Opening Forward Lines
- Thread starter slapshot
- Start date
louisstamos
Active member
freer said:
The argument is they won't make the playoffs unless they improve these stats. And even if they do, look what happened to Colorado last year to this.
louisstamos said:
Or, you know, the Leafs after the lockout season.
bustaheims
Active member
freer said:
That's just completely untrue. Two years ago, when they made the playoffs, a number of us were very concerned about the underlying numbers.
herman
Well-known member
bustaheims said:
I share these concerns over our underlying numbers. We can't take the shortsighted approach of getting too high on brief playoff appearances being indicators of success. Success must be measured in the long term, and we must aim for it to be sustainable.
How we go about winning matters in the long haul. Relying heavily on individual players' exceeding their normal performance on a regular basis is a recipe for disaster when they inevitably regress or get injured. Elevating our base line of play by maintaining possession, increasing offensive zone-time, and dominating the neutral zone is how I'd like to see us win.
GhostofPotvin29
New member
herman said:
Listened to an interview with Kyle Dubas yesterday (was on the Soo Greyhounds' local radio station) where he discussed how the media/fans were so up and down with every Leafs win or loss and how that is something he had to get used to. He was making the point that he's such a long-term sort of person that he can't relate to the up and down reactions to individual games because he's looking big picture. I thought it was good to hear it.
herman
Well-known member
Potvin29 said:
Management should have their focus on the big picture. Coaches should focus on the system and the matchups. Players should focus on their execution and continued development. Dubas is a promising hire; he really sounds like he sees the game the right way (in my amateur opinion).
bustaheims
Active member
herman said:
Exactly. Good teams attempt to address potential problem areas before they become actual problems. They have foresight and they plan ahead. Mediocre and poor teams are reactionary and focus on recent successes or failures rather than the bigger picture. That's been a major issue with the Leafs over the past . . . well, most of the past decade, really.
Kin
New member
bustaheims said:
Do you really think that's true? That at this level anyone comes onto an NHL job at the upper management level without having a long-term plan based on the situation they're coming into? Or that there are GM's out there with reasonably secure positions who don't attempt to do that?
I don't doubt that once that plan fails that occasionally a coach or GM might make some decisions in the interest of self-preservation but I think that's fundamentally a symptom of the fact that their efforts at foresight and planning were flawed.
Highlander
Active member
I think the game has changed so swiftly and continues to change even as we type. Of course the older folks become dinosaurs as they don't or can't adapt and we see the old boys getting tossed to the wayside every day. The old system/network is crumbling under new systems, a faster game, analitics, new rules and a million other things. So yes the old adapt or die off. Look at how young Dubois is and how in tune he is with the new game. I am not so sure of long term thinking in the past (Leafs trading away every first round pick) but with the introduction of the cap you have to look long term or your are done like dinner.
herman
Well-known member
Nik the Trik said:
Former management frittering away picks and valuable cap space for splashy signings (especially post salary cap and recently to try and reclaim the 'glory' of that playoff series with Boston). Coaching completely mis-identifying the systematic flaws that resulted in the playoff loss. Players who deviate from the script on a regular basis.
Kin
New member
herman said:
But that's not the same thing at all. GMs always care about the big picture. Nobody ever made a trade or signing thinking it was a bad decision at the time. You might disagree with the results of what Carlyle's doing but I promise you he focuses on matchups and the system. I guarantee that the players work hard on "execution" and don't ignore their own development.
When Clarkson got signed, and I have to assume that's chiefly the signing you're talking about, I absolutely guarantee that Nonis thought it would improve the club over the course of the deal. He looks like he was wrong, sure, but I do sometimes think you occasionally lean a little heavy on the idea that success is just a choice that various people in management have been stubbornly refusing to make in favour of...their preference for mediocrity?
Making the wrong decisions is not a symptom of not caring enough or trying hard enough. It's a question of capability and strategy, not focus.
herman
Well-known member
Nik the Trik said:
Ah, thanks for clarifying. I understand what you're saying now and I agree that no one really goes out there looking to do a bad job. It is more fair to say their focus has been misplaced.
You're right in saying that I lean heavily on management making foolhardy decisions that lead to mediocrity. I believe this because former management teams have insisted on those paths in the face of evidence that says otherwise. I'm okay with them flubbing on certain choices as there is always probability involved, but up until this past off-season there was a bullish bent towards throwing away the proven commodity of salary cap flexibility and young controllable assets.
In terms of examples of poor decision making in light of the facts, going to big and slow and expensive with declining players coming out of the lockout that produced a salary cap and rule changes against clutch & grab set us back tremendously. Giving big money to unproven netminders (Toskala, Raycroft) before they even played a game for us is a gamble with terrible odds. I like Clarkson actually, but they pooped the bed by giving him an unmovable contract with expectations attached that did more psychological harm than good. They pursued Bolland even though it was obvious he had lost a step, wanted crazy contract, and would stunt the growth of our developing assets.
The Leafs, in the most recent decade or two, have been chasing pitches out of the zone with home run swings. We've now invested in better decision makers and better data analysis; I'm legitimately excited to see this team progress in the next few years.
Kin
New member
herman said:
Just to be clear, that's not really what I said. What I said was that sometimes it sounds like you're saying that the mediocrity is a result of a choice to be mediocre rather than a choice to be good out for reasons I haven't entirely been able to work out. We'll get to the ins and outs of that in a bit but I don't think the resulting mess we've seen is really JFJ and Burke(and just for the record it's ok to use names here and get specific) insisting on anything other than doing what their bosses want. Fundamentally I think both guys were asked to do something impossible, turn an aging, talent-shy team into winners without rebuilding and their missteps were not solely of their own doing.
If you'll let me borrow your analogy for a second, I think you saw them taking the swings they did because the pitcher was throwing nothing but outside stuff and the manager said that if they don't hit one over the fence they're off the team.
herman said:
I was going to go through your list and say how I didn't really think most of what you listed were really decisions made in the face of what are/were "facts"(the psychological impact of a big contract on David Clarkson is, I think you'd agree, not something that had much in the way of precedent). I was here at the time and some people were pretty excited about Jason Allison despite the fact that we all knew about the rule changes.
I suppose instead I'd just say it's a little hard to get too excited about the team's great new capacity for foresight when your list of terrible, obviously self-defeating moves they've made over the devade is capped by the terrible, obviously self-defeating attempt to sign Dave Bolland that this management team made a few months ago. JFJ didn't offer that contract. To date I don't know that we've seen much to suggest that this management team has a broader mandate or is more competent within the narrow confines of the existing one.
herman
Well-known member
Okay, thanks for dispelling my misconceptions of your point. Your analogy helped quite a bit.
I think my (still evolving) point is that management decisions have been, for the longest time, shortsighted (or ill-advised? arm-twisted?) pursuits of win-now that does not lead to long term success. While they may not have been aiming for mediocrity, that is where those win-now and forget-the-future decisions took them.
I think Burke did a good job (for the most part) in accelerating the rebuild by converting spare parts into legitimate assets to recoup those lost in the dark age (when all the hometown players seemed to come here in droves to retire). I think this year's management team has gotten off to a good start holding back on overpaying for a huge FA signing and bolstering the bottom with cheap, temporary signings, all with the view towards playing the game the right way and letting the wins come as they may.
I think my (still evolving) point is that management decisions have been, for the longest time, shortsighted (or ill-advised? arm-twisted?) pursuits of win-now that does not lead to long term success. While they may not have been aiming for mediocrity, that is where those win-now and forget-the-future decisions took them.
I think Burke did a good job (for the most part) in accelerating the rebuild by converting spare parts into legitimate assets to recoup those lost in the dark age (when all the hometown players seemed to come here in droves to retire). I think this year's management team has gotten off to a good start holding back on overpaying for a huge FA signing and bolstering the bottom with cheap, temporary signings, all with the view towards playing the game the right way and letting the wins come as they may.
Highlander
Active member
I think this is really important and flew between the cracks under prospects so reposting here.
Really a huge move instigated by Dubois:
This one really came in under the radar http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=742519
Looks like a great addition to the staff and Hughes gets to stick around and this is good as I like Hughes.
Really a huge move instigated by Dubois:
This one really came in under the radar http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=742519
Looks like a great addition to the staff and Hughes gets to stick around and this is good as I like Hughes.
mr grieves
New member
From Mirtle. Leafs possession by line/pairing over the last 8 games. It's not adjusted for score effects, and they've been scoring early over that span. But we're told that bumps everything up ~2%. With that and minus the top line, team's around 50%.
mr grieves said:From Mirtle. Leafs possession by line/pairing over the last 8 games. It's not adjusted for score effects, and they've been scoring early over that span. But we're told that bumps everything up ~2%. With that and minus the top line, team's around 50%.
Yes with the hidden injury to Kessel that should of been expected. He did look better last evening.