The Athletic - Boston By the numbers: Offseason grades for all 31 NHL teams

[EON]

I just think it’s hacky to say the Bruins failed the offseason because we didn’t make any trades for the sake of it and JT didn’t fall into our lap.

The Bruins are coming off a 112 point season with the most rookies in the league and others right behind (Donato, etc.). Their big weakness was lack of size on LD. They signed a decent guy to a good contract. Now they have insurance if one of the kids don’t make it.

This same hack would have probably gave them an A or B if they traded the farm for Panarin.

Might as well start handing out the John Tavares Cup for the team most dominant in July.

Dom puts a lot of time and effort into the statistics behind his work, I would hardly call him a "hack". Again I think the grade is a bit harsh and he probably has a small bias for Toronto and against Boston in the words he writes but his data shows it was a questionable offseason for Boston. His opinions aren't totally unsubstantiated or some wild hot take.

If Moore plays over Grzelcyk it's a net negative imo. Grzelcyk-Miller was a very effective third pair last season.

The issue is that Boston lost Riley and Rick Nash for nothing (I know both guys are not well liked around here but they are still useful depth pieces, health pending) and didn't bring anything in aside from some 4th liners. This does open things up for young guys to step up which I think they will but it doesn't show in the numbers. Meanwhile Toronto swapped Bozak for Tavares which is a MASSIVE upgrade. They just need some improvements from young guys to replace JVR's production (Johnsson, Kapanen, Brown, plus the big 3) which seems much more feasible. Toronto also shed Martin, Komarov, and Polak who were all big negatives.

 

[DKH]

I just think that just because he's a Leafs fan, doesn't make his critique of the Bruins any less valid. Or (let's say) he was wrong about another team... Doesn't make him less right about THIS one.

I predicted the Habs would suck last season. I hate the Habs. I was still right.

Just me but I read it and thought it was written by a guy who didn’t know what he was talking about but what do I know. I don’t have a Leafs Blog or a did named Matty. He must be smart in hockey I guess .

I’m feeling guilty now I didn’t post he’s awesome. Is it to late ?

 

[Mainehockey33]

Dom puts a lot of time and effort into the statistics behind his work, I would hardly call him a "hack". Again I think the grade is a bit harsh and he probably has a small bias for Toronto and against Boston in the words he writes but his data shows it was a questionable offseason for Boston. His opinions aren't totally unsubstantiated or some wild hot take.

If Moore plays over Grzelcyk it's a net negative imo. Grzelcyk-Miller was a very effective third pair last season.

The issue is that Boston lost Riley and Rick Nash for nothing (I know both guys are not well liked around here but they are still useful depth pieces, health pending) and didn't bring anything in aside from some 4th liners. This does open things up for young guys to step up which I think they will but it doesn't show in the numbers. Meanwhile Toronto swapped Bozak for Tavares which is a MASSIVE upgrade. They just need some improvements from young guys to replace JVR's production (Johnsson, Kapanen, Brown, plus the big 3) which seems much more feasible. Toronto also shed Martin, Komarov, and Polak who were all big negatives.

It’s a useless article though. First of all he even says he’s grading teams in a vacuum. If a first place team only looses some aging bottom 6 vets and has plenty of youth ready to fill those positions, in real life they’d be considered in a better position than let’s say Buffalo. Didn’t he give Buffalo a B? What am I supposed to take from that? Everyone knows Buffalo is most likely going to suck next year and the Bruins will be good because there’s much more going on then simple additions and subtractions.

 

[EON]

It’s a useless article though. First of all he even says he’s grading teams in a vacuum. If a first place team only looses some aging bottom 6 vets and has plenty of youth ready to fill those positions, in real life they’d be considered in a better position than let’s say Buffalo. Didn’t he give Buffalo a B? What am I supposed to take from that? Everyone knows Buffalo is most likely going to suck next year and the Bruins will be good because there’s much more going on then simple additions and subtractions.

I disagree that it's useless. The point is that he is specifically analyzing what additions and what subtractions teams made. Of course there is more going on but with his model that's hard to quantify. His game score value relies on past season's data and you can't really do that with upcoming rookies.

The grades are entirely subjective and I disagree with his inclusion of them, he should have just focused on the numbers and let the readers extrapolate from there. However, some of the negative response here seems mostly to be because he graded Boston poorly when in reality Boston has had a relatively poor off-season thus far.

 

[BruinsFanSince94]

Dom puts a lot of time and effort into the statistics behind his work, I would hardly call him a "hack". Again I think the grade is a bit harsh and he probably has a small bias for Toronto and against Boston in the words he writes but his data shows it was a questionable offseason for Boston. His opinions aren't totally unsubstantiated or some wild hot take.

If Moore plays over Grzelcyk it's a net negative imo. Grzelcyk-Miller was a very effective third pair last season.

The issue is that Boston lost Riley and Rick Nash for nothing (I know both guys are not well liked around here but they are still useful depth pieces, health pending) and didn't bring anything in aside from some 4th liners. This does open things up for young guys to step up which I think they will but it doesn't show in the numbers. Meanwhile Toronto swapped Bozak for Tavares which is a MASSIVE upgrade. They just need some improvements from young guys to replace JVR's production (Johnsson, Kapanen, Brown, plus the big 3) which seems much more feasible. Toronto also shed Martin, Komarov, and Polak who were all big negatives.

How is it much more feasible for Toronto to replace 36G/54 points with one of Johnsson/Kapanen/Brown + big 3 (assuming this means they'll see increase in points) than Boston replacing Rick Nash with a younger player like Heinen (for example) who outscored Rick Nash this year, and inserting a player like Donato/Bjork/Cehlarik into his 3rd line spot, and seeing how they perform?

Toronto hasn't upgraded their defense, which still blows.

 

[EON]

How is it much more feasible for Toronto to replace 36G/54 points with one of Johnsson/Kapanen/Brown + big 3 (assuming this means they'll see increase in points) than Boston replacing Rick Nash with a younger player like Heinen (for example) who outscored Rick Nash this year, and inserting a player like Donato/Bjork/Cehlarik into his 3rd line spot, and seeing how they perform?

Toronto hasn't upgraded their defense, which still blows.

My argument is that Tavares over Bozak is a huge upgrade and now allows for a better allocation of minutes, while last season JVR-Bozak-Brown (or whoever the RW was) were sheltered a bit and got more ozone starts. Now with 2 elite C's down the middle and a very good one in Kadri Toronto is more well equipped to replace JVR's scoring as the young wingers have top tier C's to play with. You can't really say the same for Boston besides whoever plays with Bergeron (Marchand+Pastrnak or young guy) and maybe Krejci but he's a stretch.

And for all this talk about how Toronto's defense "blows" they were tied for 11th in GA last season with 232 GA, ahead of Tampa and Washington. Plus they shed Polak who is simply an anchor these days.

Games are not won on paper so I'm not handing Toronto anything. We all watched them implode again last season in crunch time against Boston. But they certainly took a step forward while I'm not sure Boston did.

 

[Mainehockey33]

I disagree that it's useless. The point is that he is specifically analyzing what additions and what subtractions teams made. Of course there is more going on but with his model that's hard to quantify. His game score value relies on past season's data and you can't really do that with upcoming rookies.

The grades are entirely subjective and I disagree with his inclusion of them, he should have just focused on the numbers and let the readers extrapolate from there. However, some of the negative response here seems mostly to be because he graded Boston poorly when in reality Boston has had a relatively poor off-season thus far.

That probably depends on what fans thought Boston needed to do this summer. Personally I think the youth they have will fill any gaps they have at forward. Depth at defense was an issue and I thought they addressed that. Now they have a bigger, NHL LD that can shelter Krug if a prospect isn’t ready.

That’s why the grades make no sense. If he gave the Bruins an A I might not bash it as much but I’d probably just ignore it. I don’t look at offseason power rankings because they’re just fantasy until the season starts.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

Dom puts a lot of time and effort into the statistics behind his work, I would hardly call him a "hack". Again I think the grade is a bit harsh and he probably has a small bias for Toronto and against Boston in the words he writes but his data shows it was a questionable offseason for Boston. His opinions aren't totally unsubstantiated or some wild hot take.

If Moore plays over Grzelcyk it's a net negative imo. Grzelcyk-Miller was a very effective third pair last season.

The issue is that Boston lost Riley and Rick Nash for nothing (I know both guys are not well liked around here but they are still useful depth pieces, health pending) and didn't bring anything in aside from some 4th liners. This does open things up for young guys to step up which I think they will but it doesn't show in the numbers. Meanwhile Toronto swapped Bozak for Tavares which is a MASSIVE upgrade. They just need some improvements from young guys to replace JVR's production (Johnsson, Kapanen, Brown, plus the big 3) which seems much more feasible. Toronto also shed Martin, Komarov, and Polak who were all big negatives.

I am not doubting that this guy researches most of his articles, but what statistics is he putting into this work? If he’s using stats from a previous team to grade how a player fits into his new team, that’s mostly speculation, isn’t it?

Seems like he’s into analytics, which is great, but analytics can’t help you with something as subjective as “offseason grades”.

“Austin Czarnik seems like a diamond in the rough”...

Translation: I have never seen this kid play, nor do I know anything about his game, but based strictly on his AHL stats, the B’s are making a mistake not signing him...demerit.

 

[EON]

I am not doubting that this guy researches most of his articles, but what statistics is he putting into this work? If he’s using stats from a previous team to grade how a player fits into his new team, that’s mostly speculation, isn’t it?

Seems like he’s into analytics, which is great, but analytics can’t help you with something as subjective as “offseason grades”.

“Austin Czarnik seems like a diamond in the rough”...

Translation: I have never seen this kid play, nor do I know anything about his game, but based strictly on his AHL stats, the B’s are making a mistake not signing him...demerit.

If you read the article he has links explaining his stats.

Here's an article explaining gamescore if you don't have an athletic subscription: Measuring Single Game Productivity: An Introduction To Game Score

Here is his FAQ page if you do have a subscription (I don't know if it's view-able otherwise): NHL Season Previews Preview: Projections FAQ

Calling it "speculation" implies he doesn't have evidence but the evidence he uses is the model itself which is based upon statistics. Hockey is pretty unpredictable so of course his model could end up being incorrect. I remember reading his season preview last year and he had Montreal winning the division, that went poorly.

Again I am not defending the grades, which I think were in fact pretty baseless and subjective but some posters seem to be upset that he claims Boston had a poor offseason thus far, which I think they did as well and the numbers show. That's what I am trying to say here.

 

[EON]

That probably depends on what fans thought Boston needed to do this summer. Personally I think the youth they have will fill any gaps they have at forward. Depth at defense was an issue and I thought they addressed that. Now they have a bigger, NHL LD that can shelter Krug if a prospect isn’t ready.

That’s why the grades make no sense. If he gave the Bruins an A I might not bash it as much but I’d probably just ignore it. I don’t look at offseason power rankings because they’re just fantasy until the season starts.

I don't really see how depth at D was an issue.

Chara-McAvoy
Krug-Carlo
Grzelcyk-Miller

is what they rolled with most of the season until the injures hit and it worked well. They've got Zboril on the way as well. If you want to argue they need a better #7 to step in if/when injuries occur instead of McQuaid that makes sense. However, committing 5 years to a bottom pairing guy is very questionable, especially if it pushes Krug down or Grzelcyk out of the lineup, both of whom are good puck movers and key to Cassidy's up-tempo style.

 

[DKH]

If you read the article he has links explaining his stats.

Here's an article explaining gamescore if you don't have an athletic subscription: Measuring Single Game Productivity: An Introduction To Game Score

Here is his FAQ page if you do have a subscription (I don't know if it's view-able otherwise): NHL Season Previews Preview: Projections FAQ

Calling it "speculation" implies he doesn't have evidence but the evidence he uses is the model itself which is based upon statistics. Hockey is pretty unpredictable so of course his model could end up being incorrect. I remember reading his season preview last year and he had Montreal winning the division, that went poorly.

Again I am not defending the grades, which I think were in fact pretty baseless and subjective but some posters seem to be upset that he claims Boston had a poor offseason thus far, which I think they did as well and the numbers show.

The numbers show it?

People forget how to think and hide behind numbers when things go wrong

The numbers show that Halak, Moore, and Wagner were bad signings.

Hilarious

Thank God for the Bertuccis Apostles

 

[Mainehockey33]

I don't really see how depth at D was an issue.

Chara-McAvoy
Krug-Carlo
Grzelcyk-Miller

is what they rolled with most of the season until the injures hit and it worked well. They've got Zboril on the way as well. If you want to argue they need a better #7 to step in if/when injuries occur instead of McQuaid that makes sense. However, committing 5 years to a bottom pairing guy is very questionable, especially if it pushes Krug down or Grzelcyk out of the lineup, both of whom are good puck movers and key to Cassidy's up-tempo style.

Because when injury occurred they were forced to put Miller in the top 4 which is a recipe for disaster. I don’t know too much about Moore, but it sounds like he could be better than Miller and play in the top 4 if need be.

I agree about Zboril possibly stepping in. Depth on defense shouldn’t be a problem this year, big upgrade from last year. When Carlo went down the Bruins were screwed. Of course this is all predictions anyway, I just don’t see the value in grading a teams offseason based largely on speculation.

 

[EON]

The numbers show it?

People forget how to think and hide behind numbers when things go wrong

The numbers show that Halak, Moore, and Wagner were bad signings.

Hilarious

Thank God for the Bertuccis Apostles

The model he uses yes, it points to them being bad signings. Of course there are many different things to look at and if you read about game score you will see it is not a flawless stat. Learning and using advanced stats should not be about hiding behind numbers but simply using all tools possible to understand the game better. To understand and judge moves simply past surface level eye test opinions.

It seems you have simply dismissed him and chosen not to think because his opinion differed from yours. He has some bias as a Leafs fan but so do we as Bruins fans. Looking at statistical models is a way to attempt to remove bias. It's not the end all be all but it can help.

 

[EON]

Because when injury occurred they were forced to put Miller in the top 4 which is a recipe for disaster. I don’t know too much about Moore, but it sounds like he could be better than Miller and play in the top 4 if need be.

I agree about Zboril possibly stepping in. Depth on defense shouldn’t be a problem this year, big upgrade from last year. When Carlo went down the Bruins were screwed. Of course this is all predictions anyway, I just don’t see the value in grading a teams offseason based largely on speculation.

I agree, Miller is best kept on the third pair. I just don't like committing five years to a guy who is being defended as "depth on defense". Depth on defense is great, Boston always seems to get crushed by injuries. I would have just strongly performed a one or two year commitment to a decent #7. The Moore move could cause issues down the road if they decide to keep Krug and Grzelcyk improves. Where does Zboril slot in?

And I don't disagree that offseason predictions can be kind of silly but we all enjoy talking about hockey so why not? I don't think it's fair to call a guy a hack because you disagree with his opinion on Boston's offseason. We're all familar with the work of Haggerty.

 

[GloryDaze4877]

If you read the article he has links explaining his stats.

Here's an article explaining gamescore if you don't have an athletic subscription: Measuring Single Game Productivity: An Introduction To Game Score

Here is his FAQ page if you do have a subscription (I don't know if it's view-able otherwise): NHL Season Previews Preview: Projections FAQ

Calling it "speculation" implies he doesn't have evidence but the evidence he uses is the model itself which is based upon statistics. Hockey is pretty unpredictable so of course his model could end up being incorrect. I remember reading his season preview last year and he had Montreal winning the division, that went poorly.

Again I am not defending the grades, which I think were in fact pretty baseless and subjective but some posters seem to be upset that he claims Boston had a poor offseason thus far, which I think they did as well and the numbers show.

It is speculation, any way you want to slice it. Even if you are using valid stats, you are still trying to project what Player X will do with Team B, after being with Team A previously. You can make educated guesses at how players will do in new situations, but you don’t really know.

Instead of writing about who won the offseason weeks after player’s sign with their new teams, wouldn’t it be better to write the article a year from now after you have relevant data from how player’s actually did with their new teams?

As others have pointed out, giving grades without context is a little disingenuous. Would the B’s have preferred to have signed Tavares or Kovalchuk? One would assume so based on their involvement with both players. Does not adding those players, while losing a couple of Bottom 6 players and a 7th/8th Dman constitute a D? Hard to tell, especially when they added a better, younger Dman and arguably a better backup goalie, as well as the 2nd best checking F in the league to a 4th line that needed some sandpaper.

In the bigger scheme of things, do the offseason grades even matter? I can’t read Dom’s grades from last year, but I’m guessing from what you said (MTL wins division), he had Boston 4th or lower? How did that work out? Anybody can give LA an A because they landed Kovalchuk, but if he comes back and scores 14 goals this year, how is that A going to look next year at this time.

Writers are welcome to speculate all they want about offseason signings and how they will affect teams next season, but don’t pretend that it’s anything more than speculation at this point.

 

[EON]

It is speculation, any way you want to slice it. Even if you are using valid stats, you are still trying to project what Player X will do with Team B, after being with Team A previously. You can make educated guesses at how players will do in new situations, but you don’t really know.

Instead of writing about who won the offseason weeks after player’s sign with their new teams, wouldn’t it be better to write the article a year from now after you have relevant data from how player’s actually did with their new teams?

As others have pointed out, giving grades without context is a little disingenuous. Would the B’s have preferred to have signed Tavares or Kovalchuk? One would assume so based on their involvement with both players. Does not adding those players, while losing a couple of Bottom 6 players and a 7th/8th Dman constitute a D? Hard to tell, especially when they added a better, younger Dman and arguably a better backup goalie, as well as the 2nd best checking F in the league to a 4th line that needed some sandpaper.

In the bigger scheme of things, do the offseason grades even matter? I can’t read Dom’s grades from last year, but I’m guessing from what you said (MTL wins division), he had Boston 4th or lower? How did that work out? Anybody can give LA an A because they landed Kovalchuk, but if he comes back and scores 14 goals this year, how is that A going to look next year at this time.

Writers are welcome to speculate all they want about offseason signings and how they will affect teams next season, but don’t pretend that it’s anything more than speculation at this point.

The grades and opinions he draws are speculation and prone to his bias and again I agree they are disingenuous but a statistical model is not speculation. They are simply numbers. The model may be flawed in that he's not using the correct evidence, maybe the search should be widened.

It's not speculation to say "Boston lost Nash/Nash and added Wagner/Nordstrom/Moore. Based upon past performances this statistical model shows that this is a net negative for them." It would be speculation to say "Because of Boston's offseason, I think they're going to fall behind Tampa/Toronto in the division this season." There's no reasonable evidence to predict that, too many factors come in to play, like change in performance, rookies stepping into the lineup, etc.

Does any of these even matter? Why are we here debating this? Because it's summer, we love hockey and want to talk about it. Predictions can be fun to look back on and see what you got correct, what you were wrong about and learn from it.

 

[Mainehockey33]

I agree, Miller is best kept on the third pair. I just don't like committing five years to a guy who is being defended as "depth on defense". Depth on defense is great, Boston always seems to get crushed by injuries. I would have just strongly performed a one or two year commitment to a decent #7. The Moore move could cause issues down the road if they decide to keep Krug and Grzelcyk improves. Where does Zboril slot in?

And I don't disagree that offseason predictions can be kind of silly but we all enjoy talking about hockey so why not? I don't think it's fair to call a guy a hack because you disagree with his opinion on Boston's offseason. We're all familar with the work of Haggerty.

Moore’s cap hit is $2.7M I think. They’ll have no problem moving it if need be, or why not just keep him as a depth D when Mcquaid’s contract is up? Moore is a cheaper depth D than Mcquaid. What LHD is impossible to move if a prospect looks ready?

Saying Toronto’s youth will easily replace a 36 goal scorer but Boston won’t function without two bottom 6 guys is all speculation. I believe that the Nash’s would be easier to replace since Rick didn’t have a huge impact on the team anyway. The question is who will play 3C and there are plenty of candidates. Remember how hard it was to replace Kessel? Savard was great but he couldn’t turn Paille into a goal scorer.

 

[DKH]

The model he uses yes, it points to them being bad signings. Of course there are many different things to look at and if you read about game score you will see it is not a flawless stat. Learning and using advanced stats should not be about hiding behind numbers but simply using all tools possible to understand the game better. To understand and judge moves simply past surface level eye test opinions.

It seems you have simply dismissed him and chosen not to think because his opinion differed from yours. He has some bias as a Leafs fan but so do we as Bruins fans. Looking at statistical models is a way to attempt to remove bias. It's not the end all be all but it can help.

I am a huge stats guy -that’s why I am a big fan of Halak besides sitting pretty much behind the goal Judge for 36 years and all of Halak’s career. I’ve been a big Halak from observation so I like him.

Halak career stats are outstanding. Or his career numbers.

Wagner - local kid always wanted him. I posted three weeks or so on HF I’d be all over him.

Moore- I actually liked him to the point I was looking thru rosters in the SIM league I’m part of to see who had him and asked Jersey Lou if he is good in SIM and what does he think of him since he goes to Devils games.

The Swede Nordström was meh because I want Cehlarik or Fitzgerald winning that battle

In the words of the POTUS I’ll put my math SAT score up against any of you number guys

So sick of ‘well the numbers say Jake. DeBrusk is a 4th liner.....blah blah blah’

 

[GloryDaze4877]

The grades and opinions he draws are speculation and prone to his bias and again I agree they are disingenuous but a statistical model is not speculation. They are simply numbers. The model may be flawed in that he's not using the correct evidence, maybe the search should be widened.

It's not speculation to say "Boston lost Nash/Nash and added Wagner/Nordstrom/Moore. Based upon past performances this statistical model shows that this is a net negative for them." It would be speculation to say "Because of Boston's offseason, I think they're going to fall behind Tampa/Toronto in the division this season." There's no reasonable evidence to predict that, too many factors come in to play, like change in performance, rookies stepping into the lineup, etc.

Does any of these even matter? Why are we here debating this? Because it's summer, we love hockey and want to talk about it. Predictions can be fun to look back on and see what you got correct, what you were wrong about and learn from it.

So, in other words, he’s making educated guesses based on a statistical model that may or may not be flawed, combined with opinions, which could be tainted by his inherent biases?

Well, I’m glad you cleared that up for me.

 

[EON]

Moore’s cap hit is $2.7M I think. They’ll have no problem moving it if need be, or why not just keep him as a depth D when Mcquaid’s contract is up? Moore is a cheaper depth D than Mcquaid. What LHD is impossible to move if a prospect looks ready?

Saying Toronto’s youth will easily replace a 36 goal scorer but Boston won’t function without two bottom 6 guys is all speculation. I believe that the Nash’s would be easier to replace since Rick didn’t have a huge impact on the team anyway. The question is who will play 3C and there are plenty of candidates. Remember how hard it was to replace Kessel? Savard was great but he couldn’t turn Paille into a goal scorer.

I just don't see the need to give him a 5 year deal when you've got prime age Krug, a good young guy in Grzelcyk and Zboril coming (along with Urho). I hope it works out though.

I didn't say Toronto will easily replace JVR's production and I think it would be wrong to say that but they seem more well equipped to do so swapping out Bozak for Tavares. Who Boston's 3C will be is definitely a huge question mark. Tampa seemed to pound Boston's depth in the playoffs and Boston really did nothing when the top line wasn't on the ice.

 

[EON]

I am a huge stats guy -that’s why I am a big fan of Halak besides sitting pretty much behind the goal Judge for 36 years and all of Halak’s career. I’ve been a big Halak from observation so I like him.

Halak career stats are outstanding. Or his career numbers.

Wagner - local kid always wanted him. I posted three weeks or so on HF I’d be all over him.

Moore- I actually liked him to the point I was looking thru rosters in the SIM league I’m part of to see who had him and asked Jersey Lou if he is good in SIM and what does he think of him since he goes to Devils games.

The Swede Nordström was meh because I want Cehlarik or Fitzgerald winning that battle

In the words of the POTUS I’ll put my math SAT score up against any of you number guys

So sick of ‘well the numbers say Jake. DeBrusk is a 4th liner.....blah blah blah’

That's great it just seemed you were very quick to dismiss his writing because he's a Leafs fan. He's still a pretty well informed guy and it's much better reading than someone like Haggerty.

Which numbers say DeBrusk is a 4th liner?

Like I said advanced stats are not everything. LA post-stanley cup wins continued to dominate corsi but didn't do much offfensively because of a lack of talent and/or lack of quality opportunities.

 

[EON]

So, in other words, he’s making educated guesses based on a statistical model that may or may not be flawed, combined with opinions, which could be tainted by his inherent biases?

Well, I’m glad you cleared that up for me.

Basically yeah, you take it for what it is. I just think he's at least an interesting writer and fairly well informed, I disagree some of the negative reaction here and posters discrediting him because he had some harsh words for Boston. Maybe he'll end up being incorrect but at least it reads like there is thought and effort put into it.

 

[DKH]

My argument is that Tavares over Bozak is a huge upgrade and now allows for a better allocation of minutes, while last season JVR-Bozak-Brown (or whoever the RW was) were sheltered a bit and got more ozone starts. Now with 2 elite C's down the middle and a very good one in Kadri Toronto is more well equipped to replace JVR's scoring as the young wingers have top tier C's to play with. You can't really say the same for Boston besides whoever plays with Bergeron (Marchand+Pastrnak or young guy) and maybe Krejci but he's a stretch.

And for all this talk about how Toronto's defense "blows" they were tied for 11th in GA last season with 232 GA, ahead of Tampa and Washington. Plus they shed Polak who is simply an anchor these days.

Games are not won on paper so I'm not handing Toronto anything. We all watched them implode again last season in crunch time against Boston. But they certainly took a step forward while I'm not sure Boston did.

Toronto defense
Hainsey
Zaitsev
Reilly
Dermott
Gardener

Who’s the shut down guys?

If Barbara Eden popped out of the bottle would one of your wishes be the Leafs win a Cup?

 

[EON]

Toronto defense
Hainsey
Zaitsev
Reilly
Dermott
Gardener

Who’s the shut down guys?

If Barbara Eden popped out of the bottle would one of your wishes be the Leafs win a Cup?

Who was Washington's shut-down guy?

Orlov-Niskanen
Kempny-Carlson
Orpik-Djoos

Defense is definitely their weakness and hopefully something Boston can exploit but their defense is not garbage.

No, because I am a Bruins fan. I'm just being realistic about the current situation. I would love if Toronto regressed this season or struggled mightily defensively I just don't see it right now.

 

[DKH]

That's great it just seemed you were very quick to dismiss his writing because he's a Leafs fan. He's still a pretty well informed guy and it's much better reading than someone like Haggerty.

Which numbers say DeBrusk is a 4th liner?

Like I said advanced stats are not everything. LA post-stanley cup wins continued to dominate corsi but didn't do much offfensively because of a lack of talent and/or lack of quality opportunities.

Last Summer was a shit show with Analytics guys explaining his age, competition, like players all leading up him

JAke De BUST

A few of the Analytics guys stayed but they act like they never posted it

Others have left HF