Confirmed with Link: [TOR/OTT] Matt Murray (25% retention), a 3rd in 2023 and a 7th in 2024 for Future Considerations.

[Dekes For Days]

but its hard playing the way you want when you ALWAYS losing goalie battle and saw your goalie giving up weak goal in a key moment during a game...

Yeah, I can't imagine dominating OT in game 6 with waves of offensive pressure, outshooting their opponent 13-2, and still losing on basically the 1st mild chance against us gave them much confidence to go on an all-out offensive in game 7.

 

[socko]

Actually, you made a comment that seemed to absolve Campbell of his performance and blame the team for putting up a great defensive performance in front of him. You then attempted to suggest that this was a departure from their normal style of play, even though they were a top defensive team all season. To try and support this suggestion, you pointed to goals against stats (which is bad enough in the first place since goals against is a combination of defensive and goaltending performances), but to make matters worse, you posted the wrong year and that same stat in the correct year actually contradicted your stance.

We've certainly run into some spectacular goaltending performances in elimination games, but interestingly, our top players are actually the only ones who have scored in a game 7 since the 2017-2018 playoffs 5 playoffs ago. They also scored every single goal in games 5, 6, and 7 this year. Where was Tampa's top players in game 7? Oh yeah, letting Nick Paul score all of their goals.

If by great defensive performance, you mean complete choke job by exceptionally high paid star players....

 

[Dekes For Days]

If by great defensive performance, you mean complete choke job by exceptionally high paid star players....

No, by great defensive performance, I mean great defensive performance, obviously.

 

[socko]

Yeah, I can't imagine dominating OT in game 6 with waves of offensive pressure, outshooting their opponent 13-2, and still losing on basically the 1st mild chance against us gave them much confidence to go on an all-out offensive in game 7.

The way they looked in game 7, it looked like their answer to game 6 was to go out drinking until 3am in the morning. And LOL at mild chance, you certainly live in your own Dubas fantasy world.

 

[Dekes For Days]

The way they looked in game 7, it looked like their answer to game 6 was to go out drinking until 3am in the morning.

Not remotely close to true.

What does this have to do with game 6 OT against Montreal? Or did you just post about the wrong season for the 2nd straight time in a row?

 

[socko]

I figured most logical people would be talking about the most recent season most of the time. Forgot who I was talking to obviously. I get now why you like Murray, you forgot what year it is.

 

[socko]

Tampa changed the way they played all the time, just like that

but its hard playing the way you want when you ALWAYS losing goalie battle and saw your goalie giving up weak goal in a key moment during a game...

And like deke was telling only 2 team having a better xGA than leafs last 2 season.. Calgary and Boston... toronto are a complete 200 feet since 2 years but their biggest weakness was goaltending

Tampa does change the way they play and they had to change their entire team makeup to make that work. And they sacrificied some of their ability to play wide open games with those changes. Such that when they tried to play wide open hockey with Colorado they looked very slow and unable to compete. That is Tampa's style now. They play that in the regular season too. Here, we're just using that as an excuse for our no-show guys in game 7.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I figured most logical people would be talking about the most recent season most of the time.

It was very obviously referring to game 6 OT in Montreal, not only from the specifics in my post, but from the fact that it was a response to a line of posts that you were literally part of, that was discussing the Montreal series. Don't blame others for your mistakes.

 

[socko]

I didn't realize there was a rule that this thread was only about the Montreal series. I thought it was about Matt Murray and goaltending in general. Perhaps if you started a thread titled "Lets discuss Campbell in the Montreal series" that would better communicate your intentions and keep us all on the same page....

 

[Dekes For Days]

I didn't realize there was a rule that this thread was only about the Montreal series. I thought it was about Matt Murray and goaltending in general. Perhaps if you started a thread titled "Lets discuss Campbell in the Montreal series" that would better communicate your intentions and keep us all on the same page....

Are you kidding me? You literally started discussing Campbell and the Montreal series before I did. My post was a response in that line of discussion, and very clearly referred to the Montreal series. You responded to me with the wrong season (twice, in fact), and now you're trying to blame others for your mistake.

 

[socko]

I was aware of the talk of the Montreal series, again I did not know that in your opinion that was the exclusive topic. The first time I used the current season was not an accident, I was intentionally talking about this season and how I didn't think it was wise to play a style of hockey that we didn't play all season long, which was really just an excuse for another choke job, and I intentionally talked about our teams defense this year because that is what was relevant.

The 2nd time was a mistake, but since you didn't specify Montreal series, I didn't know that you were still talking about it rather than the more recent season. My bad I guess.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I was aware of the talk of the Montreal series, again I did not know that in your opinion that was the exclusive topic.

Never said anything about it being the exclusive topic in this thread. It's the topic in posts that are obviously discussing it, like my post that you responded to. I would hope you were aware of the talk of the Montreal series, since you were directly part of that talk before even I was.

The first time I used the current season was not an accident, I was intentionally talking about this season and how I didn't think it was wise to play a style of hockey that we didn't play all season long, which was really just an excuse for another joke job, and I intentionally talked about our teams defense this year because that is what was relevant.

I responded to your post that was part of a discussion about the game 7 results against Montreal. Are you saying you intentionally chose to respond with a different season entirely? That's even worse... and certainly not "what was relevant". For the record, you were wrong regardless of which season you referred to, because we were a top defensive team in both seasons - only dropping in goals against (which is a combination of defense and goaltending) ranking this year because our bottom of the league goaltending tanked our top of the league defensive results.

The 2nd time was a mistake, but since you didn't specify Montreal series, I didn't know that you were still talking about it rather than the more recent season. My bad I guess.

I didn't specify Montreal by name, because it was part of the line of discussion that was already about Montreal, but I did specify the shot count which should have been a clear indication anyway. At least you've finally acknowledged your mistake on this one.

 

[socko]

Goaltending is part of team defense. Always has been, always will be. Your boy Dubas is the guy who thought Mrazek was so good he was worth low end starter money to play backup. Based on advanced stats no doubt. Advanced stats that proved to be completely useless.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Goaltending is part of team defense.

Goaltending is different from defense. There are 3 main components to a team - offense, defense, and goaltending. You were responding to somebody who was talking specifically about skater defensive results (SCA, HDSA, etc.) in game 7 against Montreal.

Your boy Dubas is the guy who thought Mrazek was so good he was worth low end starter money to play backup.

Dubas isn't "my boy", and 3.8m is not starter money. It's tandem money, which is what Mrazek was signed to be and what he has been throughout his career.

Advanced stats that proved to be completely useless.

Mrazek having a bad, injury-filled year is not proof that advanced statistics are "completely useless".

 

[Zur En Arrh]

If you think Jack Campbell's consistent 0.915 goaltending is bad, which is also what he has in the playoffs BTW, you better buckle up for next season....

I have more faith in Murray bouncing back then I do Campbell taking the oil anywhere so....

 

[socko]

I don't follow the advanced stat jargon, sorry, not sorry. If Mrazek wasn't a bad signing, why did we pay to get rid of him?

 

[Racer88]

I think it’s pretty safe to say that the one thing Dubas knows less about then negotiating is goalies

 

[Dekes For Days]

If Mrazek wasn't a bad signing, why did we pay to get rid of him?

Because he didn't have a good year last year, we wanted to go in a different direction, and the cost to move him was minimal.

 

[socko]

I'm pretty sure Mrazek sucks. We fell for the old Carolina trap, where just about every goalie that plays there has inflated stats. Plus, he falls apart all the time, similar to Murray.

 

[andora]

I don't follow the advanced stat jargon, sorry, not sorry. If Mrazek wasn't a bad signing, why did we pay to get rid of him?

Because he was a mistake

Not sure sure why he was signed in the first place

It only makes sense he was brought in because he was seen as a good enough insurance option if campbell faltered..

But clearly recognized as a mistake if he wasnt worth a second chance after injuries

Teams use injuries all the time as justification for a player they like and have confidence in

 

[Dekes For Days]

I'm pretty sure Mrazek sucks. We fell for the old Carolina trap, where just about every goalie that plays there has inflated stats.

Except none of that is true.

 

[socko]

Except none of that is true.

Dubas spreadsheet? Did you run the new macro or old macro?

 

[Dekes For Days]

Dubas spreadsheet? Did you run the new macro or old macro?

I'm sure if you take enough jabs at Dubas utilizing statistical measures like every other GM, your incorrect statements will eventually become true.

 

[socko]

I'm sure if you take enough jabs at Dubas utilizing statistical measures like every other GM, your incorrect statements will eventually become true.

Two negatives multiplied do make a positive. Make sure Dubas accounts for that in his latest and greatest.

 

[thusk]

If you think Jack Campbell's consistent 0.915 goaltending is bad, which is also what he has in the playoffs BTW, you better buckle up for next season....

Consistent ??? We dont having the same definition ... he was amaizing first 2 month, okay next 2 and trash the rest of season...

The biggest issue with Campbell is not his skills but hes mentally weak

The way leafs player last season, a good goalie should be a least in top 10 in sv % and GAA