Toronto has scored 11PPGs since Marner injury

[Orfieus]

Dubas deserves credit for the success of the team but he did bet his job on the core and if the core fails to win a round again, it will be interesting to see whether he gets to keep his job and continue to bet his job on the core or asked to move Marner or is fired altogether.

Winning 1 round is not nearly enough, but that's me

 

[ShaneFalco]

Winning 1 round is not nearly enough, but that's me

It would be a start and may help them get past the 'fold in the biggest games' issue but generally I agree

 

[The Iceman]

We are cursed being in the division we are.

So if we play a top 5 team 1st round, Florida or TB and lose a close first round series are we a failure as a team?

 

[ChickenMcNugget]

We are cursed being in the division we are.

So if we play a top 5 team 1st round, Florida or TB and lose a close first round series are we a failure as a team?

Leafs couldn't compete against bottom 5 teams in CBJ, MTL for the last 2 years either.

They could compete against team Canada for all I care but they need to win 1 round.

 

[francis246]

Dubas deserves credit for the success of the team but he did bet his job on the core and if the core fails to win a round again, it will be interesting to see whether he gets to keep his job and continue to bet his job on the core or asked to move Marner or is fired altogether.

I'd be willing to bet a lot of money that regardless of what happens this year this is probably the most likely scenario. Canadian GM's simply don't get fired often. It is what it is.

 

[Dekes For Days]

So if we play a top 5 team 1st round, Florida or TB and lose a close first round series are we a failure as a team?

According to some, unfortunately. I mean, we barely lost to the 1st, 4th, and 3rd place teams over our first 3 years, and people still somehow count those as part of some long line of "epic playoff failures".

 

[ACC1224]

We are cursed being in the division we are.

So if we play a top 5 team 1st round, Florida or TB and lose a close first round series are we a failure as a team?

Without question.

 

[ShaneFalco]

We are cursed being in the division we are.

So if we play a top 5 team 1st round, Florida or TB and lose a close first round series are we a failure as a team?

Yup. There are always upsets (which wouldn't even really be the case here) and there are no more excuses - "barely lost", "we played a top 3 team", "the team we lost against went to the SCF", "injuries", "hot goalie" etc etc
Coffee is for closers

 

[Gary Nylund]

We are cursed being in the division we are.

So if we play a top 5 team 1st round, Florida or TB and lose a close first round series are we a failure as a team?

Do it once in a vacuum and the answer is no, of course not.

Do it several years in a row, throw in a few losses against teams not even in the top 10, get consistently blown out in every game 7 and at some point the the needle starts drifting into YES territory.

 

[Holls Blackmail]

He (Marner) needs to be on PP2 with Spezza.

 

[The Iceman]

Leafs couldn't compete against bottom 5 teams in CBJ, MTL for the last 2 years either.

They could compete against team Canada for all I care but they need to win 1 round.

In fairness up 3 games to 1 is competing. If you change that to "beating" that is fair.

 

[HarryLime]

Sorry

 

[francis246]

well he's def off power play 1 now. We'll see if they score tomorrow or look "better"

 

[Oscar Peterson]

well he's def off power play 1 now. We'll see if they score tomorrow or look "better"

Last time Marner was off power play 1 they scored a ton and also looked better, if that happens again it will be interesting to see if people are still so vehemently against experimenting with moving him to PP2

 

[NinjaKick]

no probs with having Marner run PP2... spread the wealth

 

[ACC1224]

Last time Marner was off power play 1 they scored a ton and also looked better, if that happens again it will be interesting to see if people are still so vehemently against experimenting with moving him to PP2

I don't think anyone is against it. It's more justifying/understanding why the team sees to keep him on PP1.

 

[Oscar Peterson]

I don't think anyone is against it. It's more justifying/understanding why the team sees to keep him on PP1.

We must be reading different posts.

I can understand why the team is keeping him there, but imo Marner looked way better on our old powerplays with Bozak-JVR-Kadri than he ever has with Matthews, and Matthews-Nylander both playing half-wall on their strong side has a proven long track record of success.

All I'm saying is, if it so happens that the first unit starts popping off again without Mitch, surely we should experiment with a different look rather than chalking it up only to a lucky hot streak as a few posters here have done.

 

[francis246]

We must be reading different posts.

I can understand why the team is keeping him there, but imo Marner looked way better on our old powerplays with Bozak-JVR-Kadri than he ever has with Matthews, and Matthews-Nylander both playing half-wall on their strong side has a proven long track record of success.

All I'm saying is, if it so happens that the first unit starts popping off again without Mitch, surely we should experiment with a different look rather than chalking it up only to a lucky hot streak as a few posters here have done.

I'm not against it, but the first unit never gets off. So you're going to be reducing the minutes of a one group of players and someone is going to be pissed about it. Whether it's Marner's group or Matthews Group. So unless the 2nd unit starts and then gets off to balance it, I don't know how they do it without disrupting the team

 

[ACC1224]

We must be reading different posts.

I can understand why the team is keeping him there, but imo Marner looked way better on our old powerplays with Bozak-JVR-Kadri than he ever has with Matthews, and Matthews-Nylander both playing half-wall on their strong side has a proven long track record of success.

All I'm saying is, if it so happens that the first unit starts popping off again without Mitch, surely we should experiment with a different look rather than chalking it up only to a lucky hot streak as a few posters here have done.

Yeah I don't read all of them, some are too much to take.

It certainly looked different while he was out vs when he came back.
That's coaching, IMO. He's too skilled not to be part of a successful unit and he has had success in the past.
Putting the blame solely on him is misplaced, IMO.

 

[Oscar Peterson]

I'm not against it, but the first unit never gets off. So you're going to be reducing the minutes of a one group of players and someone is going to be pissed about it. Whether it's Marner's group or Matthews Group. So unless the 2nd unit starts and then gets off to balance it, I don't know how they do it without disrupting the team

That will be on Keefe to manage, and Nylander played 2nd PP for almost all of last year without the team being 'disrupted'. I kind of get what you're coming from but if our powerplays were to get better results with those looks, they should still be implemented.

 

[francis246]

That will be on Keefe to manage, and Nylander played 2nd PP for almost all of last year without the team being 'disrupted'. I kind of get what you're coming from but if our powerplays were to get better results with those looks, they should still be implemented.

well we don't know what's said behind closed doors, I'm sure JT and Nylander were both pissed about Thornton being on PP1. I hear you, 2 solid units is good. WHat I liked about Babcock is he had that rule, when we had two good units, 1 minute each. 60 seconds comes and you're out. I just don't know if Keefe has the balls to do it and tell the players it's for the greater good.

 

[ACC1224]

well we don't know what's said behind closed doors, I'm sure JT and Nylander were both pissed about Thornton being on PP1. I hear you, 2 solid units is good. WHat I liked about Babcock is he had that rule, when we had two good units, 1 minute each. 60 seconds comes and you're out. I just don't know if Keefe has the balls to do it and tell the players it's for the greater good.

I've always preferred one stacked unit for the entire 2 minutes myself.

 

[Racer88]

We are cursed being in the division we are.

So if we play a top 5 team 1st round, Florida or TB and lose a close first round series are we a failure as a team?

Yes we are a failure in that scenario. There is no reason for us to expect a team any lesser then Florida or Tampa.
The Leafs have all the financial resources needed to build a team as good as the competition.
The Leafs even won the lottery and have the 2nd best player in the world.
The time for excuses is over it’s time for them to have some success

 

[HamiltonNHL]

This is a bad look on Keefe.

and it reflects on Marner as well.

Leafs' Keefe not concerned by Marner's 'odd' power-play goal drought

Marner should give up his power play position to someone else who will be more productive.


I know he wants the free points but he's a clear drag on the power play as a whole. One fancy pass last night doesn't make up for it.

It's not "odd". It's a reality. Power plays win playoff series.

Overall, i don't care about Marner in PP1. My priority is having Nylander on PP1. I strongly oppose Marner on PP1 over Nylander.

 

[ToneDog]

View attachment 498978

This is a bad look on Keefe.

and it reflects on Marner as well.

Leafs' Keefe not concerned by Marner's 'odd' power-play goal drought

Marner should give up his power play position to someone else who will be more productive.

I know he wants the free points but he's a clear drag on the power play as a whole. One fancy pass last night doesn't make up for it.

It's not "odd". It's a reality. Power plays win playoff series.

No worries, pretty sure if Marner hasn't scored a PP this time next year, Keefe will be concerned.