Nik's Blazing Hot Morning After Goaltending Take

[mr grieves]

It's apparent we have vastly different opinions of the Leafs management move here.  I don't think acquiring Andersen was a "bad long term move" made for only short-term success.

Sure, but only because you're someone who seems to believe the Underpants Gnomes business model is a really solid plan for improving the defense.

So... your plan for drafting not just higher than we will (18?) but actually high (top 10? 5?) is to hold onto Bernier.

2,617 SF x 9.55% shooting = 250 GF
2,673 SA x Bernier?s career avg. .915 SV% = 227 GA
Differential = +23

or maybe he doesn?t bounce all the way back from his .908 and only gets to .910? that?s 250 GA - 240 GA = +10.

Run with Sparks as a backup and the team save percentage down to .905? 250 GF - 253 GA = -3.

Whichever way you want to go, those differentials don't get you into the bottom 10, definitely not the bottom 5. This year, they put them just in or just out.

The Leafs iced the best group of rookie in, like, 25 years, and saw a number of guys who underperformed last season -- most notably Kadri, Gardiner -- take steps. Swapping Andersen for Bernier wouldn't get them in range of the sort of defenseman you want.

 

[hockeyfan1]

I do not understand the love affair a select few have regarding Jonathan Bernier.

First of all, we all know that Freddy Andersen (pre-trade), and to a certain extent Bernier (post-trade) both went through a crisis period in their careers that would result in improvements career-wise and maturity-wise both on and off the ice.

As it was pretty obvious to anyone, the Leafs management practically salivated in wanting Andersen and probably could hardly wait to trade a then slumping and puzzling Bernier.  For Bernier, a change of pace and scenery seems to have served in very good stead, meanwhile, for Andersen, it offered him a new challenge in backing up a team that was unlike his previous employer particularly in the defensive aspect of it's game.

One should get off their high horse and quit ruminating or babbling about the team's goaltending which is fine at least for the foreseeable future.  If goaltending is a topic, it should be more in the arena of what is the team's goaltending pool/depth in terms of future potentials,etc. 

For now, the Leafs have more pressing concerns and needs, the least of which is Andersen.

 

[herman]

Keeping Bernier for asset management purposes would've also meant, philosophically, keeping Laich, Greening, Michalek on the roster, and spinning them and Bozak/JvR off at the deadline.

That's a boatload less goal potential and definitely a higher pick + more picks. In a league where the accumulation and retention of cost-efficient talent is king, I'd want to take advantage of soft expectations to acquire more building blocks at lower cost.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Found this on Bernier (from March 2017).  Pretty well attests the improvements made with Anaheim after being traded from Toronto):

Sudarshan Maharaj, the Ducks? goalie coach, knew Bernier from scouting him as a junior and working with him when both were part of Hockey Canada. Once the Ducks acquired him from Toronto last July, Maharaj went to Bernier?s home outside Montreal.

The two got to reviewing and working on the things that made Bernier successful, notably his footwork to improve his lateral game and allow him to be more patient in the crease. Just as important was his mental outlook after a rough 2015-16 with the Maple Leafs, where he spent time in the minors.

?Sometimes the fact that goalies are people gets lost,? Maharaj said. ?And I?m a firm believer that ? and I say it all the time ? I don?t coach goalies. I coach people. When you go through a situation like he was in in Toronto, where there was some difficult times and there?s criticism, that wears on you and it beats on you.

?In order for a goalie or any athlete to have success, that core confidence has to remain intact. When that gets battered, it?s something that you have to continually reinforce.

Once the Leafs got Frederik Andersen from the Ducks to anchor their rebuilding effort, Bernier knew his days with them were numbered. But there was no desire to leave, even when it was painfully clear he couldn?t be the savior for defensively challenged Toronto squads.

Ducks defenseman Korbinian Holzer, a teammate of Bernier?s with the Leafs in 2014-15, equated the pressure of playing in hockey-mad Toronto to being in a ?fish bowl? and that ?if you can handle that, you can pretty much handle anything.? In his mind, Bernier did, even during his struggles.

?At the time when he was there, our team there wasn?t one of the best teams we had,? Holzer said. ?We were always struggling defensively, it feels like. He was getting blamed for a lot of stuff. You?re the goalie and everybody looks at you to be the last kind of guy who has to stop the puck. And if you don?t do that, they?re all over you there."

Maharaj is happy to see this pupil reestablish himself on the NHL scene.

?I hope people understand that there was always a very good goalie there,? he said. ?And I don?t want to use the word resurrection but I believe and I hope that what he has done has certainly drawn the attention of the people that are paying attention. Because he deserves it.?

A potential unrestricted free agent this summer, Bernier faces an uncertain future in a typically fickle goalie market. The number of openings among the 30 teams fluctuates from year to year. And there is now a 31st ? the Vegas Golden Knights ? to factor in.

It is a given the Ducks will choose Gibson as the one goalie they can protect from the expansion draft, which will leave Bernier available for the Golden Knights to pluck away if they so choose.

http://www.dailynews.com/sports/20170321/ducks-goalie-jonathan-bernier-enjoying-his-career-reboot

 

[bustaheims]

With the expansion draft coming up and options on the free agent market, there's an excellent chance the Leafs, if they'd been patient could have added a solid goaltender this off-season at very little to no asset cost.

This is a thought that gets put out there a lot, but, once you look into it, it kind of falls apart. In terms of the trade market, it's really Fleury/Murray, or Grubauer. Everyone else who may be available because of the expansion draft are either older, short-term stop gap types, prospects with little to no NHL experience, or backup goalies - basically unappealing options to fill the Leafs' immediate and long-term goaltending needs. If the Pens are indeed forced into moving Murray, he won't come cheap, as there will be a number of teams willing to give up at least what the Leafs gave up for Andersen. Grubauer might be cheap, but his ability to be a starter is very much in question.

The UFA market is largely the same. There's Bishop, who's coming off a bad, injury plagued season; Miller, who's already on the wrong side of 35, and a bunch of backup types.

Honestly, of the options available for what the Leafs were looking for, in terms of acquisition cost and cap costs, Andersen is probably the most appealing option.

 

[Kin]

So... your plan for drafting not just higher than we will (18?) but actually high (top 10? 5?) is to hold onto Bernier.

No. I said it previously but the difference between what I'd have liked to have seen and the decisions they made is not limited to the one goaltending decision.

 

[Kin]

With the expansion draft coming up and options on the free agent market, there's an excellent chance the Leafs, if they'd been patient could have added a solid goaltender this off-season at very little to no asset cost.

This is a thought that gets put out there a lot, but, once you look into it, it kind of falls apart. In terms of the trade market, it's really Fleury/Murray, or Grubauer. Everyone else who may be available because of the expansion draft are either older, short-term stop gap types, prospects with little to no NHL experience, or backup goalies - basically unappealing options to fill the Leafs' immediate and long-term goaltending needs. If the Pens are indeed forced into moving Murray, he won't come cheap, as there will be a number of teams willing to give up at least what the Leafs gave up for Andersen. Grubauer might be cheap, but his ability to be a starter is very much in question.

The UFA market is largely the same. There's Bishop, who's coming off a bad, injury plagued season; Miller, who's already on the wrong side of 35, and a bunch of backup types.

Honestly, of the options available for what the Leafs were looking for, in terms of acquisition cost and cap costs, Andersen is probably the most appealing option.

Two things. One your post kind of reads like "If you ignore all of the possibilities, there aren't very many possibilities" which, you know.

Two, I think an older stop gap solution would have been fine if that's all that's available. So long as the goal is just to be somewhat competitive while you look for a long term solution. I said "solid", not superstar.

A lot of people in response to this have focused on Bernier but equally as important is my first point Andersen not really looking like the kind of guy who is so good that you have to put things on hold to snatch him up. I think the idea, for instance, that our "long term" needs are any more settled going into next year with Andersen than they would be with Bishop or Fleury is hard to justify at best. 

 

[mr grieves]

So... your plan for drafting not just higher than we will (18?) but actually high (top 10? 5?) is to hold onto Bernier.

No. I said it previously but the difference between what I'd have liked to have seen and the decisions they made is not limited to the one goaltending decision.

Sorry, missed that. What else?

Keeping Bernier for asset management purposes would've also meant, philosophically, keeping Laich, Greening, Michalek on the roster, and spinning them and Bozak/JvR off at the deadline.

That's a boatload less goal potential and definitely a higher pick + more picks. In a league where the accumulation and retention of cost-efficient talent is king, I'd want to take advantage of soft expectations to acquire more building blocks at lower cost.

Yeah, I was a bit surprised they moved on from Laich and Greening so quickly and didn't give Michalek a longer look... But I dunno, put them in, we're still at:

Komarov - Kadri - Michalek
JvR - Bozak - Marner
Greening - Matthews - Nylander
Martin - Laich - Soshnikov

Unless you send Marner back to junior, Nylander to Marlies, and Matthews to Switzerland... that team's not much worse than what they went with this year. I'd say they've got about the same goal potential (could Michalek and Greening manage ~15 goals each? Probably)

But, if that team is worse and playoffs are out of sight well before the deadline (or even if they aren't and the second/third rounders and prospects hold more appeal than the playoffs), we can unload everyone* and get it to:

Leivo - Kadri - Brown
Hyman - Matthews - Marner
Leipsic - Nylander - Kapanen
Martin - Gauthier - Soshnikov

Now, that's pretty bad... but bad enough? The 07-08 Hawks made several in-season trades and had terrible goaltending, but they ended up drafting out of the top 10. Maybe the Lightning had it figured out when they got Hedman after garbage goaltending and hiring Barry Melrose?

Put another way: there are consequences to being so bad that you draft (and draft pretty well) in the top 10 six times in a decade. One of them is that you have too many good players to keep doing it until you get everything you want.



* Not that we were able to last year, mind you. But this year... why not?

 

[Kin]

Sorry, missed that. What else?

Between you and Herman you've essentially fleshed out the broad strokes of it. Complete the tear down, more or less. Deal Bozak, deal Komarov, deal JVR once he'd re-established value.

 

[Frank E]

At the start of the season, most of us here were in the 80'ish point range in terms of predictions, right?  Only that idiot WIGWAL was even close, and he's crazy.

I have to think that management was probably thinking a bottom 10 finish too. 

The problem with this season is that the kids performed far above expectations...and really almost everyone did, really, to one extent or another.  And as has been pointed out, Andersen on the season as a whole didn't really play a lot better than Bernier was likely to.

Given that, maybe this whole debate is a little moo, other than the fact that they gave up draft picks. 

If we're going to blame people for screwing up the draft position, then I have to think that Matthews, Marner, and Nylander...also Kadri and Bozak, and Connor Brown, probably late season Polak, Gardiner for sure, that Boyle trade, and calling up Kapanen really screwed it too.  Komarov was far too good of a veteran, and lovable...but anyways...Zaitsev!!!...and Martin didn't really blow any games for them...I think he might have tried, and Babcock recognized this by ensuring he was never scratched (good try Babcock). Back to Kadri, I mean really,  32 goals Kadri?  At least JVR didn't get to his career high of 30 goals...he got to 29...but that fking Bozak set a career high in points.

At least they were trying to worsen things by picking up Smith, but that idiot goes and gets injured, then plays himself off the team all together.

So maybe the Andersen deal is just a red herring.  I'm not happy about the deal, and as much fun as it was to watch, I think the team has more than a few too many holes to fill without a strong draft position this off-season (and we've become accustomed to high draft picks around here.) 

My thing is that I really wanted them to suck another season, and I'm not so sure that at the onset they didn't try to, but the players really screwed my plan up with their mostly very solid team play this past season...and Andersen, most of the time, didn't help my cause either...but still, it was fun to watch.

Although, now they've got a big problem going into next season.

 

[Kin]

If we're going to blame people for screwing up the draft position, then I have to think that Matthews, Marner, and Nylander...also Kadri and Bozak, and Connor Brown, probably late season Polak, Gardiner for sure, that Boyle trade, and calling up Kapanen really screwed it too.

Just to step in a second here, and this is also sort of my response to Grieves trying to figure out what the goal differential would be after any change, but I don't think you can separate the results guys like Marner, Nylander and Matthews got without also looking at the conditions they did it in. Keeping Bozak and JVR allowed effectively allowed for the three line structure of the team which I think most of us agreed was really important for the team's offensive output as opponents couldn't key in on one or two offensive lines.

Remove that, make it so that they have a more traditional checking line and two scoring lines and while I think all of our super-rookies still have good years I don't think they're all setting records.

 

[mr grieves]

[snip]

So maybe the Andersen deal is just a red herring.  I'm not happy about the deal, and as much fun as it was to watch, I think the team has more than a few too many holes to fill without a strong draft position this off-season (and we've become accustomed to high draft picks around here.)

My thing is that I really wanted them to suck another season, and I'm not so sure that at the onset they didn't try to, but the players really screwed my plan up with their mostly very solid team play this past season...and Andersen, most of the time, didn't help my cause either...but still, it was fun to watch.

Although, now they've got a big problem going into next season.

Indeed we have. At some point I looked at draft positions over the last 15 years or so. Toronto was near the top of the league in terms of how many high picks it's had. You can point to repeat 1OAs or 1-2 picks and say we're still missing out on the truly elite talent, but there aren't that many teams that've done (or stumbled into) that and they aren't often accompanied by so many 4-10 picks (and, arguably, we got Nylander a lot lower than he should've gone and Marner would've been challenging for #1 in most years).

We've got some truly top end talent and a core of really good players. I guess you can assemble lines and a devise system that'll overcome all that talent, but that seems perverse. Maybe they should've given Babcock the year off and let Barry Melrose and associate coach Pierre Mcguire run things for a season.

 

[Kin]

Indeed we have. At some point I looked at draft positions over the last 15 years or so. Toronto was near the top of the league in terms of how many high picks it's had.

I'm not sure how true/meaninful this is. I just went back and looked at a handful of teams dating back to 2002 and while their are some outliers where, say, Detroit has no top 10 picks and Atlanta/Winnipeg have had 10, Toronto is pretty firmly in the middle with 6 with most teams having 4 or so. The Leafs aren't near the bottom or the top. To the extent that they're removed from the median, it'll be by a pick or so.

I mean, as simple as we can get, there've been 150 top 10 picks over the last 15 drafts. That's five per team as a blind average, the Leafs had 6. Those 6 came at #5, #7, #5, #8, #4 and #1 which means their average selection in the top 10 was exactly 5.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

That idiot WIGWAL might know a guy who has a link to the Marlies game should anyone want a PM.

 

[mr grieves]

Indeed we have. At some point I looked at draft positions over the last 15 years or so. Toronto was near the top of the league in terms of how many high picks it's had.

I'm not sure how true/meaninful this is. I just went back and looked at a handful of teams dating back to 2002 and while their are some outliers where, say, Detroit has no top 10 picks and Atlanta/Winnipeg have had 10, Toronto is pretty firmly in the middle with 6 with most teams having 4 or so. The Leafs aren't near the bottom or the top. To the extent that they're removed from the median, it'll be by a pick or so.

I mean, as simple as we can get, there've been 150 top 10 picks over the last 15 drafts. That's five per team as a blind average, the Leafs had 6. Those 6 came at #5, #7, #5, #8, #4 and #1 which means their average selection in the top 10 was exactly 5.

I guess the raw number of picks isn't particularly meaningful. Surely, management, scouting, and development are important to keeping such players, avoiding the busts, and turning them into the sort of players that'd make up a good core. But I don't think any of this changes the fact that Toronto's acquired a lot of talent at the top of the draft. Probably too much, at this point, to get another really high pick.

 

[Kin]

But I don't think any of this changes the fact that Toronto's acquired a lot of talent at the top of the draft. Probably too much, at this point, to get another really high pick.

I suppose, although I don't look at our roster and say we've just got way too much talent compared to Buffalo or Dallas.

The difference, to my mind, is that Leafs management has taken short cuts not necessarily to talent accumulation but rather to icing a competitive team. Andersen being a fairly good example.

 

[mr grieves]

But I don't think any of this changes the fact that Toronto's acquired a lot of talent at the top of the draft. Probably too much, at this point, to get another really high pick.

I suppose, although I don't look at our roster and say we've just got way too much talent compared to Buffalo or Dallas.

Dallas has had some injury trouble -- and probably the worst goaltending in the league -- but I'd still say the talent they have available isn't any better than what the Leafs have. And the Leafs certainly have more solid core pieces than Buffalo.

 

[Spider]

Indeed we have. At some point I looked at draft positions over the last 15 years or so. Toronto was near the top of the league in terms of how many high picks it's had.

I'm not sure how true/meaninful this is. I just went back and looked at a handful of teams dating back to 2002 and while their are some outliers where, say, Detroit has no top 10 picks and Atlanta/Winnipeg have had 10, Toronto is pretty firmly in the middle with 6 with most teams having 4 or so. The Leafs aren't near the bottom or the top. To the extent that they're removed from the median, it'll be by a pick or so.

I mean, as simple as we can get, there've been 150 top 10 picks over the last 15 drafts. That's five per team as a blind average, the Leafs had 6. Those 6 came at #5, #7, #5, #8, #4 and #1 which means their average selection in the top 10 was exactly 5.

Wouldn't you have to add a #2 to the list?  JvR was a 2nd overall pick in his draft.  Don't think we have any other players that we traded for that were selected in the top 10.

 

[Kin]

And the Leafs certainly have more solid core pieces than Buffalo.

Sure because that's not a ill-defined term that would be open to debate.

 

[Kin]

Wouldn't you have to add a #2 to the list?  JvR was a 2nd overall pick in his draft.  Don't think we have any other players that we traded for that were selected in the top 10.

No? Because then I'd have to go back through all 30 teams every season over the last 15 years to see if they had any players they traded for who were top 10 picks and include them in their totals.