Flyers @ Leafs - Dec. 20th, 7:00pm - CBC, Fan 590

[pmrules]

It's Buffalo and Nashville all over again. Very little, if anything, has changed.

Of course very little has changed. The main source of the problem is still employed. Anaheim had these same issues under Carlyle, and the Leafs weren't anywhere close to this bad without the puck under Wilson. While there are issues with the roster, the source of the problem is the coach and his pathetic system.

This core is flawed, plain and simple. The core has failed under 2 different coaches already. The coach, Nonis AND certain members of the core have to be changed.

 

[bustaheims]

This core is flawed, plain and simple. The core has failed under 2 different coaches already. The coach, Nonis AND certain members of the core have to be changed.

Maybe, but the failure under Wilson can be directly attributed to terrible goaltending, while the failure under Carlyle can be pretty strongly attributed to systems/coaching. There may be issues with the core, but, at most, they're secondary.

 

[Redleaf]

It's Buffalo and Nashville all over again. Very little, if anything, has changed.

Of course very little has changed. The main source of the problem is still employed. Anaheim had these same issues under Carlyle, and the Leafs weren't anywhere close to this bad without the puck under Wilson. While there are issues with the roster, the source of the problem is the coach and his pathetic system.

This core is flawed, plain and simple. The core has failed under 2 different coaches already. The coach, Nonis AND certain members of the core have to be changed.

If they core is flawed, like you say say, it's not due to the overall talent on the team, but lack of motivation on some nights.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Love Love Love how they win despite the coach but lose because of the coach...That thought process is what is flawed.

 

[ZBBM]

This is as much an indictment of Nonis and, to a lesser but still important extent, Shanahan as it is of the coach.

Part of me feels like Shanny knew there was a good chance this was going to happen, and was okay with it either way. To him, it either meant progress or a high draft pick and a pretty clean way to part with Carlyle and Nonis. Nonis, on the other hand, is the guy that stuck with Carlyle until making the decision was largely out of his hands.

Maybe, but he could have just parted with them both after last season and no one would have thought twice about it.

 

[2badknees]

Love Love Love how they win despite the coach but lose because of the coach...That thought process is what is flawed.

Completely agree.

 

[bustaheims]

Love Love Love how they win despite the coach but lose because of the coach...That thought process is what is flawed.

Well, they're not exactly winning with smart, strategic hockey or anything like that. It's through very good goaltending and an unsustainable scoring rate. So, yeah, that is in spite of the coaching. When they don't get one of those two, they lose because their system doesn't provide the structure or support to overcome it. Carlyle's teams have seen the other team have the puck significantly more than they do since his last few seasons behind the bench in Anaheim. This a common theme for his teams, and a direct result of his strategies and systems.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Love Love Love how they win despite the coach but lose because of the coach...That thought process is what is flawed.

So you're just going to pretend during their winning streak that there weren't people saying that they weren't playing well, that it wasn't sustainable, etc?

If you think the coach is bad for the team and the team isn't playing well overall in wins or losses then whether they win or lose shouldn't matter to that opinion.

 

[Kin]

Love Love Love how they win despite the coach but lose because of the coach...That thought process is what is flawed.

But it's like any other flaw a team might have. If the team's goaltending sucked, for instance, and they won some games 6-5 and lost others 5-3 they'd be winning in spite of the flaw and losing because of it. Say what you will about the relative weight of coaching but it's not like it's fundamentally flawed argument.

 

[L K]

Love Love Love how they win despite the coach but lose because of the coach...That thought process is what is flawed.

Completely agree.

That's because you are creating an argument that others aren't making.

 

[2badknees]

But it's like any other flaw a team might have. If the team's goaltending sucked, for instance, and they won some games 6-5 and lost others 5-3 they'd be winning in spite of the flaw and losing because of it. Say what you will about the relative weight of coaching but it's not like it's fundamentally flawed argument.

I believe what the fellow is referring to is that "relative weight of coaching" in comments are far more overrepresented in a loss than a win.

 

[Andy007]

But it's like any other flaw a team might have. If the team's goaltending sucked, for instance, and they won some games 6-5 and lost others 5-3 they'd be winning in spite of the flaw and losing because of it. Say what you will about the relative weight of coaching but it's not like it's fundamentally flawed argument.

I believe what the fellow is referring to is that "relative weight of coaching" in comments are far more overrepresented in a loss than a win.

Isn't there always alot of coach and system vitriol even after wins? Hasn't a huge portion of complaints the last two years been in regards to the team getting wildly outplayed and outshot despite wins?

Seems to me the coach has been getting bashed on a consitent basis non-stop; I don't see how anything has changed in the least.

 

[bustaheims]

I believe what the fellow is referring to is that "relative weight of coaching" in comments are far more overrepresented in a loss than a win.

Even if he is, that's still a flawed way of looking at things. The criticisms being levied here exist independent of the game by game results. They're about the quality of the team's play, the strategic decisions, etc. If the Leafs play poorly and win, they still played poorly, and, when that's a consistent issue, that reflects on the coaching staff. The criticism may be louder after a loss - which is understandable, as people are always more negative after a negative result - but, for most of us, it's not influenced by what the final score was.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I believe what the fellow is referring to is that "relative weight of coaching" in comments are far more overrepresented in a loss than a win.

Even if he is, that's still a flawed way of looking at things. The criticisms being levied here exist independent of the game by game results. They're about the quality of the team's play, the strategic decisions, etc. If the Leafs play poorly and win, they still played poorly, and, when that's a consistent issue, that reflects on the coaching staff. The criticism may be louder after a loss - which is understandable, as people are always more negative after a negative result - but, for most of us, it's not influenced by what the final score was.

It's not directed at those that want the coaches head and those that want him to stay. It's directed at the roller coaster many let this team take them on.

If the team plays poorly and wins and it's consistent, why is that only a reflection on the coaching staff? Why isn't it a reflection on the star forward who gives up on the puck 3 or 4 times a shift because he's afraid of body contact?  Why isn't it a reflection of a group of forwards who only show up for a shift or two per game? Why isn't it a reflection of the 3 or 4 glaring give aways that lead to amazing scoring chances against? Coaches can't teach hockey sense, nor can they teach drive. This isn't peewees. It's not their job to motivate them. I know some feel it is...I don't think it is. If they can't get up for a game against the Chicago Blackhawks they should be ashamed. Heck, Kadri needs to be called fat or lazy to get up for any games.

This team is flawed from top to bottom...Coaches included. Carlyle makes some very poor decisions. How Gardiner is still in the line up is beyond me. Are the options behind him that terrible?

I guess my point is the following....How can we, as fans, pinpoint the flaws of this team on the coach when there's so many other accompanying flaws? This team wins despite being outmatched, out skilled and out coached. Until we as fans are willing to admit that this team is a bottom third team in this league even if a new coach is brought in, we will continue to be disappointed by the results.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Love Love Love how they win despite the coach but lose because of the coach...That thought process is what is flawed.

So you're just going to pretend during their winning streak that there weren't people saying that they weren't playing well, that it wasn't sustainable, etc?

If you think the coach is bad for the team and the team isn't playing well overall in wins or losses then whether they win or lose shouldn't matter to that opinion.

And my point wasn't directed to you or your twin brother Busta. We all know your point of view. And if anyone forgets, the other guy will be right there to remind us.

 

[bustaheims]

I guess my point is the following....How can we, as fans, pinpoint the flaws of this team on the coach when there's so many other accompanying flaws? This team wins despite being outmatched, out skilled and out coached. Until we as fans are willing to admit that this team is a bottom third team in this league even if a new coach is brought in, we will continue to be disappointed by the results.

I never said it reflects only on the coaching, but, at the same time, it's also pretty clear to me that the coaching is a huge part of the issue. I mean, in spite of the pretty significant roster turnover between this season and last (on any given night, 7 or 8 skaters who did not play for the Leafs last season are dressed), the same issues are prevalent. On top of that, in his last few seasons in Anaheim, the Ducks suffered from the very same possession issues that plague the Leafs. So, while the talent on the roster is likely exacerbating the issues, to me, the source is pretty clearly the man behind the bench and his systems/strategies. That doesn't mean everyone else gets a free pass, it just means that, in order to fix the problem, you have to start at what really appears to be the source before you move on to assessing and fixing everything else.