Confirmed with Link: Scott Laughton (50% Retention), 2025 4th, 2027 6th to the Leafs for Nikita Grebenkin, conditional 2027 1st

[Clark4Ever]

The true play is to sit Matthews out all year and tank for a high pick. Then sign McJesus

View attachment 1042623

Only problem is that our record without Matthews over the years would still guarantee us a playoff spot.

 

[BlueForever75]

Except he wasn't effective in the system, not many people were, but he was especially bad.

He has another season to redeem himself, but nothing points to him doing that.

When the highlight of your season is a blocked shot, you know it is bad.

Laughton and the 4th line was the only line that was effective with the Berube system all of this years playoffs. Controlled the play most times and won the forecheck and puck board battles more then any other line.

Yes maybe it took time but against Ottawa and Florida Laughton's line controlled play as Berube wanted. Forget the stats. The play of the line was near perfect.

 

[Stephen]

I've watched lots of bad Leaf hockey - back to the early 80's... I don't know that we ever would have trudged out a more hopeless 2nd line center than Scott Laughton.

Slow, not big, can't shoot and has limited vision. This season was pretty horrid to watch night in and night out but that would take things to a new level.

Laughton is basically like a random Leaf from the 2008-2012 era teams at the bottom of the rebuild curve. That makes sense because that’s exactly what Philadelphia is today and he was a player that fit in on a bottom feeder. I mean you might get a playoff stud in Laughton but chances are he’s just a guy from a bad team.

 

[Stephen]

Laughton and the 4th line was the only line that was effective with the Berube system all of this years playoffs. Controlled the play most times and won the forecheck and puck board battles more then any other line.

Yes maybe it took time but against Ottawa and Florida Laughton's line controlled play as Berube wanted. Forget the stats. The play of the line was near perfect.

That a somewhat dubious concept. A 4th line is actually allowed to score playoff goals, not just generate spirited non event minutes.

 

[leafs in five]

he can snap a pass better than the other 4th liners we have. on the other hand I hate the way he skates, those kind of shuffly short strides with busy arms. I wish he would have got a shot off on the breakaway he had in game 7

 

[Maple Leaf]

he can snap a pass better than the other 4th liners we have. on the other hand I hate the way he skates, those kind of shuffly short strides with busy arms. I wish he would have got a shot off on the breakaway he had in game 7

Skate slow and stone hand

 

[notbias]

Laughton and the 4th line was the only line that was effective with the Berube system all of this years playoffs. Controlled the play most times and won the forecheck and puck board battles more then any other line.

Yes maybe it took time but against Ottawa and Florida Laughton's line controlled play as Berube wanted. Forget the stats. The play of the line was near perfect.

If by effective you mean ineffective, I agree.

Just because you want them to be effective, it doesn't mean they were.

Whatever you think you viewed, you are wrong.

And "trust me, I watched it" is a terrible argument.

"Forget the stats. The play of the line was near perfect." aka, yes, they played terribly and everything points to it, but just trust me.

The perfect line with the least perfect stats.

 

[LaPlante94]

If by effective you mean ineffective, I agree.

Just because you want them to be effective, it doesn't mean they were.

Whatever you think you viewed, you are wrong.

And "trust me, I watched it" is a terrible argument.

"Forget the stats. The play of the line was near perfect." aka, yes, they played terribly and everything points to it, but just trust me.

View attachment 1042743

View attachment 1042744

The perfect line with the least perfect stats.

I got a question. Why are those elite talents at the top of these charts spending almost 45% of their shifts in the defensive zone in the playoffs and just 38% in the offensive zone when other elite talent will be the complete opposite? Before you go on and try and blame coaching and systems this was pretty much the same under Keefe as well, especially in the playoffs.

 

[notbias]

I got a question. Why are those elite talents at the top of these charts spending almost 45% of their shifts in the defensive zone in the playoffs and just 38% in the offensive zone when other elite talent will be the complete opposite? Before you go on and try and blame coaching and systems this was pretty much the same under Keefe as well, especially in the playoffs.

I will answer it with another question.

Does it matter if someone is spending more time in the defensive zone if they are outscoring the opponent and outchancing them?

Also, can you show me the numbers of which lines spend the majority of their time where?

 

[Confucius]

Only problem is that our record without Matthews over the years would still guarantee us a playoff spot.

Our luck it would end up being 6th overall since our 1st is only top 5 protected. Lol

 

[LaPlante94]

I will answer it with another question.

Does it matter if someone is spending more time in the defensive zone if they are outscoring the opponent and outchancing them?

Also, can you show me the numbers of which lines spend the majority of their time where?

It's on NHL Edge website. Go to skaters pick Toronto and pick the player you want to look at.

I think it's very important, especially when these stats that say they are out chancing opponents have proven to be flawed and inconsistent. This outscoring opponents I doubt is very high when they are getting almost 50% of their production on the PP almost every playoffs. Probably explains why they don't do much scoring in games 4-7 since that's usually when our PP goes to shit. Also, maybe if our elite talent spent 45% of their even strength ice time in the offensive zone it'd help out the depth scoring a bit being able to go up against some tired players. Maybe, maybe not.

NHL EDGE Puck and Player Tracking Statistics - Skaters

NHL EDGE Puck and Player Tracking Statistics for skaters including skating speed, skating distance, shot speed, shot location, and zone time.

edge.nhl.com

If that link works then that's the NHL Edge site.

 

[notbias]

It's on NHL Edge website. Go to skaters pick Toronto and pick the player you want to look at.

I think it's very important, especially when these stats that say they are out chancing opponents have proven to be flawed and inconsistent. This outscoring opponents I doubt is very high when they are getting almost 50% of their production on the PP almost every playoffs. Probably explains why they don't do much scoring in games 4-7 since that's usually when our PP goes to shit. Also, maybe if our elite talent spent 45% of their even strength ice time in the offensive zone it'd help out the depth scoring a bit being able to go up against some tired players. Maybe, maybe not.

NHL EDGE Puck and Player Tracking Statistics - Skaters

NHL EDGE Puck and Player Tracking Statistics for skaters including skating speed, skating distance, shot speed, shot location, and zone time.

edge.nhl.com

If that link works then that's the NHL Edge site.

This shows per player... not lines.

Goals for and goals against, it is very simple, less flawed than zone time.

Some lines helped the team win (the lines you are trying to badmouth) and some lines didn't (like the Laughton line).

Is zone time more important or goals for and against? Which helps to win games?

Also, zone starts probably has something to do with zone time, I'll be curious to see if that is true though.

I do think zone time has a lot to do with coaching too, it was better under Keefe.

It also has a lot to do with opponents.

 

[LaPlante94]

This shows per player... not lines.

Goals for and goals against, it is very simple, less flawed than zone time.

Some lines helped the team win (the lines you are trying to badmouth) and some lines didn't (like the Laughton line).

Is zone time more important or goals for and against? Which helps to win games?

Also, zone starts probably has something to do with zone time, I'll be curious to see if that is true though.

I do think zone time has a lot to do with coaching too, it was better under Keefe.

It also has a lot to do with opponents.

You can look at all the linemates if that makes you happy. All 3 of them are the same because they were never broken up.

Y'all say +/- is a useless and flawed stat and this is the same thing. Guy can hop on the ice and we score and he gets credit for a GF.

When your guys that make 11+ mil are all playing in the defensive zone more than they are in the offensive zone you probably aren't gonna win which is always the case with this core in the playoffs.

Obviously goals help you win games but your best players dominating offensive zone time is gonna help you win more as well.

The Laughton line started 80% of their shifts in the D zone and spent 1% less in the offensive zone than our top line who started just under 50% in the d zone. Controlling play in the offensive zone would get everyone more offensive zone starts too which they don't do in the playoffs. Even when they were getting closer to 70% of the offensive zone starts it was the same thing.

It wasn't really better under Keefe. They had 1 good year in 2021/22 playoffs and it's been getting worse since.

Having that much elite talent it shouldn't matter who the opponent is. They should be able to dominate their ice time regardless because it's what they get paid to do.

 

[notbias]

You can look at all the linemates if that makes you happy. All 3 of them are the same because they were never broken up.

Y'all say +/- is a useless and flawed stat and this is the same thing. Guy can hop on the ice and we score and he gets credit for a GF.

These are goals for and against for lines, not individuals, it is much more likely it is a shift that they scored on if they are all on.

But sure, zone time is a great metric...

When your guys that make 11+ mil are all playing in the defensive zone more than they are in the offensive zone you probably aren't gonna win which is always the case with this core in the playoffs.

They are basically even in offensive zone time and defensive zone time........

Obviously goals help you win games but your best players dominating offensive zone time is gonna help you win more as well.

So something like xGF is a good metric, it is chances from specific places on the ice, and seems like a better metric than zone time.

The Laughton line started 80% of their shifts in the D zone and spent 1% less in the offensive zone than our top line who started just under 50% in the d zone. Controlling play in the offensive zone would get everyone more offensive zone starts too which they don't do in the playoffs. Even when they were getting closer to 70% of the offensive zone starts it was the same thing.

No they didn't... The line had over 60% shifts on the fly........

It wasn't really better under Keefe. They had 1 good year in 2021/22 playoffs and it's been getting worse since.

Every season was better, but yes, some were only slightly better.

Having that much elite talent it shouldn't matter who the opponent is. They should be able to dominate their ice time regardless because it's what they get paid to do.

The stats said they outplayed the opposition more than they didn't, this random stat of zone time is what you are hanging onto.

 

[LaPlante94]

These are goals for and against for lines, not individuals, it is much more likely it is a shift that they scored on if they are all on.

But sure, zone time is a great metric...



They are basically even in offensive zone time and defensive zone time........



So something like xGF is a good metric, it is chances from specific places on the ice, and seems like a better metric than zone time.



No they didn't... The line had over 60% shifts on the fly........



Every season was better, but yes, some were only slightly better.



The stats said they outplayed the opposition more than they didn't, this random stat of zone time is what you are hanging onto.

It is a great metric. When your highest paid elite players are playing more in the defensive zone unlike other elite talent it says a lot.

Top heavy team where those top players are even in offensive and defensive zone time. Something to celebrate I guess.

xGF has proven to be flawed at times and to not be trusted 100%.

Majority of lines shifts start on the fly. Zone starts is when they are starting their shift off a faceoff in either the offensive or defensive zone and the Laughton line started 80% of theirs in the D zone. It's the same every year for our 4th line or defensive line and then people complain why they don't score more.

Not very good.
21/22 he starts 74% ozone starts 5v5 and his o zone time is 44% and 37% d zone.
22/23 he starts 65% and his o zone time is 40% and 41% in d zone
23/24 63% and his o zone time is 40.7% and d zone time 40.5

Not good for an elite talent and getting that high of o zone starts at 5v5.

It's a stat that not just shows but proves what everyone says about Marner that you and others try and deny. When the games get tougher and tighter he doesn't know what to do.

 

[notbias]

It is a great metric. When your highest paid elite players are playing more in the defensive zone unlike other elite talent it says a lot.

Top heavy team where those top players are even in offensive and defensive zone time. Something to celebrate I guess.

xGF has proven to be flawed at times and to not be trusted 100%.

Majority of lines shifts start on the fly. Zone starts is when they are starting their shift off a faceoff in either the offensive or defensive zone and the Laughton line started 80% of theirs in the D zone. It's the same every year for our 4th line or defensive line and then people complain why they don't score more.

Not very good.
21/22 he starts 74% ozone starts 5v5 and his o zone time is 44% and 37% d zone.
22/23 he starts 65% and his o zone time is 40% and 41% in d zone
23/24 63% and his o zone time is 40.7% and d zone time 40.5

Not good for an elite talent and getting that high of o zone starts at 5v5.

It's a stat that not just shows but proves what everyone says about Marner that you and others try and deny. When the games get tougher and tighter he doesn't know what to do.

Just so I understand, counting chances is flawed, and counting goals is flawed, but how long someone can be in a specific zone is a good metric.

This is your argument, right?

 

[LaPlante94]

Just so I understand, counting chances is flawed, and counting goals is flawed, but how long someone can be in a specific zone is a good metric.

This is your argument, right?

Not at all. If you're paying for top heavy offensive players and they can't dominate in the offensive zone then wtf they getting payed for? Have 1 or 2 good shifts or 1 good period and then hold the other team to fewer chances the rest of the game? Is that a winning formula that we're striving for here with this core?

I want my teams best players to be dominating offensive zone time like other teams elite players, especially in the playoffs and not make excuses like who our opponent is.

 

[notbias]

Not at all. If you're paying for top heavy offensive players and they can't dominate in the offensive zone then wtf they getting payed for? Have 1 or 2 good shifts or 1 good period and then hold the other team to fewer chances the rest of the game? Is that a winning formula that we're striving for here with this core?

I want my teams best players to be dominating offensive zone time like other teams elite players, especially in the playoffs and not make excuses like who our opponent is.

They are scoring more than getting scored on, and normally by a fair bit... not sure what else they are supposed to do.

You want your teams to dominate zone time, but care less about production, that is all it appears.

 

[LaPlante94]

They are scoring more than getting scored on, and normally by a fair bit... not sure what else they are supposed to do.

You want your teams to dominate zone time, but care less about production, that is all it appears.

They play 20 mins a game. 15-16 of that at 5v5 most likely. They literally just have to play 1 good period of offence and you'll throw these stats around like they are elite.

I want them to be elite players. Produce and dominate zone time. I don't think that's asking for too much from players making 13.5 million and possibly soon to be 13-14 million. Or do you think that is asking too much?