- Dec 12, 2017
- 26,011
- 12,454
Confirmed with Link: [TOR/OTT] Matt Murray (25% retention), a 3rd in 2023 and a 7th in 2024 for Future Considerations.
- Thread starter SprDaVE
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
It was tough to get a good read on Campbell precisely because team D had improved when he came on board.
Team D + goaltending = goals against right? You can have the best D in the world but if the guy between the pipes is letting weak shots in, you dont see it in the goals against.
I mean, Andersen got killed by injuries his last year with the Leafs and Campbell stole the net from him while Hutch outdueled him as a backup right?
That year:
Campbell: .921
Hutch: .919
Andersen: .896
...all behind the same D in the most offense-oriented division. Without Andersen in the net, the Leafs were near the top of the league for goaltending. Injuries have played a massive role in goals against for the Leafs, especially when it comes to the goaltenders. Even Campbell's awful stretch last season had an injury angle.
Almost 2 years of Vezina level play for Campbell and then he faltered in much the same way so many were predicting. Never was a starter and couldn't handle the grind of a full season. I think giving him at north of 30 any kind of starting goalie salary at 5 years is as big a risk as any the Leafs have made, that's for sure.
Lets compare him to Shesterkin from the time he arrived in Toronto to mid January of last season.
GP:
Campbell: 55
Shesterkin: 64
GAA:
Campbell: 2.14
Shesterkin: 2.38
Save%:
Campbell: .928
Shesterkin: .927
Shots against/60:
Campbell: 29.63
Shesterkin: 32.65
High Danger Shots Against/60:
Campbell: 7.56
Shesterkin: 9.19
High Danger save%:
Campbell: .828
Shesterkin: .862
On the surface, they look very similar or even that Campbell had an edge but once you dig into them, you can see just how much of an advantage Campbell had with a better defensive team in front of him. Once he was dealing with fatigue/injuries, he couldn't maintain his level of play while Shesterkin actually picked things up a bit.
The rest of the way: (Jan. 14th - end of season)
GP:
Campbell: 22
Shesterkin: 31
GAA:
Campbell: 3.43
Shesterkin: 2.12
Save%:
Campbell: .886
Shesterkin: .931
Shots against/60:
Campbell: 30.12
Shesterkin: 30.84
High Danger Shots Against/60:
Campbell: 7.46
Shesterkin: 9.09
High Danger save%:
Campbell: .737
Shesterkin: .876
....and Toronto gave up the 9th fewest shots/ 60 and ranked 3rd best for team xGA/60 for this 2nd part of the season ( the Rangers also played much better defensive hockey the 2nd half which may have had a hand in the numbers). What Campbell was facing was virtually identical to what he had faced the previous 2 years.....he just wasnt making the stops anymore.
I reckon your take on Campbell is pretty accurate. But if you're a math guy I gotta imagine you have to be pretty nervous using these advanced stats to arrive at any concrete conclusions given the absurd amount of variables involved.
Your top 5 list doesn't pass the smell test. Leafs are not top 5, and they don't have a stronger D corps than say the Canes. Who are our league wide defensive stalwarts?
Lately we have fit the pond hockey mold and thats not because every goalie we put in the net over the last few years is complete garbage only with us.
We have no consistency, we buckle under adversity and our team defensive effort is up and down while our goalies scramble to keep with the tempo. Sounds like team construction and coaching.
The Iles don't have that particular problem.
Pond hockey teams don't give up so few shots/chances. Winnipeg, Florida, St.Louis, Ottawa, Vancouver and even Vegas were good examples of pond hockey type teams last season.
Again, a healthy Campbell put up the 2nd best save% in the league for almost 2 years with us. Is he the next Hasek or did the team D help him achieve those numbers?
Almost every single bad stretch of goaltending seems to coincide with injury issues. Andersen admitted that trying to play through injuries "wasnt the best idea" (hello .895 season) and it was learned with Campbell's bad stretch and ultimately time off that he was trying to play through an injury (.886 down the stretch). We all saw Mrazek blow out his groin a couple times too (.888 injury riddled season) and he was struggling trying to play through it coming back.
When healthy the last 3 seasons, goaltending has been good TBH (not great in playoff elimination games though dammit).
The Canes have been the corsi kings for years and gave up the fewest shots in the NHL this past season. Their only problem is they tend to give up a few too many chances of the high danger type. It was nice seeing a finally healthy Andersen looking like his old self a few months there before he broke down again. Much like us, the Canes have been looking for stable goaltending for years and keep striking out. From 2016-2019 they gave up the 2nd fewest shots in the league but had the 30th ranked team save % leading to a middle of the pack goals against. Now they finally have guys to stop the puck but they cant stay healthy. Good keepers that can stay healthy don't grow on trees though...
Think about it this way....
The Leafs gave up the 14th most goals in the league this season. That's not a great number for a contender.
Which of these things would you consider the reason for that:
7th fewest shots attempts allowed
10 fewest shots given up
7th fewest scoring chances allowed
9th fewest high danger chances allowed
3rd fewest expected goals allowed
22nd ranked team save%
With a healthy Campbell (On Jan.14th), here is where the Leafs ranked for goals allowed: 3rd fewest in the NHL (and thats with the awful Mrazek numbers)
The team didnt change how they played after that....Campbell did and has admitted as much (dealing with injury)
Anyways, enough rambling.
GLG!
Stephen
Moderator
- Feb 28, 2002
- 83,096
- 62,016
The length of the contract wouldn't match up well with that plan, since they'd have to re-sign him to a heavy contract with one year of Murray left to stickhandle around. I think it's more likely that if things go well, Samsonov will have established himself as a reliable platoon goalie for 2023-24, get the new deal and take over in Murray's last year.
What the Leafs fit the mold of is an uber dominant possession team who scares the shit out of other teams with their crazy offensive talent who's flaw is having their D attack at every opportunity which leaves them very vulnerable to counter attacks. If there's a stat that tracks odd man rushes / breakaways against - I'd love to see it, I'd bet a lot of money that the Leafs are near the top.
What you end up with is an impressive on-paper look regarding advanced GA stats due to the incredibly dominant possession hockey the Leafs play but a large % of the chances against being breakaways and odd-man rushes. There's also other flaws with the defense - net front D and not being the strongest along the boards. In terms of pure man-to-man defense I find the Leafs to be very pedestrian compared to teams who are elite at it like Carolina and Calgary.
There are no "breakaway" or "odd man rush" or "net front clearing" stats specifically, but through stats like xGA, HDCA, HDSA, rush attempts, rebound attempts, average shot distance, etc., there's nothing to indicate that we allow an abnormal amount of breakaways or odd man rushes, or even have trouble clearing the front of the net - which matches what we see. It more-so seems that you have a skewed perception of either what we allow, or what other teams allow on average.
Funny enough, the team you're describing - dominant possession team, activates their D to relentlessly push offense, allows above average odd man rushes and breakaways, etc. - sounds more like Carolina.
It's worth looking at and appreciate you pulling the numbers. But you can't confidently make conclusions here.
You can only say with certainty that the Leafs were above average in shot suppression, and that the goalies struggled a lot. But why?
It only takes significant possession time mixed with several 'super high danger chances' against to create these numbers, which could easily be the result of significant defensive breakdowns and sloppy play. Lending to pond hockey style.
What would those stats look like if you played like you were down a goal for 60 minutes every game, or in an extreme simulation, if you pulled the goalie altogether?
Noting goalie injuries is interesting, something to think about. But hard to quantify.
Nice breakdown.
I've wondered if there is a connection between the Leafs reputation for losing to bad teams and losing in the playoffs.
Bad teams with a lack of talent typically deploy trap/parking strategies and try to score off counters.
It may be difficult for elite teams to effectively pivot during the regular season, with laptops on planes, but they can better strategize against a one dimensional team in the playoffs. Particularly as the series goes on.
Notsince67
Papi and the Lamplighters
- Apr 27, 2018
- 16,376
- 11,467
Leafs have among the best defensive forwards in the league. That helps a lot
- Dec 12, 2017
- 26,011
- 12,454
If samsonov is the starter or even reliable we won't be able to afford him next year
Natural statstrick tracks rush and rebound attempts by goalies. Its a little messy in season because of player movement.
Looking at playoffs, theres been years we struggled with both (this year) and others where weve been solid. Truthfully there hasnt been much consistency in the reasons weve lost series, which is what makes it so frustrating/baffling.
Tarmore
Registered User
- Nov 11, 2008
- 1,194
- 714
- Dec 12, 2017
- 26,011
- 12,454
Management needs to win a round before they worry about next year and the mini-rebuild that’s required.
Jfresh tried to figure out which teams were most successful when it came to rush goals for the 2020-2021 season and, using the data from evolving hockey, came up with a decent method, including how well a team prevents rush goals.
He defined a rush goal as being a goal that consisted of a controlled entry (tracked by stats guys) followed by a goal scored by that team in a time frame of 5 seconds or less, without being given away to the other team during that time frame. Not a bad way to track them actually.
For that season, here are the fewest rush goals given up in the NHL:
....and then the "non rush" goals:
The Leafs were middle of the pack for goaltending (underperforming the D as usual) that season which may skew things a little bit but I dont think enough to really sway things. The Leafs gave up very few rush goals and were slightly below average otherwise.
Maybe we'll see a database created to actually track rush chances/odd man/etc.. soon?
There seems to be a lot of fluctuation year by year and playoff by playoff in the Liitle numbers i reviewed. The rush attempts were up a fair bit from last season and even varied a ton by goalie within season. You can see it was largely pond hockey with our AHL Group in net.Jfresh tried to figure out which teams were most successful when it came to rush goals for the 2020-2021 season and, using the data from evolving hockey, came up with a decent method, including how well a team prevents rush goals.
He defined a rush goal as being a goal that consisted of a controlled entry (tracked by stats guys) followed by a goal scored by that team in a time frame of 5 seconds or less, without being given away to the other team during that time frame. Not a bad way to track them actually.
For that season, here are the fewest rush goals given up in the NHL:
....and then the "non rush" goals:
The Leafs were middle of the pack for goaltending (underperforming the D as usual) that season which may skew things a little bit but I dont think enough to really sway things. The Leafs gave up very few rush goals and were slightly below average otherwise.
Maybe we'll see a database created to actually track rush chances/odd man/etc.. soon?
The question i come back to is how dangerous a rush chance? Its not what you strive to allow but would you prefer a breakaway from the redline in vs. a low turnover for a quick slow one timer?
This is where i think something like a well tracked xGF/A or HDCF/A is likely the best measure with the additional info to support areas to improve
There seems to be a lot of fluctuation year by year and playoff by playoff in the numbers I reviewed. The rush attempts were up a fair bit from last season and even varied a ton by goalie within season. You can see it was largely pond hockey with our AHL Group in net.Jfresh tried to figure out which teams were most successful when it came to rush goals for the 2020-2021 season and, using the data from evolving hockey, came up with a decent method, including how well a team prevents rush goals.
He defined a rush goal as being a goal that consisted of a controlled entry (tracked by stats guys) followed by a goal scored by that team in a time frame of 5 seconds or less, without being given away to the other team during that time frame. Not a bad way to track them actually.
For that season, here are the fewest rush goals given up in the NHL:
....and then the "non rush" goals:
The Leafs were middle of the pack for goaltending (underperforming the D as usual) that season which may skew things a little bit but I dont think enough to really sway things. The Leafs gave up very few rush goals and were slightly below average otherwise.
Maybe we'll see a database created to actually track rush chances/odd man/etc.. soon?
The question i come back to is how dangerous a rush chance? Its not what you strive to allow but would you prefer a breakaway from the redline in vs. a low turnover for a quick slow one timer?
This is where i think something like a well tracked xGF/A or HDCF/A is likely the best measure with the additional info to support areas to
deprw
Registered User
- Mar 7, 2010
- 1,403
- 784
We don't know if we could have backed Ottawa in the corner or anything about the negotiations. We assume lots of details. Everyone hoped the price would have been better, when we traded for him. Anticipation was king's ransom. We don't know if Ottawa had other option and usually you trade your player out of your division.
Fact is that if Murray is capable number one goalie he is cheap and Ottawa paid for us to have him. Fact is also that his history is troubling and assuming his going to play over 50 games is risky. Fact is also that his contract is buriable, if he fails, unlike Campbell and Kuemper. Fact is that this is odd pick from us.
We have been on goalie market last two years like many other teams. In last years lottery Andersen was best bet and it's yet to be seen what happens next season. Murray falls into same category as Andersen, his been capable starter in this league.
If Murray was the one Dubas wanted, then great. He rises or goes down with goaltender of his choosing. Only thing at the moment that matters is Murray's play. It either makes or breaks this deal.
It's up in the air like Campbell's contract with Oilers or Georgiev / Francouz with Avalanche.
I think Jumbo left the SOO before Dubas was born. Lol
Was Dubas even working at the SOO(like MGT level) when Muzzin and Simmonds were playing there?
It is fair to state Dubas got SOO guys but putting Jumbo, Muzzin and Simmonds on that list is a bit of a stretch.
Mess
Global Moderator
Murray and Campbell were teammates in the Soo in 2011-12
Both Goalies split the games fairly evenly.
Both Goalies split the games fairly evenly.
Last edited:
I know you are trying to prove Campbell is not good and Leafs is better off with Murray but if you are using stats, don’t just use stats that favor your opinion. Use the whole season instead of from Dec 1.
Murray (+3.2 GSAx) performed better than Campbell (-2.3 GSAx) over the whole season as well.
Mess
Global Moderator
You can't include November because Campbell was outstanding and saved the Leafs season. He went 9-2 record in 11 games with a 1.27 GAA and .959 sv% & GSAx +18.2 (and named to All-Star game as a result).
- Status
