Line Combos: Leafs roster [Before] & [After] and work in progress

[Gallagbi]

Oof, Seattle second in division
NYI 7th , after b2b Conference final, losing to TB twice
Buffalo and Detroit ahead of Ottawa
Those jump out as bad as a quick glance.

He has a note on NYI, which is basically since they're holding back all their UFA signings they are negatively impacted. Assumed signings like Parise, Palmieri, Zajac and Clutterbuck can't be counted since they're on the market still.

Seattle sucks, but that division may suck more IMO. The whole Western side makes the North look strong.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Every model posted is objective.

I never said they weren't and that's not the point, are you just pretending you don't get it or do you really not understand what I said? OK I will try one more time:

Let's say for example that there are a thousand models, graphs, datasets or whatever else, and let's say for arguments sake that 500 of these paint the Leafs in a positive light, 300 paint them in a negative light and 200 are neutral. An objective person wanting to share information would share the good and the bad in proportions that reflect the overall picture. However, when a person (like you) ONLY ever posts the positive stuff, they are not being objective, they are only cherry picking what supports their agenda.

As I said earlier, I'm not saying the model's right or wrong, what I am saying that if didn't post the Leafs in a positive light, you wouldn't have posted it because when it comes to the Leafs, you lack objectivity.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I think you're welcome to go find a negative article and post it, no? Hell, I'd love to see some logic for this team failing beyond things like "Marner take a DOG penalty anytime he's pressured" and "this team doesn't create 'real' chances"

We're all welcome to post what we like as long as we stay within the rules of the board. What's your point?

 

[Gary Nylund]

Oof, Seattle second in division
NYI 7th , after b2b Conference final, losing to TB twice
Buffalo and Detroit ahead of Ottawa
Those jump out as bad as a quick glance.

Yikes! I'll admit I'm not that familiar with what all the teams have done but those do seem bad to put it mildly.

 

[mclaren55]

Yikes! I'll admit I'm not that familiar with what all the teams have done but those do seem bad to put it mildly.

He has notes attached, no UFA included and rookies are replacement. Hence the skewed standings in some cases.

 

[zeke]

I never said they weren't and that's not the point, are you just pretending you don't get it or do you really not understand what I said? OK I will try one more time:

Let's say for example that there are a thousand models, graphs, datasets or whatever else, and let's say for arguments sake that 500 of these paint the Leafs in a positive light, 300 paint them in a negative light and 200 are neutral. An objective person wanting to share information would share the good and the bad in proportions that reflect the overall picture. However, when a person (like you) ONLY ever posts the positive stuff, they are not being objective, they are only cherry picking what supports their agenda.

As I said earlier, I'm not saying the model's right or wrong, what I am saying that if didn't post the Leafs in a positive light, you wouldn't have posted it because when it comes to the Leafs, you lack objectivity.

Please find 1 model that doesn't like the leafs.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Please find 1 model that doesn't like the leafs.

it's not his fault that math isn't objective enough to conform to his personal opinion

 

[Gary Nylund]

Please find 1 model that doesn't like the leafs.

It's not just models, it's all kinds of stats. If they're positive re. Leafs you brag about it, if they're no you don't post them and if someone else does, you attack them. The odds of the Leafs losing the every playoff series for example, I remember I posted on that topic, I calculated the odds of them losing every year were incredibly slim showing that they have been underachieving to a remarkable degree. You rushed in to say that "my math was wrong", I challenged you to explain why, you went silent, then a while later someone posted the calculations from some guy at the Athletic (a source of information you often use) who's numbers showed that they had underachieved even more than I had said. Does that ring a bell?

I'm not a suscriber to the Athletic so I'm not familiar with their models but I don't need a model to tell me that our playoffs performance has been so bad, it's staggering. Especially in series deciding games, I've been following the NHL for over 50 years and I don't remember seeing anything like it.

 

[Gary Nylund]

it's not his fault that math isn't objective enough to conform to his personal opinion

The Leafs now have a deserved reputation as perennial losers. That's an objective fact, opinion has nothing to do with it. Feel free to show me "the math" that contradicts this.

 

[egd27]

I think you're welcome to go find a negative article and post it, no? Hell, I'd love to see some logic for this team failing beyond things like "Marner take a DOG penalty anytime he's pressured" and "this team doesn't create 'real' chances"

How about, this team fails because they allow the opposition to score more goals than them in games where they have the opportunity to win a post season series.

 

[Gallagbi]

How about, this team fails because they allow the opposition to score more goals than them in games where they have the opportunity to win a post season series.

Sure, but why? Isn't that the important question for where we are now and where we go?

The past results are known. The causes and how it's being addressed is what there is to discuss.

 

[Bomber0104]

The Leafs now have a deserved reputation as perennial losers. That's an objective fact, opinion has nothing to do with it. Feel free to show me "the math" that contradicts this.

Leafs are out there trying to win "models" to appease Twitter users, bloggers, and the Athletic subscribers.

Montreal/Columbus OTOH went about trying to win the playoff/play-in series.

And succeeded.

Priorities, you know?

 

[egd27]

Sure, but why? Isn't that the important question for where we are now and where we go?

The past results are known. The causes and how it's being addressed is what there is to discuss.

I was purposely being tongue in cheek, but how is my "reason" any more useless than xGF, or Corsi, or Fenwick?

They are all based on past results and I am curious how they are they used to benefit the future?

It seems they are mostly used by certain posters to ease their pain of supporting a team that has been unable to get it done despite having extremely high priced help.

 

[rumman]

View attachment 459250

Good one.

 

[Gallagbi]

I was purposely being tongue in cheek, but how is my "reason" any more useless than xGF, or Corsi, or Fenwick?

Because it's not a reason at all it's a result.

They are all based on past results and I am curious how they are they used to benefit the future?

It seems they are mostly used by certain posters to ease their pain of supporting a team that has been unable to get it done despite having extremely high priced help.

Not sure it eases anything, truthfully it's more infuriating to me. Its a lot easier to plug obvious holes or simply ask if you've improved an under talented roster but that's not the Leafs. We're in a spot where we need our talent to breakthrough and produce. Chances are there by every measure and informed eye test. Conversion is not recently


I'd say we could sit here and cry about the results all summer instead of discussing the why, how it's addressed or what the impact will be, but a few posters have that covered in spades already. The chart posted is an interesting response on how ALL teams have done so far this summer. Truthfully I'm surprised we've increased in the result, but it's a decent look at things that are a hell of a lot more interesting than the usual sludge posted on here.

 

[Racer88]

In layman’s term what does this chart actual say?

 

[zeke]

It's not just models, it's all kinds of stats. If they're positive re. Leafs you brag about it, if they're no you don't post them and if someone else does, you attack them. The odds of the Leafs losing the every playoff series for example, I remember I posted on that topic, I calculated the odds of them losing every year were incredibly slim showing that they have been underachieving to a remarkable degree. You rushed in to say that "my math was wrong", I challenged you to explain why, you went silent, then a while later someone posted the calculations from some guy at the Athletic (a source of information you often use) who's numbers showed that they had underachieved even more than I had said. Does that ring a bell?

I'm not a suscriber to the Athletic so I'm not familiar with their models but I don't need a model to tell me that our playoffs performance has been so bad, it's staggering. Especially in series deciding games, I've been following the NHL for over 50 years and I don't remember seeing anything like it.

One stat that doesn't like then leafs, then.

 

[zeke]

In layman’s term what does this chart actual say?

The further to the right the more the team improved, the further down the less money they added.

 

[zeke]

It seems they are mostly used by certain posters to ease their pain of supporting a team that has been unable to get it done despite having extremely high priced help.

Are you still in pain? Maybe it's time to get over it?

Maybe it's time to assess the team heading into next season, rather than just keep crying about choking in the playoffs?

 

[zeke]

Leafs are out there trying to win "models" to appease Twitter users, bloggers, and the Athletic subscribers.

Montreal/Columbus OTOH went about trying to win the playoff/play-in series.

And succeeded.

Priorities, you know?

Would you rather have Montreal and Columbus rosters?

And do you think our front office's guiding principle is to appease bloggers?

 

[zeke]

The Leafs now have a deserved reputation as perennial losers. That's an objective fact, opinion has nothing to do with it. Feel free to show me "the math" that contradicts this.

Like the Avalanche.

 

[Racer88]

The further to the right the more the team improved, the further down the less money they added.

Thx Zeke. As you might have guessed I’m not much of a stats guy. Lol

 

[egd27]

Are you still in pain? Maybe it's time to get over it?

Maybe it's time to assess the team heading into next season, rather than just keep crying about choking in the playoffs?

I think you've confused me with one of the "but expected goals" gang.

 

[keonsbitterness]

Note that while the Canucks technically did even better while also "lowering" their caphit.....that's deceiving because all they really did was shuffle some caphit for this year out into a whole whack of longterm caphit the next bunch of years, thanks to all the buyouts.

Leafs didn't do any of that.

So an individual analytic can be both useful and useless based on homerism. Good to know.

 

[mikeyz]

I like Robertson as much as the next guy ad he seems to have a good shot, but I'm not sure he's ready for playoff hockey if he makes it that far (this year)

Robertson is the guy you're worried about being playoff ready???? Lol.