Komarov wants back in....

[nutman]

I think a line of B-K-K would be very interesting, and would be very hard to play against. It would be both a shut down line, and an energy line, that could put the puck in the net as well.

 

[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?

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

I think that Bolland will come in between 4-4.5 wherever he signs. The 5+ demands being reported reminds me of Bozak's reported demands last season.

 

[Corn Flake]

I think a line of B-K-K would be very interesting, and would be very hard to play against. It would be both a shut down line, and an energy line, that could put the puck in the net as well.

 

[Redleaf]

From Mirtle...

Nonis still has interest in Leo Komarov "at the right number." If they can't bring him back, they'll "look elsewhere for that same element."

 

[2badknees]

Do we not have a single guy in the system (Marlies?) who plays anything close to a similar style? You wouldn't think that komorov's skillset would be all that hard to come by.

 

[louisstamos]

Do we not have a single guy in the system (Marlies?) who plays anything close to a similar style? You wouldn't think that komorov's skillset would be all that hard to come by.

Jerry D'Amigo is probably the closest, although he doesn't hit nowhere near as much as Komarov does...

 

[L K]

The thing about Komarov to me is that he has an underrated skill.  He plays hard and hits everything but he still manages to be a responsible defensive player while doing it.  A lot of the guys who run around hitting everything end up being guys that take themselves out of position.  If he's too much money, sure, you can't bring him back, but you aren't replacing him with any of Ashton/Broll/D'Amigo/Holland.  They are different players.

 

[Kin]

The thing about Komarov to me is that he has an underrated skill.  He plays hard and hits everything but he still manages to be a responsible defensive player while doing it.  A lot of the guys who run around hitting everything end up being guys that take themselves out of position.  If he's too much money, sure, you can't bring him back, but you aren't replacing him with any of Ashton/Broll/D'Amigo/Holland.  They are different players.

I think that's probably true but I do sort of question just how valuable it is to "hit everything in sight" while being a responsible defensive player when compared to just being a responsible defensive player. Komarov hit people, sure, but it's not like he could credibly be described as a punishing physical player.

 

[bustaheims]

I think that's probably true but I do sort of question just how valuable it is to "hit everything in sight" while being a responsible defensive player when compared to just being a responsible defensive player. Komarov hit people, sure, but it's not like he could credibly be described as a punishing physical player.

No, but he was one of those guys that really got under the skin of the other team, and he was an excellent forechecker because he has great speed and isn't afraid to throw a hit. There are definitely other players in the organization that are capable of doing so, but I don't think we've seen enough from them to see if they're really willing to play that way.

 

[Kin]

I think that's probably true but I do sort of question just how valuable it is to "hit everything in sight" while being a responsible defensive player when compared to just being a responsible defensive player. Komarov hit people, sure, but it's not like he could credibly be described as a punishing physical player.

No, but he was one of those guys that really got under the skin of the other team, and he was an excellent forechecker because he has great speed and isn't afraid to throw a hit. There are definitely other players in the organization that are capable of doing so, but I don't think we've seen enough from them to see if they're really willing to play that way.

I think that's true but the combination of effective forechecker/solid defensive player isn't super-rare, I don't think. Valuable, yes, but I think it's the sort of thing you can find.

 

[bustaheims]

I think that's true but the combination of effective forechecker/solid defensive player isn't super-rare, I don't think. Valuable, yes, but I think it's the sort of thing you can find.

I agree, but, the devil you know and such.

 

[L K]

I think that's probably true but I do sort of question just how valuable it is to "hit everything in sight" while being a responsible defensive player when compared to just being a responsible defensive player. Komarov hit people, sure, but it's not like he could credibly be described as a punishing physical player.

No, but he was one of those guys that really got under the skin of the other team, and he was an excellent forechecker because he has great speed and isn't afraid to throw a hit. There are definitely other players in the organization that are capable of doing so, but I don't think we've seen enough from them to see if they're really willing to play that way.

I think that's true but the combination of effective forechecker/solid defensive player isn't super-rare, I don't think. Valuable, yes, but I think it's the sort of thing you can find.

I'd agree with that if the Leafs actually had a player like that in the last what 10 years?  I mean who was the last guy the Leafs had in that role?  And while guys who hit and play defense isn't rare, what impresses me more was the rate of his hits.  In 42 games last year he had 179 hits.  That would have had him 54th in the league this year against an 82 game season.

 

[Kin]

I'd agree with that if the Leafs actually had a player like that in the last what 10 years?  I mean who was the last guy the Leafs had in that role?

I think Kulemin was/is like that. I think my best friend Nik Antropov was both of those things. Alex Steen probably qualifies. Mac was, at times.

Maybe not so much in the 4th line grinder mode but, well, the Leafs have also missed the playoffs in 8 of the last 9 years. Their roster shouldn't be all that instructive beyond what not to do.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

I'd agree with that if the Leafs actually had a player like that in the last what 10 years?  I mean who was the last guy the Leafs had in that role?  And while guys who hit and play defense isn't rare, what impresses me more was the rate of his hits.  In 42 games last year he had 179 hits.  That would have had him 54th in the league this year against an 82 game season.

Chad Kilgor?

 

[L K]

I'd agree with that if the Leafs actually had a player like that in the last what 10 years?  I mean who was the last guy the Leafs had in that role?  And while guys who hit and play defense isn't rare, what impresses me more was the rate of his hits.  In 42 games last year he had 179 hits.  That would have had him 54th in the league this year against an 82 game season.

Chad Kilgor?

Yeah, that might fit it for me.  A little moreso than Antropov (who will always remain one of my favourite Leafs).

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

Yeah, that might fit it for me.  A little moreso than Antropov (who will always remain one of my favourite Leafs).

That's the one thing I always missed about him, Kilgor finished every single check. He even popped in some goals.

 

[L K]

Yeah, that might fit it for me.  A little moreso than Antropov (who will always remain one of my favourite Leafs).

That's the one thing I always missed about him, Kilgor finished every single check. He even popped in some goals.
[/quote

Kilger*

 

[Kin]

Yeah, that might fit it for me.  A little moreso than Antropov (who will always remain one of my favourite Leafs).

Just to be clear, I wasn't suggesting that all of those guys were the same player as Komarov or fit the same role, just that they did those two fundamentally good things of playing responsible defense and being effective on the forecheck. So I suppose my point was more about isolating the value of the hits themselves because, as you say, not all of those guys were hitters.

 

[princedpw]

I think that's probably true but I do sort of question just how valuable it is to "hit everything in sight" while being a responsible defensive player when compared to just being a responsible defensive player. Komarov hit people, sure, but it's not like he could credibly be described as a punishing physical player.

No, but he was one of those guys that really got under the skin of the other team, and he was an excellent forechecker because he has great speed and isn't afraid to throw a hit. There are definitely other players in the organization that are capable of doing so, but I don't think we've seen enough from them to see if they're really willing to play that way.

I think that's true but the combination of effective forechecker/solid defensive player isn't super-rare, I don't think. Valuable, yes, but I think it's the sort of thing you can find.

I'd agree with that if the Leafs actually had a player like that in the last what 10 years?  I mean who was the last guy the Leafs had in that role?  And while guys who hit and play defense isn't rare, what impresses me more was the rate of his hits.  In 42 games last year he had 179 hits.  That would have had him 54th in the league this year against an 82 game season.

Unfortunately, hit rate has not been shown to correlate with winning.  If anything, hit rate has been shown to have a slight negative correlation with winning.  You can only hit a guy if he has the puck and you don't.  Since having the puck does correlate quite strongly with winning, the guys doing most of the hitting are often on the losing team.  Moral of the story: don't use hit rates as a reason to sign a guy.