Confirmed with Link: Nick Ritchie to Toronto (2x2.5M AAV)

[Gary Nylund]

Except the depth produced in the playoffs, like they had all season, so that's wrong.

Except if we had better depth, they might have produced more.

 

[zeke]

Except if we had better depth, they might have produced more.

Except that our depth produced as well as most any team's, regular season and playoffs.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Except that our depth produced as well as most any team's, regular season and playoffs.

And if we had better depth, they might have produced even more.

 

[zeke]

And if we had better depth, they might have produced even more.

And yet, we had very good depth production, regular season and playoffs.

 

[Mad hatter]

If they can find a way to motivate him……the book on him is that he is unmotivated…….

I’ve worked with his uncle for a few years and I hear he’s going to be very motivated. This is where he’s always wanted to be and hopefully this is where he puts it all together.

 

[usernamezrhardtodo]

I'll take that. Especially if he can eliminate the bad penalties from his game.

If you look at his stats from the Ducks years compared to Boston...he cut his PM's in half pretty much. I am sure he can cut them down...but if he takes penalties we get PP's as well...ya know...to even it up fairly like they do in the NHL. So, it's not that big a deal if he does take more than average.

 

[Stephen]

I’ve worked with his uncle for a few years and I hear he’s going to be very motivated. This is where he’s always wanted to be and hopefully this is where he puts it all together.

Toronto can be a great opportunity for anyone in the right mindset to rep that blue collar hero mentality, which Nick Ritchie has the tools for. Luckily we aren't drafting him as a top 10 pick to kick off a rebuild but this is a good flyer. Look at the way Hyman parlayed his Toronto fame into such a massive deal. If he had been a New York Islander I don't think he gets that money.

 

[Stephen]

And yet, we had very good depth production, regular season and playoffs.

Teams that make deep runs into the playoffs usually benefit from some combination of their top six buying in to do bottom six chores, and bottom six guys who can excel at their chores jumping up to fill some scoring roles. By the end of the playoffs, every line looks like every other line.

The Leafs bottom six started picking up some of the scoring slack during the Montreal series, particularly in the Game 5 and 6 comebacks. But they also didn't do enough of the ugly crash and bang, put bruises on the Canadiens defensemen, crowd the Montreal crease and harass Price and strongly discourage Montreal from playing tough vs our stars kind of work.

That's why we see a revolving cast with guys like Ritchie and Bunting come in to play a heavy and pest kind of role with Kampf in for defensive disruption, etc. It's clearly designed to reproduce some of the scoring but also to give us a more rambunctious play style which is where this team always needed to go.

 

[Gary Nylund]

And yet, we had very good depth production, regular season and playoffs.

Only three of our "depth" forwards had more than one point in the playoffs. Anyhow it seems like you're missing the point, you keep repeating that the depth had good production but that has nothing to do with the fact that if our depth was better, then they'd produce more. It's a simple concept that would be true no matter how they produced and there's always room for improvement.

I’ve worked with his uncle for a few years and I hear he’s going to be very motivated. This is where he’s always wanted to be and hopefully this is where he puts it all together.

I'm skeptical. If the fact that he hasn't been where he wanted to be is an excuse for not being motivated then it's a really poor excuse IMO. Sounds like a lack of character to me and if doesn't improve he can always come up with some other excuse.

I hope I'm wrong of course, hopefully he's awesome for us, we'll see.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Teams that make deep runs into the playoffs usually benefit from some combination of their top six buying in to do bottom six chores, and bottom six guys who can excel at their chores jumping up to fill some scoring roles. By the end of the playoffs, every line looks like every other line.

The Leafs bottom six started picking up some of the scoring slack during the Montreal series, particularly in the Game 5 and 6 comebacks. But they also didn't do enough of the ugly crash and bang, put bruises on the Canadiens defensemen, crowd the Montreal crease and harass Price and strongly discourage Montreal from playing tough vs our stars kind of work.

That's why we see a revolving cast with guys like Ritchie and Bunting come in to play a heavy and pest kind of role with Kampf in for defensive disruption, etc. It's clearly designed to reproduce some of the scoring but also to give us a more rambunctious play style which is where this team always needed to go.

Yup, good point. Looking at point totals and saying "they produced" comes nowhere close to telling the whole story.

 

[usernamezrhardtodo]

Teams that make deep runs into the playoffs usually benefit from some combination of their top six buying in to do bottom six chores, and bottom six guys who can excel at their chores jumping up to fill some scoring roles. By the end of the playoffs, every line looks like every other line.

The Leafs bottom six started picking up some of the scoring slack during the Montreal series, particularly in the Game 5 and 6 comebacks. But they also didn't do enough of the ugly crash and bang, put bruises on the Canadiens defensemen, crowd the Montreal crease and harass Price and strongly discourage Montreal from playing tough vs our stars kind of work.

That's why we see a revolving cast with guys like Ritchie and Bunting come in to play a heavy and pest kind of role with Kampf in for defensive disruption, etc. It's clearly designed to reproduce some of the scoring but also to give us a more rambunctious play style which is where this team always needed to go.

I really like what Dubas has done with these signings because they are specific in nature. We aren't getting a Boyd or Vesey that is a one trick pony if they don't do their thing. Having a Bunting that can't score is not good...but he will be able to muck around for whatever line he is on. Same with Ritchie and Kampf....they are not just scorers per se ...so they can contribute in other ways...plus...they are not the usual smaller than average guys that Dubas fawns over like Malgin and Petan.

I really think the last series made a light go on in his head and he realized that you need all sorts of players to win...not just scorers and xGF super stars.

 

[koyvoo]

Personally I can't wait to go back to the no-star leafs I watched for the previous 30yrs.

30?

The Burns and Quinn era teams crap all of this group of gutless fakers.

But I asked you a question, which you didn’t answer, so it leaves me to assume that what we are now is acceptable, and makes you content as a fan.

As to my original question of - if 5 years isn’t enough, how many would be? - I still think you’ll change your tune if by year 7-8! we still have “star” players who don’t come anywhere near producing to their standards and abilities when games matter, and when opponents are bringing max effort every shift, every night.

Some people believe we are something we are not. The illustration below leaves no doubt as to our actual place in the league.


No hypotheticals. This is us when hockey matters.

 

[kb]

Forward Production Playoffs

Matthews/Marner/Tavares: 1gls
Nylander/Hyman/Foligno: 6gls
Kerfoot/Galchenyuk/Mikheyev: 2gls
Spezza/Thornton/Simmonds: 4gls
Engvall/Brooks/Nash: 0gls

Defense: 5gls

There's a problem there, but it absolutely wasn't "depth production".

So let me get this straight.

The first line, which was out for 40% of the forward ice time, only accounted for 8% of the forward goals, yet the problem is the secondary scoring, which produced 92% of the forward goals playing only 60% of the minutes?

I'm no math genius, but that's pretty easy for anyone who isn't deluding themselves or gaslighting others to see where the problem was.

Oh, and 'lacking toughness' and 'shitty D' were the other so-called problems.

A motivated Ritchie will be a real asset to the team. He has dimensions that the team was missing to a degree.

 

[zeke]

30?

The Burns and Quinn era teams crap all of this group of gutless fakers.

Both those teams had one single star caliber player and were always just gritty underdogs to the true elite teams.

But I asked you a question, which you didn’t answer, so it leaves me to assume that what we are now is acceptable, and makes you content as a fan.

As to my original question of - if 5 years isn’t enough, how many would be? - I still think you’ll change your tune if by year 7-8! we still have “star” players who don’t come anywhere near producing to their standards and abilities when games matter, and when opponents are bringing max effort every shift, every night.

Some people believe we are something we are not. The illustration below leaves no doubt as to our actual place in the league.


No hypotheticals. This is us when hockey matters.

Think about this way - I've waited literally decades for us to collect this type of prime super elite talent together.

I am in no hurry whatsoever to see them go. And definitely not in their young primes. It is much, much harder to obtain super elite talent than you think, believe me.

 

[Stephen]

Both those teams had one single star caliber player and were always just gritty underdogs to the true elite teams.



Think about this way - I've waited literally decades for us to collect this type of prime super elite talent together.

I am in no hurry whatsoever to see them go. And definitely not in their young primes. It is much, much harder to obtain super elite talent than you think, believe me.

The Leafs were always under-talented under the Fletcher/Burns and Quinn eras when they were competitive teams, so the need to collect young high end skill is something this era has done better than previous regimes at. But you also need to balance the need to collect talent with real cohesive team building which this regime has struggled at more than those eras. And if we ever had to move on from a Core 4 piece it would only be done so the team is stronger and more well rounded, like when Detroit moved Primeau and Coffey for Brendan Shanahan. Having talent is nice, we also don't want to end up like Spezza, Alfredsson, Healtey. Ritchie will likely fill a role like a McCarty if he works out.

 

[nuck]

Only three of our "depth" forwards had more than one point in the playoffs. Anyhow it seems like you're missing the point, you keep repeating that the depth had good production but that has nothing to do with the fact that if our depth was better, then they'd produce more. It's a simple concept that would be true no matter how they produced and there's always room for improvement.



I'm skeptical. If the fact that he hasn't been where he wanted to be is an excuse for not being motivated then it's a really poor excuse IMO. Sounds like a lack of character to me and if doesn't improve he can always come up with some other excuse.

I hope I'm wrong of course, hopefully he's awesome for us, we'll see.

I suspect at age 25 what you see is what you get with Ritchie. With a coach who inspires him and uses him to his maximum potential maybe something could happen but we have no evidence that Keefe is making his NHL players better except for M & M who played more minutes than ever so not sure how much credit you can give the coach for that. Maybe Hyman but nothing about Ritchie is similar to Zach. I will commit to camp Keefe if he can get much more out of Nick but his weaknesses might be so fundamental to his game that they can't be erased.

A hundred times we have heard about player x who would be so much more valuable if he would just shoot a bit more rather than always pass, or the huge guys that only had to finish a couple more checks a game and they would have a new impact, but the change doesn't happen. How hard was it for Freddy Gauthier to finish ONE check every period to stay in the NHL? Apparently it was impossible and there are a ton more like him. I think Ritchie will stay as a doughy guy who is happy to survive on basically his god given skills, without any drive to change or belie3f that he can improve- the anti Zach I guess. Not the effective aggressor to be a Tom Wilson so players know if you don't piss him off the volcano stays silent. I would like to see if a playmaker like Marner would have some chemistry though.

 

[koyvoo]

@zeke

Yes, I like having a Rocket winner too. And another top 5 scorer, arguably the best playmaker in the league on talent.

I’m 42 years old. Having some degree of success in the playoffs felt much, much better, to me anyhow.

Mitch Marner and Auston Matthews are more talented than Darcy Tucker (as a random example, fist guy came to my head).

Do the love they leafs more, or as much as Darcy Tucker did? Those guys played playoff games like theie mothers lives were on the line. Imagine Matthews with that sort of intensity and drive (when hockey matters).

The Ottawa Senators were more flashy and skilled back then. They used to fly. We beat them 4 straight playoff series on row. It was glorious. Got to the point where you knew, regardless of regular season standings, we were gonna eat them. The league knew too. It became that era of Sens reputation, and ultimately, their legacy.

Back then, you would’ve rather been them than us, because they had a note skilled and flashy lineup?

 

[Gary Nylund]

Both those teams had one single star caliber player and were always just gritty underdogs to the true elite teams.

Think about this way - I've waited literally decades for us to collect this type of prime super elite talent together.

I am in no hurry whatsoever to see them go. And definitely not in their young primes. It is much, much harder to obtain super elite talent than you think, believe me.

You didn't answer the question (if 5 years isn’t enough, how many would be?) so I guess we can assume that no amount of failure will change anything, no matter how high the failures pile up, as long as we have "prime super elite talent", you wouldn't change a thing.

I'm pretty sure nobody has said that it's easy to obtain super elite talent so it seems like you're arguing with ghosts here. Though if they keep losing, you might want to reconsider how important talent is as it seems clear that talent alone isn't enough to win.

I suspect at age 25 what you see is what you get with Ritchie. With a coach who inspires him and uses him to his maximum potential maybe something could happen but we have no evidence that Keefe is making his NHL players better except for M & M who played more minutes than ever so not sure how much credit you can give the coach for that. Maybe Hyman but nothing about Ritchie is similar to Zach. I will commit to camp Keefe if he can get much more out of Nick but his weaknesses might be so fundamental to his game that they can't be erased.

A hundred times we have heard about player x who would be so much more valuable if he would just shoot a bit more rather than always pass, or the huge guys that only had to finish a couple more checks a game and they would have a new impact, but the change doesn't happen. How hard was it for Freddy Gauthier to finish ONE check every period to stay in the NHL? Apparently it was impossible and there are a ton more like him. I think Ritchie will stay as a doughy guy who is happy to survive on basically his god given skills, without any drive to change or belie3f that he can improve- the anti Zach I guess. Not the effective aggressor to be a Tom Wilson so players know if you don't piss him off the volcano stays silent. I would like to see if a playmaker like Marner would have some chemistry though.

I suspect you're right. This "now he's where he wants to be so he's motivated so he'll be great" just sounds like BS to me. He hasn't been motivated all these years, really?

 

[Gary Nylund]

@zeke

Yes, I like having a Rocket winner too. And another top 5 scorer, arguably the best playmaker in the league on talent.

I’m 42 years old. Having some degree of success in the playoffs felt much, much better, to me anyhow.

Mitch Marner and Auston Matthews are more talented than Darcy Tucker (as a random example, fist guy came to my head).

Do the love they leafs more, or as much as Darcy Tucker did? Those guys played playoff games like theie mothers lives were on the line. Imagine Matthews with that sort of intensity and drive (when hockey matters).

The Ottawa Senators were more flashy and skilled back then. They used to fly. We beat them 4 straight playoff series on row. It was glorious. Got to the point where you knew, regardless of regular season standings, we were gonna eat them. The league knew too. It became that era of Sens reputation, and ultimately, their legacy.

Back then, you would’ve rather been them than us, because they had a note skilled and flashy lineup?

Great post! You never know what'll happen and maybe these guys will "figure it out" though I always thought that phrase was rather odd - what's to figure out, come to play every night and play your ass off, it's not rocket science. But anyway, we're certainly trending in that direction, good regular season, stacked with talent but everyone knows they're going to lose in the playoffs for the simple reason that they always do. Especially in elimination games, we're 0-7 over the last 4 years and it's even worse than it sounds, it's like we're not even competing in most of those games.

 

[Racer88]

Except the depth produced in the playoffs, like they had all season, so that's wrong.

A couple of them produced but many did not. Maybe if we had some more decent quality depth they could have got us over the hump.
I am in no way saying that it is all the depths fault. You can’t expect much from so many bargain basement players. My point is if the wealth was spread around a little more evenly it wouldn’t have been so devastating when 1 got injured and the other 2 went dark

 

[Racer88]

Great post! You never know what'll happen and maybe these guys will "figure it out" though I always thought that phrase was rather odd - what's to figure out, come to play every night and play your ass off, it's not rocket science. But anyway, we're certainly trending in that direction, good regular season, stacked with talent but everyone knows they're going to lose in the playoffs for the simple reason that they always do. Especially in elimination games, we're 0-7 over the last 4 years and it's even worse than it sounds, it's like we're not even competing in most of those games.

You would expect that players being paid 11 million per year would already have it “figured out” otherwise why are they paying them top contracts in the league

 

[Azail]

Except if we had better depth, they might have produced more.

Absolutely, however when your 60g scorer, and 95pt man go dry in the most important time of the season, it is tough to blame anyone else.

Imagine if Mack and Rantanen go dry for a whole playoff series. Or Kuch or Point do. They probably also don't win their series.

I don't disagree that more depth is good, but I am pretty sure our depth players scored at a very similar pace to the defending champs depth players. Really it was our star players that didn't come through. Obviously that is a different concern...

 

[Racer88]

I’ve worked with his uncle for a few years and I hear he’s going to be very motivated. This is where he’s always wanted to be and hopefully this is where he puts it all together.

That would be awesome and a great boost to our hopes

 

[Gary Nylund]

A couple of them produced but many did not. Maybe if we had some more decent quality depth they could have got us over the hump.
I am in no way saying that it is all the depths fault. You can’t expect much from so many bargain basement players. My point is if the wealth was spread around a little more evenly it wouldn’t have been so devastating when 1 got injured and the other 2 went dark

Indeed. We only had 6 forwards who had more than one point in the 7 playoffs games, that doesn't exactly scream "balanced offence" to me.

 

[Racer88]

Being as this thread is about Richie I sure hope that Keefe can keep him more motivated then he could Matthews and Marner