Softest Leaf Forward Group Since 2000?

[Shooter2x]

TBD. No longer a fan of Dubas but at least give the man a chance to finish the off season.

 

[andora]

I think it comes down to where are our guys like bellemare cogliano helm lewis .. bow yes these guys are older and have the experience but jesus why cant we sign guys like these. These guys play different than what we have seemed to have.. they lay it out there

These guys have playoff toughness and win you games

Archibald to pits is an example of a player that we could use. Different dynamic and he leaves everything on the ice.. probably under a million

Rowney, ashton reese, motte are still out there.. maybe cheap by now.. true diggers. Insulate a kid with a could diggers and your 4th line is done

 

[Hoglund4MvP]

So completely arbitrary and ripe for mental gymnastics to fit a narrative?

I wouldn't have called Minnesota or Boston soft either but from the sound of things, they were softer than the Leafs. Weird.

Maybe look up and see what the current context was before picking out posts to quote


unless you think hits + fights defines playoff grit fully so you disagree with me, you shouldn't even care about my post

 

[SprDaVE]

Maybe look up and see what the current context was before picking out posts to quote

I read the entire thread and my post is the same. You didn't quote anybody in your post either, so I took your comment at face value. You can expand on your definition of toughness if you want, it won't change that my reply will still be correct.

The original poster pointed to fighters like Orr, McLaren, Deveaux, etc to justify this team being soft. In your toughness equation, that would make them 10 to 15% tough, assuming they are on the same team, because all they did was fight and hit.

I'm just trying to understand the arbitrary way of being to identify a soft/tough team since hits, fights, etc don't really matter.

Would the Wild team from last season be considered soft too? What about Boston? I can't seem to get an answer here.

 

[SprDaVE]

I think it comes down to where are our guys like bellemare cogliano helm lewis .. bow yes these guys are older and have the experience but jesus why cant we sign guys like these. These guys play different than what we have seemed to have.. they lay it out there

These guys have playoff toughness and win you games

Archibald to pits is an example of a player that we could use. Different dynamic and he leaves everything on the ice.. probably under a million

Rowney, ashton reese, motte are still out there.. maybe cheap by now.. true diggers. Insulate a kid with a could diggers and your 4th line is done

We sign those players all the time. The Avs didn't win because of Coglianos or Helm, etc etc. They certainly are not "tough" players either. They are solid players that played their part of providing efficient hockey in supporting roles, not providing "toughness".

To say Cogliano or Helm are tough players is really something else and just goes to show the idea of toughness is completely subjective to the point where you can just say whatever player is tough as your argument just because they were part of a winning team.

Funny enough, Aube-Kubel was part of that team, has plenty of "tough" attributes and people think he's soft now, or completely overlook him as part of their rant.

 

[I am Canadian]

I like how people conviently forget Clifford's only contribution was to take a beyond stupid 5 minute major in his first shift.

It worked out fine for us, but let's not pretend that wasn't almost a disaster

 

[CapspaceKiller]

Fat Phil and his band of quitters were way softer outside that one year they had Orr and McLaren.

 

[The Iceman]

ALL MOD CONS THINKS This Leafs team will not make the ECF (or beyond) this year.

Fixed it for you

 

[Cap'n Flavour]

Do you remember when Naz got kneed by DeBrusk? No response.

No response?! Did you fall asleep and miss the rest of the game?

 

[andora]

We sign those players all the time. The Avs didn't win because of Coglianos or Helm, etc etc. They certainly are not "tough" players either. They are solid players that played their part of providing efficient hockey in supporting roles, not providing "toughness".

To say Cogliano or Helm are tough players is really something else and just goes to show the idea of toughness is completely subjective to the point where you can just say whatever player is tough as your argument just because they were part of a winning team.

Funny enough, Aube-Kubel was part of that team, has plenty of "tough" attributes and people think he's soft now, or completely overlook him as part of their rant.

Umm.. ok? Yes it is subjective to a degree but i think some common ground is always there. Those guys played tough the whole way by continously skating, forechecking, finishing plays until the end. They played physical beyond their sized and chipped in important goals.. and colorado won because they were part of a 4 line unit that did not stop so yeah they are a huge part of that win

Aube kubel was a great free piece all year that sakic got, he was versatile depth that played the right way within his role. He finished checks got involved and stayed in the system .. he played some hard hockey he is a good pickup and hopefully learned and took away what he saw from the vet guys.

It bothers me he couldnt get a 2nd year .. couldnt have been that much more. I like what he could become as a 4th line wing

 

[All Mod Cons]

Fixed it for you

Much appreciated.

Can we bookmark this for use later on?

 

[Shooter2x]

Attrition is the word you guys are looking for. Not grit. Grit is a subset of attrition

Attrition with respects to NHL playoff hockey is not subjective (*In the sense of great hockey minds with knowledge of the league and the players in it). It's the most used playoff adjective since hockey was invented.

 

[The Iceman]

Much appreciated.

Can we bookmark this for use later on?

HA, I do not deny it is an overwhelming possibility but can't say for 100% certainty

 

[andora]

We sign those players all the time.

Who am i forgetting that we have had that are like these players that we keep signing?

Spezza has always been half/half for me

 

[Jimmy Firecracker]

This is why we lose in thr playoffs and it's not bc of toughness. These are the stats of the last 2 games of the playoffs for the last 4 years...

1 Win 7 Losses

14 GF (1.75 GP/G) on 281 shots

27 GA (3.375 GA/G) on 248 shots

11/17 PK (64.71%)

1/20 PP (5%)

.891 SV%

Jesus Christ. Talk about failing to meet the moment.

 

[Nineteen67]

No response?! Did you fall asleep and miss the rest of the game?

What was the response?

 

[Nineteen67]

Fat Phil and his band of quitters were way softer outside that one year they had Orr and McLaren.

Phil upped his game in the playoffs.

 

[Da Mash]

Fat Phil and his band of quitters were way softer outside that one year they had Orr and McLaren.

Didn’t fat Phil win two cups with Pitt and should of at least won a playoff mvp as he was lights out in both Cup runs? Pitt also hasn’t sniffed another cup since he left.

Just sayin

Didn’t another x-leaf quitter also win a cup in St.Louis ? Bozak

 

[Racer88]

Fun fact. No team that has lost 6 consecutive first round playoff series has gone on to win a Cup.

I laugh when I read post about how Tampa took 10 years to win and the caps took a long time etc etc. What they conveniently leave out is that those teams all had varying levels of success along the way and we have endured 6 consecutive years of first round failure.
so to think we will go from perennial first round losers to the holy grail is crazy talk

 

[Racer88]

Dubas has f***ed up so far down the rabbit hole it's not fair to ask someone who they would trade for /sign now. If you'd have asked people 3 years ago, when alarm bells were starting to ring, they'd have a much better chance at providing a solution.

We've got sod-all to trade away, haven't had a 1st round draft pick in God knows how long, have very few prospects that'll make the NHL, have some awful contracts, half a team of dumpster diving signings, and you're asking people to fix this shit?

It's too late.

The next GM will have to sacrifice his first couple of years on the job, to try to get this team into playoff shape. If it's regular season success he/she wants, they can carry on as is.

Agreed. Where do you even begin with this group.

 

[notbias]

I laugh when I read post about how Tampa took 10 years to win and the caps took a long time etc etc. What they conveniently leave out is that those teams all had varying levels of success along the way and we have endured 6 consecutive years of first round failure.
so to think we will go from perennial first round losers to the holy grail is crazy talk

what do you consider success? Assuming the bar is very low because in Colorado's recent history they hadn't done anything but the second round, in fact they were in last place in the league not long ago, and Sakic + their core has been there a LONG time

 

[Fogelhund]

The expectation that the fourth line being full of bigger, tougher guys will make a difference is misplaced. Matty finally showed what it takes to win in the playoffs. He played hard, offense, defense, checked hard, went into the corners... I think he gets it now. That needs to rub off more on Marner and Nylander, that they need to play harder when it counts. Not the fourth line, the top guys, who you pay the most. Your best guys, need to be your best guys when it counts. I thought that Campbell was a weak link in game 6, and in game 7, our best guys didn't produce enough. It isn't about having size, or fighting... it's about playing hard, like Matthews did, having the will to win. If enough of the team has the right mentality, we'll start to have success in the playoffs... if they don't, we won't.. it's that simple... You can't look at a lineup and say, oh these guys don't have enough will to win / pie R squared. Probably half of our lineup will be different going into the next playoffs, from what we had last year... Besides, all this jumping to conclusions about a lineup, that isn't complete, will clearly have some moves before October, and then another 3-5 moves before the playoffs. Maybe wait a bit before jumping off the bridge.

 

[jaric1862]

I’m not as concerned about the forward group being soft as I am the defence.

 

[Racer88]

what do you consider success? Assuming the bar is very low because in Colorado's recent history they hadn't done anything but the second round, in fact they were in last place in the league not long ago, and Sakic + their core has been there a LONG time

I’m not totally sure at this point what I would consider succes. Probably conference finals at least.
As far as this year I’m totally unsure what to expect.
as far as Salic and his core being there a long time I’m betting he didn’t have the 50% on 4 players model.
I know you probably hate hearing me bring that up all the time but I don’t believe you can have any conversation about team success or improvement without that being an issue.

 

[Menzinger]

Not many people understand it from either side it looks like to me. Everyone has their own definition or understanding, especially to fit whatever narrative they want to believe. It's all over this thread.

A winning team = not soft, here are XYZ players or reasons they aren't soft.

A team that loses = soft, here are XYZ players that are soft and arbitrary reasons as to why they lost as they are soft as butter.

No amount of arguing, debating, stats and observations will change your made up mind that this Leafs team is the softest since 2000. Because it will always revert back to a team that loses = soft. Best Leafs team in franchise history lost because they are as soft as butter.

Kessel is a great example of the silliness of the toughness debate.

Often critiqued as being one of the softest guys in the league. Also happens to be a playoff warrior who led a cup winning team in post season scoring......

So is Kessel just 'tough' in the post season?