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

Leaf Rumours

The numbers are correct.

The Leafs, even with Giguere playing way above what he done over the last two year sample size, gave up more goals than they scored.

That leads to a sub .500 record and no playoffs.
 
Yup, some teams beat the odds...

Let's look at some others.

30th Edmonton Oilers 214 284 -70
29th Toronto Maple Leafs 214 267 -53
28th Florida Panthers 208 244 -36
27th Columbus Blue Jackets 216 259 -43
26th New York Islanders 222 264 -42

But at least these teams all get a shot at the number 1 draft pick to compensate for their futility. :sarcasm
 
You could simply admit how embarrassingly wrong you were and how amusing it was that the Senators made the post-season with one of the worst goal-differentials in the league.
 
Would it not stand to reason that Toskala's mid .870s save percentage was a critical factor in the Leafs place in the standings? I'm not expecting a mid-1970s Habs defence next season but I certainly think that the Leafs have the personnel in place to finish anywhere from 13th to 17th.
 
JaysCyYoung said:
Would it not stand to reason that Toskala's mid .870s save percentage was a critical factor in the Leafs place in the standings? I'm not expecting a mid-1970s Habs defence next season but I certainly think that the Leafs have the personnel in place to finish anywhere from 13th to 17th.
Click to expand...
Of course. But we were talking about GF/GA numbers AFTER Toskala left the team.
 
i don't think there's any question that the leafs need to find some guys that can put the puck in the net. whether it can come from within is a big question mark that, admittedly, looks unlikely for the time being (at least until kadri, bozak and, i'm hoping, d'amigo and caputi start hitting their primes). it's possible but a stretch. and looking up and down the roster, burke has done very little to improve this team offensively from the end of last season. and while the team as a whole was better by the end of the season, the offense had taken a hit once stajan, ponikarovsky, hagman and blake were out of the picture.

this is a team that should win -- and lose -- plenty of low scoring 1-goal games this year, that's for sure.
 
The Leafs went a pretty pitiful 12-18 in one-goal games that were not decided by a shootout last season so improvement in that regard would go a long way to determining whether the team is a contender (or even playoff-bound) or not.
 
SENSible said:
The article was wrong, but not nearly as wrong as Player.

The Leafs gave up 68 goals in 26 games for a 2.62 ga/g.

The Leafs scored 62 goals in 26 games for a 2.38 g/g

Still a negative number and still looking at a sub .500 team.
Click to expand...

-0.24gpg, would have placed them 21st in the league, 10th in the East, just behind 9th placed Sens at -0.16.

and the Leafs have made these changes from that team:

Versteeg IN - Stalberg OUT
Armstrong IN - Lundmark OUT
Kadri IN - Wallin OUT
Brown IN - Primeau OUT
Komisarek IN - Finger OUT
Lebda IN - Exelby OUT


what changes have the -0.16gpg Sens made? Gonchar IN, Volch and Cullen OUT?
 
Last edited:
Burke offhand comments about Kadri PERHAPS not making this team are pretty oftuse.

Let me put it plainly for you porky, if Kadri doesn't make this team, they have a snowballs chance in Kuwait of making the playoffs.

I don't know if this is to keep the kids ego in check, but no Kadri, no playoffs imo. But hey. I will let Don Cherry go wild on porky for that statement.

Bozak, Kessel and Kadri are the straws offensively that will stir this team. And Kadri IS NOT going to the Marlies, unless porky really is intending to join the Bruins soon.
 
Burke wants Kadri to battle and earn his way onto the team, not gift wrap it for him by saying he's guaranteed to have a spot.
 
An interesting new statistic that I think you guys would be interested in (developed by Hockey-Reference):

Strength of Schedule (zero is average, a minus schedule denotes an easy schedule determined by goals above or below average and a number above zero indicates a difficult one):

1. Nashville 0.10
2. Columbus 0.09
3. Detroit 0.09
4. San Jose 0.08
5. Edmonton 0.07
6. Dallas 0.07
7. Los Angeles 0.07
8. Chicago 0.07
9. Anaheim 0.06
10. Phoenix 0.06
11. Minnesota 0.05
12. St. Louis 0.04
13. Colorado 0.04
14. Vancouver 0.04
15. Calgary 0.02
16. Montreal 0.01
17. Philadelphia -0.02
18. New York Islanders -0.04
19. Toronto -0.05
20. Florida -0.05
21. Boston -0.05
22. Tampa Bay -0.06
23. New Jersey -0.06
24. New York Rangers -0.07
25. Ottawa -0.07
26. Carolina -0.08
27. Atlanta -0.08
28. Buffalo -0.09
29. Pittsburgh -0.10
30. Washington -0.16

Some things to note obviously:

Buffalo (the Northeast Division champion), Pittsburgh (defending Stanley Cup champion), and Washington (President's Trophy winners) all had exceedingly easy schedules. Edmonton, the worst team in the regular-season last year, had one of the worst schedules in the league based on strength of opponents and the usual evils of extensive Western Canadian travel. Montreal had a virtually dead-average schedule meaning that what we saw from the Habs last season was about the best they could have managed under the circumstances, so it's a relatively accurate picture on the strength of last season's Habs edition. Ottawa was also amongst the beneficiaries of an unusually easy schedule according to the formula. The Leafs schedule was somewhat easier than average but reasonably harder than Ottawa's. I am not making a direct comparison by stating that is the primary reason that the Sens were better, I simply find it interesting in the context of potential for improvement next season. If Ottawa receives a harder schedule it could be interesting to see how they fare and if the Leafs receive a harder one the same applies.
 
But wouldn't that stat be somewhat flawed?

Due to the amount of games played within the division if you are a top team you would have a weaker schedule than the rest of your division because they have to play you and do not get to play themselves.
 
Which is why there are so many Central Division teams at the top of the chart (arguably the best division in hockey talent-wise) and Washington was able to eviserate the weak Southeast Division teams and is thus located at the bottom in terms of strength of schedule. The numbers make sense, it's just interpretating the value that's the hard part, right?
 
The interpretation is difficult, that is the problem with leagues that play teams multiple times, NHL, NBA, MLB. NFL is really one of the few leagues where strength of schedule is not manipulated very much.

just imagine the strength of schedule for the jays
 
One thing that I just noticed that really stands out is the sheer and utter dominance of the Western Conference. All 15 of the Western Conference teams occupy the first 15 of the 30 positions on the chart with all 15 of the Eastern Conference teams occupying the last half of the list. If there was ever a quick illustration of the disparity in talent and strength between the two conferences this is it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top