Round 1: Toronto Maple Leafs vs. Montreal Canadiens

[herman]

herman, good analysis.  I don't agree with your assessment of Campbell, however.  Aside from a couple of periods where the Leafs just let MTL play shooting gallery and he was terrific, he failed in exactly the same way Andersen did: bad goals at critical times.  Campbell has seemed to somehow escape blame for the horrible GWG in G1, and the first goal in G7 was just as bad as any Andersen G7 flop.

The Leafs blew the series for many reasons, one of which was that our goalie gave up bad goals when games were on the line and theirs didn't.

Every goalie gives up the odd bad goal. But they are survivable if your team scores their own fair share. Our top line generally made it easy for Price.

Put another way, if the Leafs top line didn't overthink it and/or was deployed to succeed, you wouldn't have even seen Campbell's G7 goal against.

 

[herman]

I can only speak for myself here, but his actions on and off the ice are really reinforcing my opinion. Confirmation bias perhaps is playing a role, but I have no other hypothesis that matches. I think he cares a tremendous amount about doing what it takes to win and really looks like he's trying to singlehandedly carry the Cup home and he's crushing himself with expectations and disappointment.

I think having an opinion about Marner is fine, I just don't think we can state with any certainty what he might think about anything. I think some reluctance on his part to change is understandable as a young guy who's succeeded at every level to believe that whatever obstacle might be in his way that he can eventually overcome it. That's why, if the coaching/managing staff thinks that they need quicker results then that, it's imperative that they bring the foot down and just make that change and tell Marner to like it or lump it.

If they can sort out whatever is happening there, the Leafs can make really good hay without having to make an uncomfortable trade.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Thoughts on this series

Good:
- Campbell was largely good and truly did enough over the course of the series to give the Leafs enough of a chance to win, which is quite different from previous years

I agree with most of what you had to say except this part. I feel that while Campbell made some good saves, he didn't stop the shots that he had to. That is not "giving a team an opportunity to win." I can think of at least 3 very critical goals that an NHL playoff winning goalie cannot let go into the back of his net. I realize that I've brought this up a couple times, but I don't think it's getting enough attention in the media. I get that Jack is a super nice guy and a real good teammate, but that means nothing when you lose game 7 after being up 3-1. Was he the sole reason they lost? Far from it. Matthews, Marner, Tavares injury, Muzzin injury, Foligno injury, the Leafs inability to change their game style are all contributing factors, but Campbell could have righted that with a couple "ordinary saves" when the team needed them the most.
There's big issues with the five hole goal from the top of the circle from Gallagher in Game 7. The 5 on 3 goal short side when all the Leafs needed was a stop. The deflected goal in OT after the Leafs outshot the habs 13-1. Those are the killers. Those are the goals/saves that mean the difference between a first round loss and a first round victory. If the Leafs go into next season with Campbell as their starter with no plan B, we will be having the same conversation next spring.

 

[Kin]

I mean, the Leafs unquestionably had an opportunity to win.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

herman, good analysis.  I don't agree with your assessment of Campbell, however.  Aside from a couple of periods where the Leafs just let MTL play shooting gallery and he was terrific, he failed in exactly the same way Andersen did: bad goals at critical times.  Campbell has seemed to somehow escape blame for the horrible GWG in G1, and the first goal in G7 was just as bad as any Andersen G7 flop.

The Leafs blew the series for many reasons, one of which was that our goalie gave up bad goals when games were on the line and theirs didn't.

Every goalie gives up the odd bad goal. But they are survivable if your team scores their own fair share. Our top line generally made it easy for Price.

Put another way, if the Leafs top line didn't overthink it and/or was deployed to succeed, you wouldn't have even seen Campbell's G7 goal against.

We cannot put blame on Andersen(like has been done the past couple seasons) and not put blame on Campbell.

As for your last point I can say the same:

If Campbell doesn't let in a 60 footer in Overtime(deflected or not) we don't even see game 7. If he doesn't go swimming on the goalie interference challenge, we don't see a penalty, therefore we don't see Marner throw the puck over the glass. If he doesn't let in another 50 footer five hole shot in game 7, do the Leafs start squeezing their sticks even tighter than they were before?

Yes, it's all chicken before the egg analysis. Point being, win and lose as a team. Playoff goalies that win games need to stop 65 footers. Just as much as Rocket Richard winners need to score goals in the playoffs.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I mean, the Leafs unquestionably had an opportunity to win.

I mean, that can be said for just about every sporting match ever played between 2 teams.

 

[Kin]

I mean, the Leafs unquestionably had an opportunity to win.

I mean, that can be said for just about every sporting match ever played between 2 teams.

It was your language, not mine.

Regardless, a team that had two overtime games while a goal away from ending the series was not done in by their goaltending. Campbell was perfectly good enough for them to win, they just didn't. Sure, he didn't steal any of the games when they'd won three games but that's a far sight different from saying his goaltending was a major obstacle to them winning.

 

[Guilt Trip]

Thoughts on this series

Good:
- Campbell was largely good and truly did enough over the course of the series to give the Leafs enough of a chance to win, which is quite different from previous years

I agree with most of what you had to say except this part. I feel that while Campbell made some good saves, he didn't stop the shots that he had to. That is not "giving a team an opportunity to win." I can think of at least 3 very critical goals that an NHL playoff winning goalie cannot let go into the back of his net. I realize that I've brought this up a couple times, but I don't think it's getting enough attention in the media. I get that Jack is a super nice guy and a real good teammate, but that means nothing when you lose game 7 after being up 3-1. Was he the sole reason they lost? Far from it. Matthews, Marner, Tavares injury, Muzzin injury, Foligno injury, the Leafs inability to change their game style are all contributing factors, but Campbell could have righted that with a couple "ordinary saves" when the team needed them the most.
There's big issues with the five hole goal from the top of the circle from Gallagher in Game 7. The 5 on 3 goal short side when all the Leafs needed was a stop. The deflected goal in OT after the Leafs outshot the habs 13-1. Those are the killers. Those are the goals/saves that mean the difference between a first round loss and a first round victory. If the Leafs go into next season with Campbell as their starter with no plan B, we will be having the same conversation next spring.

Totally agree with you even on the 5on3 goal. I counted 6 he should have had and that he  wasn't good enough. The 2 scramble goals in game 5, the GWG of gm 1, the Suzuki goal in gm 2. The gm 7 was the killer though. The team was fragile and absolutely needed that save. The Leafs need to get themselves a 1a guy because Jack isn't the guy to play 40+ games and I think this team will be in big trouble if they go that route.

 

[herman]

Campbell is the only reason games 5/6 got to OT when the skaters didn't show up, when the series should've been properly finished in Game 5 period 1+2. A 0.932 sv pct is plenty sufficient. 1 goal from your 25min first line is the difference maker in the wrong direction.

 

[Kin]

Yeah, I think if you went back and looked at any close series you'd find goalies occasionally letting in goals at inopportune moments that they theoretically could have stopped. It's not a reasonable standard to hold for a "good enough to win".

Really at no point in the series did the Leafs play a game where they dominated the Habs in any meaningful way but were let down by their goalie and lost. Beyond that, you can't ask a ton more out of someone.

 

[ZBBM]

Campbell is the only reason games 5/6 got to OT when the skaters didn't show up, when the series should've been properly finished in Game 5 period 1+2. A 0.932 sv pct is plenty sufficient. 1 goal from your 25min first line is the difference maker in the wrong direction.

On the face of it, sure.  Against a popgun offense?  I think it doesn't tell the whole story.

We can disagree about where to dump the biggest pile of blame but my basic point was that Campbell was no better than Andersen in the end, the Andersen who is so much maligned by a few posters here, and failed in just the same way that Andersen did.

IMO the Leafs need an upgrade in goal.  Andersen hasn't gotten it done, and I don't have faith that Campbell is the answer either.  I fully realize how problematic that wish is.  Seems like a certain Vezina-winning goalie is about to lose 4 in a row after winning 4 in a row ... so yeah it's a bit of a roulette wheel.

 

[Highlander]

Saw Perry interviewed last night.  Guy looks like a killer, acts like a killer, is a killer and the Caufields, Suzuki's and Kokiman are killers two.  Great defence and Price was amazing, the old money guy.
And we had them down on the ropes and we didn't finish them.
Way better than what a decent Winnipeg team is experiencing.

We need some killers, why didn't Dubas get Perry instead of Simmonds? 

 

[CarltonTheBear]

It's funny how such a small decision like that ended up making such a big difference for both teams. Simmonds and Perry both wanted to be Leafs. Toronto and Montreal both wanted to sign Simmonds. The Leafs got their top choice and Montreal and Perry almost begrudgingly paired up afterward. Reverse that decision and we likely get a better 4th liner at half the cap hit and avoid a freak injury to our captain (unless that was some sort of Final Destination thing).

 

[Bill_Berg]

It's funny how such a small decision like that ended up making such a big difference for both teams. Simmonds and Perry both wanted to be Leafs. Toronto and Montreal both wanted to sign Simmonds. The Leafs got their top choice and Montreal and Perry almost begrudgingly paired up afterward. Reverse that decision and we likely get a better 4th liner at half the cap hit and avoid a freak injury to our captain (unless that was some sort of Final Destination thing).

Everything about the Leafs is a Final Destination thing.

 

[azzurri63]

Campbell is the only reason games 5/6 got to OT when the skaters didn't show up, when the series should've been properly finished in Game 5 period 1+2. A 0.932 sv pct is plenty sufficient. 1 goal from your 25min first line is the difference maker in the wrong direction.

Some questionable goals but he played well enough for the Leafs to win. Blame lies on the two 10+ million dollar stars who need to grow a couple and learn what it takes to win in the playoffs. I'm totally with you on this one Herman.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Really at no point in the series did the Leafs play a game where they dominated the Habs in any meaningful way but were let down by their goalie and lost.

OT. Game 6.

Leafs Shots - 13
Habs Shots - 2

 

[Guilt Trip]

Really at no point in the series did the Leafs play a game where they dominated the Habs in any meaningful way but were let down by their goalie and lost.

OT. Game 6.

Leafs Shots - 13
Habs Shots - 2

Mic drop....lol.

 

[Kin]

I...didnt think I'd have to explain to people what a hockey game is but there are always new challenges in life I suppose.

 

[Bender]

Thoughts on this series

Good:
- Campbell was largely good and truly did enough over the course of the series to give the Leafs enough of a chance to win, which is quite different from previous years

I agree with most of what you had to say except this part. I feel that while Campbell made some good saves, he didn't stop the shots that he had to. That is not "giving a team an opportunity to win." I can think of at least 3 very critical goals that an NHL playoff winning goalie cannot let go into the back of his net. I realize that I've brought this up a couple times, but I don't think it's getting enough attention in the media. I get that Jack is a super nice guy and a real good teammate, but that means nothing when you lose game 7 after being up 3-1. Was he the sole reason they lost? Far from it. Matthews, Marner, Tavares injury, Muzzin injury, Foligno injury, the Leafs inability to change their game style are all contributing factors, but Campbell could have righted that with a couple "ordinary saves" when the team needed them the most.
There's big issues with the five hole goal from the top of the circle from Gallagher in Game 7. The 5 on 3 goal short side when all the Leafs needed was a stop. The deflected goal in OT after the Leafs outshot the habs 13-1. Those are the killers. Those are the goals/saves that mean the difference between a first round loss and a first round victory. If the Leafs go into next season with Campbell as their starter with no plan B, we will be having the same conversation next spring.

When your goalie posts a .920+ and has a better save percentage than the other guy then you're really overthinking the goaltending and under thinking the shooters.

 

[Arn]

Well hey. At least we didn?t get swept.