PDA

View Full Version : Gunnarson traded to the Blues for Polak, draft pick



TSN.ca
06-28-2014, 11:10 AM
Go to TSN.ca for details. #TSN

More... (http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=455924)

MapleLeafBlueJayBoy
06-28-2014, 11:17 AM
James Mirtle ‏@mirtle 7m
Leafs acquire Roman Polak for Gunnarsson and a pick. More to come.

Jonas Siegel ‏@jonasTSN1050 4m
Polak has two years left on a five-year deal. Cap hit of $2.75 million (per CapGeek).

Jonas Siegel ‏@jonasTSN1050 2m
Polak averaged 17 minutes/game last season with St. Louis, fifth among Blues defenders. Employed in defensive role.

James Mirtle ‏@mirtle 3m
Trade looks like left shot D for right shot D to me. Always important to Carlyle and Co.

Matrim
06-28-2014, 11:19 AM
I don't hate this.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 11:20 AM
I'm looking for a reason to not hate this.

I especially dislike the fact that it appears at the moment that we gave up a pick with the better defender.

Metalleaf
06-28-2014, 11:21 AM
It's funny cause twitter is blowing up because Gunnarsson is Jesus.

Matrim
06-28-2014, 11:23 AM
Wait I didn't pay attention enough, the Leafs are giving up a pick as well? Yeah I still don't hate it but I dislike it now. As it is it's probably some cap savings and until/if the Leafs get a replacement for Gunnar for Phaneufs D partner then I'll withhold too much judgement. I like Polak.

JackBurton
06-28-2014, 11:23 AM
Why the **** do we give up a pick too?

Metalleaf
06-28-2014, 11:24 AM
@Michael_Traikos: So, to recap, Leafs get a defenceman who is slightly older, slightly cheaper, more physical, and a right-handed shot.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 11:27 AM
I don't hate it. We'll see.

leafman101
06-28-2014, 11:27 AM
Gunnar hasn't been very good since the hip injury and polak is the big right handed dmen they need. Not great value but it's what they need.

CRL
06-28-2014, 11:28 AM
Lol at Nonis, what a disaster

Metalleaf
06-28-2014, 11:28 AM
Leafs probably had to kick in a pick to make up the salary difference.

Rumpleforeskin
06-28-2014, 11:28 AM
Not loving this...we gave up the better dman and a pick?

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 11:28 AM
Extraskater:

Gunnarsson has been consistently better than Polak over the last 3 seasons while playing more minutes against tougher competition



Yep. About sums up how I felt about it when I heard

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 11:29 AM
I don't get calling this trade a "disaster".

Even if you don't like it, it's not at that level, IMO.

JackBurton
06-28-2014, 11:29 AM
I always worry about guys in Hitchcock's fantastic defensive system. Polak is doing a 180 going to the Leafs.

Killer93
06-28-2014, 11:30 AM
Gunnarsson was awful last year so im not too upset

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 11:31 AM
Gunnar hasn't been very good since the hip injury and polak is the big right handed dmen they need. Not great value but it's what they need.

Polak has been a sheltered #5-6 defender in St Louis. This is a guy who can replace Ranger/Fraser...not a replacement for Gunnarsson. Even a diminished Gunnar with a bad hip.

leafman101
06-28-2014, 11:32 AM
Gunnar is replaced by Rielly and gardiner not polak. He's a 3rd pair guy on this team now.

Metalleaf
06-28-2014, 11:33 AM
Gunnar's replacement is likely from within ie Granberg.

PKForce81
06-28-2014, 11:33 AM
I always worry about guys in Hitchcock's fantastic defensive system. Polak is doing a 180 going to the Leafs.

Pretty much.

This team is turning into such a joke im starting to care less and less about the upcoming season.

Hoss
06-28-2014, 11:35 AM
Gunnar's replacement will probably be the slightly overpaid Boyle.

But didn't Gunnar have some serious hip surgery again this off season??

Killer93
06-28-2014, 11:36 AM
My issue here is once again it looks like Leafs are blaming personnel and not Randy's system

Artnes
06-28-2014, 11:36 AM
I'll pass judgement when I see him in our lineup not based off the 4-5 times I've seen him play in his career like most here

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 11:37 AM
Gunnar is replaced by Rielly and gardiner not polak. He's a 3rd pair guy on this team now.

I don't understand paying 2.75 for a sheltered 3rd pairing defender when we have Granberg, Percy, etc on the cusp.

Killer93
06-28-2014, 11:37 AM
Leafs retained salary LOL

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 11:37 AM
My issue here is once again it looks like Leafs are blaming personnel and not Randy's system

Yep.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 11:38 AM
Leafs retained salary LOL

Huh?

Okay, now that is just bizarre.

soco22
06-28-2014, 11:38 AM
Yeah, sucks keeping a bit of salary. But talkin a fourth round pick here...kinda making a big deal over a pick that is not likely to pan out to much.

In terms of Gunnar. Good player. But I think phaneuf made him better. He's not good enough to be a top pairing to play alongside him and if you take him away from dion....not good enough to be on the second pairing

People are making too big of a deal. To me this is a minor flip.

JackBurton
06-28-2014, 11:38 AM
Leafs retained salary LOL

I just read that. Hilarious. A draft pick+ Retain 200K.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 11:39 AM
Yeah, sucks keeping a bit of salary. But talkin a fourth round pick here...kinda making a big deal over a pick that is not likely to pan out to much.

In terms of Gunnar. Good player. But I think phaneuf made him better. He's not good enough to be a top pairing to play alongside him and if you take him away from dion....not good enough to be on the second pairing

People are making too big of a deal. To me this is a minor flip.

Yeah, I agree.

JackBurton
06-28-2014, 11:41 AM
It is minor, yes. I do feel it's risky though. THe guy plays solid on the Blues in sheltered minutes. If he ends-up thord pairing it'll be more wasted cap room on a minor piece.

MapleLeafBlueJayBoy
06-28-2014, 11:42 AM
Jonas Siegel ‏@jonasTSN1050 15m
Polka was second-unit penalty killer for 2nd ranked St. Louis PK last season. Leafs were third-worst. Polak probably aims to address that.

Killer93
06-28-2014, 11:42 AM
Gunnarson stunk last year but we got an inferior player, gave up a pick, and retained salary. Dave Nonis folks

soco22
06-28-2014, 11:42 AM
Can polka skate,

CaptainBolduke
06-28-2014, 11:43 AM
Let's bet honest here. Both these players suck. Minor deal.

Metalleaf
06-28-2014, 11:44 AM
It is minor, yes. I do feel it's risky though. THe guy plays solid on the Blues in sheltered minutes. If he ends-up thord pairing it'll be more wasted cap room on a minor piece.

Except Polak makes less than Gunnar.

JackBurton
06-28-2014, 11:45 AM
Except Polak makes less than Gunnar.

Not anymore. Retained salary.

Metalleaf
06-28-2014, 11:46 AM
So it's a wash....who cares.

BeLeafer
06-28-2014, 11:48 AM
Nice deal for St. Louis.

JackBurton
06-28-2014, 11:52 AM
Nonis is a pussy. Burke would have threatened violence if they asked him to retain salary.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 11:53 AM
Let's bet honest here. Both these players suck. Minor deal.

With one hip, he would have been your 3rd best defender last year.

zeke
06-28-2014, 11:53 AM
****ing morons.

morons.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 11:54 AM
So it's a wash....who cares.

Yeah, we only gave up a pick and a better player for a worse player at the same money.

Who cares.

Volcanologist
06-28-2014, 11:55 AM
Guess they wanted a cheaper option who might help them a bit more on the PK, a perennial weak spot. but did we really have to retain salary AND give them a pick too, for a worse player??

Mind you, Gunnarsson has been well below his customary level lately due to the injuries.

If gunnar can get healthy again the Blues win this deal IMO. especially if they do something with that pick.

zeke
06-28-2014, 11:56 AM
Can polka skate,

no.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 11:57 AM
Could someone with twitter post the charts that extraskater.com posted concerning the trade....that would be great.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 12:00 PM
Guess they wanted a cheaper option who might help them a bit more on the PK, a perennial weak spot. but did we really have to retain salary AND give them a pick too, for a worse player??

Mind you, Gunnarsson has been well below his customary level lately due to the injuries.

If gunnar can get healthy again the Blues win this deal IMO. especially if they do something with that pick.

The idea here is that Polak is bigger and stronger, and can win battles along the boards and in front of the net. The problem for me is though, that those eye testy type things haven't translated into decent advanced statistics for Polak at all. On a very strong possession team, he's a weak possession defender, despite being heavily sheltered 5 on 5.

I have a feeling we're going to see another player from another team have his Corsi% drop like a stone under Randy.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 12:02 PM
We still need a major upgrade to our top 4 - Phaneuf, Rielly, Gardiner and -------. Not sure how they'll get it.

Metalleaf
06-28-2014, 12:03 PM
Buy out Gleason now that they have Polak, trade Franson, and then sign Boyle.

Rielly-Phaneuf
Boyle-Gardiner
Polak-Granberg

JaysCyYoung
06-28-2014, 12:12 PM
What is it with this team gifting St. Louis good players all the time in return for older, less effective versions of our guys?

Christ this stinks to high heaven as a defencemen version of the Stempniak-Steen deal. There's absolutely no justification for giving up our best defensive blueliner, hip injury or not, in return for a much more limited, older, marginally less expensive - although purportedly even that is no longer the case - version of him.

Stupid, stupid deal.

It wouldn't shock me if Gunnarsson became one of the league leaders in plus-minus under Hitchcock next season and comfortably played well over 20 minutes per game, while Polak is gone as a Leaf in under two unmemorable, ineffective years.

zeke
06-28-2014, 12:15 PM
Classic case of a very good player having his value tanked by a stupid team getting traded for a bad player having his value boosted by playing for a very smart team.

Gunnar is going to excel as a top 4 dman for the Blues, paired beautifully with Shattenkirk on the 2nd pairing. Polak is going to struggle as a #6 in Toronto, and bring down whichever of Rielly or Gardiner they decide he can "help".

and we gave up a pick and salary.

Nonis is an embarassment.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 12:15 PM
Buy out Gleason now that they have Polak, trade Franson, and then sign Boyle.

Rielly-Phaneuf
Boyle-Gardiner
Polak-Granberg

Both Polak and Granberg are right handed

If anything, Polak is blocking Granberg's spot. He's a 3rd pairing, right handed defender.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 12:15 PM
Classic case of a very good player having his value tanked by a stupid team getting traded for a bad player having his value boosted by playing for a very smart team.

Gunnar is going to excel as a top 4 dman for the Blues. Polak is going to struggle as a #6 in Toronto.

and we gave up a pick and salary.

Nonis is an embarassment.

Yep, can't say that I disagree with this.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 12:16 PM
We still need a major upgrade to our top 4 - Phaneuf, Rielly, Gardiner and -------. Not sure how they'll get it.

John Michael Boyle in free agency. 2 yrs 11 million.

Book it.

Pronger84
06-28-2014, 12:22 PM
I dont know much about Polak, but **** me... why did we piss away a 4th rounder? This is the problem I have with Nonis, it seems in every trade he makes he tosses draft picks away.... the way to build a team is through the draft, and this idiot goes out and chucks them way..... I hope that prick is fired tommorow I really do.

Lets count the number of picks he's chucked away

4th rounder- O'Byrne
2nd rounder- Bolland
4th rounder- Bolland
4th rounder- Bolland
2ndr- Bernier
4th rounder- Pollak

That's 6 picks he's tossed away- O'Byrne is long gone, Bolland looks like he's out the door, we still have Bernier which is a good thing.... just think of the players we could have drafted with those picks.

BeLeafer
06-28-2014, 12:23 PM
Classic case of a very good player having his value tanked by a stupid team getting traded for a bad player having his value boosted by playing for a very smart team.

Exactly.

It's so sad that they didn't clean house at the end of the season. This trade also has Carlyle's fingerprints all over it. Yeah, the problem with the pk is the players! I still can't believe that they not only didn't fire his ass, but extended him. What a cluster****.

JaysCyYoung
06-28-2014, 12:25 PM
Exactly.

It's so sad that they didn't clean house at the end of the season. This trade also has Carlyle's fingerprints all over it. Yeah, the problem with the pk is the players! I still can't believe that they not only didn't fire his ass, but extended him. What a cluster****.

THE PROBLEM WITH THE PK IS THE TEAM'S BEST DEFENSIVE BLUELINER!

BeLeafer
06-28-2014, 12:28 PM
Gunnarsson was one of the rare examples of the Leafs getting great value from a later draft selection. And they piss it away ... of course.

Pronger84
06-28-2014, 12:28 PM
THE PROBLEM WITH THE PK IS THE TEAM'S BEST DEFENSIVE BLUELINER!

Disagree- One player cannot sink a PK that badly in a span of a year. The problem is a systematic thing, in 12/13 Carlyle employed a very aggressive PK that charged at the points and gave other teams little to no time to set up a play, they came right up and didn't sit back in front of their net. Last year, the PK was far more passive and the players tended to collapse back in front of their net in hopes of taking away inside shots and passing, problem is that it exposed the points and as a result they were scored on a lot more then they were on the PK then they were in 12/13.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 12:29 PM
THE PROBLEM WITH THE PK IS THE TEAM'S BEST DEFENSIVE BLUELINER!

Not dropping the blame for a shitty system on Randy, where it belonged, is going to cost us in a bunch of trades I think. Much like dropping the blame on players like McCabe, Kubina, Steen, etc instead of on JFJ for not getting real NHL goaltending, hurt us previously.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 12:29 PM
Disagree- One player cannot sink a PK that badly in a span of a year. The problem is a systematic thing, in 12/13 Carlyle employed a very aggressive PK that charged at the points and gave other teams little to no time to set up a play, they came right up and didn't sit back in front of their net. Last year, the PK was far more passive and the players tended to collapse back in front of their net in hopes of taking away inside shots and passing, problem is that it exposed the points and as a result they were scored on a lot more then they were on the PK then they were in 12/13.

Whoosh

BeLeafer
06-28-2014, 12:29 PM
*whoosh*

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 12:30 PM
Disagree- One player cannot sink a PK that badly in a span of a year. The problem is a systematic thing, in 12/13 Carlyle employed a very aggressive PK that charged at the points and gave other teams little to no time to set up a play, they came right up and didn't sit back in front of their net. Last year, the PK was far more passive and the players tended to collapse back in front of their net in hopes of taking away inside shots and passing, problem is that it exposed the points and as a result they were scored on a lot more then they were on the PK then they were in 12/13.

http://kor.ill.in.ua/m/400x253/683569.jpg

Metalleaf
06-28-2014, 12:32 PM
I can't fully judge this trade until I see what else they do, I'm fully expecting wholesale changes.

zeke
06-28-2014, 12:34 PM
Exactly.

It's so sad that they didn't clean house at the end of the season. This trade also has Carlyle's fingerprints all over it. Yeah, the problem with the pk is the players! I still can't believe that they not only didn't fire his ass, but extended him. What a cluster****.

don't worry.....according to our asssistant GM, Polak is "NASTY!", so it's all good.

JaysCyYoung
06-28-2014, 12:35 PM
Gunnarsson was one of the rare examples of the Leafs getting great value from a later draft selection. And they piss it away ... of course.

Like zeke said, Thommie Bergman is the only bloody guy in the entire organization who appears to consistently know what he's doing. Christ.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 12:38 PM
Like zeke said, Thommie Bergman is the only bloody guy in the entire organization who appears to consistently know what he's doing. Christ.

Scary thing is that he's 66 yrs old.

LeafOfFaith
06-28-2014, 12:41 PM
don't worry.....according to our asssistant GM, Polak is "NASTY!", so it's all good.

I was the biggest Gunnar supporter of anyone here over the years, but I'm good with this deal if we're getting the player as advertised. The tsn panel was talking about how tough he is to play against, his hitting, his crease clearing, his nastiness. We're lacking in all these departments, so if he can bring it, that's a big upgrade.

Gunnar I always thought of as a good two way dman. All this about being a defensive stopper, I never really saw it. He was soft. I think they want to get rid of that element from the team unless a guy is offensively special like Gardiner.

So I'm going against the tide and saying good deal unless polak isn't what they say he is.

Volcanologist
06-28-2014, 12:42 PM
Classic case of a very good player having his value tanked by a stupid team getting traded for a bad player having his value boosted by playing for a very smart team.

Gunnar is going to excel as a top 4 dman for the Blues, paired beautifully with Shattenkirk on the 2nd pairing. Polak is going to struggle as a #6 in Toronto, and bring down whichever of Rielly or Gardiner they decide he can "help".

and we gave up a pick and salary.

Nonis is an embarassment.

yeah, unfortunately I think that's pretty much accurate.

When you consider that Bolland will probably walk now and Bernier was Lieweke's idea, Nonis has been very unimpressive here.

BeLeafer
06-28-2014, 12:43 PM
On the bright side, we should have another high pick coming for the new GM next year.

JaysCyYoung
06-28-2014, 12:43 PM
Nonis is an empty suit and he looks completely intimidated by the job that he has been entrusted with every time you see him. Dude is terrified to be here in a position of responsibility.

JaysCyYoung
06-28-2014, 12:43 PM
On the bright side, we should have another high pick coming for the new GM next year.

Connor McDavid or Jack Eichel please.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 12:45 PM
I was the biggest Gunnar supporter of anyone here over the years, but I'm good with this deal if we're getting the player as advertised. The tsn panel was talking about how tough he is to play against, his hitting, his crease clearing, his nastiness. We're lacking in all these departments, so if he can bring it, that's a big upgrade.

Polak is a slightly better, right handed version of Mark Fraser.


Gunnar I always thought of as a good two way dman. All this about being a defensive stopper, I never really saw it. He was soft. I think they want to get rid of that element from the team unless a guy is offensively special like Gardiner.

People score lots of goals against us as a team. But when Gunnar is on the ice (both with and without Phaneuf), teams score way less goals against us. But because he doesn't do this in a loud way, nobody notices.


So I'm going against the tide and saying good deal unless polak isn't what they say he is.

He's not what the panel was saying he is.


Someone on R/Leafs on reddit summed this up pretty coherently in one sentence so I'll steal what he said: This is a case of a club that uses advanced statistics abusing a club that doesn't.

BeLeafer
06-28-2014, 12:46 PM
Polak is a slightly better, right handed version of Mark Fraser.

Ouch.

LeafOfFaith
06-28-2014, 12:47 PM
How are you guys so familiar with a player we only saw once or twice a year, and in a supporting role?

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 12:50 PM
How are you guys so familiar with a player we only saw once or twice a year, and in a supporting role?

I spend half of my life in Alberta watching western conference hockey because the Leaf game is over by 730 pm for me.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 12:50 PM
Ouch.

Borrowed from reddit:


Just butting in here as a Hawks fan who has seen a lot of Polak: Shut down defense man is just a nice way of saying slow, bumbling, and mistake prone. He's a big hitter sure, and plays with a bit of a mean streak if that's what moves you, but he was easily St. Louis' worst d-man.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 12:52 PM
Nonis is an empty suit and he looks completely intimidated by the job that he has been entrusted with every time you see him. Dude is terrified to be here in a position of responsibility.

He probably is just a mouthpiece at this point.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 12:56 PM
I think what you'll see here is a clash of differing philosophies. If you value big, mean defenders who push people around and make really loud plays, you'll like Polak and probably didn't think much of Gunnarsson.

I personally have no time for a defender that can't competently move the puck. Throwing someone around in the corner to win a puck battle and then not having the requisite skills to move the puck out of the zone competently is useless.

This strikes me as a mis read of our defensive zone problems last season. We didn't suck defensively because our defenders couldn't win puck battles. We sucked defensively because a forward in the corner with the puck just had to wait for the cheating winger to come down for assistance (very much a systemic aspect of our defence) because Randy prefers the wingers playing low to help the defenders, opposition kicks the puck back to a wide open defender at the point...defender shoots, rinse and repeat. Polak is the type of defender who you don't "have" to send a winger into a puck battle to help. But that's Randy's shit system, the defenders weren't losing position battles to forwards with the puck in the corner. They were keeping them to the outside very competently.

LeafOfFaith
06-28-2014, 12:58 PM
Now I'm getting upset.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 12:59 PM
If you guys are upset now, wait til July 1.

Volcanologist
06-28-2014, 12:59 PM
He probably is just a mouthpiece at this point.

...which should be even more terrifying, because that means Shanahan thinks that trading Gunnarsson for Polak is a good idea.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 01:06 PM
...which should be even more terrifying, because that means Shanahan thinks that trading Gunnarsson for Polak is a good idea.

Certainly not the Red Wings model.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 01:25 PM
Now I'm getting upset.

About this trade, you should be.

Now, with that said Gunner clearly had some ongoing hip issues and we've seen how quickly a problem hip can sap a player's mobility and effectiveness. But at Gunnar's cost I would have much rather seen us slot him onto the 3rd pairing to play Robin to Gardiner's development and brought in a legit upgrade to play with Phaneuf. Gunnar playing fewer minutes against lesser competition would have made his life a lot easier and probably eased the burden on his hip. We keep throwing him from surgery, onto the 1st pairing. When was the last time he got to spend an off season getting in shape for the following year? (Remember Joffrey's comments on the importance of that?)

Habsy
06-28-2014, 01:28 PM
We still need a major upgrade to our top 4 - Phaneuf, Rielly, Gardiner and -------. Not sure how they'll get it.

Rumor out of Montreal is that the Leafs made a pitch for Gorges but Toronto wasn't on his list of teams he'd allow a trade to. Actually, no Canadian team was on his list.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 01:30 PM
Yeah, that was in the Offseason thread.

I'm gonna be really distressed if we sign like... Orpik or something.

Hoss
06-28-2014, 01:31 PM
James Mirtle ‏@mirtle 13m
Nonis on Polak: Can play in four-five hole. We feel other people can play that role with Dion.


James Mirtle ‏@mirtle 9m
Nonis says they're comfortable with what they have on defence now. Want Gardiner and Rielly to play big roles.

This is good... if you think that Polak is a replacement for Gunnar, it isn't. Maybe Gards or Rielly get that time. This seems to be a replacement for Ranger/Franson/Gleason. A right shot to play a little more nasty.

Hoss
06-28-2014, 01:32 PM
Yeah, that was in the Offseason thread.

I'm gonna be really distressed if we sign like... Orpik or something.


James Mirtle ‏@mirtle 14m
Nonis says they'll be active in free agency. Won't rule out adding defenceman.

Leafin'
06-28-2014, 01:48 PM
Meh trade.

I never really liked Gunnarson that much. On the soft side for me. Maybe the fact that he was thrown into the top pairing made me sour on him.

I don't know much about Roman Polak, but if he's the tough as nails bottom defender as advertised then im ok with that.

Our team needs toughness and people to block shots.

Was kinda hoping they would leave a spot open for Granberg, but its looking less and less likely.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 01:51 PM
James Mirtle ‏@mirtle 13m
Nonis on Polak: Can play in four-five hole. We feel other people can play that role with Dion.


James Mirtle ‏@mirtle 9m
Nonis says they're comfortable with what they have on defence now. Want Gardiner and Rielly to play big roles.

This is good... if you think that Polak is a replacement for Gunnar, it isn't. Maybe Gards or Rielly get that time. This seems to be a replacement for Ranger/Franson/Gleason. A right shot to play a little more nasty.

I'm okay with this explanation. I would prefer if we didn't retain salary or give up the pick but whatever. Gardiner or Rielly move up with Phaneuf, I'm ok with that.

Volcanologist
06-28-2014, 01:53 PM
also Gunnar's hip has to heal, because if it doesn't he's not very good.

Leafin'
06-28-2014, 01:53 PM
Rielly - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Polak
Gleason - Franson

That is how i would run it.

trujaysfan
06-28-2014, 01:56 PM
my guess would be

Rielly - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Polak
Franson - Gleason
Granberg

with 1 or both of the guys in bold gone before the season starts

Volcanologist
06-28-2014, 01:56 PM
I do like the Rielly and Gardiner getting big roles part. Those two are building blocks and we need to start treating them as such.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 01:56 PM
Rielly - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Polak
Gleason - Franson

That is how i would run it.

I'd buy out Gleason.

Rielly Phaneuf
Gardiner ----
Kid possibly? Polak

I don't really want Franson back.

Leafin'
06-28-2014, 02:02 PM
I think the fact that we haven't traded Franson yet means we might be keeping him. If we can get him on a cheap contract, then its not too bad.

If you are able to partner Franson with a Gleason-type defender he's not a bad option. He's young enough that he might still improve defensively.

Volcanologist
06-28-2014, 02:04 PM
Not too bad?? Franson is a disaster and needs to go. He's part of the problem not the solution.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 02:05 PM
I think the fact that we haven't traded Franson yet means we might be keeping him. If we can get him on a cheap contract, then its not too bad.

If you are able to partner Franson with a Gleason-type defender he's not a bad option. He's young enough that he might still improve defensively.

If you bring back Franson and Gleason... and Phaneuf, and Rielly, and Gardiner are there.

Aren't you basically giving Carlyle nearly the exact same group as last year? I'm not sure why we'd expect anything to be any different.

Leafin'
06-28-2014, 02:08 PM
Not too bad?? Franson is a disaster and needs to go. He's part of the problem not the solution.

I don't know about that. If i asked you about Franson this time last year, your answer would be different. This is a guy that was viewed as a cornerstone for our defense after the Boston series and a guy that was looking at big money. It would suck to lose him for nothing and watch him develop into the top-4 defender we all thought he was going to be.

I think a lot of Fransons issues are due to the coaching staff not playing him correctly. Maybe with a slight adjustment in coaching we might see the valuable Franson again.

da_next_kid
06-28-2014, 02:08 PM
From reading the Blues HFboards, I am not really getting the impression that he can't skate, it's the outlet pass he struggles with but otherwise he should be a good addition. Bummed to lose Gunnar tho, would have much rather traded Franson.

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 02:12 PM
I thought it was only 200-something K that we retained in the deal?

Capgeek says 630K

We also have a bonus overage of just under 475K

Leafin'
06-28-2014, 02:14 PM
So wait, we gave up the pick and retained salary?

..........

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 02:15 PM
Yes.

trujaysfan
06-28-2014, 02:20 PM
Lebrun Reported 200k... my guess is Capgeek is off right now.

Montana
06-28-2014, 02:33 PM
Gunnarsson is the kind of player you hope your GM is wise enough to poach from another team, because his value exceeds what you see on the stat sheets......not surprising at all that it's a smart franchise like St.Louis that snatched him up.

Leafin'
06-28-2014, 02:36 PM
Gunnarson has been mediocre, lets not lose our brains over it.

A C defender for a C defender. Not a good trade for either team, just shuffling of defenseman.

BeLeafer
06-28-2014, 02:53 PM
The only way that trade is even remotely defensible is if Carl's hip is done and the Leafs know this to be the case.

Pronger84
06-28-2014, 03:01 PM
Gunnarson has been mediocre, lets not lose our brains over it.

A C defender for a C defender. Not a good trade for either team, just shuffling of defenseman.

Gunnarsson is medicore? He played on the top pairing with Dion last year and was a team high plus rating, while I don't think he's a top pairing guy he's at worst a mid pairing guy who can sub in on the top pairing if an injury occurs. Mediocre would be a guy like Franson or Gleason....

The Leafs have essentially down graded here, they give up a top pairing blueliner (and yes on this team he is one) for a guy who was a bottom pairing one on the Blues, big time slide. Then on top of that Nonis gave up a 4th rounder which is just moronic on it's own merit.... you don't piss away picks like that and like Nonis has been doing for over a year now....

Bad trade all around... I'm not so much pissed we gave up Gunnarsson, to me the much bigger issue is the draft pick we through in on the deal.... it's just mind boggling how Nonis doesn't get it, he doesn't get how to build through the draft like the good teams do, instead he just loves to chuck them away for a quick fix.

Until MLSE learns a) to keep their picks (whether it be the 1st or 7th round) and b) properly learns to develop them.... this team will forever be spinning its wheels in mediocrocity

Pronger84
06-28-2014, 03:08 PM
I don't know about that. If i asked you about Franson this time last year, your answer would be different. This is a guy that was viewed as a cornerstone for our defense after the Boston series and a guy that was looking at big money. It would suck to lose him for nothing and watch him develop into the top-4 defender we all thought he was going to be.

I think a lot of Fransons issues are due to the coaching staff not playing him correctly. Maybe with a slight adjustment in coaching we might see the valuable Franson again.

I can fault Carlyle for a lot of things but he's not to blame Franson being the player he is. Franson is basically a poweplay specialist who excels at getting his shot on net, but struggles with speed and he makes far too many miscues out the epsically when it comes to joining the rush at the wrong time, making ill advised passes that get intercepted a lot of the time, he struggles against speed players espically getting burne on the outside. Those are all weaknesses within Franson, they are what they are and at 27 he's not going to suddenly get much better then what he is currently... thats on Franson, not Carlyle.

Carlyle needs to use him better to an extent... this guy needs very sheltered minutes on the bottom pairing against less skilled players.... putting him in the top 4 is a bad idea, and hell I'd even limit him to the 2nd powerplay unit.

Of course my first option is that he gets traded, but its looking more and more like he'll be back next year, can only hope Carlyle puts him in a far lesser role.

Leafin'
06-28-2014, 05:33 PM
In the sprint portion of the testing, the three fastest skaters were No. 1 Andy McDonald, No. 2 Roman Polak and No. 3 Chris Porter. All three are fitness freaks and perennial winners in the event.


John Kelly on the Blues broadcasts has said in recent seasons that he thinks that Polak might be the fastest player on the team and that other guys could skate forwards and Polak could beat them skating backwards. I don't think that's true, but watch him the next time there's a puck coming back for icing. He doesn't get beat very often. I would not call him a graceful or agile skater. Few defensemen are.

Maybe not as slow as some may think. Dude is built like a truck as well. 6' 236lb.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 06:16 PM
Gunnarson has been mediocre, lets not lose our brains over it.

A C defender for a C defender. Not a good trade for either team, just shuffling of defenseman.

Gunnarsson is much better than Polak. If Gunner is "C defender", Polak is a D-.

MindzEye
06-28-2014, 06:17 PM
The only way that trade is even remotely defensible is if Carl's hip is done and the Leafs know this to be the case.

Yep

hockeylover
06-28-2014, 09:56 PM
Maybe not as slow as some may think. Dude is built like a truck as well. 6' 236lb.

Interesting. At least he's not slow.

number17
06-28-2014, 11:19 PM
Here's proof that our GM does not know the player he just traded for...


"He's a tough guy to play against," Nonis said of Polak, picked in the sixth round of 2004 Draft. "If you look at the minutes he plays he often plays against team's top players. He is very physical, he's very strong. I think there's a perception that because he's so big he's not mobile, I don't think that's true at all. We think that one of his strengths is his skating ability. He's going to provide a little bit of edge."

First of all, the minutes he plays shows he's the Blues 3rd unit dman in 5-6 slot, hitch does not trust him for anything more than 16 min a game, that tells you something. He DOES NOT play against the other team's top players. In fact his Corsi shows he is shielded from them, and face the weakest opponents. He is not used much in close games, and he is on 2nd PK minutes not 1st.

And on his skating and his speed, he was a decent skater but many blues fans have said he's lost a step over the past years, where he's also lost some games to injuries. The fact his injuries are creeping up is possibly a sign of a player physically playing over his size. Polak is listed as 6'0 or 6'1, and while he's a 230lbs player for a smallish dman to play that physical style it does take a toll over the years.

This trade has the potential of looking stempniak bad for us.

JackBurton
06-28-2014, 11:24 PM
I will say it is tough to get minutes on the Blues. IMo they have the best top 3 in the NHL. Gunnar's ice-time will go down in St.Louis. He won't get the opportunities Steen did.

Blueman
06-29-2014, 09:47 AM
If memory serves, I believe that Polak is a decent shot blocker. With the amount of times the Leafs get outshout in a game, this should at least help in that area a bit.

Habsy
06-29-2014, 09:59 AM
On the bright side, we should have another high pick coming for the new GM next year.

Yep, Nonis angling for McDavid. He's hoping Bernier gets hurt and might have to trade a couple of more players.

MindzEye
06-29-2014, 10:33 AM
If memory serves, I believe that Polak is a decent shot blocker. With the amount of times the Leafs get outshout in a game, this should at least help in that area a bit.

We can always take that route...or we could not trade for defenders who are turn over machines, so that we have the puck more and don't give up as many shots.

Pucklosopher
06-29-2014, 10:44 AM
From a 1-on-1 value perspective, the Leafs are getting the raw-end. Gunnar's a better player than Polak. And I don't know why the **** the Leafs are retaining $200,000 and giving up a pick.

But the Leafs brass seem to think Polak's a better fit for this team. And I don't mind the emphasis on better fit. The Leafs on the ice add up to a lot less than their talent level. It's not talent the team is lacking. Adding more talent would help, could even get this team into the playoffs - but they're not going to win a Cup on talent alone. Whatever would help unify and balance the team into a more cohesive whole is welcome, IMO. And an emphasis on that as the most important thing - like it is on the Wings, the Bruins, the Kings - is a good sign to me.

MindzEye
06-29-2014, 10:54 AM
The Leafs brass thought Clarkson was a fit for this team.

Basically, they don't seem to know what is a good fit and what isn't. They're probably much better off just following the data, given their track record.

Volcanologist
06-29-2014, 11:02 AM
yeah, our pro scouting has been terrible.

but the results will continue to reflect that, and Shanahan will fire them. I hope.

Pucklosopher
06-29-2014, 11:10 AM
Personally, I think the Clarkson and Komisarek signings (and Gleason trade) were because they saw a void on the team and so they signed the individual to help resolve that problem. It's not just a roster problem, though. That's part of it. But it's an entire team thing. Just because guys like Komi and Gleason are gritty doesn't mean the rest of the team is absolved from those elements of the game.

MindzEye
06-29-2014, 11:19 AM
Personally, I think the Clarkson and Komisarek signings (and Gleason trade) were because they saw a void on the team and so they signed the individual to help resolve that problem. It's not just a roster problem, though. That's part of it. But it's an entire team thing. Just because guys like Komi and Gleason are gritty doesn't mean the rest of the team is absolved from those elements of the game.

The major, glaring problem with those signings, and they're still prevalent in the team's approach is to put obscene amounts of value on the subjective unknowable above the objective knowable. Feely "we watch the game" bullshit over objective (though in fairness, incomplete) data.

We're still doing that.

leafman101
06-29-2014, 11:51 AM
Nah that's bs. You need guys like Polak. You just can't spend $5 mill on them. And thy aren't. They finally got it right.

MindzEye
06-29-2014, 11:52 AM
Funny, a contender level club that is known for making extremely sound decisions just decided that you don't in fact need a Polak, and that Gunnarsson is the better player to move forward with.

I'm going to bank on Armstrong >>> Nonis

Pucklosopher
06-29-2014, 12:14 PM
I think the problems with this Leafs team are largely intangible. Firstly, because defence in hockey isn't something that's really objectively measurable. But also because if you look at the talent - this is not the 8th worst team in hockey. Organizations like the Wings and the Devils are doing better than the Leafs with a fraction of the talent.

The thing is.. Leafs brass has been going about fixing the intangibles the wrong way. Instead of from the inside-out, they keep trying to make a big signing that will fill the intangibles quota, like it's a checkmark on a list. Meanwhile, our top-line cherry-picks the whole game. That is more indicative of the problem with this Leafs team than anything you can find on paper, IMO.

leafman101
06-29-2014, 12:19 PM
Funny, a contender level club that is known for making extremely sound decisions just decided that you don't in fact need a Polak, and that Gunnarsson is the better player to move forward with.

I'm going to bank on Armstrong >>> Nonis

Why not look at teams that have actually won something. La had Mitchell, muzzin, regher and Greene. Chicago had hjalmersson, oduya and brookbank. Boston had ferrence, boychuk and macquaid.


Every winning team has players like that. You can't pretend like big physical defensive dmen aren't valuable in hockey. They clearly are. Just not $5 million valuable.

Pucklosopher
06-29-2014, 12:29 PM
Actually, forget about the word intangibles. The most important question is: how does this Leafs team improve defensively? How do they allow less shots / goals? Defence is an entire team thing, a habit - not something really solvable on paper.

Deckie007
06-29-2014, 12:30 PM
Why not look at teams that have actually won something. La had Mitchell, muzzin, regher and Greene. Chicago had hjalmersson, oduya and brookbank. Boston had ferrence, boychuk and macquaid.


Every winning team has players like that. You can't pretend like big physical defensive dmen aren't valuable in hockey. They clearly are. Just not $5 million valuable.

If we had a Doughty, Duncan, Seabrook or Chara it would be different. Alas, we do not.

MindzEye
06-29-2014, 12:32 PM
Why not look at teams that have actually won something. La had Mitchell, muzzin, regher and Greene.

Polak isn't like these guys though. Not even close to as good. Similar style of play, sure. But not as good. I


Chicago had hjalmersson, oduya and brookbank.

Do you watch Hjalmarrson and Oduya play? They're far more similar to Gunnarsson than they are Polak.


Boston had ferrence, boychuk and macquaid.

Are we really going to pretend that having vezina calibre goaltending didn't cover up for how slow the Bruins blueline was?


Every winning team has players like that. You can't pretend like big physical defensive dmen aren't valuable in hockey. They clearly are. Just not $5 million valuable.

Oh, they can be valuable. I'd just like for you to show me where those teams gave up something of value for those physical defenders, and didn't develop them for free.

MindzEye
06-29-2014, 12:36 PM
I think the problems with this Leafs team are largely intangible. Firstly, because defence in hockey isn't something that's really objectively measurable.

We don't measure it perfectly, but we absolutely do measure it. There's nothing intangible about not being able to clear your own zone.


But also because if you look at the talent - this is not the 8th worst team in hockey. Organizations like the Wings and the Devils are doing better than the Leafs with a fraction of the talent.

Yes, but there's nothing necessarily "intangible" about that. It's not the "character" or "toughness" or some such bullshit, it's the implementation of a decent system. Our coach has shown over the past number of years to have a system that weighs on his team's possession of the puck. We saw it last season in a team that couldn't clear it's zone and gave up the highest amount of shots in the modern era.

MindzEye
06-29-2014, 12:43 PM
Actually, forget about the word intangibles. The most important question is: how does this Leafs team improve defensively? How do they allow less shots / goals? Defence is an entire team thing, a habit - not something really solvable on paper.

1) Cover the points: We gave up a grotesque amount of point shots last season, which leads into point 2
2) Stop collapsing: So, winger would stay low in the corner to assist the defender. Puck gets chipped back to the blueline. Impending, wide open point shot would cause everything in a blue and white jersey to collapse really close to the net. Long shot on net often equals either a long rebound, or miss the next and ricochet far from the net. Now we're chasing again because of the ground you need to cover to get to the boards, where the puck is.
3) Triangle break outs: Enough with the 100 foot passes. They have their place but it should only be to establish odd man situations. 80-90% of the time your break outs should be in puck support. We have more than enough speed and skill to create havoc on the breakout, even with a boring, structured breakout.
4) Possess the ****ing puck more: Bring in strong possession depth players. No more goon lines stuck in our zone for 90 seconds, no more Jay McClement checking lines chasing the puck their whole shift. Bring in quality depth that can competently move the puck through the neutral zone, get it deep, and keep it there as much as possible.

zeke
06-29-2014, 03:24 PM
Why not look at teams that have actually won something. La had Mitchell, muzzin, regher and Greene. Chicago had hjalmersson, oduya and brookbank. Boston had ferrence, boychuk and macquaid.


Every winning team has players like that. You can't pretend like big physical defensive dmen aren't valuable in hockey. They clearly are. Just not $5 million valuable.

muzzin? Hjalmarsson? Oduya?

how are they remotely like Polak?


Mitchell? Regehr? Ference?

when has Polak ever been as good as they were?

zeke
06-29-2014, 03:26 PM
Personally, I think the Clarkson and Komisarek signings (and Gleason trade) were because they saw a void on the team and so they signed the individual to help resolve that problem. It's not just a roster problem, though. That's part of it. But it's an entire team thing. Just because guys like Komi and Gleason are gritty doesn't mean the rest of the team is absolved from those elements of the game.

The problem is that they keep misdiagnosing a lack of TALENT as a lack of CHARACTER.

over and over and over again.

MyNameIsJonas
06-29-2014, 03:36 PM
I'm feeling a Shawn Thornton character signing.

MindzEye
06-29-2014, 03:38 PM
Culture Change ftw!

Leafin'
06-29-2014, 04:04 PM
I would be willing to bet we in fact do sign Shawn Thornton.

I have no problem with the trade. Gunnarson was very meh to me.

Our draft was relatively weak in that we didn't move up or get any additional picks. The prospects we got i don't know enough about to comment, so i will reserve judgement for the future.

I will give Shanahan and Nonis until opening day to see what the roster looks like.

Pronger84
06-29-2014, 05:01 PM
Hmmmm

Thornton-Mcclement-Bodie/Ashton could make for a very nasty 4th line.

number17
06-29-2014, 06:03 PM
To be fair, I haven't seen Polak play as much as I'd like, so maybe the trade is not as disastrous as I thought. And it IS true you don't need a bunch of redundant defensemen on the backend - all 6 softish, skilled, good skating dmen (not say that's what we have, but just saying a group of 6 like that) won't work very well. You do need a mix of muscle and finess on your 6 D unit to make it work. Having said that, if you handle the puck like a hand grenade, then you will always struggle to play key roles in the NHL.

Nonis publicly admitted Polak is a 4-5 D, and if you consider the fact that Gunnarson was our 1st unit D playing upward of 20 min a game in PP, PK and ES, that's when you realize the trade is a DOWNGRADE - and this is despite the fact Gunnaron was not a true 1st unit guy, he's very easy a 3-4 D, so going from a 3-4 D to a 5-6 D is a downgrade.

So we downgraded to go for a different kind of dman, that alone might not be so bad, but we also have to throw in a pick and retain some salary to make that trade happen???? Immediately you know it isn't a good trade even IF Polak is a good fit on this team.

And here's the other problem. A major problem with our D last few years was Phaneuf was the only dman playing where he should. Gunnar should have been playing
on 2nd unit and he played on the 1st. Franson should have been playing on 3rd unit and he was playing on 2nd. Gleason should have been #6 or #7, but he was playing as high as #4. Gardiner was inconsistent, Rielly was a rookie. We really needed another top unit dman to help Phaneuf so we can push everyone else down a slot.

In trading a #3-4 guy for a #4-5 guy, not only we haven't got that all important #2D, we now essentially brought everyone up a slot!

If we traded Gunnar for, say, Polak and a 2nd or Polak + a prospect I may have been ok with it. But we had to throw in some cap space and a pick to make that trade happen tell us it's a bad trade. There's just no way to defend that.

uncus
06-30-2014, 09:04 AM
I have no problem with the Polak trade ..... it was the draft pick I cant understand. Maybe Gunnersons hip played some part of this inclusion.
The leafs have one of the softest defences in the league ... this will help.
I do have a problem with the possible slotting of Reilly into the top d pairing. He isn't ready .. not even close. (keep protecting him for at least half of the season)
Also, the team doesn't need both Gleason and Polak. That friggen forth could have been used to trade away Gleason and his contract.
The Ranger experiment must be over.
I still think you might see some sort of Franson, Riemer and Clarkson deal with Edmonton.

uncus
06-30-2014, 09:07 AM
does Clarkson have a nmc in his contract?

uncus
06-30-2014, 09:16 AM
I'm feeling a Shawn Thornton character signing.
I have no problem with a Shawn Thorton signing ... he would be better than Bodie or Orr, and maybe just his experience of having been part of a winning organization could help with the younger guys in the room.
Thorton - ? - D`Amigo line would not be a bad base for a 4th line ..... Ashton needs top 6 minutes to prove he is able to produce (at least 10-15 games) this year or it will be time to realize he wont become that top 6 forward we suppose him to be.

CTheBigPicture
06-30-2014, 09:21 AM
does Clarkson have a nmc in his contract?
Yes he has a NMC and a modified NTC (10 teams I think)

Pucklosopher
06-30-2014, 09:43 AM
1) Cover the points: We gave up a grotesque amount of point shots last season, which leads into point 2
2) Stop collapsing: So, winger would stay low in the corner to assist the defender. Puck gets chipped back to the blueline. Impending, wide open point shot would cause everything in a blue and white jersey to collapse really close to the net. Long shot on net often equals either a long rebound, or miss the next and ricochet far from the net. Now we're chasing again because of the ground you need to cover to get to the boards, where the puck is.
3) Triangle break outs: Enough with the 100 foot passes. They have their place but it should only be to establish odd man situations. 80-90% of the time your break outs should be in puck support. We have more than enough speed and skill to create havoc on the breakout, even with a boring, structured breakout.
4) Possess the ****ing puck more: Bring in strong possession depth players. No more goon lines stuck in our zone for 90 seconds, no more Jay McClement checking lines chasing the puck their whole shift. Bring in quality depth that can competently move the puck through the neutral zone, get it deep, and keep it there as much as possible.

The Leafs strategies and team concept are the worst part of the team. They played a ludicrous style of hockey last year.

That's not something that can be solved by roster moves. Our core has to buy-in. The top-priority of the team has to be to make sure the core players - Kessel, Phaneuf, JVR, Kadri, Gardiner, Rielly - grow in the right way. I don't mind them putting more responsibility on those guys, as they are with Gardiner and Rielly with the Gunnar trade. I also think that's primarily why they kept Carlyle - to not pin the blame on an easy scapegoat.

Anyway, Gunnar for Polak seems to be part of the bigger change. They're changing the defense, approaching it in a different way. I don't mind that at all.

MindzEye
06-30-2014, 09:52 AM
Where did this myth that the Leafs had a small, soft blueline last year come from?

Phaneuf & Franson were among what, the top 10 in hits? We spent large portions of the season with either Fraser, Ranger, or Gleason also on the blueline. That's way more physicality than you find on most bluelines.

MindzEye
06-30-2014, 09:55 AM
The Leafs strategies and team concept are the worst part of the team. They played a ludicrous style of hockey last year.

That's not something that can be solved by roster moves. Our core has to buy-in.


Our core has to buy in to what? A style of play that requires them to chase the puck endlessly in their own zone?



The top-priority of the team has to be to make sure the core players - Kessel, Phaneuf, JVR, Kadri, Gardiner, Rielly - grow in the right way. I don't mind them putting more responsibility on those guys, as they are with Gardiner and Rielly with the Gunnar trade. I also think that's primarily why they kept Carlyle - to not pin the blame on an easy scapegoat.

I view keeping Carlyle in an entirely different light. It shows me that their is a lack of understanding of exactly what was going wrong on the ice from a strategic level.


Anyway, Gunnar for Polak seems to be part of the bigger change. They're changing the defense, approaching it in a different way. I don't mind that at all.

You'll mind when it leads to a slower team less able to win hockey games.

Pucklosopher
06-30-2014, 10:21 AM
Our core has to buy in to what? A style of play that requires them to chase the puck endlessly in their own zone?

You'll mind when it leads to a slower team less able to win hockey games.

They have to learn play together, all 5 men. Defense is a team thing. Right now, they only play together when it comes to scoring beautiful goals. Our top-6 players are always leaving our defencemen stranded.

They can't get much worse at playing defence than last year. Their "speed game" style - it didn't work. The Leafs D collectively was horrendous, and that was with our goalies putting up a really good season.

MindzEye
06-30-2014, 10:37 AM
They have to learn play together, all 5 men. Defense is a team thing. Right now, they only play together when it comes to scoring beautiful goals. Our top-6 players are always leaving our defencemen stranded.

They can't get much worse at playing defence than last year. Their "speed game" style - it didn't work. The Leafs D collectively was horrendous, and that was with our goalies putting up a really good season.

Again, I think our people were exactly where they were supposed to be within our defensive scheme last season. Randy said it himself that his plan was to keep the wingers low and collapse to the front of the net. He couldn't understand what teams were doing to counteract it....teams were forcing the puck low, kicking back to the point when the winger bit to help down low, wide open point shot, rinse and repeat. It's a system that in todays NHL is almost guaranteed to be chasing the puck more often than not, and this shows in the possession numbers of Randy Carlyle coached teams over the past 5-6 seasons.

It's great to throw broad statements like "they have to play together" "5 man units" and similar shit, but if your strategy is broken, it's going to look like people are playing individual hockey.

If our defensive strategy wasn't to collapse to the net, then Randy failed at teaching his system. If our break out system wasn't based on 100 foot zone exit passes, Randy failed at teaching and enforcing a more structured system.

PKForce81
06-30-2014, 11:39 AM
Our core has to buy in to what? A style of play that requires them to chase the puck endlessly in their own zone?




I view keeping Carlyle in an entirely different light. It shows me that their is a lack of understanding of exactly what was going wrong on the ice from a strategic level.



You'll mind when it leads to a slower team less able to win hockey games.

Yep. I wanted to see what we do in terms of changes before i judge them but if this is Carlyle's stamp(which it does look like) i don't like the guy any longer. It looks like we'll have another season of him trying to figure out why these players with low hockey iq's are ruining our games. It seems the whole "you can't teach an old dog new tricks" is very much true here.

Pucklosopher
06-30-2014, 11:44 AM
Again, I think our people were exactly where they were supposed to be within our defensive scheme last season. Randy said it himself that his plan was to keep the wingers low and collapse to the front of the net. He couldn't understand what teams were doing to counteract it....teams were forcing the puck low, kicking back to the point when the winger bit to help down low, wide open point shot, rinse and repeat. It's a system that in todays NHL is almost guaranteed to be chasing the puck more often than not, and this shows in the possession numbers of Randy Carlyle coached teams over the past 5-6 seasons.

It's great to throw broad statements like "they have to play together" "5 man units" and similar shit, but if your strategy is broken, it's going to look like people are playing individual hockey.

If our defensive strategy wasn't to collapse to the net, then Randy failed at teaching his system. If our break out system wasn't based on 100 foot zone exit passes, Randy failed at teaching and enforcing a more structured system.

I may speak broadly, but truthfully I can’t pinpoint the Xs and O’s of the Leafs failed strategy. I don’t have that kind of hockey mind. But I also think it’s simplistic to say that if the Leafs just did X+Y+Z, their problems would be fixed. If it were just strategy, people working in the NHL would figure it out. You still have to get the individuals on the team – with strong individual personalities, big egos, in the Leafs case immature individuals - to really believe in any strategy.

Personally, I think the problem is within the core-players. And not resolvable by changing the roster around unless you want to get rid of said core players, which would really hurt the talent level and overall potential of the team.

The Leafs strategy last year seemed to cater to said core-players, letting them put fancy goals first. That’s largely Carlyle’s fault, sure. I think they kept him on, though, because they don’t want to allow anybody to be the scapegoat or the saviour (like a big free agent signing) this year. The message is for the core-players to find the solution on their own. At the same time, they fired the assistants to shift the strategy. Because obviously, it sucked last year.

They found a sort of middle-ground 3rd solution. That's pretty interesting and unusual for the Leafs.

zeke
06-30-2014, 11:45 AM
there was a decent quote on twitter the other day. something to the effect of: "Its painful to watch a team strip its assets to conform to the view of a coach who can't admit the game has passed him by".

zeke
06-30-2014, 11:46 AM
I'm feeling a Shawn Thornton character signing.

heh.

would be the opposite of a surprise.

and the opposite of smart.

Pucklosopher
06-30-2014, 11:50 AM
I do have to say that I think Carlyle is a dinosaur. Hopefully some new voices bring some new ideas to the table. Some Red Wings-ish ideas.

At the same time, I think it'd be sending the wrong message to this young, impressionable group to fire a coach after only his first full season with a team.

MapleLeafBlueJayBoy
06-30-2014, 12:13 PM
Seeing what Gunnar is saying on the way out about this team makes me sad. A total lack of locker room leadership. Surprised that Carlyle was kept when all his assistants were fired.

Shanny has done nothing to shake up this franchise and hold people accountable. It is the status quo.

LeafGm
06-30-2014, 12:14 PM
I do have to say that I think Carlyle is a dinosaur. Hopefully some new voices bring some new ideas to the table. Some Red Wings-ish ideas.

At the same time, I think it'd be sending the wrong message to this young, impressionable group to fire a coach after only his first full season with a team.
Yes, you're right. It's much better to show this young, impressionable group that abject failure in this organization is rewarded with a contract extension.

CRL
06-30-2014, 12:16 PM
Polak will end up in Marlies or traded and Gunnar will shine

Wayward DP
06-30-2014, 12:25 PM
Seeing what Gunnar is saying on the way out about this team makes me sad. A total lack of locker room leadership. Surprised that Carlyle was kept when all his assistants were fired.

Shanny has done nothing to shake up this franchise and hold people accountable. It is the status quo.

what has gunnar said? Beyond expecting Randy to follow Farrish out the door...

LeafGm
06-30-2014, 12:37 PM
Anyways, I'm late into this discussion since I was out in the wilderness for the weekend---but I thought I'd throw my two cents in on this trade.

Frankly, it doesn't look like a good move. Admittedly, I know next-to-nothing about Roman Polak, but the numbers don't paint an encouraging picture for me. For the past four seasons, Polak has been 5th or 6th in ice-time per game for St-Louis. In the two seasons before that, St-Louis did actually use him as a top-four defenseman, but they were a bubble playoff team both of those years---missing the playoffs by five points on year, and sneaking in by a three point margin the other year. That doesn't tell the whole picture, but I think it's telling that as St-Louis progressed from a bubble team to a top-10 NHL team, Polak was pushed down the lineup onto the bottom pair.

So, we've traded a guy who's been a solid, all-around dependable top-3/4 defenseman for us in exchange for a bottom-pairing defenseman, and to make it even more baffling, we threw in an extra draft pick and kept some of Gunn's salary so that we don't even get any cap benefit from this trade.

If this is the trading prowess of our two-headed GM Brendave Shanonishan on display, then I have to say, I'm not encouraged.

Wayward DP
06-30-2014, 01:06 PM
Yeah, tough to like this move on paper. Obviously they wanted a RH-D, but seems silly to give up Gunnar + cap space for a guy like Polak, guess time will tell.

Pronger84
06-30-2014, 01:13 PM
I have no problem with the Polak trade ..... it was the draft pick I cant understand. Maybe Gunnersons hip played some part of this inclusion.
The leafs have one of the softest defences in the league ... this will help.
I do have a problem with the possible slotting of Reilly into the top d pairing. He isn't ready .. not even close. (keep protecting him for at least half of the season)
Also, the team doesn't need both Gleason and Polak. That friggen forth could have been used to trade away Gleason and his contract.
The Ranger experiment must be over.
I still think you might see some sort of Franson, Riemer and Clarkson deal with Edmonton.

The issues aren't physicality, the problem is inability to transfer the puck up ice into an offensive rush. U can knock a guy on his ass all game but what good is it if u can't get the puck out of your own end

number17
06-30-2014, 04:30 PM
So, we've traded a guy who's been a solid, all-around dependable top-3/4 defenseman for us in exchange for a bottom-pairing defenseman, and to make it even more baffling, we threw in an extra draft pick and kept some of Gunn's salary so that we don't even get any cap benefit from this trade.

If this is the trading prowess of our two-headed GM Brendave Shanonishan on display, then I have to say, I'm not encouraged.That basically sums up my view on it too.

If Nonis & Shanny's view is Rielly and Gardiner are ready to step into #2 role, I think they are delusional, but I can at least dael with that.

If they feel that means Gunnar is now expandable, it is fine, but in the trade they did not really save any cap space, downgraded from a #3-4 to #5-6, and had to throw in a pick and some $$ to make it happen. What's the point of the trade then??? If they really deemed Gunnarsson as expandable I'd rather they trade him away for a pick or prospect to save themselves more cap space than to trade him for Polak.

And when you look at the overall picture, they downgraded from Gunnar to Polak, then bought out Gleason!!! Polak is minimal upgrade over Gleason (if any) ... why not just trade Gunnar for picks and keep Gleason in the #5 hole instead of Polak?? Doesn't that make more sense?

I still hold out a bit of hope for his management but I got a feeling I can completely write off the next 2-4 years in the next 2 days. If Shanny does any 2 of the following list I think we can write off the entire Shanny era for the next few years:
- Offer Bolland $25M/5
- Offer Boyle anything over $2.5M/1 yr
- Sign Brodeur (for any amount)

Leafin'
06-30-2014, 05:22 PM
I think Boyle will get around 4 million, and probably for 2 years.

Brodeur on a 1 year deal for around a million isn't too bad.

hockeylover
06-30-2014, 05:28 PM
I think Boyle will get around 4 million, and probably for 2 years.

Brodeur on a 1 year deal for around a million isn't too bad.

But he's just not very good anymore. He hasn't even had an average save percentage in like 4 years.

number17
06-30-2014, 05:36 PM
Brodeur posted a .901 SV% last season, as a backup. That is subpar #, even for backup.

That's almost Monster-bad. There are much better options out there.

Metalleaf
06-30-2014, 05:43 PM
I'd rather give 1 year and $2M to Thomas Greiss.

Leafin'
06-30-2014, 06:20 PM
If money is tight, brodeur on a 1mil deal isn't bad. Time for bernier to play 65+ games. If he gets injured, were ****ed regardless.

TimHorton
06-30-2014, 08:16 PM
Brodeur on any money is a bad, bad deal. He's shot.

Pucklosopher
07-01-2014, 07:13 AM
Brodeur's leaving New Jersey because he's not happy with the amount of games he would be playing. He's not a backup the Leafs should be looking at.

MyNameIsJonas
07-01-2014, 09:18 AM
Brodeur is still playing only because his ex wife cleaned him out.

This isnt a guy who's going to offer anyone a discount

Hoss
07-01-2014, 09:35 AM
I'd love to see Emery signed as the back up. The guy killed in Chicago and helped Philly come out of their hole. He isn't capable of playing the whole season, but he doesn't have to here.

Hire Brodeur as a goalie coach if he wants to be close to his son FFS.

JaysCyYoung
07-01-2014, 09:43 AM
Brodeur should either accept Jersey's terms or retire. It would be asinine for him to wreck the whole one team in his entire career narrative just to play somewhere random for one year. He's not a starter on any team in the NHL at this stage in his career.

JaysCyYoung
07-01-2014, 09:48 AM
Brodeur is still playing only because his ex wife cleaned him out.

This isnt a guy who's going to offer anyone a discount

According to CapGeek, Brodeur has made over $81 million USD in his career. I don't care if you give up half of that salary in a divorce settlement, you're not hurting for money unless you're a total moron with finances. Brodeur never struck me as particularly stupid.

He does have an ego though, and probably has difficulty coming to terms with the fact that he's no longer a competent NHL goalie.

leafman101
07-01-2014, 10:06 AM
I thought New Jersey didn't want him back.

MyNameIsJonas
07-01-2014, 10:12 AM
I thought New Jersey didn't want him back.

they dont.

MyNameIsJonas
07-01-2014, 10:13 AM
not in a goaltending capacity anyways

JackBurton
10-06-2014, 07:25 PM
This trade is looking much, much better now.

MindzEye
10-06-2014, 07:32 PM
Yeah, I hated the trade at the time but even I accepted the potential that Gunner's hip is beyond him returning to form. If he returns to form, then I think this ends up looking bad for us, if it doesn't...Polak is a pretty decent get for a gimpy defender.

BeLeafer
10-06-2014, 07:38 PM
Yeah, this looks good if his hip is done. Otherwise, we got poor value for the assets (although I do like Polak and think he's a good addition to the blueline).

leafman101
10-06-2014, 07:43 PM
IMO it looks good either way. Gunnar and Polak are both #4/5 dmen. Gunnar was overused here as the Leafs only had one defenseman in Phaneuf. He matcPolak was relegated to depth duty behind Boumeester and Shattenkirk. Both guys are really somewhere in the middle though.

Polak is a really good skater, and makes smart plays with the puck, most likely from receiving great coaching the last few years. Plus he is a big body that is tough to deal with down low, and he can play the right side.

I don't think we downgraded very much, if at all, and we got the type of player we didn't have before. A big, physical defensive dman that can play the PK, but most importantly can skate. I would make that deal again, injury or no injury.

With Phaneuf-Gardiner-Rielly-Percy on the left side, Gunnar was more than expendable. Bringing in a couple of solid defensemen that skate well on the right side in Robidas and Polak was exactly what the team needed on the back end.

leafman101
10-06-2014, 08:15 PM
Polak's Fancy Stats 2013-14 (team rank):
CF%: 49.2% (7th)
Corsi Rel QoC: -0.184 (4th)
Corsi Rel QoT: -1.313 (5th)
GAon/60: 2.17 (3rd)
PDO: 997
Off Zone St: 46.4% (6th)
Off Zone Fin: 50.2% (6th)
On Ice Sh%: 7.90 (6th)
G/60: 0.23 (1st)
P/60: 0.63 (6th)


2012-13 (rank)
CF%: 50.0% (4th)
Corsi Rel QoC: 0.291 (4th)
Corsi Rel QoT: -0.301 (5th)
GAon/60: 2.05 (2nd)
PDO: 982 (6th)
Off Zone St: 47.5% (3rd)
Off Zone Fin: 51.0% (1st)
On Ice Sh%: 7.06 (5th)
G/60: 0.08 (5th)
P/60: 0.39 (5th)

So he has been a little bit unlucky with the low PDO, On Ice Shooting Percentage, and Quality of Teamates. However, he doens't offer much offensively either way. Defensively, despite poor linemates and an unfavourable amount of defensive zone starts, he is about even possession player, and isn't on the ice for a lot of goals against.

He's nothing special, but he just a solid defenseman that makes more good decisions than poor ones and has the size and skating on the right side. The Leafs needed that.

zeke
10-06-2014, 08:20 PM
yeah, polak impressed me too. decision making was much better than i expected. toughess and speed i expected though.

just preseason but very encouraging.

but iml robidas should be the key here, as long as he doesn't fall off too much. that's a legit quality top pair dman for most of his career. should be a good upgrade over gunnar on the top pair, and polak looks like he'll be just as big an upgrade over gleason/ranger. i think gunnar is the better player but polak doesn't have to replace what gunnar brought and his strengths will be a welcome addition.

and if rielly/gards take a step up, and if phaneuf benefits from the side switch and the better partner, and if percy is an upgrade....

leafman101
10-06-2014, 08:21 PM
Polak 4 on 5 Defensmen with 1:30+ PKmins/g (NHL Rank)
GAon/60: 4.43 (14th)
Corsi On: -64.94 (6th)
Off Zone Finish: 50.0% (5th)


And he is a damn good PKer.

leafman101
10-06-2014, 08:27 PM
Yeah the D is much better constructed this year, and Franson aside has no liabilities that can't play in the NHL. The additions of Robidas and Polak give them a couple of vets that can share the load with Phaneuf. And then its all about what they get out of the young guys.

Rielly, Gardiner and Percy are the keys. When they hit their stride the D core could be very, very good. And they might not be far away. Gardiner played at a 50 point pace the second half of last year, and Percy's game is pretty simple but effective. And of course Rielly is just awesome.

Like you said, there are still question marks, but its not a bad group to take a chance on considering what we've had to trot out there the last few years.

JackBurton
10-06-2014, 08:32 PM
Yeah, this looks good if his hip is done. Otherwise, we got poor value for the assets (although I do like Polak and think he's a good addition to the blueline).

Well, his hip thus far doesn't look good. how many guys can return to form after that?

That's why the Leafs threw in additional assets. The Blues were taking a risk.

soco22
10-06-2014, 09:34 PM
yeah, polak impressed me too. decision making was much better than i expected. toughess and speed i expected though.

You literally responded to my question about does he have speed and said no on page 2...lol.