Internal Competition
- Thread starter slapshot
- Start date
I don't get all the Bozak bashing. He's played just a little more than a full season. Was given all the pressure of supposed to be top line star, and struggled with that.
I see a young guy, with decent speed and puckhandling skills, good hockey sense, good on face-offs and I think will be defensively responsible.
It's hard to be first man back when your down deep supposedly trying to set up Kessel.
Schenn struggled in his sophomore year, before eventually getting his game turned around late in the season. Bozak didn't even have a first full year under his belt and did play better after the all-star break as the team did. I think he'll be just fine.
I see a young guy, with decent speed and puckhandling skills, good hockey sense, good on face-offs and I think will be defensively responsible.
It's hard to be first man back when your down deep supposedly trying to set up Kessel.
Schenn struggled in his sophomore year, before eventually getting his game turned around late in the season. Bozak didn't even have a first full year under his belt and did play better after the all-star break as the team did. I think he'll be just fine.
Busta Reims said:
They weren't brought in to play with Kessel?
In general I don't understand the notion of training camp being an open competition for NHL jobs the way some are saying. Yes every player should be playing as hard and smart as they can but camp isn't where the lions share of NHL versus none NHL jobs are determined nor should it be.
It seems pretty normal to me that a couple younger players will be knocking on the door but even then sometimes those players shine against inferior competition and require more development time. I'm reminded of Kadri as a recent example.
bustaheims
Active member
Saint Nik said:
Being that Zigomanis only played 8 games, I have a hard time really judging his play with the team. If he had played a similar number of games, he very well could have had a comparable impact to Boyce and Crabb. I also have a hard time saying they outplayed Sjostrom. They brought a different style than he did, sure, but, in terms of the quality of their respective play, I'm not sure there's much to separate them. Honestly, I think the best you can say about Crabb and Boyce is that they were the equivalent of some of the other guys that made the 4th line, which, really, makes choosing other guys over them fairly inconsequential.
bustaheims
Active member
Saint Nik said:
Boyce had marginally more ice-time per game than Sjostrom - nowhere close to enough to make a case that one outplayed the other or was preferred by the coach. Really, the 10 second difference between the two of them can almost be explained away due to the fact that Boyce was a centre and Sjostrom's a winger.
Kin
New member
Busta Reims said:
In total, yes, but I'd be willing to bet that if you broke Sjostrom's ice time down to pre-Boyce and Crabb and post-Boyce and Crabb that you'd have a more significant difference.
And personally, observationally, I'd say that improved play from the bottom six, including Boyce and Crabb was a big reason for the team's improved play in the second half.
Kin
New member
Bender said:
Ultimately, personnel decisions are a GM's. If Burke is letting Wilson make those calls than he dodges the responsibility for them being his calls but he still has the responsibility for letting Wilson make them. So it's six of one, half a dozen of the other.
But you're missing the point slightly. I'm pointing out what's been true during Burke's tenure. Assigning specific blame for bad decisions is kind of a fool's errand here without knowing how the decisions get made.
Bender said:
I guess. Nobody is saying that though. I'm saying that they haven't done a terrific example of identifying the best of what's available, not that it's intentional.
bustaheims
Active member
Saint Nik said:
Looking through the game logs of the last 8-10 games they played together, that's largely not true in terms of Boyce and Sjostrom. Their respective TOIs were largely comparable, with Sjostrom often receiving more ice time than Boyce.
Besides, at the end of the day, we're talking about which dime-a-dozen 4th line outplay which dime-a-dozen 4th liner. If those are the worst roster decisions made by the team, then I'm perfectly happy about it. Sure, Boyce and Crabb turned out to be better fits for the team the Leafs evolved into mid-season, but, I'm not convinced that can be said of the squad that broke training camp.
Saint Nik said:
It also has to do with who was hurt when ( Armstrong and Shoey and more ) who sucked when ( Kessel and Versteeg ) and what the benefits were. Normally Crabb wouldn't have 50 seconds of pp time per game for a start.
Pre/post Boyce and Crabb sure there's a difference but that's also when Shoey started to break down with injuries.
Anwho I don't substantially disagree just thought it was worth noting.
Kin
New member
Busta Reims said:
Which, admittedly, isn't the worst thing in the world if you're the Vancouver Canucks and you're going to out-talent everyone else to death. But if you're a team like the Leafs who are going to comparatively talent poor in the top 6 then not only are your 4th liners going to have to contribute more but those small gains earned through having better 4th liners are going to end up making a big difference when it comes down to the end of the year and the handful of points that separates 8th place from 9th.
And anyway this is all sort of a microcosm of the larger issues of Burke's tenure of being slow to make changes/not terrific at identifying the best fits for the team.
Saint Nik said:
Well yes and no. The rate of change has been pretty high but I agree he hasn't been stellar identifying the best fits. One thing he does do is correct immediately so that's something. He's also pretty clever with how he uses the financial might of the Leafs ( landing Rick Dudley for example )
I honestly wonder if, back when he made the Kessel deal, he was really banking on landing the Sedins. You and I agreed at the time that the Kessel trade was wrong headed but I can see what he may have been trying to do with it in that case.
Kin
New member
Tigger said:
Maybe, although that's a good example of why going with guys like Crabb/Boyce(who, don't get me wrong, are only superior in the sense that they're average at what they do compared to some of the horse leavings the Leafs tried earlier) can actually have a significant impact on a team. Crabb, at various points, was asked to do things above and beyond just being a "4th liner" when you saw the inevitable slumps/injuries. Having an effective player in that role matters at those times.
Tigger said:
I don't think, realistically, it can be argued that Sjostrom was pretty ineffective last year. Injuries aside, I think just about everyone was comfortable with him not coming back.