OT: Leafs/NHL Thread

[ItsDanger]

I like to call the top 4 Leafs players, the finesse 4. In the playoffs, work in the corners, boards, front, taking a hit to make plays, etc, matter a LOT. Dubas marrying himself to those 4 made it hard to build around but not impossible. He never focused on complimentary skills for the other top 9 forwards to compensate and you can see the struggles.

[ciueli]

There is a difference between a random number generator being unpredictable, and a sports outcome being unpredictable. The sport still requires a human being playing that sport to be great. Like a goalie standing on his head to steal a series still requires the goalie to play exceptionally well...or have early 2000's gigantic pads.

The unpredictability is why they actually have to play the games.

The randomness aspect that is negative for me is when games are decided by one player throwing the puck in the general vicinity of the net, having it bounce off a player's skate at a weird angle and go in. That's not really a skill game, it's just a random luck game. Sometimes you see great goals that are pure skill, but a lot of the time the goals are weird flukes. You have circus shots and half court shots in the NBA, but it's different because one basket is so much less of a percentage of the overall scoring that it's rarely going to decide a game between a good team and a bad or mediocre team.

Interesting that you would bring up the goalie pads, because as someone who doesn't really watch hockey but has watched bits and pieces of this Leafs run, their pads look absolutely freaking huge to me. As I said, I really dislike games like this that have two modes, "before we have a lead mode" and "after we have a lead" mode. In the first mode you play normally, trying to score. In the second mode you play differently, just trying to maintain the lead at all costs. It doesn't always work, but it works quite a bit of the time. Hockey reinforces this two mode play with goalies so huge they block almost all of the net because once you have a lead you can just win with defence, it's like basketball was back in the days before they introduced the shot clock, you know, completely unwatchable to the point where it almost died as a sport as a consequence.

Hockey is a free flowing extremely fast game where small mistakes can lead to big results, because of the skill of the players. It's ok to not like that kind of thing, but it's also something a whole lot of people do like to watch. Playing to win vs. playing not to lose, 2 goal lead being the most dangerous in hockey etc. are cliches for a reason. You can talk about two modes or whatever but teams that grab a lead and hang back lose a whole lot. You can't actually just win with defense. Puck possession is a huge part of the game and just sitting back and letting the other team swarm you and hope your goalie watched some old Hasek videos before the game isn't really a viable strategy. Florida, for example, doesn't just sit back. They are a relentless forechecking team that wins by making you give up the puck.

Ball possession was exactly how teams played defence in the pre-shot clock era of basketball, keep the ball away from your opponent and they can't score once you have a lead. The game last night was 3-2 in the early second period and the score didn't change by the end of the game. By my count the shots in the 3rd period were 18-11 in the Leafs' favour in spite of the Panthers having the only power play of the period and one of the Panthers' shots occurred with 3 seconds left in the game (so basically when the game was already over). That sounds like a team that wasn't actually trying that hard to score more goals in the third period, more concerned with playing defence and puck possession to limit opponent scoring chances, this is exactly what I'm talking about.

[Fairview4Life]

In basketball, pre shot clock, you could just hold the ball. That...isn't an option in hockey. Keeping the puck is extremely difficult. Like, you might have a point if we were talking about soccer, but not hockey.

[JB7]

I like to call the top 4 Leafs players, the finesse 4. In the playoffs, work in the corners, boards, front, taking a hit to make plays, etc, matter a LOT. Dubas marrying himself to those 4 made it hard to build around but not impossible. He never focused on complimentary skills for the other top 9 forwards to compensate and you can see the struggles.

Plus, successful playoff teams are built from the back end out (goaltending, defense). That has never been a focus of Dubas. Always a late reaction to add D or goaltending. Look at the players he drafts. All the same. Under 6ft skilled forwards. Good luck winning in the playoffs with a team full of those players

[ciueli]

In basketball, pre shot clock, you could just hold the ball. That...isn't an option in hockey. Keeping the puck is extremely difficult. Like, you might have a point if we were talking about soccer, but not hockey.

It's the same principle though, as long as your team has possession your opponent can't score, if you have a lead do everything you can to keep possession and limit your opponent's scoring opportunities. It's easier if you have a lead because there's no pressure for your team to turn possession into scoring chances, you can just fight for possession at the expense of actually trying to convert it into shots, in some ways shooting at all is bad because a lot of the time you're giving up possession by doing so. It's more easy and obvious in soccer with a gigantic field but it's present in hockey too.

[Fairview4Life]

If you score more than the other team, you win the game. Same principle! You are way over generalizing how different sports actually work in practice. Hockey teams can't really turtle. Keeping possession is exceptionally difficult. Generating scoring chances is also very difficult. If it was so easy to just stop trying to score and turtle up, then obviously the Leafs won last game, since they were up 2-0 at one point.

[YogurtProducer]

The randomness aspect that is negative for me is when games are decided by one player throwing the puck in the general vicinity of the net, having it bounce off a player's skate at a weird angle and go in. That's not really a skill game, it's just a random luck game. Sometimes you see great goals that are pure skill, but a lot of the time the goals are weird flukes. You have circus shots and half court shots in the NBA, but it's different because one basket is so much less of a percentage of the overall scoring that it's rarely going to decide a game between a good team and a bad or mediocre team.

Interesting that you would bring up the goalie pads, because as someone who doesn't really watch hockey but has watched bits and pieces of this Leafs run, their pads look absolutely freaking huge to me. As I said, I really dislike games like this that have two modes, "before we have a lead mode" and "after we have a lead" mode. In the first mode you play normally, trying to score. In the second mode you play differently, just trying to maintain the lead at all costs. It doesn't always work, but it works quite a bit of the time. Hockey reinforces this two mode play with goalies so huge they block almost all of the net because once you have a lead you can just win with defence, it's like basketball was back in the days before they introduced the shot clock, you know, completely unwatchable to the point where it almost died as a sport as a consequence.

Except in hockey it is good play that eventually leads to luck. Over a 7-game series it is very very difficult and extremely rare to "fluke" your way to a series victory.

IDK what you are even talking about the "before we have a lead mode" and "after we have a lead mode" because that really is not a thing in the modern NHL outside of really, really late in a game (which is no different than NBA teams milking clock late in a game).

Just sounds like you have irrational hatred for hockey because you think it is cool to be different. None of your points make a lick of sense.

Once a team has a lead there is no pressure for them to continue scoring, they can sit on the lead and emphasize defence. Get in trouble in your own end? Ice the puck, win the face off, easy out. The other team then needs to take greater and greater risks to get an equalizer, which compromises their own defence and gives better chances to the defending team. It's a simple game exploit. Try this in the NBA outside a comfortable lead in the last few minutes of the game and you will lose, it's just not a real strategy. It's worse in soccer but it's still a thing in hockey.

Game wins happen all the time in hockey to single fluke goals. How many times do you see a basketball team win a game because some player made a single miracle half court shot or circus shot that had a 1% chance of going in? Bascially never. But hockey teams win all the time on a goal that went in off some guy's skate, or there was a tiny gap under the goalie's stick that the puck just squeaked under unexpectedly, or the puck tumbled over the goalie's stick on a weird hop off the ice.

I mean you have just proven you fundamentally do not understand how hockey works over and over here.

Ice the puck, win the face off, easy out - icing the puck means you cannot line change but your opponent can. Playing defense and locking yourself into your zone is exhausting and is a surefire way to get scored on.

The other team then needs to take greater and greater risks to get an equalizer, which compromises their own defence and gives better chances to the defending team. - no one who is losing 0-1 is making huge risks as its a 1 goal game, not a 3 goal game. That is like saying you need to start shooting 3's and gambling on defense because you start up down 10-0.

Game wins happen all the time in hockey to single fluke goals. - again, "fluke" goals are often a result of relentless pressure, throwing shots into areas where friendly bounces are more likely, hard work in the forecheck, etc.

But hockey teams win all the time on a goal that went in off some guy's skate, - so the player was in the right place in front of the net?

or there was a tiny gap under the goalie's stick that the puck just squeaked under unexpectedly, - so the goalie not covering the net is a fluke?

or the puck tumbled over the goalie's stick on a weird hop off the ice. - how often does this happen?

It is fine to not like hockey, but you are mistaking high variance for "fluke". Either way, the Stanley Cup champions are still heavily dominated by the top 3-4 seeds in each conference, no different than the NBA.

[YogurtProducer]

If you score more than the other team, you win the game. Same principle! You are way over generalizing how different sports actually work in practice. Hockey teams can't really turtle. Keeping possession is exceptionally difficult. Generating scoring chances is also very difficult. If it was so easy to just stop trying to score and turtle up, then obviously the Leafs won last game, since they were up 2-0 at one point.

And it is funny because Hockey and Basketball are very similar sports. 5 on 5, similar offensive and defensive strategies, etc. I know big basketball guys can really easily pick up on hockey strategy because it is very familiar.

[Fairview4Life]

If you score more than the other team, you win the game. Same principle! You are way over generalizing how different sports actually work in practice. Hockey teams can't really turtle. Keeping possession is exceptionally difficult. Generating scoring chances is also very difficult. If it was so easy to just stop trying to score and turtle up, then obviously the Leafs won last game, since they were up 2-0 at one point.

And it is funny because Hockey and Basketball are very similar sports. 5 on 5, similar offensive and defensive strategies, etc. I know big basketball guys can really easily pick up on hockey strategy because it is very familiar.

Hockey to me is much more like soccer, but I get the point.

[pingpongrac]

I think we should have disengaged from this discussion when the "last time I tried to get into hockey was the early 2000s" comment was made. The game has evolved since then – just as it has in the NBA – and a lot of the points being made just seem rooted in a dislike or lack of understanding of the game. Like I'm not going to parade around complaining about things in the NFL when I haven't seriously watched it in 10 or 15 years lol.

[ciueli]

If you score more than the other team, you win the game. Same principle! You are way over generalizing how different sports actually work in practice. Hockey teams can't really turtle. Keeping possession is exceptionally difficult. Generating scoring chances is also very difficult. If it was so easy to just stop trying to score and turtle up, then obviously the Leafs won last game, since they were up 2-0 at one point.

Obviously no strategy is going to work perfectly 100% of the time, and some teams are going to be better at it than others. Seems like the Panthers are quite good at it, even good enough to be a team as good as Boston with it and the Leafs, well, not so much.

[ATLTimekeeper]

If you score more than the other team, you win the game. Same principle! You are way over generalizing how different sports actually work in practice. Hockey teams can't really turtle. Keeping possession is exceptionally difficult. Generating scoring chances is also very difficult. If it was so easy to just stop trying to score and turtle up, then obviously the Leafs won last game, since they were up 2-0 at one point.

Obviously no strategy is going to work perfectly 100% of the time, and some teams are going to be better at it than others. Seems like the Panthers are quite good at it, even good enough to be a team as good as Boston with it and the Leafs, well, not so much.

They posted a stat in game 1 how the Leafs and Panthers had the least amount of time leading the game in the first round of the playoffs. Seems like the Panthers just had great goaltending last game and also got lucky that the Leafs hit like 3 posts as they were fighting off this 'turtle' strategy that you think works.

[ciueli]

Except in hockey it is good play that eventually leads to luck. Over a 7-game series it is very very difficult and extremely rare to "fluke" your way to a series victory.

IDK what you are even talking about the "before we have a lead mode" and "after we have a lead mode" because that really is not a thing in the modern NHL outside of really, really late in a game (which is no different than NBA teams milking clock late in a game).

Just sounds like you have irrational hatred for hockey because you think it is cool to be different. None of your points make a lick of sense.

Once a team has a lead there is no pressure for them to continue scoring, they can sit on the lead and emphasize defence. Get in trouble in your own end? Ice the puck, win the face off, easy out. The other team then needs to take greater and greater risks to get an equalizer, which compromises their own defence and gives better chances to the defending team. It's a simple game exploit. Try this in the NBA outside a comfortable lead in the last few minutes of the game and you will lose, it's just not a real strategy. It's worse in soccer but it's still a thing in hockey.

Game wins happen all the time in hockey to single fluke goals. How many times do you see a basketball team win a game because some player made a single miracle half court shot or circus shot that had a 1% chance of going in? Bascially never. But hockey teams win all the time on a goal that went in off some guy's skate, or there was a tiny gap under the goalie's stick that the puck just squeaked under unexpectedly, or the puck tumbled over the goalie's stick on a weird hop off the ice.

I mean you have just proven you fundamentally do not understand how hockey works over and over here.

Ice the puck, win the face off, easy out - icing the puck means you cannot line change but your opponent can. Playing defense and locking yourself into your zone is exhausting and is a surefire way to get scored on.

It's a move that works as a pressure release to buy time that costs a team very little. In the NBA the similar move is to foul, which usually costs the fouling team points. One sport punishes players heavily for such desperation plays and the other doesn't.

The other team then needs to take greater and greater risks to get an equalizer, which compromises their own defence and gives better chances to the defending team. - no one who is losing 0-1 is making huge risks as its a 1 goal game, not a 3 goal game. That is like saying you need to start shooting 3's and gambling on defense because you start up down 10-0.

As I've said, hockey and basketball are very different. In basketball you will lose if you stop trying to score at practically any point, that's not true of hockey where entire periods can go by with no scoring, it makes a defence first strategy possible.

Game wins happen all the time in hockey to single fluke goals. - again, "fluke" goals are often a result of relentless pressure, throwing shots into areas where friendly bounces are more likely, hard work in the forecheck, etc.

And yet there are plenty of examples of teams that win games on fluke goals when the other team outshot them by a wide margin. That's the problem that comes with a sport where scoring is rare, too many games decided by 1 goal and it magnifies the value of fluke goals.

But hockey teams win all the time on a goal that went in off some guy's skate, - so the player was in the right place in front of the net?

By contrast no NBA in existence has ever won by a basketball that accidentally hit a guy on the head and bounced in the net or something equally ridiculous. I guess you can't see the difference between a scoring play that was intended (shooting the puck at an uncovered part of the net) and a scoring play where the player just shot the puck at the goalie hoping for maybe a rebound to come to another player to get a real shot but it bounced strangely and dribbled in off the post or something. Seems like half the goals I see in the NHL is a variation of this.

or there was a tiny gap under the goalie's stick that the puck just squeaked under unexpectedly, - so the goalie not covering the net is a fluke?

Did the player actually intend to hit that tiny gap? Did he even know it was there? Or was it just luck, a completely random event? Imagine watching the NBA if players were typically shooting 1% from 3 point range and everyone took a lot of 3 pointers, that's the parallel.

or the puck tumbled over the goalie's stick on a weird hop off the ice. - how often does this happen?

Often enough to decide games, which hockey fans like you are totally fine with.

It is fine to not like hockey, but you are mistaking high variance for "fluke". Either way, the Stanley Cup champions are still heavily dominated by the top 3-4 seeds in each conference, no different than the NBA.

It's fine to not like people who don't like hockey, but I'd ask if you want to do that, go over to the Leafs board.

[ciueli]

If you score more than the other team, you win the game. Same principle! You are way over generalizing how different sports actually work in practice. Hockey teams can't really turtle. Keeping possession is exceptionally difficult. Generating scoring chances is also very difficult. If it was so easy to just stop trying to score and turtle up, then obviously the Leafs won last game, since they were up 2-0 at one point.

Obviously no strategy is going to work perfectly 100% of the time, and some teams are going to be better at it than others. Seems like the Panthers are quite good at it, even good enough to be a team as good as Boston with it and the Leafs, well, not so much.

They posted a stat in game 1 how the Leafs and Panthers had the least amount of time leading the game in the first round of the playoffs. Seems like the Panthers just had great goaltending last game and also got lucky that the Leafs hit like 3 posts as they were fighting off this 'turtle' strategy that you think works.

But clearly it does work because the Panthers beat Boston, a juggernaut team doing it.

https://insidetherink.com/the-boston-bruins-have-one-thing-to-blame-for-game-5-loss/

The Boston Bruins dropped Game 5 to the Florida Panthers last night, losing 4-3 in overtime. They had the chance to close out the series at home but failed to do so. The Bruins outshot the Panthers 47-25 and completely dominated puck possession in the second and third periods. Yet, they still couldn’t pull out the win.

Apparently they lost that game due to two mistakes, two really bad turnovers. Wow, imagine an NBA team losing because they turned to ball over twice, but dominated every other aspect of the game and won the possessions battle nearly 2 to 1.

[HiJiNX]

Obviously no strategy is going to work perfectly 100% of the time, and some teams are going to be better at it than others. Seems like the Panthers are quite good at it, even good enough to be a team as good as Boston with it and the Leafs, well, not so much.

They posted a stat in game 1 how the Leafs and Panthers had the least amount of time leading the game in the first round of the playoffs. Seems like the Panthers just had great goaltending last game and also got lucky that the Leafs hit like 3 posts as they were fighting off this 'turtle' strategy that you think works.

But clearly it does work because the Panthers beat Boston, a juggernaut team doing it.

https://insidetherink.com/the-boston-bruins-have-one-thing-to-blame-for-game-5-loss/

The Boston Bruins dropped Game 5 to the Florida Panthers last night, losing 4-3 in overtime. They had the chance to close out the series at home but failed to do so. The Bruins outshot the Panthers 47-25 and completely dominated puck possession in the second and third periods. Yet, they still couldn’t pull out the win.

Apparently they lost that game due to two mistakes, two really bad turnovers. Wow, imagine an NBA team losing because they turned to ball over twice, but dominated every other aspect of the game and won the possessions battle nearly 2 to 1.

Sounds like the 2022-2023 Raptors.

[ATLTimekeeper]

Obviously no strategy is going to work perfectly 100% of the time, and some teams are going to be better at it than others. Seems like the Panthers are quite good at it, even good enough to be a team as good as Boston with it and the Leafs, well, not so much.

They posted a stat in game 1 how the Leafs and Panthers had the least amount of time leading the game in the first round of the playoffs. Seems like the Panthers just had great goaltending last game and also got lucky that the Leafs hit like 3 posts as they were fighting off this 'turtle' strategy that you think works.

But clearly it does work because the Panthers beat Boston, a juggernaut team doing it.

https://insidetherink.com/the-boston-bruins-have-one-thing-to-blame-for-game-5-loss/

The Boston Bruins dropped Game 5 to the Florida Panthers last night, losing 4-3 in overtime. They had the chance to close out the series at home but failed to do so. The Bruins outshot the Panthers 47-25 and completely dominated puck possession in the second and third periods. Yet, they still couldn’t pull out the win.

Apparently they lost that game due to two mistakes, two really bad turnovers. Wow, imagine an NBA team losing because they turned to ball over twice, but dominated every other aspect of the game and won the possessions battle nearly 2 to 1.

No, in this game that strategy didn't work at all because the Panthers led 3 different times and Boston, by outplaying them, tied the game and sent it to overtime. Florida was unable to protect the lead. The result of the game was an overtime goal, and overtime hockey is extremely entertaining in the playoffs.

Your like for like comparisons are pointless. They're different games, and I explained the difference very plainly to you in how they're measured. btw, the Cavs upset of the Warriors weren't two evenly matched teams. There was a 16 game difference, and Golden State doubled up on them in SRS. The Cavs required a suspension of Draymond Green for an act he was previously not suspended for by the league, and needed Steph Curry to play through a knee sprain. The unpredictability of sports led to the league finally deciding to suspend Green, and Curry spraining his knee, giving the Cavs the opportunity to deliver one of the greatest upsets in NBA history.

[ciueli]

They posted a stat in game 1 how the Leafs and Panthers had the least amount of time leading the game in the first round of the playoffs. Seems like the Panthers just had great goaltending last game and also got lucky that the Leafs hit like 3 posts as they were fighting off this 'turtle' strategy that you think works.

But clearly it does work because the Panthers beat Boston, a juggernaut team doing it.

https://insidetherink.com/the-boston-bruins-have-one-thing-to-blame-for-game-5-loss/

The Boston Bruins dropped Game 5 to the Florida Panthers last night, losing 4-3 in overtime. They had the chance to close out the series at home but failed to do so. The Bruins outshot the Panthers 47-25 and completely dominated puck possession in the second and third periods. Yet, they still couldn’t pull out the win.

Apparently they lost that game due to two mistakes, two really bad turnovers. Wow, imagine an NBA team losing because they turned to ball over twice, but dominated every other aspect of the game and won the possessions battle nearly 2 to 1.

No, in this game that strategy didn't work at all because the Panthers led 3 different times and Boston, by outplaying them, tied the game and sent it to overtime. Florida was unable to protect the lead. The result of the game was an overtime goal, and overtime hockey is extremely entertaining in the playoffs.

It did work because it got them to overtime without being crushed which they should have been with that kind of shot and time of possession differential. They had no business being in that game at all, but came out with a win, that's because in hockey you can win with defence and getting lucky.

Your like for like comparisons are pointless. They're different games, and I explained the difference very plainly to you in how they're measured. btw, the Cavs upset of the Warriors weren't two evenly matched teams. There was a 16 game difference, and Golden State doubled up on them in SRS. The Cavs required a suspension of Draymond Green for an act he was previously not suspended for by the league, and needed Steph Curry to play through a knee sprain. The unpredictability of sports led to the league finally deciding to suspend Green, and Curry spraining his knee, giving the Cavs the opportunity to deliver one of the greatest upsets in NBA history.

I already qualified injuries as a reason the better team might not win, though I wouldn't say Steph's knee sprain played a huge part in their loss, it's possible it was a factor. Most at the time said it was fatigue from a long season that finally caught up with Warriors, they played hard every game of the regular season to get to 73 wins and it's telling that in future seasons even when their team was more stacked with the addition of Durant they never won as many regular season games, they were more willing to rest players, win a few less games and focus on the playoffs. In any case, the playoffs in basketball is different as teams tighten their rotations, there are plenty of teams that win lots of games in the regular season against bad or mediocre teams but don't win the title in the playoffs. Personally I don't see LeBron/Irving/Love as a particularly worse top three than Curry/Klay/Dray.

[ATLTimekeeper]

I already qualified injuries as a reason the better team might not win, though I wouldn't say Steph's knee sprain played a huge part in their loss, it's possible it was a factor. Most at the time said it was fatigue from a long season that finally caught up with Warriors, they played hard every game of the regular season to get to 73 wins and it's telling that in future seasons even when their team was more stacked with the addition of Durant they never won as many regular season games, they were more willing to rest players, win a few less games and focus on the playoffs. In any case, the playoffs in basketball is different as teams tighten their rotations, there are plenty of teams that win lots of games in the regular season against bad or mediocre teams but don't win the title in the playoffs. Personally I don't see LeBron/Irving/Love as a particularly worse top three than Curry/Klay/Dray.

Go count for me how many times a team with 16 or more wins has lost in the NBA playoffs

[ciueli]

I already qualified injuries as a reason the better team might not win, though I wouldn't say Steph's knee sprain played a huge part in their loss, it's possible it was a factor. Most at the time said it was fatigue from a long season that finally caught up with Warriors, they played hard every game of the regular season to get to 73 wins and it's telling that in future seasons even when their team was more stacked with the addition of Durant they never won as many regular season games, they were more willing to rest players, win a few less games and focus on the playoffs. In any case, the playoffs in basketball is different as teams tighten their rotations, there are plenty of teams that win lots of games in the regular season against bad or mediocre teams but don't win the title in the playoffs. Personally I don't see LeBron/Irving/Love as a particularly worse top three than Curry/Klay/Dray.

Go count for me how many times a team with 16 or more wins has lost in the NBA playoffs

They had LeBron still at his peak and LeBron is a top 2 player All-Time. The previous season it actually looked like LeBron was going to beat the Warriors with Irving and Love out with injuries, it isn't the huge upset you're making it out to be.

[Brinbe]

Knies news was really disappointing. You never want a young player to get hurt like that and potentially have it derail his career down the line.