R1, G3: Lightning vs. Maple Leafs - Apr. 22nd, 7:00pm - CBC, Fan 590

[Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate]

I don't know exactly what was said to Dubas but it's pretty obvious it went over the line....good on him. He looks like he's ready to go. Dubas has the passion.
https://twitter.com/AHobsonMedia/status/1650145373522997251

Fully admit that I'll probably not have the consensus opinion, but I didn't like it at all. It's a bad look on a guy that I've always respected for rising above the BS.

I agree, and all it does is encourage other drunks to do the same next game.  That said, if I'm running the arena I'd have security out in front of the box with orders to toss anyone who starts anything.  Just like they got rid of that idiot Leafs fan back in Toronto.

[Dappleganger]

Hockey is just different. :)

[princedpw]

Any thoughts about tactical problems that the leafs ran into? How can we overcome those tactical problems?

[cabber24]

I think Stamkos attacking Matthews has everything to do with what looked like a severely hurt Point on a perceived dangerous play. It's not right and it seems even less so with Point coming back. I don't think it was as calculated as Keefe thinks.

Nah Keefe was right. It was well after the hit, Matthews was just picking up sticks thinking all the pushing was over. Stamkos knew Leafs were getting a PP and tried to take Matthews off so he wasn't available for the PP, I called it last night during the game. Smart move by Stamkos knowing the refs usually even things out in situations like that

Yeah, I agree. There's no question in my mind Stamkos knew exactly what he was doing, and that the refs were not going to give a 5 on 3 unless someone left on a stretcher. I've got grudging respect, that was a pretty smart move in the moment.

As a player, I would be furious if my teams best player was laid out after a hit and might try to return the favour by going after theirs. I think Stamkos and Kuch lost their minds when they saw Point down. No one knew how the PIMs would shake out not even the refs until post review.

[Arn]

Lafferty gets fined.  Nothing for Tampa.  The league continues to be a joke

 A ha has just done something very similar in the Bruins Panthers game, possibly even more aggressive actually. Be interesting to see if the outcome is consistent.

[Guilt Trip]

I think Stamkos attacking Matthews has everything to do with what looked like a severely hurt Point on a perceived dangerous play. It's not right and it seems even less so with Point coming back. I don't think it was as calculated as Keefe thinks.

Nah Keefe was right. It was well after the hit, Matthews was just picking up sticks thinking all the pushing was over. Stamkos knew Leafs were getting a PP and tried to take Matthews off so he wasn't available for the PP, I called it last night during the game. Smart move by Stamkos knowing the refs usually even things out in situations like that

Yeah, I agree. There's no question in my mind Stamkos knew exactly what he was doing, and that the refs were not going to give a 5 on 3 unless someone left on a stretcher. I've got grudging respect, that was a pretty smart move in the moment.

As a player, I would be furious if my teams best player was laid out after a hit and might try to return the favour by going after theirs. I think Stamkos and Kuch lost their minds when they saw Point down. No one knew how the PIMs would shake out not even the refs until post review.

Kucherov yes because he reacted immediately, Stamkos was calculated. And tell me how did Kucherov get a penalty for fighting against ROR? He had the guy that delivered the hit so once that's broken up he's goes after someone else. These guys know that after the initial penalty is called either way, it's a free for all so let's take the Leafs best players off the ice.
Too bad the refs didn't get it right but oh well now it's in the past.

[herman]

Any thoughts about tactical problems that the leafs ran into? How can we overcome those tactical problems?

Maybe less tactical and more of a personnel/skill set thing.

NZ transition has suffered as the Lightning are quick on pucks and the Leafs don't have as many puckmovers who can solo rush through the zone, requiring a greater reliance on chaining passes through the Lightning players.

Leafs are basically down to Nylander, and his ice time is curated due to his general lack of urgency in DZ coverage. Marner has the puck skills and the agility, but no pull-away first step or top speed. Kerfoot has the wheels but isn't as strong on the puck. Lafferty has the straightaway speed but literally cannot process the moves required for complicated navigation.

The Leafs are getting by with muscling it out and in at times using moving picks to open lanes. Their backend is slower than average unless Rielly is on, but generally harder on retrievals now.

It's resulting in more patient, bend-and-hopefully-not-break defense (Carlyle tried to do this) unless we are chaining a lot of OZ sequences regularly. Interrupting/slowing down Tampa's rush attack has been key to stifling their offense in games 2/3.

[princedpw]

Any thoughts about tactical problems that the leafs ran into? How can we overcome those tactical problems?

Maybe less tactical and more of a personnel/skill set thing.

NZ transition has suffered as the Lightning are quick on pucks and the Leafs don't have as many puckmovers who can solo rush through the zone, requiring a greater reliance on chaining passes through the Lightning players.

Leafs are basically down to Nylander, and his ice time is curated due to his general lack of urgency in DZ coverage. Marner has the puck skills and the agility, but no pull-away first step or top speed. Kerfoot has the wheels but isn't as strong on the puck. Lafferty has the straightaway speed but literally cannot process the moves required for complicated navigation.

The Leafs are getting by with muscling it out and in at times using moving picks to open lanes. Their backend is slower than average unless Rielly is on, but generally harder on retrievals now.

It's resulting in more patient, bend-and-hopefully-not-break defense (Carlyle tried to do this) unless we are chaining a lot of OZ sequences regularly. Interrupting/slowing down Tampa's rush attack has been key to stifling their offense in games 2/3.

Sounds like Liljegren would be helpful.

[cw]

Any thoughts about tactical problems that the leafs ran into? How can we overcome those tactical problems?

Maybe less tactical and more of a personnel/skill set thing.

NZ transition has suffered as the Lightning are quick on pucks and the Leafs don't have as many puckmovers who can solo rush through the zone, requiring a greater reliance on chaining passes through the Lightning players.

Leafs are basically down to Nylander, and his ice time is curated due to his general lack of urgency in DZ coverage. Marner has the puck skills and the agility, but no pull-away first step or top speed. Kerfoot has the wheels but isn't as strong on the puck. Lafferty has the straightaway speed but literally cannot process the moves required for complicated navigation.

The Leafs are getting by with muscling it out and in at times using moving picks to open lanes. Their backend is slower than average unless Rielly is on, but generally harder on retrievals now.

It's resulting in more patient, bend-and-hopefully-not-break defense (Carlyle tried to do this) unless we are chaining a lot of OZ sequences regularly. Interrupting/slowing down Tampa's rush attack has been key to stifling their offense in games 2/3.

What did you see that was different in game 2?

[herman]

Sounds like Liljegren would be helpful.

He has a much better first pass and mobility, so in a vacuum, yes. But he'll be paired with Rielly, which cedes d-zone time for his offensive rush tendencies. Schenn is much better in the D-zone but also tends to get us hemmed too. The calculus is weighing the value of spending less time in our zone nut higher likelihood of getting scored on, vs spending more time in our zone but lower likelihood of getting scored on. I don't think there is a perfect answer and I think many playoff teams would like to have this 'problem' on there with their third pair.

What did you see that was different in game 2?

Hedman was missing from game 2 so every D pair was overmatched, and the Leafs getting the early goal gave them latitude to play without as much hesitancy.

Tampa buckled down and played extremely well in G3 and got their borderline ticky-tacky interference game humming. They were on top of nearly every puck play and rushed Leaf decisions. Samsonov straight up goalied them in the back half and OT, and Vasilevskiy being merely average (no rhythm) sunk them.

[princedpw]

Sounds like Liljegren would be helpful.

He has a much better first pass and mobility, so in a vacuum, yes. But he'll be paired with Rielly, which cedes d-zone time for his offensive rush tendencies. Schenn is much better in the D-zone but also tends to get us hemmed too. The calculus is weighing the value of spending less time in our zone nut higher likelihood of getting scored on, vs spending more time in our zone but lower likelihood of getting scored on. I don't think there is a perfect answer and I think many playoff teams would like to have this 'problem' on there with their third pair.

What did you see that was different in game 2?

Hedman was missing from game 2 so every D pair was overmatched, and the Leafs getting the early goal gave them latitude to play without as much hesitancy.

Tampa buckled down and played extremely well in G3 and got their borderline ticky-tacky interference game humming. They were on top of nearly every puck play and rushed Leaf decisions. Samsonov straight up goalied them in the back half and OT, and Vasilevskiy being merely average (no rhythm) sunk them.

The coach has likely made his decision but we could put Liljegren back with Giordano:

McCabe-Holl
Giordano-Liljegren
Rielly-Brodie

I think I noticed Brodie playing a few shifts with Rielly later in the game.

[Bill33]

Meh. I'd be cautious about removing physicality from the back end. I could definitely be convinced of Schenn potentially playing more situational minutes, but they got him specifically for an ugly series that this is turning out to be, and he's playing a very effective role, imo.

[cw]

What did you see that was different in game 2?

Hedman was missing from game 2 so every D pair was overmatched, and the Leafs getting the early goal gave them latitude to play without as much hesitancy.

Tampa buckled down and played extremely well in G3 and got their borderline ticky-tacky interference game humming. They were on top of nearly every puck play and rushed Leaf decisions. Samsonov straight up goalied them in the back half and OT, and Vasilevskiy being merely average (no rhythm) sunk them.

What would your advice be for the Leafs tonight?

[bustaheims]

What did you see that was different in game 2?

Hedman was missing from game 2 so every D pair was overmatched, and the Leafs getting the early goal gave them latitude to play without as much hesitancy.

Tampa buckled down and played extremely well in G3 and got their borderline ticky-tacky interference game humming. They were on top of nearly every puck play and rushed Leaf decisions. Samsonov straight up goalied them in the back half and OT, and Vasilevskiy being merely average (no rhythm) sunk them.

What you your advice be for the Leafs tonight?

Play like Game 2, but moreso?

[herman]

What did you see that was different in game 2?

Hedman was missing from game 2 so every D pair was overmatched, and the Leafs getting the early goal gave them latitude to play without as much hesitancy.

Tampa buckled down and played extremely well in G3 and got their borderline ticky-tacky interference game humming. They were on top of nearly every puck play and rushed Leaf decisions. Samsonov straight up goalied them in the back half and OT, and Vasilevskiy being merely average (no rhythm) sunk them.

What you your advice be for the Leafs tonight?

Play like Game 2, but moreso?

This!

(Different) Set breakouts on retrievals so players don't need to think. Lighting forecheck is going to be sending 2 players in. Beat that first lasher and the Leafs have numbers moving up the ice.

I'd send the most dangerous forward up ice to space out the structure and cut across to the opposite lane to cause some chaos and hand offs. The puck doesn't need to be airmailed to the cherry picker, but it should open up a carry lane