GDT #8 - 2023/10/28 - TOR @ NSH 7pm - LoF Revenge Game

[Preston]

eh we're on the edge here. running out of runway I think...

Yeah I'm satisfied now. It's dragging a bit. At the time we were at the climax. The writers can wrap it up now. I'm sure it'll end with LOF admitting he was wrong about something. Anything.

 

[LeafOfFaith]

It is about RESOURCE MANAGEMENT (sorry about the caps, just want to make my point clear).

You are a lawyer, so I will make an analogy that you might understand.

You have 2 Research Assistants on your team. One is good at researching History and Historical Rulings but doesn't get recent rulings or recent case law. The other is just as good at Historical Rulings but is SUPER at recent case law. (I am not a lawyer, so please don't pick apart the semantics of the jargon that I am using, you get the point).

How would you assign those 2 Research Assistants?

What I'm assigning them to? Is your point to use them at what they're best at? Okay, sure. It doesn't have any bearing on this issue though.

If Kampf was incredible at faceoffs, say 70% or 75% to justify trusting him to win the all important draw over Tavares, or if he was a significantly better defensive player than Matthews to justify having him defend in the event of a faceoff loss, then there's an argument to be made maybe. But he's neither. He's a shitty faceoff guy, with zero offensive skills, and arguably good defensively when we've already got Matthews who is better at faceoffs and as good or better defensively.

So why the fuck are we using Kampf? The facts show us that the less he exists in OT (i.e., less than 20 seconds), our chances are infinitely higher to win the OT or get to the shootout. What else needs to be said here?

 

[LeafOfFaith]

you just moved the goalposts from FO% to 'possession'

Dude, it was never about who is better at faceoffs.

That's not debatable, and it's not Kampf.

Try to be a little smarter about this. You don't have to eat the bullshit zeke is feeding you.

 

[LeafOfFaith]

Yeah I'm satisfied now. It's dragging a bit. At the time we were at the climax. The writers can wrap it up now. I'm sure it'll end with LOF admitting he was wrong about something. Anything.

I was wrong to think that most of you had a functioning brain.

Hope you're fully satisfied now.

 

[zeke]

You have a problem with identifying the heart of the discussion apparently.

The issue is and always was whether Kampf should be out there at all, correct?

Correct.

Zeke Evidence: Win Percentage without Kampf, Win Percentage with Kampf, Goals Percentage, Goals Against, Expected Goals Percentage, Expected Goals Against, Shift Length
LoF Evidence: Faceoffs, Kampf Sucks, Keefe Sucks

It starts at the faceoff.

We agree that you think faceoffs are all-important. You keep saying this. Except when you don't.

You even tried to break down the leafs' records of Kampf FO Wins and Kampf FO Losses, except you got those records badly wrong, as you labelled 1/3 of the faceoffs incorrectly for each sample.

Now you have started to make a bunch of arguments which tell us that faceoff wins and losses aren't actually important, except you don't realize that's what you're doing.

He's our worst faceoff guy this year, correct?

Does it matter if 1/3 of his faceoff losses actually end up as wins, according to you?

And why would anyone judge a guy's faceoff ability on 8gms anyways?

So next we go to see what happens after the faceoff. If he wins, he leaves quickly. If he loses, he stays on. Correct?

Looking at your game logs, I used 20 seconds or less as the reasonable marker for him leaving quickly, probably because of a faceoff win. The win or loss is not important for these purposes. Whether he leaves quickly or not is.

You then pointed to two games where he left quickly and said those were faceoff losses and shouldn't be counted, correct?

I showed you that the NYR one is obviously a win because we get possession FROM THE FACEOFF, so Kampf was irrelevant - in fact, in the video you can see him getting off the ice as soon as Marner enters the zone.

I showed you that the Calgary video where the play was called dead after 3 seconds, meaning Kampf was gone with PP1 showing up.

In other words, your whole argument now rests on whether the two technical faceoff losses, which saw Kampf leave in less than 16 seconds each time, change anything in any material way. They obviously don't. Kampf was gone quick both times, which is all we're talking about, and the Leafs won both times.

So again, Kampf leaves quickly, we're 5-1-2. If he stays more than 20 seconds, we're 1-2-3. No one has been talking faceoff percentages with you. We all know Kampf is at 41% and basically every other center on the team has been doing better. The topic was always what happens after the faceoff.

If you can't admit that you're running around in circles trying to bullshit your way around the actual result here, then that's your problem.

So even though you don't realize it, at least you understand deep down inside that faceoff percentage is besides the point. That's good. Even though I know that in the very next post you will still repeat that faceoff percentage is all that matters. oh well.

So now you're breaking it down by "quick possession" - and you've noted that the leafs are near perfect when Kampf starts result in quick possession (the majority of games), and close to even (dead .500 before last game) in the ones he doesn't get quick possession (because he doesn't get scored on when he loses possession!). And you don't realize that these are good results either way.

Moreover, in those 2 losses that have come when he hasn't won quick possession, Kampf was long off the ice before we lost either of them.


But yes, Faceoffs, Kampf Sucks, Keefe Sucks.

 

[zeke]

Whatever statistics you can come up with, I’m going to reject them out of hand if they tell you that you should play David Kampf in a “next goal wins” scenario instead of any of Matthews, Marner, Nylander or Tavares.

Leafs lost 6 OTs in a row within 5 weeks before Keefe decided to play Kampf in OTs, and the Leafs have been a good OT team ever since.

If the OT goes south again with Kampf starting, Keefe will likely switch it up again.

 

[Pwner]

What I'm assigning them to? Is your point to use them at what they're best at? Okay, sure. It doesn't have any bearing on this issue though.

If Kampf was incredible at faceoffs, say 70% or 75% to justify trusting him to win the all important draw over Tavares, or if he was a significantly better defensive player than Matthews to justify having him defend in the event of a faceoff loss, then there's an argument to be made maybe. But he's neither. He's a shitty faceoff guy, with zero offensive skills, and arguably good defensively when we've already got Matthews who is better at faceoffs and as good or better defensively.

So why the fuck are we using Kampf? The facts show us that the less he exists in OT (i.e., less than 20 seconds), our chances are infinitely higher to win the OT or get to the shootout. What else needs to be said here?

It is about management. You could assign the person that is good at both to do the thing that the other is good at and maybe assign the other something they are bad at, or have the person do both, but that is not a good use of time or energy.

So you assign the assistant that is good at the thing they are good at (history), and then assign the other person the thing they are also good at (recent) but is soooo much better than the other assistant.

You save time but most importantly energy so that the work doesn't suffer from "burning the candle at both ends".

 

[Slinger 48]

Just a lump of hide and bones.........

 

[Habsy]

Does anyone else see the irony in LoF fighting for Kampf?


Now there's this book about Kampf by a short prick with really bad grooming too

 

[axlsalinger]

 

[LeafOfFaith]

Does anyone else see the irony in LoF fighting for Kampf?

View attachment 18257
Now there's this book about Kampf by a short prick with really bad grooming too

Um, I'm not fighting for Kampf.

 

[Habsy]

 

[Habsy]

Um, I'm not fighting for Kampf.

Carry on then

 

[LeafOfFaith]

It is about management. You could assign the person that is good at both to do the thing that the other is good at and maybe assign the other something they are bad at, or have the person do both, but that is not a good use of time or energy.

So you assign the assistant that is good at the thing they are good at (history), and then assign the other person the thing they are also good at (recent) but is soooo much better than the other assistant.

You save time but most importantly energy so that the work doesn't suffer from "burning the candle at both ends".

Kampf is worse than Tavares at faceoffs, and worse than Matthews at faceoffs and as you said probably not as good defensively and Matthews is far better at getting the puck back.

I would rather "burn" the Matthews candle on a faceoff loss and have him out there for two minutes, and then turn to all the other great players we have after him. What are you "managing" other than a faceoff loss with Kampf? We're so scared of Matthews playing defensively in OT, when we talk about him maybe being the best overall center in all of hockey at all other times?

 

[Habsy]

I should have known it was about JT

 

[Pwner]

Kampf is worse than Tavares at faceoffs, and worse than Matthews at faceoffs and as you said probably not as good defensively and Matthews is far better at getting the puck back.

I would rather "burn" the Matthews candle on a faceoff loss and have him out there for two minutes, and then turn to all the other great players we have after him. What are you "managing" other than a faceoff loss with Kampf? We're so scared of Matthews playing defensively in OT, when we talk about him maybe being the best overall center in all of hockey at all other times?

So what you are saying is that you would rather have your 2nd best offensive player in the offensive zone (because Matthews just spent a minute trying to get the puck back) or your best offensive player at 50%?

Cool.

 

[LeafOfFaith]

Correct.

Zeke Evidence: Win Percentage without Kampf, Win Percentage with Kampf, Goals Percentage, Goals Against, Expected Goals Percentage, Expected Goals Against, Shift Length
LoF Evidence: Faceoffs, Kampf Sucks, Keefe Sucks



We agree that you think faceoffs are all-important. You keep saying this. Except when you don't.

You even tried to break down the leafs' records of Kampf FO Wins and Kampf FO Losses, except you got those records badly wrong, as you labelled 1/3 of the faceoffs incorrectly for each sample.

Now you have started to make a bunch of arguments which tell us that faceoff wins and losses aren't actually important, except you don't realize that's what you're doing.



Does it matter if 1/3 of his faceoff losses actually end up as wins, according to you?

And why would anyone judge a guy's faceoff ability on 8gms anyways?




So even though you don't realize it, at least you understand deep down inside that faceoff percentage is besides the point. That's good. Even though I know that in the very next post you will still repeat that faceoff percentage is all that matters. oh well.

So now you're breaking it down by "quick possession" - and you've noted that the leafs are near perfect when Kampf starts result in quick possession (the majority of games), and close to even (dead .500 before last game) in the ones he doesn't get quick possession (because he doesn't get scored on when he loses possession!). And you don't realize that these are good results either way.

Moreover, in those 2 losses that have come when he hasn't won quick possession, Kampf was long off the ice before we lost either of them.


But yes, Faceoffs, Kampf Sucks, Keefe Sucks.

This is a whirlwind of bullshit flying out in all directions.

Kampf is one of our worst faceoff guys this year. If the goal is to get quick possession and get Kampf off quickly, it's a better idea to not have Kampf on at all and let Matthews or Tavares take the faceoff.

Next, if he loses and stays on, you spent lots of time gathering up info that tells us what happens next. And what happens next is that we go 5-1-2 if he's gone in the first 20 seconds, and basically 1-5 when he stays on for longer. That's a problem.

So yes, Keefe is stupid for using Kampf in OT, Kampf sucks, and you love to bullshit when it's clear that two particular faceoff "losses" that you rested your case on actually resulted in our getting possession immediately, which completely destroyed your case.

 

[LeafOfFaith]

So what you are saying is that you would rather have your 2nd best offensive player in the offensive zone (because Matthews just spent a minute trying to get the puck back) or your best offensive player at 50%?

Cool.

I don't understand what you're saying.

But yes, I prefer Matthews over Kampf. I prefer his ability to win more faceoffs and immediately start out with possession more frequently, his ability to defend as well as any other center I've ever seen play for the Leafs, his ability to take the puck away 2.5x more than Kampf (which is extremely valuable in the event the faceoff is lost), and if the game is still going at the end of his shift, to then bring on Tavares, Nylander, Marner, Bertuzzi, Knies, and almost anyone else other than Kampf.

Your position seems to start from the premise that we have no good players to put out there after Auston Matthews needs to go rest for a shift. That's not the case.

 

[zeke]

This is a whirlwind of bullshit flying out in all directions.

certainly is.

Kampf is one of our worst faceoff guys this year.

why do you keep repeating this 8gm sample as if it means something.

If the goal is to get quick possession and get Kampf off quickly, it's a better idea to not have Kampf on at all and let Matthews or Tavares take the faceoff.

Actually in that case it's irrelevant who is on.

Next, if he loses and stays on, you spent lots of time gathering up info that tells us what happens next.

When he loses, the leafs do better than when the others lose, because he rarely gets stuck out there for long, and he's so far not allowing any goals while on and barely any chances at all.

And what happens next is that we go 5-1-2 if he's gone in the first 20 seconds, and basically 1-5 when he stays on for longer. That's a problem.

no, 1-2-3 is not "basically 1-5".

So yes, Keefe is stupid for using Kampf in OT, Kampf sucks, and you love to bullshit

I know. Faceoffs. Kampf sucks. Keefe sucks.

when it's clear that two particular faceoff "losses" that you rested your case on actually resulted in our getting possession immediately, which completely destroyed your case.

my "case" never rested on faceoffs. not even a little bit.

your "case" rested entirely on faceoffs - and you were proven wrong about them.

 

[Pwner]

I don't understand what you're saying.

But yes, I prefer Matthews over Kampf. I prefer his ability to win more faceoffs and immediately start out with possession more frequently, his ability to defend as well as any other center I've ever seen play for the Leafs, his ability to take the puck away 2.5x more than Kampf (which is extremely valuable in the event the faceoff is lost), and if the game is still going at the end of his shift, to then bring on Tavares, Nylander, Marner, Bertuzzi, Knies, and almost anyone else other than Kampf.

Your position seems to start from the premise that we have no good players to put out there after Auston Matthews needs to go rest for a shift. That's not the case.

My position is this: 3v3 has turned into a possession based form of hockey.

So if Matthews loses 4 out of 10 times (that is being generous), he would spend the next (I don't know) 30 to 60 seconds trying to get the puck back. And since there is a lot more room out on the ice, he is skating more than just on the PP. By the time he gets the puck back, he is tired and ready for a change so the second-best (or 3rd) offensive player is now taking his place to go into the offensive zone and try to score a goal.

Now if they use their 2nd best defensive player to start the game, he either gets the puck (Matthews now changes and gets on the ice in like 10 seconds) or uses all his energy to get the puck back so Matthews can use his Energy in the Offensive zone.

I know what scenario I would prefer to use to win the game.