hockeyfan1
New member
"Mr. Fashionista", Joffrey Lupul...
http://www.ellecanada.com/fashion/trends/joffrey-lupul-hockey-s-fashion-risk-taker/
http://www.ellecanada.com/fashion/trends/joffrey-lupul-hockey-s-fashion-risk-taker/
Joffrey Lupul
- Thread starter Fanatic
- Start date
Bullfrog
Active member
Sportsnet: "Lupul: What the Leafs Must do to Contend"
It basically boils down to get getter and have veterans.
Good to hear he's recovered from his injury. He sounds committed to coming back in great shape.
[quote author=Lupul]We need to use some of the adversity we?ve had over the last couple years as experience and turn ourselves into one of those championship teams that contend regularly.?[/quote]
[quote author=Lupul]When I see teams that have success in the playoffs, they did it with a lot of veteran leaders,? said Lupul. ?I think we have a lot of good, young players, but when it comes down to playoff hockey and crunch time, it seems the teams that have the most experience are winning. ... So you want to add experience, size, puck-moving defencemen?but it?s funny, so do the other 29 teams.?[/quote]
It basically boils down to get getter and have veterans.
Good to hear he's recovered from his injury. He sounds committed to coming back in great shape.
[quote author=Lupul]We need to use some of the adversity we?ve had over the last couple years as experience and turn ourselves into one of those championship teams that contend regularly.?[/quote]
[quote author=Lupul]When I see teams that have success in the playoffs, they did it with a lot of veteran leaders,? said Lupul. ?I think we have a lot of good, young players, but when it comes down to playoff hockey and crunch time, it seems the teams that have the most experience are winning. ... So you want to add experience, size, puck-moving defencemen?but it?s funny, so do the other 29 teams.?[/quote]
[quote author=Lupul]When I see teams that have success in the playoffs, they did it with a lot of veteran leaders,? said Lupul. ?I think we have a lot of good, young players, but when it comes down to playoff hockey and crunch time, it seems the teams that have the most experience are winning. ... So you want to add experience, size, puck-moving defencemen?but it?s funny, so do the other 29 teams.?[/quote]
As dark as things seem for right now, The Leafs aren't that far off from moving in the right direction and they are on to the solution.
The Leafs are no doubt a talented team with a good group of young players. They are capable of playing against top tier teams for stretches and can score in bunches when they are feeling confident.
What has been their biggest downfall for two seasons is the inability to play for more than 20 minutes per game. Even at that rate, they won a lot of games.
I really do feel the solution is this simple. The thing about stats hockey is it doesn't address anything tangible. You can talk about possession all day, but it means nothing without reference as to why it is so.
And that's when we get into looking at the big picture.
Hockey is full of cliches, but that's because they are true. Think about this one for a minute, "When the going gets tough..."
Now finish that statement in regards to the Leafs.
Winning is a state of mind, and the Leafs don't have that yet, at least not at the NHL level.
There are some people in this world who do not take a shift off, who are pure soldiers, and losing is not an option (Hayley Wickenheiser for example) There are probably current Leaf players who have had this trait in their pre-NHL careers, but have no reference point as to how to achieve an even higher level of this mentality.
I reckon many of the highly skilled prospects are drafted and the guys who have done nothing but win, but without the obvious flair and high numbers don't get a shot. The Leafs have numbers guys, but they don't know how to win.
I use Wick as an example of this because the women's national roster do not lose the big one. They just don't. A fool would bet against them, even against higher skilled opponents. It's veteran leadership that makes the difference.
Another good example is the 03/04 Bolts. It's no coincidence that several of their players had career years. I think even Fred Modin was a 30 goal man that year. Veteran leadership was the driving force behind that squad.
I haven't really investigated the new additions yet, I don't care about their stats. I am going to trust that Shanny has figured it out, and it seems he has.
Very happy to hear Lupul say this, even if he is just parroting management. Actually, especially if he is parroting management.
As dark as things seem for right now, The Leafs aren't that far off from moving in the right direction and they are on to the solution.
The Leafs are no doubt a talented team with a good group of young players. They are capable of playing against top tier teams for stretches and can score in bunches when they are feeling confident.
What has been their biggest downfall for two seasons is the inability to play for more than 20 minutes per game. Even at that rate, they won a lot of games.
I really do feel the solution is this simple. The thing about stats hockey is it doesn't address anything tangible. You can talk about possession all day, but it means nothing without reference as to why it is so.
And that's when we get into looking at the big picture.
Hockey is full of cliches, but that's because they are true. Think about this one for a minute, "When the going gets tough..."
Now finish that statement in regards to the Leafs.
Winning is a state of mind, and the Leafs don't have that yet, at least not at the NHL level.
There are some people in this world who do not take a shift off, who are pure soldiers, and losing is not an option (Hayley Wickenheiser for example) There are probably current Leaf players who have had this trait in their pre-NHL careers, but have no reference point as to how to achieve an even higher level of this mentality.
I reckon many of the highly skilled prospects are drafted and the guys who have done nothing but win, but without the obvious flair and high numbers don't get a shot. The Leafs have numbers guys, but they don't know how to win.
I use Wick as an example of this because the women's national roster do not lose the big one. They just don't. A fool would bet against them, even against higher skilled opponents. It's veteran leadership that makes the difference.
Another good example is the 03/04 Bolts. It's no coincidence that several of their players had career years. I think even Fred Modin was a 30 goal man that year. Veteran leadership was the driving force behind that squad.
I haven't really investigated the new additions yet, I don't care about their stats. I am going to trust that Shanny has figured it out, and it seems he has.
Very happy to hear Lupul say this, even if he is just parroting management. Actually, especially if he is parroting management.
Mostar said:
As dark as things seem for right now, The Leafs aren't that far off from moving in the right direction and they are on to the solution.
The Leafs are no doubt a talented team with a good group of young players. They are capable of playing against top tier teams for stretches and can score in bunches when they are feeling confident.
What has been their biggest downfall for two seasons is the inability to play for more than 20 minutes per game. Even at that rate, they won a lot of games.
I really do feel the solution is this simple. The thing about stats hockey is it doesn't address anything tangible. You can talk about possession all day, but it means nothing without reference as to why it is so.
And that's when we get into looking at the big picture.
Hockey is full of cliches, but that's because they are true. Think about this one for a minute, "When the going gets tough..."
Now finish that statement in regards to the Leafs.
Winning is a state of mind, and the Leafs don't have that yet, at least not at the NHL level.
There are some people in this world who do not take a shift off, who are pure soldiers, and losing is not an option (Hayley Wickenheiser for example) There are probably current Leaf players who have had this trait in their pre-NHL careers, but have no reference point as to how to achieve an even higher level of this mentality.
I reckon many of the highly skilled prospects are drafted and the guys who have done nothing but win, but without the obvious flair and high numbers don't get a shot. The Leafs have numbers guys, but they don't know how to win.
I use Wick as an example of this because the women's national roster do not lose the big one. They just don't. A fool would bet against them, even against higher skilled opponents. It's veteran leadership that makes the difference.
Another good example is the 03/04 Bolts. It's no coincidence that several of their players had career years. I think even Fred Modin was a 30 goal man that year. Veteran leadership was the driving force behind that squad.
I haven't really investigated the new additions yet, I don't care about their stats. I am going to trust that Shanny has figured it out, and it seems he has.
Very happy to hear Lupul say this, even if he is just parroting management. Actually, especially if he is parroting management.
[/quote]
Stats actually are very tangible. Things like "Grit" "tough to play against" are intangibles.
For the most part the stats guys have been right the last couple of years.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
Mostar said:
But you say that with absolutely nothing to back it up. No one ever mentions the veteran laden teams that don't win, even though every season they exist. How on earth could you possibly know that veteran leadership was driving that squad?
bustaheims
Active member
Nik the Trik said:
"...the tough don't contribute in any meaningful way."
"...the tough miss the playoffs."
"...the tough go golfing."
Bender said:
Stats actually are very tangible. Things like "Grit" "tough to play against" are intangibles.
For the most part the stats guys have been right the last couple of years.
[/quote]
They illustrate shortcomings, yes, but I don't think they are definitive enough to provide big picture solutions.
Kin
New member
Mostar said:
I'm still not sure of your general point. You seem to be saying that what the Leafs lack is veteran experience or players who "know how to win" but the Leafs really haven't added anyone who fits that mold in a conventional sense. Stephane Robidas is old, sure, but he's only ever been out of the first round of the playoffs twice, out of the second round once and never to the finals. He's missed the playoffs as often as he's made them. Then they added a bunch of guys with little to no NHL experience. Between Santorelli, Komarov and Santiola they added the grand total of 7 NHL playoff games.
So on the one hand it seems like you think guys with lots of veteran leadership and winning on their resume are the key, Shanahan adds none of those guys and you think he's figured it out?
What we need is toughness, not face punchers. Example of toughness IMO is Steve yzerman playing with basically one leg In the playoffs. Guys who sacrifice themselves for the team, not players who sacrifice their face for absolutely no reason at all other then to collect their 900k a year.Nik the Trik said:
2badknees
New member
What Nonis has figured out is that the team isn't good enough to set the team back taking on expensive FA contracts, and limiting available minutes to develop a young team.
That's more significant to me than a discussion on unquantifiable intangibles. They way they're set up now, there's something to be gained if they even underachieve.
That's more significant to me than a discussion on unquantifiable intangibles. They way they're set up now, there's something to be gained if they even underachieve.
WhatIfGodWasALeaf
Active member
Well played sir.TML fan said:
Nik the Trik said:
All Im really saying is I think they have accumulated some very good players who have some good years left in the tank, but there is another type of player missing from the equation, and its hard to quantify that type of player from the couch, but not hard at all if in the dressing room or on the bench.
Maybe Clarkson was supposed to be that type of player? I really don't know. Maybe.
This opinion is based on the pattern of effort we have seen for 2 seasons. Play some good hockey, coast for a while, etc...and it seems the good hockey comes when the other team lets off the gas for a bit, but the Leafs can score 3 goals when the opponent is in a brief lull. When the opponent applies some pressure back, the Leafs just seem to pack up and go home.
I don't necessarily think a player needs to have rings to be "that" kind of guy. Fedotenko never won a championship before playing for Tampa, but he exuded that quality in that playoff. I don't think Andreychuk won any championships either before that. Fedotenko went on to win another as a hired gun with Pitt. I am of the opinion that those guys were instrumental in guiding younger skilled players to play beyond their abilities. Fedotenko was only 25 or 26 I believe, but Toews is a kid too, but he has the Stevie Y ice in his blood.
Not to say any vet can do the job. The chemistry has to be there too. It's more of a personality type the Leafs seem to be missing. I know nothing of the new guys brought in. I don't think any of us know if these guys have "it" or not. So I wont comment on that or take any heed in anybody's else's assessment of those moves until I see if there is a change of overall team play.
I'm not alone in feeling retaining RC was a mistake. But those who have spent their entire lives assessing hockey seem to think the problem lies elsewhere. Being an armchair GM is fun, but really we have to have some trust in these guys. I've been dead wrong before, and I probably will again...this in me talking from my gut (as usual). When I hear them talk about the importance of vets (the Lupul quote), leadership (Shanny and Nonis have talked about this), and "compete" level, it sounds to me there is a certain quality they feel are missing, and I agree with that assessment.
hockeyfan1
New member
Mostar said:
You are right. Something was/is "missing". Some blame it on Carlyle's system, others believe that he (Carlyle) doesn't have the right players for his system, or vice versa. Whatever.
The fact remains that system or no system, the Leafs are far from being a Stanley Cup contender, and no one knows this better than Shanahan himself. No one in the organization is trying to create miracles, but by adding the likes of Komarov & Robidas in particular, the Leafs a veteran presence and experience in both positions. Komarov brings a certain type of 'leadership' on the forward line and for the team in general. His style of play connotates that.
We have Lupul, Phaneuf, Clarkson, and the list goes on. Many do not like Phaneuf as captain, Lupul is too injury-prone, Clarkson has been thus far a galloping disappointment, et al. The Leafs are not devoid of players who can provide leadership, but it's not the kind of leadership where a personality shines a la Sundin, or it takes responsibility and sets an example for all to follow a la a Darryl Sitter or Gilmour-type captain, get the idea.
I've noticed that the decades when the Maple Leafs were at their most suuessful in the playoffs, and as a team, they had captains and players with personalities that we embraced by both the fans and the team -- (1940's) Teeder Kennedy/Connaoher/Primeau/etc; (1950's ) Barillko/etc; (1960's) Armstrong/Bower/Mahovlich/eto; (1970's) Sittler/McDonald/SaIming/etc; (1990's)Gilmour/Clark/etc; (2000's)Sundin/Joseph/etc.
Many of these Leaf teams had a small core group that were at the forefront of leadership aided by a strong and skilled supporting cast. With all but the exception of Punch Imlaoh in the '60's, all of the coaches were well-liked, respected, with solid systems in place.
[/quote]
Kin
New member
Mostar said:
If identifying that type of player wasn't hard at all from the bench or locker room then why would it be hard to find one? Why would the team have thought that Clarkson was one? Why would they give Phaneuf the captaincy if he wasn't?
Mostar said:
This is why I think most people look at your argument as being one where rather than identifying actual attributes that are valuable you're just ascribing a mystical nature to role players on winning teams. If Fedotenko was so key to transforming an otherwise ordinary bunch into cup champions, why did he then have some years where he wasn't very good in the playoffs? Did he just turn on and off this "Soldier who cannot accept losing" mentality? Or was he a soldier who was ok with losing some years, in which case how is this a valuable quality to look for in players if sometimes it just disappears?
Fedotenko was in the playoffs four different times for the Lightning. In their cup winning year he played really well, scoring 12 goals in their 22 games. In the three other years he had 0 goals and only 1 assist in 20 games and the Lightning were a non-factor. If Fedotenko was this awesome sparkplug whose gritty attitude inspired the Lightning to such heights, where did it go?
Mostar said:
We really don't. JFJ, Burke...those guys had spent their entire lives "assessing hockey" and they made all sorts of bad decisions. More to the point though...Shanahan hasn't spent his entire life assessing hockey. He's not someone with a track record of front office experience, let alone front office success. Playing hockey is one thing but the list of good players who weren't good executives is as long as my arm.