• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

Rangers @ Leafs - Oct. 18th, 7:00pm - SN, Fan 590

Bender said:
L K said:
Brutal?..all of those absurd chances amd the Rangers win it.  What an undeserving win for the Rangers.  That can?t go in from Campbell
Click to expand...
Are we really going to blame Campbell for this game??
Click to expand...

That wasn't a good goal.  Are we really so afraid of calling that not a great goal?  He wasn't bad.  He wasn't the reason we lost but that goal should not go in.
 
Significantly Insignificant said:
As long as Matthews wasn't hurt at the end of this game, because he looked like he was laboring there.
Click to expand...

First game of the season and he played 23 minutes. He was just gassed.
 
Significantly Insignificant said:
As long as Matthews wasn't hurt at the end of this game, because he looked like he was laboring there.
Click to expand...

First game of the year and played 23 minutes after no preseason.  He was likely just gassed.
 
I appreciate the way we tend to think of these things but at some point don't you have to question whether or not this team was, at least in part, built to be a team that frequently outshoots their opponent without necessarily having the skill to have a ton to show for it?
 
Tavares lost his man on that face off, created 2 on 1 down low...not Campbell's fault there.  I do understand having Tavares out for d zone face off but his game is not well suited for 3 on 3 play and Keefe continues to roll him out there.
 
Nik said:
I appreciate the way we tend to think of these things but at some point don't you have to question whether or not this team was, at least in part, built to be a team that frequently outshoots their opponent without necessarily having the skill to have a ton to show for it?
Click to expand...
They aren't the Ron Wilson era Leafs.
 
Nik said:
I appreciate the way we tend to think of these things but at some point don't you have to question whether or not this team was, at least in part, built to be a team that frequently outshoots their opponent without necessarily having the skill to have a ton to show for it?
Click to expand...

Personally I disagree. I feel this is a timing and familiarity issue. We?re only 4 games into the season and we?ve seen this for years and years and years. Some games you throw everything you have at the goalie and you get stoned and then another game you have 4 goals on 20 shots. It?ll even out.

As bender said this isn?t the Ron Wilson leafs that were outshooting opponents but clearly being the inferior team on the ice.

One thing I?d like to acknowledge is the commitment to team defence. I?d say all of last season and so far this season you?re not seeing at all the frustrations that existed with the Babcock leafs and the frequency of blown leads. And I think with that comes some sacrifice on the offensive side.

It?ll even out. I?m sure of it.
 
Joe S. said:
Nik said:
I appreciate the way we tend to think of these things but at some point don't you have to question whether or not this team was, at least in part, built to be a team that frequently outshoots their opponent without necessarily having the skill to have a ton to show for it?
Click to expand...

Personally I disagree. I feel this is a timing and familiarity issue. We?re only 4 games into the season and we?ve seen this for years and years and years. Some games you throw everything you have at the goalie and you get stoned and then another game you have 4 goals on 20 shots. It?ll even out.

As bender said this isn?t the Ron Wilson leafs that were outshooting opponents but clearly being the inferior team on the ice.

One thing I?d like to acknowledge is the commitment to team defence. I?d say all of last season and so far this season you?re not seeing at all the frustrations that existed with the Babcock leafs and the frequency of blown leads. And I think with that comes some sacrifice on the offensive side.

It?ll even out. I?m sure of it.
Click to expand...
I really didn't see a team that couldn't generate quality chances tonight though or took a step back offensively really. The chances were there.
 
Agreed on that point as well. 2 posts on 2 consecutive shots, Matthews missing an open net? it was one of those nights.
 
Joe S. said:
Personally I disagree. I feel this is a timing and familiarity issue. We?re only 4 games into the season and we?ve seen this for years and years and years. Some games you throw everything you have at the goalie and you get stoned and then another game you have 4 goals on 20 shots. It?ll even out.
Click to expand...

Maybe but as the cap squeeze forces the team to cut back on talent I can't help but think that when someone like Dubas has to choose among the end of roster fillers he's going to favour a guy who will have good possession numbers which lead to lots of shots while not being the kind of guy who can actually capitalize on those chances.
 
gunnar36 said:
Tavares lost his man on that face off, created 2 on 1 down low...not Campbell's fault there.  I do understand having Tavares out for d zone face off but his game is not well suited for 3 on 3 play and Keefe continues to roll him out there.
Click to expand...

It was a scramble. Bunting is as responsible as on that play as Tavares is. Also, Campbell can not let in a 10 footer from below the face off dot.
 
Nik said:
Joe S. said:
Personally I disagree. I feel this is a timing and familiarity issue. We?re only 4 games into the season and we?ve seen this for years and years and years. Some games you throw everything you have at the goalie and you get stoned and then another game you have 4 goals on 20 shots. It?ll even out.
Click to expand...

Maybe but as the cap squeeze forces the team to cut back on talent I can't help but think that when someone like Dubas has to choose among the end of roster fillers he's going to favour a guy who will have good possession numbers which lead to lots of shots while not being the kind of guy who can actually capitalize on those chances.
Click to expand...

But those are the fillers I want. Those are the strong 3rd and 4th liners on a team. They maintain posession until the top lines get back on the ice. It keeps the momentum going in the right direction. Yes they need to bang some ugly ones home once and a while to even out the scoring a little, but 80% of the scoring is ultimately going to come from the guys getting 20-24 minutes a night.
 
Maybe Keefe should have let Kampf take that faceoff since he was killing it in that department last night. Also, Panarin is one of those guys that capitalize on chances like these and made a perfect shot. Oh well, at least we get a point onto the next set. Who's excited to see Hutch in net? 😬
 
OldTimeHockey said:
But those are the fillers I want. Those are the strong 3rd and 4th liners on a team. They maintain posession until the top lines get back on the ice. It keeps the momentum going in the right direction. Yes they need to bang some ugly ones home once and a while to even out the scoring a little, but 80% of the scoring is ultimately going to come from the guys getting 20-24 minutes a night.
Click to expand...

I think the better teams will have some guys who can do both and, to boot, some young guys with talent blocked in the line-up and in the bottom 6 by necessity rather than skillset. 
 
dekedastardly said:
Maybe Keefe should have let Kampf take that faceoff since he was killing it in that department last night. Also, Panarin is one of those guys that capitalize on chances like these and made a perfect shot. Oh well, at least we get a point onto the next set. Who's excited to see Hutch in net? 😬
Click to expand...
Kampf was 70%....JT was 79%...Matthews was 87%...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

About Us

This website is NOT associated with the Toronto Maple Leafs or the NHL.


It is operated by Rick Couchman and Jeff Lewis.
Back
Top