Cap world - Comparison of Leafs with competitors

[JT AM da real deal]

Ok, thanks.

I think Tampa, who got knocked out in the first round by the Leafs last year got older (in key areas) and weaker (due to cap constraints). They have the pedigree for sure, so I wouldn't say they are NOT a contender. I struggle to know why they are and the Leafs are NOT given the Leafs best them in the most recent playoff series.

Florida? Yes, they went to the cup. If Bobrovsky repeats his playoff performance from the first three rounds then yes, they could be considered a contender. However, they appear weaker than last year and of Bobrovsky is the same goalie of the part three years they might be in danger of missing the playoffs...just as they were last year. If Pittsburgh beat Chicago on the last day of the season Florida is out.

Boston? That's a pretty big caveat. They had both Bergeron and Krejci last year and couldn't get out of the first round. Those guys MIGHT come back, they will certainly be older and almost assuredly less effective and productive. They also lost a lot of other parts. The Leafs went further than they did last year.

...so, you listed three teams that have question marks. The Leafs have question marks too. This does not make a compelling case that these three are contenders and the Leafs are not. Interesting that you don't consider Carolina to be a contender.

You are however entitled to your opinion of course and thank you for sharing it. I just don't fully agree.


.

Tampa played an AHL defense against us - Hedman badly hurt and missed time and Cernak concussed .. and we feasted on Sergey who has his moments on D .. those guys played and we lose round 1 .. primetime example of what happens without D

Boston and Florida went OT in game 7 .. that was a coin flip series .. could have hust as easily been Bruins v Vegas in final

 

[notbias]

Tampa played an AHL defense against us - Hedman badly hurt and missed time and Cernak concussed .. and we feasted on Sergey who has his moments on D .. those guys played and we lose round 1 .. primetime example of what happens without D

Boston and Florida went OT in game 7 .. that was a coin flip series .. could have hust as easily been Bruins v Vegas in final

You can tell who is not a real Leafs fan.

When we have injuries, we should have won.

When we win and they have injuries, we are lucky.

Pretty sure every series we have played someone has been injured/missing.

 

[conFABulator]

Tampa played an AHL defense against us - Hedman badly hurt and missed time and Cernak concussed .. and we feasted on Sergey who has his moments on D .. those guys played and we lose round 1 .. primetime example of what happens without D

Boston and Florida went OT in game 7 .. that was a coin flip series .. could have hust as easily been Bruins v Vegas in final

Older players get hurt more. It's why I said they are aging. I also pointed out that Tampa lost depth. Maybe McDonough allows them to absorb the loss of Cernak a bit more?

I am sure when the Leafs lost to Montreal you were telling everyone it was because Tavares was injured.

Yes, Boston lost in G7. Every time the Leafs lost round one in G7 were you telling people it could have been us in the final that year?

That's my point, you seem to be holding the Leafs to a much different standard.

 

[ACC1224]

Older players get hurt more. It's why I said they are aging. I also pointed out that Tampa lost depth. Maybe McDonough allows them to absorb the loss of Cernak a bit more?

I am sure when the Leafs lost to Montreal you were telling everyone it was because Tavares was injured.

Yes, Boston lost in G7. Every time the Leafs lost round one in G7 were you telling people it could have been us in the final that year?

That's my point, you seem to be holding the Leafs to a much different standard.

Tampa and Toronto are much closer that an injury to a major player could be the difference.
That wasn't the case with Tavares and Montreal.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

You can tell who is not a real Leafs fan.

When we have injuries, we should have won.

When we win and they have injuries, we are lucky.

Pretty sure every series we have played someone has been injured/missing.

In playoff hockey you win and lose with D and G .. Florida, Tampa and Bruins all have it in spades .. of course Tampa had D injuries this run .. Tampa can lose Point and/or Stammer even though it hurts-- but they won with D and G anyways .. Tavares goes down a couple years back yes it hurts team but our D and G were not capable .. bottom line regular season hockey comes down to scoring and playoff hockey it comes down to D and G and it has been that way for a hundred years with few exceptions

 

[notbias]

In playoff hockey you win and lose with D and G .. Florida, Tampa and Bruins all have it in spades .. of course Tampa had D injuries this run .. Tampa can lose Point and/or Stammer even though it hurts-- but they won with D and G anyways .. Tavares goes down a couple years back yes it hurts team but our D and G were not capable .. bottom line regular season hockey comes down to scoring and playoff hockey it comes down to D and G and it has been that way for a hundred years with few exceptions

Win and lose with D and G... names Florida as a team with good D... then lists Bruins as a team who has both but also lost.
Colorado just won with AHL level goaltending.

That statement is not true

 

[conFABulator]

Tampa and Toronto are much closer that an injury to a major player could be the difference.
That wasn't the case with Tavares and Montreal.

What? In what way. That series was about as close as can be.

 

[notDatsyuk]

It was being suggested that other teams can earn contender status and have their contender status be heavily impacted by a partial season of play in the regular season, but the Leafs have "done nothing in 20 years, to ever earn the contender status". Quite contradictory.

The '20 years' is pointless, but it isn't contradictory.

A change in contender status is a result of changes elsewhere: players, coaching, maturing or aging core, and so on.

When a team, for example, changes their coaching staff, and an improvement in regular season productions is seen, it can lead to a change in perceived contender status.

With the Leafs in the last three or four years (not 20!) the changes have been mainly in peripheral players, so we have little basis for changing their status.

For the Leafs it's been regular season success doesn't carry over, so I don't think we can equate them.

 

[ACC1224]

I

What? In what way. That series was about as close as can be.

I wasn’t referring to the series but the teams playing them.
Toronto and Tampa were considered pretty much equal while Toronto was considered much better than Montreal.

 

[conFABulator]

I

I wasn’t referring to the series but the teams playing them.
Toronto and Tampa were considered pretty much equal while Toronto was considered much better than Montreal.

I am not sure I get the relevance of that. Most Leaf losses were one goal or in OT in that series. I think JT would have made the difference.

If anything it shows what a good/hot goalie can do. We saw it with Bobrovsky this year.

 

[ACC1224]

I am not sure I get the relevance of that. Most Leaf losses were one goal or in OT in that series. I think JT would have made the difference.

If anything it shows what a good/hot goalie can do. We saw it with Bobrovsky this year.

Yes it’s obvious you don’t get it.

 

[Fogelhund]

Yes it’s obvious you don’t get it.

We were much better than Montreal, until JT got a concussion, and Matthews had his wrist slashed, requiring surgery. If you don't have your top two C's healthy, you aren't going very far.

 

[Dekes For Days]

The '20 years' is pointless, but it isn't contradictory.
A change in contender status is a result of changes elsewhere: players, coaching, maturing or aging core, and so on.
When a team, for example, changes their coaching staff, and an improvement in regular season productions is seen, it can lead to a change in perceived contender status.
With the Leafs in the last three or four years (not 20!) the changes have been mainly in peripheral players, so we have little basis for changing their status.
For the Leafs it's been regular season success doesn't carry over, so I don't think we can equate them.

All but one contender loses every year. That doesn't mean they weren't contenders. A top 5 team in the league is a contender.
But that's also besides the point. It is contradictory to argue that regular season matters in determining contender status and simultaneously argue that a team that has had many top tier seasons in the past half decade never earned contender status in the last 20 years. The things that would elevate somebody to contender mid-season are things we've done.

 

[authentic]

We were much better than Montreal, until JT got a concussion, and Matthews had his wrist slashed, requiring surgery. If you don't have your top two C's healthy, you aren't going very far.

True but it was ultimately pretty disappointing seeing as how we went up 3-1 without Tavares.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Toronto and Tampa were considered pretty much equal while Toronto was considered much better than Montreal.

Toronto was considered much better than Montreal when healthy and with Montreal getting their normal mediocre goaltending. That gap gets smaller when you have Matthews, Tavares, Muzzin, Hyman, and Foligno all either playing injured or knocked out of the series, and Price back playing all of their games at his peak level.
If Tavares didn't get knocked out with a horrifying injury, we probably win game 1 and sweep them.

 

[socko]

I am not sure I get the relevance of that. Most Leaf losses were one goal or in OT in that series. I think JT would have made the difference.

If anything it shows what a good/hot goalie can do. We saw it with Bobrovsky this year.

Would JT have made a positive difference? The Montreal series was the best playoff series of the young career of William Nylander. And that line also looked fast with Kerfoot centering it.

 

[conFABulator]

Yes it’s obvious you don’t get it.

what's obvious to me is that people seem to contort themselves into position to hold the Leafs to a higher standard than they hold other teams.

My simple question is if the Leafs are not a SC contender then who in the EC is and why?

The example you just weighed into is someone saying Cernak's injury is a valid excuse for TB losing to Toronto while Tavares going down against Montreal was not.

Yeah, that's what I don't understand. Care to explain it yourself? You seemed to want to belittle me for not getting that so can you enlighten me please?

Would JT have made a positive difference? The Montreal series was the best playoff series of the young career of William Nylander. And that line also looked fast with Kerfoot centering it.

Who knows? I said it in response to a poster saying Cernak being hurt was the reason TB lost to the Leafs this year.

 

[notDatsyuk]

All but one contender loses every year. That doesn't mean they weren't contenders. A top 5 team in the league is a contender.
But that's also besides the point. It is contradictory to argue that regular season matters in determining contender status and simultaneously argue that a team that has had many top tier seasons in the past half decade never earned contender status in the last 20 years. The things that would elevate somebody to contender mid-season are things we've done.

A top 5 regular season team is a regular season contender.

I did not argue that regular season success determines contender status, but just the opposite.

But considering our penchant for regular season success followed by playoff non-success, what have we done that would justify saying that has changed?

 

[Dekes For Days]

A top 5 regular season team is a regular season contender.

There is no such thing as a "regular season contender". A top 5 team is a contender.

I did not argue that regular season success determines contender status, but just the opposite.

Well that's what was being argued in the discussion you decided to join.

But considering our penchant for regular season success followed by playoff non-success, what have we done that would justify saying that has changed?

There's nothing about how we've performed in the playoffs that would prevent us from winning a cup.

 

[Shanwhatplan]

So here is what the comparison looks like

Assuming Leafs have to go through ECF I will focus on Atlantic Division and handpick Metro teams who I think may end up in ECF again next season

ATLANTIC
LEAFS: Matthews (11.6), Tavares, (11), Marner (11), Nylander (7), Rielly (7.5)
Total: 48 million for 5 guys. If Matthews and Nylander re-up at approx 2M increase each that is about 52 million for 5 guys

Bruins: Pasta (11.25), Marchand (6.1), McAvoy (9.5), Lindholm (6.5), Ullmark (5), Zacha (4.75), Debrusk (4)
Total: 47.1 million for 7 guys (including a goalie) still less than Leafs for just 5 guys (not including Matthews/Nylander raises)

Florida: Barkov (10), Tkachuk (9.5), Rienhart (6.5), Bennet (4.5), Verhaeghe (4.1), Ekblad (7.5), Montour (3.5), Bob (10)
Total: 55.6 million for 8 guys (including goalie), factor in 2M each increase for Willy/Matthews that is 4M more in spending for 3 more guys

Tampa: Kucherov (9.5), Point (9.5), Stamkos (8), Hedman (7.8), Sergachev (8.5), Vasy (9.5)
Total: 53.3 million for 6 guys (including a goalie), factor in 2M each raises for Willy/Matthews that is just 1.2M more in spending for 1 extra guy -> vezina winning goalie btw, also have a norris winning d-man, art-ross winner (kuch), rocket winner (stamkos) and selke candidate that produces (point). Not to mention they have 3 SCF appearances and 2 cups to go with it.

Ottawa (potential new competitor): Brady (8.2), Stutzle (8.4), Giroux (6.5), Batherson (5), Chabot (8), Chychrun (4.6), Korpisalo (4)
Total: approx 45 million for 7 guys (including a goalie) still less than leafs for just 5 guys (not including Matthews/Nylander raises)

Sabres: Tage (7), Skinner (9), Cozens (7), Tuch (4.8), Dahlin (6, rumoured new contract at 9), Samuelson (4.2)
Total: approx 38 million (41 if include Dahlin's rumoured contract), for 6 guys excluding goalie. That is less than the Leafs for 1 additional core peice.

METRO
Devils: Hischier (7.25), Bratt (7.8), Huges (8), Meier (8.8), Palat (6), Hamilton (9), Marino (4.4), Seighenthaler (3.4)
Total: Approx 54 million for 8 guys excluding goalie. That is 2M more if you factor in Willy/Matthews raises for 3 more guys.

Canes: Aho (8.5 rumoured new contract ceieling is 10.5), Teravainen (5.4), Bunting (4.5), Kotka (4.8), Svechnikov (7.8), Orlov (7.8), Slavin (5.3), Burns (5.3), Skjei (5.3) -> (exclude goalie and Pesce)
Total: Approx 54M for 9 guys (56M if factor in Aho's extension); just 2M more for 4 more guys compared to leafs if you factor in Matthews and Willy raises of aproox 2M each.


Comments:
You can do this for other metro teams if you want. I think Devils and Canes are potential ECF finalists anyway.

For atlantic, redwings are a dark horse with no true star power, so not looking at them and habs are potentially still in rebuild phase so not looking at them either but the suzuki and caufield deals aren't that bad to begin with.

One cannot compete in this league with the kind of cap allocation and structure Leafs have. Dubas and Shanahan have completely screwed the Leafs.

IMO it is better to take a few steps back and re-tool and not push for cup runs at least until Tavares is on the cap. We just can't compete in our own conference and division, forget about winning the cup.

Treliving has to completely restructure the crap that is dubas' doing under shanahan umbrella. IMO we gotta be patient and just miss playoffs next season, draft high and then re-evaluate. Note we don't have 2025 first rounder either because dubas traded that too.

its a mess but IMO a patient and prudent approach with a foresight is required here. Going for cup runs until Tavares is on the cap with ridiculous increases to Matthews, Nylander and potentially Marner is not the way to move forward as a franchise.

We gotta make hay when the sun shines, the sun ain't shining anymore, gotta wait till sun is shining for the Leafs after Tavares is off the cap.

Just my opinion, but I believe this will never happen as long as Shanahan is here, and maybe as long as the board is here. Sad if true.

 

[Nineteen67]

Thats too harsh for MM.
JT is not as advertise as he is really not that good on defense and not someone who raises their game when the going get tough.

JT was supposed to make the players on his line better. He hasn’t done much of that, has he?

 

[Nineteen67]

No, I get that is how you feel. I was just wondering why you listed Carolina and NYR as contenders when contrasting the Leafs as non-contenders?

i think the Rangers have won ONE more playoff series than the Leafs have in the past five years and they really showed nothing in last year's playoffs. Carolina has been swept in the last four conference finals they have been in. They didn't take a game from the Panthers this year. Their goalie is Andersen.

Again, why are these guys contenders exactly?


Maybe you can answer my actual question though, since the OP didn't; if the Leafs are not to be considered cup contenders why are Carolina and the Rangers?

Two seasons ago I was ridiculed for picking Carolina and the Leafs as least likely to win the East, simply because of how they were built.
Since then, the Canes added Burns, their goaltending is adequate and their line up is stable. Not to mention they have some speed.
With Boston and Tampa possibly taking a step back it makes it a little easier to pick them now.

The Leafs‘ roster is a mess right now.

 

[notDatsyuk]

There is no such thing as a "regular season contender". A top 5 team is a contender.

Well that's what was being argued in the discussion you decided to join.

There's nothing about how we've performed in the playoffs that would prevent us from winning a cup.

A 'regular season contender' is a team contending for the President's Trophy, as was detailed in the discussion you decided to join.

Some people said regular season determined (playoff) contender status, while others didn't. I picked one side, and you guessed wrong.

There's nothing about how we've performed in the playoffs that would suggest we are a contender for winning the Cup.

And of course you didn't answer my question.

 

[IPS]

A 'regular season contender' is a team contending for the President's Trophy, as was detailed in the discussion you decided to join.

Some people said regular season determined (playoff) contender status, while others didn't. I picked one side, and you guessed wrong.

There's nothing about how we've performed in the playoffs that would suggest we are a contender for winning the Cup.

And of course you didn't answer my question.

Context does actually matter with who's considered a contender.

Everybody and their dog considered LA a contender in 2015 right up until they missed the playoffs. And it wasn't cause of their regular season either.

If Tavares didn't get knocked out with a horrifying injury, we probably win game 1 and sweep them.

Stick with the hindsight, it's definitely all you got.

 

[IPS]

You can tell who is not a real Leafs fan.

When we have injuries, we should have won.

When we win and they have injuries, we are lucky.

Pretty sure every series we have played someone has been injured/missing.

Dekes is literally saying that we sweep Montreal if Tavares doesn't get hurt.

I'm not a Leafs fan if I disagree with this?