Rielly's year?

kb

Registered User
Aug 28, 2009
15,272
21,695
Don't put words in my mouth. Nothing is my "lone criteria", and as good as TOI is for telling the story of a defenseman's value, it's not nearly as important for forwards. Production is much more important. Besides, most of the guys with more TOI/GP than Matthews only got there by their PK minutes; Matthews was 15th in ESTOI/GP.

Production is not nearly as important for judging a defenseman's value. All you have to do is look at any season and rank the top scoring defensemen and then rank them by TOI and it's pretty clear right away which list contains all the elite defensemen and which one contains a mix of great players and good PP specialists. Production for defensemen is highly situational; the vast majority of them score at a pretty consistent ES rate and the their raw totals are based on their PP time and what caliber of forwards are on their PP.

And no, Hainsey is obviously not better than Rielly. I think we all know that. I think it's mighty strange though, that Rielly isn't trusted with 4-5 more minutes per game than a guy like Hainsey. A true franchise #1 D with the potential to be top-10 in the league certainly would be. A coach's job is to win hockey games and they're paid millions to do it. If Babcock thinks the best formula to win is to have Rielly out there for just 21-22 minutes then I trust that. It does tell us something about how he values them. It's not like Babcock won't play a player for 24+ minutes. Lidstrom, Kronwall, Schneider and Rafalski were all given that much in one or more seasons.

You look at any other elite, consensus top-15 defenseman and their team is putting them out there for 24+ per game. If Rielly is to be ranked that highly, we have to explain what it is about him, the Leafs, or Babcock that makes him an exception. It doesn't seem to be Babcock, and it's not like there's a ton of quality defenders here taking minutes away from him. Don't act like it isn't important. There are no 18-19 minute defensemen who are elite at anything. The good ones rise to the top and get put out on the ice the most.

He's getting good quality of competition, and his zone starts show a good degree of trust. He's That is a good start. Now he needs to do it so well that the coaches can't help but put him out there more and more often. Having a positive goal differential for the first time in his career would help, too. It's not like the Leafs of the past two seasons haven't been a good place to put up a strong +/- for most players.
That is still missing the point. No one is going to get big minutes on this team no matter what they do. No one. Their sports science department (who Babcock has taken many thinly veiled shots at) has been involved in this to try to keep players at their peak. Which means no big minutes for anyone.

Maple Leafs hire Director of Sports Science

You don't think that they could have played Matthews 20 minutes per game on a team with a black hole for a third line C and basically no 4th line C? How many more points does that equate to, and more importantly.....how many more wins? This is my point. Rielly won't get 24+ minutes even if he is Bobby Orr. You are using an arbitrary factor here.

And just for the record, Brent Burns was a -16 on a 100 point team playing against easier competition. So I think Rielly is doing better than his detractors want to admit.
 

seventieslord

Student Of The Game
Mar 16, 2006
36,113
7,179
Regina, SK
That is still missing the point. No one is going to get big minutes on this team no matter what they do. No one. Their sports science department (who Babcock has taken many thinly veiled shots at) has been involved in this to try to keep players at their peak. Which means no big minutes for anyone.

Maple Leafs hire Director of Sports Science

You don't think that they could have played Matthews 20 minutes per game on a team with a black hole for a third line C and basically no 4th line C? How many more points does that equate to, and more importantly.....how many more wins? This is my point. Rielly won't get 24+ minutes even if he is Bobby Orr. You are using an arbitrary factor here.

And just for the record, Brent Burns was a -16 on a 100 point team playing against easier competition. So I think Rielly is doing better than his detractors want to admit.

Your article doesn't really say much. I can't say with 100% certainty that the team's top players' minutes are being limited by the Director of Sports Science... can you?

Let's say it's true. That doesn't change the fact that Rielly - who is the youngest, the best player and the best athlete in the group - should still be playing more than the rest of them. He sure shouldn't finish 4th in TOI. If he is our best defenseman and it is by far, then the coaches should want him on the ice the most. Even if not for 24 minutes, then for 23, with some space between him and the next couple guys.

As far as Burns is concerned, that's not something to strive for. If you're the top defenseman on a 100 point team, you should not be a minus. Burns is a huge exception to what would normally be expected. I don't think you'll find very many recent examples of this.

I'm not a "detractor" of Rielly. I think given his statistical performance, the eye test, and the results the team has achieved with him in the roles he's been in, I'm being optimistic and generous when I list him 27th in the NHL and when THN puts him 25th. I am sure on the main board he'd be called a #2 (fair) or maybe even #3 (BS). Call those people detractors. And yeah he's doing better than they want to admit.
 

IPS

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
15,501
24,594
We have a perfect partner for Rielly just waiting to be traded for in San Jose. Justin Braun would be a fantastic addition to Toronto's blueline.
 

Notsince67

Papi and the Lamplighters
Apr 27, 2018
15,973
11,161
We have a perfect partner for Rielly just waiting to be traded for in San Jose. Justin Braun would be a fantastic addition to Toronto's blueline.
I was thinking that same thing
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->