Re-tooling For One More Run With This Core

  • Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
Proof of what? That it was just one game for Kucherov? Read the article you posted... Or do you mean about Nylander? It was widely reported before game 1. He ate bad sushi and had food poisoning.

EDIT: I don't know why this article link is creating an embedded video, but it's titled "Maple Leafs' Nylander played through bad sushi in game 1" on Sportsnet.
you said kucherov was not sick or dealing with anything the article I posted proved you were wrong here is the quote please read!
"But this game wasn’t the same after Kucherov put his fingerprints all over it late in the second period. He had been dealing with flu-like symptoms since before Saturday’s Game 7"
 
You did notice Vasilevakiy played like junk for like 5 and a half games? He was good from the second half of game 6 and game 7. Until that point, Toronto had better goaltending.

Yes, Tampa got 2 goals and Leafs got 1 in the deciding game.

Tampa also won a game in overtime.

Pretty darn close series.

Vasilevskiy comes up huge, even when his team gets 49 shots against.
Goaltenders alone can and Vasilevskiy has alone won games for them.
Their last game is an example of Vasilevkiy winning the game.

Campbell can have good games as well, but I don't think he can cover-up like Vasilevskiy does.
 
Yes, Tampa got 2 goals and Leafs got 1 in the deciding game.

Tampa also won a game in overtime.

Pretty darn close series.

Vasilevskiy comes up huge, even when his team gets 49 shots against.
Goaltenders alone can and Vasilevskiy has alone won games for them.
Their last game is an example of Vasilevkiy winning the game.

Campbell can have good games as well, but I don't think he can cover-up like Vasilevskiy does.

Oh, he definitely showed up late and made a difference in games 6 and 7. That’s what made games 2 and 4 so frustrating. The series was there for the taking and we just didn’t take it.

Tampa Bay allocated a significant cap percentage to their goalie, so they should expect elite performance at that position.

Jack Campbell has gone head to head with Vasilevakiy and Price, and hasn’t been outplayed yet. That’s impressive. Hopefully, we can afford to keep him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bax
That’s right. I asked what they did specifically to make it look like Kucherov wasn’t trying. Such a difference.
There is a huge difference, as your initial question (asking what the Leafs did to make Kucherov "not try") - which I also responded to - was based on a false premise.
Excellent generic response that falls apart as soon as you know we gave up 3 PP goals in game 2, another in game 3, and another in game 4. I wouldn’t say that was very frustrating for them.
I mean, first off, nothing "falls apart", as the PK was but one small part of the response that you picked out while ignoring everything else. And second, that's painting a much more flattering picture than what actually happened. They got some fortunate bounces in game 2 (in 7 chances) despite the PP not looking very good, but the 1st unit got shut out in games 1 (including a 5 min PP) and game 3, and despite 8 opportunities in game 4, they only scored on the 5 on 3. They also allowed a shorthanded goal in each of the first 2 games. Kucherov, in pretty visible frustration, also took a pretty stupid penalty right after their 5 min PP failed.
 
Yes, Tampa got 2 goals and Leafs got 1 in the deciding game.

Tampa also won a game in overtime.

Pretty darn close series.

Vasilevskiy comes up huge, even when his team gets 49 shots against.
Goaltenders alone can and Vasilevskiy has alone won games for them.
Their last game is an example of Vasilevkiy winning the game.

Campbell can have good games as well, but I don't think he can cover-up like Vasilevskiy does.
It was there for the taking. Went into the 3rd of game 6 with a one goal lead and tampa scored the next 4/5 goals. Series over.
 
you said kucherov was not sick or dealing with anything the article I posted proved you were wrong here is the quote please read!
"But this game wasn’t the same after Kucherov put his fingerprints all over it late in the second period. He had been dealing with flu-like symptoms since before Saturday’s Game 7"
Like I said, 1 player felt a bit ill before 1 game. Kind of like a milder version of how Nylander had food poisoning for 1 game.
 
There is a huge difference, as your initial question (asking what the Leafs did to make Kucherov "not try") - which I also responded to - was based on a false premise.

So, you’re still going to dodge the question, right?

I mean, first off, nothing "falls apart", as the PK was but one small part of the response that you picked out while ignoring everything else. And second, that's painting a much more flattering picture than what actually happened. They got some fortunate bounces in game 2 (in 7 chances) despite the PP not looking very good, but the 1st unit got shut out in games 1 (including a 5 min PP) and game 3, and despite 8 opportunities in game 4, they only scored on the 5 on 3. They also allowed a shorthanded goal in each of the first 2 games. Kucherov, in pretty visible frustration, also took a pretty stupid penalty right after their 5 min PP failed.

The PK was the only point you brought up. Sure, Tampa looked frustrated in game 1. Then they scored 3 PP goals in game 2. Seems they got over it pretty quickly.

Yes, close.

Pretty even series.

Leafs just needed something from the bottom 6.

The bottom 6, outside Kampf was atrocious. That was the most glaring weakness, followed by soft defensive play.
 
So, you’re still going to dodge the question, right?
I have now answered this question twice, including mere minutes ago directly to you in post #1146.
The PK was the only point you brought up.
That is not true. Here it is again, for your convenience:
It's almost like our speed and hard forecheck made them force passes quicker, making them less crisp and accurate, and our positioning and good anticipatory abilities gave them little time and space in the offensive zone as well as bad angles to get good shots off, forcing them to pass too much.
Our PK also visibly frustrated them and got in their heads during the first couple games. Etc.
It's odd that you keep demanding others endlessly answer your questions that they've already answered when you're the one making a claim that you have brought zero evidence of or reasoning for.
Sure, Tampa looked frustrated in game 1. Then they scored 3 PP goals in game 2. Seems they got over it pretty quickly.
Well at least we've made progress and you'll now acknowledge game 1, but as I discuss here:
that's painting a much more flattering picture than what actually happened. They got some fortunate bounces in game 2 (in 7 chances) despite the PP not looking very good, but the 1st unit got shut out in games 1 (including a 5 min PP) and game 3, and despite 8 opportunities in game 4, they only scored on the 5 on 3. They also allowed a shorthanded goal in each of the first 2 games. Kucherov, in pretty visible frustration, also took a pretty stupid penalty right after their 5 min PP failed.
There was more frustration than just in game 1.
 
I have now answered this question twice, including mere minutes ago directly to you in post #1146.

That is not true. Here it is again, for your convenience:

That was just generic fluff, and has nothing to do with Kucherov specifically. He had clean looks where he just made weird decisions and poor shot attempts.

It's odd that you keep demanding others endlessly answer your questions that they've already answered when you're the one making a claim that you have brought zero evidence of or reasoning for.

The evidence was on the ice.

Well at least we've made progress and you'll now acknowledge game 1, but as I discuss here:

There was more frustration than just in game 1.

I'm sure this comes as a shock, but you're just plain wrong. I know, as the guy who predicted wins in the last 3 series, you're not used to it.
 
That was just generic fluff, and has nothing to do with Kucherov specifically.
It's not "generic fluff", and it applied to Kucherov as well. It's bad enough that you're demanding answers to your already answered questions instead of bringing any evidence of or reasoning for the claim that you're making, but now you're also dismissing the answer to the question you asked.
The evidence was on the ice.
There was no evidence on the ice of your claims. Your claim isn't even about what we saw on the ice - it's making claims about the reason for what we saw on the ice, which you wouldn't have information about, and isn't supported by anybody that would.
I'm sure this comes as a shock, but you're just plain wrong.
Everything I said there was accurate, and falling back on the ol' "yeah well you're just plain wrong" instead of actually addressing anything said suggests you know that.
 
It's not "generic fluff", and it applied to Kucherov as well. It's bad enough that you're demanding answers to your already answered questions instead of bringing any evidence of or reasoning for the claim that you're making, but now you're also dismissing the answer to the question you asked.

Throwing out some hockey-sounding cliches is generic fluff. You claimed Toronto did something specifically to Kucherov, then talk about a forecheck.

There was no evidence on the ice of your claims. Your claim isn't even about what we saw on the ice - it's making claims about the reason for what we saw on the ice, which you wouldn't have information about, and isn't supported by anybody that would.

I offered possible reasons for what I saw. He was either sick, injured, or not engaged for whatever reason. I don't know which of those it was.

Everything I said there was accurate, and falling back on the ol' "yeah well you're just plain wrong" instead of actually addressing anything said suggests you know that.

When you're wrong as often as you are, you should be used to people telling you that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Bomber0104
One more run? why is everything is Toronto have a deadline. Matthews doosday clock. Leafs contending window. one more run.

McDavid has been in EDM longer than Matthews has been in Toronto and No CUP. Stamkos and Hedman got 14 years to win. Ovie and Backstrom had 14 years to win.

Why is it always fire fire fire and trade trade trade??? get a clue people. Championships are not won over night.
 
Rumors from insiders:

-Kerfoot, Mrzek, Mikheyev, Kase, Blackwell, Campbell, Simmonds will not be back. Simmonds will be banished to press box or asked to retire.
Blackwell I’d like to keep around on a deal that can be fully buried. Guy could be a kerfoot replacement at 1/3 the cost. I get we want to get more north south and bigger, and I’m 100% on board, but Blackwell fit in nicely and played well as a bottom 6 energy guy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: showtime8
I think the point remains Vas has around a .970 sv% vs FLA and a .880 vs Toronto. That is not because TB was not trying its because the Leafs are/were a damn good team. This loss reminds me of when Edmonton lost to NYI, defending champs, Gretzs said that after that series loss they then realized what you had to do to win the cup. You sometimes have to have these sort of losses before you develop that championship DNA.
WHY ARE WE AGREEING ON THINGS NOW, ITS NOT SUPPOSED TO BE THIS WAY!!!!

The proper credit of losing in the first round again? You have created a desperately low bar for your GM/hero.

Kucherov wasn’t right. It was obvious. You can pretend otherwise if it makes you feel better.
Seems like you’re the one making up narratives and setting bars.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bluelines
I was talking about all those stuff in real time in the game threads. I could be wrong, but it’s not something I’m fabricating after the fact.
So you were diagnosing kuch’s illnesses in real time over the TV? Geez are you accepting new patients?
 
  • Like
Reactions: deprw
So you were diagnosing kuch’s illnesses in real time over the TV? Geez are you accepting new patients?

I’m not the one who said he was sick. I said he’s playing like he’s disinterested. After I was confronted with the “as if he doesn’t care” crowd, I said it wasn’t necessarily that he didn’t care, but he was playing that way - and he could possibly be I’ll or injured.
 
That was just generic fluff, and has nothing to do with Kucherov specifically. He had clean looks where he just made weird decisions and poor shot attempts.

The evidence was on the ice.

I'm sure this comes as a shock, but you're just plain wrong. I know, as the guy who predicted wins in the last 3 series, you're not used to it.
Symptoms sounded so clinically proven and serious, that I used your god given analysis method. Rewinded some cursed game tapes and started analyzing. After hours of tedious research work and painful soul searching of Nikita Kucherov I could isolate the disease! It is called "stamkonitis" it originates from Markham, Ontario, Toronto, but during modern days it catches it victim mostly in southern US region called Florida and more precise in Tampa Bay.

Symptoms are mediocre 5v5 play vs. adequate competition in risky environment. That crushes the hockey iq of the patient and makes his hockey skill mere passable. It can be treated by making the competition mediocre, so victim can think and shoot even while contaminated with "stamkonitis".

You said that we didn't do anything special for Kucherov. Actually we did when we matched our first line against theirs. Stamkos isn't as good 5v5 center as Matthews, which tilted the ice for Toronto. At the same time that we have defensively better 1st line in own end, it can also push the play to other end. Causing Kucherov getting lesser and fewer looks than he has used to. It makes this hot head frustrated, which you could see in most of the games. Also Kucherov have to respect our first line, which means that you can't bobble the puck in risk areas because player like Matthews don't need good look to score. It makes Stamkos line with Kucherov playing out of their regular playstyle, which took their also out of their regular comfort zone. It also helps that we matched them with Muzzin-Brodie pairing, which was our top pairing in the own end.

I know it's hard to comprehend, since when walking into a bar you can't yell at the door "I'm Toronto Maple Leafs fan! Where's all the ash trays?" and go then pour all of them on you, because our team is the worst. We actually have good 1st line, who can tilt the ice. You can only pour like 2/3 of the ash trays on you, because we still sucked enough to lose to that Kucherov with "stamkonitis", because their bottom6 was better and they had superior goaltender.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ULF_55

Ad

Ad