• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

2nd Rnd '25 Playoffs: Leafs vs Panthers - Flo-Rida them onto the ECF - LFG!

zeke said:

View: https://x.com/jonassiegel/status/1923400874929340910
Click to expand...


So Robby can score in game 7

200w.gif
 
Artnes said:
Id throw Steeves in over Jarnkrok
Click to expand...

To the day that I die I will never understand the fascination coaches have with "veterans" who provide zero positive impact on a game pretty much ever, but are considered "safe" because they play so fucking risk averse that they don't hurt you often. Those guys are almost always net negatives over the course of even just a playoff series and do nothing but put more pressure on players up the lineup to outright win their matchups. I can squint and see the utility when it's a guy who can play like a fucking neanderthal and "set the tone" and all of that, but when it's just a bottom 6 cardio merchant like we've had here over the years (Jarnkrok, Kerfoot, ZAR, Kampf, Gregor, Dewar, etc) I just don't. Depth players need to check at least one of 3 boxes to be useful. Skilled (within reason, within the boundaries of a bottom 6 role), puck/possession dominant, angry.

I would much, much rather take a swing on players who generate positive events but might burn you than run with these "safe" players who do nothing of positive value but burn you less often.
 
CH1 said:
Vegas still has Leafs at +475 to win the series.

If forumice comments were a sportsbook, it'd be +5000
Click to expand...
+475 gives them implied odds of around 17%. In the last 10 years the success rate of the team down 3-2 is around 21%. And that number rises when it's the #1 team in the division (though sample is too small to matter).

So if anything that tells me that even Vegas doesn't beleaf!
 
  • Like
Reactions: CH1
MindzEye said:
To the day that I die I will never understand the fascination coaches have with "veterans" who provide zero positive impact on a game pretty much ever, but are considered "safe" because they play so fucking risk averse that they don't hurt you often. Those guys are almost always net negatives over the course of even just a playoff series and do nothing but put more pressure on players up the lineup to outright win their matchups. I can squint and see the utility when it's a guy who can play like a fucking neanderthal and "set the tone" and all of that, but when it's just a bottom 6 cardio merchant like we've had here over the years (Jarnkrok, Kerfoot, ZAR, Kampf, Gregor, Dewar, etc) I just don't. Depth players need to check at least one of 3 boxes to be useful. Skilled (within reason, within the boundaries of a bottom 6 role), puck/possession dominant, angry.

I would much, much rather take a swing on players who generate positive events but might burn you than run with these "safe" players who do nothing of positive value but burn you less often.
Click to expand...
The closest claim they can make to nourishing and developing a Marlie at the NHL level is Robertson, and his development has been handled terribly.

It's wild, absolutely wild the amount of Spezza, Simmonds, ZAR, Aube-Kubel, Kampf, Laughton, Gregor, Dewar and Jarnkrok that these idiots have trotted out at the expense of developing from within, something their chief Atlantic rivals do very very well.
 
MyNameIsJonas said:
The closest claim they can make to nourishing and developing a Marlie at the NHL level is Robertson, and his development has been handled terribly.

It's wild, absolutely wild the amount of Spezza, Simmonds, ZAR, Aube-Kubel, Kampf, Laughton, Gregor, Dewar and Jarnkrok that these idiots have trotted out at the expense of developing from within, something their chief Atlantic rivals do very very well.
Click to expand...

If it's not set to easy mode where the kid is NHL ready out of the box, we just don't develop them well.
 
MyNameIsJonas said:
The closest claim they can make to nourishing and developing a Marlie at the NHL level is Robertson, and his development has been handled terribly.

It's wild, absolutely wild the amount of Spezza, Simmonds, ZAR, Aube-Kubel, Kampf, Laughton, Gregor, Dewar and Jarnkrok that these idiots have trotted out at the expense of developing from within, something their chief Atlantic rivals do very very well.
Click to expand...

They also draft like shit.

Knies has had no problem earning a huge role. Holmberg, McMann.
 
MindzEye said:
If it's not set to easy mode where the kid is NHL ready out of the box, we just don't develop them well.
Click to expand...
Like in addition to keeping a steady flow of kids into the lineup introduced in 4th line roles with the potential to grow into larger ones, it's also wildly more economic than FA
 
Like, the big 4, specifically big 2 have been shit in the playoffs, but these guys are also built very poorly.

Shit drafting, shit development, shit preference to shitty washed gud pro vets, and some inherent belief that a Scott Laughton is more important than additional scoring help.
 
leafman101 said:
They also draft like shit.

Knies has had no problem earning a huge role. Holmberg, McMann.
Click to expand...

Sure, but he showed up ready to go at 21 yrs old. We benefitted from Michigan doing 1-2 years of development on him that we have to do ourselves with CHL prospects.
 
That does reduce the sting of drafting and developing like shit I guess.

We're just not a smart organization. I think we tried to be for a few minutes and when it didn't work immediately, made a hard right into the same old same old. If you removed all of the names next to the moves and just looked at them, have we done anything over the last 6-7 years that Brian Burke wouldn't have done?

Have we drafted much different at all than he would have drafted?
 
Big boys fading every series and not having a real #1 d for the big boys to play with (that can often act like a 4th forward) for me are the two biggest issues. Everything else is secondary, though the depth has gotten ass blasted this series, no doubt.

As the great dom put it, maybe spending nearly 4m on a guy that has been basically unplayable wasn't the best idea. At that aav he should be driving your bottom six depth, not being a liability.
 
I watched Domi as a Hab and decided that he’d never be useful on a good team… he’ll put up numbers on a bad team tho
 
Preston said:
Big boys fading every series and not having a real #1 d for the big boys to play with (that can often act like a 4th forward) for me are the two biggest issues. Everything else is secondary, though the depth has gotten ass blasted this series, no doubt.

As the great dom put it, maybe spending nearly 4m on a guy that has been basically unplayable wasn't the best idea. At that aav he should be driving your bottom six depth, not being a liability.
Click to expand...

Signing Domi to play in your bottom 6 is and was stupid. You only bring in a flawed, offensively oriented guy like Domi if the plan is to spread the big guys out over 3 lines. Domi works better as a left winger for Auston than he does as a left winger for Pontus Holmberg. If you didn't want him as a winger for Auston or Tavares, why are you signing him?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top