Tribute Jack Campbell Discussion

[Dekes For Days]

I didn't say the last 4 games, I said the last 10 periods

So now not only are we evaluating current team quality by the past playoff goal differential outcomes of past versions of this team, while ignoring EN goal impacts and every other metric, and not only are we doing this only for specific games within the series, but now we're doing this for specific periods within specific games within the series.

Cool. Whatever it takes to create a narrative I guess.

What exactly does this have to do with Campbell and the ridiculousness of a top-5 ranked team selling off their Vezina-contending #1 goalie as they enter the playoffs?

 

[Gary Nylund]

And you knew it was over the second they started playing. Total lack of intensity. Why did they talk about "demons" and such - because these guys are in their own heads and have failed in the biggest games, every time. Not only failed, but looked like they weren't even trying hard ..... at all.

Exactly. I can take losing, hey I've been a Leaf fan for over 50 years, I'm used to it but when a team comes out for the deciding game in the playoffs and looks like their heads not in the game from the start ... that's embarrassing, I'll just leave it at that. I really hope we win this spring and put this streak behind us, with each year it gets harder to take and losing to MTL as huge favorites and not even competing in game 7, I don't think it gets any worse than that.

 

[Gary Nylund]

So now not only are we evaluating current team quality by the past playoff goal differential outcomes of past versions of this team, while ignoring EN goal impacts and every other metric, and not only are we doing this only for specific games within the series, but now we're doing this for specific periods within specific games within the series.

Cool. Whatever it takes to create a narrative I guess.

What exactly does this have to do with Campbell and the ridiculousness of a top-5 ranked team selling off their Vezina-contending #1 goalie as they enter the playoffs?

LOL metrics. You can spin it all you like (and I know how much you love to spin) but 15-2 is an ugly pig no matter how much metric lipstick you slather on it.

LOL past versions - it's been the same core players in each of the embarrassing finishes the last 4 years.

I'm simply stating facts. You calling facts "a narrative" is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to spin away unpleasant facts.

In case you've forgotten, this started when you stated that we are "one of the best teams in the league" - it's embarrassing to keep hearing this nonsense which is why I reminded you of these unpleasant facts. Stop bragging about nothing and I'll stop reminding you of unpleasant facts - deal?

When the finish line is in sight and the going gets tough, we've been "disappearing". You said you don't like that word, how's your search for a more appropriate word going so far?

 

[ShaneFalco]

It may be a blessing in disguise if Soup struggles for a bit. As long as he's firing on all cylinders for the playoffs. But they were so extrenely careful with his usage last year and thins year they keep running him out there. Get Mrazek in for a few.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

But that's a simplistic way of looking at Shesterkin.

That's a young goalie who has progressed perfectly as an elite goalie from KHL to AHL/NHL backup 2yrs ago to fulltime starter last year and then gets 5.66x4 at age 26 for prime ages 26-29. Seems a far cry from Campbell going for a contract at age 30 off of one season as a fulltime starter.

Also, it's a safe bet that Campbell's sv% continues to fall back to the pack.

Pretty funny way to look at the track record of Shesterkin vs Campbell. Shesterkin played 1 year as a starter and 1 year as a backup. That is the extent of his NHL track record which you said is key for determining goalie contracts (47 NHL games). Campbell by the end of this year will have had 2 years as a starter and 2 years as a backup (likely 120+ NHL games). Yet somehow your trying to make it seem like Shesterkin has more of a track record than Campbell?

Age definitely plays as factor as your saying but Shesterkin didn't have a vezna quality season last year like Campbell is now and Shesterkin signed as a RFA vs Campbell as a UFA. These both inflate Campbell's prospective contract when comparing with Shesterkin

 

[zeke]

Pretty funny way to look at the track record of Shesterkin vs Campbell. Shesterkin played 1 year as a starter and 1 year as a backup. That is the extent of his NHL track record which you said is key for determining goalie contracts (47 NHL games). Campbell by the end of this year will have had 2 years as a starter and 2 years as a backup (likely 120+ NHL games). Yet somehow your trying to make it seem like Shesterkin has more of a track record than Campbell?

Age definitely plays as factor as your saying but Shesterkin didn't have a vezna quality season last year like Campbell is now and Shesterkin signed as a RFA vs Campbell as a UFA. These both inflate Campbell's prospective contract when comparing with Shesterkin

Yeah I think it's clear to most anyone that looking at those track records Shesterkin was a safer bet.

 

[nsleaf]

Oh oh, there's an embarrassed Leaf fan dwelling the past........... again

 

[Ziggdiezan]

Yeah I think it's clear to most anyone that looking at those track records Shesterkin was a safer bet.

Thats odd, the guy with less track record in North America (almost 3 times less games played at time of contract signing) with worse stats is a safer bet and that would be clear to pretty much anyone? Does not compute lol

 

[zeke]

Thats odd, the guy with less track record in North America (almost 3 times less games played at time of contract signing) with worse stats is a safer bet and that would be clear to pretty much anyone? Does not compute lol

I think most people would trade Campbell for Shesterkin right now.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

I think most people would trade Campbell for Shesterkin right now.

One is a UFA at seasons end and the other is tied down for multiple years so ya they probably would. That is irrelevant and doesn't really effect their contract predictions which is what we were talking about. you seemed to think my prediction of 5.5-6.5 AAV being offered to Campbell by some team wasn't close. You have yet to say your predictions or provide me a reason why mine is wrong

 

[zeke]

One is a UFA at seasons end and the other is tied down for multiple years so ya they probably would. That is irrelevant and doesn't really effect their contract predictions which is what we were talking about and you seemed to think my prediction of 5.5-6.5 AAV being offered to Campbell by some team wasn't close. You have yet to say your predictions or provide me a reason why mine is wrong

Let me rephrase - I think most people would trade Campbell for Shesterkin right now if they had identical contracts.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Pretty funny way to look at the track record of Shesterkin vs Campbell. Shesterkin played 1 year as a starter and 1 year as a backup. That is the extent of his NHL track record which you said is key for determining goalie contracts (47 NHL games). Campbell by the end of this year will have had 2 years as a starter and 2 years as a backup (likely 120+ NHL games). Yet somehow your trying to make it seem like Shesterkin has more of a track record than Campbell?

Age definitely plays as factor as your saying but Shesterkin didn't have a vezna quality season last year like Campbell is now and Shesterkin signed as a RFA vs Campbell as a UFA. These both inflate Campbell's prospective contract when comparing with Shesterkin

LOL, that's funny.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

Let me rephrase - I think most people would trade Campbell for Shesterkin right now if they had identical contracts.

Again not relevant to the conversation we were having and you still haven't responded to the part I actually wanted you to, aka why is my prediction wrong and what is yours

 

[zeke]

Again not relevant to the conversation we were having and you still haven't responded to the part I actually wanted you to, aka why is my prediction wrong and what is yours

I think Jack should come in the ~$5m range. maybe more maybe less depending on how the rest of the season goes. I don't expect him to finish near a .930sv%, for the record.

I don't doubt that there may be some teams that try to blow that offer out of the water, though tbh I'm not convinced all that many GMs would view Jack as the kind of horse goalie that they usually give the big dollars to, and I'm confident Jack treasures his current situtation more than most players would.

I do think the fact that most would prefer Shesterkin over Campbell on the same contract right now is relevant to the conversation, though.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Again not relevant to the conversation we were having and you still haven't responded to the part I actually wanted you to, aka why is my prediction wrong and what is yours

When people refuse to give a straightforward answer to a straightforward question, that's an answer in itself.

 

[Dekes For Days]

LOL metrics. You can spin it all you like but 15-2 is an ugly pig no matter how much metric lipstick you slather on it.

15-2 is an arbitrary and misleading number that is an inaccurate reflection of how we played in those cherry picked periods, how we played in those playoff series as a whole, as well as our current quality of team and potential this year and moving forward. If it shows anything, it shows how impactful goaltending has been in the game 7 outcomes we've been a part of - which only supports my position that we shouldn't be selling off our Vezina-contending #1 goalie as we enter the playoffs this year.

LOL past versions - it's been the same core players

While some of our core players have been there throughout, we've had very different teams and mixes of players over those 4 years. Tavares wasn't there for half of them, we've completely remade our defense in that time to go from one of the worst to one of the best, we've changed our bottom-six and complimentary players, we've changed our goaltending, we've changed our coach, etc. Just because Matthews, Marner, Nylander, and Rielly were there, it doesn't mean playoff outcomes from 3-4 years ago have any relevance to our current team. Playoff outcomes from last year don't even really say much about this current team, especially when you laugh at and ignore every valuable piece of information and context other than your specifically chosen metric in specifically chosen periods in specifically chosen games.

In case you've forgotten, this started when you stated that we are "one of the best teams in the league" - it's embarrassing to keep hearing this nonsense which is why I reminded you of these unpleasant facts.

The only thing embarrassing is our own supposed fans not only thinking that we're not one of the best teams in the league, but thinking that the mere suggestion of it is "nonsense". Of course we are one of the best teams in the league, so no reason to not say it.

In case you've forgotten, this actually started when I was addressing somebody's suggestion that we should sell off Campbell before the playoffs started. Then you came in upset that I dared suggest that our top-5 ranked team was actually good and we weren't in a position to be selling off our Vezina-contending #1 goalie, and you went off on some rant about past playoffs that have nothing to do with Campbell or the discussion.

Since you don't seem to think top-5 teams are among the best in the league, what is the criteria a team has to hit for you to think they're good enough to not sell off their #1 vezina-contending goalie as the playoffs approach?

 

[Ziggdiezan]

I think Jack should come in the ~$5m range. maybe more maybe less depending on how the rest of the season goes. I don't expect him to finish near a .930sv%, for the record.

I don't doubt that there may be some teams that try to blow that offer out of the water, though tbh I'm not convinced all that many GMs would view Jack as the kind of horse goalie that they usually give the big dollars to, and I'm confident Jack treasures his current situtation more than most players would.

I do think the fact that most would prefer Shesterkin over Campbell on the same contract right now is relevant to the conversation, though.

Thank you for providing a prediction. I agree that his numbers will likely regress a bit too. Hopefully that will help but if he ends a vezina finalists or even worse winner, I don't see him coming in at 5 milliom or under. Especially with teams like Edmonton, Colorado etc desperate for a good starter which its looking like Campbell is.

Hopefully your right and Jack does appreciate the amazing situation he is in and takes a discount to stay with the team. I dont see how to fit him without taking a discount or making a fairly decently sized trade.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

When people refuse to give a straightforward answer to a straightforward question, that's an answer in itself.

Got the answer I was looking for finally lol

 

[Gary Nylund]

15-2 is an arbitrary and misleading number that is an inaccurate reflection of how we played in those cherry picked periods, how we played in those playoff series as a whole, as well as our current quality of team and potential this year and moving forward. If it shows anything, it shows how impactful goaltending has been in the game 7 outcomes we've been a part of - which only supports my position that we shouldn't be selling off our Vezina-contending #1 goalie as we enter the playoffs this year.

15-2 is a simple fact. 15-2 tells a story. You may not like the story, hell there isn't a Leaf fan anywhere that likes the story but it's still a fact. You can argue that we didn't play as bad as those numbers say but no amount of spin can change the fact that we played absolutely horribly.

I'm specifically talking about how for 4 years in a row, when our entire season comes down to one game we've choked. That's 12 periods of hockey, there are no other periods to choose from. The fact that you call it cherry picking only shows that you're in denial - there are 12 cherries to pick from, that's it.

The first two periods were fine, IIRC we were leading 4-3 and since then, it's been a 15-2 disaster. We scored 4 goals in 2 periods and then only 2 in the next 10 periods. You're spinning so hard calling it "arbitrary and misleading" but those are the facts. You don't like it, nobody likes it but it's still a fact.

If a team that gets outscored 15-2 when the stakes are the highest is "one of the leagues best teams", then the league sucks, simple as that. I don't think it does though, I think the NHL has the best hockey teams in the world. I also think we need to play better when the pressure is on and the stakes are raised before we can say we're one of the best, no make that much better. But you seem to think that we've accomplished something worth bragging about, I can't understand how anyone could think that but you do have the right to brag about nothing and you are exercising that right so good for you I guess.

 

[Confucius]

Enjoying the speculation part. Just wish you guys would add term to your AAV speculations. We all know saying 5.5 is one thing but when you are 30, 5,5 X 3 years is worse for the player than 4.5 X 8 years. Just my opinion but maybe i'm wrong.

 

[ToneDog]

Enjoying the speculation part. Just wish you guys would add term to your AAV speculations. We all know saying 5.5 is one thing but when you are 30, 5,5 X 3 years is worse for the player than 4.5 X 8 years. Just my opinion but maybe i'm wrong.

I'd take 5.5x3 = 16.5 over 4.5x8=36. I'd be inclined to give him 5.5x3 now if he would take it.

 

[Confucius]

I'd take 5.5x3 = 16.5 over 4.5x8=36. I'd be inclined to give him 5.5x3 now if he would take it.

Intersting, Id take the 4.5 x 8. Security done deal no more stress that I have to produce and try to make that 20 million down the road.

Edit to add: I would probably even take 4 X 8 years if the team wants to load it all up on the first couple of years with signing bonus etc.

 

[Nylanderthal]

Thats odd, the guy with less track record in North America (almost 3 times less games played at time of contract signing) with worse stats is a safer bet and that would be clear to pretty much anyone? Does not compute lol

highly revered prospect that has met or surpassed all expectations vs a guy nearing 30 who had pretty limited experience in the decade since being drafted... big difference.

 

[ShaneFalco]

Thank you for providing a prediction. I agree that his numbers will likely regress a bit too. Hopefully that will help but if he ends a vezina finalists or even worse winner, I don't see him coming in at 5 milliom or under. Especially with teams like Edmonton, Colorado etc desperate for a good starter which its looking like Campbell is.

Hopefully your right and Jack does appreciate the amazing situation he is in and takes a discount to stay with the team. I dont see how to fit him without taking a discount or making a fairly decently sized trade.

Noone takes a discount here
But if he walks we're screwed
I think 5 years at $5 m woukd be nice
And yet still risky

 

[ACC1224]

Intersting, Id take the 4.5 x 8. Security done deal no more stress that I have to produce and try to make that 20 million down the road.

Edit to add I would probably even taks 4 X 8 years if the team wants to load it all up on the first couple of years with signing bonus etc.

8 years seems like a massive risk, can't see the Leafs committing to that.