Line Combos: Leafs' biggest need?

[Guided by Veseys]

Reilly is tied for 7th in points among all defencemen over the past 3 years. That's pretty top level.

That’s true but that total is boosted by that one career outlier year of 72 points. He’s dropped off again and appears to be regular a 50 point per year guy. He’s a good all around D but maybe just not a strong offensive talent, particularly on the powerplay.

 

[Bluelines]

The next time we see Keefe giving Matthews & Marner another 3-4 minute straight shift at the end of a game, in an attempt to mount a late comeback with the goalie out, your suspicions will be confirmed and so will those of others that are witnessing these same strange coaching strategies unfold and only left shaking our heads in disbelief .

When you see the NHL playoff scoring leader Kucherov put up 32 points and his ATOI/g is 18:18, and you see Marner and Matthews averaging nearly 25 minutes a night despite the lack of offensive contribution, without any attempt to line match, or break them up and try something different, then we know he has nothing else.

When the opposition has predesignated designs and systems to shutdown Leafs stars like we saw from both CBJ and Montreal, the only response we saw from our coach as his solution was more ice-time. We're getting clearly out-coached making him among the weakest links behind the losses.

With Leafs roster last year against North Div QofC Leafs should have cruised to the final 4 under the new playoff format.

Yup.. hope Sheldon can grow as a coach and learn from his past mistakes. I don't get the sense that he is a dummy or too stubborn to change, I think he just lacks experience. I can only speak for myself , when I F up, I want to learn a better way, I think this is normal for most people, I hope Sheldon has the same mindset.

 

[CDN24]

The next time we see Keefe giving Matthews & Marner another 3-4 minute straight shift at the end of a game, in an attempt to mount a late comeback with the goalie out, your suspicions will be confirmed and so will those of others that are witnessing these same strange coaching strategies unfold and only left shaking our heads in disbelief .

When you see the NHL playoff scoring leader Kucherov put up 32 points and his ATOI/g is 18:18, and you see Marner and Matthews averaging nearly 25 minutes a night despite the lack of offensive contribution, without any attempt to line match, or break them up and try something different, then we know he has nothing else.

When the opposition has predesignated designs and systems to shutdown Leafs stars like we saw from both CBJ and Montreal, the only response we saw from our coach as his solution was more ice-time. We're getting clearly out-coached making him among the weakest links behind the losses.

With Leafs roster last year against North Div QofC Leafs should have cruised to the final 4 under the new playoff format.

Full disclosure- I am a hockey fan 1st but Habs fan 2nd. In last year's playoffs I could not understand why Keefe did not adjust during/after game 5. He had last change in game 5 and 7 and choose not to take advantage of it at all. He allowed Ducharme to dictate his matchups. The Danault line was effectively shutting down the big 2 so get them away from that matchup, maybe a few less mins total ice time but they would have been more productive. The Suzuki Caufield duo was Mtl's most dangerous combo at that point- get Marner and Matthews out against them and force them to defend - they can't score in their own end. With Caufields inexperience there were going to be offensive opportunities there. Vegas made the same mistakes letting Mtl dictate the matchup they wanted, Tampa quickly established in game one that in their barn Danault was not going to get the Kucherov Point match-up.

Having talented players is not enough, coaching matters a lot especially in the playoffs. A well coached team that works both smarter and harder can and will beat the more talented team often. We can make cracks about players not working hard enough/not wanting it but the coach has to use his players in a manner (smarter) that will give the best chance of team success- especially in the playoffs. A lot that we attribute to luck in the playoffs is not luck, its coaching/player utilization optimization that improves a teams chances or improves their luck if you will. Despite being top heavy that Leafs team should have come out of the North last year and would have IMO with better coaching/player utilization.

 

[ShaneFalco]

Yup.. hope Sheldon can grow as a coach and learn from his past mistakes. I don't get the sense that he is a dummy or too stubborn to change, I think he just lacks experience. I can only speak for myself , when I F up, I want to learn a better way, I think this is normal for most people, I hope Sheldon has the same mindset.

It's sweet that our GM and coach are learning on the job

 

[Coachcorner]

Had to put it on other corner sire.... I didn't catch that d-man with grit/thugginesh option. We ain't needing grit or thugs on forwards, but likely will need one for the d-men. Not ceserraily though. We have Holl and Muzzin who will have to do a lot destruction derby on those..... but our forwards will also have to skate back hard and kill suckas off when andersen.... I mean campbell is hit and ran over. Our Gabriel, Simmonds and Bunting and Ritchie will take care of bidness then though. For surely So yeah, we ain't even have needs then. Our team is set for life and for the upcoming dirt season. We will have to fight-a-lot though. Playoffs will be a tricky run for surely.

I'm sure also we will add some sort of a soulja at deadline for our playoffs. We ain't have the best playoffs players, so one mo thug will come in then. Bank on that. But that's then and now is now sire. I likes this thread.

 

[Mess]

Yup.. hope Sheldon can grow as a coach and learn from his past mistakes. I don't get the sense that he is a dummy or too stubborn to change, I think he just lacks experience. I can only speak for myself , when I F up, I want to learn a better way, I think this is normal for most people, I hope Sheldon has the same mindset.

Begs the question why are our Leafs being used as guinea pigs and training grounds, for inexperienced management learning on the job at Leaf Nation expense?

In a Salary Cap World where only player salaries are capped, and management salaries are not, why would one of the richest NHL franchises not be flexing their financial muscle and bring in the best and brightest most qualified people to run the organization if success is the true objective when managing the salary cap and the team?

Inexperienced President, leading a inexperienced GM, leading a rookie coach are producing the exact results one would expect when unqualified people are employed with the hope they learn in time and gain experience though mistakes and eventually get it right. This is what you might expect in a small market, low in finances and working on a budget with low playoff expectations due to financial limitations.

Why would a NHL flagship original 6 franchise be going down this path, willing to throw away years when they have a talented young roster and wasting years training management?

Leafs biggest need is for Ownership to stand up and claim they have seen enough, and move the organization in a new direction, as all these 1st round losses can't be good for business. I suspect we're in the last year of on the job training program and without concrete playoff results the experiment will be officially over. Sooner rather than later, holding the longest Stanley Cup drought 54 years and longest streak without a playoff series win 17 years has to forced change.

 

[Bluelines]

It's sweet that our GM and coach are learning on the job

LOL.. go to Toronto learn, leave Toronto to win the Cup...

 

[Racer88]

There are so many things with the entire Leafs organization right now that defy logic.

 

[Bluelines]

Begs the question why are our Leafs being used as guinea pigs and training grounds, for inexperienced management learning on the job at Leaf Nation expense?

In a Salary Cap World where only player salaries are capped, and management salaries are not, why would one of the richest NHL franchises not be flexing their financial muscle and bring in the best and brightest most qualified people to run the organization if success is the true objective when managing the salary cap and the team?

The best and the brightest are probably smart enough to not come here. What happens to coaches after they went through the meat grinder in Toronto? Wilson - never worked in the NHL again. Randy went to Anaheim and was a shadow of himself, Babcock a ghost...

 

[egd27]

Inexperienced President, leading a inexperienced GM, leading a rookie coach are producing the exact results one would expect when unqualified people are employed with the hope they learn in time and gain experience though mistakes and eventually get it right.

What I find most perplexing about this is that when Shanahan was truly a "rookie", he went down the path of acquiring a GM and Coach with proven track records of success.

After 3 seasons of improvement and an approach that appeared to be paying dividends, he changed course and appointed a GM with no NHL track record whatsoever.

Now I fully understand everyone needs to start somewhere, but (to use a music analogy) you typically don't start playing stadiums, you hone your craft in smaller venues and work your way up to the big time.

 

[TGB]

We're getting clearly out-coached making him among the weakest links behind the losses.

Of course, our talented players could have, you know, proved they're our most talented players by, I dunno, doing things talented players do.

It's "The players make a coach look good or bad" for a reason. Let's stop pointing fingers at everyone and everything and point them in the one direction that actually matters: the players.

Inexperienced President, leading a inexperienced GM, leading a rookie coach are producing the exact results one would expect when unqualified people are employed with the hope they learn in time and gain experience though mistakes and eventually get it right.

This is the sort of thing I routinely see in these forums that makes me chuckle. I'm sure you were cheerleading and calling the Leafs the best team ever and Keefe the best coach ever when they were winning, and Dubas the best GM ever when they drafted Matthews and Sandin and all them, but when they lose...no, they suck and are the worst ever. "Clearly".

 

[Racer88]

What I find most perplexing about this is that when Shanahan was truly a "rookie", he went down the path of acquiring a GM and Coach with proven track records of success.

After 3 seasons of improvement and an approach that appeared to be paying dividends, he changed course and appointed a GM with no NHL track record whatsoever.

Now I fully understand everyone needs to start somewhere, but (to use a music analogy) you typically don't start playing stadiums, you hone your craft in smaller venues and work your way up to the big time.

Ya, I would love to know what hold Dubas has over Shanny

 

[Bomber0104]

You know your argument is bad when you have to cut sample size to make your point. America has a political party looking for your type

Obviously the sample size is going to be small.

Coaches and GM's typically don't get a large sample size of horrible game 7 losses in the first round (versus inferior opponents) before the axe falls on them.

Any more and this front-office and coaching staff are gone.

And there'll be an OHL team in Northern Ontario looking for their type.

 

[Zybalto]

Exactly and in game 5 and 7 where he had last change in these playoffs why did Marner and Matthews play so much against Danault line? With last change you can minimize that, trap Danault on ice against someone else. Maybe the M&M get a few less mins overall but they are more productive against someone else. Game 1 of Finals Cooper had his big line out against Suzuki line all night. No Danault to slow them down and they neutralized the best scoring line of Mtl by making them play D all night.

Vegas made the same mistake. Coaching matters a lot in Playoffs

I think the matchups in the finals had more to do with the Habs approach than anything Cooper did. Cooper just logically reacted to how the Habs were operating.

The Habs played the Leafs as if they wanted to stop any scoring coming from Matthews/Marner and so matched their shutdown peeps against them at all times and this was made possible once Tavares went down. Tavares had been on a bit of tear the last quarter of the season and was going to cause all sorts of headaches for matchups and it simplified things for the Habs.

Against the Bolts, the Habs recognized they couldn't just load up against one line and so just buried their best defensive players even further in defensive zone starts instead of furiously matching up against certain lines at all times.

Its why a guy like Danault had 26.32% ozone starts against the Leafs (pretty typical of a shutdown center in the playoffs) and fell to an insane 13.89% ozone starts against Bolts.

Oddly enough, the least sheltered player in the entire series Caufield (90.91% ozone starts) had the worst Goals against/60 of any player in the series. The Bolts just feasted on him when he was on the ice.

It really comes down to goalkeeping in the end though. Much like the series against the first place Pens the year before (and the Vegas series IMO), Price took a team that had no business winning over a better team in the Leafs and is the only reason they would be a threat this year as well, if they even make the playoffs (there's a strong chance they would have failed the previous two years in normal seasons). For all his struggles during the regular seasons, Price has shown he's still a gamer once the playoffs start, bizarrely raising his save% 30+ points against better teams to steal series. It's why you cant really name any other MVPs from the team when you think of their run and why you cant really give Ducharme that much credit when the team routinely got outshot, outworked and outchanced but won because Price was his all world old self. Couldnt keep it up all the way through the final though.

In the Leafs series, the final 3 games stats:

Leafs outshoot Montreal 109-84
Leafs outchance Montreal 97-72 (High Danger Chances 38-23 Toronto)
Montreal outscores Toronto 10-6
Montreal goes 3-0

Team save% over those three games?
Toronto: 88.10
Montreal: 94.50

A series loss is a series loss though I guess and we are all looking for answers but coaching isnt one I would be looking at as, systemically, the ice was titled in the Leafs favor and, even with their offensive woes, the Marner/Matthews line still ended up with a 70%+ goal differential which certainly gave the other 3 lines a buffer to work with.

The one thought that goes through my head often is the sad reality that if we swapped goalies, the Leafs would have an easy series win and we wouldnt even be talking about this....yet again.....

This year I wanna see a healthy team, improved scoring depth and, for the love of god, a playoff goalie performance over a whole series. Just be better than the other goalie for once?

 

[Dekes For Days]

Many are assistant coaches in the NHL before they make the head Coaching gig

Some are. Many aren't. Including very successful ones. Including the back-to-back Cup champion. It is not a requirement to be a good NHL coach.

they use CHL coaching skills when NHL coaching skills are required

There is no evidence that this person who won in the AHL and is doing quite well in the NHL, is only using "CHL coaching skills" and not NHL coaching skills. These claims are baseless. You personally disagreeing with something that Keefe barely even ever does, that many other successful NHL coaches also do, does not mean that he doesn't have NHL coaching skills.

Perhaps it is due to your inexperience in hockey?

I do not have inexperience in hockey. We have already gone over this. The fact that you keep deflecting to this lie really speaks volumes. Spread lies about me again, and you will be reported.

that probably explains why you believe the illogical fallacy if you are a good OHL coach you will be a good NHL coach

Stop putting words in people's mouths. As I've already explained, being a good AHL coach doesn't necessarily mean you will be a good NHL coach, but it does mean that the chance was justified and based on merit, which was the topic of discussion. Once again, you haven't brought a single reason why it would be unjustified.

if you are suggesting that you don't need a different set of skills in the NHL vs the OHL

It's not the exact same thing, but you are grossly exaggerating the difference in the skillsets required for the AHL (where he won) and NHL. The peter principle does not apply here. The Peter principle discusses instances where the job completely changes within a promotional pathway, like somebody going from a public-facing job to one that is more managerial or administrative, with entirely different tasks. Not going from a coaching job to a coaching job.

 

[Bluelines]

I think the matchups in the finals had more to do with the Habs approach than anything Cooper did. Cooper just logically reacted to how the Habs were operating.

The Habs played the Leafs as if they wanted to stop any scoring coming from Matthews/Marner and so matched their shutdown peeps against them at all times and this was made possible once Tavares went down. Tavares had been on a bit of tear the last quarter of the season and was going to cause all sorts of headaches for matchups and it simplified things for the Habs.

Against the Bolts, the Habs recognized they couldn't just load up against one line and so just buried their best defensive players even further in defensive zone starts instead of furiously matching up against certain lines at all times.

Its why a guy like Danault had 26.32% ozone starts against the Leafs (pretty typical of a shutdown center in the playoffs) and fell to an insane 13.89% ozone starts against Bolts.

Oddly enough, the least sheltered player in the entire series Caufield (90.91% ozone starts) had the worst Goals against/60 of any player in the series. The Bolts just feasted on him when he was on the ice.

It really comes down to goalkeeping in the end though. Much like the series against the first place Pens the year before (and the Vegas series IMO), Price took a team that had no business winning over a better team in the Leafs and is the only reason they would be a threat this year as well, if they even make the playoffs (there's a strong chance they would have failed the previous two years in normal seasons). For all his struggles during the regular seasons, Price has shown he's still a gamer once the playoffs start, bizarrely raising his save% 30+ points against better teams to steal series. It's why you cant really name any other MVPs from the team when you think of their run and why you cant really give Ducharme that much credit when the team routinely got outshot, outworked and outchanced but won because Price was his all world old self. Couldnt keep it up all the way through the final though.

In the Leafs series, the final 3 games stats:

Leafs outshoot Montreal 109-84
Leafs outchance Montreal 97-72 (High Danger Chances 38-23 Toronto)
Montreal outscores Toronto 10-6
Montreal goes 3-0

Team save% over those three games?
Toronto: 88.10
Montreal: 94.50

A series loss is a series loss though I guess and we are all looking for answers but coaching isnt one I would be looking at as, systemically, the ice was titled in the Leafs favor and, even with their offensive woes, the Marner/Matthews line still ended up with a 70%+ goal differential which certainly gave the other 3 lines a buffer to work with.

The one thought that goes through my head often is the sad reality that if we swapped goalies, the Leafs would have an easy series win and we wouldnt even be talking about this....yet again.....

This year I wanna see a healthy team, improved scoring depth and, for the love of god, a playoff goalie performance over a whole series. Just be better than the other goalie for once?

Great insight.

 

[Bluelines]

No, the Peter Principle states that a person who is competent at their job will earn a promotion to a position that requires different skills.

While obviously there are similarities, the ability to coach at the NHL level certainly requires different skills than coaching at the AHL and lower leagues.

Devil is in the details

The Peter Principle states that a person who is competent at their job will earn a promotion to a position that requires different skills. If the promoted person lacks the skills required for the new role, they will be incompetent at the new level, and will not be promoted again. If the person is competent in the new role, they will be promoted again and will continue to be promoted until reaching a level at which they are incompetent. Being incompetent, the individual will not qualify for promotion again, and so will remain stuck at this "Final Placement" or "Peter's Plateau."​

 

[CDN24]

I think the matchups in the finals had more to do with the Habs approach than anything Cooper did. Cooper just logically reacted to how the Habs were operating.

The Habs played the Leafs as if they wanted to stop any scoring coming from Matthews/Marner and so matched their shutdown peeps against them at all times and this was made possible once Tavares went down. Tavares had been on a bit of tear the last quarter of the season and was going to cause all sorts of headaches for matchups and it simplified things for the Habs.

Against the Bolts, the Habs recognized they couldn't just load up against one line and so just buried their best defensive players even further in defensive zone starts instead of furiously matching up against certain lines at all times.

Its why a guy like Danault had 26.32% ozone starts against the Leafs (pretty typical of a shutdown center in the playoffs) and fell to an insane 13.89% ozone starts against Bolts.

Oddly enough, the least sheltered player in the entire series Caufield (90.91% ozone starts) had the worst Goals against/60 of any player in the series. The Bolts just feasted on him when he was on the ice.

It really comes down to goalkeeping in the end though. Much like the series against the first place Pens the year before (and the Vegas series IMO), Price took a team that had no business winning over a better team in the Leafs and is the only reason they would be a threat this year as well, if they even make the playoffs (there's a strong chance they would have failed the previous two years in normal seasons). For all his struggles during the regular seasons, Price has shown he's still a gamer once the playoffs start, bizarrely raising his save% 30+ points against better teams to steal series. It's why you cant really name any other MVPs from the team when you think of their run and why you cant really give Ducharme that much credit when the team routinely got outshot, outworked and outchanced but won because Price was his all world old self. Couldnt keep it up all the way through the final though.

In the Leafs series, the final 3 games stats:

Leafs outshoot Montreal 109-84
Leafs outchance Montreal 97-72 (High Danger Chances 38-23 Toronto)
Montreal outscores Toronto 10-6
Montreal goes 3-0

Team save% over those three games?
Toronto: 88.10
Montreal: 94.50

A series loss is a series loss though I guess and we are all looking for answers but coaching isnt one I would be looking at as, systemically, the ice was titled in the Leafs favor and, even with their offensive woes, the Marner/Matthews line still ended up with a 70%+ goal differential which certainly gave the other 3 lines a buffer to work with.

The one thought that goes through my head often is the sad reality that if we swapped goalies, the Leafs would have an easy series win and we wouldnt even be talking about this....yet again.....

This year I wanna see a healthy team, improved scoring depth and, for the love of god, a playoff goalie performance over a whole series. Just be better than the other goalie for once?

You are essentially making my argument. Cooper reacted logically Keefe did not.

• Cooper identified the threat of Danault against his top offensive players so he kept them away from Danault, Keefe could have and should have done that done that. Road games is not easy but at home you should be able to control the matchups.
• Cooper identified the weakness of Caufield's defensive game and matched up his best offensive players against him. Why do you think Caufield started 90% of his shifts in offensive zone? because Ducharme knew he was a liability defensively at this stage of his career too.
• Why do you think Caufield didn't play game 1 and 2 vs Leafs? because Ducharme was scared of getting him stuck out there against Matthews and Marner. By Game 5 Ducharme had to roll the dice and Keefe made his life easy by not exploiting his last change advantage.
• The reason Danault had less Ozone starts against Tampa is they are way better and Danault was essentially taking every D zone draw as he would use 2 centres to have Danault out there for every d zone draw
• Price played real well but he is not the only reason they won
• Ducharme deserves a ton of credit for devising a game plan to beat a more talented opponent albeit Keefe made is job easier.
• Outworked? Habs were many things in that series but outworked isn't one of them.

Flipping goalies may change the result? Flipping coaches would IMO

 

[Dekes For Days]

No, the Peter Principle states that a person who is competent at their job will earn a promotion to a position that requires different skills.

Eventually, when (or if) the promotional pathway leads to a job that is considerably different from the original position. This is most often seen in promotional pathways where more public-facing positions eventually lead to managerial positions, and the tasks required of that person completely change. While coaching in the AHL and the NHL are not exactly the same, they are not nearly different enough for the Peter principle to apply. It might apply if a successful coach was given a GM position, but not when a coach is just moving up a competitive level, and remaining a coach. That is the pathway for every coach we have in the NHL.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Biggest need is more changes still.

 

[egd27]

Eventually, when (or if) the promotional pathway leads to a job that is considerably different from the original position. This is most often seen in promotional pathways where more public-facing positions eventually lead to managerial positions, and the tasks required of that person completely change.

So you are going with the Peter Dekes Principle so that it better aligns with how you believe the theory should work.

 

[Dekes For Days]

So you are going with the Peter Dekes Principle

No, what I accurately explained to you was the Peter principle, which very obviously does not apply here.

 

[egd27]

No, what I accurately explained to you was the Peter principle, which very obviously does not apply here.

Can you link me to the part that indicates the promotion leads to a job that is considerably different from the original position?

 

[zeke]

Biggest question on the team this year is whether a couple of our oodles of middle six forwards can turn it up into legit top 6 producers this year (while not being defensive liabilities either).

 

[Dekes For Days]

Can you link me to the part that indicates the promotion leads to a job that is considerably different from the original position?

You're welcome to read the book or the research that's been conducted on this, if you're looking to better understand it. Examples include teachers becoming principals, or salespeople becoming managers, despite lacking the necessary skills for those considerably different positions. It does not apply to a coach becoming a coach for a slightly higher competitive level, which has been the pathway for every coach we have in the NHL.