Is this what the Leafs desperately lack ?

[zeke]

Really????? Even over a guy like Probert, Kocur, Twist, Grimson......?

easily.

Hell, even little Wendel dusted those guys.

 

[rimshot]

The Naysayers include Chicago and their three Cups. They were the second least physical team in the league. Some of the best teams in the league are not physical, including the one trying to shatter records. There is zero measurable correlation between physicality and wins.

Any claim that you can't win without it is pure ignorance, and a severely short memory.

You are just saying that because we are tied for second in ROW and second in goal differential. However, we seem to be destined to lose a series to a rival in the near future because we are not able to compete. Contrary to all evidence, our future is bleak because...reasons.

 

[Stephen]

Do the Bolts lack physicality? Are they not considered the team to beat?? This is silly.

No. The Lightning do not lack in physicality. They have both skill, size and physicality and are a more developed version of the Leafs.

 

[Loosie]

Phaneuf's 'big hit' in game 4 if the 2013 playoff series cost us that game. We had physicality in that series and it didn't help us. Physicality didn't cost us last years series, the fact we couldn't stop the Bruins top line is what cost us the series.

 

[Loosie]

You are just saying that because we are tied for second in ROW and second in goal differential. However, we seem to be destined to lose a series to a rival in the near future because we are not able to compete. Contrary to all evidence, our future is bleak because...reasons.

We don't seem destined to lose. There just some people that can only live in panic mode with this team that sees us 'losing easily' to the Bruins.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

Most Boston fans think he has declined significantly and is quite slow. That doesn’t mean he is bad, he fits in great with Boston. But if you plug him into our defence he’s probably going to be much less effective, similar to Muzzin.
My point is that our problem is with the utilization of our existing talent rather than our deficiency of 6’7’’ ogres who can beat the **** out of everyone.

If Chara was on the Leafs this upcoming series instead of Boston I would say we win it in 5 games. The guy is 6 ft 9 inches and hits like a brick sh*t house. He scares everyone on the ice when he is out there. Everyone is looking over their shoulder to see where the beast is. And if he gets you in his crosshairs lights out. You are out. Our guys Matty and Willy are super sacred of him. Why do you think no one goes to the net against the Bruins?????????? Also as we all saw you put him in front of the net on the PP and it adds another dimension. Defense are scared to try to move him. Goalies can't see the puck. The guy brings so many different dimensions to the game then just being the guy back there that you know of any serious trouble comes to you he saves the day. Although that factor alone makes a lot of smaller Bruins like 10 ft tall.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

easily.

Hell, even little Wendel dusted those guys.

Wendy is one of my heros but be honest Wendy never dusted any of those guys you mentioned. What he did really well was throw his gloves in your face fast and then unload his left hook very quickly. He would stun you and then shoot his load. Probs would wait until Wendy was done and then holy hell broke loose. We all hoped Wendy could hold on for life.

 

[zeke]

Wendy is one of my heros but be honest Wendy never dusted any of those guys you mentioned. What he did really well was throw his gloves in your face fast and then unload his left hook very quickly. He would stun you and then shoot his load. Probs would wait until Wendy was done and then holy hell broke loose. We all hoped Wendy could hold on for life.

nah man wendel dusted all of them, more than once.

 

[barilko05]

You mean...do we need a 42 year old freak of nature who can barely skate anymore, and who would probably get called for all the shit he pulls with Boston 10x more if he were a Leaf, meaning his greatest contribution would be warming his gigantic ass in the penalty box? I don't think so...

 

[zeke]

I mean I love Wendel, but he's never, ever doing this against Chara:

 

[JT AM da real deal]

nah man wendel dusted all of them, more than once.

in our dreams. he did have a great left hook. a bunch of ex players had a fun game at meadowvale arena a couple years after wendy retired. and i can tell you wendy played for real. he let a wrist shot go that broke the goalie mask of a house league goalie that was helping us out for the game. he got knocked out. and he was cut. i happened to be the guy closest to wendy after the shot so i grabbed him. in a half a second he was throwing. lucky for me a couple guys were close by and broke things up pretty quick. but as we were changing afterwards he apologized to all of us and we shared a couple pops and he told me personally what his fighting plan was. years later he coached his kid and his kid played up a few games in his AAA team so his kid played against one of my kids. and we shared another couple pops again and he signed my kids skates and jersey and got us moved down on glass one game from our green seats. he is a real nice guy but he always has his game face on. trust me on that one. the guy loves to win.

 

[Pookie]

This debate will go in circles as the fans of non contact hockey think physicality means big hits and fights.

It doesn’t.

It’s the will to compete. It’s the confidence and trust that is developed by playing with guys you know will have your back or throw themselves in front of a puck. Their commitment affects yours.

And no you can’t measure it on a spreadsheet.

It’s the injury riddle Leafs beating Aflie and the Sens with Alyn McCauley as the#1C.

And if EVERYONE is honest, we all know we don’t have it.

We ALL hope it doesn’t matter but in recent playoff memory it has.

 

[Notsince67]

The Naysayers include Chicago and their three Cups. They were the second least physical team in the league. Some of the best teams in the league are not physical, including the one trying to shatter records. There is zero measurable correlation between physicality and wins.

Any claim that you can't win without it is pure ignorance, and a severely short memory.

The Russians in the 72 summit series largely lost due to the lack of physicality. They were seen as far more skilled. Game has changed but that is what has fed the physicality mystique.

 

[rimshot]

We don't seem destined to lose. There just some people that can only live in panic mode with this team that sees us 'losing easily' to the Bruins.

These same people will also tell you that Tampa will destroy Boston with their speed and skill...just like last year. For Tampa, speed and skill will give them a guaranteed victory over Boston. Meanwhile, for the Leafs a guaranteed loss to Boston.

 

[Pookie]

We don't seem destined to lose. There just some people that can only live in panic mode with this team that sees us 'losing easily' to the Bruins.

Considering we haven’t beat Boston yet and we have a softer team, it’s a fair position to take.

It was the reverse whenever we drew the Sens. Regular season? Whatever. Until you beat us, here is the monkey and it’s squarely on your back.

And they never gave it back. Our grittier team has their number. We were tougher physically and mentally. Even beating them with a depleted line up.

It is until it isn’t.

 

[member 262271]

It's still an interesting argument to me. Why is physicality in the playoffs considered a bad thing? The refs don't call shit. If anything you're dumb for not being physical.

 

[Menzinger]

They don’t have a formula for success but since playoffs are all about winning 4 series... you only have to match up well to 4 teams. You don’t play the whole league.

So... they are licking their chops to face us. They will probably get smoked against Tampa. Who have skill and grit.

And our path goes through Boston and Tampa. Neither of whom we match up well against.

I hope Tavares and Muzzin are the difference makers this year but I sure don’t feel confident.

Our game is soft. We rely on goaltending and offence to counter a weak D. Tampa out skills and out work us. Boston out works us. And we have a Coach that seemingly seems stuck in a roll 4 mind set.

I’m not so sure I’d agree about your thoughts regarding the Leafs vs Tampa.

They’re a much better team than Boston, but I think the Leafs actually match up better against them: the ice opens up more and allows the Leafs to use their speed more effectively in these games.

 

[zeke]

The Russians in the 72 summit series largely lost due to the lack of physicality. They were seen as far more skilled. Game has changed but that is what has fed the physicality mystique.

well, now you're calling hacking and breaking the other team's best player's ankle "physicality".

so now I agree - if we go out and deliberately injure the other team's star players, we will have a better chance of winning.

 

[Menzinger]

Imo most of Tampa’s “toughness” comes from the fact their core is a bit older and has more playoff experience. An advantage that shrinks with every passing season

 

[rimshot]

I’m not so sure I’d agree about your thoughts regarding the Leafs vs Tampa.

They’re a much better team than Boston, but I think the Leafs actually match up better against them: the ice opens up more and allows the Leafs to use their speed more effectively in these games.

I guess I did not explain my point well enough. Tampa beat Boston easily in last years playoffs using their speed and skill. Most of the posters that state that Boston will easily beat the Leafs because the Leafs are not tough enough admit that Tampa beat Boston without "toughness" being a factor and will do the same this year. My question is why do people say the Leafs speed and skill by itself is not enough to beat Boston when Tampa beat them easily last year using only speed and skill?

 

[Trapper]

This debate will go in circles as the fans of non contact hockey think physicality means big hits and fights.

It doesn’t.

It’s the will to compete. It’s the confidence and trust that is developed by playing with guys you know will have your back or throw themselves in front of a puck. Their commitment affects yours.

And no you can’t measure it on a spreadsheet.

It’s the injury riddle Leafs beating Aflie and the Sens with Alyn McCauley as the#1C.

And if EVERYONE is honest, we all know we don’t have it.

We ALL hope it doesn’t matter but in recent playoff memory it has.

When the going gets tough, the tough get going.

 

[Loosie]

Considering we haven’t beat Boston yet and we have a softer team, it’s a fair position to take.

It was the reverse whenever we drew the Sens. Regular season? Whatever. Until you beat us, here is the monkey and it’s squarely on your back.

And they never gave it back. Our grittier team has their number. We were tougher physically and mentally. Even beating them with a depleted line up.

It is until it isn’t.

But we have? We did win a game against them this year, last year we won the season series. We went into the 3rd period of the 7th game with the lead, and a horrendously bad period cost us the game and the series.

People act like the Bruins rag dolled us all series last year. we had a horrible first 2 games, and horrible 3rd period of game 7. The Bruins weren't nailing us into the boards or beating us in the alley. Bergeron, Pasternak and Marchand killed us.

 

[Trapper]

I guess I did not explain my point well enough. Tampa beat Boston easily in last years playoffs using their speed and skill. Most of the posters that state that Boston will easily beat the Leafs because the Leafs are not tough enough admit that Tampa beat Boston without "toughness" being a factor and will do the same this year. My question is why do people say the Leafs speed and skill by itself is not enough to beat Boston when Tampa beat them easily last year using only speed and skill?

Tampa used their speed to get in behind the Boston D and their aggressive to disrupt them once they got there.
Toughness is aggressive, 1 on 1 battles in the playoffs. If you don’t have it, you will lose. If you want to white collar delegate the hard work (curl and drag at the blue line and hope someone else retrieves the puck) you will lose.

 

[Notsince67]

well, now you're calling hacking and breaking the other team's best player's ankle "physicality".

so now I agree - if we go out and deliberately injure the other team's star players, we will have a better chance of winning.

Yeah that happened but a lot more than that happened too. It was game 6 and Clarke was retaliating from a previous hit. Kharmlakov wasn't their best player and he was using his stick as a weapon too BTW.
I don't really expect anything less than of a twisting of the truth though

 

[rimshot]

Tampa used their speed to get in behind the Boston D and their aggressive to disrupt them once they got there.
Toughness is aggressive, 1 on 1 battles in the playoffs. If you don’t have it, you will lose. If you want to white collar delegate the hard work (curl and drag at the blue line and hope someone else retrieves the puck) you will lose.

Yet this thread is about adding the toughness of a Chara to our lineup to fix our "toughness"deficit. But thanks for the alternate definition of toughness.