I'll never forget the 11 games Foligno played for the leafs and the leadership he provided
Only cost us a first rounder. Luckily for us the player Columbus picked looks like a flop so far (Corson Ceulemans) and we did draft Hiddelby with the other pick we got back
Man amount of trash players we had to sign because we had no cap space
Galleychunk needs to be added to the list. He only got arrested after
I fear for Pens fans tonight.
They weren't bums when they were here, and they weren't "held in such high regard" or "used so prominently". They ranged from #4-#6 defenseman and 3rd line-4th line forward with us. Based on their play with the Leafs, the rest of the league saw them to be worth assets in Engvall's case, and more money in both cases.Why were these bums held in such high regard and used so prominently here when the rest of the league can see them for what they are?
Seems you still struggle to understand that players and their impacts change over time. Nobody thought he was an "elite shutdown D", but you were wrong if you think he always sucked. He paired well with Muzzin, and they were a strong shutdown pairing for a couple years. As he moved out of his peak and into his 30s, moved to a more chaotic team, and played with lesser quality and less complimentary partners under a worse coach, he started to struggle.Could we please rehash all of the advanced stats that told us Justin Holl was an elite shutdown D and those of us who said he sucked had no idea what we were watching?
@Dekes For Days you're pretty well versed in those stats, wanna start?
Love this... "f*** the plays, pound their f***ing D!"
Holl never struggled here?They weren't bums when they were here, and they weren't "held in such high regard" or "used so prominently". They ranged from #4-#6 defenseman and 3rd line-4th line forward with us. Based on their play with the Leafs, the rest of the league saw them to be worth assets in Engvall's case, and more money in both cases.
Seems you still struggle to understand that players and their impacts change over time. Nobody thought he was an "elite shutdown D", but you were wrong if you think he always sucked. He paired well with Muzzin, and they were a strong shutdown pairing for a couple years. As he moved out of his peak and into his 30s, moved to a more chaotic team, and played with lesser quality and less complimentary partners under a worse coach, he started to struggle.
They weren't bums when they were here, and they weren't "held in such high regard" or "used so prominently". They ranged from #4-#6 defenseman and 3rd line-4th line forward with us. Based on their play with the Leafs, the rest of the league saw them to be worth assets in Engvall's case, and more money in both cases.
Seems you still struggle to understand that players and their impacts change over time. Nobody thought he was an "elite shutdown D", but you were wrong if you think he always sucked. He paired well with Muzzin, and they were a strong shutdown pairing for a couple years. As he moved out of his peak and into his 30s, moved to a more chaotic team, and played with lesser quality and less complimentary partners under a worse coach, he started to struggle.
hhHoll never struggled here?
I’d say he struggled a little.Holl never struggled here?
Yup, 31 year old D with less than 300 career games played just "exit" their peak the second they leave the LeafsSeems you still struggle to understand that players and their impacts change over time. Nobody thought he was an "elite shutdown D", but you were wrong if you think he always sucked. He paired well with Muzzin, and they were a strong shutdown pairing for a couple years. As he moved out of his peak and into his 30s, moved to a more chaotic team, and played with lesser quality and less complimentary partners under a worse coach, he started to struggle.
He had stretches where he struggled like all depth players, especially towards the end and in that final playoffs. Nobody is perfect, and we saw some of that decline starting while he was with us. But he also had stretches where he played really well, and overall in his time here, he was a decent defenseman for us and provided surplus value on his contract when we needed it most through the flat cap. He formed a decent shutdown pairing with Muzzin, and while Muzzin was the driver of that pairing, Holl held his own in difficult minutes. Over his time here, he averaged 20 minutes a game, including shutdown 5v5 and top PK roles, put up respectable defensive results, and was positive in goal differential and underlying play every single year.Holl never struggled here?
He sucks now, and he sucked with the Leafs. Many of us told you that, but you denied the reality right in front of your eyes and clinged to some obscure advanced stats that didn't say anything at all. Things don't work how you think they work, if he was even half as good now as he allegedly was with the Leafs according to you, someone would have taken him off waivers.He had stretches where he struggled like all depth players, especially towards the end and in that final playoffs. Nobody is perfect, and we saw some of that decline starting while he was with us. But he also had stretches where he played really well, and overall in his time here, he was a decent defenseman for us and provided surplus value on his contract when we needed it most through the flat cap. He formed a decent shutdown pairing with Muzzin, and while Muzzin was the driver of that pairing, Holl held his own in difficult minutes. Over his time here, he averaged 20 minutes a game, including shutdown 5v5 and top PK roles, put up respectable defensive results, and was positive in goal differential and underlying play every single year.
Unfortunately, some people made Holl their scapegoat, and after failing so hard at actually justifying that hatred based on his play while with us, they are now taking his struggles in his 30s on a bad team with a bad coach and zero defensive structure, to try and rewrite his history. They don't seem to realize that players change over time. Some depth players are only able to hit NHL level through their peak, or until certain attributes decline, or in certain situations or roles. That doesn't diminish what they were able to provide.
Quite frankly, if these people truly think that Holl was, is, and always will be the exact same, and he's just an inherently bad player, then it really just speaks highly of Keefe that he was able to make him effective and extract the value and impact he did out of him. What he provided for the Leafs is really all that matters.
Yeah, he provided us with being on the ice for 75% of Tampa's goals in the lone series they were able to win. Great playerHe had stretches where he struggled like all depth players, especially towards the end and in that final playoffs. Nobody is perfect, and we saw some of that decline starting while he was with us. But he also had stretches where he played really well, and overall in his time here, he was a decent defenseman for us and provided surplus value on his contract when we needed it most through the flat cap. He formed a decent shutdown pairing with Muzzin, and while Muzzin was the driver of that pairing, Holl held his own in difficult minutes. Over his time here, he averaged 20 minutes a game, including shutdown 5v5 and top PK roles, put up respectable defensive results, and was positive in goal differential and underlying play every single year.
Unfortunately, some people made Holl their scapegoat, and after failing so hard at actually justifying that hatred based on his play while with us, they are now taking his struggles in his 30s on a bad team with a bad coach and zero defensive structure, to try and rewrite his history. They don't seem to realize that players change over time. Some depth players are only able to hit NHL level through their peak, or until certain attributes decline, or in certain situations or roles. That doesn't diminish what they were able to provide.
Quite frankly, if these people truly think that Holl was, is, and always will be the exact same, and he's just an inherently bad player, then it really just speaks highly of Keefe that he was able to make him effective and extract the value and impact he did out of him. What he provided for the Leafs is really all that matters.
I distinctly recall you arguing he was an excellent shutdown D, using the same stats people now use with Lil to argue his effectiveness. Dubas fell in love with his AHL players, Holl was always miscast and unfortunately that misguided loyalty cost the Leafs dearly when Holl blew up in the playoffs. Your revisionism is embarrassing.He had stretches where he struggled like all depth players, especially towards the end and in that final playoffs. Nobody is perfect, and we saw some of that decline starting while he was with us. But he also had stretches where he played really well, and overall in his time here, he was a decent defenseman for us and provided surplus value on his contract when we needed it most through the flat cap. He formed a decent shutdown pairing with Muzzin, and while Muzzin was the driver of that pairing, Holl held his own in difficult minutes. Over his time here, he averaged 20 minutes a game, including shutdown 5v5 and top PK roles, put up respectable defensive results, and was positive in goal differential and underlying play every single year.
Unfortunately, some people made Holl their scapegoat, and after failing so hard at actually justifying that hatred based on his play while with us, they are now taking his struggles in his 30s on a bad team with a bad coach and zero defensive structure, to try and rewrite his history. They don't seem to realize that players change over time. Some depth players are only able to hit NHL level through their peak, or until certain attributes decline, or in certain situations or roles. That doesn't diminish what they were able to provide.
Quite frankly, if these people truly think that Holl was, is, and always will be the exact same, and he's just an inherently bad player, then it really just speaks highly of Keefe that he was able to make him effective and extract the value and impact he did out of him. What he provided for the Leafs is really all that matters.
He wasn't very good last year (which was most visible in the metrics you bash without understanding), but that doesn't change that he played well through the majority of his time with the Leafs. Nothing will ever change that fact; no matter how much you attempt to go back and rewrite history based on everything except his play and results during that time. I suggest you take your own advice and learn from the more knowledgeable posters on this board.He sucks now, and he sucked with the Leafs. Many of us told you that, but you denied the reality right in front of your eyes and clinged to some obscure advanced stats that didn't say anything at all.
It wasn't 75%, and yes I noted that he had some struggles then, but the fact that you need to go to his worst series after he'd already started to decline and include goaltending impacts, really says it all. By your same logic, you would be praising him for allowing some of the fewest goals against through the previous 2 playoffs.Yeah, he provided us with being on the ice for 75% of Tampa's goals in the lone series they were able to win.
I said he performed well in a top-4 shutdown role next to Muzzin when he performed well in a top-4 shutdown role next to Muzzin, because it was objectively true and valuable.I distinctly recall you arguing he was an excellent shutdown D
He started to decline because again, he wasnt being carried by a D partner as strong as Muzzin lmao. Muzzin is literally the best overall D we've had in a long time.He wasn't very good last year (which was most visible in the metrics you bash without understanding), but that doesn't change that he played well through the majority of his time with the Leafs. Nothing will ever change that fact; no matter how much you attempt to go back and rewrite history based on everything except his play and results during that time. I suggest you take your own advice and learn from the more knowledgeable posters on this board.
It wasn't 75%, and yes I noted that he had some struggles then, but the fact that you need to go to his worst series after he'd already started to decline and include goaltending impacts, really says it all. By your same logic, you would be praising him for allowing some of the fewest goals against through the previous 2 playoffs.
I said he performed well in a top-4 shutdown role next to Muzzin when he performed well in a top-4 shutdown role next to Muzzin, because it was objectively true and valuable.
He didn't always or immediately look bad away from Muzzin, but even if Muzzin was just carrying him, who cares? It worked. That's all that really matters.He started to decline because again, he wasnt being carried by a D partner as strong as Muzzin lmao. Muzzin is literally the best overall D we've had in a long time.
Quite the coincidence he started to look awful when Muzzin was gone.
Yeah definitely worked well, got amazing results with him on the teamHe didn't always or immediately look bad away from Muzzin, but even if Muzzin was just carrying him, who cares? It worked. That's all that really matters.
We didn't win the cup, but the pairing worked well together, and it was valuable to only have to pay ~7.5m for an effective top-4 shutdown pairing through the flat cap era.Yeah definitely worked well, got amazing results with him on the team