Line Combos: TOR needs to **** or get off the pot in regards to our defense

[I am Canadian]

I really hope we aren't considering Faulk. Not the guy we need

 

[al secord]

Isles fan here. I never understood why the Leafs went after Tavares when offense was already the Leaf''s strength. Made no sense because it's costly. Now if he was #1 draft pick that's another story, but where do you guys get the Cap space to fill in the gaps in your defense? I think it was a question of not looking before you leaped.

Ya. I was disappointed to find that the Leaf brass did not know there was a cap before they signed another superstar.

 

[pheasant]

I am getting the feeling that the management and coaching staff is going to roll the dice with the team as they are this season. See if things can work by being really front-heavy with forwards, and just good enough on the blueline.

I expect maybe a waiver claim (Kampfer or Lovejoy) or a deadline addition for the D group, not a long term answer. But if it doesn't work this season, then we're in a bit of trouble with the cap crunch the next.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

I am getting the feeling that the management and coaching staff is going to roll the dice with the team as they are this season. See if things can work by being really front-heavy with forwards, and just good enough on the blueline.

I expect maybe a waiver claim (Kampfer or Lovejoy) or a deadline addition for the D group, not a long term answer. But if it doesn't work this season, then we're in a bit of trouble with the cap crunch the next.

My thoughts too. Leafs should be in no rush to make a panic trade.

Start the season as is, let the young team develop and see how things go. Dermott could make a big step again, Rielly could also make another stride, maybe a bounce back year for Z and perhaps Lily is ready next year. Way too many possible variables to go make a trade at this point

 

[Ziggdiezan]

This might be one of the best articles I've read regarding Hockey Analytics or even Hockey in gnereal recently, and a reason I will gladly support the work of The Athletic even if I think some of their hires are completely incompetent (I'm looking at a certain prospect writer who is trying to be a draft expert while riding an AHL bus). Dellow really captures the middle ground here between usage by coaches, how defenders are used, and why their may be a disconnect leading to Rielly and Hainsey's numbers being further depressed while explaining why someone like Dermott might be excelling vs top 6 competition, and how that could be an illusion.

Dellow: How Mike Babcock (and others) are sheltering...

Did it basically say that Rielly was leaned on like no other, Gardiner's paring saw higher end 2nd pairing usage and the 3rd pairing was sheltered like no other?

I feel like Gardiner's QoC gets dragged down a bit because he plays so much damn ice time at ES. We know Gardiner almost always plays with Matthews' line (top competition) but when you average all his ice time out that very high level of competition doesn't shine through.

 

[Fogelhund]

Isles fan here. I never understood why the Leafs went after Tavares when offense was already the Leaf''s strength. Made no sense because it's costly. Now if he was #1 draft pick that's another story, but where do you guys get the Cap space to fill in the gaps in your defense? I think it was a question of not looking before you leaped.

Strength down the middle is one of the more critical positions in the NHL. We were definitely going to have an issue with the 3rd C spot, so adding Tavares helps, in that regards (not that he is a 3C, but it moves Kadri down to that spot). We have one of the strongest C lineups in the league now.

When I looked at the numbers, we had enough money to sign Tavares and Carlson, along with Matthews, Nylander and Marner. Under that scenario, Gardiner would be moved, though it was net for Tanev, though not a straight trade.

For this year, all we have to sign is Nylander, and we have nearly $14 million in cap space. Plus we have the Nathan Horton $5.3 million, that we could LTIR, if it became necessary.

Horton and Marleau come off the books in two years, giving us $11.5 million in extra space.

We also have quite a few ELC guys, to come in and fill positions in the next few years, so we have plenty of cost controlled contracts, and most of our draft picks still, to continue filling the pipeline.

At this point, I doubt we make any big trades for a RHD, and there doesn't seem to be any that help us defensively available anyway. But, if we did make such a trade, contracts and cap space would no doubt be part of the trade anyway.

Noting, if Cap issues became an issue, and a big $ RHD became available, it's more valuable to have C strength, than Winger strength... so we'd move a winger first. It's a luxury, that gives incredible flexibility.

Our management include a number of Cap experts, including people involved in the creation of the Cap... that area is one of my few concerns.

 

[93LEAFS]

Did it basically say that Rielly was leaned on like no other, Gardiner's paring saw higher end 2nd pairing usage and the 3rd pairing was sheltered like no other?

I feel like Gardiner's QoC gets dragged down a bit because he plays so much damn ice time at ES. We know Gardiner almost always plays with Matthews' line (top competition) but when you average all his ice time out that very high level of competition doesn't shine through.

No, it focused on how Babcock utilized his lines on on-the-fly changes vs top 6 competition. It barely talked about Jake who had normal usage with that. It focused on the extremes, which was Rielly and Hainsey compared to our bottom pairing.

Showing at one point how Rielly and Hainsey had a negative shift, but got the puck up ice, which led to a Marleau goal. But, they already quickly changed, so as the puck was put in the opposition end, our bottom pairing came out to a very advantageous situation. Even if it wasn't a goal, it was a clean entry and a chance to control possession and dictate shots. It showed how our bottom pairing often got more advantageous 5v5 on the fly changes, which may help prop up their underlying numbers. It was a unique premise. By further delving into the numbers, he showed what most smart coaches were thinking, and how some numbers can be deceiving, such as how our bottom pairing tended to look good vs top competition because they tend to go on against tired top 6 lines when we have possession, compared to Rielly and Hainsey who generally play against them at the start of shifts.

 

[Gary Nylund]

It was a unique premise. By further delving into the numbers, he showed what most smart coaches were thinking, and how some numbers can be deceiving, such as how our bottom pairing tended to look good vs top competition because they tend to go on against tired top 6 lines when we have possession, compared to Rielly and Hainsey who generally play against them at the start of shifts.

That's really interesting, thanks! I think this is a really interesting post in the context of the whole advanced stats, are they good or are they useless discussion. Some people may read this and say see, I told you all along that stats lie and the eye test rules. I think it goes to show that advanced stats are their infancy but there will come a time in the not too distant future when they will be much more "advanced" and then those who ignore them will be at a huge disadvantage. But people need to (especially for now) think critically, question the numbers and always, always look for more/different numbers to provide that all-important context.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

No, it focused on how Babcock utilized his lines on on-the-fly changes vs top 6 competition. It barely talked about Jake who had normal usage with that. It focused on the extremes, which was Rielly and Hainsey compared to our bottom pairing.

Showing at one point how Rielly and Hainsey had a negative shift, but got the puck up ice, which led to a Marleau goal. But, they already quickly changed, so as the puck was put in the opposition end, our bottom pairing came out to a very advantageous situation. Even if it wasn't a goal, it was a clean entry and a chance to control possession and dictate shots. It showed how our bottom pairing often got more advantageous 5v5 on the fly changes, which may help prop up their underlying numbers. It was a unique premise. By further delving into the numbers, he showed what most smart coaches were thinking, and how some numbers can be deceiving, such as how our bottom pairing tended to look good vs top competition because they tend to go on against tired top 6 lines when we have possession, compared to Rielly and Hainsey who generally play against them at the start of shifts.

Very interesting, I had noticed Kadri's line would do similar changes at some points last year to get the Bozak line on for a good offensive chance.

I honestly think if Hainsey got rested down the stretch and didn't lead the league in PK time he would have been fine last year. Gets a lot of stick in this parts but he did pretty damn well on the top pairing in some crazy hard usage.

The next zone start stat will be which direction the puck is moving when you change on the fly. It will be a pain to track lol.

 

[Fogelhund]

That's really interesting, thanks! I think this is a really interesting post in the context of the whole advanced stats, are they good or are they useless discussion. Some people may read this and say see, I told you all along that stats lie and the eye test rules. I think it goes to show that advanced stats are their infancy but there will come a time in the not too distant future when they will be much more "advanced" and then those who ignore them will be at a huge disadvantage. But people need to (especially for now) think critically, question the numbers and always, always look for more/different numbers to provide that all-important context.

You'd also have to look at, how often the Rielly/Hainsey unit benefits from the same... coming on at the opportune time. Does that type of benefit even out, over the course of the season?

 

[Mess]

I think Leafs are waiting on UFA signing this summer Igor Ozzy first impression to evaluate this situation further to see how bad the RDH really is heading into the season, before there is pressure on Dubas to address it via trade.

If he can have a similar impact to Zaitsev in his rookie year, than this might be as bad as they seems on the surface.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

You'd also have to look at, how often the Rielly/Hainsey unit benefits from the same... coming on at the opportune time. Does that type of benefit even out, over the course of the season?

Seemingly from 93Leafs post it seemed like it doesn't even out and it was done very meticulously to shelter the 3rd pairing.

 

[Notsince67]

Did it basically say that Rielly was leaned on like no other, Gardiner's paring saw higher end 2nd pairing usage and the 3rd pairing was sheltered like no other?

I feel like Gardiner's QoC gets dragged down a bit because he plays so much damn ice time at ES. We know Gardiner almost always plays with Matthews' line (top competition) but when you average all his ice time out that very high level of competition doesn't shine through.

He plays the 5th highest EV minutes in the league among defensemen.

 

[93LEAFS]

Very interesting, I had noticed Kadri's line would do similar changes at some points last year to get the Bozak line on for a good offensive chance.

I honestly think if Hainsey got rested down the stretch and didn't lead the league in PK time he would have been fine last year. Gets a lot of stick in this parts but he did pretty damn well on the top pairing in some crazy hard usage.

The next zone start stat will be which direction the puck is moving when you change on the fly. It will be a pain to track lol.

Yeah, I really like some of Dellow's work, and I'd say he might be the main reason to have the Athletic. I love articles that bridge the divide between analytics and how veteran but respected coaches see the game. Dellow occasionally does a good job of it. Sometimes, these concepts are so simple after explained but are just not realized. I really thought it was an insightful piece on how analytics doesn't capture certain things that a lifer like Babcock sees. He also points to Babs disciples (Blashill and Peters) and other respected coaches who do this like DeBoar and Trotz.

Like, you realize on the fly changes do this for certain shifts, but you don't realize how disproportional it is until the numbers are delved deeper into.

 

[93LEAFS]

You'd also have to look at, how often the Rielly/Hainsey unit benefits from the same... coming on at the opportune time. Does that type of benefit even out, over the course of the season?

It shows it doesn't. Rielly and Hainsey disporpotionally started against top units within 10 seconds on them being on. The bottom pairing had the opposite effect, where they were catching them at the tail end of their shifts.

 

[ponder]

I am getting the feeling that the management and coaching staff is going to roll the dice with the team as they are this season. See if things can work by being really front-heavy with forwards, and just good enough on the blueline.

I expect maybe a waiver claim (Kampfer or Lovejoy) or a deadline addition for the D group, not a long term answer. But if it doesn't work this season, then we're in a bit of trouble with the cap crunch the next.

I think you’re probably right, but personally I’d love one more significant move. Ideally something involving Gards for an RHD. For example:

Gards + Brown + 2019 1st
for
Tanev + Virtanen

Hyman - Tavares - Marner
Marleau - Matthews - Nylander
Johnsson - Kadri - Kapanen
Jooris/Ennis/Grundstrom/Leivo - Lindholm - Virtanen

Rielly - Tanev
Dermott - Hainsey
Borgman - Zaitsev
Carrick

Andersen
McBackup

IMO that team has 3 pairings you can depend on, while still being electric offensively.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

Yeah, I really like some of Dellow's work, and I'd say he might be the main reason to have the Athletic. I love articles that bridge the divide between analytics and how veteran but respected coaches see the game. Dellow occasionally does a good job of it. Sometimes, these concepts are so simple after explained but are just not realized. I really thought it was an insightful piece on how analytics doesn't capture certain things that a lifer like Babcock sees. He also points to Babs disciples (Blashill and Peters) and other respected coaches who do this like DeBoar and Trotz.

Like, you realize on the fly changes do this for certain shifts, but you don't realize how disproportional it is until the numbers are delved deeper into.

Ya I have been thinking of signing up, always a few articles I see that I'm interested in.

It is very insightful for sure and it does seem obvious now lol. For all the flack Babcock gets he obviously has a great hockey mind and knows the practical components extremely well.

Ya, there are certainty other slight subtle tweaks made by coaches that haven't been quantified by the analytics community but that is to be expected. Its all a work in progress.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

I think you’re probably right, but personally I’d love one more significant move. Ideally something involving Gards for an RHD. For example:

Gards + Brown + 2019 1st
for
Tanev + Virtanen

Hyman - Tavares - Marner
Marleau - Matthews - Nylander
Johnsson - Kadri - Kapanen
Jooris/Ennis/Grundstrom/Leivo - Lindholm - Virtanen

Rielly - Tanev
Dermott - Hainsey
Borgman - Zaitsev
Carrick

Andersen
McBackup

IMO that team has 3 pairings you can depend on, while still being electric offensively.

That is a really bad trade for the leafs... what happens if Tanev gets injured (hint he will),?you now have a significantly worse defensive unit than last year. On top of that what happens if Dermott can't take over Gardiner's role which is playing with the Matthews line as well as playing the 5th most ES ice time of any defender in the league (thanks Notsince67 lol).

Then on top of that Brown and a 1st, I don't view Virtanen highly either.

 

[93LEAFS]

That's really interesting, thanks! I think this is a really interesting post in the context of the whole advanced stats, are they good or are they useless discussion. Some people may read this and say see, I told you all along that stats lie and the eye test rules. I think it goes to show that advanced stats are their infancy but there will come a time in the not too distant future when they will be much more "advanced" and then those who ignore them will be at a huge disadvantage. But people need to (especially for now) think critically, question the numbers and always, always look for more/different numbers to provide that all-important context.

Ya I have been thinking of signing up, always a few articles I see that I'm interested in.

It is very insightful for sure and it does seem obvious now lol. For all the flack Babcock gets he obviously has a great hockey mind and knows the practical components extremely well.

Ya, there are certainty other slight subtle tweaks made by coaches that haven't been quantified by the analytics community but that is to be expected. Its all a work in progress.

Oh, yeah. I'm not using this article to discredit analytics (if I didn't have an interest in them, I wouldn't read Tyler Dellow's work). The only thing I would knock is having a dogmatic way of thinking about them (but I would apply that to almost anyway of thinking about something that isn't purely scientific). I like it because it helps create the middle-ground between the two. Its what we need more of. When both sides become tribal in their ways of thinking it just gets ridiculous. If Dellow one of the early adaptors and creators of analytics in Hockey can discover knew things, and point to how these coaches are being creative and affecting numbers, it is quite useful, and it further helps bridge the gap. In return, it also allows for people who don't believe in the intuitiveness of coaches or their usage to see how maybe they were being a bit extreme. Now, if you fragment numbers too much they become useless, but examing shift changes in the fashion Dellow did is very interesting.

The one or the other argument is quite tiresome. I respect guys like Dellow and Vollman who try to find a reasonable middle ground.

 

[Trapper]

I think right now it's fine to stay the course.
We have nothing to lose by seeing how Zaitsev rebounds and more experience for Dermott/Borgman/Rosen.

Whatever D is available through trade (at the moment), also comes with as many cons as pros.
Players like Tanev/Faulk have their question marks.
After that, I don't see what is available.

And then you have to take into consideration the price paid for the above.
Especially giving up assets when we have a major asset in Gardiner to deal with.

Stay the course. Deal with Gardiner. If he's not in the plans, something needs to be done with him.
Letting him walk is beyond foolish.

 

[Rehabguy]

The team's philosophy is that you are opportunistic on talent. Going into next year's draft, if the leafs has #1, they would likely pick Jack Hughes, even though they don't need a center

That's my point. I would agree with that because you acquire a potentially tradeable asset at no cost, but in this case you are acquiring a great talent, but at what cost, and was he really needed? I would think that money would have been better spent balancing out the Leaf's line-up with an improved defense. The Leafs already had all the offense they needed.

 

[Rob Brown]

Isles fan here. I never understood why the Leafs went after Tavares when offense was already the Leaf''s strength. Made no sense because it's costly. Now if he was #1 draft pick that's another story, but where do you guys get the Cap space to fill in the gaps in your defense? I think it was a question of not looking before you leaped.

Yeah, because Shanny, the guy that has guided this rebuild and rise almost perfectly since he took the helm, didn't think about things before he signed Tavares. What a bad take.

 

[Rehabguy]

Yeah, because Shanny, the guy that has guided this rebuild and rise almost perfectly since he took the helm, didn't think about things before he signed Tavares. What a bad take.

Question: What was different about the line-up from 2016-2017 team to the 2017-2018 team that made them a much more competitive team? What do they have to give up to insert Tavares in the line-up next year. And not having personally watched last year's first round, what cost them the match against the Bruins? Was it scoring?

Also in regards to the Tavares acquisition, I'm looking at the long term consequences for your team. Let's face it he's costly. As an Islander fan, I was hoping he would re-sign with the team, but I've often worried about at what cost, given the big contract that McDavid signed.

 

[Rob Brown]

Question: What was different about the line-up from 2016-2017 team to the 2017-2018 team that made them a much more competitive team? What do they have to give up to insert Tavares in the line-up next year. And not having personally watched last year's first round, what cost them the match against the Bruins? Was it scoring?

Also in regards to the Tavares acquisition, I'm looking at the long term consequences for your team. Let's face it he's costly.

It doesn't really matter. If you have the opportunity to add a top 10 C like Tavares without giving up any assets (other than cap), you do it. It absolutely makes the team better - when you talk about what they gave up to add Tavares, they are all players that can be replaced internally. If they resigned all of the UFAs that left it would have cost more than Tavares.

The Leafs struggled against the Bruins from a defensive perspective, which does need to be addressed. Every Leafs fan agrees with that, but every single Leafs fan will also agree that adding Tavares will help the team.

 

[Liminality]

Question: What was different about the line-up from 2016-2017 team to the 2017-2018 team that made them a much more competitive team? What do they have to give up to insert Tavares in the line-up next year. And not having personally watched last year's first round, what cost them the match against the Bruins? Was it scoring?

Also in regards to the Tavares acquisition, I'm looking at the long term consequences for your team. Let's face it he's costly.

Matthews and Tavares are a cup contending center core that create match up problems like the Pens roster creates match up problems. It's quite simple.