Brad Treliving is doing a great job.

[TMLBlueandWhite]

If the advanced metrics are telling you that the Leafs are not better defensively or playing with more structure conducive to success in the playoffs, then those stats should be taken with a grain of salt. Virtually all the former players, coaches, managers (people who know the game from the inside) that I've listened to these past few days, say the Leafs are playing a brand of hockey that can lead to more success in the playoffs. Yet, you continue to spew stats that show the contrary, like that is some kind of determining, all-encompassing factor in the success of a team.

Appeals to authority (in this case many of whom are employed by the same company that owns the team) are the last resort of the desperate who lack any shred of evidence to support their argument.

Literally every stat, advanced or otherwise, points to the same thing the eye test does... the only major improvement this year has come from goaltending.

Are they hitting more? No
Are they blocking more shots? No
Has shot quality differential (HDCF%) improved? No

So what are they doing differently then?

If they are playing such a radically different style that should be an easy question for you to answer without appealing to authority.

You should be presenting evidence to support your claim otherwise you just come across as a shill.

 

[LeafEgo]

Appeals to authority (in this case many of whom are employed by the same company that owns the team) are the last resort of the desperate who lack any shred of evidence to support their argument.

Literally every stat, advanced or otherwise, points to the same thing the eye test does... the only major improvement this year has come from goaltending.

Are they hitting more? No
Are they blocking more shots? No
Did they improve HDCF%? No

So what are they doing differently then?

If they are playing such a radically different style that should be an easy question for you to answer without appealing to authority.

You should be presenting evidence to support your claim otherwise you just come across as a shill.

There's a lot more to hockey than hitting and blocking shots. Hdcf is just silly.

Good goaltending is what you get with good defence. We have good defence now. And good goaltending.

And an NHL coach.

 

[TMLBlueandWhite]

There's a lot more to hockey than hitting and blocking shots. Hdcf is just silly.

Good goaltending is what you get with good defence. We have good defence now. And good goaltending.

And an NHL coach.

I'm sure if all those stats were in your favour they wouldn't be so silly.

If this team is sooooo much better defensively and playing such a radically different game style present some evidence to support your claim.

Should be easy for you.

 

[Aashir]

A lot of feelings and no facts, typical of this poster.

The great thing about those past teams are we can see the outcome of their play.

I think our defence is built more for the playoffs than years past where we had liljegren or holl in the lineup. Those two struggled when playoff time came around. Justin holl had a horrid final playff run for us he was literally unplayable, looking past that he had a near .940 on ice save percentage in 2021-2022 and yet he was till only a +1, but managed to be on the ice and one of the key contributers to the game 6 OT winner by point. he was awful in the bubble when muzzin was taken away from him giving up 4 GA (Out of a possible 10) in 3 games and only being on for 1 GF in the entire series (-3 in the 3-0 collapse and on for all 4 GA with the PP goal having him completly out of position and -1 in the 3-0 comeback). He was better in the montreal series but stapled to muzzin. It was clear he was around a 5 who got carried by Muzzin.

Liljegren despite having a career .929 on ice SV% and deployed in favourable offensive situations barely ever won his minutes. He also gave up that GWG to marchand in game 3 by being soft as a pillow.

The defence is a retirement home waiting to happen sure, but strictly this season I don't think it's lacking compared to past seasons, and with it not having the prototypical soft styled dman in holl or liljegren I am more confident in this dcore than past iterations.

And the goalies he hit straight on the head. he gambled on sparks and hutchinson being backup options..and was dead wrong

Dubas went with:
Andersen: Workhorse goalie who choked hard when we needed him. We probably should've tried moving him in the 2020-21 deadline instead of own rentaling him like we do with everyone
Campbell: Decent Platoon goalie but couldn't get it done. Not the worst option
Mrazek: Goalie who was coming off an injury that caused him to nearly miss the entire season, than he played great in the playoffs (altough it was 5 games). He was so bad Kallgren was an upgrade on him
Samsonov: Youngish goaltender who was very erratic in playstyle and would get in his own head. Had a great year and an awful year. wasn't bad but not what we needed
Matthew fricking Murray: He took on a literal cap dump because 1) He thought he was smarter than everyone and investing in a hidden asset and 2) he played for SOO. He got a 3rd and a 7th for taking on the cap dump. This was the worse move of them all, it was just so dumb it baffles me. The best thing that happened to him was not playing, we got to see Woll in the playoffs and he took an NHL job away from him. Woll probably could've given us similar or better results than murray did that season at a fraction of the cost.

As for coaching, Keefe's home record stunk. Keefe's PP always got shut down. Keefe's PK got exposed in the playoffs. Keefe got outcoached by fricking Ducharme. He kept throwing matthews and marner out there against danault because....he thought line matching just wasn't a thing that affected players??

Berube isn't some holy saviour, but Keefe set the bar on the ground, it isn't gonna be hard for Berube to jump over it

 

[ClarkSittler]

Appeals to authority (in this case many of whom are employed by the same company that owns the team) are the last resort of the desperate who lack any shred of evidence to support their argument.

Literally every stat, advanced or otherwise, points to the same thing the eye test does... the only major improvement this year has come from goaltending.

Are they hitting more? No
Are they blocking more shots? No
Has shot quality differential (HDCF%) improved? No

So what are they doing differently then?

If they are playing such a radically different style that should be an easy question for you to answer without appealing to authority.

You should be presenting evidence to support your claim otherwise you just come across as a shill.

Wow, thanks for the TED Talk on analytics, truly groundbreaking stuff. But here’s the thing: parroting spreadsheets and sneering at anything that doesn’t come from a model isn’t the great revelation you think it is.

You’re so deep in the numbers you’ve forgotten the game is played by actual humans, not algorithms. You treat “appeal to authority” like a dirty phrase, but quoting HDCF% like it’s scripture isn’t any better, it’s just appealing to a different kind of authority: one that fits your narrative.


Funny how for someone demanding "evidence," you're laser-focused on a narrow slice of stats while ignoring things like system changes, forechecking schemes, line matching, and puck management—stuff that doesn’t always show up neatly in your favorite metrics. But I get it, if it’s not in a spreadsheet, it must not be real, right?

So if you’re going to accuse people of being shills just for noticing things that go beyond the numbers, maybe take a second to consider whether you're just clinging to a different kind of bias, one that calls it "data" instead of admitting it’s still a belief system with flaws.

 

[notbias]

The great thing about those past teams are we can see the outcome of their play.

I think our defence is built more for the playoffs than years past where we had liljegren or holl in the lineup. Those two struggled when playoff time came around. Justin holl had a horrid final playff run for us he was literally unplayable, looking past that he had a near .940 on ice save percentage in 2021-2022 and yet he was till only a +1, but managed to be on the ice and one of the key contributers to the game 6 OT winner by point. he was awful in the bubble when muzzin was taken away from him giving up 4 GA (Out of a possible 10) in 3 games and only being on for 1 GF in the entire series (-3 in the 3-0 collapse and on for all 4 GA with the PP goal having him completly out of position and -1 in the 3-0 comeback). He was better in the montreal series but stapled to muzzin. It was clear he was around a 5 who got carried by Muzzin.

Liljegren despite having a career .929 on ice SV% and deployed in favourable offensive situations barely ever won his minutes. He also gave up that GWG to marchand in game 3 by being soft as a pillow.

The defence is a retirement home waiting to happen sure, but strictly this season I don't think it's lacking compared to past seasons, and with it not having the prototypical soft styled dman in holl or liljegren I am more confident in this dcore than past iterations.

And the goalies he hit straight on the head. he gambled on sparks and hutchinson being backup options..and was dead wrong

Dubas went with:
Andersen: Workhorse goalie who choked hard when we needed him. We probably should've tried moving him in the 2020-21 deadline instead of own rentaling him like we do with everyone
Campbell: Decent Platoon goalie but couldn't get it done. Not the worst option
Mrazek: Goalie who was coming off an injury that caused him to nearly miss the entire season, than he played great in the playoffs (altough it was 5 games). He was so bad Kallgren was an upgrade on him
Samsonov: Youngish goaltender who was very erratic in playstyle and would get in his own head. Had a great year and an awful year. wasn't bad but not what we needed
Matthew fricking Murray: He took on a literal cap dump because 1) He thought he was smarter than everyone and investing in a hidden asset and 2) he played for SOO. He got a 3rd and a 7th for taking on the cap dump. This was the worse move of them all, it was just so dumb it baffles me. The best thing that happened to him was not playing, we got to see Woll in the playoffs and he took an NHL job away from him. Woll probably could've given us similar or better results than murray did that season at a fraction of the cost.

As for coaching, Keefe's home record stunk. Keefe's PP always got shut down. Keefe's PK got exposed in the playoffs. Keefe got outcoached by fricking Ducharme. He kept throwing matthews and marner out there against danault because....he thought line matching just wasn't a thing that affected players??

Berube isn't some holy saviour, but Keefe set the bar on the ground, it isn't gonna be hard for Berube to jump over it

I basically disagree with everything... but I am wondering if anyone actually knows what being "outcoached" means... your team outplaying the other team and running into a hot goalie does not mean you were outcoached, and that was the Montreal series.

Matthews' line outscored the Danault line 3-1, the Nylander line outscored their opposition 3-2, no other line scored.

You can dislike xGF% but it is just chances, and Matthews' line had a 67% xGF, which is amazing.

Out of all the lines that played 60 minutes together in the playoffs, guess who was #1 for xGF%.

Danault did nothing.

Expected stats are coaching stats, and I'd love to hear how they aren't if anyone thinks they aren't.

Coaches don't dictate where players shoot or the saves goalies make, they are running systems to get their shooters the best quality shots and limit the quality of the other team, that is xGF%.

 

[notbias]

Funny how for someone demanding "evidence," you're laser-focused on a narrow slice of stats while ignoring things like system changes, forechecking schemes, line matching, and puck management—stuff that doesn’t always show up neatly in your favorite metrics. But I get it, if it’s not in a spreadsheet, it must not be real, right?

What stats support that we linematch, forecheck, or have good puck management?

And why don't you tell us why the systems are great?

Our team doesn't have a ton of hits, giveaways aren't good, takeaways aren't good, and we don't have any statistics that lead you to think we have played good hockey.

Does it all come back to the "eye test" and trusting the poster?

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

What stats support that we linematch, forecheck, or have good puck management?

And why don't you tell us why the systems are great?

Our team doesn't have a ton of hits, giveaways aren't good, takeaways aren't good, and we don't have any statistics that lead you to think we have played good hockey.

Does it all come back to the "eye test" and trusting the poster?

You know your user name says "nobias" but that's bullshit.

You talk about no stats pointing to playing good hockey I got a few for you.

52 wins

5 straight wins.

9-1 in their last 10.

1st in the Atlantic

Top 5 in the NHL.

You can't do those things without playing good hockey it's impossible.

THOSE are the stats that are real.

THOSE that matter

THOSE are the stats that count.

 

[notbias]

You know your user name says "nobias" but that's bullshit.

Started off strong, then you got into your arguments and it kind of fell apart.

Edit: Just realized you said "nobias" and not "notbias" even this statement was weak.

You talk about no stats pointing to playing good hockey I got a few for you.

52 wins

40 regulation wins.

5 straight wins.

9-1 in their last 10.

Who cares?

1st in the Atlantic

Top 5 in the NHL.

This is our 2nd worst season of the last 5 years.

Thankfully other teams got worse.

You can't do those things without playing good hockey it's impossible.

That is false.

Hockey is the luckiest sport of all the major ones, look into it.

Goaltenders carried us a lot this year.

THOSE are the stats that are real.

THOSE that matter

THOSE are the stats that count.

40 wins in real hockey is not great, but it is good...

24-25: 40-26
23-24: 33-26
22-23: 42-21
21-22: 45-21
20-21: 29-14

I am not even saying it is a bad season, I just don't see what others are.

If we are just comparing them to the disastorous team assembled last year, this team is much better.

I have more issues with the trash coaching than the GM, Treliving assembled a good team even if it is very short sighted and the D is old and signed long term.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Started off strong, then you got into your arguments and it kind of fell apart.

Edit: Just realized you said "nobias" and not "notbias" even this statement was weak.



40 regulation wins.



Who cares?



This is our 2nd worst season of the last 5 years.

Thankfully other teams got worse.



That is false.

Hockey is the luckiest sport of all the major ones, look into it.

Goaltenders carried us a lot this year.



40 wins in real hockey is not great, but it is good...

24-25: 40-26
23-24: 33-26
22-23: 42-21
21-22: 45-21
20-21: 29-14

I am not even saying it is a bad season, I just don't see what others are.

If we are just comparing them to the disastorous team assembled last year, this team is much better.

I have more issues with the trash coaching than the GM, Treliving assembled a good team even if it is very short sighted and the D is old and signed long term.

It's not luck you can't win 52 games because luck.

Or finish 1st in the Atlantic division because luck.

Or finish 4th in the entire league because luck.

You need to be good to do those things.

If It's just luck then how do you explain Buffalo missing the playoffs for 14 straight years?

Or Detroit missing for 9 straight years?

Are they just unlucky?

Luck plays a part, every team wins games they shouldn't

Or loses games they shouldn't, opening night VS Montreal being exhibit A, March 8th VS Colorado being exhibit B it happens.

But luck is a VERY small part unless you believe that Detroit and Buffalo have just been unlucky for 14 and 9 years respectively.

 

[notbias]

It's not luck you can't win 52 games because luck.

Or finish 1st in the Atlantic division because luck.

Or finish 4th in the entire league because luck.

You need to be good to do those things.

If It's just luck then how do you explain Buffalo missing the playoffs for 14 straight years?

Or Detroit missing for 9 straight years?

Are they just unlucky?

Luck plays a part, every team wins games they shouldn't

Or loses games they shouldn't, opening night VS Montreal being exhibit A, March 8th VS Colorado being exhibit B it happens.

But luck is a VERY small part unless you believe that Detroit and Buffalo have just been unlucky for 14 and 9 years respectively.

0/10 on reading comprehension.

Luck was mentioned once, because hockey, like it or not, is a very lucky sport.

Re-read the rest and respond to how this team is no better than the teams the last few years (worse in most stats), and then we can talk.

For now, I appreciate you latching onto a single word and pretending that was what the post was about, just so you can ramble on about it, but it isn't what the post was about.

 

[Legion34]

Dubas was


Nope Mcmann is Dubas.

So is Marner, Lou wasn't hired yet.

He helped bring in Matthews

He brought in Tavares

Jarnkrok
Knies
Kampf
Woll

Almost 75% of the forwards are Dubas in some way either as part of management or as GM.

By my count he's responsible or at least partly responsible for about half the roster.

I’m not sure you count. Marner as dubas. The AGM responsible for the marlies was now the GM

Pretty sure he was hunter. Not dubas. He was the one doing the picking. Or at least he was the one that got all the blame for the 2016 disaster. Can’t had the both ways.

It depends which of the players play.
Dubas was 2018 and on

So whichever of Robertson/kampf/jarnkrok play.

Thats allowing for keeping the players re signed by Tre as dubas players. Which once they hit ufa is kind of suspect.

 

[CabanaBoy5]

What stats support that we linematch, forecheck, or have good puck management?

And why don't you tell us why the systems are great?

Our team doesn't have a ton of hits, giveaways aren't good, takeaways aren't good, and we don't have any statistics that lead you to think we have played good hockey.

Does it all come back to the "eye test" and trusting the poster?

It's kind of sad that people dig deep into advanced stats to support their agenda of trashing Treliving and denigrating this year's team. It's almost like they feel the Leafs haven't earned their first place finish. They go to great lengths in trying to prove that this season's success is all a mirage and due to one aspect of the team (goaltending).

There are stats that show this team is more than just goaltending (although that is a big part of our success) and deserving of the praise and optimism we give this team going into the playoffs. Here are a few:

-Top 5 in blocked shots (1 357)
-Top 10 in hits (1 982)
-A league best .733 winning percentage in one-goal games
-Top 10 in the NHL in goals against per game (2.79)
-The second best 5-on-5 save percentage (92.6)

 

[DarkKnight]

Hunter ran the Marner draft, and Lou ran the Matthews / Woll draft.

Now London Knight Mitch Marner wasn’t solely a Hunter push pick, who he fought for in spite of Babs wanting a d man. I love this place. Had nothing to really do with Marner, Matthews was a no brainer, inherited Nylander and Reilly, brought in JT. That’s his impact on the “core”. What a legacy.

 

[DarkKnight]

It's kind of sad that people dig deep into advanced stats to support their agenda of trashing Treliving and denigrating this year's team. It's almost like they feel the Leafs haven't earned their first place finish. They go to great lengths in trying to prove that this season's success is all a mirage and due to one aspect of the team (goaltending).

There are stats that show this team is more than just goaltending (although that is a big part of our success) and deserving of the praise and optimism we give this team going into the playoffs. Here are a few:

-Top 5 in blocked shots (1 357)
-Top 10 in hits (1 982)
-A league best .733 winning percentage in one-goal games
-Top 10 in the NHL in goals against per game (2.79)
-The second best 5-on-5 save percentage (92.6)

There’s always a stat for every position these days. However, if you’re still trying to undermine this particularly team, then you’re really just saying more about your boring bias than anything truly constructive. Remember too, these are the same posters who were in mourning for Leafs great Sam Lafferty, so enjoy the comedy, it was a long time ago any of it was taken seriously.

Tre has done solid work, some bad moves, some great adds. Dubas failed, his book is closed, this one remains to be seen.

 

[CabanaBoy5]

There’s always a stat for every position these days. However, if you’re still trying to undermine this particularly team, then you’re really just saying more about your boring bias than anything truly constructive. Remember too, these are the same posters who were in mourning for Leafs great Sam Lafferty, so enjoy the comedy, it was a long time ago any of it was taken seriously.

Tre has done solid work, some bad moves, some great adds. Dubas failed, his book is closed, this one remains to be seen.

I agree. The team finished with 52 wins, but then the poster has to say but yeah they only have 40 RW. The team had 108 points, but the poster adds but yeah the division was weaker. They finished with the 4th best no. of points, but yeah it was only the goaltending. Some in here go to great lengths to try to show that Dubas and Keefe were just unlucky in being able to lead this team to more than one series win and that this season's philosophical change in approach is flawed.

 

[TMLBlueandWhite]

Wow, thanks for the TED Talk on analytics, truly groundbreaking stuff. But here’s the thing: parroting spreadsheets and sneering at anything that doesn’t come from a model isn’t the great revelation you think it is.

You’re so deep in the numbers you’ve forgotten the game is played by actual humans, not algorithms. You treat “appeal to authority” like a dirty phrase, but quoting HDCF% like it’s scripture isn’t any better, it’s just appealing to a different kind of authority: one that fits your narrative.


Funny how for someone demanding "evidence," you're laser-focused on a narrow slice of stats while ignoring things like system changes, forechecking schemes, line matching, and puck management—stuff that doesn’t always show up neatly in your favorite metrics. But I get it, if it’s not in a spreadsheet, it must not be real, right?

So if you’re going to accuse people of being shills just for noticing things that go beyond the numbers, maybe take a second to consider whether you're just clinging to a different kind of bias, one that calls it "data" instead of admitting it’s still a belief system with flaws.

So in other words you got nothing.

 

[TMLBlueandWhite]

It's kind of sad that people dig deep into advanced stats to support their agenda of trashing Treliving and denigrating this year's team. It's almost like they feel the Leafs haven't earned their first place finish. They go to great lengths in trying to prove that this season's success is all a mirage and due to one aspect of the team (goaltending).

There are stats that show this team is more than just goaltending (although that is a big part of our success) and deserving of the praise and optimism we give this team going into the playoffs. Here are a few:

-Top 5 in blocked shots (1 357)
-Top 10 in hits (1 982)
-A league best .733 winning percentage in one-goal games
-Top 10 in the NHL in goals against per game (2.79)
-The second best 5-on-5 save percentage (92.6)

How many hits and blocks did they have last year compared to this year?

The rest can be explained by the better goaltending they have this year.

You got nothing either obviously

 

[Evilhomer]

I agree. The team finished with 52 wins, but then the poster has to say but yeah they only have 40 RW. The team had 108 points, but the poster adds but yeah the division was weaker. They finished with the 4th best no. of points, but yeah it was only the goaltending. Some in here go to great lengths to try to show that Dubas and Keefe were just unlucky in being able to lead this team to more than one series win and that this season's philosophical change in approach is flawed.

I don't know if it's just a Toronto thing, or maybe just a Leafs thing because i don't remember seeing this with the raptors, but there is a decent portion of this fan base that simply prefers to be pessimistic and negative. It is what it is. There are so many real and justifiable things in life to be negative about, so I find it odd to be argumentative and negative about something as silly as sports. It's mindless entertainment. A distraction from real life. Why make it a chore?

 

[notbias]

It's kind of sad that people dig deep into advanced stats to support their agenda of trashing Treliving and denigrating this year's team. It's almost like they feel the Leafs haven't earned their first place finish. They go to great lengths in trying to prove that this season's success is all a mirage and due to one aspect of the team (goaltending).

There are stats that show this team is more than just goaltending (although that is a big part of our success) and deserving of the praise and optimism we give this team going into the playoffs. Here are a few:

-Top 5 in blocked shots (1 357)
-Top 10 in hits (1 982)
-A league best .733 winning percentage in one-goal games
-Top 10 in the NHL in goals against per game (2.79)
-The second best 5-on-5 save percentage (92.6)

It's kind of sad people grab obscure stats to support their flimsy arguments, let's simplify it more since that seems like what you want to do.

4th best team of the last 5 years based on point %.

But, just do wins in regulation and losses for how good the team is, not sure winning at 3 on 3 or in shootouts matter all too much.

Just do goals against for defensive play, goals for for the offensive play, and then save % for goaltending.

 

[Dreakmur]

It's kind of sad people grab obscure stats to support their flimsy arguments

Hmmm….

4th best team of the last 5 years based on point %.

But, just do wins in regulation and losses for how good the team is, not sure winning at 3 on 3 or in shootouts matter all too much.

Just do goals against for defensive play, goals for for the offensive play, and then save % for goaltending.

Thank you for the excellent examples of the above.

 

[IPS]

I don't know if it's just a Toronto thing, or maybe just a Leafs thing because i don't remember seeing this with the raptors, but there is a decent portion of this fan base that simply prefers to be pessimistic and negative. It is what it is. There are so many real and justifiable things in life to be negative about, so I find it odd to be argumentative and negative about something as silly as sports. It's mindless entertainment. A distraction from real life. Why make it a chore?

No, the pessimism comes from the years upon years of disappointing results. Roll the clock back to 2016 and the earlier parts of the rebuild and there was far more optimism than pessimism. If you were on these boards long enough you'd know that.

 

[IPS]

Just curious if the Dubasites are gonna enjoy a good playoff run if we go deep or be committed to their ongoing effort of convincing everybody just how amazing we had it in the Dubas/Keefe days.

2 years later now and they're still running defense for Dubie, let it f***ing go already, goodness gracious.

 

[notbias]

Hmmm….



Thank you for the excellent examples of the above.

Ah yes, wins via the only way you can win in the playoffs... such a terrible stat.

 

[TMLBlueandWhite]

Wow, thanks for the TED Talk on analytics, truly groundbreaking stuff. But here’s the thing: parroting spreadsheets and sneering at anything that doesn’t come from a model isn’t the great revelation you think it is.

You’re so deep in the numbers you’ve forgotten the game is played by actual humans, not algorithms. You treat “appeal to authority” like a dirty phrase, but quoting HDCF% like it’s scripture isn’t any better, it’s just appealing to a different kind of authority: one that fits your narrative.


Funny how for someone demanding "evidence," you're laser-focused on a narrow slice of stats while ignoring things like system changes, forechecking schemes, line matching, and puck management—stuff that doesn’t always show up neatly in your favorite metrics. But I get it, if it’s not in a spreadsheet, it must not be real, right?

So if you’re going to accuse people of being shills just for noticing things that go beyond the numbers, maybe take a second to consider whether you're just clinging to a different kind of bias, one that calls it "data" instead of admitting it’s still a belief system with flaws.

Is this what you were looking for?