Root against Leafs Playoff Competition

[Erndog]

Strictly speaking regular season here, how much of an improvement is Bryzgalov over Bobrovsky based on last season?

Bob was 28-13 last year with a 2.59 GAA, and .915 SV%.  It's not like Bryz is going to come in and completely blow those numbers away.

I wouldn't necessarily rule it out. Bryz put up those numbers on a pretty talent poor Phoenix team. Bobrovsky put his up in front of a very good Flyers team. There's also a pretty significant difference in terms of doing it while getting 52 starts, as Bobrovsky did, and doing it in 67 starts, which is what Bryzgalov did.

That's fair, but goaltending during the regular season (last year anyways) wasn't the Flyers' issue.  I don't see a whole lot separting what Bob gave them, vs. what Bryz will give them this year. 

Their could be a world of difference between Carter/Richards/Versteeg vs. Simmonds/Voracek/Jagr.  And yes, I realize Versteeg wasn't there the whole season but the new guys are replacing someone who finished with them.

 

[Kin]

But, at the same time, Byzgalov put up his numbers on a trap heavy team, which Philly isn't as much. That being said, the issue, to me, isn't whether or not Philly got better or worse on paper, but, rather, whether or not the new group will find enough chemistry and do so early enough in the season to keep them from slipping into the pack of playoff bubble teams. There's a lot of new forwards on that team, and the lack of familiarity between the group and the defence and among the forward group itself could certainly lead to Philly slipping back in the race.

Personally, if it comes down to talent vs. chemistry I tend to be a believer that talent is probably going to win out. We could probably put forth pretty nebulous and vaguely defined "Will they gel" sort of questions about any team in the league and I think, for the most part, we tend to weigh teams more in this sort of discussion on how they look on paper. I'm not sure Philly should necessarily be an exception.

 

[Kin]

That's fair, but goaltending during the regular season (last year anyways) wasn't the Flyers' issue.  I don't see a whole lot separting what Bob gave them, vs. what Bryz will give them this year. 

I think it was an issue for them a little more than you're making it out. I think Bobrovsky played well but, in Bryzgalov, you're replacing him with a guy who was a Vezina finalist a year back. That's a massive difference before you factor in games played.

Their could be a world of difference between Carter/Richards/Versteeg vs. Simmonds/Voracek/Jagr.  And yes, I realize Versteeg wasn't there the whole season but the new guys are replacing someone who finished with them.

Sure but that's not a total picture of their forward changes. They've also got their rookies and they also lost Zherdev so it's not just that three for three swap that I agree looks grim.

 

[bustaheims]

Personally, if it comes down to talent vs. chemistry I tend to be a believer that talent is probably going to win out. We could probably put forth pretty nebulous and vaguely defined "Will they gel" sort of questions about any team in the league and I think, for the most part, we tend to weigh teams more in this sort of discussion on how they look on paper. I'm not sure Philly should necessarily be an exception.

While that's true, I can't think of any teams other than Florida that overhauled their forwards this summer to the same extreme that the Flyers did. Only 6 forwards on their NHL roster played a regular season game for them last season - and that number includes Jody Shelley. A failure there certainly wouldn't be the first time we've seen a team go through that kinda of revamping in the offseason to miss the playoffs despite having a very talented lineup on paper.

 

[Kin]

While that's true, I can't think of any teams other than Florida that overhauled their forwards this summer to the same extreme that the Flyers did. Only 6 forwards on their NHL roster played a regular season game for them last season - and that number includes Jody Shelley. A failure there certainly wouldn't be the first time we've seen a team go through that kinda of revamping in the offseason to miss the playoffs despite having a very talented lineup on paper.

Not that I'm asking you to show your work or anything but I really can't think of a team that good that improved that significantly in net that missed the playoffs.

I mean, yeah, there's a lot of turnover but a lot of the guys who didn't leave are all-stars/near that level. So their chemistry issues are kind of limited to a few spots in their top six and a big chunk of their bottom six.

 

[bustaheims]

I mean, yeah, there's a lot of turnover but a lot of the guys who didn't leave are all-stars/near that level. So their chemistry issues are kind of limited to a few spots in their top six and a big chunk of their bottom six.

That's not true either. Half their top 6 has been replaced, as has half their bottom 6. Of their top producing forwards from last season, 3 of the top 5 are no longer in the organization.

 

[Kin]

That's not true either. Half their top 6 has been replaced, as has half their bottom 6. Of their top producing forwards from last season, 3 of the top 5 are no longer in the organization.

I think the confusion there is that Philadelphia didn't really have a traditional top 6/bottom 6 split. I'm pretty sure they had a Richards line, a Giroux line and a Briere line. So what I meant is that they can come back and still have a relatively consistent group of top 6 forwards even if it's not exactly the same group as last year.

 

[bustaheims]

I think the confusion there is that Philadelphia didn't really have a traditional top 6/bottom 6 split. I'm pretty sure they had a Richards line, a Giroux line and a Briere line. So what I meant is that they can come back and still have a relatively consistent group of top 6 forwards even if it's not exactly the same group as last year.

Nevertheless, replacing 3 of the top 5 producing forwards represents significant turnover in the core of their offence, as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Kin]

Nevertheless, replacing 3 of the top 5 producing forwards represents significant turnover in the core of their offence, as far as I'm concerned.

It is significant, I agree. But it's not a monumental shift and I'm sure that for every team that brought in talent that had trouble fitting in we could find an example of a talented player brought into a new situation and hit it off easily.

I'm certainly aware of why it could not work but I have to think that the talent level should probably trump that.

 

[bustaheims]

I'm certainly aware of why it could not work but I have to think that the talent level should probably trump that.

Well, clearly, some people don't see it the same way, and that's where the idea of Philly being worse this season comes from.

 

[Fanatic]

This is an interesting thread. I know it is early, but I will certainly be watching for some teams in the East to lose.

The way I see it - Wash, Pitts, Buff, Bost, and TB are a lock to finish in the top 5 spots. I am pretty sure Philly will be in with them as well to make up the top six. Ott, Fla, Win, and NYI should be a lock to finish below the Leafs and be in the bottom 4 - so the Leafs better beat these teams (clean and not in OT) and they better be losing a fair bit when we see them on the scoreboard.

That leaves NJ, NYR, Car, and the Habs to battle with Toronto for the 7th and 8th spots in the East. Every time they play one of these teams they are 4 point games and every night these teams are playing it is worth watching out to see if they are winning or losing because when next March rolls around every point they don't get now is one more point ahead for Toronto.

I'm in a rare club of people that belive that the Leafs will make the playoffs and if I had to pick I would say that they finish 6th because one of the teams I see ahead of them (like Philly or even Boston) will fail along the way and not deliver as they should. But just look at last year and you will see that the difference between 6th and 9th is less than 3 wins.

 

[Kin]

Well, clearly, some people don't see it the same way, and that's where the idea of Philly being worse this season comes from.

Yeah, I can't help but think that's more of a by-product of how loathsome the Flyers are and our collective desire to want them to fail than it is objective analysis. It's the only rationale I can see for treating newness as a negative.

 

[Fanatic]

This is for Nik or anyone else that wants to take it on.... if you take my top 6 of Wash, Pitts, Bos, Buff, TB and Philly and had to say which one is most likely to just bomb and not make the playoffs who would you choose?

I would say Philly or maybe even Boston - I know it is crazy, but it has happened before. 

 

[cw]

There's a pretty good write up here on what happened with Bobrovsky last season.
http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=35744

He's looked sharp when I've seen him this preseason (saw him a bit beyond the Leafs). But the way he played in the 2nd half did cost the Flyers some points. Bryzgalov should help steady the position and he's off to a hot start with a .977 save% over two games.

Another key to my concern for the Flyers was Pronger's health. He wasn't expected to be back to start the season from back surgery. But he made it back and seems to be ok. If he can stay healthy, they've got five decent Dmen and some depth.

Another question might have been Jagr after time in the KHL: six points, +3 in three preseason games ... 1 pt +2 to start the season. He's looked fairly decent in the little I've seen of him.

Simmonds has looked very good as someone mentioned on HNIC (Cherry?).

Then they add this rookie Matt Read from the NCAA in March and he's burned it up in preseason 6GP 7pts +4.

1st rounder Couturier's looked good and they have Schenn waiting for callup in the AHL.

Matt Walker had a really good preseason as well and is waiting in the press box.

A bunch of those mentioned are depth guys (not all key to the trades) so they've got a little depth to start the season.

Saw some of their game against the Devils - looked like a mismatch. They shut them out. They beat the Bruins by a goal, outshot them  and looked very competitive doing so.

The team has answered a number of questions in terms of their ability to get off to a good start. I just can't see how it's likely they'll miss the top 8 unless they're devastated with injuries. I'd rate them as a virtual lock to make the playoffs.

 

[cw]

This is for Nik or anyone else that wants to take it on.... if you take my top 6 of Wash, Pitts, Bos, Buff, TB and Philly and had to say which one is most likely to just bomb and not make the playoffs who would you choose?

I would say Philly or maybe even Boston - I know it is crazy, but it has happened before.

I'm not a complete believer in TB largely because of age related concerns - that they'll be prone to injury/performance drop off in key positions and don't have the depth to compensate.

 

[Kin]

This is for Nik or anyone else that wants to take it on.... if you take my top 6 of Wash, Pitts, Bos, Buff, TB and Philly and had to say which one is most likely to just bomb and not make the playoffs who would you choose?

Anytime you give me a list like that I'd be inclined to go with the team that has the most issues in net. To me, of that list, that's Tampa by a significant measure. Roloson had a great playoffs but there's a long stretch between that and being the kind of goalie that a top flight team needs.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

This is for Nik or anyone else that wants to take it on.... if you take my top 6 of Wash, Pitts, Bos, Buff, TB and Philly and had to say which one is most likely to just bomb and not make the playoffs who would you choose?

Anytime you give me a list like that I'd be inclined to go with the team that has the most issues in net. To me, of that list, that's Tampa by a significant measure. Roloson had a great playoffs but there's a long stretch between that and being the kind of goalie that a top flight team needs.

Last night's game would be clear evidence of what you are saying. He didn't look at all like the Roloson we've seen in the past, it was down right awful IMO.

 

[Kin]

Last night's game would be clear evidence of what you are saying. He didn't look at all like the Roloson we've seen in the past, it was down right awful IMO.

It's funny you say that because as I was looking at his stats his numbers post lock-out as a whole are pretty terrible. Not once in that span has a team he started the season with made the playoffs.

Now, admittedly, he's been on some pretty bad teams in that time and that will impact the numbers but outside of two great playoff runs I don't know he's been that great for...7 years?

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

It's funny you say that because as I was looking at his stats his numbers post lock-out as a whole are pretty terrible. Not once in that span has a team he started the season with made the playoffs.

Now, admittedly, he's been on some pretty bad teams in that time and that will impact the numbers but outside of two great playoff runs I don't know he's been that great for...7 years?

Well for us I think it's skewed a bit, as we've seen him play some very good games against the Leafs, where it looks like he's unbeatable. I haven't followed the teams he's played for, so I'd have to rely on stats, which doesn't tell the whole story. I just happened to watch the Washington/ Tampa game last night and he wasn't sharp at all, neither was Vokoun for that matter.

 

[cw]

It's funny you say that because as I was looking at his stats his numbers post lock-out as a whole are pretty terrible. Not once in that span has a team he started the season with made the playoffs.

Now, admittedly, he's been on some pretty bad teams in that time and that will impact the numbers but outside of two great playoff runs I don't know he's been that great for...7 years?

Well for us I think it's skewed a bit, as we've seen him play some very good games against the Leafs, where it looks like he's unbeatable. I haven't followed the teams he's played for, so I'd have to rely on stats, which doesn't tell the whole story. I just happened to watch the Washington/ Tampa game last night and he wasn't sharp at all, neither was Vokoun for that matter.

That's kind of it in a nutshell for the difference in the two teams goaltending for me. Volkoun's got the better pedigree but even if he sucks, the Caps have two up and coming goalies in  Neuvirth & Holtby (who really impressed me when I saw him). Who does the Lightening have if their 41 year old goalie turning 42 tomorrow falters:
http://forecaster.faceoff.com/faceoff/hockey/player.cgi?806
http://forecaster.faceoff.com/faceoff/hockey/player.cgi?6031
http://forecaster.faceoff.com/faceoff/hockey/player.cgi?6743
http://forecaster.faceoff.com/faceoff/hockey/player.cgi?8929

I'm not very familiar with that crop and maybe one of those guys plays out of his mind but it's not very likely.

I'm also not sold on their D - a number of rejects  filling in (ie Bergeron, Gervais, Gilroy). Kubina may be hitting his best before date. Ohlund is on the IR with a couple of their depth dmen. Brewer I've never been 100% sold on - though he seemed better last year. About the only guy I like who is still developing is Hedman. I'm not very familiar with Clark who played out west.

If they hadn't done what they did last year, I'd say Yzerman, who obviously knows a heck of a lot more than I ever will, had cobbled together a collection of misfits for his D. Regardless of what they did last year, I struggle to have much confidence in that group. It's looks like a bunch due to come back down to earth - a step forward last year and a step back in the wake of a lack of solid talent and potentially some shaky goaltending.