Komarov wants back in....

[GhostofPotvin29]

Bolland.

It could just as easily apply to Komarov.

No it can't.  Komarov isn't expected to be anything more than a 4th liner agitator.  Haven't seen any media claiming otherwise and haven't seen it stated otherwise by management or by more than (possibly) a handful of fans.

 

[L K]

Bolland.

It could just as easily apply to Komarov.

I think this is true.  Komarov was a nice piece in the abbreviated season but I think a lot of the soft play by the Leafs this past year has made Komarov's performance seem more impressive than it was.  Komarov is a fantastic super-pest in that he plays clean hockey but will hit absolutely everyone on the ice.  He's a solid skater and plays decent defensive hockey.  But ultimately he's a decent 3rd liner (he needs to show a little more offensive pop to justify that) and a fantastic 4th line hockey player.  Komarov doesn't make the team as aggressive as they were during the lockout season but I think his play is the style of play that becomes infectious for other players.

 

[Redleaf]

Bolland.

It could just as easily apply to Komarov.

No it can't.  Komarov isn't expected to be anything more than a 4th liner agitator. 

Your right, Bolland's better. Can't compare the two whatsoever.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Bolland.

It could just as easily apply to Komarov.

I think this is true.  Komarov was a nice piece in the abbreviated season but I think a lot of the soft play by the Leafs this past year has made Komarov's performance seem more impressive than it was.  Komarov is a fantastic super-pest in that he plays clean hockey but will hit absolutely everyone on the ice.  He's a solid skater and plays decent defensive hockey.  But ultimately he's a decent 3rd liner (he needs to show a little more offensive pop to justify that) and a fantastic 4th line hockey player.  Komarov doesn't make the team as aggressive as they were during the lockout season but I think his play is the style of play that becomes infectious for other players.

Who thinks he's anything more than that?

 

[bustaheims]

Just give Holland his minutes and be done with him.  He's been built up into something he's not by management and the media.

This. A million times this.

 

[bustaheims]

Your right, Bolland's better. Can't compare the two whatsoever.

Bolland is a better player, yes, but, there's a very good chance that Komarov will provide better value. I'd much rather have Komarov at $2M-$3M per on a short deal than Bolland on the $5M+, long-term deal that he's supposedly looking for.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Just give Holland his minutes and be done with him.  He's been built up into something he's not by management and the media.

This. A million times this.

And I don't say that so much as a slight on Bolland as I think Holland is past the AHL and deserves an NHL spot.  I think he could handle a 3rd line role, will be significantly cheaper, and if there is a drop-off between the two of them I don't think it would be great.  In reality, Bolland became a bit-piece on the Hawks last Cup-winning team and I don't see him suddenly becoming much more than that in the league at 28+.  I'd rather go younger.

 

[Corn Flake]

I'm glad we're so comfortable with the Leafs giving a guy a contract assuming that he'll miss a significant portion of it.

Just give Holland his minutes and be done with him.  He's been built up into something he's not by management and the media.

While I don't think Bolland has been built into something he's not at all, I'm okay with handing the gig to Holland too, as long as the configuration of the bottom 3 lines is adjusted accordingly in other areas.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Bolland.

It could just as easily apply to Komarov.

No it can't.  Komarov isn't expected to be anything more than a 4th liner agitator. 

Your right, Bolland's better. Can't compare the two whatsoever.

You're response makes me think your confusing what I meant.  I was just responding to you're assertion that it could apply to Komarov - "it" being that Bolland has been built up by management (it was repeated ad nauseum how much Bolland's injury derailed the season) and media (more arguable but IMO it has happened).  If you're takeaway is different, or you have seen this happen with Komarov, that's okay - I haven't and, by and large, I don't think it has occurred.

 

[Frank E]

Just give Holland his minutes and be done with him.  He's been built up into something he's not by management and the media.

This. A million times this.

Well, wasn't Holland's problem his defensive play?  I'm not dead set against the idea or anything, I just don't think it's a no-brainer given the fact that team defense was a pretty HUGE problem this past season.

 

[Redleaf]

Your right, Bolland's better. Can't compare the two whatsoever.

Bolland is a better player

Fourth line guys are a dime a dozen, but a third line centre like Bolland can be the difference in a game when the first two lines cancel each other out. He's shown he can be that guy with the cup winner last year. I think he's worth another look, and if there are a lot of teams interested in him, than it shouldnt be too hard to find a trading partner if the Leafs decide to move in a different direction later in. And, yes, of we're comparing the two, I don't think Holland has close to the same defensive acumen as Bolland.

 

[Deebo]

Your right, Bolland's better. Can't compare the two whatsoever.

Bolland is a better player, yes, but, there's a very good chance that Komarov will provide better value. I'd much rather have Komarov at $2M-$3M per on a short deal than Bolland on the $5M+, long-term deal that he's supposedly looking for.

What about Bolland at around $4M vs. Komarov at 3M?

 

[bustaheims]

And I don't say that so much as a slight on Bolland as I think Holland is past the AHL and deserves an NHL spot.  I think he could handle a 3rd line role, will be significantly cheaper, and if there is a drop-off between the two of them I don't think it would be great.  In reality, Bolland became a bit-piece on the Hawks last Cup-winning team and I don't see him suddenly becoming much more than that in the league at 28+.  I'd rather go younger.

I'm with you, 100%. Bolland's a perfectly good 3rd line centre, but, the Leafs need to maximize their cap space, and spending the kind of money he's going to be looking for to fill that position just doesn't make sense.

 

[bustaheims]

What about Bolland at around $4M vs. Komarov at 3M?

Well, at point, it gets a little more murky, and, to be honest, my choice there would probably be neither.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Your right, Bolland's better. Can't compare the two whatsoever.

Bolland is a better player, yes, but, there's a very good chance that Komarov will provide better value. I'd much rather have Komarov at $2M-$3M per on a short deal than Bolland on the $5M+, long-term deal that he's supposedly looking for.

What about Bolland at around $4M vs. Komarov at 3M?

That gets interesting.  I wouldn't give Komarov $3M.  Bolland, it's close.

 

[Redleaf]

You're response makes me think your confusing what I meant.
[/quote]

I was commenting on Bolland being a different type of player than Komarov, and which player I thought was better suited for this team. My conclusion was that I'd rather have Bolland over Komarov any day of the week. He's a better fit and a better all around player, regardless of which line he is playing on. I do like Komarov as well, but more because of his physical presence and less about his offensive abilities.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I'm glad we're so comfortable with the Leafs giving a guy a contract assuming that he'll miss a significant portion of it.

Just give Holland his minutes and be done with him.  He's been built up into something he's not by management and the media.

While I don't think Bolland has been built into something he's not at all

This is the kind of stuff I mean, and this is just from a quick Twitter search + one article.  I know we all don't take these guys seriously, but I do think they have some influence over fans as a whole.

Nonis: "the one guy we really miss is Dave Bolland"

Dreger: "Bolland is the unofficial identity of this team"

Dreger: "just having Bolland in the room and on the bench is a stabilizing presence"

Dreger: "Bolland does something every shift. I thought similar of Getzlaf when watching Anaheim win their Cup"

@Hope_Smoke 

Steve Simmons said that a high ranking Leaf executive told him that if Bolland was on the Leafs they don't lose Game 7 in Boston.

Simmons: "Now, I don't believe for a second that any of this would be happening if A) Bernier hadn't been hurt. B) Bolland hadn't been hurt"

Simmons: "to me the number one issue going forward for the Leafs is you have to sign David Bolland"

Simmons: "I fully believe that. I think Bolland's place on this hockey team is enormous"

Michael Traikos:

"Somewhere along the way, Dave Bolland achieved mystical status. He went from being a complementary piece on a 2013 Stanley Cup-winning team to a core player on a team that cannot make the playoffs."

I recall articles in the summer as well, but too lazy to look them up.  That sort of thing - the "identity" kind of talk.

 

[Redleaf]

I'm glad we're so comfortable with the Leafs giving a guy a contract assuming that he'll miss a significant portion of it.

Just give Holland his minutes and be done with him.  He's been built up into something he's not by management and the media.

While I don't think Bolland has been built into something he's not at all

This is the kind of stuff I mean, and this is just from a quick Twitter search + one article.  I know we all don't take these guys seriously, but I do think they have some influence over fans as a whole.

Nonis: "the one guy we really miss is Dave Bolland"

Dreger: "Bolland is the unofficial identity of this team"

Dreger: "just having Bolland in the room and on the bench is a stabilizing presence"

Dreger: "Bolland does something every shift. I thought similar of Getzlaf when watching Anaheim win their Cup"

@Hope_Smoke 

Steve Simmons said that a high ranking Leaf executive told him that if Bolland was on the Leafs they don't lose Game 7 in Boston.

Simmons: "Now, I don't believe for a second that any of this would be happening if A) Bernier hadn't been hurt. B) Bolland hadn't been hurt"

Simmons: "to me the number one issue going forward for the Leafs is you have to sign David Bolland"

Simmons: "I fully believe that. I think Bolland's place on this hockey team is enormous"

Michael Traikos:

"Somewhere along the way, Dave Bolland achieved mystical status. He went from being a complementary piece on a 2013 Stanley Cup-winning team to a core player on a team that cannot make the playoffs."

I recall articles in the summer as well, but too lazy to look them up.  That sort of thing - the "identity" kind of talk.

You disagree with all of them about everything they are saying about him?

 

[Corn Flake]

I'm glad we're so comfortable with the Leafs giving a guy a contract assuming that he'll miss a significant portion of it.

Just give Holland his minutes and be done with him.  He's been built up into something he's not by management and the media.

While I don't think Bolland has been built into something he's not at all

This is the kind of stuff I mean, and this is just from a quick Twitter search + one article.  I know we all don't take these guys seriously, but I do think they have some influence over fans as a whole.

Nonis: "the one guy we really miss is Dave Bolland"

Dreger: "Bolland is the unofficial identity of this team"

Dreger: "just having Bolland in the room and on the bench is a stabilizing presence"

Dreger: "Bolland does something every shift. I thought similar of Getzlaf when watching Anaheim win their Cup"

@Hope_Smoke 

Steve Simmons said that a high ranking Leaf executive told him that if Bolland was on the Leafs they don't lose Game 7 in Boston.

Simmons: "Now, I don't believe for a second that any of this would be happening if A) Bernier hadn't been hurt. B) Bolland hadn't been hurt"

Simmons: "to me the number one issue going forward for the Leafs is you have to sign David Bolland"

Simmons: "I fully believe that. I think Bolland's place on this hockey team is enormous"

Michael Traikos:

"Somewhere along the way, Dave Bolland achieved mystical status. He went from being a complementary piece on a 2013 Stanley Cup-winning team to a core player on a team that cannot make the playoffs."

I recall articles in the summer as well, but too lazy to look them up.  That sort of thing - the "identity" kind of talk.

You disagree with all of them about everything they are saying about him?

+1

While some of those quotes are some serious tire pumping, the Leafs DID miss Bolland and he WAS considered an important piece of the puzzle for last year. 

The problem I have with the Traikos quote is who has really given him "mystical" status.  I think "good player" and "important role" are about as far as most have gone,  outside of Dreger and Simmons who love to embellish. 

Bolland was still an important player to the Hawks in that 2013 playoff run, but he got hurt and his role was reduced.  They were lucky Handzus took on some of it and was able to fill in. Their first cup he played a critical defensive shutdown role.  He is way too young to be considered incapable of returning to that form.

Bolland to me is a lot like Chris Drury was in that he comes up huge in big games (like Stanley Cup winning goals), he's not the biggest, most dominant guy but a smart player who gets a lot more done out there than gets noticed.

 

[Redleaf]

I'm glad we're so comfortable with the Leafs giving a guy a contract assuming that he'll miss a significant portion of it.

Just give Holland his minutes and be done with him.  He's been built up into something he's not by management and the media.

While I don't think Bolland has been built into something he's not at all

This is the kind of stuff I mean, and this is just from a quick Twitter search + one article.  I know we all don't take these guys seriously, but I do think they have some influence over fans as a whole.

Nonis: "the one guy we really miss is Dave Bolland"

Dreger: "Bolland is the unofficial identity of this team"

Dreger: "just having Bolland in the room and on the bench is a stabilizing presence"

Dreger: "Bolland does something every shift. I thought similar of Getzlaf when watching Anaheim win their Cup"

@Hope_Smoke 

Steve Simmons said that a high ranking Leaf executive told him that if Bolland was on the Leafs they don't lose Game 7 in Boston.

Simmons: "Now, I don't believe for a second that any of this would be happening if A) Bernier hadn't been hurt. B) Bolland hadn't been hurt"

Simmons: "to me the number one issue going forward for the Leafs is you have to sign David Bolland"

Simmons: "I fully believe that. I think Bolland's place on this hockey team is enormous"

Michael Traikos:

"Somewhere along the way, Dave Bolland achieved mystical status. He went from being a complementary piece on a 2013 Stanley Cup-winning team to a core player on a team that cannot make the playoffs."

I recall articles in the summer as well, but too lazy to look them up.  That sort of thing - the "identity" kind of talk.

You disagree with all of them about everything they are saying about him?

+1

While some of those quotes are some serious tire pumping, the Leafs DID miss Bolland and he WAS considered an important piece of the puzzle for last year. 

The problem I have with the Traikos quote is who has really given him "mystical" status.  I think "good player" and "important role" are about as far as most have gone,  outside of Dreger and Simmons who love to embellish. 

Bolland was still an important player to the Hawks in that 2013 playoff run, but he got hurt and his role was reduced.  They were lucky Handzus took on some of it and was able to fill in. Their first cup he played a critical defensive shutdown role.  He is way too young to be considered incapable of returning to that form.

Bolland to me is a lot like Chris Drury was in that he comes up huge in big games (like Stanley Cup winning goals), he's not the biggest, most dominant guy but a smart player who gets a lot more done out there than gets noticed.

Yeah. He plays an unassuming game. If you don't pay attention to the little things he does without the puck, you could very easily peg him as an average, to slightly above average player, as many fans tend to do.