Prospect Info: Timothy Liljegren

[Gary Nylund]

If you're talking to me, I never said Gardiner wasn't a decent player. he is.

We're trying to win a Cup though. We need defencemen who don't crumble at the toughest time of year.

As for Kadri, I've listed him as a guy who should go as well. Check my recent post history.

I wasn't talking to you, just musing.

Gardiner is a lot better than you think he is and he'll be missed. Labelling someone a "choker" or someone who "crumbles" etc. is so cliche and sports history is littered with athletes who have been labelled as such and then go on to excel.

 

[Randy Randerson]

What? no it isn't. Using the word literal makes it even worse.

Saying he blows up under pressure isn't feelings. The game tapes are out there, should you wish to review them.

saying he blows up under pressure because you notice that happening, but having that not be the objective truth in samples large enough to mean anything, and siding with how you feel over the evidence to form your opinion is exactly that.

If you're talking to me, I never said Gardiner wasn't a decent player. he is.

We're trying to win a Cup though. We need defencemen who don't crumble at the toughest time of year.

As for Kadri, I've listed him as a guy who should go as well. Check my recent post history.

Gardiner has been generally a pretty good playoff performer who had a really bad game 7 last year and one gaff in a game 7 this year that hurt us - those look bad but its way too small of a sample to call it a trend, I think it's in human nature to underestimate the element of random chance and see patterns where they don't really exist.

If you were evaluating him against a similar level of low-event dman line a Mattias Ekholm, I think the real deciding factor would be game situation - you'd want Ekholm to protect the lead but Gardiner if you were chasing it, so all you can do is try to guess which situation your team will be in and place your bet, then you're at the whim of the universe. Also I think the differnce between how Ekholm and Gardiner are viewed highlights the feelings effect, they're objectively very similar level players but the consensus view on them is a long way from that.

 

[Spirit of 67]

One great thing about Jake Gardiner that people overlook is there is a thread with a terrific conversation about Timothy Liljegren in it.

 

[Randy Randerson]

One great thing about Jake Gardiner that people overlook is there is a thread with a terrific conversation about Timothy Liljegren in it.

That line of convo started with the similarities between Liljegren and Gardiner. Hopefully that means that Liljegren's floor is around a Jake Gardiner level result

 

[Gary Nylund]

Gardiner has been generally a pretty good playoff performer who had a really bad game 7 last year and one gaff in a game 7 this year that hurt us - those look bad but its way too small of a sample to call it a trend, I think it's in human nature to underestimate the element of random chance and see patterns where they don't really exist.

Well put!

Gardiner discussions here over the years are a textbook example of this phenomenon.

One great thing about Jake Gardiner that people overlook is there is a thread with a terrific conversation about Timothy Liljegren in it.

Link?

 

[Randy Randerson]

Well put!

Gardiner discussions here over the years are a textbook example of this phenomenon.

I think I stole that from Neil DeGrasse Tyson from the Cosmos remake. Pattern recognition is one of the few things that sets us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom, but we're so good at it that we see any coincidence as pattern until it proves otherwise even when it's statistically unlikely to be one or a larger sample is at odds with the small segment with the pattern

 

[Hockey Talker29]

If you're talking to me, I never said Gardiner wasn't a decent player. he is.

We're trying to win a Cup though. We need defencemen who don't crumble at the toughest time of year.

As for Kadri, I've listed him as a guy who should go as well. Check my recent post history.

For those concerned about players blowing up under pressure, Andersen is a wayyyyy bigger concern than Gardiner. Andy has basically blown both game 7s after playing quite strong overall in games 1-6.

If Andy could make a few saves in game 7, Gardiner would be looked at much differently, since we'd have beaten the Bruins in 2018, and possibly even this year.

 

[LeafsOHLRangers98]

Timothy Liljegren is a great player. Back on topic people! Man these threads get de-railed lol

 

[Morbo]

saying he blows up under pressure because you notice that happening, but having that not be the objective truth in samples large enough to mean anything, and siding with how you feel over the evidence to form your opinion is exactly that.

What do you mean not the objective truth? I'm starting to think you're the one with the feelings here.

you can't develop sentimental attachments to players.

Gardiner has been generally a pretty good playoff performer who had a really bad game 7 last year and one gaff in a game 7 this year that hurt us - those look bad but its way too small of a sample to call it a trend, I think it's in human nature to underestimate the element of random chance and see patterns where they don't really exist.

He's had some of his worst games when we need him most. That isn't a good playoff performer.

It's impossible for the sample size to be "large". we don't win playoff rounds. I can only comment on the ones he appears in, right? How many more chances do you want to give him to turn over the puck and blow it at a critical time?

What, out of curiousity, would be an "adequate" sample size in your mind? How many critical playoff games would it take?

If you were evaluating him against a similar level of low-event dman line a Mattias Ekholm, I think the real deciding factor would be game situation - you'd want Ekholm to protect the lead but Gardiner if you were chasing it, so all you can do is try to guess which situation your team will be in and place your bet, then you're at the whim of the universe. Also I think the differnce between how Ekholm and Gardiner are viewed highlights the feelings effect, they're objectively very similar level players but the consensus view on them is a long way from that.

what a bizarre comparison.

anyway, I think we're done here. I've explained several objective non-emotional points why he won't be back, but you keep talking about feelings.

 

[Morbo]

For those concerned about players blowing up under pressure, Andersen is a wayyyyy bigger concern than Gardiner. Andy has basically blown both game 7s after playing quite strong overall in games 1-6.

If Andy could make a few saves in game 7, Gardiner would be looked at much differently, since we'd have beaten the Bruins in 2018, and possibly even this year.

Absolutely. Gardiner, Kadri and Andersen have failed us repeatedly at crucial times.

I think Andersen gets less discussion out of the 3 because it's hard to see an available improvement out there.

 

[Randy Randerson]

What do you mean not the objective truth? I'm starting to think you're the one with the feelings here.

you can't develop sentimental attachments to players.

objective truth -> in line with dependable evidence. Picking highlights or lowlights and forming your opinion on those rather than on the greater body of work is nonobjective.

He's had some of his worst games when we need him most. That isn't a good playoff performer.

It's impossible for the sample size to be "large". we don't win playoff rounds. I can only comment on the ones he appears in, right? How many more chances do you want to give him to turn over the puck and blow it at a critical time?

What, out of curiousity, would be an "adequate" sample size in your mind? How many critical playoff games would it take?

more than 2, and more than half of the playoff games he's played. It's usually around 300-400 minutes of playing time where samples get to be statistically indicative of future performance. I'm not arguing that he's had some memorable errors in the last 2 game 7's, but that's likely random. He was also an absolute star in the first series against Boston, and very very good against Washington.

what a bizarre comparison.

anyway, I think we're done here. I've explained several objective non-emotional points why he won't be back, but you keep talking about feelings.

a bizarre comparison in that it exactly highlights what we're talking about....sure I guess? Let's be done here

 

[Joey Hoser]

I think Andersen gets less discussion out of the 3 because it's hard to see an available improvement out there.

Leafs fans have been weird about Andersen for awhile. They're convinced our defense is worse than it is, which makes them think Andersen is better than he is.

I mean, we had a thread were everyone was outraged that Andersen and his .917 wasn't nominated for the Vezina.

That's not me talking shit about Andersen. He's solid and better than what many teams have, but to me it's more like "good enough, he will do", than it's like he carries the team on his back.

 

[SmoggyTwinkles]

Timothy Liljegren is a great player. Back on topic people! Man these threads get de-railed lol

Is he? That's why I clicked on this thread here that is apparently supposed to be prospect info on Liljegren.

I have found out nothing about his recent status on this page at least.

Anyone have a decent breakdown on how he's developing? Can't say I've watched the Marlies playoff run.

 

[Morbo]

Leafs fans have been weird about Andersen for awhile. They're convinced our defense is worse than it is, which makes them think Andersen is better than he is.

I mean, we had a thread were everyone was outraged that Andersen and his .917 wasn't nominated for the Vezina.

That's not me talking **** about Andersen. He's solid and better than what many teams have, but to me it's more like "good enough, he will do", than it's like he carries the team on his back.

Yeah agreed. He's a solid midpack starter. Would I prefer a top 5 goalie? yeah definitely. but I'm not seeing how we get one of those.

 

[The Kessel Run]

Is he? That's why I clicked on this thread here that is apparently supposed to be prospect info on Liljegren.

I have found out nothing about his recent status on this page at least.

Anyone have a decent breakdown on how he's developing? Can't say I've watched the Marlies playoff run.

I caught the first 2 games vs. Cleveland and he looksd like a stud.

 

[Jozay]

Leafs fans have been weird about Andersen for awhile. They're convinced our defense is worse than it is, which makes them think Andersen is better than he is.

I mean, we had a thread were everyone was outraged that Andersen and his .917 wasn't nominated for the Vezina.

That's not me talking **** about Andersen. He's solid and better than what many teams have, but to me it's more like "good enough, he will do", than it's like he carries the team on his back.

To be fair, before March he was performing like a vezina candidate. He put up a .890 sv% in March.

But yeah, he's a solid goalie. Not top 5 in the league, but maybe around 10 or so.

 

[Advanced stats]

To be fair, before March he was performing like a vezina candidate. He put up a .890 sv% in March.

But yeah, he's a solid goalie. Not top 5 in the league, but maybe around 10 or so.

Well in all honesty, he'll likely finish top 5 in vezina voting for the 2nd year in a row.
The grass always seems greener on the other side, but I think Andersen is our horse.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Well in all honesty, he'll likely finish top 5 in vezina voting for the 2nd year in a row.
The grass always seems greener on the other side, but I think Andersen is our horse.

my biggest concern with Andersen has been his playoff performances and whether he can be good enough to win with when it counts. During the regular season he can be very reliable for a ton of games, but I think this year his play against Boston really sold me on him. At least through the first 6 games, he was spectacular and gave the Leafs a great shot at winning. Unfortunately they blew it, but hopefully he'll be able to tap into that next year for us

 

[Nineteen67]

Bad defensively is just untrue though. Based on isolated impact (RAPM.Def_xGA) he was actually the 2nd best defensively on our team (After Oz), and 45th ranked for defenseman that played over 500 minutes last sesason. This isn't just this season too, he's always been a positive defensive player (Unlike Rielly). Let's not kid ourselves, he will be missed; especially when his offensive isolated impact (RAPM.Off_xGF) in 9th ranked for defenseman that played over 500 minutes. We're just in a far better place than we've ever been to lose a top-30 defenseman in the entire league, but really Dubas should be trying his best to keep him (assuming he'll get back to full health).

View attachment 226503

Why didn’t Oz play more if he had the best RAMP.DEF_xGA. Makes no sense.

 

[Morgs]

Why didn’t Oz play more if he had the best RAMP.DEF_xGA. Makes no sense.

Well Babcock is dumb? Also Oz was much better at the beginning at the season than he was by the end.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Dermott has had some bumps.

requiring surgery !

 

[Kurtz]

Well Babcock is dumb? Also Oz was much better at the beginning at the season than he was by the end.

If Gards is a top-30 dman according to this stat, and Oz was that much better than Gards, especially early on, does this mean that Oz was playing at a Norris level at the beginning of the season?

 

[Joey Hoser]

Why didn’t Oz play more if he had the best RAMP.DEF_xGA. Makes no sense.

Is that a hockey stat or an html5 error?

 

[Nineteen67]

Is that a hockey stat or an html5 error?

I don’t know?

 

[Nineteen67]

Well Babcock is dumb? Also Oz was much better at the beginning at the season than he was by the end.

Stats can’t and don’t lie.....why Oz and Gauthier don’t play 22 mins per game is a travesty.


ETA....I take that back...+/- ‘s pants are on fire