TMLfans.ca

Maple Leafs News and Views => Main Leafs Hockey Talk => Topic started by: Green Leaf on July 11, 2011, 02:29:19 PM

Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Green Leaf on July 11, 2011, 02:29:19 PM
Fabian Brunnstrom  was in Montreal for two days on the weekend and has visited  two other cities (reportedly Dallas and Detroit). Gainey said Brunnstrom "has the talent for the NHL" and expects the  Swedish star to make a decision by  the end of the week." - hockeyinsideout.com

I really hope that Burkie signs him. I think he is still worth a look over another year.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on July 11, 2011, 03:16:25 PM
Fabian Brunnstrom  was in Montreal for two days on the weekend and has visited  two other cities (reportedly Dallas and Detroit). Gainey said Brunnstrom "has the talent for the NHL" and expects the  Swedish star to make a decision by  the end of the week." - hockeyinsideout.com

Flashback!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: ThatLeafsFan on July 11, 2011, 03:52:20 PM
Fabian Brunnstrom  was in Montreal for two days on the weekend and has visited  two other cities (reportedly Dallas and Detroit). Gainey said Brunnstrom "has the talent for the NHL" and expects the  Swedish star to make a decision by  the end of the week." - hockeyinsideout.com

Flashback!

I was going to say the same thing!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Green Leaf on July 11, 2011, 04:02:00 PM
Fabian Brunnstrom  was in Montreal for two days on the weekend and has visited  two other cities (reportedly Dallas and Detroit). Gainey said Brunnstrom "has the talent for the NHL" and expects the  Swedish star to make a decision by  the end of the week." - hockeyinsideout.com

Flashback!

I was going to say the same thing!

why is that?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: lamajama on July 11, 2011, 04:03:36 PM
Fabian Brunnstrom  was in Montreal for two days on the weekend and has visited  two other cities (reportedly Dallas and Detroit). Gainey said Brunnstrom "has the talent for the NHL" and expects the  Swedish star to make a decision by  the end of the week." - hockeyinsideout.com

Flashback!

I was going to say the same thing!

why is that?

Well 3 or so years ago, he was on a tour with teams trying to sign him. Now, he's trying to convince them to even offer a deal.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: pindreamer on July 11, 2011, 05:53:53 PM
There's not too many players that can say their best game in the NHL was the best game of their career. If the leafs get to a point where they need a body for The Marlies I say go for it but otherwise not a player I would lose a lot of sleep over.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on July 11, 2011, 05:56:05 PM
There's not too many players that can say their best game in the NHL was the best game of their career.

I would think most players could say that. :P
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: oldrugbyguy on July 12, 2011, 10:11:51 AM
Can not see the leafs trying to sign him. They would have signed him when had him last year
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Damian on July 12, 2011, 10:28:19 AM
Can not see the leafs trying to sign him. They would have signed him when had him last year

I think thats probably correct... it was a whole tadooo about nuthin before....
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: pindreamer on July 12, 2011, 12:33:16 PM
Busta Reims I think you misunderstood me comment.  I can see where a player's first NHL came would be the best experience of their career.  I would think very few players would be able to say their NHL career peaked at game 1 and was down hill from there.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Damian on July 12, 2011, 12:42:57 PM
dude.... he didnt misunderstand you. You actually wrote "their best game in the NHL" when you meant "first"... thats all .... no worries
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on July 12, 2011, 01:58:03 PM
dude.... he didnt misunderstand you. You actually wrote "their best game in the NHL" when you meant "first"... thats all .... no worries

Yeah. I was just poking fun at the mistyped statement - which, to be fair, made it a statement worthy of being poked with fun.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: pindreamer on July 12, 2011, 04:59:23 PM
Duh.  My Bad.  I even missed it when I reread it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Omallley on July 12, 2011, 05:39:56 PM
There's not too many players that can say their best game in the NHL was the best game of their career.

I would think most players could say that. :P

Now if he said "first game".
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on July 19, 2011, 02:56:21 PM
mirtle James Mirtle Liles will wear No. 24 in Toronto.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: louisstamos on July 19, 2011, 02:59:28 PM
mirtle James Mirtle Liles will wear No. 24 in Toronto.

(http://www.digitaljournal.com/img/1/6/5/3/2/5/i/3/8/0/o/mccabe%20huh.jpg)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: The Red Polar Bear on July 19, 2011, 03:31:29 PM
mirtle James Mirtle Liles will wear No. 24 in Toronto.

So, *thats* what the JM stands for.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Omallley on July 19, 2011, 04:01:23 PM
mirtle James Mirtle Liles will wear No. 24 in Toronto.

(http://www.digitaljournal.com/img/1/6/5/3/2/5/i/3/8/0/o/mccabe%20huh.jpg)

I hope to God he can maintain the stupid face quotient...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on July 19, 2011, 05:12:25 PM
mirtle James Mirtle Liles will wear No. 24 in Toronto.

BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on July 19, 2011, 06:14:13 PM
The Omen is bad...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: 13th fan on July 19, 2011, 07:28:29 PM
The Omen is bad...
if he had a 5.5 million contract and no movement clause it would complete the number 24
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Gilmour the Great on July 19, 2011, 08:35:53 PM
First we have to put up with that dumb Jim Carrey movie, now this...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on July 20, 2011, 12:48:57 PM
MapleLeafs Toronto Maple Leafs The jersey numbers for a few of the new #Leafs - Tim Connolly No. 12, Cody Franson No. 22 and John-Michael Liles No. 24
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on July 27, 2011, 10:08:07 AM
According to Sportsnet, the Leafs have grand plans to celebrate their centennial (2017) with several events.  They are:  hosting an NHL All-Star Game, the NHL Entry Draft, and finally, an outdoor game.
All of these will be leading up to their centennial year & season (2016-17).
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on July 27, 2011, 10:11:04 AM
According to Sportsnet, the Leafs have grand plans to celebrate their centennial (2017) with several events.  They are:  hosting an NHL All-Star Game, the NHL Entry Draft, and finally, an outdoor game.
All of these will be leading up to their centennial year & season (2016-17).

It will also likely be 50 years since our last cup.  :-[
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on July 27, 2011, 10:36:53 AM
According to Sportsnet, the Leafs have grand plans to celebrate their centennial (2017) with several events.  They are:  hosting an NHL All-Star Game, the NHL Entry Draft, and finally, an outdoor game.
All of these will be leading up to their centennial year & season (2016-17).

It will also likely be 50 years since our last cup.  :-[


Oh... no, no...    :'(   .... they've got to win it around then!    :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Dappleganger on July 27, 2011, 12:09:35 PM
According to Sportsnet, the Leafs have grand plans to celebrate their centennial (2017) with several events.  They are:  hosting an NHL All-Star Game, the NHL Entry Draft, and finally, an outdoor game.
All of these will be leading up to their centennial year & season (2016-17).

2016-2017 will be our first year with Stamkos so I'd imagine we'll have a good shot at the cup that year.  ;)

Should have Getzlaf too by then .

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on July 28, 2011, 11:24:22 AM
Some speculation that Phil Kessel (and Taylor Hall) are training with Gary Roberts this summer.

Any idea if this is true?  Couldn't hurt.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Fletch on July 28, 2011, 11:35:17 AM
Former Leafs prospect Justin Pogge has signed on with Phoenix.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/07/27/justin_pogge/

One year/two way contract.  No money mentioned.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Damian on July 28, 2011, 12:17:25 PM
Former Leafs prospect Justin Pogge has signed on with Phoenix.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/07/27/justin_pogge/

One year/two way contract.  No money mentioned.

no money given ;)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: 13th fan on July 28, 2011, 07:02:37 PM
Some speculation that Phil Kessel (and Taylor Hall) are training with Gary Roberts this summer.

Any idea if this is true?  Couldn't hurt.
It should be good for him as long Gary doesn't train him in the lip service in the locker room :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: WAYNEINIONA on July 28, 2011, 08:38:41 PM
Some speculation that Phil Kessel (and Taylor Hall) are training with Gary Roberts this summer.

Any idea if this is true?  Couldn't hurt.


I believe Stamkos trained with him last year and look at the season he had. We can only hope that Gary can get him in the shape ne needs to be to bring his game to the next level. Roberts has done some great work with a number of young players.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: freer on July 29, 2011, 11:35:12 AM
lets hope he puts some muscle on. its too bad Gary cant teach his meanness
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Boston Leaf on July 29, 2011, 01:09:24 PM
GO LEAFS GO!!!! just felt like saying it
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Rob on July 29, 2011, 02:12:39 PM
GO LEAFS GO!!!! just felt like saying it

Should we start the vortex of doom already????!!!???!?!?!?!?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Green Leaf on August 21, 2011, 03:58:56 PM
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/08/21/leafs-youngsters-the-key-to-success (http://www.torontosun.com/2011/08/21/leafs-youngsters-the-key-to-success)

Nice article
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on August 25, 2011, 04:09:37 PM
For those interested in jersey numbers, Kadri announced on twitter earlier today that he would be sticking with #43. And Tim Connolly will switch to #12 since his usual #19 is being used by Lupul.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on August 25, 2011, 04:49:28 PM
For those interested in jersey numbers, Kadri announced on twitter earlier today that he would be sticking with #43. And Tim Connolly will switch to #12 since his usual #19 is being used by Lupul.

I was hoping he'd take 91.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: No.92 on August 25, 2011, 05:20:39 PM
For those interested in jersey numbers, Kadri announced on twitter earlier today that he would be sticking with #43. And Tim Connolly will switch to #12 since his usual #19 is being used by Lupul.

I was hoping he'd take 91.

x2.  Ya, 43 is kinda lame.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 06:00:57 PM
For those interested in jersey numbers, Kadri announced on twitter earlier today that he would be sticking with #43. And Tim Connolly will switch to #12 since his usual #19 is being used by Lupul.

I was hoping he'd take 91.

x2.  Ya, 43 is kinda lame.

#43 is beyond lame... though I respect his decision to make that number his own.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Dappleganger on August 25, 2011, 06:03:40 PM
ummm.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l68vlVI5Nuo&feature=player_profilepage
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 06:04:59 PM

It's a jersey number. One is as good as the other.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 06:08:08 PM

It's a jersey number. One is as good as the other.

Only in the same way that the guy's garage door down the street is as good as the rest of ours... even if it's painted bright purple.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 06:10:38 PM

It's a jersey number. One is as good as the other.

Only in the same way that the guy's garage door down the street is as good as the rest of ours... even if it's painted bright purple.

Exactly. Only in the way in which things are true as opposed to nonsense.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on August 25, 2011, 06:18:48 PM

It's a jersey number. One is as good as the other.

Only in the same way that the guy's garage door down the street is as good as the rest of ours... even if it's painted bright purple.

Exactly. Only in the way in which things are true as opposed to nonsense.

One jersey number is as good as the other for you, not so for others.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Deebo on August 25, 2011, 06:23:11 PM
I don't know how jersey number can be lame.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 06:25:23 PM
I don't know how jersey number can be lame.

... says the guy with the bright purple garage door.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on August 25, 2011, 06:49:42 PM
I don't know how jersey number can be lame.

I've never quite figured that one out either.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 06:57:02 PM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lame

lame1    /leɪm/  Show Spelled [leym]  Show IPA adjective, lam·er, lam·est,  verb, lamed, lam·ing,  noun
adjective
1. crippled or physically disabled, especially in the foot or leg so as to limp or walk with difficulty.
2. impaired or disabled through defect or injury: a lame arm.
3. weak; inadequate; unsatisfactory; clumsy: a lame excuse.
4. Slang . out of touch with modern fads or trends; unsophisticated.
verb (used with object)
5. to make lame or defective.

See line 3... I (like some others) are "unsatisfied" with the number. Just speaking for my self, I find the number unappealing because it looks odd or "clumsy" (again, to me) on a hockey sweater.

Everyone happy now?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on August 25, 2011, 08:54:57 PM
I'm going to rewrite a blues song, 'The Thrill is Paiement'...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 09:06:45 PM
One jersey number is as good as the other for you, not so for others.

Sure. Some people think Obama is a good president, others think he's secretly a reptilian alien who's been sent here to steal our thoughts. Opinions vary but it doesn't mean they have equal validity. 

Does it affect play at all? No. Have players been successful with non-traditional numbers? Yes. Are there a billion other things to think about of more weight and import? I think that's a safe bet.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: AvroArrow on August 25, 2011, 09:49:29 PM
Nik, take your insults to HFBoards or somewhere else.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on August 25, 2011, 09:52:43 PM
One jersey number is as good as the other for you, not so for others.

Sure. Some people think Obama is a good president, others think he's secretly a reptilian alien who's been sent here to steal our thoughts. Opinions vary but it doesn't mean they have equal validity.

Just so I have you right you're equating people who have an opinion about what they like or don't like in a jersey number with people who believe Obama is a reptile from another planet? Generous round of hyperbole or did I miss the gray area? 

Quote
Does it affect play at all? No. Have players been successful with non-traditional numbers? Yes. Are there a billion other things to think about of more weight and import? I think that's a safe bet.

The context recited was from a fan pov. From a players pov, sure and I somewhat agree with the last part but why did you bother typing it?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 09:54:20 PM
Are there a billion other things to think about of more weight and import? I think that's a safe bet.

I'm fairly sure CTB felt it was worth mentioning when he was good enough to post the jersey # info today and I'm also fairly certain he would have placed said post in the useless thread if he felt it belonged there. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with him mentioning it or other peolpe discussing it further.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 09:59:13 PM
Just so I have you right you're equating people who have an opinion about what they like or don't like in a jersey number with people who believe Obama is a reptile from another planet? Generous round of hyperbole or did I miss the gray area?

It's an analogy. It's helpfully summed up with my last sentence in the paragraph.   

The context recited was from a fan pov. From a players pov, sure and I somewhat agree with the last part but why did you bother typing it?

I think the fan's POV and the player's are pretty well aligned here.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 10:01:01 PM
Personally, I don't see anything wrong with him mentioning it or other peolpe discussing it further.

I didn't say word one about what CTB told us. It's information pertinent to anyone following the Maple Leafs this season.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 10:09:27 PM
Personally, I don't see anything wrong with him mentioning it or other peolpe discussing it further.

I didn't say word one about what CTB told us. It's information pertinent to anyone following the Maple Leafs this season.

You may think you didn't, but you did. CTB brought up the numbers and you said (after some discussion about said numbers) that there were a billion other thinks worth talking about.

God, what's wrong with just post things that are on our minds? I don't think the dialogue on this subject (a subject I might remind you that you said isn't all that important) is worth all the nagging, dude.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 10:11:25 PM
You may think you didn't, but you did.

No, I flat out didn't. What number a player wears on the team is a piece of information. What I'm specifically and clearly referring to is the "debate" of whether one number is better than the other.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 10:19:51 PM
Just throwing it out there but if one number isn't better than the other than why do some players give away Rolex's and sports cars for one over another? Why should number preferences be limited to just the player and not the fan? To a lesser degree, I think it's alright to have an emotional/sentimental attachment to certain numbers and dislikes towards others as a fan. If you don't like #43 as a number because it isn't traditional or it just looks bad in your mind, I see no problem with that.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 10:24:01 PM
Just throwing it out there but if one number isn't better than the other than why do some players give away Rolex's and sports cars for one over another?

Because certain players are superstitious and others are willing to profit from that.

You're absolutely, 100% free to prefer players wear traditional numbers or drive red cars or have dreamy blue eyes. Likewise, I think it's fine for other fans to point out that "disliking" a number, read that sentence again, is a little nutty.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 10:31:57 PM
Just throwing it out there but if one number isn't better than the other than why do some players give away Rolex's and sports cars for one over another?

Because certain players are superstitious and others are willing to profit from that.

You're absolutely, 100% free to prefer players wear traditional numbers or drive red cars or have dreamy blue eyes. Likewise, I think it's fine for other fans to point out that "disliking" a number, read that sentence again, is a little nutty.

Well, isn't being a fan of a sports team "nutty" anyway? I mean, unless you're financially invested in said club why should you care about the team anyway? Perhaps for many of the same reasons you might prefer one number over another? - and none of those reasons are particularly sane anyway. What I take issue with is when you say it isn't worth talking about. Personally, I think it's as sound as a discussion as anything sports related when you think about it and if you don't care to participate, don't.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on August 25, 2011, 10:34:31 PM
Brian Lawton is the only player to have worn #98.  I think some players place some importance,  significance or preference to their jersey numbers. Doesn't surprise me that some fans do as well. From that, some numbers for some people may appeal more than others.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Green Leaf on August 25, 2011, 10:34:50 PM
ummm.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l68vlVI5Nuo&feature=player_profilepage

hahahaha He's Great!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 10:41:13 PM
Well, isn't being a fan of a sports team "nutty" anyway?

No, or at least I've never thought so. Being a fan of a sports team is a way to align yourself with a community and city. It's expressing an interest in a sport at it's highest level. Being a fan of a sports team is a way people have bridged barriers of race, ethnicity, language and religion. 

I mean, unless you're financially invested in said club why should you care about the team anyway?

Because it's, as mentioned, something that links you with a community. It can tie generations together and serve as a common reference point for people who'd otherwise have nothing in common. The better the Maple Leafs do the more hockey is played in this city and the more a hockey fan can watch. Underpinning any attachment are rational reasons to support your local team. 

Personally, I think it's as sound as a discussion as anything sports related when you think about it and if you don't care to participate, don't.

If you think 43 vs. 91 is as sound a discussion as, say, the respective quality of a team's players or the myriad issues facing the sport as it's played, well, I'm pretty comfortable taking the opposite position there.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 11:00:47 PM
Well, isn't being a fan of a sports team "nutty" anyway?

No, or at least I've never thought so. Being a fan of a sports team is a way to align yourself with a community and city. It's expressing an interest in a sport at it's highest level. Being a fan of a sports team is a way people have bridged barriers of race, ethnicity, language and religion. 

I mean, unless you're financially invested in said club why should you care about the team anyway?

Because it's, as mentioned, something that links you with a community. It can tie generations together and serve as a common reference point for people who'd otherwise have nothing in common. The better the Maple Leafs do the more hockey is played in this city and the more a hockey fan can watch. Underpinning any attachment are rational reasons to support your local team. 

Personally, I think it's as sound as a discussion as anything sports related when you think about it and if you don't care to participate, don't.

If you think 43 vs. 91 is as sound a discussion as, say, the respective quality of a team's players or the myriad issues facing the sport as it's played, well, I'm pretty comfortable taking the opposite position there.

I think feelings and importance towards numbers can be held as strong as feelings towards teams. Sure, teams link communities and generations but so do associated jersey numbers. For example, I remember as a kid my Dad (who was away on business for what I thought was a long time) came back from Dallas with a #33 Tony Dorsett shirt for me and I loved it. He wasn't a Cowboys fan or anything but I instantly became one then... I'm still a huge fan. #33 isn't a traditional hockey number (as #43 isn't) but I've always tried to snag it in whatever league (in whatever sport) I was playing ever since.

Sure, I'll put up sports psychology and how it affects players, fans, and business/marketing (yes, logos, images and numbers fall in to that category) right up there with whatever issues you want to bring up and also feel pretty comfortable with my position.

If you don't think numbers matter, fine... just don't insult people who have reasons to believe they do. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on August 25, 2011, 11:09:00 PM
With some trepidation, I'll say that jersey numbers are important.  Very.  Just like we all prefer same names to others (that surely is not a matter of indifference), some of us -- maybe most of us -- have numbers we prefer, for various personal, though not thereby necessarily irrational, reasons.

For me, 43 is ultralame for Kadri, a skill guy.  Prime numbers in the 40s all stink (yeah, that goes for you too Kulemin).  Why?  Because I grew up watching football and I associate them with blocking backs and other "non-skilled" players.  A personal, but not an irrational, reason.

Kadri wore 13 in junior, did he not?  Since on the Leafs no more jerseys are being retired he should just go for it and wear 13.  If Stajan could wear Keon's number, Kadri can wear Sundin's.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 11:11:42 PM
Sure, I'll put up sports psychology and how it affects players, fans, and business/marketing (yes, logos, images and numbers fall in to that category) right up there with whatever issues you want to bring up and also feel pretty comfortable with my position.

Again, lots of players have had very successful careers with very unconventional numbers. Jagr, Hasek, Bourque, Crosby and on and on and on. Kessel wears #81, Gilmour wore #93 and none of that impacted/affected their ability to play hockey or endear themselves to fans of the Maple Leafs.

If you don't think numbers matter, fine... just don't insult people who have reasons to believe they do.

They're wrong. And I think this board allows for people to say when other people are wrong about something.

I mean, listen to yourself for a second. Kadri is wearing #43, so obviously it's a number he likes, doesn't mind. If you think yourself justified in insulting his choice of number is and saying that it's "beyond lame" I'm pretty comfortable in the retort that it doesn't actually matter.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 11:15:54 PM
With some trepidation, I'll say that jersey numbers are important.  Very.  Just like we all prefer same names to others (that surely is not a matter of indifference), some of us -- maybe most of us -- have numbers we prefer, for various personal, though not thereby necessarily irrational, reasons.

For me, 43 is ultralame for Kadri, a skill guy.  Prime numbers in the 40s all stink (yeah, that goes for you too Kulemin).  Why?  Because I grew up watching football and I associate them with blocking backs and other "non-skilled" players.  A personal, but not an irrational, reason.

Kadri wore 13 in junior, did he not?  Since on the Leafs no more jerseys are being retired he should just go for it and wear 13.  If Stajan could wear Keon's number, Kadri can wear Sundin's.

I couldn't agree more... I'll also add that some Chinese folks won't even but a house they're in love with because there's a "4" in the street address it... or is it "8", or both? Numbers I think have a lot of meaning. In sports and in life.   
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 11:16:39 PM
Kadri wore 13 in junior, did he not?  Since on the Leafs no more jerseys are being retired he should just go for it and wear 13.  If Stajan could wear Keon's number, Kadri can wear Sundin's.

The images I have of Kadri in Junior are of him wearing #91(another high, non-traditional number).

Either way, I think it's pretty odd to be making a case for numerology and then saying "why not just wear #13?".
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 11:27:34 PM
I mean, listen to yourself for a second. Kadri is wearing #43, so obviously it's a number he likes, doesn't mind. If you think yourself justified in insulting his choice of number is and saying that it's "beyond lame" I'm pretty comfortable in the retort that it doesn't actually matter.

Kadri's #43 is lame by the word's very defintion just as a QB wearing #63 would be. Sorry but these are just the facts of the matter. Like I said earlier, I dig he wants to make it his own but it's still lame... just as Gretzky's might have been at first.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 11:28:06 PM
I couldn't agree more... I'll also add that some Chinese folks won't even but a house they're in love with because there's a "4" in the street address it... or is it "8", or both? Numbers I think have a lot of meaning. In sports and in life.   

Oh, I see.

Very well then. Has anyone weighed Kadri to see if he weighs the same as a duck?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 11:33:23 PM
Kadri's #43 is lame by the word's very defintion just as a QB wearing #63 would be.

Not really. An NFL quarterback isn't actually allowed to wear #63 as the NFL has pretty strict rules regarding player's numbers. QB's can wear 1-19. Numbers in the NFL serve a very specific purpose as certain players are allowed to do things other players aren't. If a QB insisted on wearing #63 he'd be in trouble with the league.

As for the word's definition, leaving aside that you used the third word in the third definition the use of the word you're using is so broad(as #43 is an entirely satisfactory number to suit the league's purpose that every player wear a number) that anything that anyone may dislike for whatever reason is equally as "lame".
 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 11:33:29 PM
I couldn't agree more... I'll also add that some Chinese folks won't even but a house they're in love with because there's a "4" in the street address it... or is it "8", or both? Numbers I think have a lot of meaning. In sports and in life.   

Oh, I see.

Very well then. Has anyone weighed Kadri to see if he weighs the same as a duck?

Wait, YOU brought up superstition when I said that if numbers weren't important, players wouldn't spend tens of thousands (or more) on them, not me.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 11:35:14 PM
Wait, YOU brought up superstition when I said that if numbers weren't important, players wouldn't spend tens of thousands (or more) on them, not me.

And your rationale, somehow, is that because people are superstitious that their superstitions are grounded in sensible reality. You're saying that people's superstitions make "numbers matter".

Again, weigh him to see if he's a duck.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 11:39:19 PM
Kadri's #43 is lame by the word's very defintion just as a QB wearing #63 would be.

Not really. An NFL quarterback isn't actually allowed to wear #63 as the NFL has pretty strict rules regarding player's numbers. QB's can wear 1-19. Numbers in the NFL serve a very specific purpose as certain players are allowed to do things other players aren't. If a QB insisted on wearing #63 he'd be in trouble with the league.

As for the word's definition, leaving aside that you used the third word in the third definition the use of the word you're using is so broad(as #43 is an entirely satisfactory number to suit the league's purpose that every player wear a number) that anything that anyone may dislike for whatever reason is equally as "lame".

Ok, fine... I've always found Jagr's #68 as lame then... and just because it's the word's third defintion, it doesn't give it any less weight in my opinion.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 11:40:51 PM
You're saying that people's superstitions make "numbers matter".


I don't see any fault in that.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 11:44:06 PM
Ok, fine... I've always found Jagr's #68 as lame then.

I'm sure you did. It's an important number to Jagr though as it represents the Prague Spring rebellion. For someone who's super quick to talk about how numbers that are important to him should be represented you're awfully quick to dismiss numbers that are important to others as being lame.

.. and just because it's the word's third defintion, it doesn't give it any less weight in my opinion.

That's why I said to leave it aside. What makes it not terribly weighty is that it can apply to absolutely everything in the world equally.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on August 25, 2011, 11:46:58 PM
Kadri wore 13 in junior, did he not?  Since on the Leafs no more jerseys are being retired he should just go for it and wear 13.  If Stajan could wear Keon's number, Kadri can wear Sundin's.

The images I have of Kadri in Junior are of him wearing #91(another high, non-traditional number).

Either way, I think it's pretty odd to be making a case for numerology and then saying "why not just wear #13?".

OK, I stand corrected -- thought he wore 13.

However, it's not numerology I'm professin' -- numerology is the belief that numbers have some special power or other difference-making property.  I don't believe that; I just like some numbers in some contexts much more than others.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 25, 2011, 11:49:22 PM
It's an important number to Jagr though as it represents the Prague Spring rebellion. For someone who's super quick to talk about how numbers that are important to him should be represented you're awfully quick to dismiss numbers that are important to others as being lame.


That I did not know. Now, I don't find it lame. See? Easy.

Anyway, it's been a slice having the lengthy chat on the subject you said there were a billion other things worth chatting about.  :P and with that, I bid you a good night.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 25, 2011, 11:58:21 PM
However, it's not numerology I'm professin' -- numerology is the belief that numbers have some special power or other difference-making property.  I don't believe that; I just like some numbers in some contexts much more than others.

Ok, then we agree. It doesn't matter. The difference between wearing a number that lots of other good players have worn before and one that people haven't is that Kadri will be, hopefully, the first guy to carve out an identity wearing #43. Just like Gilmour did with #93, if Kadri has success then the next guy who wears it will do so without a lot of questions.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on August 26, 2011, 12:00:53 AM
Kadri wore 13 in junior, did he not?  Since on the Leafs no more jerseys are being retired he should just go for it and wear 13.  If Stajan could wear Keon's number, Kadri can wear Sundin's.

The images I have of Kadri in Junior are of him wearing #91(another high, non-traditional number).

Either way, I think it's pretty odd to be making a case for numerology and then saying "why not just wear #13?".

OK, I stand corrected -- thought he wore 13.

However, it's not numerology I'm professin' -- numerology is the belief that numbers have some special power or other difference-making property.  I don't believe that; I just like some numbers in some contexts much more than others.

He wore 13 when he was with the Marlies.

Also, the season clearly can't start soon enough.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on August 26, 2011, 12:39:41 AM
Also, the season clearly can't start soon enough.

I'm with you on that, I can't believe I read all of that.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on August 26, 2011, 07:48:54 AM
With some trepidation, I'll say that jersey numbers are important.  Very.  Just like we all prefer same names to others (that surely is not a matter of indifference), some of us -- maybe most of us -- have numbers we prefer, for various personal, though not thereby necessarily irrational, reasons.

For me, 43 is ultralame for Kadri, a skill guy.  Prime numbers in the 40s all stink (yeah, that goes for you too Kulemin).  Why?  Because I grew up watching football and I associate them with blocking backs and other "non-skilled" players.  A personal, but not an irrational, reason.

Kadri wore 13 in junior, did he not?  Since on the Leafs no more jerseys are being retired he should just go for it and wear 13.  If Stajan could wear Keon's number, Kadri can wear Sundin's.

I have no problem with anyone's opinion on jersey numbers, but I do have to disagree with your statement that it's not irrational, because it is. it's irrational because how a number fits in in football doesn't apply to hockey. Once referees figured out they could use two hands at the same time, "normal" numbers became any two digit number.

Your reason is personal and irrational. Nothing wrong with that though, as most emotional opinions are. Most players' superstitions are irrational too, but there's also nothing wrong with having them. I'm trying to point out that, while I think your reasoning (and many others who hold on to such significance on what number a player wears) is irrational, but it's not meant as an insult.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Jalili on August 26, 2011, 08:34:49 AM
So excited to see Kadri play. Make us proud bro
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: moon111 on August 26, 2011, 09:12:11 AM
Never before have I felt so uncertain how the team will do.  Counting on allot of young players who haven't proven themselves and older players who have a history of injuries.  It's a high-risk, high-reward season.  Reimer/Gustavsson could become a dynamic duo, or become a pair of shattered hopes.  No sure the defense is well-rounded enough to give the team a good transition game, power-play, and penalty-killing too.  There's only one line that can be counted upon, but any reduction in Bozak's roll should be an improvement.  Really wish Colbourne was furthered developed, think he'd be a great fit.  But the one area I really don't have confidence in is the coaching.  Sure it won't be easy, but Ron Wilson has to do something by now.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on August 26, 2011, 09:47:57 AM

It's a jersey number. One is as good as the other.

Only in the same way that the guy's garage door down the street is as good as the rest of ours... even if it's painted bright purple.

Exactly. Only in the way in which things are true as opposed to nonsense.

I don't like the aesthetic of 43. Looks odd to me.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on August 26, 2011, 09:54:48 AM
It's August 26, but I think we may have found our running ruse about Kadri this year.

"Dammit Kadri change that jersey number!"
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on August 26, 2011, 10:01:35 AM
With some trepidation, I'll say that jersey numbers are important.  Very.  Just like we all prefer same names to others (that surely is not a matter of indifference), some of us -- maybe most of us -- have numbers we prefer, for various personal, though not thereby necessarily irrational, reasons.

For me, 43 is ultralame for Kadri, a skill guy.  Prime numbers in the 40s all stink (yeah, that goes for you too Kulemin).  Why?  Because I grew up watching football and I associate them with blocking backs and other "non-skilled" players.  A personal, but not an irrational, reason.

Kadri wore 13 in junior, did he not?  Since on the Leafs no more jerseys are being retired he should just go for it and wear 13.  If Stajan could wear Keon's number, Kadri can wear Sundin's.

I have no problem with anyone's opinion on jersey numbers, but I do have to disagree with your statement that it's not irrational, because it is. it's irrational because how a number fits in in football doesn't apply to hockey. Once referees figured out they could use two hands at the same time, "normal" numbers became any two digit number.

Your reason is personal and irrational. Nothing wrong with that though, as most emotional opinions are. Most players' superstitions are irrational too, but there's also nothing wrong with having them. I'm trying to point out that, while I think your reasoning (and many others who hold on to such significance on what number a player wears) is irrational, but it's not meant as an insult.

I don't think it's irrational to think that someone wearing something uncommon, whether its a piece of clothing or a jersey number, can look odd. While 91 is an "uncommon" number, he wore 91 in Junior. In that sense, it was traditional for him to wear that uncommon number, which made it normal and expected. In my personal history I don't recall players that stood out wearing 43, much in the way I find Gustavsson's 50 also odd. Over time maybe there will be a stronger history of players wearing these numbers and will no longer be seen as strange.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on August 26, 2011, 10:06:15 AM
This is a serious question and not meant to incite anything one way or another but for those who think numbers aren't a big deal, how would you feel it someone wore #99 (assuming of course, they would be allowed) or if say, Lupul or Boyce or someone decided to wear #13 next season?

Honest question.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Deebo on August 26, 2011, 10:10:14 AM
This is a serious question and not meant to incite anything one way or another but for those who think numbers aren't a big deal, how would you feel it someone wore #99 (assuming of course, they would be allowed) or if say, Lupul or Boyce or someone decided to wear #13 next season?

Honest question.

99 is retired league wide.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on August 26, 2011, 10:18:32 AM
This is a serious question and not meant to incite anything one way or another but for those who think numbers aren't a big deal, how would you feel it someone wore #99 (assuming of course, they would be allowed) or if say, Lupul or Boyce or someone decided to wear #13 next season?

Honest question.

I know it was pretty sideways but that's what my blues song reference was about...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on August 26, 2011, 10:25:58 AM
This is a serious question and not meant to incite anything one way or another but for those who think numbers aren't a big deal, how would you feel it someone wore #99 (assuming of course, they would be allowed) or if say, Lupul or Boyce or someone decided to wear #13 next season?

Honest question.

99 is retired league wide.

I know it is.

Hence the "assuming of course, they would be allowed."
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Newbury on August 26, 2011, 10:31:29 AM
Zzzzzzz.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on August 26, 2011, 10:32:30 AM

It's a jersey number. One is as good as the other.

Only in the same way that the guy's garage door down the street is as good as the rest of ours... even if it's painted bright purple.

Exactly. Only in the way in which things are true as opposed to nonsense.

I don't like the aesthetic of 43. Looks odd to me.

Yeah, Goose looked odd to me as well but supposedly the idea was that 50 looked like SO but, y'know, there aren't any reasons it's all superstition vs. weighty import that relegates to crude analogies and other things worthy of time wasting.

Bollocks.

Daniel Tammet sees different shapes in numbers while making extraordinary calculations in his head and notes that to him each positive integer up to 10,000 has its own unique shape, colour, texture and feel. Just because somethings intuitive doesn't mean it's irrational.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 26, 2011, 11:29:32 AM
I don't think it's irrational to think that someone wearing something uncommon, whether its a piece of clothing or a jersey number, can look odd. While 91 is an "uncommon" number, he wore 91 in Junior. In that sense, it was traditional for him to wear that uncommon number, which made it normal and expected. In my personal history I don't recall players that stood out wearing 43, much in the way I find Gustavsson's 50 also odd. Over time maybe there will be a stronger history of players wearing these numbers and will no longer be seen as strange.

You're absolutely correct. Kadri wearing #43 is odd. Much like Grabo wearing 84 or Crosby wearing 87 or Gilmour wearing 93. So if someone had said "Kadri's wearing #43, huh, that's unusual" they would have been right. But that's fairly value-neutral. The idea that new or unusual = bad or lame simply by the virtue of being new or unusual is different and one I reject pretty strongly.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on August 26, 2011, 11:35:47 AM
This is a serious question and not meant to incite anything one way or another but for those who think numbers aren't a big deal, how would you feel it someone wore #99 (assuming of course, they would be allowed) or if say, Lupul or Boyce or someone decided to wear #13 next season?

Honest question.

Never for 99. 13 would be distasteful I think, but Sundin's been gone for a few years so I think I'd be ok with it. Other Leafs numbers are being worn to pay homage to the previous players who wore them.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 26, 2011, 11:38:00 AM
This is a serious question and not meant to incite anything one way or another but for those who think numbers aren't a big deal, how would you feel it someone wore #99 (assuming of course, they would be allowed) or if say, Lupul or Boyce or someone decided to wear #13 next season?

Those, to me, are two very different issues. As a Leafs fan, most of my memories of Gretzky are negative. Aside from the '93 playoffs there's the fact that he tended to score at will against the Leafs over the years. If a Leafs player wanted to wear #99 and do a little good for the club with it I'd be fine with it. I think it'd be awfully ballsy of any such player though.

13 is a different story for me just because it would be less about my feelings on Mats Sundin specifically and more about how stupid I think it is that the team doesn't retire numbers. Being as that policy seems to be pretty firmly in place, I'm pretty much at peace with it. They gave Jamal Mayers #21 and Marchment #27, so it's not like a minor player getting #13 will knock my socks off.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 26, 2011, 11:47:46 AM
I'm not attempting to bash Sundin here but I don't think he did anything here that was well above and beyond all the other players that are currently being "honoured" in the ACC rafters. - There is no good reason why another player can't wear #13 in my opinion.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 26, 2011, 11:53:31 AM
I'm not attempting to bash Sundin here but I don't think he did anything here that was well above and beyond all the other players that are currently being "honoured" in the ACC rafters. - There is no good reason why another player can't wear #13 in my opinion.

I agree for the most part(although I think Sundin being the Franchise's all-time leading scorer is notable) but I sort of wonder if MLSE maybe has a sort of soft-retiring of numbers these days. Of the players whose numbers they've raised, which is just #93 and #17 as far as I'm aware, I don't think anyone's worn them since(although I may be spacing on someone wearing #17 and #93 is obviously unusual).
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 26, 2011, 11:59:04 AM
I'm not attempting to bash Sundin here but I don't think he did anything here that was well above and beyond all the other players that are currently being "honoured" in the ACC rafters. - There is no good reason why another player can't wear #13 in my opinion.

I agree for the most part(although I think Sundin being the Franchise's all-time leading scorer is notable) but I sort of wonder if MLSE maybe has a sort of soft-retiring of numbers these days. Of the players whose numbers they've raised, which is just #93 and #17 as far as I'm aware, I don't think anyone's worn them since(although I may be spacing on someone wearing #17 and #93 is obviously unusual).

I'm not sure why that is. Actually, I think it would be rather cool if Sundin passed off his number to a young player like Kadri at the ceremony. Likewise, I think it would have been a cool thing at the Clark and Gilmour ceremonies had a Leaf at the time been interested in the number. Circle of life. Closure. Yada, yada, yada. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 26, 2011, 12:22:04 PM
I'm not sure why that is. Actually, I think it would be rather cool if Sundin passed off his number to a young player like Kadri at the ceremony. Likewise, I think it would have been a cool thing at the Clark and Gilmour ceremonies had a Leaf at the time been interested in the number. Circle of life. Closure. Yada, yada, yada.

I wouldn't go that far. Like I said, I'm pretty strong in my belief that the Leafs should just retire numbers already.

I mean, at this point, they should have #1, #7, #9, #10, #13, #14, #17, #21, #27 retired. That's it. Eleven numbers. There'd still be plenty to choose from.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 26, 2011, 12:29:42 PM
I'm completely fine with having no numbers retired at all. I think there are other ways to honour a former player who was significant to your franchise.  Does the current Leaf way make everyone happy? No. Are there other things they can be doing? Maybe... but I don't think we're insulting our history by closing the doors on those numbers.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on August 26, 2011, 12:36:21 PM
With some trepidation, I'll say that jersey numbers are important.  Very.  Just like we all prefer same names to others (that surely is not a matter of indifference), some of us -- maybe most of us -- have numbers we prefer, for various personal, though not thereby necessarily irrational, reasons.

For me, 43 is ultralame for Kadri, a skill guy.  Prime numbers in the 40s all stink (yeah, that goes for you too Kulemin).  Why?  Because I grew up watching football and I associate them with blocking backs and other "non-skilled" players.  A personal, but not an irrational, reason.

Kadri wore 13 in junior, did he not?  Since on the Leafs no more jerseys are being retired he should just go for it and wear 13.  If Stajan could wear Keon's number, Kadri can wear Sundin's.

I have no problem with anyone's opinion on jersey numbers, but I do have to disagree with your statement that it's not irrational, because it is. it's irrational because how a number fits in in football doesn't apply to hockey. Once referees figured out they could use two hands at the same time, "normal" numbers became any two digit number.

Your reason is personal and irrational. Nothing wrong with that though, as most emotional opinions are. Most players' superstitions are irrational too, but there's also nothing wrong with having them. I'm trying to point out that, while I think your reasoning (and many others who hold on to such significance on what number a player wears) is irrational, but it's not meant as an insult.

Well, this point is hardly worth debating but I can't let it pass.  If I have an association in my mind (not the same thing as an emotion, BTW) that is based on a rational observation -- in this case, that the number 43 tends to be worn by football players who are not in "skill" positions -- then even if I transfer it to another context (hockey) it is not irrational.  You may claim that each sport is a different universe and you can't have transfer associations from one to another, but that assertion is just a preference and has no basis in fact.

My point is, I didn't just say, "I just don't like the number 43 (or 41, 47, etc.)" or "I just don't like prime numbers from 40-49" or "Numbers in the 40s are unlucky."  That would be irrational.  I gave a rational reason (with which you are of course free to disagree) for not liking those numbers.

Like I said, not really important but an interesting point of logic.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 26, 2011, 12:38:18 PM
Just an idea off the to of my head...

In Dallas (I'm talking football now) , rookies aren't allowed to a star on theit helmet until they've earned it. Perhaps a goal needs to be set for current Leafs to "earn" a previously honoured number should they want one? What that goal our achievement might be is something I haven't given much thought to but it's an idea nevertheless.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 26, 2011, 12:38:59 PM
I'm completely fine with having no numbers retired at all. I think there are other ways to honour a former player who was significant to your franchise.

There are, but nothing anyone's come up with has the permanence and actual effect that retiring numbers has(except, I guess, statues). I don't think passing those numbers on is insulting, exactly, but it gives the impression to me of a half-measure. An honour that's not on par with the tradition embraced by other clubs.

Nobody wants to be the Habs and indulge in an 82 game orgiastic festival of past accomplishments but I personally feel that, unfortunately, the Leafs are on the other end of that spectrum, pre-game Alyn McAuley celebrations aside.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on August 26, 2011, 12:40:24 PM
Just an idea off the to of my head...

In Dallas (I'm talking football now) , rookies aren't allowed to a star on theit helmet until they've earned it. Perhaps a goal needs to be set for current Leafs to "earn" a previously honoured number should they want one? What that goal our achievement might be is something I haven't given much thought to but it's an idea nevertheless.

That's worth considering.  Yes, it would ultimately be a subjective judgment, but so is retiring a number.

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 26, 2011, 12:46:20 PM
Here's another idea... Nik suggested 10 numbers. I haven't given much thought as to whether or not all 10 of those numbers are deserving but what if each current jersey from here on out had a shoulder patch that  honoured whatever numbers belong there? - It would of course need to remain aestetically pleasing.     
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 26, 2011, 12:50:39 PM
Here's another idea... Nik suggested 10 numbers. I haven't given much thought as to whether or not all 10 of those numbers are deserving but what if each current jersey from here on out had a shoulder patch that  honoured whatever numbers belong there? - It would of course need to remain aestetically pleasing.   

Why not just retire them? Personally, I'm not a fan of cluttering up a jersey with Shoulder patches and there are a handful of numbers(#9 and #27 come to mind immediately) where you'd have to have multiple shoulder patches on the same jersey.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 26, 2011, 12:55:24 PM
Here's another idea... Nik suggested 10 numbers. I haven't given much thought as to whether or not all 10 of those numbers are deserving but what if each current jersey from here on out had a shoulder patch that  honoured whatever numbers belong there? - It would of course need to remain aestetically pleasing.   

Why not just retire them? Personally, I'm not a fan of cluttering up a jersey with Shoulder patches and there are a handful of numbers(#9 and #27 come to mind immediately) where you'd have to have multiple shoulder patches on the same jersey.

Well, the point of not retiring them is so they can be used again but I'm thinking maybe a maple leaf shoulder patch that read "21, 27, 13, 1, etc, etc..." instead of "TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS."

Edit: There's a maple leaf already there now anyway, isn't there?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 26, 2011, 01:03:20 PM
Well, the point of not retiring them is so they can be used again but I'm thinking maybe a maple leaf shoulder patch that read "21, 27, 13, 1, etc, etc..." instead of "TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS."

It strikes me as pretty tricky to come up with a shoulder patch that would somehow incorporate 12 or 13 different numbers and not look like an absolute jumble of a mess or some sort of Keno score card.

Like I said, it'd be 11 retired numbers representing the team's first 100 or so years. There'd still be 88 other numbers to choose from.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 26, 2011, 01:09:00 PM
Well, the point of not retiring them is so they can be used again but I'm thinking maybe a maple leaf shoulder patch that read "21, 27, 13, 1, etc, etc..." instead of "TORONTO MAPLE LEAFS."

It strikes me as pretty tricky to come up with a shoulder patch that would somehow incorporate 12 or 13 different numbers and not look like an absolute jumble of a mess or some sort of Keno score card.

Like I said, it'd be 11 retired numbers representing the team's first 100 or so years. There'd still be 88 other numbers to choose from.

I don't know. I'm guessing you could fit 15 or more numbers on the patch and have it still look good.... and if the need arose, you could always duplicate on the other shoulder. - 150-200 years from now, deal with the 2 full shoulders.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 26, 2011, 01:13:41 PM
Well, this point is hardly worth debating but I can't let it pass.  If I have an association in my mind (not the same thing as an emotion, BTW) that is based on a rational observation -- in this case, that the number 43 tends to be worn by football players who are not in "skill" positions -- then even if I transfer it to another context (hockey) it is not irrational.  You may claim that each sport is a different universe and you can't have transfer associations from one to another, but that assertion is just a preference and has no basis in fact.

The problem I have with the Football association is that it's so broad because of the relative scarcity of skill players in football and the rules concerning the wearing of numbers. "Skill players", assuming you're using the traditional definition of QB's, RB's and WR's are limited to the numbers 1-49 and then 80-89. I think it's fair to say that most fans won't associate numbers in the 80's with skill in the NHL but it does represent it in the NFL. Likewise, there are a whole ton of numbers in the NHL that have come to represent skilled play(#66, #77, #99) that are the province of linemen in football.

That said, I'm sure you wouldn't say that you saw #66 and #99 in the NHL and didn't think of skilled hockey players. Because that's the essential and crucial difference between NHL numbers and NFL numbers. NHL numbers and their meaning will change based on who wears them. #66 in the NFL is always going to be the province of guys like Ray Nitschke. No QB will ever wear it. NHL numbers aren't that.

Although with that said, if you asked me to name a NFL player wearing #43 the only guy who'd immediately come to mind is Troy Polamalu, a guy who has no deficiency of skill.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 26, 2011, 01:19:26 PM
I don't know. I'm guessing you could fit 15 or more numbers on the patch and have it still look good.... and if the need arose, you could always duplicate on the other shoulder. - 150-200 years from now, deal with the 2 full shoulders.

I just don't see anything about it that appeals vs. just going with the simple, elegant and permanent solution of retiring a player's number. Like I said, everything else seems like a half-measure.

I look around the sports landscape and see that the teams out there who are really successful all tend to do it. Heck, the Habs wear themselves out patting their old-timers on the back and the Yankees are going to be out of single-digit numbers once Jeter retires.

I'm not sure it's great that the Leafs are on the other side of that spectrum.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 26, 2011, 01:20:13 PM
Although with that said, if you asked me to name a NFL player wearing #43 the only guy who'd immediately come to mind is Troy Polamalu, a guy who has no deficiency of skill.

Right... but you might be hard pressed to find another example. It's odd for a high profile player - full stop. Who knows though, perhaps Polamalu winds up making it a more popular number down the line (maybe he has already.) I think we'd all dig it if Kadri can do that in hockey. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 26, 2011, 01:27:47 PM
Right... but you might be hard pressed to find another example.

Google's my friend. Also Cliff Harris, great safety for the 70's Cowboys. Just at a glance it seems to be a number more common to DB's than fullbacks.

edit: Also Larry Brown, apparently. So a Cowboys fan should certainly be warm to #43.

It's odd for a high profile player - full stop. Who knows though, perhaps Polamalu winds up making it a more popular number down the line (maybe he has already.) I think we'd all dig it if Kadri can do that in hockey.

But that's my point. Nobody's arguing that #43 is a common number on a sports jersey. In hockey, for nearly 30 years now, there are lots and lots of skilled players who've come into the league, found a number that wasn't associated with any past success, and made them their own. Gretzky, Lemieux, Jagr, Bourque, Lindros, Bure, Mogilny, Fedorov, Roenick, Hasek, Crosby, Nash and on and on. If we're going to be making an argument from tradition, you can just as easily argue that Kadri going with #43 is his part of that tradition. It's a good group to associate with.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on August 26, 2011, 01:44:15 PM
Right... but you might be hard pressed to find another example.

Google's my friend. Also Cliff Harris, great safety for the 70's Cowboys. Just at a glance it seems to be a number more common to DB's than fullbacks.

It's odd for a high profile player - full stop. Who knows though, perhaps Polamalu winds up making it a more popular number down the line (maybe he has already.) I think we'd all dig it if Kadri can do that in hockey.

But that's my point. Nobody's arguing that #43 is a common number on a sports jersey. In hockey, for nearly 30 years now, there are lots and lots of skilled players who've come into the league, found a number that wasn't associated with any past success, and made them their own. Gretzky, Lemieux, Jagr, Bourque, Lindros, Bure, Mogilny, Fedorov, Roenick, Hasek, Crosby, Nash and on and on. If we're going to be making an argument from tradition, you can just as easily argue that Kadri going with #43 is his part of that tradition. It's a good group to associate with.

Fair enough... but to come full circle, this whole thing started when it was suggested that any given number could be classiified as "lame." My point was (is) that a bunch of then can (for various reasons) be classified as lame. In my mind, #43 remains lame as a hockey choice. Can it for one reason or another become not lame (in my mind at least?) Absolutely.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on August 26, 2011, 01:54:53 PM
Fair enough... but to come full circle, this whole thing started when it was suggested that any given number could be classiified as "lame." My point was (is) that a bunch of then can (for various reasons) be classified as lame. In my mind, #43 remains lame as a hockey choice. Can it for one reason or another become not lame (in my mind at least?) Absolutely.

Ok, but I didn't say you didn't feel that way. Just that it was nutty.

And like I said, under your definition, every number can be classified as lame. Not some. All. All that makes it lame is someone not liking it for whatever reason they want. I'm sure if Kadri decided on wearing #13 or #11 or whatever that you'd object to someone saying those numbers are lame but they'd be as right as you are here.

Personally, if I have any preference as a fan it goes back to superstitions. Players can be superstitious. I was back in the day. That can affect players. So my only preference as a fan, who's primary interest is in the players on the Leafs playing well, is that they have numbers they like. Kadri likes #43, that makes it aces in my books.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: ThatLeafsFan on August 26, 2011, 04:21:26 PM
I dont like the number seven cuz it ate nine :(
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: moon111 on August 26, 2011, 11:33:40 PM
To me, the #43 is 'The King'.  7 Winston Cup Championships. 200+ wins.  In comparison, Dale Earnhardt Sr had 76 wins.  Petty, Gretzky, Jordan... Kadri? :) LOL
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on August 26, 2011, 11:37:22 PM
To me, the #43 is 'The King'.  7 Winston Cup Championships. 200+ wins.  In comparison, Dale Earnhardt Sr had 76 wins.  Petty, Gretzky, Jordan... Kadri? :) LOL

Sorry, we are talking about sports here, which NASCAR decidedly is not.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on August 27, 2011, 10:29:55 AM
NHL.com reviews the Leafs for 2011-12
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=587307
If Reimer proves to be the real deal and Burke's free-agent signings don't disappoint, there could be playoff hockey in Toronto for the first time in a long time.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Fletch on August 27, 2011, 11:04:07 AM
However, it's not numerology I'm professin' -- numerology is the belief that numbers have some special power or other difference-making property.  I don't believe that; I just like some numbers in some contexts much more than others.

Ok, then we agree. It doesn't matter. The difference between wearing a number that lots of other good players have worn before and one that people haven't is that Kadri will be, hopefully, the first guy to carve out an identity wearing #43. Just like Gilmour did with #93, if Kadri has success then the next guy who wears it will do so without a lot of questions.

With all due respect to Alexander Godynyuk
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on August 27, 2011, 11:18:23 AM
As a bit of a bizarre coincidental aside I looked up some video of Tammet to refresh my memory, in an interview with David Letterman he references the number 43 while describing how he sees numbers and then tells Dave he looks like the number 117...

around the 5 min mark...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXG-1YLGAS0

It is just a coincidence ( I hadn't seen it before ) and really doesn't mean anything but it sure seemed odd when I first heard it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on August 29, 2011, 01:29:34 PM
So Matthew Lombardi was on the radio today, and from what I read (I didn't hear the interview myself, just read some recaps) it sounds promising that we will likely see him sooner rather then later.

The recap from a dude at HF:


- Still in Montreal but coming to Toronto next week
- Feeling pretty good, come a long way last 6 weeks
- Doing some workouts, is on the ice, getting in better shape
- Progressing real well
- No timeline when hell be ready but heading in right direction
- havent been this excited to play in as long as i can remember
- Excited about the leaf team and the future here
- Will get examined by leaf doctors next week but is hopefull to be ready soon (didnt explitly say hell be ready for training camp but didnt shoot it down)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on August 29, 2011, 04:08:49 PM
Here's a link to the Lombardi interview on FAN590:
http://www.fan590.com/media.jsp?content=20110829_110024_12368
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on August 29, 2011, 06:13:05 PM
Lombardi sounded pretty upbeat in that interview, good to hear and thanks for posting.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on August 30, 2011, 03:39:59 AM
Lombardi sounded pretty upbeat in that interview, good to hear and thanks for posting.


Good news, indeed!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: princedpw on August 30, 2011, 11:15:49 AM
So Matthew Lombardi was on the radio today, and from what I read (I didn't hear the interview myself, just read some recaps) it sounds promising that we will likely see him sooner rather then later.

The recap from a dude at HF:


- Still in Montreal but coming to Toronto next week
- Feeling pretty good, come a long way last 6 weeks
- Doing some workouts, is on the ice, getting in better shape
- Progressing real well
- No timeline when hell be ready but heading in right direction
- havent been this excited to play in as long as i can remember
- Excited about the leaf team and the future here
- Will get examined by leaf doctors next week but is hopefull to be ready soon (didnt explitly say hell be ready for training camp but didnt shoot it down)

From reading a few Crosby articles, it seems like a lot of guys get to the 90% exertion threshold and then find their symptoms return.  Lombardi must be way below that.  Hence, I'm happy to hear he is feeling good and making progress but until he gets past that 90% threshold, I'm not holding my breath.  If he returns as early as Christmas, that will be unexpectedly good news.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: princedpw on August 30, 2011, 11:31:05 AM
I just listened to the Lombardi interview.  It certainly doesn't sound like he is considering retirement at all.  He just can't wait to get back to playing.  Sounds like his first 6-7 weeks after the concussion all he could do was sit in a dark room doing nothing.  The next time is going to be worse and you can't help but think there will be a next time.  It's really very scary stuff. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on August 30, 2011, 03:27:07 PM
This was posted at PPP, just thought I would share, for all that don't frequent there...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rjjDVj2qc6U&feature=player_embedded
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kaberle15 on August 30, 2011, 03:35:13 PM
I wounder if the Luke Schenn situation (yet to sign) means that Burke is exploring a trade (that not includes Luke) to see how much cap is left ?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on August 31, 2011, 12:22:29 AM
Watching the video of the Leafs hanging with the Jays was cool. Kessel looks more trim this year. Hed also be one of the better Jays seeing how almost homered a few times :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on August 31, 2011, 09:25:39 AM
Watching the video of the Leafs hanging with the Jays was cool. Kessel looks more trim this year. Hed also be one of the better Jays seeing how almost homered a few times :)

I thought Kessel was the only Leaf to get any good hacks in.  Bozak and Caputi were pretty bad.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on August 31, 2011, 09:29:50 AM
Watching the video of the Leafs hanging with the Jays was cool. Kessel looks more trim this year. Hed also be one of the better Jays seeing how almost homered a few times :)

I thought Kessel was the only Leaf to get any good hacks in.  Bozak and Caputi were pretty bad.

Yeah, I didn't see Bozak hit many. Kessel's got a pretty good swing eh? He said he played organized baseball until he was 16 so he has an idea of what he's doing.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on August 31, 2011, 09:34:14 AM
Lombardi declared symptom free (http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/nhl/mapleleafs/article/1046972--leafs-lombardi-almost-up-to-speed-after-concussion?bn=1)

Well that's some more good news. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kaberle15 on August 31, 2011, 10:27:43 AM
I wounder if the Luke Schenn situation (yet to sign) means that Burke is exploring a trade (that not includes Luke) to see how much cap is left ?

Quote from: Brian Burke on Schenn

"Outside of re-signing defenceman Luke Schenn, Burke believes the players he has now will be the ones who open camp on Sept. 16.

Right now, Ive got nothing going, said Burke. This is the group were likely to head in with.

Schenns contract talks are dragging on. Schenns agent, Don Meehan, said he expects to meet with the Leafs later this week.

Burke said fans shouldnt be concerned that Schenn hasnt yet inked a deal.

Weve had some discussions, said Burke. We remain optimistic that well sign him before camp.

Full history here

Lombardi declared symptom free (http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/nhl/mapleleafs/article/1046972--leafs-lombardi-almost-up-to-speed-after-concussion?bn=1)

Well that's some more good news. 

Great news about Lombardi! Now, the leafs don't need to rush him, he has to get in game shape, and be inserted in the lineup when he is symptom free and can play a full NHL game.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Damian on August 31, 2011, 10:56:41 AM
great news indeed
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Britishbulldog on August 31, 2011, 01:50:14 PM
Watching the video of the Leafs hanging with the Jays was cool. Kessel looks more trim this year. Hed also be one of the better Jays seeing how almost homered a few times :)

Video??
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on August 31, 2011, 02:17:59 PM
Watching the video of the Leafs hanging with the Jays was cool. Kessel looks more trim this year. Hed also be one of the better Jays seeing how almost homered a few times :)

Video??

It's on the Leafs site somewhere.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Britishbulldog on August 31, 2011, 03:04:30 PM
Watching the video of the Leafs hanging with the Jays was cool. Kessel looks more trim this year. Hed also be one of the better Jays seeing how almost homered a few times :)

Video??

It's on the Leafs site somewhere.

Thanks.  I tried google and couldn't find it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: You're right on August 31, 2011, 04:21:39 PM
Watching the video of the Leafs hanging with the Jays was cool. Kessel looks more trim this year. Hed also be one of the better Jays seeing how almost homered a few times :)

Video??

It's on the Leafs site somewhere.

Thanks.  I tried google and couldn't find it.
Try here
http://video.mapleleafs.nhl.com/videocenter/console (http://video.mapleleafs.nhl.com/videocenter/console)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Britishbulldog on August 31, 2011, 09:46:04 PM
Watching the video of the Leafs hanging with the Jays was cool. Kessel looks more trim this year. Hed also be one of the better Jays seeing how almost homered a few times :)

Video??

It's on the Leafs site somewhere.

Thanks.  I tried google and couldn't find it.
Try here
http://video.mapleleafs.nhl.com/videocenter/console (http://video.mapleleafs.nhl.com/videocenter/console)

You're the man!  Thanks!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on September 01, 2011, 10:04:30 AM
http://lockerz.com/s/134688262

Gotta love Grabbo and Kooly! Keeping it real in the offseason. Also Grabbo looks like he's in game shape. Can't wait to see if all the off season conditioning has paid off this year with our team.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on September 01, 2011, 10:16:19 AM
http://lockerz.com/s/134688262

Gotta love Grabbo and Kooly! Keeping it real in the offseason. Also Grabbo looks like he's in game shape. Can't wait to see if all the off season conditioning has paid off this year with our team.

Grabs is wearing a knee brace in the 2nd pic! 

OH NoeSz!!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on September 02, 2011, 09:44:58 AM
The one thing I like about work is it distracts me from getting antsy from the lack of hockey.

... So is the Leafs game on tonight?? ;)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on September 02, 2011, 12:40:17 PM
The one thing I like about work is it distracts me from getting antsy from the lack of hockey.

... So is the Leafs game on tonight?? ;)

even that is not helping me, i think its too close to not keep thinking about it. now where did that remote go.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on September 02, 2011, 01:26:59 PM
Training camp is what, two weeks?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: You're right on September 02, 2011, 01:44:21 PM
Training camp is what, two weeks?
Officially September 16th.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on September 02, 2011, 02:08:43 PM
The rookie tournament starts Sep 10th
http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=585936

Those games can be fun to watch. If you need a Leafs fix, it won't be long now ..
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on September 02, 2011, 02:11:00 PM
The rookie tournament starts Sep 10th
http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=585936

Those games can be fun to watch. If you need a Leafs fix, it won't be long now ..

That sounds like I am a crack addict haha.  :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: AvroArrow on September 02, 2011, 03:22:54 PM
The rookie tournament starts Sep 10th
http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=585936

Those games can be fun to watch. If you need a Leafs fix, it won't be long now ..

Anyone know if it'll be broadcast at all?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on September 02, 2011, 03:32:31 PM
The rookie tournament starts Sep 10th
http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=585936

Those games can be fun to watch. If you need a Leafs fix, it won't be long now ..

Anyone know if it'll be broadcast at all?

I believe Rogers TV will be playing them live. And last year they were shown on mapleleafs.com on tape-delay an hour after they started, but I haven't found any confirmation they'll be doing that again this year. We might get lucky and someone could be streaming it online too.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on September 02, 2011, 03:45:15 PM
The rookie tournament starts Sep 10th
http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=585936

Those games can be fun to watch. If you need a Leafs fix, it won't be long now ..

Anyone know if it'll be broadcast at all?

The Pens game will be on line:
http://www.pensburgh.com/2011/8/30/2393616/pens-to-participate-in-rookie-tournament-sept-9-13-in-oshawa-ontario
All three games will air on Penguins HD Radio (WXDX FM HD-2 and streamed live on www.pittsburghpenguins.com). Steve Mears and two-time Stanley Cup champion Phil Bourque will broadcast the action. Full tournament coverage can also be found at www.pittsburghpenguins.com.

I'll keep an eye out for the other games and post as the info comes available.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on September 04, 2011, 12:21:29 PM
Can't wait for my first hockey fix of the season.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Moot Point on September 04, 2011, 07:51:23 PM
Getting antsy....please drop the puck!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: You're right on September 04, 2011, 09:11:46 PM
Getting antsy....please drop the puck!
No kidding - I hate the off season....
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: anton girdeaux on September 05, 2011, 05:32:18 AM
I'm cautiously optimistic for the coming season.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on September 05, 2011, 07:27:43 AM
I'm cautiously optimistic for the coming season.

You know, this is a strange year for me that way. I know I have a little more reason to be optimistic than perhaps any year post lock-out but I have very little of it for this team this year. I really have absolutely zero expectation of making the playoffs but at the same time, there a a handful of players on this team that I'm really excited about watching this year... perhaps more so than in the last two/three years.  In a nutshell, I'm optimistic but not in a way that translates to any post-season aspirations... If that makes any sense.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on September 05, 2011, 08:10:13 AM
Not sure if he has it in him, but what would really make this season for me is seeing Grabovski win the No. C spot. I've liked him since he arrived in Toronto, but last year he became my favourite player on the team (after Kab's departure.)

The favourite player thing was actually strange as it had been Sundin and Kaberle (and Antropov) for the longest time. After Sundin left, Kaberle filled the void. After he left, I was torn. Grabovski's tenacity and never give up attitude though did it for me.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on September 05, 2011, 08:55:00 AM
Grabovski's tenacity and never give up attitude though did it for me.

I've not been his biggest fan and that impressed me about him.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on September 05, 2011, 10:26:15 AM
I'm cautiously optimistic for the coming season.

You know, this is a strange year for me that way. I know I have a little more reason to be optimistic than perhaps any year post lock-out but I have very little of it for this team this year. I really have absolutely zero expectation of making the playoffs but at the same time, there a a handful of players on this team that I'm really excited about watching this year... perhaps more so than in the last two/three years.  In a nutshell, I'm optimistic but not in a way that translates to any post-season aspirations... If that makes any sense.



Why is that... this team looks very good, i would say you are aiming very low Floyd.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on September 05, 2011, 10:30:13 AM
I'm cautiously optimistic for the coming season.

You know, this is a strange year for me that way. I know I have a little more reason to be optimistic than perhaps any year post lock-out but I have very little of it for this team this year. I really have absolutely zero expectation of making the playoffs but at the same time, there a a handful of players on this team that I'm really excited about watching this year... perhaps more so than in the last two/three years.  In a nutshell, I'm optimistic but not in a way that translates to any post-season aspirations... If that makes any sense.



Why is that... this team looks very good, i would say you are aiming very low Floyd.

Too many good teams in the east, nutman. I hope I'm wrong but I don't think this is our year... but we're getting there.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on September 05, 2011, 11:59:10 AM
I agree that the east is going to be strong but i also think we have a team that is turning the corner. i believe we are going to be right in the mix from the start. there is not much to dislike about this team, but i do have one big concern, and that is the special teams, if we can stay in the middle of the pack or better we will be a very good team.

i think our forward lines will be awsome, i think we will have three very good lines, and add the d and goaltending, i think this season will be fun. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: moon111 on September 05, 2011, 01:28:27 PM
I think the Leafs will need to score 25 more goals and stop 25 more goals against to make the playoffs. 

Keys to this happening:
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on September 05, 2011, 02:49:16 PM
I think the Leafs will need to score 25 more goals and stop 25 more goals against to make the playoffs. 

Keys to this happening:
  • Reimer to continue where he left off.
  • First line chemistry/Connolly's impact
  • Third line depth/offense improves
  • More offense from the D.

3rd line of kadri, Armstrong and Bozak should do just fine in bringing more goals from the 3rd line.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: moon111 on September 05, 2011, 05:03:45 PM
I haven't warmed up to Lupul just yet.  If someone else took the #1 LW spot, the Leaf's 3rd line would end up being 2/3rd of last year's first line. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Jalili on September 05, 2011, 09:16:30 PM
The East looks really balanced this year. There's not much separating the top teams from the rest (excluding maybe a few bad teams like Ottawa and Florida.)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on September 06, 2011, 09:32:19 AM
The East looks really balanced this year. There's not much separating the top teams from the rest (excluding maybe a few bad teams like Ottawa and Florida.)

I think every game will be big.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on September 06, 2011, 09:33:59 AM
Just going over the The Hockey News' Fantasy Pool Guide and I stumbled over a couple interesting Leaf related stats I wasn't aware of...

1. Even Strength Sv%; James Reimer's was .933. Good for 3rd in the league behind only Tim Thomas (.947) and Roberto Luongo (.934.)  8)

2. Giveaways; Luke Schenn had 95. Again, good for 3rd in the league behind Ilya Hovalchuk (104) and Joe Thornton (98.)  ??? Now, he led all NHL defensmen in hits and was 12th in the league in blocked shots so I guess we'll forgive him.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on September 06, 2011, 09:47:44 AM
The East looks really balanced this year. There's not much separating the top teams from the rest (excluding maybe a few bad teams like Ottawa and Florida.)

I agree.  I even think Ottawa and Florida won't be pushovers.  They are probably the 2 weakest teams in the East sure and certainly won't make the playoffs but they aren't going to be teams that get steamrolled every night. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on September 06, 2011, 09:59:39 AM
The East looks really balanced this year. There's not much separating the top teams from the rest (excluding maybe a few bad teams like Ottawa and Florida.)

I think that's the kind of thing that's easy to say right now but could probably be said every year at this point. 4-5 teams will probably pull away from the pack by mid-season and establish themselves as the more legitimate contenders.

I think you can say the same about the West though. The East and West both will probably have two or three lousy teams, two or three top flight contenders and then a bunch of teams in the middle.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: You're right on September 06, 2011, 11:26:37 AM
So the courier just dropped off my tickets for this year.

This year's "bonus" for ticket subscribers is a fleece lined blanket (white sheepskin like lining and the outside is like a huge flag of the 1967 team logo (I love it - my wife says it is banned from any "public" areas of the house.....should have known better than to marry a born and raised in Quebec Habs fan!).

One other interesting item of note - this years tickets have differentiated pricing based on the day of the week (Saturdays are more than mid week games) or whether it is a "premium" game (such as the first Jets game even though it is a weekday).

Never heard that was coming into play.....
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: caveman on September 06, 2011, 07:06:21 PM
I haven't warmed up to Lupul just yet.  If someone else took the #1 LW spot, the Leaf's 3rd line would end up being 2/3rd of last year's first line.

I think it's possible that Lupul might have a breakout year and be one of those comeback/surprise players. Not probable,just possible. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: sampson on September 12, 2011, 04:38:12 PM
Grabovski's tenacity and never give up attitude though did it for me.

I've not been his biggest fan and that impressed me about him.

I hope this year you will be his biggest fan!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on September 14, 2011, 01:59:08 PM
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/HockeyBuzz-Hotstove/The-Hotstove-Ed-14-Worst-Offseason-Move/160/38023

I know this probably isn't even worth talking about: But how can you criticize the Connolly deal as one of the worst moves of the offseason? We did not have a player with his skillset, he's filling a need, does not have an NMC and while he is overpaid, its not extremely high and only two years. He's a stopgap solution, we're not married to him.

What grinds me up is that they reference health issues for Connolly (and Lupul)  but not for Fleischmann, who had a pulmonary embolism! Who has an NMC, absurd term and is primarily successful for playing alongside Matt Duchene or Alexander Semin. They're stuck with him if he bombs somewhere down the road.

I call balony on Connolly being the worst transaction of the offseason.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on September 14, 2011, 02:05:02 PM
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/HockeyBuzz-Hotstove/The-Hotstove-Ed-14-Worst-Offseason-Move/160/38023

I know this probably isn't even worth talking about: But how can you criticize the Connolly deal as one of the worst moves of the offseason? We did not have a player with his skillset, he's filling a need, does not have an NMC and while he is overpaid, its not extremely high and only two years. He's a stopgap solution, we're not married to him.

What grinds me up is that they reference health issues for Connolly (and Lupul)  but not for Fleischmann, who had a pulmonary embolism! Who has an NMC, absurd term and is primarily successful for playing alongside Matt Duchene or Alexander Semin. They're stuck with him if he bombs somewhere down the road.

I call balony on Connolly being the worst transaction of the offseason.

Two guys did pick the trade for Lebda and Slaney as the worst move, that is the correct answer.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on September 14, 2011, 02:09:29 PM
My guess is if any other team other than the Leafs make the Connolly deal, it goes completely unnoticed. I'm not going to try to argue that it's a great deal, but, a bad deal? Connolly was the 2nd best UFA centre on the market this summer, and he signed for reasonable term and money. It's far from the worst deal of the summer. In fact, it's firmly in the middle of the pack in terms of quality.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Deebo on September 14, 2011, 02:10:49 PM
They call Connolly the worst move, I would say its risky.

Most UFA contracts are risky though, Buffalo commited 27 million to Ville Leino -- a player with 30 carreer goals.

At least the Leafs risk is short term.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on September 14, 2011, 02:11:56 PM
http://watch.tsn.ca/featured/#clip531532

What a heartfelt story. I have so much respect for James, this kid is unbelievable.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on September 14, 2011, 02:15:55 PM
I know this probably isn't even worth talking about: But how can you criticize the Connolly deal as one of the worst moves of the offseason? We did not have a player with his skillset, he's filling a need, does not have an NMC and while he is overpaid, its not extremely high and only two years. He's a stopgap solution, we're not married to him.

I don't know that I'd call it one of the worst moves of the off-season but I remember that when Connolly was mentioned as a possibility here pre-July 1st a lot of people reacted pretty negatively to taking a flyer on him even on a one year deal. In a summer where some pretty good #1 C's ended up getting moved, I think a lot of people saw him as a kind of crummy consolation prize.

Did the Leafs upgrade with him? Probably. If they hadn't signed him the #1 C spot would be filled with Bozak again and they'd be hoping he has a bounce back year. As it is it's filled by Connolly and they're hoping he's healthy. That's a better situation to be in but not by leaps and bounds.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on September 14, 2011, 02:32:05 PM
http://watch.tsn.ca/featured/#clip531532

What a heartfelt story. I have so much respect for James, this kid is unbelievable.
Posted this over in the Reimer thread, a few people talking about it over there.  A very moving story.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Deebo on September 14, 2011, 02:39:50 PM
I know this probably isn't even worth talking about: But how can you criticize the Connolly deal as one of the worst moves of the offseason? We did not have a player with his skillset, he's filling a need, does not have an NMC and while he is overpaid, its not extremely high and only two years. He's a stopgap solution, we're not married to him.

I don't know that I'd call it one of the worst moves of the off-season but I remember that when Connolly was mentioned as a possibility here pre-July 1st a lot of people reacted pretty negatively to taking a flyer on him even on a one year deal. In a summer where some pretty good #1 C's ended up getting moved, I think a lot of people saw him as a kind of crummy consolation prize.

Did the Leafs upgrade with him? Probably. If they hadn't signed him the #1 C spot would be filled with Bozak again and they'd be hoping he has a bounce back year. As it is it's filled by Connolly and they're hoping he's healthy. That's a better situation to be in but not by leaps and bounds.

I don't think anyone is anything other than it's wasn't the worst move.

As for the worst move, it's hard to say now for sure but I think the Varlamov trade has the potential to be very bad for Colorado. Colorado has some pretty good young talent, but I don't think it would take much to go wrong for them to end up very close to the bottom of the leauge. I don't think you can call Varlamov proven, this could end up being like Rask and Toskala deals. Giving up a 1st and not really getting better in the process, only this pick has a real shot at being very high.

I wonder what Varlamov's WAR would be if they kept that type of stat in hockey, or maybe it would be P(oints)AR.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Jalili on September 14, 2011, 03:10:55 PM
I don't think anyone is anything other than it's wasn't the worst move.

As for the worst move, it's hard to say now for sure but I think the Varlamov trade has the potential to be very bad for Colorado. Colorado has some pretty good young talent, but I don't think it would take much to go wrong for them to end up very close to the bottom of the leauge. I don't think you can call Varlamov proven, this could end up being like Rask and Toskala deals. Giving up a 1st and not really getting better in the process, only this pick has a real shot at being very high.

I wonder what Varlamov's WAR would be if they kept that type of stat in hockey, or maybe it would be P(oints)AR.

I would go with the Varlamov trade as well, just because of the risk involved.

I don't think they'll finish in the bottom 5 again for a few reasons, but it could certainly happen. When a team finishes as badly as Colorado did, that 1st rounder should be treated as a potential lifeline and not as a trading chip.

All in all, a very confusing move on Colorado's part.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on September 14, 2011, 04:10:50 PM
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/HockeyBuzz-Hotstove/The-Hotstove-Ed-14-Worst-Offseason-Move/160/38023

I know this probably isn't even worth talking about: But how can you criticize the Connolly deal as one of the worst moves of the offseason? We did not have a player with his skillset, he's filling a need, does not have an NMC and while he is overpaid, its not extremely high and only two years. He's a stopgap solution, we're not married to him.

What grinds me up is that they reference health issues for Connolly (and Lupul)  but not for Fleischmann, who had a pulmonary embolism! Who has an NMC, absurd term and is primarily successful for playing alongside Matt Duchene or Alexander Semin. They're stuck with him if he bombs somewhere down the road.

I call balony on Connolly being the worst transaction of the offseason.

A - It's Hockeybuzz
B - Travis Yost is the Sens blogger there so there's a chance he is just hating
C - Signing Connollly isn't nearly as bad as trading for Lombardi   

:p
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Crucialness Key on September 16, 2011, 01:48:07 PM
Signing Connollly isn't nearly as bad as trading for Lombardi   
:p
Haven't you heard? Word out of camp is that Lombardi will score a hat-trick on opening night on a line with Frattin & McKegg.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on September 16, 2011, 04:18:37 PM
Alright, Cody Franson is now in the running as my new favorite Leaf after hearing his interview today.  There was a question for him as to who his favorite Leaf was while growing up.  His answer, and I quote:

Quote from: Cody Franson
I was die hard Wendel Clark my whole life.  He was my idol.  There's a video of him that my uncle got that's now on Youtube.  My uncle sent it to me when I was playing Junior B in Trail, it was the Wendel Clark All Heart video that's on the Internet. I used to watch that all the time and I still do.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on September 16, 2011, 06:49:43 PM
Alright, Cody Franson is now in the running as my new favorite Leaf after hearing his interview today.  There was a question for him as to who his favorite Leaf was while growing up.  His answer, and I quote:

Quote from: Cody Franson
I was die hard Wendel Clark my whole life.  He was my idol.  There's a video of him that my uncle got that's now on Youtube.  My uncle sent it to me when I was playing Junior B in Trail, it was the Wendel Clark All Heart video that's on the Internet. I used to watch that all the time and I still do.

That's a little bit of a allright!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on September 17, 2011, 05:06:13 AM
So, the Leafs have Purolator as their sponsor/advertiser on their practice jerseys, joining the likes of the Canucks, Hawks, and a few others.  However, much talk has been made on whether the NHL will one day adopt the Euro-style advertisement on hockey jerseys. Doubtful that that will ever transpire.  Imagine our beloved Leafs logo awash in a sea of ads!  Unthinkable!  Never!

http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/Impoverished-Maple-Leafs-place-advertising-on-pr?urn=nhl-wp12689 (http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/Impoverished-Maple-Leafs-place-advertising-on-pr?urn=nhl-wp12689)

The controversy isn't about selling ad space on a practice jersey about as inconsequential a piece of hockey gear this side of a division champions hat but, obviously, where it all could lead.
Yes, the spectre of European hockey/NASCAR billboard jerseys in the NHL is raised again, this time by Toronto Star bloviater Cathal Kelly:
In order to reap maximum financial advantage, NHL teams would have to make room by getting rid of their team logos. Nobody in Raleigh is going to kick too hard if the stylized hurricane is bumped. Just try replacing the winged tire on Detroit's jersey with a Chrysler logo. In the current climate, it's impossible.
But, let's say the NHL left this up to clubs to decide. And let's imagine that a few of the fringe or nearly bankrupt outfits decided to try it out. As soon as the predictable backlash petered off, how long would the Original Six hold out?

The NHL policy to allow ads on practice jerseys is just a year old, and it's actually a little surprising the fad hasn't swept through the league quite yet. With regard to ads on game jerseys down the line, NHL VP Bill Daly said "who knows what the future holds" when asked last October:
"The whole business area of sports evolves over time. People in this room probably remember a time when there was no advertising on dasher boards, and now there is. So things change."
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on September 17, 2011, 06:06:11 AM
I guess a twitter report I read of the Leafs possibly unveiling their 3rd jersey Monday was incorrect.

Hope we see it soon though!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on September 17, 2011, 06:23:14 AM
Probably better suited for the complaint thread but why is Kadri a bust among some Leaf fans because he hasn't been able to crack the line up yet as a top 10 pick? (Grrrrrrr  >:() Just had a conversation with a guy here at work who claims if Kadri can't crack the line-up out of camp he's done for. I then mentioned that B. Schenn (who went 2 spots higher in the same draft) has actually accomplished less at the NHL level then Kadri has. I asked him if B. Schenn was a bust and after he said no, claimed that there was no way I was correct about my numbers. (Double Grrrrrr  >:( >:()
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on September 17, 2011, 08:10:51 AM
Probably better suited for the complaint thread but why is Kadri a bust among some Leaf fans because he hasn't been able to crack the line up yet as a top 10 pick? (Grrrrrrr  >:() Just had a conversation with a guy here at work who claims if Kadri can't crack the line-up out of camp he's done for. I then mentioned that B. Schenn (who went 2 spots higher in the same draft) has actually accomplished less at the NHL level then Kadri has. I asked him if B. Schenn was a bust and after he said no, claimed that there was no way I was correct about my numbers. (Double Grrrrrr  >:( >:()

Well, not that I subscribe to the idea that Kadri is a bust but to play devil's advocate here:

1. Kadri is almost a full year older than Schenn.
2. Neither guy has really accomplished anything at the NHL level.
3. Kadri had ample opportunity to cement his status as a NHL'er last year and didn't.
4. Kadri has sort of a glaring issue that needs resolving

Like I said, it's premature by a couple hundred miles to call Kadri a bust but I don't think it's crazy to view the two guys differently. Schenn, let's not forget, was a significantly higher valued prospect coming out of the draft.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on September 17, 2011, 08:29:03 AM
Oh, I get all of that and would trade Kadri for Schenn in a heartbeat but I'm just frustrated by the mentality of some fans that top 10 forward picks (well, top 10 forward LEAF picks) need to come in and score 70+ points in their first or second season and if they don't, they're finished. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: lamajama on September 17, 2011, 08:49:16 AM
Oh, I get all of that and would trade Kadri for Schenn in a heartbeat but I'm just frustrated by the mentality of some fans that top 10 forward picks (well, top 10 forward LEAF picks) need to come in and score 70+ points in their first or second season and if they don't, they're finished.

Anyone who declares Kadri is a bust at this stage of his career is a buffoon. Your point is spot on.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on September 17, 2011, 11:59:26 AM
Anyone who declares Kadri is a bust at this stage of his career is a buffoon. Your point is spot on.

Yeah, that pretty much covers it. He's at least a couple seasons away from being at risk of really being a bust.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: WAYNEINIONA on September 17, 2011, 12:20:36 PM
Probably better suited for the complaint thread but why is Kadri a bust among some Leaf fans because he hasn't been able to crack the line up yet as a top 10 pick? (Grrrrrrr  >:() Just had a conversation with a guy here at work who claims if Kadri can't crack the line-up out of camp he's done for. I then mentioned that B. Schenn (who went 2 spots higher in the same draft) has actually accomplished less at the NHL level then Kadri has. I asked him if B. Schenn was a bust and after he said no, claimed that there was no way I was correct about my numbers. (Double Grrrrrr  >:( >:()

Well, not that I subscribe to the idea that Kadri is a bust but to play devil's advocate here:

1. Kadri is almost a full year older than Schenn.
2. Neither guy has really accomplished anything at the NHL level.
3. Kadri had ample opportunity to cement his status as a NHL'er last year and didn't.
4. Kadri has sort of a glaring issue that needs resolving

Like I said, it's premature by a couple hundred miles to call Kadri a bust but I don't think it's crazy to view the two guys differently. Schenn, let's not forget, was a significantly higher valued prospect coming out of the draft.

So what is Kadri's glaring issue?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on September 17, 2011, 12:39:43 PM
Grabovski's tenacity and never give up attitude though did it for me.

I've not been his biggest fan and that impressed me about him.

I hope this year you will be his biggest fan!

If the rest of the team played with as much of his 'never-say-die, knock-me-down and I'll get right back up again' attitude, they'd be a playoff club certainty. I truly respected him for that last season.  The challenge this season will be for him to repeat it against teams more prepared for his line. But nobody is pulling any harder for him to succeed in the blue and white than I am.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on September 17, 2011, 03:34:20 PM
Anyone who declares Kadri is a bust at this stage of his career is a buffoon. Your point is spot on.

Yeah, that pretty much covers it. He's at least a couple seasons away from being at risk of really being a bust.

It's not like every talented player breaks into the league right away. Richards didn't amount to much until he was 23. Patrick Sharp didn't amount to much until he was 25 or so. Its hard to just write a player off this early in his career when he's trending toward improvement. You have to be able to see some key issues wrong with the player to do so, imo. Alex Steen isn't all that young anymore but he broke out last season and I think the team would be better off with him than without him.

We have had our fair share of busts but Leafs history is littered with players we gave up on only to have them breakout elsewhere.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on September 17, 2011, 04:11:04 PM
I think a lot of people really over-estimate what a top 10 pick is. It's really rare that a player drafted outside the top 2 or 3 picks of the draft makes a significant impact within 2 seasons of being drafted. I mean, just look at Kadri's draft class - other than Kane and Pajaarvi, who have both only had moderate success so far, no one has really had much of an impact at the NHL level - there are no 20 goal seasons from this draft from guys not named Tavares or Duchene, there are no starting goalies, there's only 1 defenceman of note (Kulikov) and he hasn't exactly lit it up either. Heck, there are only a handful of players outside the top 3 that have even played full NHL seasons. Some people really need to re-adjust their expectations to get in line with reality. I don't know where Kadri will end up in the future, but, calling him a bust because he hasn't earned a full-time spot within 2 years of being drafted? That's just ridiculous.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on September 17, 2011, 04:44:11 PM
Heck, there are only a handful of players outside the top 3 that have even played full NHL seasons. Some people really need to re-adjust their expectations to get in line with reality. I don't know where Kadri will end up in the future, but, calling him a bust because he hasn't earned a full-time spot within 2 years of being drafted? That's just ridiculous.

I lump these people that say this stuff, in with the comments on the TSN article's that are posted about the Leafs, they really only like to bash everything Leafs. Most of the time, they have absolutely no idea what they're saying anyway.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on September 17, 2011, 06:21:17 PM
So what is Kadri's glaring issue?

I'd say size/strength.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on September 17, 2011, 07:06:32 PM
So what is Kadri's glaring issue?

I'd say size/strength.

At 6'0", ~190 lbs, I wouldn't call size an issue (though, it's not an asset either - in terms of size, he's neither here nor there). As for strength . . . it did seem to be an issue for him when he was up last season, but, I'd like to see what his offseason conditioning program has done for him - it could well be something that's resolved already.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on September 17, 2011, 07:31:20 PM
So what is Kadri's glaring issue?

I'd say size/strength.

I'd expand that to defensive ability maybe relating to sense or aptitude - to the extent that Burke/Wilson seem to have written him off as a potential center because of it.

That's not to say he can't improve that part of his game though.

I also agree heartily with Busta - way, way too soon to declare him a bust.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: lamajama on September 17, 2011, 09:36:01 PM

Now whether he meets the lofty expectations of the organization is another question...

That's an interesting comment. Is this "lofty expectations" being driven by fans in forums such as this or indeed by the Leafs for Naz? The fact the Leafs haven't developed what you would call a "significant" home grown drafted talent in the last 30+ years is pretty telling. Much of that is p-poor drafting and some of it is giving up on players quickly.

I'm not that disappointed at all in what he's done so far but obviously would have loved him to have entered the league in a Calder-worthy debut but I'm also content to let him gain strength and D awareness. As far as the offensive skills go, he's on par with anyone in the organization as evidenced by his shootout skills.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on September 17, 2011, 09:37:02 PM
So what is Kadri's glaring issue?

I'd say size/strength.

At 6'0", ~190 lbs, I wouldn't call size an issue (though, it's not an asset either - in terms of size, he's neither here nor there). As for strength . . . it did seem to be an issue for him when he was up last season, but, I'd like to see what his offseason conditioning program has done for him - it could well be something that's resolved already.

He was saying he thought he bulked up too much for last season and it affected his speed, so he has dropped a few pounds for this year and worked on his speed/agility in the summer.  I'm hoping that it is noticeable.

EDIT: Seems to jive with Wilson's comments too:
Quote
Hes still young, still has things to learn, and hes showing improvement. Just what I saw today was better than anything he brought to the table, even at the end (of last season), when he was playing quite a lot. He looked half-a-step to a step quicker.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on September 17, 2011, 11:14:28 PM
At 6'0", ~190 lbs, I wouldn't call size an issue (though, it's not an asset either - in terms of size, he's neither here nor there).


If that's legitimately how big he is, sure. I've heard conflicting reports on that though.

As for strength . . . it did seem to be an issue for him when he was up last season, but, I'd like to see what his offseason conditioning program has done for him - it could well be something that's resolved already.

Sure. Like I said, it's something that needs resolving. I acknowledge it may get resolved.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on September 17, 2011, 11:26:09 PM
If that's legitimately how big he is, sure. I've heard conflicting reports on that though.

Those are the official numbers. So, assuming the Leafs fudge their numbers in roughly the same proportions as the rest of the league . . .
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on September 20, 2011, 06:24:17 PM
Quote
"It's the best place to play in the league," said Leafs forward Colby Armstrong. "It's unbelievable the support we get here. It's like the best feeling ever. If you have a chance to come play here, it's amazing. It's the best."

...

"I loved playing here as a visitor and playing here as a Maple Leaf, I don't know that there's really words that I can use to describe it," said Liles. "It's just a pretty amazing feeling. I definitely had some nerves going tonight, but we'll work through those as the pre-season goes on. The fans here are fantastic, it's a great hockey city.

"Back from where I'm from, not many people know a whole lot about hockey, so the best description I can give people that I usually say is it's like playing for the New York Yankees. Everybody seems to get it then."

http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110920/110920_toronto_sports/20110920/?hub=CP24Sports

Damn right.   8)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bleeding Blue & White on September 22, 2011, 03:01:06 PM
random note: look at the 12-13 leafs ufa list...

conolley, lupul, lombardi, macarthur, armstrong, bozak.  We can really clean house if things still aren't working then.   
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Chev-boyar-sky on September 22, 2011, 05:39:14 PM
random note: look at the 12-13 leafs ufa list...

conolley, lupul, lombardi, macarthur, armstrong, bozak.  We can really clean house if things still aren't working then.

That's assuming any or all of those players are the problem though....
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on September 22, 2011, 07:13:07 PM
random note: look at the 12-13 leafs ufa list...

conolley, lupul, lombardi, macarthur, armstrong, bozak.  We can really clean house if things still aren't working then.

That's assuming any or all of those players are the problem though....

With the possibility of acquiring any of Weber, Getzlaf, Perry or Staal that year ( at this point ) it could be a matter of balance.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on September 22, 2011, 07:36:28 PM
With the possibility of acquiring any of Weber, Getzlaf, Perry or Staal that year ( at this point ) it could be a matter of balance.

Yeah. 2013 has potential to be a very interesting summer.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on September 22, 2011, 10:22:38 PM
Leafs brass rethinks lines concept
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/09/22/leafs-brass-rethinks-lines-concept
Remember top six, bottom six, once one of the more bold commandments of Brian Burke and his philosophy for constructing a rugged, winning NHL team?

Havent heard much of it around the Leafs lately, have we?

For a variety of reasons, team management has temporarily had to tinker with the concept in attempting to upgrade the forward group.
...

I was hoping they'd do that more than a year ago when there were UFas who could have helped to do so. Better late than never.

Bozak-Armstrong look good together. Having to choose between Kadri & Frattin or a darker horse isn't such a bad problem to have.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on September 22, 2011, 10:55:52 PM
With the top six, bottom six, there has always been a clear division of skill and grinding. Thats not necessarily the case any more.

Not sure who that quote is from, maybe Nonis, still.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on September 22, 2011, 11:03:21 PM
With the top six, bottom six, there has always been a clear division of skill and grinding. Thats not necessarily the case any more.

Not sure who that quote is from, maybe Nonis, still.

Unless I missed someone, he's the only one quoted in the article.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on September 22, 2011, 11:05:35 PM
http://www.torontosun.com/2011/09/22/colborne-likely-headed-to-marllies
Wilson said he had no idea when Mike Brown would get through a lower-body injury to re-join full practice

Hopefully, he's not picking up where he left off last year though with the style he plays, I'd never expect an 82 game season out of him.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on September 23, 2011, 04:22:10 AM
With the possibility of acquiring any of Weber, Getzlaf, Perry or Staal that year ( at this point ) it could be a matter of balance.

Yeah. 2013 has potential to be a very interesting summer.


If Burke makes it so.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on September 23, 2011, 10:24:00 AM
http://capgeek.com/charts.php?Team=4

I can't believe we're the 6th highest team paid team this year.

Yes, I would say summer 2013 looks very interesting. However, I fully expect Burke to start turning over the roster. There's no way he goes forward with this exact team forever. We're going to need to cut down on spending somewhere in order to fit under the cap. I'd hate to see our players walk for nothing.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on September 23, 2011, 10:34:45 AM
With the possibility of acquiring any of Weber, Getzlaf, Perry or Staal that year ( at this point ) it could be a matter of balance.

Yeah. 2013 has potential to be a very interesting summer.


If Burke makes it so.

I didn't mean just for the Leafs.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: AvroArrow on September 23, 2011, 12:22:56 PM
http://capgeek.com/charts.php?Team=4

I can't believe we're the 6th highest team paid team this year.

Yes, I would say summer 2013 looks very interesting. However, I fully expect Burke to start turning over the roster. There's no way he goes forward with this exact team forever. We're going to need to cut down on spending somewhere in order to fit under the cap. I'd hate to see our players walk for nothing.

That's where depth and youth come in.  I've been thinking Grabovski over the last little while, and while I'd like to keep him, if his contract request exceeds the space we have available, we could potentially slot Bozak in as a cheaper replacement (assuming Bozak has the year we all hope he will).  A guy like Colborne then slots in on the 3rd line.

Having depth and youth will allow us to continue to build under the cap (at least, that's the hope).
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on September 23, 2011, 07:51:24 PM
Yup... Still like the 3rd jersey. Actually, I like it even more now that I see some guys wearing it.

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/09/23/leafs_third_jersey/
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Rob on September 23, 2011, 08:48:53 PM
Very nice.  Also, the pants they will wear with this jersey will have a white stripe down the thigh.


(http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20110923/cp24_416_jersey_110923.jpg)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on September 24, 2011, 10:26:49 AM
Very nice.  Also, the pants they will wear with this jersey will have a white stripe down the thigh.


(http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20110923/cp24_416_jersey_1
10923.jpg)


Very nice, indeed.  A good blend of past and present, classically done.

Carlton the Bear looks cute!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on September 24, 2011, 10:33:03 AM
I want one but who?...  :-\ I currently have one from the "TML" days with my surna.e and "00" on the back ala Clark Griswold but not sure I need another like that.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Chev-boyar-sky on September 24, 2011, 02:02:23 PM
With the possibility of acquiring any of Weber, Getzlaf, Perry or Staal that year ( at this point ) it could be a matter of balance.

Yeah. 2013 has potential to be a very interesting summer.


If Burke makes it so.

Burke channeling Jean-Luc Picard?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: The Red Polar Bear on September 24, 2011, 03:14:58 PM
I for one still don't like it. My favourites were the old alternates, so I'm rather biased.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on September 25, 2011, 08:37:25 AM
I maintain anything with that funny looking leaf is terrible.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on October 02, 2011, 02:51:41 AM
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/48086--puck-money-methodology (http://www.canadianbusiness.com/article/48086--puck-money-methodology)

Grabovski ranks 13th out of the more than 140 forwards valued:

 Mikhail Grabovski
Salary: $2.85 million
Points: 58
Normalized Points: 62
Time on Ice: 1,568 minutes
Plus/Minus: 14
Salary Rank: 57 out of 148 eligible players.
Point rank: 44 out of 148 eligible players.
Time on Ice rank: 28 out of 148 eligible players.
Plus/Minus: 27 out of 148 eligible players

Math: (57*.2) + (44*.267) + (29*.267) + (27*.267) = 37.80

Mikhail Grabovski received 37.80 points which ranked him No. 12 most valuable out of 148 players.




Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on October 02, 2011, 05:31:30 PM
Ben Scrivens was sent to the Marlies today, when is the next round of cuts? Tomorrow?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 02, 2011, 05:38:46 PM
Ben Scrivens was sent to the Marlies today, when is the next round of cuts? Tomorrow?

That's what Wilson said after the last game last night. His reasoning was that they couldn't waive anyone on a Sunday (I think they can but the teams get an extra day to mull it over which wisely the Leafs don't want to give any team).
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on October 02, 2011, 06:08:29 PM
Ben Scrivens was sent to the Marlies today, when is the next round of cuts? Tomorrow?

That's what Wilson said after the last game last night. His reasoning was that they couldn't waive anyone on a Sunday (I think they can but the teams get an extra day to mull it over which wisely the Leafs don't want to give any team).

Makes sense. Who would need to be waived? Crabb, and? I can't even remember who is left in camp...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 02, 2011, 06:14:40 PM
Makes sense. Who would need to be waived? Crabb, and? I can't even remember who is left in camp...

Lashoff and Rosehill would need to go through waivers to be sent down.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: L K on October 02, 2011, 07:00:31 PM
Makes sense. Who would need to be waived? Crabb, and? I can't even remember who is left in camp...

Lashoff and Rosehill would need to go through waivers to be sent down.

Barring a glut of defensemen going on waivers, I think Lashoff is an Oiler when he gets waived. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 02, 2011, 07:01:00 PM
Here's a decent Mirtle article on the final roster decisions
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/leafs-final-cuts-loom/article2187997/

With Scrivens sent down, goal is set with Reimer & Gustavsson.

On defence, six veterans in Phaneuf, Schenn, Liles, Franson, Gunnarsson and Komisarek are all staying, barring a trade (more on that later).

I suspect only one of these:
Defencemen on bubble: Aulie, Gardiner and Lashoff
stays. My guess would be Gardiner. the experiment with Liles & Phaneuf struck me as exploring options not Aulie who didn't have a great camp.

With Lomdardi in the mix, the forwards are interesting:
 including MacArthur and Kadri, there are 12 players in the "for sure" side of things: Armstrong, Bozak, Brown, Connolly, Grabovski, Kadri (injured), Kessel, Kulemin, Lombardi, Lupul, MacArthur and Orr.

Kadri will be on the IR (or maybe ultimately LTIR). So there are two openings that will be filled from this group:
Forwards on bubble: Boyce, Crabb, Dupuis, Frattin, Rosehill and Zigomanis

I think Rosehill, Crabb are likely to be Marlies bound. Orr fills Rosehill's role.

Zigomanis has already cleared waivers but his faceoff performance last night might be giving them second thoughts because Grabbo, Connolly, Lombardi &  Boyce are not strong on the draw - only Bozak is.

Frattin is waiver exempt but surely he played well enough to stick otherwise.

Some decisions might get delayed until they're sure Connolly & Bozak will play Thursday. It might be Frattin, Dupuis, Boyce & Zigomanis surviving until they find out the status of Connolly & Bozak.

That's my guess.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 02, 2011, 07:01:47 PM
Makes sense. Who would need to be waived? Crabb, and? I can't even remember who is left in camp...

Lashoff and Rosehill would need to go through waivers to be sent down.

Barring a glut of defensemen going on waivers, I think Lashoff is an Oiler when he gets waived.

I have the same feeling.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 02, 2011, 07:28:00 PM
Barring a glut of defensemen going on waivers, I think Lashoff is an Oiler when he gets waived.

Definitely a possibility.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: leafplasma on October 02, 2011, 07:51:41 PM
Makes sense. Who would need to be waived? Crabb, and? I can't even remember who is left in camp...

Lashoff and Rosehill would need to go through waivers to be sent down.

Barring a glut of defensemen going on waivers, I think Lashoff is an Oiler when he gets waived.

I have the same feeling.

If that happens, well good for him, he deserves the shot.  We have far too much depth here in TO and on the farm to worry about the loss of Lashoff.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 02, 2011, 08:00:04 PM
I suspect only one of these:
Defencemen on bubble: Aulie, Gardiner and Lashoff
stays. My guess would be Gardiner. the experiment with Liles & Phaneuf struck me as exploring options not Aulie who didn't have a great camp.

While that may be true, I also get the feeling that the Gardiner-Komisarek pairing was an indication of where they were considering using Gardiner, and seeing how much of a mess they were defensively (and both equally to blame for the poor defensive play of the pairing), it really would not shock me if that altered their thinking about him and ends up with him in the AHL to work on the flaws in his defensive game.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 02, 2011, 08:26:56 PM
Makes sense. Who would need to be waived? Crabb, and? I can't even remember who is left in camp...

Lashoff and Rosehill would need to go through waivers to be sent down.

Barring a glut of defensemen going on waivers, I think Lashoff is an Oiler when he gets waived.

I have the same feeling.

If that happens, well good for him, he deserves the shot.  We have far too much depth here in TO and on the farm to worry about the loss of Lashoff.

Agree with the first part, disagree with the second.  You can't have too much depth on D.  Lashoff would be a capable call-up when injuries hit the back end.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 02, 2011, 08:29:36 PM
Ziggy really is a faceoff specialist. How about Dupuis - Zigomanis - Boyce/?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: L K on October 03, 2011, 11:15:41 AM
Aulie and Zigomanis go to the Marlies along with Crabb, Boyce, and Lashoff who have to clear waivers.

Gardiner sticks with the club for now.  Interesting.

I'm not a fan of keeping two completely useless players in Rosehill and Orr on the roster, I think that is a huge mistake and it only serves to tire out the top 3 lines who have to play more minutes because you can't play Rosehill/Orr more than 6-7 minutes a game at the best of times.

Lupul - Connolly - Kessel
Kulemin - Grabovski - MacArthur (Frattin)
Frattin (Brown) - Bozak - Armstrong
Rosehill/Lombardi - Dupuis - Orr/Brown

Phaneuf - Liles
Gunnarsson - Schenn
Gardiner - Komisarek
Hanson
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 03, 2011, 11:21:00 AM
You're missing Brown, who will definitely be in over Rosehill. I imagine Rosehill will be gone once MacArthur's suspension is done.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 03, 2011, 11:21:03 AM
Does anyone know off-hand if other teams' 4th lines typically play more than 7 minutes or so a night?  I'd be curious to know, but my internet is too slow to look it up.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 03, 2011, 11:24:06 AM
Does anyone know off-hand if other teams' 4th lines typically play more than 7 minutes or so a night?  I'd be curious to know, but my internet is too slow to look it up.

4th lines aroudn the league seem to play anywhere from 5 to 12 minutes a night, depending on the team/situation/etc.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: L K on October 03, 2011, 11:27:40 AM
Does anyone know off-hand if other teams' 4th lines typically play more than 7 minutes or so a night?  I'd be curious to know, but my internet is too slow to look it up.

It's not perfect because it includes guys who played less than a full season but 450 players averaged 10 minutes of ice-time a game last year (for forwards only).

565 players averaged more ice-time than Rosehill/game and 571 averaged more ice-time than Orr.  Orr played the 16th least ice-time per game of all forwards in the NHL and Rosehill was the 22nd least utilized player.   I do understand having one of them, but I don't understand both of them being on the roster when they don't really provide much of anything to the roster.

Boyce and Zigomanis aren't anything to worry about not having on the roster, but I think Boyce's ability to actually play a bit of defense and chip in some gritty offense make him a much better 4th liner/13th forward, and Zigomanis' ability to win faceoffs is infinitely more valuable than Orr's staged fights.

The team still has a long way to go toward being a complete roster, so I really think you need to utilize your roster spots to their best effectiveness at this point, and that means having offensive specialists for when the team is struggling to score, and a defensive specialist for games where your team is having a hard time keeping pucks out of the net.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Guilt Trip on October 03, 2011, 11:28:01 AM
Aulie and Zigomanis go to the Marlies along with Crabb, Boyce, and Lashoff who have to clear waivers.

Gardiner sticks with the club for now.  Interesting.

I'm not a fan of keeping two completely useless players in Rosehill and Orr on the roster, I think that is a huge mistake and it only serves to tire out the top 3 lines who have to play more minutes because you can't play Rosehill/Orr more than 6-7 minutes a game at the best of times.

Lupul - Connolly - Kessel
Kulemin - Grabovski - MacArthur (Frattin)
Frattin - Bozak - Armstrong
Rosehill/Lombardi - Dupuis - Orr

Phaneuf - Liles
Gunnarsson - Schenn
Gardiner - Komisarek
Franson
Check out any good team....the 4th line plays 5-7 minutes max. I think you're way off with the tiring comment. I want the top 2 lines playing roughly 20 mins , and the 3rd playing up to 15. That leaves 5 for for 4th. Same with the D. Top pair plays 25, 2nd 20, 3rd around 15.

I think Lashoff might get picked up by Edmonton.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 03, 2011, 11:29:27 AM
Does anyone know off-hand if other teams' 4th lines typically play more than 7 minutes or so a night?  I'd be curious to know, but my internet is too slow to look it up.

It's not perfect because it includes guys who played less than a full season but 450 players averaged 10 minutes of ice-time a game last year (for forwards only).

565 players averaged more ice-time than Rosehill/game and 571 averaged more ice-time than Orr.  Orr played the 16th least ice-time per game of all forwards in the NHL and Rosehill was the 22nd least utilized player.   I do understand having one of them, but I don't understand both of them being on the roster when they don't really provide much of anything to the roster.

Agreed, I could do without having both.  Burke clearly likes having them around, though.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Guilt Trip on October 03, 2011, 11:33:22 AM
Does anyone know off-hand if other teams' 4th lines typically play more than 7 minutes or so a night?  I'd be curious to know, but my internet is too slow to look it up.

It's not perfect because it includes guys who played less than a full season but 450 players averaged 10 minutes of ice-time a game last year (for forwards only).

565 players averaged more ice-time than Rosehill/game and 571 averaged more ice-time than Orr.  Orr played the 16th least ice-time per game of all forwards in the NHL and Rosehill was the 22nd least utilized player.   I do understand having one of them, but I don't understand both of them being on the roster when they don't really provide much of anything to the roster.

Agreed, I could do without having both.  Burke clearly likes having them around, though.
Rosehill is still here because he has to clear waivers, and we don't know if Orr can drop them yet. If Orr can't resume his role, Rosehill will fill in nicely. I've got no problem with RW's decision....it's the 4th line.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: L K on October 03, 2011, 11:38:08 AM
Aulie and Zigomanis go to the Marlies along with Crabb, Boyce, and Lashoff who have to clear waivers.

Gardiner sticks with the club for now.  Interesting.

I'm not a fan of keeping two completely useless players in Rosehill and Orr on the roster, I think that is a huge mistake and it only serves to tire out the top 3 lines who have to play more minutes because you can't play Rosehill/Orr more than 6-7 minutes a game at the best of times.

Lupul - Connolly - Kessel
Kulemin - Grabovski - MacArthur (Frattin)
Frattin - Bozak - Armstrong
Rosehill/Lombardi - Dupuis - Orr

Phaneuf - Liles
Gunnarsson - Schenn
Gardiner - Komisarek
Franson
Check out any good team....the 4th line plays 5-7 minutes max. I think you're way off with the tiring comment. I want the top 2 lines playing roughly 20 mins , and the 3rd playing up to 15. That leaves 5 for for 4th. Same with the D. Top pair plays 25, 2nd 20, 3rd around 15.

I think Lashoff might get picked up by Edmonton.

The Leafs aren't a good team.  On any given night, the Kessel line is going to look bad, the Grabovski line isn't going to be able to carry 82 games, and the Leafs are going to be carrying guys who you can't trust on the ice.  Detroit doesn't ice a terrible 4th line, they don't play it as much because their top 9 is just much better.

Stanley Cup Winning Boston Bruins - no forward under 10 min/game
Chicago - No player with >5 games played under 10 min/game
Detroit - No player under 8 min AND no player >10 games under 10 min
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Guilt Trip on October 03, 2011, 12:03:08 PM
Aulie and Zigomanis go to the Marlies along with Crabb, Boyce, and Lashoff who have to clear waivers.

Gardiner sticks with the club for now.  Interesting.

I'm not a fan of keeping two completely useless players in Rosehill and Orr on the roster, I think that is a huge mistake and it only serves to tire out the top 3 lines who have to play more minutes because you can't play Rosehill/Orr more than 6-7 minutes a game at the best of times.

Lupul - Connolly - Kessel
Kulemin - Grabovski - MacArthur (Frattin)
Frattin - Bozak - Armstrong
Rosehill/Lombardi - Dupuis - Orr

Phaneuf - Liles
Gunnarsson - Schenn
Gardiner - Komisarek
Franson
Check out any good team....the 4th line plays 5-7 minutes max. I think you're way off with the tiring comment. I want the top 2 lines playing roughly 20 mins , and the 3rd playing up to 15. That leaves 5 for for 4th. Same with the D. Top pair plays 25, 2nd 20, 3rd around 15.

I think Lashoff might get picked up by Edmonton.

The Leafs aren't a good team.  On any given night, the Kessel line is going to look bad, the Grabovski line isn't going to be able to carry 82 games, and the Leafs are going to be carrying guys who you can't trust on the ice.  Detroit doesn't ice a terrible 4th line, they don't play it as much because their top 9 is just much better.

Stanley Cup Winning Boston Bruins - no forward under 10 min/game
Chicago - No player with >5 games played under 10 min/game
Detroit - No player under 8 min AND no player >10 games under 10 min

You're absolutely right....I stand corrected....Only regular Leafs under 10 minutes a game were Rosehill and Orr. Maybe it's an RW thing where his enforcers only play around 5 minutes. Brown plays 10 minutes a night. I doubt that both will be in the lineup together so while Brown and Orr/ Rosehill did play on the same line last year, Brown still averaged about 5 minutes a game more.
I still don't think our 4th line is terrible. Brown and whoever the center is, are more then capable defensively. I myself would have kept Ziggy here but let's not forget....who starts the year here doesn't necessarily finish the year here.
Versteeg, Caputi, Ziggy, Mitchell, Sjostrom, Beau, Lebda...all started with the Leafs last year.....
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: drummond on October 03, 2011, 12:38:30 PM
With all those injuries to our centres, it do not get why Zigomanis was sent down. If anything he is excellent in face-off circle.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 03, 2011, 12:44:32 PM
With all those injuries to our centres, it do not get why Zigomanis was sent down. If anything he is excellent in face-off circle.

Because he's mostly useless outside the face-off circle.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: drummond on October 03, 2011, 12:46:59 PM
With all those injuries to our centres, it do not get why Zigomanis was sent down. If anything he is excellent in face-off circle.

Because he's mostly useless outside the face-off circle.

While Rosehill/Orr do the miracles on the ice, right?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Guilt Trip on October 03, 2011, 12:58:33 PM
With all those injuries to our centres, it do not get why Zigomanis was sent down. If anything he is excellent in face-off circle.

Because he's mostly useless outside the face-off circle.

While Rosehill/Orr do the miracles on the ice, right?
No. We have 4 centers already. Ziggy was to be a 4th line guy and was beaten out by Dupuis....like I said earlier, I think Rosehill will be here until Orr proves he can do the job, and they didn't want to risk losing him just in case Orr couldn't.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 03, 2011, 01:14:59 PM
Aulie and Zigomanis go to the Marlies along with Crabb, Boyce, and Lashoff who have to clear waivers.

Gardiner sticks with the club for now.  Interesting.

I'm not a fan of keeping two completely useless players in Rosehill and Orr on the roster, I think that is a huge mistake and it only serves to tire out the top 3 lines who have to play more minutes because you can't play Rosehill/Orr more than 6-7 minutes a game at the best of times.

Lupul - Connolly - Kessel
Kulemin - Grabovski - MacArthur (Frattin)
Frattin - Bozak - Armstrong
Rosehill/Lombardi - Dupuis - Orr

Phaneuf - Liles
Gunnarsson - Schenn
Gardiner - Komisarek
Franson
Check out any good team....the 4th line plays 5-7 minutes max. I think you're way off with the tiring comment. I want the top 2 lines playing roughly 20 mins , and the 3rd playing up to 15. That leaves 5 for for 4th. Same with the D. Top pair plays 25, 2nd 20, 3rd around 15.

I think Lashoff might get picked up by Edmonton.

The Leafs aren't a good team.  On any given night, the Kessel line is going to look bad, the Grabovski line isn't going to be able to carry 82 games, and the Leafs are going to be carrying guys who you can't trust on the ice.  Detroit doesn't ice a terrible 4th line, they don't play it as much because their top 9 is just much better.

Stanley Cup Winning Boston Bruins - no forward under 10 min/game
Chicago - No player with >5 games played under 10 min/game
Detroit - No player under 8 min AND no player >10 games under 10 min

Always the eternal optimist.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 03, 2011, 01:26:30 PM
There were some pretty awful rumours about Orr's concussion last winder/spring. I wonder if he's one 'good' (if you'll excuse the terminology because it wouldn't be 'good') punch away from retirement. And therefore, Rosehill is being retained to provide insurance - something like that. Or maybe Orr is a little banged up ...

Keeping both enforcers longer term doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 03, 2011, 01:29:09 PM
While Rosehill/Orr do the miracles on the ice, right?

No, but Zigomanis wasn't competing for a spot against Rosehill and Orr, nor can he fill the role that they're meant to.
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: 4th Liner on October 03, 2011, 01:44:44 PM
Lots of talk about Rosehill sticking, but as others have said, it's likely he's only here until MacArthur's suspension is over. Makes sense to see if Orr is truly up to his job or not.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 03, 2011, 02:01:54 PM
Can't believe Franson starts as the 7th D-man. At least he has a few things he can do other than be a pylon. Komi needs to be shown the door.
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: 4th Liner on October 03, 2011, 02:08:58 PM
Can't believe Franson starts as the 7th D-man. At least he has a few things he can do other than be a pylon. Komi needs to be shown the door.

I don't think he's the 7th. I think Komi starts there and then it'll go game by game, unless there's a trade and/or Gardiner falters. One bad game and you could sit - I like it, it keeps everyone on their toes.

EDIT: I see RW says it's so - a surprise to me, but I think it still stands to reason that they all will be on a short leash - including Komi
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Frank E on October 03, 2011, 02:16:47 PM
Seems everybody's jumping up and down happy with this roster, eh?
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: 4th Liner on October 03, 2011, 02:19:59 PM
“@TSNScottyMac: #Leafs are incredibly young: @TSNResearch says of all current rosters, Leafs only team in #NHL w/all players born 1980 or after.”
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 03, 2011, 02:25:47 PM
@TSNScottyMac: #Leafs are incredibly young: @TSNResearch says of all current rosters, Leafs only team in #NHL w/all players born 1980 or after.

Only 2 players (Connolly and Liles) have already passed their 30th birthday, and only another 3 (Lombardi, Komisarek and Orr) will get there before the end of the season. That's crazy.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 03, 2011, 02:28:54 PM
Seems everybody's jumping up and down happy with this roster, eh?

I'm all a-tingle.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 03, 2011, 02:31:16 PM
There were some pretty awful rumours about Orr's concussion last winder/spring. I wonder if he's one 'good' (if you'll excuse the terminology because it wouldn't be 'good') punch away from retirement. And therefore, Rosehill is being retained to provide insurance - something like that. Or maybe Orr is a little banged up ...

Keeping both enforcers longer term doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Further to this, Orr has 373 GP plus 12 playoff games. To get a max NHL pension, he needs 400. Now I think games missed due to injury or games available to play count towards the 400 but maybe if he was short a few, they'd hang on to him and let him get his full pension.

And maybe he's just fine or has enough games and that has nothing to do with it.

Just noting I kicked around the notion.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Newbury on October 03, 2011, 02:42:16 PM
Can't believe Franson starts as the 7th D-man. At least he has a few things he can do other than be a pylon. Komi needs to be shown the door.

Is this true? If he's not already, I think Franson has top-four potential. He was pretty good on Nashville last year so I'm not sure why he wouldn't be in our top six.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 03, 2011, 03:03:00 PM
Can't believe Franson starts as the 7th D-man. At least he has a few things he can do other than be a pylon. Komi needs to be shown the door.

Is this true? If he's not already, I think Franson has top-four potential. He was pretty good on Nashville last year so I'm not sure why he wouldn't be in our top six.

Honestly. He's good enough for Nashville but not good enough here? What?

Komi has got to go. He's holding the defense back completely. Franson's played a steadier, if unspectacular game.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on October 03, 2011, 03:34:55 PM
re: Komi over Franson... its only the roster for opening night, right?

Also, Franson didn't exactly tear it up at camp, and Komi established chemistry with Gardiner, who was the winner of camp.  So by association he gets to play opening night. 

We will see if it lasts beyond game 1.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on October 03, 2011, 03:38:42 PM
Aulie and Zigomanis go to the Marlies along with Crabb, Boyce, and Lashoff who have to clear waivers.

Gardiner sticks with the club for now.  Interesting.

I'm not a fan of keeping two completely useless players in Rosehill and Orr on the roster, I think that is a huge mistake and it only serves to tire out the top 3 lines who have to play more minutes because you can't play Rosehill/Orr more than 6-7 minutes a game at the best of times.

Lupul - Connolly - Kessel
Kulemin - Grabovski - MacArthur (Frattin)
Frattin - Bozak - Armstrong
Rosehill/Lombardi - Dupuis - Orr

Phaneuf - Liles
Gunnarsson - Schenn
Gardiner - Komisarek
Franson
Check out any good team....the 4th line plays 5-7 minutes max. I think you're way off with the tiring comment. I want the top 2 lines playing roughly 20 mins , and the 3rd playing up to 15. That leaves 5 for for 4th. Same with the D. Top pair plays 25, 2nd 20, 3rd around 15.

I think Lashoff might get picked up by Edmonton.

The Leafs aren't a good team.  On any given night, the Kessel line is going to look bad, the Grabovski line isn't going to be able to carry 82 games, and the Leafs are going to be carrying guys who you can't trust on the ice.  Detroit doesn't ice a terrible 4th line, they don't play it as much because their top 9 is just much better.

Stanley Cup Winning Boston Bruins - no forward under 10 min/game
Chicago - No player with >5 games played under 10 min/game
Detroit - No player under 8 min AND no player >10 games under 10 min

Always the eternal optimist.

I'd like to think the Leafs can aspire to being close or on par with teams more at their level (like 6th-10th seeds) rather than comparing to the last 3 cup winners... lets wait a few years on that one.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Spider on October 03, 2011, 03:41:05 PM
re: Komi over Franson... its only the roster for opening night, right?

Also, Franson didn't exactly tear it up at camp, and Komi established chemistry with Gardiner, who was the winner of camp.  So by association he gets to play opening night. 

We will see if it lasts beyond game 1.

Plus, the Leafs are playing against the Habs (which is Komi's ex-team).  Usually players play harder against their previous employers.  :D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 03, 2011, 03:47:31 PM
re: Komi over Franson... its only the roster for opening night, right?

Also, Franson didn't exactly tear it up at camp, and Komi established chemistry with Gardiner, who was the winner of camp.  So by association he gets to play opening night. 

We will see if it lasts beyond game 1.

Plus, the Leafs are playing against the Habs (which is Komi's ex-team).  Usually players play harder against their previous employers.  :D

I think I've watched this movie before.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 03, 2011, 05:09:12 PM
Can't believe Franson starts as the 7th D-man. At least he has a few things he can do other than be a pylon. Komi needs to be shown the door.

Is this true? If he's not already, I think Franson has top-four potential. He was pretty good on Nashville last year so I'm not sure why he wouldn't be in our top six.

Honestly. He's good enough for Nashville but not good enough here? What?

Komi has got to go. He's holding the defense back completely. Franson's played a steadier, if unspectacular game.

It's not a big fall for Franson. He was a 6th or 7th in Nashville with limited ice time.

Ron Wilson has no future in Toronto if he gets off to a bad start. No contract renewal and this time, I'd predict Burke will pull the trigger sooner than later - no thumbs twiddling until after Xmas this season.

Ron picks the roster. So it comes down to which dmen Ron feels give him the best chance to get them off to a good start (and keep his job).

If Komi sucks, then Wilson will be quick with the hook. His job attempting to finish this season as Leafs coach depends on it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Jalili on October 03, 2011, 05:48:07 PM
Komisarek is such a useless mofo.

Not only are Aulie and Franson better than him, but I prefer Lashoff and Finger as well.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: You're right on October 03, 2011, 06:56:02 PM
Komisarek is such a useless mofo.

Not only are Aulie and Franson better than him, but I prefer Lashoff and Finger as well.
I'm not a big fan either - but to his credit, he does seem to genuinely be trying and his preseason was (in some ways) better than what he has showed in his time with the Leafs. Points for trying (but maybe the points get taken away for not succeeding)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on October 03, 2011, 07:02:51 PM
There were some pretty awful rumours about Orr's concussion last winder/spring. I wonder if he's one 'good' (if you'll excuse the terminology because it wouldn't be 'good') punch away from retirement. And therefore, Rosehill is being retained to provide insurance - something like that. Or maybe Orr is a little banged up ...

Keeping both enforcers longer term doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

Further to this, Orr has 373 GP plus 12 playoff games. To get a max NHL pension, he needs 400. Now I think games missed due to injury or games available to play count towards the 400 but maybe if he was short a few, they'd hang on to him and let him get his full pension.

And maybe he's just fine or has enough games and that has nothing to do with it.

Just noting I kicked around the notion.

I didn't mention it before but I thought Orr looked ok against Detroit, set up Brown IIRC. I take the piss out of him regularly so if I'm to be fair...

Interesting notion regarding the pension and if true it wouldn't surprise me with BurkeplayersgmInc. I agree with the suggestion that Rosehill will be gone when Mac returns but if he isn't then we'll definitely be revisiting at least the question of 'why' if not this theory directly.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on October 03, 2011, 07:13:21 PM
The choice to send down Aulie is interesting if only in that Gardiner is somewhat his antithesis as a player.

I agree with Cornb'zkill Flake, we'll see how it shakes out. I can't imagine Burke sitting around with Aulie in the minors for long though...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: lamajama on October 03, 2011, 07:25:36 PM
Connolly "50-50" for opener according to Wilson (as per TSN)
<sigh>

Couldn't he have waited a few games at least.

The naysayers about the contract will have fun with this.... :-[
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: leafplasma on October 03, 2011, 07:47:01 PM
Makes sense. Who would need to be waived? Crabb, and? I can't even remember who is left in camp...

Lashoff and Rosehill would need to go through waivers to be sent down.

Barring a glut of defensemen going on waivers, I think Lashoff is an Oiler when he gets waived.

I have the same feeling.

If that happens, well good for him, he deserves the shot.  We have far too much depth here in TO and on the farm to worry about the loss of Lashoff.

Agree with the first part, disagree with the second.  You can't have too much depth on D.  Lashoff would be a capable call-up when injuries hit the back end.
Not me Lashoff is serviceable sure but I would prefer the Leafs number 7 stepping in or one of Aulie, Mikus or Holzer as the first call ups.  Then there is Blacker depending on how he plays with the Marlies and even Gysbers has shown a lot of promise.  Whatever way you slice it the Marlies IMHO will have one of the best if not the best D in the AHL and it is time for Lashoff to catch on somewhere else.  You may say we have more than enough depth at D and if we lose Lashoff I won't be too upset.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: leafplasma on October 03, 2011, 07:49:16 PM
Can't believe Franson starts as the 7th D-man. At least he has a few things he can do other than be a pylon. Komi needs to be shown the door.

Is this true? If he's not already, I think Franson has top-four potential. He was pretty good on Nashville last year so I'm not sure why he wouldn't be in our top six.

He was used in a pretty limited role in Nashville, his D game has a lot to be desired so far at this stage in his young career. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on October 03, 2011, 07:58:00 PM
Not me Lashoff is serviceable sure but I would prefer the Leafs number 7 stepping in or one of Aulie, Mikus or Holzer as the first call ups.  Then there is Blacker depending on how he plays with the Marlies and even Gysbers has shown a lot of promise.  Whatever way you slice it the Marlies IMHO will have one of the best if not the best D in the AHL and it is time for Lashoff to catch on somewhere else.  You may say we have more than enough depth at D and if we lose Lashoff I won't be too upset.

Agreed, I don't want to lose Lashoff but I also won't be torn up if the Leafs lose him to a numbers game.  I agree with your call ups pretty much in that order but I'd say while I don't know Gysbers very well I think Blacker is the kind of player that will benefit from pretty much a full year with the  Marlies, look for him next year is my guess and in a regular role. Same goes for Mikus though maybe closer to February but only if hockeyjeebus smiles on him as far as a regular role goes.

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kaberle15 on October 03, 2011, 09:03:30 PM
He was used in a pretty limited role in Nashville, his D game has a lot to be desired so far at this stage in his young career.

yada yada yada, he is better than Komisarek. PERIOD!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 03, 2011, 09:43:13 PM
Colton Orr was definitely better against Detroit the other night, he had some real jump in his game Tigger. So I agree with your comment.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: L K on October 03, 2011, 09:51:45 PM
Connolly "50-50" for opener according to Wilson (as per TSN)
<sigh>

Couldn't he have waited a few games at least.

The naysayers about the contract will have fun with this.... :-[

I'm not sure what can be held over people though, everyone knew he was more likely to miss 15-20 games than 1-5.  He's a 2-year stop-gap to hope that either someone else develops or they can find a trade/free agent.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on October 03, 2011, 09:52:42 PM
Connolly "50-50" for opener according to Wilson (as per TSN)
<sigh>

Couldn't he have waited a few games at least.

The naysayers about the contract will have fun with this.... :-[

Yeah really. I mean he fell in practice. Practice!  :o
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 03, 2011, 09:56:49 PM
I'm not sure what can be held over people though, everyone knew he was more likely to miss 15-20 games than 1-5.  He's a 2-year stop-gap to hope that either someone else develops or they can find a trade/free agent.

Pretty much. And, once Richards did the inevitable and signed with the Rangers, Connolly was the best top 6 centre option available on the UFA market this summer and is better than any of the true centres scheduled to be available next summer.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 03, 2011, 10:14:31 PM
Colton Orr was the 13th forward at practice today. Maybe he's banged up.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 03, 2011, 10:22:39 PM
Colton Orr was the 13th forward at practice today. Maybe he's banged up.

I think that is exactly where he should be every night. In when they need him and watching from up top when they don't.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 04, 2011, 06:52:26 AM
I'm not sure what can be held over people though, everyone knew he was more likely to miss 15-20 games than 1-5.  He's a 2-year stop-gap to hope that either someone else develops or they can find a trade/free agent.

Well, the naysayers I've heard have all generally made the argument that Connolly isn't likely to help the Leafs a ton and the injury bug is, obviously, the biggest impediment there.

I'm a pretty big believer that with the exception of becoming impossible to trade no FA signing is a bad one and I think Connolly is a pretty safe bet, provided the team doesn't improve much, to be dealt during the length of his deal. The issue with him isn't going to be whether or not it was a great signing but whether they should have looked to sign anyone at all.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on October 04, 2011, 06:57:33 AM
Dion Phaneuf, the eternal optimist....

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/10/03/brophy_phaneuf_captain/ (http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/10/03/brophy_phaneuf_captain/)

"We added some new guys in the offseason and I think each and everyone of them bring different elements of their game that really add to our team," Phaneuf said. "You look at Lombardi who brings a lot of speed up the middle and that will really help us up front. Connolly can really make plays. He's very, very skilled. Those are two guys who'll add a lot to our team.

"Liles skates so well and moves the puck well and Franson has a great shot, moves the puck well and see the ice well. Plus he's a big guy who adds size on our back end. We added four real big pieces that will help us so that something that definitely gives our team a new look and adds to the depth of our team."

"The other thing is every game is so important. The reason we didn't make the playoffs last year - the reason we just missed after playing really good hockey down the stretch - is we dug ourselves a hole by having a bad month. When you have a bad stretch of games where you dig yourself into a hole in the first half or first quarter of the season, it's too hard now with the way the schedule is and with the three-point games, to make up those lost points. It's very tough to make up points after Christmas because it seems every team you are chasing is always winning or at least getting a point. That's the way it is now. We have to be consistent right from the start. We can't have any swings where we're good for two weeks and then bad for two weeks. You've got to be as consistent as you can and then we'll be fine."

Not many are giving the Leafs much of a chance to make it to the playoffs this season. They have too many question marks, from an unproven No. 1 goalie, a sharp-shooter who can't seem to take his game to the next level and they are quite thin down the middle with both Connolly and Lombardi having had problems with concussions.

That doesn't faze Phaneuf.

"Whether you are in the West or the East, it's a tight battle to make the playoffs and you have to play well all year,' he said. "That's the goal for our team. We want to be a playoff team and to do that we have to learn from the things that we didn't do well last year. We have to take the positives from the things we did do well. We have to keep the positives and learn from the negatives and we'll be fine.






Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on October 04, 2011, 10:00:10 AM
The choice to send down Aulie is interesting if only in that Gardiner is somewhat his antithesis as a player.

I agree with Cornb'zkill Flake, we'll see how it shakes out. I can't imagine Burke sitting around with Aulie in the minors for long though...

These things seem to work themselves out over time. Depending on how things go with Gardiner and Komi, we could see him up really quick or not at all.  Working Franson in there is probably a bit more urgent at the moment.

My guess is Gardiner and Aulie will swap places by November, as will Franson and Komisarek, but we shall see. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 04, 2011, 10:20:09 AM
The choice to send down Aulie is interesting if only in that Gardiner is somewhat his antithesis as a player.

I agree with Cornb'zkill Flake, we'll see how it shakes out. I can't imagine Burke sitting around with Aulie in the minors for long though...

These things seem to work themselves out over time. Depending on how things go with Gardiner and Komi, we could see him up really quick or not at all.  Working Franson in there is probably a bit more urgent at the moment.

My guess is Gardiner and Aulie will swap places by November, as will Franson and Komisarek, but we shall see.

I really do think Gunnarsson is the unfortunate odd man out here. I think he's developing into a fine player. Aulie had a very unimpressive camp. Hopefully he can pull it together in the A.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 04, 2011, 11:19:08 AM
The choice to send down Aulie is interesting if only in that Gardiner is somewhat his antithesis as a player.

I agree with Cornb'zkill Flake, we'll see how it shakes out. I can't imagine Burke sitting around with Aulie in the minors for long though...

These things seem to work themselves out over time. Depending on how things go with Gardiner and Komi, we could see him up really quick or not at all.  Working Franson in there is probably a bit more urgent at the moment.

My guess is Gardiner and Aulie will swap places by November, as will Franson and Komisarek, but we shall see.

I really do think Gunnarsson is the unfortunate odd man out here. I think he's developing into a fine player. Aulie had a very unimpressive camp. Hopefully he can pull it together in the A.

I'd trade Phaneuf, Komisarek, Liles or Franson before Gunnarsson. I think he's going to be a good bang for the cap buck. I thought he played quite well in preseason - seems physically stronger to me.

Wilson pairing him with Phaneuf to start the season isn't entirely a bad thing though I have concerns that Dion could impose an Aulie preseason effect on him.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 04, 2011, 11:34:58 AM


I'd trade Phaneuf, Komisarek, Liles or Franson before Gunnarsson. I think he's going to be a good bang for the cap buck. I thought he played quite well in preseason - seems physically stronger to me.

Wilson pairing him with Phaneuf to start the season isn't entirely a bad thing though I have concerns that Dion could impose an Aulie preseason effect on him.

I like Phaneuf's positive attitude in the interview HG posted above -- as captain you have to project that kind of attitude -- but Dion needs to look in the mirror and really really step it up this season.  He can't be the one who is holding anyone back in any way this year.  I'd go so far to say that, after Reimer, it's Dion's performance that will make or break our playoff aspirations.  He sets the tone for the whole team, not just the D.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on October 04, 2011, 12:32:47 PM
I'd trade Phaneuf, Komisarek, Liles or Franson before Gunnarsson. I think he's going to be a good bang for the cap buck. I thought he played quite well in preseason - seems physically stronger to me.

Wilson pairing him with Phaneuf to start the season isn't entirely a bad thing though I have concerns that Dion could impose an Aulie preseason effect on him.

While he may prove to be a good bang for the buck, isn't it safe to say at this point that Phaneuf is a better player? I'd say Liles is too. So, while it's good to have good value on the team, in the end isn't better to simply have better players?

Unless you're suggesting the return from trading other guys will allow for better players....
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Frank E on October 04, 2011, 01:00:26 PM
Has anyone, other than Gardiner, really impressed this pre-season? 

I'm a little nervous about this current roster's prospects this fall.  Connolly is pretty much where we thought he'd be, injured.  And Burke is fooling around with the defense combos again.  The bottom two lines aren't appreciably better on paper, and the top two lines are practically the same without Connolly.  Lupul has been meh, Kessel meh...I'm not very optimistic here.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on October 04, 2011, 01:03:05 PM
Anyone know if the Leafs that were put on waivers yesterday passed through alright?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Hockey_gal on October 04, 2011, 01:11:08 PM
Anyone know if the Leafs that were put on waivers yesterday passed through alright?

Nobody was picked up.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Strangelove on October 04, 2011, 01:20:39 PM
I'd trade Phaneuf, Komisarek, Liles or Franson before Gunnarsson. I think he's going to be a good bang for the cap buck. I thought he played quite well in preseason - seems physically stronger to me.

Wilson pairing him with Phaneuf to start the season isn't entirely a bad thing though I have concerns that Dion could impose an Aulie preseason effect on him.

While he may prove to be a good bang for the buck, isn't it safe to say at this point that Phaneuf is a better player? I'd say Liles is too. So, while it's good to have good value on the team, in the end isn't better to simply have better players?

Unless you're suggesting the return from trading other guys will allow for better players....

Even if you want to discount the fact that Phaneuf is grossly overpaid which, in a capped league, is a big problem, there is,  I think, a good case to be made for Gunnarsson being the better player overall.  He seems more defensively sound than Phaneuf most of the time, and makes better decisions at both ends of the ice.  I'm hoping Phaneuf can build on the momentum he had at the end of last season though.

Overall, I'm not particularly optimistic about this season--probably less so than in the past few years, in fact.  I think there's a pretty decent chance they'll squeak into the playoffs, but there's still a glaring lack of top-lier talent across the line-up, along with an obvious lack of depth at forward (Grabo has flashes of brilliance but is still prone to disappearing--he's not a consistent force).  I'm not at all convinced about the defense either.  Of course, I'd like to be wrong...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: princedpw on October 04, 2011, 01:30:24 PM
Has anyone, other than Gardiner, really impressed this pre-season? 

I'm a little nervous about this current roster's prospects this fall.  Connolly is pretty much where we thought he'd be, injured.  And Burke is fooling around with the defense combos again.  The bottom two lines aren't appreciably better on paper, and the top two lines are practically the same without Connolly.  Lupul has been meh, Kessel meh...I'm not very optimistic here.

I feel that the 3rd line has the potential to be quite a bit better than last year.  Armstrong was hurt for quite a while last season and he's a good player.  Pushing Bozak down from the 1st to 3rd improves the 3rd line.  Frattin seems to be a smart 2-way player with the potential to score 15 goals, or if he gets tired half-way through the season, we switch him up with Kadri, who should have the energy and motivation to sub in well.  Or, in place of either of those guys, Lombardi, who if healthy could score 40 points and 15-20 goals.

I can't even remember who our third line players were for most of last year (Brent? Boyce?).  I think that lineup is better.

If we could get 15goals, 15goals, 20goals from our 3 3rd line players, that would be a lot better than the 8 goals, 10 goals, 12 goals (or whatever it was) we got last year.  It's not enough to push us over the playoff hump, but it gets us closer. 

If we can get +10 goals from the 1st line and +10 goals from the defense, and even on the 2nd and 4th lines then we might see a 30-40 goal improvement.  Of course, that counts on a lot of people being healthy.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on October 04, 2011, 01:39:29 PM
Has anyone, other than Gardiner, really impressed this pre-season? 

I'm a little nervous about this current roster's prospects this fall.  Connolly is pretty much where we thought he'd be, injured.  And Burke is fooling around with the defense combos again.  The bottom two lines aren't appreciably better on paper, and the top two lines are practically the same without Connolly.  Lupul has been meh, Kessel meh...I'm not very optimistic here.

I know, I have that pessimistic feeling aswell.  I think, like last year, the Leafs are probably over estimating the 'Improvement from within/young guys' they are hoping for.  We saw the same thing last summer and it didn't really amount to much.  I know Burke said that they are still counting on the young guys improving but I'm not sure how much more some of these guys can give (i.e. can the Grabo line really do better than last year?).

At the end of the day, they did add 4 decent players (Franson, Liles, Connolly, Lombardi) without really subtracting anyone of significance (Brent?) so they should be better but it's generally not that simple.  We're life and death as it is, all it takes is an injury to Kessel or Phaneuf or Grabo to sink us.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on October 04, 2011, 03:34:28 PM
Anyone know if the Leafs that were put on waivers yesterday passed through alright?

Nobody was picked up.

Good. Thanks.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on October 04, 2011, 03:47:14 PM
jonasTSN1050 Jonas Siegel
Tim Connolly told Ron Wilson after practice that he's doubtful for Thursday.

So it begins.  I know people will say "relax" but I can't believe how injury prone this guy is.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on October 04, 2011, 04:16:29 PM
jonasTSN1050 Jonas Siegel
Tim Connolly told Ron Wilson after practice that he's doubtful for Thursday.

So it begins.  I know people will say "relax" but I can't believe how injury prone this guy is.

Starting to wonder if this guy has AJ Burnett disease, where he didn't see to be willing to play through any pain and would pull himself from the lineup.  I don't know anything, but when a player (not a doctor) goes to the coach and says he's doubtful, it makes you wonder.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Strangelove on October 04, 2011, 04:38:24 PM
jonasTSN1050 Jonas Siegel
Tim Connolly told Ron Wilson after practice that he's doubtful for Thursday.

So it begins.  I know people will say "relax" but I can't believe how injury prone this guy is.

Disappointing that he'll be out but hardly surprising.  Burke knew exactly what he was getting when he signed the guy.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: pnjunction on October 04, 2011, 05:00:00 PM
jonasTSN1050 Jonas Siegel
Tim Connolly told Ron Wilson after practice that he's doubtful for Thursday.

So it begins.  I know people will say "relax" but I can't believe how injury prone this guy is.

Starting to wonder if this guy has AJ Burnett disease, where he didn't see to be willing to play through any pain and would pull himself from the lineup.  I don't know anything, but when a player (not a doctor) goes to the coach and says he's doubtful, it makes you wonder.

I kind of see your point but then again pushing himself into action and then making it worse would be a dumb thing to do right at the beginning of the season.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on October 04, 2011, 05:12:12 PM
You guys knew the deal when you signed Connolly
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on October 04, 2011, 06:05:40 PM
Cody Franson as the #7? Apparently he isn't very happy about it..
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 04, 2011, 06:26:36 PM
jonasTSN1050 Jonas Siegel
Tim Connolly told Ron Wilson after practice that he's doubtful for Thursday.

So it begins.  I know people will say "relax" but I can't believe how injury prone this guy is.

What could he possibly have from falling into the boards, that is serious enough to keep him out 2 weeks and not heal, but not serious enough to have a length of time put on it?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 04, 2011, 06:39:17 PM
Cody Franson as the #7? Apparently he isn't very happy about it..

Franson's direct quote:

Quote from: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/leafs-beat/franson-feeling-left-out/article2190813/
"Right now I'm not too thrilled with it," Franson said of where he's at. "You've got to just, I don't know, stick with it. It's a tough situation. We've got some good players here. Be interesting to see how it turns out."

"It would have been nice to be able to get locked down with somebody," Franson said. "But we're big boys, we can handle it."

Not exactly anything to be worried about. I'd be more concerned if he was alright with the decision.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 04, 2011, 06:43:24 PM
What could he possibly have from falling into the boards, that is serious enough to keep him out 2 weeks and not heal, but not serious enough to have a length of time put on it?

Lots of things - sprains, strains, bruised shoulders, jammed wrists, etc. And, based on the fact that he's at least been practicing, none of them too serious.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 04, 2011, 06:43:32 PM
Cody Franson as the #7? Apparently he isn't very happy about it..

Franson's direct quote:

Quote from: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/leafs-beat/franson-feeling-left-out/article2190813/
"Right now I'm not too thrilled with it," Franson said of where he's at. "You've got to just, I don't know, stick with it. It's a tough situation. We've got some good players here. Be interesting to see how it turns out."

"It would have been nice to be able to get locked down with somebody," Franson said. "But we're big boys, we can handle it."

Not exactly anything to be worried about. I'd be more concerned if he was alright with the decision.

He said what he heard from Wilson in the media scrum wasn't a good thing, but it seemed pretty good to me (despite the circumstances).  From that same article...

Quote
Wilson's only comment on Franson that day?

"Right now [Franson] is our seventh defenceman, but I wouldn't hesitate to play him in any situation," he said. "That's just the way it is right now."
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Frank E on October 04, 2011, 06:48:36 PM
I have a feeling watching Connolly is going to be like watching Coco...rare and nerve racking.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: moon111 on October 04, 2011, 07:58:30 PM
If anyone is going to be in my neck of the woods.  (Trenton)  The Leafs will be at the R.C.A.F. arena for three days.  Told the skates would be open to the public.  Wonder if they bused or flew in?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: showmethemoneyman on October 05, 2011, 11:07:13 AM
"And a day after being placed on waivers, Joey Crabb was back at practice, as with all the injuries, he gets a chance to stay around a while longer. Darryl Boyce and Matt Lashoff, meanwhile, cleared waivers and went to the Marlies. "

Im surprised they would keep Crabb around over  Boyce. I thought Boyce had a decent camp , better than Crabb , and I thought Boyce was a better player last year
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on October 05, 2011, 11:09:17 AM
The arrival of Steckel has sent Crabb back to the minors.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 05, 2011, 11:12:25 AM
Im surprised they would keep Crabb around over  Boyce. I thought Boyce had a decent camp , better than Crabb , and I thought Boyce was a better player last year

I don't think their relative worth had anything to do who stayed around. I think it was when the Leafs wanted to send the other two through waivers. It's like a chess game this time of year I think and with so many players going through waivers, Boyce being a bit more valuable than Crabb, made it worth it to send them down at the same time I think. That's my take on it. I don't think anybody cares if Crabb gets picked up.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: mr10am on October 05, 2011, 05:37:20 PM
at this point, anything we get out of Connolly is a bonus.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on October 09, 2011, 09:56:59 PM
So the season just started and a whole week off between games? Right.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: moon111 on October 09, 2011, 10:45:25 PM
Living in Trenton, have worked at C.F.B. Trenton, and have made a few friends within the military.  I think this week off is going to be great for the team.  They got a chance in actual games to see what they need to work on.  They have a rink to practice at, and if anything, the military guys will give them a chance to come together as a team with an assortment of team-building activities.  And they'll do some great PR.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: moon111 on October 10, 2011, 02:17:59 PM
Just got back from seeing some of the practice.  Took 3 of my kids, the 4th is going with her class.  I think the highlight was the look in Grabovski's eyes.  Totally intense. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 10, 2011, 08:35:00 PM
I like that this team seems to get along so well off the ice, I think it can only be positive for their on the ice chemistry too.

http://www.tsn.ca/toronto/blogs/jonas_siegel/?id=377822
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 11, 2011, 07:15:36 AM
And some of the generation of young people giving up on the Leafs.... ;)

http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/article/1067387--public-leafs-practice-a-real-hit-with-fans-at-cfb-trenton
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: spiderbob on October 11, 2011, 08:30:38 AM
And some of the generation of young people giving up on the Leafs.... ;)

http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/article/1067387--public-leafs-practice-a-real-hit-with-fans-at-cfb-trenton

Hey all, my first post on the new page but this caught my eye in the article:
Quote
In the meantime, Nazem Kadri was back in full practice mode Monday morning, and was skating on the line with Mikhail Grabovski and Nikolai Kulemin. Kadri was injured (knee) during the final pre-season games against Detroit. He was originally pegged at 2-4 weeks on the injury shelf.

The little bastard is coming back quicker than I was led to believe, said coach Ron Wilson. Well figure something out.
Not trying to add more fuel to the Ron Wilson hate fire but why would he refer to Kadri that way publicly? The quote itself just seems off to me.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 11, 2011, 08:44:11 AM
No.

It doesn't need to be explained.  It's a matter of common sense.  If Wilson did not like him, he would not publicly insult him like that.  It's clearly a joke.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: You're right on October 11, 2011, 09:02:36 AM
No.

It doesn't need to be explained.  It's a matter of common sense.  If Wilson did not like him, he would not publicly insult him like that.  It's clearly a joke.
I took it in jest, meaning that it probably meant they had to make some decisions sooner than they originally anticipated. I'm sure Wilson is fine with having more options to chose from.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on October 11, 2011, 09:02:39 AM
Just got back from seeing some of the practice.  Took 3 of my kids, the 4th is going with her class.  I think the highlight was the look in Grabovski's eyes.  Totally intense.

Sounds like you had a good time. Grabovski's for real. I'm always impressed with his apparent effort and the things he says.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: spiderbob on October 11, 2011, 09:11:23 AM
No.

It doesn't need to be explained.  It's a matter of common sense.  If Wilson did not like him, he would not publicly insult him like that.  It's clearly a joke.

Where did I say Ron don't like Kadri? I never even implied it, all I said was that I found it a bit odd that Ron would refer to Kadri as "The little Bastard...". Obviously the team building exercises are working for Ron to feel comfortable enough to talk to like that in the Media. It may have been a joke, as it obviously was, but still in poor taste.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 11, 2011, 09:23:41 AM
No.

It doesn't need to be explained.  It's a matter of common sense.  If Wilson did not like him, he would not publicly insult him like that.  It's clearly a joke.

Where did I say Ron don't like Kadri? I never even implied it, all I said was that I found it a bit odd that Ron would refer to Kadri as "The little Bastard...". Obviously the team building exercises are working for Ron to feel comfortable enough to talk to like that in the Media. It may have been a joke, as it obviously was, but still in poor taste.

It's pretty clearly implied, but I'm not going to argue what you were or were not trying to say.  It will not change that I see nothing wrong with what he said, other than maybe it shouldn't be shown to children.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 11, 2011, 09:24:02 AM
No.

It doesn't need to be explained.  It's a matter of common sense.  If Wilson did not like him, he would not publicly insult him like that.  It's clearly a joke.

Where did I say Ron don't like Kadri? I never even implied it, all I said was that I found it a bit odd that Ron would refer to Kadri as "The little Bastard...". Obviously the team building exercises are working for Ron to feel comfortable enough to talk to like that in the Media. It may have been a joke, as it obviously was, but still in poor taste.

At least he didn't call him a 'little puke' (see Don Cherry's rant)  :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: spiderbob on October 11, 2011, 09:40:27 AM
No.

It doesn't need to be explained.  It's a matter of common sense.  If Wilson did not like him, he would not publicly insult him like that.  It's clearly a joke.

Where did I say Ron don't like Kadri? I never even implied it, all I said was that I found it a bit odd that Ron would refer to Kadri as "The little Bastard...". Obviously the team building exercises are working for Ron to feel comfortable enough to talk to like that in the Media. It may have been a joke, as it obviously was, but still in poor taste.

It's pretty clearly implied, but I'm not going to argue what you were or were not trying to say.  It will not change that I see nothing wrong with what he said, other than maybe it shouldn't be shown to children.
It may all be a case of misinterpretation. I too personally have no qualms with the words spoken, just don't agree with Ron doing it publicly.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on October 11, 2011, 09:42:03 AM
It wouldn't have been funny if he said it privately.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 11, 2011, 10:26:49 AM
No.

It doesn't need to be explained.  It's a matter of common sense.  If Wilson did not like him, he would not publicly insult him like that.  It's clearly a joke.

Personally it's how guy's who're close talk to each other. What he's really saying is how tenacious he is.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 11, 2011, 01:33:54 PM
No.

It doesn't need to be explained.  It's a matter of common sense.  If Wilson did not like him, he would not publicly insult him like that.  It's clearly a joke.

Personally it's how guy's who're close talk to each other. What he's really saying is how tenacious he is.

Bingo. Move along folks.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on October 11, 2011, 01:57:34 PM
Just got back from seeing some of the practice.  Took 3 of my kids, the 4th is going with her class.  I think the highlight was the look in Grabovski's eyes.  Totally intense.

Sounds like you had a good time. Grabovski's for real. I'm always impressed with his apparent effort and the things he says.

I like the fact that Grabs was taking faceoff tips from Steckel last week and then went 14 for 22 on Saturday night. I really like that he sees a guy who is good at something and then goes to him to learn and to get better. Grabovski is growing on a lot of Leafs fans who did not necessarily like him so much when he first came over.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: lamajama on October 11, 2011, 03:21:05 PM
No.

It doesn't need to be explained.  It's a matter of common sense.  If Wilson did not like him, he would not publicly insult him like that.  It's clearly a joke.

Personally it's how guy's who're close talk to each other. What he's really saying is how tenacious he is.

Bingo. Move along folks.

I'll "move along" but it's not professional. Not at all. You wouldn't hear
Burke say it in public.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 11, 2011, 04:53:51 PM
I'll "move along" but it's not professional. Not at all. You wouldn't hear
Burke say it in public.

Burke and Wilson are two completely different personalities when in front of a microphone. Wilson has always been a little smirky and sarcastic. If you haven't watched the video (http://video.mapleleafs.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=800&id=127419&navid=DL|TOR|home) of the comment, you can see that Wilson smiled the entire time he said it and the entire media scrum got a good chuckle out of it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: leafplasma on October 11, 2011, 06:06:48 PM
No.

It doesn't need to be explained.  It's a matter of common sense.  If Wilson did not like him, he would not publicly insult him like that.  It's clearly a joke.

Personally it's how guy's who're close talk to each other. What he's really saying is how tenacious he is.

Bingo. Move along folks.
No I think by calling him a little bastard he is clearly stating that he is not big enough to play on his team.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 11, 2011, 06:09:51 PM
No.

It doesn't need to be explained.  It's a matter of common sense.  If Wilson did not like him, he would not publicly insult him like that.  It's clearly a joke.

Personally it's how guy's who're close talk to each other. What he's really saying is how tenacious he is.

Bingo. Move along folks.
No I think by calling him a little bastard he is clearly stating that he is not big enough to play on his team.

THAT. That and he's born out of wedlock! Rabble rabble.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: lamajama on October 11, 2011, 06:23:39 PM
I'll "move along" but it's not professional. Not at all. You wouldn't hear
Burke say it in public.

Burke and Wilson are two completely different personalities when in front of a microphone. Wilson has always been a little smirky and sarcastic. If you haven't watched the video (http://video.mapleleafs.nhl.com/videocenter/console?catid=800&id=127419&navid=DL|TOR|home) of the comment, you can see that Wilson smiled the entire time he said it and the entire media scrum got a good chuckle out of it.

Thanks for the link. I watched the video and you're right. It shows much better on tape.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: The Red Polar Bear on October 11, 2011, 06:38:50 PM
c/o Gunnar's twitter, Grabo with a C7:

(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg876/scaled.php?tn=0&server=876&filename=13172760.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 11, 2011, 06:46:10 PM
c/o Gunnar's twitter, Grabo with a C7:

(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg876/scaled.php?tn=0&server=876&filename=13172760.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)

We need to photoshop his head from the pineapple pic onto that photo... LOL
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 11, 2011, 07:06:31 PM
c/o Gunnar's twitter, Grabo with a C7:

(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg876/scaled.php?tn=0&server=876&filename=13172760.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)

Typical Grabbo always tinkering ... and working on his shot ....

;) :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 11, 2011, 07:10:54 PM
Typical Grabbo always tinkering ... and working on his shot ....

;) :)

 :D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: leafplasma on October 11, 2011, 07:50:02 PM
Sigh, I feel like it is the offseason.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 11, 2011, 11:17:54 PM
If anyone is interested in another pic, posted by Liles:

(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg863/scaled.php?tn=0&server=863&filename=kdqdv.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 11, 2011, 11:20:33 PM
Also, yes, that is a Tim Connolly sighting.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: sampson on October 11, 2011, 11:42:04 PM
If anyone is interested in another pic, posted by Liles:

(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg863/scaled.php?tn=0&server=863&filename=kdqdv.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)

Damn, looks like they are having fun.  So who can name off everyone in the pic?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 11, 2011, 11:43:43 PM
I can't tell one or two, but I'm probably wrong.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 12, 2011, 12:29:53 AM
Does the guy in the back with the blue hat even play for the Leafs?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on October 12, 2011, 08:01:24 AM
Who's the guy in the helmet doing Tony Montana? Army?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Rob on October 12, 2011, 08:45:38 AM
Does the guy in the back with the blue hat even play for the Leafs?


That's the guy from Ice Road Truckers.


(http://blog.zap2it.com/kate_ohare/irt-deadliest-roads-dave-redmon.jpg)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 12, 2011, 08:51:01 AM
Who's the guy in the helmet doing Tony Montana? Army?

Yeah, who else?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stronger Than All on October 12, 2011, 08:52:58 AM
So who would shoot who first?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 12, 2011, 09:27:49 AM
Lombardi looks jacked.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: pnjunction on October 12, 2011, 09:56:28 AM
Lombardi looks jacked.
Ah that's who that is. I thought so too, looks like he could snap bozak like a twig.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on October 12, 2011, 11:37:50 AM
Lombardi looks jacked.
Ah that's who that is. I thought so too, looks like he could snap bozak like a twig.

[/quole]

Hey, Lombardi is Italian!    :D   
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Chev-boyar-sky on October 12, 2011, 12:32:35 PM
If anyone is interested in another pic, posted by Liles:

(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg863/scaled.php?tn=0&server=863&filename=kdqdv.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)

Damn, looks like they are having fun.  So who can name off everyone in the pic?

Front row: L-R

dupuis (?)- Lombardi-Brown-Bozak-Liles-Franson-Army

Back row is tough:

Phaneuf-Orr?-random-Gardiner (don't think this is right)-Kessel-Frattin-Connolly

That's the best I can figure.

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on October 12, 2011, 12:36:58 PM
It's L-R

Back row: Dion, Gus, ?, Gardiner, Kessel, Connolly
Front row: ?, Lombardi, Brown, Bozak, Liles, Franson, Army.

Apart from the two "?"s, I'm fairly sure of the others. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Chev-boyar-sky on October 12, 2011, 01:04:29 PM
It's L-R

Back row: Dion, Gus, ?, Gardiner, Kessel, Connolly
Front row: ?, Lombardi, Brown, Bozak, Liles, Franson, Army.

Apart from the two "?"s, I'm fairly sure of the others.

Gus is right. Forgot he existed.

Who's between Kessel and Connolly though.

On a side note, Kessel looks the least like an athlete out of the whole group (not that it matters on the ice).
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on October 12, 2011, 01:10:55 PM
It's L-R

Back row: Dion, Gus, ?, Gardiner, Kessel, Connolly
Front row: ?, Lombardi, Brown, Bozak, Liles, Franson, Army.

Apart from the two "?"s, I'm fairly sure of the others.

Gus is right. Forgot he existed.

Who's between Kessel and Connolly though.

On a side note, Kessel looks the least like an athlete out of the whole group (not that it matters on the ice).

Lupul
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on October 12, 2011, 01:13:57 PM
Yeah, I think so too.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Green Leaf on October 12, 2011, 01:42:35 PM
Question:

Does anyone have a list of where every player in the organization (Draftees, AHL, Prospects etc..) plays?

Please copy and paste, or send me a message.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 12, 2011, 10:35:27 PM
http://video.mapleleafs.nhl.com/videocenter/console

I love the way Joffrey talks about the fans during his interview snippet. Looks like he really appreciates the support.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on October 13, 2011, 02:08:49 AM
Captain Dion Phaneuf was asked about the reception the Leafs received upon arrival Monday morning in Trenton. "Weve got the best fans in hockey," Phaneuf said. "Were grateful for that. Like Ive said before, weve got unbelievable fans not just in Toronto, but throughout Ontario and, really, the whole country.

 ;D

Source:  Sportsnet
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Hockey_gal on October 13, 2011, 02:14:58 AM
http://video.mapleleafs.nhl.com/videocenter/console

I love the way Joffrey talks about the fans during his interview snippet. Looks like he really appreciates the support.

That link didn't send me to Lupul's interview but found it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Rebel_1812 on October 13, 2011, 02:21:19 AM
I hope they beat calgary on the weekend. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 13, 2011, 10:18:57 AM
http://video.mapleleafs.nhl.com/videocenter/console

I love the way Joffrey talks about the fans during his interview snippet. Looks like he really appreciates the support.

That link didn't send me to Lupul's interview but found it.

Yeah I didn't know how to hyperlink to the actual video.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: iwas11in67 on October 13, 2011, 05:46:16 PM
Just some random thought about this season's schedule:

1. A week off after 2 games and then 4 games in 6 nights
2. 14 games in November
3. 13 games in December
4. 12 games in January AND another 1 week between games ( i'm sure this is for the all star game)
5. 14 games in February - almost a game every other night.
6. 15 games in March - again almost a game every other night.

I've never done this for any previous season but this seems quirky to me.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 13, 2011, 06:39:26 PM
Just some random thought about this season's schedule:

1. A week off after 2 games and then 4 games in 6 nights
2. 14 games in November
3. 13 games in December
4. 12 games in January AND another 1 week between games ( i'm sure this is for the all star game)
5. 14 games in February - almost a game every other night.
6. 15 games in March - again almost a game every other night.

I've never done this for any previous season but this seems quirky to me.

Hopefully they can keep their momentum going. Unfortunately it seems like Connolly won't be back until November, but we might have enough depth to squeak through. I think having Steckel and Lombardi will go a long way in helping us stay competitive, and luckily we've got quite a lot of depth on the back end.

Here's hoping that a big part of the skid last year was goaltending and the loss of Phaneuf. If Phaneuf can stay healthy (aka not get his leg chopped up) and Reimer plays half decent then I think we can come out of October in good shape.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on October 13, 2011, 07:55:31 PM
It's L-R

Back row: Dion, Gus, ?, Gardiner, Kessel, Connolly
Front row: ?, Lombardi, Brown, Bozak, Liles, Franson, Army.

Apart from the two "?"s, I'm fairly sure of the others.

Gus is right. Forgot he existed.

Who's between Kessel and Connolly though.

On a side note, Kessel looks the least like an athlete out of the whole group (not that it matters on the ice).

There's no way that is Kessel. It must be one of the troops.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 13, 2011, 09:43:27 PM
It's L-R

Back row: Dion, Gus, ?, Gardiner, Kessel, Connolly
Front row: ?, Lombardi, Brown, Bozak, Liles, Franson, Army.

Apart from the two "?"s, I'm fairly sure of the others.

Gus is right. Forgot he existed.

Who's between Kessel and Connolly though.

On a side note, Kessel looks the least like an athlete out of the whole group (not that it matters on the ice).

There's no way that is Kessel. It must be one of the troops.

If it's not Kessel, then that person is wearing the same hat Kessel was wearing in an interview from Trenton I saw on the Leafs site.
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 13, 2011, 10:01:53 PM
It's L-R

Back row: Dion, Gus, ?, Gardiner, Kessel, Connolly
Front row: ?, Lombardi, Brown, Bozak, Liles, Franson, Army.

Apart from the two "?"s, I'm fairly sure of the others.

Gus is right. Forgot he existed.

Who's between Kessel and Connolly though.

On a side note, Kessel looks the least like an athlete out of the whole group (not that it matters on the ice).

There's no way that is Kessel. It must be one of the troops.

If it's not Kessel, then that person is wearing the same hat Kessel was wearing in an interview from Trenton I saw on the Leafs site.

#whereintheworldisphilkessel
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 13, 2011, 10:07:00 PM
I think the Leafs need to partner with the 'Where's Waldo?' people with a 'Where's Kessel?' and photoshop that photo into all sorts of other pictures for children to find.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Mordac on October 14, 2011, 01:14:28 AM
I think the Leafs need to partner with the 'Where's Waldo?' people with a 'Where's Kessel?' and photoshop that photo into all sorts of other pictures for children to find.

Like this one?
(http://www.nhlsnipers.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/59098752.jpg)

Or does he need the striped shirt, and hat?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on October 14, 2011, 10:00:08 AM
Somewhat off topic, but I don't think I'd even feel comfortable holding a machine gun, unloaded or not.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on October 14, 2011, 10:12:12 AM
Somewhat off topic, but I don't think I'd even feel comfortable holding a machine gun, unloaded or not.


I'd feel strange , too.  Kind of unreal.  No fan of it, of course.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 14, 2011, 10:23:18 AM
Somewhat off topic, but I don't think I'd even feel comfortable holding a machine gun, unloaded or not.

I don't really see an issue to be honest.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on October 14, 2011, 11:13:15 AM
I didn't mean to suggest there was any issue with it, it's just not something I'd feel comfortable with. I've never held a gun of any sort and don't ever plan to.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on October 14, 2011, 11:32:23 AM
I didn't mean to suggest there was any issue with it, it's just not something I'd feel comfortable with. I've never held a gun of any sort and don't ever plan to.

Machine guns are made with people in mind, same with handguns, I can see why anyone might be uncomfortable with that.

Reminds me of an old joke about the 'right to bear arms' in the states, sure, muskets for everyone!



Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 14, 2011, 11:55:37 AM
I didn't mean to suggest there was any issue with it, it's just not something I'd feel comfortable with. I've never held a gun of any sort and don't ever plan to.

Machine guns are made with people in mind, same with handguns, I can see why anyone might be uncomfortable with that.

Reminds me of an old joke about the 'right to bear arms' in the states, sure, muskets for everyone!

Right, and guns are weapons for the purpose to injure or kill. However, I would be ok holding one or shooting one at a gallery because my intentions and actions wouldn't be to injure or kill anyone or anything. Ownership is a whole different matter.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on October 14, 2011, 12:03:10 PM
I didn't mean to suggest there was any issue with it, it's just not something I'd feel comfortable with. I've never held a gun of any sort and don't ever plan to.

Machine guns are made with people in mind, same with handguns, I can see why anyone might be uncomfortable with that.

Reminds me of an old joke about the 'right to bear arms' in the states, sure, muskets for everyone!

Right, and guns are weapons for the purpose to injure or kill. However, I would be ok holding one or shooting one at a gallery because my intentions and actions wouldn't be to injure or kill anyone or anything. Ownership is a whole different matter.

Sure I can understand that but the actual creation of those kinds of guns is for killing people, that weirds me out regardless of my intention.

I spent a lot of years in rural Ontario where long guns are looked at like tools by most of the old timers and used to deal with varmints and such, rarely used for hunting animals never mind killing people.

There are sport hunters and lots of people I know hunt to provide for themselves and that's fine too but they're not doing it with machine guns or hand guns ( I hope... ). I guess it's just a perspective but even my uncle's M1 seems wrong to me, not very machine-gunny but a man killer from ww2.

Sure a single shot .22 or shotgun could kill a man but it seems much less like the point of it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bleeding Blue & White on October 15, 2011, 10:10:23 PM
http://www.nhl.com/ice/statshome.htm#?navid=nav-sts-main

Look at who is at the top of goals, points, +-, wins, and shutouts
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on October 16, 2011, 02:48:11 AM
http://www.nhl.com/ice/statshome.htm#?navid=nav-sts-main

Look at who is at the top of goals, points, +-, wins, and
 shutouts


                 ;D ;D ;D


Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 16, 2011, 06:13:56 PM
http://www.nhl.com/ice/statshome.htm#?navid=nav-sts-main

Look at who is at the top of goals, points, +-, wins, and shutouts

I want to see some of those goalies drop back down to earth.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hap_leaf on October 18, 2011, 03:15:16 PM
Somewhat off topic, but I don't think I'd even feel comfortable holding a machine gun, unloaded or not.


I'd feel strange , too.  Kind of unreal.  No fan of it, of course.

I imagine the sheer weight of a machine gun would be surprising. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Mordac on October 18, 2011, 04:08:32 PM
Somewhat off topic, but I don't think I'd even feel comfortable holding a machine gun, unloaded or not.


I'd feel strange , too.  Kind of unreal.  No fan of it, of course.

I imagine the sheer weight of a machine gun would be surprising.

Not really. Typically around 8-10 lbs. or so, and almost always well balanced, they're surprisingly light to handle.

What's really surprising about machine guns is just how much they'll jump around when you're firing them. It'll jump right out of your grasp, if you're not careful.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on October 18, 2011, 04:17:56 PM
Somewhat off topic, but I don't think I'd even feel comfortable holding a machine gun, unloaded or not.


I'd feel strange , too.  Kind of unreal.  No fan of it, of course.

I imagine the sheer weight of a machine gun would be surprising.

Not really. Typically around 8-10 lbs. or so, and almost always well balanced, they're surprisingly light to handle.

What's really surprising about machine guns is just how much they'll jump around when you're firing them. It'll jump right out of your grasp, if you're not careful.

Hopefully at that point it stops firing.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on October 19, 2011, 03:21:18 PM
Nazem Kadri has been sent down to the Marlies.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on October 19, 2011, 03:22:20 PM
Nazem Kadri has been sent down to the Marlies.

Good... Probably needs to get in to game shape.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 19, 2011, 04:35:21 PM
Nazem Kadri has been sent down to the Marlies.

Good... Probably needs to get in to game shape.

No question about that.

Normally, the Leafs might need to get the leagues permission to send a vet on a conditioning stint. With him waiver exempt, the Leafs can do whatever they want without input from the league.

But I looked for some sort of indication that he was just going down for conditioning that they'd often include with the press release if that was what was happening. I've seen a number of reports but none so far that mentioned a conditioning assignment.

With Connolly coming back soon, it will likely force another decision beyond this one if no  forward gets hurt in the interim so it wouldn't surprise me if he's in the AHL for a while. I think Frattin won the job fair and square (until Connolly returns ...). 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 19, 2011, 06:26:06 PM
Leafs ink first-round pick Kadri
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2011/10/19/leafs-ink-first-round-pick-kadri/
Published October 19, 2011 | Sports Network
Toronto, ON   The Toronto Maple Leafs signed 2009 first-round year entry level contract on Monday.
Financial details surrounding the deal were not released.
The seventh overall pick ranked ninth in the Ontario Hockey League this past season with 53 assists and 15th in points with 78. He went on to add 21 points (9G, 12A) in 14 playoff games.
The 21-year-old was instrumental in leading the Kitchener Rangers to the OHL championship one year prior, collecting nine goals and 17 assists in the 2008 playoffs.

I can't stand the GOP propaganda machine that pretends to be news: Fox News. So I thought I'd point out a pretty sloppy error. "The 21 year old" part suggests they might have got confused with notification that he got sent down to the AHL today and maybe computer generated the story.

Their sports editor is probably too busy making up policy positions and fake videos for the Tea Party.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 19, 2011, 06:29:22 PM
There's just so much wrong there that it's laughable.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on October 19, 2011, 06:31:14 PM
Wasn't Kadri taken in the 6th round?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 19, 2011, 06:33:48 PM

I'm afraid to ask how you managed to come across Foxnews.com's hockey section but it's a good find. I'm stumbling to come up with a possible reason as to how it could have been published at all.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 19, 2011, 06:41:50 PM

I'm afraid to ask how you managed to come across Foxnews.com's hockey section but it's a good find. I'm stumbling to come up with a possible reason as to how it could have been published at all.

The Google news feed picked it up as Leafs news  published 58 minutes ago.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on October 19, 2011, 07:05:47 PM
Good God!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 19, 2011, 07:36:51 PM
Leafs ink first-round pick Kadri
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2011/10/19/leafs-ink-first-round-pick-kadri/
Published October 19, 2011 | Sports Network
Toronto, ON   The Toronto Maple Leafs signed 2009 first-round year entry level contract on Monday.
Financial details surrounding the deal were not released.
The seventh overall pick ranked ninth in the Ontario Hockey League this past season with 53 assists and 15th in points with 78. He went on to add 21 points (9G, 12A) in 14 playoff games.
The 21-year-old was instrumental in leading the Kitchener Rangers to the OHL championship one year prior, collecting nine goals and 17 assists in the 2008 playoffs.

I can't stand the GOP propaganda machine that pretends to be news: Fox News. So I thought I'd point out a pretty sloppy error. "The 21 year old" part suggests they might have got confused with notification that he got sent down to the AHL today and maybe computer generated the story.

Their sports editor is probably too busy making up policy positions and fake videos for the Tea Party.

Why put it together at all if you're not even going to half ass it?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 19, 2011, 10:30:43 PM
Leafs ink first-round pick Kadri
http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2011/10/19/leafs-ink-first-round-pick-kadri/
Published October 19, 2011 | Sports Network
Toronto, ON   The Toronto Maple Leafs signed 2009 first-round year entry level contract on Monday.
Financial details surrounding the deal were not released.
The seventh overall pick ranked ninth in the Ontario Hockey League this past season with 53 assists and 15th in points with 78. He went on to add 21 points (9G, 12A) in 14 playoff games.
The 21-year-old was instrumental in leading the Kitchener Rangers to the OHL championship one year prior, collecting nine goals and 17 assists in the 2008 playoffs.

I can't stand the GOP propaganda machine that pretends to be news: Fox News. So I thought I'd point out a pretty sloppy error. "The 21 year old" part suggests they might have got confused with notification that he got sent down to the AHL today and maybe computer generated the story.

Their sports editor is probably too busy making up policy positions and fake videos for the Tea Party.

Why put it together at all if you're not even going to half ass it?

Maybe it is just their opinion and then it doesn't need to be accurate or even show much effort.  Fox punk'd us with that joke.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on October 19, 2011, 11:19:15 PM
Beauchemin for Lupul and Gardiner.

 ;D

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 19, 2011, 11:29:28 PM
Beauchemin for Lupul and Gardiner.

 ;D

That trade seems kind of laughable right now.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on October 20, 2011, 06:53:37 AM
Stats for the NHL this morning - Kessel is first in points and goals

Dion, Kessel, and Lupul are 1,2,3 in +/-

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Mack674 on October 20, 2011, 09:18:31 AM
Theyve been playing pretty well but the only thing that concerns me right now is if they can keep it up - and the fact that besides Montreal, none of the teams they've played so far made the playoffs last year.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on October 20, 2011, 10:47:44 AM
http://www.tsn.ca/toronto/blogs/jonas_siegel/?id=378517

I would agree with the jist of this blog. I would also add that Reimer has not yet been the Reimer of last year. Yes, the Leafs are winning, but he has not been consistently good so far. He looks great at times and very shaky at other times.

Hopefully the Leafs of this year are doing a lot less celebrating about 4-0-1 than the Leafs of last year who also started 4-0-1.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 20, 2011, 10:52:37 AM

I'm not sure I agree that the Leafs winning has masked any of those things. Look in any of the GDT's and there have been plenty of comments about Grabo's line struggling, Reimer letting in some softies and the PP not being very good.

I mean, it strikes me as saying that though the Leafs have been winning they haven't been perfect which doesn't really require saying.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on October 20, 2011, 11:18:51 AM
Wow, and here I was all worried that Nazem wouldn't get signed.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 20, 2011, 11:20:15 AM
I would agree with the jist of this blog. I would also add that Reimer has not yet been the Reimer of last year. Yes, the Leafs are winning, but he has not been consistently good so far. He looks great at times and very shaky at other times.

While there's some truth to that, even though he hasn't been at the top of his game, he's really only been truly bad for 1 period so far and has played well enough to give the Leafs a chance to win every game he's started, which is really all you can ask of a goalie.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on October 20, 2011, 11:24:07 AM

I'm not sure I agree that the Leafs winning has masked any of those things. Look in any of the GDT's and there have been plenty of comments about Grabo's line struggling, Reimer letting in some softies and the PP not being very good.

I mean, it strikes me as saying that though the Leafs have been winning they haven't been perfect which doesn't really require saying.

Yeah.  I don't see anything earth shattering here.  I think the Leafs as group even realize they have some faults and need to be better in certain areas.

We need the Grabo line to start scoring.  We need our #5/6 d-men (whoever they may be) to be better.  We need something out of our 3rd line, etc. 

The good news is even with these current setbacks the team is winning and that is something we haven't really been able to say in years past.  Before, we needed the stars to almost align perfectly to get a win. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 20, 2011, 12:35:23 PM
I would agree with the jist of this blog. I would also add that Reimer has not yet been the Reimer of last year. Yes, the Leafs are winning, but he has not been consistently good so far. He looks great at times and very shaky at other times.

While there's some truth to that, even though he hasn't been at the top of his game, he's really only been truly bad for 1 period so far and has played well enough to give the Leafs a chance to win every game he's started, which is really all you can ask of a goalie.

I didn't see any bad goals on Reimer yesterday, just bad coverage by the Leafs' D. He made a number of impeccable saves that kept them in the game in the first place and looked very sharp in the shootout win. If this we Jiggy or Jonas of last year the game would've likely been over.

I do agree he's not the same lights out goalie he was last year so far, but I have very few complaints with James. Its the rest of the team sans Kessel line that I'm worried about.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 20, 2011, 02:35:44 PM
markhmasters: #Leafs confirm Colby Armstrong sustained a left ankle sprain last night; placed on IR; 'out of the lineup for an indefinite time period'
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on October 20, 2011, 02:38:43 PM
markhmasters: #Leafs confirm Colby Armstrong sustained a left ankle sprain last night; placed on IR; 'out of the lineup for an indefinite time period'

Boo. The Leafs are a 100 point team with him in the line-up. 97/98 anyway I think?

Edit: Yup. 29 - 19 - 7. I believe that's pretty close pro-rated over 82 games.
Edit II: Okay, I did the math now... 97 points.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: TML fan on October 20, 2011, 02:48:51 PM
Reimer hasn't been that good. He hasn't been that bad either. He's let in some weak goals but he's also given his team a chance to win every game by making some stops he probably shouldn't.

It doesn't really matter how many goals Reimer lets in, as long as he keeps making the saves when the team needs it. I'm not saying bad goals are ok, but so far Reimer and the team have been pretty good at shrugging off the bad ones and doing what needs to be done to win games. I think that's been the difference between Reimer and the other goalies we've had in the last 6 years (Gustavsson included). I think the team believes that Reimer will always keep his cool and keep them in the game.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: TML fan on October 20, 2011, 02:50:56 PM
Also, with the way Gardiner has been playing (especially last night) I don't see Franson getting into too many more games unless Schenn or Komisarek come out.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Britishbulldog on October 20, 2011, 03:33:59 PM
Yeah.  I don't see anything earth shattering here.  I think the Leafs as group even realize they have some faults and need to be better in certain areas.

We need the Grabo line to start scoring.  We need our #5/6 d-men (whoever they may be) to be better.  We need something out of our 3rd line, etc. 

The good news is even with these current setbacks the team is winning and that is something we haven't really been able to say in years past.  Before, we needed the stars to almost align perfectly to get a win.

That's the way I see it too.  The Leafs have a few things working well but alot needs to be better like 2nd and 3rd line scoring, better PP, better play from Schenn and Komi which is ALL possible.

If the Leafs have a stable environment so that the players can form a bit of chemistry you will see an improvement as well. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 20, 2011, 11:50:48 PM
markhmasters: RT @SheriTSN Clarke MacArthur-day to day-right hip flexor. #Leafs
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 21, 2011, 01:58:21 AM

I'm not sure I agree that the Leafs winning has masked any of those things. Look in any of the GDT's and there have been plenty of comments about Grabo's line struggling, Reimer letting in some softies and the PP not being very good.

I mean, it strikes me as saying that though the Leafs have been winning they haven't been perfect which doesn't really require saying.

Yeah.  I don't see anything earth shattering here.  I think the Leafs as group even realize they have some faults and need to be better in certain areas.

We need the Grabo line to start scoring.  We need our #5/6 d-men (whoever they may be) to be better.  We need something out of our 3rd line, etc. 

The good news is even with these current setbacks the team is winning and that is something we haven't really been able to say in years past.  Before, we needed the stars to almost align perfectly to get a win.

I mean, isn't it a good thing they've been winning DESPITE not playing their best?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on October 21, 2011, 08:02:00 AM
I have yet to see the Leafs play a full game. Last night was a disaster. I can accept a loss when some nights you just get beat by a better team, but last night the Leafs got beat by a hungrier team and a team that was willing to work.

Not having played a full game yet, I see that as a concern in spite of the 4-0-1 record.

The only appropriate response will be for the Leafs to go into Montreal and overwhelm them with a determined 60 minute effort. If not then the glaring special teams issues, the lack of playing a full game etc. will be front and centre by Monday morning.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on October 21, 2011, 10:20:26 AM
Stats for the NHL this morning - Kessel is first in points and goals

Dion, Kessel, and Lupul are 1,2,3 in +/-


Sounds refreshingly good for a change!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on October 21, 2011, 10:23:48 AM
Stats for the NHL this morning - Kessel is first in points and goals

Dion, Kessel, and Lupul are 1,2,3 in +/-


Sounds refreshingly good for a change!

I wouldn't get used to it.   
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on October 21, 2011, 10:32:44 AM
Stats for the NHL this morning - Kessel is first in points
and goals
Dion, Kessel, and Lupul are 1,2,3 in +/-

Sounds refreshingly good for a change!
I wouldn't get used to it.
   

....while it lasts.   :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 21, 2011, 12:24:15 PM
I watched the game in 6 and while Gustavsson still looks like he has some positional problems, it looked like they just left him out to dry. The D were getting beat so easily and constantly looking flat footed. Defensive coverage was just bad and they left Chara wide open on the second Boston goal. This team's systems just seem horrendous.

I think CW may have been right in that we're hanging too much of our team (esp. the D) on its potential rather than on its actual ability. I think we've got a good top pairing guy in Phaneuf right now, and some guys who can play the 4-6 role, but I think you'd be hard pressed to find a 2-3 guy right now who can really bring it defensively as well as chip in offensively.

On the bright side: Kadri's got a point, Gardiner looked really slick on that play and Grabovski is starting to buzz. Apparently Schenn also played better?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Seymore Pucks on October 21, 2011, 09:14:33 PM
Its like the guys that were ok or worse last year are playing alot better:
Kadri, Kessel, Phanuaf, Komi, Lupul and Bozak

and the ones who were awesome are ok or worse:
Grabo's line and Schenn.

Im sure it won't carry on through the whole season, but would just like to see the whole team click together like Lego.  Burke won't hesitate to move some bodies out and I wouldnt be suprised if its one of the D and someone off Grab's line.  Hopefully it will never come to that. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bleeding Blue & White on October 23, 2011, 12:08:59 AM
The combined record of the teams the Leafs have beaten is 9-17-4. Next week the Leafs play the Flyers, Rangers, and Penguins I figure it is a real benchmark to see if we are a legit team.  Think we can take at least 2/3?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 23, 2011, 01:23:13 AM
The combined record of the teams the Leafs have beaten is 9-17-4. Next week the Leafs play the Flyers, Rangers, and Penguins I figure it is a real benchmark to see if we are a legit team.  Think we can take at least 2/3?

Playoff teams beat the teams they're supposed to beat. That's what the Leafs have done so far. If Reimer's good to go, I like their chances against the Rags and a split in Pennsylvania is certainly a possibility.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on October 23, 2011, 08:46:59 AM
Listening to the game last night and all the Leaf cheers has me begging the question; Is there a pro sports team in North America that gets more support on the road than our Leafs? I mean, I went to a Yanks/Jays game this year and sure, you can easily hear the Yankee fans but not like Leaf fans in say, Montreal or Ottawa.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: 4th Liner on October 23, 2011, 12:02:37 PM
The combined record of the teams the Leafs have beaten is 9-17-4. Next week the Leafs play the Flyers, Rangers, and Penguins I figure it is a real benchmark to see if we are a legit team.  Think we can take at least 2/3?

Like Busta said, the Leafs needed to beat those teams. In years past, they seemed to always lose to the teams under them and then beat the top teams - it mas maddening.

Also, turn those losses to the Leafs into wins and those teams are then 14-12-4, correct? You have to give the Leafs some credit for those poor starts by their opponents.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on October 24, 2011, 05:23:02 PM
10 of the 23 Leafs goals have come in the third period or OT? We can't keep digging holes and getting away with it.  :-\
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on October 24, 2011, 05:29:11 PM
I could live with splitting all the games against top teams so long as the Leafs continue to dominate in the win column against inferior teams ( maybe that's just too obvious, still )

Yeah Floyd, that will probably bite them soon if they don't start putting in full efforts over 60+mins.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kaberle15 on October 24, 2011, 05:58:16 PM
People do realize that the Leafs got 11 of possible 14 points, right ?

I don't want to get my hopes up, and I know that this week (Philly-Rangers-Pens) its a great test, and I would love to see 3 or 4 points out of it. Hopefully Reimer is back in NY.

But is kind of early to over analysis like "They only beat botton teams", they beat divisional rivals, the so called 4 points game, sure Boston hammered then, but for me Wilson should let Gus start against the Jets and let Reimer take the Bruins, they would have a better shot at the win.

Anyway, too early to get hopes up and down like that.

Hope that Gus can handle the Flyers.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bleeding Blue & White on October 25, 2011, 08:33:45 AM
based on our recent performances I hate to break it to you guys but we suck.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on October 25, 2011, 08:40:35 AM
based on our recent performances I hate to break it to you guys but we suck.

I prefer to think there is much room for improvement. 5-2-1 doesn't "suck" in my mind... and that's even said while being in a very bad mood today about other crap. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bleeding Blue & White on October 25, 2011, 08:44:55 AM
based on our recent performances I hate to break it to you guys but we suck.

I prefer to think there is much room for improvement. 5-2-1 doesn't "suck" in my mind... and that's even said while being in a very bad mood today about other crap.

5 wins vs 4 of the 5 worst teams in the NHL.  Just sayin
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on October 25, 2011, 08:47:30 AM
based on our recent performances I hate to break it to you guys but we suck.

I prefer to think there is much room for improvement. 5-2-1 doesn't "suck" in my mind... and that's even said while being in a very bad mood today about other crap.

5 wins vs 4 of the 5 worst teams in the NHL.  Just sayin

... and losing to them would have sucked.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Rob on October 25, 2011, 08:59:43 AM
based on our recent performances I hate to break it to you guys but we suck.

No no no, it's "We stink dudes".
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on October 25, 2011, 09:10:43 AM
based on our recent performances I hate to break it to you guys but we suck.

So if we suck, they need to invent a new word to define what Columbus, Montreal, Ottawa, etc are.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on October 25, 2011, 12:21:34 PM
5 wins vs 4 of the 5 worst teams in the NHL.  Just sayin

Playoff teams win games against those teams and hold the fort against the good teams. So, the Leafs are halfway there.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on October 25, 2011, 01:59:17 PM
Something I noticed last night, is that this team currently has almost no ability to cycle the puck in the offensive zone.  You know, where the forwards work behind the net, holding off d-men, working the puck in the corners to try and open up something in front of the net.  The corner tuck ins, the whistles in the offensive zone, etc.

Sundin and Roberts were great at this, then came Antropov and Poni who were also quite good at this.  These guys were able to really generate some offense by just hanging onto the puck and holding d-men off their backs for 20-30 seconds at a time.  I remember Sundin vivlde with his one hand on the stick and the other pushing someone away.

This team has zero ability to do that.  None.  The one guy who is solid along the boards (Army) has been hurt quite a bit in his tenure here and doesn't really have a natural scoring touch.

Anyways... it's something I've noticed and longed for.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on October 25, 2011, 02:02:36 PM
Something I noticed last night, is that this team currently has almost no ability to cycle the puck in the offensive zone.  You know, where the forwards work behind the net, holding off d-men, working the puck in the corners to try and open up something in front of the net.  The corner tuck ins, the whistles in the offensive zone, etc.

Sundin and Roberts were great at this, then came Antropov and Poni who were also quite good at this.  These guys were able to really generate some offense by just hanging onto the puck and holding d-men off their backs for 20-30 seconds at a time.  I remember Sundin vivlde with his one hand on the stick and the other pushing someone away.

This team has zero ability to do that.  None.  The one guy who is solid along the boards (Army) has been hurt quite a bit in his tenure here and doesn't really have a natural scoring touch.

Anyways... it's something I've noticed and longed for.

I haven't watched much Marlie hockey this year but folks seem to think Colborne is excelling at just that.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on October 25, 2011, 02:03:22 PM
Something I noticed last night, is that this team currently has almost no ability to cycle the puck in the offensive zone.  You know, where the forwards work behind the net, holding off d-men, working the puck in the corners to try and open up something in front of the net.  The corner tuck ins, the whistles in the offensive zone, etc.

Sundin and Roberts were great at this, then came Antropov and Poni who were also quite good at this.  These guys were able to really generate some offense by just hanging onto the puck and holding d-men off their backs for 20-30 seconds at a time.  I remember Sundin vivlde with his one hand on the stick and the other pushing someone away.

This team has zero ability to do that.  None.  The one guy who is solid along the boards (Army) has been hurt quite a bit in his tenure here and doesn't really have a natural scoring touch.

Anyways... it's something I've noticed and longed for.


How about Kuemin, i would say he is very good at it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on October 25, 2011, 02:09:06 PM
Something I noticed last night, is that this team currently has almost no ability to cycle the puck in the offensive zone.  You know, where the forwards work behind the net, holding off d-men, working the puck in the corners to try and open up something in front of the net.  The corner tuck ins, the whistles in the offensive zone, etc.

Sundin and Roberts were great at this, then came Antropov and Poni who were also quite good at this.  These guys were able to really generate some offense by just hanging onto the puck and holding d-men off their backs for 20-30 seconds at a time.  I remember Sundin vivlde with his one hand on the stick and the other pushing someone away.

This team has zero ability to do that.  None.  The one guy who is solid along the boards (Army) has been hurt quite a bit in his tenure here and doesn't really have a natural scoring touch.

Anyways... it's something I've noticed and longed for.

Kulemin can do it but hasn't been so far this year. 

But yes.. we need more of this, but size/strength is key to it and our forwards in general aren't really built for it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on October 25, 2011, 02:14:40 PM
Something I noticed last night, is that this team currently has almost no ability to cycle the puck in the offensive zone.  You know, where the forwards work behind the net, holding off d-men, working the puck in the corners to try and open up something in front of the net.  The corner tuck ins, the whistles in the offensive zone, etc.

Sundin and Roberts were great at this, then came Antropov and Poni who were also quite good at this.  These guys were able to really generate some offense by just hanging onto the puck and holding d-men off their backs for 20-30 seconds at a time.  I remember Sundin vivlde with his one hand on the stick and the other pushing someone away.

This team has zero ability to do that.  None.  The one guy who is solid along the boards (Army) has been hurt quite a bit in his tenure here and doesn't really have a natural scoring touch.

Anyways... it's something I've noticed and longed for.

Kulemin can do it but hasn't been so far this year. 

But yes.. we need more of this, but size/strength is key to it and our forwards in general aren't really built for it.

Yeah, I don't think Kule is that bad at it, but generally speaking, we have 2-3 forwards at best who might be adequate at it.  Nobody really excels.  But like you said, we aren't built like that.

I would love nothing more than that number 1 center who can man handle d-men.  Getzlaf immediately comes to mind but I know it's a pipe dream.  I miss Mats  :'(
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Deebo on October 25, 2011, 02:31:48 PM
based on our recent performances I hate to break it to you guys but we suck.

I prefer to think there is much room for improvement. 5-2-1 doesn't "suck" in my mind... and that's even said while being in a very bad mood today about other crap.

5 wins vs 4 of the 5 worst teams in the NHL.  Just sayin

And the 2 regulation losses were against good teams on the road.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 28, 2011, 07:49:40 PM

Anyone else a little surprised at the way the team has sat Orr so consistently? It's not a criticism as I think it's probably the right move for the team but it seemed as though whenever you mentioned the possibility in the off-season the consensus would be that a Burke team wouldn't be without a heavyweight for most of the year.

Yet here we are, Orr isn't playing, and nobody seems eager to get him back into the lineup.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: leafplasma on October 28, 2011, 08:18:16 PM
Can't help but think the issues in the offseason with the deaths of 3 former pugilists has soured that part of the game if even inadvertently perhaps.  Guys like Brown are more important anyway
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 28, 2011, 08:24:29 PM

Anyone else a little surprised at the way the team has sat Orr so consistently? It's not a criticism as I think it's probably the right move for the team but it seemed as though whenever you mentioned the possibility in the off-season the consensus would be that a Burke team wouldn't be without a heavyweight for most of the year.

Yet here we are, Orr isn't playing, and nobody seems eager to get him back into the lineup.

I continue to think part of it is a carryover from the severity of his head injury last season.

I also think it's philosophical in realizing they can get more out of their 4th line in PK/checking and maybe a little scoring if they only dress their enforcer when they need him (like some of us have advocated for a while).

They've only dressed Rosehill and/or Orr in five of nine games (one game with both). Between they two of them, they've played 31 minutes combined and Orr had one fight.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: lamajama on October 28, 2011, 09:10:18 PM
Can't help but think the issues in the offseason with the deaths of 3 former pugilists has soured that part of the game if even inadvertently perhaps.  Guys like Brown are more important anyway

I agree. Spot Orr and Rosehill.

I'm really happy with our 4th line. Totally comfortable with them.

Typically on a 4th line you're hoping for 30 seconds of energy and off and maybe 5 min per game.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: puckinthehead on October 28, 2011, 09:25:54 PM
(http://img843.imageshack.us/img843/8230/torstandings.jpg)


Muhahahahahaha!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on October 28, 2011, 09:27:24 PM
Can't help but think the issues in the offseason with the deaths of 3 former pugilists has soured that part of the game if even inadvertently perhaps.  Guys like Brown are more important anyway

I agree. Spot Orr and Rosehill.

I'm really happy with our 4th line. Totally comfortable with them.

Typically on a 4th line you're hoping for 30 seconds of energy and off and maybe 5 min per game.

My early impression is that against the fast skating teams like the Rangers & Avs for example, when without an enforcer:
http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20112012/ES020064.HTM
http://www.nhl.com/scores/htmlreports/20112012/ES020127.HTM
the 4th liners are getting 9-10+ minutes each in those games.

That helps to have fresher legs for the other lines to skate a little harder each shift and keep up.

Correspondingly, the 4th line with Zigomanis last season for example seemed to get considerably less ice time.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 28, 2011, 10:26:14 PM


Muhahahahahaha!

Our +1 goal differential is a bit of a concern.  Just a little bit, though, since a 9-0 loss is the same as a 1-0 loss pointwise, and vice versa.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 29, 2011, 10:47:43 AM


Muhahahahahaha!

Our +1 goal differential is a bit of a concern.  Just a little bit, though, since a 9-0 loss is the same as a 1-0 loss pointwise, and vice versa.

Yeah, in the short term I think that Boston loss is weighing heavily on the GF/GA differential.
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on October 29, 2011, 05:03:16 PM


Muhahahahahaha!

Our +1 goal differential is a bit of a concern.  Just a little bit, though, since a 9-0 loss is the same as a 1-0 loss pointwise, and vice versa.

Yeah, in the short term I think that Boston loss is weighing heavily on the GF/GA differential.

It's early but yeah the Boston game and the late rally by Sens / collapse by Leafs is 11 goals in 2 games. In the other 7 games Leafs gave up only 18 which is very good.  So 2 bad games out of 9 isn't that alarming.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 31, 2011, 05:36:22 AM
I think Frattin needs to go down. I feel like its a D'Amigo parallel when he was in the AHL last year. He needs to score some to get his confidence back. I honestly think he's a bit of an anchor on the third line right now. Its almost expected that he wont score.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on October 31, 2011, 08:54:03 AM
Is there any reason to carry both Orr and Rosehill on the roster while still carrying the max number of bodies? Seems a bit unnecessary doesn't it?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Jalili on October 31, 2011, 09:32:17 AM
I think Frattin needs to go down. I feel like its a D'Amigo parallel when he was in the AHL last year. He needs to score some to get his confidence back. I honestly think he's a bit of an anchor on the third line right now. Its almost expected that he wont score.

I was thinking the same thing as well. Frattin's gotten some valuable experience at the NHL level but his lack of production indicates that he's not quite ready yet. In my mind it would be better for his development to succeed with the Marlies rather than tread water with the Leafs.

It would also allow them to revamp the 3rd line a bit, which hasn't been very good lately.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Andy on October 31, 2011, 10:05:51 AM
I think Frattin needs to go down. I feel like its a D'Amigo parallel when he was in the AHL last year. He needs to score some to get his confidence back. I honestly think he's a bit of an anchor on the third line right now. Its almost expected that he wont score.



It would also allow them to revamp the 3rd line a bit, which hasn't been very good lately.

I like the idea of keeping Lombardi on the wing and Steckel at centre.

Lombardi     Steckel          Kadri
Brown         Bozak            Frattin/Dupuis

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on October 31, 2011, 02:27:59 PM
Who has some quick stats on what the Leafs record was last November and December?


Edit: actually figured it out.  We started 5-4-1 in October, were 8-11-4 by end of Nov and 13-19-4 by end of Dec.  Pathetic.  So that means Nov-Dec combined the record was 8-15-3.

Something to shoot for this year, let's improve November and December substantially.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on October 31, 2011, 02:37:08 PM
Who has some quick stats on what the Leafs record was last November and December?


Edit: actually figured it out.  We started 5-4-1 in October, were 8-11-4 by end of Nov and 13-19-4 by end of Dec.  Pathetic.  So that means Nov-Dec combined the record was 8-15-3.

Something to shoot for this year, let's improve November and December substantially.

Yeah we definitely nosedived those two months. I hope that doesn't happen this year. If we get Reims and Armstrong back I think we'll be ok.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on October 31, 2011, 02:37:38 PM
Who has some quick stats on what the Leafs record was last November and December?


Edit: actually figured it out.  We started 5-4-1 in October, were 8-11-4 by end of Nov and 13-19-4 by end of Dec.  Pathetic.  So that means Nov-Dec combined the record was 8-15-3.

Something to shoot for this year, let's improve November and December substantially.

Yeah we definitely nosedived those two months. I hope that doesn't happen this year. If we get Reims and Armstrong back I think we'll be ok.

Even if they can go .500 over the next 27 (# of games this year in Nov-Dec) we'll be in decent shape.

To put it into perspective, given the good start, the Leafs would have to win only 6 of the next 27 games to be as bad as last year to December 31st.  If we only win 6 of the next 27 I'm jumping off a bridge somewhere.


27 games from until until Dec 31st.

Best case: Leafs win 27 in a row.  Record on Dec 31 sits at 34-3-1.
Worst case: Leafs lose 27 in a row.  Record on Dec 31 sits at 7-30-1

Manage your expectations accordingly.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 01, 2011, 12:35:48 AM
(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg737/scaled.php?tn=0&server=737&filename=eugrd.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Hockey_gal on November 01, 2011, 02:36:58 AM
(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg860/scaled.php?tn=0&server=860&filename=4vwmc.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Hockey_gal on November 01, 2011, 02:38:52 AM
(https://p.twimg.com/AdHswEXCEAA0X83.jpg)

Schenn,Gunnar,Gus and Kessel
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Hockey_gal on November 01, 2011, 02:40:14 AM
(https://p.twimg.com/AdHjiKaCIAAChZZ.jpg)

Armstrong and family
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Hockey_gal on November 01, 2011, 02:43:31 AM
(https://p.twimg.com/AdIao1FCMAAGOA9.jpg)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Hockey_gal on November 01, 2011, 02:44:24 AM
I'm sure most of you follow Leafs on twitter if not hope you liked the photos  ;D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: TheMightyOdin on November 01, 2011, 07:02:07 AM
Little miss riding hood looks delicious.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 01, 2011, 11:45:06 AM
Quote
HennyTweets Paul Hendrick
Jake gardiner exits ice at practise. Update coming later. Might provide cody franson with an opportunity.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on November 01, 2011, 01:17:30 PM
Best case: Leafs win 27 in a row.  Record on Dec 31 sits at 34-3-1.
Worst case: Leafs lose 27 in a row.  Record on Dec 31 sits at 7-30-1

Manage your expectations accordingly.
;D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 01, 2011, 01:22:59 PM
TSNScottyMac: Colby Armstrong is AT LEAST a month away and likely more suffering from that sprained ankle. #Leafs #NHL
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on November 01, 2011, 01:31:47 PM
(https://p.twimg.com/AdIao1FCMAAGOA9.jpg)

Looks like someone in the background there dressed up as Raffi Torres dressed up as Jay Z.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: pnjunction on November 01, 2011, 01:36:24 PM
(https://p.twimg.com/AdHswEXCEAA0X83.jpg)

Schenn,Gunnar,Gus and Kessel

Those their girlfriends?  They certainly have a 'type' don't they.  I wonder if they ever get them mixed up lol.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 01, 2011, 01:37:48 PM
TSNScottyMac: Colby Armstrong is AT LEAST a month away and likely more suffering from that sprained ankle. #Leafs #NHL

Here's further confirmation:
http://twitter.com/#!/jonasTSN1050/status/131420049889181696

@jonasTSN1050
Jonas Siegel
For those wondering on Colby Armstrong timetable. Out another 5-7 weeks according to Wilson. 6-8 week ankle sprain.

So folks can start bellyaching about the team's prognosis after five more weeks!!  :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on November 01, 2011, 01:49:53 PM
He must have rolled it pretty good, I've done that to each ankle playing ball hockey and tennis, the second one took 3 months before I was comfortable putting much weight on it with any confidence. At the time the doctor said I would have been better off if I had broken it...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on November 01, 2011, 01:50:34 PM
TSNScottyMac: Colby Armstrong is AT LEAST a month away and likely more suffering from that sprained ankle. #Leafs #NHL

Here's further confirmation:
http://twitter.com/#!/jonasTSN1050/status/131420049889181696

@jonasTSN1050
Jonas Siegel
For those wondering on Colby Armstrong timetable. Out another 5-7 weeks according to Wilson. 6-8 week ankle sprain.

So folks can start bellyaching about the team's prognosis after five more weeks!!  :)

Weird.  I thought I just read Colby himself tweet that he isn't far away.

I had a severe ankle sprain about 8-9 months ago.  Took me a solid 3 weeks before some light running than another 3 weeks before I started feeling like I could go full out again.  My very first game back at soccer someone slide tackled me and hit my ankle and I thought I was going to throw up I was in so much pain. 

They ain't fun.

My ankle:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/dredjaw/ankle.jpg)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 01, 2011, 01:55:56 PM
Yuk.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on November 01, 2011, 01:59:33 PM
That happened to my head once.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on November 01, 2011, 02:09:50 PM
That happened to my head once.

Spbrain?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on November 01, 2011, 02:38:19 PM
That happened to my head once.

Spbrain?

Yeah, secondary to a painfully inflated Ego.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on November 01, 2011, 02:43:27 PM
That happened to my head once.

Spbrain?

Yeah, secondary to a painfully inflated Ego.

Hehe, tough to ice that kind of swelling... ;)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 01, 2011, 03:19:42 PM
DarrenDreger: Leafs announce Crabb recalled and Frattin assigned to Marlies.

Not a huge shock - Frattin has struggled a little of late and hasn't had any success on the offensive side of things. Better for him to (hopefully) have some success in the AHL right now.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 01, 2011, 04:04:03 PM
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v502/dredjaw/ankle.jpg)

Gnarly!
You weren't playing in one of the OSSC leagues were you?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Arn on November 03, 2011, 05:46:43 AM
Hey guys, Leafs are 2nd in the league

http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?season=20112012&type=LEA
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on November 03, 2011, 07:40:09 AM
Hey guys, Leafs are 2nd in the league

http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?season=20112012&type=LEA

Could be #1 after tonight.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on November 03, 2011, 07:59:44 AM
Hey guys, Leafs are 2nd in the league

http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?season=20112012&type=LEA (http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?season=20112012&type=LEA)

Could be #1 after tonight.



Simply f-a-n-t-a-s-t-i-c!!!   ;D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 03, 2011, 08:02:12 AM
Kent_WilsonKent Wilson
RT @felixpotvin: With that assist Jonas Gustavsson ties Matt Stajan in the scoring race.

LOL

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 03, 2011, 08:07:44 AM
Hey guys, Leafs are 2nd in the league

http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?season=20112012&type=LEA

Could be #1 after tonight.

27th in the NHL in Penalty Kill - If I were on the Leafs I would focus a lot more on that than on # 2 in the league in points after 12 games in a soft schedule.

16th in PP - also need work.

3rd in NHL in Goals For - great!

But also 26th worst in Goals Against (just 2 goals away from 29th) and that needs a lot of work.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: lc9 on November 03, 2011, 08:24:11 AM
27th in the NHL in Penalty Kill - If I were on the Leafs I would focus a lot more on that than on # 2 in the league in points after 12 games in a soft schedule.

16th in PP - also need work.

3rd in NHL in Goals For - great!

But also 26th worst in Goals Against (just 2 goals away from 29th) and that needs a lot of work.

After last night the Leafs are now worst in the NHL in penalty killing.  They now sit at 69.4% (simply embarrassing).  They better figure this out and figure it out in a hurry.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 03, 2011, 08:58:21 AM
27th in the NHL in Penalty Kill - If I were on the Leafs I would focus a lot more on that than on # 2 in the league in points after 12 games in a soft schedule.

16th in PP - also need work.

3rd in NHL in Goals For - great!

But also 26th worst in Goals Against (just 2 goals away from 29th) and that needs a lot of work.

After last night the Leafs are now worst in the NHL in penalty killing.  They now sit at 69.4% (simply embarrassing).  They better figure this out and figure it out in a hurry.

Wow. You are right. I missed that.

That is awful.

How does a team sit 2nd in the NHL in standings but sit 30th in PK? The answer is that they won't be atop the standings for long at all if the PK is not corrected.

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Crucialness Key on November 03, 2011, 09:01:04 AM
Kent_WilsonKent Wilson
RT @felixpotvin: With that assist Jonas Gustavsson ties Matt Stajan in the scoring race.

LOL
And Matt Frattin  :(
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: You're right on November 03, 2011, 09:54:34 AM
Kent_WilsonKent Wilson
RT @felixpotvin: With that assist Jonas Gustavsson ties Matt Stajan in the scoring race.

LOL
And Matt Frattin  :(
He is also ahead of Sidney Crosby!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: lc9 on November 03, 2011, 09:59:07 AM
Wow. You are right. I missed that.

That is awful.

How does a team sit 2nd in the NHL in standings but sit 30th in PK? The answer is that they won't be atop the standings for long at all if the PK is not corrected.

You're right.  Once games start to get tighter games will be won and lost on special teams.  Its amazing the Leafs have been able to get away with their horrid PK up to this point. 

Every time they go down a man I think to myself, "well there's a goal."  Its getting to the point of ridiculous.

I know a lot of people love the grinders out there for the PK, but the lack of skill being used on the PK is apparent, lots of mishandling of clear-outs, poor dump ins and generally poor positioning. 

I want the Sundin/Mogliny package out there.  Put Kessel and Lupol out there, let them scare the other team a bit, the PK can't really get any worse.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 03, 2011, 10:11:48 AM
To summarize - after 12 games:

Points - 17
Standings - 2nd in the league
Goals For - 3rd
Goals Against - 26th
Power Play - 16th
Penalty Kill - 30th
Shots Against per game - 20th
Faceoffs - 10th
Goals Against per game - 27th
Goals Against per game (5 on 5) - 16th

I could go on with more... but the point, for me anyway, is that there are a lot more troubling stats than there are good ones. The Leafs can score and they can get points in teh standings against weak teams. But how long can they hold as they are with goals against, shots against and PK like they have?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on November 03, 2011, 10:30:04 AM
27th in the NHL in Penalty Kill - If I were on the Leafs I would focus a lot more on that than on # 2 in the league in points after 12 games in a soft schedule.

16th in PP - also need work.

3rd in NHL in Goals For - great!

But also 26th worst in Goals Against (just 2 goals away from 29th) and that needs a lot of work.

After last night the Leafs are now worst in the NHL in penalty killing.  They now sit at 69.4% (simply embarrassing).  They better figure this out and figure it out in a hurry.

Wow. You are right. I missed that.

That is awful.

How does a team sit 2nd in the NHL in standings but sit 30th in PK? The answer is that they won't be atop the standings for long at all if the PK is not corrected.

The other answer is that they've been statistically absolutely dominant 5-on-5, tied for 1st in the league with Washington with a GF/GA ratio of 1.53.  Tops in the NHL last year was Boston at 1.40.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 03, 2011, 10:47:52 AM
The other answer is that they've been statistically absolutely dominant 5-on-5, tied for 1st in the league with Washington with a GF/GA ratio of 1.53.  Tops in the NHL last year was Boston at 1.40.

So you are one of them nutty "glass is half-full" kind of Leafs fans.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 03, 2011, 11:00:20 AM
To summarize - after 12 games:

Points - 17
Standings - 2nd in the league
Goals For - 3rd
Goals Against - 26th
Power Play - 16th
Penalty Kill - 30th
Shots Against per game - 20th
Faceoffs - 10th
Goals Against per game - 27th
Goals Against per game (5 on 5) - 16th

I could go on with more... but the point, for me anyway, is that there are a lot more troubling stats than there are good ones. The Leafs can score and they can get points in teh standings against weak teams. But how long can they hold as they are with goals against, shots against and PK like they have?

Kind of like the 98/99 season, where, in 27 team league, the Leafs were . . .

Points - 97
Standings - 5th in the league
Goals for - 1st
Goals against - 21st
Powerplay - 17th
Penalty Kill - 24th
Shots Against/Game - 17th
Faceoffs - 14th
Goals Against/game - 21st
5 on 5 GA/G - 5th

And, as we all know, that season worked out fairly well for the Leafs, and was the beginning of a pretty decent run for them.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on November 03, 2011, 11:26:33 AM
The other answer is that they've been statistically absolutely dominant 5-on-5, tied for 1st in the league with Washington with a GF/GA ratio of 1.53.  Tops in the NHL last year was Boston at 1.40.

So you are one of them nutty "glass is half-full" kind of Leafs fans.

If you like, or maybe more of a "glass is not empty"?  There are reasons for their successes as much as there are reasons for concern.  Both successes and failures warrant attention and criticism.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 03, 2011, 11:40:03 AM
27th in the NHL in Penalty Kill - If I were on the Leafs I would focus a lot more on that than on # 2 in the league in points after 12 games in a soft schedule.

16th in PP - also need work.

3rd in NHL in Goals For - great!

But also 26th worst in Goals Against (just 2 goals away from 29th) and that needs a lot of work.

After last night the Leafs are now worst in the NHL in penalty killing.  They now sit at 69.4% (simply embarrassing).  They better figure this out and figure it out in a hurry.

Wow. You are right. I missed that.

That is awful.

How does a team sit 2nd in the NHL in standings but sit 30th in PK? The answer is that they won't be atop the standings for long at all if the PK is not corrected.

The other answer is that they've been statistically absolutely dominant 5-on-5, tied for 1st in the league with Washington with a GF/GA ratio of 1.53.  Tops in the NHL last year was Boston at 1.40.

At even strength, they've been average: 14th in GAA.

Their top PKer, Reimer, has missed a bunch of games. I also think they miss Armstrong for this role.

There are plenty of areas one could cite this team for desired improvement. But the PK is obviously the biggest need.

Normally, when a team is really bad at something, it's fairly easy to get some improvement. The confidence in that theory may be shaken some when one considers this is Wilson's 4th crack at it and his results to date in Toronto are quite poor/downright bad in this area.

In terms of talent, I think the collection of forwards for the PK is arguably above average - pretty darn good. The biggest weaknessin talent is probably the D followed by the goaltending. Liles, Franson & Gardiner have little to no prior NHL PK experience. It's never been Phaneuf's forte and still isn't. Schenn & Komisarek have not been consistent at it - less than desirable/average. Gunnarsson may be the best of the bunch right now which I wouldn't have expected from him.

I think the Leafs have been decent but also fortunate. Teams haven't entirely pulled their rosters and systems together. By the end of 20 games in, they will. Scoring will probably be harder to come by at that point. While that's going on, hopefully our Leafs can counter with better execution on the PK.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 03, 2011, 11:46:19 AM
Normally, when a team is really bad at something, it's fairly easy to get some improvement. The confidence in that theory may be shaken some when one considers this is Wilson's 4th crack at it and his results to date in Toronto are quite poor/downright bad in this area.

In terms of talent, I think the collection of forwards for the PK is arguably above average - pretty darn good. The biggest weaknessin talent is probably the D followed by the goaltending. Liles, Franson & Gardiner have little to no prior NHL PK experience. It's never been Phaneuf's forte and still isn't. Schenn & Komisarek have not been consistent at it - less than desirable/average. Gunnarsson may be the best of the bunch right now which I wouldn't have expected from him.

Right there in a nutsheel is the cause of my concern. This rotten PK has stuck with the team regardless of the upgrade in talent and the one remaining constant is Wilson - not Toskala, not Kaberle and not even Keith Acton. On paper the Leafs should be great at the PK - great faceoff record.... I just don't get it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 03, 2011, 12:15:36 PM
On paper the Leafs should be great at the PK - great faceoff record.... I just don't get it.

I'm not sold on that. Their goaltending is roughly .900 save%. That's not all on the D. And defensively, I don't think their D talent is that hot. For the record, that's not a new observation about their D: I felt that before the season started.

They only have 4 D who have NHL PK experience. When one of them is in the box, they're basically breaking in a rookie NHL PKer (Liles or Gardiner or Franson)for one of the two PK shifts. Hard to expect excellence when they have to do that. Those guys are going to make mistakes and they have. Look at the number of breakaways they've given up. Some shoddy crease clearing, coverage and poor passing or poor execution to dump the puck out of the zone.

Goaltending should stop about two thirds of breakaways. It hasn't. Some of that is due to the quality of shot/attempt but I wonder about all of it being due to that. A fuzzy area I question.

Winning faceoffs is great and helps but that's just the start of it. It's what they do after that where they're getting burned.

On paper, they're not that hot as a defensive club at this time. If Komisarek & Schenn could pick up their play, as they've both shown in the past they're capable of, that would certainly help my perception of them on paper. But until then, until they've shown consistency over a significant period of time, I'm not sold on the D talent at all. There isn't a reliable shutdown dman in the bunch right now.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: caveman on November 03, 2011, 01:42:51 PM
Have Franson and Aulie watch Hal Gill highlights. (Is there such a thing?)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zid on November 03, 2011, 01:53:37 PM
Have Franson and Aulie watch Hal Gill highlights. (Is there such a thing?)

I'm easily expecting Zapruder-like picture quality on those.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on November 03, 2011, 01:57:36 PM
For Heaven's sake people, let's just enjoy this crest the Leafs are riding on, so to speak, and then, if thy come crashing back down to earth, then reality will have sunk in, probably for keeps.

The Leafs aren't the best team in the league, as the statistics tell the tale, but, for now, their being at or near the top is enjoyable.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 04, 2011, 07:52:18 AM
I am absolutely thrilled with the Leafs record so far, but I really hope that they do not let their foot off the gas and think that they are actually this good. They're not.

Brilliant move by Wilson to throw Scrivens in net last night. When you could just see another let down game coming it made sense to go with the young hungry rookie - and he did a great job. But the team was outshot 39-18 and that is simply not acceptable against any team, let alone the CBJ.

The team has promise and many games are exciting. The last two have not been exciting - but I will take a boring win over an exciting loss any day.

It seems to me that the Leafs are getting outworked a lot of times, they are getting outshot, they do not kill penalties well, don't execute on the PP, they give up a lot of odd man rushes and breakaways (hanging Gus out to dry)..... yet they keep winning.

On paper I figure that this team looks solid defensively and yet this is the area of their game that needs work. Give up fewer shots, be far more aggressive on the PK and watch the odd man rushes.

I keep waiting for reality to catch up with the Leafs but so far they are riding the wave and this opening run may very well launch them into the playoffs. I just hope they tighten up in the areas that need to be tightened up and start to shape up like a real playoff threat down the line.

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: SFBayLeaf on November 04, 2011, 11:07:45 AM
I guess dwelling on perceived weaknesses is understandable, waiting for the other shoe to drop and all that, but Jeez we're 9-3-1.  How about that top six, huh?  ;D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 04, 2011, 11:14:43 AM
I have to give Wilson props for how he handled the goalie selection yesterday, he told both guys that Scrivens was starting in the morning, but told them not to say anything to the press.  That kept the reporters from hounding Scrivens all day long and/or second guessing the choice even before gametime.  Just took that extra pressure off Scrivens before the start.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 04, 2011, 10:07:26 PM
I'm not entirely familiar with how OCPR formulas are calculated but this me happy nevertheless,

NHL Player Rankings After October

Forwards
1. Phil Kessel, Toronto - 84.63
2. Claude Giroux, Philadelphia - 83.90
3. Anze Kopitar, Los Angeles - 80.69
4. James Neal, Pittsburgh - 78.66
5. Joe Pavelski, San Jose - 77.53
6. Milan Michalek, Ottawa - 77.37
7. Jason Spezza, Ottawa - 76.56
8. Jason Pominville, Buffalo - 74.95
9. Jonathan Toews, Chicago - 74.22
10. Ryan Callahan, NY Rangers - 73.98

Defense
1. Dion Phaneuf, Toronto - 96.29
2. Kris Letang, Pittsburgh - 95.12
3. Alexander Edler, Vancouver - 94.95
4. Ryan Suter, Nashville - 87.38
5. Sami Salo, Vancouver - 84.67
6. Shea Weber, Nashville - 84.60
7. Erik Karlsson, Ottawa - 84.34
8. Kyle Quincey, Colorado - 84.30
9. Jason Garrison, Florida - 84.28
10. Alex Pietrangelo, St. Louis - 83.81

Read more: link (http://hockey.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/10554/20111102/nhl_player_rankings_after_october/#ixzz1cnD4FuHO)

Edit: Reimer ranked 11th among goalies, BTW. - Not too shabby.

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on November 04, 2011, 10:50:43 PM
I'm not entirely familiar with how OCPR formulas are calculated but this me happy nevertheless,

NHL Player Rankings After October

Forwards
1. Phil Kessel, Toronto - 84.63
2. Claude Giroux, Philadelphia - 83.90
3. Anze Kopitar, Los Angeles - 80.69
4. James Neal, Pittsburgh - 78.66
5. Joe Pavelski, San Jose - 77.53
6. Milan Michalek, Ottawa - 77.37
7. Jason Spezza, Ottawa - 76.56
8. Jason Pominville, Buffalo - 74.95
9. Jonathan Toews, Chicago - 74.22
10. Ryan Callahan, NY Rangers - 73.98

Defense
1. Dion Phaneuf, Toronto - 96.29
2. Kris Letang, Pittsburgh - 95.12
3. Alexander Edler, Vancouver - 94.95
4. Ryan Suter, Nashville - 87.38
5. Sami Salo, Vancouver - 84.67
6. Shea Weber, Nashville - 84.60
7. Erik Karlsson, Ottawa - 84.34
8. Kyle Quincey, Colorado - 84.30
9. Jason Garrison, Florida - 84.28
10. Alex Pietrangelo, St. Louis - 83.81

Read more: link (http://hockey.realgm.com/src_wiretap_archives/10554/20111102/nhl_player_rankings_after_october/#ixzz1cnD4FuHO)

Edit: Reimer ranked 11th among goalies, BTW. - Not too shabby.

I'd never heard of this site but they might be more credible if their picture of Phaneuf showed him in his Leafs uni rather than as a Flame.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 05, 2011, 09:53:00 AM
Their use of art has always been really, REALLY bad.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 05, 2011, 10:33:14 PM
Some people want to look at the standings and just say "yeah" but others don't mind talking about the really big flaws. After tonight they look even worse.

Kessel - no goals in 4 games and 1 goal in 6

Goals for = 45
Goals Against = 46

PK - 30th

The scoring (or at least the potential for scoring) is great. Kessel, or Lupul, or Grabo, or MacArthur etc. are exciting to watch and they have been scoring some goals. But the D - or the team's defensive play - is just failing badly and it is going from a ild problem to a glaring concern.

I still think on paper they should be able to kill penalties and reduce the goals against. I just do not know why that is not happening.

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: princedpw on November 05, 2011, 11:05:02 PM
Some people want to look at the standings and just say "yeah" but others don't mind talking about the really big flaws. After tonight they look even worse.

Kessel - no goals in 4 games and 1 goal in 6

Goals for = 45
Goals Against = 46

PK - 30th

The scoring (or at least the potential for scoring) is great. Kessel, or Lupul, or Grabo, or MacArthur etc. are exciting to watch and they have been scoring some goals. But the D - or the team's defensive play - is just failing badly and it is going from a ild problem to a glaring concern.

I still think on paper they should be able to kill penalties and reduce the goals against. I just do not know why that is not happening.

Well, take away the bruins games and GF/GA is 43/34.  Not bad.  The PK is atrocious, no question about it.

Let's hope they come back and win the next one and make this a one-game/bruins anomaly.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on November 05, 2011, 11:07:46 PM


Goals for = 45
Goals Against = 46

PK - 30th

The scoring (or at least the potential for scoring) is great. Kessel, or Lupul, or Grabo, or MacArthur etc. are exciting to watch and they have been scoring some goals. But the D - or the team's defensive play - is just failing badly and it is going from a ild problem to a glaring concern.

I still think on paper they should be able to kill penalties and reduce the goals against. I just do not know why that is not happening.

The GF/GA doesn't concern me  because a loss like tonight has a disproportionate effect on the stat.  Last in the league in PK?  No team will make the playoffs with that.

I know no one wants to enter the tired debate over how much fault Wilson bears.  All I know is that he hasn't been able to fix it, his new assistants haven't been able to fix it, so it's time for a whole new approach from them.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: TheMightyOdin on November 06, 2011, 06:36:28 AM
(http://desmond.yfrog.com/Himg737/scaled.php?tn=0&server=737&filename=eugrd.jpg&xsize=640&ysize=640)

He answered back

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4yuiEJyepc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

And then

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6rkqqghWkQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Boston Leaf on November 06, 2011, 06:52:04 AM
we are not well coached... all around.. Someone remind me about the great work Francois Allaire has done with the leafs?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: KW Sluggo on November 06, 2011, 07:37:47 AM
Well... going into the Columbus game I was struck by how similar the the stats were for the PK and PP of the two teams with disparate record. Consider the fact that Columbus has lost some games it should have won as well as some close ones (in addition to the not close at all ones of course) and you get an idea just how little separates worst from first.

We simply are not as good as our record indicates.

As for the trade, on one side of the ledger the Bruins have a Cup and Seguin with Doug Hamilton (allegedly a Rob Blake type but we will see about that) and we have a pretty good scorer.

I am willing to discount the effect of the trade on the Cup win because I believe that the Bruins with Kessel would have been a lot stronger than the Bruins with Seguin at that stage of Segiun's career.

On the other hand, the addition of Kessel to our line up has not translated this team to any great improvement. I do not blame Kessel in the least -- he is playing well and has scored in decent numbers since he arrived,

The fact is that we were way farther away from any respectability than a Kessel. We would have been better building with a Segiun and a Hamilton and making a trade for a missing star some time around next season or possibly at the trade deadline this one.

The prematurity of the Kessel trade has done a disservice to Kessel and to the development of this team. It is like putting lipstick on a pig.

Last night's result may have been extreme but I found it unsurprising. We still need a better roster and we have to go through that "learn to lose" phase in order to learn how to win.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Hank Yarbo on November 06, 2011, 08:45:41 AM
I think this pretty much sums up last nights game:

(http://bradyonthebrain.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/spanking2.jpg)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: slapshot on November 06, 2011, 12:04:29 PM
Well... going into the Columbus game I was struck by how similar the the stats were for the PK and PP of the two teams with disparate record. Consider the fact that Columbus has lost some games it should have won as well as some close ones (in addition to the not close at all ones of course) and you get an idea just how little separates worst from first.

We simply are not as good as our record indicates.

As for the trade, on one side of the ledger the Bruins have a Cup and Seguin with Doug Hamilton (allegedly a Rob Blake type but we will see about that) and we have a pretty good scorer.

I am willing to discount the effect of the trade on the Cup win because I believe that the Bruins with Kessel would have been a lot stronger than the Bruins with Seguin at that stage of Segiun's career.

On the other hand, the addition of Kessel to our line up has not translated this team to any great improvement. I do not blame Kessel in the least -- he is playing well and has scored in decent numbers since he arrived,

The fact is that we were way farther away from any respectability than a Kessel. We would have been better building with a Segiun and a Hamilton and making a trade for a missing star some time around next season or possibly at the trade deadline this one.

The prematurity of the Kessel trade has done a disservice to Kessel and to the development of this team. It is like putting lipstick on a pig.

Last night's result may have been extreme but I found it unsurprising. We still need a better roster and we have to go through that "learn to lose" phase in order to learn how to win.

I am so sick about hearing about the Kessel trade. Whether the Leafs won or lost the deal is irrevelant now. It's done.
This is like driving a car, by looking through the rear view mirror to try to figure out which way the road is bending.
Kessel didn't trade himself, so why put this extra burden on his shoulders. Burke made the deal, and he's won FAR MORE than he's lost. The team is on an upward trend, is far deeper than  its been in a long time. The butt kicking last night can happen to any team, any time. The Bruins were at their best last night, like they were in the playoffs, when they trashed Vancouver twice in the own barn, with Luongo and the top team standing wise overall for the season. Crap happens.
I'd sooner address what we need going forward. Here's where I see some defencies. Obviously, special teams, but beyond that.
I like to see one center who is a defensive specialist (while capable of offence), some one who could shutdown top players on other teams.
I like to see more turculence up front, punishing type forwards. Guys like Roberts, Tucker, Domi, Green and Corson used to intimidate the more skilled Sens, but they were also skilled players in their own right. We have a lot of the same types of players.
I've been a long time Wilson supporter, and the team is winning more, but some of these trends are really disturbing.

1. All the breakaways.
2. Lack of pressure on the PK and gaps all over the place
3. Inability to get traffic in front of the net on the PK.
4. Inability to move the puck out along the boards, when opposition pinches
5. Leaving opposition points open to make plays way too much.
6. Inability of defence to clear way rebounds

Some of these trends have to change, if the good record they built up is to stay intact.
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 06, 2011, 01:32:29 PM
Some people want to look at the standings and just say "yeah" but others don't mind talking about the really big flaws. After tonight they look even worse.

Kessel - no goals in 4 games and 1 goal in 6

Goals for = 45
Goals Against = 46

PK - 30th

The scoring (or at least the potential for scoring) is great. Kessel, or Lupul, or Grabo, or MacArthur etc. are exciting to watch and they have been scoring some goals. But the D - or the team's defensive play - is just failing badly and it is going from a ild problem to a glaring concern.

I still think on paper they should be able to kill penalties and reduce the goals against. I just do not know why that is not happening.

I'm not going to argue that there aren't  problems, but goals for/goals against is a bit of a mirage here.

45 for 46 against in 14 games
Take away the 2 absolutely brutal games against the Bruins and it's :
43 for and 33 against in 12 other games -- that is not bad at all.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 06, 2011, 06:13:18 PM
I'm not going to argue that there aren't  problems, but goals for/goals against is a bit of a mirage here.

45 for 46 against in 14 games
Take away the 2 absolutely brutal games against the Bruins and it's :
43 for and 33 against in 12 other games -- that is not bad at all.

It's not ideal, but, I agree, it's not bad either.

A couple other positive statistics (in light of all the recent negativity):

The Leafs have won every game where they're had a lead of 2 or more goals. In fact, they have yet to allow the opposition to tie the game when they've put up a lead of 2 or more.

On 4 occasions, the Leafs held the lead but did not win the game. However, in all those cases, it was an early 1 goal lead that did not last the period. The Leafs have to play a game where they finished a period with the lead and did not win.

In 2 of the 6 games where the Leafs trailed by more than 1 goal, they have come back to win. In 4 of the 8 games in which the Leafs trailed in the 3rd period, they have come back to earn at least a point - 3 of those 4 games being wins.

The Leafs have scored the first goal in 9 of 14 games this season, though, oddly enough, they're 4-1-0 when giving up the first goal, while only 5-3-1 when scoring it themselves.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: leafplasma on November 06, 2011, 06:31:39 PM
Another thing to note just to try to spin a little bit of positive on this.  The Bruins the defensive juggernaut and stanley cup champions had 7 goals scored against them once and 6 goals scored against them twice last season.  It happens to the best of them.  We have had the luxury of our number one goalie for what amounts to only 5 of the 14 games this season.  This is still a very young team that will go through some ups and downs. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 06, 2011, 06:49:49 PM
I'm not going to argue that there aren't  problems, but goals for/goals against is a bit of a mirage here.

45 for 46 against in 14 games
Take away the 2 absolutely brutal games against the Bruins and it's :
43 for and 33 against in 12 other games -- that is not bad at all.

The problem, of course, is that in the real world you cannot take away any games, let alone both games vs. Boston.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 06, 2011, 06:57:11 PM
I'm not going to argue that there aren't  problems, but goals for/goals against is a bit of a mirage here.

45 for 46 against in 14 games
Take away the 2 absolutely brutal games against the Bruins and it's :
43 for and 33 against in 12 other games -- that is not bad at all.

The problem, of course, is that in the real world you cannot take away any games, let alone both games vs. Boston.

Just as a 5-6 night on the PP, and 0-fers on other nights, would not be indicative of much long-term about our PP, 2 extremely poor showings against Boston do not indicate much overall about the team.  Anomaly.

Now, if this result keeps happening again and again more frequently, then yes it is cause for concern.  But if not, we'd hardly be the first team, or only team in the league, to have another team have our number.

Just as we are wondering why the Leafs play like this against Boston, Bruins fans I'm sure are wondering why this season the Bruins can't play like they do against the Leafs against other teams.

It reminds me of why, for whatever reason, Brodeur's regular season numbers were never that good against us, even when our team was poor.  He could be great against everyone else, and then against us it would be different.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 06, 2011, 07:37:07 PM
It reminds me of why, for whatever reason, Brodeur's regular season numbers were never that good against us, even when our team was poor.  He could be great against everyone else, and then against us it would be different.

That is a good point and you are right. If Boston simply has the Leafs number then so be it I suppose.

But if you look back at this young season you can see an opener against the Habs where the Leafs were non-existent for half the game and lucky to win, a 2nd game against Ottawa where they built a 5-1 lead and then barely hung on to a 6-5 win, a NJ game where a weak goalie gave us the win and a CBJ game where an even weaker goalie did the same. My point is that the Leafs are not nearly as good as their record seems to indicate. It is not wrong to point out that some of this euphoria is not well placed or well considered.

Wins are wins and they help get to the playoff goal, but I am still a long way from being convinced that this is a playoff team. Goals against and PK are the two most glaring problems that make me feel that way. on top of that the Leafs were fortunate to open the season riding a hot hand by Kessel, but now that has dried up again (although it will come back again as it always does).

I just want more..... isn't that fair?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Chev-boyar-sky on November 06, 2011, 07:47:29 PM
Some people want to look at the standings and just say "yeah" but others don't mind talking about the really big flaws. After tonight they look even worse.

Kessel - no goals in 4 games and 1 goal in 6

Goals for = 45
Goals Against = 46

PK - 30th

The scoring (or at least the potential for scoring) is great. Kessel, or Lupul, or Grabo, or MacArthur etc. are exciting to watch and they have been scoring some goals. But the D - or the team's defensive play - is just failing badly and it is going from a ild problem to a glaring concern.

I still think on paper they should be able to kill penalties and reduce the goals against. I just do not know why that is not happening.

I'm not going to argue that there aren't  problems, but goals for/goals against is a bit of a mirage here.

45 for 46 against in 14 games
Take away the 2 absolutely brutal games against the Bruins and it's :
43 for and 33 against in 12 other games -- that is not bad at all.

I don't get the Kessel criticism.

He's the leading scorer in the league (pts and goals), leads (or lead) in plus minus, and in the aforementioned last 6 games, where he only has 1 goal, he has 6 pts.

The knock on Kessel was that he went through scoring droughts and, unlike other better players, brought nothing else to the table. No defence, few assists, and was basically invisible. That simply isn't true this year. Now there's a new reason to knock the guy.

Most players who score 6 pts in 6 games are seen to be producing at a very good clip. Kessel on the other hand doesn't have enough goals......
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Jalili on November 06, 2011, 07:48:40 PM
That is a good point and you are right. If Boston simply has the Leafs number then so be it I suppose.

But if you look back at this young season you can see an opener against the Habs where the Leafs were non-existent for half the game and lucky to win, a 2nd game against Ottawa where they built a 5-1 lead and then barely hung on to a 6-5 win, a NJ game where a weak goalie gave us the win and a CBJ game where an even weaker goalie did the same. My point is that the Leafs are not nearly as good as their record seems to indicate. It is not wrong to point out that some of this euphoria is not well placed or well considered.

Wins are wins and they help get to the playoff goal, but I am still a long way from being convinced that this is a playoff team. Goals against and PK are the two most glaring problems that make me feel that way. on top of that the Leafs were fortunate to open the season riding a hot hand by Kessel, but now that has dried up again (although it will come back again as it always does).

I just want more..... isn't that fair?

I like to think of it as a reverse of the team going 4-9-1 while clearly demonstrating that they're better than their record indicates.
 
I'm beginning to think that unless the team sorts out some pretty significant issues on special teams and the blueline, the team may be destined to level off in the next few weeks.

*I should note that I'm still happy about the team's record, just wary of what the numbers actually indicate.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 06, 2011, 07:49:01 PM
It is not wrong to point out that some of this euphoria is not well placed or well considered.

What euphoria?  At the most there has been optimism or cautious optimism, but that hardly seems out of place with a positive start to the season after the tough start last season.

If anything there has been, on the board and in the media (I'm looking at you James Mirtle), a "they are going to start losing a bunch of games in a row" mentality.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 06, 2011, 07:50:41 PM
The problem, of course, is that in the real world you cannot take away any games, let alone both games vs. Boston.

Except, of course, you absolutely can if you're trying to learn things from statistics, especially if you're dealing with small sample sizes. If a team's goal differential is even and they're 5-5 it says something very different than a team with an even goal differential who are 8-2.

Let's use an extreme example. Let's say that, for whatever reason, an NHL team gave up fifty shots in a game and their goalies stopped none of them. That would obviously have a very negative effect on their goal differential but would not be particularly helpful in examining them on the year.

That's basically the case here. The Boston games are outliers. They've been good this year even if their goal differential doesn't show it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 06, 2011, 09:44:29 PM
The problem, of course, is that in the real world you cannot take away any games, let alone both games vs. Boston.

Except, of course, you absolutely can if you're trying to learn things from statistics, especially if you're dealing with small sample sizes. If a team's goal differential is even and they're 5-5 it says something very different than a team with an even goal differential who are 8-2.

Let's use an extreme example. Let's say that, for whatever reason, an NHL team gave up fifty shots in a game and their goalies stopped none of them. That would obviously have a very negative effect on their goal differential but would not be particularly helpful in examining them on the year.

That's basically the case here. The Boston games are outliers. They've been good this year even if their goal differential doesn't show it.

Agreed on all counts. While the GF/GA still counts in the statistics, the outliers aren't very good measuring sticks when it comes to projecting the overall standings. I think there will likely be a couple outliers where the Leafs blowout a couple of opponents like they did Atlanta last year as well, and I don't think using them as an example of how dominant the Leafs really are is prudent either.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 06, 2011, 09:48:01 PM
I think with the goal differential, it's just too early to put tons of stock in it.

Of the top 8 teams in the standings, the other seven are five or more goals better than the Leafs so if someone made an argument that maybe they don't belong in the top 8, I'd listen but couldn't accept it solely on that stat.

If one did the standings by goal differential, the Leafs would be in 16th place. To me, based upon their play to date, that seems rather harsh - in spite of their easy schedule to begin the season.

In Pts win%, that has them in 6th - maybe high in how many might expect them to finish.

If we toss the two Boston outliers for the Leafs, arguably, we should toss two outliers for the other teams. Doing that, I doubt a bunch would change in how they stack up in goal differential in a meaningful way - even if the ranking by differential shifts some.

Bottom line to me is they're ranked 28th in GAA and 30th in the PK. To remain a playoff team, those numbers are very likely going to have to improve. And they have four more games against the Bruins. Of course, they could try to shove them aside as outliers as well pretending they don't have a problem there ....
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 06, 2011, 10:27:09 PM
I think with the goal differential, it's just too early to put tons of stock in it.

Of the top 8 teams in the standings, the other seven are five or more goals better than the Leafs so if someone made an argument that maybe they don't belong in the top 8, I'd listen but couldn't accept it solely on that stat.

If one did the standings by goal differential, the Leafs would be in 16th place. To me, based upon their play to date, that seems rather harsh - in spite of their easy schedule to begin the season.

In Pts win%, that has them in 6th - maybe high in how many might expect them to finish.

If we toss the two Boston outliers for the Leafs, arguably, we should toss two outliers for the other teams. Doing that, I doubt a bunch would change in how they stack up in goal differential in a meaningful way - even if the ranking by differential shifts some.

Bottom line to me is they're ranked 28th in GAA and 30th in the PK. To remain a playoff team, those numbers are very likely going to have to improve. And they have four more games against the Bruins. Of course, they could try to shove them aside as outliers as well pretending they don't have a problem there ....

Well they aren't outliers when they are indeed the trend.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 07, 2011, 07:46:08 AM
I just heard a stat this morning that in the past 10 years not one team that has finished 30th in PK has made the playoffs.

Hardly surprising. But it also highlights the disparity that we see right now between a team that is 3rd overall (recently 1st overall) in the standings and a team that is also firmly in 30th place with the PK.

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 07, 2011, 09:05:29 AM
I've made a promise to myself to look at the overall record in 10 game chunks.  If they play well through each 10 game span the Leafs will be fine.

First 10: 7-2-1
Second 10: 2-2-0

Obviously the next 5-6 games are crucial.  If the Leafs can go 4-2 over the next 6 they're in good shape with a 6-4 record in the second 10 despite all the issues.  That would leave the overall record at 13-6-1 after 20 games.

Next 6 games are:
Panthers
@Blues
Senators
Coyotes
@Predators
Capitals

I'm hoping for wins against Panthers, Sens, Coyotes and then one of Blues/Predators.  I don't see us beating the Caps and the Preds game might be tough as well.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 07, 2011, 09:08:21 AM
I've made a promise to myself to look at the overall record in 10 game chunks. 

 8) I've done the exact same thing.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 07, 2011, 10:20:12 AM
I had a look at goal differential since the lockout:
NHL Sortable Standings link (http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?season=20112012&sort=standingsGoalDifferential&type=CON)

Every year since the lockout, the top 8 in goal differential in each conference made the playoffs (unless I missed one in my quick scan). 

Seven teams with a negative goal differential made it into the playoffs but they were within the top eight in their conference in that year.

Generally, with the object of the game to outscore the other team, that makes plenty of sense and would surprise few though the fact that I saw no exception surprised me a little.

The Leafs currently at -1 are in 7th place, one goal ahead of Tampa, Florida and Montreal in the 8th to 10th spots at -2.

I'm sure we could find in the past or might see in the future cases where a team slightly lower in goal differential beats out a team slightly higher for the final playoff berth. I doubt the stat is that reliable in terms of determining a playoff berth without exception. But if I were coach Wilson, that's not something I would want to bank my future on.

I do think the Leafs standing in that stat ought to set off some alarm bells that they're far less secure of a playoff berth than the generic standings might indicate given that they had a pretty easy schedule to start the season and rack up some numbers. As I interpret it, either they improve defensively or they're in the dogfight many predicted they would be to make the playoffs. And if they slip further, their playoff aspirations are likely in trouble.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on November 07, 2011, 11:27:33 AM
No Tim Connolly at practice today.

Is this really happening again?  Already!?!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zid on November 07, 2011, 11:39:22 AM
No Tim Connolly at practice today.

Is this really happening again?  Already!?!

This guy needs a per game contract.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 07, 2011, 12:43:29 PM
No Tim Connolly at practice today.

Is this really happening again?  Already!?!

markhmasters: Ron Wilson says Tim Connolly is out 10 days to two weeks with an upper-body injury
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Peter D. on November 07, 2011, 12:52:17 PM
markhmasters: Ron Wilson says Tim Connolly is out 10 days to two weeks with an upper-body injury

Did he break a nail or something?  For cryin' out loud.

His talent is undeniable, but this is exactly what many of us were weary of when we signed him.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 07, 2011, 12:57:11 PM
markhmasters: Ron Wilson says Tim Connolly is out 10 days to two weeks with an upper-body injury

Did he break a nail or something?  For cryin' out loud.

His talent is undeniable, but this is exactly what many of us were weary of when we signed him.

Seems like we're starting to get hit with the injury bug. We still have no ETA for Reimer...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 07, 2011, 12:57:17 PM
Yeah, not looking good.  We were hoping Connolly could put injury woes behind him, and yet he's only appeared in 6 out of 14 games, and how will miss a bunch more.  *Sigh*
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Derk on November 07, 2011, 01:01:20 PM
Meh. So far the risk hasn't paid off. Still some time left on that contract for him to miraculously change.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: pnjunction on November 07, 2011, 01:23:45 PM
Oh my the fans and media are not going to take kindly to this.

I think the Armstrong and Reimer injuries hurt the team more though. It is right in the numbers that we lose without them. I always considered Connolly a gamble that might pay off, it doesn't look good right now but could turn around.

The smoke being blown up our asses about Reimer is my biggest concern right now.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on November 07, 2011, 01:43:09 PM
No Tim Connolly at practice today.

Is this really happening again?  Already!?!

markhmasters: Ron Wilson says Tim Connolly is out 10 days to two weeks with an upper-body injury

I wonder if this is an aggravation of the same injury or a new one? If it's a new one, then this guy comes as advertised, just made of glass and that's unfortunate for us.

Maybe we could bring up Colborne, that would be awesome. Part of me wants to just let him destroy the AHL, but I have this feeling that our future 1st line center is playing with the Marlies as we speak and his name is Joe Colborne.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on November 07, 2011, 01:56:04 PM
No Tim Connolly at practice today.

Is this really happening again?  Already!?!

markhmasters: Ron Wilson says Tim Connolly is out 10 days to two weeks with an upper-body injury

I wonder if this is an aggravation of the same injury or a new one? If it's a new one, then this guy comes as advertised, just made of glass and that's unfortunate for us.

Maybe we could bring up Colborne, that would be awesome. Part of me wants to just let him destroy the AHL, but I have this feeling that our future 1st line center is playing with the Marlies as we speak and his name is Joe Colborne.

Wilson said this injury is unrelated to his previous injury.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Joe S. on November 07, 2011, 01:56:35 PM
I'd like to, in some way, offer some perspective if I can.

I truly feel that 'the age of the internet' has, in some way, ruined the joy of being a sports fan. Even I've been here since 2001, I think the post lockout analysis and discussions are dramatically different. I, for one, do not remember the goal by goal criticism of Leafs goaltenders - or the analysis of a season period by period...

I'm not saying it was better back then, but the micro criticism just seemed to be dialed down somewhat...

Anyway, what I wanted to show were some scores from a few seasons back - all losses:

Tampa 7-2
Buffalo 5-1
Florida 4-0
Boston 5-2
Philly 4-0
Philly 4-1
Ottawa 7-1
Anaheim 5-1
Philly 7-1
Montreal 4-0

And at the end of the season, Toronto finished with 45 wins - 3d most in the league and 103 points which points wise put them 5th overall. This was the 2003/2004 season, which I think almost all of us can agree may have been one of the best Leafs teams of the last 20 or so years...

What's my point? Well - that you can't sum up a season by 2 blow outs to the Bruins... it's such a long season, and I find the play by play by play hyper-analysis of each move in a game just overwhelming at times...

I'm not trying to be dramatic or call anyone out - I just miss the days when there was hope, or when it was fun to be excited about the Leafs...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on November 07, 2011, 01:57:32 PM
No Tim Connolly at practice today.

Is this really happening again?  Already!?!

markhmasters: Ron Wilson says Tim Connolly is out 10 days to two weeks with an upper-body injury

I wonder if this is an aggravation of the same injury or a new one? If it's a new one, then this guy comes as advertised, just made of glass and that's unfortunate for us.

Maybe we could bring up Colborne, that would be awesome. Part of me wants to just let him destroy the AHL, but I have this feeling that our future 1st line center is playing with the Marlies as we speak and his name is Joe Colborne.

I think the key word here is "future", as in a year or two. I really don't see him making much of a difference if they put him on the first line now with Connolly out (again). My guess is Bozak drops into that spot, and Lombardi moves to centre the 3rd line. I just don't think Colbourne is ready to center the top line on the big club just yet. Maybe they call him up to center the 3rd line?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Mordac on November 07, 2011, 03:27:38 PM
I just miss the days when there was hope, or when it was fun to be excited about the Leafs...

October 1968?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Joe S. on November 07, 2011, 03:36:58 PM
I just miss the days when there was hope, or when it was fun to be excited about the Leafs...

October 1968?

If you want to be a smart ass fine... but 1998-2004 was a pretty awesome time to be a Leafs fan...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on November 07, 2011, 03:52:51 PM
I'm not trying to be dramatic or call anyone out - I just miss the days when there was hope, or when it was fun to be excited about the Leafs...

I have to tell you... taking a looong break from it all this summer was refreshing.  Staying out of the weeds of the micro-discussion has been a good thing.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 07, 2011, 03:57:06 PM
I just miss the days when there was hope, or when it was fun to be excited about the Leafs...

October 1968?

If you want to be a smart ass fine... but 1998-2004 was a pretty awesome time to be a Leafs fan...

'93 and '94 were pretty good years too!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on November 07, 2011, 04:03:34 PM
I'd like to, in some way, offer some perspective if I can.

I truly feel that 'the age of the internet' has, in some way, ruined the joy of being a sports fan. Even I've been here since 2001, I think the post lockout analysis and discussions are dramatically different. I, for one, do not remember the goal by goal criticism of Leafs goaltenders - or the analysis of a season period by period...

I'm not saying it was better back then, but the micro criticism just seemed to be dialed down somewhat...

Anyway, what I wanted to show were some scores from a few seasons back - all losses:

Tampa 7-2
Buffalo 5-1
Florida 4-0
Boston 5-2
Philly 4-0
Philly 4-1
Ottawa 7-1
Anaheim 5-1
Philly 7-1
Montreal 4-0

And at the end of the season, Toronto finished with 45 wins - 3d most in the league and 103 points which points wise put them 5th overall. This was the 2003/2004 season, which I think almost all of us can agree may have been one of the best Leafs teams of the last 20 or so years...

What's my point? Well - that you can't sum up a season by 2 blow outs to the Bruins... it's such a long season, and I find the play by play by play hyper-analysis of each move in a game just overwhelming at times...

I'm not trying to be dramatic or call anyone out - I just miss the days when there was hope, or when it was fun to be excited about the Leafs...

Totally agree.

Mostly it's almost always negative criticism. Why? I'm not sure, but I feel sometimes it appears as some are just too committed to negativity or like you say, hyper criticism. No team is going to be perfect during a season and we should be happy with our record right now. Do they have some glaring defensive problems? Yes, but I feel much better with getting behind our team, than just pointing out the negative aspects of our games constantly. It doesn't really help anything.

I miss things like Potvin29's threads about positivity. It's pretty bad that he would have to start a thread like that, but it makes a point, that some people like to hear the good things also.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 07, 2011, 05:20:37 PM
I'd like to, in some way, offer some perspective if I can.

I truly feel that 'the age of the internet' has, in some way, ruined the joy of being a sports fan. Even I've been here since 2001, I think the post lockout analysis and discussions are dramatically different. I, for one, do not remember the goal by goal criticism of Leafs goaltenders - or the analysis of a season period by period...

I'm not saying it was better back then, but the micro criticism just seemed to be dialed down somewhat...

Anyway, what I wanted to show were some scores from a few seasons back - all losses:

Tampa 7-2
Buffalo 5-1
Florida 4-0
Boston 5-2
Philly 4-0
Philly 4-1
Ottawa 7-1
Anaheim 5-1
Philly 7-1
Montreal 4-0

And at the end of the season, Toronto finished with 45 wins - 3d most in the league and 103 points which points wise put them 5th overall. This was the 2003/2004 season, which I think almost all of us can agree may have been one of the best Leafs teams of the last 20 or so years...

What's my point? Well - that you can't sum up a season by 2 blow outs to the Bruins... it's such a long season, and I find the play by play by play hyper-analysis of each move in a game just overwhelming at times...

I'm not trying to be dramatic or call anyone out - I just miss the days when there was hope, or when it was fun to be excited about the Leafs...

Agreed 100%.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: brothert on November 07, 2011, 05:36:39 PM
FWIW, I think their strongest played game to date was the 3-2 loss versus Colorado.

You can throw stats around left and right but the team doesn't look right.  I think they are 'quick counterattacking' style of team that is easily pinned in their own end (which is a bit of an oxymoron IMO)

Special teams are awful and I wouldn't mind Eakins taking over as bench boss before this team goes on its gut wrenching losing stretch which I feel is coming, much like last year and the year before.

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Mordac on November 07, 2011, 05:38:54 PM
I just miss the days when there was hope, or when it was fun to be excited about the Leafs...

October 1968?

If you want to be a smart ass fine... but 1998-2004 was a pretty awesome time to be a Leafs fan...

'93 and '94 were pretty good years too!

Totally being a smartass. :D

Hell, I've gotten excited about teams that went absolutely nowhere...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 07, 2011, 05:47:41 PM
I just miss the days when there was hope, or when it was fun to be excited about the Leafs...

October 1968?

If you want to be a smart ass fine... but 1998-2004 was a pretty awesome time to be a Leafs fan...

But isn't that kind of the real point? I understand not liking the tenor of the change around here but I think it's pretty obvious that it's just a reaction to the team's performance.

I mean, yeah, if people weren't as down or inclined to pick away at the smaller things then it was probably because the larger issues were pretty rosy. People are probably going to be less critical of the goaltending when the goaltending is year-in, year-out top of the league and in the hands of future hall-of-famers.

I've been here over that span and, personally, I don't know if people here have become any more detail oriented or any less forgiving but I think what we've seen is that same critical eye turn from something a lot of fun as a hockey fan to something that's not very fun at all as a hockey fan.

If someone now says "The Leafs' #1 centre is friggin' clown shoes" when they back then said "What an awesome #1 centre we have" it's not the cynicism of age, it's the proper application of eyeballs.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Hank Yarbo on November 07, 2011, 09:17:48 PM
I'd like to, in some way, offer some perspective if I can.

I truly feel that 'the age of the internet' has, in some way, ruined the joy of being a sports fan. Even I've been here since 2001, I think the post lockout analysis and discussions are dramatically different. I, for one, do not remember the goal by goal criticism of Leafs goaltenders - or the analysis of a season period by period...

I  think there's a lot of truth in this statement. In years past, before we had access to the internet, I didn't come to this site or any hockey site for "post game analysis" nor did I watch all sports stations like TSN or listen to all Toronto sports radio stations. If the Leafs lost, that was it until the next game and I think I was a happier leaf fan back then.

Before it was only close friends who were fans of the Wings or Habs who razzed you about a game. Now we have access to millions of trolls on websites and in the comment section of articles spouting off reasons why the Leafs suck and why we suck for liking them.

I don't remember putting much stock in a loss, even a blowout game, I tried to keep everything in proportion. But the sports media, especially out of Toronto, is so full of "the sky is falling" propoganda for each Leaf loss it seems almost designed to make the fans feel as if the season is lost with each tick of the "L" column.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on November 07, 2011, 11:04:30 PM
If someone now says "The Leafs' #1 centre is friggin' clown shoes" when they back then said "What an awesome #1 centre we have" it's not the cynicism of age, it's the proper application of eyeballs.

I believe "clown casts" is presently the more accurate assessment.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 08, 2011, 09:39:20 AM
I don't remember putting much stock in a loss, even a blowout game, I tried to keep everything in proportion. But the sports media, especially out of Toronto, is so full of "the sky is falling" propoganda for each Leaf loss it seems almost designed to make the fans feel as if the season is lost with each tick of the "L" column.

Although the old site is gone, if there's one thing that stood out during those pre lockout years, it was a bunch of folks who fell into "the sky is falling" syndrome after a Leafs loss. Countless game day threads had Chicken Little images, etc.

So I'm not convinced that's changed much. If anything it seems to be less because expectations are not as high as they were prior to the lockout.

As for the media, it's still not very good but it was terrible before. Cox & Simmons have toned it down some. Strachan is gone. Berger's less visible. But we still see some pretty awful coverage or analysis.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 08, 2011, 09:52:38 AM
As for the media, it's still not very good but it was terrible before. Cox & Simmons have toned it down some. Strachan is gone. Berger's less visible. But we still see some pretty awful coverage or analysis.

What happened to Berger anyways?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 08, 2011, 09:57:12 AM
I don't remember putting much stock in a loss, even a blowout game, I tried to keep everything in proportion. But the sports media, especially out of Toronto, is so full of "the sky is falling" propoganda for each Leaf loss it seems almost designed to make the fans feel as if the season is lost with each tick of the "L" column.

Although the old site is gone, if there's one thing that stood out during those pre lockout years, it was a bunch of folks who fell into "the sky is falling" syndrome after a Leafs loss. Countless game day threads had Chicken Little images, etc.

So I'm not convinced that's changed much. If anything it seems to be less because expectations are not as high as they were prior to the lockout.

As for the media, it's still not very good but it was terrible before. Cox & Simmons have toned it down some. Strachan is gone. Berger's less visible. But we still see some pretty awful coverage or analysis.

I'm glad we have guys like Mirtle and Siegel as some of the newer beat writers, though. Mirtle's a lot better than expected imo, and I only recently discovered pension plan puppets, which can be a good resource for analytical breakdowns of the Leafs' play.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 08, 2011, 10:58:27 AM
I don't remember putting much stock in a loss, even a blowout game, I tried to keep everything in proportion. But the sports media, especially out of Toronto, is so full of "the sky is falling" propoganda for each Leaf loss it seems almost designed to make the fans feel as if the season is lost with each tick of the "L" column.

Although the old site is gone, if there's one thing that stood out during those pre lockout years, it was a bunch of folks who fell into "the sky is falling" syndrome after a Leafs loss. Countless game day threads had Chicken Little images, etc.

So I'm not convinced that's changed much. If anything it seems to be less because expectations are not as high as they were prior to the lockout.

As for the media, it's still not very good but it was terrible before. Cox & Simmons have toned it down some. Strachan is gone. Berger's less visible. But we still see some pretty awful coverage or analysis.

I'm glad we have guys like Mirtle and Siegel as some of the newer beat writers, though. Mirtle's a lot better than expected imo, and I only recently discovered pension plan puppets, which can be a good resource for analytical breakdowns of the Leafs' play.

If there has been any improvement in the media, it's come from guys like that who started out on the net and migrated to more formal positions in the media. Much of their work is better than what we were fed by the papers. Some of it has been very thoughtful, original and well researched analysis - much better quality than pre internet.

Back in the early 90s for example, I used to track the Leafs with word processing documents to record/analyze trades and stats, etc pulled out of the paper. Today, if the Leafs pick up a player, within a couple of hours, we've got his scouting reports, career stats, a bunch of past interviews/articles, video highlights, etc, etc - an incredible amount of info on the guy. So that's a change for the better and probably has shifted some of the dialogue because we have those details to digest and discuss. Largely, I think that's been a good thing.

And the pace at which that info arrives is kind of remarkable relative to the past. In years gone by, most of us wouldn't find out Connolly was hurt until the 1st intermission of the Panthers game or something like that. Within minutes, we knew Kulemin got hit in the face by a puck and had to leave practice yesterday (he's ok). Maybe some of that is overkill but I prefer that problem vs the past.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 08, 2011, 10:59:20 AM
As for the media, it's still not very good but it was terrible before. Cox & Simmons have toned it down some. Strachan is gone. Berger's less visible. But we still see some pretty awful coverage or analysis.

What happened to Berger anyways?

Writing a column for the National Post.

http://sports.nationalpost.com/tag/howard-berger/
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 08, 2011, 11:01:09 AM
As for the media, it's still not very good but it was terrible before. Cox & Simmons have toned it down some. Strachan is gone. Berger's less visible. But we still see some pretty awful coverage or analysis.

What happened to Berger anyways?

He was his bitter self and basically fell on his sword with kamikaze behavior at the FAN590. So they dumped him.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on November 08, 2011, 11:04:52 AM
I don't remember putting much stock in a loss, even a blowout game, I tried to keep everything in proportion. But the sports media, especially out of Toronto, is so full of "the sky is falling" propoganda for each Leaf loss it seems almost designed to make the fans feel as if the season is lost with each tick of the "L" column.

Although the old site is gone, if there's one thing that stood out during those pre lockout years, it was a bunch of folks who fell into "the sky is falling" syndrome after a Leafs loss. Countless game day threads had Chicken Little images, etc.

So I'm not convinced that's changed much. If anything it seems to be less because expectations are not as high as they were prior to the lockout.

As for the media, it's still not very good but it was terrible before. Cox & Simmons have toned it down some. Strachan is gone. Berger's less visible. But we still see some pretty awful coverage or analysis.

I'm glad we have guys like Mirtle and Siegel as some of the newer beat writers, though. Mirtle's a lot better than expected imo, and I only recently discovered pension plan puppets, which can be a good resource for analytical breakdowns of the Leafs' play.

If there has been any improvement in the media, it's come from guys like that who started out on the net and migrated to more formal positions in the media. Much of their work is better than what we were fed by the papers. Some of it has been very thoughtful, original and well researched analysis - much better quality than pre internet.

Back in the early 90s for example, I used to track the Leafs with word processing documents to record/analyze trades and stats, etc pulled out of the paper. Today, if the Leafs pick up a player, within a couple of hours, we've got his scouting reports, career stats, a bunch of past interviews/articles, video highlights, etc, etc - an incredible amount of info on the guy. So that's a change for the better and probably has shifted some of the dialogue because we have those details to digest and discuss. Largely, I think that's been a good thing.

And the pace at which that info arrives is kind of remarkable relative to the past. In years gone by, most of us wouldn't find out Connolly was hurt until the 1st intermission of the Panthers game or something like that. Within minutes, we knew Kulemin got hit in the face by a puck and had to leave practice yesterday (he's ok). Maybe some of that is overkill but I prefer that problem vs the past.

That's why I like twitter.

Before, you would notice someone would leave the game or the commentator mentions someone going to the locker room and you had to wait a while for word on what it was.

Now?  I have my iphone right next to me and within minutes you get some sort of update.

Just the other game (against CBJ) I noticed Grabovski left the game (lombardi took a shift or two with Kulemin and Grabs) and I tweeted MattIaboni what happened and he responded it looked like an equipment thing, and sure enough, Grabs was back not long after.

Twitter has really excelled the pace at which we receive news.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 08, 2011, 11:19:35 AM
That's why I like twitter.

Before, you would notice someone would leave the game or the commentator mentions someone going to the locker room and you had to wait a while for word on what it was.

Now?  I have my iphone right next to me and within minutes you get some sort of update.

Just the other game (against CBJ) I noticed Grabovski left the game (lombardi took a shift or two with Kulemin and Grabs) and I tweeted MattIaboni what happened and he responded it looked like an equipment thing, and sure enough, Grabs was back not long after.

Twitter has really excelled the pace at which we receive news.

For sure.

On the upside, it seems to have put a dent in Eklund's effort to "be first" with his rumours because the whole world knows all the rumours within five minutes on twitter.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on November 08, 2011, 11:30:57 AM
I'm glad we have guys like Mirtle and Siegel as some of the newer beat writers, though. Mirtle's a lot better than expected imo, and I only recently discovered pension plan puppets, which can be a good resource for analytical breakdowns of the Leafs' play.

If there has been any improvement in the media, it's come from guys like that who started out on the net and migrated to more formal positions in the media. Much of their work is better than what we were fed by the papers. Some of it has been very thoughtful, original and well researched analysis - much better quality than pre internet.

Yeah Mirtle started out with us at McKeen's while he was still in Journalism school at Ryerson. Pretty opportunistic guy who was always eager to work to put in the hard work.  He had his blog and his scouting/columns with us.  He outgrew the online thing pretty quick.

The irony of his role as a beat writer here is he hates the Leafs. (he will of course never admit that now)  ;)   Although sometimes you can sense it in his writing... so he fits right in with most of the writers in this town.

The guy who really bothers me now who I used to like a lot is Bruce Arthur.  Always been insightful but lately has taken the tone of a pompous preacher in a lot of his pieces. Especially when writing about a number of the "moral" issues that have entered the sports world lately.  Comes across very pompous on twitter if you dare to disagree. Too bad.  He wasn't like that a few years ago.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on November 08, 2011, 11:37:03 AM
That's why I like twitter.

Before, you would notice someone would leave the game or the commentator mentions someone going to the locker room and you had to wait a while for word on what it was.

Now?  I have my iphone right next to me and within minutes you get some sort of update.

Just the other game (against CBJ) I noticed Grabovski left the game (lombardi took a shift or two with Kulemin and Grabs) and I tweeted MattIaboni what happened and he responded it looked like an equipment thing, and sure enough, Grabs was back not long after.

Twitter has really excelled the pace at which we receive news.

For sure.

On the upside, it seems to have put a dent in Eklund's effort to "be first" with his rumours because the whole world knows all the rumours within five minutes on twitter.

That's why I find it funny when people take pride in "breaking news." 

Within 2 minutes, it will be on TSN, Sportsnet, the Score, every blogger, all over twitter and message boards.

There really isn't a 'go-to' place for breaking news because they all get it within minutes it will appear on whatever site you just so happen to be on at that time.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Peter D. on November 08, 2011, 11:47:22 AM
The guy who really bothers me now who I used to like a lot is Bruce Arthur.  Always been insightful but lately has taken the tone of a pompous preacher in a lot of his pieces. Especially when writing about a number of the "moral" issues that have entered the sports world lately.  Comes across very pompous on twitter if you dare to disagree. Too bad.  He wasn't like that a few years ago.

Glad I'm not the only one who thinks this. 

His stances on the Torres, Avery/Simmonds and Goddard issues in recent months, both on radio and in print, annoyed me.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 08, 2011, 12:26:03 PM
For those here who work, here is something to surely make your job seem a little more cumbersome than it already is.  ;D  For myself, I do fairly well with salary but I work a ton of hours and get a lot of emails and calls after hours and on weekends to boot. When I think of what some Leafs make per game I cannot help but be just a little jealous.

Phaneuf - $79,268 per game

Kessel - $65,854 per game

Komisarek - $54,878 per game (including the ones in the press box)

Tucker - $12,195 per game - this one bugs me most - I am a way bigger fan than he is and I get paid nothing to sit at home and watch TV

 ;D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 08, 2011, 12:32:06 PM
For those here who work, here is something to surely make your job seem a little more cumbersome than it already is.  ;D  For myself, I do fairly well with salary but I work a ton of hours and get a lot of emails and calls after hours and on weekends to boot. When I think of what some Leafs make per game I cannot help but be just a little jealous.

Phaneuf - $79,268 per game

Kessel - $65,854 per game

Komisarek - $54,878 per game (including the ones in the press box)

Tucker - $12,195 per game - this one bugs me most - I am a way bigger fan than he is and I get paid nothing to sit at home and watch TV

 ;D

Well, that's all well and good, except for the fact that players don't get paid on a per game basis.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: princedpw on November 08, 2011, 12:47:41 PM
For those here who work, here is something to surely make your job seem a little more cumbersome than it already is.  ;D  For myself, I do fairly well with salary but I work a ton of hours and get a lot of emails and calls after hours and on weekends to boot. When I think of what some Leafs make per game I cannot help but be just a little jealous.

Phaneuf - $79,268 per game

Kessel - $65,854 per game

Komisarek - $54,878 per game (including the ones in the press box)

Tucker - $12,195 per game - this one bugs me most - I am a way bigger fan than he is and I get paid nothing to sit at home and watch TV

 ;D

Well, that's all well and good, except for the fact that players don't get paid on a per game basis.

Despite the detail you point out, it is still quite a reasonable way to characterize the salary of an NHL player.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: princedpw on November 08, 2011, 12:50:37 PM
What I should have added is that what is missing from the picture is the fact that NHL careers are typically short.  I wouldn't be surprised if the average career was on the order of 4-8 years long.

Another sad stat (quoting from memory so I might be off slightly):  the average NBA player (whose salary probably compares roughly with the average NHL player) is broke 4 years after retirement.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 08, 2011, 12:59:38 PM
What I should have added is that what is missing from the picture is the fact that NHL careers are typically short.  I wouldn't be surprised if the average career was on the order of 4-8 years long.

Another sad stat (quoting from memory so I might be off slightly):  the average NBA player (whose salary probably compares roughly with the average NHL player) is broke 4 years after retirement.

That is just sad.

A guy making a comfortable living of $150,000 per year would have enough to own a home, pay towards his kids educations, and save for retirement. If that guy worked 40 years (not accounting for indexing) he would have a lifetime income of $6 million which is what Dion earns in one season.

Guys need to NOT live high off the hog and think about their futures.

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: pnjunction on November 08, 2011, 12:59:41 PM
Well, that's all well and good, except for the fact that players don't get paid on a per game basis.

Don't they deduct salary on a per-game bases when players get suspended?  There is some formal connection there beyond just how people think of it, which is valid enough for casual discussion anyways.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 08, 2011, 01:02:46 PM
Well, that's all well and good, except for the fact that players don't get paid on a per game basis.

Don't they deduct salary on a per-game bases when players get suspended?  There is some formal connection there beyond just how people think of it, which is valid enough for casual discussion anyways.

I think they are paid monthly, but Busta is just being picky about it. The point remains the same.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Rob on November 08, 2011, 01:19:52 PM
Well, that's all well and good, except for the fact that players don't get paid on a per game basis.

Don't they deduct salary on a per-game bases when players get suspended?  There is some formal connection there beyond just how people think of it, which is valid enough for casual discussion anyways.

I think they are paid monthly, but Busta is just being picky about it. The point remains the same.

Every two weeks.  Generally, 15th and 30th of the month, October to April.

So Phaneuf is getting $464,285.71 put into his bank account every two weeks. 

Now, there are escrow payments, and players get a per diem as well for days they are on the road.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 08, 2011, 01:20:31 PM
Don't they deduct salary on a per-game bases when players get suspended?  There is some formal connection there beyond just how people think of it, which is valid enough for casual discussion anyways.

EDIT: Well, looks like I was a little off here - they do lose out on a per game basis, but, that amount is calculated on a per day basis. In other words, for every game a player is suspended for this season, they forfeit 1/186 of their salary. And, it's also important to point out that the forfeited salary amounts are based on the player's cap hit rather than their actual salary.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Deebo on November 08, 2011, 01:26:03 PM
Well, that's all well and good, except for the fact that players don't get paid on a per game basis.

Don't they deduct salary on a per-game bases when players get suspended?  There is some formal connection there beyond just how people think of it, which is valid enough for casual discussion anyways.

I think they are paid monthly, but Busta is just being picky about it. The point remains the same.

Every two weeks.  Generally, 15th and 30th of the month, October to April.

So Phaneuf is getting $464,285.71 put into his bank account every two weeks. 

Now, there are escrow payments, and players get a per diem as well for days they are on the road.

Don't forget income tax.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on November 08, 2011, 01:39:26 PM
The guy who really bothers me now who I used to like a lot is Bruce Arthur.  Always been insightful but lately has taken the tone of a pompous preacher in a lot of his pieces. Especially when writing about a number of the "moral" issues that have entered the sports world lately.  Comes across very pompous on twitter if you dare to disagree. Too bad.  He wasn't like that a few years ago.

Glad I'm not the only one who thinks this. 

His stances on the Torres, Avery/Simmonds and Goddard issues in recent months, both on radio and in print, annoyed me.

On the Torres one specifically.... explaining how his agent - an African American - should feel and act given the situation, was ridiculous. 

I've gotten into it with him a few times on twitter and trust me - there is not a subject on earth he is not an expert and authority on.  ::)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on November 08, 2011, 01:41:02 PM
Well, that's all well and good, except for the fact that players don't get paid on a per game basis.

Don't they deduct salary on a per-game bases when players get suspended?  There is some formal connection there beyond just how people think of it, which is valid enough for casual discussion anyways.

I think they are paid monthly, but Busta is just being picky about it. The point remains the same.

Every two weeks.  Generally, 15th and 30th of the month, October to April.

So Phaneuf is getting $464,285.71 put into his bank account every two weeks. 

Now, there are escrow payments, and players get a per diem as well for days they are on the road.

I believe this is the type of thing Joe S. was referring to when he said the MICRO ANALYSIS OF THE LEAFS GETS OUT OF HAND.

:p
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on November 08, 2011, 02:17:08 PM
$150K is a comfortable living? I thought I was doing ok on a combined family income of just over $40K.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on November 08, 2011, 02:30:58 PM
$150K is a comfortable living? I thought I was doing ok on a combined family income of just over $40K.
I take your point, but where you live plays a big factor.  I live in California and wouldn't get out of bed for 40k. (not really, but you get my meaning I'm sure.)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Rob on November 08, 2011, 03:54:01 PM
Well, that's all well and good, except for the fact that players don't get paid on a per game basis.

Don't they deduct salary on a per-game bases when players get suspended?  There is some formal connection there beyond just how people think of it, which is valid enough for casual discussion anyways.

I think they are paid monthly, but Busta is just being picky about it. The point remains the same.

Every two weeks.  Generally, 15th and 30th of the month, October to April.

So Phaneuf is getting $464,285.71 put into his bank account every two weeks. 

Now, there are escrow payments, and players get a per diem as well for days they are on the road.

I believe this is the type of thing Joe S. was referring to when he said the MICRO ANALYSIS OF THE LEAFS GETS OUT OF HAND.

:p

You are over analizing my micro analizing.   ;D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Mordac on November 08, 2011, 04:15:42 PM
Well, that's all well and good, except for the fact that players don't get paid on a per game basis.

Don't they deduct salary on a per-game bases when players get suspended?  There is some formal connection there beyond just how people think of it, which is valid enough for casual discussion anyways.

I think they are paid monthly, but Busta is just being picky about it. The point remains the same.

Every two weeks.  Generally, 15th and 30th of the month, October to April.

So Phaneuf is getting $464,285.71 put into his bank account every two weeks. 

Now, there are escrow payments, and players get a per diem as well for days they are on the road.

I believe this is the type of thing Joe S. was referring to when he said the MICRO ANALYSIS OF THE LEAFS GETS OUT OF HAND.

:p

You are over analizing my micro analizing.   ;D

Is he? Perhaps we should take a closer look.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 08, 2011, 06:19:37 PM
Another sad stat (quoting from memory so I might be off slightly):  the average NBA player (whose salary probably compares roughly with the average NHL player) is broke 4 years after retirement.

How would that work? The average net worth of these guys is zero? Broke can't really be an average.

A lot of them do end up broke but there's not a hard and fast number. Here's something I found pretty quickly:

Quote
But that stat, used by the players' association to get the attention of young millionaires, is thought to be an educated estimate.

"Sixty per cent is a ballpark. But we've seen a lot of guys who've really come into hard times five years after they leave the league," said Roy Hinson, the former NBA forward who's a representative for the players' association. "The problems are, for a lot of guys, they have a lot of cars, they have multiple houses, they're taking care of their parents. They're taking care of a whole host of issues. And the cheques aren't coming in anymore."

http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/299119 (http://www.thestar.com/Sports/article/299119)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 08, 2011, 06:22:13 PM
I think they are paid monthly, but Busta is just being picky about it. The point remains the same.

The point being that you're jealous of people who make a lot of money?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 08, 2011, 06:30:59 PM
The irony of his role as a beat writer here is he hates the Leafs. (he will of course never admit that now)  ;)   Although sometimes you can sense it in his writing... so he fits right in with most of the writers in this town.

I was wondering that, because it was definitely something I thought.  He seems to post more on Twitter, and write more, when it's the bad stuff.

Still really enjoy his stuff, though.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 08, 2011, 06:31:50 PM
The irony of his role as a beat writer here is he hates the Leafs. (he will of course never admit that now)  ;)   Although sometimes you can sense it in his writing... so he fits right in with most of the writers in this town.

I was wondering that, because it was definitely something I thought.  He seems to post more on Twitter, and write more, when it's the bad stuff.

Still really enjoy his stuff, though.

What team does he support then? Jets? Canes?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 08, 2011, 06:35:18 PM
Stars?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 08, 2011, 06:36:07 PM
The irony of his role as a beat writer here is he hates the Leafs. (he will of course never admit that now)  ;)   Although sometimes you can sense it in his writing... so he fits right in with most of the writers in this town.

I was wondering that, because it was definitely something I thought.  He seems to post more on Twitter, and write more, when it's the bad stuff.

Still really enjoy his stuff, though.

What team does he support then? Jets? Canes?

Such as?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 08, 2011, 06:36:41 PM
The irony of his role as a beat writer here is he hates the Leafs. (he will of course never admit that now)  ;)   Although sometimes you can sense it in his writing... so he fits right in with most of the writers in this town.

I was wondering that, because it was definitely something I thought.  He seems to post more on Twitter, and write more, when it's the bad stuff.

Still really enjoy his stuff, though.

What team does he support then? Jets? Canes?

Such as?

The Wild?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Dappleganger on November 08, 2011, 06:38:16 PM
The irony of his role as a beat writer here is he hates the Leafs. (he will of course never admit that now)  ;)   Although sometimes you can sense it in his writing... so he fits right in with most of the writers in this town.

I was wondering that, because it was definitely something I thought.  He seems to post more on Twitter, and write more, when it's the bad stuff.

Still really enjoy his stuff, though.

What team does he support then? Jets? Canes?

Such as?

The Wild?

I heard he hates hockey and only follows football.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 08, 2011, 06:40:24 PM
The irony of his role as a beat writer here is he hates the Leafs. (he will of course never admit that now)  ;)   Although sometimes you can sense it in his writing... so he fits right in with most of the writers in this town.

I was wondering that, because it was definitely something I thought.  He seems to post more on Twitter, and write more, when it's the bad stuff.

Still really enjoy his stuff, though.

What team does he support then? Jets? Canes?

Such as?

The Wild?

I heard he hates hockey and only follows football.

Renegades? Pirates? Stallions?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 08, 2011, 06:57:53 PM
I think they are paid monthly, but Busta is just being picky about it. The point remains the same.

The point being that you're jealous of people who make a lot of money?

Nope.

I know you're kind of a big deal around here and all, but seriously, do you have to be like this? We all know that you are smart, that you will go against the grain in just about every debate and that you have more free time to post than just about anyone in Leaf land, but why must you be so condescending?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 08, 2011, 07:03:00 PM
I think they are paid monthly, but Busta is just being picky about it. The point remains the same.

The point being that you're jealous of people who make a lot of money?

Nope.

When I think of what some Leafs make per game I cannot help but be just a little jealous.

So, I mean, you might be able to see how I got a little confused. 

Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 08, 2011, 07:04:04 PM
I think they are paid monthly, but Busta is just being picky about it. The point remains the same.

The point being that you're jealous of people who make a lot of money?

Nope.

When I think of what some Leafs make per game I cannot help but be just a little jealous.

So, I mean, you might be able to see how I got a little confused.

Nik, you are many things, but confused is not one of them.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 08, 2011, 07:08:36 PM
I think they are paid monthly, but Busta is just being picky about it. The point remains the same.

The point being that you're jealous of people who make a lot of money?

Nope.

When I think of what some Leafs make per game I cannot help but be just a little jealous.

So, I mean, you might be able to see how I got a little confused.

Nik, you are many things, but confused is not one of them.

(http://manhattaninfidel.com/__oneclick_uploads/2011/06/dos-equis-guy-gives-advice.jpg)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 08, 2011, 07:10:36 PM
Nik, you are many things, but confused is not one of them.

No, you have legitimately managed to confuse me here. I genuinely don't understand what you were trying to get at outside of, I guess, "pro hockey players make a lot of money."
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 08, 2011, 07:11:30 PM
(http://manhattaninfidel.com/__oneclick_uploads/2011/06/dos-equis-guy-gives-advice.jpg)

I don't always try to engage Fanatic in discussion but, when I do, I always end up regretting it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 08, 2011, 07:11:58 PM
Seriously - what team does Siegel support if he hates the Leafs?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 08, 2011, 07:12:53 PM
Seriously - what team does Siegel support if he hates the Leafs?

The Markham Waxers.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 08, 2011, 07:13:02 PM
Seriously - what team does Siegel support if he hates the Leafs?

Why does there have to be one?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 08, 2011, 07:13:31 PM
Seriously - what team does Siegel support if he hates the Leafs?

Why does there have to be one?

Advanced OCD.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 08, 2011, 07:13:54 PM
Seriously - what team does Siegel support if he hates the Leafs?

The Markham Waxers.

What a bandwagoner.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 08, 2011, 07:14:29 PM
I don't always try to engage Fanatic in discussion but, when I do, I always end up regretting it.

See? For humour that is really no better than a 5 or 6 out of 10. But for pure and simple condescension you always score with a 10.

Sometimes Nik, things are exactly what they seem.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 08, 2011, 07:15:43 PM
Seriously - what team does Siegel support if he hates the Leafs?

The Markham Waxers.

What a bandwagoner.

It took him a long time to get over the loss of the Thornhill Thunderbirds.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 08, 2011, 07:15:57 PM
Advanced OCD.

Seriously though, I think reporters tend to fall out of the idea of cheering for any one specific team. I think they can still dislike a team in the more practical sense of "I'm covering this team and those people are jerks" though.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Rob on November 08, 2011, 07:16:55 PM

So, I mean, you might be able to see how I got a little confused.

Nik, you are many things, but confused is not one of them.
[/quote]


His mystery is only exceeded by his power.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 08, 2011, 07:17:39 PM
See? For humour that is really no better than a 5 or 6 out of 10. But for pure and simple condescension you always score with a 10.

In fairness to me A) it's not like the Dos Equis guy is the freshest of material to work with and B) you're not exactly the fairest judge there.

Sometimes Nik, things are exactly what they seem.

So...you are jealous?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 08, 2011, 07:18:43 PM
Advanced OCD.

Seriously though, I think reporters tend to fall out of the idea of cheering for any one specific team. I think they can still dislike a team in the more practical sense of "I'm covering this team and those people are jerks" though.

"Keeping it real"
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 08, 2011, 07:19:43 PM
Seriously - what team does Siegel support if he hates the Leafs?

The Markham Waxers.

What a bandwagoner.

It took him a long time to get over the loss of the Thornhill Thunderbirds.

Some things you just don't get over.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 08, 2011, 10:44:56 PM
Tonight was worse than the Boston game. I am starting to think they really are this bad, but early on a hot hand by Kessel and decent play by Reimer allowed the Leafs to win a few that today they would be losing. Now, no one is scoring and no one is stopping.

The team looks lousy out there and who/what do you blame? The goalies aren't getting much help, but the team likely isn't playing with a lot of confidence in front of these .860 goalies either.

Bleh! I was hoping they were better than this.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: crazyperfectdevil on November 08, 2011, 10:46:22 PM
Tonight was worse than the Boston game. I am starting to think they really are this bad, but early on a hot hand by Kessel and decent play by Reimer allowed the Leafs to win a few that today they would be losing. Now, no one is scoring and no one is stopping.

The team looks lousy out there and who/what do you blame? The goalies aren't getting much help, but the team likely isn't playing with a lot of confidence in front of these .860 goalies either.

Bleh! I was hoping they were better than this.

philly had back to back crappy games...guess they're done for the season too ...

it's an 82 game sched...sky isn't falling yet
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 08, 2011, 10:49:05 PM
Tonight was worse than the Boston game. I am starting to think they really are this bad, but early on a hot hand by Kessel and decent play by Reimer allowed the Leafs to win a few that today they would be losing. Now, no one is scoring and no one is stopping.

The team looks lousy out there and who/what do you blame? The goalies aren't getting much help, but the team likely isn't playing with a lot of confidence in front of these .860 goalies either.

Bleh! I was hoping they were better than this.

So why do a few poor games tell you so much more than the good games where they won? 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 08, 2011, 10:53:37 PM
Tonight was worse than the Boston game. I am starting to think they really are this bad, but early on a hot hand by Kessel and decent play by Reimer allowed the Leafs to win a few that today they would be losing. Now, no one is scoring and no one is stopping.

The team looks lousy out there and who/what do you blame? The goalies aren't getting much help, but the team likely isn't playing with a lot of confidence in front of these .860 goalies either.

Bleh! I was hoping they were better than this.

So why do a few poor games tell you so much more than the good games where they won?

If they played solidly through their wins and also through their losses but maybe just didn't get the chances or whatever then we could be encouraged. Hey guys, you know, they are playing solidly and just didn't get the chances in the past two games, but if they keep playing like they are they will be fine.......... this isn't that.

This is some really suspect wins, starting with Game 1, and then some terrible losses stacked on top of that. No one is scorting, goaltending is atrocious, PK is even worse - they look lethagic for long stretches of games (including again tonight).

I just do not see a reason to be encouraged by this team right now. In fact I see no reason to believe that they are not about to go into a dive. I hope not... but what I am seeing doesn't look good.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 08, 2011, 10:58:37 PM
Tonight was worse than the Boston game. I am starting to think they really are this bad, but early on a hot hand by Kessel and decent play by Reimer allowed the Leafs to win a few that today they would be losing. Now, no one is scoring and no one is stopping.

The team looks lousy out there and who/what do you blame? The goalies aren't getting much help, but the team likely isn't playing with a lot of confidence in front of these .860 goalies either.

Bleh! I was hoping they were better than this.

So why do a few poor games tell you so much more than the good games where they won?

If they played solidly through their wins and also through their losses but maybe just didn't get the chances or whatever then we could be encouraged. Hey guys, you know, they are playing solidly and just didn't get the chances in the past two games, but if they keep playing like they are they will be fine.......... this isn't that.

This is some really suspect wins, starting with Game 1, and then some terrible losses stacked on top of that. No one is scorting, goaltending is atrocious, PK is even worse - they look lethagic for long stretches of games (including again tonight).

I just do not see a reason to be encouraged by this team right now. In fact I see no reason to believe that they are not about to go into a dive. I hope not... but what I am seeing doesn't look good.

But you've been spreading almost nothing but doom and gloom anyways, so you're probably at the extreme of the expectations, just like I am predominantly positive so I am probably not the best to look to either.

The truth is probably somewhere in between.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 08, 2011, 11:03:47 PM
The truth is probably somewhere in between.

I hope you're right.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on November 09, 2011, 08:15:33 AM
Seriously - what team does Siegel support if he hates the Leafs?

The Markham Waxers.

What a bandwagoner.

It took him a long time to get over the loss of the Thornhill Thunderbirds.

Some things you just don't get over.

such as?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Damian on November 09, 2011, 08:23:23 AM
Seems like Tim Connolly is just as promised... made of crackers.... holy crap... now that salary buys a lot of triscuits...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 09, 2011, 08:24:00 AM
Seriously - what team does Siegel support if he hates the Leafs?

The Markham Waxers.

What a bandwagoner.

It took him a long time to get over the loss of the Thornhill Thunderbirds.

Some things you just don't get over.

such as?

Well I'm still grieving the loss of the Blackburn Barking Beavers - and that happened in '84.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 09, 2011, 09:22:52 AM
Seems like Tim Connolly is just as promised... made of crackers.... holy crap... now that salary buys a lot of triscuits...

We haven't even heard an update from Reimer and our goaltending is burying us and yet we focus on Tim Connolly. We knew he had a history of injury and we bought him for nothing. I don't understand the hate here, since he was pretty much the only option left during free agency. I'd rather have him play 50 games than 0.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on November 09, 2011, 09:26:54 AM
I know I am getting ahead of myself but Martin Biron is a free agent this summer.  He will have just turned 35 so he would probably be a perfect compliment/backup.  Heck he could probably even push Reimer for the starting job.
Either way, he probably won't be too expensive, has a career 911 SV%, and can handle a hefty workload if need be.  We won't have to marry him to a long term deal either.  I think 2 years would probably be very good for both sides.

I think it's clear that Gus is starting to run out of track here.  Still a lot of hockey left and a lot can happen but right now, I'm hoping Biron makes it to free agency and we make a move for him.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 09, 2011, 09:28:35 AM
I know I am getting ahead of myself but Martin Biron is a free agent this summer.  He will have just turned 35 so he would probably be a perfect compliment/backup.  Heck he could probably even push Reimer for the starting job.
Either way, he probably won't be too expensive, has a career 911 SV%, and can handle a hefty workload if need be.  We won't have to marry him to a long term deal either.  I think 2 years would probably be very good for both sides.

I think it's clear that Gus is starting to run out of track here.  Still a lot of hockey left and a lot can happen but right now, I'm hoping Biron makes it to free agency and we make a move for him.

TBH, I was actually toying with the idea of flipping a pick for a backup goaltender. I think if the Leafs want to salvage the season they really have to buy some insurance.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on November 09, 2011, 10:13:58 AM
Might be some grasping at straws here but what about recalling Zigomanis to play on the 4th line.  He's a very good faceoff guy and should help the PK.  God knows the PK needs all the help it can get and Zigo's been known to be pretty good in that area.

It's no long term solution or anything but might provide a little help right now and give the PK a jolt.  I'd rather have Zigo's faceoffs and PK ability in then Rosehills nothing ability.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zid on November 09, 2011, 10:28:31 AM
Might be some grasping at straws here but what about recalling Zigomanis to play on the 4th line.  He's a very good faceoff guy and should help the PK.  God knows the PK needs all the help it can get and Zigo's been known to be pretty good in that area.

It's no long term solution or anything but might provide a little help right now and give the PK a jolt.  I'd rather have Zigo's faceoffs and PK ability in then Rosehills nothing ability.

If you think a career AHLer is an aswer to this team's woes then this team is really screwed.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 09, 2011, 10:43:08 AM
The thing with Ziggy is he's almost everything you want a bottom 6 player to be but he lacks one major thing - Speed.... and speed has kind of been what has given us our early success (save for the last two games that is.)   :-\
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on November 09, 2011, 10:47:22 AM
I think it's clear that Gus is starting to run out of track here.  Still a lot of hockey left and a lot can happen but right now, I'm hoping Biron makes it to free agency and we make a move for him.

If Reimer plays like a legit #1, I don't mind this idea one bit. I've always liked Biron, seems like a great teammate.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on November 09, 2011, 11:46:25 AM
Might be some grasping at straws here but what about recalling Zigomanis to play on the 4th line.  He's a very good faceoff guy and should help the PK.  God knows the PK needs all the help it can get and Zigo's been known to be pretty good in that area.

It's no long term solution or anything but might provide a little help right now and give the PK a jolt.  I'd rather have Zigo's faceoffs and PK ability in then Rosehills nothing ability.

If you think a career AHLer is an aswer to this team's woes then this team is really screwed.

Maybe you missed the part where I said "might be grasping at straws here", and "It's no long term solution," and "might provide a little help."

I'm just looking at options from within.  No one person, player or coach is going to come in here and suddenly make the PK jump from 30th to 10th.  It's going to require a lot of little things.  Zigomanis is a guy who's very good on faceoffs and known to be a good PKer.  Even if he helps it ever so marginally it's better than what we are getting now. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 09, 2011, 12:22:00 PM
LOL...

TSNDolan Katherine Dolan
#Leafs practice this am - Noon skate they're not on the ice yet - and the lights keep going on and off in the dressing room. #unusual
1 minute ago
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: You're right on November 09, 2011, 12:23:48 PM
LOL...

TSNDolan Katherine Dolan
#Leafs practice this am - Noon skate they're not on the ice yet - and the lights keep going on and off in the dressing room. #unusual
1 minute ago
Still problems with the "power" play ;)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 09, 2011, 12:27:21 PM
Even better...

Zeisberger Mike Zeisberger
Leafs on ice 25 minutes late. Some would say that's been theeir problem during recent games.
41 seconds ago

Seriously, I think somehow the team just got reamed.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on November 09, 2011, 12:40:39 PM
Seriously, I think somehow the team just got reamed.

I would say that is closer to the truth.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 09, 2011, 12:49:26 PM
Seriously, I think somehow the team just got reamed.

I would say that is closer to the truth.

... and if that is the truth, and they don't respond tomorrow, maybe that's the time for Burke to think seriously about coaching situation.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 09, 2011, 12:52:25 PM
I'm just looking at options from within.  No one person, player or coach is going to come in here and suddenly make the PK jump from 30th to 10th.  It's going to require a lot of little things.  Zigomanis is a guy who's very good on faceoffs and known to be a good PKer.  Even if he helps it ever so marginally it's better than what we are getting now.

I don't know that you can say that though if you're not also going to say who Zigomanis would replace.

Right now the Leafs #1 forward on the PK, by a pretty wide margin, is Steckel. A guy who I think is better on the PK than Zigomanis and a guy I know is better on face-offs.

Would he add more to the team than Brown? Dupuis? Is he better than either guy on the PK to the extent that it's worth the trade-off?

Right now Steckel has taken 78 of the team's 108 total face-offs on the PK and he's winning 60% of them. So whatever the team's problems are with the PK, face-offs aren't one of them.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on November 09, 2011, 12:53:15 PM
Seriously, I think somehow the team just got reamed.

I would say that is closer to the truth.

... and if that is the truth, and they don't respond tomorrow, maybe that's the time for Burke to think seriously about coaching situation.

I'm not going to panic about that right now. I'm with cw a bit here on this. I like their record right now, it's only been two losses in a row, so that really isn't enough for me to set myself on fire like a few are doing with regards to coaching changes.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: LittleHockeyFan on November 09, 2011, 12:55:45 PM
not time for this yet?:

(http://cstarr.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/panic-button-large.jpg?w=143&h=148)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 09, 2011, 12:58:35 PM
Maybe I'm panicking...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 09, 2011, 01:04:01 PM
mirtleJames Mirtle
Allaire working with Scrivens alone in practice today. I imagine he starts tomorrow against the Blues.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 09, 2011, 01:17:46 PM
mirtleJames Mirtle
Allaire working with Scrivens alone in practice today. I imagine he starts tomorrow against the Blues.

Allaire only focuses on one player?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 09, 2011, 01:20:19 PM
mirtleJames Mirtle
Allaire working with Scrivens alone in practice today. I imagine he starts tomorrow against the Blues.

Allaire only focuses on one player?

I've always responded better to one-on-one training/coaching (whatever) than in groups. I'm sure there is a method to Allaire's madness.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: AvroArrow on November 09, 2011, 01:23:44 PM
I'm not going to panic about that right now. I'm with cw a bit here on this. I like their record right now, it's only been two losses in a row, so that really isn't enough for me to set myself on fire like a few are doing with regards to coaching changes.

I've tried to keep quiet to see how things play out a little farther into the season, but despite their record, I haven't really been that impressed with the play of the team.  They have spurts of high calibre hockey, but then play like AHLers for other spurts.  Overall, I think their record is flattering to how they've played, but so far, I'm willing to let it go because they've found a way to win more often than not.

I'd say that, while I'm not panicking, I'm concerned.

(and, of course, missing key guys [Army, Reimer] makes it even harder to get a good read on the team)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on November 09, 2011, 01:28:07 PM
I'm just looking at options from within.  No one person, player or coach is going to come in here and suddenly make the PK jump from 30th to 10th.  It's going to require a lot of little things.  Zigomanis is a guy who's very good on faceoffs and known to be a good PKer.  Even if he helps it ever so marginally it's better than what we are getting now.

I don't know that you can say that though if you're not also going to say who Zigomanis would replace.

Right now the Leafs #1 forward on the PK, by a pretty wide margin, is Steckel. A guy who I think is better on the PK than Zigomanis and a guy I know is better on face-offs.

Would he add more to the team than Brown? Dupuis? Is he better than either guy on the PK to the extent that it's worth the trade-off?

Right now Steckel has taken 78 of the team's 108 total face-offs on the PK and he's winning 60% of them. So whatever the team's problems are with the PK, face-offs aren't one of them.

Well, even though they are completely different players I was looking at Zigomanis taking Rosehills spot in the lineup (I know he doesn't play too often).  Perhaps sit Crabb a game?  Or Dupuis?

As for who he would directly replace on the PK, I'd say no one in particular.  Just give him some PK time (along with the others like Brown, Steckal, Dupuis, etc). 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 09, 2011, 04:17:16 PM
andystricklandAndy Strickland
Hitchcock calls the #Torontomapleleafs the most dangerous attack team off the rush in the #NHL agree?

Isn't it great to be buttered up before you're made to look like a bunch of turkeys?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 09, 2011, 04:28:17 PM
mirtleJames Mirtle
Allaire working with Scrivens alone in practice today. I imagine he starts tomorrow against the Blues.

Allaire only focuses on one player?

I've always responded better to one-on-one training/coaching (whatever) than in groups. I'm sure there is a method to Allaire's madness.

link (http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Toronto/2011/11/09/18946041.html)
Both Scrivens and Gustavsson spent significant chunks of time working with goalie coach Francois Allaire, who seemed to be concentrating on their techniques when facing bad angle shots. It was almost as if they were starting from scratch.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 09, 2011, 04:38:59 PM
andystricklandAndy Strickland
Hitchcock calls the #Torontomapleleafs the most dangerous attack team off the rush in the #NHL agree?

Isn't it great to be buttered up before you're made to look like a bunch of turkeys?

 :)

Could be interesting. Two coaches facing each other who have stifled their offence in the past to improve their defence.

If it were me, I'd cut the Leafs waterbugs loose and run & gun them like crazy. Even if they get lit up, they'll get some scoring confidence back. I guess that's to counter my fear of a deer in the headlights attempt at a defensive game trying to protect their iffy goaltending which plays into Hitchcock's strengths.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: applecheeks on November 09, 2011, 06:11:58 PM
andystricklandAndy Strickland
Hitchcock calls the #Torontomapleleafs the most dangerous attack team off the rush in the #NHL agree?

Isn't it great to be buttered up before you're made to look like a bunch of turkeys?

 :)

Could be interesting. Two coaches facing each other who have stifled their offence in the past to improve their defence.

If it were me, I'd cut the Leafs waterbugs loose and run & gun them like crazy. Even if they get lit up, they'll get some scoring confidence back. I guess that's to counter my fear of a deer in the headlights attempt at a defensive game trying to protect their iffy goaltending which plays into Hitchcock's strengths.

I like the way you think. RELEASE THE WATERBUGS.  pretty sure it would be more entertaining, fo sure.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on November 09, 2011, 06:26:49 PM
andystricklandAndy Strickland
Hitchcock calls the #Torontomapleleafs the most dangerous attack team off the rush in the #NHL agree?

Isn't it great to be buttered up before you're made to look like a bunch of turkeys?

That statement is riddled with secret meanings.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 09, 2011, 06:29:49 PM
andystricklandAndy Strickland
Hitchcock calls the #Torontomapleleafs the most dangerous attack team off the rush in the #NHL agree?

Isn't it great to be buttered up before you're made to look like a bunch of turkeys?

That statement is riddled with secret meanings.

"Someone is going to make that team eat some buttered turkey"
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 09, 2011, 06:44:08 PM
andystricklandAndy Strickland
Hitchcock calls the #Torontomapleleafs the most dangerous attack team off the rush in the #NHL agree?

Isn't it great to be buttered up before you're made to look like a bunch of turkeys?

That statement is riddled with secret meanings.

Little known fact: Ken Hitchcock's birth name was, in fact, Edward Nigma.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 09, 2011, 07:41:22 PM
Classic Hitch though eh. Second game back and he's already at it with the mind tricks.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on November 09, 2011, 07:58:52 PM
What wasn't quoted is his next statement: "We will be sure to get in Ed Belfour's kitchen too".
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Damian on November 10, 2011, 12:29:16 PM
Seems like Tim Connolly is just as promised... made of crackers.... holy crap... now that salary buys a lot of triscuits...

We haven't even heard an update from Reimer and our goaltending is burying us and yet we focus on Tim Connolly. We knew he had a history of injury and we bought him for nothing. I don't understand the hate here, since he was pretty much the only option left during free agency. I'd rather have him play 50 games than 0.

Hate? What hate? I dint say I hate him. I stated facts. 1) He's a brittle as a cracker, and 2)$4M buys a lot of Triscuits.... I wish he could play more than 50.... and who said "we" anyway? Its me... as in "I".... facts man... just the facts
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 10, 2011, 10:59:04 PM
Another win that they did not deserve. Hey, I am all for getting 2 points here and there while learning to play as a team, but the Leafs simply suck in the past several games. Tonight was a joke and they have one man alone to thank.

If Gus was in net the Leafs would have lost. Unquestionable I think.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 10, 2011, 11:00:00 PM
And Theodore played great and if we had some routine saves in the Florida game maybe it's a different result.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 10, 2011, 11:02:01 PM
Another win that they did not deserve. Hey, I am all for getting 2 points here and there while learning to play as a team, but the Leafs simply suck in the past several games. Tonight was a joke and they have one man alone to thank.

If Gus was in net the Leafs would have lost. Unquestionable I think.

I really think the Blues swarmed us like bees because we were dripping with pollen in the form of bad officiating... You just can't build any momentum when it's call after call after call...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on November 10, 2011, 11:04:32 PM
Another win that they did not deserve. Hey, I am all for getting 2 points here and there while learning to play as a team, but the Leafs simply suck in the past several games. Tonight was a joke and they have one man alone to thank.

If Gus was in net the Leafs would have lost. Unquestionable I think.

I didn't think the game was a joke at all. The Blues were all over us and we got some good goaltending, but I think you're stretching it. Leafs had their legs tonight and created lots of chances IMO.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zid on November 10, 2011, 11:06:17 PM
Another win that they did not deserve. Hey, I am all for getting 2 points here and there while learning to play as a team, but the Leafs simply suck in the past several games. Tonight was a joke and they have one man alone to thank.

If Gus was in net the Leafs would have lost. Unquestionable I think.

I didn't think the game was a joke at all. The Blues were all over us and we got some good goaltending, but I think you're stretching it. Leafs had their legs tonight and created lots of chances IMO.

Yeah I think people are forgetting Curtis Joseph's first season with us. What happened tonite was pretty much every game occurance.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on November 10, 2011, 11:08:39 PM
Yeah I think people are forgetting Curtis Joseph's first season with us. What happened tonite was pretty much every game occurance.

I really enjoyed this game and I think even if we lost in overtime or the shootout, I still would have enjoyed it. A much better effort on defense tonight.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 10, 2011, 11:27:06 PM
Man, we really have to watch out for the Eastern teams... everyone's winning right now, and the fact that we've played one or two more games than the others REALLY doesn't bode well. I can't believe how close the standings are right now.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 10, 2011, 11:55:35 PM
Quote
HennyTweets Paul Hendrick
Jason arnott chops away. Steckel and komisarek are the recipients. Steckel is fine, komisarek will be x-rayed tomorrow.

No penalties though!  ;)
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: 4th Liner on November 11, 2011, 07:42:50 AM
Quote
HennyTweets Paul Hendrick
Jason arnott chops away. Steckel and komisarek are the recipients. Steckel is fine, komisarek will be x-rayed tomorrow.

No penalties though!  ;)

Of course not, it's not like he broke their sticks or anything serious like that.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 11, 2011, 10:59:52 AM
3-3 in the second stretch of 10 games so far this season.  4 more games left to have a successful first 20.

First 10: 7-2-1
Second 10: 3-3

Next 4 games:
Ottawa
Phoenix
@Nashville
Washington

I'd be over the moon with a 3-1 record over the next 4, although I suspect 2-2.  We'll see.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zid on November 11, 2011, 11:14:31 AM
Quote
HennyTweets Paul Hendrick
Jason arnott chops away. Steckel and komisarek are the recipients. Steckel is fine, komisarek will be x-rayed tomorrow.

No penalties though!  ;)

He looked like Paul Bunyan out there.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on November 11, 2011, 01:02:05 PM
andystricklandAndy Strickland
Hitchcock calls the #Torontomapleleafs the most dangerous attack team off the rush in the #NHL agree?

Isn't it great to be buttered up before you're made to look like a bunch of turkeys?

That statement is riddled with secret meanings.

...such as...?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 11, 2011, 01:56:12 PM
Quote
HennyTweets Paul Hendrick
Jason arnott chops away. Steckel and komisarek are the recipients. Steckel is fine, komisarek will be x-rayed tomorrow.

No penalties though!  ;)

He looked like Paul Bunyan out there.

Going to the Bill Clement school of commentating? ;)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: The Red Polar Bear on November 11, 2011, 03:13:45 PM
Quote
HennyTweets Paul Hendrick
Jason arnott chops away. Steckel and komisarek are the recipients. Steckel is fine, komisarek will be x-rayed tomorrow.

No penalties though!  ;)

He looked like Paul Bunyan out there.

Going to the Bill Kuleent school of commentating? ;)

Too much NHL12.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 11, 2011, 03:14:31 PM
Quote
HennyTweets Paul Hendrick
Jason arnott chops away. Steckel and komisarek are the recipients. Steckel is fine, komisarek will be x-rayed tomorrow.

No penalties though!  ;)

He looked like Paul Bunyan out there.

Going to the Bill Kuleent school of commentating? ;)

Too much NHL12.

Why did it auto-correct to Kuleent? LOL
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on November 11, 2011, 11:17:10 PM
Looking at the EC standings tonight, our GF/GA stat sticks out among the leading teams.  All the others with similar point totals are >+10 and we are -4.  BOS games account for that, of course.  Still, an objective person could logically conclude "mirage."  Just observin'.....
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 11, 2011, 11:21:43 PM
Looking at the EC standings tonight, our GF/GA stat sticks out among the leading teams.  All the others with similar point totals are >+10 and we are -4.  BOS games account for that, of course.  Still, an objective person could logically conclude "mirage."  Just observin'.....

Maybe, but, at the same time, at this point, every team probably has a couple games that skew their numbers, and, with no one in the conference having played more than 17 games, those games are going to have a significant impact on the goal differential at this point. If things are still looking the same way 15-20 games from now, that's a different story.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 11, 2011, 11:26:20 PM
And a lot of that has been with a rotating platoon of our 2nd and 3rd string goalies.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: ThatLeafsFan on November 12, 2011, 03:22:37 AM
Looking at the EC standings tonight, our GF/GA stat sticks out among the leading teams.  All the others with similar point totals are >+10 and we are -4.  BOS games account for that, of course.  Still, an objective person could logically conclude "mirage."  Just observin'.....

Maybe, but, at the same time, at this point, every team probably has a couple games that skew their numbers, and, with no one in the conference having played more than 17 games, those games are going to have a significant impact on the goal differential at this point. If things are still looking the same way 15-20 games from now, that's a different story.

I agree, at the 21 game mark you can kind of determine a team then, but a true value now a days, can't really be determined until the half way mark.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on November 12, 2011, 07:54:52 AM
Quote
HennyTweets Paul Hendrick
Jason arnott chops away. Steckel and komisarek are the recipients. Steckel is fine, komisarek will be x-rayed tomorrow.

No penalties though!  ;)

He looked like Paul Bunyan out there.

Going to the Bill Kuleent school of commentating? ;)

Too much NHL12.

Why did it auto-correct to Kuleent? LOL

Because someone has set it up so that c.l.e.m. Turns To k.u.l.e. Who was it that used to call Kulemin c.l.e.m? There lies your answer :) I call shenanigans! 8)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 12, 2011, 01:15:39 PM
I thought this was worth sharing;

paul_romanuk Paul Romanuk
According to Swiss paper, the Toronto Maple Leafs have entered "collaboration" (partnership would be my loose translation) w Zurich Lions.
7 minutes ago

Leaf Nation... The manifest destiny continues. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 12, 2011, 01:25:05 PM
I thought this was worth sharing;

paul_romanuk Paul Romanuk
According to Swiss paper, the Toronto Maple Leafs have entered "collaboration" (partnership would be my loose translation) w Zurich Lions.
7 minutes ago

Leaf Nation... The manifest destiny continues.

What does this mean?  Bob Hartley becomes our new coach and Ron Wilson gets shipped to Switzerland?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 12, 2011, 01:30:29 PM
I thought this was worth sharing;

paul_romanuk Paul Romanuk
According to Swiss paper, the Toronto Maple Leafs have entered "collaboration" (partnership would be my loose translation) w Zurich Lions.
7 minutes ago

Leaf Nation... The manifest destiny continues.

What does this mean?  Bob Hartley becomes our new coach and Ron Wilson gets shipped to Switzerland?

Not sure... Toblerones for everyone?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 12, 2011, 01:31:07 PM
Ewww... think of all thos potential upper body injuries.  :o
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stebro on November 12, 2011, 02:54:19 PM
Which leaf do you miss the most? I still think back of the times when we had Gilmour, my favourite player of all time :'( just read about him on the official site. He was the reason why I became a leaf fan.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 12, 2011, 03:01:54 PM
Which leaf do you miss the most? I still think back of the times when we had Gilmour, my favourite player of all time :'( just read about him on the official site. He was the reason why I became a leaf fan.

Clark was my favourite but yeah, it's hard to argue with Gilmour as the one I really miss. He was on Hockeycentral at noon yesterday for the whole show and one of the things that I kind of forgot about was the "rock star" status he had here. Nobody, I mean nobody really had that here. He was talking about how he couldn't even leave the house at times. I can't remember one player - ever in a Leafs uniform who crated so much buzz 'round here... I'd say it's that buzz (along with the player) that I miss.

With that said however, I wish I was tad older so I could have appreciated Salming more. Or, Salming was much a younger so I could appreciate him now... Know what I mean? I still think he's the greatest Leaf ever and it's hard not to say I miss him the most too.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 12, 2011, 03:45:41 PM
JSportsnet John Shannon
DPoulin on TML's Zurich affiliation:"Just being globally progressive with player development, and markets that are continuing to improve."
3 minutes ago

So I was right!  :D

Edit:

JSportsnet John Shannon
DPoulin Part 2:"We have a great relationship with Mannheim that goes back and forth in training and development..."
3 minutes ago

JSportsnet John Shannon
DPoulin Part 3:"... and this will add to what is clearly an emerging market in elite level players in Switzerland."
3 minutes ago

It's true... Swiss hockey does really seem to be evolving for the better rather rapidly. though
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: brothert on November 13, 2011, 09:48:25 AM
Which leaf do you miss the most? I still think back of the times when we had Gilmour, my favourite player of all time :'( just read about him on the official site. He was the reason why I became a leaf fan.
Excepting Kessel, the entire 2011-12 leafs team.  They took off at game 4 and I havent seen them since.

Seriously, where's the panic button, this worst i've ever seen the leafs play (I think i said it this time last year) so sad...

And I don't really care if they win, I just want to watch a good game of hockey.........
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on November 13, 2011, 09:52:03 AM
Which leaf do you miss the most? I still think back of the times when we had Gilmour, my favourite player of all time :'( just read about him on the official site. He was the reason why I became a leaf fan.
Excepting Kessel, the entire 2011-12 leafs team.  They took off at game 4 and I havent seen them since.

Seriously, where's the panic button, this worst i've ever seen the leafs play (I think i said it this time last year) so sad...

And I don't really care if they win, I just want to watch a good game of hockey.........


Me to, where did the leafs go. they are better then these last 5or6 games.
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 13, 2011, 05:25:15 PM
Any press conferences scheduled?  *crosses fingers*
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on November 14, 2011, 03:21:27 AM
... Salming... I still think he's the greatest Leaf ever and it's hard not to say I miss him the most too.
 

Salming is among my favourite Leaf defencemen of all-time.  Along with his defence partner Ian Turnbull, together they were  one of the more celebrated or well-known defence pairings among Leaf fans who remember that era of the '70s.  I remember very well and some of the favourite players to don a Leaf uniform were there at the time.


Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 14, 2011, 08:22:42 AM
Which leaf do you miss the most? I still think back of the times when we had Gilmour, my favourite player of all time :'( just read about him on the official site. He was the reason why I became a leaf fan.
Excepting Kessel, the entire 2011-12 leafs team.  They took off at game 4 and I havent seen them since.

Seriously, where's the panic button, this worst i've ever seen the leafs play (I think i said it this time last year) so sad...

And I don't really care if they win, I just want to watch a good game of hockey.........

Yeah, none of the lines are really showing up except for Kessel's line, only because Kessel and Lupul are playing with some great chemistry right now.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stronger Than All on November 14, 2011, 08:43:55 AM
Which leaf do you miss the most? I still think back of the times when we had Gilmour, my favourite player of all time :'( just read about him on the official site. He was the reason why I became a leaf fan.
Excepting Kessel, the entire 2011-12 leafs team.  They took off at game 4 and I havent seen them since.

Seriously, where's the panic button, this worst i've ever seen the leafs play (I think i said it this time last year) so sad...

And I don't really care if they win, I just want to watch a good game of hockey.........

Yeah, none of the lines are really showing up except for Kessel's line, only because Kessel and Lupul are playing with some great chemistry right now.

Sometimes I don't even realize who's centering Kessel and Lupul.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 14, 2011, 08:49:27 AM
Which leaf do you miss the most? I still think back of the times when we had Gilmour, my favourite player of all time :'( just read about him on the official site. He was the reason why I became a leaf fan.
Excepting Kessel, the entire 2011-12 leafs team.  They took off at game 4 and I havent seen them since.

Seriously, where's the panic button, this worst i've ever seen the leafs play (I think i said it this time last year) so sad...

And I don't really care if they win, I just want to watch a good game of hockey.........

Yeah, none of the lines are really showing up except for Kessel's line, only because Kessel and Lupul are playing with some great chemistry right now.

Sometimes I don't even realize who's centering Kessel and Lupul.

I think TC did a pretty good job when he was here. Pretty shifty, did a good job of distributing the puck. Bozak has looked invisible.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Britishbulldog on November 14, 2011, 12:24:40 PM

Sometimes I don't even realize who's centering Kessel and Lupul.

I think TC did a pretty good job when he was here. Pretty shifty, did a good job of distributing the puck. Bozak has looked invisible.

I also was impressed with Connolly.  He actually made me think that we had heard the last of the E Staal, Spezza, Getzlaf, etc trades for awhile.

Unfortunately he can't seem to stay healthy.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 14, 2011, 12:59:14 PM

Sometimes I don't even realize who's centering Kessel and Lupul.

I think TC did a pretty good job when he was here. Pretty shifty, did a good job of distributing the puck. Bozak has looked invisible.

I also was impressed with Connolly.  He actually made me think that we had heard the last of the E Staal, Spezza, Getzlaf, etc trades for awhile.

Unfortunately he can't seem to stay healthy.

On the plus side, Dregs said he's possible for tomorrow. If not then Thursday latest.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on November 14, 2011, 04:13:05 PM
What about bringing Aulie back into the fold? He was pretty solid defensively last season. That is precisely what we are lacking of late. Maybe send down Gardiner and give Keith a shot. What can it hurt?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 14, 2011, 04:20:22 PM
What about bringing Aulie back into the fold? He was pretty solid defensively last season. That is precisely what we are lacking of late. Maybe send down Gardiner and give Keith a shot. What can it hurt?

He's played pretty poorly for the Marlies so far. Not sure he'd be an improvement in an area other than size.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Omallley on November 14, 2011, 05:15:46 PM
What about bringing Aulie back into the fold? He was pretty solid defensively last season. That is precisely what we are lacking of late. Maybe send down Gardiner and give Keith a shot. What can it hurt?

He's played pretty poorly for the Marlies so far. Not sure he'd be an improvement in an area other than size.

By and far the worst +/- on the Marlies, and a pretty off pre-season...I suspect he's going to need to turn it around before he gets a callup.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: leafplasma on November 14, 2011, 05:54:16 PM
What about bringing Aulie back into the fold? He was pretty solid defensively last season. That is precisely what we are lacking of late. Maybe send down Gardiner and give Keith a shot. What can it hurt?

He's played pretty poorly for the Marlies so far. Not sure he'd be an improvement in an area other than size.

By and far the worst +/- on the Marlies, and a pretty off pre-season...I suspect he's going to need to turn it around before he gets a callup.

Yes and last night was his first game back after an injury and low and behold he was a -2 :(.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stebro on November 15, 2011, 06:28:40 AM
Some interesting stats:

Phaneuf 1 point in his last 7 games
MacArthur 0 points in his last 4 games
Kulemin 0 points in his last 4 games
Lombardi 0 points in his 5 last games
Liles 1 point in his last 4 games
Grabovski 0 points in his last 4 games
Gardiner 0 points in his 4 last games
Komisarek 0 points in his 5 last games
Steckel 0 points in his last 9 games
Brown 0 points in his last 8 games
Crabb 0 points in his last 4 games
Frattin 0 points in his last 6 games
Dupuis 0 points in his last 15 games

Imagine if Kessel or Lupul or both would get hurt, then we would be lucky to average 1 goal per game :)

We could talk about poor d and poor goaltending, but I mean the rest can't produce this bad.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 15, 2011, 07:12:09 AM
Just to nikpick, Komisarek not having a point in 5 games is not really 'interesting' and moreso expected.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stebro on November 15, 2011, 07:54:24 AM
Just to nikpick, Komisarek not having a point in 5 games is not really 'interesting' and moreso expected.
Sure, some of those are not expected to produce, but it's still pretty crappy that they have a combined 2 points.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 15, 2011, 08:08:39 AM
Just to nikpick, Komisarek not having a point in 5 games is not really 'interesting' and moreso expected.
Sure, some of those are not expected to produce, but it's still pretty crappy that they have a combined 2 points.

I don't disagree that they've been slumping offensively the past few games, but some of them are weird # of games choices.  Like Liles - 1 point in 4 games, but 3 in his last 6 and 7 in his last 11.

I'm mostly worried about the Grabovski line turning their totals around, and hopefully they do so the next few games so we can see those stats in the opposite direction.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stebro on November 15, 2011, 09:13:44 AM
Just to nikpick, Komisarek not having a point in 5 games is not really 'interesting' and moreso expected.
Sure, some of those are not expected to produce, but it's still pretty crappy that they have a combined 2 points.

I don't disagree that they've been slumping offensively the past few games, but some of them are weird # of games choices.  Like Liles - 1 point in 4 games, but 3 in his last 6 and 7 in his last 11.

I'm mostly worried about the Grabovski line turning their totals around, and hopefully they do so the next few games so we can see those stats in the opposite direction.
Blame TSN ;) That's where I checked. I think that they should split up the Grabovski line. To be honest I think we should try splitting up Kessel and Lupul too, even if they're finding eachother, we need more balanced scoring. I think that we should move Kulemin to the 3rd or 4th line. And I think that Lombardi should get a chance at the 1st or 2nd.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 15, 2011, 10:01:27 AM
Just to nikpick, Komisarek not having a point in 5 games is not really 'interesting' and moreso expected.
Sure, some of those are not expected to produce, but it's still pretty crappy that they have a combined 2 points.

I don't disagree that they've been slumping offensively the past few games, but some of them are weird # of games choices.  Like Liles - 1 point in 4 games, but 3 in his last 6 and 7 in his last 11.

I'm mostly worried about the Grabovski line turning their totals around, and hopefully they do so the next few games so we can see those stats in the opposite direction.
Blame TSN ;) That's where I checked. I think that they should split up the Grabovski line. To be honest I think we should try splitting up Kessel and Lupul too, even if they're finding eachother, we need more balanced scoring. I think that we should move Kulemin to the 3rd or 4th line. And I think that Lombardi should get a chance at the 1st or 2nd.

You're asking for more struggles if you break up Lupul and Kessel. Why mess with a scoring formula?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stebro on November 15, 2011, 10:35:52 AM
Just to nikpick, Komisarek not having a point in 5 games is not really 'interesting' and moreso expected.
Sure, some of those are not expected to produce, but it's still pretty crappy that they have a combined 2 points.

I don't disagree that they've been slumping offensively the past few games, but some of them are weird # of games choices.  Like Liles - 1 point in 4 games, but 3 in his last 6 and 7 in his last 11.

I'm mostly worried about the Grabovski line turning their totals around, and hopefully they do so the next few games so we can see those stats in the opposite direction.
Blame TSN ;) That's where I checked. I think that they should split up the Grabovski line. To be honest I think we should try splitting up Kessel and Lupul too, even if they're finding eachother, we need more balanced scoring. I think that we should move Kulemin to the 3rd or 4th line. And I think that Lombardi should get a chance at the 1st or 2nd.

You're asking for more struggles if you break up Lupul and Kessel. Why mess with a scoring formula?
Well we can't have one line that scores only, and I think it would be good with a little shakeup. Kessel will score anyways, Lupul? Hopefully. But the Grabovski line must be split imo, Kulemin is looking crappy, and McArthur is not very consistant.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Omallley on November 15, 2011, 11:05:53 AM
Well we can't have one line that scores only, and I think it would be good with a little shakeup. Kessel will score anyways, Lupul? Hopefully. But the Grabovski line must be split imo, Kulemin is looking crappy, and McArthur is not very consistant.

I could be completely off, because I have been disconnected from these parts for a while, but of all players not scoring, Kulemin has not looked crappy to me. He's looked snakebit, but solid - a lot more solid than his offensive totals indicate.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: AvroArrow on November 15, 2011, 11:15:12 AM
I'd like to see Grabovski with Kessel and Lupul, and Connolly with Kulemin and MacArthur.  If Connolly can't get them going, then I'm not sure what to do with those two.  We need them firing now.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stebro on November 15, 2011, 11:20:23 AM
Well we can't have one line that scores only, and I think it would be good with a little shakeup. Kessel will score anyways, Lupul? Hopefully. But the Grabovski line must be split imo, Kulemin is looking crappy, and McArthur is not very consistant.

I could be completely off, because I have been disconnected from these parts for a while, but of all players not scoring, Kulemin has not looked crappy to me. He's looked snakebit, but solid - a lot more solid than his offensive totals indicate.
I have watched most games lately, but not all so I could also have missed seeing him playing well. But in the games I've watched I have barely noticed Kulemin. Grabovski is noticeable though.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 15, 2011, 11:22:50 AM
Just to nikpick, Komisarek not having a point in 5 games is not really 'interesting' and moreso expected.
Sure, some of those are not expected to produce, but it's still pretty crappy that they have a combined 2 points.

I don't disagree that they've been slumping offensively the past few games, but some of them are weird # of games choices.  Like Liles - 1 point in 4 games, but 3 in his last 6 and 7 in his last 11.

I'm mostly worried about the Grabovski line turning their totals around, and hopefully they do so the next few games so we can see those stats in the opposite direction.
Blame TSN ;) That's where I checked. I think that they should split up the Grabovski line. To be honest I think we should try splitting up Kessel and Lupul too, even if they're finding eachother, we need more balanced scoring. I think that we should move Kulemin to the 3rd or 4th line. And I think that Lombardi should get a chance at the 1st or 2nd.

You're asking for more struggles if you break up Lupul and Kessel. Why mess with a scoring formula?
Well we can't have one line that scores only, and I think it would be good with a little shakeup. Kessel will score anyways, Lupul? Hopefully. But the Grabovski line must be split imo, Kulemin is looking crappy, and McArthur is not very consistant.

Lupul hopefully? Do you not think that Kessel's success has something to do with playing with Lupul and vice-versa? Its not a surprise that Lupul and Kessel are top of the team regardless of who the centre is - and Bozak clearly isn't that big a beneficiary. Connolly will be back soon and they've shown enough success to keep them together. If you need to jumble the second and third lines then that's fine, but to jumble up our best scoring line because our second line isn't scoring is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stebro on November 15, 2011, 11:27:03 AM
Just to nikpick, Komisarek not having a point in 5 games is not really 'interesting' and moreso expected.
Sure, some of those are not expected to produce, but it's still pretty crappy that they have a combined 2 points.

I don't disagree that they've been slumping offensively the past few games, but some of them are weird # of games choices.  Like Liles - 1 point in 4 games, but 3 in his last 6 and 7 in his last 11.

I'm mostly worried about the Grabovski line turning their totals around, and hopefully they do so the next few games so we can see those stats in the opposite direction.
Blame TSN ;) That's where I checked. I think that they should split up the Grabovski line. To be honest I think we should try splitting up Kessel and Lupul too, even if they're finding eachother, we need more balanced scoring. I think that we should move Kulemin to the 3rd or 4th line. And I think that Lombardi should get a chance at the 1st or 2nd.

You're asking for more struggles if you break up Lupul and Kessel. Why mess with a scoring formula?
Well we can't have one line that scores only, and I think it would be good with a little shakeup. Kessel will score anyways, Lupul? Hopefully. But the Grabovski line must be split imo, Kulemin is looking crappy, and McArthur is not very consistant.

Lupul hopefully? Do you not think that Kessel's success has something to do with playing with Lupul and vice-versa? Its not a surprise that Lupul and Kessel are top of the team regardless of who the centre is - and Bozak clearly isn't that big a beneficiary. Connolly will be back soon and they've shown enough success to keep them together. If you need to jumble the second and third lines then that's fine, but to jumble up our best scoring line because our second line isn't scoring is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Well the problem is if that other teams shut down our first line, then we are done.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 15, 2011, 11:35:39 AM
Just to nikpick, Komisarek not having a point in 5 games is not really 'interesting' and moreso expected.
Sure, some of those are not expected to produce, but it's still pretty crappy that they have a combined 2 points.

I don't disagree that they've been slumping offensively the past few games, but some of them are weird # of games choices.  Like Liles - 1 point in 4 games, but 3 in his last 6 and 7 in his last 11.

I'm mostly worried about the Grabovski line turning their totals around, and hopefully they do so the next few games so we can see those stats in the opposite direction.
Blame TSN ;) That's where I checked. I think that they should split up the Grabovski line. To be honest I think we should try splitting up Kessel and Lupul too, even if they're finding eachother, we need more balanced scoring. I think that we should move Kulemin to the 3rd or 4th line. And I think that Lombardi should get a chance at the 1st or 2nd.

You're asking for more struggles if you break up Lupul and Kessel. Why mess with a scoring formula?
Well we can't have one line that scores only, and I think it would be good with a little shakeup. Kessel will score anyways, Lupul? Hopefully. But the Grabovski line must be split imo, Kulemin is looking crappy, and McArthur is not very consistant.

Lupul hopefully? Do you not think that Kessel's success has something to do with playing with Lupul and vice-versa? Its not a surprise that Lupul and Kessel are top of the team regardless of who the centre is - and Bozak clearly isn't that big a beneficiary. Connolly will be back soon and they've shown enough success to keep them together. If you need to jumble the second and third lines then that's fine, but to jumble up our best scoring line because our second line isn't scoring is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Well the problem is if that other teams shut down our first line, then we are done.

Right, but it's not like we have a whole load of options, our forwards still leave a lot to be desired. What would your forward lines look like?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 15, 2011, 11:37:53 AM
I could be completely off, because I have been disconnected from these parts for a while, but of all players not scoring, Kulemin has not looked crappy to me. He's looked snakebit, but solid - a lot more solid than his offensive totals indicate.

Same here. I mean, he hasn't looked dominant or anything, obviously, but, he hasn't made a ton of mistakes either. The puck's not going in for him, so, he's less noticeable, but, that's a far ways from "looking crappy."
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 15, 2011, 11:41:24 AM
I could be completely off, because I have been disconnected from these parts for a while, but of all players not scoring, Kulemin has not looked crappy to me. He's looked snakebit, but solid - a lot more solid than his offensive totals indicate.

Same here. I mean, he hasn't looked dominant or anything, obviously, but, he hasn't made a ton of mistakes either. The puck's not going in for him, so, he's less noticeable, but, that's a far ways from "looking crappy."

Yeah, I agree with this.

I still recall a few moves he made where he's looked good. Unfortunately is inability to finish is really frustrating right now, and somewhat hard to explain.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stebro on November 15, 2011, 11:46:54 AM
Just to nikpick, Komisarek not having a point in 5 games is not really 'interesting' and moreso expected.
Sure, some of those are not expected to produce, but it's still pretty crappy that they have a combined 2 points.

I don't disagree that they've been slumping offensively the past few games, but some of them are weird # of games choices.  Like Liles - 1 point in 4 games, but 3 in his last 6 and 7 in his last 11.

I'm mostly worried about the Grabovski line turning their totals around, and hopefully they do so the next few games so we can see those stats in the opposite direction.
Blame TSN ;) That's where I checked. I think that they should split up the Grabovski line. To be honest I think we should try splitting up Kessel and Lupul too, even if they're finding eachother, we need more balanced scoring. I think that we should move Kulemin to the 3rd or 4th line. And I think that Lombardi should get a chance at the 1st or 2nd.

You're asking for more struggles if you break up Lupul and Kessel. Why mess with a scoring formula?
Well we can't have one line that scores only, and I think it would be good with a little shakeup. Kessel will score anyways, Lupul? Hopefully. But the Grabovski line must be split imo, Kulemin is looking crappy, and McArthur is not very consistant.

Lupul hopefully? Do you not think that Kessel's success has something to do with playing with Lupul and vice-versa? Its not a surprise that Lupul and Kessel are top of the team regardless of who the centre is - and Bozak clearly isn't that big a beneficiary. Connolly will be back soon and they've shown enough success to keep them together. If you need to jumble the second and third lines then that's fine, but to jumble up our best scoring line because our second line isn't scoring is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Well the problem is if that other teams shut down our first line, then we are done.

Right, but it's not like we have a whole load of options, our forwards still leave a lot to be desired. What would your forward lines look like?
I would try something like this:

McArthur-Lombardi-Kessel
Frattin-Grabovski-Lupul
Kulemin-Bozak-Crabb
Dupuis-Steckel-Brown



Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 15, 2011, 11:51:43 AM
I still recall a few moves he made where he's looked good. Unfortunately is inability to finish is really frustrating right now, and somewhat hard to explain.

Partly due to bad luck, partly due to other teams putting more pressure on him and partly due to his own frustration, I'm sure. He's one of those guys that, once it starts going in for him, he's going to score in bunches.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 15, 2011, 11:56:04 AM
You just have to keep Lupul and Kessel together... It's the only bit of chemistry working right now.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stebro on November 15, 2011, 12:00:05 PM
I think that we should trade Bozak and a d-man for another winger who can score. We already have Kadri and Colborne who can play C, and with Tim coming back?! I don't see the need for Bozak.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zid on November 15, 2011, 01:14:08 PM
I think that we should trade Bozak and a d-man for another winger who can score. We already have Kadri and Colborne who can play C, and with Tim coming back?! I don't see the need for Bozak.

What can you get for Bozak? His play away from Kessel has been abysmal. They were many games that I didn't even realize he was playing.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 18, 2011, 10:30:05 AM
3-3 in the second stretch of 10 games so far this season.  4 more games left to have a successful first 20.

First 10: 7-2-1
Second 10: 3-3

Next 4 games:
Ottawa
Phoenix
@Nashville
Washington

I'd be over the moon with a 3-1 record over the next 4, although I suspect 2-2.  We'll see.

Oh how stupid I was, what perspective a few losses gives you.
So by my "let's see each 10 game stretch" talk, we have totally blown it in the 2nd 10 of the season. First 10 games was 7-2-1, second 10 so far 3-5-1 with one left to play.  Under .500 ain't ever good. :(

Funny I thought we'd go 2-2 over the next 4, tooks like we'll end up losing all 4, yes I know we got a point in the Phoenix game that I missed.  0-3-1 isn't a hell of a lot better than 0-4
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 18, 2011, 12:48:11 PM

mirtleJames Mirtle
Bit of a different look at Leafs practice... optional skate, meaning nobody on the ice.

(http://c0014049.r32.cf1.rackcdn.com/x2_95fce95)


I can understand why no one is there. After all, when you are that good why would you need to practice.   ???
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 18, 2011, 12:50:46 PM
3 games in 4 nights, right? Lots of bumps and bruises. I think you're reaching for new things to be miserable about, Fanatic... and it's not all rosey right now so there isn't really a need to, you know?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on November 18, 2011, 12:51:31 PM
Well, to be fair they probably got in at 3:00 in the morning.  Game didn't end until near midnight Eastern time.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 18, 2011, 01:00:17 PM
3 games in 4 nights, right? Lots of bumps and bruises. I think you're reaching for new things to be miserable about, Fanatic... and it's not all rosey right now so there isn't really a need to, you know?

You are a man without humour. I thought the new Jays logo had you feeling all perky.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 18, 2011, 01:02:49 PM

 I thought the new Jays logo had you feeling all perky.

It does... and you are harshing my logo mellow.  >:(
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 18, 2011, 01:07:42 PM

 I thought the new Jays logo had you feeling all perky.

It does... and you are harshing my logo mellow.  >:(

Probably doesn't belong in this thread but... that is a beautiful logo!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on November 18, 2011, 04:30:21 PM
Joffrey Lupul
Anyone want to venture a guess as to what I said to that dude who kicked the glass into my head last night?

Joffrey Lupul
I can't remember exactly but I feel that the word "toothless" was my initial reaction. He only had 4 of em

lolz
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: LittleHockeyFan on November 18, 2011, 04:41:43 PM
Joffrey Lupul
Anyone want to venture a guess as to what I said to that dude who kicked the glass into my head last night?

Joffrey Lupul
I can't remember exactly but I feel that the word "toothless" was my initial reaction. He only had 4 of em

lolz

I love Joffrey Lupul. Lol
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: leafplasma on November 19, 2011, 08:07:55 AM

mirtleJames Mirtle
Bit of a different look at Leafs practice... optional skate, meaning nobody on the ice.

(http://c0014049.r32.cf1.rackcdn.com/x2_95fce95)


I can understand why no one is there. After all, when you are that good why would you need to practice.   ???

So 2 skaters and a goalie along with one coach.  I wonder who was out there???
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on November 19, 2011, 08:47:53 AM

mirtleJames Mirtle
Bit of a different look at Leafs practice... optional skate, meaning nobody on the ice.

(http://c0014049.r32.cf1.rackcdn.com/x2_95fce95)


I can understand why no one is there. After all, when you are that good why would you need to practice.   ???

So 2 skaters and a goalie along with one coach.  I wonder who was out there???



All the leafs who were not injured. 8)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 19, 2011, 01:52:42 PM
Did anyone hear Wilson's presser today? One of the most entertaining ones I've heard in a while! :)

http://www.tsn.ca/toronto/blogs/jonas_siegel/?id=380840

Click podcast section on the right.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sevax on November 19, 2011, 02:18:00 PM
Saturday's Projected Lines vs. Capitals

Forwards:
Lupul - Bozak - Kessel
Frattin - Connolly - Kulemin
Steckel - Colborne - Crabb
Rosehill - Dupuis - Orr

Defence:
Gunnarsson - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Schenn
Liles - Franson

Goalies:
Gustavsson starts
Scrivens
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on November 19, 2011, 03:51:57 PM
Saturday's Projected Lines vs. Capitals

Forwards:
Lupul - Bozak - Kessel
Frattin - Connolly - Kulemin
Steckel - Colborne - Crabb
Rosehill - Dupuis - Orr

Defence:
Gunnarsson - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Schenn
Liles - Franson

Goalies:
Gustavsson starts
Scrivens

It just seems wrong to put our two biggest centre's, and forwards for that matter, on the same line.  I think Dupuis is a better winger than a centre.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on November 19, 2011, 03:55:18 PM
Saturday's Projected Lines vs. Capitals

Forwards:
Lupul - Bozak - Kessel
Frattin - Connolly - Kulemin
Steckel - Colborne - Crabb
Rosehill - Dupuis - Orr

Defence:
Gunnarsson - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Schenn
Liles - Franson

Goalies:
Gustavsson starts
Scrivens

It just seems wrong to put our two biggest centre's, and forwards for that matter, on the same line.  I think Dupuis is a better winger than a centre.

Hey wow...I'm over a 100 posts.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zid on November 19, 2011, 04:25:41 PM
Saturday's Projected Lines vs. Capitals

Forwards:
Lupul - Bozak - Kessel
Frattin - Connolly - Kulemin
Steckel - Colborne - Crabb
Rosehill - Dupuis - Orr

Defence:
Gunnarsson - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Schenn
Liles - Franson

Goalies:
Gustavsson starts
Scrivens

Thats a terrible line up.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: princedpw on November 19, 2011, 04:33:30 PM
yeah ... when 8 of your 12 forwards might be playing in the minors if you had a better team, it doesnt look promising
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Strangelove on November 19, 2011, 04:37:01 PM
Saturday's Projected Lines vs. Capitals

Forwards:
Lupul - Bozak - Kessel
Frattin - Connolly - Kulemin
Steckel - Colborne - Crabb
Rosehill - Dupuis - Orr

Defence:
Gunnarsson - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Schenn
Liles - Franson

Goalies:
Gustavsson starts
Scrivens

It's a good thing they didn't bother call Kadri up.  It's clearly essential to have Crabb, Rosehill, Orr, and Frattin all in at once.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on November 19, 2011, 05:42:41 PM
yeah ... when 8 of your 12 forwards might be playing in the minors if you had a better team, it doesnt look promising

? I see 6 from that lineup...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on November 19, 2011, 05:44:06 PM
Saturday's Projected Lines vs. Capitals

Forwards:
Lupul - Bozak - Kessel
Frattin - Connolly - Kulemin
Steckel - Colborne - Crabb
Rosehill - Dupuis - Orr

Defence:
Gunnarsson - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Schenn
Liles - Franson

Goalies:
Gustavsson starts
Scrivens

It just seems wrong to put our two biggest centre's, and forwards for that matter, on the same line.  I think Dupuis is a better winger than a centre.

I'd be shocked if that 4th line gets more than 3 minutes at even-strength. It really doesn't matter where Dupuis lines up.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on November 19, 2011, 06:31:23 PM
Saturday's Projected Lines vs. Capitals

Forwards:
Lupul - Bozak - Kessel
Frattin - Connolly - Kulemin
Steckel - Colborne - Crabb
Rosehill - Dupuis - Orr

Defence:
Gunnarsson - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Schenn
Liles - Franson

Goalies:
Gustavsson starts
Scrivens

It just seems wrong to put our two biggest centre's, and forwards for that matter, on the same line.  I think Dupuis is a better winger than a centre.

I'd be shocked if that 4th line gets more than 3 minutes at even-strength. It really doesn't matter where Dupuis lines up.

I think Dupuis is more effective on the wing.  I thought he had a pretty good game in Nashville, keeping the puck in the offensive zone.  One of the weaknesses of this team the last couple of years has been their lack of quality centremen.  Now you have two on the same line, and on the fourth line you have a guy that looks like he is more comfortable on the wing.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: princedpw on November 20, 2011, 12:04:49 AM
yeah ... when 8 of your 12 forwards might be playing in the minors if you had a better team, it doesnt look promising

? I see 6 from that lineup...

i was counting kessel, connolly, lupul, kulemin as the real nhlers. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Stebro on November 20, 2011, 06:49:17 AM
When was the last time we had two leafs among the 5 best in scoring in the league? I don't know if it's ever been the case since I became a fan. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 20, 2011, 07:40:34 AM
When was the last time we had two leafs among the 5 best in scoring in the league? I don't know if it's ever been the case since I became a fan.

The best find is 93/94 when Gilmour finished 4th and Andreychuk finished 9th... Not sure if at any point they were in the top 5 together that season but yeah, it's been a looooong time.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on November 20, 2011, 08:24:27 AM
Saturday's Projected Lines vs. Capitals

Forwards:
Lupul - Bozak - Kessel
Frattin - Connolly - Kulemin
Steckel - Colborne - Crabb
Rosehill - Dupuis - Orr

Defence:
Gunnarsson - Phaneuf
Gardiner - Schenn
Liles - Franson

Goalies:
Gustavsson starts
Scrivens

Thats a terrible line up.


Bet you cant convince wash of that.lol
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: 4th Liner on November 20, 2011, 02:43:51 PM
When was the last time we had two leafs among the 5 best in scoring in the league? I don't know if it's ever been the case since I became a fan.

The best find is 93/94 when Gilmour finished 4th and Andreychuk finished 9th... Not sure if at any point they were in the top 5 together that season but yeah, it's been a looooong time.

Quote
“@mulmer: RT @NitzysHockeyDen: Last time a Leaf led the NHL in scoring at least 20 games into  a season, Big M,  Feb 15, 1961. -Wow.”

I'll say Wow!!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: draeko17 on November 20, 2011, 03:04:19 PM
When was the last time we had two leafs among the 5 best in scoring in the league? I don't know if it's ever been the case since I became a fan.

The best find is 93/94 when Gilmour finished 4th and Andreychuk finished 9th... Not sure if at any point they were in the top 5 together that season but yeah, it's been a looooong time.

Quote
@mulmer: RT @NitzysHockeyDen: Last time a Leaf led the NHL in scoring at least 20 games into  a season, Big M, Feb 15, 1961. -Wow.

I'll say Wow!!

The day I was born.....lol   yikes.  I really am the reason the Leafs have not won the cup....  :o       :'(       8)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on November 20, 2011, 06:15:04 PM
yeah ... when 8 of your 12 forwards might be playing in the minors if you had a better team, it doesnt look promising

? I see 6 from that lineup...

i was counting kessel, connolly, lupul, kulemin as the real nhlers.

Bozak and Steckel are real NHL'ers.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 21, 2011, 09:31:41 AM
Zee's 10 game-at-a-time watch is into the 3rd set of 10 now.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set - disappointing failure
4-5-1

Third set - work in progress, going to be tough - 7 of 10 on the road
0-1
Next 9
@Tampa
@Dallas
@Anaheim
Boston
@Boston
@Rangers
NJ
@Washingon
Carolina
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 21, 2011, 09:35:14 AM
We're still roughly a little over 2 weeks ahead of last year's pace. Hopefully, our slump has plateaued and we can build on that.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 21, 2011, 09:46:49 AM
We're still roughly a little over 2 weeks ahead of last year's pace. Hopefully, our slump has plateaued and we can build on that.

Yeah, I'll take that 4-5-1 stretch as a mini-slump and hope we can win 2-3 in a row now.  *crossing fingers*
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 21, 2011, 09:51:11 AM
BTW, Zee... Thanks for keeping track of these 10 game stretches. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 21, 2011, 09:53:42 AM
BTW, Zee... Thanks for keeping track of these 10 game stretches.

Helps break up the season and keep things in perspective.  Given that crappy 2nd set of games, I'm *hoping* Leafs can win 6 of the third set of 10 to stay near the top of the conference.  Anything short of that and we'll be dropping in the standings.  The east is tightening up.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 21, 2011, 10:05:45 AM
BTW, Zee... Thanks for keeping track of these 10 game stretches.

Helps break up the season and keep things in perspective.  Given that crappy 2nd set of games, I'm *hoping* Leafs can win 6 of the third set of 10 to stay near the top of the conference.  Anything short of that and we'll be dropping in the standings.  The east is tightening up.

Before the Carolina game, the Leafs were .600 pts win% which had them around 10-11th. After the loss to Carolina, .571, 19th - 8/9 place drop with one loss. It's still very tight with the difference between 3rd place and 25th place being 6 pts - not a lot with 61 games to go.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 21, 2011, 10:07:02 AM
BTW, Zee... Thanks for keeping track of these 10 game stretches.

Helps break up the season and keep things in perspective.  Given that crappy 2nd set of games, I'm *hoping* Leafs can win 6 of the third set of 10 to stay near the top of the conference.  Anything short of that and we'll be dropping in the standings.  The east is tightening up.

I think things will find a way of evening out. Reimer will be coming back soon by all indications and we have a lethal PP. We just need work on balanced scoring and better PK. I think Connolly being back for an extended period will help that, and I think the D just needs to be more responsible instead of dual-pinching.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 21, 2011, 10:18:49 AM
I think things will find a way of evening out. Reimer will be coming back soon by all indications and we have a lethal PP. We just need work on balanced scoring and better PK. I think Connolly being back for an extended period will help that, and I think the D just needs to be more responsible instead of dual-pinching.

Yup. Somewhat lost in all of the losses is how much the special teams have actually improved over the last stretch. Over the last 9 games, the PP has converted 8 of 25 opportunities, for a 32% rate, and the PK has killed off 25 of 29, for a 86.2% rate.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 21, 2011, 10:38:14 AM
I think things will find a way of evening out. Reimer will be coming back soon by all indications and we have a lethal PP. We just need work on balanced scoring and better PK. I think Connolly being back for an extended period will help that, and I think the D just needs to be more responsible instead of dual-pinching.

Yup. Somewhat lost in all of the losses is how much the special teams have actually improved over the last stretch. Over the last 9 games, the PP has converted 8 of 25 opportunities, for a 32% rate, and the PK has killed off 25 of 29, for a 86.2% rate.

All we need now is some balanced scoring, which might not be an easy thing to do in practice, as I feel like the Grabbo line's lack of ability to do a whole lot is head scratching. I understand their drop in minutes, but for some reason I got the sense that they were invisible more than they were visible.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on November 21, 2011, 10:43:50 AM
Zee's 10 game-at-a-time watch is into the 3rd set of 10 now.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set - disappointing failure
4-5-1

Third set - work in progress, going to be tough - 7 of 10 on the road
0-1
Next 9
@Tampa
@Dallas
@Anaheim
Boston
@Boston
@Rangers
NJ
@Washingon
Carolina

I don't think I would categorize the second set of games as a disappointing failure.  One game below .500 over a stretch that included not having Reimer at all, plus all the other injuries, is not all that horrible.  They could have completely imploded but so far have at least kept their heads above water, which is about all we could ask for without Reimer.   Even through this whole mess they have given up a lot of goals against, but the PP and PK have shown signs of being respectable and the top end scoring is still top end. 

I would say they "survived" set 2.

The next stretch will be real tough. Those Boston games I don't look forward to but hopefully by then the B's will have settled down a bit.  I think .500 over the next set is realistic.  Hopefully they win that and steal a couple more, esp if Reimer returns soon.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 21, 2011, 10:48:27 AM
Zee's 10 game-at-a-time watch is into the 3rd set of 10 now.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set - disappointing failure
4-5-1

Third set - work in progress, going to be tough - 7 of 10 on the road
0-1
Next 9
@Tampa
@Dallas
@Anaheim
Boston
@Boston
@Rangers
NJ
@Washingon
Carolina

I don't think I would categorize the second set of games as a disappointing failure.  One game below .500 over a stretch that included not having Reimer at all, plus all the other injuries, is not all that horrible.  They could have completely imploded but so far have at least kept their heads above water, which is about all we could ask for without Reimer.   Even through this whole mess they have given up a lot of goals against, but the PP and PK have shown signs of being respectable and the top end scoring is still top end. 

I would say they "survived" set 2.

The next stretch will be real tough. Those Boston games I don't look forward to but hopefully by then the B's will have settled down a bit.  I think .500 over the next set is realistic.  Hopefully they win that and steal a couple more, esp if Reimer returns soon.

Yeah, you're right.  After the 7-2-1 start I had hoped they could play over .500 the next 10, but with all the injury woes I suppose it's not that bad a stretch all things considered.  Amazing how my expectations changed after 10 games.   I'm hoping for at least .500 over the next 10, preferably .600 6-4 like I mentioned.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 21, 2011, 10:53:31 AM
I think things will find a way of evening out. Reimer will be coming back soon by all indications and we have a lethal PP. We just need work on balanced scoring and better PK. I think Connolly being back for an extended period will help that, and I think the D just needs to be more responsible instead of dual-pinching.

Yup. Somewhat lost in all of the losses is how much the special teams have actually improved over the last stretch. Over the last 9 games, the PP has converted 8 of 25 opportunities, for a 32% rate, and the PK has killed off 25 of 29, for a 86.2% rate.

This is the most encouraging thing of the last little while.  Slowly but surely the Leafs have moved out of 30th in PK (now up to 27th).  If they can continue to improve upon that, the wins will start to come.  PP too is now 5th overall, that's great.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 21, 2011, 10:54:15 AM
All we need now is some balanced scoring, which might not be an easy thing to do in practice, as I feel like the Grabbo line's lack of ability to do a whole lot is head scratching. I understand their drop in minutes, but for some reason I got the sense that they were invisible more than they were visible.

To me, the biggest issue is still goaltending. A lot of the team's issues stem from there. If the team can minimize the soft/bad goals against, I think we'll see a number of the other issues begin to sort themselves out. Not having to play from behind as much or be as concerned about making mistakes and all that could do wonders for this team.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 21, 2011, 10:57:08 AM

I would say they "survived" set 2.


3-2-1 over a 6 game stretch is pretty much what get you into the dance. Point wise, that's roughly 5-3-2 over 10 games.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: sampson on November 21, 2011, 11:00:30 AM
Really too bad they didn't win last night... would have put them alone in 1st in the East... :(
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 21, 2011, 11:02:14 AM
Really too bad they didn't win last night... would have put them alone in 1st in the East... :(

Boston is going to pass us real soon, they have 3 games in hand and only 2 points back.  I can't imagine them losing all 3 of those games in hand.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Britishbulldog on November 21, 2011, 11:23:56 AM
Really too bad they didn't win last night... would have put them alone in 1st in the East... :(

Boston is going to pass us real soon, they have 3 games in hand and only 2 points back.  I can't imagine them losing all 3 of those games in hand.

If the Leafs had won though the Bruins would have had to continue playing top hockey to overtake them in the standings.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on November 21, 2011, 11:41:00 AM
Yeah, you're right.  After the 7-2-1 start I had hoped they could play over .500 the next 10, but with all the injury woes I suppose it's not that bad a stretch all things considered.  Amazing how my expectations changed after 10 games.   I'm hoping for at least .500 over the next 10, preferably .600 6-4 like I mentioned.

There will be ups and downs all year, but I think the key from the sched point of view is to not go on any prolonged losing streaks throughout the year as they did last year in Nov and sunk the season.  A bad stretch of 4-5 games without a win could cause them to tumble from 6th to 10th or worse. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: freer on November 21, 2011, 12:39:57 PM
Just to nikpick, Komisarek not having a point in 5 games is not really 'interesting' and moreso expected.
Sure, some of those are not expected to produce, but it's still pretty crappy that they have a combined 2 points.

I don't disagree that they've been slumping offensively the past few games, but some of them are weird # of games choices.  Like Liles - 1 point in 4 games, but 3 in his last 6 and 7 in his last 11.

I'm mostly worried about the Grabovski line turning their totals around, and hopefully they do so the next few games so we can see those stats in the opposite direction.
Blame TSN ;) That's where I checked. I think that they should split up the Grabovski line. To be honest I think we should try splitting up Kessel and Lupul too, even if they're finding eachother, we need more balanced scoring. I think that we should move Kulemin to the 3rd or 4th line. And I think that Lombardi should get a chance at the 1st or 2nd.

You're asking for more struggles if you break up Lupul and Kessel. Why mess with a scoring formula?
Well we can't have one line that scores only, and I think it would be good with a little shakeup. Kessel will score anyways, Lupul? Hopefully. But the Grabovski line must be split imo, Kulemin is looking crappy, and McArthur is not very consistant.

Lupul hopefully? Do you not think that Kessel's success has something to do with playing with Lupul and vice-versa? Its not a surprise that Lupul and Kessel are top of the team regardless of who the centre is - and Bozak clearly isn't that big a beneficiary. Connolly will be back soon and they've shown enough success to keep them together. If you need to jumble the second and third lines then that's fine, but to jumble up our best scoring line because our second line isn't scoring is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Well the problem is if that other teams shut down our first line, then we are done.

Right, but it's not like we have a whole load of options, our forwards still leave a lot to be desired. What would your forward lines look like?
I would try something like this:

McArthur-Lombardi-Kessel
Frattin-Grabovski-Lupul
Kulemin-Bozak-Crabb
Dupuis-Steckel-Brown

IMO I think it would be crazy to move Lupul for Kessel's line they are currently the top scoring players in the league
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on November 22, 2011, 03:36:51 AM
Zee's 10 game-at-a-time watch is into the 3rd set of 10 now.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set - disappointing failure
4-5-1

Third set - work in progress, going to be tough - 7 of 10 on the road
0-1
Next 9
@Tampa
@Dallas
@Anaheim
Boston
@Boston
@Rangers
NJ
@Washingon
Carolina


They need to beat the Bruins, both at home, and in Beantown.

The last time Leafs lost to Boston, that 7-0 trouncing they took, they proceeded to go into a 'slump', and the Bruins proceeded  onto a  long winning streak....  I consider these games important for psychological reasons.  It will give the Leafs a 'lift' if they can tango with the Bruins and not endure another blowout, and with Kessel breaking out of his Boston funk.  That would be nice.

As we can all note, most of these will be road games, a chance for the Leafs to play a tighter defensive game against the more offensively-inclined teams such as the Rangers, Bruins, and Caps.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on November 22, 2011, 04:16:59 AM
Nice, upbeat (media) article about the Leafs....for a change....

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/What-We-Learned-Why-aren-8217-t-the-Maple-Leaf;_ylt=Ah9ymEVFwgFPkBFIMhrNZVgJfwM6?urn=nhl-wp17903
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on November 22, 2011, 11:24:44 AM
I agree with much of this article. This team should have a better record than they do based on the injury to our #1 goalie (not to mention Armstrong, Grabbo, Mac, Lombardi etc.). If you put as much stock into the goaltending problem as I do, the loss of Reimer has substantially affected our overall record. To get a better read on where this team should/could be in the standings I would take 3 games from the loss column and move them to the win column.

So...

GP 21- W 11- L 8- OT 2- PTS 24

becomes

GP 21- W 14- L 5- OT 2- PTS 30

Give or take a point or two in either column, I think this is a pretty fair assessment of where this team could have been with better goaltending (and less significant injuries to key pieces like Armstrong and Connolly)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 22, 2011, 11:26:47 AM
I agree with much of this article. This team should have a better record than they do based on the injury to our #1 goalie (among others). If you put as much stock into the goaltending problem as I do, the loss of Reimer has substantially affected our overall record. To get a better read on where this team should/could be in the standings I would take 3 games from the loss column and move them to the win column.

So...

GP 21- W 11- L 8- OT 2- PTS 24

becomes

GP 21- W 14- L 5- OT 2- PTS 30

Give or take a point or two in either column, I think this is a pretty fair assessment of where this team could have been with better goaltending.

What would Columbus's record be with better goaltending?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 22, 2011, 11:31:18 AM
What would Columbus's record be with better goaltending?

Something, deep down, tells me you understand the difference between "What if this player hadn't gotten hurt?" and "What if this team had better players?".
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Madferret on November 22, 2011, 12:11:03 PM
What would Columbus's record be with better goaltending?

Something, deep down, tells me you understand the difference between "What if this player hadn't gotten hurt?" and "What if this team had better players?".

Qu'est-ce que sais "difference"?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on November 22, 2011, 02:10:16 PM
I agree with much of this article. This team should have a better record than they do based on the injury to our #1 goalie (not to mention Armstrong, Grabbo, Mac, Lombardi etc.). If you put as much stock into the goaltending problem as I do, the loss of Reimer has substantially affected our overall record. To get a better read on where this team should/could be in the standings I would take 3 games from the loss column and move them to the win column.

So...

GP 21- W 11- L 8- OT 2- PTS 24

becomes

GP 21- W 14- L 5- OT 2- PTS 30

Give or take a point or two in either column, I think this is a pretty fair assessment of where this team could have been with better goaltending (and less significant injuries to key pieces like Armstrong and Connolly)

I agree and as they come back the leafs will climb. this is why i think we will finish top six.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Arn on November 22, 2011, 10:13:48 PM
So, eh, first in NHL scoring with 30 points is Phil Kessel.

But also, now second in NHL scoring with 26 points is Joffrey Lupul. (Tied with Giroux).

Anyone predict that would be the case 22 games into the season?
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 22, 2011, 10:35:55 PM

Anyone predict that would be the case 22 games into the season?

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say no, no one predicted it.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on November 22, 2011, 10:38:41 PM
So, eh, first in NHL scoring with 30 points is Phil Kessel.

But also, now second in NHL scoring with 26 points is Joffrey Lupul. (Tied with Giroux).

Anyone predict that would be the case 22 games into the season?

Anyone care to predict where they'll be at the halfway mark? :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 22, 2011, 10:39:00 PM
At the same time, we're still in a very precarious position. We could be in 8th place just by virtue of every other EC teams having a bunch of games in hand.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 22, 2011, 10:46:31 PM

Anyone care to predict where they'll be at the halfway mark? :)

On top of the league, farting rainbows.

(http://i485.photobucket.com/albums/rr217/23liliana/funny/Farting-Rainbows.jpg)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 22, 2011, 10:49:42 PM

Anyone care to predict where they'll be at the halfway mark? :)

On top of the league, farting rainbows.

(http://i485.photobucket.com/albums/rr217/23liliana/funny/Farting-Rainbows.jpg)

Sidney Crosby has that trademarked, according to Hal Gill.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 24, 2011, 04:28:43 PM
LeafsBB20 Brian Burke
Very proud that all of our players bought suite tickets for charity. Their generosity means 2200+ kids will see a Leafs game this season.
3 hours ago

 :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on November 24, 2011, 04:38:43 PM

Anyone care to predict where they'll be at the halfway mark? :)

On top of the league, farting rainbows.

(http://i485.photobucket.com/albums/rr217/23liliana/funny/Farting-Rainbows.jpg)

(http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploads19/topatoco+unicorn+poop+shirt11312904604.jpg)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: TML fan on November 24, 2011, 05:44:57 PM
LeafsBB20 Brian Burke
Very proud that all of our players bought suite tickets for charity. Their generosity means 2200+ kids will see a Leafs game this season.
3 hours ago

 :)

Why would they want to torture kids that way?!  ;)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: princedpw on November 24, 2011, 06:04:05 PM
At the same time, we're still in a very precarious position. We could be in 8th place just by virtue of every other EC teams having a bunch of games in hand.

In terms of percentage of points won, Toronto is currently in 8th in the East, the tiniest smidge above NJ who is 9th.  It is a shame NJ won last night.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 25, 2011, 01:20:57 PM
It's too early in the season for this: seven Leafs have a shooting% of 20% or better. Four of them playing 10 games or more. Some guys are truly sniping.

Toronto is 2nd in the league in blocked shots while 22nd in shots allowed.

Toronto is 7th in faceoffs

Toronto is 5th in giveaways and 9th in takeaways
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: DK2 on November 26, 2011, 01:42:30 PM
everybody may know this, but somebody I know got
invited to the Richard Peddie retirement party,
so I guess he's leaving.
used to be rather hated around here.  :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 26, 2011, 01:49:51 PM

Just something I noticed while watching some out of market games. It used to be that when we talked about free agents signing in Toronto we'd say that there was potential for significant off-ice earnings because of the team's prominence in the market. Has that held up? I've noticed a lot of out of market broadcasts have commercials featuring the stars of their team for something or other but, I mean, aside from Reimer's clothing thing has anyone noticed any Leafs getting high profile endorsements? I think I saw Kessel on a billboard ad for canned tuna today but it was at high speed and I wasn't sure.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on November 26, 2011, 04:02:46 PM
everybody may know this, but somebody I know got
invited to the Richard Peddie retirement party,
so I guess he's leaving.
used to be rather hated around here.  :)

His retirement has been announced for months now. It was supposed to be by September or October if I remember correctly, but was delayed to December 31st due to the NBA lockout or something along those lines.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 26, 2011, 04:34:20 PM
everybody may know this, but somebody I know got
invited to the Richard Peddie retirement party,
so I guess he's leaving.
used to be rather hated around here.  :)

His retirement has been announced for months now. It was supposed to be by September or October if I remember correctly, but was delayed to December 31st due to the NBA lockout or something along those lines.

Dec 31 was announced a year ago. Prior to that, they had not picked a date.
Richard Peddie to retire from MLSE in one year (http://www.thestar.com/article/898945--richard-peddie-to-retire-from-mlse-in-one-year)

If the sale of MLSE had come off, he stood to make a major bonus - 8 digits I think.

With a pending sale, why would the Teachers hire a replacement when the new owners would want to hire their own exec?

Since the sale has fallen through, it wouldn't shock me if they have him hang around in some capacity until his replacement is in place unless they're promoting from within or going with an interim exec from within - which they could do promptly.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 27, 2011, 12:29:28 AM
We're starting to build a bit of cushion, and we won't drop off out of the top 8 even if we lose the next couple of games. We can really start to build on developing a cushion. Unforunately, we're now in tough to be at the top of our division with Boston destroying it right now.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on November 27, 2011, 05:44:51 AM

Just something I noticed while watching some out of market games. It used to be that when we talked about free agents signing in Toronto we'd say that there was potential for significant off-ice earnings because of the team's prominence in the market. Has that held up? I've noticed a lot of out of market broadcasts have commercials featuring the stars of their team for something or other but, I mean, aside from Reimer's clothing thing has anyone noticed any Leafs getting high profile endorsements? I think I saw Kessel on a billboard ad for canned tuna today but it was at high speed and I wasn't sure.


Dion Phaneuf for Citizen Eco-Drive watches.  Seen this advertisement on billboards and in magazines.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on November 27, 2011, 08:26:51 AM
We're starting to build a bit of cushion, and we won't drop off out of the top 8 even if we lose the next couple of games. We can really start to build on developing a cushion. Unforunately, we're now in tough to be at the top of our division with Boston destroying it right now.

Not to mention the two upcoming matches against them.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: L K on November 27, 2011, 10:29:23 AM
We're starting to build a bit of cushion, and we won't drop off out of the top 8 even if we lose the next couple of games. We can really start to build on developing a cushion. Unforunately, we're now in tough to be at the top of our division with Boston destroying it right now.

Not to mention the two upcoming matches against them.

At least they are on a streak...the Leafs are good at breaking those ;)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on November 27, 2011, 10:56:58 AM
We're starting to build a bit of cushion, and we won't drop off out of the top 8 even if we lose the next couple of games. We can really start to build on developing a cushion. Unforunately, we're now in tough to be at the top of our division with Boston destroying it right now.

Not to mention the two upcoming matches against them.

At least they are on a streak...the Leafs are good at breaking those ;)

I think I'd be pretty happy with a split with Bruins, as long as one of them isn't a lopsided embarrassment like the last time they met.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: princedpw on November 27, 2011, 01:49:59 PM
We're starting to build a bit of cushion, and we won't drop off out of the top 8 even if we lose the next couple of games. We can really start to build on developing a cushion. Unforunately, we're now in tough to be at the top of our division with Boston destroying it right now.

Not to mention the two upcoming matches against them.

At least they are on a streak...the Leafs are good at breaking those ;)

I think I'd be pretty happy with a split with Bruins, as long as one of them isn't a lopsided embarrassment like the last time they met.
The way Boston is playing, I'll be happy with any points in two games.  I'd be thrilled if it was 7-0 Boston then 2-1 leafs.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 27, 2011, 11:41:27 PM
As much as the Leafs have struggled against the Bruins, after this weekend, they become less of an issue for the team - they'll only have to face them twice in their final 56 games after having played them 4 times in their first 26.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 27, 2011, 11:43:00 PM
We're not getting any points vs. Boston. It just aint happening.  :-\
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on November 27, 2011, 11:43:41 PM
As much as the Leafs have struggled against the Bruins, after this weekend, they become less of an issue for the team - they'll only have to face them twice in their final 56 games after having played them 4 times in their first 26.

Well, Millen stated the obvious: the next 2 games are a real test.  If the Leafs win both ... they are for real and they'll make the playoffs.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on November 27, 2011, 11:44:03 PM
We're not getting any points vs. Boston. It just aint happening.  :-\

Might as well let the games happen before we say that.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on November 27, 2011, 11:48:07 PM
We're not getting any points vs. Boston. It just aint happening.  :-\

Might as well let the games happen before we say that.

Sure. There's always a chance. I just need to set my expectations going in.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 27, 2011, 11:49:30 PM
We're not getting any points vs. Boston. It just aint happening.  :-\

Might as well let the games happen before we say that.

Sure. There's always a chance. I just need to set my expectations going in.

Nowhere to go but up.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on November 27, 2011, 11:51:15 PM
As much as the Leafs have struggled against the Bruins, after this weekend, they become less of an issue for the team - they'll only have to face them twice in their final 56 games after having played them 4 times in their first 26.

Well, Millen stated the obvious: the next 2 games are a real test.  If the Leafs win both ... they are for real and they'll make the playoffs.

I think a split would almost say as much, as was mentioned during the game, November used to kill them more than any one particular team.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 27, 2011, 11:52:22 PM
Well, Millen stated the obvious: the next 2 games are a real test.  If the Leafs win both ... they are for real and they'll make the playoffs.

If they win both, I'd say they're real enough to potentially win the division.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on November 28, 2011, 12:00:17 AM
Well, Millen stated the obvious: the next 2 games are a real test.  If the Leafs win both ... they are for real and they'll make the playoffs.

If they win both, I'd say they're real enough to potentially win the division.

Yes, I'd go that far too.  The difference this year is their depth.  They have quality guys to turn to.

And kudos to Wilson.  He seems to finally -- FINALLY! -- gotten them to play sound team defense, and to have fixed the special teams.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on November 28, 2011, 05:41:10 AM
I would like to see two things happen:

1). The Leafs take one of two (if not both) against the Bruins.... and..

2). Kessel breaks his jinx in Boston by scoring a pair of goals (while the Leafs contain Tyler Seguin who cones up nil in the scoring department.

Oh yeah, the Monster makes life a nightmare for Boston's forwards, while the Leafs make Thomas miserable.  Having Reimer back would definitely be an added plus.

Finally, the last time the Bruins walloped us 7-0, the Leafs went into a bit of a 'slump' (which they've broke out of), while the Bruins went on their winning streak
(and counting).  It would do wonders if the Leafs could hand Boston 2 losses and send them on a tailspin.  Now, wouldn't that be great?!!

Anyone think of any if these things happening?!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Chev-boyar-sky on November 28, 2011, 06:34:10 AM
Not sure if this is the right place to mention this, but I hope Burke et al are trying very hard to sign JML.

I love his puck control, fluid skating and passing abilities. He may leave a little to be desired defensively but he reminds me a Kaberle in his prime.

Ultimately he may be too expensive (4-5 years x 4.5-5?) with the year he's putting together. It will be a big dilemma if we're in a playoff race, or spot and he's unwilling to sign. I could see a great return for him at the deadline, but really hope he stays put. Having 3 D-men (Gardiner, Liles, and Phaneuf)  who can all skate with the puck is something we haven't seen for some time.

Keep up the good work JML!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on November 28, 2011, 07:05:23 AM
I think the Leafs can take at least one from Boston but what is the Kessel 'jinx' all about?

...Liles is playing well but back in the 'making sense of the Leafs d' thread we touched on this a little, it seems almost inevitable that the Leafs will have to make a move of some sort with the young dmen they have coming along, Liles could be a pretty attractive trade commodity at the deadline but however it goes the Leafs are in the drivers seat somewhat having negotiating rights too.

Burke ( and others ) were right though, Komi, Gunnar and Lashoff go down and *plunk* Franson and Aulie are available, depth is a crucial element for success.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 28, 2011, 07:18:01 AM
I think the Leafs can take at least one from Boston but what is the Kessel 'jinx' all about?

People wanting to invent narratives where none exist.

Kessel scored well against Boston last year but hasn't scored against them this year. Clearly it's the result of a "jinx" as opposed to Boston being terrific defensively or the best defenseman, for my money, in the NHL playing against Kessel.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 28, 2011, 09:19:54 AM
Zee's 10 game-at-a-time watch is into the 3rd set of 10 now.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set - disappointing failure
4-5-1

Third set - work in progress, going to be tough - 7 of 10 on the road
0-1
Next 9
@Tampa
@Dallas
@Anaheim
Boston
@Boston
@Rangers
NJ
@Washingon
Carolina


Next 9
@Tampa  WIN
@Dallas  WIN
@Anaheim WIN
Boston
@Boston
@Rangers
NJ
@Washingon
Carolina

3-1 in the 3rd set of 10 games!  Things are looking good so far.  Crucial next 2 against Boston.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Deebo on November 28, 2011, 01:30:30 PM
Outside of Schenn, who cost a 1st and 2nds, the leafs have very economically built quite a deep defense in terms of assets.

Liles for 2nd, Gunnarsson drafted in the 6th, Franson for Lebda, FA Komisarek, Gardiner  for FA Beauchemin and Phaneuf/Aulie for White+.

Even up front, Grabovski, Armstrong, Lupul, MacArthur, Steckel, Connolly, Bozak and Kulemin were all accquired for essentially 2 2nds, a 4th and 5th.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on November 28, 2011, 02:30:06 PM
Recovery Doesnt Stop After Injuries Heal (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/28/sports/hockey/for-ex-nhl-linesman-dapuzzo-recovery-doesnt-stop-when-injuries-heal.html?pagewanted=1&utm_campaign=Feed:%20nyt/rss/Sports%20%28NYT%20&utm_medium=feed&%2362&_r=1&seid=auto&smid=tw-nytimessports&utm_source=feedburner&%2359;%20Sports%29)

A nice but kind of unfinished story about a new Leafs scout and Brian Burke giving him a chance after a very tough time from a bad injury as a NHL linesman that he's still recovering from.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: 13 on November 28, 2011, 03:24:23 PM
I've had a game day ritual for years and years that on game day I wear my Leafs jersey. The last few years and maybe the first month of this season, I didn't see a whole lot of other Leafs gear on, not even on game days. Today, a non-game day I've seen at least 6 jerseys and a boatload of Leafs caps. I hear many call them bandwagon jumpers, fair weather fans, or whatever. I don't care there's room for lots more. The Buzz is-a starting. I can't wait to feel that feeling again, WHEN we make the play-offs and the whole city (well, Southern Ontario, really) starts to lose it's mind. Wear your Leafs stuff and wear it proud.  8)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on November 28, 2011, 03:45:57 PM
I've had a game day ritual for years and years that on game day I wear my Leafs jersey. The last few years and maybe the first month of this season, I didn't see a whole lot of other Leafs gear on, not even on game days. Today, a non-game day I've seen at least 6 jerseys and a boatload of Leafs caps. I hear many call them bandwagon jumpers, fair weather fans, or whatever. I don't care there's room for lots more. The Buzz is-a starting. I can't wait to feel that feeling again, WHEN we make the play-offs and the whole city (well, Southern Ontario, really) starts to lose it's mind. Wear your Leafs stuff and wear it proud.  8)

I've also noticed a lack of Habs-wear in and around the city. When they were in the playoffs I noticed Habs jerseys, flags, stickers everywhere I went.  Not so much now, and it feels good.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Lee-bo on November 28, 2011, 07:12:20 PM
Not sure if this is being discussed elsewhere or has already been discussed. But with bozak playing like a #1 centerman, and Connolly doing well on the 2nd, where does that leave grabovski? It's a nice dilemma to have for a change, don't remember ever having too many centermen, but we can't leave grabbs on the third line, total waste of talent, unless you want skilled players there too. Just wondering what others think.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: RedLeaf on November 28, 2011, 09:38:00 PM
Don't look now, but Stamkos is about to knock Kessel off his 'most goals in the league' perch soon. Maybe tonight? :(

He only needs one more to tie Phil at 16.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: crazyperfectdevil on November 28, 2011, 10:02:38 PM
Don't look now, but Stamkos is about to knock Kessel off his 'most goals in the league' perch soon. Maybe tonight? :(

He only needs one more to tie Phil at 16.

not tonight
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on November 29, 2011, 08:18:25 AM

Just something I noticed while watching some out of market games. It used to be that when we talked about free agents signing in Toronto we'd say that there was potential for significant off-ice earnings because of the team's prominence in the market. Has that held up? I've noticed a lot of out of market broadcasts have commercials featuring the stars of their team for something or other but, I mean, aside from Reimer's clothing thing has anyone noticed any Leafs getting high profile endorsements? I think I saw Kessel on a billboard ad for canned tuna today but it was at high speed and I wasn't sure.


Dion Phaneuf for Citizen Eco-Drive watches.  Seen this advertisement on billboards and in magazines.

Caputi and Zigomanis? for Cheetah Power Surge!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Chev-boyar-sky on November 29, 2011, 11:50:23 AM
Anybody talking about this?

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/11/29/ducks_ryan/

Do we have the kind of assets to get him (Kadri + 1st + Blacker/Percy/Gardiner)?

I like the idea of him but am not sure he's exactly the player we need moving forward over say a #1 center at the price he's likely to command. For once it's great to have depth and prospects and I'm not completely sold on his skill set. I think he's very good, but not a creator, more a finisher who needs good players on his line.

It is an interesting idea though.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Erndog on November 29, 2011, 11:57:00 AM
Anybody talking about this?

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2011/11/29/ducks_ryan/

Do we have the kind of assets to get him (Kadri + 1st + Blacker/Percy/Gardiner)?

I like the idea of him but am not sure he's exactly the player we need moving forward over say a #1 center at the price he's likely to command. For once it's great to have depth and prospects and I'm not completely sold on his skill set. I think he's very good, but not a creator, more a finisher who needs good players on his line.

It is an interesting idea though.

A second line of MacArthur and Connolly (2 playmakers primarily- albeit Mac is finishing this year) would be a perfect compliment to Ryan.  Not to mention if the Lupul-Kessel well ever runs dry, we can try some combination with Ryan. 

Ryan is 24 years old and has 3 straight years of 30+ goals.  Those players don't grow on trees (we have one in Kessel... how nice would it be to have 2?).  Not to mention his style is actually very different to Kessel (he's a big, strong, power forward type of player).

The Ducks are a budget team.  IF they are in fact trading him, we may be able to entice him with all our young pieces.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on November 29, 2011, 02:17:54 PM
I think the Leafs can take at least one from Boston but what is the Kessel 'jinx' all about?

People wanting to invent narratives where none exist.

Kessel scored well against Boston last year but hasn't scored against them this year. Clearly it's the result of a "jinx" as opposed to Boston being terrific defensively or the best defenseman, for my money, in the NHL playing against Kessel.

When you put it that way, I don't see how you can't believe in the jinx.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on November 30, 2011, 03:55:36 PM
My boss is a fellow Leafs lover and he shares platinum seasons tickets with 2 other guys. I see him all the time on TV because they are first row behind the glass. Today he gave me the pair for a birthday present - tickets are for Dec 13 against Carolina. Woohoo. These are $250 tickets a piece. Nice present!

Very very cool!

 ;D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 30, 2011, 05:16:15 PM
So why aren't we second in the conference? We have more wins in less games than Florida... Man, I feel like I'm losing it today.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on November 30, 2011, 05:17:45 PM
So why aren't we second in the conference? We have more wins in less games than Florida... Man, I feel like I'm losing it today.

Each team has played 24 games, and they have more wins (excluding shootout wins).
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 30, 2011, 05:19:21 PM
So why aren't we second in the conference? We have more wins in less games than Florida... Man, I feel like I'm losing it today.

Total wins isn't the tie breaker anymore - it's regulation and OT wins only, and they Cats have 1 more of those in the same number of games.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kaberle15 on November 30, 2011, 05:55:19 PM
My boss is a fellow Leafs lover and he shares platinum seasons tickets with 2 other guys. I see him all the time on TV because they are first row behind the glass. Today he gave me the pair for a birthday present - tickets are for Dec 13 against Carolina. Woohoo. These are $250 tickets a piece. Nice present!

Very very cool!

 ;D
is your Boss hiring ? ;)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 30, 2011, 06:56:36 PM
So why aren't we second in the conference? We have more wins in less games than Florida... Man, I feel like I'm losing it today.

Total wins isn't the tie breaker anymore - it's regulation and OT wins only, and they Cats have 1 more of those in the same number of games.

That just seems silly to me.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on November 30, 2011, 07:08:00 PM
That just seems silly to me.

As an opponent of the shootout, I fully support making a shootout win less valuable than a regulation or OT win, even if in a marginal way such as this.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on November 30, 2011, 07:11:03 PM
That just seems silly to me.

As an opponent of the shootout, I fully support making a shootout win less valuable than a regulation or OT win, even if in a marginal way such as this.

Sure, but to me it's all or nothing. It's like not counting the goal in the shootout - I can't imagine how believing a score is 3-2 with only 4 goals counting makes any sense at all. A goal is a goal, no matter what the mechanism is. A win is a win imo, but I can't really back up my argument any further.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on December 01, 2011, 11:42:59 AM
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=604176

Lupul named 3rd star for November.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on December 01, 2011, 12:25:37 PM
I dig this star per month pace.  :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on December 01, 2011, 03:53:04 PM
There was a stat shown during last nights game that said the Leafs were tied for tops in the league in points from defense, something like 62 points compared to 30-ish at the same time last year.

I'm looking around trying to find it but if true that's a decent accomplishment.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 01, 2011, 04:05:16 PM
There was a stat shown during last nights game that said the Leafs were tied for tops in the league in points from defense, something like 62 points compared to 30-ish at the same time last year.

I'm looking around trying to find it but if true that's a decent accomplishment.

Sounds right.  I checked NHL.com and Leafs are over 60 points on D.  I randomly checked a few other teams (Det, Pitts, Bos) and we're ahead of them.
(http://i.imgur.com/RLJ5r.jpg)

Ottawa has 60 points from the D, Leafs are at 64
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on December 01, 2011, 04:06:49 PM
There was a stat shown during last nights game that said the Leafs were tied for tops in the league in points from defense, something like 62 points compared to 30-ish at the same time last year.

I'm looking around trying to find it but if true that's a decent accomplishment.

Tied with Florida, yeah - at least, they were at that point. Things could have changed as the night went on, I suppose.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 01, 2011, 04:07:05 PM
There was a stat shown during last nights game that said the Leafs were tied for tops in the league in points from defense, something like 62 points compared to 30-ish at the same time last year.

I'm looking around trying to find it but if true that's a decent accomplishment.

Sounds right.  I checked NHL.com and Leafs are over 60 points on D.  I randomly checked a few other teams (Det, Pitts, Bos) and we're ahead of them.
(http://i.imgur.com/RLJ5r.jpg)

Ottawa has 60 points from the D, Leafs are at 64

Florida is the other team leading the league in defensive scoring.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on December 04, 2011, 11:17:38 AM
Damien Cox just called Paul Hendrick a Leafs homer on twitter. Hoo boy.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 04, 2011, 11:19:40 AM
Damien Cox just called Paul Hendrick a Leafs homer on twitter. Hoo boy.

Yeah, and he's STILL going on about Wilson being a liar. This guy needs a new hobby.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on December 04, 2011, 11:30:22 AM
Damien Cox just called Paul Hendrick a Leafs homer on twitter. Hoo boy.

His little rants lately have been pathetic.

Yeah, and he's STILL going on about Wilson being a liar. This guy needs a new hobby.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on December 04, 2011, 12:22:23 PM
Yeah, Cox should be lecturing people on their moral compass.

How did that whole 'post Pat Burns' death announcement without checking if he had died' thing go for you Damien?

Journalism at its finest from him.
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 04, 2011, 12:49:04 PM
Yeah, Cox should be lecturing people on their moral compass.

How did that whole 'post Pat Burns' death announcement without checking if he had died' thing go for you Damien?

Journalism at its finest from him.

I had Cox in a twitter list called "Sports". Basically I don't follow him directly, but when I check my Sports list I would see his tweets.

I removed him from my list after last night. What a child he is.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Rob on December 04, 2011, 01:23:51 PM
Yeah, Cox should be lecturing people on their moral compass.

How did that whole 'post Pat Burns' death announcement without checking if he had died' thing go for you Damien?

Journalism at its finest from him.

I had Cox in a twitter list called "Sports". Basically I don't follow him directly, but when I check my Sports list I would see his tweets.

I removed him from my list after last night. What a child he is.

His last name is quite fitting.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on December 04, 2011, 01:44:43 PM
Damien Cox just called Paul Hendrick a Leafs homer on twitter. Hoo boy.

What?  Paul Hendrick, the employee of Leafs TV, a homer?!  Who's Damien going to call out next, Andy Frost?  And look out, Andi Petrillo, badass Damien's coming after you, too!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Deebo on December 04, 2011, 01:47:23 PM
coachrw63Ron Wilson
Favorite movies: Liar,Liar; The Invention of Lying; Big Fat Liar. HaHa!
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 04, 2011, 02:12:38 PM
coachrw63Ron Wilson
Favorite movies: Liar,Liar; The Invention of Lying; Big Fat Liar. HaHa!

LOL you know that's gonna bug Cox.
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 04, 2011, 02:18:56 PM
Think the Cox twitter crap should go in the media thread.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on December 04, 2011, 03:01:39 PM
#Coxblocked... :)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on December 04, 2011, 03:20:06 PM
I heard if Damien were born a girl, he'd have been named Sofonda.
Title: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 04, 2011, 03:37:05 PM
Well, Leafs don't play the Bruins again until March. Reimer is back, Arnstrong back within a week, time to make some hay and get the points they need to get. The difference from a playoff spot to 11th or 12th is way too close for my comfort.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 04, 2011, 05:42:55 PM
coachrw63Ron Wilson
Favorite movies: Liar,Liar; The Invention of Lying; Big Fat Liar. HaHa!

What a liar. Nobody liked The Invention of Lying.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Kessel Run on December 04, 2011, 05:51:11 PM
That picture from Henny of Colton Orr's father tying his skates today at practice is priceless.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on December 04, 2011, 09:17:29 PM
coachrw63Ron Wilson
Favorite movies: Liar,Liar; The Invention of Lying; Big Fat Liar. HaHa!

What a liar. Nobody liked The Invention of Lying.

I thought it was a good movie actually.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: caveman on December 05, 2011, 04:52:43 PM
Yeah, Cox should be lecturing people on their moral compass.

How did that whole 'post Pat Burns' death announcement without checking if he had died' thing go for you Damien?

Journalism at its finest from him.

I had Cox in a twitter list called "Sports". Basically I don't follow him directly, but when I check my Sports list I would see his tweets.

I removed him from my list after last night. What a child he is.

His last name is quite fitting.

BUDDABING!!!   ;D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: caveman on December 05, 2011, 04:53:51 PM
I heard if Damien were born a girl, he'd have been named Sofonda.

....And again... beautiful!!  ;D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Rob on December 05, 2011, 06:04:32 PM
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1orMXD_Ijbs[/youtube]
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on December 05, 2011, 06:48:38 PM
Here's an article from a real reporter on Armstrong's progress:
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=382050
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Hockey_gal on December 05, 2011, 11:21:19 PM
I didn't know where to post this but so cute.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0I_ZLKmaTQ&feature=share[/youtube]
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on December 05, 2011, 11:45:36 PM
I love Tortorella's expression after the goal.  Kind of bemused.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on December 06, 2011, 06:29:10 AM
So, we're 1/3 through the season. If it ended now, the Leafs are in the playoffs and Kessel is the league MVP... Anyone not happy here?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on December 06, 2011, 06:32:33 AM
So, we're 1/3 through the season. If it ended now, the Leafs are in the playoffs and Kessel is the league MVP... Anyone not happy here?



I'd be vedy, vedy, vedy heppy!    ;D   ;D   ;D
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Arn on December 06, 2011, 12:59:33 PM
So, we're 1/3 through the season. If it ended now, the Leafs are in the playoffs and Kessel is the league MVP... Anyone not happy here?

Yeah. Kessel hasn't scored a goal in like 5 games. Disgrace.




;)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on December 06, 2011, 01:04:23 PM
So, we're 1/3 through the season. If it ended now, the Leafs are in the playoffs and Kessel is the league MVP... Anyone not happy here?

Yeah. Kessel hasn't scored a goal in like 5 games. Disgrace.




;)

6 games.... since you are counting.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Michael on December 06, 2011, 01:06:56 PM
Bozak is doing well on AND off the ice. I have been watching his twitter messages back and forth with Kapte Upton who was at the game last night. Who is Kate Upton you ask.... a swimsuit model (SI and others) seen below. I hope this is considered PG.

(http://cdn.chud.com/f/f7/f7ae8c9c_Kate-Upton-Sports-Illustrated-Swimsuit-2011.jpeg)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 06, 2011, 01:41:01 PM
Zee's 10 game-at-a-time watch is into the 3rd set of 10 now.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set - disappointing failure
4-5-1

Third set - work in progress, going to be tough - 7 of 10 on the road
0-1
Next 9
@Tampa
@Dallas
@Anaheim
Boston
@Boston
@Rangers
NJ
@Washingon
Carolina


Next 10
@Carolina LOSS
@Tampa  WIN
@Dallas  WIN
@Anaheim WIN
Boston LOSS
@Boston LOSS
@Rangers WIN
NJ
@Washingon
Carolina

3-1 in the 3rd set of 10 games!  Things are looking good so far.  Crucial next 2 against Boston.

4-3 now, 3 left.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Crake on December 06, 2011, 09:08:18 PM
Neat trivia fact that somebody may have already noticed:

The Leafs had the 99th overall pick in the fourth round two years in a row in 2006 and 2007. The players selected - Reimer ('06) and Frattin ('07).

Maybe they should trade for the 99th overall pick every year.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 12, 2011, 10:05:07 AM
Zee's 10 game-at-a-time watch is into the 3rd set of 10 now.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set - disappointing failure
4-5-1

Third set - work in progress, going to be tough - 7 of 10 on the road
0-1
Next 9
@Tampa
@Dallas
@Anaheim
Boston
@Boston
@Rangers
NJ
@Washingon
Carolina


Next 10
@Carolina LOSS
@Tampa  WIN
@Dallas  WIN
@Anaheim WIN
Boston LOSS
@Boston LOSS
@Rangers WIN
NJ
@Washingon
Carolina

3-1 in the 3rd set of 10 games!  Things are looking good so far.  Crucial next 2 against Boston.

4-3 now, 3 left.


@Carolina LOSS
@Tampa  WIN
@Dallas  WIN
@Anaheim WIN
Boston LOSS
@Boston LOSS
@Rangers WIN
NJ OTL
@Washingon LOSS
Carolina

4-4-1

Best we can hope for now is 5-4-1, let's not bookend this 10 game stretch with losses to Carolina.
Not liking the last 5 games.   Leafs are 1-3-1.  Need to turn it around and get on a roll.

Even worse, since starting 7-2-1, Leafs have gone 8-9-2.  That's not gonna get it done over the long haul.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 14, 2011, 08:32:41 AM
The 30 games in 10 game stretches so far.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set
4-5-1

Third set
5-4-1

Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo
Vancouver
Los Angeles
Buffalo
@ NY Islanders
@ Florida
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg

Need to get on a roll.  The standings are way too tight.  Let's hope for at least 6 wins out of the next 10 games.  First few games can be tough, but starting with that Islanders game we need to get on a roll.  Florida is playing well so that game will be tough, but Carolina, Winnipeg, Tampa are all beatable. 
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on December 14, 2011, 09:15:41 AM
Winnipeg's been playing very well lately, especially at home - just knocked off Boston and Minnesota in regulation.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 14, 2011, 09:18:07 AM
Winnipeg's been playing very well lately, especially at home - just knocked off Boston and Minnesota in regulation.

Lately sure, but we don't play them until the 31st, plenty of time for them to get back into a funk.  ;)
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Chev-boyar-sky on December 14, 2011, 09:57:33 AM
The 30 games in 10 game stretches so far.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set
4-5-1

Third set
5-4-1

Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo
Vancouver
Los Angeles
Buffalo
@ NY Islanders
@ Florida
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg

Need to get on a roll.  The standings are way too tight.  Let's hope for at least 6 wins out of the next 10 games.  First few games can be tough, but starting with that Islanders game we need to get on a roll.  Florida is playing well so that game will be tough, but Carolina, Winnipeg, Tampa are all beatable.

The missing combination seems to be 6-3-1, so I'll go with that.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 14, 2011, 10:12:36 AM
The 30 games in 10 game stretches so far.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set
4-5-1

Third set
5-4-1

Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo
Vancouver
Los Angeles
Buffalo
@ NY Islanders
@ Florida
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg

Need to get on a roll.  The standings are way too tight.  Let's hope for at least 6 wins out of the next 10 games.  First few games can be tough, but starting with that Islanders game we need to get on a roll.  Florida is playing well so that game will be tough, but Carolina, Winnipeg, Tampa are all beatable.

The missing combination seems to be 6-3-1, so I'll go with that.

I'm counting on wins against LA, Islanders, Carolina,Winnipeg(1 game), Tampa.  That's 5 out of 10 with up in the air games being 2 against Buffalo, Vancouver, other Winnipeg game and Florida.

If Leafs win the 5 games they *should* win, only need to sneak another win in one of the *tougher* games to have 6 out of 10.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on December 14, 2011, 10:25:02 AM
The 30 games in 10 game stretches so far.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set
4-5-1

Third set
5-4-1

Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo
Vancouver
Los Angeles
Buffalo
@ NY Islanders
@ Florida
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg

Need to get on a roll.  The standings are way too tight.  Let's hope for at least 6 wins out of the next 10 games.  First few games can be tough, but starting with that Islanders game we need to get on a roll.  Florida is playing well so that game will be tough, but Carolina, Winnipeg, Tampa are all beatable.

The missing combination seems to be 6-3-1, so I'll go with that.

I'm counting on wins against LA, Islanders, Carolina,Winnipeg(1 game), Tampa.  That's 5 out of 10 with up in the air games being 2 against Buffalo, Vancouver, other Winnipeg game and Florida.

If Leafs win the 5 games they *should* win, only need to sneak another win in one of the *tougher* games to have 6 out of 10.

With Reimer and several others injured, they compiled 5-4-1 and 4-5-1 in their second and third 10 game stretches (9-9-2). The last very roughly 15 or so games were a fairly tough schedule.

The schedule for the next 10 doesn't look too bad while no games in the NHL today are "easy". If they can stay relatively healthy, I think they'll play .600+ hockey. They have to continue to take advantage of the easier opponents and bank those points.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on December 14, 2011, 10:31:41 AM
I will not be happy with less then a 7-3 run, this team should with Riemer back be over .600 most of the way from here on.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 14, 2011, 10:41:38 AM
I will not be happy with less then a 7-3 run, this team should with Riemer back be over .600 most of the way from here on.

Love you nutman.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on December 14, 2011, 12:32:12 PM
At the same time they can't squander any opportunity for points. They could be on the outside looking in very quickly.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: hockeyfan1 on December 16, 2011, 11:19:16 AM
Top 5 NHL dynamic duo(s)... combined points
(goals+assists)...

1.  Kessel/Lupul                     70 pts.    (Leafs)
2.  Sedins                             67 pts.    (Canucks)
3.  Toews/Sharp                    66 pts.    ('Hawks)
4.  Versteeg/Weiss.                64 pts.    (Panthers)
5.  Nugent-Hopkins/ Eberle     63pts.     (Oilers)   
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Corn Flake on December 16, 2011, 11:23:59 AM
Third set
5-4-1

Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo
Vancouver
Los Angeles
Buffalo
@ NY Islanders
@ Florida
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg


That is a relatively soft 10 game stretch, all things considered.  Florida is really the only team in there that you could say is truly a dangerous team night in, night out.  Vancouver is unpredictable and certainly not to be taken lightly but they are beatable right now, especially if "SUCKS" is in net.

Very good opportunity to rack up some points for sure.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 18, 2011, 05:35:52 PM
The 30 games in 10 game stretches so far.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set
4-5-1

Third set
5-4-1

Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo
Vancouver
Los Angeles
Buffalo
@ NY Islanders
@ Florida
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg

Need to get on a roll.  The standings are way too tight.  Let's hope for at least 6 wins out of the next 10 games.  First few games can be tough, but starting with that Islanders game we need to get on a roll.  Florida is playing well so that game will be tough, but Carolina, Winnipeg, Tampa are all beatable.

So I was hoping for 6 out of 10, we've lost the first 2, now it's gotta be 6 out of 8.  Yikes.


Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo L
Vancouver L
Los Angeles OTL
Buffalo
@ NY Islanders
@ Florida
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg

0-2-1 so far, 7 left.  On track for the worst 10 game stretch so far this season.  This needs to turn around ASAP.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on December 18, 2011, 07:13:14 PM
Leafs coach Wilson looking for balance (http://sports.nationalpost.com/2011/12/18/leafs-coach-wilson-looking-for-balance/)
head coach Ron Wilson still managed to shake up his slumping lineup Sunday. Tim Connolly replaced Tyler Bozak on the top line with Phil Kessel and Joffrey Lupul; Clarke MacArthur was reunited with Mikhail Grabovski and Nikolai Kulemin on the second line, and Bozak joined Matt Frattin and Joey Crabb on the third line.

Its just a chance for us to find a little bit more balance in our scoring and defensively too, Wilson said. I want [the Grabovski] line to find some chemistry and to get the job done. We expected them to be our No. 2/No. 1 line and, for whatever reason, it hasnt always worked. So I want them to get going.
...
David Steckel, who was sick for Saturdays game against Vancouver, missed Sundays practice and is doubtful for Mondays game against Los Angeles.

Colby Armstrong also missed practice after taking a shot off the foot in Saturdays game, but Wilson said he is expected to be in the lineup.

So Connolly is replacing Bozak to try to help the top line defensively. Grabbo line back together - hopefully, Kulemin's goal against the Sabres sparks them.

Steckel may be out for Monday's game.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on December 18, 2011, 07:18:14 PM
What's Bozak's +/-?  I haven't paid any attention to that stat but otherwise I have to question kicking him off the top line (esp. since he was our best forward against Vancouver).

It's the damn second line that's letting us down offensively.  It's gotten to be a major problem.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on December 18, 2011, 07:22:52 PM
As good as the Lupul-Bozak-Kessel combo have been in the offensive zone, I have definitely noticed some deficiencies on their end in the defensive zone. Still, with the way that combo has produced, I'd be loathe to break it up right now.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: L K on December 18, 2011, 07:35:08 PM
The problem with the team to me is secondary scoring.  It's just not consistent enough for the defensive quality of the team.

Frattin with 3 goals, Kulemin with 3 goals, Dupuis with 0 goals Brown with 1 goal (injured right now), Armstrong with 0 goals, Crabb with 5 goals (hasn't scored in 8 games), Gardiner with 0 goals, Gunnarsson with 0 goals, Schenn with 1 goal, Komisarek with 1 goal (injured right now), Lombardi with 2 goals (injured right now).

It's just a lot of guys who are on pace to finish the year with under 8 goals...I know that's around average for an offensive team and everything, but the Leafs just don't play sound enough defensively to have guys not put up a few more goals outside of the top line.

As for Bozak's defensive play, he put up 3 points against Vancouver and still managed to be a -2.  The Kessel line was abused defensively last night, and I think they have been that way for the last few games.  Some chances that are really dangerous amid some long stretches where they get hemmed in their own zone.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 18, 2011, 08:44:55 PM
I don't like taking Bozak off that top-line, but hopefully it means he gets some more minutes on the penalty kill. Wilson has said that he's hesitant to play him when the Leafs are down a man because of the minutes he's getting at even-strength and on the powerplay. I've always though Bozak was a pretty decent penalty killer so hopefully he can get an opportunity to help the club there.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: L K on December 19, 2011, 09:56:17 AM
Reimer starting again.  I really think Gus deserved the start.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on December 19, 2011, 03:22:57 PM
Pretty good interview with Eakins on the PK and Kadri
http://www.fan590.com/media.jsp?content=20111219_124245_3204
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 19, 2011, 03:55:49 PM
Pretty good interview with Eakins on the PK and Kadri
http://www.fan590.com/media.jsp?content=20111219_124245_3204

Is that the same interview from Hockeycentral with Kypreos and MacLean?  I saw it at noon and it sounded like they were trying to get him to trash talk the Leafs PK which he wouldn't fall into.

Edit: oh yes it is.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: cw on December 19, 2011, 04:38:28 PM
Pretty good interview with Eakins on the PK and Kadri
http://www.fan590.com/media.jsp?content=20111219_124245_3204

Is that the same interview from Hockeycentral with Kypreos and MacLean?  I saw it at noon and it sounded like they were trying to get him to trash talk the Leafs PK which he wouldn't fall into.

Edit: oh yes it is.

Yes, they tried to get him to go there and he handled it pretty well. It was kind of a stupid thing for them to try but those two aren't the sharpest knives in the drawer.

I thought there was some value in his remarks about Kadri & the PK though:

1. That when Kadri came down, he was so lousy (had regressed to the previous AHL season)  that Eakins told him to shape up or he wouldn't play him in the AHL! He also questioned Kadri's fitness and strength. But he was very complimentary about his offensive skill calling him the most dangerous in the AHL or something like that and that he needed to be allowed to be creative - couldn't keep to tight a rein on him.

2. That their 5 on 5 system is similar to Wilson's but his PK and PP are different - he goes into some detail on the PK which I'm not going to try and type up when folks can listen
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on December 20, 2011, 09:33:18 AM
Boyce getting the call-up as per Twitter.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zid on December 20, 2011, 09:38:06 AM
Boyce getting the call-up as per Twitter.

He should help out secondary scoring....
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: freer on December 20, 2011, 10:15:48 AM
Boyce getting the call-up as per Twitter.

He should help out secondary scoring....

He cant do any worse then Armstrong 9GP 0G 1A 1PTS -4

Everyone here can say he bring other stuff to the team like leadership. I just dont see it. Leafs have been so much better without him in the lineup this year IMO
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: gunnar36 on December 20, 2011, 10:22:08 AM
Boyce getting the call-up as per Twitter.

thats great news!  Now he can prove he belongs here more than useless Dupuis.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 20, 2011, 11:16:08 AM
Boyce getting the call-up as per Twitter.

He should help out secondary scoring....

He cant do any worse then Armstrong 9GP 0G 1A 1PTS -4

Everyone here can say he bring other stuff to the team like leadership. I just dont see it. Leafs have been so much better without him in the lineup this year IMO

Well actually he could if he goes 10 games 0 points.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: L K on December 20, 2011, 11:48:21 AM
Leafs sit 8th in the East in PT% and their PK has fallen below San Jose to 30th.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Strangelove on December 20, 2011, 01:19:02 PM
Boyce getting the call-up as per Twitter.

He should help out secondary scoring....

He cant do any worse then Armstrong 9GP 0G 1A 1PTS -4

Everyone here can say he bring other stuff to the team like leadership. I just dont see it. Leafs have been so much better without him in the lineup this year IMO

I don't think there can be any doubt about that.  He's been nothing short of terrible this year, probably due to his conditioning.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: freer on December 20, 2011, 01:24:43 PM
Boyce getting the call-up as per Twitter.

He should help out secondary scoring....

He cant do any worse then Armstrong 9GP 0G 1A 1PTS -4

Everyone here can say he bring other stuff to the team like leadership. I just dont see it. Leafs have been so much better without him in the lineup this year IMO

I don't think there can be any doubt about that.  He's been nothing short of terrible this year, probably due to his conditioning.

Good so someone else agrees with me. Good, I am not going to get screamed at again for stating an opinion
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Strangelove on December 20, 2011, 01:38:10 PM
Boyce getting the call-up as per Twitter.

He should help out secondary scoring....

He cant do any worse then Armstrong 9GP 0G 1A 1PTS -4

Everyone here can say he bring other stuff to the team like leadership. I just dont see it. Leafs have been so much better without him in the lineup this year IMO

I don't think there can be any doubt about that.  He's been nothing short of terrible this year, probably due to his conditioning.

Good so someone else agrees with me. Good, I am not going to get screamed at again for stating an opinion

He gets a pass from a lot of fans for some reason, possibly because he's a good interview.  Still, it's pretty amazing to witness the differing treatment for a good Canadian boy like Armstrong vis-a-vis Antropov in his time here - the latter actually contributed in a big way and wasn't nearly as injury prone as the former, and yet he was routinely jeered when he was announced as being out of the line-up.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on December 20, 2011, 02:12:29 PM
Wow, define fickle.

Last year Army started off poorly as well, by Dec 20 he had 1g 1a -6 while recovering from injuries which he wasn't use to experiencing.

In the next 33 games he had 6g 14a +5, above his career pace by a good margin and a noticeable contributor at both ends of the rink.

He was a ufa without a history of injuries when signed by the Leafs, 3 mil might have been a little high but not much.

He may be getting older and his body may be showing some wear and tear but IIRC, his injuries have been related to his style of play not because he can't play hockey.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on December 20, 2011, 10:14:03 PM
How dare Colby Armstrong get injured!!!  The nerve of some hockey players.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on December 21, 2011, 01:32:07 AM
Wow, define fickle.

Last year Army started off poorly as well, by Dec 20 he had 1g 1a -6 while recovering from injuries which he wasn't use to experiencing.

In the next 33 games he had 6g 14a +5, above his career pace by a good margin and a noticeable contributor at both ends of the rink.

He was a ufa without a history of injuries when signed by the Leafs, 3 mil might have been a little high but not much.

He may be getting older and his body may be showing some wear and tear but IIRC, his injuries have been related to his style of play not because he can't play hockey.

TIM CONNOLLY IS A JERK. Wait... Armstrong? Like... Colby??
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Sarge on December 21, 2011, 07:39:57 AM
The difference between Connolly and Armstrong is that before joining the Leafs, one had a history of missing chunks of seasons and the other was about as durable as they come. Nobody saw these string of injuries with Army coming. It can happen to anyone.   
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on December 21, 2011, 09:34:31 AM
More proof of how much the PK is killing us - and how the 5 on 5 defensive play isn't so bad.  Also how the PP success has been key considering our PK.

The Leafs sit 11th overall in the league in 5 on 5 GF/GA ratio at 1.02, ahead of teams like Pittsburgh, Chicago, and Florida.  I think Montreal is the only team in the 1-10 spots who is not in a playoff position.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Propellertop on December 21, 2011, 05:45:38 PM
Ah. Looked at the standings for the first time in a couple weeks really and now I know we're only 3 pts outta 12th..... (yes, I'm putting the most positive spin on things).

Oh Boy...
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: nutman on December 21, 2011, 05:59:27 PM
Ah. Looked at the standings for the first time in a couple weeks really and now I know we're only 3 pts outta 12th..... (yes, I'm putting the most positive spin on things).

Oh Boy...

Ya i did the same it sucks.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bender on December 21, 2011, 10:28:57 PM
The difference between Connolly and Armstrong is that before joining the Leafs, one had a history of missing chunks of seasons and the other was about as durable as they come. Nobody saw these string of injuries with Army coming. It can happen to anyone.

BUT CONNOLLY IS MADE OF GLASS!! COLBY IS A STRONG CANADIAN BOY! ANTRO SUCKS TOO!!!
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Tigger on December 22, 2011, 10:40:39 AM
Is there a stare down over the game day thread or something?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: freer on December 22, 2011, 11:41:32 AM
The difference between Connolly and Armstrong is that before joining the Leafs, one had a history of missing chunks of seasons and the other was about as durable as they come. Nobody saw these string of injuries with Army coming. It can happen to anyone.

BUT CONNOLLY IS MADE OF GLASS!! COLBY IS A STRONG CANADIAN BOY! ANTRO SUCKS TOO!!!

At least Connolly can put points up
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Andy on December 22, 2011, 11:44:38 AM
The difference between Connolly and Armstrong is that before joining the Leafs, one had a history of missing chunks of seasons and the other was about as durable as they come. Nobody saw these string of injuries with Army coming. It can happen to anyone.

BUT CONNOLLY IS MADE OF GLASS!! COLBY IS A STRONG CANADIAN BOY! ANTRO SUCKS TOO!!!

I think this biting satire only works if Connolly is an actual European player.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: drummond on December 22, 2011, 02:28:15 PM
The difference between Connolly and Armstrong is that before joining the Leafs, one had a history of missing chunks of seasons and the other was about as durable as they come. Nobody saw these string of injuries with Army coming. It can happen to anyone.

BUT CONNOLLY IS MADE OF GLASS!! COLBY IS A STRONG CANADIAN BOY! ANTRO SUCKS TOO!!!

I think this biting satire only works if Connolly is an actual European player.

An American, eh?
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Potvin29 on December 24, 2011, 09:02:28 PM
What are we now - 18-9-4 against non-Bruins teams?

Damn Bruins.  On the bright side, we have beaten the Rangers twice, and they're only 1 point behind the Bruins.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Bullfrog on December 24, 2011, 10:16:09 PM
Ah. Looked at the standings for the first time in a couple weeks really and now I know we're only 3 pts outta 12th..... (yes, I'm putting the most positive spin on things).

Oh Boy...

7 points out of 12th now.......also 7 points out of 1st.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 27, 2011, 03:18:56 PM
With a week to go in all-star voting Kessel, Phaneuf, and Reimer are all still in a starters position. Thomas is creeping up on Reimer though.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: bustaheims on December 27, 2011, 03:38:09 PM
With a week to go in all-star voting Kessel, Phaneuf, and Reimer are all still in a starters position. Thomas is creeping up on Reimer though.

I'd kind of like for Reimer to not be there, to be honest. Partly because he doesn't really deserve it and partly because having 3 Leafs voted in would probably means Lupul, who does deserve to be there, doesn't get an invite.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 27, 2011, 03:47:59 PM
With a week to go in all-star voting Kessel, Phaneuf, and Reimer are all still in a starters position. Thomas is creeping up on Reimer though.

I'd kind of like for Reimer to not be there, to be honest. Partly because he doesn't really deserve it and partly because having 3 Leafs voted in would probably means Lupul, who does deserve to be there, doesn't get an invite.

Agreed for the most part. Both your reasons are incredibly valid, but if there's one guy who would truly enjoy being part of this game it's Reimer. It might even increase his confidence. 

There's a pretty solid chance Thomas overtakes Reimer though. He was 18,000 votes behind in week 5 and is only 5,000 behind a week later.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Boston Leaf on December 27, 2011, 05:01:00 PM
With a week to go in all-star voting Kessel, Phaneuf, and Reimer are all still in a starters position. Thomas is creeping up on Reimer though.

I'd kind of like for Reimer to not be there, to be honest. Partly because he doesn't really deserve it and partly because having 3 Leafs voted in would probably means Lupul, who does deserve to be there, doesn't get an invite.

I agree with this
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 28, 2011, 12:31:39 PM
The 30 games in 10 game stretches so far.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set
4-5-1

Third set
5-4-1

Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo
Vancouver
Los Angeles
Buffalo
@ NY Islanders
@ Florida
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg

Need to get on a roll.  The standings are way too tight.  Let's hope for at least 6 wins out of the next 10 games.  First few games can be tough, but starting with that Islanders game we need to get on a roll.  Florida is playing well so that game will be tough, but Carolina, Winnipeg, Tampa are all beatable.

So I was hoping for 6 out of 10, we've lost the first 2, now it's gotta be 6 out of 8.  Yikes.




Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo L
Vancouver L
Los Angeles OTL
Buffalo W
@ NY Islanders W
@ Florida L
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg

2-3-1 so far, 4 left.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: drummond on December 28, 2011, 01:09:53 PM
The 30 games in 10 game stretches so far.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set
4-5-1

Third set
5-4-1

Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo
Vancouver
Los Angeles
Buffalo
@ NY Islanders
@ Florida
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg

Need to get on a roll.  The standings are way too tight.  Let's hope for at least 6 wins out of the next 10 games.  First few games can be tough, but starting with that Islanders game we need to get on a roll.  Florida is playing well so that game will be tough, but Carolina, Winnipeg, Tampa are all beatable.

So I was hoping for 6 out of 10, we've lost the first 2, now it's gotta be 6 out of 8.  Yikes.




Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo L
Vancouver L
Los Angeles OTL
Buffalo W
@ NY Islanders W
@ Florida L
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg

2-3-1 so far, 4 left.

To keep up the pace with other teams withing Eastern Conference it basically means to go 3-1 in remaining 4 to make it 5-4-1 (which is nothing spectacular, btw.) The Leafs must beat Carolina, Tampa and Winnipeg once. This may seem tough to achieve, but if the Leafs consider themselves as playoff material, they will have to beat those teams. Simple as that.
Title: Re: General Leafs Talk
Post by: Zee on December 28, 2011, 02:52:22 PM
The 30 games in 10 game stretches so far.

First set - excellent
7-2-1

Second set
4-5-1

Third set
5-4-1

Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo
Vancouver
Los Angeles
Buffalo
@ NY Islanders
@ Florida
@ Carolina
@ Winnipeg
Tampa Bay
Winnipeg

Need to get on a roll.  The standings are way too tight.  Let's hope for at least 6 wins out of the next 10 games.  First few games can be tough, but starting with that Islanders game we need to get on a roll.  Florida is playing well so that game will be tough, but Carolina, Winnipeg, Tampa are all beatable.

So I was hoping for 6 out of 10, we've lost the first 2, now it's gotta be 6 out of 8.  Yikes.




Next 10 games:
@ Buffalo L
Vancouver L
Los Angeles OTL
Buffalo W
@ NY Islanders W