Symptom of a bigger problem? How we play with the lead...

[Andy007]

The goaltending was better, and combined with their ridiculously high shooting percentage, they were able to win games. I wouldn't call being hemmed in your own end for huge portions of the game "looking good", but as you said, we don't share opinions on this matter.

Great goaltending and alot of scoring depth; those are the reasons the Leafs had any success this year. Everything else was absolutely awful. And the notion that Carlyle's 'system' played a part in the team's good fortune is mindboggling. Countless giveaways, weak clearing attempts and long stretches of being completely stuck in the defensive zone is the product of Carlyle's 'system.'

I'm not quite as down on the team as you seem to be, but I definitely agree with your post.

 

[bustaheims]

I'm pretty convinced they still make the playoffs over a full season. I think the difference would be that they wouldn't have been fighting for the division lead or home ice at the end, but, rather, they'd be finishing closer to 7th or 8th.

 

[ZBBM]

Pushing the idea that the Leafs wouldn't have made the playoffs if the season had been longer as if it were a fact to be discussed is totally vacuous.  The season was the season was the season.  Those who harangue on this point can just go ahead and posit as many parallel universes as they want.  The cash value of same = 0.

 

[TML fan]

The goaltending was better, and combined with their ridiculously high shooting percentage, they were able to win games. I wouldn't call being hemmed in your own end for huge portions of the game "looking good", but as you said, we don't share opinions on this matter.

Great goaltending and alot of scoring depth; those are the reasons the Leafs had any success this year. Everything else was absolutely awful. And the notion that Carlyle's 'system' played a part in the team's good fortune is mindboggling. Countless giveaways, weak clearing attempts and long stretches of being completely stuck in the defensive zone is the product of Carlyle's 'system.'

I'm not quite as down on the team as you seem to be, but I definitely agree with your post.

I think there is a lot of misunderstanding going on here. I'm not "down" on the team. I was actually incredibly impressed with how they played in the playoffs, because it was NOTHING like they had played in the regular season. For me, it goes back to the regular season, particularly that game in Winnipeg that everyone makes fun of me for being so angry that the Leafs won...it's just, I knew the Leafs were so much better than they were showing. I knew they were way better than Winnipeg, and Winnipeg wasn't even playing particularly well that game, and yet the Leafs could barely get the puck out of their own end. It was all self-inflicted. They were just coughing it up over and over, not even trying to attack. When they took the lead, they made it look so stupidly easy and it was just so frustrating for me to watch the Leafs eek out a win in a game they could have won without breaking a sweat.

That's how they played all year. Barely hanging onto games they could have just taken over. They played to not lose. That's how they played game 1 of the playoffs. They scored early and then just stopped playing with the puck, and let Boston take over the game. They did the same thing in game 7. When Boston made it 4-2, they panicked and stopped doing everything they did to get them the 4-1 lead in the first place, and went back to playing the same way they had all year, and I believe I said at one point during the season, that kind of hockey will not work in the playoffs, and well, there is your proof. They couldn't even make it work for 10 minutes.

So, I'm not down on the team. When they play to win like they did for the majority of the playoffs, the Leafs are actually a pretty good team. All I'm saying is, I want them to play like they did in the playoffs, because they aren't going to be able to sustain this kind of scoring rate while trying (key word) to play defence for 50 minutes over the course of a full 82 game season.

 

[TML fan]

Pushing the idea that the Leafs wouldn't have made the playoffs if the season had been longer as if it were a fact to be discussed is totally vacuous.  The season was the season was the season.  Those who harangue on this point can just go ahead and posit as many parallel universes as they want.  The cash value of same = 0.

I don't think anyone is stating it as fact, but as a matter of opinion.

 

[ZBBM]

Pushing the idea that the Leafs wouldn't have made the playoffs if the season had been longer as if it were a fact to be discussed is totally vacuous.  The season was the season was the season.  Those who harangue on this point can just go ahead and posit as many parallel universes as they want.  The cash value of same = 0.

I don't think anyone is stating it as fact, but as a matter of opinion.

And there's no evidence whatsoever that the Leafs would have played any worse (or any better) than they did over 48 games if the season were 82. 

 

[mr grieves]

The goaltending was better, and combined with their ridiculously high shooting percentage, they were able to win games. I wouldn't call being hemmed in your own end for huge portions of the game "looking good", but as you said, we don't share opinions on this matter.

Great goaltending and alot of scoring depth; those are the reasons the Leafs had any success this year. Everything else was absolutely awful. And the notion that Carlyle's 'system' played a part in the team's good fortune is mindboggling. Countless giveaways, weak clearing attempts and long stretches of being completely stuck in the defensive zone is the product of Carlyle's 'system.'

I'm not quite as down on the team as you seem to be, but I definitely agree with your post.

+1

I've no idea how anyone can say the team was "consistent" over the 55 games played this season, when 5 and 2/3rds of the Boston series showed a style of play so different from what we saw during the regular season.

Also: without the playoffs reset, I wonder whether they would've righted the ship. The team was trending down over the last 10-12 games of the season.

 

[TML fan]

Pushing the idea that the Leafs wouldn't have made the playoffs if the season had been longer as if it were a fact to be discussed is totally vacuous.  The season was the season was the season.  Those who harangue on this point can just go ahead and posit as many parallel universes as they want.  The cash value of same = 0.

I don't think anyone is stating it as fact, but as a matter of opinion.

And there's no evidence whatsoever that the Leafs would have played any worse (or any better) than they did over 48 games if the season were 82.

That's right, but this isn't a courtroom.

 

[Optimus Reimer]

The goaltending was better, and combined with their ridiculously high shooting percentage, they were able to win games. I wouldn't call being hemmed in your own end for huge portions of the game "looking good", but as you said, we don't share opinions on this matter.

Great goaltending and alot of scoring depth; those are the reasons the Leafs had any success this year. Everything else was absolutely awful. And the notion that Carlyle's 'system' played a part in the team's good fortune is mindboggling. Countless giveaways, weak clearing attempts and long stretches of being completely stuck in the defensive zone is the product of Carlyle's 'system.'

I'm not quite as down on the team as you seem to be, but I definitely agree with your post.

+1

I've no idea how anyone can say the team was "consistent" over the 55 games played this season, when 5 and 2/3rds of the Boston series showed a style of play so different from what we saw during the regular season.

Also: without the playoffs reset, I wonder whether they would've righted the ship. The team was trending down over the last 10-12 games of the season.

That could have been due to RC wanting to minimize any injuries that would occur when the players are playing full out.  It was not really a question of whether or not the Leafs would make the playoffs, because it would have taken an act of God for the Leafs not to make the playoffs. 

As for RC's system, the Leafs played very similar to last season, but with more physicality.  Last season it was turnovers galore, not being able to clear the puck out, getting hemmed in their own zone all of which carried into this season.  I still believe that under RC's system, and eliminating the RW affect, the Leafs defensive system will improve.

 

[L K]

Let's also keep in mind that the East Next year will be two divisions of 8 teams:

Boston, Buffalo, Detroit, Florida, Montreal, Ottawa, Tampa, Toronto

Carolina, Columbus, New Jersey, New York, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Washington

Top 3 teams from each divsion make the playoffs and the last 2 spots are wild-cards.

Based on the standings last year: 
Montreal (63), Boston (62), Toronto (57), Detroit (56), Ottawa (56), Buffalo (48), Tampa (40), Florida (36)

Pittsburgh (67), Washington (57), NYR (56), NYI (55), Columbus (55), Philly (49), New Jersey (48), Carolina (42)

The East loses Winnipeg (9th) place and added two stronger teams in Columbus and Detroit.

Based off last year the Playoffs would have been:

Montreal (1) vs. Ottawa (W1)
Boston (2) vs. Toronto (3)

Pittsburgh (1) vs. Detroit (W2)
Washington (2) vs NYR (3)

It's really a stupid system to be honest. 

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

But why is this happening? Has to be one of the following

1) Coaches are telling them to sit back
2) They don't have the right type of players that can play shut down Defense.

It's both.

3) young team learning how to play the damn game.

I think NHL players know how to play hockey. If you're referring to learning Carlyle's system, well I hope it's something they can unlearn because it cost them the series.

It's the same system that helped put them in the playoffs for the first time in 9 years.

In a short season...

Did the rest of the league play a longer season?

Don't think the Leafs would have made the playoffs if they had

Yeah why put stock in a tangible thing like the result they achieved when one can just dream up a scenario where the outcome is different and use that as a measure of the team.

Awesome!

I can acknowledge the achievement as well as the fact that it was earned under different than normal circumstances.

If the league had played 48 games last year, the Leafs would have made the playoffs as well.

Which is great and all but the team was:

a) a different team last year
b) had a different coach (and system) last year
c) had poor goaltending last year
d) actually, you know, played a full season last year

If doesn't really count for much in general. If the leafs had played the remainder of the season like they played games 5, 6 and 7 then the team could've finished ahead of Montreal in 3rd.
Now that statement may be ridiculous but hey, it's just an opinion.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Pushing the idea that the Leafs wouldn't have made the playoffs if the season had been longer as if it were a fact to be discussed is totally vacuous.  The season was the season was the season.  Those who harangue on this point can just go ahead and posit as many parallel universes as they want.  The cash value of same = 0.

It's not that we're concerned about what happened in parallel universes (although I kinda am), it's that we're concerned about next season. If the Leafs play the same "system" that they did this season next year then there will be problems. Two of the biggest reasons for the Leafs success were that Reimer played like a top-10 goalie, and Kadri was a top-10 scorer for about 75% of the season. We weren't expecting those two things to happen and they helped mask some of the issues that Leafs had. I'm not really comfortable assuming we get those performances again next season, 82 games or not.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

Pushing the idea that the Leafs wouldn't have made the playoffs if the season had been longer as if it were a fact to be discussed is totally vacuous.  The season was the season was the season.  Those who harangue on this point can just go ahead and posit as many parallel universes as they want.  The cash value of same = 0.

It's not that we're concerned about what happened in parallel universes (although I kinda am), it's that we're concerned about next season. If the Leafs play the same "system" that they did this season next year then there will be problems. Two of the biggest reasons for the Leafs success were that Reimer played like a top-10 goalie, and Kadri was a top-10 scorer for about 75% of the season. We weren't expecting those two things to happen and they helped mask some of the issues that Leafs had. I'm not really comfortable assuming we get those performances again next season, 82 games or not.

Were we expecting Lupul to play 16 games in our ideal plan? We may not get the same performances next year but we had a bunch of negatives on the offensive side too.

Will Lupul play more than 16 of 48 games, let alone 82? That should be a safe bet and should offset any short comings of Kadri. 

Can Grabovski return to a 45-50 pt pace? That would make the offense even better. How about Kuli? Does Frattin make progress? Will a full season of Gardiner playing like the rookie Gardiner help the offense and defense? etc. and on and on...

As to Reimer's tending abilities, he had a good year and played well in the playoffs. The team isn't set yet with UFA's yet to sign, so we may see more defensive help added which will only help Reimer with his job.

This team made the playoffs despite a drop in scoring from some key players (Grabbo, Gardiner) and missing one of their top offensive threats for more than half the season. The fact that Kadri overproduced (though maybe he's just developed and continues to do so next year) doesn't change that.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

Were we expecting Lupul to play 16 games in our ideal plan? We may not get the same performances next year but we had a bunch of negatives on the offensive side too.

Will Lupul play more than 16 of 48 games, let alone 82? That should be a safe bet and should offset any short comings of Kadri. 

Can Grabovski return to a 45-50 pt pace? That would make the offense even better. How about Kuli? Does Frattin make progress? Will a full season of Gardiner playing like the rookie Gardiner help the offense and defense? etc. and on and on...

As to Reimer's tending abilities, he had a good year and played well in the playoffs. The team isn't set yet with UFA's yet to sign, so we may see more defensive help added which will only help Reimer with his job.

This team made the playoffs despite a drop in scoring from some key players (Grabbo, Gardiner) and missing one of their top offensive threats for more than half the season. The fact that Kadri overproduced (though maybe he's just developed and continues to do so next year) doesn't change that.

That's still more of the same from this season though. We're crossing our fingers that hopefully our offence will make up for our short comings defensively. And like you said, that could very well work again. But for a coaching system that apparently focuses on defence-first hockey, that's kind of absurd.

Looking at some of those what-ifs though a little more closely, I'm not sure we can bank on Lupul playing a full season yet. Injuries have followed him pretty closely the past few years. As for whether or not Grabbo (and Kulemin goes hand-in-hand here) can regain his scoring touch, that likely depends a lot on how Carlyle is going to play them. It doesn't look like they'll be taken out of their checking roles any time soon, so we might have to get used to what we got this season out of them.

Some of you might have picked up on this recently, but it's not the team/roster that I have a problem with. There's plenty of offence throughout our forward lines, we have a pretty mobile defence, and a goalie that could potentially continue to make some pretty big saves. It's kind of funny. Wilson coached a run and gun style with a roster that wasn't at all capable of doing so. Carlyle's doing the exact opposite in my opinion.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

Were we expecting Lupul to play 16 games in our ideal plan? We may not get the same performances next year but we had a bunch of negatives on the offensive side too.

Will Lupul play more than 16 of 48 games, let alone 82? That should be a safe bet and should offset any short comings of Kadri. 

Can Grabovski return to a 45-50 pt pace? That would make the offense even better. How about Kuli? Does Frattin make progress? Will a full season of Gardiner playing like the rookie Gardiner help the offense and defense? etc. and on and on...

As to Reimer's tending abilities, he had a good year and played well in the playoffs. The team isn't set yet with UFA's yet to sign, so we may see more defensive help added which will only help Reimer with his job.

This team made the playoffs despite a drop in scoring from some key players (Grabbo, Gardiner) and missing one of their top offensive threats for more than half the season. The fact that Kadri overproduced (though maybe he's just developed and continues to do so next year) doesn't change that.

That's still more of the same from this season though. We're crossing our fingers that hopefully our offence will make up for our short comings defensively. And like you said, that could very well work again. But for a coaching system that apparently focuses on defence-first hockey, that's kind of absurd.

Looking at some of those what-ifs though a little more closely, I'm not sure we can bank on Lupul playing a full season yet. Injuries have followed him pretty closely the past few years. As for whether or not Grabbo (and Kulemin goes hand-in-hand here) can regain his scoring touch, that likely depends a lot on how Carlyle is going to play them. It doesn't look like they'll be taken out of their checking roles any time soon, so we might have to get used to what we got this season out of them.

Some of you might have picked up on this recently, but it's not the team/roster that I have a problem with. There's plenty of offence throughout our forward lines, we have a pretty mobile defence, and a goalie that could potentially continue to make some pretty big saves. It's kind of funny. Wilson coached a run and gun style with a roster that wasn't at all capable of doing so. Carlyle's doing the exact opposite in my opinion.

Lupul playing more than 32 games over an 82 game season is a pretty safe bet IMO.

As to the difference in rosters vs. coaches, I'd say the teams aren't vastly different (at least in Wilson's final season vs. Carlyle's first)

Wilson had: Lombardi, Brown, Schenn, Steckel, Connolly, Crabb, Frattin (for more games), Gardiner (for more games)

Carlyle had: JVR, McClement, Komarov, Kostka, Fraser, McLaren, Franson, and the reappearance of Orr

The constant parts of Bozak, Lupul, Kessel, Phaneuf, Liles etc. were available to both.

IMO Ron Wilson tried to play a run and gun style with a team that probably could've hacked it if they hadn't been so horrible defensively, which also led to poorer goaltending (higher % shots, rebounds etc.).

Carlyle, after Wilson's offensive system, has tried to make the forwards more defensively responsible. It looked as if it was working to me with Kessel, Kulemin, McClement and some others. Also I'm not sure the names he has are more "run and gun" types than what Wilson had but that's just me.

Here are GF vs. GA stats from Wilson's last 4 seasons and Carlyle's 1st:

          Wilson                                            Carlyle
2008-09:  GF 250  GA 293          2012-13:  GF 145  GA 133
2009-10:  GF 214  GA 267           
2010-11:  GF 218  GA 251
2011-12:  GF 231  GA 264

Prorated over 82 games that's:      GF 247    GA 227

So he basically reproduces Wilson's best offensive season playing "run and gun", and has by far the best GA numbers. Best of both worlds really but he gets no credit.

I find that interesting if nothing else.

Edit: You have to go all the way back to 2003-04 (15th) to find a team that finished better than 18th out of 30 teams (this years result) in GA. The next closest team finished 21st (05-06) and no other team finished better than 25th.