WildCard Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Septic 6 showdown in Air Canada Center tonight. Vamanos mis amigos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 7:0 score, eh? Yeah, the Leaves do suck that bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doohickie Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Who we gonna beat? WE ARE! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Win 1 of 3 we are allowed will likely occur tonight. I just love raking the Leafs too much to care about the panzer for tonight. Destroy them Buffalo 12-1 Ennis with a hat-trick, Gionta with a hat-trick, Foligno, Risto, Zadorov, and Bogo have 1 goal a piece and lastly Moulson has a 2 goal game. Ennis and Moulson both finish the night with 7 points and when Ennis gets his hat-trick the Leafs throw jerseys on the ice. Gionta's hat-trick leaves many Leaf fans without shirts in general causing a small pandemic of influenza in the city and causing the stock market to drop 200pts on Friday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CallawaySabres Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I will feel much better about securing last if they can pull off a loss tonight. Put in the worst goalie you got Buff... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SABRES 0311 Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I will feel much better about securing last if they can pull off a loss tonight. Put in the worst goalie you got Buff...kind of a coin toss on that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brawndo Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Lindback in net @BuffaloSabres: Lindback is 2-0-0 in 3 career games against the Leafs with a .948 save % and 1.33 GAA. #BUFvsTOR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Lindback in net @BuffaloSabres: Lindback is 2-0-0 in 3 career games against the Leafs with a .948 save % and 1.33 GAA. #BUFvsTOR SAMPLE SIZE! :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyldnwoody44 Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I will feel much better about securing last if they can pull off a loss tonight. Put in the worst goalie you got Buff...VINZ!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jsixspd Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) I will feel much better about securing last if they can pull off a loss tonight. Put in the worst goalie you got Buff... Should be Hackett in, BUT, Nolan is inexplicably playing Lindback. I don't think Nolan is much of one for strategic thinking. IF Nolan thinks he's gonna save his job by trying to pile up some meaningless wins at the end of the year - well, then he's thinking backwards. Wins now could actually speed his departure. GMTM should send Battista downstairs to review goalie selection with Nolan - lol Edited March 11, 2015 by Jsixspd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Should be Hackett in, BUT, Nolan is inexplicably playing Lindback. I don't think Nolan is much of one for strategic thinking. IF Nolan thinks he's gonna save his job by trying to pile up some meaningless wins at the end of the year - well, then he's thinking backwards. Wins now could actually speed his departure. GMTM should send Battista downstairs to review goalie selection with Nolan - lol Nolan is trying to win. What else could he possibly do? He's a man of effort and character, and just because the organization is tanking doesn't mean the coach or players ever will. Especially not this coach. Not to mention playing Lindback over Hackett is hardly an upgrade. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samson's Flow Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Should be Hackett in, BUT, Nolan is inexplicably playing Lindback. I don't think Nolan is much of one for strategic thinking. IF Nolan thinks he's gonna save his job by trying to pile up some meaningless wins at the end of the year - well, then he's thinking backwards. Wins now could actually speed his departure. GMTM should send Battista downstairs to review goalie selection with Nolan - lol It would be pretty hard to justify playing Hackett in the first game after his last disasterous showing. They're both bad, but it seems pretty obvious based on recent play that Lindback should be the "starter". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pastajoe Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I thought Hackett gave up one bad goal, but the rest were due to leaving guys open. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3putt Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I thought Hackett gave up one bad goal, but the rest were due to leaving guys open. That avatar is priceless! :worthy: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I thought Hackett gave up one bad goal, but the rest were due to leaving guys open. I want a shirt with your avatar... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carpandean Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) Nolan is trying to win. What else could he possibly do? He's a man of effort and character, and just because the organization is tanking doesn't mean the coach or players ever will. Especially not this coach. I don't quite buy this. It is true that you cannot tell the players to go lose on purpose and you can't pull some scrub from the AHL to play ahead of your NHL goaltenders, but that doesn't mean that your coach should have winning as his top priority whether or not it benefits the franchise. Many teams who find themselves out of the playoffs say that the rest of the season is about player development. That means that younger players, who might not be as good now but are more important to the future of the franchise, get played ahead of vets. Obviously, that's not the case here with the goaltenders (neither is likely a big part of the future), but it is an example of the franchise directing the coach to do something other than win at all cost, because it is better for the franchise. A more comparable example, here, would be giving young defensemen more minutes than Zach Bogosian, even though playing Zach more would give them the best chance to win. Not that Zach isn't part of the future, but he is already more developed. For the goaltenders, though, Nolan said (before Johnson went down) that if one of them got hot, then he would continue to play him. That idea should absolutely have been squashed by GMTM in favor of "I want to see them both get games" plan, instead. Even more, I would absolutely expect GMTM to tell Ted that he needs to start whichever one is playing worse against Arizona, especially on the road. Edited March 11, 2015 by carpandean Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBHockey13 Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I don't quite buy this. It is true that you cannot tell the players to go lose on purpose and you can't pull some scrub from the AHL to play ahead of your NHL goaltenders, but that doesn't mean that your coach should have winning as his top priority whether or not it benefits the franchise. Many teams who find themselves out of the playoffs say that the rest of the season is about player development. That means that younger players, who might not be as good now but are more important to the future of the franchise, get played ahead of vets. Obviously, that's not the case here with the goaltenders (neither is likely a big part of the future), but it is an example of the franchise directing the coach to do something other than win at all cost, because it is better for the franchise. A more comparable example, here, would be giving young defensemen more minutes than Zach Bogosian, even though playing Zach more would give them the best chance to win. Not that Zach isn't part of the future, but he is already more developed. For the goaltenders, though, Nolan said (before Johnson went down) that if one of them got hot, then he would continue to play him. That idea should absolutely have been squashed by GMTM in favor of "I want to see them both get games" plan, instead. Even more, I would absolutely expect GMTM to tell Ted that he needs to start whichever one is playing worse against Arizona, especially on the road. GMTM might have to start telling Nolan who to play, even if he hasn't before. I wouldn't worry about what Nolan might say after he leaves Buffalo - that's why you give him one of those non-disclosure agreements you gave Patty. It seems they aren't too worried about letting Hackett leave for nothing at the end of the year. They have to play him to keep his rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I don't quite buy this. It is true that you cannot tell the players to go lose on purpose and you can't pull some scrub from the AHL to play ahead of your NHL goaltenders, but that doesn't mean that your coach should have winning as his top priority whether or not it benefits the franchise. Many teams who find themselves out of the playoffs say that the rest of the season is about player development. That means that younger players, who might not be as good now but are more important to the future of the franchise, get played ahead of vets. Obviously, that's not the case here with the goaltenders (neither is likely a big part of the future), but it is an example of the franchise directing the coach to do something other than win at all cost, because it is better for the franchise. A more comparable example, here, would be giving young defensemen more minutes than Zach Bogosian, even though playing Zach more would give them the best chance to win. Not that Zach isn't part of the future, but he is already more developed. For the goaltenders, though, Nolan said (before Johnson went down) that if one of them got hot, then he would continue to play him. That idea should absolutely have been squashed by GMTM in favor of "I want to see them both get games" plan, instead. Even more, I would absolutely expect GMTM to tell Ted that he needs to start whichever one is playing worse against Arizona, especially on the road. I agree that most coaches would adjust their plans to their GM's wishes, but I haven't seen TN make a move in favor of player/franchise development over winning yet this year. I think TM hasn't been involved enough with TN this year (just my hunch, not based on anything). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 GMTM might have to start telling Nolan who to play, even if he hasn't before. I wouldn't worry about what Nolan might say after he leaves Buffalo - that's why you give him one of those non-disclosure agreements you gave Patty. It seems they aren't too worried about letting Hackett leave for nothing at the end of the year. They have to play him to keep his rights. That's what I'm confused about. Leaving the team to Nolan is fine and all, but if you have a coin-flip in goal and playing one keeps his rights, it seems like you should play him. I realize his value isn't that high, but (say) a 6th round pick in trade for Hackett in the off-season is still a pick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Assquatch Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 I don't quite buy this. It is true that you cannot tell the players to go lose on purpose and you can't pull some scrub from the AHL to play ahead of your NHL goaltenders, but that doesn't mean that your coach should have winning as his top priority whether or not it benefits the franchise. Many teams who find themselves out of the playoffs say that the rest of the season is about player development. That means that younger players, who might not be as good now but are more important to the future of the franchise, get played ahead of vets. Obviously, that's not the case here with the goaltenders (neither is likely a big part of the future), but it is an example of the franchise directing the coach to do something other than win at all cost, because it is better for the franchise. A more comparable example, here, would be giving young defensemen more minutes than Zach Bogosian, even though playing Zach more would give them the best chance to win. Not that Zach isn't part of the future, but he is already more developed. For the goaltenders, though, Nolan said (before Johnson went down) that if one of them got hot, then he would continue to play him. That idea should absolutely have been squashed by GMTM in favor of "I want to see them both get games" plan, instead. Even more, I would absolutely expect GMTM to tell Ted that he needs to start whichever one is playing worse against Arizona, especially on the road. I agree with every word of this. I liken it to when I was in middle management, it was nothing for one of the VPs to slash my budget for the good of another department that needed it more. Yes it hurts my department and our goals but it's better for the company as a whole you just accept it and move on. I don't see why it's so sacrilegious for Murray to step in and explain what's better for the organization's longer term goals when it clashes with the short term goals of his employee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJFIVEOH Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Separation of coach and GM is still important. If GMTM crosses that line, and then Nolan is fired or quits, it'll get out to the media that Nolan was forced to leave because he wouldn't tank. And. We. Will. Never. Hear. The. End. Of. It. We've been under the shelter of plausible deniability about the tank. GMTM makes moves that he can claim "make sense for the rebuild," and he gets to deny the involvement in a tank. That changes if he tells the coach who to play. It also potentially threatens the ability to keep or hire a head coach if candidates believe that the GM will "meddle" in the coaching duties. The way to tank isn't to force the coach or players to do something they weren't bred to do. It's to cut the nuts off of the roster. Don't like who Nolan plays? Move 'em. GMTM had his chance to maximize the tank with roster moves before the deadline, with the exception of players on two-way contracts. The train has left the station, and we're all on board, wherever it's headed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IKnowPhysics Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 We can only hope. We can only hope. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 11, 2015 Report Share Posted March 11, 2015 Wait last one... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.