Leafs need to address the goaltending.

[Confucius]

Leafs currently sit 14th in SV% league wide with a .906 SV% average. Had Sammy let in a single goal yesterday Leafs would have fallen outside the top 20.

View attachment 781003

Yeah but in the only stat that really matters we are tied for 5th in the league

 

[Martin Skoula]

This is what happens when you treat the most important position in the game as an afterthought.

There's only one player on the ice the entire game. The last line of defense. The only thing preventing a puck from entering an open net.

So that player better be damn good.

Samsonov is NOT a stud goaltender. His history of poor play and inconsistent effort is concerning. Meanwhile Jones was the worst goalie in the NHL last year and currently sports an .887 SV% in the AHL this year.

The pedigree of the two combined doesn't give much confidence.

Fans are gonna have to get used to injury prone replacement level goalies from now on. The team can only afford guys trying to resurrect their failing careers. The inevitable byproduct of Studs'n'Duds.

The glory of "we can and we will".

The top 10 goalies in sv% right now make 5 mil or less, good goalies is not the same thing as expensive goalies. The harder part is getting a good one, paying them is easy.

 

[Fogelhund]

Our priorities in scouting towards goaltending is what needs shifting.

Was Rask the last goalie we drafted in the first round?

Say what? We are incredibly deep in decent goalie prospects... they just aren't ready for the NHL at this point.

 

[ThrowDemTongs]

I don't assume a win every game. Mostly the obvious ones. Monday night against the Islanders is a good example. Tuesday against the Rangers will be a tougher game.

If "we want Florida" was a person

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

If "we want Florida" was a person

"We want Florida" was several people, several thousand people actually

 

[Evilhomer]

If "we want Florida" was a person

Yeah, I'm sure the crowd that night was filled with 50 year old public markets lawyers like me. That said, it's a master class in revisionist history for anyone to say that, at that moment, they thought Florida would beat Toronto.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Yup, occasionally I'm wrong, but have you read some of the posts on here?

Assuming we will win is always wrong.

 

[ITM]

Say what? We are incredibly deep in decent goalie prospects... they just aren't ready for the NHL at this point.

We don’t know what we have. You don’t know we’re deep, you hope we are. I hope we are.

But the finer point is prioritizing goaltender prospects is something we should do at least in a fraction of our drafts.

It’s a glaring hole that trade and FA signing haven’t been able to fill.

Hoping Woll’s it, but the proposition remains.

 

[Fogelhund]

We don’t know what we have. You don’t know we’re deep, you hope we are. I hope we are.

But the finer point is prioritizing goaltender prospects is something we should do at least in a fraction of our drafts.

It’s a glaring hole that trade and FA signing haven’t been able to fill.

Hoping Woll’s it, but the proposition remains.

Which we’ve done. We have drafted goalies. Plenty.

 

[ThrowDemTongs]

"We want Florida" was several people, several thousand people actually

Yes

 

[ITM]

Which we’ve done. We have drafted goalies. Plenty.

Since Rask, how many goalies have we drafted in our first three rounds?

Where are we drafting typically?

Do we draft goalies every draft?

 

[Fogelhund]

Since Rask, how many goalies have we drafted in our first three rounds?

Where are we drafting typically?

Do we draft goalies every draft?

Six of the last 8 drafts, we've drafted a goalie.

Who cares where they are drafted... there isn't much of a correlation between success and draft position, except for those goalies drafted in the top 15.

Our goalie prospects are excelling, it's strange that you are unaware of of this, and unaware that we've drafted so many, yet still are going on about this. It's legitimately an organizational strength... if you want to complain, go talk about C's and D's.

 

[ITM]

Six of the last 8 drafts, we've drafted a goalie.

Who cares where they are drafted... there isn't much of a correlation between success and draft position, except for those goalies drafted in the top 15.

Our goalie prospects are excelling, it's strange that you are unaware of of this, and unaware that we've drafted so many, yet still are going on about this. It's legitimately an organizational strength... if you want to complain, go talk about C's and D's.

My good faith question doesn't ask about the last eight drafts. It is comprehensive to Rask's draft FOR A REASON. And it doesn't paint the kind of picture, you're curiously painting.

Who cares where they are drafted? I do, for one. The idea that when we do draft goalies that we're usually in the 4th round or 6th or 7th is short-sighted. Our present outlier, Woll, was taken in the third. Hildeby in the 4th, illustrating the point that while they are promising...our chances naturally increase when we select a greater number of goalies in the early to middle rounds.

I am completely aware of our goaltending situation. Of AA, Peksa and Bouthiller, etc...But to say "It's legitimately an organizational strength...." , is because of Woll and Hildeby, right? It misses the point that our emphasis on developing goaltending isn't commensurate with our need, given past production. Since 2006, we haven't drafted and/or developed a bona fide number one goalie. And even then, it was the Bruins who developed Rask.

Again, hope Woll is "it". Perhaps Hildeby is to Woll as Rhodes was to Potvin - I'd take it. But we're not there yet, anymore than we were with Reimer as our starter. It's a "not good enough" proposition where we can't reliably point to our system and note successive goaltending prospect hits. And we're certainly less likely to ever do so and avoid threads like these unless our drafting approach shifts attention to a more balanced draft and development approach.

Because in terms of acquisition -- again, a good faith question: Look at every goalie we've had since Ed Belfour. So that's twenty years since Belfour and seventeen since drafting Rask. You don't have to report your findings, but just look at the names and look at our outcomes. Balance that with our draft over the last 17 or so seasons, in which our club should be stockpiling at position given the time it takes to develop goalies.

When we drafted Matthews and traded for Andersen, I thought the next logical step would have been to take Carter Hart (and on record as also saying or Kale Clague if memory serves). But we swung for Korshkov instead. It was (and is) part and parcel what's wrong with our development philosophy. We had a generational junior goalie ripe for the taking, and we erred towards an older Russian forward?

 

[Gary Nylund]

My good faith question doesn't ask about the last eight drafts. It is comprehensive to Rask's draft FOR A REASON. And it doesn't paint the kind of picture, you're curiously painting.

Who cares where they are drafted? I do, for one. The idea that when we do draft goalies that we're usually in the 4th round or 6th or 7th is short-sighted. Our present outlier, Woll, was taken in the third. Hildeby in the 4th, illustrating the point that while they are promising...our chances naturally increase when we select a greater number of goalies in the early to middle rounds.

I am completely aware of our goaltending situation. Of AA, Peksa and Bouthiller, etc...But to say "It's legitimately an organizational strength...." , is because of Woll and Hildeby, right? It misses the point that our emphasis on developing goaltending isn't commensurate with our need, given past production. Since 2006, we haven't drafted and/or developed a bona fide number one goalie. And even then, it was the Bruins who developed Rask.

Again, hope Woll is "it". Perhaps Hildeby is to Woll as Rhodes was to Potvin - I'd take it. But we're not there yet, anymore than we were with Reimer as our starter. It's a "not good enough" proposition where we can't reliably point to our system and note successive goaltending prospect hits. And we're certainly less likely to ever do so and avoid threads like these unless our drafting approach shifts attention to a more balanced draft and development approach.

Because in terms of acquisition -- again, a good faith question: Look at every goalie we've had since Ed Belfour. So that's twenty years since Belfour and seventeen since drafting Rask. You don't have to report your findings, but just look at the names and look at our outcomes. Balance that with our draft over the last 17 or seasons, in which our club should be stockpiling at position given the time it takes to develop goalies.

When we drafted Matthews and traded for Andersen, I thought the next logical step would have been to take Carter Hart (and on record as also saying or Kale Clague if memory serves). But we swung for Korshkov instead. It was part and parcel what's wrong with our development philosophy. We had a generational junior goalie ripe for the taking, and we erred towards an older Russian forward?

Not saying that I disagree with you in principle, but a lot of ideas are going to look good if you compare them to drafting Korshkov.

 

[ITM]

Not saying that I disagree with you in principle, but a lot of ideas are going to look good if you compare them to drafting Korshkov.

Oh completely...But see the point, Gary? We just drafted a generational C. We traded for a good goalie, and we had a generational G prospect sitting there ready for the taking. And when you look at our G prospect drafting record then, our dearth glared back all the more.

There was an ocean of difference in comparative prospect value, and we chose as we did. Would love to know what that conversation went down like.

 

[Fogelhund]

Oh completely...But see the point, Gary? We just drafted a generational C. We traded for a good goalie, and we had a generational G prospect sitting there ready for the taking. And when you look at our G prospect drafting record then, our dearth glared back all the more.

There was an ocean of difference in comparative prospect value, and we chose as we did. Would love to know what that conversation went down like.

I will never understand why people obsess over what happened in 2016, and create a whole thought line based on... but we didn't draft Carter Hart. Then again, given his career track record so far, he would have been run out of town a long time ago. Who cares about the last 20 years... unless you want to live in the past.

I live in the now, and for this team in the now.... and we have pretty good strength in goalie prospects. Sure... we should probably draft another goalie nearly every year... or 6 in the next 8 anyway... But that too, that's looking forward, not what we did 17 years ago...

 

[ITM]

I will never understand why people obsess over what happened in 2016, and create a whole thought line based on... but we didn't draft Carter Hart. Then again, given his career track record so far, he would have been run out of town a long time ago. Who cares about the last 20 years... unless you want to live in the past.

I live in the now, and for this team in the now.... and we have pretty good strength in goalie prospects. Sure... we should probably draft another goalie nearly every year... or 6 in the next 8 anyway... But that too, that's looking forward, not what we did 17 years ago...

Looking to past trend lines in order to avoid undesirable outcomes, is looking forward.

Ignoring them, neglects the future.

And my thought line isn’t based on 2016. It’s based on the ten years leading up to it and passed it. where we inexplicably ignored fundamentals in favour of what I can only surmise was whatever typical Toronto draft approach was deemed institutional.

Organizationally I hope we’ve seen the light.

Time will tell.

 

[Menzinger]

There's really not much (historical) evidence that 1st round selected goalies tend to be overwhelmingly better than guys taken later in the draft or later bloomers. Certainly not compared to significant gaps in quality of forwards for example in the top of the draft vs later rounds.

There's the odd counter to this - Vasy, Price, ect. But as a general rule seems like more of a waste of a pick to use a 1st on one

 

[acrobaticgoalie]

My good faith question doesn't ask about the last eight drafts. It is comprehensive to Rask's draft FOR A REASON. And it doesn't paint the kind of picture, you're curiously painting.

Who cares where they are drafted? I do, for one. The idea that when we do draft goalies that we're usually in the 4th round or 6th or 7th is short-sighted. Our present outlier, Woll, was taken in the third. Hildeby in the 4th, illustrating the point that while they are promising...our chances naturally increase when we select a greater number of goalies in the early to middle rounds.

I am completely aware of our goaltending situation. Of AA, Peksa and Bouthiller, etc...But to say "It's legitimately an organizational strength...." , is because of Woll and Hildeby, right? It misses the point that our emphasis on developing goaltending isn't commensurate with our need, given past production. Since 2006, we haven't drafted and/or developed a bona fide number one goalie. And even then, it was the Bruins who developed Rask.

Again, hope Woll is "it". Perhaps Hildeby is to Woll as Rhodes was to Potvin - I'd take it. But we're not there yet, anymore than we were with Reimer as our starter. It's a "not good enough" proposition where we can't reliably point to our system and note successive goaltending prospect hits. And we're certainly less likely to ever do so and avoid threads like these unless our drafting approach shifts attention to a more balanced draft and development approach.

Because in terms of acquisition -- again, a good faith question: Look at every goalie we've had since Ed Belfour. So that's twenty years since Belfour and seventeen since drafting Rask. You don't have to report your findings, but just look at the names and look at our outcomes. Balance that with our draft over the last 17 or so seasons, in which our club should be stockpiling at position given the time it takes to develop goalies.

When we drafted Matthews and traded for Andersen, I thought the next logical step would have been to take Carter Hart (and on record as also saying or Kale Clague if memory serves). But we swung for Korshkov instead. It was (and is) part and parcel what's wrong with our development philosophy. We had a generational junior goalie ripe for the taking, and we erred towards an older Russian forward?

Here is what I (as well as most people) would consider the top 10 goalies in the NHL currently. And where they were drafted.

1. Vasilevskiy (1st)
2. Shesterkin (4th)
3. Sorokin (3rd)
4. Hellebuyck (5th)
5. Saros (4th)
6. Oettinger (1st)
7. Ullmark (6th)
8. Swayman (4th)
9. Demko (2nd)
10. Markstrom (2nd)

Then you have a bunch of average starters like Kuemper, Jarry, Andersen, Georgiev, Thompson, Hart etc, etc, who were drafted anywhere from the 2nd round to being undrafted. Looks to me like you are just as likely to land an NHL goalie or even an elite starter in the late rounds as you are the early rounds.

Bernier, Campbell and Samsonov were all drafted in the 1st rounds. It's not always worth taking goalies high. Those guys aren't any better than guys in the league who were drafted in the 5th round.

 

[mikeyz]

It's like I said in the GDT. We are so f***ed without Woll it's not even funny.

 

[34]

It's like I said in the GDT. We are so f***ed without Woll it's not even funny.

Yup

samsonov is absolutely terrifying when he is in goal. He is honestly not even even an AHL goalie.

 

[Maple Leaf]

It's like I said in the GDT. We are so f***ed without Woll it's not even funny.

Not even Woll can save this team

 

[Gary Nylund]

Samsonov had a horrendous start to the season though and has been good since the beginning of November.

In his last six starts he has a save % of .935 and 1.90 GAA.

Bump.

Some of you people need to take a chill pill and not lose your minds every time Sammy lets in a bad goal. He's had a rough season but he's been pretty good as of late.

The team in front of him needs to be so much better. Remember, this is the same group that played a solid 60 minutes just 2 days ago, what's their excuse for forgetting how they're supposed to play?

 

[mikeyz]

Brodie thinking he's Orr or Bourque there trying to dipsy doodle dangle to no avail.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

870 save% again tonight

Piece of shit goalie plays like a piece of shit again can't wait to hear the excuses.