BruinLVGA
Next: CZ SP-01 Tactical!
"Another 100+ season"? This is only the 4th 100+ points season the Leafs had since 1917.
Leafs have 10 players with 40pts or more
- Thread starter Halla
- Start date
- Status
"Another 100+ season"? This is only the 4th 100+ points season the Leafs had since 1917.
A1LeafNation
Good, is simply not good enough!
- Oct 17, 2010
- 27,814
- 17,958
LOL, I think you should post bigger pictures next time to try and over compensate your weak arguments.
zeke
The Dube Abides
- Mar 14, 2005
- 66,937
- 36,957
since you're intent on derailing the thread with your insecurity, do you realize that injuries actually HELPED your team's depth scoring, not hurt it?
that injuries gave your depth players chances on scoring lines and PP units that the leafs' depth players never did?
for example, the Bruins had 8 players average 2:30 or more pp minutes per game, the leafs had zero. the bruins had 16 players average at least 1:45pp minutes per game, the leafs had 10.
Impressive depth. They could stack 2 lines and have 80 + point scorers easily I believe.
I agree with the strategy in the regular season. There are times in the playoffs where your best players will need to play more. I hope that Babcock is cognizant of that but I am not so sure. Maybe Wings fans can shed some light.
I agree with the strategy in the regular season. There are times in the playoffs where your best players will need to play more. I hope that Babcock is cognizant of that but I am not so sure. Maybe Wings fans can shed some light.
BruinLVGA
Next: CZ SP-01 Tactical!
It's not bias. It's just that very often your fan base presents information that is skewed because no context is given.
"Only team with 10 players at 40 points! Next best is at 7!": A magnificent feat... But wait: Tampa has 9, Nashville and Boston 8. Without a crap load of injuries each of these teams would have gotten to 10 too, easily. Not so unique anymore...
"Another 100+ season": only the 4th in a century. Last one was in the dead puck era.
It's always the same stuff...
zeke
The Dube Abides
- Mar 14, 2005
- 66,937
- 36,957
No. Let's be clear. Before the season started we told non Leaf fans the Leafs had the best depth and had the typical "LOL Leaf Fans Overate Their Players" nonsense.
So we were right and yet we cannot get the people who disagreed to even acknowledge that.
The facts and stats say Leaf fans were correct. What context is needed?
You guys are biased. Sorry.
Agreed.
By the way Leafs are pretty pathetic with no player able to score 70 points. They are 14th out of 16 playoff teams in that regards.
Sounds like an incoming first round sweep to me.
We of course don't know if any of the Leafs players would have been able to actually top 70 points under different circumstances because it didn't happen.
zeke
The Dube Abides
- Mar 14, 2005
- 66,937
- 36,957
you say this as if the Leafs AREN'T criticized for not having as good star players as other teams.
but they are. constantly. thread after thread about the leafs top players not being as good as the other teams top players.
DKH
Worst Poster/Awful Takes
- Feb 27, 2002
- 76,665
- 57,710
I grew up with the Leafs because of my father - Marcel Pronovost, Paul Henderson, Murray Oliver etc stayed with us when I was a kid - I loved Dave Keon and was around him many times. My mother even joked she lost her red fake nails over George Armstrong house as his carpet was red. I sent pictures of myself to friends here in the Leafs locker after the 1993 LA Kings 7th game
But this is why I root against them which is hard considering how I grew up
Holymakinaw
Registered User
Correct.
But because so many of the Leaf players who scored 60-something points are around 20 years old, I am more than happy with their performance.
That is probably because he hasn’t played 82 games in years. He hasn’t hit 40 in years but he put up 38 in 67 games and his point production shows that he has scored at that level almost continuously throughout his career. So maybe he would have, maybe not. He was looking pretty good on the Bruins and it wouldn’t have surprised me.
Backes and McAvoy on the other hand almost certainly would have hit 40 points if they had played 82 games. Extremely deep teams here. Tampa and Winnipeg are deep too as are others. Boston and Toronto have point scoring depth everywhere and Boston added Ryan Donato who looks great as well.
Both teams should be set up for a while.
Nope. But in LVGAs fantasy land Matthews put up 45G and 84 Points this year so that should give us a boost.
Well this is such an informative opinion. Their top scorer "Only" got 69 points due to him having lousy TOI and at times on the 4th line due to great depth and Matthews missed 20 games and was PPG.
So depth does not matter? You do know that great depth can lead to worse TOI and hurt your top players' production, right?BTW guys, the Leafs have great health and are lucky, That's why they are succesful. LOL.
This is a bit of an irritating "chest thumping" type thread but that doesn't change the fact that you are flat out wrong this year about the Leafs injury "luck". That narrative holds up for last season, but this year the Leafs have had major injuries to both core guys like Matthews (1C), Reilly (1D), Zaitsev (top-4 D) and depth guys like Komorov (3d-line winger).
The numbers clearly show you are pushing a false narrative here. The Leafs have had to overcome their share of injuries this season, like most other teams; it is why guys like Johnsson and Dermott got called up in the first place.
Stop your crying. Every single Leafs thread you're there sobbing. OP said he might be wrong about other teams having more than 7 40 point guys, which he was. You are literally starting a one man sobfest over your lack of reading abilities.
I know you probably mean well but your insecurities seem to get the best of you. I see more posts by you and TWS in Leafs related threads than any single Leafs fan. I'm not sure what this means but maybe it's time to find a better hobby or maybe it's time to crack out the ol Blue n White sweater that you've hidden at the back of your closets.
I'm a neutral party just responding to overtly silly statements when I see them is all
Of course Leafs get criticized a lot too for a number of reasons
Today I learned the Leafs were only able to accomplish this by being healthy enough to play the games :O mind blowing stuff right here!
If you’re a neutral party why are you trying to change the topic so you can take cheap shots at the Leafs?
Anyone notice how happy people are that Marner did not get 70? Now they can say no Leaf got 70 so I guess that means the team is not good...
I've seen it mentioned so much. Such a worthless argument. No one got 70 because Matthews missed 20 games. Nut did you know the Leafs are lucky and had no injuries?
I've seen it mentioned so much. Such a worthless argument. No one got 70 because Matthews missed 20 games. Nut did you know the Leafs are lucky and had no injuries?
BruinLVGA
Next: CZ SP-01 Tactical!
Helped, but not top the tune of getting a 4th line player get the production of a top 6 guy, come on.
LOL @ this PP "stat". This might be the most biased and useless one. You count X players for the Bruins having Y time, vs the same for the Leafs, like that was an advantage for the Bruins!
You know what that says? It says that you had pretty much your PP units set, while the Bruins were trying a ton of players. That's all.
And when you use that to "prove" that the Bruins saw increased production across the board because of that, you just shoot yourself in the foot.
Look at some of those who benefitted so much (/s) because of that PP: Cehlarik 2:01 PP, 6 games, 1 total points... Agostino 3:04, 5 games, 1 point... Gionta, 2:00, 19 games, 7 points... And from your list, there's another great deal of players who are good points producers but have been with us for so little games that they're also nowhere close to 40 points (like Rick Nash, Donato).
This PP stat of yours proves nothing.
Speaks to what people are resorting to when their most compelling argument is someone who barely got over 16 minutes TOI only got 69 points instead of 70.
You really think no player getting 70 is a big deal? Matthews was injured. But the Leafs are lucky with injuries!
That does not change the argument they had the best depth. If they had less depth, Marner would have over 70 easily. But would that mean they are better for it?
Grasping at straws?
BruinLVGA
Next: CZ SP-01 Tactical!
I am not disputing that you have ten 40 points players. I am disputing that it's so much ahead of anyone else, when it's clear that there's at least three other teams who, had it not been for injuries, would have been right there.
And if this is petty "revenge" for statements from before the season (I think that's what you are inferring)...
There's been scores of you guys saying that the Bruins were going to drop to earth once March arrived, that we were not good, only played easy teams. Well, we're at 112 points, possibly up to 114. No one is starting "revenge" threads for that. Ffs.
- Status
