove anything to anyone on either of these two potential sides?

Well, I'm one that would certainly prefer the team finish out of the playoffs and get another lottery pick. It's goaltending that's winning them games, not really well rounded efforts, and the blue line is pretty weak. I thought getting Andersen would keep things close in order to keep morale up, and that was the purpose of signing him,  but I didn't think he was going to be top 3 in the league discounting his slow start off of injury.

Ideally, to me at least, they get a lottery pick, trade some F vets at the deadline for D prospects,  sign a good UFA defenceman (Shattenkirk?) and start a slow climb in 2017-18.

 

[Andy007]

But yeah, tanking for another high draft pick is so much better for team development, right?

It's pretty impressive how often you win the arguments you have with yourself.

Also, proclaiming victory before the season is even half over. Just wonderful, all around.

I'm just trying to figure out who Leafer is rallying against. Has anyone championed the idea of a full-out tank to further player development? Or is he mistaking the people who acknowledge the fact that this team is young and full of flaws and isn't near contending yet for ardent "tankers"?  And why would a win against a mid-range team at game 34 of the season prove anything to anyone on either of these two potential sides?

Well, I'm one that would certainly prefer the team finish out of the playoffs and get another lottery pick. It's goaltending that's winning them games, not really well rounded efforts, and the blue line is pretty weak. I thought getting Andersen would keep things close in order to keep morale up, and that was the purpose of signing him,  but I didn't think he was going to be top 3 in the league discounting his slow start off of injury.

Ideally, to me at least, they get a lottery pick, trade some F vets at the deadline for D prospects,  sign a good UFA defenceman (Shattenkirk?) and start a slow climb in 2017-18.

I pretty much agree with your assessment and proposals. It's certainly a more appealing situation than, say, them sneaking into the playoffs and getting bounced early (which, barring some sort of miracle, would surely happen). But that doesn't mean one can't take pleasure in wins or well-played games; that's just a realistic preference for a team that is a few years away from potentially contending.

 

[McGarnagle]

But yeah, tanking for another high draft pick is so much better for team development, right?

It's pretty impressive how often you win the arguments you have with yourself.

Also, proclaiming victory before the season is even half over. Just wonderful, all around.

I'm just trying to figure out who Leafer is rallying against. Has anyone championed the idea of a full-out tank to further player development? Or is he mistaking the people who acknowledge the fact that this team is young and full of flaws and isn't near contending yet for ardent "tankers"?  And why would a win against a mid-range team at game 34 of the season prove anything to anyone on either of these two potential sides?

Well, I'm one that would certainly prefer the team finish out of the playoffs and get another lottery pick. It's goaltending that's winning them games, not really well rounded efforts, and the blue line is pretty weak. I thought getting Andersen would keep things close in order to keep morale up, and that was the purpose of signing him,  but I didn't think he was going to be top 3 in the league discounting his slow start off of injury.

Ideally, to me at least, they get a lottery pick, trade some F vets at the deadline for D prospects,  sign a good UFA defenceman (Shattenkirk?) and start a slow climb in 2017-18.

I pretty much agree with your assessment and proposals. It's certainly a more appealing situation than, say, them sneaking into the playoffs and getting bounced early (which, barring some sort of miracle, would surely happen). But that doesn't mean one can't take pleasure in wins or well-played games; that's just a realistic preference for a team that is a few years away from potentially contending.

Agreed. I think the "our time is now" folks are conditioned to feel that a playoff berth is the equivalent of success, due to the decade+ or relative futility in that regard; and we've seen the lessons learned by organizations like Calgary, Colorado, and NYI - that believe they're competitive with their core based upon a playoff berth, invest in it, and then have to look at a partial teardown early in the process.

I want to see a team built where a top 3 conference result is the goal, not a playoff berth. That will take more patience, but I'm finding it easy to enjoy the games even at this stage.

 

[Heroic Shrimp]

Straight from Babcock's mouth:

Coach Mike Babcock?s message was: ?You can ask guys to work hard. You can teach guys to block shots. Who?s going to score? Who?s going to bring the offence?? It?s now the mantra for all of Hockey Canada.

...

"To me you take the best players, that?s what you do, and you can always get them to do whatever you want them to do, you just tell them what you want.?

The context is player selection for tournaments like the Olympics or WJHC.

So the Leafs don't have Team Canada's depth. No team does. What is it about the NHL regular season that changes this philosophy then? Could just be that Babcock doesn't believe we have the depth yet and put a hard cut off on the 9.

Teams that are pushing to go top-12 instead of top-6/9 (with varying degrees of efficacy): Pittsburgh, Montreal, New York Rangers, Boston, Tampa Bay, Columbus, Calgary, Winnipeg.

I don't necessarily disagree with you at all on the issue at hand, but nonetheless, I think there's a very big difference between asking a talented player to play a different role in a short tournament with a huge payoff and asking a talented player to play a different role for an entire season (and possibly an entire career).