Mo Rielly - "Our Norris Trophy Candidate"

[LeafGrief]

I see you "got rid of" a few players there and inserted some replacements (though you still don't have a full roster). And this right after chiding others for talking about doing the exact same thing.

You're funny.

I know you're just fighting with Zeke for the principle at this point, but there's six million in cap space with 19 players on that roster. Enough wiggle room to make the point.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

If you're going to be making choices based on who can get back if a guy gets past them for a breakaway, it's Rielly or bust. Brodie and Dermott have wheels, but Rielly is in a class of his own for skating. I honestly cannot remember Dermott taking a slapshot, much less scoring on one. He's been in the NHL for almost 200 games, even if it's ES, he's had enough reps where we can evaluate his shot. He's got a wrister that's similar to Rielly's, aka not much of a direct threat. The only real reason to take Rielly off the PP imo is if you want the slapshot. Our PP runs through Marner anyways, the Dman is mostly just a bumper to pass it between Matthews and Marner if the lane is clogged. Rielly does that just fine. If our PP is going to start looking for a defenseman to jump into the slot, Rielly is the best at that, especially since he can get back in position if it goes the other way. If we're looking to have a defender hold the puck and QB more, Rielly is probably the best until Sandin is ready.

I would like to see a straight run with Rielly against Dermott.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I am funny, true.

But I didn't get rid of any core players, like you guys are so desperate to.

Here's what it looks like without getting rid of even Kerfoot:

I've never said I want to "get rid of" any core players.

There's that reading comprehension thing again.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I know you're just fighting with Zeke for the principle at this point, but there's six million in cap space with 19 players on that roster. Enough wiggle room to make the point.

What point is that? That people shouldn't speculate on how we might manage the cap, something that Dubas is obviously thinking about?

Just to be even more clear - I've never said that I'm worried about it. But it is understandably a subject for discussion so why give people grief for discussing it?

 

[Wafflewhipper]

If you're going to be making choices based on who can get back if a guy gets past them for a breakaway, it's Rielly or bust. Brodie and Dermott have wheels, but Rielly is in a class of his own for skating. I honestly cannot remember Dermott taking a slapshot, much less scoring on one. He's been in the NHL for almost 200 games, even if it's ES, he's had enough reps where we can evaluate his shot. He's got a wrister that's similar to Rielly's, aka not much of a direct threat. The only real reason to take Rielly off the PP imo is if you want the slapshot. Our PP runs through Marner anyways, the Dman is mostly just a bumper to pass it between Matthews and Marner if the lane is clogged. Rielly does that just fine. If our PP is going to start looking for a defenseman to jump into the slot, Rielly is the best at that, especially since he can get back in position if it goes the other way. If we're looking to have a defender hold the puck and QB more, Rielly is probably the best until Sandin is ready.

Rielly hasn’t scored on the powerplay. Our powerplay is stagnant and terrible with no execution. Whats left good to say about it. Teams pressure the points and there has been no adjustment. The drop pass is pathetic. The zone entries are weak and very uncontrolled.
It’s terrible. Our PK is a collapsed low pressure below average at best success. Special teams are average combined.something needs to give.

 

[LeafGrief]

I would like to see a straight run with Rielly against Dermott.

I think Rielly wins 98 times out of 100.

 

[zeke]

To understand my preference always, i always want tough defensive defensemen that do everything good and points are last consideration for me. I don’t prefer offensive dmen. It’s my last concern for defense.

The biggest weakness of our current defense corps is its lack of offensive skill after Rielly.

 

[zeke]

I've never said I want to "get rid of" any core players.

There's that reading comprehension thing again.

other, more honest posters have already admitted thats what this convo is about.

 

[wingman75]

I was critical of Rielly last night, but that was from an offensive perspective. He has been tremendous defensively recently. I wonder if they should give the PP1 time to someone else? Could Dermott do it? I know Brodie could.
Could still give him some PP2 time... I have to say I do roll my eyes whenever Mo shoots on the PP when you have Matthews, Marner, Nylander and JT on the ice. That should be last chance station if you ask me.

To those who say we have weakness in offensive production from our D, I generally do think they are all good outlet passers. Lets face it, with what we pay our forwards how many actual points do we need from the D? If they can get the puck out of our zone efficiently I am good with that. Now, in the offensive zone I do agree that lack of any kind of dangerous shot allows other teams to focus on the more dangerous players.

 

[LeafGrief]

What point is that? That people shouldn't speculate on how we might manage the cap, something that Dubas is obviously thinking about?

Just to be even more clear - I've never said that I'm worried about it. But it is understandably a subject for discussion so why give people grief for discussing it?

Honestly, I haven't read much of what you guys have been writing for the last two pages, but to me the point was something along the lines of, "We can afford to keep our core players and everyone who thinks we should trade Rielly is dumb". I might be wrong there, but that was my interpretation of the point. The point may not have been a direct response to your previous post, but without diving into a meta analysis of the state of the thread and your argument with @zeke, I felt it was a succinct enough that it was worth engaging on. Sorry, I'm not trying to call you out individually here or get involved in the fight.

Though I will say that anyone considering moving Rielly because of the cap implications does deserve the grief. It's worth considering if only to discard immediately as a preposterous idea.

 

[LeafGrief]

Rielly hasn’t scored on the powerplay. Our powerplay is stagnant and terrible with no execution. Whats left good to say about it. Teams pressure the points and there has been no adjustment. The drop pass is pathetic. The zone entries are weak and very uncontrolled.
It’s terrible. Our PK is a collapsed low pressure below average at best success. Special teams are average combined.something needs to give.

Yeah he's been bad at it. I don't mind the idea of trying someone else. But I don't think that player is Dermott, and I don't think our other defenders can actually bring new elements that Rielly doesn't already have. Muzzin has the shot, otherwise Rielly is what we've got.

Our PK is actually pretty good though, it's been Freddy holding that back. We do quite well at keeping shots to the outside and now that Campbell actually makes saves on deflections we should see some better results.

 

[LeafGrief]

other, more honest posters have already admitted thats what this convo is about.

To be fair to @Gary Nylund, it's kind of weird when you reply to him directly while making meta commentary posts about the thread.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

The biggest weakness of our current defense corps is its lack of offensive skill after Rielly.

I just posted that Muzzin and Holl have as many even strength points as Rielly. They are our shut down guys. After Muzzy/Holl and Rielly.
Rielly is on the powerplay not them guys. They match him even strength and start much more in the defensive zone. That’s the kind of defense i like.
Great that Rielly is equal to them offensively at even strength.

 

[zeke]

I just posted that Muzzin and Holl have as many even strength points as Rielly. They are our shut down guys. After Muzzy/Holl and Rielly.
Rielly is on the powerplay not them guys. They match him even strength and start much more in the defensive zone. That’s the kind of defense i like.
Great that Rielly is equal to them offensively at even strength.

what you don't realize is that this is because Muzzin and Holl are producing very well at even strength, not because rielly is producing poorly.


Even Strength

Hedman 14pts
Burns 14pts
Rielly 14pts
Holl 14pts
Hughes 14pts
Petry 14pts
Muzzin 13pts
Jones 13pts
Hamilton 12pts
Krug 12pts

 

[Dekes For Days]

I've never said I want to "get rid of" any core players.

Lol, that's completely incorrect. Even aside from this thread, you should take a look at your posts through pretty much all last offseason.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

what you don't realize is that this is because Muzzin and Holl are producing very well at even strength, not because rielly is producing poorly.


Even Strength

Hedman 14pts
Burns 14pts
Rielly 14pts
Holl 14pts
Hughes 14pts
Petry 14pts
Muzzin 13pts
Jones 13pts
Hamilton 12pts
Krug 12pts

I responded because you said our defense biggest weakness after Rielly is offense
I understand they are producing ok. I’ll ask this. If we ran 4 defensemen on our two PP units, would Rielly’s points even be that far ahead. I don’t think so. Not with this forward groups scoring. It’s not all Rielly for me. I think its under utilized

 

[Gary Nylund]

Honestly, I haven't read much of what you guys have been writing for the last two pages, but to me the point was something along the lines of, "We can afford to keep our core players and everyone who thinks we should trade Rielly is dumb". I might be wrong there, but that was my interpretation of the point. The point may not have been a direct response to your previous post, but without diving into a meta analysis of the state of the thread and your argument with @zeke, I felt it was a succinct enough that it was worth engaging on. Sorry, I'm not trying to call you out individually here or get involved in the fight.

Though I will say that anyone considering moving Rielly because of the cap implications does deserve the grief. It's worth considering if only to discard immediately as a preposterous idea.

I don't think anyone wants "get rid of" anyone, much less Morgan Rielly. As for moving him because of cap implications, that's not necessarily so dumb depending on circumstances. What if his agent wants dollars/term that don't make sense for us, then what? If I'm Shanahan and Dubas says to me "I have an idea that I think is best for the team going forward and it involves moving Rielly", I wouldn't say no, forget it, Rielly must be part of any plan. I would say wow OK, let's hear your idea.

I would move anyone on the team if I thought it made the team better, period. That doesn't mean I want to get rid of anyone, much less Rielly who is one of my favourite players.

 

[LeafGrief]

I don't think anyone wants "get rid of" anyone, much less Morgan Rielly. As for moving him because of cap implications, that's not necessarily so dumb depending on circumstances. What if his agent wants dollars/term that don't make sense for us, then what? If I'm Shanahan and Dubas says to me "I have an idea that I think is best for the team going forward and it involves moving Rielly", I wouldn't say no, forget it, Rielly must be part of any plan. I would say wow OK, let's hear your idea.

I would move anyone on the team if I thought it made the team better, period. That doesn't mean I want to get rid of anyone, much less Rielly who is one of my favourite players.

I think there are quite a few people over the last few pages who explicitly want to get rid of Rielly. I've certainly seen a bunch. I understand your nuance and I think there's room for discussion there, but there are people who want to "get rid" of him. This one got 7 likes so far:

If the Leafs start Sandin and Lilly next season and trade Rielly in the off-season, it wouldn't hurt my feelings whatsoever.

There is room for nuance and those posters might not be trying to run Rielly out of town at all costs, but I disagree with your premise that "No one wants to get rid of" players or Rielly. I've had explicit conversations about it on Reddit. It's practically the only thing that some people know how to do tbh.

 

[Mr Hockey]

I would like to see a straight run with Rielly against Dermott.

I would say Rielly cruised right by him at the 3/4 mark

 

[Wafflewhipper]

I would say Rielly cruised right by him at the 3/4 mark

Well you can say that but you don’t know i would say I’d like to see it ha

 

[Gary Nylund]

I think there are quite a few people over the last few pages who explicitly want to get rid of Rielly. I've certainly seen a bunch. I understand your nuance and I think there's room for discussion there, but there are people who want to "get rid" of him. This one got 7 likes so far:

There is room for nuance and those posters might not be trying to run Rielly out of town at all costs, but I disagree with your premise that "No one wants to get rid of" players or Rielly. I've had explicit conversations about it on Reddit. It's practically the only thing that some people know how to do tbh.

That quote was talking about trading, not getting rid of, there's a big difference. Get rid of - to me that means just ... get rid of him, don't care about getting any return, just get rid of the guy. That applied to Clarkson a while back, for many it applies to Andersen today but I don't think anyone wants to get rid of Rielly.

 

[LeafGrief]

That quote was talking about trading, not getting rid of, there's a big difference. Get rid of - to me that means just ... get rid of him, don't care about getting any return, just get rid of the guy. That applied to Clarkson a while back, for many it applies to Andersen today but I don't think anyone wants to get rid of Rielly.

I see what you're saying with regards to player management, but I think that's a pretty narrow view semantically which is needlessly creating an argument where there is none. I don't see that big of a difference between "get rid of" and "trade the guy". That's just how language works, I suppose. It's probably true that nobody wants to chuck Rielly in the dumpster, thankfully.

Ah well, enough boring ass posts about semantics and meta-thread analysis. Brad Marchand is a rat and the Habs suck. Matthews for Hart.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I see what you're saying with regards to player management, but I think that's a pretty narrow view semantically which is needlessly creating an argument where there is none. I don't see that big of a difference between "get rid of" and "trade the guy". That's just how language works, I suppose. It's probably true that nobody wants to chuck Rielly in the dumpster, thankfully.

Ah well, enough boring ass posts about semantics and meta-thread analysis. Brad Marchand is a rat and the Habs suck. Matthews for Hart.

Amen brother to all of that!

 

[Mr Hockey]

Well you can say that but you don’t know i would say I’d like to see it ha

half ice, dermott wins, full ice Rielly wins

 

[hockeyes]

It's hard to imagine a cup winner with Mo as the number one guy. Would love to be wrong.