Wild @ Leafs - Nov. 8th, 7:30pm - SN, TSN 1050

[Coco-puffs]

RE: Martin

Justin Bourne and Kent Wilson had a good conversation about this very topic the other day:
https://theathletic.com/150291/2017/11/08/bourne-and-wilson-a-conversation-on-the-value-of-having-a-tough-guy/

They get into something that I've mused about before: hockey is run for the most part by people who've played the game (in different eras), so their priorities are sometimes emotional connections to what worked for them in the dressing room in the past.

Coming up against a team where you know someone will try to run you does affect your decision-making to a degree, which tips the balance of the many 50/50 plays that happen during the course of the game. Learning how to play through that will separate the elite players from the merely skilled players.

Aside from that, the skills dev team have been putting in really good work into the fringes of our lineup. Martin is a better puckhandler now than he was when he arrived (he's still probably the worst in our lineup, but it's serviceable now). Polak noticeably improved after a season and a half (but we can't fix his speed).

I thought it was interesting that Wilson and Bourne didn't mention Martin in that piece, but did mention Polak.  And here's why (IMO):  Martin is at least a replacement level player, Polak definitely isn't.

So, the issue for me isn't that Martin isn't an NHLer.  I think he is, and he does provide the toughness that GM's/Coaches want to see.  He's definitely not Tom Wilson/Milan Lucic tough AND decent, but he's not going to hurt you like Glass does.  But the Leafs have above-replacement level players sitting regularly or in the minors and I totally understand the frustration that Babcock isn't playing them ahead of Martin.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

RE: Martin

Justin Bourne and Kent Wilson had a good conversation about this very topic the other day:
https://theathletic.com/150291/2017/11/08/bourne-and-wilson-a-conversation-on-the-value-of-having-a-tough-guy/

Thanks for posting that, it was an excellent read.

 

[bustaheims]

Bergman's play definitely dragged the pairing's numbers down. I didn't notice Carrick making any significant mistakes, and he was good with the puck when he had it on his stick. For a third pairing guy, he was having a good night.

Yeah, playing a 69-year-old Scandinavian scout on the third pair was probably a bad idea. 

well played, sir. Well played.

 

[bustaheims]

But the Leafs have above-replacement level players sitting regularly or in the minors and I totally understand the frustration that Babcock isn't playing them ahead of Martin.

That's mostly what it is. Martin isn't necessarily a negative, but he's so rarely a positive that he shouldn't be in the lineup over a number of guys in the organization who have much more potential for positive contributions. The 'positive' things he's supposedly able to do on the ice don't really happen - at least, at nowhere near a frequent enough basis to warrant him playing every game.

 

[ZBBM]

Really?  I don't think he was having a particularly bad night himself, but him and Borgman were buried in their own end alot.  (32% CF)  Borgman was definitely the worst of the two though.  He had tons of trouble moving the puck.  I'd really like to see Dermott come up.

Bergman's play definitely dragged the pairing's numbers down. I didn't notice Carrick making any significant mistakes, and he was good with the puck when he had it on his stick. For a third pairing guy, he was having a good night.

Well, up until his penalty.

 

[Frank E]

Really?  I don't think he was having a particularly bad night himself, but him and Borgman were buried in their own end alot.  (32% CF)  Borgman was definitely the worst of the two though.  He had tons of trouble moving the puck.  I'd really like to see Dermott come up.

Bergman's play definitely dragged the pairing's numbers down. I didn't notice Carrick making any significant mistakes, and he was good with the puck when he had it on his stick. For a third pairing guy, he was having a good night.

Well, up until his penalty.

Yep, Martin would have been put through a meat grinder around here if he did what Carrick did at that point of a close game.

 

[Coco-puffs]

But the Leafs have above-replacement level players sitting regularly or in the minors and I totally understand the frustration that Babcock isn't playing them ahead of Martin.

That's mostly what it is. Martin isn't necessarily a negative, but he's so rarely a positive that he shouldn't be in the lineup over a number of guys in the organization who have much more potential for positive contributions. The 'positive' things he's supposedly able to do on the ice don't really happen - at least, at nowhere near a frequent enough basis to warrant him playing every game.

I agree with you.

But, I'm pretty sure when they signed him it wasn't just to be their enforcer.  His only "positive" isn't knocking the snot out of guys or keeping the flies off as Babcock likes to say.  They wanted a guy who was going to forecheck his ass off and finish his checks.  I'd say those are positives.

Some may not think finishing your check is a positive because it means you don't have the puck, but I'd say making life uncomfortable for the opposition D is part of his mandate and he certainly does that frequently enough (top 5 in the NHL in hits/60).

 

[ZBBM]

Really?  I don't think he was having a particularly bad night himself, but him and Borgman were buried in their own end alot.  (32% CF)  Borgman was definitely the worst of the two though.  He had tons of trouble moving the puck.  I'd really like to see Dermott come up.

Bergman's play definitely dragged the pairing's numbers down. I didn't notice Carrick making any significant mistakes, and he was good with the puck when he had it on his stick. For a third pairing guy, he was having a good night.

Well, up until his penalty.

Yep, Martin would have been put through a meat grinder around here if he did what Carrick did at that point of a close game.

That's very true.

Although I totally can see why guys lose their tempers, he was pretty egregious there in cross-checking the guy around the neck.  Mid-torso, maybe it doesn't get called.  It's too bad that tarnished an otherwise good outing from him.

 

[Bullfrog]

That's exactly how earn a seat in the pressbox regardless of the rest of his game. Those bone head penalties are also the most difficult to kill. Enjoy your seat next game.

How are these types of penalties harder to kill off?

 

[AvroArrow]

How are these types of penalties harder to kill off?

They cause -2 speed for all players on the board.

 

[disco]

How are these types of penalties harder to kill off?

They cause -2 speed for all players on the board.

Also a -5 to team morale (30 seconds).

 

[louisstamos]

How are these types of penalties harder to kill off?

They cause -2 speed for all players on the board.

Also a -5 to team morale (30 seconds).

But can Leo Komarov cast Bardic Inspiration when on the PK?

 

[rdowdall]

How are these types of penalties harder to kill off?

They cause -2 speed for all players on the board.

Also a -5 to team morale (30 seconds).

But can Leo Komarov cast Bardic Inspiration when on the PK?

Only the dodecahedron knows.

 

[Highlander]

Bergman's play definitely dragged the pairing's numbers down. I didn't notice Carrick making any significant mistakes, and he was good with the puck when he had it on his stick. For a third pairing guy, he was having a good night.

Yeah, playing a 69-year-old Scandinavian scout on the third pair was probably a bad idea. 

Nice.

Spell check, Borgman becomes Bergman, happens to all of us. Unless the Borg!

 

[bustaheims]

That's exactly how earn a seat in the pressbox regardless of the rest of his game. Those bone head penalties are also the most difficult to kill. Enjoy your seat next game.

How are these types of penalties harder to kill off?

Because Stone Cold said so.