Unpopular Opinions: Leafs Edition

Gary Nylund

Registered User
Oct 10, 2013
29,922
22,199
You keep him.

Folks who think the Leafs D will get better via subtraction when it comes to Gardiner will be in for a rude awakening.

Wow, are these really people who think that? I understand there are people who don't like Gardiner but that's just nuts.


Um, because the notion that removing Gardiner from the team makes the team better is absurd? Or are you one of the people who actually thinks this true?
 

hullsy47

Registered User
Dec 7, 2005
6,356
1,052
Wow, are these really people who think that? I understand there are people who don't like Gardiner but that's just nuts.

I thinl gardiner has to go kudos for him being standup in after game 7 for sucking but he sucked in big games before
I hope for his sake they move him

I hope
Um, because the notion that removing Gardiner from the team makes the team better is absurd? Or are you one of the people who actually thinks this true?
 

Menzinger

Kessel4LadyByng
Apr 24, 2014
41,074
32,572
St. Paul, MN

Because he’s a good defensemen - I think he’s a bit ill suited for a top pairing usage, but is just fine in the top four. And unless the Leafs have an replacement candidate ready to go, the Leafs D will be worse as a result.

That said, I am fine with Dubas trading him if he doesn’t plan on resigning him - from an asset management POV. But just getting rid of him isn’t going to improve anything
 
  • Like
Reactions: Daisy Jane

LeafingTheWay

Registered User
May 31, 2014
6,726
1,855
Leafs fans are too attached to Gardiner. He's one season away from UFA and based on comparables, it looks like he'll be earning around $7 million on his next contract. That's not an efficient way to allocate your cap space long term when you already have Rielly and Dermott on the team.

But to even speculate about a Gardiner trade is some kind of great insult to some of the leafs fans on here.

I have to yet to see anyone say the Leafs should sign Gardiner again for more than $6 million, let alone $7 million. I'm his biggest fan and I want him gone if he costs more than $5.8 mill long-term.
 

Gary Nylund

Registered User
Oct 10, 2013
29,922
22,199
Because he’s a good defensemen - I think he’s a bit ill suited for a top pairing usage, but is just fine in the top four. And unless the Leafs have an replacement candidate ready to go, the Leafs D will be worse as a result.

That said, I am fine with Dubas trading him if he doesn’t plan on resigning him - from an asset management POV. But just getting rid of him isn’t going to improve anything

Yup, good defenseman. People argue about how good he is exactly (which is true for every player) but of course he is a good player so the addition by subtraction idea here is ridiculous IMO. And I definitely agree with sign or trade him, gotta manage those assets.
 

luvdahattymatty

Registered User
Apr 8, 2018
511
405
Gards has skills no doubt people have been saying that for many years. I agree too. But he is not a defenceman. He does not think defence. As rest of nhl knows when you pressure Gards he gets scared and gives it up . The game plan of Boston was throw it into Gards corner. Why do you think they decided that was a big part of their game plan? They chose and picked on Gards. Again if he was a really good defence why would they do it consistently?
 

ShaneFalco

Registered User
Jul 15, 2012
21,414
15,770
London, On
Re-sign him if under 5.5.....maybe even 5, or trade him this summer
D-men are hard to find as we've noticed over the years and he has talent. Just miscast perhaps
 

ULF_55

Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
84,015
16,050
Mountain Standard Ti
Visit site
Yup, good defenseman. People argue about how good he is exactly (which is true for every player) but of course he is a good player so the addition by subtraction idea here is ridiculous IMO. And I definitely agree with sign or trade him, gotta manage those assets.

I would hope the people who say move him (I'm one of them) believe the goal is to move him and replace him, not just remove him and go with 4 skaters.

I'd have a hard time supporting a group that suggests you remove him but don't replace him? Now this might not be politically correct but I'd have to suggest removing Gardiner but not replacing him is pretty dense. Who in their right mind thinks playing 1/3 the game with only 4 skaters on the ice makes any sense?

I'm for moving Gardiner, but my goal would be to replace him with a better defender. I suspect their are few better offensive players in the league, so I'd target a defender that doesn't have his offensive skills, but has decent offensive skills and stronger defensive skills. At Gardiner's age I don't think he's going to get better defensively. I could be wrong, maybe he shows up with something to prove and he adds a little meanness to his repertoire and decides he's going to own his side of the d-zone and makes everyone pay for trespassing on his side of the ice. I'm not suggesting he starts running guys, but confronting them, using his body. It could happen, then I'd be fine signing him 6-7 years.

Perhaps Gardiner isn't the problem at all though? Perhaps he's the question, and the answer is the rest of the team?

Perhaps Babcock is the problem? Perhaps the entire system that Babcock employs makes the d-zone look like a free for all. Maybe without a Lidstrom (or Olympic team) Babcock's system is trash? Leafs don't have a Lidstrom, unless his name is yet-to-be-determined, and Babcock's system will miraculously become a good system when he has a Norris level defender cleaning up?

Perhaps running with the same defense this year will have completely different results? Perhaps it was Polak who was the problem, and with Polak gone everyone else will immediately be better. I can see it now, no more brainfarts from any of the defenders. No more getting out of position or bobbling the puck at the opposition blue-line. No more trading scoring chances while on the PP.

Polak was such a difference maker, such a team wide influence top to bottom.

If they move Gardiner, I suspect they'll replace him. I have faith management will do the right thing and perhaps I'll see another Cup. Maybe not.
 

4thline

Registered User
Jul 18, 2014
14,378
9,688
Waterloo
If there is no long term plan or intention to move Willy to C then we're better off trading him for a a savvy package that blends our short and long term needs while at the same time making this board riot.
ie. Tierney+Braun+1st
 

Gary Nylund

Registered User
Oct 10, 2013
29,922
22,199
I would hope the people who say move him (I'm one of them) believe the goal is to move him and replace him, not just remove him and go with 4 skaters.

I'd have a hard time supporting a group that suggests you remove him but don't replace him? Now this might not be politically correct but I'd have to suggest removing Gardiner but not replacing him is pretty dense. Who in their right mind thinks playing 1/3 the game with only 4 skaters on the ice makes any sense?

I'm for moving Gardiner, but my goal would be to replace him with a better defender. I suspect their are few better offensive players in the league, so I'd target a defender that doesn't have his offensive skills, but has decent offensive skills and stronger defensive skills. At Gardiner's age I don't think he's going to get better defensively. I could be wrong, maybe he shows up with something to prove and he adds a little meanness to his repertoire and decides he's going to own his side of the d-zone and makes everyone pay for trespassing on his side of the ice. I'm not suggesting he starts running guys, but confronting them, using his body. It could happen, then I'd be fine signing him 6-7 years.

Perhaps Gardiner isn't the problem at all though? Perhaps he's the question, and the answer is the rest of the team?

Perhaps Babcock is the problem? Perhaps the entire system that Babcock employs makes the d-zone look like a free for all. Maybe without a Lidstrom (or Olympic team) Babcock's system is trash? Leafs don't have a Lidstrom, unless his name is yet-to-be-determined, and Babcock's system will miraculously become a good system when he has a Norris level defender cleaning up?

Perhaps running with the same defense this year will have completely different results? Perhaps it was Polak who was the problem, and with Polak gone everyone else will immediately be better. I can see it now, no more brainfarts from any of the defenders. No more getting out of position or bobbling the puck at the opposition blue-line. No more trading scoring chances while on the PP.

Polak was such a difference maker, such a team wide influence top to bottom.

If they move Gardiner, I suspect they'll replace him. I have faith management will do the right thing and perhaps I'll see another Cup. Maybe not.

When people talk about addition by subtraction I always assume they mean get rid of the player and replace him with whoever happens to be next on our depth chart. Either way, the notion that we could just subtract Gardiner from our team and be better is just idiotic IMO.
 

ACC1224

Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
Aug 19, 2002
73,615
38,977
When people talk about addition by subtraction I always assume they mean get rid of the player and replace him with whoever happens to be next on our depth chart. Either way, the notion that we could just subtract Gardiner from our team and be better is just idiotic IMO.
Addition by Subtraction means the Team is better without that Player regardless of the replacement.
I don't think the current Leafs have anyone that meets that description.
 

ULF_55

Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
84,015
16,050
Mountain Standard Ti
Visit site
Addition by Subtraction means the Team is better without that Player regardless of the replacement.
I don't think the current Leafs have anyone that meets that description.

The goals should be to make the team better.

If you can replace Polak with OEL, then that would make the team better, by subtracting Polak and Adding OEL.
 

CantLoseWithMatthews

Registered User
Sep 28, 2015
49,659
59,330
Addition by Subtraction means the Team is better without that Player regardless of the replacement.
I don't think the current Leafs have anyone that meets that description.
komarov does. Other than that, you're probably right. Not really anything in terms of dead weight on the team
 

Gary Nylund

Registered User
Oct 10, 2013
29,922
22,199
Addition by Subtraction means the Team is better without that Player regardless of the replacement.
I don't think the current Leafs have anyone that meets that description.

My guess is that few NHL teams do.

Well yes, but the posts can be more tolerable if one is old enough buy alcohol in order to read.

So true. Now if I could only drink alcohol at work ...
 

ACC1224

Super Elite, Passing ALL Tests since 2002
Aug 19, 2002
73,615
38,977
He's really not though. His metrics on the 4th line are still pretty bad. It also means we'd have to actively try to shelter the 4th line which isn't ideal
There can always be better options. Komarov isn't so bad that he's and "addition by subtraction".
 

Joey Hoser

Registered User
Jan 8, 2008
14,232
4,143
Guelph
I would hope the people who say move him (I'm one of them) believe the goal is to move him and replace him, not just remove him and go with 4 skaters.

I'd have a hard time supporting a group that suggests you remove him but don't replace him? Now this might not be politically correct but I'd have to suggest removing Gardiner but not replacing him is pretty dense. Who in their right mind thinks playing 1/3 the game with only 4 skaters on the ice makes any sense?

I'm for moving Gardiner, but my goal would be to replace him with a better defender. I suspect their are few better offensive players in the league, so I'd target a defender that doesn't have his offensive skills, but has decent offensive skills and stronger defensive skills. At Gardiner's age I don't think he's going to get better defensively. I could be wrong, maybe he shows up with something to prove and he adds a little meanness to his repertoire and decides he's going to own his side of the d-zone and makes everyone pay for trespassing on his side of the ice. I'm not suggesting he starts running guys, but confronting them, using his body. It could happen, then I'd be fine signing him 6-7 years.

Perhaps Gardiner isn't the problem at all though? Perhaps he's the question, and the answer is the rest of the team?

Perhaps Babcock is the problem? Perhaps the entire system that Babcock employs makes the d-zone look like a free for all. Maybe without a Lidstrom (or Olympic team) Babcock's system is trash? Leafs don't have a Lidstrom, unless his name is yet-to-be-determined, and Babcock's system will miraculously become a good system when he has a Norris level defender cleaning up?

Perhaps running with the same defense this year will have completely different results? Perhaps it was Polak who was the problem, and with Polak gone everyone else will immediately be better. I can see it now, no more brainfarts from any of the defenders. No more getting out of position or bobbling the puck at the opposition blue-line. No more trading scoring chances while on the PP.

Polak was such a difference maker, such a team wide influence top to bottom.

If they move Gardiner, I suspect they'll replace him. I have faith management will do the right thing and perhaps I'll see another Cup. Maybe not.

When people talk about replacing Gardiner, they aren't assuming we will play fewer bodies. I mean, come on man, you know people aren't that stupid. That's straw men all around.

When people talk about "not replacing Gardiner" , they're talking about replacing a 50 point defenseman who reliably drives the puck up the ice. You can't just go out and find a replacement for that. The trade value of such a thing is like, multiple first round picks and prospects, and you aren't getting a Doughty or top guy, so the player is going to have their own limitations just like Gardiner does. That's why addition by subtraction is a ridiculous notion here. You can't get rid of Gardiner and then just see what you can find. You're going to find shit. Really expensive shit.
 

HoweHullOrr

Registered User
Oct 3, 2013
11,602
2,208
This thread should be titled ****ty hot takes: troll edition.

Could be I suppose, but isn't the point of this thread to list "unpopular opinions"?

I'll nominate two unpopular opinions:

  1. Those that balked or didn't believe in the notion of an early window.
  2. The idea that its unlikely we'll trade for a defender that's a difference maker for a bunch of our spare parts.
 

Joey Hoser

Registered User
Jan 8, 2008
14,232
4,143
Guelph
He's really not though. His metrics on the 4th line are still pretty bad. It also means we'd have to actively try to shelter the 4th line which isn't ideal

Generally you're not supposed to judge players by the worst you've ever seen them play, which was the case for Komarov last season. You take some sort of average, which says Komarov is at least a solid fourth liner.
 

Brobust

Registered User
Sep 29, 2017
6,869
6,300
Yup, good defenseman. People argue about how good he is exactly (which is true for every player) but of course he is a good player so the addition by subtraction idea here is ridiculous IMO. And I definitely agree with sign or trade him, gotta manage those assets.

I really haven't come across anyone either here or on reddit who believes in addition by subtraction when it comes to trading Gardiner. All I'm seeing is people using that as excuse to completely dismiss any trade discussion involving a 28 year old pending UFA.
 

CantLoseWithMatthews

Registered User
Sep 28, 2015
49,659
59,330
Generally you're not supposed to judge players by the worst you've ever seen them play, which was the case for Komarov last season. You take some sort of average, which says Komarov is at least a solid fourth liner.
Fair, but I also think in this case his most recent year is probably the most indicative of his value going forward. He doesn't look to be the same player as when he was an all star. I'm not sure if it's due to injury or natural regression or what, but I think the leafs have to move on from him
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad