Somewhere along the line I think you've misunderstood me, Daisy. It seems like you're addressing other peoples' arguments as a way to defend your feelings, as opposed to truly addressing what I'm saying in my own posts.i suppose, for the following.
1: i don't think i like the philosophy of "Pittsburgh won with meh D" which is what I feel a lot of people (not saying you) tend to fall back on. this doesn't mean i think we need to hunt for the second coming of Pronger, and MacInnis either but still.
2: That's the bottom pair. I'd like to shore up the top four.
3: I personally would feel a lot better if we had some defensemen who were smart, can take hits, and was more defensive minded. (this doesn't mean a Polak-esque type, but not. a Rielly/Gardiner type) this is an issue. (for me)
4: I don't feel (and I could be wrong and i'll totally own it) that a good chunk of what we have is actually a clear cut #1 defenseman in the mix. Again. Maybe Lilly is the exception (and I feel a lot of people base this on points. and you know, i'll acknowledge maybe my beliefs are a bit dated but I feel the way I feel just like i respect the way others view things)
5: I think there is a thin line between being in love with what you have and wanting to toss everything overboard (and hey i tap-dance on it so lol i own it), as well as being patient and doing nothing. I don't want to sit here several years from now and go "gee. you know. if we really only did this, then you know." because we've done that already. There's a need. and I just feel a good chunk of people want to close their eyes to that need because either A: Pittsburgh/Washington won with medicore defensemen, or B: we can't touch anyone else. and that just doesn't sit well with me at all.
and yes that is acknowledging that the team defense is also an issue and it should be better, and some of it is also time. to which is why I would rather the leafs get the defenseman they need now that fits into the age of the group we're really going to depend on (Nylander, Marner and Matthews for the 8+++) and let that guy merge and gel and all that jazz vs. getting say 5 years (thus kadri is up and we have to deal with it) we still don't have that guy and we're not really accomplishing anything.
Not only did I never mention anything about Pittsburgh's D, I've maintained all along that I believe our blueline will be a legitimate strength for us within only a couple of years. We already had/have a "Pittsburgh D" last year and (so far) this year, capable, I think, of getting the job done behind our insane offense and in front of Andersen - But between the remaining development of our current defensemen (Rielly, Zaitsev, Dermott, Carrick), a re-signed Gardiner (or his right-shooting counterpart), the potential of a blue-chipper like Liljegren in the system and solid prospects like Sandin, Durzi, Rasanen, Kral, Gordeev, to go along with our bevy of depth, I think we already have the pieces in place to build an excellent blueline.
While I referenced Rosen, Borgman, Carrick, Holl and Ozhiganov as depth for the bottom pair, I was talking specifically about this year, and that was only a small portion of that point. Depth is important - as parity becomes a bigger and bigger thing and the game continues to evolve in the cap era, we're seeing 4th-line and 3rd-pairing depth become a prominent factor in deciding some games - but beyond that, prospects like Liljegren, Sandin and Durzi all have (at least) top-4 potential, with Liljegren having legitimate top-pair potential, and Rielly, Gardiner (or his return), Dermott, Zaitsev, and Hainsey are all currently real top-4 defensemen, with half of them having the potential to continue improving. It's not just our bottom pair that's in solid shape moving forward.
As I mentioned before, Liljegren possesses every single quality that you're looking for in a defenseman, and our entire blueline is being structured around smarts, skating, and skill - this shouldn't be a concern for anyone, as every target of Dubas (whether through draft, trade, or free agency) will almost assuredly be lauded for their intelligence and their ability to move the puck. The NHL has been evolving for the past several years and Dubas is our first GM in the cap era to truly seem to have his finger on the pulse of the League - I believe with our management's vision for drafting and development, within 5 years we'll be essentially a factory of new-age defensemen, just like Nashville used to be.
Rielly and Liljegren have clear-cut #1 potential. If, after everything I've said in my posts about Liljegren's abilities, you still think that that statement or belief comes from a place of simple point-watching, then frankly I'm a little offended.
I think there are huge gaps between loving what you have and wanting to throw everything overboard, as well as between being patient and doing nothing.
- Firstly, I think Dubas does love what he has - I think he's put several years into trying to help this organization grow, it's now his ship to sail, and he has a great affinity for, and trust and faith in, his players and his staff, and that's a big part of him creating a comfortable, positive environment that helps create long-term organizational health and growth. While it's important to understand how all of the pieces are fitting in your puzzle, and you need to be able to swap out the pieces that don't fit right for pieces that do, I think it's equally important to love and respect what you already have in place. I have great respect for people like Kyle Dubas and Paul Maurice who unabashedly love their players and staff. That love does not mean that they are unable to make smart, calculated moves for the betterment of their team.
- Secondly, being patient and doing nothing are very, very, wildly different things. Our scouting and development programs are always working to improve our players, both organizationally and on the Leafs main roster, and are always looking for new players to bring into the fold whether it be through the draft, through free agency, or through trade. Having an ideal method of acquiring those players, based on sensible acquisition costs, is a key part of making sure you don't overpay when bringing in new talent, and a big part of making sure you can achieve sustainable success, rather than just a flash in the pan.
I have never disagreed that we need to improve as far as our team D goes. But just because I'm willing to be patient as far as adding current NHL players goes doesn't mean I think we're not willing to do anything at all. What we have control over is our developmental and systemic approach to the game, and I think these are always being worked on - Through NHL-level development, further buy-in from our forward group, and a much stronger offense, I think we'll already see huge strides in our team D this year, and, as I already mentioned, there is help on the way in our pipeline. And then we have Jake Gardiner, who either needs to be re-signed and considered part of our core moving forward, or should be traded to try and help balance our D a little bit - If you can get a guy like Braun/Myers/Spurgeon for him, I think our D looks awesome next year. There are tons and tons of ways for teams to improve while also being patient.
If, in 3-4 years' time, we are in a position where we either need to re-sign Kadri or move on from him, and his contract demands don't appear to be able to work under our cap structure, then I think you can take a look at trading him to try and fill a need. But why anyone would look at moving him right now - with the center depth we have with him (and the center depth we'd have without him), with the contract he has, and with the attributes and stats he has - as a first option to try and fill a hole (that, again, is not even that deep) will forever be beyond me.
If you want to be competitive now - if you're worried that we're set up for 5 years of non-contention now - then trading Kadri for a top-4 D still doesn't make sense because it's a sideways move, because we don't have anything in place to replace Kadri. If you're not comfortable with what we have, then what we need to do is add, not simply shift. Like I said before, not a single one of Matthews, Tavares, Marner, Nylander, Kadri, Marleau, Rielly, Liljegren, Dermott, Gardiner, Zaitsev, or Andersen were acquired by trading away a Nazem Kadri-caliber player - Obviously adding quality is possible without stripping away important pieces from your current roster, so unless a player is redundant, or not in our long-term plans, trading them away to try and fill a hole is just opening up another hole and not adding anything at all. There is no reason to believe that Kadri is either redundant or not in our long-term plans, but there is every reason to believe we would miss him terribly as soon as he was gone.
Keep Kadri. Keep Nylander. The need at D is overblown. We are fine now. We will be excellent soon.
Last edited: