• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

GDT LEAFS @ FLYERS

Wayward DP said:
Lupul has shown a disappointing inability to be 'the man' this season. For stretches he's played at a level comparable to Phil, but we haven't seen that from him in quite some time.

And yeah, Kadri's not there yet. To be honest I don't think JVR will ever get there. He's a great secondary piece and has a pretty unique skill set, but I cannot see him ever driving a line by himself.
Click to expand...

If this is the best JVR is ,whats wrong with that?

Solid cap for a legit 25-30 goal man , tough down low scorer . This year team defense has been your problem all year . I know the Leafs arent built like the Blues to be great defensively but shocked at the same miscues made game in game out .
 
MindzEye said:
Almost everyone on this team has played defence at an adequate level in the past for other coaches or other teams. The personnel being bad defensively isn't why we allow 35 shots a game.
Click to expand...

Whether or not they were defensively adequate in the past holds no bearing on the present, and when you give up the most amount it usually means you spend more time in your own end chasing the puck then you do in the other teams end creating scoring chances.

This the thing that perplexes me about the Leafs, no matter how many roster changes we go through, no matter how many coaches we go through this team is usually in the bottom 1/3 of the league for goals against, penalty killing and shots against. I'm trying to figure out the common link here and I just can't seem to find a rhyme or reason for the Leafs poor defensive play over the past decade or longer.
 
Pronger84 said:
Whether or not they were defensively adequate in the past holds no bearing on the present,
Click to expand...

Sure it does. ****, of course it has baring on the present. If someone scored 30 goals in the past, they're a lot more likely to score 30 goals in the present or future than someone who has never scored 30 goals. If players has been adequate defensively in the past, than odds are, it's not necessarily the fault of the players for a team's poor defensive play.


and when you give up the most amount it usually means you spend more time in your own end chasing the puck then you do in the other teams end creating scoring chances.
Click to expand...

Thanks, tips.

This the thing that perplexes me about the Leafs, no matter how many roster changes we go through, no matter how many coaches we go through this team is usually in the bottom 1/3 of the league for goals against, penalty killing and shots against. I'm trying to figure out the common link here and I just can't seem to find a rhyme or reason for the Leafs poor defensive play over the past decade or longer.
Click to expand...

It's only killing you because you stop digging there. The reasons have been different with every iteration of the club. The 06-07 Leafs, for example were 7th in the league in shots against. That's a good defensive team...unfortunately though, we received .888% goaltending which caused us to be 25th in goals against.

The following season we were averagish in shots allowed, coming in 17th...but 27th in goals allowed because, drum roll please.... .893% team save percentage. 08/09 was a similar story where we were average in shots allowed, but a .885% had us again in the basement in goals allowed.

This trend continued until 10/11...and was only discontinued whenever James Reimer was in net. The team gave up 2.99 goals per game in total (including Reimer's start), but somehow managed 2.60 per game in front of Reimer. It's that season which shattered the previous narrative about the Toronto defence making it's goalies look bad. The team was so different statistically when Reimer was in net vs Gusto or Giguere. Same defence in front of all of them, but Reimer was letting in a half a goal a game less than Gustavsson, and a quarter of a goal less than Giguere.

11/12 rolls around, Wilson's team slides a bit (tied for 20th in shots against, .7 from 14th)...but the goaltending slides due to Reimer's injury...we're hilarious in Goals Against again.

Cue the Randy Carlyle era and right off the hop our shots against go up over 32 a game but we sky rocket up to 17th in goals against at a decent 2.67 per. We're disorganized and give up a ton of shots, but our goaltending is good enough to float the defence. This year though the bottom fell out of the team defensive play. It's simply never been like this of the time period you're quoting. We're giving up a full 4-5 shots per game more than we were during those other seasons. Shit...we're giving up almost 4 more shots per game than last year's hilariously bad total of 32.3
 
MindzEye said:
Sure it does. ****, of course it has baring on the present. If someone scored 30 goals in the past, they're a lot more likely to score 30 goals in the present or future than someone who has never scored 30 goals. If players has been adequate defensively in the past, than odds are, it's not necessarily the fault of the players for a team's poor defensive play.




Thanks, tips.


It's only killing you because you stop digging there. The reasons have been different with every iteration of the club. The 06-07 Leafs, for example were 7th in the league in shots against. That's a good defensive team...unfortunately though, we received .888% goaltending which caused us to be 25th in goals against.

The following season we were averagish in shots allowed, coming in 17th...but 27th in goals allowed because, drum roll please.... .893% team save percentage. 08/09 was a similar story where we were average in shots allowed, but a .885% had us again in the basement in goals allowed.

This trend continued until 10/11...and was only discontinued whenever James Reimer was in net. The team gave up 2.99 goals per game in total (including Reimer's start), but somehow managed 2.60 per game in front of Reimer. It's that season which shattered the previous narrative about the Toronto defence making it's goalies look bad. The team was so different statistically when Reimer was in net vs Gusto or Giguere. Same defence in front of all of them, but Reimer was letting in a half a goal a game less than Gustavsson, and a quarter of a goal less than Giguere.

11/12 rolls around, Wilson's team slides a bit (tied for 20th in shots against, .7 from 14th)...but the goaltending slides due to Reimer's injury...we're hilarious in Goals Against again.

Cue the Randy Carlyle era and right off the hop our shots against go up over 32 a game but we sky rocket up to 17th in goals against at a decent 2.67 per. We're disorganized and give up a ton of shots, but our goaltending is good enough to float the defence. This year though the bottom fell out of the team defensive play. It's simply never been like this of the time period you're quoting. We're giving up a full 4-5 shots per game more than we were during those other seasons. Shit...we're giving up almost 4 more shots per game than last year's hilariously bad total of 32.3
Click to expand...

Thanks, haven't had time to research the shot totals against vs the save %, it's interesting it seems when we have average s/a totals we get sup par save % from the goalie, yet when we get above average save %, we get a higher s/a total per game, it seems the goalies far well when faced with more pepper, you've made some very interesting and valid points there. I disagree though with one thing though, the players (and the goalie) are on the ice so generally it's their fault for defensive miscues, missed assignments and goals against, a coach can match lines all he wants and instruct the team all game long but eventually it comes down to excecution from the team.
 
Shape and structure of a defense has as much to do with missed assignments as the personnel. Now, if a defenders get beat like a mule on the rush, that's on him. If the system calls for the winger to cheat really low to help the defender and it leaves an open point shot that ends up in the back of the net, that's not a defensive miscue, that's systemic.
 
MindzEye said:
Shape and structure of a defense has as much to do with missed assignments as the personnel. Now, if a defenders get beat like a mule on the rush, that's on him. If the system calls for the winger to cheat really low to help the defender and it leaves an open point shot that ends up in the back of the net, that's not a defensive miscue, that's systemic.
Click to expand...

No denying that, coaching plays a role too in how a team preforms out there to an extent. Take Carlyle for example, I've noticed that when the Leafs are in their own end the forwards skate up to the blueline which forces the defense to force a stretch pass, instead of the forwards coming back to close the gap between the defensemen/forwards for passing lanes, I'm not sure if it's Randy who's instructing them to do that or if the forwards are taking it upon themselves to cheat at the blueline.

I also think though a coach can instruct his players to do things but in the end it comes down to the players exceuting said system out there.
 
Hey, if you want to believe that players who bought in, and were defensively successful (to varying degrees) in other systems have either forgotten how to, or stopped caring about playing well defensively, that's up to you. It's not like we've been just bad at allowing shots this season, we've been historically abysmal at limiting shots on net.

We're a full shot per game worse than the 2nd worst team at limiting shots since the lockout...nope, not that lockout.....the other lockout. In most seasons being in the 33.5 range is enough to be 30th in the league. We're a full 2.5 shots worse than that. To put that in perspective quickly, 2.5 shots per game is the current difference between the 7th place Calgary Flames, and the 22nd place Carolina Hurricanes....it's a pretty big margin when made relative to the league.

I am a firm believer that shot quality matters a lot when it comes to team defensive play, but there's no way that we're allowing that volume of shots without giving up a higher than average volume of shots from higher leverage ice as well. This is just far too broken for me to hang it on players who have almost to a man, been solid contributing members to team defences much, much better than this at limiting shots.
 
MindzEye said:
Hey, if you want to believe that players who bought in, and were defensively successful (to varying degrees) in other systems have either forgotten how to, or stopped caring about playing well defensively, that's up to you. It's not like we've been just bad at allowing shots this season, we've been historically abysmal at limiting shots on net.

We're a full shot per game worse than the 2nd worst team at limiting shots since the lockout...nope, not that lockout.....the other lockout. In most seasons being in the 33.5 range is enough to be 30th in the league. We're a full 2.5 shots worse than that. To put that in perspective quickly, 2.5 shots per game is the current difference between the 7th place Calgary Flames, and the 22nd place Carolina Hurricanes....it's a pretty big margin when made relative to the league.

I am a firm believer that shot quality matters a lot when it comes to team defensive play, but there's no way that we're allowing that volume of shots without giving up a higher than average volume of shots from higher leverage ice as well. This is just far too broken for me to hang it on players who have almost to a man, been solid contributing members to team defences much, much better than this at limiting shots.
Click to expand...

I'm in full agreement with you, this is a systematic problem as well as a player one, it goes hand in hand. We give up not just a high shot total but quality ones as well, last year we were a lot better at boxing out the opposition and limiting them to the outside.... this year were giving up a lot of scoring quality shots too which I feel is because we collapse back. It's pretty bad when a team like Edmonton and Buffalo who are abysmal defensive clubs give up less shots then we do, if you ask me it's alarming.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top