Softest Leaf Forward Group Since 2000?

[paulhiggins]

If any of those players played for the current team, they would be called soft too, because none of this actually has anything to do with actual play style or a lack of similar style players.

We don't lose because we're soft. We're labeled soft because we lose, and that invites people to push their own narratives instead of looking at and acknowledging the actual reasons why.

Leafs are labelled soft because they ARE soft. I don't know how many times I've seen the top 2 lines do fly-byes, turn back when they should be going forward to be physical, not standing up for their fellow players (with a couple exceptions), allowing themselves to be rag-dolled, not protecting the goalie properly. They are by definition playing scared and if you cannot recall the specifics of my examples above, try to find some old Leaf games from the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00, where for the most part they played like men, not like the chickens we see today in blue and white. If the reffing was fair, they would have the lowest penalty minutes in the league. Guys like Wendel Clark probably have to watch other teams now, to avoid throwing up.

 

[Knies iT]

In that case, by your same criteria:

22-23: Clifford, Simmonds, Bunting, Kampf, Engvall, Anderson.

End of debate, really. If you're going to name low/no minute guys as those that move the toughness "needle", I'll add guys of that same ilk + add guys who play more than low-minutes that play hard also.

Conclusion = this isn't anywhere near the softest team in the past 22 years. Some of the Leafs teams you are defending because they had 1 or 2 enforcers who played 4 minutes a night, used to get bullied all over the rink consistently.

So by my criteria you proved my exact point?

That is easily the softest group on the list. You also continue to not read the actual post. I said you could omit the players that fit Clifford/Simmonds' criteria of non permanent players.

Nice mic drop.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Leafs are labelled soft because they ARE soft. I don't know how many times I've seen the top 2 lines do fly-byes, turn back when they should be going forward to be physical, not standing up for their fellow players (with a couple exceptions), allowing themselves to be rag-dolled, not protecting the goalie properly.

They're not though. You believe that because they've lost, and you want the reason to be that they're soft, so that's what you focus in on and see. Your description is a wild, wild exaggeration of what our players do, especially in the playoffs, and other players doing the same things on other teams is dismissed and forgotten because they don't have the flashy playoff loss history to drive the narrative. They don't play much differently than a bunch of other successful teams, and they certainly aren't scared of anything.

if you cannot recall the specifics of my examples above, try to find some old Leaf games from the 70s, 80s, 90s, 00, where for the most part they played like men, not like the chickens we see today in blue and white.

If you compare any team from 50 years ago to today - especially if you focus in on and exaggerate specific instances - they're going to seem more "soft", because we actually care when we give people permanent brain damage now. You don't need to almost kill people to be "a man". Your issue seems to be with the league, medicine, law, and societal progress, not the Leaf team.

 

[Tak7]

So by my criteria you proved my exact point?

That is easily the softest group on the list. You also continue to not read the actual post. I said you could omit the players that fit Clifford/Simmonds' criteria of non permanent players.

Nice mic drop.

You can omit players that fit Clifford/Simmonds criteria of non-permanent players, but you won't omit players like Rosehill, McLaren, and Orr?

If you think me naming NHLers on the current roster than play a stronger, tougher game, with higher average TOIs than most of the guys you named, is somehow "proving your point", I would suggest that you aren't even sure what point you're trying to make anymore.

Having a face-puncher or two doesn't make a team "tough". Conversely, a lack of one doesn't make a team soft.

We've watched teams get bullied out of TD Gardens, and pushed around by Montreal and Columbus, but the team that went toe-to-toe in a physical series against Tampa is the one that you call the softest?

You're wrong here, and that's fine. Just own it.

 

[markh100]

Even the dark ages there was always a Belak, Bell, Deveaux, Mayers, Rosehill, Brown, Orr, McLaren, Sill, Clarkson, etc....

Wow, no wonder I don't visit this message board any more. Open a thread listing the 10 absolute worst Leafs to play over the last 15 years, and lamenting the fact that the line-up is missing them.

 

[Tak7]

Wow, no wonder I don't visit this message board any more. Open a thread listing the 10 absolute worst Leafs to play over the last 15 years, and lamenting the fact that the line-up is missing them.

Bingo.

The old age fans here would much rather be shit, and fight once a week, than be good & hard to beat.
Nostalgia is a hell of a drug.

 

[notbias]

Guys that are willing to put their bodies on the line at the required times.

Surely a blocked shot is the greatest indicator of this, right? Toronto is tougher than Colorado, we were also tougher than Tampa in the first round.

 

[LeafEgo]

They're not though. You believe that because they've lost, and you want the reason to be that they're soft, so that's what you focus in on and see. Your description is a wild, wild exaggeration of what our players do, especially in the playoffs, and other players doing the same things on other teams is dismissed and forgotten because they don't have the flashy playoff loss history to drive the narrative. They don't play much differently than a bunch of other successful teams, and they certainly aren't scared of anything.

If you compare any team from 50 years ago to today - especially if you focus in on and exaggerate specific instances - they're going to seem more "soft", because we actually care when we give people permanent brain damage now. You don't need to almost kill people to be "a man". Your issue seems to be with the league, medicine, law, and societal progress, not the Leaf team.

Hockey is a contact sport that requires physicality or 'toughness'. It's subjective and opinion based to be sure.

Gone are the 4th line goon days and more recent focus has been on the those getting ice time.

What's your opinion on the Avs three F amigos vs the Leafs three F amigos in the category of toughness? And if there is a difference do you think it matters or that we have compensated for it?

 

[Knies iT]

You can omit players that fit Clifford/Simmonds criteria of non-permanent players, but you won't omit players like Rosehill, McLaren, and Orr?

If you think me naming NHLers on the current roster than play a stronger, tougher game, with higher average TOIs than most of the guys you named, is somehow "proving your point", I would suggest that you aren't even sure what point you're trying to make anymore.

Having a face-puncher or two doesn't make a team "tough". Conversely, a lack of one doesn't make a team soft.

We've watched teams get bullied out of TD Gardens, and pushed around by Montreal and Columbus, but the team that went toe-to-toe in a physical series against Tampa is the one that you call the softest?

You're wrong here, and that's fine. Just own it.

You listed David Kampf and Pierre Engvall in a discussion of most/least physical teams in the last two decades. With a straight face.

You can't follow a linear conversation so i'll leave it here. You continue to bring up entire team performance when for the 4th time this is about the forward group. OP wasn't about management, the team quality across years, how competitive they are, if toughness is correlated with success, etc. It is purely about how soft the forward group is relative to other years.

Not having a face puncher doesn't make a team soft, but on top of that having one of the softest cores in the league insulated by Engvall, Kampf, Jarnkrok, Kerfoot, Holmberg/Anderson, etc. (+ the two I mentioned in OP) certainly does. Nothing you've said is convincing.

 

[Tak7]

You listed David Kampf and Pierre Engvall in a discussion of most/least physical teams in the last two decades. With a straight face.

You can't follow a linear conversation so i'll leave it here. You continue to bring up entire team performance when for the 4th time this is about the forward group. OP wasn't about management, the team quality across years, how competitive they are, if toughness is correlated with success, etc. It is purely about how soft the forward group is relative to other years.

Not having a face puncher doesn't make a team soft, but on top of that having one of the softest cores in the league insulated by Engvall, Kampf, Jarnkrok, Kerfoot, Holmberg/Anderson, etc. (+ the two I mentioned in OP) certainly does. Nothing you've said is convincing.

I've only mentioned forwards for the 4th or 5th consecutive post now. Think you're having a hard time following.

Now you're moving the goalposts back to "physical teams", yet you listed a bunch of players that by your own admission, were "tough to play against". When you make concessions for that, it's fine, but when I do, it's an issue? Lol my guy.

Of course I'm going to mention tough to play against forwards when discussing how soft vs hard the Leafs are. Kampf and Engvall, especially during the 2nd half of the season, were absolute pains to play against in the corners and in the neutral zone. So was Bunting, all year long. Throw Clifford + Simmonds and you had a forward core (yes, all these names are forwards - you can verify for yourself afterwards) that was tough to play against, and far tougher than the soft forward group that used to constantly get bullied and pushed off the puck.

If you're not sure who plays in what position for this team, that's fine - take some time to familiarize yourself with them, as we all make mistakes.

If you continue to change the parameters of your argument to fit your narrative, which has been deconstructed without even looking at hitting statistics, then you're deliberating being facetious and flippant - which isn't too smart on your part.

Good day.

 

[Knies iT]

I've only mentioned forwards for the 4th or 5th consecutive post now. Think you're having a hard time following.

Now you're moving the goalposts back to "physical teams", yet you listed a bunch of players that by your own admission, were "tough to play against". When you make concessions for that, it's fine, but when I do, it's an issue? Lol my guy.

Of course I'm going to mention tough to play against forwards when discussing how soft vs hard the Leafs are. Kampf and Engvall, especially during the 2nd half of the season, were absolute pains to play against in the corners and in the neutral zone. So was Bunting, all year long. Throw Clifford + Simmonds and you had a forward core (yes, all these names are forwards - you can verify for yourself afterwards) that was tough to play against, and far tougher than the soft forward group that used to constantly get bullied and pushed off the puck.

If you're not sure who plays in what position for this team, that's fine - take some time to familiarize yourself with them, as we all make mistakes.

If you continue to change the parameters of your argument to fit your narrative, which has been deconstructed without even looking at hitting statistics, then you're deliberating being facetious and flippant - which isn't too smart on your part.

Good day.

You seem worked up. Physicality is a part of toughness. Not sure what you're rambling about there. It's also about the upcoming season's projected lineup which we're assuming Clifford and Simmonds are not regulars on.

We have very different standards if you're including Engvall and Kampf in this convo as defining pieces of a team's grit/physicality/whatever you want to call it.

 

[Tak7]

You seem worked up. Physicality is a part of toughness. Not sure what you're rambling about there. It's also about the upcoming season's projected lineup which we're assuming Clifford and Simmonds are not regulars on.

We have very different standards if you're including Engvall and Kampf in this convo as defining pieces of a team's grit/physicality/whatever you want to call it.

I'm aware - yours keep changing with every post

We move on.

 

[Dreakmur]

Surely a blocked shot is the greatest indicator of this, right? Toronto is tougher than Colorado, we were also tougher than Tampa in the first round.

Actually sacrificing your body to block a shot is important, but that’s not what the blocked shot statistics count - they just count pucks that hit you.

 

[hockeyes]

I don't know if they are the softest forward group since whenever BUT they are soft as butter. Nylander pulling up to negate an icing easily in game 6 or 7 is the perfect example. I don't care if you have a 3% chance of winning that race, a cup contending, legit player, is going 100% for that puck. The rest of the supporting cast is no better, Matthews, Tavares, Marner all duck out whenever they can, so don't think I am picking on Nylander. Lots of players have shown flashes of the anger and drive needed but they just don't consistently do it. Engvall was a monster one random shift this season where he looked like he would kill anyone in his way.. but it was one shift, the entire year? WTF, pull that in and do it semi-often and you are a monster out there.

 

[DarkKnight]

I don't know if they are the softest forward group since whenever BUT they are soft as butter. Nylander pulling up to negate an icing easily in game 6 or 7 is the perfect example. I don't care if you have a 3% chance of winning that race, a cup contending, legit player, is going 100% for that puck. The rest of the supporting cast is no better, Matthews, Tavares, Marner all duck out whenever they can, so don't think I am picking on Nylander. Lots of players have shown flashes of the anger and drive needed but they just don't consistently do it. Engvall was a monster one random shift this season where he looked like he would kill anyone in his way.. but it was one shift, the entire year? WTF, pull that in and do it semi-often and you are a monster out there.

That play was quite an optical let down and everyone saw it. But, remember, he scored two nothing goals late that game when it didn’t matter and then of course when the series ends, we must endure the pure stats show he “produced”. That’s why sport is more than just metrics, ya you got your cookies when the game was over, but where were you when we needed some heart, checking out completely, and that’s why the former players who saw it were so animated, it sent a clear message…to both benches.

 

[Larcos_Unal]

Surely the Leafs being one of the softest teams in the league is not a surprise. Do you see them ever lay the body, do you see the Dmen punish people consistently? Do you see them go into the corner and impose their will?

This team is built in Dubas' idealistic notion that skill will trump will and guess what, in the playoffs it's all about will. That audio of Maroon calling the Leafs soft during one of the early games said it all.

 

[hockeyes]

That play was quite an optical let down and everyone saw it. But, remember, he scored two nothing goals late that game when it didn’t matter and then of course when the series ends, we must endure the pure stats show he “produced”. That’s why sport is more than just metrics, ya you got your cookies when the game was over, but where were you when we needed some heart, checking out completely, and that’s why the former players who saw it were so animated, it sent a clear message…to both benches.

I agree, I hate to write a guy off over 1 play, but wow. If there was ever a play to write someone off over, that was it. Too bad Dubas said he will die before trading Nylander, big brain, small thought process.

 

[TheRumble]

Somebody said unironically that the way to get richer is to have less money.

And that's when I stopped engaging seriously.

 

[Kyle089]

I do find this team is missing heart and grit and that's partially why they can't get over the initial hump. They've shown glimpses in very small samples, but it's never consistent. Keefe has even mentioned it multiple times how the team needs to be more consistent in those areas, in order to have more success. It seems to be a lack of will power IMO.

They don't need to focus on leading the league in hits, but they should be consistently going into the corners and along to boards with the mindset that it's their puck and they refuse to come out with it. When going into the boards on the forecheck, if the opposition has to inside track and is going to get their first, finish your check at least if you're in position. Don't just attempt a poke check and skate away after it doesn't work. During the rough stuff, at least stick up for yourself and your teammates in a show of solidarity when a cheap shot is thrown.

They've lost 5 times in the first round and once in a play in round to just get into the first round of the playoffs. They keep mentioning how it frustrates them and they're tired of the feeling of losing. Well talk is cheap as they say and they need to start showing it on the ice on a consistent basis.

 

[sittler rules!!!]

The thing about the days of Belak, Bell, Orr, Mayers, Rosehill etc. Those teams were trash

Disgrace

Pathetic

An embarrassment

Referencing the latter 3, really not much different then these recent playoff Leaf teams of the past 5 years.

 

[sittler rules!!!]

I watched Tampa try to push Colorado around and not a single Avs player back down. They clearly tried to intimidate Byram. I watched Hagel try to goat Engvall into a fight only to see Engvall not interested. I watch Tavares get punched in the face and turn and skate away. I watch Willie afraid to go into a corner and battle for a puck. This team is easily intimated.

Stop with the knuckles b.s. Nobody is asking for players to fight. Just show some backbone.

well said

 

[sittler rules!!!]

It’s like we didn’t even win a round again or something. I can’t believe the negativity after six years of complete futility, squandering years of the best talent we’ve had perhaps in Leafs history. Can you believe the negative Nancy’s? Can you believe they’ve lost faith in a GM, coach, who have failed? Clearly we should be celebrating, what an off season it’s been too, its just nothing but amazing everywhere we look.

Its just so ridiculous to bash loyal fans who have watched disappointment after disappointment after disappointment after disappointment after disappointment after disappointment, to actually get snarky because people aren’t lighting candles at the altar of management for amassing exactly Jack squat. No, let’s praise and talk about handshakes and “should have won” and “next year”, that’s the realism, expected goals not wins.

Losers accept losing, it’s nothing to aspire to.

We should be pissed.

Love it man, love it

 

[DarkKnight]

I agree, I hate to write a guy off over 1 play, but wow. If there was ever a play to write someone off over, that was it. Too bad Dubas said he will die before trading Nylander, big brain, small thought process.

I just bring it up because the “he scored three goals“ that series without context doesn’t tell you everything.

Game 5 he was much better.

 

[Nineteen67]

Bingo.

The old age fans here would much rather be shit, and fight once a week, than be good & hard to beat.
Nostalgia is a hell of a drug.

or maybe they get beat every year because they’re not willing to do what it takes. See Nylander last 4 minutes of game 7 as a prime example. The loss wasn’t accident, it was a decision.

 

[Fogelhund]

Anybody who has listed Matthews as being soft, has negated anything else that they've posted.