• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

2018-19 Toronto Maple Leafs - General Discussion

I know the ASG isn't meant to be taken seriously, but it'll be interesting to see how many Leafs are selected this year. Marner is top-10 in points. Tavares is top-5 in goals. Rielly leads all defencemen in points. Matthews is 1st in goals/per and top-3 in points/game. Andersen is 2nd in wins. At most they can probably only fit 3 of them onto the team though.
 
https://twitter.com/LeafsPR/status/1076130287745228801

I'm just going to assume this was Dubas' direct response to this:

https://twitter.com/Prospects_Watch/status/1075880870635032577
 
Edmonton used analytics? I know they had a strong department at one point, but it also seems like they never really listened to them.
 
bustaheims said:
Edmonton used analytics? I know they had a strong department at one point, but it also seems like they never really listened to them.

I'm not really sure what he's referring to with Buffalo too, other than Tim Murray saying the word analytics a few times. He also seems to not realize that Pittsburgh and Washington, winners of the last 3 Stanley Cups, both have prominent members of the analytics community on their staffs. Bowman in Chicago has openly talked about how their use of analytics have given them an advantage. I don't quite remember if LA had people on their staff for it (although they recently hired one of the pioneers of hockey analytics) but their teams were analytics darlings.

I mean in this day and age pretty much every team has an analytics department and uses them in one way or another. Pierre just picked out a bunch of bad teams while ignoring all the good ones.
 
CarltonTheBear said:
I mean in this day and age pretty much every team has an analytics department and uses them in one way or another. Pierre just picked out a bunch of bad teams while ignoring all the good ones.

Yeah, and Florida had the analytics-heavy group in charge for what, 2 seasons? Maybe it was only one. It was brief, for sure. Arizona is failing, sure, but, they have a few significant barriers and haven't landed the top draft picks they need to get the highend talent that could push them over the top.

Typical McGuire hogwash - and part of the reason he doesn't get significant airtime up here anymore. He's among the last of a dying guard.
 
CarltonTheBear said:
https://twitter.com/LeafsPR/status/1076130287745228801

I was expecting one of the AGMs to manage this back before we had AGMs under Dubas. This is a better solution anyway.
 
CarltonTheBear said:
I know the ASG isn't meant to be taken seriously, but it'll be interesting to see how many Leafs are selected this year. Marner is top-10 in points. Tavares is top-5 in goals. Rielly leads all defencemen in points. Matthews is 1st in goals/per and top-3 in points/game. Andersen is 2nd in wins. At most they can probably only fit 3 of them onto the team though.

My first reaction to this was there's no way Matthews is top-3 in pts/gm. Yep, he's tied for 2nd with MacKinnon.
 
https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2018/12/21/mike-babcock-on-heaviness-the-advantages-of-depth-down-the-middle-lightening-frederik-andersens-workload-in-the-second-half-more/

Babcock has quite a bit to share on Overdrive. Primarily, how there?s a plan in place to net Sparks more starts over the second half and keep Andersen around 60 starts.
 
herman said:
https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2018/12/21/mike-babcock-on-heaviness-the-advantages-of-depth-down-the-middle-lightening-frederik-andersens-workload-in-the-second-half-more/

Babcock has quite a bit to share on Overdrive. Primarily, how there?s a plan in place to net Sparks more starts over the second half and keep Andersen around 60 starts.
He got a bit prickly when Feschuck suggested Andersen was worn out last season come playoffs. Like take a chill pill Mike
 
Zee said:
herman said:
https://mapleleafshotstove.com/2018/12/21/mike-babcock-on-heaviness-the-advantages-of-depth-down-the-middle-lightening-frederik-andersens-workload-in-the-second-half-more/

Babcock has quite a bit to share on Overdrive. Primarily, how there?s a plan in place to net Sparks more starts over the second half and keep Andersen around 60 starts.
He got a bit prickly when Feschuck suggested Andersen was worn out last season come playoffs. Like take a chill pill Mike

I, too, would like to see Sparks receive more playing time.  He needs it to fine tune his game further.    Looking forward to seeing the back-up in action more and the first-stringer not getting so 'worn out'.
 
Just pulling this out of the GDT because it?s good:
Coco-puffs said:
herman said:
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:
Rielly has 4 assists so far?

Yep, but only one primary assist. Still a fantastic game for Morgan.

I think evaluating defensemen on primary points is kinda hogwash.  The analytics groups have proven that for forwards, secondary assists is not predictive of future performance and thats why we talk alot about primary points.  IIRC, there was less "its just noise" for d-men.

On another note, some people (not necessarily on this board) have been looking at Morgan's stats this year and saying "well yeah, he's just racking up the points on that lethal PP just passing across the umbrella... anyone decent can do that".  They aren't necessarily wrong.

That said, Morgan has 20 points at 5v5 this season (2nd in the league behind Chabot).  He's on pace for 47 points at 5v5.  Which would be the highest total for a D-man in the analytics era (since 2007-2008)

Only Erik Karlsson (x4), Brent Burns, Duncan Keith, and Mike Green have got 35 points in a year at 5v5 in that timespan.

While I also think points by defensemen (primary or otherwise) are not a key evaluator of their capabilities directly, it does give a proxy measure of their usage and specifically quality of teammate.

No surprise Rielly?s numbers are hopping in his second year getting more ice time with Marner, Matthews, and now John frickin? Tavares. 
 
While I?m semi on that train of thought, is it not fair to characterize John Tavares as the older, slower, smaller, more boring, and less flashy Auston Matthews?
 
herman said:
While I?m semi on that train of thought, is it not fair to characterize John Tavares as the older, slower, smaller, more boring, and less flashy Auston Matthews?

Sure, so long as you add "more durable and with a longer track record of success."
 
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:
Sure, so long as you add "more durable and with a longer track record of success."

I love John Tavares as much as legally required but success is not a track record he has.
 
herman said:
While I?m semi on that train of thought, is it not fair to characterize John Tavares as the older, slower, smaller, more boring, and less flashy Auston Matthews?

except for the smaller part, that kinda drscribes the goat too.
 
princedpw said:
herman said:
While I?m semi on that train of thought, is it not fair to characterize John Tavares as the older, slower, smaller, more boring, and less flashy Auston Matthews?

except for the smaller part, that kinda drscribes the goat too.

Implicit is the prolific scoring bit that the Goat currently does not possess.
 
https://twitter.com/daveamccarthy/status/1076516835372220416

Matthews keeps a high grip on a shortish stick with a high kick point. Just a quick weight shift to bring some weight down on his hands and the stick does the bulk of the shot speed. Matthews? gift is in getting to the hard-earned ice with the puck in control (shorter stick + stronger arms) and putting the puck where the goalie isn?t with a larger repertoire of deceptive techniques.
 
Nik the Trik said:
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:
Sure, so long as you add "more durable and with a longer track record of success."

I love John Tavares as much as legally required but success is not a track record he has.

And that's why several teams were ready to pay him more than $11m to keep on failing.
 
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:
And that's why several teams were ready to pay him more than $11m to keep on failing.

Hold on a sec, I'm looking up my latin to find out how to describe the "Appealing to the Wisdom of NHL teams' spending habits on the UFA market" fallacy.
 

About Us

This website is NOT associated with the Toronto Maple Leafs or the NHL.


It is operated by Rick Couchman and Jeff Lewis.
Back
Top