Canadian Division (Canada Cup) Part IX

[HockeyVirus]

We'll have to agree to disagree. I'll be willing to bet you anything that you'll start to see the type of goals and the type of "down" performances I'm referring to over a larger sample size.

Unless you truly believe the Leafs are just so dominant that him sporting a 1.53 GAA and .944 save percentage is simply "making the saves an NHL goalie should" and that those numbers aren't a result of him playing above what one can expect from him every night.

Of course not. No reasonable person is suggesting this. It also doesn't mean he has been winning the games for the team either.

And honestly, there is no science on regression and how it works. Do I think he is a starter randomly? Maybe but we need a bigger sample size. Do I think that goalies all the time, even in recent history (Murray and Binnington) go on crazy runs through middle of seasons and carry it into the playoffs? Yes I do. And that's all we need. Goaltending to get us deep. Leaf fans would lose every single player off the roster next year if it meant winning 1 cup.

Yes he is due for regression. Yes he likely isn't a top 10 starter. But also, yes he can be this level goalie so long as the Leafs continue to be a top 10 in shots/game and top 10 in goals against / game, along with all the nice supporting stats, then we will be fine. We just needed better than Andersen who is either cooked or was so injured he shouldn't have been playing.

 

[Zybalto]

I think Hasek was 28 when he finally became a starter.

Stuck behind Belfour for forever.

 

[Papi 4 Hart]

We'll have to agree to disagree. I'll be willing to bet you anything that you'll start to see the type of goals and the type of "down" performances I'm referring to over a larger sample size.

Unless you truly believe the Leafs are just so dominant that him sporting a 1.53 GAA and .944 save percentage is simply "making the saves an NHL goalie should" and that those numbers aren't a result of him playing above what one can expect from him every night.

What you aren't realizing is Campbell isn't "so dominant" hes been above average and does not let in 3 soft goals a night so the leafs have to win 5-4 in overtime every game.

He is slow and steady. Great at controlling rebounds and rarely gives up a weak goal. Our team barely gives up any high danger chances. We collapse and control teams to the outside so all they get are point chances. Andersen is a goalie who is more of an athletic battler great on the rush but he can not track pucks or play positionally.

Campbell is the opposite. Campbell is great at being in the right spot to put himself in the right place to control rebounds. He's much better suited for what the leafs have evolved into under Keefe. Heck even Hutch is better suited for what the leafs are this year, hence his better numbers.

 

[HockeyVirus]

What you aren't realizing is Campbell isn't "so dominant" hes been above average and does not let in 3 soft goals a night so the leafs have to win 5-4 in overtime every game.

He is slow and steady. Great at controlling rebounds and rarely gives up a weak goal. Our team barely gives up any high danger chances. We collapse and control teams to the outside so all they get are point chances. Andersen is a goalie who is more of an athletic battler great on the rush but he can not track pucks or play positionally.

Campbell is the opposite. Campbell is great at being in the right spot to put himself in the right place to control rebounds. He's much better suited for what the leafs have evolved into under Keefe. Heck even Hutch is better suited for what the leafs are this year, hence his better numbers.

Well said. Andersen is a high event goalie. He makes a big flashy save then lets in a goal that makes you want to puke. As he's gotten older the big saves have become more rare and the soft goal has become more common. What the Leafs really need is just a positional calm goalie who stops shots through traffic and can give us the occasional big save.

Andersen almost seems to play better when under siege. As the Leafs have gotten better defensively, he has gotten worse. It's like when he doesn't have time to think and can just react and be in the moment, he is good. But when he has a chance to think and a chance to get out of that zone he isn't an NHL starter. And that is also why he hasn't been able to give us NHL goaltending during elimination games. He thinks too much and gets into his own head.

Last part is my speculation from watching him so much at his best and worst.

 

[Flair Hay]

What you aren't realizing is Campbell isn't "so dominant" hes been above average and does not let in 3 soft goals a night so the leafs have to win 5-4 in overtime every game.

He is slow and steady. Great at controlling rebounds and rarely gives up a weak goal. Our team barely gives up any high danger chances. We collapse and control teams to the outside so all they get are point chances. Andersen is a goalie who is more of an athletic battler great on the rush but he can not track pucks or play positionally.

Campbell is the opposite. Campbell is great at being in the right spot to put himself in the right place to control rebounds. He's much better suited for what the leafs have evolved into under Keefe. Heck even Hutch is better suited for what the leafs are this year, hence his better numbers.

Campbell looked pretty damn good in there in the games against the Jets. Leafs have found their goalie for this year I think.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

Fair deal and thanks for the correction.

Maybe this is just me, but why do people brag about finals appearances? Yes you won rounds, but you fell short of the title.

I will never understand bragging about how good you looked at losing to the better team. Every coach goes in with the same mindset, cup or bust.

Certain individual accolades are nice but the end result is always the same. You want the cup, not the participation trophy.

I've never subscribed to this zero-sum bullshit.

Like, if nothing but a cup matters, then why bother watching? The odds (if all teams were even, and they aren't) would be that you only get one cup every 31 years. If that's the only way that watching hockey is meaningful to you, then find another hobby with a seriously higher yield.

Or, maybe we can stop with the 'winner takes all' b.s. when it comes to enjoying watching hockey and be proud of a team when it exceeds our expectations, or enjoy watching really good players.

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

There is no such thing as OT loss points. It doesn't exist and never did. Teams that are tied at the end of 60 minutes have always earned a point. That's how hockey has worked since the beginning.

The extra gimmick point is the one given to the team that wins a contrived 3-on-3 or shootout contest. Dislike gimmick points? Remove the points from teams that won in OT/SO.

That's not true. There was a point where games went to O.T. (prior to the advent of the shootout in the NHL) where the losing team did not get a point.

 

[Eat The Rich]

Thats fine but some teams have been competing during that time and entertaining people with decent competitive hockey and some have been in the bottom of the league for the whole time lmao

Montreal has the least amount of success since then.

2 appearances in the conference finals. Leafs have 3.

Edit: I guess Winnipeg takes that title. Only one appearance.

The other 4 teams have SCF appearances to fall back on. Vancouver wins the title for going to game 7 twice.

 

[Three On Zero]

EVERY team in the North is a bad hockey team, none of them have had any form of recent success. For one fan base to chirp another is hilarious when it comes to failures or success

 

[Heldig]

EVERY team in the North is a bad hockey team, none of them have had any form of recent success. For one fan base to chirp another is hilarious when it comes to failures or success

Define recent success? Do you only mean winning a cup?

As for every team being bad, by almost every measure Toronto is a very good team right now. Excellent offense lead by star players, some grit and savvy veterans (Thornton, Spezza and Simmonds). Under rated D (+32 goal differential shows that). And while I dont see Campbell suddenly being the best goalie in hockey goalies are voodoo. Good coaching to boot.

 

[Three On Zero]

Define recent success? Do you only mean winning a cup?

As for every team being bad, by almost every measure Toronto is a very good team right now. Excellent offense lead by star players, some grit and savvy veterans (Thornton, Spezza and Simmonds). Under rated D (+32 goal differential shows that). And while I dont see Campbell suddenly being the best goalie in hockey goalies are voodoo. Good coaching to boot.

One successful year doesn’t outweigh the decades of failure

 

[Rude Dog]

Oilers finishing fourth in the division. It will become clear within the next three weeks.

 

[Rude Dog]

Love how Hab fans go on and on about 5v5 like it matters and dismiss OT points as gimmicks because it helps them sleep at night. Fact is your team has left the ice losing more times then you have won this year. 3v3 may be a gimmick but it showcases pure skill. In a division full of stars it is not a coincidence you keep losing. You lose because you can’t match it.

Having said that they will be a tough out.

 

[Bee Holder]

Love how Hab fans go on and on about 5v5 like it matters and dismiss OT points as gimmicks because it helps them sleep at night. Fact is your team has left the ice losing more times then you have won this year. 3v3 may be a gimmick but it showcases pure skill. In a division full of stars it is not a coincidence you keep losing. You lose because you can’t match it.

Having said that they will be a tough out.

Fair enough, but there's none of that 3v3 or SO gimmick in the playoffs, and fewer penalty called by refs also, which is why Habs fans are showcasing their teams great 5v5 stats.

Still, you were not at all an a-hole in your post so you deserve this star:

 

[McJC]

So I guess its out now

Joel Edmundson was the answer to McDrai all along

 

[antiqueslivers]

forums are going to be wild/broken when the north division playoffs start.

 

[RealisticLeaf55]

Playoffs will turn this place into a blood bath.

 

[Hollywood3]

Helle has 17 saves above expected in 31 gp (.54) this year (2nd league wide behind Vasilevskiy). Last year he was 24 in 58 (.41)

5v5, Jets are

77 GF 71GA

expected

74 GF 88GA

So it seems like again this year Helle is the most important piece of this team!

The "expected" stats category is the dumbest invention ever.

 

[Adam da bomb]

The "expected" stats category is the dumbest invention ever.

But he is right helly is the most important part of the team. Gee getting great consistent goaltending is such a unique burden I don’t know how we’ll deal with it. Other goalies have hot streaks helly is just the real deal.
But to your point expected vs real is dumb.

 

[Lshap]

That's not true. There was a point where games went to O.T. (prior to the advent of the shootout in the NHL) where the losing team did not get a point.

Yes, I clarified that:

Yes, because that OT was an extension of regular hockey. The current OT is not regular hockey; it's not even 4-on-4. It's a different thing altogether, the equivalent of deciding a game by a free-throw competition. Fun to watch, but nothing like the normal game.

There is no such thing as a "Loser point". It's made-up and factually wrong. Teams have always earned a point when they're tied at the end of regulation, or the short extension of regulation you mentioned. The current OT isn't an extension of regulation, it's almost literally a different game.

Love how Hab fans go on and on about 5v5 like it matters and dismiss OT points as gimmicks because it helps them sleep at night. Fact is your team has left the ice losing more times then you have won this year. 3v3 may be a gimmick but it showcases pure skill. In a division full of stars it is not a coincidence you keep losing. You lose because you can’t match it.

Having said that they will be a tough out.

Nobody cares about the existential meaning of 3-on-3 OT. We're comparing relative strengths for possible playoff matchups. The OT skills competition becomes totally irrelevant the moment the regular season ends. That's where teams' 5-on-5 strength becomes VERY relevant. Like it or not, Montreal's 5-on-5 game has been very strong and is central to the discussion. That doesn't change no matter how many times someone pretends OTs are losses.

 

[FrankMTL]

This thread is basically this:

 

[Essenege]

The "expected" stats category is the dumbest invention ever.

It does a very good job of predicting goal differential for most teams over a large enough sample.

But if you don’t like the stat, let me phrase it another way for you.

Jets have a 48%CF which is not that bad BUT a 43.5% high danger chance for. They give a lot of high quality chances...that are saved at a high rate by Helle.

Oh, btw...

Ranking expected goal diff 5v5

1. Colorado
2. Montréal
3. NYI
4. Toronto
5. Carolina

Ranking actual goal diff

1. Colorado
2.Montréal
3.NYI
4.Toronto
5. TBL

It does a fine job

 

[NyQuil]

This thread continues to be great.

So far I’ve learned from:

1. Leafs fans who say that playoff series wins don’t matter.

2. Habs fans who say that OT and shootout points don’t matter.

3. Jets fans who say that Corsi, Expected Goals and high danger chances against don’t matter.

4. Oilers fans who say that depth doesn’t really matter.

5. I assume that Flames, Canucks and Sens fans are fairly uniform in saying that this season no longer really matters.

All of these contentions coming from a place of objective analysis.

 

[Peggy]

Montreal has the least amount of success since then.

2 appearances in the conference finals. Leafs have 3.

Edit: I guess Winnipeg takes that title. Only one appearance.

The other 4 teams have SCF appearances to fall back on. Vancouver wins the title for going to game 7 twice.

Huh? The Leafs haven't gone passed the first round since Winnipeg has returned

Not a fair way to compare success when the Jets were gone for 15 years

 

[NyQuil]

I'm a vikings fan. Why would I cheer about 4 superbowl failures? It doesn't make sense. I'd rather lose in the wildcard than the big show.

So if that were the case, I assume that you only watch one or zero football games a year?

When the Vikings are in the Superbowl (or not)?

Otherwise, it's meaningless, right?