Is Keefe the right coach for this team at this time.

[egd27]

Idk what that pic is supposed to argue. I literally agreed with you that Torts was a good coach. Torts is a good coach regardless of the fact that he won a cup. Dan Bylsma is a bad coach regardless of the fact that he won a cup. Kyle Dubas and Sheldon Keefe winning the Calder Cup as GM is almost entirely irrelevant to their respective merits for NHL positions.

Wasn't your point that a picture of someone holding a trophy doesn't prove competency? I was agreeing with you too.

 

[member 300185]

Clifford has 4 career playoff goals and 15 pts in 60 games including 1 goal in the 24 games when they Kings won the cup. He had 0 pts in the 5 games in the play in round this year. Putting him on the 3rd line with Kerfoot and Kap doesn't win us the series nor does it make Matthews/ Marner score on the 1st line or Tavares/Nylander score on the 2nd line.

Seems like a huge reach here

well I guess then that Dubas shouldnt have wasted a 3rd to get him then? And all we needed was one stinking goal. Clifford was never given a proper chance. Crashing the net and having net presence can give others a chance to score also. Dubas even offered Clifford a contract and Clifford basically said "screw you" to Dubas and Keefe burying him on the 4th line. How am i right you ask? Who did Dubas sign in the last couple months? Tough guys, thats who. And he coaches butter soft. I want to say the word that starts with P and ends with sy. But that is what he is. He didnt figure he needed any toughness therefore put Clifford on the 4th line. People whining about how he only got this many goals or that many points in LA are laughable. Cliffords linemates sure rapped up a bunch of points. All you stat primadonna's, go have a look at how many points his linemates got. Yes Keefe got outcoached. That 3rd line was butter soft and Keefe gave his only forward tough guy 6 minutes a game. Torts played his tough guys appropriately throughout his lineup. And everyone in LA knows Clifford was a beast to play against.

 

[member 300185]

There's a lot of inexperienced people in this Management group. There's no question about it. I don't like that Dubas isn't surrounded by experienced people. Is Shanny that person? It seems hard to believe at times. I do like that Maclean is with Keefe now. I hope that is role is more than pep talks and line changes.

Solid post

 

[KyleDubasBoyGeniua]

well I guess then that Dubas shouldnt have wasted a 3rd to get him then? And all we needed was one stinking goal. Clifford was never given a proper chance. Crashing the net and having net presence can give others a chance to score also. Dubas even offered Clifford a contract and Clifford basically said "screw you" to Dubas and Keefe burying him on the 4th line. How am i right you ask? Who did Dubas sign in the last couple months? Tough guys, thats who. And he coaches butter soft. I want to say the word that starts with P and ends with sy. But that is what he is. He didnt figure he needed any toughness therefore put Clifford on the 4th line. People whining about how he only got this many goals or that many points in LA are laughable. Cliffords linemates sure rapped up a bunch of points. All you stat primadonna's, go have a look at how many points his linemates got. Yes Keefe got outcoached. That 3rd line was butter soft and Keefe gave his only forward tough guy 6 minutes a game. Torts played his tough guys appropriately throughout his lineup. And everyone in LA knows Clifford was a beast to play against.

BY that definition he was never given a chance with the KIngs either. He's a4th liner. He's 30. That won't change. What happens in every other instance he can't "Crash the net"? He kills the entire line. He's not good enough in all areas to be on the 3rd line. You know how people say Rielly isn't good enough to be a #1 D on a contenderm or Kerfoot #3 C on a contender? Well Clifford is not good enough to be a 3rd liner on a team this deep offensively or a contender.

And the 3rd was for Ckifford and a guy named Campbell..

 

[34]

Early to call this. Give him a full season to see what he can do.

 

[acrobaticgoalie]

well I guess then that Dubas shouldnt have wasted a 3rd to get him then? And all we needed was one stinking goal. Clifford was never given a proper chance. Crashing the net and having net presence can give others a chance to score also. Dubas even offered Clifford a contract and Clifford basically said "screw you" to Dubas and Keefe burying him on the 4th line. How am i right you ask? Who did Dubas sign in the last couple months? Tough guys, thats who. And he coaches butter soft. I want to say the word that starts with P and ends with sy. But that is what he is. He didnt figure he needed any toughness therefore put Clifford on the 4th line. People whining about how he only got this many goals or that many points in LA are laughable. Cliffords linemates sure rapped up a bunch of points. All you stat primadonna's, go have a look at how many points his linemates got. Yes Keefe got outcoached. That 3rd line was butter soft and Keefe gave his only forward tough guy 6 minutes a game. Torts played his tough guys appropriately throughout his lineup. And everyone in LA knows Clifford was a beast to play against.

No one is arguing that the team doesn't need need grit and balance. I challenged your claim that putting him on the 3rd line changes the whole series. You said if he crashes the net, we score some goals. Maybe, but looking at his career numbers it seems unlikely. The stats don't support your argument. He is a 4th line tough guy with very minimal skill. The Kings thought so as well. I guess the Knights have bad coaches as well seeing as Reaves is on the 4th line. For a banger to play higher in the lineup with skill guys, you still need to have some skill or else the play dies on your stick. Hyman is a perfect example of a guy who traditionally would be 3rd liner but he could at least score in lower leagues and has enough skill to play with elite talent.

As for your "Screw you" comment. You really think he declined because he wasn't used on the 3rd line? I don't think Clifford himself would agree with you that he is a 3rd liner seeing as again he doesnt have the stats to support it and has been 4th line for most of his career. We moved on from him because we took that money and spent it on a better version of him in Simmonds. He gives us what Clifford brought and what you're yearning for while supporting my argument of a guy that has skill and can actually play higher in the lineup and PP, seeing as he is a former 60 pt player. Signing Clifford also would have meant giving up a 2nd round pick instead of a 3rd and he is not worth that.

Thornton is one of the greatest players of all time and can also provide that big net front presence at a lower cost than what Clifford is and has the ability to put up 40 pts.

 

[ShaneFalco]

Early to call this. Give him a full season to see what he can do.

You'd think
He also had 2 lines that were doing next to nothing. The 3rd line especially

 

[rojac]

We'd have to giev up a 2nd just to keep Clifford. He's not worth that. Not when we were able to sign Simmonds without giving-up assets.

To be accurate, the pick going to L.A. would have changed from a 3rd to a 2nd. The cost of keeping Clifford was the difference between a 3rd and 2nd round pick. Many people on here talk like the cost was a 2nd round pick.

 

[ToneDog]

BY that definition he was never given a chance with the KIngs either. He's a4th liner. He's 30. That won't change. What happens in every other instance he can't "Crash the net"? He kills the entire line. He's not good enough in all areas to be on the 3rd line. You know how people say Rielly isn't good enough to be a #1 D on a contenderm or Kerfoot #3 C on a contender? Well Clifford is not good enough to be a 3rd liner on a team this deep offensively or a contender.

And the 3rd was for Ckifford and a guy named Campbell..

Not exactly:

It was goaltender Jack Campbell and forward Kyle Clifford from the Los Angeles Kings in exchange for :

1) forward Trevor Moore,
2) Columbus’ third round pick in the 2020 NHL Draft and
3) a conditional third round pick in 2021

The 3rd for Cliffy was not as bad as the 2nd for Pleks (although Pleks did play more and was more of a factor vs Bruins after Kadri was suspended) but nobody is crying over it as some are for the 2nd and bashing Lou.[/QUOTE]

 

[ToneDog]

To be accurate, the pick going to L.A. would have changed from a 3rd to a 2nd. The cost of keeping Clifford was the difference between a 3rd and 2nd round pick. Many people on here talk like the cost was a 2nd round pick.

Leafs were ready to pay the difference between the 3rd and 2nd by offerring Cliffy a one year contract. Cliffy turned it down and settled for less money but two years with the Blues. Dubas turned around and signed Simmonds. I do not find any fault in that move but it sure would have been nice to surround our skill up front with Cliffy and Simmonds.

 

[justashadowof]

I think the St. Louis hockey culture more closely matches with Kyle Clifford's game. I hope I've said that in the nicest possible way. Personally, ignoring the draft pick penalty, I'd have preferred Clifford for no other reason than age.

 

[KyleDubasBoyGeniua]

Not exactly:

It was goaltender Jack Campbell and forward Kyle Clifford from the Los Angeles Kings in exchange for :

1) forward Trevor Moore,
2) Columbus’ third round pick in the 2020 NHL Draft and
3) a conditional third round pick in 2021

The 3rd for Cliffy was not as bad as the 2nd for Pleks (although Pleks did play more and was more of a factor vs Bruins after Kadri was suspended) but nobody is crying over it as some are for the 2nd and bashing Lou.

[/QUOTE]

Yes, I am aware of the trade. I was pointing-out Jack Campbell was also involved as he was left out

 

[KyleDubasBoyGeniua]

To be accurate, the pick going to L.A. would have changed from a 3rd to a 2nd. The cost of keeping Clifford was the difference between a 3rd and 2nd round pick. Many people on here talk like the cost was a 2nd round pick.

I am aware. That's what I meant. That's a big difference though. Why would Dubas lose a pick 30 spots higher for a 4th liner when he can get Simmonds without giving up assets?

Kyle is hitting homers on the drafting. I want those picks as high as can be.

 

[Mess]

Dubas believes Keefe is the best coach for his HockeyPuck advanced analytics vision to how he wants the Leafs to play based on the player personnel he has provided.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

The 3rd for Cliffy was not as bad as the 2nd for Pleks (although Pleks did play more and was more of a factor vs Bruins after Kadri was suspended) but nobody is crying over it as some are for the 2nd and bashing Lou.

I hated that Pleks trade at the time. Mainly because we weren't ready to compete deep yet (I mean if people complain that adding Tavares for free is ill timed, adding rental Pleks at a cost is way ill timed) plus if he was bolstering at the deadline, he should have targeted a guy like Petry. Stupid timing for a rental.

 

[Mickey Marner]

I hated that Pleks trade at the time. Mainly because we weren't ready to compete deep yet (I mean if people complain that adding Tavares for free is ill timed, adding rental Pleks at a cost is way ill timed) plus if he was bolstering at the deadline, he should have targeted a guy like Petry. Stupid timing for a rental.

I didn't mind Boyle as we only made the playoffs by one point with him and a 2nd round pick is IMO worth the learning experience. But Plekanec was just pissing assets away.

I recall Plekanec being sold as Bergeron's kryptonite, but it doesn't appear that was ever the case.

Plekanec in the 2009, 2011, 2014 & 2018 playoffs vs Bergeron.

[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]TOI[/TD][TD]CF[/TD][TD]CA[/TD][TD]CF%[/TD][TD]GF[/TD][TD]GA[/TD][TD]GF%[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]115:52[/TD][TD]81[/TD][TD]188[/TD][TD]30.1[/TD][TD]4[/TD][TD]8[/TD][TD]0.33[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]

Looks pretty shit tbh.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

He had weeks to prepare a game plan for a team that everybody knew exactly what they were going to do.
He had a mini camp to get the team ready to execute that game plan.
He had a basically healthy roster to deploy.

And his team laid an egg in games 1, 4 (aside from getting lucky in a one in a million fluke), and 5 and choked up a 3 goal lead in game 3.

He did not coach the series really well.....CBJ did exactly what everyone knew they were going to and the Leafs had no answer. That is not coaching "really well"

"Laid an egg" is egregious and, quite frankly, incorrect. Game 1 was a 50/50 toss up. The Leafs' skaters were much better than Columbus in Game 5, as they were in most of the series.

No matter how you split it up, even with our cold offense, we should have won 3/5 of those games (Game 2, 3, and 5), and we could have easily won Game 1 as well.

Tortorella did not outcoach Keefe at all. He just had a lot of things go his way, and barely squeaked through a series against us.

 

[SeaOfBlue]

When it comes to next season, the most glaring question for the Leafs is easily how Andersen will play. His regular season performance was simply unacceptable for an NHL starting goalie, never mind one for a Cup-contender like the Leafs, and he has been outplayed in 4 playoff series. You are not winning a Cup by dragging a goalie. If anything, your goalie has to be one of your best players. The chances of winning a series with an inferior performing goalie is not great, regardless of how the team plays in front of him.

I was not a fan of everything Keefe did systemically with the Marlies, but he is a guy who can definitely adapt and create solutions when something does not go well. If you are able to pace over 100 points with the number of injuries and woeful goaltending he was receiving, then you are probably doing something right.

 

[ToneDog]

I didn't mind Boyle as we only made the playoffs by one point with him and a 2nd round pick is IMO worth the learning experience. But Plekanec was just pissing assets away.

I recall Plekanec being sold as Bergeron's kryptonite, but it doesn't appear that was ever the case.

Plekanec in the 2009, 2011, 2014 & 2018 playoffs vs Bergeron.

[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]TOI[/TD][TD]CF[/TD][TD]CA[/TD][TD]CF%[/TD][TD]GF[/TD][TD]GA[/TD][TD]GF%[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]115:52[/TD][TD]81[/TD][TD]188[/TD][TD]30.1[/TD][TD]4[/TD][TD]8[/TD][TD]0.33[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
Looks pretty shit tbh.

With the Kadri suspension, in hindsight acquiring a capable #3C was a brilliant move. Unfortunately Pleks was no longer capable. Add to that, that he bled Bleu, Blanc et Rouge, he was clearly the wrong #3C to go after.

 

[Martin Skoula]

I didn't mind Boyle as we only made the playoffs by one point with him and a 2nd round pick is IMO worth the learning experience. But Plekanec was just pissing assets away.

I recall Plekanec being sold as Bergeron's kryptonite, but it doesn't appear that was ever the case.

Plekanec in the 2009, 2011, 2014 & 2018 playoffs vs Bergeron.

[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD]TOI[/TD][TD]CF[/TD][TD]CA[/TD][TD]CF%[/TD][TD]GF[/TD][TD]GA[/TD][TD]GF%[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]115:52[/TD][TD]81[/TD][TD]188[/TD][TD]30.1[/TD][TD]4[/TD][TD]8[/TD][TD]0.33[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
Looks pretty shit tbh.

Plekanec was literally not good enough to be 1C in the Czech league within 6 months of the playoffs. He didn't even score a single goal down there that season, it's incredible. 18 year old 5'9 Hirvonen is doing better at 1C in a much stronger league for context.

 

[darrylsittler27]

I'm not paying a second rounder for Clifford who would be a 4th liner here when guys like Simmonds are free. We can add guys like that at TD and it won't cost us a 2nd rounder.

 

[SmoggyTwinkles]

I think Keefe is fine.

Now, if he becomes our new Paul Maurice and somehow never goes away (I'm talking Jets here) despite how meh he might turn out, then I will say differently.

I have no objections about him yet.

 

[Doublerum1975]

He's :Griity", so that answers all. He has no teeth, so that means something./

Clifford is a plug. He's thankfully gone

Our fourth line played better than our third line clifford wasn't the problem

 

[PromisedLand]

It has less to do with the coach and more to do with the culture of "entitlement" started and fostered by the GM

 

[ottomaddox]

Torts didn't school Keefe. Some people need to learn analyze coaching better. Keefe made many adjustments throughout the series. Tortz got better goaltending. Thats the only reason he won.
There is a good argument Keefe outcoached Torts in the series.
Game 1: game was right there until Freddy allowed an awful goal.
Game 2: Keefe made a systematic adjustment, and Torts had no answers.
Game 3: same story as game 2 but Freddy went into melt down mode.
Game 4: bad until Keefe decided to stack the lines which lead to a great comeback.
Game 5: game was even until Freddy decided to strike again.

Leafs completely outplayed the Jackets in that series, and that tells me Keefe was terrific.

What does whip mean? Thats what Babcock did and where did that get us? Also Keefe was pretty hard on these guys throughout the season.
Keenan? You lost credibility with that option.

In this age of anxiety and misinformation posts like this occur.

You don't have to like Torts and you can support Keefe all you like, but you do not get to redefine what "outcoached" means.

The coach that "outcoaches" another coach is the winner of a game or a series. You cannot attempt to change facts either!

There are so many examples in sports where a team dominates in possession statistics, etc. and loses. Toronto’s offensive plays, power plays, drop passes, zone entries all look sweet with nothing to show for it. I agree that goaltending was a factor, but that's why people tend to love the emotion of hockey. I also think that your #1 scapegoat held TOR in many games / series long before CBJ came around.