Round 1 Bruins-Leafs

MiracleOfO2704

not AWOL
SoSH Member
Jul 12, 2005
9,638
The Island
Ontario seems to be on a different track. I just got back from a long walk, and saw not one Leafs jersey, t-shirt, hat or flag in 2.5 hrs.
I went shopping wearing my 2010s alternate Seidenberg jersey, and got a lot more attaboys than usual. So the Maritimes aren’t in mourning.
 

Dummy Hoy

Angry Pissbum
SoSH Member
Jul 22, 2006
8,302
Falmouth
Great find. It's absolutely the same play. Lindholm said that was a set play and you can see how they've been working on it. Pasta even went to the backhander both times.
It’s a great way to break a 131 NZ trap…was causing the Bs a lot of trouble the last couple of games.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,442
306, row 14
What do we think the fall out in Leaf land ends up being? Seems we have this discussion every year but it feels like this one has to be the straw that breaks the proverbial camel's back. I don't really know how they do it without getting worse. I also don't know how they can justify the running it back approach any more.

They kind of have a run-and-gun, no attention to defense or details reputation, but it's kind of the opposite. They can't score goals in the playoffs. Their goals for in their last 12 playoff games: 2,2,2,2,2,1,3,2,1,2,2,1.

Shannahan? The Shanna-plan is in year 10. 8 playoff appearances, 7 first round exits. Asserted control last year by firing Dubas. Does MLSE ax him?

Treliving? Only been there a year so I assume he's safe and will get a chance to put more of a mark on the team. Shannahan being fired would introduce some uncertainty for Treliving's future, but again, GM's tend to get more than a year.

Keefe? This seems to be the easist, and probably happens. 5 years behind the bench, only 1 series victory. 5 years is kind of a lot for any coach these days, let alone one with no playoff success. Additionally he wasn't hired by the current GM (although he may have been extended by him). The old adage of "you can't change all the players.." thing probably applies.

The core 4? Tavares, Matthews, Nylander, Marner. Tavares is 33, entering the final year of his contract at $11 million AAV, and has a ful no-move. That'd be a tough sell in terms of getting Tavares to waive (the guy posted a photo of him as a kid sleeping in Maple Leaf pj's and sheets when he signed) and also finding value in a trade. Matthews just signed a huge extension with a full no-move and scored 69 goals this year. He's also nominated for the Selke. He's a terrific hockey player, trading him would be dumb. The ink is still fresh on William Nylander's 8-year, $11.5 million AAV contract with a full no-move. He ain't going anywhere. That leaves annual whipping boy Mitch Marner. That one, too, won't be easy. He's got, you guessed it, a no-move and is entering the final year of a $10.9 million AAV contract. So the acquiring team has to be suitible enough for Marner to waive the NMC, have the cap space for a $10.9 million winger next season and also be prepared to offer him more than that on an extension. Good luck finding fair value.

Elsewhere? We maybe could expand the core 4 to the core 5 with Rielly. He's really the only non-core guy making any money. $7.5 million for 6 more years. The rest of the group is short-term guys. Bertuzzi and sone of Tie are UFA's and probably walk. Jarnkrok and Kampf are signed to modest deals. Reaves stinks but is there for a reason and doesn't make a ton. But these are always the places the roster churns over year-to-year.

Kind of fascinating. They have $18 million in cap space but have to replace/re-sign Domi, Bertuzzi and at least 2 defensemen (they only have 4 NHL D under contract for next year).

Edit: There was an article in the Athletic that noted that the time to move a core piece was last year. Nylander and Marner didn't have no-moves and in Nylander's case was entering the final year of his deal. But they won a round so they fired the GM and are now a bit boxed in.
 
Last edited:

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
55,686
deep inside Guido territory
What do we think the fall out in Leaf land ends up being? Seems we have this discussion every year but it feels like this one has to be the straw that breaks the proverbial camel's back. I don't really know how they do it without getting worse. I also don't know how they can justify the running it back approach any more.

They kind of have a run-and-gun, no attention to defense or details reputation, but it's kind of the opposite. They can't score goals in the playoffs. Their goals for in their last 12 playoff games: 2,2,2,2,2,1,3,2,1,2,2,1.

Shannahan? The Shanna-plan is in year 10. 8 playoff appearances, 7 first round exits. Asserted control last year by firing Dubas. Does MLSE ax him?

Treliving? Only been there a year so I assume he's safe and will get a chance to put more of a mark on the team. Shannahan being fired would introduce some uncertainty for Treliving's future, but again, GM's tend to get more than a year.

Keefe? This seems to be the easist, and probably happens. 5 years behind the bench, only 1 series victory. 5 years is kind of a lot for any coach these days, let alone one with no playoff success. Additionally he wasn't hired by the current GM (although he may have been extended by him). The old adage of "you can't change all the players.." thing probably applies.

The core 4? Tavares, Matthews, Nylander, Marner. Tavares is 33, entering the final year of his contract at $11 million AAV, and has a ful no-move. That'd be a tough sell in terms of getting Tavares to waive (the guy posted a photo of him as a kid sleeping in Maple Leaf pj's and sheets when he signed) and also finding value in a trade. Matthews just signed a huge extension with a full no-move and scored 69 goals this year. He's also nominated for the Selke. He's a terrific hockey player, trading him would be dumb. The ink is still fresh on William Nylander's 8-year, $11.5 million AAV contract with a full no-move. He ain't going anywhere. That leaves annual whipping boy Mitch Marner. That one, too, won't be easy. He's got, you guessed it, a no-move and is entering the final year of a $10.9 million AAV contract. So the acquiring team has to be suitible enough for Marner to waive the NMC, have the cap space for a $10.9 million winger next season and also be prepared to offer him more than that on an extension. Good luck finding fair value.

Elsewhere? We maybe could expand the core 4 to the core 5 with Rielly. He's really the only non-core guy making any money. $7.5 million for 6 more years. The rest of the group is short-term guys. Bertuzzi and sone of Tie are UFA's and probably walk. Jarnkrok and Kampf are signed to modest deals. Reaves stinks but is there for a reason and doesn't make a ton. But these are always the places the roster churns over year-to-year.

Kind of fascinating. They have $18 million in cap space but have to replace/re-sign Domi, Bertuzzi and at least 2 defensemen (they only have 4 NHL D under contract for next year).

Edit: There was an article in the Athletic that noted that the time to move a core piece was last year. Nylander and Marner didn't have no-moves and in Nylander's case was entering the final year of his deal. But they won a round so they fired the GM and are now a bit boxed in.
I don't think they can really do anything with the core 5 players. They can't trade the captain Tavares, Matthews and Nylander just signed enormous extensions, and Rielly is their best defenseman. In short, they are what they are and they can't do much to change things. That's what happens when you front-load your roster with long-term, huge money deals in a hard cap sport. If it doesn't work out, you're stuck with it.
 

ColdSoxPack

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
Jul 14, 2005
2,534
Simi Valley, CA
The whole core 4 business is now an albatross, as shown above. 4 $10 million plus guys and nothing to show for it sucks. It was a mistake to can Lou Lamoriello. I give them kudos for keeping their home grown guys around though. Matthews is a prolific goal scorer. Marner is talented and unselfish. Nylander can play. Tavares was an unforced error. Poor goaltending is an annual problem. The Blackhawks tried this with 2 expensive forwards and that worked a for a few years. This did not.
 

Frisbetarian

♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2003
5,285
Off the beaten track
When over 55% of the salary cap is allocated to just 4 players in a sport where even the (non goalie) players with the most ice time get just 20 minutes a game and there are 5 players on the ice at all times you are going to have huge holes elsewhere. Hockey is not a sport where a non goalie can influence games by themselves to the degree they can in basketball or even baseball. The last time I ran the numbers, every ~5 goals a team scored above the opposition is worth 1 win, and a win's value was close to $3.5 million. Therefore, for a player to be worth 11 million, they would have to contribute over 3 wins (or +15 goals), which is difficult to do when you are effectively only 1/15 of the on ice team. Depth is key in the NHL, especially in the playoffs when injuries are always an issue, and allotting almost 60% of your money to 4 players leaves little for the other 19 on the roster.

The Leafs are a dumb team (don't get me started on how many games they played Anderson), and they are and will continue to pay the price.
 

astrozombie

New Member
Sep 12, 2022
438
I can't help but think Toronto runs it back next year and blames all of this on untimely illnesses/Swayman getting red hot/the variance that happens in hockey. I realize that sounds like insanity, but what else are the Leafs going to do?
 

Cotillion

New Member
Jun 11, 2019
5,397
I can't help but think Toronto runs it back next year and blames all of this on untimely illnesses/Swayman getting red hot/the variance that happens in hockey. I realize that sounds like insanity, but what else are the Leafs going to do?
I’m not sure they can. The fans want blood. They wanted it last year, and Dubas was the sacrifice. Whether any blood will satiate them is a different argument.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,442
306, row 14
I think they’ll try to sign-and-trade Marner. Basically push his UFA decision up a year. He gets to go somewhere he wants to plus gets the 8th year. Treliving has experience having done so with Tkachuk. They’ll probably take an L on the return but the real value back will be the cap flexibility. What they do with the cap space is anyone’s guess.

I always thought their biggest blunder was not investing enough in goal.
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
14,974
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
When over 55% of the salary cap is allocated to just 4 players in a sport where even the (non goalie) players with the most ice time get just 20 minutes a game and there are 5 players on the ice at all times you are going to have huge holes elsewhere. Hockey is not a sport where a non goalie can influence games by themselves to the degree they can in basketball or even baseball. The last time I ran the numbers, every ~5 goals a team scored above the opposition is worth 1 win, and a win's value was close to $3.5 million. Therefore, for a player to be worth 11 million, they would have to contribute over 3 wins (or +15 goals), which is difficult to do when you are effectively only 1/15 of the on ice team. Depth is key in the NHL, especially in the playoffs when injuries are always an issue, and allotting almost 60% of your money to 4 players leaves little for the other 19 on the roster.

The Leafs are a dumb team (don't get me started on how many games they played Anderson), and they are and will continue to pay the price.
So based on this, what is a guy like Pasta worth compared to DeBrusk?
 

Frisbetarian

♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2003
5,285
Off the beaten track
So based on this, what is a guy like Pasta worth compared to DeBrusk?
That’s a billion dollar question. I don’t think anyone has developed a wins above replacement metric that’s even close to accurate in hockey. I have some thoughts and estimates that I can’t share here, but a better question might be what’s a player like Bergeron worth compared to Pasta?

Really, all I was trying to say was using close to 60% of your cap on less that 20% of your roster is going to leave holes in the lineup and give the team very limited depth. Neither is optimal for post season success.
 

wiffleballhero

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 28, 2009
4,710
In the simulacrum
Not that it really works this way, but maybe Leaf fans can take some solace in watching game 1 vs. Florida -- it sort of suggests that the Leafs played a pretty damn good series defensively and ran into a very hot goalie.

I mean, all along I had a suspicion that Toronto was playing out of their minds to stick with Boston.
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
14,974
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
That’s a billion dollar question. I don’t think anyone has developed a wins above replacement metric that’s even close to accurate in hockey. I have some thoughts and estimates that I can’t share here, but a better question might be what’s a player like Bergeron worth compared to Pasta?

Really, all I was trying to say was using close to 60% of your cap on less that 20% of your roster is going to leave holes in the lineup and give the team very limited depth. Neither is optimal for post season success.
But isn't that true of any sport (besides maybe basketball, but that's kind of a soft cap).
 

NYCSox

chris hansen of goats
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
May 19, 2004
10,546
Some fancy town in CT
I think they’ll try to sign-and-trade Marner. Basically push his UFA decision up a year. He gets to go somewhere he wants to plus gets the 8th year. Treliving has experience having done so with Tkachuk. They’ll probably take an L on the return but the real value back will be the cap flexibility. What they do with the cap space is anyone’s guess.

I always thought their biggest blunder was not investing enough in goal.
Forget the 54 goals this year since he finally got significant PP time with two crazy elite playmakers, but how much better would they'd be with Hyman and Kadri instead of Taveras?
 

Frisbetarian

♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2003
5,285
Off the beaten track
But isn't that true of any sport (besides maybe basketball, but that's kind of a soft cap).
To some degree it is true in other sports, but I think it's more so in hockey. It's harder for an individual player to impact the game in hockey than baseball or especially basketball. In hockey you have 4 lines, 3 pairs, and a goalie (19 players) playing every game, and sans goalies those players average at most 20 minutes a game (1/3). In baseball there are only 10 (including DH), they play the full game, and the better players play premium positions and bat at the top of the order getting more plate appearances. And in basketball there are only 5 players on the court at a time, and the best players average 40 minutes a game (5/6). You also have to consider the scoring environment in each sport (hockey is lowest), and the amount of luck involved in the respective games (the most luck is in hockey, the least in basketball). I think paying 4 players who are all forwards 60% of your cap is insane. Maybe if they spread it among positions it would be more effective, but even then you really need depth in the NHL, especially in the playoffs. My guess (I have not run these numbers) is hockey is more a sport of attrition (again, especially in the postseason where hit more than double) and I think the number of injuries in the game also necessitates more depth, especially on defense.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
36,117
Deep inside Muppet Labs
To some degree it is true in other sports, but I think it's more so in hockey. It's harder for an individual player to impact the game in hockey than baseball or especially basketball. In hockey you have 4 lines, 3 pairs, and a goalie (19 players) playing every game, and sans goalies those players average at most 20 minutes a game (1/3). In baseball there are only 10 (including DH), they play the full game, and the better players play premium positions and bat at the top of the order getting more plate appearances. And in basketball there are only 5 players on the court at a time, and the best players average 40 minutes a game (5/6). You also have to consider the scoring environment in each sport (hockey is lowest), and the amount of luck involved in the respective games (the most luck is in hockey, the least in basketball). I think paying 4 players who are all forwards 60% of your cap is insane. Maybe if they spread it among positions it would be more effective, but even then you really need depth in the NHL, especially in the playoffs. My guess (I have not run these numbers) is hockey is more a sport of attrition (again, especially in the postseason where hit more than double) and I think the number of injuries in the game also necessitates more depth, especially on defense.
This is such great info. Explains very well why Toronto has chronically underachieved for years.

I really hope Donny gets you on retainer this summer.
 

Maximus

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
5,787
Toronto needs to find a elite goalie at this point and continue to beef up their D that has progressed significantly during the past series.
 
Last edited:

Two Youks

New Member
Jun 18, 2013
138
To some degree it is true in other sports, but I think it's more so in hockey. It's harder for an individual player to impact the game in hockey than baseball or especially basketball. In hockey you have 4 lines, 3 pairs, and a goalie (19 players) playing every game, and sans goalies those players average at most 20 minutes a game (1/3). In baseball there are only 10 (including DH), they play the full game, and the better players play premium positions and bat at the top of the order getting more plate appearances. And in basketball there are only 5 players on the court at a time, and the best players average 40 minutes a game (5/6). You also have to consider the scoring environment in each sport (hockey is lowest), and the amount of luck involved in the respective games (the most luck is in hockey, the least in basketball). I think paying 4 players who are all forwards 60% of your cap is insane. Maybe if they spread it among positions it would be more effective, but even then you really need depth in the NHL, especially in the playoffs. My guess (I have not run these numbers) is hockey is more a sport of attrition (again, especially in the postseason where hit more than double) and I think the number of injuries in the game also necessitates more depth, especially on defense.
Are there any numbers regarding the value one position (say a 1st line, PP1 center) vs another (say a #1 goalie)?
 

Frisbetarian

♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫ ♫
Moderator
SoSH Member
Dec 3, 2003
5,285
Off the beaten track
This is such great info. Explains very well why Toronto has chronically underachieved for years.

I really hope Donny gets you on retainer this summer.
Thanks SJM, but I’m really happily retired.

Are there any numbers regarding the value one position (say a 1st line, PP1 center) vs another (say a #1 goalie)?
That’s a great question that unfortunately I cannot answer. And tbh, even if I could I have little faith in the accuracy of the response.

One thing I can say is that we were always trying to determine how a potential acquisition would perform in a different role (3C vs 2C for example) and with different teammates. I think that was beneficial.
 

FL4WL3SS

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
14,974
Andy Brickley's potty mouth
To some degree it is true in other sports, but I think it's more so in hockey. It's harder for an individual player to impact the game in hockey than baseball or especially basketball. In hockey you have 4 lines, 3 pairs, and a goalie (19 players) playing every game, and sans goalies those players average at most 20 minutes a game (1/3). In baseball there are only 10 (including DH), they play the full game, and the better players play premium positions and bat at the top of the order getting more plate appearances. And in basketball there are only 5 players on the court at a time, and the best players average 40 minutes a game (5/6). You also have to consider the scoring environment in each sport (hockey is lowest), and the amount of luck involved in the respective games (the most luck is in hockey, the least in basketball). I think paying 4 players who are all forwards 60% of your cap is insane. Maybe if they spread it among positions it would be more effective, but even then you really need depth in the NHL, especially in the playoffs. My guess (I have not run these numbers) is hockey is more a sport of attrition (again, especially in the postseason where hit more than double) and I think the number of injuries in the game also necessitates more depth, especially on defense.
Besides QB, I would think in football this is largely true too, right? It's a game of attrition and depth.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,301
Hingham, MA
Besides QB, I would think in football this is largely true too, right? It's a game of attrition and depth.
Yes and no IMO. If you stay healthy in football, you can win a title with a top-heavy roster. But if the injury bug hits you're screwed.
 

cshea

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 15, 2006
36,442
306, row 14
Leafs bras post-mortem. Injury front:

- Matthews got really sick after game 2, suffered a hit in game 4 that presented "head injury issues." So possibly concussed, dancing around protocls?
- Nylander apparently had really bad migraines.
- Woll was a sprained back
 

Silverdude2167

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 9, 2006
4,736
Amstredam
Apparently the Youtube algorithm thinks I'm a Leafs fan now after I have spent so much time watching Leafs stuff... probably doesn't help that I've always enjoyed Dangle's stuff so I have a subscription on his channel

But cause of this the algo has delivered this to me... A series film retrospective from a Leafs fan... it pretty well edited together...

(4) How The Leafs Lost To The Bruins, Again. A Series Film. - YouTube
The algorithms are the best.
My phone thinks I am a Lightning and Dodgers fan, no idea why.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
36,117
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Leafs bras post-mortem. Injury front:

- Matthews got really sick after game 2, suffered a hit in game 4 that presented "head injury issues." So possibly concussed, dancing around protocls?
- Nylander apparently had really bad migraines.
- Woll was a sprained back
Nylander talked about the migraines after Game 7, they were so bad at one point that he couldn't see.

Woll got hurt on the goal at 19:59 of the 3rd in Game 6. So never stop trying to score!