Auston Matthews Discussion Thread

[Mickey Marner]

Guys, my dad could beat up your dad.

 

[Jimmy Firecracker]

Substitute the Stanley Cup for "Capone", and stop expecting to follow the "law"

Love the Untouchables. First mob movie I saw that really got me into them.

The “Toronto Way” would be to uncomfortably laugh as if to say “I’m not owned.”

 

[Dekes For Days]

Did The Leafs Win That Game%: still 0%

Except that's not relevant at all to the discussion you quoted, about how tilted the actual play was during the referenced OT.

 

[keonsbitterness]

Except that's not relevant at all to the discussion you quoted, about how tilted the actual play was during the referenced OT.

Except your post quoted nothing, therefore I had no obligation to assume a reference to any discussion.

 

[Racer88]

Enjoyed this article, the guy speaks a lot of truths:


The Most Annoying Thing About the Toronto Maple Leafs


The most annoying thing about the Toronto Maple Leafs is that there is really nothing wrong with their team.

When a team has a weakness you can complain about it and give yourself some satisfaction knowing that it will likely be addressed. But the Toronto Maple Leafs are a team that just about won the President’s Trophy, and who have had a positive expected goals rating in 11 straight playoff games.

The Leafs lost because their two best players – Auston Matthews and Mitch Marner – went cold at the absolute worst time, and because of some untimely injuries. They had great goaltending, defense, and depth scoring. They had solid penalty killing. The only thing that they didn’t have was offense from the players who almost always provide offense.

more of the article here : The Most Annoying Thing About the Toronto Maple Leafs

I would say that when 2 of your highest paid players go cold when it matters that’s a pretty big problem. Lol

 

[Racer88]

Game 6 OT:

CF%: 77%
FF%: 89%
SF%: 87%
SCF%: 81%
HDCF%: 100%
xGF%: 88%

"not tilted"

Lots of pretty numbers but the only number that matters is did they out score the opposition……..sadly no they did not. All the rest of that stuff is just excuses. Plain and simple they didn’t get the job done

 

[Racer88]

I highly doubt he makes it to UFA without an extension

Unless he wants to…….

 

[Dekes For Days]

Except your post quoted nothing, therefore I had no obligation to assume a reference to any discussion.

Actually, my post, which was clearly not about who won/lost the overall game, did reference the "not tilted" comment that spawned the fairly lengthy discussion that directly preceded my post.

Lots of pretty numbers but the only number that matters is did they out score the opposition

Actually, no, that's not what matters when discussing the way the ice was tilted in the time prior to the OT goal.

 

[Racer88]

Actually, my post, which was clearly not about who won/lost the overall game, did reference the "not tilted" comment that spawned the fairly lengthy discussion that directly preceded my post.

Actually, no, that's not what matters when discussing the way the ice was tilted in the time prior to the OT goal.

I guess that is a different discussion……..I’m still stuck on they lost no matter what the numbers say.

 

[keonsbitterness]

Actually, my post, which was clearly not about who won/lost the overall game, did reference the "not tilted" comment that spawned the fairly lengthy discussion that directly preceded my post.

Looked boring after skimming a bit so I skipped over it. Never assume everyone reads every post.

 

[Suntouchable13]

I would say that when 2 of your highest paid players go cold when it matters that’s a pretty big problem. Lol

Yea, o-8 in series clinching games. Sure, there's nothing wrong here. Nothing at all. Just "unlucky" LOL

 

[The CyNick]

A lot of the same people who were so confident that Dubas was the right man for the job are the same people who today grasp for any "expected stats" that tell a false narrative that everything is good with the team and they are getting hit with bad luck and great goalies and slumps and injuries.

It's become undeniable what the issue is, and while many have come to the camp I established many years ago, some are refusing to accept the reality. Sad.

 

[Racer88]

Yea, o-8 in series clinching games. Sure, there's nothing wrong here. Nothing at all. Just "unlucky" LOL

So the stats guys would have us believe, unfortunately games are contested on the field of battle not a slide rule

 

[Stephen]

A lot of the same people who were so confident that Dubas was the right man for the job are the same people who today grasp for any "expected stats" that tell a false narrative that everything is good with the team and they are getting hit with bad luck and great goalies and slumps and injuries.

It's become undeniable what the issue is, and while many have come to the camp I established many years ago, some are refusing to accept the reality. Sad.

It comes down to more of a philosophical difference in the way the game is consumed by some fans than a Dubas issue per se.

But I think if you're approaching the game via analytics and your model consistently fails to account for the luck factor and other random variables, maybe you need to spend more time reconciling all the other stuff that wasn't expected. Imagine a meteorologist forecast that expects rain every day of the week and is consistently wrong. It's not nature that's broken, you're just not modeling everything.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Looked boring after skimming a bit so I skipped over it. Never assume everyone reads every post.

One would not have to read every post or even any other post to know that my post was not about who won/lost the overall game, and there were in fact references to a discussion that you choose not to read. I believe everybody here is aware that Toronto lost the game at this point.

 

[Stephen]

One would not have to read every post or even any other post to know that my post was not about who won/lost the overall game, and there were in fact references to a discussion that you choose not to read. I believe everybody here is aware that Toronto lost the game at this point.

"They lost the game but generated the a set of numbers which would lead one to believe they ought to have won the game."

Great. We'll get 'em in Game 8.

 

[Gallagbi]

One would not have to read every post or even any other post to know that my post was not about who won/lost the overall game, and there were in fact references to a discussion that you choose not to read. I believe everybody here is aware that Toronto lost the game at this point.

It's such a weird dynamic around the "stats" people here.

You hear a lot of complaints about "they don't even watch the games" and "can't even think for themselves" but the rebuttal to the numbers is rarely anything more but "well they lost" ot "it doesn't matter"

There's ton of game footage available. That whole game is posted with opposing breakdowns of chances in detail on that page. I don't want to put words into @Stephen mouth, but it looked like his position evolved from no clean looks to only clean looks without many rebound or crease plays. I'll say I went in thinking there were a few more scrambles like the Matthews chance and less clean lines to the net.

Just interesting how those harping on numbers seem reluctant to do the deeper dives and it's not just this conversation, it happens all the time

 

[Suntouchable13]

It's such a weird dynamic around the "stats" people here.

You hear a lot of complaints about "they don't even watch the games" and "can't even think for themselves" but the rebuttal to the numbers is rarely anything more but "well they lost" ot "it doesn't matter"

There's ton of game footage available. That whole game is posted with opposing breakdowns of chances in detail on that page. I don't want to put words into @Stephen mouth, but it looked like his position evolved from no clean looks to only clean looks without many rebound or crease plays. I'll say I went in thinking there were a few more scrambles like the Matthews chance and less clean lines to the net.

Just interesting how those harping on numbers seem reluctant to do the deeper dives and it's not just this conversation, it happens all the time

All I am going to say is this: I hope that a GM in the NHl doesn't rely on analytics 99% of the time. I just hope that a smart individual, someone who became a GM in the NHL, wouldn't rely so heavily on analytics like some fans on here. This game has many other factors that you can't evaluate with numbers. To be honest, I don't care what analytics say about the Leafs in the playoffs. It doesn't give me any relief. If Kyle thinks that this team is great just unlucky, then we are in bigger trouble than we thought. He is clueless. He can go join Jon Chayka.

 

[Dekes For Days]

"They lost the game but generated the a set of numbers which would lead one to believe they ought to have won the game."

No, I think you'll find that's in fact not what I said. Do not put words in my mouth. My post merely showed how the ice was "tilted" in that OT, to assist in countering some incorrect claims that had been made about that specifically.

 

[Stephen]

It's such a weird dynamic around the "stats" people here.

You hear a lot of complaints about "they don't even watch the games" and "can't even think for themselves" but the rebuttal to the numbers is rarely anything more but "well they lost" ot "it doesn't matter"

There's ton of game footage available. That whole game is posted with opposing breakdowns of chances in detail on that page. I don't want to put words into @Stephen mouth, but it looked like his position evolved from no clean looks to only clean looks without many rebound or crease plays. I'll say I went in thinking there were a few more scrambles like the Matthews chance and less clean lines to the net.

Just interesting how those harping on numbers seem reluctant to do the deeper dives and it's not just this conversation, it happens all the time

You went through the OT period yourself and distilled 6 opportunities including a Zach Bogosian shot from the top circle, Brodie shot from the point and a Kerfoot partial 2 on 1 as “good opportunities.”

Matthews got one look from the LW side wall which he missed entirely. Matthews had an off balanced backhand along the ice and Marner got a one timer off with no traffic in front of the net, and a cross crease play he complete missed on. I’ll even throw in the Dermott LW shot which you didn’t even seem a good chance.

These are the highest grade chances you’ve outlined. And when you roll tape they’re not that impressive. So aside from high volume shooting what did the Leafs really generate to suggest Price robbed them?

 

[Stephen]

No, I think you'll find that's in fact not what I said. Do not put words in my mouth. My post merely showed how the ice was "tilted" in that OT, to assist in countering some incorrect claims that had been made about that specifically.

So the numbers suggested the ice was tilted, but didn’t suggest they ought to have won. That sounds like a lot of high volume shooting.

 

[Gallagbi]

All I am going to say is this: I hope that a GM in the NHl doesn't rely on analytics 99% of the time. I just hope that a smart individual, someone who became a GM in the NHL, wouldn't rely so heavily on analytics like some fans on here. This game has many other factors that you can't evaluate with numbers.

I get that, but I'd also say that I hope a GM in this day and age is filming, rewatching and tracking what they value- whether that be things like xGF, rebounds, puck battles, or anything they feel relevant.

Understanding why it happened instead of just the fact it happened is the key.

 

[Gallagbi]

You went through the OT period yourself and distilled 6 opportunities including a Zach Bogosian shot from the top circle, Brodie shot from the point and a Kerfoot partial 2 on 1 as “good opportunities.”

Matthews got one look from the LW side wall which he missed entirely. Matthews had an off balanced backhand along the ice and Marner got a one timer off with no traffic in front of the net, and a cross crease play he complete missed on. I’ll even throw in the Dermott LW shot which you didn’t even seem a good chance.

These are the highest grade chances you’ve outlined. And when you roll tape they’re not that impressive. So aside from high volume shooting what did the Leafs really generate to suggest Price robbed them?

I've broken down a number of good opportunities.

But yes a 2on1, two point blank onetimers - one of which tipped from the slot going from low corner to high corner, 2 walk ins from the 2 and a patented curl and drop from the top of the circles is generally what I'd consider good opportunities for our team that results in a goal. Add in the fact Montral didn't generate anything, even on their goal, and I'd say the chances were heavily skewed

You also said this

The quality of their scoring chances looked like panicked scrambles more than "domination." Not a lot of clean looks, spammed shots and did most of their work on the outside.

Which you seemed to have changed course to only clean looks. Unless you don't think those Dermott, Bogo, Kerfoot, Marner, Brodie looks were clean?

 

[Stephen]

All I am going to say is this: I hope that a GM in the NHl doesn't rely on analytics 99% of the time. I just hope that a smart individual, someone who became a GM in the NHL, wouldn't rely so heavily on analytics like some fans on here. This game has many other factors that you can't evaluate with numbers. To be honest, I don't care what analytics say about the Leafs in the playoffs. It doesn't give me any relief. If Kyle thinks that this team is great just unlucky, then we are in bigger trouble than we thought. He is clueless. He can go join Jon Chayka.

Which coach was saying some players play to generate better analytics numbers? Was it Boudreau? Analytics are fine but if a play style is being applied in order to generate a certain volume of shots from certain areas “expecting” goals to happen I think you run into maybe an unforeseen issue of other teams knowing what kind of patterns your offense is looking to generate.

 

[Stephen]

I've broken down a number of good opportunities.

You also said this


Which you seemed to have changed course to only clean looks.

When the cleanest looks you’re identifying include a Kerfoot rush, Bogosian slapper, a Brodie point shot, a missed Matthews wrister from the LW wall I’d say the Canadiens weren’t conceding a lot of clean looks for the Leafs.

Again, my contention is Price wasn’t an unbeatable god after we stormed back from 3-0 and 2-0 deficits, and the Leafs never looked like they did whatever they had to to beat him. I don’t think that’s debatable when you yourself admitted they didn’t do the Tampa things to score the greasy goal.