2016-17 Centennial Leafs General Team Discussion

[Kin]

I really do liked the balanced attack. It forces opponents into matchup nightmares where one or two of our lines always has a good chance to run roughshod. In the playoffs, I think it'd be pretty easy to shorten the bench to 3 or even 2 lines towards the end of the game. A lot of roles are hot-swappable for situational matchups too.

And I think that generally works against lower quality or even middle tier teams.

When you start playing the better teams, who can have some pretty stacked #1 and #2 lines, I'm a little worried it'll result in situations where their #1 and #2 lines have the edge on ours and we're trading a two line disadvantage for a one line advantage.

So, yeah, towards the end of the game your can change things up but I'm a little skeptical of it over the course of a series against a really good team. I think Pittsburgh gets away with it because no matter what they do 2 of their 3 lines are going to have an all-world C and, respect due to Kadri and Bozak, that's just not the case here.

 

[herman]

And I think that generally works against lower quality or even middle tier teams.

When you start playing the better teams, who can have some pretty stacked #1 and #2 lines, I'm a little worried it'll result in situations where their #1 and #2 lines have the edge on ours and we're trading a two line disadvantage for a one line advantage.

So, yeah, towards the end of the game your can change things up but I'm a little skeptical of it over the course of a series against a really good team. I think Pittsburgh gets away with it because no matter what they do 2 of their 3 lines are going to have an all-world C and, respect due to Kadri and Bozak, that's just not the case here.

We saw a bit of that earlier in the season when Babcock rolled out Matthews against top lines (with Brown?). It was okay for a bit but he took some development lumps. Same thing with Rielly.

With the playoffs around the corner, he's switched to win-tactics to find matchup advantages (Gardiner-Zaitsev, Kadri line matching), and we're seeing some of those results now.

Tonight should be a good preview of how we measure up so far.

Next year will be more interesting should Bozak and JvR depart (a more sheltered Nylander line?).

 

[herman]

Speaking of lineup construction:

https://twitter.com/domluszczyszyn/status/849293065047212032
www.twitter.com/domluszczyszyn/status/849293065047212032

Associated article explaining how the playstyles are determined, and what combinations generate the most opportunity:
https://hockey-graphs.com/2017/04/04/identifying-player-types-with-clustering/

Some of these look like they need more data to stabilize. By my eye, Matthews is balanced (leaning shooter), Marner is a playmaker, and Martin is a dependent.

 

[Coco-puffs]

Speaking of lineup construction:

https://twitter.com/domluszczyszyn/status/849293065047212032
www.twitter.com/domluszczyszyn/status/849293065047212032

Associated article explaining how the playstyles are determined, and what combinations generate the most opportunity:
https://hockey-graphs.com/2017/04/04/identifying-player-types-with-clustering/

According to RK_Stimp's analysis, these are the xGF% rates of D pairings we've seen most this year:

Shooter - Shooter:  54.5%  (Rielly- Carrick)
Puck-Mover - Shooter: 51.1%  (Gardiner - Carrick)
Shooter - Defensive:  49.9% (Rielly - Zaitsev)
Puck-Mover - Defensive:  49.5%  (Gardiner - Zaitsev)
Defensive-Defensive:  46%  (Hunlak)

Overall, it seems Rielly-Carrick and Gardiner-Zaitsev is better than what we had for most of the year according to this analysis.  (Big boosts for Rielly & Carrick, Barely a drop for Zaitsev, somewhat significant drop for Gardiner)

Hunlack is seriously outperforming the prediction here though, with a 56.8% GF% on the season together.


Oh, the list of All-around is quite short at only 15 guys.  A few of them are surprises (and have limited minutes to use) and the others are your Doughty, Karlsson, Hedman, Keith types.

 

[McGarnagle]

We talk a lot about the things Babcock does that irritate, vex and confound us but I will say that probably one of the better decisions he made was to maintain the balanced approach and resist the temptation to ever go with a more traditional top heavy approach.

I sometimes question its wisdom going forward and its ability to get things done in the playoffs but for this group in the regular season it really proved effective.

I don't think that it was done in the spirit of winning - I think Babcock knew the priority of the club this year was to develop the young players - and to do it for so many required adequate balanced icetime for them and his established players.

I would expect that Babcock is likely as surprised as most of us (WIGWAL excepted) as to the success the team has had, as it essentially required all lines to play at or above expectations.

 

[Coco-puffs]

Another great article at theAthleticTO this morning.  Probably paywalled though.

https://theathletic.com/49083/2017/04/05/dellow-building-a-great-team-dont-get-great-depth-forwards/

TL;DR; Summary:

Lots of stats showing their Bottom 6 forwards (over the past decade) do a lot worse once they leave Chicago.  All of the stats focus on their performance without any Top 6 players on the ice (ie, without anyone to prop them up).

There are people who seem to think that you can get the results Chicago gets from their bottom six forwards by signing Chicago?s bottom six forwards.  This isn?t to suggest that there aren?t good bottom six forwards and bad ones.  Only that bottom six forwards on really good teams almost certainly look much better than they really are because good teams tend to have really good defencemen. Like the Blackhawks.

Dellow then goes on to discuss Martin, who's actually had pretty good results this year.  (Note, the other 3 lines in Toronto all have at least one "Top 6" guy on them, so the analysis would focus on the 4th line) 

So like with Chicago and their depth forwards over the years, you get into a question of why the team looks good without any top six forwards. In Toronto, I?m inclined to think that it?s an underrated group of defencemen and a high-end coaching staff that enable the Leafs to put up respectable numbers without any top six forwards on the ice.

Further analysis on Martin shows he also had above average results in his last two years on NYI.  Prior to that, they were well below average.  What changed on Long Island:  Nick Leddy and Johnny Boychuk.  Big improvement on defense.

It may well be that you can?t really buy a good fourth line. All you can do is create the conditions in which the kind of player who plays on fourth lines succeeds and be clever enough not to get fooled by the illusion that creates. Chicago?s done a good job of not buying into their depth players ? they let them move on when they stop being cheap and bring in the next batch.  That?s a challenge that will come soon for the Maple Leafs.

What does that mean to me?  Improving our defense is priority #1 (not surprising).  Skip paying Boyle big (for the 4th line) money.  Although, if Vegas will take Martin, I don't mind allocating his salary to Boyle.  He's not an enforcer, but I still think he's enough of a deterrent and he's much more useful in your lineup.  Beyond that, don't spend in FA on 4th liners or trade useful assets for them either.  Unfortunately, we are not deep at center organizationally, so we may have no other option.

 

[Kin]

I don't think that it was done in the spirit of winning - I think Babcock knew the priority of the club this year was to develop the young players - and to do it for so many required adequate balanced icetime for them and his established players.

I would expect that Babcock is likely as surprised as most of us (WIGWAL excepted) as to the success the team has had, as it essentially required all lines to play at or above expectations.

I didn't say it was done "in the spirit of winning", I said I thought it proved really effective. I think it was a good way to get the best out of the young players on the team and that was the only way this team was going to amount to much.

 

[bustaheims]

Skip paying Boyle big (for the 4th line) money.  Although, if Vegas will take Martin, I don't mind allocating his salary to Boyle.  He's not an enforcer, but I still think he's enough of a deterrent and he's much more useful in your lineup.  Beyond that, don't spend in FA on 4th liners or trade useful assets for them either.  Unfortunately, we are not deep at center organizationally, so we may have no other option.

Agreed. If Boyle will come back on a short-term deal for ~$2M per or less, I'd be all for bringing him back - especially considering the lack of organizational depth at C. More than that, and he's pricing himself out of the 4th line range.

 

[herman]

Skip paying Boyle big (for the 4th line) money.  Although, if Vegas will take Martin, I don't mind allocating his salary to Boyle.  He's not an enforcer, but I still think he's enough of a deterrent and he's much more useful in your lineup.  Beyond that, don't spend in FA on 4th liners or trade useful assets for them either.  Unfortunately, we are not deep at center organizationally, so we may have no other option.

Agreed. If Boyle will come back on a short-term deal for ~$2M per or less, I'd be all for bringing him back - especially considering the lack of organizational depth at C. More than that, and he's pricing himself out of the 4th line range.

Booyeah!

Money goes to top primary points getters, defensemen who drive play, and your starting goalie.

 

[Frank E]

Skip paying Boyle big (for the 4th line) money.  Although, if Vegas will take Martin, I don't mind allocating his salary to Boyle.  He's not an enforcer, but I still think he's enough of a deterrent and he's much more useful in your lineup.  Beyond that, don't spend in FA on 4th liners or trade useful assets for them either.  Unfortunately, we are not deep at center organizationally, so we may have no other option.

Agreed. If Boyle will come back on a short-term deal for ~$2M per or less, I'd be all for bringing him back - especially considering the lack of organizational depth at C. More than that, and he's pricing himself out of the 4th line range.

Booyeah!

Money goes to top primary points getters, defensemen who drive play, and your starting goalie.

Sure, but they've got quite a bit of cap space available for the next 2 years anyway...I'm not sure spending $2.5m on Boyle for a couple of years would hamper anything from getting done, as opposed to Gauthier at $1m.

They'll have to start paying attention to that space once Nylander, Matthews, and Marner's deals are up.  While they're on their ELC, you can afford to spend some extra dollars on a supporting cast, as long as the deals are short enough...especially a centreman.

 

[herman]

Cap availability should not determine managerial practice.

Setting precedence for over paying 4th liners hinders negotiation power down the line. I like what they did with Rielly and Kadri establishing a manageable threshold. Is Kadri only $2M more valuable than your 'best' 4th liner?

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

Speaking of Boyle, who I'd be fine bring back for a year or two at the same price, any injury update this morning?

 

[mr grieves]

It may well be that you can?t really buy a good fourth line. All you can do is create the conditions in which the kind of player who plays on fourth lines succeeds and be clever enough not to get fooled by the illusion that creates. Chicago?s done a good job of not buying into their depth players ? they let them move on when they stop being cheap and bring in the next batch.  That?s a challenge that will come soon for the Maple Leafs.

What does that mean to me?  Improving our defense is priority #1 (not surprising).  Skip paying Boyle big (for the 4th line) money.  Although, if Vegas will take Martin, I don't mind allocating his salary to Boyle.  He's not an enforcer, but I still think he's enough of a deterrent and he's much more useful in your lineup.  Beyond that, don't spend in FA on 4th liners or trade useful assets for them either.  Unfortunately, we are not deep at center organizationally, so we may have no other option.

What the article meant to me had less to do with the fourth line (which is obvious enough -- don't pay a premium for what you can get cheap) than with the top 6.

Dellow reminded me of how much churn there's been there outside of Toews/Kane/Hossa, and how players we might've thought were 'core' were moved out: some, like Sharp, because they got old/expensive; some, like Ladd and Versteeg, because they were judged to be not part of the core; and others, like Saad, because they misjudged some contributors as 'core' (i.e. Bickell). 

Obviously, overpaying Brian Boyle to play on the fourth line isn't a good thing, although, as Frank pointed out, we have the money for a short term deal. But even if he were extended at a slight overpayment (Martin money, say) past the holy trinity's ELC years, that likely won't be the move that makes it really hard to keep the best players around.

Mistaking decent, complementary players for top-six/core pieces, simply because they've been placed in a position to succeed and the team might've had success with them, seems to be how franchises with elite talent get into trouble.

Who risks being the Leafs' Bickell? How does the team avoid having a Saad? -- Avoiding obvious blunders like overpaying fourth liners is the easy part. Ruthlessly turning over the Browns, Hymans, and Komarovs to make room for cheaper replacements and assets to get those replacements' replacements will be the harder part.

 

[Britishbulldog]

Mistaking decent, complementary players for top-six/core pieces, simply because they've been placed in a position to succeed and the team might've had success with them, seems to be how franchises with elite talent get into trouble.

That has been the past problem with the Leafs. Seeing the top money given to Kessel and Phaneuf plus core money given to Grabovski, Clarkson and others was puzzling as a casual fan.  Having that trend apparently stopped has given me cautious optimism. 

Who risks being the Leafs' Bickell? How does the team avoid having a Saad? -- Avoiding obvious blunders like overpaying fourth liners is the easy part. Ruthlessly turning over the Browns, Hymans, and Komarovs to make room for cheaper replacements and assets to get those replacements' replacements will be the harder part.

I agree with this 100%  Hopefully we will see our team with 15+ years of hockey from Matthews, Nylander and Marner.

 

[mr grieves]

Mistaking decent, complementary players for top-six/core pieces, simply because they've been placed in a position to succeed and the team might've had success with them, seems to be how franchises with elite talent get into trouble.

That has been the past problem with the Leafs. Seeing the top money given to Kessel and Phaneuf plus core money given to Grabovski, Clarkson and others was puzzling as a casual fan.  Having that trend apparently stopped has given me cautious optimism. 

Well, I'm not sure we've seen it stop. We don't know yet. They've had no real success with this group yet. If they make the playoffs and take the Caps to 6 games on the back of a Brown hot streak or fall short because they're missing one specific piece... management's reaction will be telling.

 

[herman]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCItLdP-SJs[/youtube]

I really enjoyed this one.

 

[herman]

https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2017/04/10/leafs-notebook-regular-season-wrapup-and-playoff-lookahead-april-10/

Always good stuff from MLHS and AP. Just look at these notes!

? There have been a lot of unsung heroes and surprises this season ? Curtis McElhinney, Connor Carrick, Leo Komarov, to name a few ? but the sports science department has not received its proper due. There are 11 members of the medical staff listed on the Leafs website, led by Dr. Jeremy Bettle, who is listed as the ?Director, Sports Science & Performance.? The Leafs just had nine players play in all 82 games this season. Since the full-season lockout, the highest number of Leafs players to feature in all 82 games was six in the 2006-07 season. Even in the lockout-shortened season, only seven players played in every game. Last season, only Morgan Rielly played all 82.

? One of the biggest reasons the Leafs have had success this year, particularly compared to some of the teams chasing them down the stretch, is that they managed to stay relatively healthy throughout the season and avoid any sort of major injury. Even when Mitch Marner or Morgan Rielly were hurt ? and Babcock was publicly campaigning for them to play ? they were sat out until ready and the injuries were a non-issue once they returned. There is also a more recent example with Andersen getting hurt, Babcock wanting him to play Sunday?s game against Columbus, and McElhinney getting the start with Garret Sparks backing up.

Another group I'd throw in there is the Skills Development team. Gauthier and Leivo's skating improved quite a bit compared to last year. Polak's skill game from beginning to the end was night and day, wherein he was able to use his innate skills (heavy, fastish) to actually start making plays. Komarov adapted his heavy agitation game to something more nuanced and positional and far less injurious. Kadri bounced back from his atrocious shooting percentage last season (on a contract year!) by learning to beat goaltenders with his feet and positioning, rather than an overpowering shot (which he might never have). Bozak's backchecking also improved quite a bit, using positioning to use his above average speed to good effect.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2017/04/10/leafs-notebook-regular-season-wrapup-and-playoff-lookahead-april-10/

Always good stuff from MLHS and AP. Just look at these notes!

? There have been a lot of unsung heroes and surprises this season ? Curtis McElhinney, Connor Carrick, Leo Komarov, to name a few ? but the sports science department has not received its proper due. There are 11 members of the medical staff listed on the Leafs website, led by Dr. Jeremy Bettle, who is listed as the ?Director, Sports Science & Performance.? The Leafs just had nine players play in all 82 games this season. Since the full-season lockout, the highest number of Leafs players to feature in all 82 games was six in the 2006-07 season. Even in the lockout-shortened season, only seven players played in every game. Last season, only Morgan Rielly played all 82.

Classic herman, not giving Matt Martin his proper credit.

 

[Kin]

Classic herman, not giving Matt Martin his proper credit.

Can I beat the Matt Martin dead horse a minute:

I was sitting on this all week but...what the heck sort of cheap shots is having Matt Martin preventing again? Guys run our goalie, Take knee on knee shots at Matthews...the retaliation was what exactly? I know that when they were desperate for a win you didn't want to risk a long shorthanded situation just for payback but the hits themselves are pretty good proof that just having a fighter around doesn't stop those things.

 

[herman]

Classic herman, not giving Matt Martin his proper credit.

Hey, I gave him his due the other day when he remembered to fetch Kapanen's puck off the ref.

His game hasn't really changed. He just has a centre that his style is better suited to now.

As for the extra-curriculars around the last handful of games: I like the way the team responded as a whole in focusing on scoring. I hate frontier justice in hockey, but if you've shoehorned just such a player onto the lineup at extraneous cost, I'm not sure why you wouldn't even use him. Dotchin and Sestito are the exact type of players (and plays) you need to sMartin up.