News Article: Jake Gardiner and the Toronto Maple Leafs blueline

[sgupca]

Gunnarsson got few tools and a solid toolbox and he knows how to use them.

Phaneuf got all the tools but no toolbox.

Franson got all the tools but no toolbox.

Rielly got all the tools and most likely have a solid toolbox and the ability to use them.

Gardiner has all the tools but so far I question if he have the toolbox to keep them in.

Ranger got a few tools and a solid toolbox and he knows how to use them.



We clearly need more toolboxes at the backend.

Other than Gunnar, i agree with the rest

Gunnar to me is a bottom pairing, 14-15min dman. He goes through spurts when he's super consistant, then very unconsistant. If i'm Nonis/Shanny i look to package gunnar this summer for an upgrade up front. He can be replaced on the backed by Granberg, MacWilliams or Percy IMO, or a cheap UFA signing.

other than that, i agree with your statement. Not enough defensive IQ back there, and def not the right coach for this team.

 

[King85Kong]

I can't believe we are still debating this. Carlyle was obviously talking about Franson. Franson's minutes were reduced and taken off the #1PP unit. Gardiner's minutes were increased as the season went on.
If you are to believe he was talking about Gardiner, then you would also have to believe that Carlyle was purposely trying to lose games, by playing players he did not believe in for more minutes. If that is the case then Carlyle should be fired immediately. Of course that doesn't make sense at all. Come on people use your head.
Not hard to figure out.

 

[MakeTheIronSing]

I can't believe we are still debating this. Carlyle was obviously talking about Franson. Franson's minutes were reduced and taken off the #1PP unit. Gardiner's minutes were increased as the season went on.
If you are to believe he was talking about Gardiner, then you would also have to believe that Carlyle was purposely trying to lose games, by playing players he did not believe in for more minutes. If that is the case then Carlyle should be fired immediately. Of course that doesn't make sense at all. Come on people use your head.
Not hard to figure out.

I agree, Carlyle was most likely speaking about Franson.

For Carlyle to come out and speak openly about one of the few bright spots on a very dark end of the year would be very confusing. While I suppose its possible, he isn't completely watching a different game than we were.

 

[HonestHockey*]

Nobody thought the end of the year was great, so why lie about it?

The play of a certain player was deemed great.

 

[HonestHockey*]

I agree, Carlyle was most likely speaking about Franson.

For Carlyle to come out and speak openly about one of the few bright spots on a very dark end of the year would be very confusing. While I suppose its possible, he isn't completely watching a different game than we were.

So a player changes his game because he got a green light and it helps the team collapse is a good thing? Since people just make up **** in here I'll give you my two cents. At the deadline Carlyle wanted some trades to happen. He knew he needed some help on the backend. Nonis said this is what you have so play them to their game. So Carlyle did, and you get exactly what you got. Hence Shanahans meeting with Carlyle went like this, "Randy what happened?" "Well we have players who can't play an NHL game. Asked Nonis to get me help. He didn't so I played it his way at his request" "Thanks Randy, I thought so. I'll get you the help needed." And bye bye the guy who thinks he's Karlsson. See ya Jake.

 

[King85Kong]

So a player changes his game because he got a green light and it helps the team collapse is a good thing? Since people just make up **** in here I'll give you my two cents. At the deadline Carlyle wanted some trades to happen. He knew he needed some help on the backend. Nonis said this is what you have so play them to their game. So Carlyle did, and you get exactly what you got. Hence Shanahans meeting with Carlyle went like this, "Randy what happened?" "Well we have players who can't play an NHL game. Asked Nonis to get me help. He didn't so I played it his way at his request" "Thanks Randy, I thought so. I'll get you the help needed." And bye bye the guy who thinks he's Karlsson. See ya Jake.

Please provide proof to what you just stated.
Oh the irony of the bolded part.

 

[HonestHockey*]

Please provide proof to what you just stated.

After proof is provided it was Franson not Gardiner. The bolded part was the whole point lol.

 

[Gallagbi]

The play of a certain player was deemed great.

That's a hell of a lot different than what you said.

You do understand that players can play well on losing teams, right?

 

[King85Kong]

After proof is provided it was Franson not Gardiner.

So you accuse others of making stuff up, then you do it in the same post.

Franson's minutes went down as the season went on, and was taken off the #1PP unit. Gardiner's minutes went up as the season went on. Do you honestly think Carlyle would play someone he doesn't believe in for more minutes? Gardiner played some the most minutes on the team. Makes zero sense if it is Gardiner. Unless our coach is purposely trying to lose.

 

[HonestHockey*]

That's a hell of a lot different than what you said.

You do understand that players can play well on losing teams, right?

Define play well? You mean cause the play to stand still while you run around? That play well? Team game. When you're a negative affect it doesn't mean ****.

 

[HonestHockey*]

So you accuse others of making stuff up, then you do it in the same post.

Franson's minutes went down as the season went on, and was taken off the #1PP unit. Gardiner's minutes went up as the season went on. Do you honestly think Carlyle would play someone he doesn't believe in for more minutes? Gardiner played some the most minutes on the team. Makes zero sense if it is Gardiner. Unless our coach is purposely trying to lose.

That was the whole point!!!!!

Every single reporter writes it's Gardiner but on here it's Franson lol.

 

[Gallagbi]

Define play well? You mean cause the play to stand still while you run around? That play well? Team game. When you're a negative affect it doesn't mean ****.

He negatively impacted the team by being a plus player and leading them in scoring and Toi, while others all struggled to play their role?

Is that seriously your argument still?

 

[Cor]

So, I was just looking at random stats, and why are we looking at moving Jake Gardiner?

- In his rookie season, he played 75 games, he potted 7 goals, and 23 assists for 30 points

- In his 2nd full season, he played 80 games, he potted 10 goals, and 21 assists for 31 points.

This is a 23 year old that has never potted less than 30 points. Even in 12-13 he played 12 games, and got 4 points. That is about 32 points in 82 games.

I mean, you can say "oh, his D" but all young players struggle with the defensive side of the game, because it is more of a transition. He has shown flashes as well of using his speed to get into position and break up plays.

Looking at his stats really opened my eyes more to how good this kid has actually been.

Should we deal Phaneuf, Gardiner/Rielly are two great D to build around, with Finn/Percy/Granberg/MacWilliam all coming up

 

[HonestHockey*]

He negatively impacted the team by being a plus player and leading them in scoring and Toi, while others all struggled to play their role?

Is that seriously your argument still?

Played the most minutes of any player in the last 14 games. What affect did he have on the outcome? How many teammates games did he raise? How do we collapse totally with him leading in points yet he's deemed to have played well?

 

[Cor]

So a player changes his game because he got a green light and it helps the team collapse is a good thing? Since people just make up **** in here I'll give you my two cents. At the deadline Carlyle wanted some trades to happen. He knew he needed some help on the backend. Nonis said this is what you have so play them to their game. So Carlyle did, and you get exactly what you got. Hence Shanahans meeting with Carlyle went like this, "Randy what happened?" "Well we have players who can't play an NHL game. Asked Nonis to get me help. He didn't so I played it his way at his request" "Thanks Randy, I thought so. I'll get you the help needed." And bye bye the guy who thinks he's Karlsson. See ya Jake.

Okay, so the meeting went nothing like that. Like at all. Want to know what the meeting was about? Both McKenzie, Dreger, Kyper all said this (and this is different, because this isn't opinionated)

- Carlyle sits down
- Shanahan says we are firing your assistants, but you are coming back for your final year
- Carlyle says he wants his assistants back with him, Shanahan says no.
- Carlyle says he will only come back if he gets more term, so Shanahan throws on an extra "guaranteed" year, and a team option.
- Carlyle leaves.

 

[Gallagbi]

Played the most minutes of any player in the last 14 games. What affect did he have on the outcome? How many teammates games did he raise? How do we collapse totally with him leading in points yet he's deemed to have played well?

Because he's 1 player who isn't Gretzky, Lemieux or Orr? That's the blatantly obvious reason, but you don't seem to grasp it.

We collapsed because of the poor play of others. Guys like Reimer, Phaneuf, Clarkson, etc.. Not stepping up.

So playing well defensively and offensively whole leading in toi would be obvious reasons for him "playing well".

Note i didn't say turning water in to wine or pulling up the play of every Leafs teammate and singlehandedly vaulting them to victory.

 

[HonestHockey*]

Okay, so the meeting went nothing like that. Like at all. Want to know what the meeting was about? Both McKenzie, Dreger, Kyper all said this (and this is different, because this isn't opinionated)

- Carlyle sits down
- Shanahan says we are firing your assistants, but you are coming back for your final year
- Carlyle says he wants his assistants back with him, Shanahan says no.
- Carlyle says he will only come back if he gets more term, so Shanahan throws on an extra "guaranteed" year, and a team option.
- Carlyle leaves.

End of day Carlyle still here. Why? This should be good.

 

[HonestHockey*]

You seem to get confused very easily about what you post, what I quoted had nothing to do with either Carlyle or Franson.

No need to reply, you're very transparent.

So Leaf fans aren't saying he was great?

 

[Cor]

End of day Carlyle still here. Why? This should be good.

It's been said already. Leafs management don't feel anyone that was available was better than Carlyle. It is believed Leafs will be taking a run at Babcock, who is leaving Detroit, next summer.

Babcock is believed to be the guy Shanahan and Leiweke want long-term, and unless Todd McLellan was fired by San Jose, Carlyle was going to be back.

 

[jboknows]

It's been said already. Leafs management don't feel anyone that was available was better than Carlyle. It is believed Leafs will be taking a run at Babcock, who is leaving Detroit, next summer.

Babcock is believed to be the guy Shanahan and Leiweke want long-term, and unless Todd McLellan was fired by San Jose, Carlyle was going to be back.

I don't have a quote, but I remember reading something on Sportsnet a while ago (an interview with Babcock) where he quite clearly stated he has no desire to leave Detroit and that he loves the city, the team, etc. Other than rumours that we're interested in him and the fact that he isn't signed beyond this year, has anyone heard anything to the contrary from Babcock that he's interested in a change?

 

[Hockey Talker29]

Not that I really want to add to the controversy surrounding RC's comments...

but why hasn't anyone suggested that his comments were about Rielly?

"Just a defenceman. One example. A defenceman that's a young defenceman that's playing a you know a rover type of hockey earlier in the season versus a more condensed style of hockey, a more conservative style at the end of the season. And coming back and feeling that the leash that he was afforded in the beginning of the season wasn't as long as the one he was afforded in the end of the season. And the coach says well if he would have played longer he would have had a longer leash. So it's like the chicken before the egg. Specifically that one player had a feeling that his leash was short where we believed it was longer than that, it was just kind of a surprise. And then the comparison of who he compared himself with, it was just kind of shocking."

Gardiner was undoubtedly afforded a longer leash at the end of the season, so that last bolded sentence appears to rule him out.

Both Franson and Rielly could arguably fit into that description.

I'm not saying it's Rielly. I just don't see how certain posters are so certain that it's Gardiner, yet Rielly is completely ruled out.

 

[Cor]

I don't have a quote, but I remember reading something on Sportsnet a while ago (an interview with Babcock) where he quite clearly stated he has no desire to leave Detroit and that he loves the city, the team, etc. Other than rumours that we're interested in him and the fact that he isn't signed beyond this year, has anyone heard anything to the contrary from Babcock that he's interested in a change?

He said something about coaching at Michigan State as an assistant coach this year, but I think that was more if he got let go.

The Wings denying teams of Jeff Blashill, who would have certainly been hired by someone, added fuel to the fire.

McKenzie I believe mentioned that Babcock may be looking for a change, and a new challenge, and since his daughter is done school after this year, and his contract is up after this year, the timing makes sense.

Just a bunch of little things that add together

 

[Cor]

Is it just me or are comments like moving around and disappearing and then reappearing and stuff?

 

[jboknows]

He said something about coaching at Michigan State as an assistant coach this year, but I think that was more if he got let go.

The Wings denying teams of Jeff Blashill, who would have certainly been hired by someone, added fuel to the fire.

McKenzie I believe mentioned that Babcock may be looking for a change, and a new challenge, and since his daughter is done school after this year, and his contract is up after this year, the timing makes sense.

Just a bunch of little things that add together

If I'm running a team or really any business, it seems slightly moronic to base a decision to keep the current coach/status quo for another year based on a dream/desire to get Babcock in the future. I think the Leafs could have targeted a couple coaches this year that would be far more suitable for the current roster. I would also be concerned that we are going to make drastic changes to the roster to work with Carlyle this year, which could go against what Babcock would want even if he were to come here.

It just seems like a really bad business decision... an equivalent would be making roster changes to plan on Stastny coming here as your #1 centre this year because of connections like "his wife loves the city", "he wants to play in Canadian market", etc. --- note that I'm making those statements up so people on here shouldn't get their hopes up!

Anyway, just my thought. I guess I'm a little hesitant to believe that any player/coach/GM is going to come here, because time and time again we hear this kind of thing and then it doesn't happen

 

[Parkdale]

Not that I really want to add to the controversy surrounding RC's comments...

but why hasn't anyone suggested that his comments were about Rielly?

"Just a defenceman. One example. A defenceman that's a young defenceman that's playing a you know a rover type of hockey earlier in the season versus a more condensed style of hockey, a more conservative style at the end of the season. And coming back and feeling that the leash that he was afforded in the beginning of the season wasn't as long as the one he was afforded in the end of the season. And the coach says well if he would have played longer he would have had a longer leash. So it's like the chicken before the egg. Specifically that one player had a feeling that his leash was short where we believed it was longer than that, it was just kind of a surprise. And then the comparison of who he compared himself with, it was just kind of shocking."

Gardiner was undoubtedly afforded a longer leash at the end of the season, so that last bolded sentence appears to rule him out.

Both Franson and Rielly could arguably fit into that description.

I'm not saying it's Rielly. I just don't see how certain posters are so certain that it's Gardiner, yet Rielly is completely ruled out.

Rielly is not speculated on because he is the current golden boy....can basically do no wrong (mostly true) so no-one would connect any negative comments to him when the Carlyle whipping boy - Gardiner and general whipping boy - Franson are in the picture. However, your observation has some merit as deep down it is believable that Carlyle is not totally comfortable with Rielly....he may only be totally comfortable with Phaneuf (another story). I still throw out the theory that Carlyle was just throwing out random thoughts without any particular player in mind. This was at a end of season news conference when most of the speculation was that he was about to be fired and before his obscene out of the blue extension was given to him. I can see the passive aggressive side of Carlyle throwing out jabs at some of the players without being totally transparent who he was talking about. Thus the continuing confusion to this day about who he might have had in mind. Now that he has his extension, the last thing he wants to do is clarify his remarks...after all, he was the one that said stuff said in the locker room should stay there!