What are the playoffs teaching us?

[ZBBM]

(Aside from the lesson that Boston is a better team.  We knew that already.)

I realize that the series is not over, but even if (miracle of miracles) we were to come back and take it, I think we are seeing some clear indications of what needs to happen with the team in the offseason to get ready for next year.

1.  We need at least 2, maybe 3, new competent defensemen.  The core D going forward are Franson, Gunnarsson, and Gardiner -- but one of them may have to be dealt to get help up front.
2.  Phaneuf will probably not be traded over the summer, but by the same token he may not be re-signed.  In the meantime, he needs to drop to the second pairing.
3.  Reimer needs a mentor.  He's not quite ready for prime time.

 

[Rebel_1812]

I don't know how you think franson is better then phaneuf.  Franson makes more mistakes and doesn't have the offensive or hitting game Phaneuf does. 

 

[TML fan]

Franson has been better than Phaneuf in almost every aspect during these playoffs, but I don't think he's a better player. He's a perfect 3rd pairing, PP specialist.

Phaneuf is still a top pairing guy, but he needs someone better than Gunnarsson to help with the big minutes.

 

[Omallley]

Biggest thing for me: The guys with previous playoff experience have generally been the better players on the team: JvR, Kessel, Lupul, Franson are good examples. Some notable exceptions are Gardiner (in a good way) and Phaneuf (in a not-so-good-way). But generally, experience makes a difference.

 

[ZBBM]

I don't know how you think franson is better then phaneuf.  Franson makes more mistakes and doesn't have the offensive or hitting game Phaneuf does.

I'll give you credit for your temerity in making that statement so soon on the heels of last night's game.

 

[bustaheims]

What's been most obvious to me is that the Leafs still need significant upgrades down the middle. Look at the Bruins' centres in comparison to the Leafs. It's laughable. At the same time, it says to me that the Leafs don't necessarily need a true #1 centre - I wouldn't say the Bruins have one, but, with the depth they have, they don't need one.

Better mobility on the backend, as well.

 

[bustaheims]

Phaneuf is still a top pairing guy, but he needs someone better than Gunnarsson to help with the big minutes.

That's sort of how I see it, too. I like Gunnarsson a lot, but, he's not a top pairing guy, and Phaneuf needs another top pairing type to play with him. Gunnarsson-Gardiner could make for an excellent 2nd pairing next season if the Leafs can add another top pairing guy somehow.

 

[Jalili]

What's been most obvious to me is that the Leafs still need significant upgrades down the middle. Look at the Bruins' centres in comparison to the Leafs. It's laughable. At the same time, it says to me that the Leafs don't necessarily need a true #1 centre - I wouldn't say the Bruins have one, but, with the depth they have, they don't need one.

Better mobility on the backend, as well.

I agree. The Leafs are stacked at both wings but not really well put together down the middle.

I'd argue that Bergeron is a #1 center though.

 

[bustaheims]

I'd argue that Bergeron is a #1 center though.

Pre-concussion, he looked like he might have been able to be, but, since coming back, his offence hasn't been at as high a level. He's an excellent #2, though.

 

[Zee]

I don't know how you think franson is better then phaneuf.  Franson makes more mistakes and doesn't have the offensive or hitting game Phaneuf does.

Well, Franson did have more points than Phaneuf this season both in regular season and so far in playoffs, so I'm not sure why you're dissing Franson's offensive game.  He's also smarter when it comes to knowing when to pinch, and getting his shot through from the point.  The only edge I give Phaneuf is in the hitting department.  Defensively I don't see how you can say Phaneuf is better.  Franson uses his long reach very well to poke the puck away from forwards, he's fairly dependable in his own end.

 

[Corn Flake]

Phaneuf is still a top pairing guy, but he needs someone better than Gunnarsson to help with the big minutes.

That's sort of how I see it, too. I like Gunnarsson a lot, but, he's not a top pairing guy, and Phaneuf needs another top pairing type to play with him. Gunnarsson-Gardiner could make for an excellent 2nd pairing next season if the Leafs can add another top pairing guy somehow.

Fully agree.  Leafs need a #2 or a #3 d-man to round out a Phanueuf/Gunarsson/Gardiner/?? top four.  Obviously the cost and availability of a #3 would be a lot easier to deal with.  A guy like Erik Johnson is the type I would be after.  Our top four needs a big physical guy who isn't a slug on skates. 

 

[mr grieves]

Phaneuf is still a top pairing guy, but he needs someone better than Gunnarsson to help with the big minutes.

That's sort of how I see it, too. I like Gunnarsson a lot, but, he's not a top pairing guy, and Phaneuf needs another top pairing type to play with him. Gunnarsson-Gardiner could make for an excellent 2nd pairing next season if the Leafs can add another top pairing guy somehow.

Fully agree.  Leafs need a #2 or a #3 d-man to round out a Phanueuf/Gunarsson/Gardiner/?? top four.  Obviously the cost and availability of a #3 would be a lot easier to deal with.  A guy like Erik Johnson is the type I would be after.  Our top four needs a big physical guy who isn't a slug on skates.

That's about what I learned, but I've been impressed with Franson. Does he not seem a legitimate top-4 dman to you? His pairing with Gardiner worked well, and both seem talented enough that rounding out their defensive games shouldn't be impossible. That'd make for a lot of puck-moving talent on the backend and fast transitions up ice -- what's looked so impressive about the team in the last three games, especially compared to game one or the last quarter of the season (all those shifts hemmed into the zone).

Point is: seems that Phaneuf is an excellent all-purpose defenseman when kept under 25 min or so, we've two promising puck-movers who look top-4 quality, and Gunnarson, whose quiet talents aren't to be dismissed. That's 4 possible top-4s, but they don't really mesh well. 

A big physical guy who isn't a pylon would round out that group, and Gunnarson seems (to me) like the odd-man out. But he wouldn't fetch as much in a trade as Franson or Gardiner... I like them both a lot, and value puck movement more than anything from a D man, but one could probably be converted into something more useful to the team. 

 

[ZBBM]

I agree with much of what you say MRGrieves, but I would rather see what Phaneuf would fetch in the way of a center.  I don't consider Phaneuf a true #1 dman, but I admit that nobody else on the roster is either.  Franson seems to me an ideal #3.

 

[Jalili]

I'd argue that Bergeron is a #1 center though.

Pre-concussion, he looked like he might have been able to be, but, since coming back, his offence hasn't been at as high a level. He's an excellent #2, though.

I think his all-around play merits discussion for him being a #1.

 

[Jalili]

I agree with much of what you say MRGrieves, but I would rather see what Phaneuf would fetch in the way of a center.  I don't consider Phaneuf a true #1 dman, but I admit that nobody else on the roster is either.  Franson seems to me an ideal #3.

I think Dion's value is higher in terms of what we provides on the ice compared to what he'd get us in a trade.

I'm all in favour of cutting down his PP time though.

 

[mr grieves]

I agree with much of what you say MRGrieves, but I would rather see what Phaneuf would fetch in the way of a center.  I don't consider Phaneuf a true #1 dman, but I admit that nobody else on the roster is either.  Franson seems to me an ideal #3.

I think Dion's value is higher in terms of what we provides on the ice compared to what he'd get us in a trade.

I'm all in favour of cutting down his PP time though.

There are two defensemen on the team who are more talented offensively than he is. And it's obvious he's already playing too much. I really don't get why his time isn't being limited in one of the few places where the team has better options.

 

[hap_leaf]

Forwards:
Need Colborne to develop into 1C
Improve in faceoffs and puck posession
We cannot have guys going 10-20 games with one goal.  The coaches have to find a way to fix this.
Keep going with successful PK strategies

Defense:
Need Gardiner to continue to improve with experience
Decide (if they haven't already) the end game strategy for Phaneuf as a Leaf.

Goal:
Continue with Reimer, he has shown he can deliver and he will only get better.

We are still a few years away from Colborne, Gardiner and Reimer coming to fruition.  Stay the course and don't trade any of them.

 

[mr grieves]

Forwards:
[...]
Improve in faceoffs and puck posession
We cannot have guys going 10-20 games with one goal. 

The second is something I'd imagine would be helped by fixing the first, and, to that, I'd add only play defensemen that can move the puck. If Gardiner had played more often, I think we'd have had a more threatening attack from our forwards.

 

[bustaheims]

I think his all-around play merits discussion for him being a #1.

A centre has to put up more than 60 points a season to even be considered a true #1. I'd go even further to say that, really, in addition to having a solid all around game, a true #1 centre excels offensively. Bergeron's all-around play is what makes him an excellent #2, not a #1.

 

[Leaflifer]

Honestly, I don't think much is being gained here in the post season, as Burke implied by a quick first round exit,

What can be learned that we didn't already know?

I do hope that RC will come to terms with Gardiners assets.

That's about the only positive I can see going forward in terms of lessons learned.

Size up the middle has been discussed here since preseason.

Our best players (Kessel and Phaneuf) are not well rounded enough to lead the team through high level playoff hockey.

Good players, no doubt, but not dominant.

I'm happy with Reimer. He had a great season for a younger goalie and should still have plenty of upside left in him. Again, no news we are going to learn in a first round exit.

Last night Boston deserves all the credit. They had the Leafs coming at them in waves, but experience taught them to stick with it and were never knocked off their game.

I am going to cheer the Leafs on in G5, but last night was a good demonstration of the difference between the rebuilding Leafs and the established, experienced Bs.

The Bs play a way simpler game.