Around the NHL 2018-2019

[Randall Flagg]

2 hours ago, LTS said:

Way ahead of Buffalo? Where is Toronto right now if they don't have Tavares but they have Nylander in the lineup?  Are they 3-1-0?  I doubt it.

The Sabres win Thursday and they have the same record as the Leafs.  I think the Leafs are a better team, this year, but I don't think they will continue this pace for the year and I am curious where they will be next year when it comes to managing their salaries. 

They have 12 players on the roster that have expiring contracts and that does not include Nylander and what they do with him.

The question regarding the Leafs is sustainability.

They're probably 3-1-0 since, in this exact situation you describe, last season, they had the best or second-best regular season in their franchise history, eh? 

If we were faced with that exact same "problem" this board would be completely drunk off of success and happier than it's ever been since its inception. 

[WildCard]

17 hours ago, Hoss said:

Fend off the guys overdoing the advanced stats in an attempt to make it seem like we’re still really bad three games into the season.

Helluva a lot better than debating what we can and cannot say about players

[LTS]

48 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

They're probably 3-1-0 since, in this exact situation you describe, last season, they had the best or second-best regular season in their franchise history, eh? 

If we were faced with that exact same "problem" this board would be completely drunk off of success and happier than it's ever been since its inception. 

I agree, this place would be punch drunk nuts.  And in two years, if it goes poorly this place will be back into its normal deep depression.  Last season they still did not win.  This season they're clearly going for it, but they're going to have to do something pretty amazing to keep this team together after this year. I'm not saying it can't be done, but it won't be easy.

If they continue along their merry way this year I could see them trying to offer up Nylander and Horton's contract just to get it off the books.  They can sell Nylander somewhat cheap to open up the financial options for them next year.

They are a good team. I am not saying otherwise. But they are a good team with a lot of money that will be tied up in only a few players next year.

2 hours ago, That Aud Smell said:

That was a weird take.

The balance of the post makes sense to me. It's an enviable problem to have, though -- to be bombing other teams out and have a need for improvement on D.

I'm not sure how.  Let's assume the Sabres win Thursday.  The two teams (not accounting for another Maple Leafs game) would be sitting in the same spot in the standings. On paper they are tied in the standings.  They are equal.  Which is why I said, on paper.  I had already said i think the Leafs are a better team than the Sabres but I wouldn't say their "rebuild" is/was light years ahead.

 

[Marions Piazza]

3 hours ago, LTS said:

Way ahead of Buffalo? Where is Toronto right now if they don't have Tavares but they have Nylander in the lineup?  Are they 3-1-0?  I doubt it.

The Sabres win Thursday and they have the same record as the Leafs.  I think the Leafs are a better team, this year, but I don't think they will continue this pace for the year and I am curious where they will be next year when it comes to managing their salaries. 

They have 12 players on the roster that have expiring contracts and that does not include Nylander and what they do with him.

The question regarding the Leafs is sustainability.

They are giving up a league worst 4.25 goals per game.  that's crazy.  we'd have to give up 10 in our next game to match them.  Can't take away from their offense whatsoever, but, is pumping out over 4.25 goals a game sustainable?  tough call.  lack of defense and reliable goaltending will cause some issues, especially in the playoffs

[That Aud Smell]

4 minutes ago, LTS said:

I'm not sure how.  Let's assume the Sabres win Thursday.  The two teams (not accounting for another Maple Leafs game) would be sitting in the same spot in the standings. On paper they are tied in the standings.  They are equal.  Which is why I said, on paper.  I had already said i think the Leafs are a better team than the Sabres but I wouldn't say their "rebuild" is/was light years ahead.

You seems to be equating where teams are in the standings after a few games with where teams are in a rebuild. Looking at a stand of trees and making a judgment on the forest. It continues to be an odd take.

[TrueBlueGED]

3 hours ago, LTS said:

Denial?  Did I not say they were the better team in my post? Did I say they were not good? No.  What are you pointing out?

For all the glory to the Leafs the fact is they are 1 win more than the Sabres right now. Does that put them further ahead on the rebuild? Not on paper.

The Leafs will have to shore up their defense to make a run at the Cup. Perhaps they can do that by trading Nylander.  The fact remains that they will have 12 players that need contracts next year.  Last year they were +6 in GA/GF differential, they are only +3 now.  Last year JvR had a good portion of the offense after a whole 4 games.

I'll consider the Leafs a threat for the Cup when they can shut down other teams.  Right now they can only hope to outgun them.

 

This is what I'm pointing out. For someone preaching the long game and sustainability, you are oddly focused on 4 games. Toronto has made the playoffs two years in a row, and added one of the best players in the game. They have one of the best coaches in the game. We're still trying to figure out whether Housley is an NHL coach, let alone a great one. Two years ago they had 95 points and a +9 goal differential. Not great, but a heck of a lot better than that year's Sabres of a -36 goal differential and 78 points. Last year the Leafs were +45 in goal differential and had 105 points. The Sabres? 62 points and a -81 goal differential.

It's fair to question the sustainability once all of their young stars get paid, or whether they can score their way to a Cup, but the notion that we don't know that they're far ahead in the rebuild is complete lunacy, and yes, puts you firmly in some form of denial.

[LTS]

6 minutes ago, Marions Piazza said:

They are giving up a league worst 4.25 goals per game.  that's crazy.  we'd have to give up 10 in our next game to match them.  Can't take away from their offense whatsoever, but, is pumping out over 4.25 goals a game sustainable?  tough call.  lack of defense and reliable goaltending will cause some issues, especially in the playoffs

They could very well be this years Islanders.  All the goals scored, both for and against.

3 minutes ago, That Aud Smell said:

You seems to be equating where teams are in the standings after a few games with where teams are in a rebuild. Looking at a stand of trees and making a judgment on the forest. It continues to be an odd take.

I'm not sure, perhaps the phrase, "on paper" is not translating.  The simple facts are that the two teams are separated by 1 game in the W column and that's possibly because the Sabres haven't played that game yet.  So, yes, at the moment, the comparison is very real, on paper.

Now let's play out where things can go from here:

The Leafs win the Cup and Buffalo finishes last.  - yes, then the Leafs are clearly ahead and have succeeded.

The Leafs make the playoffs and Buffalo finishes last - I'll give them the rebuild, but they might be torn down quickly too.

The Leafs win the Cup and Buffalo makes the play-offs - I'll give a nod to the Leafs but not light years ahead given that most of their advancement may come because of Tavares

The Leafs make the play-offs and Buffalo finishes close - perhaps they are ahead, the following season will determine if they shot too fast for the top.

The Leafs don't make the play-offs and Buffalo does not - not ahead.

The Leafs don't make the play-offs and Buffalo does - Buffalo clearly wins. This is not likely.

At this moment in time, you can't look at the standings and tell me the Leafs are a far better team then the Sabres.  Yes, it's 4 games.  The opposite position seems hard to make as well.  The Leafs are light years ahead because they are 3-1-0?  The same 4 games.  I know what they did last year, but I don't put them light years ahead as they still got bounced and they haven't fixed their biggest problems, they are simply going to try and outscore everyone... which, in the playoffs, usually isn't the recipe for success.

2 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

This is what I'm pointing out. For someone preaching the long game and sustainability, you are oddly focused on 4 games. Toronto has made the playoffs two years in a row, and added one of the best players in the game. They have one of the best coaches in the game. We're still trying to figure out whether Housley is an NHL coach, let alone a great one. Two years ago they had 95 points and a +9 goal differential. Not great, but a heck of a lot better than that year's Sabres of a -36 goal differential and 78 points. Last year the Leafs were +45 in goal differential and had 105 points. The Sabres? 62 points and a -81 goal differential.

It's fair to question the sustainability once all of their young stars get paid, or whether they can score their way to a Cup, but the notion that we don't know that they're far ahead in the rebuild is complete lunacy, and yes, puts you firmly in some form of denial.

Fine, I am in denial.  What's the goal?  Win the Cup?  They haven't.  If their plan never equates to competing for the Cup let alone winning it, do we consider their rebuild a success just because they made the playoffs and fizzled out?

 

[That Aud Smell]

6 minutes ago, LTS said:

At this moment in time, you can't look at the standings and tell me the Leafs are a far better team then the Sabres.  Yes, it's 4 games.  The opposite position seems hard to make as well.  The Leafs are light years ahead because they are 3-1-0?  The same 4 games.  I know what they did last year, but I don't put them light years ahead as they still got bounced and they haven't fixed their biggest problems, they are simply going to try and outscore everyone... which, in the playoffs, usually isn't the recipe for success.

I can't? 

They have a better winning percentage, fwiw.

And anyway, I probably can't say much on the subject because I don't know enough about the Leafs roster and I simply don't watch enough hockey. But this analysis is overly simplistic; affectedly so, it seems. Would a panel of 5 neutral hockey personnel experts take the Leafs team (including coaches) over the Sabres team (same inclusion)? That's one other way to look at the matter. I am sure there are others.

Are the Sabres precisely as far along in building a winning franchise as the Islanders? The Blue Jackets? The Stars? The Jets? All of those teams that have played 3 games and have 4 points to show for it.

[Brawndo]

1 hour ago, Randall Flagg said:

Can Matthews be offer-sheeted this coming offseason? I believe so, but just making sure. Because I had a dream that Arizona gave him a max offer sheet this coming summer and it was a nice dream

Yes he can. 

If and it’s a big if, he does agree to an offer sheet he should go with a 4 year deal to get to UFA Status at 25 years of age. 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

You guys all have good and bad in your analogies.....IMO it's way too early to compare anything, but your "thoughts" could all be relevant.

here's my good and bad(or just bad LOL)

The Leafs went to OT against Canadians, LOST to Ottawa, had to go to OT and score 7g to beat Chicago and beat Dallas while having to score at least 5g to win. Not one of these teams made the playoffs last year and most were near us in the standings.

With that said....if Vegas beats the Caps tonite does that mean WE should win the Cup this year because we beat Vegas? LOL

[WildCard]

The Red Wings are changing all their seats in the lower bowls from red to black to hide the fact that they can't sell them out

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/2018/10/08/little-caesars-arena-red-seats-lower-bowl-attendance/1573228002/

[TrueBlueGED]

1 hour ago, LTS said:

Fine, I am in denial.  What's the goal?  Win the Cup?  They haven't.  If their plan never equates to competing for the Cup let alone winning it, do we consider their rebuild a success just because they made the playoffs and fizzled out?

 

Making the playoffs, by definition, is competing for the Cup. Now I know what you're saying, you might not think they can make a deep run as constructed, but they took a very good Boston team to 7 last year. It isn't like they make it and get swept while looking out of their league. 

But all of that is really besides the point. You're arguing that they aren't very far ahead of the Sabres. That's a really untenable position when the evidence is brought to bare. They are competing in the playoffs while we're drafting #1 overall. And for all the talk about their defense, they gave up fewer goals than the Caps last year. The Caps gave up 7 more goals, scored 18 fewer...and won the Cup. It's a hard sell to say the Leafs aren't good enough defensively when they allowed less and scored more than the team that actually won. 

And not for nothin, but the Leafs gave up 48 fewer goals than the Sabres last year. So again if your argument hinges on the their defensive capability, they're still significantly ahead. 

Edited October 10, 2018 by TrueBlueGED

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

11 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

Making the playoffs, by definition, is competing for the Cup. Now I know what you're saying, you might not think they can make a deep run as constructed, but they took a very good Boston team to 7 last year. It isn't like they make it and get swept while looking out of their league. 

But all of that is really besides the point. You're arguing that they aren't very far ahead of the Sabres. That's a really untenable position when the evidence is brought to bare. They are competing in the playoffs while we're drafting #1 overall. And for all the talk about their defense, they gave up fewer goals than the Caps last year. The Caps gave up 7 more goals, scored 18 fewer...and won the Cup. It's a hard sell to say the Leafs aren't good enough defensively when they allowed less and scored more than the team that actually won. 

And not for nothin, but the Leafs gave up 48 fewer goals than the Sabres last year. So again if your argument hinges on the their defensive capability, they're still significantly ahead. 

Not at the moment!!! If we somehow make the playoffs and the Leafs just miss what then? Or we both make the playoffs?

Anything can happen seeing how things are at this very moment rather than "last year" yada yada yada. 

[TrueBlueGED]

8 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

Not at the moment!!! If we somehow make the playoffs and the Leafs just miss what then? Or we both make the playoffs?

Anything can happen seeing how things are at this very moment rather than "last year" yada yada yada. 

A scant possibility of what may or may not happen 7 months from now isn't evidence, though. When the Leafs are the same team while adding one of the best players in the league, their recent seasons shouldn't be tossed aside just because it's a new season. Etc etc. It's a bad argument to say the Leafs aren't far ahead of the Sabres' rebuild. 

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

10 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

A scant possibility of what may or may not happen 7 months from now isn't evidence, though. When the Leafs are the same team while adding one of the best players in the league, their recent seasons shouldn't be tossed aside just because it's a new season. Etc etc. It's a bad argument to say the Leafs aren't far ahead of the Sabres' rebuild. 

I guess the issue with this conversation as a whole is what each of us considers "far ahead" or "not so far ahead". To some , 1-2yrs is not "far ahead" but 3-5yrs might be. Others might think "WOW, they're a whole year ahead of us in their build". 

But as of today, right now, this season we can't verify which is significantly ahead in all aspects just by looking at their 3-4 games, nor using what happened last year. It's a whole new season in which anything can happen. 

Edited October 10, 2018 by MakeSabresGrr8Again

[pi2000]

6 hours ago, Marions Piazza said:

Matthews and Tavares have 13 goals combined in 4 games...yikes.

This is the best Matthews we'll ever see in our lifetimes.

[Marions Piazza]

1 minute ago, pi2000 said:

This is the best Matthews we'll ever see in our lifetimes.

and i honeslty hope it continues because I want him to command a salary north of $13M/yr.  With JT's salary what it is, and what Marner will need, that cap hell will not be enviable.  they'll have a hard time with depth and defense with that much tied up in offense.

[TrueBlueGED]

4 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

I guess the issue with this conversation as a whole is what each of us considers "far ahead" or "not so far ahead". To some , 1-2yrs is not "far ahead" but 3-5yrs might be. Others might think "WOW, they're a whole year ahead of us in their build". 

But as of today, right now, this season we can't verify which is significantly ahead in all aspects just by looking at their 3-4 games, nor using what happened last year. It's a whole new season in which anything can happen. 

We can't verify, but we're not exactly going in blind either. Recent history matters. Yes, it's a new season, but we shouldn't exactly ignore the last two when the Leafs roster is almost identical (while adding Tavares, which isn't exactly a trivial improvement). The Sabres made significant turnover and are certainly looking better than the last couple of season, but they had 43 points to make up in the standings. They can be notably improved and still significantly behind. 

[Marions Piazza]

4 minutes ago, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

I guess the issue with this conversation as a whole is what each of us considers "far ahead" or "not so far ahead". To some , 1-2yrs is not "far ahead" but 3-5yrs might be. Others might think "WOW, they're a whole year ahead of us in their build". 

But as of today, right now, this season we can't verify which is significantly ahead in all aspects just by looking at their 3-4 games, nor using what happened last year. It's a whole new season in which anything can happen. 

the only thing we can say for sure after 4 games is that the Leafs are better offensively but, defensively yikes, I'd have to give us the nod and our D will only get better as Dahlin settles in.  

Marner is what the 3rd best forward on their team, 4th if Nylander were there?  He'd be easily the 2nd best forward in Buffalo.  It will be interesting to see how things shake up over the course of the first 10-15 games

Just now, TrueBlueGED said:

We can't verify, but we're not exactly going in blind either. Recent history matters. Yes, it's a new season, but we shouldn't exactly ignore the last two when the Leafs roster is almost identical (while adding Tavares, which isn't exactly a trivial improvement). The Sabres made significant turnover and are certainly looking better than the last couple of season, but they had 43 points to make up in the standings. They can be notably improved and still significantly behind. 

can't say it any better than this

[That Aud Smell]

1 hour ago, WildCard said:

The Red Wings are changing all their seats in the lower bowls from red to black to hide the fact that they can't sell them out

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/2018/10/08/little-caesars-arena-red-seats-lower-bowl-attendance/1573228002/

9 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

This is the best Matthews we'll ever see in our lifetimes.

God love ya.

[Randall Flagg]

*Points to True's posts* 

that

[MakeSabresGrr8Again]

13 minutes ago, TrueBlueGED said:

We can't verify, but we're not exactly going in blind either. Recent history matters. Yes, it's a new season, but we shouldn't exactly ignore the last two when the Leafs roster is almost identical (while adding Tavares, which isn't exactly a trivial improvement). The Sabres made significant turnover and are certainly looking better than the last couple of season, but they had 43 points to make up in the standings. They can be notably improved and still significantly behind. 

They lost JVR and Bozak along with Nylander holding out. Komarov and Martin gone. Not sure who else.

JVR, Bozak, and Nylander accounted for 67 goals/ 158pts last year will Tavares reach that level...lol, he might but I doubt it.

[Randall Flagg]

29 minutes ago, pi2000 said:

This is the best Matthews we'll ever see in our lifetimes.

This isn't saying much, considering that his scoring rate could significantly decrease and still win him dozens of harts, art rosses, and richard trophies. 

We try, but there's no way to "feel good" about what is going on with Matthews and the Leafs right now, unless you truly believe that their offense is likely to stagnate but their defense is unlikely to allow fewer goals

Just now, MakeSabresGrr8Again said:

They lost JVR and Bozak along with Nylander holding out. Komarov and Martin gone. Not sure who else.

JVR, Bozak, and Nylander accounted for 67 goals/ 158pts last year will Tavares reach that level...lol, he might but I doubt it.

The problem is, guys like Kapanen are sliding up into those roles and have a good chance at just being better, faster, smarter players than JVR/Bozak. 

[Marions Piazza]

5 minutes ago, Randall Flagg said:

This isn't saying much, considering that his scoring rate could significantly decrease and still win him dozens of harts, art rosses, and richard trophies. 

We try, but there's no way to "feel good" about what is going on with Matthews and the Leafs right now, unless you truly believe that their offense is likely to stagnate but their defense is unlikely to allow fewer goals

The problem is, guys like Kapanen are sliding up into those roles and have a good chance at just being better, faster, smarter players than JVR/Bozak. 

their offense doesn't need to go stagnant, based on averages, they need to score 5 every game to win because they are giving up 4.25.  they can score 4 goals a game which is spectacular, but if they cant keep the puck out of the net, its bound to catch up to them.

[Randall Flagg]

1 minute ago, Marions Piazza said:

their offense doesn't need to go stagnant, based on averages, they need to score 5 every game to win because they are giving up 4.25.  they can score 4 goals a game which is spectacular, but if they cant keep the puck out of the net, its bound to catch up to them.

Right, what I'm saying is, why is it likely that their offense would but their defense wouldn't? With the same defensive players, they were 15th in the NHL in goals allowed last year, and still top 2 in ES goals scored. 

If anything, it's more likely that their goals allowed becomes a more reasonable number, but they remain elite at scoring.