Carlyle fired

[Kin]

So a lot of the fan base that had to endure the late and post Sittler years were still happier about the state of things. 

Well, you'll notice that in what I said about Sundin I didn't say word one about the fans. I was talking about how he dealt with the media and the media's job ultimately is the same regardless of how good the team is, they want to drive conversation and sell papers and the easy way to do that is to criticize the club.

I actually think being on a losing team insulates Kessel to a degree. Phaneuf too. What's, by far, the most common defense of Phaneuf? "Who else is going to play those minutes? Who else should be the #1 defenseman?". Same thing with Kessel. Most people will say, rightfully, that Kessel isn't the problem with this team but in a situation like the Leafs were in for most of Sundin's tenure(and let's not forget that Sundin had quite a few years on bad teams too) Sundin did face a lot of questions as to whether or not he was a good enough captain/best player to take the team where they needed to go.

But, again, that didn't tend to go anywhere because Mats just never went for the bait. He didn't give interesting copy. He was honest but not overly insightful and didn't give the impression that he was overly annoyed by that aspect of the job.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Sundin was almost unanimously praised by the media to the point that when a critical article appeared it would really stand out.  The most criticism of him was typically what he wasn't: wasn't Gary Roberts/Wendel Clark/Doug Gilmour - wasn't exciting like those players, didn't electrify like those players and all that.

But I don't recall there being reporters like Feschuk during that time who would get in his face.

Maybe Sundin escaped criticism more than Kessel, but the amount of criticism the team received hasn't really changed. The were questions about why they couldn't break through to the next level, why they struggled with teams like Philly and New Jersey, why they couldn't find players to play with Sundin, etc. They may not have been quite as aggressive, but they were there.

And, there were definitely some pretty significant criticisms pointed at Sundin in his first few seasons as captain, and a number of articles about whether or not he should be traded.

Yeah that's what I'm trying to say, that the tone was different.  I'm not saying that's unexpected either.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Wonder why Kessel doesn't like him?

http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2014/09/17/leafs_kessel_not_hot_on_spotts_breakout_strategy_feschuk.html

http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2013/10/02/maple_leafs_promised_land_could_be_long_way_away_if_kessels_doing_leading_feschuk.html

http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/2013/06/07/maple_leafs_should_trade_phil_kessel_feschuk.html

Not that I think he's read any of them.

Stick tap to @wyshynski.

 

[Peter D.]

I think Kessel has just been miscast here as the leader and face of the franchise. He is neither. I still think they need to find someone that can potentialy become that character leader and face of the team. A real captain. Phaneuf isn't that guy either.

If Kane is Chicago's comparable to Kessel, than the Leafs desperatly need a Toews.

I'd say this is a pretty accurate assessment of the situation.  A guy like Phil needs to be insulated by a few other prominent players wherein he can just blend in and go about doing his job of scoring goals and putting up points.  That's it.  Not be required to be one of the main guys (along with Phaneuf) expected to stand up in front of the cameras every day, nor even be expected to wear a letter or take on some great leadership role. 

I don't see anything wrong with what Wilson said on the radio today.  He's pretty much spot on.  And I don't expect a new coach to all of a sudden change things with Phil.

It may be unpopular with some, but I do think the whole situation does highlight that Phil is more a complementary player than he is a player to build around.  And there is nothing wrong with that.  Too bad he was thrust into a situation where the reverse is expected and applied.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

It may be unpopular with some, but I do think the whole situation does highlight that Phil is more a complementary player than he is a player to build around.  And there is nothing wrong with that.  Too bad he was thrust into a situation where the reverse is expected and applied.

He's Patrick Kane only Kane has Toews and he has Bozak.

 

[Kin]

It may be unpopular with some, but I do think the whole situation does highlight that Phil is more a complementary player than he is a player to build around.  And there is nothing wrong with that.  Too bad he was thrust into a situation where the reverse is expected and applied.

Yeah, I think that's more or less true. The Mogilny comparison, I think, was fairly apt in that respect.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

It may be unpopular with some, but I do think the whole situation does highlight that Phil is more a complementary player than he is a player to build around.  And there is nothing wrong with that.  Too bad he was thrust into a situation where the reverse is expected and applied.

Maybe I just define complimentary player a little different than you do, but I still think Phil can be a part of a winning teams core. Can he be the absolute best player and the guy you build around? Maybe not. But if you break down a top teams core as their top 2 forwards (usually a C-C or C-W combo), their top defenceman, and starting goalie, I think Kessel can fill that W spot. Unfortunately for him and the Leafs, their top C and D haven't performed close to what's needed and those are arguably the toughest positions to fill.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

It may be unpopular with some, but I do think the whole situation does highlight that Phil is more a complementary player than he is a player to build around.  And there is nothing wrong with that.  Too bad he was thrust into a situation where the reverse is expected and applied.

Maybe I just define complimentary player a little different than you do, but I still think Phil can be a part of a winning teams core. Can he be the absolute best player and the guy you build around? Maybe not. But if you break down a top teams core as their top 2 forwards (usually a C-C or C-W combo), their top defenceman, and starting goalie, I think Kessel can fill that W spot. Unfortunately for him and the Leafs, their top C and D haven't performed close to what's needed and those are arguably the toughest positions to fill.

As I alluded to above, on what top team would a player of Kessel's skill not have another player of equal/better skill with him?  Same with Phaneuf.  Whether they can be the #1 guy or not, they can't if they're not surrounded properly.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Same with Phaneuf.  Whether they can be the #1 guy or not, they can't if they're not surrounded properly.

I am beginning to seriously question Phaneuf as a top-pairing defenceman. He's the guy I most wanted to see under a different coaching staff. If we don't see some sort of improvement in his performance/numbers in the 2nd half of the season I'd be looking to trade him and use that cap space better.

 

[bustaheims]

I am beginning to seriously question Phaneuf as a top-pairing defenceman. He's the guy I most wanted to see under a different coaching staff. If we don't see some sort of improvement in his performance/numbers in the 2nd half of the season I'd be looking to trade him and use that cap space better.

After looking at the chart that was posted the other day with the Corsi% of players who were still around from Wilson's last season, I'm almost willing to completely throw out everything we saw from Phaneuf under Carlyle. His numbers took the biggest hit out of anyone still on the team. I really wouldn't surprise me in the least if he saw the biggest rebound.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Same with Phaneuf.  Whether they can be the #1 guy or not, they can't if they're not surrounded properly.

I am beginning to seriously question Phaneuf as a top-pairing defenceman. He's the guy I most wanted to see under a different coaching staff. If we don't see some sort of improvement in his performance/numbers in the 2nd half of the season I'd be looking to trade him and use that cap space better.

He was fine possession wise in Calgary and even early on as a Leaf.  But it's been really 2-3 seasons now of constantly starting in your own end, getting physical abuse shift after shift and playing those big minutes - and with partners who on any given night might have been Carl Gunnarsson, Keith Aulie, Francois Beauchemin, Jake Gardiner, Korbinian Holzer, Mike Kostka, Cody Franson or John-Michael Liles.

I'm not ready to write him off, I think it's all still there he's just been put in a position to do something he never did in Calgary and arguably shouldn't have had to do here.  But if the team doesn't get the possession issues sorted then...

 

[Kin]

Maybe I just define complimentary player a little different than you do, but I still think Phil can be a part of a winning teams core. Can he be the absolute best player and the guy you build around? Maybe not. But if you break down a top teams core as their top 2 forwards (usually a C-C or C-W combo), their top defenceman, and starting goalie, I think Kessel can fill that W spot. Unfortunately for him and the Leafs, their top C and D haven't performed close to what's needed and those are arguably the toughest positions to fill.

But I think there's a difference in this case between "can" fill that spot and someone who's going to be a particular strength in that spot. Like could we find a cup winner where the #1 winger or #2 forward who is a roughly comparable player? Sure, I mean, the Canes won a cup without a great #1 defensman. But I feel like the big problem with the Leafs right now is that the same is sort of true with Phaneuf. Could he fill that role? Maybe, if they're great at the other spots. But you can't fill every spot there with guys who "can" fill the role.

 

[crazyperfectdevil]

So a lot of the fan base that had to endure the late and post Sittler years were still happier about the state of things. 

Well, you'll notice that in what I said about Sundin I didn't say word one about the fans. I was talking about how he dealt with the media and the media's job ultimately is the same regardless of how good the team is, they want to drive conversation and sell papers and the easy way to do that is to criticize the club.

I actually think being on a losing team insulates Kessel to a degree. Phaneuf too. What's, by far, the most common defense of Phaneuf? "Who else is going to play those minutes? Who else should be the #1 defenseman?". Same thing with Kessel. Most people will say, rightfully, that Kessel isn't the problem with this team but in a situation like the Leafs were in for most of Sundin's tenure(and let's not forget that Sundin had quite a few years on bad teams too) Sundin did face a lot of questions as to whether or not he was a good enough captain/best player to take the team where they needed to go.

But, again, that didn't tend to go anywhere because Mats just never went for the bait. He didn't give interesting copy. He was honest but not overly insightful and didn't give the impression that he was overly annoyed by that aspect of the job.

but see..that's the thing.  I think when you're talking about legacy you're really talking about the fans not sportswriters.  It's like politicians Bill Clinton was constantly under heavy scrutiny during his two terms as president that pretty much comes with the job of being president.  But as we get further from the clinton presidency the metric we use to guage him is not how many positive articles were written about him...but instead what the people think of him. 

So I don't think you can escape talking about fans when you're considering how Sundin is perceived.  Even if Cox wants to sit down and write an article bashing Sundin today I don't think it's going to do much to change his over all perception with the fan base.  Right or wrong it's now part of history. 

As far as Kessel goes I think he's the best offensive player we've had during my time as a leaf fan.  So I'm not sure what else I'd be asking of him.  And in a Similar way it was something that he and Sundin shared.  While Sundin was around the constant question was, why can't we get this guy some wingers.  Now we're stuck with one hell of a winger who quite honestly needs a better center.  So I think it's really a push there.  As far as Phaneuf goes,  perhaps he benefits, the only way to really know would be to see him get traded to a decent team and see how it went.

 

[Kin]

So I don't think you can escape talking about fans when you're considering how Sundin is perceived. 

Ok, but I wasn't making a grand statement on how Sundin is "perceived". I was talking specifically about his interactions with the media and the effect it had on the team. I'm pretty sure that when the topic is his interactions with the media I can limit the scope of it to, you know, his interactions with the media.

 

[crazyperfectdevil]

So I don't think you can escape talking about fans when you're considering how Sundin is perceived. 

Ok, but I wasn't making a grand statement on how Sundin is "perceived". I was talking specifically about his interactions with the media and the effect it had on the team. I'm pretty sure that when the topic is his interactions with the media I can limit the scope of it to, you know, his interactions with the media.

Okay..but with that eliminated I think we have a rather fuzzy impression of who was treated how.  As you've said the media's job is to continuously sell papers, ergo criticism sells.  I guess now it comes down to our perceptions of all the articles we've read about Sundin and Kessel and if there's any real appreciable difference.  Since I think it's fair to say that both have had their share of press written about them.  I have to say..I myself don't feel confident enough in my memory to assert that Sundin was definitely treated better or worse by the media as a whole.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

But I think there's a difference in this case between "can" fill that spot and someone who's going to be a particular strength in that spot. Like could we find a cup winner where the #1 winger or #2 forward who is a roughly comparable player? Sure, I mean, the Canes won a cup without a great #1 defensman. But I feel like the big problem with the Leafs right now is that the same is sort of true with Phaneuf. Could he fill that role? Maybe, if they're great at the other spots. But you can't fill every spot there with guys who "can" fill the role.

Well now I'm kicking myself for writing "can". I do think the 3rd highest scoring player in the past 4 seasons (5th if you go by a per game ratio) would be a particular strength in that position. I just can't fathom how anybody could say otherwise. His performance in the playoffs against Boston reinforced that for me too. But I do know that those people are out there and won't change their mind until they actually see it, just like I can't see myself changing my mind until the core around Kessel doesn't include a 1C who is probably in the bottom-5 in the league in that category and a top pairing defenceman certainly performing like a pretty poor 1D.

 

[mc]

Kessel Kettle calling somebody something an idiot black?

Love what you did there!

 

[hockeyfan1]

Wonder why Kessel doesn't like him?

http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2014/09/17/leafs_kessel_not_hot_on_spotts_breakout_strategy_feschuk.html

http://www.thestar.com/sports/leafs/2013/10/02/maple_leafs_promised_land_could_be_long_way_away_if_kessels_doing_leading_feschuk.html

http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/2013/06/07/maple_leafs_should_trade_phil_kessel_feschuk.html

Not that I think he's read any of them.

Stick tap to @wyshynski.

I don't think Kessel "doesn't like him".  It's just that some of these articles (Feschuk's) have an inflammatory or exaggerated tone to them, seeming to imply that anything that takes place is always in the negative.  The way the article(s) is/are written that give that impression.

Compare to this:
http://www.pensionplanpuppets.com/2014/9/18/6388909/leafs-kessel-spott-collaborate-on-breakout-strategy

 

[Kin]

I just can't fathom how anybody could say otherwise.

Well, let me try just so as to make it seem like I'm not a crazy person. Here are the second best forwards on post-04-05 lockout teams to win the cup(I'm going with a general feel/qualitative evaluation as opposed to just "highest scoring")

Henrik Zetterberg
Evgeni Malkin
Patrick Kane x 2
Milan Lucic
Ryan Getzlaf
Dustin Brown
Jeff Carter
Rod Brind'Amour

Where does Kessel rank on that list? The middle of the pack, I think. Below Zetterberg and Malkin I think we can agree, I'd put him below Kane, Getzlaf and maybe Brind'Amour. He's almost certainly ahead of Lucic and the Kings players.

So when I say "not a strength" all I really mean is that in that role I don't think he'd be particularly stronger than what you see on your average cup winner. You know, if Kessel were the team's second best forward right now then to win a cup the team likely still has to go through teams whose second best forwards include guys like Getzlaf(or Perry) or Kane or Malkin or Nash and so on and he's, charitably, a push with those guys. If they were doing one of those old "Who has the edge' features in the Star the way they used to for a playoff series and one of the categories was "2nd best forward" he wouldn't be an easy check mark in any of those cases.

 

[LittleHockeyFan]

my big laugh for the day?  Phaneuf: "We feel responsible for this (Carlyle firing)"

Ya think?!