What did Winnipeg do differently from us?

[Gallagbi]

Do you always answer a question with a question?

Seriously though, all I'm saying that while it was only one period, it was a hell of a lot more than "just one period". I'm not saying that it defines the entire season but I am saying that people who want to say we're on a par with WPG (or even Boston for that matter) and that the way we lost game 7 doesn't matter because "it was only one period" are kidding themselves and trying too hard to make excuses. It was a very important period of hockey, in the same way as it was the last time we lost to Boston in the playoffs. I don't take any comfort in the fact that we "almost" won then or now because the truth is, we didn't "almost" win.

Also, comparing it to game 5 or 6 isn't quite the same thing. you know how it goes, game 5 the pressure is off, everyone figures we're toast so you go out there and you're loose etc. Game 7 though, that's another story. The pressure was on and it was obvious we just weren't up to the challenge and in the end, that showed in dramatic fashion.

Most of this is garbage IMO. Yes it was a bad period and being "close" doesn't excuse the implosion, but Boston wasn't some insane team we couldn't keep up with. The fact it was that close in game 7, and we blew it more than Bos stepped up, means those 2 teams were similar. I don't think the gap between the top 5-10 teams in the league is all that big at the moment.

 

[Community]

Do you always answer a question with a question?

Seriously though, all I'm saying that while it was only one period, it was a hell of a lot more than "just one period". I'm not saying that it defines the entire season but I am saying that people who want to say we're on a par with WPG (or even Boston for that matter) and that the way we lost game 7 doesn't matter because "it was only one period" are kidding themselves and trying too hard to make excuses. It was a very important period of hockey, in the same way as it was the last time we lost to Boston in the playoffs. I don't take any comfort in the fact that we "almost" won then or now because the truth is, we didn't "almost" win.

Also, comparing it to game 5 or 6 isn't quite the same thing. you know how it goes, game 5 the pressure is off, everyone figures we're toast so you go out there and you're loose etc. Game 7 though, that's another story. The pressure was on and it was obvious we just weren't up to the challenge and in the end, that showed in dramatic fashion.

Okay, so say we reset the series right now to game #7, but we reverse how the game went down and the Leafs come back to win in the 3rd. Should Boston fans think their team is significantly worse than Toronto's or feel that their core group isn't good?

Better example, Nashville shit the bed in game #7 in a similar way as the Leafs (except they fell behind earlier)... Does that mean that they arent nearly as good as WPG? I think NSH should be a favourite next year without having to change their team one bit.

 

[Community]

If that's a fair question than I suppose this is also a fair question:

If the Leafs are a 105 point team that skates like the wind, why didn't they bother showing up when the season was on the line?

Have you ever played sports? Andersen let in two fairly soft goals (we can argue if the defense deserves some of the blame but whatever), it is EXTREMELY difficult to bounceback and gain momentum after that (Nashville couldnt in their game 7). Its not like they didnt show up for any of game 7.

 

[Gary Nylund]

They did. Had a good 40 minutes and then the veteran team shut the Leafs down and a few players had a lacklustre 20 mins.

Our oldest core player is 27 (Naz) and most would argue he's one of the least valuable pieces of our core. There are lots of ups and downs.

As mentioned before, why didnt WPG show up last year? Maybe because their core is still fairly young (albeit significantly older than ours) and their group continued to grow from one year to the next (mainly Hellebuyck, Scheifele, and Connor).

Why are people so pessimistic about our team? This should be the most optimistic you've been in this millenium.

Just because I'm not dismissing our failure in game 7 doesn't mean I'm not optimisic. Quite the contrary, I've been following this team for almost 50 years and I've never been as optimistic as I am now.

Most of this is garbage IMO. Yes it was a bad period and being "close" doesn't excuse the implosion, but Boston wasn't some insane team we couldn't keep up with. The fact it was that close in game 7, and we blew it more than Bos stepped up, means those 2 teams were similar. I don't think the gap between the top 5-10 teams in the league is all that big at the moment.

Sorry you think my opinion is garbage. If you have no respect for my opinion then perhaps you shouldn't waste any more time on me in this discussion. The rest of your post I agree with. Glad you're not excusing the implosion, it was real.

Okay, so say we reset the series right now to game #7, but we reverse how the game went down and the Leafs come back to win in the 3rd. Should Boston fans think their team is significantly worse than Toronto's or feel that their core group isn't good?

Better example, Nashville **** the bed in game #7 in a similar way as the Leafs (except they fell behind earlier)... Does that mean that they arent nearly as good as WPG? I think NSH should be a favourite next year without having to change their team one bit.

Sorry, not going to spend time on this unlikely hypothetical scenario. We were significantly worse than they were in the 3rd period, that doesn't mean we will be next year, it doesn't mean I think our core sucks or anything like that. I think our core group is very good.

Edit - after a bit of reflection I'll answer - I can't even imagine Boston collapsing the way we did, the experience on that team makes the odds of that happening a tremendous long shot. If someone told you that either Boston or Toronto collapsed like that admit it - you'd know instantly that it was Toronto wouldn't you? But if it had happened to Boston then sure it would downgrade my opinion of their team, absolutely it would. Just like Toronto, it wouldn't entirely define them but it would carry a fair bit of weight at the same time, it definitely wouldn't be "just one period".

 

[Gary Nylund]

Have you ever played sports? Andersen let in two fairly soft goals (we can argue if the defense deserves some of the blame but whatever), it is EXTREMELY difficult to bounceback and gain momentum after that (Nashville couldnt in their game 7). Its not like they didnt show up for any of game 7.

Spare me the condescension. Yes, I've played a ton of sports. You?

That was a rhetorical question BTW, I really don't care if you have or not.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

The leafs had the lead going into the third period of a game 7 series. It's not like we got our asses handed to us. We got that far without 2 of our best 3 players even showing up.

Laine and Sheifele showed up for the playoffs. Matthews and Nylander didn't. That was the difference. It remains to be seen if Matthews and Nylander will be continued playoff busts. Let's hope they aren't.\

If Laine and Sheifele keep showing up like this every post season... and Matthews and Nylander continue being disgraceful human beings in the post season... well... get used to seeing this every year.

 

[LeafFever]

The leafs had the lead going into the third period of a game 7 series. It's not like we got our asses handed to us. We got that far without 2 of our best 3 players even showing up.

Laine and Sheifele showed up for the playoffs. Matthews and Nylander didn't. That was the difference. It remains to be seen if Matthews and Nylander will be continued playoff busts. Let's hope they aren't.\

If Laine and Sheifele keep showing up like this every post season... and Matthews and Nylander continue being disgraceful human beings in the post season... well... get used to seeing this every year.

This is the point I am making. does anyone think that many core players don't show up again? How about another 3 game suspension and sub .900% goaltending? The Leafs are good enough, they just have to play their best like the Caps are finally doing (And this is their worst team talent-wise in along time).

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

The only thing they've done "differently" is to have more vets as their top contributers while our top contributers are still babies. Several of our bigger vet contributers offensively are guys we have to shelter. Give it a little time.

 

[StatsNightHeroes]

To get back on topic, I think a key for Winnipeg was moving on from guys at the right times and getting valuable pieces back. They also did a good job keeping the right vet guys even after missing the playoffs last year. Obviously, they have drafted very well and picked up their star young goalie in the 5th round.

I can’t help but think about the number of chances Toronto has had to sell high on guys at the deadline or with a couple years to go on their deal and have blown it. Most of the blame falls on the previous regimes but it really hurts to see 2 2nd round picks gone for 4th line rentals and the very significant opportunity cost of keeping our own pending UFAs this year.

Grabovski, Kulemin and MacArthur all gone for nothing. Reimer and Bernier for next to nothing. Phaneuf for next to nothing after a stupid extension. Kessel sold low because of his contract and him being run out of town by the new regime and media. Not to mention all the other terrible asset management of the Nonis and Burke eras which brought one playoff appearance in a shortened season.

Up until Matthew’s first year this team was pretty much a bottom 10 team every year. The cupboard consisted of 1st rounders from the last 2 years and a few late round guys in Brown, Johnsson and Leivo who had some promise. Obviously the team is in much better shape now than they were, just need to stick with it and try to maximize our opportunities when the team is truly peaking.

 

[drewjenks]

Here they are headed to the WCF having beat some pretty good teams. They look legit.

When they inherited Atlanta’s roster it wasn’t anything special and they were a bottom feeder, just like Toronto. Yet they appear to be in a much better position than us. Why?

I don't understand a lot of these comments....

The Leafs have been rebuilding for 3-4 seasons.
The Jets have been rebuilding for 6-8 seasons.

That's why the Jets are better at the moment.

PLEASE NOTE: The Leafs should have been rebuilding during the Burke/Nonis era....just like the Jets were....but Burke thought Kessel & Phaneuf would take us to the promised land.

However, the Jets have done a good job sticking with the build.

They didn't trade futures in their bubble years & they hit on a lot of mid-late 1st rounders:

2nd | Laine (can't give much credit)
9th | Trouba
9th | Ehlers
17th | Connor
24th | Vesalainen (He's put up strong numbers since getting drafted)
25th | Roslovic (He looks like he'll become a solid two-way center)

The Jets also have better veterans than the Leafs at the moment:

- Scheifele
- Wheeler
- Byfuglien
- Statsny
- Myers
- Little
- Perreault
- Lowry

One thing the Leafs might be struggling with is asset retention.

We could have had all the below picks (if these players were moved at the right time). None of them projected to be in the long term plan, mostly due to their age. However, we've been performing much better than expected, so it's hard to blame management for this. I was personally on the side of 'trading them all' at the deadline & in summer 2017 (I was happy to keep Leivo, but only if Backcock was going to play him).

1st + 3rd | Gardiner in Summer 2017 | Coming off 43 points & a plus 24.
1st + 3rd | JVR in summer 2017 | Coming off 62 points.
1st | Bozak in summer 2017 | Coming off 55 points.
2nd | Komarov in summer 2017 | Coming off 32 points
2nd | Leivo in summer 2017 | Coming off a top-10 Points Per 60 in the NHL.
2nd | Boyle (not a necessary trade)
2nd | Plekanec (not a necessary trade)

 

[Community]

Just because I'm not dismissing our failure in game 7 doesn't mean I'm not optimisic. Quite the contrary, I've been following this team for almost 50 years and I've never been as optimistic as I am now.



Sorry you think my opinion is garbage. If you have no respect for my opinion then perhaps you shouldn't waste any more time on me in this discussion. The rest of your post I agree with. Glad you're not excusing the implosion, it was real.



Sorry, not going to spend time on this unlikely hypothetical scenario. We were significantly worse than they were in the 3rd period, that doesn't mean we will be next year, it doesn't mean I think our core sucks or anything like that. I think our core group is very good.

Edit - after a bit of reflection I'll answer - I can't even imagine Boston collapsing the way we did, the experience on that team makes the odds of that happening a tremendous long shot. If someone told you that either Boston or Toronto collapsed like that admit it - you'd know instantly that it was Toronto wouldn't you? But if it had happened to Boston then sure it would downgrade my opinion of their team, absolutely it would. Just like Toronto, it wouldn't entirely define them but it would carry a fair bit of weight at the same time, it definitely wouldn't be "just one period".

The bolded is my exact point. It isnt that they are significantly better than the Lwafs, but their experience calmed them down and was why they were able to get ahead (along with somw unfortunate Leaf plays). The Leafs were with Boston until the 3rd period of game 7. With more experience, I am sure they would have done a much better job shutting them down.

Spare me the condescension. Yes, I've played a ton of sports. You?

That was a rhetorical question BTW, I really don't care if you have or not.

Not trying to be condescending. Was just trying to point out that in any team sport it is very difficult to come back when you let in a deflating goal or 2. Its not like the entire team was the reason we lost in the third (yes, you win/lose as a team but those mistakes were not on the whole team even if it took the wind out of everybody's sails).


Im not excusing our 3rd period, that is something thst needs to be worked on. However, based on your posts in this thread it seems you are putting way too much weight on a third period lead loss in a high scoring game where we were only up by 1 goal.

Experience will help keep our team ahead in that situation. However, we should all be able to agree that if we redid that 3rd period most likely Gardiner and Andersen would not have made the mistakes thst led to the goals against. They were bad decisions/plays, but they are both good players. That is why some people are not as upset abot the 3rd period as you, it sucked but it was not a full team 3 goal collapse like 2013. It was a couple bad plays in a 1 goal/tie game that make it neafly impossible to get going again with 15mins left in the game.

 

[Community]

I don't get a lot of the comments?

The Leafs have been rebuilding for 3 seasons.
The Jets started their rebuild like 6-10 years ago.

That's why their better at the moment (note: the Leafs should have been rebuilding as well, but Burke thought Kessel, Phaneuf & Bozak would take us to the promised land).

However...the Jets did a good job sticking with the build.

They avoided losing assets in their bubble years & they hit on a ton of mid/late 1st rounders:

2nd | Laine (no credit given)
7th | Scheifele
9th | Trouba
9th | Ehlers
17th | Connor
18th | Stanley (No idea - but he's huge)
24th | Vesalainen (I think he'll be good)
25th | Roslovic (I think he'll be good)


One thing the Leafs may be struggling with is asset retention.

We could have had all the picks below (if players were moved at a good time):

1st Rounder + | JVR
1st Rounder + | Gardiner
2nd Rounder | Bozak
2nd Rounder | Boyle Trade
2nd Rounder | Pleks Trade
3rd Rounder | Komarov

I agree with most of this post except: the value lost in trading for players (or not trading ours) allowed us to make the playoffs last year and was good insurance this year as to why we pushed Boston to 7 games.

And for the drsfting, the last 3 are not big finds at this point (Stanley looks like a bad pick IMO, hes huge but nothing else). The Leafs have guys like them thst may or may not work out. As for the others, our top picks match up pretty well with theirs. Our vets arr the big difference and hopefully something we can find in a good value trade or not insane UFA deal because we dont have a wheeler or Byfuglien.

 

[Gary Nylund]

The leafs had the lead going into the third period of a game 7 series. It's not like we got our asses handed to us. We got that far without 2 of our best 3 players even showing up.

Laine and Sheifele showed up for the playoffs. Matthews and Nylander didn't. That was the difference. It remains to be seen if Matthews and Nylander will be continued playoff busts. Let's hope they aren't.\

If Laine and Sheifele keep showing up like this every post season... and Matthews and Nylander continue being disgraceful human beings in the post season... well... get used to seeing this every year.

LOL. You really need to take a deep breath and calm thyself.

The bolded is my exact point. It isnt that they are significantly better than the Lwafs, but their experience calmed them down and was why they were able to get ahead (along with somw unfortunate Leaf plays). The Leafs were with Boston until the 3rd period of game 7. With more experience, I am sure they would have done a much better job shutting them down.

Not trying to be condescending. Was just trying to point out that in any team sport it is very difficult to come back when you let in a deflating goal or 2. Its not like the entire team was the reason we lost in the third (yes, you win/lose as a team but those mistakes were not on the whole team even if it took the wind out of everybody's sails).

Im not excusing our 3rd period, that is something thst needs to be worked on. However, based on your posts in this thread it seems you are putting way too much weight on a third period lead loss in a high scoring game where we were only up by 1 goal.

Experience will help keep our team ahead in that situation. However, we should all be able to agree that if we redid that 3rd period most likely Gardiner and Andersen would not have made the mistakes thst led to the goals against. They were bad decisions/plays, but they are both good players. That is why some people are not as upset abot the 3rd period as you, it sucked but it was not a full team 3 goal collapse like 2013. It was a couple bad plays in a 1 goal/tie game that make it neafly impossible to get going again with 15mins left in the game.

1)
Agree to disagree, Boston is as of right now "significantly better" than we are. You talk about how much better we'd have been if only we had more experience and that's exactly the point - we don't have that experience, they do and that's a big part of why they are better. Not light years better but they were almost 3-2 favourites before the series began and they proved that that was fair and if anything, they should have been bigger favourites than they were.

2)
It wasn't a high scoring game until we collapsed in the 3rd period.

3)
Not sure how much "weight" you think I'm putting on it. I'm not saying it defines us as a team or anything, I just disagree with the people saying things like "it's only one period" or "anyone can win a game 7" or even you with your theoretical question of what if this had happened to Boston instead of us - it didn't happen to them and I can't even imagine it happening to them, that's the whole point. I said this earlier:

If someone told you that either Boston or Toronto collapsed like that admit it - you'd know instantly that it was Toronto wouldn't you?

It was meant as a rhetorical question but I'm going to ask that question of you directly this time and if you answer honestly, I'd be surprised if your answer was anything but yes, you could guess with a great degree of certainty that if one of these two teams collapsed, it was the Leafs.

4)
You say that is was "nearly impossible to get going again" with 15 minutes left. Again, IMHO that just again shows that we lack the experience needed to beat a team like Boston. If you can't "get going" then well, that's a pretty big problem. Game 7, 3rd period, if you can't "get going" then you don't really even stand a chance do you?

Not the end of the world. The collapse last time we played Boston was awful but I got over it in time and TBH, I'm alreay over this collapse too. I'm not going to pretend it didn't happen or that it was "just another period" though, it was what it was and hopefully the scars won't last but the experience will serve as strong motivation for next season. Boston is absolutely better than we are today, whether that's still the case next season, we'll see. At any rate both teams will have some roster turnover next season so it will be a new day so to speak to some extent for both teams.

Edit - would add that comparing us to WPG is rather pointless. We're in the East, they're in the West, they're a few years ahead of us in the process so they have some very good vets who play huge roles etc. They're much better than we are right now too but that's OK, doesn't mean they will be next season. We should be trying to be the best team we can be, not just better than WPG but better than everyone else too but it will take time.

 

[Bluelines]

LOL. You really need to take a deep breath and calm thyself.



1)
Agree to disagree, Boston is as of right now "significantly better" than we are. You talk about how much better we'd have been if only we had more experience and that's exactly the point - we don't have that experience, they do and that's a big part of why they are better. Not light years better but they were almost 3-2 favourites before the series began and they proved that that was fair and if anything, they should have been bigger favourites than they were.

Disagree, they have a better top line but not a better team and they had a tonne of help from the refs and we only lost by a period in that series.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Disagree, they have a better top line but not a better team and they had a tonne of help from the refs and we only lost by a period in that series.

Yeah I get it, it was just one period. It was a pretty huge period though so it all depends on how you look at it I suppose. Or maybe we should narrow down what we mean by "significant" before you agree/disagree with my statement. And I do strongly disagree with "not a better team".

Boston was given about a 57% chance of beating us by the bookies. If we were to replay the series, what would you set the betting line at? Do you disagree with them being solid favourites? I suppose you do if you say they're not a better team so would the betting line be pickem? Or would you have Toronto as the favourites?

 

[LeafFever]

LOL. You really need to take a deep breath and calm thyself.



1)
Agree to disagree, Boston is as of right now "significantly better" than we are. You talk about how much better we'd have been if only we had more experience and that's exactly the point - we don't have that experience, they do and that's a big part of why they are better. Not light years better but they were almost 3-2 favourites before the series began and they proved that that was fair and if anything, they should have been bigger favourites than they were.

2)
It wasn't a high scoring game until we collapsed in the 3rd period.

3)
Not sure how much "weight" you think I'm putting on it. I'm not saying it defines us as a team or anything, I just disagree with the people saying things like "it's only one period" or "anyone can win a game 7" or even you with your theoretical question of what if this had happened to Boston instead of us - it didn't happen to them and I can't even imagine it happening to them, that's the whole point. I said this earlier:

If someone told you that either Boston or Toronto collapsed like that admit it - you'd know instantly that it was Toronto wouldn't you?

It was meant as a rhetorical question but I'm going to ask that question of you directly this time and if you answer honestly, I'd be surprised if your answer was anything but yes, you could guess with a great degree of certainty that if one of these two teams collapsed, it was the Leafs.

4)
You say that is was "nearly impossible to get going again" with 15 minutes left. Again, IMHO that just again shows that we lack the experience needed to beat a team like Boston. If you can't "get going" then well, that's a pretty big problem. Game 7, 3rd period, if you can't "get going" then you don't really even stand a chance do you?

Not the end of the world. The collapse last time we played Boston was awful but I got over it in time and TBH, I'm alreay over this collapse too. I'm not going to pretend it didn't happen or that it was "just another period" though, it was what it was and hopefully the scars won't last but the experience will serve as strong motivation for next season. Boston is absolutely better than we are today, whether that's still the case next season, we'll see. At any rate both teams will have some roster turnover next season so it will be a new day so to speak to some extent for both teams.

Edit - would add that comparing us to WPG is rather pointless. We're in the East, they're in the West, they're a few years ahead of us in the process so they have some very good vets who play huge roles etc. They're much better than we are right now too but that's OK, doesn't mean they will be next season. We should be trying to be the best team we can be, not just better than WPG but better than everyone else too but it will take time.

Boston has some core players who could be worse next season. I do not expect them to be better than the Leafs next season.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Boston has some core players who could be worse next season. I do not expect them to be better than the Leafs next season.

Then again, we have some players who probably won't be back including 2 players from our very strong #1 PP unit. It's pretty hard to predict which team will be better next year IMHO though I think TB would have to be the favourites to win the division at this point in time. Hopefully we sign Tavares, that should muddy the waters a tad.

 

[LeafFever]

I love the idea of building the offence around Matthews/Marner/Nylander next year. All 22 and under. Bergeron will be 33, Marchand 30. Char will be 42.
The NHl is so wide open. The Leafs are right there. The Capitals are worse and are playing better.

 

[luvdahattymatty]

The FIX around the Leafs is rebuilding the D core and maybe the goalie. I don't think it is fair to throw Andy under the bus until he is given an NHL calibre D core. The forwards are fine. The D core is very weak. The FIX is finding bigger stronger nastier and more skilled D. Dermott and Rielly can be the puck movers. Much like Morrisey and Enstrom in the Peg. However we LACK the 4 big men who control the puck and the net front. We LACK Buff, Trouba, Chiarot and Myers. Until we can control the game in our own end we will always have trouble with boston and winnipeg and san jose and LA type teams. We can't play those kinda games. Z, Gards, Hainsey etc. are just not those guys. And they will NEVER be those guys. We have too many of same kinda D core player which gets exposed whenever someone wants to rough us up. Those type of guys just cough it up under pressure as they don't want to do what it takes as a D man. They are trying to figure out how to skate and position when other team is just flat out manhandling you. The truth is until this situation is figured out we will lose every year in either the first or second round depending on the luck of the opponent draw. This is Dubas big conundrum. Hunter and Shanny both know the issue and Dubas too. Babs may be the problem. He may be stuck in ways. We do not have the BEST efenceman in the NHL like he did. Having a Lindstrom changes everything. Play him 30 minutes a night and with his speed and unbelievable skill level you always get outta trouble. We don't have anything near that guy and can't hope to build a d core like that. Even a trade for Doughty won't do it. Doughty is not that guy either. I express the opinion that that guy is not in the nhl today. Finding Orr or Lindstrom is the 1 in a million lottery ball win.

 

[Bluelines]

Yeah I get it, it was just one period. It was a pretty huge period though so it all depends on how you look at it I suppose. Or maybe we should narrow down what we mean by "significant" before you agree/disagree with my statement. And I do strongly disagree with "not a better team".

Boston was given about a 57% chance of beating us by the bookies. If we were to replay the series, what would you set the betting line at? Do you disagree with them being solid favourites? I suppose you do if you say they're not a better team so would the betting line be pickem? Or would you have Toronto as the favourites?

Bookies ..Meh... sports odds ..meh...

I guess the only way to answer would be IF I knew Boston would get so many PP opportunities in their home rink, yeah Boston would be the favorite. IF I knew Bostons #1 line would be so dominant, yep they would be the favorite. IF I knew Austin would be playing hurt and basically a no show, yeah Boston would be the favorite. IF I knew one of our 30 goal scorers would be out 3 games, yeah that tips the scale in Boston favor.

We basically had one of our impact players show up (Marner) and we still pushed it to 7 games and led going into the 3rd. Kadri, Nylander, Matthews, Anderson, Bozak, JVR, Brown, Gardiner, Dermott all no shows or negative shows. Not criticizing those player but merely outlining for all the no shows or negative shows that we had, we still pushed it that far, looking back on the series with hindsight, no I would not say Boston is a better team or the clear favorite.

If the Matthews line showed up, like we know they can (and do), we would have won the series. If Anderson steals us one game, like he had been doing all year, we would have won the series. If Jake had been the good Jake in Game 7, we would have won the series. If JVR had scored at the pace he did all year, we would have won the series. If Kappy didn't ring 3 (4?) off the irons in critical points in the game, we would have wont the series.... If, If, If.

The team that deserved to win the series, won the series but I don't believe that Boston is a better team. I believe Boston got more breaks and that was the difference.

 

[FerrisRox]

Better blueline + better veteran core + better goaltending.

They are also a much tougher team and a much more difficult team to play against. They can intimidate opponents and wear them down physically and when playoff hockey gets tougher and chipper, Winnipeg has the horses to do the same. That's a tool completely absent from the Maple Leafs toolbox.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Bookies ..Meh... sports odds ..meh...

I used to make a fair bit of money betting on sports and I can tell you this with full confidence - the odds set by the bookies are quite good and 99.99+% of the people who try to outsmart them, fail. And unlike the people blowing smoke on the internet, they back their opinions with lots of real money and do so with great success. But if you think you know better than they do, hey good for you, I'll take their opinion over yours without thinking about it more than the 2 seconds it deserves (if that).

The rest of your post is mostly if this and if that then we would have won, if that makes you feel better that's great.

So many Leaf fans in denial, not sure if I should be surprised or not, probably not I guess.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I love the idea of building the offence around Matthews/Marner/Nylander next year. All 22 and under. Bergeron will be 33, Marchand 30. Char will be 42.
The NHl is so wide open. The Leafs are right there. The Capitals are worse and are playing better.

Well ... I'm not sure about this "Capitals are worse" stuff. It's true that everyone gets old and goes downhill at some point though, Chara should be lose to being done for sure. Boston has some good young players too though, I wouldn't count on them going downhill soon, Bergeron and Marchand should be good for a few more years, we'll see.

 

[Bluelines]

I used to make a fair bit of money betting on sports and I can tell you this with full confidence - the odds set by the bookies are quite good and 99.99+% of the people who try to outsmart them, fail. And unlike the people blowing smoke on the internet, they back their opinions with lots of real money and do so with great success. But if you think you know better than they do, hey good for you, I'll take their opinion over yours without thinking about it more than the 2 seconds it deserves (if that).

The rest of your post is mostly if this and if that then we would have won, if that makes you feel better that's great.

So many Leaf fans in denial, not sure if I should be surprised or not, probably not I guess.

You don't read well, eh?

Odds set by bookies are set to make sure the house wins.

If you did well at gambling, you are the exception. Which would suggest you went against the odds the bookies set...because ya know bookies don't make a lot of money if they are paying out often...

 

[Gary Nylund]

If you did well at gambling, you are the exception. Which would suggest you went against the odds the bookies set...because ya know bookies don't make a lot of money if they are paying out often...

Oh I read just fine. But I'll bite, which part of "Bookies ..Meh... sports odds ..meh..." do you think I misunderstood?

Of course the odds are set to make sure the house wins, that is to say that the goal is to set the line in such a way that money comes in evenly on both sides. However, if you think that there's a big difference in the lines that are set and what the bookies consider the true odds to be then you'd be wrong. That was no doubt the case a few decades ago but there are enough "sharpies" out there that if huge inefficiencies were be posted, they'd jump all over it. The lines posted are super close to the "true" lines, that's a fact.

If you did well at gambling, you are the exception. Which would suggest you went against the odds the bookies set...because ya know bookies don't make a lot of money if they are paying out often...

In that sense sure, I am the exception. I didn't bet against the bookies though, I bet against proline which used to make a TON of HUGE mistakes in their lines. Fun times, and profitable too.