Maple Leafs are better, but are they a playoff team?

[Madferret]

They are in the playoffs and the Leafs are not.  Realistically, that is the first step.  Once you get in anything can happen.  I would say the basis for cup contention begins with making the playoffs.

Good thing it doesn't matter until the end of the season. Even then, qualifying for the playoffs, doesn't mean your a contending team.

But if the Senators are in the playoffs, and the Leafs aren't, which one is further along for contending for the cup?

I do not expect the turds to be a long term cup contender.  Having too many young players who have no playoff experience will come back to haunt them, and long term, there are no guarantees.

So if / when the too many young Leaf players <youngest in the league right?> make the playoffs what happens to this logic? Out the window right?

 

[maplesyrup]

As things stand right now, winning 4 of every 7 the rest of the way might get the Leafs into a playoff spot. Winning 5 of every 8 almost certainly does.

Personally, I don't see it... I think our record games 10-45 is probably the correct indication of what this team is and it's not good enough. I don't mean to be a wet blanket but if I'm Burke, unless I can get a top 6 stud who's going to be part of this team's long-term future, I'm in "sell" mode as opposed to "buy."

 

[Erndog]

As things stand right now, winning 4 of every 7 the rest of the way might get the Leafs into a playoff spot. Winning 5 of every 8 almost certainly does.

mirtle tweeted today we would have to go 22-15-0 the rest of the way to get to 93 points which looks like the cutoff.

 

[Zee]

As things stand right now, winning 4 of every 7 the rest of the way might get the Leafs into a playoff spot. Winning 5 of every 8 almost certainly does.

Personally, I don't see it... I think our record games 10-45 is probably the correct indication of what this team is and it's not good enough. I don't mean to be a wet blanket but if I'm Burke, unless I can get a top 6 stud who's going to be part of this team's long-term future, I'm in "sell" mode as opposed to "buy."

Yeah the 7-2-1 start really skewed the perception of this team.  Since then the Leafs are 15-16-4, or 15 wins and 20 losses.  That's not good enough by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[maplesyrup]

22-15-0 aint happening.  :'(

 

[Tigger]

As things stand right now, winning 4 of every 7 the rest of the way might get the Leafs into a playoff spot. Winning 5 of every 8 almost certainly does.

Personally, I don't see it... I think our record games 10-45 is probably the correct indication of what this team is and it's not good enough. I don't mean to be a wet blanket but if I'm Burke, unless I can get a top 6 stud who's going to be part of this team's long-term future, I'm in "sell" mode as opposed to "buy."

10-45?

 

[maplesyrup]

10-45?

Huh?

 

[Tigger]

Yeah the 7-2-1 start really skewed the perception of this team.

You're speaking for yourself here, right?

 

[Tigger]

10-45?

Huh?

It's from your post so, yeah?

 

[louisstamos]

I think he meant games 10 - 45...so ignoring the first 9 games of the season...

(right?)

 

[maplesyrup]

I think he meant games 10 - 45...so ignoring the first 9 games of the season...

(right?)

Correct... I thought it was clear. Sorry.

 

[Tigger]

I think he meant games 10 - 45...so ignoring the first 9 games of the season...

(right?)

Ah, right, sorry Sarge I just didn't see it.

I think it's probably somewhere in between but before the last 3 games the Leafs were 22-15-5, not impossible with some improvements.

Edit to add, ...and the Leafs don't have the injuries they had through a good chunk of that stretch...

 

[maplesyrup]

I think he meant games 10 - 45...so ignoring the first 9 games of the season...

(right?)

Ah, right, sorry Sarge I just didn't see it.

I think it's probably somewhere in between but before the last 3 games the Leafs were 22-15-5, not impossible with some improvements.

Edit to add, ...and the Leafs don't have the injuries they had through a good chunk of that stretch...

No worries... Not impossible but not very likely in my opinion. Who knows though. A simple little trade like Turris one seems to have made all the difference in the world for the Sens so it's not like there's not another example out there but still... Like I said, we may be selling 5 weeks from now.

 

[Erndog]

It hit me last night.  We aren't a playoff team.  And it's not because of 1 loss or anything but I've come to grips with a lot of things lately.  Since the first 2-3 weeks of the year we've been a .500 team (worse!).  We just have too many holes to plug, and too many teams around us are winning now (Ottawa, Washington, NJ, etc).

We still need a #1 center, a power forward, heck any sort of team toughness, and probably above all, consistent goaltending.  Our goaltending might be okay if we were a powerhouse offensively or if we allowed the least shots on goal or something but we're neither.  We need above average goaltending 9 games out of 10 and we just aren't getting it.

So no, this isn't a chicken little post or anything but I've really been looking at things objectively lately and I don't see a playoff team here.  I do see a decent young team (last night Phaneuf was our oldest Dman at what?  26?), some moveable parts, some good guys going forward but as it stands, today, this is not a playoff team.

 

[maplesyrup]

It hit me last night.  We aren't a playoff team.  And it's not because of 1 loss or anything but I've come to grips with a lot of things lately.  Since the first 2-3 weeks of the year we've been a .500 team (worse!).  We just have too many holes to plug, and too many teams around us are winning now (Ottawa, Washington, NJ, etc).

We still need a #1 center, a power forward, heck any sort of team toughness, and probably above all, consistent goaltending.  Our goaltending might be okay if we were a powerhouse offensively or if we allowed the least shots on goal or something but we're neither.  We need above average goaltending 9 games out of 10 and we just aren't getting it.

So no, this isn't a chicken little post or anything but I've really been looking at things objectively lately and I don't see a playoff team here.  I do see a decent young team (last night Phaneuf was our oldest Dman at what?  26?), some moveable parts, some good guys going forward but as it stands, today, this is not a playoff team.

I'm with you 100% - My feelings exactly. I think the difference here is that we have more "parts" that real contenders may want for their run than we did last year so in that regard, YAY? 

 

[Tigger]

Like I said, we may be selling 5 weeks from now.

For me that wouldn't be the end of the world if it happened and for others it could even be a happy dance day as Wilson would likely be gone.

Last year Burke made a similar determination and I think it had a net benefit, one more year like that could be a good thing overall for long term success.

I don't think the Leafs are a 'Turris' away from much to brag about, fwiw.

Looking back at that game against Ottawa it's probably one they deserved to win, those things tend to balance out over the long haul too.

 

[Erndog]

It hit me last night.  We aren't a playoff team.  And it's not because of 1 loss or anything but I've come to grips with a lot of things lately.  Since the first 2-3 weeks of the year we've been a .500 team (worse!).  We just have too many holes to plug, and too many teams around us are winning now (Ottawa, Washington, NJ, etc).

We still need a #1 center, a power forward, heck any sort of team toughness, and probably above all, consistent goaltending.  Our goaltending might be okay if we were a powerhouse offensively or if we allowed the least shots on goal or something but we're neither.  We need above average goaltending 9 games out of 10 and we just aren't getting it.

So no, this isn't a chicken little post or anything but I've really been looking at things objectively lately and I don't see a playoff team here.  I do see a decent young team (last night Phaneuf was our oldest Dman at what?  26?), some moveable parts, some good guys going forward but as it stands, today, this is not a playoff team.

I'm with you 100% - My feelings exactly. I think the difference here is that we have more "parts" that real contenders may want for their run than we did last year so in that regard, YAY?

I would think so.  Grabovski immediately comes to mind but really, what is he worth?  Would some team give us a late 1st for him?  Even if they did, is that worth it to us or do we try to extend him?

Same can be said for Liles.  If we get a 2nd for him... whoopdy doo... chances are that 2nd won't turn into a Lucic/Bergeron type.

Those 2 are really the only 2 I think that might have some decent value and we would consider moving. 

 

[Zee]

I think he meant games 10 - 45...so ignoring the first 9 games of the season...

(right?)

Ah, right, sorry Sarge I just didn't see it.

I think it's probably somewhere in between but before the last 3 games the Leafs were 22-15-5, not impossible with some improvements.

Edit to add, ...and the Leafs don't have the injuries they had through a good chunk of that stretch...

I don't think it's somewhere in between, I think it's closer to the lower end.  What range of games should we put more emphasis on the first 10 or the subsequent 35?  I say the longer stretch of games is more indicative of where this team is, and that 35 games says they're an UNDER .500 team.  Sure you can argue that if they didn't lose the last 3 in a row it would be better, but the fact is they did lose them.  This team has fallen into a bad habit of win 2 lose 3, there's no consistency from game to game anymore.  The only thing that is consistent is mental errors, bad goals and the occasional good stretch of 2-3 games.

 

[Tigger]

I disagree that there's no consistency from game to game, pretty straight on, they work hard and are an offensive threat most nights but they aren't a defensive minded team and aren't getting top shelf goaltending.

That stretch was riddled with injuries as well though so I give that some consideration too.

For a young and incomplete team I'm pretty satisfied with most of their efforts on balance.

 

[Erndog]

I think he meant games 10 - 45...so ignoring the first 9 games of the season...

(right?)

Ah, right, sorry Sarge I just didn't see it.

I think it's probably somewhere in between but before the last 3 games the Leafs were 22-15-5, not impossible with some improvements.

Edit to add, ...and the Leafs don't have the injuries they had through a good chunk of that stretch...

I don't think it's somewhere in between, I think it's closer to the lower end.  What range of games should we put more emphasis on the first 10 or the subsequent 35?  I say the longer stretch of games is more indicative of where this team is, and that 35 games says they're an UNDER .500 team.  Sure you can argue that if they didn't lose the last 3 in a row it would be better, but the fact is they did lose them.  This team has fallen into a bad habit of win 2 lose 3, there's no consistency from game to game anymore.  The only thing that is consistent is mental errors, bad goals and the occasional good stretch of 2-3 games.

You know, if we take the first 10, then include games 22-24 where they went 3-0, and also games 38-40, again where they went 3-0 we would be 13-2-1.  Championship caliber!