TMLfans.ca

Maple Leafs News and Views => Main Leafs Hockey Talk => Topic started by: Michael on October 11, 2011, 10:40:11 AM

Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Michael on October 11, 2011, 10:40:11 AM
The other night (I think it was opening night right after Andy Frost introduced "Your Captain, Dion Phaneuf) Nik pondered whether or not anyone else felt that Phaneuf was being forced upon us. It's an interesting question. I remember a point last year when fans were booing Phaneuf.

Phaneuf was injured last year early in a game in which the Leafs lost and then he was out for another 16 games after that. In total the Leafs were 5-9-3 in those 17 games and they were 32-25-8 when Dion was in the lineup. If the Leafs managed the same win % without him last year as they did with him they would have had 90 points and been just a hair away from a playoff spot.

I often read about what a great "presence" he is in the dressing room etc. and how valuable he is to the team in that way. I wasn't sure if I was buying that or if it was the management attempting to gain the fans acceptance of him. But I am not sure what to think.

I do know that in the first two games of this year he certainly looks like the guy doing it all out there - leading in ice time, getting points, on the PP, has good +/- and he delivered a clean check that most of us won't forget for a long time.

Dion is growing on me as a solid Leafs captain and someone worthy of the C on a team with a history of some great captains.

I am just wondering how everyone else is feeling about "Your Captain".
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on October 11, 2011, 10:47:00 AM
If he continues to play like he has in the first two games, he'll fit nicely into the role of captain.  He's expected to lead both on and off the ice, we don't know about off the ice since we can't see into the dressing room, but on the ice he's definitely showing the way right now.  He's grown on me as captain since about January of this year.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bender on October 11, 2011, 10:47:27 AM
The other night (I think it was opening night right after Andy Frost introduced "Your Captain, Dion Phaneuf) Nik pondered whether or not anyone else felt that Phaneuf was being forced upon us. It's an interesting question. I remember a point last year when fans were booing Phaneuf.

Phaneuf was injured last year early in a game in which the Leafs lost and then he was out for another 16 games after that. In total the Leafs were 5-9-3 in those 17 games and they were 32-25-8 when Dion was in the lineup. If the Leafs managed the same win % without him last year as they did with him they would have had 90 points and been just a hair away from a playoff spot.

I often read about what a great "presence" he is in the dressing room etc. and how valuable he is to the team in that way. I wasn't sure if I was buying that or if it was the management attempting to gain the fans acceptance of him. But I am not sure what to think.

I do know that in the first two games of this year he certainly looks like the guy doing it all out there - leading in ice time, getting points, on the PP, has good +/- and he delivered a clean check that most of us won't forget for a long time.

Dion is growing on me as a solid Leafs captain and someone worthy of the C on a team with a history of some great captains.

I am just wondering how everyone else is feeling about "Your Captain".

As a collective I think we overanalyze everything. The guy doesn't have to be a media darling to be captain. Is he being pushed on us? It doesn't matter to me to be perfectly honest.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: sampson on October 11, 2011, 10:50:10 AM
I'm starting to appreciate him as the Captain. This will be an important year for him to get solid fan support.

I just don't feel like I did with Gilmour (fav leaf ever) and Sundin yet.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on October 11, 2011, 10:55:50 AM
I'm starting to appreciate him as the Captain. This will be an important year for him to get solid fan support.

I just don't feel like I did with Gilmour (fav leaf ever) and Sundin yet.

Will be tough to get that sort of support until Leafs make the playoffs and he's contributing in a big way. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 11, 2011, 10:57:20 AM
The other night (I think it was opening night right after Andy Frost introduced "Your Captain, Dion Phaneuf) Nik pondered whether or not anyone else felt that Phaneuf was being forced upon us. It's an interesting question. I remember a point last year when fans were booing Phaneuf.

Obviously one of the biggest differences between Phaneuf and any other Captain the Leafs have had in at least 20 years or so is that Phaneuf got the Captaincy without first endearing himself to fans with several years of all-star performance. It's that sort of thing that made me wonder a little at the introduction. When he was described as "your captain" my sort of gut reaction was along the lines of "Well, no, he's your captain". Deciding on a player and stitching the C on his jersey doesn't endear him to me particularly.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: You're right on October 11, 2011, 10:58:07 AM
It's a tough gig being captain in Toronto. There have been a lot of changes and that will require time to adjust to. I think he is becoming more comforatble with the role as time passes.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on October 11, 2011, 11:08:28 AM
The other night (I think it was opening night right after Andy Frost introduced "Your Captain, Dion Phaneuf) Nik pondered whether or not anyone else felt that Phaneuf was being forced upon us. It's an interesting question. I remember a point last year when fans were booing Phaneuf.

Obviously one of the biggest differences between Phaneuf and any other Captain the Leafs have had in at least 20 years or so is that Phaneuf got the Captaincy without first endearing himself to fans with several years of all-star performance. It's that sort of thing that made me wonder a little at the introduction. When he was described as "your captain" my sort of gut reaction was along the lines of "Well, no, he's your captain". Deciding on a player and stitching the C on his jersey doesn't endear him to me particularly.

I think you're reading too much into that introduction.  I think they would announce any captain that way, whether it is Phaneuf or someone else.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 11, 2011, 11:12:49 AM
I'm a huge Sundin fan, so there is a pretty high standard as far as a Captain of the Maple Leafs goes, but I think Phaneuf is going to make a good captain. I know people criticize him for coming in and blasting the music, but there is more to him than that. I think he has the respect of all his teammates already, as judged by the way the team talks about him and he's certainly showing it on the ice since he recovered from his injury last season.

I never worried about his game, as I always knew he was going to step up and improve at some point. I'm still not sure what was the cause of his decline in Calgary, that made Calgary management feel like they could trade him. I'm not convinced it was his salary, as when he plays at this level, he's more than worth his pay IMO. If he can keep up this level of competitiveness, we'll be some happy people at the end of the season, as he is fun to watch on the ice.

All and all, being the captain is really only important to his teammates as I see it, yeah he'll be the face after tough loses and when things aren't going well, but ultimately, he needs to lead by example and rally his mates to improve their game and I think he can do that. I think he is starting to become what we all hoped when we woke up on that January morning to the excitement of a huge trade and believe we got the best player by a landslide.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 11, 2011, 11:13:20 AM
I think you're reading too much into that introduction.  I think they would announce any captain that way, whether it is Phaneuf or someone else.

I don't think I'm reading anything into the introduction itself(although I don't remember Sundin being introduced as such) but rather the question was more about the reality of the situation which the introduction represented.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: AlmosGirl on October 11, 2011, 11:20:16 AM
It's a tough gig being captain in Toronto. There have been a lot of changes and that will require time to adjust to. I think he is becoming more comforatble with the role as time passes.

I agree.  Will he ever get the adoration that Sundin had?  Probably not, Sundin was uniquely special but I think he's doing fine so far.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 11, 2011, 11:23:42 AM
I agree.  Will he ever get the adoration that Sundin had?  Probably not, Sundin was uniquely special but I think he's doing fine so far.

I don't know how unique Sundin is in that regard. Sundin, an argument could probably be made, was maybe the least beloved of the last three Maple Leafs captains.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on October 11, 2011, 11:27:45 AM
I think you're reading too much into that introduction.  I think they would announce any captain that way, whether it is Phaneuf or someone else.

I don't think I'm reading anything into the introduction itself(although I don't remember Sundin being introduced as such) but rather the question was more about the reality of the situation which the introduction represented.

I seem to remember Sundin being introduced as such, but who knows without any video to look back at.

Sundin seems like he was "forced" on the fans.  Which raises another question: does the captain have to be someone who has universal adoration at the time?  If so, why?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on October 11, 2011, 11:28:29 AM
I haven't entirely bought into his captaincy yet. To date, he's sort of been like Rob Ramage as captain - one of the better potential talents on the team who hasn't performed up to expectations or hopes.

I can't fault the team for naming him because they were without a captain for so long. He may well have been the best choice under those circumstances.

Like many Leafs fans, I'll embrace him more as captain when he consistently brings a better performance than he's been able to deliver the last year and a half.

If he plays many of the next 80 games like he played the first two games of this season, that would go a long way to improving my acceptance and respect for his captaincy.

We've talked about how important it is for Reimer to do well. I think the old cliche applies: your best players have to perform like your best players. To date, Dion hasn't really done that - rarely picked as a star in a game during his first one and a half seasons.

As a Leafs fan, I'll support Dion as captain. I just need more from him to really buy in. I don't think that's being unreasonable.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 11, 2011, 11:36:08 AM
Sundin seems like he was "forced" on the fans.  Which raises another question: does the captain have to be someone who has universal adoration at the time?  If so, why?

Like I was saying, I think the big difference there is that Sundin, whatever else someone might say about him, was unquestionably the team's best player when he was named Captain. That's not a case of damning with faint praise either as he was in the midst of his best Leaf season when he got the C.

I can understand someone not knowing enough about Sundin as a player/person in '97 to have the same questions about Sundin's off-ice qualities that we may have about Phaenuf's but at the very least nobody could doubt Sundin's deserving the nod as a player.

I've been a Leafs fan long enough to know when Andy Frost uses the voice he uses before he expects a big cheer from the crowd. When he used it during Phaneuf's intro it received, I thought, noticeably less of a fan reaction than either Grabo or Schenn got.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on October 11, 2011, 11:40:37 AM
Seigel had some comments from Grabovski where he said the room is night and day between what the Habs had when he was there and this Leafs group.  He said the Habs room was full of cliques and the Leafs room is like one big group.

Sure Grabbo is a tad biased as he didn't leave the Habs on very good terms, but it speaks to some good leadership in the room if there are no cliques, and Phaneuf would be the key part of that leadership.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Erndog on October 11, 2011, 11:44:10 AM
Seigel had some comments from Grabovski where he said the room is night and day between what the Habs had when he was there and this Leafs group.  He said the Habs room was full of cliques and the Leafs room is like one big group.

Sure Grabbo is a tad biased as he didn't leave the Habs on very good terms, but it speaks to some good leadership in the room if there are no cliques, and Phaneuf would be the key part of that leadership.


http://www.tsn.ca/toronto/blogs/jonas_siegel/?id=377822


Grabovski remembers a vastly different dressing room environment in Montreal during his early NHL days.

"Everybody made a group," he said, "and they [stayed] in groups; French guys with French guys, Czech guys with Czech guys. Here [it's] better because everybody's together. It doesn't matter what kind of nationality.

"That's better than if you're just friends on the ice."

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bender on October 11, 2011, 11:45:28 AM
I haven't entirely bought into his captaincy yet. To date, he's sort of been like Rob Ramage as captain - one of the better potential talents on the team who hasn't performed up to expectations or hopes.

I can't fault the team for naming him because they were without a captain for so long. He may well have been the best choice under those circumstances.

Like many Leafs fans, I'll embrace him more as captain when he consistently brings a better performance than he's been able to deliver the last year and a half.

If he plays many of the next 80 games like he played the first two games of this season, that would go a long way to improving my acceptance and respect for his captaincy.

We've talked about how important it is for Reimer to do well. I think the old cliche applies: your best players have to perform like your best players. To date, Dion hasn't really done that - rarely picked as a star in a game during his first one and a half seasons.

As a Leafs fan, I'll support Dion as captain. I just need more from him to really buy in. I don't think that's being unreasonable.

I don't think you necessarily need to be the most talented guy on the team in order to be the captain, and I don't know if having a rough year really means he shouldn't be captain. If he's shown flair for leading the room and giving his all amongst other qualities the staff think are important then I think those are the necessary conditions to be made Captain. And while I think he's good, I don't know if he's the best we could've chosen.

I agree with an earlier post in the sense that there wasn't much time to endear himself to fans before becoming captain. Based on his never say die attitude I would give Grabbo a good look for the C.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Peter D. on October 11, 2011, 12:00:27 PM
Despite doing minimal to actually warrant the captaincy (blaring the music when he came in doesn't count), I thought it was a matter of time and a foregone conclusion he was going to be the next captain of the Leafs the second he was traded to the team as he was Burke's prized possession. 

I didn't mind the selection as I felt he was the one who best suited the role (Schenn was/is still too young), but he has yet to take his game to a higher level.  Many know I was a big Sundin fan, but he was able to reach that extra level yet still got an unfair shake despite what he was able to accomplish (you can appreciate it even more now that he's gone and the team's been garbage without him since).  Granted, Sundin did take a little while to grow in the role, so Phaneuf deserves to be given that rope as well.  What I would like to see though is him being able to pull this team along and bring it out of the dumps when things are going wrong. 

The majority of Leaf fans love big, physical Canadian players, so I don't think it'll take much for him to be endured.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 11, 2011, 12:00:28 PM

If he plays many of the next 80 games like he played the first two games of this season, that would go a long way to improving my acceptance and respect for his captaincy.



This is how I feel about it too.  The C is something you earn, IMO, with your play as a Leaf.  He hadn't earned it when he got it.  There was no urgency at the time to have a captain (and maybe there really still isn't -- I don't want to argue this here, but I am sympathetic to claims that the C is vastly overrated).

For me, almost anyone would pale in comparison to Sundin as captain, but that's my personal favoritism speaking.  I don't particularly warm to Phaneuf's personality, but he has been superb in the first 2 games and that's what really matters.  If he keeps it going, I'll be happy to have him wear the C.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Michael on October 11, 2011, 12:05:37 PM
Nik, for what it is worth, I do recall being at Leafs games and Andy Frost introducing Mats with "and your captain, number 13 Mats Sundin" and it always seemed to get a thunderous applause.

When Dion was introduced as such last week there was almost an empty gasp sound and to me that is what made it seemed forced a bit in that regard.

I do think other captains earned the respect and adotration of fans before wearing the C whereas Dion joined a losing team and was given the C because of Brian and Ron's love for him. He is now earning that respect and adoration after the fact.

I hope he keeps going like I saw him Saturday night. If he does people will accept him pretty quickly.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on October 11, 2011, 12:08:00 PM
if Phaneuf keeps playing the way he played in the first two games, he is going to be back in Norris Trophy conversations.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Michael on October 11, 2011, 12:09:14 PM
For me, almost anyone would pale in comparison to Sundin as captain, but that's my personal favoritism speaking. 

The exact same thoughts existed, in their time, for #17 and #93 as well and yet people loved Sundin so much that by the time he left the feeling among some was that he was the finest captain ever - I don't think he was, but some certainly do.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 11, 2011, 12:19:31 PM
Nik, for what it is worth, I do recall being at Leafs games and Andy Frost introducing Mats with "and your captain, number 13 Mats Sundin" and it always seemed to get a thunderous applause.

Youtube isn't a ton of help here unfortunately but the one Sundin-containing pre-game I could find here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djPLQ1mrjKU) only had him being announced as "#13, Mats Sundin". I'm not arguing with your memory, you may be right, but it's nothing I remember particularly.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 11, 2011, 12:22:13 PM
For me, almost anyone would pale in comparison to Sundin as captain, but that's my personal favoritism speaking. 

The exact same thoughts existed, in their time, for #17 and #93 as well and yet people loved Sundin so much that by the time he left the feeling among some was that he was the finest captain ever - I don't think he was, but some certainly do.

Sundin was not accepted by a segment of the fanbase for a long time -- you can guess the likely reason -- and of course a few cranks still refuse to acknowledge that he did an excellent job in that role.

What's unquestionable is that all 3 deserved to be captain based on their play as Leafs.  That's the standard I hold too.  And I hope Phaneuf goes all Norris on us this year so he can join that group.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 11, 2011, 12:24:17 PM
Nik, for what it is worth, I do recall being at Leafs games and Andy Frost introducing Mats with "and your captain, number 13 Mats Sundin" and it always seemed to get a thunderous applause.

Youtube isn't a ton of help here unfortunately but the one Sundin-containing pre-game I could find here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djPLQ1mrjKU) only had him being announced as "#13, Mats Sundin". I'm not arguing with your memory, you may be right, but it's nothing I remember particularly.

FWIW I find "your captain" cloying (as well as "your Toronto Maple Leafs" ... would that they were, I'd love to be that rich).  What I remember is Mats getting introduced as "the captain, number 13" etc.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on October 11, 2011, 12:29:34 PM
I haven't entirely bought into his captaincy yet. To date, he's sort of been like Rob Ramage as captain - one of the better potential talents on the team who hasn't performed up to expectations or hopes.

I can't fault the team for naming him because they were without a captain for so long. He may well have been the best choice under those circumstances.

Like many Leafs fans, I'll embrace him more as captain when he consistently brings a better performance than he's been able to deliver the last year and a half.

If he plays many of the next 80 games like he played the first two games of this season, that would go a long way to improving my acceptance and respect for his captaincy.

We've talked about how important it is for Reimer to do well. I think the old cliche applies: your best players have to perform like your best players. To date, Dion hasn't really done that - rarely picked as a star in a game during his first one and a half seasons.

As a Leafs fan, I'll support Dion as captain. I just need more from him to really buy in. I don't think that's being unreasonable.

I don't think you necessarily need to be the most talented guy on the team in order to be the captain, and I don't know if having a rough year really means he shouldn't be captain. If he's shown flair for leading the room and giving his all amongst other qualities the staff think are important then I think those are the necessary conditions to be made Captain. And while I think he's good, I don't know if he's the best we could've chosen.

I agree with an earlier post in the sense that there wasn't much time to endear himself to fans before becoming captain. Based on his never say die attitude I would give Grabbo a good look for the C.

I also agree the lack of time with the fans is a fair point. But after a year and a half of underachievement ...

I don't think the captain has to be the best player. George Armstrong hoisted four Cups and was a good captain. Conn Smythe thought he was the best Leafs captain to date at the time.

But I do expect the captain to lead by example on the ice and play somewhere close to his potential. In my opinion, Dion hasn't done that in Toronto .. yet.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on October 11, 2011, 12:39:02 PM
The captaincy of Phaneuf was forced upon us, but that was because there was no real alternative at that time.  Kessel, Kulemin, Grabs etc. are all good players, but I do not see them as captain material at this time.  I also think it was important for the organization to have a captain, to give the team a stabalizing influence.  However, if we were to ask ourselves if Phaneuf deserves to be captain of the Leafs, I would answer that with a definite yes.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: anton girdeaux on October 11, 2011, 12:40:57 PM
Very much agree with CW reference Phaneuf; he can run his mouth off etc, but he has to lead by example and play to his talent level.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 11, 2011, 12:44:26 PM
The captaincy of Phaneuf was forced upon us, but that was because there was no real alternative at that time.  Kessel, Kulemin, Grabs etc. are all good players, but I do not see them as captain material at this time. 

I think the easy and obvious alternative at the time was Kaberle as a sort of stand-in until someone established themselves. Kabs was the only guy on the roster who had a legitimate claim to having earned it as a Maple Leaf.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on October 11, 2011, 12:50:02 PM
I recall Andy Frost referring to Sundin as "your captain" - I could be wrong but I thought he made some sort of reference to his captaincy almost habitually.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on October 12, 2011, 08:44:10 AM
But I do expect the captain to lead by example on the ice and play somewhere close to his potential. In my opinion, Dion hasn't done that in Toronto .. yet.

I would argue he does lead by example on the ice.  Sure, the results haven't been as great as his first few years, but it does not appear to be from lack of trying.  By all accounts he works out hard all summer (so much so that Boyce went to go train with him over the summer), and also by all accounts he practices as hard as anyone on the team.  I don't notice him on the ice not giving 100% in games.  Just because he isn't posting the same numbers, or has had some struggles, I think the younger guys can still see the work he puts into it and learn from it.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on October 12, 2011, 11:15:47 AM
But I do expect the captain to lead by example on the ice and play somewhere close to his potential. In my opinion, Dion hasn't done that in Toronto .. yet.

I would argue he does lead by example on the ice.  Sure, the results haven't been as great as his first few years, but it does not appear to be from lack of trying.  By all accounts he works out hard all summer (so much so that Boyce went to go train with him over the summer), and also by all accounts he practices as hard as anyone on the team.  I don't notice him on the ice not giving 100% in games.  Just because he isn't posting the same numbers, or has had some struggles, I think the younger guys can still see the work he puts into it and learn from it.

When you read, see or hear about all the stories from guys on the fringes of the NHL, most of them don't fall short from a lack of effort. Now, I'd be the first one to agree that the last thing you'd want in a captain is a super skilled lazy guy  who floats and gets by on his talent. So it's to his credit that Dion is making the effort. When you're paying the guy $6.5 mil/yr though, I don't think the team, management, the fans or the league should expect anything less.

I just think a captain should not only lead by example in terms of effort but by example in terms of playing up somewhere close to his potential. A number of other guys on the club are giving 110% with their effort as well. A thing that can distinguish those players from their captain to enhance the chances of them respecting and responding to him as a leader is his success on the ice and the results of his efforts.

I don't see that as an absolute criteria such that the captain must lead the team in scoring or something. George Armstrong is a good example of where he didn't score gobs of points, etc. But George Armstrong wasn't paid crazy dough and expected to score gobs of points either. Armstrong's performances were pretty close to his potential.

When Phaneuf is more consistent and playing closer to the potential we've seen from him in the past, I think he'll be accepted better and respected more as a captain by the management, his team and the fans.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bonsixx on October 12, 2011, 02:57:15 PM
If Phaneuf puts up a full season, or even most of one, at the same level he's played the first two games, I really believe that changes EVERYTHING when it comes to expectations for the Leafs this season.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Tigger on October 12, 2011, 06:41:47 PM
After Dions first few games returning from his nasty injury last year I thought he steadily improved and was a part of the reason the Leafs were so successful in the second half.

He may not have 'earned it' in a Leaf uniform but once the writing was on the wall for Kaberle there really weren't a lot of options in that regard, it's remarkable how few games this group has played in blue and white. One could argue that it wasn't necessary to name anyone captain but of all the candidates he probably made the most sense.

I don't think this will be an issue in a couple months either, Phaneuf seems like a guy who can recognize and grab an opportunity when he sees it.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on October 12, 2011, 07:35:31 PM
If he's the one that has convinced Kessel to back-check, he deserves the "C".
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Michael on October 19, 2011, 11:35:11 PM
I think Phaneuf is looking great out there. More than before I get a sense that this is "his team"/ It certainly doesn't hurt to be +8 and have 6 points in the first 5 games.

There are a lot of things to like about the Leafs right now and Phaneuf is one of them.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 19, 2011, 11:36:06 PM
I think Phaneuf is looking great out there. More than before I get a sense that this is "his team"/ It certainly doesn't hurt to be +8 and have 6 points in the first 5 games.

There are a lot of things to like about the Leafs right now and Phaneuf is one of them.

Even his and Kessel's reaction to the tying goal was amazing to see. I've never seen Phil that excited after he's scored.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 19, 2011, 11:43:23 PM
I think Phaneuf is looking great out there. More than before I get a sense that this is "his team"/ It certainly doesn't hurt to be +8 and have 6 points in the first 5 games.

There are a lot of things to like about the Leafs right now and Phaneuf is one of them.

Even his and Kessel's reaction to the tying goal was amazing to see. I've never seen Phil that excited after he's scored.

He had 7 hits tonight as well.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on October 19, 2011, 11:44:14 PM
I think Phaneuf is looking great out there. More than before I get a sense that this is "his team"/ It certainly doesn't hurt to be +8 and have 6 points in the first 5 games.

There are a lot of things to like about the Leafs right now and Phaneuf is one of them.

Even his and Kessel's reaction to the tying goal was amazing to see. I've never seen Phil that excited after he's scored.

(http://images.tsn.ca/images/stories/2011/10/19/leafs_81672.jpg)
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 19, 2011, 11:53:48 PM
Phaneuf's been amazing.  All of my usual gripees have been.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Mack674 on October 20, 2011, 09:14:36 AM
I think Phaneuf is looking great out there. More than before I get a sense that this is "his team"/ It certainly doesn't hurt to be +8 and have 6 points in the first 5 games.

There are a lot of things to like about the Leafs right now and Phaneuf is one of them.

Even his and Kessel's reaction to the tying goal was amazing to see. I've never seen Phil that excited after he's scored.

(http://images.tsn.ca/images/stories/2011/10/19/leafs_81672.jpg)

Beyond Kessel, I think he's been our best player. The little things he does to keep the play going are fantastic. If they can keep this up to the 10-15 game mark im going to get excited..
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on October 20, 2011, 09:56:18 AM
This is the Dion we had hoped for. Kudos to our resident Phaneuf "apologist" (for want of better word) Corn Flake for giving him the benefit of the doubt when a lot of us thought that perhaps we didn't get in the deal what came as advertised. Its obvious to me now that the injury was that affected his game. I officially submit I was less right than I normally am.  ;)   
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cabber24 on October 20, 2011, 10:17:52 AM
He's been awesome. Great anchor, he has Pronger like potential... and I think Pronger is a God... plays half an hour a game and carries any team to the finals, ANA, EDM, & PHI.

A bucket of pucks for Pronger Jr! Now to get Iggy for 2 bucket of pucks...
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Erndog on October 20, 2011, 10:28:28 AM
Phaneuf has been great this year.  Every time he is on the ice I breathe a sigh of relief.  It's as if, 'Ok good, Dion is on, things should be okay for the next 40 seconds'.

I love what he is doing.  Shooting better, passing well, being physical, lugging the puck up the ice.  Leading.  You can see how badly he wants to win.  It's rubbed off on the others.

If he continues to play this well I have no doubt he will get some Norris consideration. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: AlmosGirl on October 20, 2011, 11:25:02 AM
I think Phaneuf is looking great out there. More than before I get a sense that this is "his team"/ It certainly doesn't hurt to be +8 and have 6 points in the first 5 games.

There are a lot of things to like about the Leafs right now and Phaneuf is one of them.

Even his and Kessel's reaction to the tying goal was amazing to see. I've never seen Phil that excited after he's scored.

(http://images.tsn.ca/images/stories/2011/10/19/leafs_81672.jpg)

I thought that was awesome last night and it really stood out for me that this team is really coming together and that these 2 are definitely the leaders!
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Kessel_81 on October 22, 2011, 10:39:00 AM
I think Phaneuf is looking great out there. More than before I get a sense that this is "his team"/ It certainly doesn't hurt to be +8 and have 6 points in the first 5 games.

There are a lot of things to like about the Leafs right now and Phaneuf is one of them.

Even his and Kessel's reaction to the tying goal was amazing to see. I've never seen Phil that excited after he's scored.

(http://images.tsn.ca/images/stories/2011/10/19/leafs_81672.jpg)

I thought that was awesome last night and it really stood out for me that this team is really coming together and that these 2 are definitely the leaders!


AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on October 24, 2011, 12:44:21 AM
Lupul and Lombardi with some nice praise of Dion: http://www.tsn.ca/toronto/blogs/jonas_siegel/?id=378795
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Michael on October 24, 2011, 08:42:40 AM
Lupul and Lombardi with some nice praise of Dion: http://www.tsn.ca/toronto/blogs/jonas_siegel/?id=378795

Thanks for posting that. I had missed it and might not have seen it otherwise.

Great quotes in there from the other players. Very good to see.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cabber24 on October 24, 2011, 10:23:31 AM
F@#% Yeah! Phaneuf is killing it! His upside is the best d-man in the league. He has the potential to win the Norris annually for the next decade. Let's hope he can keep this up! Feels good having him be our captain.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Mordac on October 24, 2011, 10:56:43 AM
F@#% Yeah! Phaneuf is killing it! His upside is the best d-man in the league. He has the potential to win the Norris annually for the next decade. Let's hope he can keep this up!

Welcome to 2005!

Quote
Feels good having him be our captain.

Meh...honestly, I'm totally ambivalent about the captaincy. Phaneuf hasn't shown he deserves the 'C' yet, and certainly hasn't ingrained himself as "Your Captain.", as Sundin, and others before him, did. Maybe it'll come, but it certainly hasn't shown up thus far. Along with that superstar, Norris calibre D-man you're talking about...I'd love for him to show up, too, for more than just flashes.

Maybe soon. One can hope.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on October 24, 2011, 11:08:32 AM
Meh...honestly, I'm totally ambivalent about the captaincy. Phaneuf hasn't shown he deserves the 'C' yet, and certainly hasn't ingrained himself as "Your Captain.", as Sundin, and others before him, did. Maybe it'll come, but it certainly hasn't shown up thus far. Along with that superstar, Norris calibre D-man you're talking about...I'd love for him to show up, too, for more than just flashes.

Maybe soon. One can hope.

Well, over the last 40 games he's played, he's put up 28 points in 40 games, which is a 57-point pace over an 82 game schedule (which would have been good for 4th among D in points last season).  This while playing over 25:00 a night.

Since he's played 92 games now as a Leaf, he's played around 43%ish of those games at the level I mention above.  It's also been acknowledged that there were probably some issues with him coming back to soon from that injury last season, which also has to be taken into account.

Given that, I think that during his time here it's been more than just "flashes", especially if he keeps this up.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on October 24, 2011, 11:18:07 AM
Personally, I have no issues with Dion as Captain. I'm not sure what else he has to prove on or off the ice. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 24, 2011, 11:20:24 AM
Personally, I have no issues with Dion as Captain. I'm not sure what else he has to prove on or off the ice. 

Yeah, I'm pretty comfortable saying that Neon Dion is back and it doesn't look like he is going to slow down anytime soon.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Mordac on October 24, 2011, 11:24:35 AM
Oh, I don't mean to say he's not playing well...just that he's done nothing at all to make me say to myself, "Now THAT is captain material...".

Sundin, Sittler, Clark, etc...they all drew me in as strong leadership figures. Phaneuf plays well, and is a bit of an arrogant prick when he gets riled. To me, there is a difference.

However, my opinion isn't what matters. If the players feel he's an appropriate leader, and listen to him, so be it.

I'd just like a captain who I could rally behind, you know? Phaneuf just doesn't seem to have "it". At least not for me. *shrug*
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Erndog on October 24, 2011, 11:27:58 AM
Oh, I don't mean to say he's not playing well...just that he's done nothing at all to make me say to myself, "Now THAT is captain material...".

Sundin, Sittler, Clark, etc...they all drew me in as strong leadership figures. Phaneuf plays well, and is a bit of an arrogant prick when he gets riled. To me, there is a difference.

However, my opinion isn't what matters. If the players feel he's an appropriate leader, and listen to him, so be it.

I'd just like a captain who I could rally behind, you know? Phaneuf just doesn't seem to have "it". At least not for me. *shrug*

I seem to remember a lot of the same things were being said when Sundin was named captain.  Took some time but he won pretty much everyone over.

I think Dion is doing the same.  When he was first named captain a lot of people said, 'Wha?!?" but as time has passed now a lot more have jumped on board with the idea.

Me? (not that it matters)  I'm full in favour and endorse Dion as Captain.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on October 24, 2011, 11:28:43 AM
Oh, I don't mean to say he's not playing well...just that he's done nothing at all to make me say to myself, "Now THAT is captain material...".

Sundin, Sittler, Clark, etc...they all drew me in as strong leadership figures. Phaneuf plays well, and is a bit of an arrogant prick when he gets riled. To me, there is a difference.

However, my opinion isn't what matters. If the players feel he's an appropriate leader, and listen to him, so be it.

I'd just like a captain who I could rally behind, you know? Phaneuf just doesn't seem to have "it". At least not for me. *shrug*

Are you sure its not just his flat (for want of better word) personality off the ice that bothers you? Because in my mind, he's a different beast most nights on the ice. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Tigger on October 24, 2011, 11:46:15 AM
When I think of the composition of the Calgary teams when Dion broke in they had a real good mix of youth and vets, tough D and good goaltending under Darryl Sutter, I have to wonder what kind of effect Keenan had later on for an aging roster somewhat caught in no mans land rebuild wise ( things like trading a first for Cammalleri only to lose him as an ufa the very next year )

Not that I'm blaming Keenan for what happened but Iron Mike certainly had an effect on things.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Mordac on October 24, 2011, 01:15:15 PM
Oh, I don't mean to say he's not playing well...just that he's done nothing at all to make me say to myself, "Now THAT is captain material...".

Sundin, Sittler, Clark, etc...they all drew me in as strong leadership figures. Phaneuf plays well, and is a bit of an arrogant prick when he gets riled. To me, there is a difference.

However, my opinion isn't what matters. If the players feel he's an appropriate leader, and listen to him, so be it.

I'd just like a captain who I could rally behind, you know? Phaneuf just doesn't seem to have "it". At least not for me. *shrug*

Are you sure its not just his flat (for want of better word) personality off the ice that bothers you? Because in my mind, he's a different beast most nights on the ice.

Could be...though you'd be hard pressed to say Sundin had a personality off the ice...never met a captain so quiet...there was something about him though, that spoke volumes about leadership. Odd.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 24, 2011, 01:20:04 PM

I think there's a certain reality of no team's captain being universally embraced until that player either A) firmly establishes himself as an elite player or B) the team has some success during the captaincy.

Personally I tend to be of the opinion that who the captain is doesn't matter a whole heck of a lot in most cases and the best and the worst thing I can say about Phaneuf right now is that that's probably true of him.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on October 24, 2011, 02:16:51 PM
C'mon people!!!  Let Dion control the radio in your hearts.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Tigger on October 24, 2011, 02:28:00 PM
C'mon people!!!  Let Dion control the radio in your hearts.

Dials in Penfield Mood Organ to 'quietly angry'...
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on October 24, 2011, 03:44:24 PM
C'mon people!!!  Let Dion control the radio in your hearts.

If he continues to play like he has the first 7 games he can come over my house and kick me in the ass every day and I'll respond "thank you Dion, please let me have some more"
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on October 24, 2011, 04:37:26 PM
Another telling stat re. our capt. is he's currently 6th in the NHL in TOI/G @ 26:29. It's early and he'll find a level comparatively with the Webers' and the Keith's, etc. going forward but the point is - good games or bad, he's just a freakin' horse.   
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Tigger on October 24, 2011, 04:47:03 PM
Dion and Kessel, if it weren't for those two and Lupul to a lesser extent the Leafs would be in real trouble.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Kaberle15 on October 24, 2011, 05:40:04 PM
Dion and Kessel, if it weren't for those two and Lupul to a lesser extent the Leafs would be in real trouble.

Thank you Burke ?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Michael on October 30, 2011, 10:15:40 AM
In spite of kessel's great play I am most excited about Phaneuf. He is looking great.

I wonder how Calgary views that trade now - and oh ya, we still have Aullie to boot.  8)
Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on October 30, 2011, 10:37:18 AM
In spite of kessel's great play I am most excited about Phaneuf. He is looking great.

I wonder how Calgary views that trade now - and oh ya, we still have Aullie to boot.  8)

I agree. I can't remember the last time the Leafs had a defenseman who's been dominant in all facets of the game. Phaneuf has been a force in the first 10 games.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on October 30, 2011, 10:44:28 AM
In spite of kessel's great play I am most excited about Phaneuf. He is looking great.

I wonder how Calgary views that trade now - and oh ya, we still have Aullie to boot.  8)

I agree. I can't remember the last time the Leafs had a defenseman who's been dominant in all facets of the game. Phaneuf has been a force in the first 10 games.

Was McCabe the last for a brief period of time do you figure? Maybe not as "dominant" but there was a time he could do it all I think.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on October 30, 2011, 10:46:38 AM
In spite of kessel's great play I am most excited about Phaneuf. He is looking great.

I wonder how Calgary views that trade now - and oh ya, we still have Aullie to boot.  8)

Could answer that a couple of ways:
I've seen it among the debate with Flames media & fans with the Gilmour trade as the worst in franchise history

Of the two players/assets the Flames have left from that deal:
Mike Brown has substantially more ice time than Matt Stajan this season and slightly more than Hagman who previously cleared waivers with Calgary ....

They did get Babchuk (who arguably has some potential but hasn't been able to win a steady spot in the lineup this season) & Kostopoulos (a 31 yr old 4th liner/depth winger) for Ian White & Brett Sutter but both those guys have less ice time than Hagman this season.

Having blown $14 mil on their current 4th line center Stajan (who isn't worth the dough but could play 3rd line), I'd say the current trade assessment flirts with being described as a complete disaster for the Flames while Dion is the 2nd highest scoring dman with the second highest +/- in the league right now and Aulie is waiting in the wings. Like most deals of younger players, maybe giving it more time is fair as Dion may slow down but I don't see how the Flames come close to break even on this deal no matter how long they get.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on October 30, 2011, 11:40:28 AM
Through the first 10 games, here's how Dion shapes among other NHL defencemen;

Points: 2nd (tie)
+/-: 2nd (tie)
Shf/G: 2nd
S/G: 4th
TOI/G: 5th

Pretty impressive.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Strangelove on October 30, 2011, 11:44:21 AM
Yeah i don't really understand it, but Dion is twice the player he was for most of the past few seasons.  Could be that Carl is stabalizing his defensive game a bit, but he looks extremely poised almost every shift.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on November 01, 2011, 08:42:17 PM
Keep the positive vibes around Phaneuf (and Gunnarsson) going..

Quote
Toronto has been out-shot by an average of 4.2 shots per game, which is fifth worst in the league and a trend they’ll want to reverse if they want to return the postseason after all these years away.

The issue is the worst when Phaneuf isn’t on the ice. The Leafs actually out-shoot their opposition when the captain (usually with defence partner Carl Gunnarsson) is on at even strength but are badly out chanced when they’re on the bench.

“We chart scoring chances [for and against] and his numbers are off the chart there,” Wilson said of Phaneuf.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/leafs-beat/are-these-leafs-for-real/article2220487/
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Tigger on November 01, 2011, 08:50:20 PM
High risk, high reward. Can't really argue about that trade though.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 04, 2011, 11:08:25 AM

Not sure if anyone saw this but it's Dion Phaneuf's team photos through the years.

(http://blogimages.thescore.com/nhl/files/2011/10/phaneuf.jpg)

He's just getting angrier and angrier.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on November 04, 2011, 11:27:17 AM

Not sure if anyone saw this but it's Dion Phaneuf's team photos through the years.

(http://blogimages.thescore.com/nhl/files/2011/10/phaneuf.jpg)

He's just getting angrier and angrier.

Seems to be related to the length of his hair.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Mack674 on November 04, 2011, 11:40:32 AM

Not sure if anyone saw this but it's Dion Phaneuf's team photos through the years.

(http://blogimages.thescore.com/nhl/files/2011/10/phaneuf.jpg)

He's just getting angrier and angrier.

LOL Thats so funny it almost had to be photoshopped but the fact it's true makes it even more hilarious. You can't make this stuff up.

1. Im in the NHL! Jubilation!
2. Last year was great! I hope this year is just as fun!
3. I still enjoy playing hockey most of the time =)
4. Work starts at 6am.
5. Im starting to get sick of this ***t in Calgary
6. I know I just got here, but I own this team now. YOU BETTER BE OKAY WITH IT
7. hurry up and take the picture before I murder you.
8. If it takes eating babies to win, thats what it takes.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on November 04, 2011, 11:58:34 AM
The evolution of a serial killer.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on November 15, 2011, 12:06:41 PM
He needs to be a captan and grab this team and help get it going.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Michael on November 15, 2011, 12:17:08 PM
He needs to be a captan and grab this team and help get it going.

.... or walk into Burke's office and have a long chat about how Wilson's not cutting it anymore.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on November 15, 2011, 12:22:08 PM
He needs to be a captan and grab this team and help get it going.

.... or walk into Burke's office and have a long chat about how Wilson's not cutting it anymore.

lolol
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Mordac on November 15, 2011, 12:24:52 PM
He needs to be a fungicide?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on November 15, 2011, 12:47:42 PM
He needs to be a fungicide?

Well-played, good man.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: spiderbob on November 15, 2011, 02:05:10 PM
Not a Dion hater but have noticed he's been kind of lazy the last two games. Just doesn't seem to be moving his feet the way he should be and was pretty lethargic in front of Gus in the Boston game. Don't know if it's him losing confidence in Wilson, or if there is something else going on off the ice but just something I've noticed. Still hoping this guy can take the team on his back like he's shown us glimpses of in the past.

Also is anyone else frustrated by the lack of one timer's  on the PP from all the D(not just Phaneuf)? Too many times I've seen good PP work go to waste because of an in-ability to one time the pass. I don't know if this is a skill set problem or a logistics problem(ie LH Shot on the wrong side?) but it's hard too watch.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: pnjunction on November 17, 2011, 10:34:56 PM
Phaneuf 11 points and +7 in the first 10 games, now 1 point and -6 in the last 9

Along with all the other shiat that has the fan...when it rains in Leaf land it pours
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on November 20, 2011, 12:56:58 PM
Phaneuf 11 points and +7 in the first 10 games, now 1 point and -6 in the last 9

Along with all the other shiat that has the fan...when it rains in Leaf land it pours

H e can get the Leafs going , but i wish he would be more consistant
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: draeko17 on November 20, 2011, 12:58:41 PM
I think he's playing with an injury.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Kessel Run on November 20, 2011, 12:58:50 PM
Well he had a decent game last night, along with another 2 assists.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: draeko17 on November 20, 2011, 01:11:41 PM
I don't think he's playing badly right now, just a little less dynamically than he was.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on November 26, 2011, 12:42:00 AM
6 pts in his last 4 brings him up to 18 points in 23 games now.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: L K on November 26, 2011, 12:44:41 AM
6 pts in his last 4 brings him up to 18 points in 23 games now.

I went to go check where that had him for defensive scoring (obviously figured) high.  He's in a 3-way tie for 2nd (more GP though) behind Brian Campbell and Erik Karlsson.

What impressed me more?  6G 10A +8 - Nik Lidstrom.  The guy just doesn't age.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Deebo on November 26, 2011, 12:55:38 AM
What impressed me more?  6G 10A +8 - Nik Lidstrom.  The guy just doesn't age.

It's ridiculous, his prodcution was from day one in the NHL.

60 points his rookie year, 15 50+ point years 9 of which are 60+ and 4 70+.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: L K on November 26, 2011, 01:03:49 AM
What impressed me more?  6G 10A +8 - Nik Lidstrom.  The guy just doesn't age.

It's ridiculous, his prodcution was from day one in the NHL.

60 points his rookie year, 15 50+ point years 9 of which are 60+ and 4 70+.

I don't even know how to describe how good he is.  He's 6th in all time defense scoring behind Larry Murphy, Phil Housley, Al MacInnis, Paul Coffey and Ray Bourque.  He probably won't catch any of them unless he plays for another 2-3 years as he is still 90-110 points back of 5th and 4th, but you have to keep him mind that he played the majority of his career in the dead-puck era of the 90s/2000s. 

Of guys who starting in the late 80s/early 90s, the next best scorer is Brian Leetch with 1028 points starting 4 years earlier than Lidstrom.  Rob Blake with 777 points (a little under 400 points short of Lidstrom).  Niedermayer who started in the same year as Lidstrom has 740 points. 

Then you couple it with his defensive play and the continual barrage of post-season runs every year and the man is an absolute machine.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on December 07, 2011, 04:24:10 PM
Again, Dad's reaction... absolutely priceless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1GcHkhmdzE

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: LuncheonMeat on December 07, 2011, 04:46:13 PM
Again, Dad's reaction... absolutely priceless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1GcHkhmdzE

You know you've been hit when your helmet flies off and your holding a piece of stick in each hand.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on December 07, 2011, 11:53:03 PM
Quote
What do these advanced stats say about Toronto's defencemen? For one, Dion Phaneuf has been a very big part of the blueline, leading the group in facing the other team's top lines every night (qualcomp) and also doing very well when it comes to puck possession (corsi rel).

Phaneuf's play has also been better than his plus-minus would indicate, as he has the lowest PDO of this group. For the most part, he's having a great year and been one of their best players.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/what-advanced-statistics-say-about-the-leafs-start/article2263263/

And an explanation of the stats: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/hockeys-new-numbers/article2178781/
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Michael on December 08, 2011, 11:43:01 PM
Nice piece on the improvement in Dion's game. Looks like Wilson gets some credit on this.

link (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/leafs-beat/dion-phaneuf-becomes-a-hit-by-taking-fewer-of-them/article2265341/)
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: slapshot on December 30, 2011, 03:59:37 PM
Got to say I was really disappointed with Phaneuf's play against the Canes.
First he fails to read the play between Aulie and Staal, leads to second Canes goal.
Then, he fails to clear the crease on their third goal.
Finally, what I don't understand, no media interview with him after the game?
As captain he should have been accountable for that debacle.
I can't imagine the media not wanting to interview him about those goals. If he wasn't asked about them, shame of the media. If he wasn't giving interviews, shame on him.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on January 10, 2012, 11:14:34 AM
Blog on Phanuef as a captain:

http://www.tsn.ca/toronto/blogs/jonas_siegel/?id=384649
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on January 10, 2012, 12:11:20 PM
That's a very complimentary blog about him as the captain.

I often forget he's only 26 years old.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: lamajama on January 10, 2012, 12:16:06 PM
If he's that wound up all the time I wonder how he reacts with himself when he gets owned, like by Mason Raymond in the Canuck game. I do not say this in jest but often guys like this develop head problems from the pressure they put on themselves.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on January 10, 2012, 12:34:14 PM
I think Phaneuf was the perfect choice as captain of this team.  You needed a guy who wouldn't crumble under the spotlight, and Phaneuf was already a "known" name from his Calgary days.  He's talented, tough and at times brash.  With a young, evolving team like the Leafs, it's good to have a strong character filling in the captains role. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on February 24, 2012, 01:32:06 PM
Anyone else shuddering everytime he steps on the ice?  I am not sure if it is the style employed by RW, but Phaneuf is playing like titts on a bull.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Guilt Trip on February 24, 2012, 01:38:07 PM
Phaneuf's issue has always been his hockey sense, or lack there of. All the tools, but doesn't have the brain.....
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on February 24, 2012, 01:41:56 PM
I've made my feelings about Phaneuf clear in the Burke thread.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zid on February 24, 2012, 01:47:50 PM
All the tools with an IQ of a peanut.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on February 24, 2012, 01:51:22 PM
I've defended our captain a lot this year but I was at the game last night and followed him a lot. - I didn't like what I saw. I think he's wrapped up in trying to find guys to murder when perhaps he should be just focusing on playing the game... He's got the skills. That much is clear to me.   
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Crake on February 24, 2012, 01:59:07 PM
I've defended our captain a lot this year but I was at the game last night and followed him a lot. - I didn't like what I saw. I think he's wrapped up in trying to find guys to murder when perhaps he should be just focusing on playing the game... He's got the skills. That much is clear to me.   

He's trying to do too much, especially with the team on a losing streak. He can and has been a great player, he just needs to play to his strengths.

As much as we would like to think otherwise, he is closer to Bryan McCabe than Chris Pronger. Trying to force him to be the latter just sets him up to fail. McCabe at his peak was a very good top pairing dman, he just couldn't sustain that level for more than a few years.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on February 29, 2012, 11:33:04 PM
How many more years are we stuck with this wipe?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zid on February 29, 2012, 11:34:13 PM
Captain Peanut!!!!!
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on February 29, 2012, 11:57:21 PM
How many more years are we stuck with this wipe?

Two more after this.

His captaincy to me was Burke's way of conceding we didn't have an elite player on the roster and too much time had passed since we last did.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on March 01, 2012, 12:01:50 AM
How many more years are we stuck with this wipe?

Two more after this.

His captaincy to me was Burke's way of conceding we didn't have an elite player on the roster and too much time had passed since we last did.

I think that's exactly it.  And he was spectacularly wrong.  And, as I pointed out elsewhere, his inability to admit he was wrong has given us a inconsistent, non-elite defenseman who is both untradeable and unbenchable because of the letter.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on March 01, 2012, 12:05:47 AM
I say bump his PP time ever so slightly and cut his regular strength time a healthy amount.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bonsixx on March 01, 2012, 12:18:06 AM
He's essentially Brian McCabe, armed with the ability to deliver brutal hits.

Nothing wrong with that, he just shouldn't be playing a half-hour every game.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on March 01, 2012, 12:20:59 AM
He's essentially Brian McCabe, armed with the ability to deliver brutal hits.

Nothing wrong with that, he just shouldn't be playing a half-hour every game.

He does log a lot of minutes.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on March 01, 2012, 12:40:52 AM
How many more years are we stuck with this wipe?

Two more after this.

His captaincy to me was Burke's way of conceding we didn't have an elite player on the roster and too much time had passed since we last did.

I think that's exactly it.  And he was spectacularly wrong.  And, as I pointed out elsewhere, his inability to admit he was wrong has given us a inconsistent, non-elite defenseman who is both untradeable and unbenchable because of the letter.

When you have Komisarek as one of your top 7, you can't really expect them to bench Dion much. He may not be elite but he hasn't been nearly as marginal/bad as Komisarek.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on March 01, 2012, 12:49:24 AM
How many more years are we stuck with this wipe?

Two more after this.

His captaincy to me was Burke's way of conceding we didn't have an elite player on the roster and too much time had passed since we last did.

I think that's exactly it.  And he was spectacularly wrong.  And, as I pointed out elsewhere, his inability to admit he was wrong has given us a inconsistent, non-elite defenseman who is both untradeable and unbenchable because of the letter.

When you have Komisarek as one of your top 7, you can't really expect them to bench Dion much. He may not be elite but he hasn't been nearly as marginal/bad as Komisarek.

I disagree. I see him making mistake after mistake after mistake.  Tonight's final shot.  Not tying up a guy's stick who scores on a tip.  Giveaways in our zone.  Giveaways in their zone.  Fumbling the puck.  Missing the net by a country mile more often than not.

Komisarek hasn't been good, of course.  But Phaneuf gets loads of ice in all important situations and fails in all of them.  The very fact that we are comparing the two of them ... well it's just depressing.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on March 01, 2012, 01:09:43 AM
How many more years are we stuck with this wipe?

Two more after this.

His captaincy to me was Burke's way of conceding we didn't have an elite player on the roster and too much time had passed since we last did.

I think that's exactly it.  And he was spectacularly wrong.  And, as I pointed out elsewhere, his inability to admit he was wrong has given us a inconsistent, non-elite defenseman who is both untradeable and unbenchable because of the letter.

When you have Komisarek as one of your top 7, you can't really expect them to bench Dion much. He may not be elite but he hasn't been nearly as marginal/bad as Komisarek.

I disagree. I see him making mistake after mistake after mistake.  Tonight's final shot.  Not tying up a guy's stick who scores on a tip.  Giveaways in our zone.  Giveaways in their zone.  Fumbling the puck.  Missing the net by a country mile more often than not.

Komisarek hasn't been good, of course.  But Phaneuf gets loads of ice in all important situations and fails in all of them.  The very fact that we are comparing the two of them ... well it's just depressing.

Even if Komisarek is better defensively and that's at least debatable, Dion does contribute offensively and without that this team would be sunk much worse than they are. Because the balance of the club isn't strong defensively, they have to run and gun to try to keep up. If they tried to do that with Komisarek, they might as well give up.

I wish we didn't have to use Phaneuf on the PK and at even strength as much because he is clumsy and lacking in hockey sense to be very reliable defensively. But we really don't have a shutdown guy and most of our dmen are also suspect defensively.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on March 01, 2012, 08:51:56 AM
Not tying up a guy's stick who scores on a tip.

I mean, without having the ability to look through tape of every great defenseman out there, I'm going to hazard a pretty safe guess that every D that logs big minutes makes mistakes like this, makes giveaways, etc.  Some of them will be predominantly defensive d-men and do all or most of their contributing defensively, others may be an elite mix, and still others will be predominantly offensive d-men. 

Phaneuf clearly falls into the latter category, and I don't know why you'd expect otherwise.  But in saying that, he's nowhere near as bad as the hyperbole that gets thrown around about him.  His first half was better than his second half has been, but even still he's being talked about as though he can't do anything defensively.  He's not great defensively, but he's top 10 in D offensively, so he's contributing to a team that lacks in depth scoring. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: proteus2000 on March 01, 2012, 09:27:40 AM
Phaneuf atoi is at 25:21, the next highest is Gunnar at 22:01... obviously when he plays 9 more minutes a night than Franson, Schenn, Komi, he makes a higher number of mistakes ESPECIALLY since he is the main QB on defense after Liles (Gardiner is being groomed for this now as well).

He does make boneheaded plays and can get caught flatfooted, but the problem lies in not trusting to put other D on the ice and give him a break. If the Leafs had a solid shutdown guy that could log 20+ minutes, it would help Phaneuf focus on what he excels at. Sitting 4th in points on the team is pretty impressive.



Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on March 08, 2012, 11:37:13 AM
My apologies for the intemperate rants about Phaneuf last night.  I just get so bummed out watching that guy supposedly "lead" us.

What Proteus says above, and what several posters said late in the GDT, is true.  Phaneuf is set up to fail by being given too much ice and too much leadership responsibility, which he simply can't handle.

My hope is that Schenn can, under Carlyle's tutelage, turn into the shutodwn guy Proteus refers to above.  That, and a goalie, are our 2 biggest needs, miles ahead of anything on offense.  Just look the the GA during the death spiral.  Our defense killed our chances this year.

But if Schenn can't do it -- and soon -- deal him and find someone who can.  Too bad Komi didn't work out.  I'll give Burke credit for at least trying to find thte shutdown guy.

Whatever the case, it's imperative to cut Phaneuf's TOI considerably, and as long as Kessel's on the team the 2 of them should never been on together.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on March 08, 2012, 12:00:47 PM
They need to dial his minutes back significantly.

He should play 22 tops, I'd be happier at around 20.

We also need to be quicker to change on the PP, I hate seeing him play 90 or more of the 120 seconds of the PP when it is failing miserably.  I also don't think he is significantly better than Gardiner and Franson in this area if they where given the same opportunities.

The one play I have seen from him in the last few weeks, that was anything close to exceptional, was the back-check in OT against Edmonton where he chased the guy who had a 10 foot lead on him, he lifted the stick and we went the other way and won it.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zid on March 08, 2012, 12:24:52 PM
They need to dial his minutes back significantly.

He should play 22 tops, I'd be happier at around 20.

We also need to be quicker to change on the PP, I hate seeing him play 90 or more of the 120 seconds of the PP when it is failing miserably.  I also don't think he is significantly better than Gardiner and Franson in this area if they where given the same opportunities.

The one play I have seen from him in the last few weeks, that was anything close to exceptional, was the back-check in OT against Edmonton where he chased the guy who had a 10 foot lead on him, he lifted the stick and we went the other way and won it.

I agree completely. I don't think he should be the first one out there on the PP as well. I rather have Liles and Franson (or Gardiner) out there.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Tigger on March 08, 2012, 04:54:31 PM
Just so I have this right you guys are suggesting that Phaneuf, with the 4th highest PP totals among defensmen in the league right now with 21 PPp should be replaced with Franson who's career year, in terms of PP production, is this year with 7 PPp?

Truly nutty.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zid on March 08, 2012, 04:57:58 PM
Just so I have this right you guys are suggesting that Phaneuf, with the 4th highest PP totals among defensmen in the league right now with 21 PPp should be replaced with Franson who's career year, in terms of PP production, is this year with 7 PPp?

Truly nutty.

An average power play is what 15%? You put the same guy out there for full 2 min for every PP chances are he will get a lot of points. It doesn't mean you can't try someone else.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Tigger on March 08, 2012, 05:12:35 PM
Just so I have this right you guys are suggesting that Phaneuf, with the 4th highest PP totals among defensmen in the league right now with 21 PPp should be replaced with Franson who's career year, in terms of PP production, is this year with 7 PPp?

Truly nutty.

An average power play is what 15%? You put the same guy out there for full 2 min for every PP chances are he will get a lot of points. It doesn't mean you can't try someone else.

Franson had 6 PPp with almost a full two minutes of PP toi with Nashville in each of his two seasons there so, no.

Also, a quick look at the list of PPtoi leaders shows a significant amount of dmen above Phaneuf ( Letang, Boyle, Doughty, Visnovsky, Del Zotto, Kaberle, Johnson, etc. ) yet with significantly lower production.

To suggest that Franson could do better just 'because' flies in the face of the reality of the situation.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on March 09, 2012, 03:46:56 PM
Just so I have this right you guys are suggesting that Phaneuf, with the 4th highest PP totals among defensmen in the league right now with 21 PPp should be replaced with Franson who's career year, in terms of PP production, is this year with 7 PPp?

Truly nutty.


Show me in my post where I said that...

I said I don't think he is significantly better if Franson was given the same opportunity. 

This means, give Phaneuf more yes, but not 90 or so at least seconds of every PP.  Get him off quicker is all and I don't think it would hurt our PP significantly.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Tigger on March 09, 2012, 03:57:25 PM
Just so I have this right you guys are suggesting that Phaneuf, with the 4th highest PP totals among defensmen in the league right now with 21 PPp should be replaced with Franson who's career year, in terms of PP production, is this year with 7 PPp?

Truly nutty.


Show me in my post where I said that...

I said I don't think he is significantly better if Franson was given the same opportunity. 

This means, give Phaneuf more yes, but not 90 or so at least seconds of every PP.  Get him off quicker is all and I don't think it would hurt our PP significantly.

Sorry Wigwal, you got lumped in there when you were mostly talking about overall minutes. I don't really agree on Franson being potentially as productive, fwiw, Phaneuf has been pretty darn effective on the PP this year but I get the point, a little less might be a little more overall.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on March 10, 2012, 11:39:29 AM
No worries, I think we're on the same page for the most part.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Michael on March 30, 2012, 04:24:28 PM
I don't think Phaneuf looks like much of a leader now at all. No one can blame this whole mess on him, but when a team is this bad things have to happen. Wilson is gone and yet the problem continues. Ship Phaneuf out this summer and send a message that losing is not a culture that the Leafs will accept any longer.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: proteus2000 on March 30, 2012, 06:19:59 PM
I don't think Phaneuf looks like much of a leader now at all. No one can blame this whole mess on him, but when a team is this bad things have to happen. Wilson is gone and yet the problem continues. Ship Phaneuf out this summer and send a message that losing is not a culture that the Leafs will accept any longer.

And replace his 25:21 ATOI with whom next year? Weber and Suter sure aren't signing here. The Leafs' defense are all either plodding or soft, all have a tendency to make mistakes with the puck, and I still think Phaneuf is (sadly) the most trustworthy guy we have on the backend. When he plays 9 more minutes/game, 55% more, than Schenn/Franson/Komi etc, obviously his mistakes can stand out more. The Leafs need to scale back his minutes, but I don't think the coaching staff has had any justification to give more minutes to the other dmen.

Phaneuf is not the main issue with the team or defense. We won't have an answer via FA this year- no way does he get moved unless a team actually anties something up of value, which I doubt. Hopefully some of the younger dmen bring a more consistent game next yr enabling the Leafs to dump him and his $6.5 mil even for nothing.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: ontariojames on April 11, 2012, 12:22:23 AM
What are your opinions on his skating? I've read some comments on here about his skating not being very good but I'm not sure if the people who made those comments were referring to his backwards skating or forwards skating. Skating has always been talked about as one of his strengths and he looks pretty fast to me when he's rushing the puck up the ice.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Jalili on April 11, 2012, 03:02:44 AM
What are your opinions on his skating? I've read some comments on here about his skating not being very good but I'm not sure if the people who made those comments were referring to his backwards skating or forwards skating. Skating has always been talked about as one of his strengths and he looks pretty fast to me when he's rushing the puck up the ice.

His mechanics aren't pretty, but he's got decent mobility for a D-man. It might be the way he skates that gives him a bad rap. Some guys are effortless skaters with smooth strides, and he's definitely not one of them.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on April 11, 2012, 12:28:09 PM
What are your opinions on his skating? I've read some comments on here about his skating not being very good but I'm not sure if the people who made those comments were referring to his backwards skating or forwards skating. Skating has always been talked about as one of his strengths and he looks pretty fast to me when he's rushing the puck up the ice.

His skating is fine.  The problem is his lack of leadership and his soft play at times. 

When questioned by a media guy about his leadership being a problem, Phaneuf deflected the criticsm.  My belief in leadership is, take the blame when things go sour and don't be deflecting the blame onto others.  It is up to the leader to set an example for the rest of the players and to be able to give them a kick in the rear end when they need it.  If Phaneuf said he failed as a captain and needed to do better, that he wasn't satisfied with his performance or that of the team, I would have been okay with that because he was speaking from the heart.  Now, if he did say something similar to that, I did not hear it.  Conversely, when the team does well, share the credit around because to make the other team members feel proud about the team's success.  A leader cannot accept sole success for the the team's success.

As for playing soft, it drove me crazy when he would do a soft poke check, hoping to take the puck away from the carrier, but it always resulted in the puck carrier blowing past Phaneuf, resulting in a goal or a scoring chance.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CarltonTheBear on April 11, 2012, 12:32:07 PM
What are your opinions on his skating? I've read some comments on here about his skating not being very good but I'm not sure if the people who made those comments were referring to his backwards skating or forwards skating. Skating has always been talked about as one of his strengths and he looks pretty fast to me when he's rushing the puck up the ice.

One of my biggest problems with Phaneuf is that he doesn't rush the puck enough. I'll always remember that one play in overtime against Pittsburgh I think where he went end-to-end and passed off to Grabs who scored.

I seem to rememer that Wilson wasn't nuts about his defencemen carrying the puck, so hopefully we see that change a little under Randy.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on April 11, 2012, 12:33:16 PM
When questioned by a media guy about his leadership being a problem, Phaneuf deflected the criticsm.

You're right:

Quote
“It’s part of being the captain of the team,” Phaneuf said. “I definitely accept responsibility for the way this season has ended.

“I take that upon myself.”
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Tigger on April 11, 2012, 12:44:41 PM
What are your opinions on his skating? I've read some comments on here about his skating not being very good but I'm not sure if the people who made those comments were referring to his backwards skating or forwards skating. Skating has always been talked about as one of his strengths and he looks pretty fast to me when he's rushing the puck up the ice.

One of my biggest problems with Phaneuf is that he doesn't rush the puck enough. I'll always remember that one play in overtime against Pittsburgh I think where he went end-to-end and passed off to Grabs who scored.

I seem to rememer that Wilson wasn't nuts about his defencemen carrying the puck, so hopefully we see that change a little under Randy.

It's fine for them to be able to rush it up the ice but Wilson wasn't wrong to me, you can pass it a lot faster than you can skate it.

Fwiw, Phaneuf isn't the worst skater I've ever seen.

I don't think he's ever really soft, sometimes he looks gassed though, a consideration where his minutes are concerned.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on April 11, 2012, 12:48:11 PM
I don't think he's ever really soft, sometimes he looks gassed though, a consideration where his minutes are concerned.

That's it too me also, he plays so many minutes, that he gets gassed if he doesn't change when he probably should.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: LuncheonMeat on April 11, 2012, 01:27:06 PM
I don't think he's ever really soft, sometimes he looks gassed though, a consideration where his minutes are concerned.

That's it too me also, he plays so many minutes, that he gets gassed if he doesn't change when he probably should.

And you can always tell with him when he reaches that point because he stands around and watches the play.  I wonder with Carlyle's line-matching tendencies if we see shorter shifts (and maybe more of them) when the team plays next year.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on April 11, 2012, 01:47:15 PM
And you can always tell with him when he reaches that point because he stands around and watches the play.  I wonder with Carlyle's line-matching tendencies if we see shorter shifts (and maybe more of them) when the team plays next year.

Yeah, maybe, but I think Phaneuf will still be relied on heavily to carry the load on D.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bbt on April 11, 2012, 05:02:52 PM
And let's hope he isn't carrying that load with a "C" on his jersey! 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: moon111 on April 11, 2012, 06:50:58 PM
I wouldn't be disappointed to see him traded for Edmonton's 1st.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on April 12, 2012, 01:13:43 PM
I wouldn't be disappointed to see him traded for Edmonton's 1st.

Edmonton would have to be on crack to make that trade, unless there were others involved.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: A Weekend at Bernier's on April 13, 2012, 10:16:47 AM
I wouldn't be disappointed to see him traded for Edmonton's 1st.

Edmonton would have to be on crack to make that trade, unless there were others involved.

While I agree that Edmonton would have to be crazy to trade the first overall for Phaneuf, the bashing this guy gets is so over-the-top.  He's a very good defenseman.  Not great.  He's still young enough that he's got time to mature into an even better player.  But he's not a Weber, Chara, Karlsson, etc.  But is that his fault?  Is it his fault Sutter gave him a, what is now in hindsight, ridiculous contract?  Is it his fault he's not particularly charismatic?  Did he petition for the 'C' by befriending Burke and Nonis and politik like #28 (well, maybe, I don't know)?  What I'm saying is that the criticisms levied against Phaneuf are the result that he's an easy target.  But making it seem like he's a worthless pile of manure with no value to the team or across the League is crazy to me.

Too many minutes.  Too much emphasis.  Lack of strong support around him.  All of these can be rectified.  If and when they do, you'll see a much more effective player.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on April 13, 2012, 03:31:33 PM
I wouldn't be disappointed to see him traded for Edmonton's 1st.

Edmonton would have to be on crack to make that trade, unless there were others involved.

While I agree that Edmonton would have to be crazy to trade the first overall for Phaneuf, the bashing this guy gets is so over-the-top.  He's a very good defenseman.  Not great.  He's still young enough that he's got time to mature into an even better player.  But he's not a Weber, Chara, Karlsson, etc.  But is that his fault?  Is it his fault Sutter gave him a, what is now in hindsight, ridiculous contract?  Is it his fault he's not particularly charismatic?  Did he petition for the 'C' by befriending Burke and Nonis and politik like #28 (well, maybe, I don't know)?  What I'm saying is that the criticisms levied against Phaneuf are the result that he's an easy target.  But making it seem like he's a worthless pile of manure with no value to the team or across the League is crazy to me.

Too many minutes.  Too much emphasis.  Lack of strong support around him.  All of these can be rectified.  If and when they do, you'll see a much more effective player.

The criticisms in Calgary against him are pretty much the same here.  Yes he can nail someone into next week with one of his checks, and for sticking up for his team mates, he is right up there.  However, he is prone to turnovers, he takes silly penalties because he gets caught out of position and he plays too soft sometimes for a player who is supposed to be physical.  When a player's negative reputation does not change from team to team, it will be difficult to change.   

However, I do agree with your other point.  Maybe if the defensive system changes under Carlyle that provides better support between the forwards and d-men, then perhaps Phaneuf will be more effective.  Until then, if I am another GM, unless I knew my coach had a really good defensive system, and unless my coach really wanted Phaneuf on the team, I would not consider trading a 1st for him. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: moon111 on April 13, 2012, 08:59:44 PM
I wouldn't be disappointed to see him traded for Edmonton's 1st.

Edmonton would have to be on crack to make that trade, unless there were others involved.
I actually think Toronto would be losing in that deal, but then again I'm not really excited by this draft.  Maybe it's just past experience that has equated the Leafs with a good draft position with equally bad depth at the draft.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: princedpw on April 14, 2012, 09:00:47 AM
I wouldn't be disappointed to see him traded for Edmonton's 1st.

Edmonton would have to be on crack to make that trade, unless there were others involved.
I actually think Toronto would be losing in that deal, but then again I'm not really excited by this draft.  Maybe it's just past experience that has equated the Leafs with a good draft position with equally bad depth at the draft.

I think that trade would be a huge win for the leafs, which is why Edmonton would not do it.  A#1 overall forward will usually become a top-10 forward league-wide in their prime.  It would open 6.5 million in cap space that could be used for, perhaps Suter as a UFA. Even if we could not fill the space properly this offseason, it would be great longer term.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Andy on April 14, 2012, 09:14:10 AM
I'm not sure the market is that big/attractive for Phaneuf. EDM won't give up the 1st overall pick for him, even with a big salary dump included.

I wonder about a team like Montreal. They could use a solid D with offensive potential and would love to get out under the Kaberle contract. Would anyone do Phaneuf for Kaberle and Montreal's 2nd (33 overall)?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: lamajama on April 14, 2012, 12:17:26 PM
I think - well I know - Burke is not trading Phaneuf unless he's offered
a Getzlaff or Perry or Eric Staal etc. No one in the NHL would do this for a captain that picks a scrap and then backs down 3/4 of the time. If he traded him for less, he'd have to admit that his choice of cornerstone/captain was wrong. And we all know that just ain't happening.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: sneakyray on April 14, 2012, 12:35:20 PM
I don't know if its as impossible as you think (re traking phaneuf) Burke did it with beauchemin and versteeg.  Also, to me the most telling thing is that at the year end presser Elliot Friedman asked burke if he had a list of untouchables.  Burke said he had to think about it but that it was a fair question that he would answer it later.

If the captain was untouchable wouldn't burke have started with him...or at least given the schenn trade deadline answer (nobodies untouchable but we're not shopping him blah, blah, blah)

so maybe burke is considering moving some of the big guns if the return is good enough.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bates on April 14, 2012, 01:18:10 PM
There is no such thing as an "untouchable" in sports.  Pens love Malkin, don't want to trade him.  Now imagine Ducks call offering Getzlaf, Perry, and Ryan.  Malkin is now no longer untouchable.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: princedpw on April 14, 2012, 04:52:05 PM
There is no such thing as an "untouchable" in sports.  Pens love Malkin, don't want to trade him.  Now imagine Ducks call offering Getzlaf, Perry, and Ryan.  Malkin is now no longer untouchable.

While it is literally true that any player can be part of a trade, there are some players who are so exceptionally unlikely to be traded that it is not worth wasting time discussing it. In such situations, people use the word untouchable.  For example: "Chara is untouchable." "Lidstrom is untouchable"
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Spare Change on April 14, 2012, 06:19:11 PM
There is no such thing as an "untouchable" in sports.  Pens love Malkin, don't want to trade him.  Now imagine Ducks call offering Getzlaf, Perry, and Ryan.  Malkin is now no longer untouchable.

3 words....

No. Movement. Clause.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bates on April 14, 2012, 07:05:45 PM
Yeah because no one has ever been traded that had a no movement clause. You want rid of someone make Life miserable for them to stay and they will waive quickly.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: moon111 on April 14, 2012, 07:18:48 PM
I'm not sure the market is that big/attractive for Phaneuf. EDM won't give up the 1st overall pick for him, even with a big salary dump included.

I wonder about a team like Montreal. They could use a solid D with offensive potential and would love to get out under the Kaberle contract. Would anyone do Phaneuf for Kaberle and Montreal's 2nd (33 overall)?
I'd do it for Montreal's 1st overall and if Kaberle's contract would allow him to replace Jeff Finger.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on April 14, 2012, 09:29:09 PM
I'd be shocked if we traded Phaneuf but Pittsburgh's woes on D have me thinking abut a deal with the principles being Phaneuf and Staal.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on April 14, 2012, 09:39:59 PM
I'd be shocked if we traded Phaneuf but Pittsburgh's woes on D have me thinking abut a deal with the principles being Phaneuf and Staal.

When they have Letang and Martin already, how does acquiring an offensive-minded d-man, and giving up one of the better defensive centers, help their D woes?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: princedpw on April 14, 2012, 10:03:53 PM
Basically, the penguins are not going to completely reorganize their team by taking on Phaneuf's 6.5 million contract when they had the 2nd best goal differential and the 4th best defense in the East despite missing Crosby for 80% of the season.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: puckhog78 on April 14, 2012, 10:28:30 PM
if you guys are talking fantasyland and what you want to happen fine, but if you actually think Deon is going anywhere youll be dissapointed as theres a 100% chance he's a leaf next year. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on April 14, 2012, 10:34:20 PM
if you guys are talking fantasyland and what you want to happen fine, but if you actually think Deon is going anywhere youll be dissapointed as theres a 100% chance he's a leaf next year.

Well, that's just an absurd statement.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on April 14, 2012, 11:00:52 PM
I'd be shocked if we traded Phaneuf but Pittsburgh's woes on D have me thinking abut a deal with the principles being Phaneuf and Staal.

When they have Letang and Martin already, how does acquiring an offensive-minded d-man, and giving up one of the better defensive centers, help their D woes?

Okay, agreed. Fair point.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on April 14, 2012, 11:01:36 PM
Basically, the penguins are not going to completely reorganize their team by taking on Phaneuf's 6.5 million contract when they had the 2nd best goal differential and the 4th best defense in the East despite missing Crosby for 80% of the season.

That's fair too.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on April 14, 2012, 11:05:47 PM
The more I think about it, I just don't see a market for Dion... Which is fine because I still think you can win with him.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: puckhog78 on April 14, 2012, 11:06:19 PM
if you guys are talking fantasyland and what you want to happen fine, but if you actually think Deon is going anywhere youll be dissapointed as theres a 100% chance he's a leaf next year.

Well, that's just an absurd statement.

How so?

if posters here are stating what they would do if they were in charge [armchair GM] thats one thing, but if the people in this thread actually think theres a chance phaneuf gets moved and are speculating as to a possible deal, well theyre going to be dissapointed as Deon will assuredly be back in blue and white next year as the organization believes in him.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: moon111 on April 15, 2012, 12:26:47 AM
I'm pretty sure Burke would consider all angles.  Some didn't think Fuhr would be traded, but in came this kid Potvin they thought could do the job.  The emergence of Gardiner has to considered.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Spare Change on April 15, 2012, 12:37:21 AM
Yeah because no one has ever been traded that had a no movement clause. You want rid of someone make Life miserable for them to stay and they will waive quickly.

a player with an NMC is completely 100% untouchable unless he wants to be moved.  If a team actually tried to make a players life miserable the NHLPA would be all over that in a heartbeat.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bates on April 15, 2012, 01:52:46 AM
What a crock!  The NHLPA will be able to do nothing with how a player is used. All these guys are professionals and have put a lot into getting where they are. You play them on the fourth line and in the press box for an extended time and I bet you will get a list of acceptable teams. No one likes to be embarassed.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: lamajama on April 15, 2012, 02:00:54 AM
I don't know if its as impossible as you think (re traking phaneuf) Burke did it with beauchemin and versteeg.  Also, to me the most telling thing is that at the year end presser Elliot Friedman asked burke if he had a list of untouchables.  Burke said he had to think about it but that it was a fair question that he would answer it later.


I think that relates to the fact that we finished 5th worst in the league. I think for once BB didn't want to look like an idiot.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on April 15, 2012, 02:07:27 AM
What a crock!  The NHLPA will be able to do nothing with how a player is used. All these guys are professionals and have put a lot into getting where they are. You play them on the fourth line and in the press box for an extended time and I bet you will get a list of acceptable teams. No one likes to be embarassed.

Good luck ever signing another free agent again if you're not going to honor the spirit of a NMC that you offered to a player and then try to publicly embarrass them.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on April 15, 2012, 08:11:19 AM
What a crock!  The NHLPA will be able to do nothing with how a player is used. All these guys are professionals and have put a lot into getting where they are. You play them on the fourth line and in the press box for an extended time and I bet you will get a list of acceptable teams. No one likes to be embarassed.

I think the NHL would also have a problem with it. They require teams to ice their best team at all times. Sitting someone who is a top-4 d-man on every team in the league and a top pairing on most is not icing your best team.

While stars have been benched before, it's never for a sustained amount of time, usually just a game or two.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bates on April 15, 2012, 09:09:18 AM
I wonder what the NHL and NHLPA DID about guys like Surray and Redden being dumped in the minors???  They can both play in the nhl as Surray showed this season. Neither the nhl or nhlpa have any say on who makes the line-up day in or day out for teams. Neither know what happens in the team atmosphere that warrants the decisions that are made.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: princedpw on April 15, 2012, 07:13:23 PM
What a crock!  The NHLPA will be able to do nothing with how a player is used. All these guys are professionals and have put a lot into getting where they are. You play them on the fourth line and in the press box for an extended time and I bet you will get a list of acceptable teams. No one likes to be embarassed.

Good luck ever signing another free agent again if you're not going to honor the spirit of a NMC that you offered to a player and then try to publicly embarrass them.

Of course there are degrees of embarrassment and degrees of not honoring the spirit of an agreement, but I don't generally believe the line of "if you do X you will never be able to sign a free agent".  I think Philly's treatment of Carter is pretty damn close to not obeying the spirit of the no-trade clause.  They signed Matt Read after that, right?  (that was a question, not an assertion).  Generally, when I think of Philly, that is not the first thing that comes to my mind -- it may not be the first thing that comes to a UFA's mind. 

Likewise with the " you can't send X to the minors otherwise no good UFA will sign here".  If a guy doesn't play well, you can generally use such tactics.  If a guy does play well, then a team doesn't resort to such tactics simply because a guy's presence in the lineup far outweighs the benefits of not having him around.  So, if the leafs were to screw around with, for instance, Komisarek, to get him to accept a trade, I'd be completely fine with that.  However, Burke has never acted in that way... So it doesn't really matter what I think or would do ...
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: princedpw on April 15, 2012, 07:16:56 PM
I'm pretty sure Burke would consider all angles.  Some didn't think Fuhr would be traded, but in came this kid Potvin they thought could do the job.  The emergence of Gardiner has to considered.

I also think that given Burke's apparent personality and past behaviour, I would be completely, utterly shocked if Phaneuf was traded.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rebel_1812 on April 15, 2012, 07:32:34 PM
What a crock!  The NHLPA will be able to do nothing with how a player is used. All these guys are professionals and have put a lot into getting where they are. You play them on the fourth line and in the press box for an extended time and I bet you will get a list of acceptable teams. No one likes to be embarassed.

Good luck ever signing another free agent again if you're not going to honor the spirit of a NMC that you offered to a player and then try to publicly embarrass them.

It has been done before.  UFAs look for money and a chance to win.  Begone stories of mistreatment are kind of low on the list of priorities.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Spare Change on April 15, 2012, 07:56:14 PM
I wonder what the NHL and NHLPA DID about guys like Surray and Redden being dumped in the minors???  They can both play in the nhl as Surray showed this season. Neither the nhl or nhlpa have any say on who makes the line-up day in or day out for teams. Neither know what happens in the team atmosphere that warrants the decisions that are made.

Neither of which could contribute to their team more so than the players who replaced them. Souray had major injury problems, and he openly demanded a trade, there were no takers. Even after being waived twice (at the beginning of the season and at the trade deadline) no team was willing to bite. Once the season ended Edmonton played the only real card they had... they bought out his contract and made him a free agent.   Souray wanted to leave, Edmonton did not ask him to waive.

What could either the NHL or NHLPA have say about a team sending a player who missed over 50% of a season with serious injuries, and has been a (Edmonton)locker room cancer to the minors?

Redden. Are you referring to when Ottawa tried to trade him and he used his NMC to stay with the team, and continued playing regular shifts until his contract expired?

Or are you referring to New York? Where he put up career lows two straight years, and became an offensive defenseman with no offense to speak of?  Contracts don't gaurantee quality play. Just because he was being paid, doesn't mean he's got a locked in roster spot. Especially when his play declines rapidly after signing the contract.

If Pittsburgh decided it wanted to start fresh, and benched Crosby for a few weeks because he wouldn't accept a trade, heads in this league would roll.

No team owner is going to watch a talented player sit because the GM has an issue and wants to trade him. All he's doing is insulting the jersey he works for, lowering the teams value, the players value and insulting the fans personally by lowering the quality of on ice product.


Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: sneakyray on April 16, 2012, 09:25:32 AM
I'm pretty sure Burke would consider all angles.  Some didn't think Fuhr would be traded, but in came this kid Potvin they thought could do the job.  The emergence of Gardiner has to considered.

I also think that given Burke's apparent personality and past behaviour, I would be completely, utterly shocked if Phaneuf was traded.

I don't know...like I mentioned earlier in the thread he did trade his 2nd big UFA signee Beauchemin and his 2nd big trade player in versteeg.

I think that if they can land one of the few players that they think can be "the guy" anyone will be on the table.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Erndog on April 16, 2012, 01:54:04 PM
What a crock!  The NHLPA will be able to do nothing with how a player is used. All these guys are professionals and have put a lot into getting where they are. You play them on the fourth line and in the press box for an extended time and I bet you will get a list of acceptable teams. No one likes to be embarassed.

Good luck ever signing another free agent again if you're not going to honor the spirit of a NMC that you offered to a player and then try to publicly embarrass them.

Dude you of all people should know that's horse poop.

Philly totally blindsided Carter before his NTC kicked in.  Jagr and Bryzgalov didn't have any problems signing there.

Edmonton tried whatever they could to dump Souray, even sending him to the minors for a year.  Eric Belanger and Ben Eager signed this past summer, Smyth couldn't wait to get back there, and nobody is talking about how poor Edmonton looks for treating Souray like dung.

The Rangers threw Redden on a bus 2 years into a 6 year contract.  I don't think Gaborik or Richards give 2 hoots how they treated their big time UFA signing before them.

NJ basically forced Malakhov and Mogilny to retire by trading/sending them to the minors.  Kovalchuk, a fellow Russian, didn't seem to mind signing there.

The Sharks signed Setoguchi and a day later trade him to Minny.  I think San Jose will be alright attracting free agents and/or re-signning there own players.

Ottawa signed Kovalev.  He was repeatedly booed, benched, tatterred and torn in Ottawa.  Don't think Craig Anderson, or Kovy's buddy Sergei Gonchar are having much trouble there.

Carolina signed Thomas Kaberle and half a season in could not WAIT to jettison him.  Tuomo Ruutu and Bryan Allen had no problems re-signing.

Our own Leafs signed Jeff Finger and he was ridiculed throught the GTA... we signed Armstrong, Connolly, Komisarek, Beauchemin, etc soon after.

I could keep going.  And sure these instances aren't exactly alike, no 2 instances are, but it's complete horse poop saying "good luck signing UFAs if you treat one poorly." 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on April 16, 2012, 02:16:28 PM
What a crock!  The NHLPA will be able to do nothing with how a player is used. All these guys are professionals and have put a lot into getting where they are. You play them on the fourth line and in the press box for an extended time and I bet you will get a list of acceptable teams. No one likes to be embarassed.

Good luck ever signing another free agent again if you're not going to honor the spirit of a NMC that you offered to a player and then try to publicly embarrass them.

Dude you of all people should know that's horse poop.

Agreed.. wait when did Carolina sign Bryan Allen?

edit: I think right-minded players recognize and appreciate teams who are willing to make the moves needed to move the team forward.  Maybe only those players who are all about the paycheque and the contract would be concerned.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on April 16, 2012, 02:35:56 PM
I could keep going.  And sure these instances aren't exactly alike, no 2 instances are, but it's complete horse poop saying "good luck signing UFAs if you treat one poorly."

Not a single one of these instances represent a situation where a team actively "made life miserable for them" (as Bates put it) and made line-up and ice time decisions that weren't in line with on-ice performances. In all these cases, everything was done above board (though, in some cases, on the less than honourable side, sure) and every move that was made was in line with how that particular player was performing. Not one of those players had an organization attempt to unduly pressure them into accepting a move they were not comfortable with when that player had the right to refuse to accept such a move.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on April 16, 2012, 02:57:03 PM
What a crock!  The NHLPA will be able to do nothing with how a player is used. All these guys are professionals and have put a lot into getting where they are. You play them on the fourth line and in the press box for an extended time and I bet you will get a list of acceptable teams. No one likes to be embarassed.

Good luck ever signing another free agent again if you're not going to honor the spirit of a NMC that you offered to a player and then try to publicly embarrass them.

Dude you of all people should know that's horse poop.

Philly totally blindsided Carter before his NTC kicked in.  Jagr and Bryzgalov didn't have any problems signing there.

Edmonton tried whatever they could to dump Souray, even sending him to the minors for a year.  Eric Belanger and Ben Eager signed this past summer, Smyth couldn't wait to get back there, and nobody is talking about how poor Edmonton looks for treating Souray like dung.

The Rangers threw Redden on a bus 2 years into a 6 year contract.  I don't think Gaborik or Richards give 2 hoots how they treated their big time UFA signing before them.

NJ basically forced Malakhov and Mogilny to retire by trading/sending them to the minors.  Kovalchuk, a fellow Russian, didn't seem to mind signing there.

The Sharks signed Setoguchi and a day later trade him to Minny.  I think San Jose will be alright attracting free agents and/or re-signning there own players.

Ottawa signed Kovalev.  He was repeatedly booed, benched, tatterred and torn in Ottawa.  Don't think Craig Anderson, or Kovy's buddy Sergei Gonchar are having much trouble there.

Carolina signed Thomas Kaberle and half a season in could not WAIT to jettison him.  Tuomo Ruutu and Bryan Allen had no problems re-signing.

Our own Leafs signed Jeff Finger and he was ridiculed throught the GTA... we signed Armstrong, Connolly, Komisarek, Beauchemin, etc soon after.

I could keep going.  And sure these instances aren't exactly alike, no 2 instances are, but it's complete horse poop saying "good luck signing UFAs if you treat one poorly."

Plus, there's always the element of a free agent thinking, "it's not a risk or a problem, because I don't suck like those other guys".
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on April 16, 2012, 04:02:17 PM
I could keep going.  And sure these instances aren't exactly alike, no 2 instances are, but it's complete horse poop saying "good luck signing UFAs if you treat one poorly."

There's a major and fundamental difference between every single one of those situations and what was being talked about. Players everywhere, I think, accept that when they sign a contract they have a responsibility to play up to the level of the contract they signed. Players everywhere also understand that absent a NTC their teams can choose to trade them at any time, regardless of sweet talk. As Yogi Berra once famously said, verbal agreements aren't worth the paper they're written on.

Nobody can legitimately say that Jeff Finger was hard done-by in Toronto. He didn't play well enough to be on the club and, as a result, isn't on the club. That's the case for 90% of your list. They were treated commensurate with how they were playing. Players accept that as a fact of life. As a player agent I'd tell any of my players that if they signed a 5 million dollar a year contract without a NMC that they'd have to provide their team with roughly that level of value or else they could be cut or traded. Similarly, I'd tell each and every one of the players I represented that any deal signed without a NTC should be seen as one that could be moved at any time and that that 5 year/25 million dollar deal in Miami could just as easily be in Winnipeg next week.

What we're talking about is something entirely different. Something that hasn't been seen in the NHL before. The example Bates used was of the guy who's almost certainly going to win the Hart trophy being benched/stuck on the fourth line specifically to exert pressure on him to accept a trade. If that happened you couldn't tell a player "Well, just don't suck and it won't happen to you" because nobody is talking about a player sucking. Nobody would laud that team's commitment to winning because it's insane to think that sticking Malkin in the pressbox would increase their chances of winning. Treating a player with a NMC that badly regardless of how well they're playing is saying it could happen to anyone at any time and that a player's performance is not the determining factor in how he's treated.

Athletes, all their lives, have existed within the sort of peculiar meritocracy that is sports. If you're one of the 20 best guys, you make the team. If you're one of the best guys, you get the most ice time. Help the team win, people are happy with you. Screw up and the team loses and people get pissed. They're on board with that. The team that turns that on it's ear? The team that says treating their players fairly commensurate with their performance is secondary to our every desire being met at every time? That's an organization that absolutely would be treated like they had the plague.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on April 16, 2012, 04:35:25 PM
Philly totally blindsided Carter before his NTC kicked in.  Jagr and Bryzgalov didn't have any problems signing there.

Carter's an interesting case. For starters, we don't know precisely how "blindsided" he was with the idea that the team wasn't exactly thrilled with him. I'm guessing that, with all the rumours about what was going on in the dressing room and off-ice, that Jeff Carter either did or should have known that the Flyers were having second thoughts about the marriage.

But ignore that for a second. Let's say that's true. Carter had no idea that Philadelphia wanted to deal him and was totally knocked on his butt by it.

Now let's imagine that you're my agent. I'm a young player on the Flyers having a terrific season. Paul Holmgren comes to you and says "Hey Ern, Nik sure is great. We'd like to sign him to a 10 year/50 million dollar contract and don't worry about that year until his NTC kicks in, we wouldn't even think about trading him."

Now, as my agent and someone who saw what went on with Carter, would you take Holmgren at his word on that? Would you advise me to? Would you seriously tell me to put pen to paper on that and assure me I'd be in Philadelphia for the next 11 years?

I'd hope not because A) it'd make you a terrible agent and B) we've developed a good relationship over the years and I'd hate to have to fire you. Holmgren gets to pull what he did with Carter once.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bates on April 16, 2012, 09:11:59 PM
Nik I can't find me saying anything here about doing anything to anyone who will certainly win the Hart trophy.  I was responding to the fact that the NHL and NHLPA would not allow a team to do things like benching and such to a player who is good enough to play.  I simply said that neither of the 2 groups did anything about players like Redden and Sourey who I believe are still able to contribute in the NHL.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on April 16, 2012, 10:04:59 PM
Nik I can't find me saying anything here about doing anything to anyone who will certainly win the Hart trophy.

Here you go

There is no such thing as an "untouchable" in sports.  Pens love Malkin, don't want to trade him.  Now imagine Ducks call offering Getzlaf, Perry, and Ryan.  Malkin is now no longer untouchable.

3 words....

No. Movement. Clause.

Yeah because no one has ever been traded that had a no movement clause. You want rid of someone make Life miserable for them to stay and they will waive quickly.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bates on April 16, 2012, 10:20:54 PM
Sorry I was treating those as 2 different answers.  The first answer was in reference to the "untouchables" post before it.  The second answer was in reference to the "no movement clause" and was to a no movement clause in general not in every instance.  I don't believe you will ever see any team pull the 4th line and press box tactic on a player such as a Malkin.  I do think however it can be used on someone like Komi who really needs a new home from his and the team's best interests.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on April 16, 2012, 10:25:43 PM
Sorry I was treating those as 2 different answers.  The first answer was in reference to the "untouchables" post before it.  The second answer was in reference to the "no movement clause" and was to a no movement clause in general not in every instance.  I don't believe you will ever see any team pull the 4th line and press box tactic on a player such as a Malkin.


Fair enough. That's what I was referring to. Apologies for the mix-up.

  I do think however it can be used on someone like Komi who really needs a new home from his and the team's best interests.

Well, not to be too much of a smart-ass or anything but I'm guessing that threatening Mike Komisarek with the pressbox at this point is like threatening Bernie Madoff with jailtime.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bates on April 16, 2012, 10:29:18 PM
This is very true but these are all hypotheticals.  The "untouchables" and "no movement clause" things just seem to me to really be things that don't exist.  I would think though that Komi is a proud guy and would really look at a trade from Burke if it gave him a chance to ressurrect his career as an actual player?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on April 17, 2012, 11:18:04 AM
This is very true but these are all hypotheticals.  The "untouchables" and "no movement clause" things just seem to me to really be things that don't exist.  I would think though that Komi is a proud guy and would really look at a trade from Burke if it gave him a chance to ressurrect his career as an actual player?

A NMC is a very real thing and something that a team should offer only if they really understand the consequences. Right now the Leafs with Komisarek are seeing what a NMC really means. If you're inclined to offer one as a means to entice someone to sign with you then you have to be mindful of what the downside could be. You can't offer one and then try to wriggle your way out of it because then the next free agent who wants one will know that you don't live by it.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Etiam Vultus on April 17, 2012, 08:10:47 PM
This is very true but these are all hypotheticals.  The "untouchables" and "no movement clause" things just seem to me to really be things that don't exist.  I would think though that Komi is a proud guy and would really look at a trade from Burke if it gave him a chance to ressurrect his career as an actual player?

I believe that Komi has a no movement clause (so he cannot be sent to the Marlies), but only a limited no trade clause (so he can be traded, but only to certain teams).  According to Gapgeek, Komi provides a list of teams each year by June 15.

Thus, he could be traded if Burke could work out a deal with a team on the list, but he cannot be sent to the Marlies for cap relief.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on April 19, 2012, 01:59:08 PM
This is very true but these are all hypotheticals.  The "untouchables" and "no movement clause" things just seem to me to really be things that don't exist.  I would think though that Komi is a proud guy and would really look at a trade from Burke if it gave him a chance to ressurrect his career as an actual player?

I believe that Komi has a no movement clause (so he cannot be sent to the Marlies), but only a limited no trade clause (so he can be traded, but only to certain teams).  According to Gapgeek, Komi provides a list of teams each year by June 15.

Thus, he could be traded if Burke could work out a deal with a team on the list, but he cannot be sent to the Marlies for cap relief.

I think Komi took his no movement clause too far, thinking that was what was expected of him on the ice.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: moon111 on April 20, 2012, 05:57:15 PM
This is very true but these are all hypotheticals.  The "untouchables" and "no movement clause" things just seem to me to really be things that don't exist.  I would think though that Komi is a proud guy and would really look at a trade from Burke if it gave him a chance to ressurrect his career as an actual player?

I believe that Komi has a no movement clause (so he cannot be sent to the Marlies), but only a limited no trade clause (so he can be traded, but only to certain teams).  According to Gapgeek, Komi provides a list of teams each year by June 15.

Thus, he could be traded if Burke could work out a deal with a team on the list, but he cannot be sent to the Marlies for cap relief.
Did you mean Capgeek?  Although I'm sure Gapgeek is a fine source of news information on Komisarek as well.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: x.jr.benchwarmer on January 27, 2013, 06:57:46 AM
I know that this topic was last updated in April,  but it seems that Phaneuf has played about as well as people could have expected this past 5 games.

His ice-time is significant;  he plays almost every power-play, and is the go-to shut-down defenceman for the Leafs.

As of today, our captain has the worst plus-minus in the NHL at -8.  (at a stellar 386th place in the stats). Of course, this is only after 5 games.   But in looking at his style, objectively, perhaps it might make better sense to trade him for a bona fide big time NHL goaltender (if available and not Luongo).

He is on every power play but only has 1 assist to date.  His shot is ridiculously heavy (ask Lupul), but it is so ineffective in actually producing scoring chances, and is typically so high, and hardly gets through.

In assessing his ability, relative to the other Leafs defencemen, he can't skate as well as Gardiner, and doesn't have the puck awareness of Liles, nor even the upside of perhaps Rielly.  So given his talent relative to the rest of the Leafs defence, he is expendable, IMHO.   And Gunnar has been playing pretty effectively this year, and is a much more effective defensive defenceman than Phaneuf as well, IMHO.  And Phaneuf is certainly a physical presence, but that may be somewhat overrated in today's NHL, as very few players are intimidated (except for perhaps Phil Kessel) and Phaneuf doesn't really throw a lot of body checks a game, and when he does, it rarely makes a difference on the outcome of the game.

Phaneuf's play benefits from less ice-time rather than more, as he tires easily, and tries to do too much, arguably.   But, like the trade of Schenn,  there is an argument his absence has not  negatively affected the Leafs at all, especially given his lack of agility, and quickness.  And, using Phaneuf in a trade for a big time goaltender (or even one who is above average, whatever that looks like-  t.m.   Down Goes Brown/Bloge Salming), could only benefit the Leafs defensively.

It's still early, but realistically, the Leafs have been pretty mediocre with Phaneuf as captain over the past 3 years, and it doesn't look like it is going to get much better, really soon.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: drummond on January 27, 2013, 08:19:58 AM
As mentioned in Kostka thread, the Leafs should try to maximize what Phaneuf brings to them. He is their best paid guy and captain. Pair him with Gunnar and reduce a little his ice time. He will be excellent No. 1 guy. He can be a beast out there.
Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: PG on January 27, 2013, 08:32:19 AM

So given his talent relative to the rest of the Leafs defence, he is expendable, IMHO.

Of course he's expendable, the question  becomes is he tradable?

The Leafs acquired him for nothing (now we know why). Since then he has led one of the worst defenses, and captained one of the worst teams, in the league.

Then look at his salary and cap hit. I think the only way the Leafs could move him is if they took back a similarly overpaid player.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: x.jr.benchwarmer on January 27, 2013, 08:36:17 AM
As mentioned in Kostka thread, the Leafs should try to maximize what Phaneuf brings to them. He is their best paid guy and captain. Pair him with Gunnar and reduce a little his ice time. He will be excellent No. 1 guy. He can be a beast out there.

I certainly agree with you that his ice time should be reduced, especially since Gunnar has been playing quite well, and other defencemen can pick up the slack.

But I don't know if he has ever been an excellent #1 guy with the Leafs yet, IMHO (not that it conceivably couldn't happen).

He perhaps benefitted with being handed the captaincy through Burke's machinations  (Quare, whether the Leaf players would have had any say on it, and arguably Lupul would be a terrifc captain, once he can raise his arm again after Phaneuf put him out for about 6 weeks).

The trade with Calgary seemed to be an excellent one, from all indications, at the time.  Phaneuf being traded for ,  well,  a bag of pucks.   (But one can't underestimate how important Stajan's 8 goals were with Calgary last year). :)   But, from all indications, Sutter is a very fine hockey man, and he probably had several reasons why the Flames would have been better without Phaneuf, rather than with him.

IMHO,   the Leafs might benefit from this line of thinking, especially if they can use Phaneuf in a trade to get a bona fide monster (not Gus, nor a beast :)) goaltender.

 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on January 27, 2013, 08:39:11 AM
I'm sure playing him half the game with a 27 yr old AHLer against the other team's best forwards is helping.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on January 27, 2013, 08:43:36 AM

So given his talent relative to the rest of the Leafs defence, he is expendable, IMHO.

Of course he's expendable, the question  becomes is he tradable?

The Leafs acquired him for nothing (now we know why). Since then he has led one of the worst defenses, and captained one of the worst teams, in the league.

Then look at his salary and cap hit. I think the only way the Leafs could move him is if they took back a similarly overpaid player.

I think you're seriously underrating Phaneuf and his value to any team. I'm not suggesting he's a no.1 guy on every team, but he's a top pairing defenseman, no doubt. I think he's easily tradeable, even if he is slightly overpaid. He's got one more season at a cap hit of $6.5M, but he's only paid $5.5M in that year. I think he's worth $5.5M -- easily -- on the open market.
Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on January 27, 2013, 09:29:36 AM
Criticisms of Phaneuf are legion but everything is exacerbated by his wearing the C. His icetime could be reduced, he could be demoted go second pairing and there would be little controversy. Not to mention that he has displayed no discernible leadership qualities.

He and Kostka held their own for the half last night but as many have noted in the GDT they cannot handle immense minutes. Only a very few can.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on January 27, 2013, 09:35:16 AM
Not to mention that he has displayed no discernible leadership qualities.

I would guess most team captains don't display discernible leadership qualities since most of it probably occurs behind team doors.  On the ice?  I don't know what is expected or what constitutes 'leadership' on the ice, is the fact he's among the most vocal on the ice with his teammates a sign of leadership or just normal?  I don't know, I think it's pretty subjective.  I would consider Sundin to have been a great captain, but I know he was criticized for a long time about his 'leadership'.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on January 27, 2013, 09:43:00 AM
Criticisms of Phaneuf are legion but everything is exacerbated by his wearing the C. His icetime could be reduced, he could be demoted go second pairing and there would be little controversy.

I think there'd be some controversy on this team, perhaps not so much on another. I can't think of any Leaf that could supplant him as a top pairing d-man. At his best, Gunnarsson has shown that he can be a complementary piece on a top line, but he's certainly not a game-changer.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on January 27, 2013, 09:43:57 AM
Is Phaneuf overpaid? Yep. Super badly? Not in my opinion. Not for a dman who was 12th in league scoring for dmen while playing on a bad team last year.

Does his league worst -8 make him the worst dman in the league defensively? Nope. It's not a great stat in that it doesn't show how Scrivens/Reimer soft/stoppable goals impacted that number nor how the big Rangers forwards dominated his club last night - for example. Nor does it consider how his team is still a work in progress trying to adapt to and learn Carlyle's new system (which can take 1/2 a season). Dion isn't that great defensively but he's not terrible either in my opinion.

I'm not nuts about Dion but he's well down my list on what ails this team in terms of his ability to play because he's one of the best dmen this team has. He's played some of his best two-way hockey as a Leaf recently in my opinion (prior to the last couple of games).

Is he tradeable? I think so - probably fairly easily if you don't expect a fantastic return. He'd probably be second pairing in the worst case on another club.

Before going crazy dumping players, I'd like to see 5-15 more games to assess what we have and who will play well under Carlyle.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on January 27, 2013, 09:44:28 AM
Criticisms of Phaneuf are legion but everything is exacerbated by his wearing the C. His icetime could be reduced, he could be demoted go second pairing and there would be little controversy.

I think there'd be some controversy on this team, perhaps not so much on another. I can't think of any Leaf that could supplant him as a top pairing d-man. At his best, Gunnarsson has shown that he can be a complementary piece on a top line, but he's certainly not a game-changer.

Speaking of which, I think Gunnarsson and Phaneuf should be reunited as the top pairing.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on January 27, 2013, 09:44:38 AM
Not to mention that he has displayed no discernible leadership qualities.

I would guess most team captains don't display discernible leadership qualities since most of it probably occurs behind team doors.  On the ice?  I don't know what is expected or what constitutes 'leadership' on the ice, is the fact he's among the most vocal on the ice with his teammates a sign of leadership or just normal?  I don't know, I think it's pretty subjective.  I would consider Sundin to have been a great captain, but I know he was criticized for a long time about his 'leadership'.

I agree. We really don't know what kind of leadership qualities Phaneuf really possesses, because none of us are really privy to the situations where it comes into play. We're not in the dressing room. We don't hear the chatter on the bench or on the ice. We can't say for sure how the rest of the players on the team view him. Sure, his leadership hasn't produced results, but, how much that is his fault and how much of the blame lies in the talent surrounding him or the rest of the leadership structure (and that includes the front office and the coaching staff)? Whether or not he should be captain is certainly open to debate, but, truthfully, we have no idea which players on this roster  are the real leaders and who are not. What we see is really only a fraction of what being part of the team consists of.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on January 27, 2013, 09:55:09 AM
Not to mention that he has displayed no discernible leadership qualities.

I would guess most team captains don't display discernible leadership qualities since most of it probably occurs behind team doors.  On the ice?  I don't know what is expected or what constitutes 'leadership' on the ice, is the fact he's among the most vocal on the ice with his teammates a sign of leadership or just normal?  I don't know, I think it's pretty subjective.  I would consider Sundin to have been a great captain, but I know he was criticized for a long time about his 'leadership'.

I agree. We really don't know what kind of leadership qualities Phaneuf really possesses, because none of us are really privy to the situations where it comes into play. We're not in the dressing room. We don't hear the chatter on the bench or on the ice. We can't say for sure how the rest of the players on the team view him. Sure, his leadership hasn't produced results, but, how much that is his fault and how much of the blame lies in the talent surrounding him or the rest of the leadership structure (and that includes the front office and the coaching staff)? Whether or not he should be captain is certainly open to debate, but, truthfully, we have no idea which players on this roster  are the real leaders and who are not. What we see is really only a fraction of what being part of the team consists of.

+1

Concern about his leadership is even further down my list of concerns for this team.

If you have to have a letter before you can lead a hockey club, you're not much of a leader in my opinion. Before being too critical of Phaneuf's leadership, let someone else step up and lead on the ice. I tend to think leadership issues are a little overblown in the media.
Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: PG on January 27, 2013, 09:59:06 AM
..,,,,,,he's one of the best dmen this team has.

Is that really saying much though?

That's like arguing about who has been the team's best PKer in each of the last 3 seasons.

Being the best of a decidedly awful group is not really impressive IMO.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on January 27, 2013, 10:18:28 AM
..,,,,,,he's one of the best dmen this team has.

Is that really saying much though?

That's like arguing about who has been the team's best PKer in each of the last 3 seasons.

Being the best of a decidedly awful group is not really impressive IMO.

Based on advanced metrics Phaneuf comes out looking good, not just in the context of the Leafs team either.

A couple links discussing him:
http://nhlnumbers.com/2012/7/2/dissenting-thoughts-torontos-top-4-is-set
http://canucksarmy.com/2012/7/24/dion-phaneuf-and-jake-gardiner-comparing-matchups
http://theleafsnation.com/2012/4/5/leading-by-example-dion-phaneuf

Obviously it's not the be all, end all, but I think he comes out pretty good.  He's consistently got the toughest matchups since arriving in Toronto and he's performed pretty well in the circumstances, especially in the fact that his offensive production didn't fall off the face of the earth facing tougher comps.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on January 27, 2013, 10:25:27 AM
Put Phaneuf on a more talented team and he's be a stud I think.
Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on January 27, 2013, 10:51:53 AM
Put Phaneuf on a more talented team and he's be a stud I think.

Or on a second pairing, which is where he belongs.

By discernible leadership qualities I mean exactly that -- nothing that the average fan can see on the ice. He doesn't make his partner play better, as one possible example. He may be General Patton revisited in the dressing room for all I know.

Phaneuf has value, and if I were Nonis I wouldn't hesitate to trade him for a decent return. He's not a guy you are going to build a successful defense around. Too many problems on both ends of the ice. If you aren't going to trade him then acquire a true stud and position Phaneuf as a complementary piece.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Jay-Mar on January 27, 2013, 10:52:54 AM
 Every year that Phaneuf has been here stories have always come out about how much he helps the young guys come along. This year Reilly was quoted about how much he helped him in scrimmages and what not. The other year, Im not sure who it was, they went to P.E.I. to train with him.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: sneakyray on January 27, 2013, 11:09:19 AM
Every year that Phaneuf has been here stories have always come out about how much he helps the young guys come along. This year Reilly was quoted about how much he helped him in scrimmages and what not. The other year, Im not sure who it was, they went to P.E.I. to train with him.

it was some guy named kadri
Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: PG on January 27, 2013, 11:11:51 AM
Put Phaneuf on a more talented team and he's be a stud I think.

Or on a second pairing, which is where he belongs.

By discernible leadership qualities I mean exactly that -- nothing that the average fan can see on the ice. He doesn't make his partner play better, as one possible example. He may be General Patton revisited in the dressing room for all I know.

Phaneuf has value, and if I were Nonis I wouldn't hesitate to trade him for a decent return. He's not a guy you are going to build a successful defense around. Too many problems on both ends of the ice. If you aren't going to trade him then acquire a true stud and position Phaneuf as a complementary piece.

Those are my feelings as well.

To be clear, I don't think he's awful. He's a polarizing guy like McCabe. Some Leaf fans think he is indeed a stud and awesome, whereas some think he's the worst d-man on the team. Like McCabe, I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle.

Some nights he will play incredible but some nights he will be one of the main contributors to a loss (too often for my taste).

Like cw said, he's far down the list of "problems" with the Leafs. But I certainly don't believe he's part of any solution.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Hampreacher on January 27, 2013, 11:23:18 AM
On Phaneuf. He is playing always against the top lines and playing too many minutes. Neither Phaneuf nor Reimer can be blamed for last night.  Leafs need a number one center and more offense. Reduce Phaneufs ice time by trusting second unit more and then the first line defence can be more effective laster in the game and in key situations.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on January 27, 2013, 11:33:17 AM
Or on a second pairing, which is where he belongs.

Based on what?  I think he's clearly a top 60 d-man in the league.

He doesn't make his partner play better, as one possible example.

I would argue he contributed to Gunnarsson moving from a 3rd pairing guy to a 1st pairing, and I would also argue he made Keith Aulie look better than he was/is.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bonsixx on January 27, 2013, 11:39:25 AM
Phaneuf is a guy who, if you put him on Detroit, he's suddenly amazing. I think Leaf fans give him too hard of a time. No, he isn't perfect, and it would certainly be helpful if our main power-play cannon could hit the net consistently, but for the minutes he plays and the opposition he plays against, he's pretty solid.

He's by far the best defenceman on the Leafs right now. By FAR.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on January 27, 2013, 11:42:39 AM
No, he isn't perfect, and it would certainly be helpful if our main power-play cannon could hit the net consistently

I looked this up on NHL.com and it doesn't appear he misses the net any more regularly than any of the other d-men in the league who take a lot of shots:  http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.htm?fetchKey=20122ALLDADALL&sort=missedShots&viewName=rtssPlayerStats
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bonsixx on January 27, 2013, 11:45:06 AM
No, he isn't perfect, and it would certainly be helpful if our main power-play cannon could hit the net consistently

I looked this up on NHL.com and it doesn't appear he misses the net any more regularly than any of the other d-men in the league who take a lot of shots:  http://www.nhl.com/ice/playerstats.htm?fetchKey=20122ALLDADALL&sort=missedShots&viewName=rtssPlayerStats

Yeah, must be akin to the whole "Kaberle doesn't shoot" thing. Just seems like the dude can't hit the broad side of a barn for some reason.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on January 27, 2013, 12:05:01 PM
..,,,,,,he's one of the best dmen this team has.

Is that really saying much though?

That's like arguing about who has been the team's best PKer in each of the last 3 seasons.

Being the best of a decidedly awful group is not really impressive IMO.

Maybe not. But if they're going to improve this team, getting rid of their best or one of their best isn't where I'd start (assuming a rebuild isn't an option for Nonis).

Now if someone wants to trade the Leafs a Norris candidate for Phaneuf, I'm all ears. But realistically, I don't think that's something we can reasonably expect.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on January 27, 2013, 12:27:20 PM
..,,,,,,he's one of the best dmen this team has.

Is that really saying much though?

That's like arguing about who has been the team's best PKer in each of the last 3 seasons.

Being the best of a decidedly awful group is not really impressive IMO.

Maybe not. But if they're going to improve this team, getting rid of their best or one of their best isn't where I'd start (assuming a rebuild isn't an option for Nonis).

Now if someone wants to trade the Leafs a Norris candidate for Phaneuf, I'm all ears. But realistically, I don't think that's something we can reasonably expect.

Fan590 being ridiculous: http://theleafsnation.com/2013/1/27/should-the-leafs-buy-out-dion-phaneuf-this-summer

And that link makes a very strong case for Phaneuf, too.  I respect Cam Charron's opinion as well.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cw on January 27, 2013, 01:03:44 PM
..,,,,,,he's one of the best dmen this team has.

Is that really saying much though?

That's like arguing about who has been the team's best PKer in each of the last 3 seasons.

Being the best of a decidedly awful group is not really impressive IMO.

Maybe not. But if they're going to improve this team, getting rid of their best or one of their best isn't where I'd start (assuming a rebuild isn't an option for Nonis).

Now if someone wants to trade the Leafs a Norris candidate for Phaneuf, I'm all ears. But realistically, I don't think that's something we can reasonably expect.

Fan590 being ridiculous: http://theleafsnation.com/2013/1/27/should-the-leafs-buy-out-dion-phaneuf-this-summer

And that link makes a very strong case for Phaneuf, too.  I respect Cam Charron's opinion as well.

The other thing Phaneuf has been doing quite a bit this season is playing the left hand side with Kostka. So he's been making that adjustment while his shot is tougher to get through.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rebel_1812 on January 27, 2013, 01:19:23 PM
Phaneuf is a guy who, if you put him on Detroit, he's suddenly amazing. I think Leaf fans give him too hard of a time. No, he isn't perfect, and it would certainly be helpful if our main power-play cannon could hit the net consistently, but for the minutes he plays and the opposition he plays against, he's pretty solid.

He's by far the best defenceman on the Leafs right now. By FAR.

That is exactly what happened with Ian White.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bonsixx on January 27, 2013, 01:49:25 PM
Phaneuf is a guy who, if you put him on Detroit, he's suddenly amazing. I think Leaf fans give him too hard of a time. No, he isn't perfect, and it would certainly be helpful if our main power-play cannon could hit the net consistently, but for the minutes he plays and the opposition he plays against, he's pretty solid.

He's by far the best defenceman on the Leafs right now. By FAR.

That is exactly what happened with Ian White.

To be fair, I loved Ian White. I always thought he played a very smart, minimum-mistake game and I was sorry to see him go. I even re-acquired him in my NHL 13 GM mode.

That said, he's not the player Phaneuf is.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on January 28, 2013, 04:08:59 AM
I'm not suggesting he's a no.1 guy on every team, but he's a top pairing defenseman, no doubt.

I really don't think that's true. I don't think he'd be on the top pairing for most of the better clubs in the league and ultimately that's the measurement you need to be using.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Peter D. on January 28, 2013, 04:32:33 AM
Ever since the trade, I have expected more from Phaneuf.  As a former Norris candidate, I have been looking for him to play a more refined game.  Instead, he has been prone to some poor decisions more than I would like and I believe he could be more of a "rock" on the back end.

As for his captaincy, I'm still waiting for him to put this team on his back and carry it out of this abyss.  With the previous captains, you knew that Clark, Gilmour and Sundin could provide that big goal or huge play and get these guys on the right track for a sustained period.  I can't think of an instance where Phaneuf has been able to do that.  The lack of talent is obviously a factor, but I don't believe that should excuse him completely. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on January 28, 2013, 04:38:44 AM
I'm not suggesting he's a no.1 guy on every team, but he's a top pairing defenseman, no doubt.

I really don't think that's true. I don't think he'd be on the top pairing for most of the better clubs in the league and ultimately that's the measurement you need to be using.

We'll just have to disagree then. I had previously looked through all of the rosters and would still put him on the top pairing on most teams in the league.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on January 28, 2013, 04:43:09 AM
Or on a second pairing, which is where he belongs.

Based on what?  I think he's clearly a top 60 d-man in the league.

But if someone is the 59th defenseman in the league, for argument's sake, then wouldn't it be likely that their presence on a team's top pairing is almost a sure sign that a team's top pairing isn't very good relative to most other teams? And that if that player is going to be part of a winning team either A) He'd have to be on the second pairing or B) the team is good enough in other areas that they can make up for a below average top pairing?

I'm not saying Phaneuf is the 59th best defenseman in the league but that there is sort of the issue with Phaneuf. He has to be measured against other teams top defensemen, not to the general pool of defensemen.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on January 28, 2013, 04:47:06 AM
We'll just have to disagree then. I had previously looked through all of the rosters and would still put him on the top pairing on most teams in the league.

But are you doing that with any actual regard to the way a defensive pairing is put together or is that just sort of an arbitrary ranking based on "talent"?

Like, use the Cup winning Kings as an example. I think most would agree that Phaneuf isn't better than Doughty. But is Phaneuf better than Willie Mitchell? Obviously that's an issue that boils down to the shaky way we examine defensive talent but I don't think it matters as much as whether or not Phaneuf is a better match for Drew Doughty. I think in that respect, 30 out of 30 GM's would choose a more defensively solid stay-at-home type to pair with their more offensive defenseman.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on January 28, 2013, 06:01:25 AM
Ever since the trade, I have expected more from Phaneuf.  As a former Norris candidate, I have been looking for him to play a more refined game.  Instead, he has been prone to some poor decisions more than I would like and I believe he could be more of a "rock" on the back end.

As for his captaincy, I'm still waiting for him to put this team on his back and carry it out of this abyss.  With the previous captains, you knew that Clark, Gilmour and Sundin could provide that big goal or huge play and get these guys on the right track for a sustained period.  I can't think of an instance where Phaneuf has been able to do that.  The lack of talent is obviously a factor, but I don't believe that should excuse him completely.

I think your expectations were very unrealistic.

Phaneuf was a disappointment in Calgary his final 1.5 years.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on January 28, 2013, 06:16:06 AM
We'll just have to disagree then. I had previously looked through all of the rosters and would still put him on the top pairing on most teams in the league.

But are you doing that with any actual regard to the way a defensive pairing is put together or is that just sort of an arbitrary ranking based on "talent"?

Like, use the Cup winning Kings as an example. I think most would agree that Phaneuf isn't better than Doughty. But is Phaneuf better than Willie Mitchell? Obviously that's an issue that boils down to the shaky way we examine defensive talent but I don't think it matters as much as whether or not Phaneuf is a better match for Drew Doughty. I think in that respect, 30 out of 30 GM's would choose a more defensively solid stay-at-home type to pair with their more offensive defenseman.

It was done mostly in an arbitrary comparison of overall talent. Given that the Leafs are currently running with Kostka on the top line, you can't just look at the pairings. So it's more on the line of, "is he in the top 60 or so defensemen in the league," and I think he is.

And I disagree that he has to be ranked against the other top players in the league. Rather, it should be against the general pool of players. And against the general pool, he's in the upper echelon. Whether that's top 60, or top 50, I'm not sure it really matters.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on January 28, 2013, 06:28:42 AM
It was done mostly in an arbitrary comparison of overall talent. Given that the Leafs are currently running with Kostka on the top line, you can't just look at the pairings. So it's more on the line of, "is he in the top 60 or so defensemen in the league," and I think he is.

I think the problem with that, though, is that "talent" is such a nebulous concept when it comes to defense where stay-at-home guys tend not to get credit as being strictly talented players as opposed to being good defensively through things like hard work or grit or whatever. "Talent" tends to be reserved for offensively gifted players which throws the whole thing out of whack when you're just looking at who's on a top pairing.

I mean, right now, the guy Nashville has paired up with Shea Weber, who's getting 25+ minutes a night is a 22 year old named Roman Josi. I'll be honest, I'd never heard of the guy. But is he more or less talented than Phaneuf? Is he playing better defensively? I have no idea and, unless you're watching a lot of Predators hockey, I doubt you do either.

And I disagree that he has to be ranked against the other top players in the league. Rather, it should be against the general pool of players.

But I think that renders it ultimately meaningless when it comes down to the central issue of whether or not Dion Phaneuf is helping the Leafs win. A hockey team wins by virtue of doing things better than the other team. That can be offense or defense or goaltending or any combination of the three but ultimately you're being judged against the other team.

If Dion Phaneuf is the #24th best defenseman in the NHL that's tremendous. But if he's the Leafs #1 defenseman being the #24th best defenseman in the league really just means that on most nights the Leafs #1 defenseman is probably going to be not as good as the other team's #1 defenseman. If, as I say above, a team wins on the virtue of being better than the other team, that already puts them in a hole.

I mean, if a goalie is the 20th best goaltender in the league he's a legitimate #1 goalie in the same sense but it still leaves the club with bottom 3rd goaltending and a team shouldn't be satisfied with that. Ideally, that #20 goalie would be a back-up. I think the same thing applies to Phaneuf.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on January 28, 2013, 06:40:42 AM
Ever since the trade, I have expected more from Phaneuf.  As a former Norris candidate, I have been looking for him to play a more refined game.  Instead, he has been prone to some poor decisions more than I would like and I believe he could be more of a "rock" on the back end.

I think he was really a Norris candidate solely due to his big offensive numbers, which were also probably unsustainable.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Peter D. on January 28, 2013, 06:47:28 AM
I think he was really a Norris candidate solely due to his big offensive numbers, which were also probably unsustainable.

While true the offensive numbers led to his Norris candidacy, I don't think 50 to 60 points from Phaneuf as a Leaf is unattainable.

And that Phaneuf I remember as being an extremely hard-hitting, absolute beast of a d-man at both ends of the rink.  I'm assuming others were also hoping he'd rediscover that with the change of scenery.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on January 28, 2013, 07:03:20 AM
I think he was really a Norris candidate solely due to his big offensive numbers, which were also probably unsustainable.

While true the offensive numbers led to his Norris candidacy, I don't think 50 to 60 points from Phaneuf as a Leaf is unattainable.

And that Phaneuf I remember as being an extremely hard-hitting, absolute beast of a d-man at both ends of the rink.  I'm assuming others were also hoping he'd rediscover that with the change of scenery.

But I don't believe he was a beast in his own end.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on January 28, 2013, 07:05:39 AM
But I don't believe he was a beast in his own end.

I agree. I think he earned that reputation because there are a lot of people who falsely equate throwing big hits with being a good defender but when the trade was made a lot of people were saying that he left a lot to be desired in his own end.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on January 28, 2013, 07:52:42 AM
If Dion Phaneuf is the #24th best defenseman in the NHL that's tremendous. But if he's the Leafs #1 defenseman being the #24th best defenseman in the league really just means that on most nights the Leafs #1 defenseman is probably going to be not as good as the other team's #1 defenseman. If, as I say above, a team wins on the virtue of being better than the other team, that already puts them in a hole.

I mean, if a goalie is the 20th best goaltender in the league he's a legitimate #1 goalie in the same sense but it still leaves the club with bottom 3rd goaltending and a team shouldn't be satisfied with that. Ideally, that #20 goalie would be a back-up. I think the same thing applies to Phaneuf.

I don't disagree with any what you state here, all of which is logical. However, if I may dumb it down, I thought we were essentially just discussing whether he was one of the better defensemen in the league, by whatever subjective criteria we're going to use.

Ideally, it would be nice to have the 20th best goalie as the backup, but in reality, there's 30 NHL teams and not everyone can have the best goalie.

Unfortunately, the leafs are in that category and the other categories (#1D-man, #1 centre, etc.) are also in that category.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on January 28, 2013, 08:00:02 AM
Jonas Siegel ‏@jonasTSN1050
Carlyle conceded today that he overplayed Phaneuf and Kostka on Saturday. Both played over 30 mins. Gunnarsson only other D with 20+.

Gee, thanks Randy.  I don't have a major problem with Phaneuf when he's utilized correctly.  He can't play that many minutes in a game and be effective.  His -4 on Saturday can be laid right at the feet of Carlyle.  He put him in a position to fail, and fail he did.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on January 28, 2013, 08:02:02 AM
I don't disagree with any what you state here, all of which is logical. However, if I may dumb it down, I thought we were essentially just discussing whether he was one of the better defensemen in the league, by whatever subjective criteria we're going to use.

Well, the thing in your post I was responding to was the notion of Phaneuf as a "top-pairing" defenseman. To my mind, like the aforementioned hypothetical goalie, that's only really a fair categorization on a club that just doesn't have better options.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on January 28, 2013, 08:25:15 AM
Quote
Mark Masters ‏@markhmasters

Carlyle says Phaneuf TOI was result of wanting him on the ice for every d-zone draw & then not controlling puck off draws & getting trapped

And the team has had a terrible SH% when he's on the ice (AKA, should even out) - no wonder where the bad +/- comes from.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: ThatLeafsFan on January 28, 2013, 08:33:49 AM
At least Carlyle is accepting the blame, good on him for that.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on January 28, 2013, 08:44:52 AM
At least Carlyle is accepting the blame, good on him for that.

Yeah I give him credit for that.  It's such a fine line.  I think Carlyle got enamored with the big minutes for those two guys because it was working through 2 periods.  Had the Leafs gotten a 3rd goal early in the third or held on for the win I guess he'd look like a genius today with the big "shutdown pair".  Oh well.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: ThatLeafsFan on January 28, 2013, 08:54:09 AM
At least Carlyle is accepting the blame, good on him for that.

Yeah I give him credit for that.  It's such a fine line.  I think Carlyle got enamored with the big minutes for those two guys because it was working through 2 periods.  Had the Leafs gotten a 3rd goal early in the third or held on for the win I guess he'd look like a genius today with the big "shutdown pair".  Oh well.
Yea I agree. We aren't going to win the cup this year, so I'm ok with him doing things like this to learn his players, as well as his players to learn his coaching style, its a learning season.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on January 28, 2013, 09:37:30 AM
At least Carlyle is accepting the blame, good on him for that.

Yeah I give him credit for that.  It's such a fine line.  I think Carlyle got enamored with the big minutes for those two guys because it was working through 2 periods.  Had the Leafs gotten a 3rd goal early in the third or held on for the win I guess he'd look like a genius today with the big "shutdown pair".  Oh well.

I think he just forgot he doesn't have Pronger and Niedermeyer.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: crowlster on January 28, 2013, 04:28:29 PM
I think he was really a Norris candidate solely due to his big offensive numbers, which were also probably unsustainable.

While true the offensive numbers led to his Norris candidacy, I don't think 50 to 60 points from Phaneuf as a Leaf is unattainable.

And that Phaneuf I remember as being an extremely hard-hitting, absolute beast of a d-man at both ends of the rink.  I'm assuming others were also hoping he'd rediscover that with the change of scenery.

but that was also when he was not a number one pair in Calgary. He had less ice time and was able to use that extra energy to throw those hits... also not being against the other teams top lines allowed him to be able to go after the big hits and not worry so much about leaving open a scoring opportunity. Right now, he is re-establishing his game as a number one defenceman and I think he has being doing much better than his stats suggest. He is still hitting although not so many 'big' hits but was still 7th in the league last season in hits.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: pnjunction on January 28, 2013, 06:15:19 PM
He is still hitting although not so many 'big' hits but was still 7th in the league last season in hits.

I checked the stats and Schenn was 7th, Phaneuf was 22nd.

Both those numbers have me wondering about that stat though.

Wouldn't a d-man be laying many more hits if his team were a turnover machine and he spent all his shifts tied up in his own end?  Meanwhile guys who can move the puck out (and play with better d partners and forwards) wouldn't spend as much time in their own zone hitting opposition puck carriers.

By definition the other team has to have the puck for a player to make an 'official' hit, it's going to be easier to make that happen more often if the opposing team has the puck all of the time.

Hypothetical shift: Hit -> turnover -> hit -> turnover -> hit -> turnover -> opposition scores.   Great way to rack up the hit stats while losing games.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rebel_1812 on January 28, 2013, 06:46:32 PM
He is still hitting although not so many 'big' hits but was still 7th in the league last season in hits.

I checked the stats and Schenn was 7th, Phaneuf was 22nd.

Both those numbers have me wondering about that stat though.

Wouldn't a d-man be laying many more hits if his team were a turnover machine and he spent all his shifts tied up in his own end?  Meanwhile guys who can move the puck out (and play with better d partners and forwards) wouldn't spend as much time in their own zone hitting opposition puck carriers.

By definition the other team has to have the puck for a player to make an 'official' hit, it's going to be easier to make that happen more often if the opposing team has the puck all of the time.

Hypothetical shift: Hit -> turnover -> hit -> turnover -> hit -> turnover -> opposition scores.   Great way to rack up the hit stats while losing games.

I know schenn and komi have consistently high in the hit stats.  However, I don't think the hit stat takes only big hits into play.  As such I would rather have a guy that can lay someone out like Phaneuf then someone that padds their hit totals with light body checks.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Britishbulldog on January 28, 2013, 07:36:35 PM
But I don't believe he was a beast in his own end.

I agree. I think he earned that reputation because there are a lot of people who falsely equate throwing big hits with being a good defender but when the trade was made a lot of people were saying that he left a lot to be desired in his own end.

Phaneuf got that HUGE contract coming off his ELC by the Flames GM.  Most in the hockey media were shocked.  He could shoot the puck and throw the occasional bone crushing hit but seemed to have glaring holes...like defensive zone coverage and not a very high hockey IQ.

What salary should Phaneuf be making based on his ability based on other defense men in the league?   Do you folks think his next contract will correct his salary like Dustin Penner's did last year?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bbt on January 29, 2013, 09:39:25 AM
Phaneuf.....Too many glaring mistakes in def zone. Plays like he is on a fishing expedition in his own zone. Plays like he might be a good lacrosse player especially the way he carries his stick in front of the net.  Being a captain he's doesn't seem to have the ability to make that big play to rally this team.  Great at missing the net in the offensive zone.....not worth the $$'s  The positive is he can hit and some of them are huge. With all the ice he is getting maybe Norris is shopping him around the league...Oh well the Leafs haven't made any significant changes that would have got us out of these many years of misery so until that happens we are going to be enduring another season of mediocore
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2hfR3CR-k8
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on January 29, 2013, 11:02:51 AM
I dont know about anyone else but Deon just rubs me the wrong way as a captan.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on January 29, 2013, 11:42:46 AM
He is still hitting although not so many 'big' hits but was still 7th in the league last season in hits.

I checked the stats and Schenn was 7th, Phaneuf was 22nd.

Both those numbers have me wondering about that stat though.

Wouldn't a d-man be laying many more hits if his team were a turnover machine and he spent all his shifts tied up in his own end?  Meanwhile guys who can move the puck out (and play with better d partners and forwards) wouldn't spend as much time in their own zone hitting opposition puck carriers.

By definition the other team has to have the puck for a player to make an 'official' hit, it's going to be easier to make that happen more often if the opposing team has the puck all of the time.

Hypothetical shift: Hit -> turnover -> hit -> turnover -> hit -> turnover -> opposition scores.   Great way to rack up the hit stats while losing games.

I know schenn and komi have consistently high in the hit stats.  However, I don't think the hit stat takes only big hits into play.  As such I would rather have a guy that can lay someone out like Phaneuf then someone that padds their hit totals with light body checks.

I actually prefer the opposite. I'd like a guy that can rub someone out and gain control of the puck. I could care less if there's a big, booming hit. I mean I enjoy it, but far too often, the big hit leads to a dman being out of position due to throwing it.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Jay-Mar on January 29, 2013, 05:29:02 PM
  Until that player is gone does Leaf Nation appreciate what they had, When Mats was the Captain it was story after story about how hes not a good captain and other players should take it away from him. Once he left everyone's story has changed to he was a class act and great leader. Dion is doing fine, no one see's what happens behind the scenes yet the teammates are always showing respect towards him in interviews and giving him prop's for helping someone along.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bbt on February 05, 2013, 05:19:53 AM
Still think the "C" is still re-establishing his game as a number one defenceman? Still think he has being doing much better than his stats suggest?  Time for Phaneuf to move on.  Last year and 9 games in this year hasn't changed him a bit.  Same old defenseless defenseman.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Strangelove on February 15, 2013, 05:12:22 PM
Captain Dion on Keon and the 1963 championship team:

Quote
“It will be an honour to meet him,” said Phaneuf. “I know he was a real good leader.”
“They won a championship,” said Phaneuf. “They deserve to be honoured. It’s a tough thing to win.”

I wish he wasn't such a blockhead.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on February 15, 2013, 08:43:56 PM
Captain Dion on Keon and the 1963 championship team:

Quote
“It will be an honour to meet him,” said Phaneuf. “I know he was a real good leader.”
“They won a championship,” said Phaneuf. “They deserve to be honoured. It’s a tough thing to win.”

I wish he wasn't such a blockhead.

You tell him, Charlie Brown.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Fred Wesley on February 16, 2013, 01:33:16 PM
Captain Dion on Keon and the 1963 championship team:

Quote
“It will be an honour to meet him,” said Phaneuf. “I know he was a real good leader.”
“They won a championship,” said Phaneuf. “They deserve to be honoured. It’s a tough thing to win.”

I wish he wasn't such a blockhead.

Honoured and championship were probably the biggest words he could think of.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on February 16, 2013, 02:01:45 PM
What's with the hate for Phaneuf?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: moon111 on February 16, 2013, 02:05:18 PM
What's with the hate for Phaneuf?
Looks like McCabe's simple brother.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on February 16, 2013, 02:07:15 PM
What's with the hate for Phaneuf?

I don't think there's hate. People just like cracking wise about Captain Caveman.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: caveman on February 16, 2013, 04:20:04 PM
Caveman being a good thing... right ??   ::)
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: x.jr.benchwarmer on February 16, 2013, 11:10:35 PM
Phaneuf actually made a good play in the game against the Sens when he made a shot/pass in the direction of Bozak which resulted in the 2nd goal.  It has been the first time that I can remember at least that he actually made a heads-up hockey play, and doing something that the opposing team wasn't anticipating.  But then he took that really bad penalty towards the end of the game, which could have resulted in a one goal game with a couple of minutes to play.

Phaneuf is basically not going to get any better than what we've seen over the past 3 years, IMHO.  He makes many defensive mistakes, he lacks agility, doesn't have a quick first step, has historically had a bad shot on the power play, telegraphs virtually every pass and shot, takes bad penalties because of his slowness in his own end,  and has a bad plus-minus.  But he is the captain, (perhaps because Brian Burke said it was so), and is the anchor of the power play and the penalty kill, and as loyal Leaf fans, we'll just watch this play out again this year, and have faith in the Leaf coaching staff and management.....
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: caveman on February 16, 2013, 11:30:56 PM
That is far too negative of an assessment of Phanuef IMHO. He brings many positives to the game . He corrals the puck behind the net and starts the play going up the ice well, takes the body, has a good slapshot, and jumps into the attack on the powerplay.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: caveman on February 16, 2013, 11:33:14 PM
and i think you see the best of Phanuef when he is paired with a defence partner who compliments his style.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Jay-Mar on February 17, 2013, 11:00:50 AM
People were anticipating all the hype he had when he first came into the league with his crushing hits and hard shot. He's always been the same player defensively.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on February 17, 2013, 11:05:05 AM
and i think you see the best of Phanuef when he is paired with a defence partner who compliments his style.

It looks like Carlyle is seeing that, and I agree with you 100%.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on February 17, 2013, 12:31:36 PM
and i think you see the best of Phanuef when he is paired with a defence partner who compliments his style.

I always do my best work with someone who is complimentary to me.   ;)
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: sucka on February 19, 2013, 01:00:46 PM
and i think you see the best of Phanuef when he is paired with a defence partner who compliments his style.

I dunno, i haven't seen his partner gush about his clothes and hairdo yet.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on February 20, 2013, 10:32:38 AM
In his first full season with the Leafs in a pre-season game against Ottawa, he let the Sens winger go past him with out any resistance, resulting in a goal.  Against the Canes the other night, he made a really soft pass up the middle resulting in a goal.  Last night against the Bolts, he lost the puck behind the net, then stood there, along with 3 other Leafs behing the goal line, while the Bolts scored.  If he shot the puck out of his end like he was supposed to, that goal never happens and the game result would have been different. 

Those are just three examples of the type of errors he makes on a regular basis.  For a supposedly physical d-man, he plays too soft for long stretches, and for supposedly a big tough d-man, he often shoots the puck like a little girl.  He is often out of position, covering the wrong player, just stands there at times watching as opposing players take shot after shot in front of the net.  As another poster indicated, he takes bad penalties because he is slow.  He has become the weakest link on the team.     

At the time he became captain, I really didn't see any other options for captain, and I do believe he is a really good voice in the dressing room and to bring player issues to the coaches/management.  Having said that, the captain is also supposed to be the leader on the ice, who should be the role model for the other players on the team.  I do not see Phaneuf as having that capability, and being picked by Burke to be the captain should make it easier for Nonis to at some point remove Phaneuf from his role as captain. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on February 20, 2013, 10:35:39 AM
He did get smoked on two races for the iceing puck last night, that is not good.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: LuncheonMeat on February 20, 2013, 04:00:56 PM
In his first full season with the Leafs in a pre-season game against Ottawa, he let the Sens winger go past him with out any resistance, resulting in a goal.  Against the Canes the other night, he made a really soft pass up the middle resulting in a goal.  Last night against the Bolts, he lost the puck behind the net, then stood there, along with 3 other Leafs behing the goal line, while the Bolts scored.  If he shot the puck out of his end like he was supposed to, that goal never happens and the game result would have been different. 

Those are just three examples of the type of errors he makes on a regular basis.  For a supposedly physical d-man, he plays too soft for long stretches, and for supposedly a big tough d-man, he often shoots the puck like a little girl.  He is often out of position, covering the wrong player, just stands there at times watching as opposing players take shot after shot in front of the net.  As another poster indicated, he takes bad penalties because he is slow.  He has become the weakest link on the team.     

At the time he became captain, I really didn't see any other options for captain, and I do believe he is a really good voice in the dressing room and to bring player issues to the coaches/management.  Having said that, the captain is also supposed to be the leader on the ice, who should be the role model for the other players on the team.  I do not see Phaneuf as having that capability, and being picked by Burke to be the captain should make it easier for Nonis to at some point remove Phaneuf from his role as captain.
Lupul might take issue with you saying Phaneuf shoots the puck like a girl.  ;)

BTW, how do you know he's a really good voice in the room?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: drummond on February 20, 2013, 04:46:26 PM
In his first full season with the Leafs in a pre-season game against Ottawa, he let the Sens winger go past him with out any resistance, resulting in a goal.  Against the Canes the other night, he made a really soft pass up the middle resulting in a goal.  Last night against the Bolts, he lost the puck behind the net, then stood there, along with 3 other Leafs behing the goal line, while the Bolts scored.  If he shot the puck out of his end like he was supposed to, that goal never happens and the game result would have been different. 

Those are just three examples of the type of errors he makes on a regular basis.  For a supposedly physical d-man, he plays too soft for long stretches, and for supposedly a big tough d-man, he often shoots the puck like a little girl.  He is often out of position, covering the wrong player, just stands there at times watching as opposing players take shot after shot in front of the net.  As another poster indicated, he takes bad penalties because he is slow.  He has become the weakest link on the team.     

At the time he became captain, I really didn't see any other options for captain, and I do believe he is a really good voice in the dressing room and to bring player issues to the coaches/management.  Having said that, the captain is also supposed to be the leader on the ice, who should be the role model for the other players on the team.  I do not see Phaneuf as having that capability, and being picked by Burke to be the captain should make it easier for Nonis to at some point remove Phaneuf from his role as captain.

I am not advocating Phaneuf captaincy, but there is quite limited pool of players who are more suitable. The only viable alternative IMHO is Lupul.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: sneakyray on February 20, 2013, 04:58:08 PM
I've got an idea...put phaneuf in front of the net on the pp.

that is all
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on February 20, 2013, 10:42:52 PM
In his first full season with the Leafs in a pre-season game against Ottawa, he let the Sens winger go past him with out any resistance, resulting in a goal.  Against the Canes the other night, he made a really soft pass up the middle resulting in a goal.  Last night against the Bolts, he lost the puck behind the net, then stood there, along with 3 other Leafs behing the goal line, while the Bolts scored.  If he shot the puck out of his end like he was supposed to, that goal never happens and the game result would have been different. 

Those are just three examples of the type of errors he makes on a regular basis. 

You could probably do a similar thing picking out errors of almost every D man in the league.  These are just anecdotes.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 21, 2013, 06:18:15 AM
Phaneuf contributed to 3 goals going in for Tampa on Tuesday. He looked like his old self. Hopefully he returns to form.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on February 21, 2013, 12:42:30 PM
In his first full season with the Leafs in a pre-season game against Ottawa, he let the Sens winger go past him with out any resistance, resulting in a goal.  Against the Canes the other night, he made a really soft pass up the middle resulting in a goal.  Last night against the Bolts, he lost the puck behind the net, then stood there, along with 3 other Leafs behing the goal line, while the Bolts scored.  If he shot the puck out of his end like he was supposed to, that goal never happens and the game result would have been different. 

Those are just three examples of the type of errors he makes on a regular basis. 

You could probably do a similar thing picking out errors of almost every D man in the league.  These are just anecdotes.

Those are errors that d-men should not be making on a regular basis, and are not anecdotes.  Of course players will make mistakes from time to time, but if you watch tonights game against the Sabres, I guarantee DP will make more than one of the following goof ups that will result in either a scoring chance or a goal:  not clearing the puck out of their defensive zone, playing defence behind the net for no apparant reason, taking a bad penalty due to his slowfootedness, covering the wrong player, letting an opposing forward get past him without being touched etc. 

The problem may be that being the captain, he shouldn't be ragged on, but he needs to smarten up because right now he is the weakest link on the team, maybe he just has to simplify his game a bit.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on February 22, 2013, 09:51:19 PM
In his first full season with the Leafs in a pre-season game against Ottawa, he let the Sens winger go past him with out any resistance, resulting in a goal.  Against the Canes the other night, he made a really soft pass up the middle resulting in a goal.  Last night against the Bolts, he lost the puck behind the net, then stood there, along with 3 other Leafs behing the goal line, while the Bolts scored.  If he shot the puck out of his end like he was supposed to, that goal never happens and the game result would have been different. 

Those are just three examples of the type of errors he makes on a regular basis. 

You could probably do a similar thing picking out errors of almost every D man in the league.  These are just anecdotes.

Those are errors that d-men should not be making on a regular basis, and are not anecdotes.

You brought up a PRE-SEASON game, I mean, come on.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on February 22, 2013, 10:48:46 PM
In his first full season with the Leafs in a pre-season game against Ottawa, he let the Sens winger go past him with out any resistance, resulting in a goal.  Against the Canes the other night, he made a really soft pass up the middle resulting in a goal.  Last night against the Bolts, he lost the puck behind the net, then stood there, along with 3 other Leafs behing the goal line, while the Bolts scored.  If he shot the puck out of his end like he was supposed to, that goal never happens and the game result would have been different. 

Those are just three examples of the type of errors he makes on a regular basis. 

You could probably do a similar thing picking out errors of almost every D man in the league.  These are just anecdotes.

Those are errors that d-men should not be making on a regular basis, and are not anecdotes.

You brought up a PRE-SEASON game, I mean, come on.

From 2010, no less.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: mjmgrand on February 23, 2013, 04:09:56 AM
Phaneuf has been excellent. I really fail to understand the criticism.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 23, 2013, 08:22:23 AM
Phaneuf has been excellent. I really fail to understand the criticism.

Phaneuf has been excellent offensively over the last 6 games. His defence is p*ss poor.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bonsixx on February 23, 2013, 08:33:57 AM
Phaneuf has been excellent. I really fail to understand the criticism.

Phaneuf has been excellent offensively over the last 6 games. His defence is p*ss poor.

I disagree whole-heartedly.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on February 23, 2013, 08:37:55 AM
Phaneuf has been excellent. I really fail to understand the criticism.

Phaneuf has been excellent offensively over the last 6 games. His defence is p*ss poor.

I disagree whole-heartedly.

If Phaneuf was faster he would be a great player, but since he is very slow footed we have to take the good with the bad, and as long as we keep a good stay at home partner with him, all should balance out.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 23, 2013, 10:21:58 AM
Phaneuf has been excellent. I really fail to understand the criticism.

Phaneuf has been excellent offensively over the last 6 games. His defence is p*ss poor.

I disagree whole-heartedly.

We're all allowed to have our own opinions.

Being a tender, Phaneuf is the kind of guy I hated playing behind. It's great when he's scoring and the puck is in the other end....but give him the puck in his own end and he makes at least 2 or 3 poor decisions a game. A lot of them end up in the net. He reminds me a lot of Bryan McCabe in that regard.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on February 23, 2013, 10:38:25 AM
Phaneuf has been excellent. I really fail to understand the criticism.

Phaneuf has been excellent offensively over the last 6 games. His defence is p*ss poor.

I disagree whole-heartedly.

We're all allowed to have our own opinions.

Being a tender, Phaneuf is the kind of guy I hated playing behind. It's great when he's scoring and the puck is in the other end....but give him the puck in his own end and he makes at least 2 or 3 poor decisions a game. A lot of them end up in the net. He reminds me a lot of Bryan McCabe in that regard.

And that wasnt a bad player, I'll take two more just like him any day.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: TML fan on February 23, 2013, 11:12:32 AM
Phaneuf isn't that slow. He's just not a very good skater. He's good in a straight line, but throw a couple turns in there and you don't know what's happening.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on February 23, 2013, 11:29:06 AM
Phaneuf isn't that slow. He's just not a very good skater. He's good in a straight line, but throw a couple turns in there and you don't know what's happening.

I think for some reason he looks akward out there.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 23, 2013, 01:29:53 PM
Phaneuf has been excellent. I really fail to understand the criticism.

Phaneuf has been excellent offensively over the last 6 games. His defence is p*ss poor.

I disagree whole-heartedly.

We're all allowed to have our own opinions.

Being a tender, Phaneuf is the kind of guy I hated playing behind. It's great when he's scoring and the puck is in the other end....but give him the puck in his own end and he makes at least 2 or 3 poor decisions a game. A lot of them end up in the net. He reminds me a lot of Bryan McCabe in that regard.

And that wasnt a bad player, I'll take two more just like him any day.

That would be sweet. Our idiotic plays in our own zone would go from 3 or 4 to 10 or 12...That would be awesome.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on February 23, 2013, 02:13:02 PM
Phaneuf has been excellent. I really fail to understand the criticism.

Phaneuf has been excellent offensively over the last 6 games. His defence is p*ss poor.

I disagree whole-heartedly.

We're all allowed to have our own opinions.

Being a tender, Phaneuf is the kind of guy I hated playing behind. It's great when he's scoring and the puck is in the other end....but give him the puck in his own end and he makes at least 2 or 3 poor decisions a game. A lot of them end up in the net. He reminds me a lot of Bryan McCabe in that regard.

And that wasnt a bad player, I'll take two more just like him any day.

That would be sweet. Our idiotic plays in our own zone would go from 3 or 4 to 10 or 12...That would be awesome.

Mccabe.... we are talking about him are we not. he was a high end dman that any team would have loved. and you can shoot him down, some fan. he had way more up side than down, and was our best for years.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on February 23, 2013, 02:22:17 PM
Phaneuf has been excellent. I really fail to understand the criticism.

Phaneuf has been excellent offensively over the last 6 games. His defence is p*ss poor.

I disagree whole-heartedly.

We're all allowed to have our own opinions.

Being a tender, Phaneuf is the kind of guy I hated playing behind. It's great when he's scoring and the puck is in the other end....but give him the puck in his own end and he makes at least 2 or 3 poor decisions a game. A lot of them end up in the net. He reminds me a lot of Bryan McCabe in that regard.

Think about how much he plays per night for the Leafs, and how the Leafs are 8th best in the NHL in goals against per game.  If he were anywhere near as bad defensively as you are saying he is, wouldn't our goals against be much worse than it is?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on February 23, 2013, 02:45:11 PM
Think about how much he plays per night for the Leafs, and how the Leafs are 8th best in the NHL in goals against per game.  If he were anywhere near as bad defensively as you are saying he is, wouldn't our goals against be much worse than it is?

I agree with you Potvin, I can't understand the Phaneuf bashing. I mean, I understood it when he was playing bad, but not anymore. He just seems to always be a polarizing figure, even with people around my home here, from die hard Leafers. Alot of them just can't get by his salary, which doesn't really affect any of us fans.

I get that he's overpaid, like a rather large part of the league, but his defense (which was always a point of contention for him) has been miles better. I find his shot is even much, much better this season so far.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on February 23, 2013, 03:20:49 PM
Think about how much he plays per night for the Leafs, and how the Leafs are 8th best in the NHL in goals against per game.  If he were anywhere near as bad defensively as you are saying he is, wouldn't our goals against be much worse than it is?

If he were playing defense in a vacuum, sure. With four other guys on the ice and improved goaltending, no. Erik Karlsson, of the team with the best GAA in the league, is also not a very good defensive defenseman.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rebel_1812 on February 23, 2013, 05:32:02 PM
Think about how much he plays per night for the Leafs, and how the Leafs are 8th best in the NHL in goals against per game.  If he were anywhere near as bad defensively as you are saying he is, wouldn't our goals against be much worse than it is?

I agree with you Potvin, I can't understand the Phaneuf bashing. I mean, I understood it when he was playing bad, but not anymore. He just seems to always be a polarizing figure, even with people around my home here, from die hard Leafers. Alot of them just can't get by his salary, which doesn't really affect any of us fans.

I get that he's overpaid, like a rather large part of the league, but his defense (which was always a point of contention for him) has been miles better. I find his shot is even much, much better this season so far.

I agree.  It was the same thing with McCabe.  He could be playing 30 minutes a night, yet people would still complain about him.  They must think Quinn was crazy putting out his worst dman for half the game.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 23, 2013, 07:26:09 PM
Think about how much he plays per night for the Leafs, and how the Leafs are 8th best in the NHL in goals against per game.  If he were anywhere near as bad defensively as you are saying he is, wouldn't our goals against be much worse than it is?

If he were playing defense in a vacuum, sure. With four other guys on the ice and improved goaltending, no. Erik Karlsson, of the team with the best GAA in the league, is also not a very good defensive defenseman.

Exactly. I don't have to go back to 2010 to find a Phaneuf screw up. Watch the highlights from the loss against Tampa Bay. He was at fault, or at the least contributed to 3 of the 4 goals against.

Like McCabe, he is very valuable when the team is on the Powerplay or in the offensive zone. When you watch him in his own zone, far too often he wanders off, panics with the puck, or makes some other boneheaded play.
McCabe did the same thing. Often.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on February 23, 2013, 08:36:45 PM
I agree.  It was the same thing with McCabe.  He could be playing 30 minutes a night, yet people would still complain about him.  They must think Quinn was crazy putting out his worst dman for half the game.

No, other people just don't set the bar quite as low as that. Like it or not if the Maple Leafs are ever going to be a championship hockey club they're going to have to have guys on the team who are excellent, perhaps the best in the league, at their position. Just being the best on the team wins you nothing. When people criticize Phaneuf it's because they know that in order to be the #1 defenseman on a contending team there's a certain standard that can't be met simply by virtue of being more deserving of ice time than Mike Kostka.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on February 23, 2013, 08:40:42 PM
Think about how much he plays per night for the Leafs, and how the Leafs are 8th best in the NHL in goals against per game.  If he were anywhere near as bad defensively as you are saying he is, wouldn't our goals against be much worse than it is?

If he were playing defense in a vacuum, sure. With four other guys on the ice and improved goaltending, no. Erik Karlsson, of the team with the best GAA in the league, is also not a very good defensive defenseman.

Exactly. I don't have to go back to 2010 to find a Phaneuf screw up. Watch the highlights from the loss against Tampa Bay. He was at fault, or at the least contributed to 3 of the 4 goals against.

Like McCabe, he is very valuable when the team is on the Powerplay or in the offensive zone. When you watch him in his own zone, far too often he wanders off, panics with the puck, or makes some other boneheaded play.
McCabe did the same thing. Often.

But then is it a case of that was a bad game where he got exposed, or is he really that bad?  I've seen Pronger have some pretty bad games as well, where he just looks lost.  He was a pretty good defencman.  I'm not saying that Phanuef should win the Norris, but it is funny that after a bad game people jump all over him, and then after a good game, people want to erect a statue for him.

He is what he is, a pretty good #2 or #3 defencemen.  Just so happens on the Leafs, he gets #1 minutes.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 25, 2013, 11:00:05 AM
Think about how much he plays per night for the Leafs, and how the Leafs are 8th best in the NHL in goals against per game.  If he were anywhere near as bad defensively as you are saying he is, wouldn't our goals against be much worse than it is?

If he were playing defense in a vacuum, sure. With four other guys on the ice and improved goaltending, no. Erik Karlsson, of the team with the best GAA in the league, is also not a very good defensive defenseman.

Exactly. I don't have to go back to 2010 to find a Phaneuf screw up. Watch the highlights from the loss against Tampa Bay. He was at fault, or at the least contributed to 3 of the 4 goals against.

Like McCabe, he is very valuable when the team is on the Powerplay or in the offensive zone. When you watch him in his own zone, far too often he wanders off, panics with the puck, or makes some other boneheaded play.
McCabe did the same thing. Often.

He is what he is, a pretty good #2 or #3 defencemen.  Just so happens on the Leafs, he gets #1 minutes.

But then it goes back to what Nik said. He's paid like a #1 dman, we as fans expect him to be a #1 dman...not on the team, a number 1 dman in the league.

If you're going to be the captain, making all kinds of big bucks, you need to be able to play that 27/28 minutes a night and not have really off nights. I can forgive the odd one, but it's a constant struggle with him in his own end.

If I had the time, I'd sit on the board and make a note of every poor decision he made during a game, but as it is, I have a hard time watching a full game, never mind typing away while it's going on.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on February 25, 2013, 12:48:52 PM
Quote
22. Two maligned blue-liners, Jay Bouwmeester and Dion Phaneuf, are taking on huge roles for their teams. Phaneuf's been on the ice for offensive-zone faceoffs just 36 per cent of the time, the lowest among defencemen who've played at least 10 games. Bouwmeester is at 41 per cent, which is 13th-lowest. Only Zdeno Chara and Johnny Boychuk face tougher competition than Phaneuf. Bouwmeester is 11th in that category (with partner Mark Giordano ninth).

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/opinion/2013/02/30-thoughts-nhl-realignment-still-needs-work.html
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on February 25, 2013, 01:20:09 PM
I'm not saying that Phanuef should win the Norris, but it is funny that after a bad game people jump all over him, and then after a good game, people want to erect a statue for him.

You could say that about any player though. When anyone has a good game the people who tend to be fans of theirs will say how great he is and when a player has a poor one their detractors tend to jump on it. If it were the same people, sure, but I don't think that's the case here.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on February 25, 2013, 03:56:46 PM
Think about how much he plays per night for the Leafs, and how the Leafs are 8th best in the NHL in goals against per game.  If he were anywhere near as bad defensively as you are saying he is, wouldn't our goals against be much worse than it is?

If he were playing defense in a vacuum, sure. With four other guys on the ice and improved goaltending, no. Erik Karlsson, of the team with the best GAA in the league, is also not a very good defensive defenseman.

Exactly. I don't have to go back to 2010 to find a Phaneuf screw up. Watch the highlights from the loss against Tampa Bay. He was at fault, or at the least contributed to 3 of the 4 goals against.

Like McCabe, he is very valuable when the team is on the Powerplay or in the offensive zone. When you watch him in his own zone, far too often he wanders off, panics with the puck, or makes some other boneheaded play.
McCabe did the same thing. Often.

He is what he is, a pretty good #2 or #3 defencemen.  Just so happens on the Leafs, he gets #1 minutes.

But then it goes back to what Nik said. He's paid like a #1 dman, we as fans expect him to be a #1 dman...not on the team, a number 1 dman in the league.

If you're going to be the captain, making all kinds of big bucks, you need to be able to play that 27/28 minutes a night and not have really off nights. I can forgive the odd one, but it's a constant struggle with him in his own end.

If I had the time, I'd sit on the board and make a note of every poor decision he made during a game, but as it is, I have a hard time watching a full game, never mind typing away while it's going on.

What he is paid is not Dion Phanuef's fault.  His agent and the GM that gave him the contract are the ones that resulted in that.  I have not heard Dion spout off about how he needs to get "his" minutes.  Nor has he thrown anybody under the bus and said "I'm the #1 d-man on this team".  If Shea Weber magically showed up at the door, I don't think Dion would turn him away by saying "Sorry, we have a #1 d-man here, and it's me.  So hit the road Jack."   The people who made the decisions to put Dion in the position he is in are the ones that should be faulted for Dion playing the amount he is playing, not Dion Phanuef himself.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on February 25, 2013, 03:57:36 PM
I'm not saying that Phanuef should win the Norris, but it is funny that after a bad game people jump all over him, and then after a good game, people want to erect a statue for him.

You could say that about any player though. When anyone has a good game the people who tend to be fans of theirs will say how great he is and when a player has a poor one their detractors tend to jump on it. If it were the same people, sure, but I don't think that's the case here.

Okay, then it's funny in the general case. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 25, 2013, 07:53:44 PM
Think about how much he plays per night for the Leafs, and how the Leafs are 8th best in the NHL in goals against per game.  If he were anywhere near as bad defensively as you are saying he is, wouldn't our goals against be much worse than it is?

If he were playing defense in a vacuum, sure. With four other guys on the ice and improved goaltending, no. Erik Karlsson, of the team with the best GAA in the league, is also not a very good defensive defenseman.

Exactly. I don't have to go back to 2010 to find a Phaneuf screw up. Watch the highlights from the loss against Tampa Bay. He was at fault, or at the least contributed to 3 of the 4 goals against.

Like McCabe, he is very valuable when the team is on the Powerplay or in the offensive zone. When you watch him in his own zone, far too often he wanders off, panics with the puck, or makes some other boneheaded play.
McCabe did the same thing. Often.

He is what he is, a pretty good #2 or #3 defencemen.  Just so happens on the Leafs, he gets #1 minutes.

But then it goes back to what Nik said. He's paid like a #1 dman, we as fans expect him to be a #1 dman...not on the team, a number 1 dman in the league.

If you're going to be the captain, making all kinds of big bucks, you need to be able to play that 27/28 minutes a night and not have really off nights. I can forgive the odd one, but it's a constant struggle with him in his own end.

If I had the time, I'd sit on the board and make a note of every poor decision he made during a game, but as it is, I have a hard time watching a full game, never mind typing away while it's going on.

What he is paid is not Dion Phanuef's fault.  His agent and the GM that gave him the contract are the ones that resulted in that.  I have not heard Dion spout off about how he needs to get "his" minutes.  Nor has he thrown anybody under the bus and said "I'm the #1 d-man on this team".  If Shea Weber magically showed up at the door, I don't think Dion would turn him away by saying "Sorry, we have a #1 d-man here, and it's me.  So hit the road Jack."   The people who made the decisions to put Dion in the position he is in are the ones that should be faulted for Dion playing the amount he is playing, not Dion Phanuef himself.

And I hold nothing personally against Dion as a player. I haven't said that he 'thinks' he's a "#1 dman". I complain because the Leafs organization refuses to see his obvious shortcomings...or at the least, compensate it by getting a true stay at home defense...Holzer is that, but he's not a #2 guy on any team in this league.

I also take issue with people saying "he's playing 30 minutes a game, how can anyone say he's bad"....he plays 30 minutes because noone else is available to play that many minutes. People say that the defense is deep...I'm not so sure..It's much like the rest of the team a couple years ago, where we had Mats Sundin, and a boatload of 2nd and 3rd liners. Well, We have Dion Phaneuf(a number 2 guy with a solid defensive guy beside him) and then we have a bunch of #4's, 5's and 6's....As much as people say that D isn't a hole right now, a there's really only 1 guy between #1 and #3.(We can point to Rielly or Gardiner being that #1 guy, but we still need a solid stay at home guy to compensate for their talents).



note; I hold nothing against players personally. They're far better than you or I could hope to be. I have issues with them being in the line up, or in the case of Dion, being in the roles they're assigned. That doesn't reflect poorly on them other than them not being good enough to do said role. Much the way Bozak is asked to do much more than he's capable of doing.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on February 27, 2013, 10:27:55 AM
Think about how much he plays per night for the Leafs, and how the Leafs are 8th best in the NHL in goals against per game.  If he were anywhere near as bad defensively as you are saying he is, wouldn't our goals against be much worse than it is?

If he were playing defense in a vacuum, sure. With four other guys on the ice and improved goaltending, no. Erik Karlsson, of the team with the best GAA in the league, is also not a very good defensive defenseman.

Exactly. I don't have to go back to 2010 to find a Phaneuf screw up. Watch the highlights from the loss against Tampa Bay. He was at fault, or at the least contributed to 3 of the 4 goals against.

Like McCabe, he is very valuable when the team is on the Powerplay or in the offensive zone. When you watch him in his own zone, far too often he wanders off, panics with the puck, or makes some other boneheaded play.
McCabe did the same thing. Often.

He is what he is, a pretty good #2 or #3 defencemen.  Just so happens on the Leafs, he gets #1 minutes.

But then it goes back to what Nik said. He's paid like a #1 dman, we as fans expect him to be a #1 dman...not on the team, a number 1 dman in the league.

If you're going to be the captain, making all kinds of big bucks, you need to be able to play that 27/28 minutes a night and not have really off nights. I can forgive the odd one, but it's a constant struggle with him in his own end.

If I had the time, I'd sit on the board and make a note of every poor decision he made during a game, but as it is, I have a hard time watching a full game, never mind typing away while it's going on.

What he is paid is not Dion Phanuef's fault.  His agent and the GM that gave him the contract are the ones that resulted in that.  I have not heard Dion spout off about how he needs to get "his" minutes.  Nor has he thrown anybody under the bus and said "I'm the #1 d-man on this team".  If Shea Weber magically showed up at the door, I don't think Dion would turn him away by saying "Sorry, we have a #1 d-man here, and it's me.  So hit the road Jack."   The people who made the decisions to put Dion in the position he is in are the ones that should be faulted for Dion playing the amount he is playing, not Dion Phanuef himself.

And I hold nothing personally against Dion as a player. I haven't said that he 'thinks' he's a "#1 dman". I complain because the Leafs organization refuses to see his obvious shortcomings...or at the least, compensate it by getting a true stay at home defense...Holzer is that, but he's not a #2 guy on any team in this league.

I also take issue with people saying "he's playing 30 minutes a game, how can anyone say he's bad"....he plays 30 minutes because noone else is available to play that many minutes. People say that the defense is deep...I'm not so sure..It's much like the rest of the team a couple years ago, where we had Mats Sundin, and a boatload of 2nd and 3rd liners. Well, We have Dion Phaneuf(a number 2 guy with a solid defensive guy beside him) and then we have a bunch of #4's, 5's and 6's....As much as people say that D isn't a hole right now, a there's really only 1 guy between #1 and #3.(We can point to Rielly or Gardiner being that #1 guy, but we still need a solid stay at home guy to compensate for their talents).



note; I hold nothing against players personally. They're far better than you or I could hope to be. I have issues with them being in the line up, or in the case of Dion, being in the roles they're assigned. That doesn't reflect poorly on them other than them not being good enough to do said role. Much the way Bozak is asked to do much more than he's capable of doing.

Despite some of the boneheaded plays the defence makes from time to time, this is actually one of the best defensive systems I have seen the Leafs use in a very long time.  When the d-men play agressive, in your face hockey, the team wins, and it is really nice to see opposing players getting flattened in the Leafs defensive zone for a change.  Leafs GA is way down from years past, the goalies are getting a clear view of most shots, and I notice a lot less rebounds than in years past. 

Remember how many games Raycrap played when he broke the team record for most wins in a season by a Leaf goalie?  Just because he played a lot of games that season, and got a lot of wins did not mean he was a great goalie.  Besides, most of those wins were due to the Leafs offense and little to do with Raycraps stellar play while most of the Leafs losses that season were due to defensive and goalie miscues.  Just because Phaneuf is playing almost half of each game, and just because he is wearing the C, does not mean he is the best Leafs d-man.  When he simplifies his game, and doesn`t do more than what he should, he plays pretty good.  It`s when he tries to do too much, that he gets caught out of position, covers the wrong player, takes a bad penalty or tries to play with a broken stick (Leafs were extremely lucky Phaneuf did not get a penalty for that).

ostka, Fraser and Holzer are just as physical as Dion and are more reliable than Dion and Gunnerson has been playing much better lately.  The bottom 2 pairing would actually be Franson and Dion, based on what I have seen thus far. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on February 27, 2013, 11:39:47 AM
I got no issue with Dion myself (ok paid a bit too much) But I would shutter to think who would replace his top 2 pairing minutes vs the other players best night after night.. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 27, 2013, 11:52:21 AM
I got no issue with Dion myself (ok paid a bit too much) But I would shutter to think who would replace his top 2 pairing minutes vs the other players best night after night..

And that lends to what I said. Dion plays top 2 minutes, because quite frankly, he's the best option they have right now. My issue is that in itself.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on February 27, 2013, 12:56:50 PM
or tries to play with a broken stick (Leafs were extremely lucky Phaneuf did not get a penalty for that).

When he tries to do too much that is when a shot breaks his stick unbeknownst to him?  It's instinct to clear the puck, the puck hit his stick and broke it, he didn't feel it happen, and he dropped it after he saw.  He's not the first player this has happened to (sticks are crazy light now, it's sometimes hard to tell in heat of the moment if you're not taking a shot when it happens) and won't be the last, but it's hardly as a result of trying to do too much.

Remember how many games Raycrap played when he broke the team record for most wins in a season by a Leaf goalie?  Just because he played a lot of games that season, and got a lot of wins did not mean he was a great goalie.  Besides, most of those wins were due to the Leafs offense and little to do with Raycraps stellar play while most of the Leafs losses that season were due to defensive and goalie miscues.  Just because Phaneuf is playing almost half of each game, and just because he is wearing the C, does not mean he is the best Leafs d-man.

Except with Raycroft you could back up his subpar play with more than "he tries to do too much", or "he's bad in our end" types of comments that are by their nature subjective an will differ depending on the person.  I mean, you're commenting in one paragraph about how good the Leafs are defensively this season, while at the same time criticizing the player who plays the most and plays the toughest minutes (some of the toughest of all D in the league). 

Raycroft had an .894 SV% that season, 36th among those who qualified for NHL's "save % leader" stat.  Lots and lots of people could point to Raycroft's brutal SV% and see that the team made up for his goaltending to get him that many wins.

Only 1 other defenseman in the league has started a lower % of shifts at even-strength (off a face-off) in the offensive zone (Phaneuf starts just 37.5% of his shifts there), and yet he is still in the top 30 in defenseman scoring.  He's used in all situations, doesn't take a lot of penalties, plays all the toughest minutes defensively, and still produces top 30 offensively (top 10 last season starting 50% in the offensive zone).

I'm sure I'll get more sarcastic Phaneuf comments directed at me in the GDT's going forward, but I'm doing everything I can to explain it using facts.  I don't think he's perfect, I don't think any player is perfect, but I think he's been very good for the Leafs.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Dappleganger on February 27, 2013, 01:03:42 PM
The Leafs have a team GA/G of 2.30.

Dion is averaging over 26 minutes a game. He deserves some credit for that doesn't he or at least proves he's not that much of a detriment to the team.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on February 27, 2013, 01:31:16 PM
The Leafs have a team GA/G of 2.30.

Dion is averaging over 26 minutes a game. He deserves some credit for that doesn't he or at least proves he's not that much of a detriment to the team.

I beleive he does. Ever see how many gaffs in a game Zdeno Chara makes? But he is the goldne boy when it comes to D men. If he was a Leaf he'd be crucified as well.. And I am not saying Phaneuf and Chara are equal
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 27, 2013, 01:39:12 PM
or tries to play with a broken stick (Leafs were extremely lucky Phaneuf did not get a penalty for that).

When he tries to do too much that is when a shot breaks his stick unbeknownst to him?  It's instinct to clear the puck, the puck hit his stick and broke it, he didn't feel it happen, and he dropped it after he saw.  He's not the first player this has happened to (sticks are crazy light now, it's sometimes hard to tell in heat of the moment if you're not taking a shot when it happens) and won't be the last, but it's hardly as a result of trying to do too much.

Remember how many games Raycrap played when he broke the team record for most wins in a season by a Leaf goalie?  Just because he played a lot of games that season, and got a lot of wins did not mean he was a great goalie.  Besides, most of those wins were due to the Leafs offense and little to do with Raycraps stellar play while most of the Leafs losses that season were due to defensive and goalie miscues.  Just because Phaneuf is playing almost half of each game, and just because he is wearing the C, does not mean he is the best Leafs d-man.

Except with Raycroft you could back up his subpar play with more than "he tries to do too much", or "he's bad in our end" types of comments that are by their nature subjective an will differ depending on the person.  I mean, you're commenting in one paragraph about how good the Leafs are defensively this season, while at the same time criticizing the player who plays the most and plays the toughest minutes (some of the toughest of all D in the league). 

I think he compliments the defensive system as a whole.

Quote
Only 1 other defenseman in the league has started a lower % of shifts at even-strength (off a face-off) in the offensive zone (Phaneuf starts just 37.5% of his shifts there), and yet he is still in the top 30 in defenseman scoring.  He's used in all situations, doesn't take a lot of penalties, plays all the toughest minutes defensively, and still produces top 30 offensively (top 10 last season starting 50% in the offensive zone).

I think if you can throw around that face off stat, then the +/- stat should be in play also.

The stat shows a lot of faceoffs in the defensive/neutral zone, but tells no story of where it goes from there.

If the GAA is down, shouldn't Dion's +/- go down?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on February 27, 2013, 01:44:45 PM
The Leafs have a team GA/G of 2.30.

Dion is averaging over 26 minutes a game. He deserves some credit for that doesn't he or at least proves he's not that much of a detriment to the team.

But using that logic, what's the more relevant thing to consider? The 20 games the Leafs have played this season where they've had a good GAA or the several hundred games previous where Phaneuf was playing a ton of minutes and they had one of the very worst GAA in the league? I mean, if that follows, then hasn't Dion Phaneuf been one of the very worst defensemen in the entire league the last few years?

I just don't think it works like that. There are so many factors that go into the amount of goals a team gives up that trying to attribute a big chunk of it to just Phaneuf's play seems to minimize the far more important factors like goaltending, team defense and on and on. If you look back throughout the years you can find lots of teams with so-so #1's near the top of GAA and really good ones in the middle of the pack.
Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: PG on February 27, 2013, 02:00:11 PM
The Leafs have a team GA/G of 2.30.

Dion is averaging over 26 minutes a game. He deserves some credit for that doesn't he or at least proves he's not that much of a detriment to the team.

I beleive he does. Ever see how many gaffs in a game Zdeno Chara makes? But he is the goldne boy when it comes to D men. If he was a Leaf he'd be crucified as well.. And I am not saying Phaneuf and Chara are equal

Chara has not had less than 44 points over the last 5 seasons and is a +122 over that span. He is the "golden boy" for a reason. Oh, and he has a Cup.

Of course he makes mistakes, but when you are affecting the play at both ends like he does, they are overlooked. If Phaneuf was putting up numbers like that, I couldn't care less if he scored in his own net every once in a while.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on February 27, 2013, 02:02:22 PM
I think if you can throw around that face off stat, then the +/- stat should be in play also.

The stat shows a lot of faceoffs in the defensive/neutral zone, but tells no story of where it goes from there.

If the GAA is down, shouldn't Dion's +/- go down?

But that's why I am talking about the zone starts, to help put a stat like +/- in context.  A +/- number on its own can look good or bad, but if you look past it you can start to see how a stat like that can be impacted by the way the player is utilized.  If a player starts most of their shifts in the offensive zone, they have a better chance of getting more offensive chances and being on the ice for more goals for, and vice versa if you're always starting most of your shifts in your own end.  It's not a perfect stat by any stretch, but I think it is much better than something like +/- on it's own.

These are a couple of explanations of the impacts it can have on things like +/- (and there are some linked to parts within that text you can get from the article if you wish to read more):

Quote
There's no question that this is important: a lost defensive zone faceoff costs a team approximately 0.25 shots on goal. For a guy like Kurt Sauer, who was out for 239 more defensive zone draws than offensive ones last year, that's incredibly costly - perhaps 3 to 5 goals versus an even split. Sauer, who was on the ice for 39 goals for at 5v5 and 43 goals against last year, could be a +1 instead of a -4. With six goals corresponding to approximately one win, that has a huge impact on a defenseman's apparent value. Indeed, the correlation between which zone a player starts in and the number of shots for and against his team while he's on the ice are very highly-correlated - Tyler Dellow again brings us the analysis of Corsi Number vs Zone Starts for defensemen.

http://www.arcticicehockey.com/2009/10/8/1077082/frequently-asked-questions-4-zone

Quote
It should be clear that defensive zone faceoffs represent a substantial defensive risk. Indeed, after winning a defensive zone draw, your team will allow more shots on goal in the next 30 seconds than if you had lost a faceoff in the neutral zone.

[click link to see table/graph]

It's hard to downplay what happens here. After you lose a faceoff in the neutral zone, you have time to set up defensively and you don't give up a particularly large number of good scoring opportunities. However, when you lose a faceoff in your own end, opponent shots on goal go up so quickly that it's as though you gave the other team a 10-15 second power-play. For several seconds, the rate of shots allowed is as high as it is on a 5-on-3. The prospect of this level of defensive disadvantage, particularly late in a one-goal game, must give coaches nightmares.

http://www.puckprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=239

This is not to absolve him of any mistakes he makes, because he does (and will continue to) make mistakes.  However, like I said above, I think he's performed very well in the role Carlyle has given him this season.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on February 27, 2013, 02:04:11 PM
The Leafs have a team GA/G of 2.30.

Dion is averaging over 26 minutes a game. He deserves some credit for that doesn't he or at least proves he's not that much of a detriment to the team.

I beleive he does. Ever see how many gaffs in a game Zdeno Chara makes? But he is the goldne boy when it comes to D men. If he was a Leaf he'd be crucified as well.. And I am not saying Phaneuf and Chara are equal

Chara has not had less than 44 points over the last 5 seasons and is a +122 over that span. He is the "golden boy" for a reason. Oh, and he has a Cup.

Of course he makes mistakes, but when you are affecting the play at both ends like he does, they are overlooked. If Phaneuf was putting up numbers like that, I couldn't care less if he scored in his own net every once in a while.

Bryan McCabe was putting numbers like that up, and people gave him a hard time.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on February 27, 2013, 02:07:34 PM
The Leafs have a team GA/G of 2.30.

Dion is averaging over 26 minutes a game. He deserves some credit for that doesn't he or at least proves he's not that much of a detriment to the team.

I beleive he does. Ever see how many gaffs in a game Zdeno Chara makes? But he is the goldne boy when it comes to D men. If he was a Leaf he'd be crucified as well.. And I am not saying Phaneuf and Chara are equal

Chara has not had less than 44 points over the last 5 seasons and is a +122 over that span. He is the "golden boy" for a reason. Oh, and he has a Cup.

Of course he makes mistakes, but when you are affecting the play at both ends like he does, they are overlooked. If Phaneuf was putting up numbers like that, I couldn't care less if he scored in his own net every once in a while.

I really didn't want to turn this into a Chara vs Dion thing.. But Chara has played with a much better team who is all about Team D and had world class goaltending. Until this year the leafs Team D/goaltending has been atrociuos...I just feel Dion gets a bum rap quite a bit. He absolutley makes mistakes. But he plays such big minutes agianst the top players in league. Without him I think we would suffer big time..
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on February 27, 2013, 02:11:30 PM
Until this year the leafs Team D/goaltending has been atrociuos...

Right, so you think the team's GAA has much more to do with team D/goaltending then the play of their #1 defenseman. So it's entirely possible to have a good GAA and a sub-par guy playing a ton of minutes.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on February 27, 2013, 02:16:29 PM
Until this year the leafs Team D/goaltending has been atrociuos...

Right, so you think the team's GAA has much more to do with team D/goaltending then the play of their #1 defenseman. So it's entirely possible to have a good GAA and a sub-par guy playing a ton of minutes.

Of course it has to do with team D/goaltending.. I just feel if Dion wasn't there I think it is "possible" that the GAA might not be quite as good. If Dion wans't there and Komi/Liles got in and someone else grabbed big minutes against the elite.. I think it possible our numbers would suffer..
Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: PG on February 27, 2013, 02:16:59 PM
The Leafs have a team GA/G of 2.30.

Dion is averaging over 26 minutes a game. He deserves some credit for that doesn't he or at least proves he's not that much of a detriment to the team.

I beleive he does. Ever see how many gaffs in a game Zdeno Chara makes? But he is the goldne boy when it comes to D men. If he was a Leaf he'd be crucified as well.. And I am not saying Phaneuf and Chara are equal

Chara has not had less than 44 points over the last 5 seasons and is a +122 over that span. He is the "golden boy" for a reason. Oh, and he has a Cup.

Of course he makes mistakes, but when you are affecting the play at both ends like he does, they are overlooked. If Phaneuf was putting up numbers like that, I couldn't care less if he scored in his own net every once in a while.

I really didn't want to turn this into a Chara vs Dion thing.. But Chara has played with a much better team who is all about Team D and had world class goaltending. Until this year the leafs Team D/goaltending has been atrociuos...I just feel Dion gets a bum rap quite a bit. He absolutley makes mistakes. But he plays such big minutes agianst the top players in league. Without him I think we would suffer big time..

I'm not trying to be a smart ass but it sounds like you are saying the previous 2+ seasons of the team's horrible defensive play had little to do with Phaneuf and more to do with goaltending.

He's led the team in icetime his entire time with the team.....
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on February 27, 2013, 02:22:26 PM
The Leafs have a team GA/G of 2.30.

Dion is averaging over 26 minutes a game. He deserves some credit for that doesn't he or at least proves he's not that much of a detriment to the team.

I beleive he does. Ever see how many gaffs in a game Zdeno Chara makes? But he is the goldne boy when it comes to D men. If he was a Leaf he'd be crucified as well.. And I am not saying Phaneuf and Chara are equal

Chara has not had less than 44 points over the last 5 seasons and is a +122 over that span. He is the "golden boy" for a reason. Oh, and he has a Cup.

Of course he makes mistakes, but when you are affecting the play at both ends like he does, they are overlooked. If Phaneuf was putting up numbers like that, I couldn't care less if he scored in his own net every once in a while.

I really didn't want to turn this into a Chara vs Dion thing.. But Chara has played with a much better team who is all about Team D and had world class goaltending. Until this year the leafs Team D/goaltending has been atrociuos...I just feel Dion gets a bum rap quite a bit. He absolutley makes mistakes. But he plays such big minutes agianst the top players in league. Without him I think we would suffer big time..

I'm not trying to be a smart ass but it sounds like you are saying the previous 2+ seasons of the team's horrible defensive play had little to do with Phaneuf and more to do with goaltending.

He's led the team in icetime his entire time with the team.....

I dont think you are trying to be a smart ass.. Of course he is a big part of the team so therefore contributes to team D. But when you don't have co-operation from the forwards helping out and the goalie making saves it will of course make the guy who is playing the most minutes look worse. Im not trying to paint him as a Norris trophy winner but he is far from the Leafs version of Larry Murphy. If Dion played with Boston the last 5 years he would have a cup and a great +/- as well
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on February 27, 2013, 02:23:12 PM
Of course it has to do with team D/goaltending.. I just feel if Dion wasn't there I think it is "possible" that the GAA might not be quite as good. If Dion wans't there and Komi/Liles got in and someone else grabbed big minutes against the elite.. I think it possible our numbers would suffer..

I think that's probably true but I don't think there's anyone who is saying that Phaneuf is the worst defender on the team or should be in the pressbox. It's not, or at least I haven't seen it, simply about comparing him to the other guys on the team.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on February 27, 2013, 02:34:40 PM
I'm not trying to be a smart ass but it sounds like you are saying the previous 2+ seasons of the team's horrible defensive play had little to do with Phaneuf and more to do with goaltending.

He's led the team in icetime his entire time with the team.....

Obviously everyone plays a part in it, but here's a look at how poorly the Leafs goaltending was, and how much of an impact that can have on a player's stats.

This (http://theleafsnation.com/2012/3/21/what-is-this-a-goal-scoring-competition-phil-kessels-defensive-game) article shows that Kessel (who was a -8 at the time) was getting an On-Ice SV% of .893 from Leafs goaltenders.  They adjusted it for league average goaltending (so not even for great goaltending), and his adjusted +/- would have come out to be +18.

Just like this season, a number of players (Phaneuf included) are benefitting from some of the league's best SV%, the last couple seasons they've also grappled with some of the worst.  It makes it difficult to point to things like +/- anyways.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Mostar on February 27, 2013, 02:36:04 PM
The Leafs have a team GA/G of 2.30.

Dion is averaging over 26 minutes a game. He deserves some credit for that doesn't he or at least proves he's not that much of a detriment to the team.

But using that logic, what's the more relevant thing to consider? The 20 games the Leafs have played this season where they've had a good GAA or the several hundred games previous where Phaneuf was playing a ton of minutes and they had one of the very worst GAA in the league? I mean, if that follows, then hasn't Dion Phaneuf been one of the very worst defensemen in the entire league the last few years?

I just don't think it works like that. There are so many factors that go into the amount of goals a team gives up that trying to attribute a big chunk of it to just Phaneuf's play seems to minimize the far more important factors like goaltending, team defense and on and on. If you look back throughout the years you can find lots of teams with so-so #1's near the top of GAA and really good ones in the middle of the pack.

This is true. I mean, statistically I could probably make a case that Dion and my goldfish are the same person.

Even Raycroft's save %. The Leafs were giving up tons of quality scoring chances as opposed to keeping shots to the outside and clearing rebounds, which is what Scrivens is getting from the Leafs.

Stats are only useful in a vary narrow perspective. Once we develop quantum computing I will be all in.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on February 27, 2013, 02:43:54 PM
If Dion played with Boston the last 5 years he would have a cup and a great +/- as well

But, and I apologize but I'm just trying to wrap my head around the concept here, but if the argument is that +/- is inextricably linked to the quality of team defense and goaltending on a team and that explains the discrepancy between, say, Chara and Phaneuf then how come, right now, with the Leafs getting comparable goaltending to the Bruins and with a fairly comparable goal differential Chara is a +7 and Phaneuf is a -6?
Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: PG on February 27, 2013, 03:04:25 PM
I'm not trying to be a smart ass but it sounds like you are saying the previous 2+ seasons of the team's horrible defensive play had little to do with Phaneuf and more to do with goaltending.

He's led the team in icetime his entire time with the team.....

Obviously everyone plays a part in it, but here's a look at how poorly the Leafs goaltending was, and how much of an impact that can have on a player's stats.

This (http://theleafsnation.com/2012/3/21/what-is-this-a-goal-scoring-competition-phil-kessels-defensive-game) article shows that Kessel (who was a -8 at the time) was getting an On-Ice SV% of .893 from Leafs goaltenders.  They adjusted it for league average goaltending (so not even for great goaltending), and his adjusted +/- would have come out to be +18.

Just like this season, a number of players (Phaneuf included) are benefitting from some of the league's best SV%, the last couple seasons they've also grappled with some of the worst.  It makes it difficult to point to things like +/- anyways.

I'm not crazy about On Ice SV% because it more or less implies the goalie's play is a determinant on the player's stats and not the other way around. Does this factor in how many goals may have been as a direct result of a Kessel turnover, or not coming back and taking his man?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 27, 2013, 03:21:16 PM
I'm not trying to be a smart ass but it sounds like you are saying the previous 2+ seasons of the team's horrible defensive play had little to do with Phaneuf and more to do with goaltending.

He's led the team in icetime his entire time with the team.....

Obviously everyone plays a part in it, but here's a look at how poorly the Leafs goaltending was, and how much of an impact that can have on a player's stats.

This (http://theleafsnation.com/2012/3/21/what-is-this-a-goal-scoring-competition-phil-kessels-defensive-game) article shows that Kessel (who was a -8 at the time) was getting an On-Ice SV% of .893 from Leafs goaltenders.  They adjusted it for league average goaltending (so not even for great goaltending), and his adjusted +/- would have come out to be +18.

Just like this season, a number of players (Phaneuf included) are benefitting from some of the league's best SV%, the last couple seasons they've also grappled with some of the worst.  It makes it difficult to point to things like +/- anyways.

Man, imagine how bad Phaneuf's +/- would be without the strong team d and goaltending  ;)
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on February 27, 2013, 03:27:57 PM
I'm not trying to be a smart ass but it sounds like you are saying the previous 2+ seasons of the team's horrible defensive play had little to do with Phaneuf and more to do with goaltending.

He's led the team in icetime his entire time with the team.....

Obviously everyone plays a part in it, but here's a look at how poorly the Leafs goaltending was, and how much of an impact that can have on a player's stats.

This (http://theleafsnation.com/2012/3/21/what-is-this-a-goal-scoring-competition-phil-kessels-defensive-game) article shows that Kessel (who was a -8 at the time) was getting an On-Ice SV% of .893 from Leafs goaltenders.  They adjusted it for league average goaltending (so not even for great goaltending), and his adjusted +/- would have come out to be +18.

Just like this season, a number of players (Phaneuf included) are benefitting from some of the league's best SV%, the last couple seasons they've also grappled with some of the worst.  It makes it difficult to point to things like +/- anyways.

Man, imagine how bad Phaneuf's +/- would be without the strong team d and goaltending  ;)

I dont put to much into +/- . I dont think it tells the true worth of all players.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on February 27, 2013, 03:28:58 PM
I'm not trying to be a smart ass but it sounds like you are saying the previous 2+ seasons of the team's horrible defensive play had little to do with Phaneuf and more to do with goaltending.

He's led the team in icetime his entire time with the team.....

Obviously everyone plays a part in it, but here's a look at how poorly the Leafs goaltending was, and how much of an impact that can have on a player's stats.

This (http://theleafsnation.com/2012/3/21/what-is-this-a-goal-scoring-competition-phil-kessels-defensive-game) article shows that Kessel (who was a -8 at the time) was getting an On-Ice SV% of .893 from Leafs goaltenders.  They adjusted it for league average goaltending (so not even for great goaltending), and his adjusted +/- would have come out to be +18.

Just like this season, a number of players (Phaneuf included) are benefitting from some of the league's best SV%, the last couple seasons they've also grappled with some of the worst.  It makes it difficult to point to things like +/- anyways.

I'm not crazy about On Ice SV% because it more or less implies the goalie's play is a determinant on the player's stats and not the other way around. Does this factor in how many goals may have been as a direct result of a Kessel turnover, or not coming back and taking his man?

Well it's the same as the stats don't make due for Gustavsson putting a shot going wide into his own net.  But I think the real impact on it is that on-ice SV% from year to year will have it's share of randomness, but as I've found through googling + twitter, league average on-ice SV% is typically .920.  No Leaf that played any significant minutes last season finished with an on-ice SV% of at least .920.  That on it's own probably wouldn't be worth a lot, but it's probably pretty bad that not a single player (a few did in shortened NHL stints, or in 4th line minutes - Rosehill) was league average.

If that's combined with the overall picture of the goaltender's numbers, coupled with any visual scouting you want to do on the goaltenders, I think it paints a picture of some pretty godawful goaltending.  Prior to this season, I think only James Reimer in the last couple seasons ever had a decent stretch of hockey with a league average or better even strength SV%.  The players deserve a chunk of the blame for the goaltending, but it was still terrible by any measurement.  I had such hope for Gustavsson too....
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on February 27, 2013, 03:34:39 PM
I'm not trying to be a smart ass but it sounds like you are saying the previous 2+ seasons of the team's horrible defensive play had little to do with Phaneuf and more to do with goaltending.

He's led the team in icetime his entire time with the team.....

Obviously everyone plays a part in it, but here's a look at how poorly the Leafs goaltending was, and how much of an impact that can have on a player's stats.

This (http://theleafsnation.com/2012/3/21/what-is-this-a-goal-scoring-competition-phil-kessels-defensive-game) article shows that Kessel (who was a -8 at the time) was getting an On-Ice SV% of .893 from Leafs goaltenders.  They adjusted it for league average goaltending (so not even for great goaltending), and his adjusted +/- would have come out to be +18.

Just like this season, a number of players (Phaneuf included) are benefitting from some of the league's best SV%, the last couple seasons they've also grappled with some of the worst.  It makes it difficult to point to things like +/- anyways.

Man, imagine how bad Phaneuf's +/- would be without the strong team d and goaltending  ;)

His on-ice SV% is actually right around the avg right now.  I think the goalies will probably regress some, but hopefully at 5 on 5 it won't be too bad.  Scrivens is sitting at a .939 SV% at even strength so far, which last year would be one of the top 1 or 2 in the league.  So I'd expect that to fall a bit, but if he can keep it between .920-.930 that should be good enough.  The league average is right around there (to the .920 end of that scale).
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Dappleganger on February 28, 2013, 01:11:30 AM
Until this year the leafs Team D/goaltending has been atrociuos...

Right, so you think the team's GAA has much more to do with team D/goaltending then the play of their #1 defenseman. So it's entirely possible to have a good GAA and a sub-par guy playing a ton of minutes.

So it's entirely possible to have a good GAA and a really good guy playing a ton of minutes.

That means nothing.

I feel stupid bringing up the team GA/G. My point was that as a team we're playing well defensively so let's not harp on Phaneuf because it ain't that bad.

The biggest difference with this team is Carlyle and I don't think he'd be playing Phaneuf so much if he wasn't getting the job done.

Phaneuf is not my favourite Leaf but I have no problem with what he brings to the team. That could change.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 28, 2013, 07:41:12 AM
Two more huge flubs by Phaneuf.

One on the 2 on 1 where Scrivens made a huge(could of been game saving) save.

The other on the goal to make it 4-2.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on February 28, 2013, 08:29:12 AM
Two more huge flubs by Phaneuf.

One on the 2 on 1 where Scrivens made a huge(could of been game saving) save.

The other on the goal to make it 4-2.

Just wondering.. do you keep track of the dozens of plays he does correctly each game, or his ability to turn many dangerous situations into a Leafs possession, you know, just to be fair?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on February 28, 2013, 09:28:17 AM
Two more huge flubs by Phaneuf.

One on the 2 on 1 where Scrivens made a huge(could of been game saving) save.

The other on the goal to make it 4-2.

Just wondering.. do you keep track of the dozens of plays he does correctly each game, or his ability to turn many dangerous situations into a Leafs possession, you know, just to be fair?

I agree with that
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 28, 2013, 09:35:06 AM
Two more huge flubs by Phaneuf.

One on the 2 on 1 where Scrivens made a huge(could of been game saving) save.

The other on the goal to make it 4-2.

Just wondering.. do you keep track of the dozens of plays he does correctly each game, or his ability to turn many dangerous situations into a Leafs possession, you know, just to be fair?

Do I keep track? No. Do those that rip on the goaltending keep track of the saves they make before they let in a softie? Good plays don't make up for bad plays in hockey. When you are causing your team goals against, I don't care how many you fend off...especially when that's your job.

If you're fine with the "#1 dman" causing goals against, perhaps our standards are just different.

There were several other idiotic plays he made that I chose to forgive because they didn't lead to scoring chances/goals..
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 28, 2013, 09:37:19 AM
Two more huge flubs by Phaneuf.

One on the 2 on 1 where Scrivens made a huge(could of been game saving) save.

The other on the goal to make it 4-2.

Just wondering.. do you keep track of the dozens of plays he does correctly each game, or his ability to turn many dangerous situations into a Leafs possession, you know, just to be fair?

Do those that rip on the goaltending keep track of the saves they make before they let in a softie?

And in saying that I mean, if Ben Scrivens makes 30 of 32 saves and the game is tied 2-2 and he suddenly lets in a squeaker from the point that any average goalie could of stopped, do his 30 saves remove him from criticism? What about if 10 of those 30 saves were on legtitimate scoring chances? I don't think it does. your job is to stop the puck...If you don't do it, you're not doing your job.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on February 28, 2013, 10:12:33 AM
Two more huge flubs by Phaneuf.

One on the 2 on 1 where Scrivens made a huge(could of been game saving) save.

The other on the goal to make it 4-2.

Just wondering.. do you keep track of the dozens of plays he does correctly each game, or his ability to turn many dangerous situations into a Leafs possession, you know, just to be fair?

Do those that rip on the goaltending keep track of the saves they make before they let in a softie?

And in saying that I mean, if Ben Scrivens makes 30 of 32 saves and the game is tied 2-2 and he suddenly lets in a squeaker from the point that any average goalie could of stopped, do his 30 saves remove him from criticism? What about if 10 of those 30 saves were on legtitimate scoring chances? I don't think it does. your job is to stop the puck...If you don't do it, you're not doing your job.

But as a keeper, I'm sure you'll agree that if you get peppered with 30 shots over the first two periods, your focus wanes a little bit in the third.  Also letting in a bad goal in the first couple of minutes because your focus was off happens.  If you reset and play a stellar game the rest of the way and buckle down, I think some would absolve the goalie of that first goal.

I remember the first playoff series Joseph played for the Wings against the Ducks.  The Ducks won the series, but they won it because Detroit just couldn't score.  Was that Joseph's fault?  If he lets in a bad goal in a game, but loses the game 1-0, is that still his fault?  In the case where you lose one nothing, is it the goalies fault depending on whether or not it is a bad goal?   Is it his fault if there was nothing he could do on the play?  What if there were no mistakes on the play, but Kariya just makes an unbelievable individual effort, and scores a goal on a powerplay?  Is that still Josephs fault?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 28, 2013, 11:06:20 AM
Two more huge flubs by Phaneuf.

One on the 2 on 1 where Scrivens made a huge(could of been game saving) save.

The other on the goal to make it 4-2.

Just wondering.. do you keep track of the dozens of plays he does correctly each game, or his ability to turn many dangerous situations into a Leafs possession, you know, just to be fair?

Do those that rip on the goaltending keep track of the saves they make before they let in a softie?

And in saying that I mean, if Ben Scrivens makes 30 of 32 saves and the game is tied 2-2 and he suddenly lets in a squeaker from the point that any average goalie could of stopped, do his 30 saves remove him from criticism? What about if 10 of those 30 saves were on legtitimate scoring chances? I don't think it does. your job is to stop the puck...If you don't do it, you're not doing your job.

But as a keeper, I'm sure you'll agree that if you get peppered with 30 shots over the first two periods, your focus wanes a little bit in the third.  Also letting in a bad goal in the first couple of minutes because your focus was off happens.  If you reset and play a stellar game the rest of the way and buckle down, I think some would absolve the goalie of that first goal.

I remember the first playoff series Joseph played for the Wings against the Ducks.  The Ducks won the series, but they won it because Detroit just couldn't score.  Was that Joseph's fault?  If he lets in a bad goal in a game, but loses the game 1-0, is that still his fault?  In the case where you lose one nothing, is it the goalies fault depending on whether or not it is a bad goal?   Is it his fault if there was nothing he could do on the play?  What if there were no mistakes on the play, but Kariya just makes an unbelievable individual effort, and scores a goal on a powerplay?  Is that still Josephs fault?

Well, it would all depend on the situation. A 1-0 loss is generally not the goalies fault. But if said goal was a weak one, there's still going to be some that rag on him.

Perhaps I should rephrase my statement in saying it is the goalie's job to stop the puck. It's the goalie's job to stop the 'stoppable' shots.

It's Phaneuf's job to break up plays in the defensive zone. It's Phaneuf's job to gain control of the puck and remove it from harm. I'll be the first to admit when a defenseman gets burnt by a great offensive play. But, when a dman is carrying the puck and in attempting to get the puck out, he actually places it in risky situations, I have to call him on it.

I'm not saying he's the only one that made mistakes last night. And perhaps my microscope is on him a tad more than others..but that's to be expected when you're the captain of the team, you're getting paid 6 million a year, and you're on the ice so much when it's really not warranted.

Like I said previously...He's out there because there is no other option. Scrivens is playing well, but if he was only playing average, chances are he'd still be out there because the next option isn't really an option at this point.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on February 28, 2013, 11:22:00 AM
Two more huge flubs by Phaneuf.

One on the 2 on 1 where Scrivens made a huge(could of been game saving) save.

The other on the goal to make it 4-2.

Just wondering.. do you keep track of the dozens of plays he does correctly each game, or his ability to turn many dangerous situations into a Leafs possession, you know, just to be fair?

Do those that rip on the goaltending keep track of the saves they make before they let in a softie?

And in saying that I mean, if Ben Scrivens makes 30 of 32 saves and the game is tied 2-2 and he suddenly lets in a squeaker from the point that any average goalie could of stopped, do his 30 saves remove him from criticism? What about if 10 of those 30 saves were on legtitimate scoring chances? I don't think it does. your job is to stop the puck...If you don't do it, you're not doing your job.

But as a keeper, I'm sure you'll agree that if you get peppered with 30 shots over the first two periods, your focus wanes a little bit in the third.  Also letting in a bad goal in the first couple of minutes because your focus was off happens.  If you reset and play a stellar game the rest of the way and buckle down, I think some would absolve the goalie of that first goal.

I remember the first playoff series Joseph played for the Wings against the Ducks.  The Ducks won the series, but they won it because Detroit just couldn't score.  Was that Joseph's fault?  If he lets in a bad goal in a game, but loses the game 1-0, is that still his fault?  In the case where you lose one nothing, is it the goalies fault depending on whether or not it is a bad goal?   Is it his fault if there was nothing he could do on the play?  What if there were no mistakes on the play, but Kariya just makes an unbelievable individual effort, and scores a goal on a powerplay?  Is that still Josephs fault?

Well, it would all depend on the situation. A 1-0 loss is generally not the goalies fault. But if said goal was a weak one, there's still going to be some that rag on him.

Perhaps I should rephrase my statement in saying it is the goalie's job to stop the puck. It's the goalie's job to stop the 'stoppable' shots.

It's Phaneuf's job to break up plays in the defensive zone. It's Phaneuf's job to gain control of the puck and remove it from harm. I'll be the first to admit when a defenseman gets burnt by a great offensive play. But, when a dman is carrying the puck and in attempting to get the puck out, he actually places it in risky situations, I have to call him on it.

I'm not saying he's the only one that made mistakes last night. And perhaps my microscope is on him a tad more than others..but that's to be expected when you're the captain of the team, you're getting paid 6 million a year, and you're on the ice so much when it's really not warranted.

Like I said previously...He's out there because there is no other option. Scrivens is playing well, but if he was only playing average, chances are he'd still be out there because the next option isn't really an option at this point.

I should point out that I agree with you.  I think that Phanuef is a capable defenceman, one who deserves to be in the NHL, but he should not be in the role that he is in and he is there because there isn't another option for that role.  If Reilly or Gardiner develop the way people are hoping then do, then he probably isn't in that role in a couple of years, if he is still with the Leafs.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 28, 2013, 11:28:48 AM

I should point out that I agree with you.  I think that Phanuef is a capable defenceman, one who deserves to be in the NHL, but he should not be in the role that he is in and he is there because there isn't another option for that role.  If Reilly or Gardiner develop the way people are hoping then do, then he probably isn't in that role in a couple of years, if he is still with the Leafs.

See, I'm not entirely sure that Reilly or Gardiner solve the problem either, because from what I've seen of them, neither are entirely responsible in their own end either.

Every team needs that #2 dman that's out there just to shut the other team down. I see noone on Toronto capable of doing so.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on February 28, 2013, 12:26:23 PM

I should point out that I agree with you.  I think that Phanuef is a capable defenceman, one who deserves to be in the NHL, but he should not be in the role that he is in and he is there because there isn't another option for that role.  If Reilly or Gardiner develop the way people are hoping then do, then he probably isn't in that role in a couple of years, if he is still with the Leafs.

See, I'm not entirely sure that Reilly or Gardiner solve the problem either, because from what I've seen of them, neither are entirely responsible in their own end either.

Every team needs that #2 dman that's out there just to shut the other team down. I see noone on Toronto capable of doing so.

I think what you may be coming to realize is there really are very few in the NHL who can do the job Phaneuf does better and NOT make the odd mistake, despite dealing with the best opponents every single night.

Mark Fraser has far better stats than Phaneuf but if you put him up against the competition that Dion deals with, I'm sure his numbers would drop in a big way.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on February 28, 2013, 12:37:18 PM
Well, it would all depend on the situation. A 1-0 loss is generally not the goalies fault. But if said goal was a weak one, there's still going to be some that rag on him.


Sorry jumping back into the discussion here....

Kind of my point is that those who rag on a goalie for only letting in 1 goal that wasn't a great one when he stopped 30 other shots with some wild saves need to look at the big picture.  Yes if the goalie is letting in one bad one EVERY night then it's a whole different problem.  Scrivens had a weak one last night through the wickets - but he made some incredible saves before that.  The team let him down and he wore down - that's the reality of the situation, and the case for basically every other goalie - there will be mistakes.  It's a game of mistakes.

That said, I think comparing goalies to d-men in the context you are trying to is tough though.

Quote
It's Phaneuf's job to break up plays in the defensive zone. It's Phaneuf's job to gain control of the puck and remove it from harm. I'll be the first to admit when a defenseman gets burnt by a great offensive play. But, when a dman is carrying the puck and in attempting to get the puck out, he actually places it in risky situations, I have to call him on it.

I'm not saying he's the only one that made mistakes last night. And perhaps my microscope is on him a tad more than others..but that's to be expected when you're the captain of the team, you're getting paid 6 million a year, and you're on the ice so much when it's really not warranted.

To your last phrase.. he doesn't decide when he's on the ice.  So you should direct your frustration to the coach if you don't like how much ice he gets, not at Phaneuf.

All of the best d-men out there make mistakes.  I've seen Chara make big goofs and giveaways many times.  Chara makes more money than Phaneuf so should he be held even more accountable?  What if we had Chara instead? 99 times out of 100 he will make the right play.. but if he makes 1 mistake do you jump and down talking about how Chara is error prone and shouldn't be?

My issue is that I think you sit back and wait for mistakes and the second you see one you jump out of your chair and point at the TV.. but when there are 99 other plays made by the same guy which are fine, you aren't even noticing them. 


Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on February 28, 2013, 12:39:18 PM

I should point out that I agree with you.  I think that Phanuef is a capable defenceman, one who deserves to be in the NHL, but he should not be in the role that he is in and he is there because there isn't another option for that role.  If Reilly or Gardiner develop the way people are hoping then do, then he probably isn't in that role in a couple of years, if he is still with the Leafs.

See, I'm not entirely sure that Reilly or Gardiner solve the problem either, because from what I've seen of them, neither are entirely responsible in their own end either.

Every team needs that #2 dman that's out there just to shut the other team down. I see noone on Toronto capable of doing so.

Well, I think the Leafs need a #1 d-man first.  If you look at Erik Karlsson, he's considered a number one defenceman.  While he is not as bad defensively as some make him out to be, his strong suit is definitely offense.  Then you slot Phanuef in to the number 3 role.  Now you just have to find partners for them.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on February 28, 2013, 01:34:46 PM
Well, it would all depend on the situation. A 1-0 loss is generally not the goalies fault. But if said goal was a weak one, there's still going to be some that rag on him.


Yes if the goalie is letting in one bad one EVERY night then it's a whole different problem. 

Well, it seems to me that Phaneuf is making some mighty big errors almost on a nightly basis..sooooo....


Quote
It's Phaneuf's job to break up plays in the defensive zone. It's Phaneuf's job to gain control of the puck and remove it from harm. I'll be the first to admit when a defenseman gets burnt by a great offensive play. But, when a dman is carrying the puck and in attempting to get the puck out, he actually places it in risky situations, I have to call him on it.

I'm not saying he's the only one that made mistakes last night. And perhaps my microscope is on him a tad more than others..but that's to be expected when you're the captain of the team, you're getting paid 6 million a year, and you're on the ice so much when it's really not warranted.

To your last phrase.. he doesn't decide when he's on the ice.  So you should direct your frustration to the coach if you don't like how much ice he gets, not at Phaneuf.

All of the best d-men out there make mistakes.  I've seen Chara make big goofs and giveaways many times.  Chara makes more money than Phaneuf so should he be held even more accountable?  What if we had Chara instead? 99 times out of 100 he will make the right play.. but if he makes 1 mistake do you jump and down talking about how Chara is error prone and shouldn't be?

My issue is that I think you sit back and wait for mistakes and the second you see one you jump out of your chair and point at the TV.. but when there are 99 other plays made by the same guy which are fine, you aren't even noticing them.
[/quote]

If you take a look back at my posts just a couple pages ago, you'll see that I say almost the exact same thing. My problem isn't with Phaneuf's skill set persay...it's in the way he's being used. He makes some bonehead plays and they're all that more noticeable because he's expected to be that shutdown guy. Perhaps I'm ragging in the wrong thread.

As for the 99 other plays. I shouldn't notice those. Well atleast, not take note of them. They're normal plays that every dman on the ice is expected to make.

Let's get something clear. When Phaneuf wasn't scoring, I had zero problem with it. He wasn't noticeable on the ice. That's great for a dman. That's what you want. Phaneuf does have some offensive talent but he shouldn't be going balls out to make fancy scoring plays unless he knows his defensive zone is under control.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on February 28, 2013, 10:05:28 PM
Just couldn't resist..Big OT goal for the captain..I like to celebrate when he does good things
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on February 28, 2013, 10:11:00 PM
He may not be a true #1. He may not be an ideal captain (or captain material at all.) He's probably overpaid. All that being said, I like that he's on the team.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on February 28, 2013, 10:17:02 PM
He may not be a true #1. He may not be an ideal captain (or captain material at all.) He's probably overpaid. All that being said, I like that he's on the team.

Pretty much sums up my thoughts
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on February 28, 2013, 10:23:18 PM
I feel stupid bringing up the team GA/G. My point was that as a team we're playing well defensively so let's not harp on Phaneuf because it ain't that bad.

I suppose the difference is that I don't see the continuing discussion/evaluation of any player, particularly not an important one, as tantamount to "harping" on anything even if the opinion isn't all roses and sunshine and the team is doing well. Any team, good or bad, is a collection of moving parts that aren't all going to be as good as you'd like.

scrutiny is a good thing. It feeds analysis.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Dappleganger on February 28, 2013, 11:21:46 PM
I feel stupid bringing up the team GA/G. My point was that as a team we're playing well defensively so let's not harp on Phaneuf because it ain't that bad.

I suppose the difference is that I don't see the continuing discussion/evaluation of any player, particularly not an important one, as tantamount to "harping" on anything even if the opinion isn't all roses and sunshine and the team is doing well. Any team, good or bad, is a collection of moving parts that aren't all going to be as good as you'd like.

scrutiny is a good thing. It feeds analysis.

Scrutiny is fine but what happens with Phaneuf is more along the lines of carping.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on February 28, 2013, 11:26:45 PM
Scrutiny is fine but what happens with Phaneuf is more along the lines of carping.

I don't think that's true. I think that if you compared the scrutiny he gets to say, guys like McCabe or Kaberle, it's no more harsh and I think both Kabs and McCabe at their best were better players than Phaneuf has shown himself to be on the Leafs.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Dappleganger on March 01, 2013, 02:02:13 AM
Scrutiny is fine but what happens with Phaneuf is more along the lines of carping.

I don't think that's true. I think that if you compared the scrutiny he gets to say, guys like McCabe or Kaberle, it's no more harsh and I think both Kabs and McCabe at their best were better players than Phaneuf has shown himself to be on the Leafs.

Just because two former Leafs were scrutinized doesn't mean it is accurate. If you want to talk about former Leafs, Larry Murphy was booed out of town and all he did was go to Detroit and win back-to-back cups and then enter the hall of fame. Are you suggesting Leaf fans are ignorant about NHL defencemen?

Toronto needs it's whipping boy!
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on March 01, 2013, 02:43:50 AM
Just because two former Leafs were scrutinized doesn't mean it is accurate.

Doesn't mean what is accurate? I didn't say Leafs fans are always right, I said that the level of criticism that Phaneuf is subject to isn't disproportionate to guys like Kaberle or McCabe, despite their being better players.

If you want to talk about former Leafs, Larry Murphy was booed out of town and all he did was go to Detroit and win back-to-back cups and then enter the hall of fame. Are you suggesting Leaf fans are ignorant about NHL defencemen?

You've lost me. Aren't you suggesting that by trying to establish an incongruity between the Leafs fans' harsh criticism of Murphy and his later accomplishments?

I mean, it seems to me you're now making my point for me. Larry Murphy, another guy who's at least on Phaneuf's level, was subject to way harsher criticism than Phaneuf. To the extent that he got booed every time he touched the puck. All Phaneuf is getting is criticism from fans who don't think he's very good defensively and jokes about it from people like me.

(I also think that's kind of a misrepresentation of the Murphy situation. Sure the booing didn't help but I don't think it's the reason he got dealt. The Leafs were a bottom feeding team that dealt away basically everyone on the team over 30, including Gilmour, Ellett and Muller.If the Leafs were going to trade Murphy because he was being booed they wouldn't have waited almost 70 games.)

Toronto needs it's whipping boy!

Yeah, again, that just doesn't jibe with what I'm seeing. Kessel doesn't get his share of criticism? Grabo doesn't? Kulemin and Bozak are immune? Phaneuf is subject to the exact same analysis/criticism that any other Leaf is. It's loud, sure, but that's just part of being on the Maple Leafs.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Dappleganger on March 01, 2013, 03:00:06 AM
Sorry I lost you Nik.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on March 01, 2013, 07:40:56 AM
I must admit, Phaneuf played a much better game lastnight. He picked his spots and didn't play outside himself.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on March 01, 2013, 08:50:44 AM
I must admit, Phaneuf played a much better game lastnight. He picked his spots and didn't play outside himself.

Consistency is the key.  He'll have games where he looks good, and others where you cringe from his cement head decisions.  He needs to be more consistent.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Significantly Insignificant on March 01, 2013, 09:24:34 AM
I must admit, Phaneuf played a much better game lastnight. He picked his spots and didn't play outside himself.

Consistency is the key.  He'll have games where he looks good, and others where you cringe from his cement head decisions.  He needs to be more consistent.

It may be that he isn't very good at determining when to do something.  People used to say that Al Iafrate had just as much talent as Ray Bourque.  The difference between the two of them was that Bourque new you shouldn't try an end to end rush in a game in which you were winning 2-0, where as Al didn't.  Phanuef probably just can't read plays well, and that's probably not a good thing.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on March 01, 2013, 10:13:06 AM
I did not see the game last night, only the highlights, but I did not see him on the ice for any of the goals against, and getting the OT winner is what the captain needs to bring to the table. 

I know I will rag on the d-men and the goaltending just because I played those positions and know what it takes, and the pressure involved, so I may appear to be critical at times, but I do try to be fair as well.  When Phaneuf plays a simple game does not do more than what he should, he plays great, and from what I saw, thought he played great last night.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on March 01, 2013, 11:26:52 AM
I must admit, Phaneuf played a much better game lastnight. He picked his spots and didn't play outside himself.

Consistency is the key.  He'll have games where he looks good, and others where you cringe from his cement head decisions.  He needs to be more consistent.

Bingo!
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on March 01, 2013, 11:56:40 AM
I must admit, Phaneuf played a much better game lastnight. He picked his spots and didn't play outside himself.

Consistency is the key.  He'll have games where he looks good, and others where you cringe from his cement head decisions.  He needs to be more consistent.

Bingo!

So he looks good some games and makes errors some other times? Nothing out of the ordinary, and as I've argued many times, it's nowhere near as often or as bad as it is made out to be.  I'm guessing if you watch other top D in the league the same amount, and with the same critical eye, as you watch Phaneuf that you will see them making comparable numbers of mistakes (some less, some more).  I don't want to compare him to anyone because it's futile, I don't think any one of us watches other d-men play full games enough to comment on their play, at least I don't feel comfortable enough doing so.

I won't continue to argue this for a little bit though, I've said enough on the subject and nobody's opinions seem to be changing, and that's okay.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on March 01, 2013, 12:48:50 PM
I must admit, Phaneuf played a much better game lastnight. He picked his spots and didn't play outside himself.

Consistency is the key.  He'll have games where he looks good, and others where you cringe from his cement head decisions.  He needs to be more consistent.

Bingo!

So he looks good some games and makes errors some other times? Nothing out of the ordinary, and as I've argued many times, it's nowhere near as often or as bad as it is made out to be.  I'm guessing if you watch other top D in the league the same amount, and with the same critical eye, as you watch Phaneuf that you will see them making comparable numbers of mistakes (some less, some more).  I don't want to compare him to anyone because it's futile, I don't think any one of us watches other d-men play full games enough to comment on their play, at least I don't feel comfortable enough doing so.

I won't continue to argue this for a little bit though, I've said enough on the subject and nobody's opinions seem to be changing, and that's okay.

Of course I'm going to be more critical of my own team's players.

If you'd like, give me a list of comparable players to Phaneuf.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on March 01, 2013, 03:58:55 PM
I must admit, Phaneuf played a much better game lastnight. He picked his spots and didn't play outside himself.

Consistency is the key.  He'll have games where he looks good, and others where you cringe from his cement head decisions.  He needs to be more consistent.

Bingo!

So he looks good some games and makes errors some other times? Nothing out of the ordinary, and as I've argued many times, it's nowhere near as often or as bad as it is made out to be.  I'm guessing if you watch other top D in the league the same amount, and with the same critical eye, as you watch Phaneuf that you will see them making comparable numbers of mistakes (some less, some more).  I don't want to compare him to anyone because it's futile, I don't think any one of us watches other d-men play full games enough to comment on their play, at least I don't feel comfortable enough doing so.

I won't continue to argue this for a little bit though, I've said enough on the subject and nobody's opinions seem to be changing, and that's okay.

Of course I'm going to be more critical of my own team's players.

If you'd like, give me a list of comparable players to Phaneuf.

I didn't mean critical as in negative, I meant critical as in watching players very closely with a critical eye - to critique/analyse/etc - moreso than we're able to do with other players on other teams.

I said I don't want to, but if you want cap hit comparables they're right here: http://www.capgeek.com/comparables/?player=442
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on March 01, 2013, 04:08:16 PM
I must admit, Phaneuf played a much better game lastnight. He picked his spots and didn't play outside himself.

Consistency is the key.  He'll have games where he looks good, and others where you cringe from his cement head decisions.  He needs to be more consistent.

Bingo!

So he looks good some games and makes errors some other times? Nothing out of the ordinary, and as I've argued many times, it's nowhere near as often or as bad as it is made out to be.  I'm guessing if you watch other top D in the league the same amount, and with the same critical eye, as you watch Phaneuf that you will see them making comparable numbers of mistakes (some less, some more).  I don't want to compare him to anyone because it's futile, I don't think any one of us watches other d-men play full games enough to comment on their play, at least I don't feel comfortable enough doing so.

I won't continue to argue this for a little bit though, I've said enough on the subject and nobody's opinions seem to be changing, and that's okay.

Of course I'm going to be more critical of my own team's players.

If you'd like, give me a list of comparable players to Phaneuf.

I didn't mean critical as in negative, I meant critical as in watching players very closely with a critical eye - to critique/analyse/etc - moreso than we're able to do with other players on other teams.

I said I don't want to, but if you want cap hit comparables they're right here: http://www.capgeek.com/comparables/?player=442

Wow, Tyler Myers is raking in almost $40million over the life of his contract.  Life's good.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on March 01, 2013, 08:05:11 PM
I must admit, Phaneuf played a much better game lastnight. He picked his spots and didn't play outside himself.

Consistency is the key.  He'll have games where he looks good, and others where you cringe from his cement head decisions.  He needs to be more consistent.

I think something needs to be said though about the difference between "mistakes" and weaknesses. Just about every defenseman, Nik Lidstrom excluded maybe, makes mistakes. They pass the puck somewhere they shouldn't or join a rush at a bad time or whatever. McCabe putting the puck in the Leafs net the one time, that was a mistake.

A weakness is something else. That's being too slow to handle quicker forwards consistently or too small to handle bigger ones. It's having bad instincts about when to go for a big hit or how to read a developing odd-man rush.

So for me anyway, it's not so much about saying "Dion Phaneuf did X on that play, so he's dumb" but rather "Dion Phaneuf frequently does X, which is indicative of him not being very good at Y".
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Mostar on March 02, 2013, 01:30:43 AM
McCabe putting the puck in the Leafs net the one time, that was a mistake.

I agree with the gist of your post. The quote above almost looks as if McCabe made only one mistake. That goal he caused was something every involved D man does in their career. I'll wager Lidstrom had a few of those too.

Phaneuf makes some mistakes. McCabe, on the other hand, had a serious weakness IMO and that was his play under pressure. He was consistent with that.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Dappleganger on March 02, 2013, 02:33:04 AM
I wonder if Detroit fans still talk about this one:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-KeGeVsqgw[/youtube]
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on March 02, 2013, 02:48:37 AM
McCabe, on the other hand, had a serious weakness IMO and that was his play under pressure. He was consistent with that.

I think that's some fairly selective memory at work. McCabe played pretty well under pressure as the team's #1 defenseman when they were making the playoffs every year.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Mostar on March 02, 2013, 03:53:59 AM
McCabe, on the other hand, had a serious weakness IMO and that was his play under pressure. He was consistent with that.

I think that's some fairly selective memory at work. McCabe played pretty well under pressure as the team's #1 defenseman when they were making the playoffs every year.

I've been flamed pretty hard before for making similar statements about McCabe...I don't want to go down that road again.

I'm not a big fan as Dion as the Leaf captain, but he may be the best choice for now. I am hoping he is a big game type of player and we'll see a guy who can dominate stretches of games IF the Leafs get into the play-offs.

He has some tools.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Hampreacher on March 02, 2013, 03:35:08 PM
Part of the reason that leafs cannot sign top flight free agents are their over critical fans. Given what and who Phaneuf plays against and the huge ice time he logs, that all plays into his performance and his plus minus. Did not Don Cherry make comments about this. Fans need to stop throwing their players under the bus. When free agents look at offers this does effect their destination. I have read comment after comment of players attributing Phaneuf's leadership and help. When Kadri was taking some conditioning training this past summer was notPhaneuf there to encourage Him. Not every player is going to be a Bobby Orr or a Scott Stevens nor should we expect them to be. Fans drove Macabe and Murphy away and who knows which free agents the fans critical spirit scared off.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on March 02, 2013, 04:00:18 PM
Not every player is going to be a Bobby Orr or a Scott Stevens nor should we expect them to be.

Yeah, you're right. It's over-critical fans who don't have perspective.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on March 02, 2013, 04:52:51 PM
Part of the reason that leafs cannot sign top flight free agents are their over critical fans. Given what and who Phaneuf plays against and the huge ice time he logs, that all plays into his performance and his plus minus. Did not Don Cherry make comments about this. Fans need to stop throwing their players under the bus. When free agents look at offers this does effect their destination. I have read comment after comment of players attributing Phaneuf's leadership and help. When Kadri was taking some conditioning training this past summer was notPhaneuf there to encourage Him. Not every player is going to be a Bobby Orr or a Scott Stevens nor should we expect them to be. Fans drove Macabe and Murphy away and who knows which free agents the fans critical spirit scared off.

I'm not even sure how to comment to this. But I'll be sure just to smile and jump up and down every time someone on the Leafs is mentioned.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: x.jr.benchwarmer on March 08, 2013, 07:47:12 PM
After 25 games (slightly over half of the year),  the plus-minus and average time on ice stats are telling in relation to Dion's play.

He has a minus 10 stat, which ranks him at a solid 616th overall in the NHL.  Dead last at minus 13   are  Brian Campbell,   Steve Weiss,  and Nick Schulz.

By comparison, as noted already,  Fraser is at plus 17, which puts him in a tie for 1st overall.

The average ice time per game for Phaneuf is 26:00  which puts him at 6th overall in the NHL.   By comparison, the average ice time for Fraser is 15:01 minutes per game.

Of course, this is but one statistic (as non-overally critical fans will point out),  and it does not reflect the fact that Dion also plays the power play   and penalty kills.  And Phaneuf is often against the opposing team's best players.

But it just goes to show that the way he is being played, and the way he has been playing, is not good.   And  it might be worth a shot to have Fraser get that many more minutes, and to try to pair him against the better players more often, since Dion is just over-matched most nights, because of his regrettable lack of foot speed, and agility, and questionable puck sense/ hockey  intelligence.

I earlier believed that Toronto would be better off to trade him for a bona fide first string top-flight goaltender, but since the goaltending is good right now, it is questionable whether this is a glaring need.  (It is also questionable whether Dion's trade value/talent  would even merit such discussion,  since an opposing GM would have to be pretty desperate to pull the trigger and get rid of a very fine goaltender in a package involving Phaneuf).

But with Dion getting the minutes that he has been getting,  and with his difficulty moving the puck on the power play, and struggles in his own end on more than a few nights,  it just makes much better sense to try something different now, IMHO, and play Fraser significantly more.

(And I don't know if looking at the stats and writing about how terrific Fraser has been playing is being 'overly critical' about Dion).
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Tigger on March 08, 2013, 08:32:14 PM
This is an interesting look at Fraser's year so far...

http://www.sportsnet.ca/blogs/fanfuel/maple-leafs-mark-fraser-plus-16-rating/

Quote
According to behindthenet.ca (all of the following stats are based on five-on-five play), Fraser and his partner Cody Franson have played against the easiest competition of any Leafs defenceman. Most hockey fans probably aren’t surprised to hear that considering Fraser and Franson are the third pairing.

But, things get more interesting. Fraser has the highest offensive zone start percentage of any of the Leafs regular defenceman. Both of those factors – low quality of competition and high offensive zone start percentage – usually translate into strong puck possession numbers. It’s pretty intuitive: if you’re starting more often than not in the offensive zone, against the other teams’ worst players, then usually you do a pretty good job of controlling the puck. Not so for Fraser. His Relative Corsi is 4.6, which is fourth amongst Leafs defenceman behind Franson, Carl Gunnarsson and Mike Kostka. Fraser’s puck possession numbers aren’t bad, they’re just not as high as you’d expect considering the situations he’s played in.

I know those metrics aren't perfect but I think this nicely alludes to why Fraser's numbers, when it comes to +/-, are what they are. He is being slightly protected when it comes to his on ice situations. Difficult to say how he'd manage as his Qoc and zone starts became more challenging.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: TheMightyOdin on March 08, 2013, 08:37:33 PM
Maybe it's because he is a defenceman but it feels like to me that expectations of Dion are way lower than they were of Sundin.

Can't really compare the two players. Sundin was an absolute superstar stud of a captain.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Hampreacher on March 08, 2013, 08:50:50 PM
When are some of you going to see that Phaneuf plays against the oppositions top ofensive players. That is going to effect his plus minus. He is probably the leafs top all round defenceman. He has also demonstrated great leadership as captain. Not everybody is going to be a Scott Stevens or Bobby Orr.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bonsixx on March 08, 2013, 09:28:13 PM
Can't really compare the two players. Sundin was an absolute superstar stud of a captain.

Who ultimately accomplished nothing in Toronto.

If Phaneuf ever lifts a Cup here, and I'm certainly not suggesting he will, he probably goes down as the greatest captain of the modern era.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on March 09, 2013, 08:32:42 AM
When are some of you going to see that Phaneuf plays against the oppositions top ofensive players. That is going to effect his plus minus. He is probably the leafs top all round defenceman. He has also demonstrated great leadership as captain. Not everybody is going to be a Scott Stevens or Bobby Orr.

I think if you say the same thing for a 3rd time, most people will start to realise.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on March 09, 2013, 09:10:33 AM
Can't really compare the two players. Sundin was an absolute superstar stud of a captain.

Who ultimately accomplished nothing in Toronto.

If Phaneuf ever lifts a Cup here, and I'm certainly not suggesting he will, he probably goes down as the greatest captain of the modern era.

I highly doubt that. Hall of famer Sundin will always be more highly regarded.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on March 09, 2013, 09:33:56 AM
I highly doubt that. Hall of famer Sundin will always be more highly regarded.

I agree, Phaneuf would have to provoke a change in the fans, much like Sundin did, to really have any chance of that.
Title: Re: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on March 09, 2013, 10:23:59 AM
I highly doubt that. Hall of famer Sundin will always be more highly regarded.

I agree, Phaneuf would have to provoke a change in the fans, much like Sundin did, to really have any chance of that.

Are you guys joking?  IF Phaneuf captains this team to the Cup, unless he's injured the entire playoff run he'll be a huge part of that. Suggesting a Cup winning captain won't we as highly regarded as someone who never won one is ludicrous. I'll be chiseling the statue of Phaneuf myself if he ever wins a Cup here. 50 years or so of drought tends to put perspective on winning one.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on March 09, 2013, 10:38:30 AM
Are you guys joking?  IF Phaneuf captains this team to the Cup, unless he's injured the entire playoff run he'll be a huge part of that. Suggesting a Cup winning captain won't we as highly regarded as someone who never won one is ludicrous. I'll be chiseling the statue of Phaneuf myself if he ever wins a Cup here. 50 years or so of drought tends to put perspective on winning one.

I left it open for him to do it, but I don't think he will. I'd also wonder how much a cup win would be the result of Phaneuf's leadership. From what I see right now, he's not in Sundin's league as far as Captain's go.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on March 09, 2013, 11:05:23 AM
Should he have declined?  See, I don't think so. I think Phaneuf gets too much heat for accepting the job that honestly, anyone would be crazy to not take.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rebel_1812 on March 09, 2013, 03:18:40 PM
When are some of you going to see that Phaneuf plays against the oppositions top ofensive players. That is going to effect his plus minus. He is probably the leafs top all round defenceman. He has also demonstrated great leadership as captain. Not everybody is going to be a Scott Stevens or Bobby Orr.

I think if you say the same thing for a 3rd time, most people will start to realise.

I think trolls will try to make smart ass remarks no matter how true a statement is nor how often it is repeated.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: leafplasma on March 09, 2013, 04:42:31 PM
There really isn't any other player on this team that strikes me as the Captain type.  You don't tend to take a young player like a Kadri, Frattin or JVR.  You don't tend to take a guy with language issues and that is reserved in the spotlight like a Grabovski or Kulemin.  A skilled guy with virtually no charisma like a Kessel would never work out.  Guys like Bozak and Mac may not even be here long term.  Blood and guts guys like McClement or Komarov are too new to the team.  Lupul may be a future choice who knows but when he was first added to the mix, it was never meant to be long term either, it just very nicely worked out that way.  Phaneuf really is the guy like it or not, time to get behind him and live with it.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on March 09, 2013, 04:49:15 PM
There really isn't any other player on this team that strikes me as the Captain type. 

Not then, no... Now? Maybe Lupul if when Phaneuf and the Leafs part ways?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on March 09, 2013, 08:44:59 PM
When are some of you going to see that Phaneuf plays against the oppositions top ofensive players. That is going to effect his plus minus. He is probably the leafs top all round defenceman. He has also demonstrated great leadership as captain. Not everybody is going to be a Scott Stevens or Bobby Orr.

I think if you say the same thing for a 3rd time, most people will start to realise.

I think trolls will try to make smart ass remarks no matter how true a statement is nor how often it is repeated.

Are you really calling me a troll rebel?

Give me a break.

I simply commented on an asinine comment that's been repeated twice now that makes no sense as no one here has asked him(Phaneuf) to be/or expects him to be a Bobby Orr or Scott Stevens.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on March 09, 2013, 08:59:01 PM
@mattiaboni
Dion Phaneuf has 3 assists tonight, 5 hits & 15:50 TOI after 2 periods #TMLtalk
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CarltonTheBear on March 09, 2013, 09:02:04 PM
@mattiaboni
Dion Phaneuf has 3 assists tonight, 5 hits & 15:50 TOI after 2 periods #TMLtalk

My MOTM so far. He's done what he can to shut down/limit Crosby.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on March 09, 2013, 09:03:09 PM
@mattiaboni
Dion Phaneuf has 3 assists tonight, 5 hits & 15:50 TOI after 2 periods #TMLtalk

My MOTM so far. He's done what he can to shut down/limit Crosby.

Agreed.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rebel_1812 on March 10, 2013, 04:04:18 AM
When are some of you going to see that Phaneuf plays against the oppositions top ofensive players. That is going to effect his plus minus. He is probably the leafs top all round defenceman. He has also demonstrated great leadership as captain. Not everybody is going to be a Scott Stevens or Bobby Orr.

I think if you say the same thing for a 3rd time, most people will start to realise.

I think trolls will try to make smart ass remarks no matter how true a statement is nor how often it is repeated.

Are you really calling me a troll rebel?

Give me a break.

I simply commented on an asinine comment that's been repeated twice now that makes no sense as no one here has asked him(Phaneuf) to be/or expects him to be a Bobby Orr or Scott Stevens.

if you call a comment "asinine" when he merely points out that phaneuf has faults to his game unlike Orr or Stevens; your in troll country.  He isn't generational talent; nor did we pay that kind of price to accquire him; so stop harping on his faults.  To make those faults seem bigger then they are, and please don't belittle people who give a dose of common sense; even if they give it twice.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: proteus2000 on March 10, 2013, 08:11:52 AM
This conversation has become redundant. Phaneuf is overpaid. He makes dumb mistakes sometimes. But he is still by far the best guy we have on defense for the PP, is our most physical presence on the back end, and he plays as hard as he can 30 min/night against the opposing best lines every night.

Being overpaid led to us trading a bunch of easily replaceable pieces for him. At this point we can't do better for a #1 D. We wouldn't get anything good in a trade nor could we use the cap space to sign a better D as a UFA. I don't care for him but godspeed Phaneuf, we need him to play well.
Title: Re: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on March 10, 2013, 09:17:29 AM
Are you guys joking?  IF Phaneuf captains this team to the Cup, unless he's injured the entire playoff run he'll be a huge part of that. Suggesting a Cup winning captain won't we as highly regarded as someone who never won one is ludicrous. I'll be chiseling the statue of Phaneuf myself if he ever wins a Cup here. 50 years or so of drought tends to put perspective on winning one.


If he leads the team to a Cup, he'll enter the conversation. If he just happens to be the captain of a Cup winning team . . . not so much.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on March 10, 2013, 09:30:20 AM
When are some of you going to see that Phaneuf plays against the oppositions top ofensive players. That is going to effect his plus minus. He is probably the leafs top all round defenceman. He has also demonstrated great leadership as captain. Not everybody is going to be a Scott Stevens or Bobby Orr.

I think if you say the same thing for a 3rd time, most people will start to realise.

I think trolls will try to make smart ass remarks no matter how true a statement is nor how often it is repeated.

Are you really calling me a troll rebel?

Give me a break.

I simply commented on an asinine comment that's been repeated twice now that makes no sense as no one here has asked him(Phaneuf) to be/or expects him to be a Bobby Orr or Scott Stevens.

if you call a comment "asinine" when he merely points out that phaneuf has faults to his game unlike Orr or Stevens; your in troll country.  He isn't generational talent; nor did we pay that kind of price to accquire him; so stop harping on his faults.  To make those faults seem bigger then they are, and please don't belittle people who give a dose of common sense; even if they give it twice.

It's funny, I didn't say asinine until you accused me of something that simply did not take place.

Using the same argument twice, regardless of how ridiculous it is and regardless of how little merit it holds in the conversation does not give a 'dose of common sense'.

It would be like people defending Kessel by saying "He's no Wayne Gretzky or Pavel Bure"...Yeah, of course he isn't..and your point?

No one expects Phaneuf to resemble Bobby Orr, or Scott Stevens. He will never be a top defensive dman. I have little problem with his offensive play but I don't expect him to be Bobby Orr...Nor does anyone around here...Well atleast I'd hope not.

When Dion is sheltered, he is fine defensively. When he has someone to lean on, he is fine defensively. When Phaneuf plays outside himself and tries to be a defensive stalwart, his weaknesses are exposed. Is this necessarily Dion's fault? No, not really. But most people who play a strong game in and out, have the consistency to play 'within themselves.'

If you take a look back, this has been my stance all along. I realise why he plays 26 minutes a game. The Leafs have no better option.

But, because the Leafs have no better option, does not remove him from criticization. Much like the goalies were criticized despite the Leafs having no better option.

So do me a favour, next time you want to call me names and take down the thread, do it in a private message. Oh and look up the meaning of troll while you're at it. I may not post in a style that you or many enjoy, but I do not intend to troll.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Frank E on March 10, 2013, 09:33:23 AM
I think Phaneuf is a very good defenseman.

Playing half the hockey game can lead to making a couple of boners, but the other 30 plays you properly complete don't get talked about.   
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on March 10, 2013, 10:50:44 AM
I think Phaneuf is a very good defenseman.

Playing half the hockey game can lead to making a couple of boners, but the other 30 plays you properly complete don't get talked about.

Exactly. Nobody ever talked about the fact that Andrew Raycroft stopped 89 out of the 100 shots he'd face, they just cynically focused on the eleven he didn't.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on March 10, 2013, 11:36:07 AM

On a sort of side note one of the things I've been wondering with regards to Phaneuf is the question of his ice time. It's one of the more frequent numbers thrown around in his favour when trying to weigh his value to the club and, to be fair, Phaneuf is ranking among the league leaders in ice-time, ranking 7th among defensemen at 26:06 a game.

I think the problem with that narrative, though, is two-fold. For starters if you look at the rest of the league leaders, the top 15 or so, it's definitely a group that has a great deal of elite talent, guys like Letang and Weber and Karlsson but it also has guys who I think most would agree are of substantially less value like Jack Johnson, Dennis Wideman and Brian Campbell.

Then there's the issue of the extent to which the leaders of the pack separate themselves from the rest. It seems like there's around 30 or so defensemen who play around 24 minutes or more and 50 or so who play in the vicinity of 23 minutes or more. So when we're talking about Phaneuf playing 26 minutes a game, or anyone really, what we're talking about is the value that exists in playing a couple minutes more than what seems to be the sort of standard for a #1 defenseman. I don't know what that value is and so I'm not dismissing it but I do think it's not the clearest of pictures that being where Phaneuf is in terms of ice-time necessarily equates to a ton of value.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on March 10, 2013, 11:40:44 AM
I thought Dion played one of his best games as a Leaf last night
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: losveratos on March 10, 2013, 12:37:38 PM
I think Phaneuf is a very good defenseman.

Playing half the hockey game can lead to making a couple of boners, but the other 30 plays you properly complete don't get talked about.

This argument is ridiculous. Of course we will talk about any and all mistakes and the amount of time or quality of play outside of that mistake makes no difference on whether or not the mistake should have happened.

Exactly. Nobody ever talked about the fact that Andrew Raycroft stopped 89 out of the 100 shots he'd face, they just cynically focused on the eleven he didn't.

And you... grow up and stop using this approach to all arguments. In my opinion its childish and one of the weakest forms of convincing dialogue.

I swear, you're getting worse and more sarcastic with every passing year and each and every loss. Grow up and prove you can be a leader on this board with your 10million posts instead of just belittling the opinions of those that don't agree with you.

There are much better ways to argue.

P.S. If you're going to quote someone quote them properly. Your signature has a major mistake. And if it's not a mistake and rather a joke about how democracy is dictatorship now... take that persons names off that you're quoting.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Frank E on March 10, 2013, 12:45:52 PM
I think Phaneuf is a very good defenseman.

Playing half the hockey game can lead to making a couple of boners, but the other 30 plays you properly complete don't get talked about.

Exactly. Nobody ever talked about the fact that Andrew Raycroft stopped 89 out of the 100 shots he'd face, they just cynically focused on the eleven he didn't.

Now you're just picking on me.

Phaneuf executes plays with an excellent success rate, given his opponents, and so much so that he plays the toughest and longest minutes on the team.  He is among the league leaders in ice-time on a surprising playoff contending team...and Andrew Raycroft didn't execute at a rate that is expected of an NHL starting goalie.

So other than that, sure, your comparison works.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on March 10, 2013, 12:47:37 PM

Exactly. Nobody ever talked about the fact that Andrew Raycroft stopped 89 out of the 100 shots he'd face, they just cynically focused on the eleven he didn't.

And you... grow up and stop using this approach to all arguments. In my opinion its childish and one of the weakest forms of convincing dialogue.

I swear, you're getting worse and more sarcastic with every passing year and each and every loss. Grow up and prove you can be a leader on this board with your 10million posts instead of just belittling the opinions of those that don't agree with you.

There are much better ways to argue.

P.S. If you're going to quote someone quote them properly. Your signature has a major mistake. And if it's not a mistake and rather a joke about how democracy is dictatorship now... take that persons names off that you're quoting.

I don't see how that approach is incorrect. I'd say it's exactly what is happening with Phaneuf and what never happened with Raycroft or Telqvist.



As a side note, I'd say his quoting of Bukowski is pretty darn close.

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/54787-the-difference-between-a-democracy-and-a-dictatorship-is-that

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Frank E on March 10, 2013, 12:54:52 PM
I think Phaneuf is a very good defenseman.

Playing half the hockey game can lead to making a couple of boners, but the other 30 plays you properly complete don't get talked about.

This argument is ridiculous. Of course we will talk about any and all mistakes and the amount of time or quality of play outside of that mistake makes no difference on whether or not the mistake should have happened.

Well, I think you're wrong...and exactly what part was ridiculous?  The part about Phaneuf being good, or the part about that he makes a few mistakes and his good plays don't really get talked about?

Statistically speaking, the more time you play, the more likely you are to make a mistake - all else remaining constant.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on March 10, 2013, 12:56:05 PM

On a sort of side note one of the things I've been wondering with regards to Phaneuf is the question of his ice time. It's one of the more frequent numbers thrown around in his favour when trying to weigh his value to the club and, to be fair, Phaneuf is ranking among the league leaders in ice-time, ranking 7th among defensemen at 26:06 a game.

I think, if anything, it's simply his abilities compared to his teammates. He's the best all around defenseman on the team, so he's going to have the most minutes. I haven't reviewed the other ice-time leaders' situations, but his high minutes are evidence of the gap in talent compared to the other defensemen on the team where some of the other defenders who are better than him might also have teammates closer in ability that they can share minutes with.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: losveratos on March 10, 2013, 12:59:06 PM

Exactly. Nobody ever talked about the fact that Andrew Raycroft stopped 89 out of the 100 shots he'd face, they just cynically focused on the eleven he didn't.

And you... grow up and stop using this approach to all arguments. In my opinion its childish and one of the weakest forms of convincing dialogue.

I swear, you're getting worse and more sarcastic with every passing year and each and every loss. Grow up and prove you can be a leader on this board with your 10million posts instead of just belittling the opinions of those that don't agree with you.

There are much better ways to argue.

P.S. If you're going to quote someone quote them properly. Your signature has a major mistake. And if it's not a mistake and rather a joke about how democracy is dictatorship now... take that persons names off that you're quoting.

I don't see how that approach is incorrect. I'd say it's exactly what is happening with Phaneuf and what never happened with Raycroft or Telqvist.



As a side note, I'd say his quoting of Bukowski is pretty darn close.

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/54787-the-difference-between-a-democracy-and-a-dictatorship-is-that

I meant his unbelievable over use of sarcasm to essentially call anyone and everyone an idiot passive aggressively.

And no his quote is very wrong.
Nik: The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is in a dictatorship you vote first and take your orders later; in a dictatorship you don't waste your time voting
-Charles Bukowski
He mentions dictatorship twice.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: x.jr.benchwarmer on March 10, 2013, 12:59:50 PM
I thought that Phaneuf had his best game this year last night against the Penguins.

He played physical, in an intelligent way.  He got rid of the puck quicker than he has in the past, especially on the power play.

Yet, because of the really weak goaltending, he was a 0, in the plus-minus category, notwithstanding his 3 assists.

It seems to me that the Leafs would be better off bringing Gardiner up to play more on the power play, because the minutes that Phaneuf plays seem to be counter-productive to his overall value to the Leafs.

And speaking about solid games for a defenceman, I thought that Gunnar was just terrific.  He blocked something like 4 shots, and was really good at shutting down the forwards.  I think that the Leafs would benefit by giving him more shifts as well.  In fact, it might make better sense to have the top 4 defencemen on the first 2 pairings, rather than dilute the talent  (i.e.  Holzer on the first line).
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: losveratos on March 10, 2013, 01:03:34 PM
I think Phaneuf is a very good defenseman.

Playing half the hockey game can lead to making a couple of boners, but the other 30 plays you properly complete don't get talked about.

This argument is ridiculous. Of course we will talk about any and all mistakes and the amount of time or quality of play outside of that mistake makes no difference on whether or not the mistake should have happened.

Well, I think you're wrong...and exactly what part was ridiculous?  The part about Phaneuf being good, or the part about that he makes a few mistakes and his good plays don't really get talked about?

Statistically speaking, the more time you play, the more likely you are to make a mistake - all else remaining constant.

The ridiculous part is that you can play 59minutes and 59 seconds of perfect hockey as a goalie. But if just before overtime starts you let in a 200 foot goal like toskola did in that one game that bounced over his glove... then I believe he deserves all the criticism he gets. Now obviously that game wasn't a 0-0 game or anything like that. This is a fictional creation. But I believe any mistake no matter how amazing you do everything around it, deserves any and all questioning and complaint.

Even after a strong win or a shutout I'm sure Randy doesn't go in the locker room and tell everyone that nothing was done wrong and no improvements can be made.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: L K on March 10, 2013, 01:25:25 PM

Exactly. Nobody ever talked about the fact that Andrew Raycroft stopped 89 out of the 100 shots he'd face, they just cynically focused on the eleven he didn't.

And you... grow up and stop using this approach to all arguments. In my opinion its childish and one of the weakest forms of convincing dialogue.

I swear, you're getting worse and more sarcastic with every passing year and each and every loss. Grow up and prove you can be a leader on this board with your 10million posts instead of just belittling the opinions of those that don't agree with you.

There are much better ways to argue.

P.S. If you're going to quote someone quote them properly. Your signature has a major mistake. And if it's not a mistake and rather a joke about how democracy is dictatorship now... take that persons names off that you're quoting.

I don't see how that approach is incorrect. I'd say it's exactly what is happening with Phaneuf and what never happened with Raycroft or Telqvist.



As a side note, I'd say his quoting of Bukowski is pretty darn close.

http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/54787-the-difference-between-a-democracy-and-a-dictatorship-is-that

I meant his unbelievable over use of sarcasm to essentially call anyone and everyone an idiot passive aggressively.

And no his quote is very wrong.
Nik: The difference between a democracy and a dictatorship is in a dictatorship you vote first and take your orders later; in a dictatorship you don't waste your time voting
-Charles Bukowski
He mentions dictatorship twice.

Someone needs to sit in the timeout chair for a while.  Calm down.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on March 10, 2013, 01:35:22 PM
Now you're just picking on me.

Phaneuf executes plays with an excellent success rate, given his opponents, and so much so that he plays the toughest and longest minutes on the team.  He is among the league leaders in ice-time on a surprising playoff contending team...and Andrew Raycroft didn't execute at a rate that is expected of an NHL starting goalie.

Well, the dispute about Phaneuf is that a lot of people don't think his success rate is excellent when compared to other top pairing defensemen, as opposed to simply comparing him to the fairly limited talent pool that makes up the Leafs defense group.

So, you know, my comparison is alright.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on March 10, 2013, 01:36:44 PM
P.S. If you're going to quote someone quote them properly. Your signature has a major mistake. And if it's not a mistake and rather a joke about how democracy is dictatorship now... take that persons names off that you're quoting.

Thanks! I hadn't noticed the typo until now. Corrected!
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on March 10, 2013, 01:37:24 PM
P.S. If you're going to quote someone quote them properly. Your signature has a major mistake. And if it's not a mistake and rather a joke about how democracy is dictatorship now... take that persons names off that you're quoting.

Thanks! I hadn't noticed the typo until now. Corrected!

I'd read it more than once and never noticed.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: losveratos on March 10, 2013, 01:41:50 PM
P.S. If you're going to quote someone quote them properly. Your signature has a major mistake. And if it's not a mistake and rather a joke about how democracy is dictatorship now... take that persons names off that you're quoting.

Thanks! I hadn't noticed the typo until now. Corrected!

I'd read it more than once and never noticed.

I see everything!  :o

Now where's my glasses?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on March 10, 2013, 01:46:11 PM
I think, if anything, it's simply his abilities compared to his teammates. He's the best all around defenseman on the team, so he's going to have the most minutes. I haven't reviewed the other ice-time leaders' situations, but his high minutes are evidence of the gap in talent compared to the other defensemen on the team where some of the other defenders who are better than him might also have teammates closer in ability that they can share minutes with.

I think there's more to it than just being the best of a bad bunch. The Rangers, for instance, have 3 defensemen in the top 30 in terms of ice time because they have three really good defensmen. The flip to it, though, is that there are guys like Campbell and Johnson right there with Phaneuf who do fall into the category of kind of getting that ice time by default.

Ryan Suter, who's leading the league in the stat, obviously contributes some amount of value by being able to be on the ice 12-15% more than your average #1 defenseman, I'm just not sure how much.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on March 10, 2013, 02:07:20 PM
I see everything!  :o

take that persons names off that you're quoting.

"Persons" is plural, "person's" is possessive.

I meant his unbelievable over use of sarcasm to essentially call anyone and everyone an idiot passive aggressively.

"Overuse" is one word. "Passive-aggressively" should be hyphenated.

So, I don't know, maybe just a word of advice that you may want to spend a little more time using those powers of sight on your own posts and their typos and a little less on obsessing over mine to the point where you feel like you're qualified to weigh in on how they've changed in tenor over the years.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Lee-bo on March 10, 2013, 03:02:03 PM
I see everything!  :o

take that persons names off that you're quoting.

"Persons" is plural, "person's" is possessive.

I meant his unbelievable over use of sarcasm to essentially call anyone and everyone an idiot passive aggressively.

"Overuse" is one word. "Passive-aggressively" should be hyphenated.

So, I don't know, maybe just a word of advice that you may want to spend a little more time using those powers of sight on your own posts and their typos and a little less on obsessing over mine to the point where you feel like you're qualified to weigh in on how they've changed in tenor over the years.
Lmao, this is not a childish post at all.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: losveratos on March 10, 2013, 04:15:50 PM
I see everything!  :o

take that persons names off that you're quoting.

"Persons" is plural, "person's" is possessive.

I meant his unbelievable over use of sarcasm to essentially call anyone and everyone an idiot passive aggressively.

"Overuse" is one word. "Passive-aggressively" should be hyphenated.

So, I don't know, maybe just a word of advice that you may want to spend a little more time using those powers of sight on your own posts and their typos and a little less on obsessing over mine to the point where you feel like you're qualified to weigh in on how they've changed in tenor over the years.

I will attack this in two parts. First... I was speaking in regards to your signature having a profoundly different meaning due to your mistake than just a mere spelling or grammar mistake. Honestly, when you're talking in a forum and just sending quick messages. The only thing I think people need worry about is making their posts understandable. Not perfect. That's just anal. Which also comes back to your ever expanding personality (personal opinion of course).

Second using my spelling mistakes and obvious exaggeration of seeing everything in an attempt of humour, when I responded to someone else... well... it's just childish. It's also sometimes referred to as an ad hominem. It's a common argument tactic of taking a disagreement to the person rather than trying to actually use real logic to disprove them. I've been reading and occasionally purposely not reading your posts for years. One of your earliest names that I can remember is Nik the Trick. And obviously you were in a lot of ways the same then too. Just I felt that back then you had the capacity to be a leader on this website. Instead you became more of the bad than the good in my opinion.

An all purpose general bully who belittles people he doesn't like, shows passive-aggressiveness to those that disagree, and just all around bullying when he feels attacked or threatened.

If you have the right to be what some days feels like 50% of all posts on the website... just like our team captain's almost 50% of icetime playing defense. Then I feel you're open to equal criticism. Especially when other people try to state their opinions and instead of posting a valid argument you sometimes just use the methods I outlined above.

See how I tied it back into the topic  :P
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on March 10, 2013, 06:51:12 PM
Yet, because of the really weak goaltending, he was a 0, in the plus-minus category, notwithstanding his 3 assists.

2 of his 3 assists were on the Powerplay...Therefore, those 2 points don't count for a positive. Essentially, he was on for 1 goal for at even strength and one against(or some variance like that).
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on March 10, 2013, 06:53:40 PM
P.S. If you're going to quote someone quote them properly. Your signature has a major mistake. And if it's not a mistake and rather a joke about how democracy is dictatorship now... take that persons names off that you're quoting.

Thanks! I hadn't noticed the typo until now. Corrected!

I'd read it more than once and never noticed.

As did I. I even compared it to the actual quote I found.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Frank E on March 10, 2013, 07:03:47 PM
I see everything!  :o

take that persons names off that you're quoting.

"Persons" is plural, "person's" is possessive.

I meant his unbelievable over use of sarcasm to essentially call anyone and everyone an idiot passive aggressively.

"Overuse" is one word. "Passive-aggressively" should be hyphenated.

So, I don't know, maybe just a word of advice that you may want to spend a little more time using those powers of sight on your own posts and their typos and a little less on obsessing over mine to the point where you feel like you're qualified to weigh in on how they've changed in tenor over the years.

I will attack this in two parts. First... I was speaking in regards to your signature having a profoundly different meaning due to your mistake than just a mere spelling or grammar mistake. Honestly, when you're talking in a forum and just sending quick messages. The only thing I think people need worry about is making their posts understandable. Not perfect. That's just anal. Which also comes back to your ever expanding personality (personal opinion of course).

Second using my spelling mistakes and obvious exaggeration of seeing everything in an attempt of humour, when I responded to someone else... well... it's just childish. It's also sometimes referred to as an ad hominem. It's a common argument tactic of taking a disagreement to the person rather than trying to actually use real logic to disprove them. I've been reading and occasionally purposely not reading your posts for years. One of your earliest names that I can remember is Nik the Trick. And obviously you were in a lot of ways the same then too. Just I felt that back then you had the capacity to be a leader on this website. Instead you became more of the bad than the good in my opinion.

An all purposegeneral bully who belittles people he doesn't like, shows passive-aggressiveness to those that disagree, and just all around bullying when he feels attacked or threatened.

If you have the right to be what some days feels like 50% of all posts on the website... just like our team captain's almost 50% of icetime playing defense. Then I feel you're open to equal criticism. Especially when other people try to state their opinions and instead of posting a valid argument you sometimes just use the methods I outlined above.

See how I tied it back into the topic  :P

All-purpose should be hyphenated.

Sometimes you've just got to remind yourself that after all, it's just an argument on a hockey forum. 

Don't take yourself, or Nik, so seriously.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on March 10, 2013, 07:17:08 PM
Instead you became more of the bad than the good in my opinion.

Ok, please get it through your head that I don't care about your opinion of me. You're not a mod here, I have absolutely no interest in what you have to say.

If you have the right to be what some days feels like 50% of all posts on the website... just like our team captain's almost 50% of icetime playing defense. Then I feel you're open to equal criticism. Especially when other people try to state their opinions and instead of posting a valid argument you sometimes just use the methods I outlined above.

You can feel that way but your problems with me, and I'm not even going to bring up the laughable idea that you started whining about me going ad hominem(not to mention you used it incorrectly), aren't supposed to be fodder for the board. It's one of the board's rules. Personal issues? Take them to PM. Despite the fact that you seem to do it with a belt tightened around your neck and a car battery hooked up to your unmentionables, I actually find talking about myself fairly boring and I suspect that goes for most.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Dappleganger on March 10, 2013, 07:28:58 PM
So, what would people think of a trade built around Phaneuf going to Tampa in exchange for Vinny Lecavalier and his monstrous contract?

I know Vinny doesn't score like he used to but I envision him between Phil and Lupul and he is a cup winner.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on March 10, 2013, 08:30:33 PM
Though I'm not a Phaneuf supporter, my biggest issue with moving him is who replaces him?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: proteus2000 on March 10, 2013, 09:12:55 PM
Though I'm not a Phaneuf supporter, my biggest issue with moving him is who replaces him?

My merits exactly. They have many D but no one else that can compete against top lines every shift.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on March 10, 2013, 09:14:58 PM
So, what would people think of a trade built around Phaneuf going to Tampa in exchange for Vinny Lecavalier and his monstrous contract?

I know Vinny doesn't score like he used to but I envision him between Phil and Lupul and he is a cup winner.

DP is probably the better player right now without the horrific contract. I don't make that deal without some serious other assets coming back.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: L K on March 10, 2013, 09:34:55 PM
So, what would people think of a trade built around Phaneuf going to Tampa in exchange for Vinny Lecavalier and his monstrous contract?

I know Vinny doesn't score like he used to but I envision him between Phil and Lupul and he is a cup winner.

DP is probably the better player right now without the horrific contract. I don't make that deal without some serious other assets coming back.

As much as I'm not a huge fan of Phaneuf as a #1 top level defenseman (top 5-10), he's a top pairing #1 (top 30 or better) player.  You aren't getting that kind of performance out of Lecavalier and are taking on a really awful contract.   

I really wouldn't want to see how bad the Leafs defense would be without Phaneuf.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on March 10, 2013, 09:41:30 PM
So, what would people think of a trade built around Phaneuf going to Tampa in exchange for Vinny Lecavalier and his monstrous contract?

I know Vinny doesn't score like he used to but I envision him between Phil and Lupul and he is a cup winner.

DP is probably the better player right now without the horrific contract. I don't make that deal without some serious other assets coming back.

As much as I'm not a huge fan of Phaneuf as a #1 top level defenseman (top 5-10), he's a top pairing #1 (top 30 or better) player.  You aren't getting that kind of performance out of Lecavalier and are taking on a really awful contract.   

I really wouldn't want to see how bad the Leafs defense would be without Phaneuf.

Yeah, I agree with everything there.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: leafplasma on March 29, 2013, 10:29:57 AM
Dion Phaneuf after a slow start (remember the 1 assist in the first 11 games) now has 7 goals and 20 points in his last 24 games.  Overall, he has 21 points in 35 games. His plus minus not that it is much of a stat to be concerned a whole lot about is up to -4  after it being down to -11 at one point.  He is 7th in the NHL in dman points and 2nd in dman goals.  He is doing this while playing against team's top lines and relied on heavily to play a shutdown defensive role.  Turning into a nice little season for Dion.  With all the criticism that he gets I thought it would  be fitting to give him a little shout out.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on March 29, 2013, 10:41:52 AM
Good post.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on March 29, 2013, 10:50:52 AM
Dion Phaneuf after a slow start (remember the 1 assist in the first 11 games) now has 7 goals and 20 points in his last 24 games.  Overall, he has 21 points in 35 games. His plus minus not that it is much of a stat to be concerned a whole lot about is up to -4  after it being down to -11 at one point.  He is 7th in the NHL in dman points and 2nd in dman goals.  He is doing this while playing against team's top lines and relied on heavily to play a shutdown defensive role.  Turning into a nice little season for Dion.  With all the criticism that he gets I thought it would  be fitting to give him a little shout out.

totally agree.. It kills some to admit he played well last night even..
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on March 29, 2013, 12:57:19 PM
Dion Phaneuf after a slow start (remember the 1 assist in the first 11 games) now has 7 goals and 20 points in his last 24 games.  Overall, he has 21 points in 35 games. His plus minus not that it is much of a stat to be concerned a whole lot about is up to -4  after it being down to -11 at one point.  He is 7th in the NHL in dman points and 2nd in dman goals.  He is doing this while playing against team's top lines and relied on heavily to play a shutdown defensive role.  Turning into a nice little season for Dion.  With all the criticism that he gets I thought it would  be fitting to give him a little shout out.

He's also on an 82 game pace for ~50 points, which would be his highest total since 07-08, and tied for 2nd highest in his career.  Also on an 82 game pace for 16 goals, which would be third highest in his career.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CarltonTheBear on March 29, 2013, 07:45:07 PM
I'm actually shocked that he's tied for 2nd in goals among defencemen. I just didn't realize that he had that many.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Highlander on March 29, 2013, 07:46:21 PM
For those of us who go to the games, you see more of the effort that Phaneuf puts in. I was in Tampa last year and within three minutes had buried one of Tampa's players in their bench. He continued the rugged physical game each and every time I see him. Sort of like Kessel, you only really notice his energy when you see the games close up.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: leafplasma on March 29, 2013, 07:58:23 PM
I'm actually shocked that he's tied for 2nd in goals among defencemen. I just didn't realize that he had that many.

Yep, I guess we have all been too busy complaining about him to realize what he has been up to of late, 3 goals in his last 6 games, some big ones at that.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: drummond on March 29, 2013, 08:59:17 PM
I'm actually shocked that he's tied for 2nd in goals among defencemen. I just didn't realize that he had that many.

What I do appreaciate most is that he is scoring clutch goals as any captain should do.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on March 29, 2013, 10:30:46 PM
Right on cue: Phaneuf deserves more credit for Toronto's success (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/leafs-beat/why-phaneuf-deserves-more-credit-for-torontos-success/article10584361/?cmpid=rss1&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter)

Quote
But this is a player who arrived in a blockbuster trade with the Calgary Flames in January of 2010, with a résumé filled with question marks, some of them relating to defensive play and others to rumoured clashes with teammates and a media-unfriendly attitude.

None of which have surfaced in Toronto.

Instead, Phaneuf’s role on the ice has become more difficult with each season, to the point that this year in his first full season under Carlyle, you could argue he has one of the toughest jobs in the league.

For one, entering Friday’s games, he had logged more minutes than all but Brian Campbell of the Florida Panthers, including three minutes a game on one of the top penalty kill units in the NHL.

At even strength, Phaneuf has been on the ice for more defensive zone draws than any other player (260) and, according to behindthenet.ca, has faced tougher opposing players in his ice time than all but four others.

And, for all that, the offence – what he became known for in Calgary – is still there.

Despite the fact Phaneuf’s role has become more defensive than ever and he spent much of the season paired with career minor-leaguers, he enters Saturday’s game with the Ottawa Senators tied for seventh in scoring among defencemen with 21 points.

And because I tend to find Scrivens as a pretty intelligent, honest interview:

Quote
“I don’t have enough good things to say about him,” netminder Ben Scrivens said. “Just because I could be talking for a half hour. He just leads by example and none of the guys work harder than he does.”
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Sarge on March 29, 2013, 10:49:29 PM
Imagine if he went down with an injury (God forbid.) How do you replace him? I'm a fan of his - warts and all.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Mostar on March 30, 2013, 01:00:06 AM
I was pretty skeptical of DP at first. Part of it was his character description upon arrival. I thought, "Sounds
like an annoying, immature kind of guy"

He didn't show much on the ice either. My expectations may have been high due to his price and I was looking for excuses to beat up on him.

Winning sure has a way of changing someone's mind, however.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on March 30, 2013, 07:44:04 AM
Its good to see all the picking players apart is stoping. Deon plays a big part in this team, and admiting he brings it, shows people are comming out of there decade of whine, and learning how to be fans of a winning team.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on March 30, 2013, 08:21:35 AM
Dion has really picked up his play the last little while. Two huge goals in recent games and he's finally showing that "leadership" on ice that people criticized him for not having. Hope his up trend continues and he has a big playoff run.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on March 30, 2013, 08:25:22 AM
Dion has really picked up his play the last little while. Two huge goals in recent games and he's finally showing that "leadership" on ice that people criticized him for not having. Hope his up trend continues and he has a big playoff run.

I'm also hoping he starts to bring the hits more often as well. he has a good history of that.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: drummond on March 30, 2013, 09:57:04 AM
Imagine if he went down with an injury (God forbid.) How do you replace him? I'm a fan of his - warts and all.

You just nailed it.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on April 09, 2013, 08:57:03 AM
So Dion is now tied for 5th in d-man scoring. 

So that offense thing is pretty much back.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on April 09, 2013, 08:59:24 AM
When he took that knee on knee hit last night I freaked. I cant imagine our D corps without the time he logs... Good luck chewing up thsoe minutes as efectively
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on April 09, 2013, 09:14:47 AM
For all the people that rip on Phaneuf, I think this is pretty telling of how he's regarded around the league:

Quote from: NyTimes
Tortorella admitted he was line-matching, trying to get Nash away from the defensive pairing of Carl Gunnarsson and Dion Phaneuf.

If Phaneuf isn't all that great a d-man, why would Tortorella bother trying to match and get his best players to avoid Dion. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/09/sports/hockey/rangers-score-three-goals-but-fail-to-earn-a-point.html?_r=0
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on April 09, 2013, 09:17:31 AM
If Phaneuf isn't all that great a d-man, why would Tortorella bother trying to match and get his best players to avoid Dion. 

Because regardless of how good someone is in context of other defensemen around the league a coach is always going to try and get his top offensive players out against the other team's weakest defensemen?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on April 09, 2013, 09:19:19 AM
For all the people that rip on Phaneuf, I think this is pretty telling of how he's regarded around the league:

Quote from: NyTimes
Tortorella admitted he was line-matching, trying to get Nash away from the defensive pairing of Carl Gunnarsson and Dion Phaneuf.

If Phaneuf isn't all that great a d-man, why would Tortorella bother trying to match and get his best players to avoid Dion. 

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/09/sports/hockey/rangers-score-three-goals-but-fail-to-earn-a-point.html?_r=0

It could also be that Tortorella does it against every team and Phaneuf is just the guy on this team he was most worried about.

I do like that he's on an 82-game pace for 50 points.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on April 09, 2013, 09:25:45 AM
If Phaneuf isn't all that great a d-man, why would Tortorella bother trying to match and get his best players to avoid Dion. 

Because regardless of how good someone is in context of other defensemen around the league a coach is always going to try and get his top offensive players out against the other team's weakest defensemen?

Sure, but some people have suggested that Phaneuf isn't a top pairing guy, and is only top pairing on the Leafs by default.  If that were the case, Tortorella wouldn't be all that concerned about line matching if Dion was so easy to play against.  Nash is supposedly a superstar and should be able to play against Phaneuf who some have suggested is weak defensively.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on April 09, 2013, 09:28:52 AM
Sure, but some people have suggested that Phaneuf isn't a top pairing guy, and is only top pairing on the Leafs by default.  If that were the case, Tortorella wouldn't be all that concerned about line matching if Dion was so easy to play against.

Regardless of how good Phaneuf is or isn't you're still going to try and get your best offensive players away from him if other players are worse. It's not like coaches will stop coaching if the other team is really bad. I'm not concerned about any defenseman on, say, Carolina but I'd still want Carlyle to stress optimal match-ups.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on April 09, 2013, 09:30:21 AM
Sure, but some people have suggested that Phaneuf isn't a top pairing guy, and is only top pairing on the Leafs by default.  If that were the case, Tortorella wouldn't be all that concerned about line matching if Dion was so easy to play against.

Regardless of how good Phaneuf is or isn't you're still going to try and get a player away from him if other players are worse. It's not like coaches will stop coaching if the other team is really bad. I'm not concerned about any defenseman on, say, Carolina but I'd still want Carlyle to stress optimal match-ups.

OK, but it just stresses the point that Phaneuf is the best the Leafs have, and even other coaches realize it. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on April 09, 2013, 09:33:05 AM
OK, but it just stresses the point that Phaneuf is the best the Leafs have, and even other coaches realize it.

Well A) Tortorella says "Gunnarson and Phaneuf" so it doesn't really stress that at all and B) even if it did I don't think most of the criticism Phaneuf has faced has been about his place in the Leafs depth chart.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on April 09, 2013, 10:36:21 AM
Of d-men who have played at least 20 games, Phaneuf has the 3rd toughest quality of competition as defined by behindthenet.ca.  On top of that he's 5th in scoring for D.  He's having a very solid season.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CoachKirill on April 09, 2013, 10:45:16 AM
OK, but it just stresses the point that Phaneuf is the best the Leafs have, and even other coaches realize it.

Well A) Tortorella says "Gunnarson and Phaneuf" so it doesn't really stress that at all and B) even if it did I don't think most of the criticism Phaneuf has faced has been about his place in the Leafs depth chart.
no, Tortorella said Phaneuf and never mentioned Gunnarson when was talking about line matching. I feel like Phaneuf will never get fair credit for he does no matter how he plays. He is having a great season and a big reason why we are in playoff spot. Think about all those last minute one goal games we are able to hold on to.
And here is a link to Torts interview after Leafs game. http://video.rangers.nhl.com/videocenter/  - about Nash's match up: "Phaneuf. Every time Phaneuf was on the ice yeah so"
Btw, I know he gets a lot of heat for being arrogant and stuff but wow they ask him dumb questions...
 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on April 09, 2013, 10:49:14 AM
Of d-men who have played at least 20 games, Phaneuf has the 3rd toughest quality of competition as defined by behindthenet.ca.  On top of that he's 5th in scoring for D.  He's having a very solid season.

But he had 1 giveaway the other day, so he still sucks.  >:(

/sarcasm
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on April 09, 2013, 10:50:34 AM
no, Tortorella said Phaneuf and never mentioned Gunnarson when was talking about line matching.

Fair enough. I wasn't referring to something he actually said but rather the article linked to and what it attributed to him.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on April 09, 2013, 10:53:30 AM
Of d-men who have played at least 20 games, Phaneuf has the 3rd toughest quality of competition as defined by behindthenet.ca.  On top of that he's 5th in scoring for D.  He's having a very solid season.

I've actually come around on Phaneuf over the last year or so.  At first I looked at his salary and his reputation when we first got him and I was expecting him to dominate on most nights with big hits and timely goals.  But as I've seen him play more and evolve I can appreciate what he's bringing night in and night out against tough competition.  He is having a very good season right now, I think much of it has to do with being paired with someone responsible like Gunnarson.  He's played very well lately after getting away from guys like Kotska and Holzer.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Stickytape on April 09, 2013, 10:56:56 AM
I've been pretty critical of Phaneuf in the past, even earlier in the season, but I've made a point of watching him more closely over the last few games and I admit that I've been impressed.  He's been playing a tight game lately, and his job is anything but easy.  Plus he's been solid with points, and has generally been pretty dangerous on the PP.  I'll have to keep watching closely before I can really say anything with confidence, but I think I may have been a little too quick to judge.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Boston Leaf on April 09, 2013, 11:11:54 AM
Call me crazy but he will get some Noris trophy votes and should.. Not top 3 but should get some votes somewhere
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on April 09, 2013, 11:12:39 AM
Of d-men who have played at least 20 games, Phaneuf has the 3rd toughest quality of competition as defined by behindthenet.ca.  On top of that he's 5th in scoring for D.  He's having a very solid season.

Yes he is.  I declared in an argument some days ago that he's not even in the top 20 or 25 dmen in general -- but this season he certainly is, there's no denying it.  For whatever reason(s), he's not making nearly as many glaring defensive mistakes.  (Although it's also it's telling that none of the dmen really are.)
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on April 09, 2013, 11:13:31 AM
Of d-men who have played at least 20 games, Phaneuf has the 3rd toughest quality of competition as defined by behindthenet.ca.  On top of that he's 5th in scoring for D.  He's having a very solid season.

I've actually come around on Phaneuf over the last year or so.  At first I looked at his salary and his reputation when we first got him and I was expecting him to dominate on most nights with big hits and timely goals.  But as I've seen him play more and evolve I can appreciate what he's bringing night in and night out against tough competition.  He is having a very good season right now, I think much of it has to do with being paired with someone responsible like Gunnarson.  He's played very well lately after getting away from guys like Kotska and Holzer.

I think he's evolved his game since he's come to Toronto, learned to be more controlled.  You rarely see him skate halfway across the rink to hit a guy anymore.  By all accounts he's extremely vocal on the ice and in the room, he goes 100% in games & in practice.  He's not the best d-man in the league, he's not perfect, but IMO we have a #1 d-man (and not just by virtue of being on the Leafs).
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on April 09, 2013, 11:57:23 AM
I've been one who has been critical of him in the past, but in the past 10 games or so, he has been really solid and steady, and as a group, the entire Leafs defensive core has been really solid.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Michael on September 09, 2013, 07:10:17 PM
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/the-captain-part-1/
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on September 09, 2013, 07:24:44 PM
Its a nice change to see him relaxed and not under the pressure that the press puts on.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on September 09, 2013, 07:38:09 PM
The bigger question is: how can such a gifted athlete have such a terrible golf and tennis swing?  :P
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: nutman on September 10, 2013, 06:31:11 AM
The bigger question is: how can such a gifted athlete have such a terrible golf and tennis swing?  :P


Because he is a Hockey player. And  them sports are his fun.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: drummond on October 23, 2013, 03:19:09 AM
Seing this tweet got me thinking.

Chris @ReimNier  Last three Phaneuf games: Staal, Semin, Kane, Toews, Hossa, Perry, and Getzlaf have combined for one goal. Sign Dion ASAP.

I know Dion is quite a popular target around here but he is a beast out there at times and against the Ducks he played his best. Credit where is due.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on October 23, 2013, 07:06:59 AM
I've ragged on Phaneuf quite a bit in the past but he's been good to great in most cases this year so far.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 23, 2013, 07:49:03 AM
If he plays like this game in and out, he'll be in the Norris voting at the end of the season for sure. He's been spectacular IMO. He's refined his game to a pretty good balance of everything and he's doing these things with authority. Faloon didn't know what hit him in the corner last night in the second period, Dion sent him flying with just a shoulder lean from a stand still. Awesome!
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 23, 2013, 07:55:38 AM
Seing this tweet got me thinking.

Chris @ReimNier  Last three Phaneuf games: Staal, Semin, Kane, Toews, Hossa, Perry, and Getzlaf have combined for one goal. Sign Dion ASAP.

I know Dion is quite a popular target around here but he is a beast out there at times and against the Ducks he played his best. Credit where is due.



He's only been on the ice for 4 even-strength goals against this season. That's pretty impressive considering he's usually going up against the other teams best players. Yzerman and co. were apparently scouting last nights game in Toronto. They definitely got a pretty good look at Dion.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: moon111 on October 23, 2013, 08:29:32 AM
He's definitely playing some of his best hockey as a Leaf, and maybe his whole career.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: AvroArrow on October 23, 2013, 09:00:44 AM
Seems to me that having a consistent NHL-calibre defensemen lined up beside him really helps.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: RedLeaf on October 23, 2013, 09:04:18 AM
Which Leaf player would you least like to lose to injury/suspension for a considerable amount of time?

IOW... Which players absence would have the most effect on the success or failure rate of this team?

Without question, in my mind, it's Dion.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 23, 2013, 10:29:18 AM
Which Leaf player would you least like to lose to injury/suspension for a considerable amount of time?

IOW... Which players absence would have the most effect on the success or failure rate of this team?

Without question, in my mind, it's Dion.

I don't know about that, but he's playing his most consistent defensive hockey since coming here.  With Gardiner & Rielly zipping around, & Franson with a big point shot, maybe he feels he can concentrate on D?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Highlander on October 23, 2013, 10:40:01 AM
I thought Phaneuf played his best game as a Leaf last night. Hope he can keep it up. The few games I have seen him play while I was in Tampa (leaf visits) he always seemed to be in the thick of play and one time about three minutes into the game sent one of the Tampa players over the boards into their bench with a thunderous hit.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rick Couchman on October 29, 2013, 12:14:38 PM
It’s interesting to listen to the Sportsnet hockey show at noon. The talk so far is Phaneuf.

They’re speculating that he’s worthy of $50 million over 7 years.  He plays a ton of minutes, is on the plus with +/-, quarterbacks the powerplay, and is a rock on penalty killing.

I'm not sold on it...
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Deebo on October 29, 2013, 12:17:45 PM
I think he'd get more if he were to hit the UFA market.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on October 29, 2013, 12:21:05 PM
I think he'd get more if he were to hit the UFA market.

I agree. My guess is he'd get a contract that would carry a hit of around $7.5M on the open market, if not more.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rick Couchman on October 29, 2013, 12:21:19 PM
I think he'd get more if he were to hit the UFA market.

The guys speculate that Edmonton would be all over him if he went UFA.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Deebo on October 29, 2013, 12:23:32 PM
I think he'd get more if he were to hit the UFA market.

The guys speculate that Edmonton would be all over him if he went UFA.

Lots of teams would be all over him.

I hope he is extended within the coming weeks.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on October 29, 2013, 12:26:33 PM
Lots of teams would be all over him.

I hope he is extended within the coming weeks.

Exactly. He's a legit 1st pairing defenceman, and a #1 on a lot of teams in the league. If he hits the open market this summer, he'd be the most appealing candidate for teams looking to upgrade their defence.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Deebo on October 29, 2013, 12:32:05 PM
Lots of teams would be all over him.

I hope he is extended within the coming weeks.

Exactly. He's a legit 1st pairing defenceman, and a #1 on a lot of teams in the league. If he hits the open market this summer, he'd be the most appealing candidate for teams looking to upgrade their defence.

His level of consistency should continue to improve as he gets more experienced, which has been his biggest issue since joining the Leafs. When he's at the top of his game, like he is so far this season, he's up there with the best defensemen in this league.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 29, 2013, 12:40:22 PM
I think he'd get more if he were to hit the UFA market.

I think that's probably true because of the way the cap is going to go up. Still, as I think a lot of people think re: Clarkson, there's something a little problematic about confusing the inflationary effect of the UFA market with a player's legitimate value to a club.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Deebo on October 29, 2013, 12:45:55 PM
there's something a little problematic about confusing the inflationary effect of the UFA market with a player's legitimate value to a club.

In this case in particular, I think his value to the club is higher than the cap hit he'll get.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 29, 2013, 01:03:12 PM
there's something a little problematic about confusing the inflationary effect of the UFA market with a player's legitimate value to a club.

In this case in particular, I think his value to the club is higher than the cap hit he'll get.

Eh, I'm mixed on that. I think he's had a dynamite start to the season but I still have my doubts about him being the sort of #1 that a contender really needs.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: A Weekend at Bernier's on October 29, 2013, 01:17:43 PM
To me, term becomes the real sticking point.  I have no issue paying Phaneuf $7M per year, as he'll easily earn that on the open market.  The issue becomes the 6, 7 or 8 years it will take to get him signed.  By the time he enters his mid-30's, the Leafs will (hopefully) have a very competant group of defensemen, led by Rielly and Gardiner, who will just then be entering the prime of their careers.

Right now, Phaneuf has tremendous value for the Leafs.  In 5 or 6 years, in a cap world (albeit an escalating one), I'd hat to have $7M tied up in a 3'rd or 4'rth defenseman.

All that said, I'd do $7.5 for 5 years.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on October 29, 2013, 01:33:05 PM
there's something a little problematic about confusing the inflationary effect of the UFA market with a player's legitimate value to a club.

In this case in particular, I think his value to the club is higher than the cap hit he'll get.

Eh, I'm mixed on that. I think he's had a dynamite start to the season but I still have my doubts about him being the sort of #1 that a contender really needs.

I'm fine with him being the #1 on a contender. But, ideally that's with another player of similar calibre (or say, a $6M defenseman.)
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on October 29, 2013, 02:18:50 PM
Right now, Phaneuf has tremendous value for the Leafs.  In 5 or 6 years, in a cap world (albeit an escalating one), I'd hat to have $7M tied up in a 3'rd or 4'rth defenseman.

Well, firstly, I wouldn't assume the Leafs will have 2 or 3 defencemen that are better than Phaneuf 5 or 6 years from now. If they do, they'll have one of the best defence corps in the league, since Phaneuf will still likely be pretty good at that point. On top of that, $7M on the cap in 5 or 6 years won't have the same impact it has now. While it obviously won't be #4 defenceman money, it could very well be #2/#2B type money, and there's a very good chance Phaneuf will still be that. He'll only be 29 by the time next season starts, and a number of very good defencemen still contribute at a high level at 35/36.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on October 29, 2013, 06:01:11 PM
I just can't even....

Quote
@RealBillWatters

7.1 Mil for 8 yrs? Are you kidding? For Phaneuf? I'm sorry, this is an outrageous misrepresentation of his value. 4 years @ 4 mil per is risky.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 29, 2013, 06:05:17 PM
I laughed out loud at that part. Can't wait to hear what he says when Phaneuf makes Team Canada.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on October 29, 2013, 06:21:32 PM
I just can't even....

Quote
@RealBillWatters

7.1 Mil for 8 yrs? Are you kidding? For Phaneuf? I'm sorry, this is an outrageous misrepresentation of his value. 4 years @ 4 mil per is risky.

If only he had any credibility left to lose.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: RedLeaf on October 29, 2013, 06:28:15 PM
I just can't even....

Quote
@RealBillWatters

7.1 Mil for 8 yrs? Are you kidding? For Phaneuf? I'm sorry, this is an outrageous misrepresentation of his value. 4 years @ 4 mil per is risky.

If only he had any credibility left to lose.

I have to agree with this one. Waters is.....out there.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on October 30, 2013, 12:25:15 AM
So I was listening to Bob McCowan talking hockey today (I know, big mistake...).  And he had the expected discussion with whatever person he was talking with about Phaneuf's contract extension rumours, and how overpaid he could end up being.  So he was trying to establish Phaneuf's standing as a defenseman in the league to roughly establish his value.  Paraphrasing, it went like this:

BM:  "Let me ask you this:  Would Phaneuf be the #1 defenseman on all 30 NHL teams?"
Other guy:  "No."
BM:  "Right.  So therefore we can conclude that Phaneuf isn't one of the 30 best defensemen in the league."

I swear to God he said that.  I don't know whether I consider that bizarre, grade school level argument and conclusion a greater affront to my hockey sensibilities or to my intellectual sensibilities.

No, Bob, you haven't established that Dion isn't one of the top 30 NHL defensemen, you've established he isn't one of the top 1 NHL defensemen.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Jalili on October 30, 2013, 12:52:27 AM
I think the best thing is to give him 8 years, and hope they can lower the cap hit a bit.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 01:31:00 AM
So I was listening to Bob McCowan talking hockey today (I know, big mistake...).  And he had the expected discussion with whatever person he was talking with about Phaneuf's contract extension rumours, and how overpaid he could end up being.  So he was trying to establish Phaneuf's standing as a defenseman in the league to roughly establish his value.  Paraphrasing, it went like this:

BM:  "Let me ask you this:  Would Phaneuf be the #1 defenseman on all 30 NHL teams?"
Other guy:  "No."
BM:  "Right.  So therefore we can conclude that Phaneuf isn't one of the 30 best defensemen in the league."

I swear to God he said that.  I don't know whether I consider that bizarre, grade school level argument and conclusion a greater affront to my hockey sensibilities or to my intellectual sensibilities.

No, Bob, you haven't established that Dion isn't one of the top 30 NHL defensemen, you've established he isn't one of the top 1 NHL defensemen.

I just listened to it and while I think he's wrong substantively(and kind of embarrassingly so as he breaks out his "I'm not familiar enough with the situation" answer whenever he's asked any specific questions about the league) what he says really isn't as jumbled as that. Verbatim, this the conversation

Quote
McCown: How many other teams would he be the #1 defenseman on?

Kypreos: I don't argue, I-I, there's only one that matters

McCown: Maybe one or two?

Kypreos: There's one in Toronto, I know for sure

McCown: Then, by that analysis, he's no better than the 30th best defenseman in the NHL.

Brunt: But I think he is better than that,

McCown: I don't think he is

Brunt: I think if we start going through team by team we could find him a home

McCown: I'm not saying we couldn't find him a home, but I'm saying where would he be the #1 defenseman would he be the best defenseman, the #1 defenseman, on how many other teams would he be the #1 defenseman, and, if you can't find one, by pure math he cannot be any better than the 31st defenseman because you've established 30 guys-

Brunt: Well, he's the #1 defenseman on the best team in the Eastern Conference right now, that's what he is.

So I think McCown is wrong, I think there's at least a dozen teams where Phaneuf is their #1 defenseman but it does at least conform to an internal logic.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on October 30, 2013, 08:54:12 AM
So I was listening to Bob McCown talking hockey today (I know, big mistake...).  And he had the expected discussion with whatever person he was talking with about Phaneuf's contract extension rumours, and how overpaid he could end up being.  So he was trying to establish Phaneuf's standing as a defenseman in the league to roughly establish his value.  Paraphrasing, it went like this:

BM:  "Let me ask you this:  Would Phaneuf be the #1 defenseman on all 30 NHL teams?"
Other guy:  "No."
BM:  "Right.  So therefore we can conclude that Phaneuf isn't one of the 30 best defensemen in the league."

I swear to God he said that.  I don't know whether I consider that bizarre, grade school level argument and conclusion a greater affront to my hockey sensibilities or to my intellectual sensibilities.

No, Bob, you haven't established that Dion isn't one of the top 30 NHL defensemen, you've established he isn't one of the top 1 NHL defensemen.

I just listened to it and while I think he's wrong substantively(and kind of embarrassingly so as he breaks out his "I'm not familiar enough with the situation" answer whenever he's asked any specific questions about the league) what he says really isn't as jumbled as that. Verbatim, this the conversation

Quote
McCown: How many other teams would he be the #1 defenseman on?

Kypreos: I don't argue, I-I, there's only one that matters

McCown: Maybe one or two?

Kypreos: There's one in Toronto, I know for sure

McCown: Then, by that analysis, he's no better than the 30th best defenseman in the NHL.

Brunt: But I think he is better than that,

McCown: I don't think he is

Brunt: I think if we start going through team by team we could find him a home

McCown: I'm not saying we couldn't find him a home, but I'm saying where would he be the #1 defenseman would he be the best defenseman, the #1 defenseman, on how many other teams would he be the #1 defenseman, and, if you can't find one, by pure math he cannot be any better than the 31st defenseman because you've established 30 guys-

Brunt: Well, he's the #1 defenseman on the best team in the Eastern Conference right now, that's what he is.

So I think McCown is wrong, I think there's at least a dozen teams where Phaneuf is their #1 defenseman but it does at least conform to an internal logic.

Wow, I commend you for your work in trying to track the exact quotes down, but unfortunately that's not the conversation I'm referring to.  It looks like what you listened to was him later expounding on his thoughts that I heard earlier in his first hour, talking with Neil Smith.  I just re-listened to what I'd heard, and here it is:

BM:  "He's the best defenseman on a group of mediocre, at best, defensemen."
NS:  "Precisely, but he's going to be overvalued."
BM:  "Is he one of the 30 best defensemen in the National Hockey League?  Think about before you answer."
NS:  "Meaning, could he be a #1 defenseman on any team?  That's what you're saying, could he be the #1 defenseman on any team in the league?"
BM:  "Yeah."
NS:  "No."
BM:  "So he's not one of the 30 best defensemen in the National Hockey League.  There are at least 30 defensemen that you would consider to be better than him.  That's not unreasonable.  How do you pay a guy who's not one of the top 30 at his position 7 million dollars a year?"

It's a horrible argument made with great confidence.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on October 30, 2013, 08:59:10 AM
So their argument is because he can't be #1 on every team in the league that means he's not top 30 D in the league?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on October 30, 2013, 09:00:53 AM
I don't think McCowan is among the 30 best sports reporters in Toronto.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 30, 2013, 09:12:39 AM
I'd absolutely love to see his list of the top-30 defencemen in the league. I can only assume 10 through 30 are <blank>.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on October 30, 2013, 09:13:31 AM
I'd absolutely love to see his list of the top-30 defencemen in the league. I can only assume 10 through 30 are <blank>.

Not familiar enough with the situation.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on October 30, 2013, 09:16:28 AM
I think Dion and his agent know he can go to the Oilers in the summer for probably $8 mil / year.  They have a very recent history of overpaying... well, every player.... and they are clearly desperate for some major improvements on defense.  Bringing Phaneuf home to Edm would be huge for them.

Kypreos keeps saying the "starting point" is $50 mil / 7.   Well which side is starting there? If it's Phaneuf's side then in all likelihood the total price comes down from there. I don't think the Leafs would throw down a flat out number like that and publicize it but I could be wrong.

In the grand scheme if Phaneuf gets $7x7 I'm not really sure it's worth freaking out about.  if he was signed at $6.5 I think most level headed people would be pretty ecstatic with that amount, so for $500k more??? meh.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on October 30, 2013, 09:17:02 AM
I'd absolutely love to see his list of the top-30 defencemen in the league. I can only assume 10 through 30 are <blank>.

I'm not sure he could name 30 d-men in the league.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 30, 2013, 09:18:38 AM
I'd absolutely love to see his list of the top-30 defencemen in the league. I can only assume 10 through 30 are <blank>.

I'm not sure he could name 30 d-men in the league.

Nik Lidstrom would probably still be on it. Pronger too.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on October 30, 2013, 09:19:31 AM
I just can't even....

Quote
@RealBillWatters

7.1 Mil for 8 yrs? Are you kidding? For Phaneuf? I'm sorry, this is an outrageous misrepresentation of his value. 4 years @ 4 mil per is risky.

If only he had any credibility left to lose.

I have to agree with this one. Waters is.....out there.

Watters has been babbling anti-Phaneuf and anti-Kessel gibberish for years and all they've done is prove him to be the fool.  He's now fully down the road of crazy old man ranting and raving from the back corner of the old folks home common room.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on October 30, 2013, 09:19:39 AM
Kypreos keeps saying the "starting point" is $50 mil / 7.   Well which side is starting there? If it's Phaneuf's side then in all likelihood the total price comes down from there. I don't think the Leafs would throw down a flat out number like that and publicize it but I could be wrong.

And who knows, because today Cox says there have been no discussions, no preliminary discussions, and no numbers yet.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on October 30, 2013, 09:20:22 AM
I just can't even....

Quote
@RealBillWatters

7.1 Mil for 8 yrs? Are you kidding? For Phaneuf? I'm sorry, this is an outrageous misrepresentation of his value. 4 years @ 4 mil per is risky.

I agree.  There's no way Phaneuf should be paid more than Jim McKenny or Ian Turnbull.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 09:22:22 AM
Wow, I commend you for your work in trying to track the exact quotes down, but unfortunately that's not the conversation I'm referring to.  It looks like what you listened to was him later expounding on his thoughts that I heard earlier in his first hour, talking with Neil Smith.  I just re-listened to what I'd heard, and here it is:

Oh, fair enough. I only responded with the "work" I did because I happened to be listening to the Kypreos conversation as I was reading your post. Either way, it's not much of an argument.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Crucialness Key on October 30, 2013, 09:25:25 AM
Wow, I commend you for your work in trying to track the exact quotes down, but unfortunately that's not the conversation I'm referring to.  It looks like what you listened to was him later expounding on his thoughts that I heard earlier in his first hour, talking with Neil Smith.  I just re-listened to what I'd heard, and here it is:

Oh, fair enough. I only responded with the "work" I did because I happened to be listening to the Kypreos conversation as I was reading your post. Either way, it's not much of an argument.

"One of these 30 guys is better than Phaneuf"
therefore
"All of these 30 guys are better than Phaneuf"

LOGIC FAIL
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 30, 2013, 09:29:16 AM
I don't think the media has watched a Leaf game all season. They base it on his overall play from the start of his Leaf career and maybe the rumours they heard from Calgary. The guy has been a beast since last season. Open your eyes Bill and Bob.

I think Corn Flake nailed what Bill Watters is now.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 09:33:43 AM

Just off the top of my head, this is a list of teams I think he'd for sure be the #1 on:

Florida
Tampa
Carolina
Dallas
Anaheim
NYI
Edmonton
Buffalo
Columbus
New Jersey

So that's 10. I think there are some other clubs where it would be an interesting discussion(Calgary, Philadelphia, Vancouver, so on) so that probably puts him among the top 25 which seems about right.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on October 30, 2013, 09:42:29 AM

Just off the top of my head, this is a list of teams I think he'd for sure be the #1 on:

Florida
Tampa
Carolina
Dallas
Anaheim
NYI
Edmonton
Buffalo
Columbus
New Jersey

So that's 10. I think there are some other clubs where it would be an interesting discussion(Calgary, Philadelphia, Vancouver, so on) so that probably puts him among the top 25 which seems about right.

I think you can also safely include Toronto on your list. ;)
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 09:46:26 AM

Just off the top of my head, this is a list of teams I think he'd for sure be the #1 on:

Florida
Tampa
Carolina
Dallas
Anaheim
NYI
Edmonton
Buffalo
Columbus
New Jersey

So that's 10. I think there are some other clubs where it would be an interesting discussion(Calgary, Philadelphia, Vancouver, so on) so that probably puts him among the top 25 which seems about right.

I think you can also safely include Toronto on your list. ;)

I'm holding out hope for a healthy Mark Fraser.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: A Weekend at Bernier's on October 30, 2013, 10:18:35 AM
I think Corn Flake nailed what Bill Watters is now.

Actually, Corn Flake has been saying this for a long time now, at least since I joined this site 6 years ago.

Poor, poor Bill. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Joe S. on October 30, 2013, 10:21:49 AM
I just can't even....

Quote
@RealBillWatters

7.1 Mil for 8 yrs? Are you kidding? For Phaneuf? I'm sorry, this is an outrageous misrepresentation of his value. 4 years @ 4 mil per is risky.

I didn't even know he was still alive.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Britishbulldog on October 30, 2013, 10:37:18 AM

Just off the top of my head, this is a list of teams I think he'd for sure be the #1 on:

Florida
Tampa
Carolina
Dallas
Anaheim
NYI
Edmonton
Buffalo
Columbus
New Jersey

So that's 10. I think there are some other clubs where it would be an interesting discussion(Calgary, Philadelphia, Vancouver, so on) so that probably puts him among the top 25 which seems about right.

I think you can also safely include Toronto on your list. ;)

I'm holding out hope for a healthy Mark Fraser.

That's my pick.  I have never seen Phaneuf fight like Mark Fraser.   :)
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on October 30, 2013, 11:10:42 AM
BM:  "Is he one of the 30 best defensemen in the National Hockey League?  Think about before you answer."
NS:  "Meaning, could he be a #1 defenseman on any team?  That's what you're saying, could he be the #1 defenseman on any team in the league?"

This is my favourite part, because, I mean, that's not what being one of the top 30 defencemen means at all. I'm no fan of McCowan - especially when it comes to hockey, which he frequent admits to not really knowing much about - but it's really Neil Smith who leads things down the absurd path with that horrible misinterpretation.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on October 30, 2013, 11:27:24 AM
BM:  "Is he one of the 30 best defensemen in the National Hockey League?  Think about before you answer."
NS:  "Meaning, could he be a #1 defenseman on any team?  That's what you're saying, could he be the #1 defenseman on any team in the league?"

This is my favourite part, because, I mean, that's not what being one of the top 30 defencemen means at all. I'm no fan of McCowan - especially when it comes to hockey, which he frequent admits to not really knowing much about - but it's really Neil Smith who leads things down the absurd path with that horrible misinterpretation.

But I think Smith was only following McCown's intended direction when McCown initially asked him, "Is he one of the 30 best defensemen in the National Hockey League?"  I think he correctly figured out exactly where Bob was going with his line of thinking and confirmed it to Bob in his response, specifically when he asked Bob, "That's what you're saying, could he be the #1 defenseman on any team in the league?", and Bob answered "Yeah".

But Smith certainly should have had the brains and/or balls to tell McCown that it's a preposterous argument.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 30, 2013, 11:30:18 AM
BM:  "Is he one of the 30 best defensemen in the National Hockey League?  Think about before you answer."
NS:  "Meaning, could he be a #1 defenseman on any team?  That's what you're saying, could he be the #1 defenseman on any team in the league?"

This is my favourite part, because, I mean, that's not what being one of the top 30 defencemen means at all. I'm no fan of McCowan - especially when it comes to hockey, which he frequent admits to not really knowing much about - but it's really Neil Smith who leads things down the absurd path with that horrible misinterpretation.

Exactly Busta -- but McCowan bears responsibility too.  Just as an exercise in logic (or in this case, the failure thereof) let's break it down:

BM:  "Is he one of the 30 best defensemen in the National Hockey League?  Think about before you answer."
 Straightforward question.
NS:  "Meaning, could he be a #1 defenseman on any team?  That's what you're saying, could he be the #1 defenseman on any team in the league?"
Smith completely misinterprets.  What he's asking is whether Phaneuf is the best defenseman in the league, because by definition the best defenseman in the league, and only that defenseman, could be best defenseman on any one team in the league.
BM:  "Yeah."
McCowan here either shows he didn't even understand his own question, or else (more charitably) in the flow of radio talk he's willing to pivot to Smith's very different question.
NS:  "No."
Smith delivers his opinion: Phaneuf is not the top defenseman in the league.
BM:  "So he's not one of the 30 best defensemen in the National Hockey League.  There are at least 30 defensemen that you would consider to be better than him.  That's not unreasonable.  How do you pay a guy who's not one of the top 30 at his position 7 million dollars a year?"
McCowan shows that he DIDN'T understand that Smith's interpretation of the original question is a misinterpretation.

My conclusion is that neither guy really knows what he's talking about .... literally.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on October 30, 2013, 11:40:24 AM
Oh, I'm not saying McCowan didn't have a part in it. In fact, I think he loved the fact that Smith so terribly misinterpreted what he asked, because it gave him such a beautiful opening to release some absurd criticism of his own.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 30, 2013, 11:45:42 AM
Oh, I'm not saying McCowan didn't have a part in it. In fact, I think he loved the fact that Smith so terribly misinterpreted what he asked, because it gave him such a beautiful opening to release some absurd criticism of his own.

Theater of the absurd, eh?  Well, if he knew that Smith misintrepreted him, but went ahead and pretended not to know, then what we have here is meta-absurdity.

EDIT: OR ... maybe Smith KNEW he was misinterpreting, and laid it out as bait for McCowan, betting that McCowan would bluster on and expose himself as not having understood that Smith was misintepreting ... which he did.  In which case Smith is an evil genius.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on October 30, 2013, 11:47:34 AM
Theater of the absurd, eh?  Well, if he knew that Smith misintrepreted him, but went ahead and pretended not to know, then what we have here is meta-absurdity.

Par for the course for Bob McCowan and Prime Time Sports.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 11:51:10 AM

It really is getting harder and harder to believe that nobody has given Smith another shot to run a NHL team.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on October 30, 2013, 11:58:49 AM
I haven't listened to Bob McCowan for years, he's just too annoying to listen to.  I hate the long dramatic pauses when he speaks, the pronouncements he makes where he leaves no doubt that he knows all and everyone else's opinion is worthless, and the general condescending attitude he has.   Other than that he's ok.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: jdh1 on October 30, 2013, 12:38:27 PM
My 2 cents opinion would like to trade Phaneuf...I don't see him as a cornerstone defenceman for a Stanley Cup team.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Gerald The Duck on October 30, 2013, 01:28:39 PM

Just off the top of my head, this is a list of teams I think he'd for sure be the #1 on:

Florida
Tampa
Carolina
Dallas
Anaheim
NYI
Edmonton
Buffalo
Columbus
New Jersey

So that's 10. I think there are some other clubs where it would be an interesting discussion(Calgary, Philadelphia, Vancouver, so on) so that probably puts him among the top 25 which seems about right.

100% agreed on the 10 you mentioned. In addition to those, I would for sure have:

Colorado (better than E.Johnson or Hejda, Benoit, Barrie)

NYR (better than Staal or Del Zotto) - I don't think Staal has really had the chance to build two solid seasons in 09-10, 10-11. In the past two campaigns injuries have robbed him of significant time. I think I'd rank Dion above him.

Then we have the 3 teams you mentioned:

Calgary: Wideman and Giordano are their top 2 currently (well on paper anyway as Giordano is out for 4-6 weeks atm) - regardless, of the two I'd definitely say Wideman is the #1. I think I would edge Phaneuf ahead of them but I might be biased by how little I see of them overall and how well Dion has played lately. No doubt they log a lot of ice time in all situations just like he does but I'll give Dion the edge.

Philadelphia: Excluding Pronger, I'd definitely put Dion ahead of Coburn, Streit or Schenn. Then you have Kimmo Timonen who is a quite remarkable model of durability and consistency over his past 12 seasons (he's missed at TOTAL of 34 games in that time). It's a tough call to put Dion above him since Timonen is also another guy who has typically played in all situations in his career (PK, PP, top pairings). It's easy to look at Dion's start to the season combined with Timonen's 0 points and the fact that he's now 38 and give it to Dion. But Timonen is playing on a really atrocious Philly team devoid of any offense. However, he's also not being played as an outright top pairing guy anymore and certainly less in all situations than he used to. Give the edge to Dion but would love to see what Timonen could still do on a non-bottom dweller.

Vancouver: Edler is a physical, mobile, all situations guy who is very comparable to Dion. I'm not sure I'd rank Dion ahead of him.

Overall though I'd feel pretty safe putting Dion in the top 20 for sure.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 01:35:48 PM
I think I would edge Phaneuf ahead of them but I might be biased by how little I see of them overall and how well Dion has played lately.

I was intentionally pretty conservative with that list in large part because I think it's a little unfair to rank Phaneuf too highly just based on his last twelve games. I mean, Dan Girardi is the guy who's actually been the Rangers' #1 guy in terms of TOI the last few years and I think he's a really good player but he's gotten off to a lousy start like the rest of his team so right now he doesn't look like much of a choice.

edit: Anyways, I don't think there's much difference here. I think most people would agree that Phaneuf probably falls somewhere in the 10-25 range. The problem there is that's kind of a problematic area where yeah, you know, that makes someone a valuable player but if he is your #1 that means your on the bottom half, or the bottom of the top half, in terms of teams' #1 defensemen when a contender really wants to be at the top.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Britishbulldog on October 30, 2013, 02:02:25 PM
Top 50 Cap Hits

Who is better than Phaneuf in the list?  Delete everyone else.

   Player   Pos   Team   Age   Start   End   Length   Amount
1.   Weber, Shea »   D   NAS   28   2012   2026   14   $7,857,143
2.   Suter, Ryan »   D   MIN   28   2012   2025   13   $7,538,462
3.   Campbell, Brian »   D   FLA   34   2008   2016   8   $7,142,875
4.   Doughty, Drew »   D   LAK   23   2011   2019   8   $7,000,000
5.   Chara, Zdeno »   D   BOS   36   2011   2018   7   $6,916,667
6.   Bouwmeester, Jay »   D   STL   30   2009   2014   5   $6,680,000
7.   Boyle, Dan »   D   SJS   37   2008   2014   6   $6,666,667
8.   Phaneuf, Dion »   D   TOR   28   2008   2014   6   $6,500,000
9.   Karlsson, Erik »   D   OTT   23   2012   2019   7   $6,500,000
10.   Pietrangelo, Alex »   D   STL   23   2013   2020   7   $6,500,000
11.   Green, Mike »   D   WAS   28   2012   2015   3   $6,083,333
12.   Timonen, Kimmo »   D   PHI   38   2013   2014   1   $6,000,000
13.   Seabrook, Brent »   D   CHI   28   2011   2016   5   $5,800,000
14.   Markov, Andrei »   D   MTL   34   2011   2014   3   $5,750,000
15.   Enstrom, Tobias »   D   WPG   28   2013   2018   5   $5,750,000
16.   Keith, Duncan »   D   CHI   30   2010   2023   13   $5,538,462
17.   Wisniewski, James »   D   CLB   29   2011   2017   6   $5,500,000
18.   Myers, Tyler »   D   BUF   23   2012   2019   7   $5,500,000
19.   Carle, Matt »   D   TBL   29   2012   2018   6   $5,500,000
20.   Ekman-Larsson, Oliver »   D   PHX   22   2013   2019   6   $5,500,000
21.   Yandle, Keith »   D   PHX   27   2011   2016   5   $5,250,000
22.   Wideman, Dennis »   D   CGY   30   2012   2017   5   $5,250,000
23.   Streit, Mark »   D   PHI   35   2013   2017   4   $5,250,000
24.   Byfuglien, Dustin »   D   WPG   28   2011   2016   5   $5,200,000
25.   Bogosian, Zach »   D   WPG   23   2013   2020   7   $5,142,857
26.   Martin, Paul »   D   PIT   32   2010   2015   5   $5,000,000
27.   Edler, Alexander »   D   VAN   27   2013   2019   6   $5,000,000
28.   Gonchar, Sergei »   D   DAL   39   2013   2015   2   $5,000,000
29.   Pronger, Chris »   D   PHI   39   2010   2017   7   $4,941,429
30.   Kronwall, Niklas »   D   DET   32   2012   2019   7   $4,750,000
31.   Visnovsky, Lubomir »   D   NYI   37   2013   2015   2   $4,750,000
32.   McDonagh, Ryan »   D   NYR   24   2013   2019   6   $4,700,000
33.   Bieksa, Kevin »   D   VAN   32   2011   2016   5   $4,600,000
34.   Goligoski, Alex »   D   DAL   28   2012   2016   4   $4,600,000
35.   Garrison, Jason »   D   VAN   28   2012   2018   6   $4,600,000
36.   Hamhuis, Dan »   D   VAN   30   2010   2016   6   $4,500,000
37.   Pitkanen, Joni »   D   CAR   30   2011   2014   3   $4,500,000
38.   Tyutin, Fedor »   D   CLB   30   2012   2018   6   $4,500,000
39.   Coburn, Braydon »   D   PHI   28   2012   2016   4   $4,500,000
40.   Johnson, Jack »   D   CLB   26   2011   2018   7   $4,357,143
41.   Volchenkov, Anton »   D   NJD   31   2010   2016   6   $4,250,000
42.   Vlasic, Marc-Edouard »   D   SJS   26   2013   2018   5   $4,250,000
43.   Shattenkirk, Kevin »   D   STL   24   2013   2017   4   $4,250,000
44.   Voynov, Slava »   D   LAK   23   2013   2019   6   $4,166,667
45.   Jovanovski, Ed »   D   FLA   37   2011   2015   4   $4,125,000
46.   Giordano, Mark »   D   CGY   30   2011   2016   5   $4,020,000
47.   Meszaros, Andrej »   D   PHI   28   2008   2014   6   $4,000,000
48.   Michalek, Zbynek »   D   PHX   30   2010   2015   5   $4,000,000
49.   Ehrhoff, Christian »   D   BUF   31   2011   2021   10   $4,000,000
50.   Hedman, Victor »   D   TBL   22   2012   2017   5   $4,000,000
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Heroic Shrimp on October 30, 2013, 02:05:46 PM
Top 50 Cap Hits

Who is better than Phaneuf in the list?  Delete everyone else.

And add Subban, not (yet) on the list.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Gerald The Duck on October 30, 2013, 02:06:05 PM
I mean, Dan Girardi is the guy who's actually been the Rangers' #1 guy in terms of TOI the last few years and I think he's a really good player but he's gotten off to a lousy start like the rest of his team so right now he doesn't look like much of a choice.

I forgot about Girardi. He'd definitely be in the conversation all things being equal.

The problem there is that's kind of a problematic area where yeah, you know, that makes someone a valuable player but if he is your #1 that means your on the bottom half, or the bottom of the top half, in terms of teams' #1 defensemen when a contender really wants to be at the top.

It's a good point. Looking back at recent cup winners the only one without a clear top defenseman were the Hurricanes in 05-06. Other than that the Hawks (Keith), Kings (Doughty), Bruins (Chara), Penguins (Letang), Red Wings (Lidstrom), Anaheim (Pronger), Tampa Bay (Boyle), New Jersey (Niedermayer), Colorado (Blake/Bourque/Foote), etc. etc. all had d-men that I think most would safely rank in the top 10 (and many top 5) in those respective seasons.

I guess there are two key and probably obvious questions when it comes to Dion:

1) Can he be consistent and sustain his current level of play over a full season?

2) Is his current level play at the level of a top 10 defenseman in this league?

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: A Weekend at Bernier's on October 30, 2013, 02:14:11 PM
Top 50 Cap Hits

Who is better than Phaneuf in the list?  Delete everyone else.

   Player   Pos   Team   Age   Start   End   Length   Amount
1.   Weber, Shea »   D   NAS   28   2012   2026   14   $7,857,143
2.   Suter, Ryan »   D   MIN   28   2012   2025   13   $7,538,462
3.   Campbell, Brian »   D   FLA   34   2008   2016   8   $7,142,875
4.   Doughty, Drew »   D   LAK   23   2011   2019   8   $7,000,000
5.   Chara, Zdeno »   D   BOS   36   2011   2018   7   $6,916,667
6.   Bouwmeester, Jay »   D   STL   30   2009   2014   5   $6,680,000
7.   Boyle, Dan »   D   SJS   37   2008   2014   6   $6,666,667


8.   Phaneuf, Dion »   D   TOR   28   2008   2014   6   $6,500,000

9.   Karlsson, Erik »   D   OTT   23   2012   2019   7   $6,500,000
10.   Pietrangelo, Alex »   D   STL   23   2013   2020   7   $6,500,000
11.   Green, Mike »   D   WAS   28   2012   2015   3   $6,083,333
12.   Timonen, Kimmo »   D   PHI   38   2013   2014   1   $6,000,000[/s
]13.   Seabrook, Brent »   D   CHI   28   2011   2016   5   $5,800,000
14.   Markov, Andrei »   D   MTL   34   2011   2014   3   $5,750,000
15.   Enstrom, Tobias »   D   WPG   28   2013   2018   5   $5,750,000
16.   Keith, Duncan »   D   CHI   30   2010   2023   13   $5,538,462
17.   Wisniewski, James »   D   CLB   29   2011   2017   6   $5,500,000
18.   Myers, Tyler »   D   BUF   23   2012   2019   7   $5,500,000
19.   Carle, Matt »   D   TBL   29   2012   2018   6   $5,500,000
20.   Ekman-Larsson, Oliver »   D   PHX   22   2013   2019   6   $5,500,000

21.   Yandle, Keith »   D   PHX   27   2011   2016   5   $5,250,000
22.   Wideman, Dennis »   D   CGY   30   2012   2017   5   $5,250,000
23.   Streit, Mark »   D   PHI   35   2013   2017   4   $5,250,000
24.   Byfuglien, Dustin »   D   WPG   28   2011   2016   5   $5,200,000
25.   Bogosian, Zach »   D   WPG   23   2013   2020   7   $5,142,857
26.   Martin, Paul »   D   PIT   32   2010   2015   5   $5,000,000
27.   Edler, Alexander »   D   VAN   27   2013   2019   6   $5,000,000
28.   Gonchar, Sergei »   D   DAL   39   2013   2015   2   $5,000,000

29.   Pronger, Chris »   D   PHI   39   2010   2017   7   $4,941,429

30.   Kronwall, Niklas »   D   DET   32   2012   2019   7   $4,750,000
31.   Visnovsky, Lubomir »   D   NYI   37   2013   2015   2   $4,750,000
32.   McDonagh, Ryan »   D   NYR   24   2013   2019   6   $4,700,000
33.   Bieksa, Kevin »   D   VAN   32   2011   2016   5   $4,600,000
34.   Goligoski, Alex »   D   DAL   28   2012   2016   4   $4,600,000

35.   Garrison, Jason »   D   VAN   28   2012   2018   6   $4,600,000
36.   Hamhuis, Dan »   D   VAN   30   2010   2016   6   $4,500,000
37.   Pitkanen, Joni »   D   CAR   30   2011   2014   3   $4,500,000
38.   Tyutin, Fedor »   D   CLB   30   2012   2018   6   $4,500,000
39.   Coburn, Braydon »   D   PHI   28   2012   2016   4   $4,500,000

40.   Johnson, Jack »   D   CLB   26   2011   2018   7   $4,357,143
41.   Volchenkov, Anton »   D   NJD   31   2010   2016   6   $4,250,000
42.   Vlasic, Marc-Edouard »   D   SJS   26   2013   2018   5   $4,250,000
43.   Shattenkirk, Kevin »   D   STL   24   2013   2017   4   $4,250,000
44.   Voynov, Slava »   D   LAK   23   2013   2019   6   $4,166,667

45.   Jovanovski, Ed »   D   FLA   37   2011   2015   4   $4,125,000
46.   Giordano, Mark »   D   CGY   30   2011   2016   5   $4,020,000
47.   Meszaros, Andrej »   D   PHI   28   2008   2014   6   $4,000,000
48.   Michalek, Zbynek »   D   PHX   30   2010   2015   5   $4,000,000
49.   Ehrhoff, Christian »   D   BUF   31   2011   2021   10   $4,000,000
50.   Hedman, Victor »   D   TBL   22   2012   2017   5   $4,000,000

OK, I'll play.

In the end, there are not many I'd rather have.  As noted, I'd put PK on the 'greater than' list, as well.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Gerald The Duck on October 30, 2013, 02:16:15 PM
I don't think going by cap hits alone is the way to judge his relative strength as it excludes guys like Subban and Pietrangelo whoops forgot he was there (who I would  rank higher than Dion at this point)

But of your list these are the guys that are either outright better or where it's pretty close:

Top 50 Cap Hits

Who is better than Phaneuf in the list?  Delete everyone else.

   Player   Pos   Team   Age   Start   End   Length   Amount
1.   Weber, Shea »   D   NAS   28   2012   2026   14   $7,857,143
2.   Suter, Ryan »   D   MIN   28   2012   2025   13   $7,538,462
4.   Doughty, Drew »   D   LAK   23   2011   2019   8   $7,000,000
5.   Chara, Zdeno »   D   BOS   36   2011   2018   7   $6,916,667
7.   Boyle, Dan »   D   SJS   37   2008   2014   6   $6,666,667
9.   Karlsson, Erik »   D   OTT   23   2012   2019   7   $6,500,000
10.   Pietrangelo, Alex »   D   STL   23   2013   2020   7   $6,500,000
11.   Green, Mike »   D   WAS   28   2012   2015   3   $6,083,333
12.   Timonen, Kimmo »   D   PHI   38   2013   2014   1   $6,000,000
16.   Keith, Duncan »   D   CHI   30   2010   2023   13   $5,538,462
20.   Ekman-Larsson, Oliver »   D   PHX   22   2013   2019   6   $5,500,000
21.   Yandle, Keith »   D   PHX   27   2011   2016   5   $5,250,000
24.   Byfuglien, Dustin »   D   WPG   28   2011   2016   5   $5,200,000
27.   Edler, Alexander »   D   VAN   27   2013   2019   6   $5,000,000
30.   Kronwall, Niklas »   D   DET   32   2012   2019   7   $4,750,000
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 02:24:44 PM

My list would be roughly similar to Beowulf's but I'd probably include Girardi, Seabrook, Letang, Subban and McDonagh as guys who should be in the conversation as well. Again, the question for me boils down more to which Dion Phaneuf we're talking about.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on October 30, 2013, 02:36:43 PM

Again, the question for me boils down more to which Dion Phaneuf we're talking about.

NewDion vs. OldDion?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 02:51:50 PM

Again, the question for me boils down more to which Dion Phaneuf we're talking about.

NewDion vs. OldDion?

Coke Zero vs. Coke Classic.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Crucialness Key on October 30, 2013, 02:52:25 PM
As long as we're comparing different versions of Dion:

Celine Dion --> $74.8 million per year (2000-2009)
Stephane Dion --> roughly $150,000 per year in Parliament

So I'd say somewhere in between would be fair.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 02:56:32 PM
As long as we're comparing different versions of Dion:

Celine Dion --> $74.8 million per year (2000-2009)
Stephane Dion --> roughly $150,000 per year in Parliament

Jeez, and to think I could have gotten into the Dog Whistle business.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CarltonTheBear on October 30, 2013, 03:11:57 PM
In no particular order, these are the only defencemen that I would absolutely take over Phaneuf without really thinking twice:

Weber
Suter
Doughty
Chara
Keith
OEL
Pietrangelo

Then there's the three recent Norris winners/nominees Karlsson, Subban and Letang, who I feel obligated to add to the list but I think Phaneuf's defensive game is superior to theirs. However the offence that those guys bring to the table is too much to ignore. So that's 10, and I don't think you could really make an argument that any one of those guys don't belong in the top-10, it just depends where they fall in that tier.

The next tier would include guys like McDonagh, Girardi, Campbell, Boyle, Timonen, Yandle, Seabrook, Green. And Phaneuf of course. And I might have Phaneuf at the top of the list in this tier.

I personally think McDonagh and Girardi were a tad overrated because of Tortorella's shot blocking system. They are both great defencemen, and would particularly look great alongside Phaneuf, but I don't think their all around games are as good as his. Campbell, Boyle, and Timonen's ages are all starting to show I think. They'll likely see themselves fall out of this tier within a year or two. That may have already happened for Timonen to be honest. Yandle's play seems to have slipped in the past season as OEL has surpassed him in Phoenix and is taking a lot of his minutes. He was never really all that strong defensively either. Seabrook and Green aren't as strong on offence and defence (respectively) to be considered better than Phaneuf, and I think both are being propped up a little bit by their linemates (Keith for Seabrook and Ovechkin for Green).

I'm sure there's a couple players that I've missed, but with all that said I'm pretty comfortable slotting Phaneuf somewhere in the 11-15 range. And if he plays the whole season like he has in the first 13 games he's bumping somebody out of the top-10.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on October 30, 2013, 03:17:54 PM
I'm sure there's a couple players that I've missed, but with all that said I'm pretty comfortable slotting Phaneuf somewhere in the 11-15 range. And if he plays the whole season like he has in the first 13 games he's bumping somebody out of the top-10.

Yeah. I'd say Phaneuf falls pretty clearly into the range of where rankings start to become much more about personal preferences and biases rather than clear differences in overall skill levels.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 03:28:50 PM
Seabrook and Green aren't as strong on offence and defence (respectively) to be considered better than Phaneuf, and I think both are being propped up a little bit by their linemates (Keith for Seabrook and Ovechkin for Green)

I think Seabrook is a little bit better offensively than you're giving him credit for. Since Phaneuf has come to the Leafs his best season offensively is last year's 48 point pace. Seabrook equaled that a couple years back. Yeah, Seabrook plays with better talent but he also doesn't get the PP time Phaneuf does. Phaneuf probably gets the edge there but I think it's closer than you make it out to be.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Peter D. on October 30, 2013, 03:34:07 PM
While on the topic of Phaneuf, I think his play thus far is giving him a really good chance of making the Olympic team. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Dappleganger on October 30, 2013, 03:35:21 PM
While on the topic of Phaneuf, I think his play thus far is giving him a really good chance of making the Olympic team.

Based on his play so this year? Yeah, he should be on the team.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 03:43:49 PM
While on the topic of Phaneuf, I think his play thus far is giving him a really good chance of making the Olympic team.

I think he's definitely in the mix but I think the first 4 spots are virtual locks at this point(Weber, Keith, Doughty and Pietrangelo) and then Phaneuf is in on those last three spots with guys like Subban, Letang, Seabrook and others.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Peter D. on October 30, 2013, 03:52:08 PM
While on the topic of Phaneuf, I think his play thus far is giving him a really good chance of making the Olympic team.

I think he's definitely in the mix but I think the first 4 spots are virtual locks at this point(Weber, Keith, Doughty and Pietrangelo) and then Phaneuf is in on those last three spots with guys like Subban, Letang, Seabrook and others.

All these guys are exactly who I think are locks and in the mix.  The one thing that makes me wonder if Phaneuf has a slight edge up is the way he shoots.  Keith would be the only left-handed shot on the team.  )Granted, I don't know how much emphasis will be put on that or if it really matters.)  Then throw in the debate as to whether you need both Letang and Subban on the team (similar argument against Green in 2010), and a spot may be ripe for Phaneuf's picking if he continues the way he is playing.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Erndog on October 30, 2013, 03:53:31 PM
While on the topic of Phaneuf, I think his play thus far is giving him a really good chance of making the Olympic team.

I think he's definitely in the mix but I think the first 4 spots are virtual locks at this point(Weber, Keith, Doughty and Pietrangelo) and then Phaneuf is in on those last three spots with guys like Subban, Letang, Seabrook and others.

Maybe it's just me but I put Letang as a lock as well.  He was over a point a game last season and very well could have won the Norris.  I agree with your other 4.

I think there are 2 spots up for grabs on D and I'd wager Seabrook and Subban do have the inside track on them.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Peter D. on October 30, 2013, 03:54:37 PM
Just to add, I do think Bouwmeester will be given similar consideration as Phaneuf.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 03:56:52 PM
All these guys are exactly who I think are locks and in the mix.  The one thing that makes me wonder if Phaneuf has a slight edge up is the way he shoots.

Maybe, but I wonder if he isn't also at a disadvantage because of the general perceptions about what sort of player thrives on the bigger ice. I think about a guy like Bouwmeester who isn't, I think, as good as Phaneuf but he's a terrific skater and wonder if this isn't a tailor-made opportunity for him to be under consideration.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on October 30, 2013, 04:02:51 PM
Maybe it's just me but I put Letang as a lock as well.  He was over a point a game last season and very well could have won the Norris. 

It's certainly possible that he's seen that way. I have some doubts just because they have so much offense from those first four I mentioned that they might want to look a little more towards the defensive side of things for the bottom half of the roster  but it wouldn't surprise me at all if Letang is a shoe-in.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Jalili on October 30, 2013, 04:11:40 PM
Just to add, I do think Bouwmeester will be given similar consideration as Phaneuf.

Yeah and Bouwmeester's a near lock IMO. He made it in '06, was the last D-man cut in '10, and plays with a D-man who's probably a lock to be there. And his style fits the international ice as well.

I think there could be a surprise pick there as well like ME Vlasic maybe.

Keith - Doughty
Subban - Weber
Bouwmeester - Pietrangelo
Vlasic - Phaneuf/Letang
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Jalili on October 30, 2013, 04:15:04 PM
...I'm pretty comfortable slotting Phaneuf somewhere in the 11-15 range. And if he plays the whole season like he has in the first 13 games he's bumping somebody out of the top-10.

I think that's exactly where he is as well.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: lamajama on October 30, 2013, 04:26:27 PM
While on the topic of Phaneuf, I think his play thus far is giving him a really good chance of making the Olympic team.

Based on his play so this year? Yeah, he should be on the team.

Personally I hope not. He has issues with skating (turning and being beaten wide - and on a large sheet of ice - yikes!) as well as periodic brain cramps. Perhaps on a NA sheet but not European.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on October 30, 2013, 04:59:51 PM
It's pretty hard to make the Canadian blueline. If he continues to play the way he has, he might knock one of the "locks" off the team, maybe based on their play not being where Phaneuf's is?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Bullfrog on October 30, 2013, 06:59:50 PM
My 2 cents opinion would like to trade Phaneuf...I don't see him as a cornerstone defenceman for a Stanley Cup team.

I don't understand this argument though. Even if he's not the cornerstone, is he not still a valuable member of the team?

If you presented an argument such as having him at a high cap hit prevents the team from acquiring a better defenseman, I could at least start to consider it. Otherwise, I'm not sure the ol' "cornerstone" argument is really all the relevant to deciding whether or not to keep a player.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: jdh1 on October 30, 2013, 07:43:51 PM
My 2 cents opinion would like to trade Phaneuf...I don't see him as a cornerstone defenceman for a Stanley Cup team.

I don't understand this argument though. Even if he's not the cornerstone, is he not still a valuable member of the team?

If you presented an argument such as having him at a high cap hit prevents the team from acquiring a better defenseman, I could at least start to consider it. Otherwise, I'm not sure the ol' "cornerstone" argument is really all the relevant to deciding whether or not to keep a player.
Well, I should of qualified my statement.While Phaneuf is a very good defenceman and can play top minutes.However,because of cap space allocation,there is only so many high value contracts that you can give on each team.
And I don't think he has the stability in high pressure situations to take the puck over and carry it out of danger.Last year playoffs proved this.To give a number one defence man as he is on the Leafs big money over the long term with his liabilities,to me is not wise.I would use that money toward someone else.

I think as well,Nonis has put together enough defenceman on this team as  evidence that he will be traded. Again that's my 2 cents opinion.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: azzurri63 on October 30, 2013, 08:02:00 PM
Don't know if this has been mentioned but I'll throw my 2 cents in. Do you think Dion's play has anything to do with his contract being up? Seen this far too often players playing mediocre or under their potential and come contract year pick it up. I have been more than happy with Dion's play but like someone said is he worth true big bucks as the new Dion or Old Dion. I'm going to forgot the rumours of him being a cancer in the dressing room because that's just what they are rumours. If he is I wouldn't think twice of keeping him. I never agreed with Burke naming him captain and as far as his potential contract I'm not totally sure it's someone you build your team around at that price. As far as signing him to a 7 or 8 year deal think Nonis would be crazy to. If Nonis can sign him to a contract in the 6 million per I would otherwise let him walk. His offence can be easily replaced on the PP by Rielly or Gardiner and I'm sure they can trade or find someone who plays a solid defensive game and not have to pay him 7 million a year. Only problem is if you don't sign him then you lose him for nothing unless traded which I don't think is going to happen. I can admit I for one have shown my displeasure with Dion over the years. When he tries to do too much he gets running around and screws up. If they can have him playing 20 mins or so with PP time he's fine. I don't mind signing him but to a reasonable amount and I wouldn't go more than 5 years.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: You're right on October 31, 2013, 06:56:32 AM
Don't know if this has been mentioned but I'll throw my 2 cents in. Do you think Dion's play has anything to do with his contract being up? Seen this far too often players playing mediocre or under their potential and come contract year pick it up. I have been more than happy with Dion's play but like someone said is he worth true big bucks as the new Dion or Old Dion. I'm going to forgot the rumours of him being a cancer in the dressing room because that's just what they are rumours. If he is I wouldn't think twice of keeping him. I never agreed with Burke naming him captain and as far as his potential contract I'm not totally sure it's someone you build your team around at that price. As far as signing him to a 7 or 8 year deal think Nonis would be crazy to. If Nonis can sign him to a contract in the 6 million per I would otherwise let him walk. His offence can be easily replaced on the PP by Rielly or Gardiner and I'm sure they can trade or find someone who plays a solid defensive game and not have to pay him 7 million a year. Only problem is if you don't sign him then you lose him for nothing unless traded which I don't think is going to happen. I can admit I for one have shown my displeasure with Dion over the years. When he tries to do too much he gets running around and screws up. If they can have him playing 20 mins or so with PP time he's fine. I don't mind signing him but to a reasonable amount and I wouldn't go more than 5 years.
I think there is potential that the contract year comes into play but also believe that he is maturing and is also becoming more comfortable with his role as captain.
If he continues his current level of play then open up the wallet and pay him what he's worth (and hopefully we get a little home team discount ;)) I have faith that Nonis will be fair and reasonable and if both sides do the same all will work out.
It would be a lot of ice time to try and replace if they let him walk.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: freer on October 31, 2013, 09:06:43 AM
Don't know if this has been mentioned but I'll throw my 2 cents in. Do you think Dion's play has anything to do with his contract being up? Seen this far too often players playing mediocre or under their potential and come contract year pick it up. I have been more than happy with Dion's play but like someone said is he worth true big bucks as the new Dion or Old Dion. I'm going to forgot the rumours of him being a cancer in the dressing room because that's just what they are rumours. If he is I wouldn't think twice of keeping him. I never agreed with Burke naming him captain and as far as his potential contract I'm not totally sure it's someone you build your team around at that price. As far as signing him to a 7 or 8 year deal think Nonis would be crazy to. If Nonis can sign him to a contract in the 6 million per I would otherwise let him walk. His offence can be easily replaced on the PP by Rielly or Gardiner and I'm sure they can trade or find someone who plays a solid defensive game and not have to pay him 7 million a year. Only problem is if you don't sign him then you lose him for nothing unless traded which I don't think is going to happen. I can admit I for one have shown my displeasure with Dion over the years. When he tries to do too much he gets running around and screws up. If they can have him playing 20 mins or so with PP time he's fine. I don't mind signing him but to a reasonable amount and I wouldn't go more than 5 years.
I think there is potential that the contract year comes into play but also believe that he is maturing and is also becoming more comfortable with his role as captain.
If he continues his current level of play then open up the wallet and pay him what he's worth (and hopefully we get a little home team discount ;)) I have faith that Nonis will be fair and reasonable and if both sides do the same all will work out.
It would be a lot of ice time to try and replace if they let him walk.

I dont know, I may be a little Bias here. But does any one else think Letang is overrated.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Kaberle15 on October 31, 2013, 09:14:38 AM
Taking Last game TOI, it was almost an even split in time with ~20 min each (Gardiner played the lowest with 18:14, Phaneuf the highest with: 21:56)

So, maybe Phaneuf is that kind of D (~23min/game) and not a 30 min/game guy as he was in the previous years. The Leafs D depth provides it.
Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on November 01, 2013, 02:02:46 AM
I thought this was an exceptional piece on Phaneuf and his value as a 7 million Dman.

http://www.fiveminutesforfighting.com/2013/10/7-million-for-phaneuf-fair-deal.html?m=1
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on November 01, 2013, 08:37:08 AM
Maybe it's just me but I put Letang as a lock as well.  He was over a point a game last season and very well could have won the Norris. 

It's certainly possible that he's seen that way. I have some doubts just because they have so much offense from those first four I mentioned that they might want to look a little more towards the defensive side of things for the bottom half of the roster  but it wouldn't surprise me at all if Letang is a shoe-in.

On Letang, he's as good defensively as he is offensively, and his wheels would come in very handy on Olympic ice vs. the very fast US and Russian teams.   

I think they opt for seven of the best skating d-men who aren't liabilities in their own zone and there will for sure be more than enough offensive output from just about any of the 10-12 candidates they pick from.

Phaneuf's advantage is he can play the physical game and not be a liability in other areas, like Subban would be on the side of taking way too many gambles in the o-zone.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Optimus Reimer on November 01, 2013, 09:38:57 AM
I for one was always an anti-Phaneuf fan...I did not like how he would be standing behind the net while the puck was in the net.  I did not how he would play soft against some forwards allowing them easy access to the net and score.  I thought he was prone to taking dumb penalties because he was getting caught out of position...thought he was completely overrated.

Since Carlyle has come in I have seen a huge difference in his play, not just this season, but last season as well...no more running around, but rather playing a simple style with improved defensive coverage that allows either goalie to make an easy save (it is why the Leafs give up 30+ shots per game, but only give up a couple of goals...most of the shots are saves that a goalie should make).  I have been really impressed with his play, and with the play of the other d-men as well.  I would even go as far as to give Phaneuf a shot at making the Olympic team...it would benefit him greatly if he were to be selected to the team.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nucc on November 26, 2013, 07:51:59 PM
I'm sorry if others disagree with me but I just can't get on the Phaneuf bandwagon.  Certainly not for what I think he's going to be asking.  Maybe for 4M but not more.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: leafplasma on November 26, 2013, 09:04:06 PM
I'm sorry if others disagree with me but I just can't get on the Phaneuf bandwagon.  Certainly not for what I think he's going to be asking.  Maybe for 4M but not more.

Apology accepted
Title: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: WhatIfGodWasALeaf on November 26, 2013, 09:23:19 PM

I'm sorry if others disagree with me but I just can't get on the Phaneuf bandwagon.  Certainly not for what I think he's going to be asking.  Maybe for 4M but not more.

Bill Waters, is that you?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on November 26, 2013, 09:33:33 PM
I'm sorry if others disagree with me but I just can't get on the Phaneuf bandwagon.  Certainly not for what I think he's going to be asking.  Maybe for 4M but not more.

So, what you're saying is Phaneuf deserves to be paid significantly less than the Dennis Widemans and Matt Carles of the world? Right . . .
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Kessel Run on November 26, 2013, 09:39:13 PM
The penalty on that hit last night was booooogus.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Highlander on November 27, 2013, 10:16:40 AM
They say that Phanuef is a good leader and chats it up, but for some reason we are not seeing that leadership or hearing about it in any case. I think a real leader steps it up and challenges the teammates to be better players, but the bunch we have seen in the last two games have looked like stiffs out there.
Maybe its time for a team meeting and some ass kicking.
This talk about replacing the coach is unreal with the record we currently have and Peter Lavialote (sorry for the spelling) does not turn my cranch as a coach, never did.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: ThatLeafsFan on November 27, 2013, 11:27:30 AM
Quote from: http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=437611
Dreger: Phaneuf's agent did make a ballpark offer a couple of weeks ago, the contract being in the seven to eight-year range with the finances above $7 million per year. GM Dave Nonis is expected to counter within a week.

Not sure how I feel about over 7 million, I'd be happy with him stay at 6.5 ish.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on November 27, 2013, 11:32:58 AM
They say that Phanuef is a good leader and chats it up, but for some reason we are not seeing that leadership or hearing about it in any case. I think a real leader steps it up and challenges the teammates to be better players, but the bunch we have seen in the last two games have looked like stiffs out there.
Maybe its time for a team meeting and some ass kicking.
This talk about replacing the coach is unreal with the record we currently have and Peter Lavialote (sorry for the spelling) does not turn my cranch as a coach, never did.

None of us really knows what goes on in the room.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Highlander on November 27, 2013, 11:47:45 AM
I guess that means the that HBO series will be even more relevant regarding the team leadership. Perhaps it is fine and happening, but with the talent pool we have to see the last two games is a bit of a concern.
If they play like that in the Winter Classic it will be bad for hockey
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on November 27, 2013, 12:17:02 PM
I guess that means the that HBO series will be even more relevant regarding the team leadership. Perhaps it is fine and happening, but with the talent pool we have to see the last two games is a bit of a concern.
If they play like that in the Winter Classic it will be bad for hockey

I can't wait to see that HBO series, heard they're very well produced (never watched the previous ones).  As far as I know, they haven't started filming the Leafs yet, so they're coming on board during a time of uncertainty.  Leafs could spiral into oblivion if they keep playing like they have the last little while.  It'll make for some dramatic TV in any event.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on November 27, 2013, 12:21:18 PM
I can't wait to see that HBO series, heard they're very well produced (never watched the previous ones).  As far as I know, they haven't started filming the Leafs yet, so they're coming on board during a time of uncertainty.  Leafs could spiral into oblivion if they keep playing like they have the last little while.  It'll make for some dramatic TV in any event.

They must have started filming the Leafs already. The 1st episode airs in a little more than 2 weeks.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zee on November 27, 2013, 12:24:38 PM
I can't wait to see that HBO series, heard they're very well produced (never watched the previous ones).  As far as I know, they haven't started filming the Leafs yet, so they're coming on board during a time of uncertainty.  Leafs could spiral into oblivion if they keep playing like they have the last little while.  It'll make for some dramatic TV in any event.

They must have started filming the Leafs already. The 1st episode airs in a little more than 2 weeks.

It does?  My information is bad.  LOL
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on November 27, 2013, 12:29:39 PM
It does?  My information is bad.  LOL

December 14th, yeah. They may not be too far into the real intense stuff, but, I'm pretty sure they've been filming each team on and off since training camp.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Highlander on November 27, 2013, 01:14:45 PM
I have watched them and Boudreau as F…ing and Blinding like a trooper…very well produced and honest.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Arn on November 27, 2013, 03:24:48 PM
I can't wait to see that HBO series, heard they're very well produced (never watched the previous ones).  As far as I know, they haven't started filming the Leafs yet, so they're coming on board during a time of uncertainty.  Leafs could spiral into oblivion if they keep playing like they have the last little while.  It'll make for some dramatic TV in any event.

They must have started filming the Leafs already. The 1st episode airs in a little more than 2 weeks.

They were definitely filming a Red Wings game I watched about two or so weeks ago - the Detroit announcers pointed them out and showed the cameraman following the team down the tunnel at the end of a period so I'd assume they've started in Toronto too
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: mc on November 27, 2013, 03:39:27 PM
Letting Bozak play Miley Cyrus in the dressing room is reason enough to trade this guy. 
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on November 27, 2013, 04:43:01 PM
Letting Bozak play Miley Cyrus in the dressing room is reason enough to trade this guy.

it's done in jest.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on November 28, 2013, 09:27:46 AM
For those into the analytics, this is an interesting read: http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/leafs-play-likely-harming-phaneufs-numbers/
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nucc on November 28, 2013, 11:54:18 AM
bustaheims says..
 
Quote
So, what you're saying is Phaneuf deserves to be paid significantly less than the Dennis Widemans and Matt Carles of the world? Right . . .

Dave Bolland gets 3.375M for this year. If Phaneuf is worth 7M plus when his contract expires then what should Bolland get?

Look at the record since Bolland was injured.
4 wins 6 losses, and that record is thankful to Reimer, and Bernier.

Wiser thinking should prevail.  If Phaneuf gets what some think he's worth then somebody has got to go.  What would be your choice Bolland or Phaneuf?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CarltonTheBear on November 28, 2013, 11:55:53 AM
If Phaneuf gets what some think he's worth then somebody has got to go.  What would be your choice Bolland or Phaneuf?

Do I want a top pairing defenceman at market value or a 2nd/3rd line centre at market value? Pretty easy question to answer I think.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Deebo on November 28, 2013, 12:13:19 PM
Wiser thinking should prevail.  If Phaneuf gets what some think he's worth then somebody has got to go.  What would be your choice Bolland or Phaneuf?

I would rather keep Phaneuf than Bolland, no question.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: louisstamos on November 28, 2013, 12:14:16 PM
Wiser thinking should prevail.  If Phaneuf gets what some think he's worth then somebody has got to go.  What would be your choice Bolland or Phaneuf?

I would rather keep Phaneuf than Bolland, no question.

Ditto here.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: hap_leaf on November 28, 2013, 12:15:41 PM
Wiser thinking should prevail.  If Phaneuf gets what some think he's worth then somebody has got to go.  What would be your choice Bolland or Phaneuf?

I would rather keep Phaneuf than Bolland, no question.

Dion has really shown his worth and I would have no problem with him getting the term and money attributed to the finest of NHL defensemen.  The scarcity of such make it a no-brainer.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on November 28, 2013, 12:16:45 PM
Dave Bolland gets 3.375M for this year. If Phaneuf is worth 7M plus when his contract expires then what should Bolland get?

Look at the record since Bolland was injured.
4 wins 6 losses, and that record is thankful to Reimer, and Bernier.

Wiser thinking should prevail.  If Phaneuf gets what some think he's worth then somebody has got to go.  What would be your choice Bolland or Phaneuf?

Phaneuf, without question - but, on top of that, you're comparing apples to oranges. Bolland's value in terms of the cap is not really judged in relation to Phaneuf's, but rather to guys like Kadri and Bozak - you know, guys who actually play the same position as he does and who he's competing for ice time with.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: A Weekend at Bernier's on November 28, 2013, 12:21:06 PM
I fail to see the Phaneuf - Bolland relationship.  Both are assets, and frankly I like both on my favorite hockey team.  Posing this question is as meaningless as saying Kadri and Franson could not both be signed last summer.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Jalili on November 28, 2013, 12:26:06 PM
There's been talk here and there about getting rid of Phaneuf, but very little explanation about how the team would go about replacing him.

There's no defenseman in the upcoming UFA market that could step into his shoes.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Highlander on November 28, 2013, 01:06:23 PM
The ones that want to get rid of Phaneuf are the ones that have never been to games and seen him play in person.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 28, 2013, 01:08:34 PM
There's been talk here and there about getting rid of Phaneuf, but very little explanation about how the team would go about replacing him.

There's no defenseman in the upcoming UFA market that could step into his shoes.

But that sort of assumes that the person talking about getting rid of Phaneuf advocates doing it via free agency. I don't advocate that personally but I do have concerns with locking him up to a contract that can really only be good value if he's consistently one of the best defensemen in the league.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Corn Flake on November 28, 2013, 01:37:31 PM
In the loss last night, Phaneuf was a +2.  :o  Crosby had no goals and I think only got his points when Phaneuf wasn't on the ice vs. him.. at least on one of the two assists.

edit: he was an even 0 +/- in the 6-0 loss vs. Columbus.

Sssssooooooooooooo we replace him, how? :)
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Jalili on November 28, 2013, 01:42:15 PM
There's been talk here and there about getting rid of Phaneuf, but very little explanation about how the team would go about replacing him.

There's no defenseman in the upcoming UFA market that could step into his shoes.

But that sort of assumes that the person talking about getting rid of Phaneuf advocates doing it via free agency. I don't advocate that personally but I do have concerns with locking him up to a contract that can really only be good value if he's consistently one of the best defensemen in the league.

I have those concerns as well, but I'm not optimistic at all about the team's chances of replacing him via FA or trade.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on November 28, 2013, 01:44:22 PM
In the loss last night, Phaneuf was a +2.  :o  Crosby had no goals and I think only got his points when Phaneuf wasn't on the ice vs. him.. at least on one of the two assists.

edit: he was an even 0 +/- in the 6-0 loss vs. Columbus.

Sssssooooooooooooo we replace him, how? :)

A real leader would take the minuses instead of letting his teammates take them, amirite?  ;)
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on November 28, 2013, 01:46:01 PM
I have those concerns as well, but I'm not optimistic at all about the team's chances of replacing him via FA or trade.

Sure but, like I said, I don't think that's the argument.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Jalili on November 28, 2013, 05:01:46 PM
I have those concerns as well, but I'm not optimistic at all about the team's chances of replacing him via FA or trade.

Sure but, like I said, I don't think that's the argument.

What is the argument?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cabber24 on December 02, 2013, 10:14:06 AM
I think Phaneuf should play 60 minutes a night. Outside of Phaneuf the D has looked awful for the last decade! A breakaway while killing a penalty! How does that happen?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: L K on December 02, 2013, 10:22:11 AM
There's been talk here and there about getting rid of Phaneuf, but very little explanation about how the team would go about replacing him.

There's no defenseman in the upcoming UFA market that could step into his shoes.

But that sort of assumes that the person talking about getting rid of Phaneuf advocates doing it via free agency. I don't advocate that personally but I do have concerns with locking him up to a contract that can really only be good value if he's consistently one of the best defensemen in the league.

I have those concerns as well, but I'm not optimistic at all about the team's chances of replacing him via FA or trade.

It depends on the type of defense the Leafs want to employ next year.  Phaneuf is the only #1 type defenseman on the UFA market this year.

There are a handful of decent 2nd pairing defensemen out there though. 

You would have to balance the loss of Phaneuf with the trade return on Phaneuf, and one would assume one of Reimer/Bernier.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on December 02, 2013, 11:52:52 AM
A breakaway while killing a penalty! How does that happen?

Not only a breakaway, but a breakaway where the player got 3 rebounds...Ummm guys, where are you? It's a complete head scratcher.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on December 02, 2013, 02:00:02 PM

You would have to balance the loss of Phaneuf with the trade return on Phaneuf, and one would assume one of Reimer/Bernier.

That could bring a major, major return.  I half sort of maybe hope we bomb out before the deadline and they make a move like that.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: cabber24 on December 02, 2013, 02:14:54 PM
A breakaway while killing a penalty! How does that happen?

Not only a breakaway, but a breakaway where the player got 3 rebounds...Ummm guys, where are you? It's a complete head scratcher.
I don't know what planet these guys are on?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Dappleganger on December 02, 2013, 02:23:13 PM
In the loss last night, Phaneuf was a +2.  :o  Crosby had no goals and I think only got his points when Phaneuf wasn't on the ice vs. him.. at least on one of the two assists.

edit: he was an even 0 +/- in the 6-0 loss vs. Columbus.

Sssssooooooooooooo we replace him, how? :)

A real leader would take the minuses instead of letting his teammates take them, amirite?  ;)

Yeah, It seems Phaneuf is only concerned about padding his stats, playing for his next contract, rather than team success.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on December 02, 2013, 02:38:42 PM
What is the argument?

That in getting rid of Phaneuf you're not looking to make a lateral move or an immediate improvement but, rather, making a decision that it's better to wait for the right player than it is to give a bad contract to the best available option.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on December 10, 2013, 11:03:43 AM
What is the argument?

That in getting rid of Phaneuf you're not looking to make a lateral move or an immediate improvement but, rather, making a decision that it's better to wait for the right player than it is to give a bad contract to the best available option.

To follow up on this belatedly....  I think Nik's hit the nail on the head. As good as he is, and as well as he's played, is Phaneuf the core guy on D that we need to invest in long-term?  I'm not sure the decision can be made on the basis of stats alone. 

I used to say that we will never build a championship team around Phaneuf and Kessel because they each have glaring flaws.  I've had to eat a bit of crow on that because each has deepened his game somewhat.

But our defense really hasn't improved since Phaneuf got here.  That's not his fault, of course.  Yet it is true that things haven't coalesced around him.

What I want to suggest is that Nonis would be remiss if he didn't consider hitting the re-set button on the D almost entirely, especially if we keep muddling along to the trade deadline and it looks touch-and-go (or worse) for making the playoffs.  I could see using assets gained by dealing Phaneuf to begin retooling the D from the ground up.  In that scenario, maybe Rielly is the only untouchable.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: OldTimeHockey on December 10, 2013, 01:32:14 PM
coalesced

Had to look that one up
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rebel_1812 on December 10, 2013, 02:24:02 PM
I don't think your going to be able to acquire a better defense men then him.  So the argument of saving to invest in a better guy is mute.  The logic is akin to not resigning either Bozak or Grabbo; because neither is a true number one center.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on December 10, 2013, 02:28:50 PM
The logic is akin to not resigning either Bozak or Grabbo; because neither is a true number one center.

Except for the guy actually producing like a #1 C, but alrighty then.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on December 10, 2013, 02:29:46 PM
The logic is akin to not resigning either Bozak or Grabbo; because neither is a true number one center.

So...it's sound then?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: freer on December 10, 2013, 02:33:57 PM
The logic is akin to not resigning either Bozak or Grabbo; because neither is a true number one center.

So...it's sound then?

WHo are we going to sign then? No one is coming, and we have to suit up a team. There are no free agents "Number one centers" to sign
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on December 10, 2013, 02:42:28 PM
WHo are we going to sign then? No one is coming, and we have to suit up a team. There are no free agents "Number one centers" to sign

I genuinely don't know how to make the point any clearer than I did in reply #586.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: CarltonTheBear on December 10, 2013, 02:48:54 PM
WHo are we going to sign then? No one is coming, and we have to suit up a team. There are no free agents "Number one centers" to sign

Signing somebody to a bloated contract for 8 years just because there is nobody better available in year 1 isn't exactly smart.

I'm not entirely sure that's where we're at with Phaneuf right now, but he was once an insta-sign for me and now I'm not too sure.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: mr grieves on December 10, 2013, 03:39:10 PM
The logic is akin to not resigning either Bozak or Grabbo; because neither is a true number one center.

So...it's sound then?

If only they did it for the scoring depth grinders of their dreams.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on December 10, 2013, 03:50:45 PM
If only they did it for the scoring depth grinders of their dreams.

Well, that's why pencils have erasers.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: lamajama on December 10, 2013, 04:29:57 PM
Well we'll have some indication of his worth the next 2 games anyway.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Joe S. on December 10, 2013, 04:38:15 PM
Well we'll have some indication of his worth the next 2 games anyway.

Don't we already know? Didn't we see the Leafs flounder when he was out for about 20 games or so a few years back?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on December 10, 2013, 04:50:22 PM
Well we'll have some indication of his worth the next 2 games anyway.

Don't we already know? Didn't we see the Leafs flounder when he was out for about 20 games or so a few years back?

I remember when Sundin was hurt in the 2002 playoffs and the Leafs still made the conference finals it proved Mats was expendable.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Joe S. on December 10, 2013, 04:51:54 PM
Well we'll have some indication of his worth the next 2 games anyway.

Don't we already know? Didn't we see the Leafs flounder when he was out for about 20 games or so a few years back?

I remember when Sundin was hurt in the 2002 playoffs and the Leafs still made the conference finals it proved Mats was expendable.

you sir, are awesome.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Hampreacher on December 10, 2013, 05:07:05 PM
Phaneuf is a number 1 defenseman. He would be a number one or two on most teams. Most teams would trade for him. He plays against the top players that effects his plus minus. He plays extra minutes and tired players make more mistakes when tired. That is tired from being over played. His suspension his problem was two fold. First His name is not Chara who has done far worse and got nothing. Second theThornton incidentand the league wanting to come down hard. On the hit admittedly i do have a bias but it appeared like he did try to avoid the hit and Miller did change direction and in process put his head down and thus more prone to falling forward.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rebel_1812 on December 10, 2013, 05:15:36 PM
The logic is akin to not resigning either Bozak or Grabbo; because neither is a true number one center.

Except for the guy actually producing like a #1 C, but alrighty then.

Well Nik's point was that he wasn't a true number #1 due to flaws in his game.  But if we quantify it with letters, Phaneuf is a 1B defense men at worse.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rebel_1812 on December 10, 2013, 05:20:40 PM
WHo are we going to sign then? No one is coming, and we have to suit up a team. There are no free agents "Number one centers" to sign

Signing somebody to a bloated contract for 8 years just because there is nobody better available in year 1 isn't exactly smart.

I'm not entirely sure that's where we're at with Phaneuf right now, but he was once an insta-sign for me and now I'm not too sure.

Yeah but how many great centers became available since the reign of Burke?  Carter, Richards, Staal, Segiun due to trade and Brad Richards due to UFA.  So even if there isn't a better defense men in year 1; it doesn't mean a better one will be available even 6 years down the road.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on December 10, 2013, 06:17:39 PM
While I think re-signing Phaneuf is the way to go, with the way things are going, I wouldn't commit to anything until the team turns it around. If things keep going as they are now and the team continues to fall in the standings, Phaneuf could be an extremely valuable piece to move at the deadline. Of course, at that point, I'd be advocating moving about 2/3 of the roster, but, moving Phaneuf at that point could actually net them a significant piece or two, and they could conceivably bring him back as a UFA.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: BlueWhiteBlood on December 10, 2013, 08:00:29 PM
We'll certainly get a couple games to see the team without him, unfortunately.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rebel_1812 on December 11, 2013, 12:57:52 PM
While I think re-signing Phaneuf is the way to go, with the way things are going, I wouldn't commit to anything until the team turns it around. If things keep going as they are now and the team continues to fall in the standings, Phaneuf could be an extremely valuable piece to move at the deadline. Of course, at that point, I'd be advocating moving about 2/3 of the roster, but, moving Phaneuf at that point could actually net them a significant piece or two, and they could conceivably bring him back as a UFA.

I'm not sure the tear everything down and rebuild model is the way to go.  Ottawa didn't trade away their best players like Spezza and seem to have rebounded.  The sharks haven't traded away Marleau or Thorton and are doing well.  If talent is a problem, trading away your best players isn't a good solution.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: bustaheims on December 11, 2013, 02:20:03 PM
I'm not sure the tear everything down and rebuild model is the way to go.  Ottawa didn't trade away their best players like Spezza and seem to have rebounded.  The sharks haven't traded away Marleau or Thorton and are doing well.  If talent is a problem, trading away your best players isn't a good solution.

Who said anything about trading away the team's best players? Other than Phaneuf, who I'm only advocating that option for because he's a pending UFA, the guys that I'd move are the depth guys and the secondary guys. I wouldn't move Kessel, Kadri, JvR, etc. It's guys like Bolland, Raymond, McClement, Frason, Kulemin, Gunnarsson, etc that should be considered as trade bait should the team bottom out. Most of these guys are pending UFAs and are in line to be paid more than the Leafs should be giving them for what they provide.

EDIT: And, for what it's worth, the last time the Sharks missed the playoffs, they traded Nolan to the Leafs, and he was either their top scorer or 2nd leading scorer in 6 of the previous 7 seasons. The Sharks have never been in a position where they were going to missed the playoffs when either Marleau or Thornton were due to be UFAs. Same with Ottawa and Spezza.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Rebel_1812 on December 12, 2013, 12:36:54 AM
I'm not sure the tear everything down and rebuild model is the way to go.  Ottawa didn't trade away their best players like Spezza and seem to have rebounded.  The sharks haven't traded away Marleau or Thorton and are doing well.  If talent is a problem, trading away your best players isn't a good solution.

Who said anything about trading away the team's best players? Other than Phaneuf, who I'm only advocating that option for because he's a pending UFA, the guys that I'd move are the depth guys and the secondary guys. I wouldn't move Kessel, Kadri, JvR, etc. It's guys like Bolland, Raymond, McClement, Frason, Kulemin, Gunnarsson, etc that should be considered as trade bait should the team bottom out. Most of these guys are pending UFAs and are in line to be paid more than the Leafs should be giving them for what they provide.

EDIT: And, for what it's worth, the last time the Sharks missed the playoffs, they traded Nolan to the Leafs, and he was either their top scorer or 2nd leading scorer in 6 of the previous 7 seasons. The Sharks have never been in a position where they were going to missed the playoffs when either Marleau or Thornton were due to be UFAs. Same with Ottawa and Spezza.

I was using that as an example of keeping the core top guys intact and just changing the secondary players.  I consider Phaneuf, Kessel and JVR as the leafs top players.  The rest can be traded.  Although I would keep Bolland since he would make suck a good number 2 center.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on December 12, 2013, 12:44:42 AM
I'm not sure the tear everything down and rebuild model is the way to go.  Ottawa didn't trade away their best players like Spezza and seem to have rebounded.  The sharks haven't traded away Marleau or Thorton and are doing well.  If talent is a problem, trading away your best players isn't a good solution.

Except neither organization questioned whether or not those players were good enough in their respective roles to win championships with them. That's the question the Leafs are facing. Not whether or not Phaneuf is "good", it's whether he's good enough.

Regardless, I wouldn't use San Jose or Ottawa as examples of teams for whom everything worked out in the end. The team that did trade away Thornton might interest you though.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on December 13, 2013, 12:47:58 PM
I'm not sure the tear everything down and rebuild model is the way to go.  Ottawa didn't trade away their best players like Spezza and seem to have rebounded.  The sharks haven't traded away Marleau or Thorton and are doing well.  If talent is a problem, trading away your best players isn't a good solution.

Except neither organization questioned whether or not those players were good enough in their respective roles to win championships with them. That's the question the Leafs are facing. Not whether or not Phaneuf is "good", it's whether he's good enough.

Regardless, I wouldn't use San Jose or Ottawa as examples of teams for whom everything worked out in the end. The team that did trade away Thornton might interest you though.

I'll say it plain and simple: Phaneuf is good, but not good enough to build a championship defense around.  The thought of locking him up for 7 more years as captain makes me ... well, not sick to my stomach ... how about just unhappy?
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on December 13, 2013, 12:50:55 PM
I'll say it plain and simple: Phaneuf is good, but not good enough to build a championship defense around.

There's no real point in talking absolutes about things you can't prove.  The answer is going to be different for every person.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: moon111 on December 13, 2013, 01:02:52 PM
I'm not sure the tear everything down and rebuild model is the way to go.  Ottawa didn't trade away their best players like Spezza and seem to have rebounded.  The sharks haven't traded away Marleau or Thorton and are doing well.  If talent is a problem, trading away your best players isn't a good solution.

Except neither organization questioned whether or not those players were good enough in their respective roles to win championships with them. That's the question the Leafs are facing. Not whether or not Phaneuf is "good", it's whether he's good enough.

Regardless, I wouldn't use San Jose or Ottawa as examples of teams for whom everything worked out in the end. The team that did trade away Thornton might interest you though.

I'll say it plain and simple: Phaneuf is good, but not good enough to build a championship defense around.  The thought of locking him up for 7 more years as captain makes me ... well, not sick to my stomach ... how about just unhappy?
In Toronto, if you're the best we can do, we pay you the best even if.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on December 13, 2013, 01:50:19 PM
I'll say it plain and simple: Phaneuf is good, but not good enough to build a championship defense around.

There's no real point in talking absolutes about things you can't prove.  The answer is going to be different for every person.

Not sure what you're getting at.  I've stated my opinion without qualification; that's what we do here all the time.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on December 13, 2013, 01:50:36 PM
I'm not sure the tear everything down and rebuild model is the way to go.  Ottawa didn't trade away their best players like Spezza and seem to have rebounded.  The sharks haven't traded away Marleau or Thorton and are doing well.  If talent is a problem, trading away your best players isn't a good solution.

Except neither organization questioned whether or not those players were good enough in their respective roles to win championships with them. That's the question the Leafs are facing. Not whether or not Phaneuf is "good", it's whether he's good enough.

Regardless, I wouldn't use San Jose or Ottawa as examples of teams for whom everything worked out in the end. The team that did trade away Thornton might interest you though.

I'll say it plain and simple: Phaneuf is good, but not good enough to build a championship defense around.  The thought of locking him up for 7 more years as captain makes me ... well, not sick to my stomach ... how about just unhappy?
In Toronto, if you're the best we can do, we pay you the best even if.

Well put.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Potvin29 on December 13, 2013, 01:59:15 PM
I'll say it plain and simple: Phaneuf is good, but not good enough to build a championship defense around.

There's no real point in talking absolutes about things you can't prove.  The answer is going to be different for every person.

Not sure what you're getting at.  I've stated my opinion without qualification; that's what we do here all the time.

Well I know it's an opinion, but isn't it like me saying "Stamkos is good but not good enough to build a championship forward group around."  What's the basis for my statement?  You can't prove or disprove it until he potentially wins the Stanley Cup.  I think opinions still need to be held to a certain standard, no? 

And I think certain criticisms of players (and even Sundin falls into this one) are unfair because championships are team trophies and it's not Sundin's fault he was never on a Cup-winning team, or Bourque's fault he had to be traded to a Cup-winning team to get one.  Sometimes players' fortunes aren't the greatest, but I don't think that's because these players could not be built around into a winning team.  They just weren't for whatever myriad reasons.

Tried to explain that bet I could.  If it doesn't make sense, c'est la vie.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on December 13, 2013, 02:24:27 PM
I'll say it plain and simple: Phaneuf is good, but not good enough to build a championship defense around.

Well, we can think something like that through. If we look back at the last 20 years of hockey who are some of the worst #1 defensemen whose teams won cups? Right off the top of my head the guys who come to mind are Sandis Ozolinsh in '96 with Colorado, Dan Boyle in Tampa, Bret Hedican with Carolina and Sergei Gonchar in Pittsburgh.

Does Phaneuf fit somewhere into that group? Yeah. I mean, Ozolinsh and Gonchar were really terrific offensive defensemen, Boyle wasn't quite at the Olympic level he eventually became and Hedican is the obvious outlier there whose team won in a profoundly strange year looking back.

But the thing that those 4 teams have in common? They killed you down the middle. Pittsburgh had Crosby and Malkin at their peak, Carolina had Staal scoring 100 points and Brind'Amour winning the Selke, Tampa had Lecavalier and Richards and St. Louis winning the Hart/Art Ross and Colorado obviously had Sakic/Forsberg.

So I might not go so far as to say that Phaneuf couldn't be the #1 defenseman on a cup winning team but, if he is, I really have to believe that said hypothetical team would not be one where the defense shook anyone but that could just bludgeon a team with talent elsewhere. That's where I think the problem is there. Winning a cup with Phaneuf as your team's top defenseman seems possible, winning a cup with Phaneuf as one of your team's best players, on the other hand, kind of flies in the face of history.

Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Nik Bethune on December 13, 2013, 02:28:03 PM
Well I know it's an opinion, but isn't it like me saying "Stamkos is good but not good enough to build a championship forward group around."  What's the basis for my statement? 

Well, you could always qualitatively assess Stamkos and compare him to the best forwards on teams that have won cups in the past. A group he'd seemingly fit pretty well into.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate on December 13, 2013, 02:55:48 PM
I'll say it plain and simple: Phaneuf is good, but not good enough to build a championship defense around.

There's no real point in talking absolutes about things you can't prove.  The answer is going to be different for every person.

Not sure what you're getting at.  I've stated my opinion without qualification; that's what we do here all the time.

Well I know it's an opinion, but isn't it like me saying "Stamkos is good but not good enough to build a championship forward group around."  What's the basis for my statement?  You can't prove or disprove it until he potentially wins the Stanley Cup.  I think opinions still need to be held to a certain standard, no? 

And I think certain criticisms of players (and even Sundin falls into this one) are unfair because championships are team trophies and it's not Sundin's fault he was never on a Cup-winning team, or Bourque's fault he had to be traded to a Cup-winning team to get one.  Sometimes players' fortunes aren't the greatest, but I don't think that's because these players could not be built around into a winning team.  They just weren't for whatever myriad reasons.

Tried to explain that bet I could.  If it doesn't make sense, c'est la vie.

Well, Nik answered it far more thoroughly than I would, with examples to back it up.  All I was going to say is that Phaneuf has too many flaws in his game (as good as he is, and has been this season) and that, as captain, he hasn't seemed to be able to elevate the level of the team at all ... which, for example, Sundin pretty clearly did -- and even that wasn't enough.

If the cap were already at $80 or $90M and we already had a Norris defenseman that Phaneuf could complement, then the reported 7x7 would be swallowable to me.  When the spotlight is on him, though?  No.
Title: Re: Captain Phaneuf
Post by: azzurri63 on December 13, 2013, 05:56:25 PM
I would honestly take a chance at trading him for some more pieces. I know Potvin you think I harp on Phaneuf and I do, but I totally agree with some of the others. He has played well this season, probably the best since he's come to TO. Like I posted a while back you think being in his last year that has anything to do with it. The money they are talking is in my mind overpayment.  Like McFate said too many flaws. He is said to be the most overrated player in the league and that comes from the players. Whether that is true or not I don't know. Personally don't think he is but I do think he is overrated. Burke traded for him to make a big splash and then made him captain. I have heard from a friend of mine that one of the Leafs current players has stated he is not the best guy in the dressing room. Again you can take that anyway you want. I know he logged a lot of minutes over the years and I have said I think that hurts his game. Believe he is playing slightly less this year. If they could keep him at a slightly reduced cap then keep him otherwise trade him. Better yet trade him and then maybe resign him.