will we win round 1 do you guys think

[zeke]

Well then the playoffs should alleviate my fears.

no guarantees, but they should.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Might be accomplished by a media narrative for ratings, but on paper there is literally no way Boston is ever going to be the favorite over us this season. Take a real look at their roster.

I was very confident going into the series against Boston last year, and guess what? Despite completely blowing 2 games at the start, it came down to 10 minutes at the end of game 7. That's as close as it can get.

Here's another perspective - you were very confident last year but we lost. Yes it was close, but I also think it could have been somewhat closer considering how we got blown out 4-0 in the 3rd period with the season on the line. 4-0 in the deciding one period of hockey, yeah that part wasn't close, that part was a blowout.

we're ahead of them in the standings, and the only reason they're actually close is they have triple the loser points. and we're better than them at this that and the other thing too.

So according to you, injuries are a non-factor, got it. And I disagree.

I'm also a little surprised that someone who loves stats as much as you do is using terms such as this thing and that thing and so on but OK.

You were upset enough not to notice that I used wins, losses, goals, goals against, and save percentage.

Not upset, just dis-interested in advanced stats over an 8 game span. Are you upset that I think wins and losses are more important than advanced stats?

yes that is how looking at hot streaks works.

which is what I assumed the comment i was responding to which said "not with how they're playing now" referred to.

if he was referring to how we were playing back before the all-star break, it's a weird way to phrase it.

There are a lot of ups and downs in a season, an 8 game stretch at this point in time isn't very meaningful, especially from an advanced stats POV.

yep, when everyone else was predicting us to get run out of the rink, I said we could win even as the underdogs. We lost in the 3rd period of game 7.

LOL that's not true at all. I said Boston deserved to be the favourites but said IMHO, the odds posted were a bit more in Boston's favour than they should be. I said it looked like it should be a very close series, and it was.

Saying we "could win" doesn't exactly make you Nostradamus my friend, the same could be said for any series ever, it's just a matter of calculating probabilities.

 

[Trapper]

no guarantees, but they should.

Don’t give up the faith Zeke.
There’s nothing wrong with being positive either.

 

[Durrr]

Here's another perspective - you were very confident last year but we lost. Yes it was close, but I also think it could have been somewhat closer considering how we got blown out 4-0 in the 3rd period with the season on the line. 4-0 in the deciding one period of hockey, yeah that part wasn't close, that part was a blowout.

That's literally irrelevant. We're talking about a series of hockey here, 7 games. A period or even a game on its own doesn't matter in the slightest and you're just using that to fit a narrative.

Over a series of hockey, it was as close as it could be in both series against Boston in the last 4-5 years. This year we have improved far more then they have, so I don't see why this doesn't make us the easy favorite.

 

[zeke]

So according to you, injuries are a non-factor, got it. And I disagree.

I typed out the games missed for you. Don't ignore it.

I'm also a little surprised that someone who loves stats as much as you do is using terms such as this thing and that thing and so on but OK.

Just talking your language.

Not upset, just dis-interested in advanced stats over an 8 game span.

pro-tip: advanced stats are especially useful in short samples where wins/losses/goals are especially prone to random variation.

Are you upset that I think wins and losses are more important than advanced stats?

I posted the wins and losses. Your analytics rage blinded you to them.

There are a lot of ups and downs in a season, an 8 game stretch at this point in time isn't very meaningful, especially from an advanced stats POV.

I was responding to a post saying "how they are playing now", it seems a little weird to insist I should be looking at games from a month ago when looking at "how they are playing now".

and, again, the analytics are actually more relevant in smaller samples relative to other numbers, while the other numbers actually catch up in relevance the larger the sample gets. your use of the word "especially" in this context is backwards.

LOL that's not true at all. I said Boston deserved to be the favourites but said IMHO, the odds posted were a bit more in Boston's favour than they should be. I said it looked like it should be a very close series, and it was.

Saying we "could win" doesn't exactly make you Nostradamus my friend, the same could be said for any series ever, it's just a matter of calculating probabilities.

You asked me what I felt about the series going in last year, and I told you. I though we could win, despite being the underdogs, though I didn't think it would be easy. What set me apart, maybe, was insisting that the game 2 performacne was nowhere near as bad as it looked, and that we could come back even from a 1-3 deficit in the series.

As for what you felt about the series, you can say whatever you'd like, as I wouldn't know.

 

[zeke]

Don’t give up the faith Zeke.
There’s nothing wrong with being positive either.

There's no need to be positive. Literally every measure in existence says we're really really good.

 

[therealkoho]

if they play the Canadiens then yes in 6

if they play the B's, if they believe they can they will

 

[AustrianHockeyfan]

Yeeeeeeees! We've got to get behind the boys and believe!

 

[Gary Nylund]

I typed out the games missed for you. Don't ignore it.

It's odd that you listed 49 missed games for Muzzin. OK I guess that's one way of looking at it.

Just talking your language.

There's really no need to be condescending/insulting. If you don't want to have a polite conversation just say so.

pro-tip: advanced stats are especially useful in short samples where wins/losses/goals are especially prone to random variation.

I posted the wins and losses. Your analytics rage blinded you to them.

I was responding to a post saying "how they are playing now", it seems a little weird to insist I should be looking at games from a month ago when looking at "how they are playing now".

and, again, the analytics are actually more relevant in smaller samples relative to other numbers, while the other numbers actually catch up in relevance the larger the sample gets. your use of the word "especially" in this context is backwards.

I understand that over a small sample size advanced stats can be useful but over 8 games, they're really not all that useful.

I have no rage Zeke and I'll ask you again to stop insulting me.

You picked 8 games, why not 10? That was a rhetorical question, just wanted to point out that that would have added two losses to our ledger and I suspect that had we won those games, you would have used them. Only you know for sure if this is true, if it's not then please accept my apologies but you are known to be a homer so ... and I think it's quite arbitrary to think that 8 games how we're "playing now" but 10 games, oh no, 10 games now that's just going back too far. In fact I'd say it's a textbook case of being arbitrary.

You asked me what I felt about the series going in last year, and I told you. I though we could win, despite being the underdogs, though I didn't think it would be easy. What set me apart, maybe, was insisting that the game 2 performacne was nowhere near as bad as it looked, and that we could come back even from a 1-3 deficit in the series.

As for what you felt about the series, you can say whatever you'd like, as I wouldn't know.

I didn't ask you "how you felt", I said that IIRC, you were posting a bunch of stats pumping up the Leafs last year as well and now you're stating that we're better than Boston as if it was a fact. And we can both say whatever we like but if your implying that I'm lying about what I said then it's all there in the archives. And again, there is no need to be insulting.

 

[Gary Nylund]

That's literally irrelevant. We're talking about a series of hockey here, 7 games. A period or even a game on its own doesn't matter in the slightest and you're just using that to fit a narrative.

Over a series of hockey, it was as close as it could be in both series against Boston in the last 4-5 years. This year we have improved far more then they have, so I don't see why this doesn't make us the easy favourite.

So the 3rd period of game 7 was irrelevant, got it.

BTW, if we're so clearly superior to Boston, why do you suppose we're only one point ahead of them in the standings? Just wondering.

 

[Durrr]

So the 3rd period of game 7 was irrelevant, got it.

BTW, if we're so clearly superior to Boston, why do you suppose we're only one point ahead of them in the standings? Just wondering.

Yes, using 20 minutes of hockey to justify which team is a favorite is irrelevant.

It's called parity. We're also 2 points ahead of Nashville and Washington, and 2 points behind Winnipeg, and yet those teams are considered ahead of the Leafs in contender status.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Yes, using 20 minutes of hockey to justify which team is a favorite is irrelevant.

It's called parity. We're also 2 points ahead of Nashville and Washington, and 2 points behind Winnipeg, and yet those teams are considered ahead of the Leafs in contender status.

Actually I'm not "using" it for anything. My position is that it's too early to say who will be the favourite if we play Boston in the playoffs but if we do play, then whoever has home advantage will likely be the favourites.

Not sure where you're getting this information about who's considered what? Contender is a subjective term and all those teams are pretty close, you're absolutely right - this is parity.

 

[BlueStorm]

They beat Montreal in 5 because they are more talented and would have confidence. They lose to Boston in 6 because Boston is a much tougher team and the Leafs still feel the Bruins have their number. Boston will turn it into a street fight and players like AM will turtle and get pushed around.
Tampa beats them in 5 due to better goal tending and forechecking.
Toronto needs a few more tough guys. Muzzin can’t do it all.
Hopefully I’m wrong.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

They beat Montreal in 5 because they are more talented and would have confidence. They lose to Boston in 6 because Boston is a much tougher team and the Leafs still feel the Bruins have their number. Boston will turn it into a street fight and players like AM will turtle and get pushed around.
Tampa beats them in 5 due to better goal tending and forechecking.
Toronto needs a few more tough guys. Muzzin can’t do it all.
Hopefully I’m wrong.

I hope you are wrong but my fears too. When it comes down to 2 guys wanting the puck the bruins have more guys who want it more. Tavares will help. Muzzy will help. But I would like 1 more defender who can help. Even having a 4th line guy on bench who does not hit ice but Chara knows is there would help. And if Chara goes Pronger on AM or MM then we have a response rather then team putting tail between the legs. Sometimes a guy just needs to skate by him early and say "heh big man are we gonna going on a canoe ride today?"

 

[ToneDog]

I hope you are wrong but my fears too. When it comes down to 2 guys wanting the puck the bruins have more guys who want it more. Tavares will help. Muzzy will help. But I would like 1 more defender who can help. Even having a 4th line guy on bench who does not hit ice but Chara knows is there would help. And if Chara goes Pronger on AM or MM then we have a response rather then team putting tail between the legs. Sometimes a guy just needs to skate by him early and say "heh big man are we gonna going on a canoe ride today?"

You are right but there are not many players who are tough enough to challenge Chara. Luckily Chara is able to control his temper and not kill somebody. We need to beat Chara with our speed. Keep throwing the puck in his corner and race him to the puck. It should take a toll on him by game 7.

 

[beebuzz]

I feel we have a chance to win no matter who we play.
We match up well against Tampa, although they are an ABSOLUTE MONSTER, and if we got hot we can beat them. I feel like in that series it would be advantage Tampa, but not impossible.
I feel like Boston could be hard to beat just because they seem to be able to get in our heads. I feel like it would be advantage Boston here, but fairly even.
I feel like Montreal should be an advantage to us as to who wins.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

You are right but there are not many players who are tough enough to challenge Chara. Luckily Chara is able to control his temper and not kill somebody. We need to beat Chara with our speed. Keep throwing the puck in his corner and race him to the puck. It should take a toll on him by game 7.

I think we need to do that too. Exhaust him early and often. But he might catch up to one of our guys and do some damage. He has done it before. Tommy is on the Marlies roster for a reason. Bruins may not even have a 4th line shift and their top line will go 26 minutes in playoffs. Why not have Tommy and Brownie and Goat for a 4th line? Brownie and Goat can play here and there when needed. Tommy can sit on bench. Maybe give him 1 shift early in 1st and tell him to look bad at Chara but come back to bench.

 

[Leaf4Life]

We will win round 1 because we will win the cup

 

[JT AM da real deal]

Everyone on both benches knows what is going on if someone decides to do something stupid. So it helps us keep game clean. And oh well if Chara decides to gangster game himself then Tommy ge s a 2nd shift.

 

[sxvnert]

Not against Boston.

 

[ToneDog]

I think we need to do that too. Exhaust him early and often. But he might catch up to one of our guys and do some damage. He has done it before. Tommy is on the Marlies roster for a reason. Bruins may not even have a 4th line shift and their top line will go 26 minutes in playoffs. Why not have Tommy and Brownie and Goat for a 4th line? Brownie and Goat can play here and there when needed. Tommy can sit on bench. Maybe give him 1 shift early in 1st and tell him to look bad at Chara but come back to bench.

Imagine the response on these boards if they brought up Tommy ? Babs would have to call him up for an audition if that is something he wants in his playoff arsenal but I doubt Babs would do that. He had Martin at his disposal last year and sat him in the pressbox.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

There is a big difference between the 2. Tommy makes Wilson fight like a school girl. Chara won't do that move but he could get caught and knocked out.

 

[JT AM da real deal]

Listen I can't see it in game 1. But I would not put in past Shanny to let a key person know he may do it if anything got stupid. Tommy is a BIG message that is sitting on the Marlies for 1 reason only.

 

[Peiskos]

It depends on who we get in round 1.

If we get Montreal I’d say solid 75% chance we move on to round 2.

If we get Boston I’d say solid 45% chance we move on to round 2.

Leafs need more grit, we need to add another depth defender too. I like that I saw an article that Dubas looked into getting Clifford from LA, that’s a kind of guy we need to add for playoff hockey.

 

[Trapper]

There's no need to be positive. Literally every measure in existence says we're really really good.

There has been lots of good teams in the history of the NHL that just didn’t have the it factor. We don’t know yet.
There has only been a small number of teams that have won it out of 30 for the past 10 + years. It’s that difficult.

We don’t know if we have all the right individuals or the right individuals around them to make a 4 round playoff team yet.

It took the Caps 10 years + roster changes over that time.

Stats don’t care about game 7 almost in the playoffs. But we’re going to find out. Can we handle any style thrown at us. If you are worried about specific teams to avoid, then the answer isn’t leaning to great.