Should the Leafs keep Nylander at C?

[Trapper]

I trust Babcock to make those decisions.
If Nylander is at C, great, if he's put on the wing, that's great as well.
Whatever is best for the team.

 

[Mess]

I trust Babcock to make those decisions.
If Nylander is at C, great, if he's put on the wing, that's great as well.
Whatever is best for the team.

Do fans really see

Kadri
Matthews
Nylander
Bozak (being used as a 4th line centre)?

The most logical player to move to the boards would be Nylander to me.

Matthews will be developed as a C, Kadri has been re-signed long-term and used as placeholder for #1C spot until someone else is ready (ie now Matthews).

Bozak is a former 1st line centre (played too high up the depth chart) out of necessity) but still one of the best FO men on the roster and now in the #3 hole better suited to his skill level. Bozak will have to be moved out to open any chance for Nylander in the middle.

Stamkos believes he is a C and prefers the situation and as a UFA will dictate terms to teams when/if shopping his services. Interested teams will need to lay out their plans for him to get him to sign with them. .Stamkos isn't leaving TB over a dispute to play C only to sign elsewhere and play the wing.

 

[darrylsittler27]

Is there room for him at C?

With Stamkos,Mathews and Kadri? Babcock said he would rather start him at wing. We just have too much depth there now guys. If he was on a really thin team like Vancouver with no elite talent he would play C but not in this lineup.

 

[zeke]

nylander was our best center this year.

 

[Mess]

With Stamkos,Mathews and Kadri? Babcock said he would rather start him at wing. We just have too much depth there now guys. If he was on a really thin team like Vancouver with no elite talent he would play C but not in this lineup.

Last year Komarov was Leafs top line RW (replacing Kessel former's spot).

Now that Leafs hit a grand slam home run with #1C Matthews coming on board why can't Leafs plan be to use Nylander and Marner as Leafs #1 and #2 future RWs?

Leafs top 9

JVR ----- Stamkos --- Nylander
XXXX --- Matthews -- Marner
Brown -- Kadri ------- Komarov

Where Jimmy Vesey would be a great fit for that XXXX on line #2.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Last year Komarov was Leafs top line RW (replacing Kessel former's spot).

Now that Leafs hit a grand slam home run with #1C Matthews coming on board why can't Leafs plan be to use Nylander and Marner as Leafs #1 and #2 future RWs?

Leafs top 9

JVR ----- Stamkos --- Nylander
XXXX --- Matthews -- Marner
Brown -- Kadri ------- Komarov

Where Jimmy Vesey would be a great fit for that XXXX on line #2.

Nylander is most likely moving to wing if Stamkos comes here. Perhaps he still will, as long as Bozak is still here. But at this point, I think a trade of Bozak is in the works.

 

[Trapper]

Last year Komarov was Leafs top line RW (replacing Kessel former's spot).

Now that Leafs hit a grand slam home run with #1C Matthews coming on board why can't Leafs plan be to use Nylander and Marner as Leafs #1 and #2 future RWs?

Leafs top 9

JVR ----- Stamkos --- Nylander
XXXX --- Matthews -- Marner
Brown -- Kadri ------- Komarov

Where Jimmy Vesey would be a great fit for that XXXX on line #2.

I might even try Nylander on LW. I think that line needs someone who plays greasy along the boards and cleans up the garbage in the crease.

Nylander-Stamkos-Hyman
JVR-Matthews-Marner
Komarov-Kadri-Soshnikov
Kapanen-Gauthier-Brown

 

[Mess]

Nylander is most likely moving to wing if Stamkos comes here. Perhaps he still will, as long as Bozak is still here. But at this point, I think a trade of Bozak is in the works.

Nylander is a top 6 skilled player and if you have Stamkos and Matthews in the #1 and #2 holes where would Willie play?

That is even if Bozak and Kadri are both dealt that moves Nylander to #3C spot at best, where as a winger he would be guaranteed top 6 minutes and linemates.

Hard to picture Leafs using a top 10 pick on Nylander and the plan is to groom his as your teams 3rd line centre, when someone like Kadri/Bozak seems more than adequate to fill that spot on the roster.

If Leafs drafted Laine instead of Matthews then Nylander in the middle would seem more logical even with Stamkos.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Nylander is a top 6 skilled player and if you have Stamkos and Matthews in the #1 and #2 holes where would Willie play?

That is even if Bozak and Kadri are both dealt that moves Nylander to #3C spot at best, where as a winger he would be guaranteed top 6 minutes and linemates.

Hard to picture Leafs using a top 10 pick on Nylander and the plan is to groom his as your teams 3rd line centre, when someone like Kadri/Bozak seems more than adequate to fill that spot on the roster.

Well first of all, I don't really believe in the idea of top 6/bottom 6 any more. I think we are likely to follow a top 9/bottom 3, or even an even 12-system like the Islanders use. As such, we'll end up having three centers getting roughly the same ice time. And linemates will likely follow the same system, with two traditional top 6 players and one traditional bottom 6 guy in each line. We know that's how Babcock sets his lines.

Also worth considering is that Babcock really wants to ease in his centers on the wing. He has the opportunity to do so with Matthews now. Now I think it's likely that Matthews will be an exception, but we shouldn't take a center spot next year for granted with him.

 

[Trapper]

Well first of all, I don't really believe in the idea of top 6/bottom 6 any more. I think we are likely to follow a top 9/bottom 3, or even an even 12-system like the Islanders use. As such, we'll end up having three centers getting roughly the same ice time. And linemates will likely follow the same system, with two traditional top 6 players and one traditional bottom 6 guy in each line. We know that's how Babcock sets his lines.

Also worth considering is that Babcock really wants to ease in his centers on the wing. He has the opportunity to do so with Matthews now. Now I think it's likely that Matthews will be an exception, but we shouldn't take a center spot next year for granted with him.

At the end of the day when you are building a Cup contending team, I think Kadri is better suited as the 3 C while Nylander compliments a center core of Stamkos(if signed),Matthews.
Although things can change quickly, Nylander could demonstrate he is the one you want at C or other draft picks/trades could factor in.

 

[Suntouchable13]

Why does Babcock think that a young centre should start playing at wing first at the NHL level? Eichel played all year at C, he did fine. McDavid too. Just 2 examples of rookies playing C right away, I am sure there are more. Where does this idea come from?

 

[Mess]

Why does Babcock think that a young centre should start playing at wing first at the NHL level? Eichel played all year at C, he did fine. McDavid too. Just 2 examples of rookies playing C right away, I am sure there are more. Where does this idea come from?

Defensive responsibilities (without the puck) are far less a requirement for a Winger as opposed to Centre while easing a player into the NHL.

Adjusting to the NHL speed and game are a big adjustment for young players so simplifying the position responsibilities eases the transition allowing them to focus on their strengths and not expose their weaknesses as rookies.

Faceoffs also something that a centre must do that a winger doesn't have to worry about if your trying to gain and keep puck possession for your team.

 

[Menzinger]

Nylander is a top 6 skilled player and if you have Stamkos and Matthews in the #1 and #2 holes where would Willie play?

That is even if Bozak and Kadri are both dealt that moves Nylander to #3C spot at best, where as a winger he would be guaranteed top 6 minutes and linemates.

Hard to picture Leafs using a top 10 pick on Nylander and the plan is to groom his as your teams 3rd line centre, when someone like Kadri/Bozak seems more than adequate to fill that spot on the roster.

If Leafs drafted Laine instead of Matthews then Nylander in the middle would seem more logical even with Stamkos.

You could role three lines with more balanced ice time.

There's no golden rule that says two lines NEED to have more icetime than the other two. It's just rolled out that way due to tradition, and often team's lack sufficient skilled players.

 

[johnny_rudeboy]

You could role three lines with more balanced ice time.

There's no golden rule that says two lines NEED to have more icetime than the other two. It's just rolled out that way due to tradition, and often team's lack sufficient skilled players.

And that is how I think we will move forward for at least the first couple of seasons. But eventually Matthews and Nylander will be to good not to be given increased time on the ice with their set of wingers. But that is a couple of seasons away and if they develop as expected.

 

[The_Chosen_One]

If Nylander immediately breaks out, I'm sure Babcock will have Stamkos move to the boards. We'd then have Mathews-Nylander-Kadri-Gauthier in the middle.

 

[ULF_55]

Who is the last 19 year old to play a legitimate stretch of NHL hockey for the Leafs at center?

Nylander should play center, with Matthews he'd be their 2nd. best option at that position.

Certainly, he isn't going to be your shutdown center, but he isn't going to be moved to wing for an inferior player.

 

[93LEAFS]

It all hinges on Stamkos, but remember lines and positions are never fully locked in. Look at the Sharks who move centers around all the time or other great Swede's like Forsberg and Zetterberg who where moved wherever they fit best at the current time. If we get Stamkos, I see Nylander playing more wing, but can easily be moved around depending on the situation.

My favorite role for Nylander going forward though is him being developed as an offensive dynamo on the 2nd line, that gets easier comp and heavy offensive zone starts, he can do that from either position, although I think for that role he is best suited to play center. While a line built around Marner and Matthews gets tough minutes and balanced zone usage. This is how Chicago deploys Toews and Kane, although this would require Kadri to eat a bunch of D-zone starts, like Terravainen and Bolland have at points for Chicago.

To conclude, I'd think it'd be misguided to make an absolute decision on Nylander position, use him at both, depending on the current state of the teams and matchups. I don't see Bozak lasting too long though, he can return a pick and frees up time for Nylander. Now, how comfortable we are using two rookies centers will determine how quickly that is. Personally, Nylander played Center against men in good leagues for 3/4 of the last 2 years, and Matthews is such a special talent, he doesn't require extreme sheltering.

 

[Mess]

Who is the last 19 year old to play a legitimate stretch of NHL hockey for the Leafs at center?

Nylander should play center, with Matthews he'd be their 2nd. best option at that position.

Certainly, he isn't going to be your shutdown center, but he isn't going to be moved to wing for an inferior player.

Answer:

1979-80 Laurie Boschman (80 games 16-32-48 points) as in (Rocky Saginuck - Laurie Boschman - John Anderson)

Drafted centres like Darryl Sittler and Vincent Damphousse both played the wing to start their NHL careers at age 18/19 for the 1st couple of seasons before being moved into the middle.

NHL adjustment plays a part in determining starting NHL position and then eventual NHL position even for highly skilled junior players. So beginning careers on the wall before transitioning to the middle is not considered a bad thing in player development terms. Darryl and Vinny went on to become the only 2 Leaf drafted centres all-time to become legitimate NHL #1C throughout Leaf draft history, and both began as NHL wingers.

 

[saltming]

Do fans really see

Kadri
Matthews
Nylander
Bozak (being used as a 4th line centre)?

The most logical player to move to the boards would be Nylander to me.

Matthews will be developed as a C, Kadri has been re-signed long-term and used as placeholder for #1C spot until someone else is ready (ie now Matthews).

Bozak is a former 1st line centre (played too high up the depth chart) out of necessity) but still one of the best FO men on the roster and now in the #3 hole better suited to his skill level. Bozak will have to be moved out to open any chance for Nylander in the middle.

Stamkos believes he is a C and prefers the situation and as a UFA will dictate terms to teams when/if shopping his services. Interested teams will need to lay out their plans for him to get him to sign with them. .Stamkos isn't leaving TB over a dispute to play C only to sign elsewhere and play the wing.

Why ar people so resistant to playing bozak on the wing? Imo he will do fine on the wing. I see him as a steen lite when steen plays wing.
On the wing he could help insulate one of the kids.
Michalek mathews bozak could work.

 

[zeke]

Bozak will be moved, sooner or later.

Matthews
Nylander
Kadri

is the future.

It's only a question of how quickly that future comes.

as for stamkos, Nylander already shows more inclination to backcheck than stamkos ever has.

 

[slozo]

Well first of all, I don't really believe in the idea of top 6/bottom 6 any more. I think we are likely to follow a top 9/bottom 3, or even an even 12-system like the Islanders use. As such, we'll end up having three centers getting roughly the same ice time. And linemates will likely follow the same system, with two traditional top 6 players and one traditional bottom 6 guy in each line. We know that's how Babcock sets his lines.

Also worth considering is that Babcock really wants to ease in his centers on the wing. He has the opportunity to do so with Matthews now. Now I think it's likely that Matthews will be an exception, but we shouldn't take a center spot next year for granted with him.

This.

I am thinking of a lineup that is very similar (in terms of future production) with the Flyers of about 8 or 9 years ago, when they had 3 centres, then 4 starting centres with the emergence of Giroux (they already had Carter, Richards and Briere). And JVR was on that team!

Centres can move easily to wing, and it allows your team extreme flexibility for injuries, for scoring slumps (if you want to mix and match), and for playoff match-ups. It also means that by default, your winger/centreman is generally a pretty responsible winger defensively when he's playing there.

I think the Leafs next season have a very competitive 2nd and 3rd line, even if there is a lot of youth and inexperience there.

And I agree that Bozak is likely headed out - either way, especially if Stamkos is jointing the team, there are likely two centres moving out - I'm guessing Holland and Bozak, but who knows what management decides.

 

[Mess]

Why ar people so resistant to playing bozak on the wing? Imo he will do fine on the wing. I see him as a steen lite when steen plays wing.
On the wing he could help insulate one of the kids.
Michalek mathews bozak could work.

Bozak is the Leafs best centre in the face-off dot and part of determining who plays where on the roster is FO% for a C.

Tyler Bozak 56.4 FO% places him not only the best on the Leafs but top 10 in the entire NHL among regular centres with Toews @58.6 and Kesler @58.5% the league leaders in the dot.

When possession drives success a good coach wouldn't move his best face-off man to the wing to remove that skill set from his job responsibilities and go with lesser players and allow the opposition more touches of the puck in key situations offensively and defensively.

Bozak has the highest OZ% (58.1%) and DZ% (56.6%) winning FO% off all Leafs players.

 

[Jack Bauer]

Why does Babcock think that a young centre should start playing at wing first at the NHL level? Eichel played all year at C, he did fine. McDavid too. Just 2 examples of rookies playing C right away, I am sure there are more. Where does this idea come from?

Comes from almost every other teenager in history not being as good as those 2.

Seriously, head coaches make rules based on the majority, not the exceptions.

Exceptions create their own scenarios by having elite talent in areas almost nobody else does at their age.

 

[slozo]

Bozak is the Leafs best centre in the face-off dot and part of determining who plays where on the roster is FO% for a C.

Tyler Bozak 56.4 FO% places him not only the best on the Leafs but top 10 in the entire NHL among regular centres with Toews @58.6 and Kesler @58.5% the league leaders in the dot.

When possession drives success a good coach wouldn't move his best face-off man to the wing to remove that skill set from his job responsibilities and go with lesser players and allow the opposition more touches of the puck in key situations offensively and defensively.

Bozak has the highest OZ% (58.1%) and DZ% (56.6%) winning FO% off all Leafs players.

That's an excellent point.

But the counterpoint is, if we get Stamkos, then we have two starting centres that have average to below average FO skills (Kadri, Stamkos) and a rookie (Matthews) and/or a near-rookie (Nylander) who will be average at best.

I don't see us keeping Bozak JUST because he has a great FO %. I see it as a great reason for another team to overpay in getting him though . . . with us hopefully getting a very solid experienced d-man.

 

[saltming]

Bozak is the Leafs best centre in the face-off dot and part of determining who plays where on the roster is FO% for a C.

Tyler Bozak 56.4 FO% places him not only the best on the Leafs but top 10 in the entire NHL among regular centres with Toews @58.6 and Kesler @58.5% the league leaders in the dot.

When possession drives success a good coach wouldn't move his best face-off man to the wing to remove that skill set from his job responsibilities and go with lesser players and allow the opposition more touches of the puck in key situations offensively and defensively.

Bozak has the highest OZ% (58.1%) and DZ% (56.6%) winning FO% off all Leafs players.

True but we are still about development so bozak takes defensive zone and flip a coin for nutral zone, while mathews take o zone faceoffs.
I know it's nice to start off with the puck but it's not everything.