We're not really the "youngest" team

[Drakkor]

You don't draft and groom enforcers, their the easiest player to obtain.

But you do groom fourth liners and if they have an enforcer quality that's a bonus. It is stupid to pay for fourth liners with draft picks (trade) or through free agency.

Drafting a player with potential to be more than a fourth liner but that is where he settles in is better than the other option.

 

[DaveT83*]

I disagree. Hawks tried to build a team who could go deep in the playoffs almost every season but had a "rotten" core and collapsed and thus got those high picks. Oilers failed on purpose.

Sorry I was referring to Keith/Seabrook/Toews/Kane all entering the league together and growing together as a group. Similar to Hall/Eberle/RNH/Yak -

 

[achtungbaby]

This seems more of difference of development paths at least with Edmonton.

They are taking their young high draft picks and putting them into the NHL right away. Developing them there. I would be worried about cronic injuries down the road.

Toronto who doesn't have the high picks, not to their level. Have chosen to develop their players in the minors to allow them the opportunity to succeed. To do this you must sign UFA to fill the roles in the meantime which is a huge no no on these boards it seems.

The waiver pick up of McLaren is another sign of this. Our fourth line isn't good but none of our potential "enforcer" prospects are even close right now. This is McLaren's tryout for Orr's spot.

Two different philosophies, I like the Leafs better. It would be better if we had a few top draft picks to go with it though.

If you had the number one overall you would keep them in the minors?

 

[ULF_55]

Leafs are not an old team.

Wouldn't the true reflection be an age TOI/g ratio?

For example,

Forwards 180 minutes per game
Defense 120 minutes per game
Goalie 60 minutes per game

Forwards:
30-40 age group: 30 minutes
25-30 age group: 120
18-25 age group: 30

et cetera

you could do:
18-22 as a very young group
23-26 as a young group
26-30 as a prime
...

whatever, but just totaling up ages without looking at minutes played likely distorts the value of stating team is is youngest. If the goal was to just be the youngest, and there was some reward for that, teams could just sit 6 rookies on the bench, 1 goalie, 2 defenders (3rd. pairing), and 3, 6 minute a night fowards.

Leafs are unlike the Flames who have key forwards in the 30's, and no matter how many Horak's and Baertschi's they put in the line-up, we know they are going to rely on 35, 32, 30 year old forwards to carry the load.

 

[Drakkor]

If you had the number one overall you would keep them in the minors?

Depending upon maturity, physical and mental but 99% of the time..... Yes.

 

[hobarth]

I definitely qualify as a fan based on this definition. I've always watched the Leafs far more than a normal person for years and years and years. Now the past 8 years have been particularly awful but I am still sticking with it because I know there's not a worse GM/combo out there than Brian Burke/Wilson and we can only improve with that in mind.

There's things to be happy with but more to be unhappy with but that is in the past (Burke/Wilson's fault) and I am very happy we have a more patient GM at the helm right now.

I think I understand that tho TO is young and other than Kessel we don't have a wow factor proven young player to build upon, no Crosby, Giroux, Taveres and the like. What we have is potential and that would all change if we could pick up a stud in the draft this year or if Gardiner, Reilly and Kadri show they will realize their potential. Youth for youth sake is not always a good thing.

Altho TO is younger than Edmonton in average age I would think most people would consider Edmonton younger because their core is young. TO's line-up indicates it should be in a perennial contender because our core players are older than Edmonton's. Foolies so the whole average age comparison is a useless stat.

I'm not sold on the notion that Nonis is patient signing Lupul to such a long term expensive contract seemed a little premature to me.

 

[Drakkor]

I think I understand that tho TO is young and other than Kessel we don't have a wow factor proven young player to build upon, no Crosby, Giroux, Taveres and the like. What we have is potential and that would all change if we could pick up a stud in the draft this year or if Gardiner, Reilly and Kadri show they will realize their potential. Youth for youth sake is not always a good thing.

Altho TO is younger than Edmonton in average age I would think most people would consider Edmonton younger because their core is young. TO's line-up indicates it should be in a perennial contender because our core players are older than Edmonton's. Foolies so the whole average age comparison is a useless stat.

I'm not sold on the notion that Nonis is patient signing Lupul to such a long term expensive contract seemed a little premature to me.

I disagree with the last part. A four year deal is about perfect for patience. It allows for another draft, a few years of development, the money value is good and doesn't deter trade value, if a prospect develops early.

Couldn't ask for much more from Toronto's perspective. Idk I personally like it.

 

[MakeTheIronSing]

This just in, people get older as time goes on. hmm

 

[zeke]

I hear this thrown around a lot, that the leafs are the first/second youngest team in the league, and that's a bit inaccurate imo.

Average age does not tell the whole story, it's actually a fairly skewed stat.

For example

Team A
18 yr old - 18 yr old - 18 yr old - 1st Line 22 mins/night
18 yr old - 18 yr old - 18 yr old - 2nd Line 18 mins/night
35 yr old - 35 yr old - 35 yr old - 3rd Line 7 mins/night
35 yr old - 35 yr old - 35 yr old - 4th Line 3 mins/night

18 yr old - 18 yr old - 1st pair 30 mins/night
35 yr old - 35 yr old - 2nd pair 15 mins/night
35 yr old - 35 yr old - 3rd pair 5 mins/night

18 yr old - 70 starts
35 yr old - 12 stars

Team B
35 yr old - 35 yr old - 35 yr old - 1st Line 22 mins/night
35 yr old - 35 yr old - 35 yr old - 2nd Line 18 mins/night
18 yr old - 18 yr old - 18 yr old - 3rd Line 7 mins/night
18 yr old - 18 yr old - 18 yr old - 4th Line 3 mins/night

35 yr old - 35 yr old - 1st pair 30 mins/night
18 yr old - 18 yr old - 2nd pair 15 mins/night
18 yr old - 18 yr old - 3rd pair 5 mins/night

35 yr old - 70 starts
18 yr old - 12 stars

The avg age of Team B is lower than Team A. But when you look at the roster and how much each piece plays, you see that actually Team A is an extremely exaggerated young team that looks like it's getting better, and Team B is a very old team that looks like it's about to fall apart.

Average age is not a good indicator of "team age" because it isn't weight, based on the players value to the team.

Going with our current roster (When healthy)

Lupul - Bozak - Kessel
Kulemin - Grabovski - MacArthur
JVR - Kadri - Frattin
Orr - McClement - Komarov

Kostak - Phaneuf
Liles - Franson/Komisarek
Gardiner - Gunnarsson

Reimer
Scrivens

29 - 26 - 25
26 - 29 - 27
23 - 22 - 25
30 - 29 - 26

27 - 27
32 - 25/31
22 - 26

24
26

This isn't a "young" team, it's a team that actually, as sad as this may or may not be, in it's prime.
It's not like Colorado where you're waiting for Landeskog/Duchene to develop, Edmonton where you're seeing Schultz/Nuge/Yakupov/Hall/Eberle develop, or Minny etc...

For every team each year their young guys get better till they hit their prime, then their prime players get worse till they retire. The leafs have just as many players who will be improving each year as those who will be declining.

This isn't a bash leafs, leafs suck etc thread. Just saying we aren't a young team full of developing kids. We're a team of players who are (for the most part) in the younger parts of their prime, with a few young guys who will improve (Kadri/Gardiner) with a few older guys who are moving into their 30's (Grabo, Liles, Komi), our avg age may be low, but are weighted avg age, isn't as low.

actually, you're completely wrong.

Let's break it up into lines and pairs of talent.

Line 1 / Pair 1 / #1 G: Kessel 25, Lupul 29, Grabo 28, Phaneuf 27, Gardiner 22, Reimer 24 = Average 25.8

Line 2 / Pair 2: Van Riemsdyk 23, Kadri 22, Kulemin 26, Gunnar 26, Liles 32 = Average 25.8

Line 3 / Pair 3 / #2 G: MacArthur 27, Bozak 26, Frattin 24, Franson 25, Kostka 27 , Scrivens 26 = Average 25.8

Line 4 / Extras : McClement 29, Komarov 25, Brown 27, Orr 29, Steckel 30, Komisarek 30, Fraser 26 = Average 28.0


The core talent on the team averages just over 25 years of age. That is a very young team.

The replaceable bottom line talent brings the average age up, not down.

 

[Faltorvo]

This seems more of difference of development paths at least with Edmonton.

They are taking their young high draft picks and putting them into the NHL right away. Developing them there. I would be worried about cronic injuries down the road.

Toronto who doesn't have the high picks, not to their level. Have chosen to develop their players in the minors to allow them the opportunity to succeed. To do this you must sign UFA to fill the roles in the meantime which is a huge no no on these boards it seems.

The waiver pick up of McLaren is another sign of this. Our fourth line isn't good but none of our potential "enforcer" prospects are even close right now. This is McLaren's tryout for Orr's spot.

Two different philosophies, I like the Leafs better. It would be better if we had a few top draft picks to go with it though.

I like the Leafs development path better also.

I'm not sold that EDM is doing the right thing in that regard.

 

[achtungbaby]

Depending upon maturity, physical and mental but 99% of the time..... Yes.

I guess I'm wondering specifically about Yak, Hall and the Nuge since you compared Edmonton to Toronto. It's nice to say you'd have done it differently, but it's not like Toronto had any rookies that we could seriously debate being worthy of keeping with the big club at a young age. Kadri maybe? Debatable.

Outside of edmontons big three, who did they rush into the NHL? Even Eberle played a whole season in the AHL before sticking with the big club.

 

[Faltorvo]

If you had the number one overall you would keep them in the minors?

I would consider that or even leave in the junior ranks.

 

[zeke]

compare to another "young" team, like say the Senators.

Line 1 / Pair 1 / #1 G: Spezza 29, Alfie 40, Michalek 28, Karlsson 22, Gonchar 38, Anderson 31 = Average 31.3

Line 2 / Pair 2: Turris 23, Greening 26, Silfverberg 22, Methot 27, Phillips 34 = Average 26.4

Line 3 / Pair 3 / #2 G: Smith 24, Latendresse 25, Zibanejad 19, Benoit 29, Cowen 22, Bishop 26 = Average 24.2

Line 4 / Extras: Neil 33, Condra 26, O'Brien 24, Regin 26, Daugavins 24, Borowiecki 23, Wiercioch 22 = Average 25.4


Now Ottawa is a team whose "average age" is deceiving - a big chunk of their core is actually very old, with only a couple of youngsters in there - and they bring down their overall average age significantly because their replaceable bottom liners are so young.

 

[GordieHoweHatTrick]

I haven't heard about how we're a young team for about a year now. A year, or two, ago we were one of the youngest teams. Now we're middle of the pack. Definitely no Detroit

 

[hobarth]

I disagree with the last part. A four year deal is about perfect for patience. It allows for another draft, a few years of development, the money value is good and doesn't deter trade value, if a prospect develops early.

Couldn't ask for much more from Toronto's perspective. Idk I personally like it.

Lupul is signed for 5 more years beyond this year @ 5.5 mil. per. He's being paid like his performance last year was a normal year for him where as we know that his best previous year was 53 points, career year perhaps. Overpaying a player does not make him a star past performance does.

We now have an injury prone player with a less than stellar past committed to consuming 1/12th of the salary cap for 5 years. I wonder if we didn't have so much money tied up by players like Lupul, Grabo and Lilies what kind of true impact player TO is missing out on, maybe 2 even. Those 3 players now represent 1/4 of TO's salary cap allowance.

Which would you prefer those 3 players or Getzlaf and Perry and I'm not saying we could sign those specific players but we certainly can't with so much $s promised to those 3.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

actually, you're completely wrong.

Let's break it up into lines and pairs of talent.

Line 1 / Pair 1 / #1 G: Kessel 25, Lupul 29, Grabo 28, Phaneuf 27, Gardiner 22, Reimer 24 = Average 25.8

Line 2 / Pair 2: Van Riemsdyk 23, Kadri 22, Kulemin 26, Gunnar 26, Liles 32 = Average 25.8

Line 3 / Pair 3 / #2 G: MacArthur 27, Bozak 26, Frattin 24, Franson 25, Kostka 27 , Scrivens 26 = Average 25.8

Line 4 / Extras : McClement 29, Komarov 25, Brown 27, Orr 29, Steckel 30, Komisarek 30, Fraser 26 = Average 28.0


The core talent on the team averages just over 25 years of age. That is a very young team.

The replaceable bottom line talent brings the average age up, not down.

Only 2 of our top 10 producers are over 26.

 

[ULF_55]

Only 2 of our top 10 producers are over 26.

You could say only 2 of all the players are over 30. Liles 31 and Komisarek 31.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

You could say only 2 of all the players are over 30. Liles 31 and Komisarek 31.

...and you'd be right?

 

[hobarth]

This seems more of difference of development paths at least with Edmonton.

They are taking their young high draft picks and putting them into the NHL right away. Developing them there. I would be worried about cronic injuries down the road.

Toronto who doesn't have the high picks, not to their level. Have chosen to develop their players in the minors to allow them the opportunity to succeed. To do this you must sign UFA to fill the roles in the meantime which is a huge no no on these boards it seems.

The waiver pick up of McLaren is another sign of this. Our fourth line isn't good but none of our potential "enforcer" prospects are even close right now. This is McLaren's tryout for Orr's spot.

Two different philosophies, I like the Leafs better. It would be better if we had a few top draft picks to go with it though.

This is the age old conundrum of whether a player should develop thru junior/college/AHL or should go straight to the NHL for development.

Most premium players spend very little to no time in the AHL because their talent supercedes the development process. In the Cap world the draft is really the only way to inject talent into your line-up without paying top $.

If a player comes to tryout camp and is one of your best players why not play him, what would be the purpose of returning him to where ever he came from ? If he's already that good why send him to a lesser environment, what could he possibly gain from that ?

I think that a player who is to talented to play where he plays becomes content and coasts on his talent rather than continuing to commit himself to learning and developing.

Kadri is a prime example of a player's talents being wasted in the AHL. When I watched Kadri in the AHL his play was not progressing, he was still constantly committing the same high percentage errors that was being cited as the reason why he wasn't in the NHL. Why was he doing that because he could, he was playing in a league where he was a man among boys, not in age in talent. All players should learn to play in the arena that's appropriate to them.

I've never understood the physical development aspect of keeping a player in junior, I don't think Gretzky ever developed a standardly acceptable NHL physique while he played in the NHL yet he seemed to muddle thru a decent career. I feel that talent alone should be the only barometer certainly not preconceived notions of what should be right or wrong.

 

[Drakkor]

I guess I'm wondering specifically about Yak, Hall and the Nuge since you compared Edmonton to Toronto. It's nice to say you'd have done it differently, but it's not like Toronto had any rookies that we could seriously debate being worthy of keeping with the big club at a young age. Kadri maybe? Debatable.

Outside of edmontons big three, who did they rush into the NHL? Even Eberle played a whole season in the AHL before sticking with the big club.

I don't know whether they are rushing anyone or not. I just wouldn't put players in the NHL right away

I like the use of development leagues in the process of creating pros. Just an opinion.

As you can see I have not discussed on skill levels. There is no doubt about how skilled Edmontons top prospects are.

 

[Drakkor]

Lupul is signed for 5 more years beyond this year @ 5.5 mil. per. He's being paid like his performance last year was a normal year for him where as we know that his best previous year was 53 points, career year perhaps. Overpaying a player does not make him a star past performance does.

We now have an injury prone player with a less than stellar past committed to consuming 1/12th of the salary cap for 5 years. I wonder if we didn't have so much money tied up by players like Lupul, Grabo and Lilies what kind of true impact player TO is missing out on, maybe 2 even. Those 3 players now represent 1/4 of TO's salary cap allowance.

Which would you prefer those 3 players or Getzlaf and Perry and I'm not saying we could sign those specific players but we certainly can't with so much $s promised to those 3.

So your saying that the contract in two or three years will none tradable.

Do we have someone screaming at the door to take his spot. I don't.

We have no guarantee on any UFA so I don't consider them going forward. If it happens awesome, if not the position is covered.

 

[ConnorTO]

the best teams are the ones filled with 30-35 year olds or so
the elite teams... teams you usually see in the Stanley Cup

with the young team
they will only get better with time

 

[hobarth]

So your saying that the contract in two or three years will none tradable.

Do we have someone screaming at the door to take his spot. I don't.

We have no guarantee on any UFA so I don't consider them going forward. If it happens awesome, if not the position is covered.

Trouble with a chronically injured player on probably on the downside of their career we probably will never be covered.

 

[Drakkor]

This is the age old conundrum of whether a player should develop thru junior/college/AHL or should go straight to the NHL for development.

Most premium players spend very little to no time in the AHL because their talent supercedes the development process. In the Cap world the draft is really the only way to inject talent into your line-up without paying top $.

If a player comes to tryout camp and is one of your best players why not play him, what would be the purpose of returning him to where ever he came from ? If he's already that good why send him to a lesser environment, what could he possibly gain from that ?

I think that a player who is to talented to play where he plays becomes content and coasts on his talent rather than continuing to commit himself to learning and developing.

Kadri is a prime example of a player's talents being wasted in the AHL. When I watched Kadri in the AHL his play was not progressing, he was still constantly committing the same high percentage errors that was being cited as the reason why he wasn't in the NHL. Why was he doing that because he could, he was playing in a league where he was a man among boys, not in age in talent. All players should learn to play in the arena that's appropriate to them.

I've never understood the physical development aspect of keeping a player in junior, I don't think Gretzky ever developed a standardly acceptable NHL physique while he played in the NHL yet he seemed to muddle thru a decent career. I feel that talent alone should be the only barometer certainly not preconceived notions of what should be right or wrong.

1) yes that conundrum

2) yes they don't spend a lot of time in the minors. But there aren't as many elite players as there are first overall picks. Playing young players to save money is short term planning. Having a strong development program accomplishes the same.

3) I have not talked on a talent level. That should not be the only determining factor in making the team. Maturity has to be a huge consideration, quality of minutes and projection of the player. Maturity is huge to me.

4) Nazem Kadri is not the player today he was when he got drafted or last year for that matter. One could argue he needed that time in the minors to develop. It will never be known for sure.

5) none of the players in question are Gretzky. Development allows for the greatest opportunity to succeed

 

[Drakkor]

Trouble with a chronically injured player on probably on the downside of their career we probably will never be covered.

Its a calculated risk yes but worth it IMO. To many what ifs to worry about right now.