GDT: Leafs @Jets. 8pm

[crump]

Maurice said there is a gentlemen's agreement today about no late hits today or whatever.
Good to hear.

I would be up for All Start Game mode, but the goalie numbers would take a hit.

 

[Optimist]

For the first time in years I'll be watching the Jays instead of the Leafs tonight.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

1. CBJ wasn't bad. They were neck and neck with the Leafs in both the standings and in the analytics. They were a legit elite defensive team.

2. The Leafs outplayed them by a healthy margin (though not as big a margin as I wanted).

3. A 5gm play-in series after months off was preseasony weirdness that caused all sorts of weird results that we've seen this year were obvious flukes.



Simply not true, in every real playoffs series they have actually performed better than the regular season performance suggested they would against those opponents.




The only "success" that matters in the playoffs is winning the cup.

Beyond that, "winning" other games is much less important than playing well relative to the quality of opponent.

This should be perfectly clear this year now - the playoffs "success" of teams like VAN and MTL last year were meaningless, and the people that thought it meant something loom really dumb now, including those teams' own management.

The leafs if I recall didn't do as well in the regular season last year as in previously years so not overly surprised they placed close to Columbus. CBJ had just lost all their best players the previous summer (Panarin, Bob, Duchene I believe). Leafs were 100% favorites and I would considered CBJ as one of the worst tea.

I agree that the shortened season etc was definitely a weird situation but Columbus had to deal with the same adversities and yet prevailed against a far better team.

So you define playing well in the playoffs as getting bounced out of the 1st round 4 years in a row? As that is what happened regardless of who they played or how well they played.

I dont agree with your definition of success. Far too black or white. Success is also when you win a round, not only winning the cup. It gives confidence to a team when they win a round not get thrown out in the 1st round every year.

Not sure how your last paragraph relates to what we are talking about.

 

[zeke]

The leafs if I recall didn't do as well in the regular season last year as I previously years. CBJ had just lost all their best players the previous summer (Panarin, Bob, Duchene I believe). Leafs were 100% favorites.

I agree that the shortened season etc was definitely a weird situation but Columbus had to deal with the same adversities and yet prevailed against a far better team.

The leafs outplayed them despite how close they were in the regular season, but lost that weird short series after months off from playing. Disappointing but probably not all that meaningful in the end.

So you define playing well in the playoffs as getting bounced out of the 1st round 4 years in a row?

I define playing well in the playoffs as how well they played in the playoffs relative to their competition.

 

[smokes lets go]

who are your tims' picks tonight?

 

[Marshy]

I see it both ways. Sure the Leafs were underdogs 3 out of the last 4 years and slight favourites/pick 'em last year.

Having said that, find a way to win one of those series vs. the Bruins. Pat Quinn's team did vs. Ottawa when they were pretty big underdogs. Excuses are for losers as they say.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

The leafs outplayed them despite how close they were in the regular season, but lost that weird short series after months off from playing. Disappointing but probably not all that meaningful in the end.



I define playing well in the playoffs as how well they played in the playoffs relative to their competition.

If it was a 1 off I would say it wasn't meaningful. However it wasn't and it continued a trend of getting kicked out in the 1st round after good regular season play. That type of stuff gets into players heads. It was 100% meaningful and not good that they lost to a far worse team who likely was spending a decent amount below the cap compared to the leafs.

Playing well without winning is meaningless in the playoffs. You just said the only marker of success is winning the cup, going to be hard to be successful by your definition when you play good hockey and lose every round.

Edit: leafs also padded CBJ goalies stats by repeated shots directly into the logo, probably gripping their sticks too tight worried they were going to get bounced in the 1st round again.

 

[zeke]

If it was a 1 off I would say it wasn't meaningful. However it wasn't and it continued a trend of getting kicked out in the 1st round after good regular season play. That type of stuff gets into players heads. It was 100% meaningful and not good that they lost to a far worse team who likely was spending a decent amount below the cap compared to the leafs.

Playing well without winning is meaningless in the playoffs. You just said the only marker of success is winning the cup, going to be hard to be successful by your definition when you play good hockey and lose every round.

Edit: leafs also padded CBJ goalies stats by repeated shots directly into the logo, probably gripping their sticks too tight worried they were going to get bounced in the 1st round again.

Again, losing tight series to superior teams is not a bad result, and not worse than beating a weak team.

This lesson should be perfectly clear this year due to how badly overhyped teams with "playoffs success" last year have flopped this year.

 

[Cams]

If it was a 1 off I would say it wasn't meaningful. However it wasn't and it continued a trend of getting kicked out in the 1st round after good regular season play. That type of stuff gets into players heads. It was 100% meaningful and not good that they lost to a far worse team who likely was spending a decent amount below the cap compared to the leafs.

Playing well without winning is meaningless in the playoffs. You just said the only marker of success is winning the cup, going to be hard to be successful by your definition when you play good hockey and lose every round.

Edit: leafs also padded CBJ goalies stats by repeated shots directly into the logo, probably gripping their sticks too tight worried they were going to get bounced in the 1st round again.

A far worse team....how so? same games played, same pts, same %, Leafs outpaced CBJ by a wide margin of 3 regulation wins. They even allowed 40 less goals in 70 games. Sure the Leafs outscored them big time, but to say the Jackets were a far inferior team is not true. Even the "experts" were saying it would likely be the closest series. It's not like the Leafs had 100 pts and CBJ had 60, which seems to be what you are trying to say. Unless you are confusing that with the Pittsburgh series, who in fact did lose to a far worse team. MTL made it last year with only 19 reg wins in 71 games!!!!

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

Again, losing tight series to superior teams is not a bad result, and not worse than beating a weak team.

This lesson should be perfectly clear this year due to how badly overhyped teams with "playoffs success" last year have flopped this year.

For real.

TBL vs CBJ 2 years ago was a bad result for TBL.

Leafs taking Bruins and Capitals as far as they did? Good result imo for the young state those Leafs teams were in.

Losing to Columbus last year? Bad result, but the ways the skaters played imo was a reassuring shift in defensive play with a new coach.

This year? Minimum result that could be considered “good” for me will be getting out of the division. I feel confident that out skaters can play well enough to get that done, we’ll see how the goaltending goes.

 

[Cotton]

If that's the criteria, I guess no team should be afraid of us either. They'd be wrong, just like you're wrong.

Nobody is afraid of us, and no he isn’t wrong. Not everybody has a yellow streak and wants the easy path, this team is good enough to light anyone up.

 

[ShaneFalco]

 

[Suntouchable13]

That’s about all they can do as far as sitting players.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Resting any of our players isn't a bad idea.

Keefe was probably pissed at Marner's poor effort and brutal turnover on the GWG on Wednesday so he's resting him to get his head straight and focused on the playoffs

Low key punishment in a meaningless game.

 

[stickty111]

Good

 

[Coachcorner]

Solid benching right thurr sire. I loves it hard. Mitch played a huge seseason for us again. He harder now too, because of our new thugs, thornton, simmonds and bogo. Foligno too. They make others (Lost) bigger thugs too. Mitch a more mature sucka now fools.

 

[Eternal Leaf]

Marner deserves a rest.

I guess that's the best they can do with the cap.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

A far worse team....how so? same games played, same pts, same %, Leafs outpaced CBJ by a wide margin of 3 regulation wins. They even allowed 40 less goals in 70 games. Sure the Leafs outscored them big time, but to say the Jackets were a far inferior team is not true. Even the "experts" were saying it would likely be the closest series. It's not like the Leafs had 100 pts and CBJ had 60, which seems to be what you are trying to say. Unless you are confusing that with the Pittsburgh series, who in fact did lose to a far worse team. MTL made it last year with only 19 reg wins in 71 games!!!!

On paper they were a far worse team. Leafs went through a slump near the end of their season i believe and dropped down the standings as a result. If that Columbus team was as good as the leafs we need to look at coaching as they have worse players pretty much across the board as well as worse depth. Top scorer for Columbus was probably like 5th on the leafs or something

 

[Ziggdiezan]

Again, losing tight series to superior teams is not a bad result, and not worse than beating a weak team.

This lesson should be perfectly clear this year due to how badly overhyped teams with "playoffs success" last year have flopped this year.

Agree to disagree. I would say losing is worse than winning regardless of who they play. Many teams cause big upsets in the playoffs every single year yet the leafs haven't manged in once the last few years.

That is fine and I agreed at the time that the Habs got lucky last year. Just don't see how it relates to our conversion about what defines success in the playoffs pertaining to the leafs

 

[Gary Nylund]

Being in the biggest hockey market with 3 $11M players and not winning a playoff series combine for a target on us IMO.

If I was a MTL fan I wouldn't expect to win either, a full 82 game season likely has them out of the playoffs with how they were trending, but this Leafs team needs to prove they're as good as they think they are

Why would there be a target on us cause we never win in the playoffs? Whatever, the way I see it whoever your opponent is, that's your target and that's the same for every team.

True, it is all about how well they played and how good their opponents were.

nothing arbitrary about it, though it may take skill to judge it properly.

I downgraded Vegas for a number of reasons in that post, including the fact their playoffs record is actually much less impressive than most seem to think.

Your claim that Vegas never beat anyone good and as soon as they played a good team (WSH), they lost. No offence but that's one of the dumbest things I've ever read here. Before facing WSH, they beat (among other teams) the team that was second in goals scored, 5th in goals against and 2nd overall (ahead of cough cough WSH).

It's getting more and more difficult to take you seriously.

Maurice said there is a gentlemen's agreement today about no late hits today or whatever.
Good to hear.

Yeah I'm guessing they haven't discussed it or anything, it's an unspoken agreement that just makes sense.

The leafs outplayed them despite how close they were in the regular season, but lost that weird short series after months off from playing. Disappointing but probably not all that meaningful in the end.

I define playing well in the playoffs as how well they played in the playoffs relative to their competition.

It was "weird"? Hmm OK then, if you're looking high and low for any excuse at all, I guess that'll do.

I see it both ways. Sure the Leafs were underdogs 3 out of the last 4 years and slight favourites/pick 'em last year.

Having said that, find a way to win one of those series vs. the Bruins. Pat Quinn's team did vs. Ottawa when they were pretty big underdogs. Excuses are for losers as they say.

I did the (rough) math at one point, the odds of the Leafs not even winning once in the last 4 series is about 10%. Excuses are indeed for losers. So are statistics, or so they say.

Nobody is afraid of us, and no he isn’t wrong. Not everybody has a yellow streak and wants the easy path, this team is good enough to light anyone up.

If you're a pro you're not afraid of anyone. But if we're not using the word literally and talking about quality of teams in general, there's about as much reason to fear the Leafs as there is to fear anyone else. This team is stacked baby!!

 

[Guided by Veseys]

I truly hope that the Marner scratch was Marner’s choice. Keefe gives me funny vibes sometimes.
Marner was terrible last game but scratching him is an overstep if that was the case. Way too valuable of a player to mess around with.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I truly hope that the Marner scratch was Marner’s choice. Keefe gives me funny vibes sometimes.
Marner was terrible last game but scratching him is an overstep if that was the case. Way too valuable of a player to mess around with.

I'm like 99.999999999% sure that scratching him is to give him a rest, not punishment. Nobody's that dumb.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

Couldn't disagree more.

The Avs beating the coyotes last year is literally meaningless.

Did it get them to the 2nd round?

 

[stickty111]

I truly hope that the Marner scratch was Marner’s choice. Keefe gives me funny vibes sometimes.
Marner was terrible last game but scratching him is an overstep if that was the case. Way too valuable of a player to mess around with.

Even if it is punishment, it's not a bad thing. Marner needs to realize he can't make those plays when the games become important. Maybe it gets him refocused. Also it's about time a coach keeps him accountable. It's probably just rest though.

 

[Guided by Veseys]

I'm like 99.999999999% sure that scratching him is to give him a rest, not punishment. Nobody's that dumb.

Well hopefully but if Marner wanted to play I certainly hope Keefe didn’t say “sorry Mitch you need to sit”. Mitch can play when he wants to play as far as I’m concerned.
Only reason I mention it is because here and on Twitter people have already speculated that Marner’s poor play may have influenced this call. I’m sure after last game Mitch might have hoped to play a better game and finish off the regular season in style with the boys.