Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Maple Leafs' busy offseason plans (all-encompassing Leafs thread)

Leaf Fans

Leaf Fans

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
19,856
8,339
kabidjan18 said:
Not sure which specific part you're talking about. I used brass in two places. The second one about Spezza, you can just youtube and look up the presser from when they signed him, Dubas says that in about 5 different ways.

About their concept being different from mine...I mean it's just obvious. If I were to build a team it'd look entirely different. And I'm not saying I'd build a better team, but just preference wise.
Click to expand...
The part I was referring to was DeAngelo specifically being mentioned.
 
Bounces R Way

Bounces R Way

Registered User
Nov 18, 2013
33,968
53,533
Weegartown
LEAFANFORLIFE23 said:
People


Doing that with Nylander is an awful idea.

You can trade Kapanen and Johnsson if you want to because Robertson is NHL ready Miktehev can slide into the top 6 full time, and if you don't think Robertson is quite ready then you can sign a winger in free agency.

But Nylander is a core piece you can't replace Nylander, see that's the difference between a depth piece and a core piece, no matter how good a depth piece, and Kapanen is a damn good one, but no matter how good a depth piece is it can ALWAYS be replaced, that's why it's a depth piece because it's replaceable.

Core pieces are MUCH harder to replace
Click to expand...

Nylander is soft skill on a team with a surplus of soft skill. The Leafs have three eight figure forwards, if they can't carry the bulk of the offense the Leafs have deeper issues. They can trade from a position of strength or keep spinning their wheels trying to win games 6-5 in the playoffs with a fatally flawed lineup.

Fans get way to attached to CORE players. You can absolutely replace a player like William Nylander. Contrary to popular belief there's tons of 60pt forwards in this league.
 
Leaf Fans

Leaf Fans

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
19,856
8,339
kabidjan18 said:
I'm confused because I never mentioned DeAngelo...
Click to expand...
Yeah, I got my wires crossed, was thinking of another poster. I meant where did the Toronto brass say specifically what they need to have a good team? Like I know there is a "process", but where did the brass decribe what they believe is the end product?
 

LEAFANFORLIFE23

Registered User
Jun 17, 2010
45,570
14,447
Bounces R Way said:
Nylander is soft skill on a team with a surplus of soft skill. The Leafs have three eight figure forwards, if they can't carry the bulk of the offense the Leafs have deeper issues. They can trade from a position of strength or keep spinning their wheels trying to win games 6-5 in the playoffs with a fatally flawed lineup.

Fans get way to attached to CORE players. You can absolutely replace a player like William Nylander. Contrary to popular belief there's tons of 60pt forwards in this league.
Click to expand...

The problem isn't soft skill, the problem is RD Nylander doesn't need to go to address that.

Chris Tanev would help address that
 
  • Like
Reactions: Petrus

kabidjan18

Registered User
Apr 20, 2015
5,786
2,111
authockeytxreports.wordpress.com
Leaf Fans said:
Yeah, I got my wires crossed, was thinking of another poster. I meant where did the Toronto brass say specifically what they need to have a good team? Like I know there is a "process", but where did the brass decribe what they believe is the end product?
Click to expand...
Well I think we heard it from the start, and the roster building has only confirmed. They wanted to be a fast team. A skilled team. Even in the recent Kyle Clifford interview Dubas said they liked that he was not just a tough guy but also "could play". What "could play" means, beyond anyone, but the insinuation is that other teams have players who can't play. And so it's a question of where is this bar for being able or unable to play. But I would guess that the some players who might be insinuated as being unable to play are still in the playoffs.
 
Leaf Fans

Leaf Fans

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
19,856
8,339
kabidjan18 said:
Well I think we heard it from the start, and the roster building has only confirmed. They wanted to be a fast team. A skilled team. Even in the recent Kyle Clifford interview Dubas said they liked that he was not just a tough guy but also "could play". What "could play" means, beyond anyone, but the insinuation is that other teams have players who can't play. And so it's a question of where is this bar for being able or unable to play. But I would guess that the some players who might be insinuated as being unable to play are still in the playoffs.
Click to expand...
Oh.
 
The90

The90

Registered User
Feb 27, 2017
6,103
4,857
kabidjan18 said:
Well I think we heard it from the start, and the roster building has only confirmed. They wanted to be a fast team. A skilled team. Even in the recent Kyle Clifford interview Dubas said they liked that he was not just a tough guy but also "could play". What "could play" means, beyond anyone, but the insinuation is that other teams have players who can't play. And so it's a question of where is this bar for being able or unable to play. But I would guess that the some players who might be insinuated as being unable to play are still in the playoffs.
Click to expand...
Apparently that’s only beyond you? You know exactly what it means I assume and are just trying to be cynical to prove a point.
 

kabidjan18

Registered User
Apr 20, 2015
5,786
2,111
authockeytxreports.wordpress.com
The90 said:
Apparently that’s only beyond you? You know exactly what it means I assume and are just trying to be cynical to prove a point.
Click to expand...
No. The definition is absolutely up for discussion. When you say something like "he can play" and imply other people cannot, it is like saying "he is good" and others are not. So what is your definition of good? What is your definition of "can play?" It's different for everyone and that's where the interesting part is.

So logically what do we know. Based off the statement that he can "bring those things and he can play", we can assume that "those things" aren't within the set of things that define "can play." So what, let's roughly generalize that things that fall within this set are like skating, stickhandling, passing, shooting. Maybe some of those things don't fall in the set, or maybe other things fall in the set that aren't captured by those, we don't know. But if we just guess those.

Ok, then it's a question of degree. Would he say Matt Martin can play? Would he say Jason Dickinson can play? Would he say William Carrier can play? Are their skating, stickhandling, passing, shooting, etc abilities good enough to qualify as being able to play? I'm eminently curious what his standard of being able to play is. And also, if it has changed over time. Was there a time when he, say, would require 6 points out of 10 in stickhandling ability to consider someone "able to play" and over time that changed to 5, or it changed to 7. Was there a time he, say, would look at a player like Mattias Janmark and think "oh, he can't play." And maybe over time his opinion changed to where he thinks "Janmark can play", or has he gone further the other way.
 
The90

The90

Registered User
Feb 27, 2017
6,103
4,857
kabidjan18 said:
No. The definition is absolutely up for discussion. When you say something like "he can play" and imply other people cannot, it is like saying "he is good" and others are not. So what is your definition of good? What is your definition of "can play?" It's different for everyone and that's where the interesting part is.

So logically what do we know. Based off the statement that he can "bring those things and he can play", we can assume that "those things" aren't within the set of things that define "can play." So what, let's roughly generalize that things that fall within this set are like skating, stickhandling, passing, shooting. Maybe some of those things don't fall in the set, or maybe other things fall in the set that aren't captured by those, we don't know. But if we just guess those.

Ok, then it's a question of degree. Would he say Matt Martin can play? Would he say Jason Dickinson can play? Would he say William Carrier can play? Are their skating, stickhandling, passing, shooting, etc abilities good enough to qualify as being able to play? I'm eminently curious what his standard of being able to play is. And also, if it has changed over time. Was there a time when he, say, would require 6 points out of 10 in stickhandling ability to consider someone "able to play" and over time that changed to 5, or it changed to 7. Was there a time he, say, would look at a player like Mattias Janmark and think "oh, he can't play." And maybe over time his opinion changed to where he thinks "Janmark can play", or has he gone further the other way.
Click to expand...
That’s a whole long 3 paragraphs of pretending you don’t know exactly what he meant.

I read the first sentence and decided it was a waste of my time to read the rest. Same as it was a waste of your time to pretend you don’t understand it.
 
FerrisRox

FerrisRox

"Wanna go, Prettyboy?"
Sep 17, 2003
20,293
12,973
Toronto, Ontario
user26 said:
Go after Boro, would be cheap, bottom pairing defence man who has some grit which leafs lack. Idk if they want a bottom pairing D tho...
Click to expand...

Boro has a ten cent head. The Leafs don't just need toughness for the sake of toughness, they need a blue liner that can contribute. He's a physical presence, and can move the puck, but defensively he's mediocre at best, mades a lot of dumb decisions and often looks over his head in his own zone and when he gets lost, he's prone to taking dumb penalties.

If I were the Leafs, I would avoid him at all costs.
 

hmc1987

Registered User
Jun 2, 2019
1,378
570
Unbiased Fan said:
Lol that’s not true at all Malkin had the highest cap hit in NHL history when he signed his deal. The leafs are following Pittsburgh’s model.
Click to expand...

Sidney the Kidney said:
He didn't even have the highest cap hit in the league that year.

As for "following the Pittsburgh model", Pens had 2 highly paid players. And both of them had actually performed as top 2 players in hockey at that point. The Leafs have 3 guys making over $10 million and none of them are top 2 players in hockey with multiple awards to their credit.
Click to expand...

Comparing Tavares, Matthews, and Marner to Sidney Crosby. Man, Toronto fans are delusional
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom