Horachek's impact on the team

[bustaheims]

I totally agree that there was a lack of communication. What bothers me is that within a weeks span they have cut the shots in half almost. You don't teach defence in a weeks time. Horachek approach of involving players seems like it's working for now, but what I'm wondering is what happens when they ask Kessel to do more then just score? Will they stop listening again? This exact scenario played out when RC came aboard. Immediate change in playing and good times for a little over a year. They d?j? vu all over again.

The thing is, it didn't happen when Carlyle took over. They first few games under Carlyle were not good. In fact, the rest of the season under Carlyle was not good. The lockout shortened season ended with some good results, but, the possession issues were still very evident to anyone who looked past the win-loss record.

On top of that, they have asked Kessel to do more, and he's responded. He's been more involved physically since Horachek took the helm. He's more committed defensively. There wasn't any need to teach defence. These are professional hockey players. They know how to play it. They were trying to execute Carlyle's system when he was here, and it was what lead to the disastrous results. They're now working on implementing Horachek's system, and so far, it's working nicely on the defensive side of the puck. Maybe, all it really took was being able to actually effectively communicate what you want done. Explain things in a way that the players can easily understand and make it a two-way street, and things can change awfully quickly.

 

[freer]

It is a good thing that they are playing defense, but it really sucks that they now  can't score a goal.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

It is a good thing that they are playing defense, but it really sucks that they now  can't score a goal.

@mirtle

The Leafs had 20 goals in the last nine games under Carlyle... offence has sagged for about a month now.

It'll come back around.

 

[ZBBM]

It is a good thing that they are playing defense, but it really sucks that they now  can't score a goal.

@mirtle

The Leafs had 20 goals in the last nine games under Carlyle... offence has sagged for about a month now.

It'll come back around.

Maybe, but right now they look like they're ready to go 0-for-California.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

It is a good thing that they are playing defense, but it really sucks that they now  can't score a goal.

@mirtle

The Leafs had 20 goals in the last nine games under Carlyle... offence has sagged for about a month now.

It'll come back around.

Maybe, but right now they look like they're ready to go 0-for-California.

Would not surprise me.  And would not have surprised me to happen if Carlyle was still the coach.  These California teams are deep, especially at the C position.  Leafs, to put it mildly, are not deep at C.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Through 4 games (and if you're thinking of making some sample size joke, look in the mirror and feel bad because no one is saying to read this as gospel) the Leafs' CF% under Horachek is 49.6% (15th in league over those games).  In the 40 games before that it was 44.6% (28th in league).  5v5 GF/GA under Horachek is -2, in 40 games previous it was -1.

On-ice SH% (5v5) under Horachek is 6.0% through 4 games, On-ice SV% is 88.9%.  For previous 40 games on-ice SH% was 9.5% and on-ice SV% was 92.1%.

 

[Redleaf]

It is a good thing that they are playing defense, but it really sucks that they now  can't score a goal.

Like I said earlier in this thread, the Leafs can't play a good defensive system without giving up the great goal production they are capable of providing. I'm starting to really believe that this is the reason Carlyle had them playing the way he did. They were winning more games cheating on the defence and playing a more offensive style game.

Obviously that wasn't sustainable for the duration of an 82 game season though.

Are we all aboard the train heading back to the 'tank nation' terminal?

 

[Joe S.]

I was putting together a post in my mind, because, my recollection was that the leafs went through the same thing when Wilson was fired and Carlyle came on board. That being that they were playing good defensive hockey, but the goals dried up. So I decided to look that up before I would post this... and on man was I wrong.

Wilson was fired on March 12th 2012. Here's what happened the final 13 games of the season:

5-6-2
31 GF 52 GA

FINAL: TOR (2) - FLA (5)

FINAL: TOR (3) - TBL (1)

FINAL: TOR (3) - OTT (1)

FINAL: TOR (0) - BOS (8 )

FINAL: NYI (5) - TOR (2)

FINAL: TOR (4) - NJD (3) S/O

FINAL: NYR (4) - TOR (3) S/O

FINAL: CAR (3) - TOR (0)

FINAL: PHI (7) - TOR (1)

FINAL: BUF (3) - TOR (4)

FINAL: TOR (5) - BUF (6) OT

FINAL: TBL (2) - TOR (3) OT

FINAL: TOR (1) - MTL (4)

So yeah. My memory was way off.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I was putting together a post in my mind, because, my recollection was that the leafs went through the same thing when Wilson was fired and Carlyle came on board. That being that they were playing good defensive hockey, but the goals dried up. So I decided to look that up before I would post this... and on man was I wrong.

Don't think they really ever played good defensive hockey under Carlyle.

 

[Joe S.]

I was putting together a post in my mind, because, my recollection was that the leafs went through the same thing when Wilson was fired and Carlyle came on board. That being that they were playing good defensive hockey, but the goals dried up. So I decided to look that up before I would post this... and on man was I wrong.

Don't think they really ever played good defensive hockey under Carlyle.

I see that now - but I really thought in those final 13 games they tightened up. Somehow that's what was etched in my mind. Clearly I was way off.

It's these last 8 or so years are just one big blob of a memory in my head. I think the only thing that's still clear 2 me are the last 2 post lockout seasons. Everything after that is just one pathetic blur to me.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

April 13, 2013:

Maple Leafs: Gritty, hard-working squad the real deal: Cox
This Leafs team is a solid hockey club, a big, physical team with strong penalty killing, efficient netminding and enough youth to imagine this might be a group built for successful seasons beyond this one.

January 15, 2015:

Why Shanahan must blow up the Maple Leafs: Cox
Shanahan has a core group of players that isn?t good enough or strong enough or committed enough to take this team anywhere meaningful. As Sportsnet colleague Jeff Blair recently pointed out, that core group also isn?t particularly likeable to the public.

 

[bustaheims]

Wilson was fired on March 12th 2012. Here's what happened the final 13 games of the season:

Wilson was actually fired on March 2nd. The Leafs went 6-9-3 in the remaining 18 games of the season under Carlyle. Your point still stands, though. They did not improve defensively under Carlyle at all. In fact, we started to see the beginnings of the poor possession game that would be the hallmark of Carlyle's tenure with the Leafs.

 

[Joe S.]

Wilson was fired on March 12th 2012. Here's what happened the final 13 games of the season:

Wilson was actually fired on March 2nd. The Leafs went 6-9-3 in the remaining 18 games of the season under Carlyle. Your point still stands, though. They did not improve defensively under Carlyle at all. In fact, we started to see the beginnings of the poor possession game that would be the hallmark of Carlyle's tenure with the Leafs.

You're right obviously - I looked up the date and read 2 as 12 for some reason.

 

[ZBBM]

April 13, 2013:

Maple Leafs: Gritty, hard-working squad the real deal: Cox
This Leafs team is a solid hockey club, a big, physical team with strong penalty killing, efficient netminding and enough youth to imagine this might be a group built for successful seasons beyond this one.

January 15, 2015:

Why Shanahan must blow up the Maple Leafs: Cox
Shanahan has a core group of players that isn?t good enough or strong enough or committed enough to take this team anywhere meaningful. As Sportsnet colleague Jeff Blair recently pointed out, that core group also isn?t particularly likeable to the public.

Aside from contradicting himself, Cox has it right this time.  You could have Scotty Bowman coaching this club and it wouldn't change this basic fact.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

April 13, 2013:

Maple Leafs: Gritty, hard-working squad the real deal: Cox
This Leafs team is a solid hockey club, a big, physical team with strong penalty killing, efficient netminding and enough youth to imagine this might be a group built for successful seasons beyond this one.

January 15, 2015:

Why Shanahan must blow up the Maple Leafs: Cox
Shanahan has a core group of players that isn?t good enough or strong enough or committed enough to take this team anywhere meaningful. As Sportsnet colleague Jeff Blair recently pointed out, that core group also isn?t particularly likeable to the public.

Aside from contradicting himself, Cox has it right this time.  You could have Scotty Bowman coaching this club and it wouldn't change this basic fact.

As long as we're making stuff up that we can't prove, you could have 12 Wayne Gretzky's, 6 Chris Pronger's and 2 Dominik Hasek's and Randy Carlyle couldn't coach that team to the playoffs.

 

[ZBBM]

April 13, 2013:

Maple Leafs: Gritty, hard-working squad the real deal: Cox
This Leafs team is a solid hockey club, a big, physical team with strong penalty killing, efficient netminding and enough youth to imagine this might be a group built for successful seasons beyond this one.

January 15, 2015:

Why Shanahan must blow up the Maple Leafs: Cox
Shanahan has a core group of players that isn?t good enough or strong enough or committed enough to take this team anywhere meaningful. As Sportsnet colleague Jeff Blair recently pointed out, that core group also isn?t particularly likeable to the public.

Aside from contradicting himself, Cox has it right this time.  You could have Scotty Bowman coaching this club and it wouldn't change this basic fact.

As long as we're making stuff up that we can't prove, you could have 12 Wayne Gretzky's, 6 Chris Pronger's and 2 Dominik Hasek's and Randy Carlyle couldn't coach that team to the playoffs.

OK, you don't like my opinion, but here's a fact: this core group has accomplished exactly nothing since it's been here.  Why you want to try to build around guys like Phaneuf and Kessel is something you've never bothered to justify, and the onus is on you to do it, not me to have to keep explaining the obvious.

 

[bustaheims]

OK, you don't like my opinion, but here's a fact: this core group has accomplished exactly nothing since it's been here.  Why you want to try to build around guys like Phaneuf and Kessel is something you've never bothered to justify, and the onus is on you to do it, not me to have to keep explaining the obvious.

The problem is that the basic premise for your argument is that, because they haven't won anything, they can't win anything - and that's a painfully flawed argument. A Detroit team that featured Yzerman and Lidstrom also went a long stretch where they didn't win anything. There were also calls to strip that team down. They didn't, and, well, you know the rest. I'm not saying Kessel and Phaneuf are Yzerman and Lidstrom. Obviously, they're not, but, just because they haven't won anything yet doesn't mean that they can't, nor does it mean that the core needs to be exploded for the Leafs to be able to win. It takes a lot of strong support players for any core group to win a Cup, and the Leafs lack that. The issues with this team aren't Kessel and Phaneuf. They're a lack of a true #1 centre, inconsistent and unreliable secondary scoring, questionable defensive depth, etc.

 

[ZBBM]

OK, you don't like my opinion, but here's a fact: this core group has accomplished exactly nothing since it's been here.  Why you want to try to build around guys like Phaneuf and Kessel is something you've never bothered to justify, and the onus is on you to do it, not me to have to keep explaining the obvious.

The problem is that the basic premise for your argument is that, because they haven't won anything, they can't win anything - and that's a painfully flawed argument. A Detroit team that featured Yzerman and Lidstrom also went a long stretch where they didn't win anything. There were also calls to strip that team down. They didn't, and, well, you know the rest. I'm not saying Kessel and Phaneuf are Yzerman and Lidstrom. Obviously, they're not, but, just because they haven't won anything yet doesn't mean that they can't, nor does it mean that the core needs to be exploded for the Leafs to be able to win. It takes a lot of strong support players for any core group to win a Cup, and the Leafs lack that. The issues with this team aren't Kessel and Phaneuf. They're a lack of a true #1 centre, inconsistent and unreliable secondary scoring, questionable defensive depth, etc.

But that's the whole point: they aren't, and never will be.  Your analogy with DET is wrong.  They had two pieces in place, neither of which had the obvious flaws Kessel and Phaneuf do.  What the Leafs need to do is add and/or develop guys of the caliber of Y&L, which they can't do through trade and still retain all the salary tied up in P&K, and waiting to hopefully develop such talent would take us well past Phaneuf's prime.

And BTW, when I say dismantle the core I don't mean just P&K.  Bozak, Kadri, JVR, none of them are untouchable.

 

[bustaheims]

But that's the whole point: they aren't, and never will be.  Your analogy with DET is wrong.  They had two pieces in place, neither of which had the obvious flaws Kessel and Phaneuf do.  What the Leafs need to do is add and/or develop guys of the caliber of Y&L, which they can't do through trade and still retain all the salary tied up in P&K, and waiting to hopefully develop such talent would take us well past Phaneuf's prime.

And BTW, when I say dismantle the core I don't mean just P&K.  Bozak, Kadri, JVR, none of them are untouchable.

I disagree. Yzerman was frequently called out for many of the same things that Kessel gets called out for. He had many of the same so-called "obvious flaws" in his game until the team started winning. Lidstrom wasn't seen as the Lidstrom we know now until the team was successful, either. He didn't get the same level of attention that Phaneuf gets, but, he also wasn't the captain and things like salary weren't as important. There were very real questions as to whether or not the Wings could win with their core, but, they stuck with most of them, and won a bunch of Cups.

And, I know what you mean when you say dismantle the core. I still think you're targeting the wrong guys. It's guys like Bozak, Lupul and Clarkson that need to be improved upon. Not the ones you're singling out.

 

[pmrules]

April 13, 2013:

Maple Leafs: Gritty, hard-working squad the real deal: Cox
This Leafs team is a solid hockey club, a big, physical team with strong penalty killing, efficient netminding and enough youth to imagine this might be a group built for successful seasons beyond this one.

January 15, 2015:

Why Shanahan must blow up the Maple Leafs: Cox
Shanahan has a core group of players that isn?t good enough or strong enough or committed enough to take this team anywhere meaningful. As Sportsnet colleague Jeff Blair recently pointed out, that core group also isn?t particularly likeable to the public.

So opinions aren't allowed to change based on results?