The Immature Team

6ix

HitEmWit4LikeAustonM
Nov 26, 2014
6,944
5,123
Tavares? Worst captain in history? Don’t you remember our last one, literally the last one before Tavares? Not even saying he’s the worst but wth.

Hope your ttc is late today

Yeah the one that actually hit people.
 

Stephen

Moderator
Feb 28, 2002
77,850
51,520
Would be good to see Tavares play like Hyman when he has an off game. Just show the team you're still going to drive the net and be chippy and be a puck hound as the captain. But at the end of the day it comes down to production. Because we can't be lowering expectations for an $11 million player in year two of a contract. Why isn't Tavares doing what Panarin is doing for the Rangers?
 
  • Like
Reactions: A1LeafNation

ITM

As Long As It Takes
Jan 26, 2012
4,536
2,509
Okay I'll back it up for you. First though, what you have said here is factually correct but this is one of those situations where how you look at it and under what time frame completely changes the conclusions.

I disagree. My point stands irrespective of whether the timeframe encompasses any single of the three first round knockouts or all of them. You said: "... painting the fans as irrational for not liking the prospect of facing clear regression isn't fair." And here, again, I disagree, and it's important to note this here, because my point isn't to state it's irrational for (Leafs) fans to dislike the prospect of facing "clear regression". My point is, it's irrational for our fanbase to dislike three first round exits to championship programs. Not simply "three first round exists". Specifically, three first round exits to two champions.

See the distinction? I'm not sure what "clear regression" entails. But I can clearly see that there's some sort of collective masochism happening that wills not to see the quality of the opponents we've faced, commensurate to the stage of our rebuild, and that under an apprehension of what a reasonable expectation entails.

My argument manifested based on my perception of the Bruins at the time, perception from this same sub forum at the time, as well as perception from fans around the league. No one was talking about the Bruins above the Leafs like they are today. In fact most people were very unsure of the series and were unsure about who the underdog was. There was heavy back and forth on who should get the underdog title, not that it necessarily matters.

But your criticism is based on my assertion that addresses our three first round exits, right? Which, exceeds (in part) your specified, date-dependent perception,right? So, doesn't that date-dependent recall kind of skew the sum of Boston's accomplishments? And in turn, the quality of opponent we've had to face two of the three match-ups, excluding of course the other team and champion?

So going back to my first paragraph, sample size matters. I'd say hockey is a very fast changing game, and teams in the NHL quickly get into contention, and just as quickly fall out. Based on that I think my assessment of the Bruins at the time is completely fair and it's completely fair to say we could have been in those shoes today if we knew how to close out a darn series.

Do you think it's fair to characterize the quality of teams like Chicago, Pittsburgh, Boston, and Washington as being equivocal to teams like Ottawa and Detroit?
Do you believe that contention entails one-off appearances by some clubs as well as multiple appearances by the same teams?


Before the Bruins bested the Maple Leafs in the 2018 playoffs, mind you only to get the daylights beaten out of them by Tampa, here is how their previous few seasons went. Actually I'll include the 2018 playoffs too for reference.
Lost second round to Tampa Bay 4-1......
Lost first round to Ottawa... 4-2
Did not qualify
Did not qualify
Beat Detroit (trash washed up team that was only squeaking into the playoffs), lost to ****ing Montreal 4-3.

That does not sound like a contender to me at that point and a 3 year sample size prior to them facing Toronto, 2 years which involved not even making the playoffs, and 1 year prior to facing Toronto losing to Ottawa in the first round is nowhere near contender status. 3 consecutive years of mediocre performance is more than enough in this parity league for the narrative to completely shift and for a team to fall out of contention. They had many of the same question marks with their youth at that point that we did, and questions over whether the core is getting washed up. Most people absolutely in no way viewed the Bruins as heavy favourites going into that series. They had a lot of question marks with their youth and whether or not they could translate their skills into the post season, their goalie who was regularly lambasted as a choker on their boards, and whether this norris winning defenseman had gotten too old. So no, they weren't considered the same great team from that 2011 Stanley Cup that had a psychopath Tim Thomas in net who decided to transcend humanity, a prime Chara, and faced a Canucks team depleted of their all star defensive defenseman in Hamhuis. A hell of a lot had changed from that 2011 run to the 2018 playoffs. 7 years man, people go through the entirety of their teens in that time frame. The only difference between us and them in the 2018 playoffs was that their boys stepped up and got the job done, ours didn't. They had Pastrnak going ham, we had his buddy Nylander along with Marner and Matthews probably producing less than him combined.

Ok, but these same Bruins won a Cup in 2011 and went to the Finals again in 2013 and in the meantime, their program is turning out best at position individual awards. Mirroring your projection is our club, fresh off of our 1st overall pick, earned 1st overall pick that is. And yet, you believed Toronto in relation to that Boston team (whatever our regular season standings/stats displayed) represented a reasonable expectation that we should have punched above our weight?

I get the notion of change. But again, we're not applying the generic to the specific. We're trying to conclude something plausible based on accurate premises. And in my memory - and I'm on record repeatedly on these boards to the point - that we did not pose a "should have" beat them threat. That doesn't mean I didn't see our potential in that series or the subsequent ousts. And it doesn't remove disappointment in any number of "what if?" moments that we all saw (i.e. Cassidy's presser re: Babcock's last minute line assignments). But the PREMISE that we are in clear regression because we failed to moved past these clubs or that it's rational to have an informed opinion echoing anything resembling that premise, is irrational.

The very nature of an underdog - your term - succeeding, presumes surprise, or, an unreasonable expectation of success. Granted, underdog doesn't entail no chance, but it certainly doesn't entail a reasonable expectation. Unreasonable expectation? Sure. Why not? But...That's not what you're weighing in on here, right?

It's also important to understand this thing called coping mechanism. There are multiple ways of coping but one of them involves seeing your opponent as much much better than you thought before you lost to them as a way of coming to terms with being on the receiving end of it. Now most people shun out those memories of "no one is a heavy favourite" and whatever is inconvenient for them but I had a troubled life which (un)fortunately allows me to emotionally detach from things more and I can't just shut out those same memories and discussions.

But how would you reconcile the coping mechanism of late teens/early twenty-somethings with the learned and professionally groomed coping mechanisms utilized by veteran groups like the Bruins and the Capitals? Again, the generic to the specific is a big mountain to climb when the specific is available and applicable. There's no coping mechanism wherein Bergeron, Marchand and Chara, to say nothing of Rask, Pastrnak and Cassidy abandon theirs in order for a group of entry level contracts to practice theirs until they get it right.

That's also an example of (for whatever reason) not seeing the obvious.

There's a reason why the playoffs are repeatedly distinguished from the regular season - noting your previous expectations. That distinction observes a change in environment. And the only way our club can learn the difference is to experience the difference. That's the rule and we aren't the exception. Moreover against champions who example(d) the rule having learned similar, hard lessons.

Anyway, the original point in all of this wasn't even whether or not they were underdogs/fairly matched up in that 2018 playoffs, but about the fact that they are facing the prospect of clear regression (missing the playoffs).

Another time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nithoniniel

A1LeafNation

Obsession beats talent everytime!!
Oct 17, 2010
27,284
17,190
To be honest the only players I expect to play more consistent are Andersen Matthews Tavares Rielly and Barrie.

The rest are either playing consistent or are not high enough on the totem pole for me to expect consistency out of them.
 

yubbers

Grown Menzez
May 1, 2013
36,053
5,039
I don't think anyone person is responsible for making them more mature. That is something that comes with time and experience.
What?
Then why are their well-disciplined, polite children and then self-entitled, immature brats the same age?

Because of the ppl that raise them. Their leadership.
 

A1LeafNation

Obsession beats talent everytime!!
Oct 17, 2010
27,284
17,190
What?
Then why are their well-disciplined, polite children and then self-entitled, immature brats the same age?

Because of the ppl that raise them. Their leadership.
Which is why Babcock was fired.
 

Dekes For Days

Registered User
Sep 24, 2018
20,095
15,266
Would be good to see Tavares play like Hyman when he has an off game.
That's not his game or his role though.
Why isn't Tavares doing what Panarin is doing for the Rangers?
He did. Last year.

Though it's never reasonable to expect somebody to put up a 14.8 ES OISH%, shoot 20%, and double their secondary assist rate. Panarin is having a great season, but he is going to come back down to earth too.
 

Bluelines

Python FTW!
Nov 17, 2013
12,349
4,559
What?
Then why are their well-disciplined, polite children and then self-entitled, immature brats the same age?

Because of the ppl that raise them. Their leadership.


Do you want to get into a nature vs nurture debate on a sports forum? I know siblings from the same family that have completely different personalities, yet same parents, same home environment. It's not always the parents.
 

yubbers

Grown Menzez
May 1, 2013
36,053
5,039
Which is why Babcock was fired.
I gave credit where due. I thought Dubas would ride him out for the year to insulate himself. He didn't. He made the move that was necessary. But that whole things was so obviously gonna fail. That's why I haven't liked the Dubas choice from day 1. We committed to Babock for 7 years......then proceed to put the youngest GM in NHL history in charge of him? A well known stubborn bastard is gonna listen to jr? Of course he wasn't. Lou is probably one of the only guys in the league that could call in Babcock to his office, close the door and rip him. Now that's on Babcock but how did Shanny not see that coming?

I'm just so fed up with impotent management costing us competitive years cause they thought mixing water with boiling oil would be a good idea. Plain stupidity. The current 'leadership' is a joke. They called me crazy when I said we wouldn't make the playoffs this year. Now you see what are defense is. Dubas made it worse. Much worse. Muzzin gets a pass. Hope we can resign him.
 

81Leafs50

Registered User
May 14, 2010
3,153
1,251
Toronto
Immaturity.

"Inconsistencies in men are generally testimony to their immaturity"
Edwin Louis Cole

This team is immature to think that they dont have to play defense.
This team is immature to think that they can outscore their way to a WIN.
This team is immature to think that they dont have to show up every night.
This team is immature to think that the playoffs are a given.

No coach can make these players play defense. They are having too much fun playing run and gun. SO the fans and the media have to make it NOT FUN anymore.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->