Nylander Discussion

[ACC1224]

Only thing 'elite' about Nylander is his hair.
Great hair, you can see why he wouldn't want to mess it up.

 

[HappyJoy]

Only thing 'elite' about Nylander is his hair.
Great hair, you can see why he wouldn't want to mess it up.

Keep on keeping it real... I guess.

 

[MarMarSab3]

One of either Babcock or Nylander has to go, hes had a hate on for Nylander since day 1, his actions speak much louder then his words when it comes to Babcock. Just looks like these pkayers don't want to play for him.

 

[ACC1224]

One of either Babcock or Nylander has to go, hes had a hate on for Nylander since day 1, his actions speak much louder then his words when it comes to Babcock. Just looks like these pkayers don't want to play for him.

Lining him up beside Matthews ever night is a funny way of showing it.

 

[Walshy7]

In a small class of the best in their field. In hockey it's made up of 3 or 4 players like Crosby, McDavid, Ovi, etc. That's it. It doesn't extend to 20-50 players.

In
HF terms it's used way too much.
Nylander
is not elite.

Wow by your definition of elite no one on our team is elite.

Id say there are tiers.
Generational: McDavid, Crosby and Ovi
Elite: thats every 90+ point player or 40+ goal scorer and top 10 goalies (we have 3 maybe 4 if Andersen can creep in))
Stars: this is probably where nylander falls and on the mid to lower end

Then pretty much every other player in the league

 

[JT AM da real deal]

You can't be serious. The cap and the size of these contracts are nothing to worry about? It's one thing to say that Nylander will be better next time, but the salaries and cap situation will always be a high level anxiety for the fans. It's got to be double for Shanny and Dubas.

Sure Dubie has to be concerned. But we don't have to worry about contracts or CAP. The Leafs have way more money than they know what to do with because of the CAP. No NHL team $$$ benefits more because of the CAP. Like I said before it is a $$$ printing bank every June of every year. What business do you know that gets paid in full 3+ months before providing the entertainment? There is ZERO sense worrying about this issue. It has been going on for 50+ years and likely 50+ more.

 

[MarMarSab3]

Lining him up beside Matthews ever night is a funny way of showing it.

That's false

 

[GoonieFace]

Elite - a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group

Matthews probably falls into that group, but noone else on the Leafs should be considered elite, and especially not Nylander, unless you say he is an "elite" disappointment

 

[meefer]

I would flip Mikheyev and Nylander line positions.

Johnson -- Matthews -- Mikheyev

When JT and Hyman return to play with Marner, then Nylander should be no better than a 3rd line player with Kerfoot and Moore.

In a way, I agree with you. I'd move Nylander and inject Kerfoot on to the 1st line, perhaps swapping Mykheyev and Johnsson as well. Kerfoot looks to be a fine skater and passer who is strong at exiting our and entering their zones, while Mikheyev might be a real Hymanesc style player, both providing Matthews with a needed element. A third line of Johnsson/Nylander/Kappy would be a threat whenever and against whomever they were up against.

Mikheyev/Matthews/Kerfoot
Hyman/Tavares/Marner
Johnsson/Nylander/Kappy
Timishov/Gauthier/Moore
Spezza/Shore

Oh, and could someone get Babs to try Holl or Dermott with Morgan, please.

 

[Mess]

That's false

Who would you rather see Nylander play with as his centre, to think Babcock was playing him where he has the best opportunity to succeed?

 

[ACC1224]

That's false

Nylander is 88(was 29) and Matthews is 34.
They always play together.

 

[Ciao]

Wow by your definition of elite no one on our team is elite.

Id say there are tiers.
Generational: McDavid, Crosby and Ovi
Elite: thats every 90+ point player or 40+ goal scorer and top 10 goalies (we have 3 maybe 4 if Andersen can creep in))
Stars: this is probably where nylander falls and on the mid to lower end

Then pretty much every other player in the league

It often puzzles me as to whether there can be multiple "generational" players within the same generation.

To my mind, the term "generational" implies that a player is so dominant among his or her peers that another similarly dominant player would not come for another generation. Michael Jordan. Babe Ruth. Pele. Wayne Gretzky. Who else?

One question is how long is a generation? Answers generally range from about 30 years -- a fairly normal life cycle between parents and children -- to as little as ten or 20 years according to sociologists.

I would think that a "generational" player is one who is so dominant that another similarly dominant player would not come along for at least another ten years, and as long as 30 years, and yes, they may overlap -- Gretzky and Lemieux.

The Leafs do not have and have never had a generational player.

So far, I would think of Connor McDavid as one; and Lemieux, Gretzky, Orr and Howe before that. Maybe Richard overlaps with Howe, and Crosby with Ovechkin? Here the lines fade because the dominance is less clear, and the jump to the next players isn't so far. I can't think of any other hockey players that were so far above the rest that they were truly generational talents.

I would even think of Howe (but for his unparalleled longevity), Richard, Crosby and Ovechkin as elite but not generational players. Howe makes it not so much because of his peak performance, but because of his peak performance for so long.

After that, dozens if not hundreds of players could be "elite", depending on how elitist your "elite" is. Personally, I don't think the Leafs have any elite players, but Matthews has the potential to become elite -- he's just not there yet.

The others are good or very good players. Tavares and Reilly are very good. Marner and Nylander are good and might become very good. Once you can start comparing players to many, many others of their own generation they are not generational nor, to my mind even elite, but just good or very good players that are comparable to many others.

Good or very good is not bad.

 

[ottomaddox]

Wow by your definition of elite no one on our team is elite.

Id say there are tiers.
Generational: McDavid, Crosby and Ovi
Elite: thats every 90+ point player or 40+ goal scorer and top 10 goalies (we have 3 maybe 4 if Andersen can creep in))
Stars: this is probably where nylander falls and on the mid to lower end

Then pretty much every other player in the league

That's right. As of now no one on TOR is elite. I can sleep at night knowing this. TOR has good players, but they are not elite.

I don't think I care for your expansion of the term "elite", and "star". Nylander's best season is 60 points and I'm not sure that makes anyone a "star". Are you using it as a short form for all star, because I suppose he could get voted to the NHL all star team.
Probably not this season. Uncle Leo was voted as an all star. Does that make him a "star"? I think you might say "no" to that.

These terms are for hockey magazines and video games. Words have definitions. Quite often they are used wildly around here. "Hybrid" used to be an HF favourite, and used wildly IMHO.

 

[ottomaddox]

Who would you rather see Nylander play with as his centre, to think Babcock was playing him where he has the best opportunity to succeed?

In the near future I can see Nylander playing with Gauthier as his center.

Once he
becomes more consistent it will be Matthews.

 

[DarkKnight]

Nylander is 88(was 29) and Matthews is 34.
They always play together.

75 percent of Matthews career, Willie has been his wingman. So many weak excuses....

 

[Ciao]

Elite - a select group that is superior in terms of ability or qualities to the rest of a group

Matthews probably falls into that group, but noone else on the Leafs should be considered elite, and especially not Nylander, unless you say he is an "elite" disappointment

I don't think Matthews is elite but he could be soon.

If his career ended today, or if he played forever and never progressed beyond his past performance he would not yet be elite to my mind.

We all respect and admire what he has done so far and we expect more, but he hasn't done it yet and he might never do it. Tavares is very good but not elite, and the same might eventually be true of Matthews.

 

[Menzinger]

should have sat him for the season or had him sign a fair contract. That would have sent a message to all pending RFA's that the TML are open for business and their business is fair contracts for both team and players.

Sitting him for the season kills his trafe value and permanently severs the relationship between player and team, essentially forcing the team to flip hi. for whatever they can get the following offseason.

I think its fair to say theres still a legitimate debate over thr Leafs strategy with these larger rfa contracts, but sitting a guy is lose-lose for all parties.

 

[ACC1224]

75 percent of Matthews career, Willie has been his wingman. So many weak excuses....

Yeah, but that 25% is totally unfair.

 

[Trapper]

Who would you rather see Nylander play with as his centre, to think Babcock was playing him where he has the best opportunity to succeed?

Whoever provides us with a long term RHD solution.

 

[ottomaddox]

Sure Dubie has to be concerned. But we don't have to worry about contracts or CAP. The Leafs have way more money than they know what to do with because of the CAP. No NHL team $$$ benefits more because of the CAP. Like I said before it is a $$$ printing bank every June of every year. What business do you know that gets paid in full 3+ months before providing the entertainment? There is ZERO sense worrying about this issue. It has been going on for 50+ years and likely 50+ more.

I'm not worried about how much the franchise makes. It does amazing.

I worry that our team will not working very well within the parameters of the cap. We've already seen early season challenges with injuries and poor backup goalies. There's no wiggle room to improve the team or replace injured players.

 

[Walshy7]

It often puzzles me as to whether there can be multiple "generational" players within the same generation.

To my mind, the term "generational" implies that a player is so dominant among his or her peers that another similarly dominant player would not come for another generation. Michael Jordan. Babe Ruth. Pele. Wayne Gretzky. Who else?

One question is how long is a generation? Answers generally range from about 30 years -- a fairly normal life cycle between parents and children -- to as little as ten or 20 years according to sociologists.

I would think that a "generational" player is one who is so dominant that another similarly dominant player would not come along for at least another ten years, and as long as 30 years, and yes, they may overlap -- Gretzky and Lemieux.

The Leafs do not have and have never had a generational player.

So far, I would think of Connor McDavid as one; and Lemieux, Gretzky, Orr and Howe before that. Maybe Richard overlaps with Howe, and Crosby with Ovechkin? Here the lines fade because the dominance is less clear, and the jump to the next players isn't so far. I can't think of any other hockey players that were so far above the rest that they were truly generational talents.

I would even think of Howe (but for his unparalleled longevity), Richard, Crosby and Ovechkin as elite but not generational players. Howe makes it not so much because of his peak performance, but because of his peak performance for so long.

After that, dozens if not hundreds of players could be "elite", depending on how elitist your "elite" is. Personally, I don't think the Leafs have any elite players, but Matthews has the potential to become elite -- he's just not there yet.

The others are good or very good players. Tavares and Reilly are very good. Marner and Nylander are good and might become very good. Once you can start comparing players to many, many others of their own generation they are not generational nor, to my mind even elite, but just good or very good players that are comparable to many others.

Good or very good is not bad.

of course there can be multiple, Crosby and McDavid overlap right now they are generational talents i guess technically Crosby is on the downward side of his peak but now you are getting into generational is only x numebr of years around their peak.

What if McDavid had a twin of equal ability, the ability of McDavid right now? would we have to downgrade them from generational becasue there are 2 of them?

 

[Ciao]

Nylander is a good player who has a lot to do if he wants to be among the best.

 

[Ciao]

of course there can be multiple, Crosby and McDavid overlap right now they are generational talents i guess technically Crosby is on the downward side of his peak but now you are getting into generational is only x numebr of years around their peak.

What if McDavid had a twin of equal ability, the ability of McDavid right now? would we have to downgrade them from generational becasue there are 2 of them?

Yes, you're right.

 

[rumman]

Sitting him for the season kills his trafe value and permanently severs the relationship between player and team, essentially forcing the team to flip hi. for whatever they can get the following offseason.

I think its fair to say theres still a legitimate debate over thr Leafs strategy with these larger rfa contracts, but sitting a guy is lose-lose for all parties.

1.: having Nylander sit because he was unwilling to accept a fair contract wouldn't have been a mistake imo.

2.: who knows for sure what his trade value would have been if he sat the season? Could it be lower than a 7 mil under performing WN?

3.: contract negotiations are part of the business side of hockey, are you inferring Nylander wouldn't be able to play for the team if sat out the season or the leafs wouldn't welcome him back?

I don't think Nylander missing last season would have been a lose/lose situation, I'd call it a short term pain for long term gain scenario. Paying 7 mil for a 1 dimensional player who isn't living up to said contract is the real lose/lose situation.

I know were on polar opposite on this issue and there's nothing wrong with differing opinions, that's what the forums for.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

I'm not worried about how much the franchise makes. It does amazing.

I worry that our team will not working very well within the parameters of the cap. We've already seen early season challenges with injuries and poor backup goalies. There's no wiggle room to improve the team or replace injured players.

It only makes sense the most profitable team by far in the league is going to spend to max and beyond. The Leafs could spend double, maybe triple, and everyone knows it.