Wow the playoffs are intense. Can we compete

[Gary Nylund]

Because you wanted it to support your lie, and it obviously didn't. So now you're just going to keep lying about it while pretending to be the reasonable and objective poster.

If you catch me lying, just quote me. Oh that's right, you can't.

You have already gone on record proclaiming winning two rounds as a non-accomplishment, with the 3rd round being the first real test. This while you take great offense to anyone who points that other teams' playoffs success is often built off of beating weak teams.

I don't take offence to nonsense posted on the internet, I do sometimes call it out as nonsense though.

My expectations are the cup. Anything less is a failure.

Weird. I could have sworn you've made many posts talking about how well the Leafs played despite losing in the playoffs. So they can play well and still be regarded as a failure by you, OK then.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I asked it before and nobody cared to answer - why haven't all these rebuilding teams over the last 2 years tried to acquire Babcock since he's allegedly such an incredible asset to a rebuild?

One of the lines that got thrown around here often during the Babcock days was "If Dubas was fired he'd never get a GM job again the league but if Babcock was fired he'd be hired instantly" and people really hammered on the latter part. Babcock hasn't been hired since because everyone knows he's a shitty coach nowadays.

I guess his stock has gone down, simple as that. And that psychological abuse scandal was probably the final nail in his coffin, had that not been a big news item then perhaps someone would have given him another chance. Maybe not though, who knows.

 

[IPS]

I guess his stock has gone down, simple as that. And that psychological abuse scandal was probably the final nail in his coffin, had that not been a big news item then perhaps someone would have given him another chance. Maybe not though, who knows.

All part of the reason of why he's a bad coach. I'll own my bias - I was against him from day 1, but there were a lot of signs from his final couple years in Detroit that really stuck out as red flags to me.

 

[notDatsyuk]

I guarantee you I won't be bragging if we beat Montreal.

But based on the arguments in this thread, a whole lot of you better be if you hope to maintain a shred of consistency.


But let's be real - we've already seen the incoming flip flop - even while praising other teams for beating the likes of the Hawks and coyotes and canucks in rounds 1 and 2, you guys have already set up the expectations that you WILL NOT praise the leafs for beating the "weak" habs and oilers in the first two rounds, and will still consider the team a failure if they lose in round 3.

This is obviously what is coming from you guys, because you guys aren't consistent or objective - only critics.

I think you may have quoted the wrong post.

The poster I responded to suggested I would start bragging if we beat the Habs. My point was that I wouldn't brag before winning anything. Beating Montreal would be a first step, but personally I won't until we make it out of the North at the very least, and probably not until we reach the finals.

I'll quite happily praise them for beating Montreal, if they do, but I won't start bragging about them, just as I won't call them failures if they don't. If they win a round, that's an improvement, and if they don't, that's another disappointment.

I'm afraid you accidentally lumped me in with some other posters, who I don't necessarily agree with. I think my point of view is a lot closer to yours than you thought.

 

[Gary Nylund]

All part of the reason of why he's a bad coach. I'll own my bias - I was against him from day 1, but there were a lot of signs from his final couple years in Detroit that really stuck out as red flags to me.

I was happy he got hired and I still think he did a good job at the start but after a few years, he started going downhill and before the end I was one of the biggest Babcock haters in these parts.

 

[Dekes For Days]

The post I was replying to was trying to show how good we are by pointing out that other teams had (relatively) poorer showings.

Actually, the post you replied to was providing context for the people who only have criticism and negativity to bring, because they exaggerate the quality and intensity of other teams, while endlessly harping on any remotely negative aspect or past event for our team. While we'd all like to win a series, judging teams exclusively on past series wins and losses with zero context behind it is highly misleading. It is a valid point that we have been very competitive and a very tough out in every one of our series, even against some of the best teams in the league. The discussion would be much different if we had been the victim of a bunch of sweeps.

 

[nsleaf]

I guarantee you I won't be bragging if we beat Montreal.

But based on the arguments in this thread, a whole lot of you better be if you hope to maintain a shred of consistency.


But let's be real - we've already seen the incoming flip flop - even while praising other teams for beating the likes of the Hawks and coyotes and canucks in rounds 1 and 2, you guys have already set up the expectations that you WILL NOT praise the leafs for beating the "weak" habs and oilers in the first two rounds, and will still consider the team a failure if they lose in round 3.

This is obviously what is coming from you guys, because you guys aren't consistent or objective - only critics.

So what, why are you so obsessed with being right and proving others wrong? it's weird.
Inferiority complex perhaps.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Actually, the post you replied to was providing context for the people who only have criticism and negativity to bring, because they exaggerate the quality and intensity of other teams, while endlessly harping on any remotely negative aspect or past event for our team. While we'd all like to win a series, judging teams exclusively on past series wins and losses with zero context behind it is highly misleading. It is a valid point that we have been very competitive and a very tough out in every one of our series, even against some of the best teams in the league. The discussion would be much different if we had been the victim of a bunch of sweeps.

But his way of providing context was by pointing out, with zero context, negative aspects of past events for other teams.

I deplore the negativity of other posters too, but I just think that the right way to counter it is not with more negatively.

 

[Mess]

I think of the first two rounds as continuations of the regular season. But a good ramp up for potentially more difficult series. So beyond just winning you want to see signs of maturation, a heavier game, more of a playoff gear.

Agree completely. I think the intensity and physicality and pressure is going to ramp up rather quickly..

This is the first year under Dubas that we finally have the player personnel of a roster assembled for playoff success that can play all types and styles and not just be that high skilled skating team that couldn't play well in hard hitting, tight checking or adapting to the opposition game when they clogged up the ice to prevent those rush attacks and keeping the Leafs on the perimeter.

The embarrassing CBJ loss was a real learning experience for Dubas and Keefe that playoff style hockey is not just about icing the most offensive team and then skate by on talent alone. You need players not afraid to play in traffic and get their hands and noses a little dirty and stand up and not back down and shy away from the physical play, and be willing to play in traffic and go hard to the blue paint and score some greasy goals along the way.

I think its great we get to warm up on lesser competition and ramp up our game and iron out the kinks in the early rounds (getting that PP cooking again, sort out our goaltending) and then be a well oiled and battle tested team come the later rounds when we go from the hunted to the hunters and from favourites to underdogs. If we got tossed into this Bos/Was or TB/Flo series in round #1 cold turkey I'm not sure we would be ready to compete or be very success even though I believe we have the player personnel finally to do so on paper.

 

[zeke]

If you catch me lying, just quote me. Oh that's right, you can't.

Please Gary, you lied and said that I claimed that the Leafs had better playoffs than those other teams. You tried to bring a quote up to back up the lie, but it didn't.

I don't take offence to nonsense posted on the internet, I do sometimes call it out as nonsense though.

Weird. I could have sworn you've made many posts talking about how well the Leafs played despite losing in the playoffs. So they can play well and still be regarded as a failure by you, OK then.

The leafs did play well. They did also fail.

 

[zeke]

So what, why are you so obsessed with being right and proving others wrong? it's weird.
Inferiority complex perhaps.

Actually we were all here discussing whether the leafs can compete in the playoffs, and then a bunch of posters got really upset and started attacking me personally. So here we are.

 

[Dekes For Days]

So what, why are you so obsessed with being right and proving others wrong?

From what I've seen, it's more-so individuals who are wrong quoting his posts that are simply stating facts, and then getting upset because the facts don't agree with their flawed perceptions that they are unable to justify. Perhaps more people should put more importance on being right. Perhaps then we could have actual hockey discussions instead of whatever this thread is.

 

[zeke]

But his way of providing context was by pointing out, with zero context, negative aspects of past events for other teams.

I deplore the negativity of other posters too, but I just think that the right way to counter it is not with more negatively.

Those past events were the very context you are complaining wasn't there.

People seem frightened that the Leafs can't compete, when they have literally been neck and neck in every series they've placed, even against elite veteran physical teams. There's literally never been an example of them NOT competing - whereas there's plenty of examples of other elite teams getting absolutely bushwacked in the playoffs, even by bad teams.

 

[Dekes For Days]

But his way of providing context was by pointing out, with zero context, negative aspects of past events for other teams.

Perhaps incomplete, but it is valid context. Our intensity and ability to compete is being unjustifiably questioned, and it is important context to show the struggles and lows that other teams experience, to provide perspective for our own "struggles" that have been endlessly exaggerated and twisted. Even lesser versions of our team were competitive against even the very best teams through the playoffs, so this questioning of our ability to compete in the playoffs based on the no-context series win/loss record is ridiculous. The lack of series wins sucks, but what happened within those series matters, and is often ignored.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Those past events were the very context you are complaining wasn't there.

People seem frightened that the Leafs can't compete, when they have literally been neck and neck in every series they've placed, even against elite veteran physical teams. There's literally never been an example of them NOT competing - whereas there's plenty of examples of other elite teams getting absolutely bushwacked in the playoffs, even by bad teams.

But the missing context was that most of them had already won a round.

I have no problem with pointing out that we played well. But I don't think it's necessary, or right, to augment it by saying that someone else had a poor series.

Plus, you missed the most obvious one - Pittsburgh getting swept by the Islanders.

 

[Mess]

That 3 game stretch was really something, probably the best we played all year. Of course there's hope, there's always hope.

I'm hanging my hat of my Final 4 or Bust expectation on knowing we were 7-2-1 against Montreal in the regular season and nearly +20 points better, and then those 3 games against McDavid and Co. that proved we can ice out the best player in the game if we need to, to be the last team standing in Canada and the true "Kings of the North".

 

[notDatsyuk]

Perhaps incomplete, but it is valid context. Our intensity and ability to compete is being unjustifiably questioned, and it is important context to show the struggles and lows that other teams experience, to provide perspective for our own "struggles" that have been endlessly exaggerated and twisted. Even lesser versions of our team were competitive against even the very best teams through the playoffs, so this questioning of our ability to compete in the playoffs based on the no-context series win/loss record is ridiculous. The lack of series wins sucks, but what happened within those series matters, and is often ignored.

So why is it wrong to compare our struggles with others teams' successes, but ok to compare our successes with other teams' struggles?

Maybe there's just too much negativity.

 

[Mess]

I asked it before and nobody cared to answer - why haven't all these rebuilding teams over the last 2 years tried to acquire Babcock since he's allegedly such an incredible asset to a rebuild?

One of the lines that got thrown around here often during the Babcock days was "If Dubas was fired he'd never get a GM job again the league but if Babcock was fired he'd be hired instantly" and people really hammered on the latter part. Babcock hasn't been hired since because everyone knows he's a shitty coach nowadays.

FYI ..

The Maple Leafs owe Babcock $5.875 million a year until his eight-year contract expires on June 30, 2023.

Babcock hasn't been hired because he had 4 years @ $ 5.875 mil per left on his contract to sit on his couch and do nothing as one of the highest paid coaches in the game even while unemployed.

Any team that hired him prior to that expiring would need to; A) Pay him more then he was making & B) Simply be taking the Leafs off the hook for any further payments owed.

It has less to do with coaching ability and mostly to due with money $$$.

 

[IPS]

FYI ..

The Maple Leafs owe Babcock $5.875 million a year until his eight-year contract expires on June 30, 2023.

Babcock hasn't been hired because he had 4 years @ $ 5.875 mil per left on his contract to sit on his couch and do nothing as one of the highest paid coaches in he game even while unemployed.

Any team that hired him prior to that expiring would need to; A) Pay him more then he was making & B) Simply be taking the Leafs off the hook for any further payments owed.

He's actually been on the record saying he'd like to coach again. And he got interviewed by the Capitals for their head coaching job (they went with Laviolette).

There's extremely rich teams in rebuilding phases like the Rangers would could easily compensate Mike Babcock properly.

Sorry your opinions didn't age well.

 

[Dekes For Days]

So why is it wrong to compare our struggles with others teams' successes, but ok to compare our successes with other teams' struggles?

Don't really understand your question. Both successes and failures should be considered. Unfortunately, this forum for Leaf fans is littered with exaggerations of other team's successes and strengths, and even bigger exaggerations of Leaf's failures and weaknesses. That's the premise that this entire thread is built around. So a reality check to counter that - outlining what playoff lows really look like, the weaknesses and failures that supposedly "intense" teams have experienced along the way, and our level of competitiveness in our own past series - is valuable context and perspective.

 

[fahad203]

Can we compete? maybe. Can we win, yes

There is a group of people think that some players are going to elevate their games just because it's the playoffs. Like Simmonds and Mikaheyev/Kerfoot

As if they have elevated their games before. They haven't. Simmonds isn't going to turn into a beast because it's the playoffs, he actually never has. Mikaheyev last year showed nothing. Kerfoot was for better part manhandled and trash

Kaprizov last night absolutely tackled Vegas player that came after him. Kaprizov. I doubt I'll ever see that from Marner or Nylander
Landeskog absolutlessly trashed Schenn after being hit and we all know about MacKinnon
We need our big boys to get more engaged. Does't mean you drop the gloves, means you get engaged. Matthews has shown to be engaged. I really worry about Nylander though. Dude is too soft.

But we can win by playing our game, whatever, that game is. Except for Oilers no team has a player or finisher like Matthews and very few has the depth like I do to keep going farther

But there has to be a unung hero, someone other than the top 4. My call for a hero this year is Joe and Gally. Joe is a vet. Joe knows what he has to do and what he can only do now. Which is essentially use his size. He also knows thats a part of the game we lack. Joe will do what GOAT never did, actually touch a player

 

[Gary Nylund]

Please Gary, you lied and said that I claimed that the Leafs had better playoffs than those other teams. You tried to bring a quote up to back up the lie, but it didn't.

The leafs did play well. They did also fail.

I quoted the lie, you just spin and spin and claim black is white. You seem to be allergic to admitting you're ever wrong about anything, at least I've never ever seen you concede a point to anyone (and you've had plenty of occasion to do so). Several people have commented on your lack of credibility recently but you don't seem to care about that so fine, be happy.

Those past events were the very context you are complaining wasn't there.

People seem frightened that the Leafs can't compete, when they have literally been neck and neck in every series they've placed, even against elite veteran physical teams. There's literally never been an example of them NOT competing - whereas there's plenty of examples of other elite teams getting absolutely bushwacked in the playoffs, even by bad teams.

Who? I haven't noticed anyone saying this myself, is this just more paranoid fantasies or can you show us a post where someone said we can't compete?

What does that even mean - can't compete? Every team competes FFS.

I'm hanging my hat of my Final 4 or Bust expectation on knowing we were 7-2-1 against Montreal in the regular season and nearly +20 points better, and then those 3 games against McDavid and Co. that proved we can ice out the best player in the game if we need to, to be the last team standing in Canada and the true "Kings of the North".

Well we are favoured to win the North so anything less than that would be a disappointment for sure. And we'd have to do a bit more than that to be really happy about the season IMHO.

He's actually been on the record saying he'd like to coach again. And he got interviewed by the Capitals for their head coaching job (they went with Laviolette).

There's extremely rich teams in rebuilding phases like the Rangers would could easily compensate Mike Babcock properly.

Sorry your opinions didn't age well.

Huh, that's interesting. Was that before of after the scandal? If it was after then maybe he'll get another kick at the can after all.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Don't really understand your question. Both successes and failures should be considered. Unfortunately, this forum for Leaf fans is littered with exaggerations of other team's successes and strengths, and even bigger exaggerations of Leaf's failures and weaknesses. That's the premise that this entire thread is built around. So a reality check to counter that - outlining what playoff lows really look like, the weaknesses and failures that supposedly "intense" teams have experienced along the way, and our level of competitiveness in our own past series - is valuable context and perspective.

Funny I thought the thread was about the intensity of the playoffs so far, but it’s obviously de-graded.

 

[ErnieLeafs]

Funny I thought the thread was about the intensity of the playoffs so far, but it’s obviously de-graded.

Thread’s a mess. Playoffs are pretty intense.

- A summary

 

[Jozay]

It might make more sense to use the phrase "as expected" after something happens, not before.

You said the Leafs have a good shot at other teams - that implies you don't think we have a good shot against those teams. For the record, I disagree. I think we have a good shot against anyone.

So I did get my opinion across...thanks for letting me know.