John Tavares Discussion

[egd27]

Is JT a sports psychologist? And it was just a few of them, this would be a whole organization exercise facilitated by a professional who can help them dive deeper.

I would question the effectiveness of a one or two sessions that involve 25ish "subjects" of various ages, backgrounds, and attitudes in a group setting. But may as well give it a try, seems the coach can't get through to them.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

Willie seems to play better when he just goes out there and does his thing without feeling the need to defer or maybe it's just changing his game to cater to his center . When JT went down against Mon he just went out and played to his abilities/strengths and if that was looking for his shot or making a play he just did it without thinking about whether his C involved in the play .

JT has always played more like a winger , in NY he use to blow the zone early while his wingers took care of most of the defensive responsibilities in there end . To get the most out of him he needs to shift to the wing and we need to find him a solid 2 way C and winger with some skill and grit . The problem is not only where we find the cap to get these players but also the fact no team would go out of their way to cater to a 2nd line player .

this is AM/Marner's team and we should be building the team to cater to them , if JT can't find a way to be effective with the players/role we give him then he should waive and go to a team that can put him in a role that's better suited to whatever strengths he has left

Agreed, Nylander definitely flourishes when he is able to play his game, carry the puck and skate like the wind.

Ya I could definitely see JT transitioning to wing near the end of his contract but probably due to bad foot speed rather than his defensive play. I could also see him flourishing with some wingers who could grind it down low with him and have some decent hands/finishing ability.

Ya having to try to acquire more top 6 wingers to get the best out of JT and/or Nylander is a really bad problem to have. Those high cap hit players should be making other players better not requiring specfic players to perform well.

 

[Trapper]

you must be a teacher with all this touch feely team building workshop stuff . lol

I agree there's a mental aspect to the game but to use it as the main reason for our losses is absurd , A much bigger reason for our losses lately is teams are limiting our strengths and exposing our weaknesses as the series go on that's why we aren't able to close them out .

if you look at T-Bays series wins you'll see it's not always there top guys coming through in the crunch and all teams want to win but sometimes a team will keep going with the same guys at key times due to stubbornness or because they feel obligated due to what they're paying them even if they aren't performing well and it costs them the series

for me it comes down to roster construction which has limited our success since i don't believe you can spend 33m on three forwards especially when 1 is no where near elite and still have money left over to fill out a quality lineup unless of course you have a fair number of players playing well above there pay grade which is very difficult to do

Blue Jackets GM:
“We believe in fair contracts, but the guys have to understand that they want to have a better team around them, too. That’s where there needs to be a little bit of a compromise.”

There is no compromise here.
This phase is almost done. 2 years and UFA is upon us. Zero playoff success to date. Do you think players compromise next term?

 

[The Management]

It's complicated, assessing Tavares. I didn't like what I saw from him in the playoffs, but I've also defended his signing before. I can see both sides of the issue. I don't have the answers.

On the one hand, wind the tape back to 2018 and put yourself in the position of Brendan Shannahan and Kyle Dubas. Here's a big bodied 27 year old center, coming off a point per game season, that goes to the front of the net and brings an extra dimension to your team in addition to some veteran leadership for a young core. He wants to sign: your team is his top choice. It doesn't cost a single draft pick, and you figure you can keep your forward core of Matthews, Marner, Rielly, and Nylander all together.

Toews and Kane were about 26 when they signed their big deals in 2014 (eight year deals, as opposed to Tavares' seven). Kopitar was around 28 when he signed for $10m with Los Angeles (also for eight years). So there was some precedent for giving Tavares the big contract he received, and to his credit, he has remained a roughly PPG player since suiting up in blue and white.

On the other hand and with the benefit of hindsight, those two teams (Blackhawks, Kings) had early success with those big contracts (I think LA's cup run may have actually preceded Kopitar's deal?), but now both clubs struggle just to make the post-season.

I think the signing made sense at the time, and I still think Tavares is an asset. If you take him off the roster, you need to find someone else capable of replacing his production.

But he always leaves you wanting more, doesn't he? He's good for a point per game, but at that cap hit you really hope for somebody who can blow the doors off the barn from time to time (Matthews, Kane) or bring you selke level defense (Toews, Kopitar). Tavares just never looks like an $11m player and that can be frustrating. Furthermore, he's getting to the age where you can reasonably anticipate diminishing returns.

As to whether his cap hit could be better spent elsewhere, that's all speculative at this point and depends on who is available to sign for how much and how long. Let's say Tavares were on an eight million dollar per year deal, does that extra cap space change the trajectory of this team in any material way? I'm honestly not sure.

 

[WTFMAN99]

It's complicated, assessing Tavares. I didn't like what I saw from him in the playoffs, but I've also defended his signing before. I can see both sides of the issue. I don't have the answers.

On the one hand, wind the tape back to 2018 and put yourself in the position of Brendan Shannahan and Kyle Dubas. Here's a big bodied 27 year old center, coming off a point per game season, that goes to the front of the net and brings an extra dimension to your team in addition to some veteran leadership for a young core. He wants to sign: your team is his top choice. It doesn't cost a single draft pick, and you figure you can keep your forward core of Matthews, Marner, Rielly, and Nylander all together.

Toews and Kane were about 26 when they signed their big deals in 2014 (eight year deals, as opposed to Tavares' seven). Kopitar was around 28 when he signed for $10m with Los Angeles (also for eight years). So there was some precedent for giving Tavares the big contract he received, and to his credit, he has remained a roughly PPG player since suiting up in blue and white.

On the other hand and with the benefit of hindsight, those two teams (Blackhawks, Kings) had early success with those big contracts (I think LA's cup run may have actually preceded Kopitar's deal?), but now both clubs struggle just to make the post-season.

I think the signing made sense at the time, and I still think Tavares is an asset. If you take him off the roster, you need to find someone else capable of replacing his production.

But he always leaves you wanting more, doesn't he? He's good for a point per game, but at that cap hit you really hope for somebody who can blow the doors off the barn from time to time (Matthews, Kane) or bring you selke level defense (Toews, Kopitar). Tavares just never looks like an $11m player and that can be frustrating. Furthermore, he's getting to the age where you can reasonably anticipate diminishing returns.

As to whether his cap hit could be better spent elsewhere, that's all speculative at this point and depends on who is available to sign for how much and how long. Let's say Tavares were on an eight million dollar per year deal, does that extra cap space change the trajectory of this team in any material way? I'm honestly not sure.

Good post, the bolded point in particular is something I wonder if we overthought, ditto Marleau?

I mean it's one thing to be a veteran but it's another thing to have won something. I look at JT and Marleau and...they haven't really won anything.

We had chances to bring in a guy like Perry previously...he's won *everything*....maybe I am being overly harsh but the right types of veterans can make all the difference.

 

[The Management]

Good post, the bolded point in particular is something I wonder if we overthought, ditto Marleau?

I mean it's one thing to be a veteran but it's another thing to have won something. I look at JT and Marleau and...they haven't really won anything.

We had chances to bring in a guy like Perry previously...he's won *everything*....maybe I am being overly harsh but the right types of veterans can make all the difference.

Yeah, no disagreement here. I suppose Tavares being a little older than our group, and appearing generally well respected and received, could be seen as having a positive influence or promoting the right ideas.

I do think it is probably an overrated quality if we're being honest. Just one factor in the basket that management may have considered when looking at JT.

 

[Koolboss]

It's complicated, assessing Tavares. I didn't like what I saw from him in the playoffs, but I've also defended his signing before. I can see both sides of the issue. I don't have the answers.

On the one hand, wind the tape back to 2018 and put yourself in the position of Brendan Shannahan and Kyle Dubas. Here's a big bodied 27 year old center, coming off a point per game season, that goes to the front of the net and brings an extra dimension to your team in addition to some veteran leadership for a young core. He wants to sign: your team is his top choice. It doesn't cost a single draft pick, and you figure you can keep your forward core of Matthews, Marner, Rielly, and Nylander all together.

Toews and Kane were about 26 when they signed their big deals in 2014 (eight year deals, as opposed to Tavares' seven). Kopitar was around 28 when he signed for $10m with Los Angeles (also for eight years). So there was some precedent for giving Tavares the big contract he received, and to his credit, he has remained a roughly PPG player since suiting up in blue and white.

On the other hand and with the benefit of hindsight, those two teams (Blackhawks, Kings) had early success with those big contracts (I think LA's cup run may have actually preceded Kopitar's deal?), but now both clubs struggle just to make the post-season.

I think the signing made sense at the time, and I still think Tavares is an asset. If you take him off the roster, you need to find someone else capable of replacing his production.

But he always leaves you wanting more, doesn't he? He's good for a point per game, but at that cap hit you really hope for somebody who can blow the doors off the barn from time to time (Matthews, Kane) or bring you selke level defense (Toews, Kopitar). Tavares just never looks like an $11m player and that can be frustrating. Furthermore, he's getting to the age where you can reasonably anticipate diminishing returns.

As to whether his cap hit could be better spent elsewhere, that's all speculative at this point and depends on who is available to sign for how much and how long. Let's say Tavares were on an eight million dollar per year deal, does that extra cap space change the trajectory of this team in any material way? I'm honestly not sure.

You lost me at " signing made sense at the time" no it did not at all. If it did than you were wrong my friend

 

[Nylanderthal]

Good post, the bolded point in particular is something I wonder if we overthought, ditto Marleau?

I mean it's one thing to be a veteran but it's another thing to have won something. I look at JT and Marleau and...they haven't really won anything.

We had chances to bring in a guy like Perry previously...he's won *everything*....maybe I am being overly harsh but the right types of veterans can make all the difference.

Only thing marleau taught the kids was to look out for numero uno and to chase the bag above all else. I mean that’s why he came to TO on a buy out proof deal handed out by a senile senior citizen.

 

[WTFMAN99]

Only thing marleau taught the kids was to look out for numero uno and to chase the bag above all else. I mean that’s why he came to TO on a buy out proof deal handed out by a senile senior citizen.

The term never made sense to me.

 

[Nylanderthal]

The term never made sense to me.

I have no clue why they didn’t go 2 years at a higher aav if they really thought marleau was the missing piece.
You could’ve given him pretty much the same total money over 2 years by not giving Zaitsev 7 years and come out cap neutral and in much better position.

 

[ACC1224]

The term never made sense to me.

Most likely it was the only way to get him to leave home.
Terrible deal no doubt but it wouldn't have been an issue until the cap was maxed out.

 

[WTFMAN99]

I have no clue why they didn’t go 2 years at a higher aav if they really thought marleau was the missing piece.
You could’ve given him pretty much the same total money over 2 years by not giving Zaitsev 7 years and come out cap neutral and in much better position.

You'll miss a couple for sure. I didn't quite like the Zaitsev or Marleau deals at the time...or at least figured he was gonna liquidate JVR once he signed Marleau.

Similar to how Mrazek was a goalie I wanted...at like 2-3M for 1-2 years tops...the deal I saw I immediately felt uneasy about.

Gotta respect that Lou was able to hold on to his 1st round picks and Hunter did hit on those, nothing else though lol.

Dubas has used higher end assets and we haven't gone any further.

 

[The Management]

You lost me at " signing made sense at the time" no it did not at all. If it did than you were wrong my friend

Unfortunate. If you're not going approach the topic with any nuance, what's the point?

It's not hard to see why the management team were interested in signing him.

 

[francis246]

I would question the effectiveness of a one or two sessions that involve 25ish "subjects" of various ages, backgrounds, and attitudes in a group setting. But may as well give it a try, seems the coach can't get through to them.

When it comes to sports psychology, the psychologist can frame the session so the focus is on a common team goal. What does age and background have to do with anything? It’s not a variable in terms of achieving the team goal. Athletes of different abilities, ages, backgrounds always come together to win a championship. Not sure why it would all of a sudden be an issue.

 

[francis246]

It's complicated, assessing Tavares. I didn't like what I saw from him in the playoffs, but I've also defended his signing before. I can see both sides of the issue. I don't have the answers.

On the one hand, wind the tape back to 2018 and put yourself in the position of Brendan Shannahan and Kyle Dubas. Here's a big bodied 27 year old center, coming off a point per game season, that goes to the front of the net and brings an extra dimension to your team in addition to some veteran leadership for a young core. He wants to sign: your team is his top choice. It doesn't cost a single draft pick, and you figure you can keep your forward core of Matthews, Marner, Rielly, and Nylander all together.

Toews and Kane were about 26 when they signed their big deals in 2014 (eight year deals, as opposed to Tavares' seven). Kopitar was around 28 when he signed for $10m with Los Angeles (also for eight years). So there was some precedent for giving Tavares the big contract he received, and to his credit, he has remained a roughly PPG player since suiting up in blue and white.

On the other hand and with the benefit of hindsight, those two teams (Blackhawks, Kings) had early success with those big contracts (I think LA's cup run may have actually preceded Kopitar's deal?), but now both clubs struggle just to make the post-season.

I think the signing made sense at the time, and I still think Tavares is an asset. If you take him off the roster, you need to find someone else capable of replacing his production.

But he always leaves you wanting more, doesn't he? He's good for a point per game, but at that cap hit you really hope for somebody who can blow the doors off the barn from time to time (Matthews, Kane) or bring you selke level defense (Toews, Kopitar). Tavares just never looks like an $11m player and that can be frustrating. Furthermore, he's getting to the age where you can reasonably anticipate diminishing returns.

As to whether his cap hit could be better spent elsewhere, that's all speculative at this point and depends on who is available to sign for how much and how long. Let's say Tavares were on an eight million dollar per year deal, does that extra cap space change the trajectory of this team in any material way? I'm honestly not sure.

The answer to your question is more then likely not. Even with Tavares at 8 you’re not getting certain guys at bargain deals. You’re probably paying Kase, bunting, Kampf a little bit more. We got bargain deals because our cap space was so little and some players wanted to help Toronto out or they wanted to be here bad. If we had more cap space it’s reasonable to conclude that we would be paying closer to market value for certain player.

This is exactly what happened to JT. I think JT was coming here regardless. The leafs unfortunately or fortunately had the cap to do it.

 

[Hoglund4MvP]

Exactly and thats exactly why i think leafs should trade nylander... its everything he never do on the ice

Nylander lead the Leafs in net drives in the playoffs. Keep talking though

 

[Hoglund4MvP]

you guys know you have 20 mil in muzzin brodie holl mrazek and kerfoot right? Yet here rubbing one out to tavares 11 mil everyday so you can most likely just end up with 3 more kerfoots instead. That is one ugly lineup you guys are trying to build if these 4 mil Palat's aren't available for you, which they most likely won't be. At best you'll get one Palat and 1 Kerfoot and 1 scrub, which is a downgrade on 1 Tavares + finding your own Palat using cap space from fraction of the 20 mil instead.

 

[thusk]

Nylander lead the Leafs in net drives in the playoffs. Keep talking though

Drive to the net on breakaway or 2v1or 3v2 or every situation he dont risk to be hit yes its possible... going on trafiic when/where he get a chance to be hit... no chance...he will go behind the net of stay outside of the box...

 

[Hoglund4MvP]

Drive to the net on breakaway or 2v1or 3v2 or every situation he dont risk to be hit yes its possible... going on trafiic when/where he get a chance to be hit... no chance...he will go behind the net of stay outside of the box...

nylander took the puck to net on non-breakaway situations the most out of any leaf. deal with it.

even when he was sick off sushi he drop shoulder on sergachev and took it to the net.

 

[CelticDruid]

Drive to the net on breakaway or 2v1or 3v2 or every situation he dont risk to be hit yes its possible... going on trafiic when/where he get a chance to be hit... no chance...he will go behind the net of stay outside of the box...

The booze must be running freely in your neck of the woods.
Either that or your just trolling.

 

[thusk]

nylander took the puck to net on non-breakaway situations the most out of any leaf. deal with it.

even when he was sick off sushi he drop shoulder on sergachev and took it to the net.

Oh boy, we certainly ddidn't watched the same player

Hes probably finishing his forecheck too, played hard 1on1 battle in corner, tried to block most shot as possible, backchecking and playing d really hard...

 

[hotpaws]

Oh boy, we certainly ddidn't watched the same player

Hes probably finishing his forecheck too, played hard 1on1 battle in corner, tried to block most shot as possible, backchecking and playing d really hard...

why don't you take it to the Nylander thread

 

[thusk]

why don't you take it to the Nylander thread

Because tavares will stay you like it or not... choosing between tavares and nylander is as hard than choosing between a ryan getzlaf or bobby ryan in my mind... and the way to upgrade that second line with TAVARES is trading away nylander and his 7M to get player who will fit in...

 

[hotpaws]

Because tavares will stay you like it or not... choosing between tavares and nylander is as hard than choosing between a ryan getzlaf or bobby ryan in my mind... and the way to upgrade that second line with TAVARES is trading away nylander and his 7M to get player who will fit in...

there's no use trying to improve a line with Tvaraes because there's never been a player good enough to play with him according to his followers who have thrown every teammate he's ever had under the bus

and i don't give a damn if he has a nmc , he wouldn't be the first nor the last player to get moved who had a full mc/ntc so why do you think his case is so special ?

 

[WillyC]

there's no use trying to improve a line with Tvaraes because there's never been a player good enough to play with him according to his followers who have thrown every teammate he's ever had under the bus

and i don't give a damn if he has a nmc , he wouldn't be the first nor the last player to get moved who had a full mc/ntc so why do you think his case is so special ?

Name a comparable NMC like JT’s in Toronto that got moved mid contract.

Hometown UFA comes home to finish his career… signs a contract that takes him to retirement… then waives his NMC mid contract to get traded away from his hometown.

Who’s the closest comparable to this scenario?

I think you’re in for a few more years of whining and crying about John Tavares… he’s going to retire a Toronto Maple Leaf.