Winter Blahs
January 22nd, 2009 by SteveIt’s funny how this season has progressed for Leafs fans. When it all began, most were happily in agreement with the dour predictions of the mainstream media that the team would suck horribly. A few followers of the club, myself included, were fairly adamant that the team would not be as bad as advertised; would likely not finish dead last in the NHL, and considered it quite probable that the team would end off the season out of the playoffs but drafting around the same spot they picked in last season.
Initially, it looked as if those who predicted a competitive, but ultimately developing squad had picked the winning horse, and most Leafs fans were glad to see some drive out of the youngins on the club. They liked the verve, and the idea that Ron Wilson got a lot out of his charges in blue and white appealed to their sense of hard working Leafs. Unfortunately the poor play of the Leafs netminders served to dampen any success the club may have had through a solid opening month or two to the season.
Now as the club slides (as it always seems to slide) into the month of February, it appears whatever shine people saw has worn off. Talk of tanking for Tavares, packing it in, trading away everyone (despite their decreasing trade value) has pretty much racheted up everywhere in Leaf land. People that love the team sound outright depressed… though at least not suicidal. They’re frustrated at the depths of the process.
Why? It’s not like anyone seriously expected the team to “compete”. Mocking how bad the club is at this stage does serve to soothe some of the anger. The funny thing is, they’re not quite to the point of packing it in.
Frankly the strange part to me is, they’ve actually got almost exactly the same winning percentage than the club they share the confines of the ACC with. The Raptors were predicted to be a playoff contender on the rise… and yet the Leafs are the brunt of all the jokes… it’s a bit bizarre methinks.
I said here, that I would be surprised if the team wins 5 games this month. At this point they’ve won 2 and there are three games left before February begins. I’m pretty sure I’m going to be right. I also said they’ve been playing better of late - that posting was written on January 11th, right when everyone was certain the offense was gone for good. Since that posting, the team’s record still sucks at 1-2-2, but that’s still superior to their immediately prior run of 2-7-0 in which they scored a total of 17 goals and gave up 38… good for 1.88 GFA, and 4.22 GAA. In their last five games, they’ve scored 12 goals and given up 16, getting the GFA to 2.4, and the GAA to 3.2 per game. Yes that’s still problematic, but think about this for a second: The Leafs were SHUT OUT IN 2 OF THOSE 5 GAMES and they still improved their goals for per game by 27%, while cutting their goals against by 75%. You might not notice a huge change in the win column, but the team IS playing better.
The Leafs are a lot closer to winning games when Ron Wilson talks about 2 or 3 KEY MISTAKES, rather than blanket statements on how the Leafs “need to play better” and “don’t have the talent” to win right now. Oh, and before we decide it’s the quality of the competition that was dashing the Leafs earlier, the bad run of play included losses to Dallas, the Islanders, and Florida… not exactly juggernauts of the NHL. Their most recent run of improving play has come against Boston and Carolina.
Let’s face it, this year’s Leafs squad was bound to go through some valleys on it’s way to the end of the season. Losing eight out of ten games is obviously one of those lows. Let’s try to have some perspective though. Last season between December 15th and January 15th, the Leafs won exactly 1 out of 13 games, with a 1-9-3 record. That’s one win to thirteen losses - oh AND the one win came in OT. With a team that included Mats Sundin, and had Vesa Toskala playing “reasonably” well. This year Toskala has sucked pretty much all season long, and the team doesn’t have a top line centre, and everyone’s annoyed at the fact that the team has a hard time by picking up 2 wins in 9 games?
Get the heck over it. That same team that went 1-9-3 for a month last year still finished with 83 points, in the 7th slot for the draft. This year? They’d have to fall behind Ottawa, the Islanders, Atlanta, St Louis, Tampa Bay, and keep crapping it to stay behind Nashville and the LA Kings. In their last
Let’s remember a few things here. The LA Kings and Nashville both play in the Western Conference, and thus have to play a lot more HARD teams to win against than the Leafs. They’re probably better teams than Toronto, but their final records might not be. Heck LA’s record against the East is actually pretty bad at 4-4-1 and St Louis is outright horrid at 4-8-1.
The way Vancouver is playing they might be down with the rest of the crap teams by the end of the season. Pittsburgh could still implode further. There’s a lot of ways for things to go wrong for OTHER teams, and it can’t really go much MORE wrong for the Leafs.
Very few outside observers expected the Leafs goaltending to be as bad as it has been this year. That strongly implies that the team in front of the Leafs net could have 4 or 5 more points if they’d gotten superior play from Toskala and Joseph. That would put the team right behind the Penguins. Thing is… their goalies DO suck… and thus so do the Leafs.
Don’t expect that to continue forever though. I still stand by my view that the team is trending upwards, and will likely win a few more games in February. If Mike Van Ryn comes back healthy (which is still possible if his base line test scores improve), if the Leafs can make a big trade of Tomas Kaberle and/or Vesa Toskala and/or Pavel Kubina and/or Nik Antropov relieve some of the “huge changes coming” pressure, and if the Leafs continue to skate the way they have for most of the year, they could easily rack up some W’s next month. They play Ottawa and the Islanders once each. They face Tampa Bay once. They face Montreal once, Buffalo and Florida twice, Pittsburgh, Vancouver, and Columbus once, and the Rangers twice. They should be able to split with Florida and Buffalo. They should be able to beat Ottawa and the Islanders. They should be able to win one of the three against Pittsburgh, Vancouver, and Columbus. That’s 5 wins, before I even mention Tampa Bay, Montreal, or the Rangers.
For such a good “defensive” team, the Rangers sure have a hell of a lot of minus players on their roster. In fact, only 5 players on the team are pluses at this point, despite the fact that they lead their division standings. That’s only one more than the Leafs. They are beatable, despite having an awesome goalie in Lundqvist and some great talent in their line up.
Tampa Bay is improved recently, going 9-5-1 in their past 15 games. I don’t personally think that hot streak will last the ENTIRE SECOND HALF OF THE SEASON. In fact, odds are that the dysfunctional ownership down in TB will do something to screw it up a week into the second half of the season. I don’t find the team all that intimidating… even for the Leafs.
Montreal is very good. They also always seem to get involved in heated dust ups with the Leafs, and occasionally lose focus. They also might take the Leafs a tad too lightly. If they’re over confident, and the Leafs are healthy, they might eke this one out.
I’m predicting that the Leafs win around 6 games in February… which is a huge step up from the 2 they’ve managed so far in January. Let’s just say I don’t think the low everyone is experiencing is quite as low as they think it is.
Posted in Game Analysis, Stat Analysis
14 Responses to “Winter Blahs”
By Gerald Norton
on Jan 22, 2009
“The Leafs were SHUT OUT IN 2 OF THOSE 5 GAMES” and “the team IS playing better” is an oxymoron. Kinda like “Ottawa Senators” and “2009 Stanley Cup Champions” lol!
By bkblades
on Jan 22, 2009
You know what I’m find really annoying lately? All this talk about “Tanking for Tavares”. Don’t get me wrong, I do believe Tavares is a wonderful player with the obvious skills to possibly make him an elite one. But what happens when the Leafs aren’t in position to draft him (and this is the Leafs we’re talking about, so this is almost a guarantee)? Does this rebuild suddenly become a disaster or that automatically the Leafs can never be salvaged? I guess the gradual improvements, which you aptly pointed out with the current crop of Leafs, are all for naught because the Leafs missed their chance to draft the hockey messiah. Aside from the fact that this upcoming draft goes beyond Tavares and Hedman, a single player isn’t going to improve the Leafs ability to sign free agents or develop their players better. Ugh.
By Steve
on Jan 23, 2009
It’s not an “oxymoron” since an oxymoron is technically a single term or saying. It might appear contradictory though.
It isn’t in actuality if you read what I said though. Despite the fact that they were shut out twice in the last 5 games, their goals for and goals against per game have trended in the right direction, and they’ve obtained a higher points percentage. In the previous 9 games they had a .222 point percentage. In the last 5 games they have a .400 points percentage. Add that in to the whole thing and it’s not as odd as it sounds.
By Dan
on Jan 23, 2009
I know Tavares is a great prospect, but I’m not convinced he’s the guy. I’m wondering if theres a guy more like Richards in the draft, more character, less flash. More cap friendly in the long run as well.
I agree with you Steve, I’m not convinced that the leafs are going to fall that far. But if they do luck out and win a lottery, I wouldn’t be upset if they traded down a couple of spots.
One other thing, as much as I like Schenn, that Boedeker kid is something else, I wouldn’t have been disappointed in him.
By Gerald Norton
on Jan 23, 2009
Actually Steve, an oxymoron is defined as “broadly : something (as a concept) that is made up of contradictory or incongruous elements”. Being shut out 2 of 5 games, and improving their play, are incongruous elements, thus an oxymoron.
At the end of the day, semantics aside, I think your argument misses the forest for the trees.
By Steve
on Jan 24, 2009
Gerald, one could say (and in my opinion more accurately say) the exact same thing to you.
You’re fixating on the shut outs in 2 of the 5 games… which they only allowed 2 goals against in. I’m describing the general trend of reducing goals against and improving goals for over a 5 game stretch. To me it appears your point would be more specific, and mine would be more generalized.
So which one is more specific and which is more generalized? The forest or the trees?
By Steve
on Jan 24, 2009
Oh and an oxymoron is typically defined as conjoined contradictory terms. Usually as a rhetorical device. I think a better term for what you’re getting at would be a dichotomy:
Dichotomy -
Division into two usually contradictory parts or opinions: “the dichotomy of the one and the many”
I don’t teach English though, so I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one.
By Doug
on Jan 24, 2009
I guess there are many ways to build a team. Some ways are more certain than others. I think everyone will agree that the Leafs won’t be ready to contend for a number of years. I’ve found teams that can collect a few high lottery picks are ready to compete in 4 or 5 years (such as Pittsburgh, Chicago and Phoenix is quietly moving into those ranks etc.Whereas, if a team collects less obvious talents from further down in the draft take longer. “Less obvious” is a player who becomes a star player(Henrik Zetterberg), but you don’t know if they are a player for 4 or 5 years of development. Zetterberg was drafted by Detroit in 1999. Even though he played for the Wings in 2002 he didn’t become a significant player on the roster until 2005 when he scored 39 goals and 46 assists and was a plus 29. Zetterberg is one of the samples used by prognosticators when extolling the virtues of poor drafting positions. It can be argued that Zetterberg wasn’t ready to help his team compete for a cup until he developed for six years, and he is just one player. If we project a team building on that pace and we say the team will need a paltry number of such players say four draft picks of such ilk and we further formulate that it would take three drafts to accumulate those players, we could project that team being ready to compete in seven years. If we look at the method used by the Penguins, the Black Hawks, the Coyotes etc. they are building their very dynamic young powerhouses in substantially less time. Let’s look at the Leaf roster and select a sample of their fully developed players who are ready to play on a championship team right now (at this point in time). For argument sake: Andropov, Hagman, Kaberle and Kubina.
Let’s say they remain with the Leafs until Toronto is ready to compete in seven years, ok, let be bold: five years, are they going to be the same quality player five years from now? Not likely! The chances are even better that they will sign with another team when their present contract expires. Those scenarios have a qualified effect on the Leaf’s rebuilding time frame. If say Toronto used those present assets to trade for younger players who would be coming into their prime in five years or for high draft picks who have a decent chance of eventually cracking the roster it could be argued that Toronto could reduce the time it takes to build a competitive team by at least two years. I would rather the Leafs sucked big time for three years if it meant more blue chippers coming on board and the Leafs would have a really exciting young powerhouse in three or four years. I’m so tired of managers with egos who say they can win now and in the future. What are they smoking? The Oiler and Islander dynasties were built through the draft. We need a manager with the foresight to build a real championship team through the draft, and do it as quickly as possible. We need a manager like Ray Shiro (Pittsbergh), or Dale Tallon in Chicago. Men who aren’t too proud to lose if the pay day is a team everyone can be proud of.
By Gerald Norton
on Jan 24, 2009
One win in their last 8 games, shut out in 2 of their last 5. Seriously, you’re looking at the big picture when you say they’re playing better? I think you’re grasping at straws, and the results prove it.
By bkblades
on Jan 24, 2009
Gerald,
If you’re going strictly by wins and losses, you’re of the same position of the MSM. It’s the stats in those games that is substantial in this article. It would be quite foolish to say that Toronto is a powerhouse or that Toronto is becoming a good team. But there are tangible improvements beyond peripheral stats that illustrate that Toronto isn’t a total lost cause. Comparatively speaking, the improvements aren’t drastic, but they are for the Leafs. Surely, as a fan of the Ottawa Senators, you look beyond just wins and losses to see and pick out trends that either show upward or downward shifts in the team’s fortunes, no? But if you’re one of the types of people who evaluate baseball pitchers solely by wins and losses, too, then I guess it’s not unfathomable for you to not look past the initial results.
By Gerald Norton
on Jan 24, 2009
Bkblades, my point is, if the team is losing, and being shut out, only over analyzing the data for positives, shows the over-all trend as anything but negative. Is it possible that some areas have shown improvement, sure, but, if at the end of the day the team is losing, and being shut out, the trend is negative, not positive.
The team is down in pp% over the last 10 games, and down in G/G.
To include the last 3 games, they’re also down in each of the 2 categories.
How this can be translated as improved play…ok, if you wish.
By Steve
on Jan 25, 2009
Gerald, I’m assuming the world of black and white is comfortable for you, which is fine.
In my world, there are a variety of shades of grey, and the Leafs do not have to be absolutely bad, or absolutely good. There are hard fought losses, and games they win that they shouldn’t have.
They might play atrociously in an 8 to 2 loss to Dallas, and guess what? Scoring 2 goals doesn’t make it some sort of freaking moral victory… especially when the goalie you score on has some of the worst numbers in the NHL.
If you want to IGNORE the stats I posted, and just post a list of your own, we could just increase the sample size to the entire season, or the last 4 seasons, or hell we could decide that who plays when is irrelevant, or argue that the Leafs have been in decline since they lost Doug Gilmour. Why bother ever analysing anything? What the hell are we doing here if all people care about are the wins and losses? People can read that crap in the Newspaper, and frankly most of the people coming to this site aren’t looking for us to parrot what the papers are already saying.
If you expect that to be what I do on here, you’re going to be confused quite regularly.
By Gerald Norton
on Jan 25, 2009
Steve, seriously? I based the results on 10, and 3 games vs this seasons average. Seems fairly sound data pool to me. But ok, if you believe the Leafs are improving, great, we’ll see I guess.