GQStylin wrote:Why is it when a Canadian team drafts a top US player its automatically assumed that he'll eventually want to go back to the US to play and the reverse isn't true? I can understand why free agents aren't as likely to want to choose Canada to go play at, but I don't know why even Canadian drafted and developed US players would all feel the same as well. I mean sure its happened a number of times, but its still not guaranteed that EVERY US player wants to return home to play though.
If this is truly the case then I guess we know a big part of the reason why Canadian teams have such a hard time winning the cup when not only free agents don't want to sign with Canadian teams, but also their own talent doesn't want to either.
With regards to Matthews specifically, I think most likely he chooses to stay as long as the price is right. What's better than playing with your best friend Marner, on a top team, being one of the highest paid players in the league, in a market that cares so much about the Leafs and hockey and where if you win you will become an instant legend to all Leafs fans everywhere? Maybe some players don't like that massive spotlight that every Canadian team has on them, but why play in a market that cares much less and will barely turn out even if you ever win a championship?
Even in the unlikely chance that Matthews does want to leave I use to dread the thought of that, but now I wouldn't be nearly as devastated considering his play in recent years. He's still a great player, but who knows if injures haven't slowed him down abit so that this year he doesn't look nearly as awesome compared to say his first couple of years in the NHL where even though he put up less points, he looked so much more dominate and impactful on the ice and seemed to have all the energy in the world.
If Matthews leaves because he wants to go or asks for too much money, as long as they can trade him and get a good package back I'd be alright in losing him.
I know it feels like a double standard, where players only seem to want to be going south of the border, but it is a dynamic of the league and other factors (weather/taxes). 2/3rds of the league is located in the US. So naturally, more opportunities south of the border. Combine that with the nicer weather and lower taxes (no state taxes in some cases) and you see why the draw is for players to go south of the border. Layer in the media and fan attention for hockey players in Canada, and yet another reason for players to go south (more obscurity). Not that there are no Canadians that don't want to play for Canadian teams. McDavid signed an 8 year extension to stay in Edmonton. Tavares signed as a FA in Toronto (even though he was probably offered more money by SJ).
With respect to Matthews, he is unique in that he is a US born player being compared to some of the greats in the game. So I would expect a significant amount of interest in any US based team that could acquire him. He could be marketed to no end in the US.
Why would he want to leave: more money, better chance at winning, closer to home, lower taxes, avoid Toronto media scrutiny etc.
The decision on Matthews is immediately after the playoffs. Either he signs an extension immediately (which if one was in the works you think you might have already heard about it), or they have to move him. As soon as he hits FA they
can lose him for nothing.
Liljegren is definitely a pretty good/very good passer and if you were watching Leafs games regularly you would see it and there's NO WAY either of Brodie or McCabe are better than he is as a puck mover. There's a reason why Holl and Gio were often a tire fire when they were together and yet Liljegren and Gio were much better and steady because Liljegren can move the puck and make good passes. Also he's a good skater and is still developing his offensive game after being put on the backburner offensively in favor of Sandin.
As for toughness that's what both Schenn and McCabe have brought significantly to the backend. Both guys can hit and perhaps more importantly they're big bodies that can help move people and grind in the corners. With Dmen you need a good mix and I think the Leafs have a decent mix right now with skill and toughness. Also while Schenn was in the bottom pairing for Tampa he's developed into a decent Dman that can move up and play more minutes without hurting you, so great for Tampa that they were so deep on defense, but that doesn't mean Schenn isn't capable of doing more than what he was given while playing with the Lightning.
In terms of the Leafs D, it looks better than in past years, but still cannot be regarded as one of the best defenses in the league, which limits their title contention. And D is not just the two guys on the back end. It is also the 3 forwards being responsible defensively on the ice and the goaltender. Areas the Leafs are weak in. Again, focus of this team is more on the offensive creativity side, vs the defensive awareness. It is plays like Marner and Matthews trying to make slick plays at their own blueline, rather than just getting the puck up the boards. They cough it up at their blueline, and it turns into a quality scoring opportunity for the opposition. But that play by them is the nature of their games. Once they give the puck up, it can be harder for them to get it back, because a player like Marner is not going to body someone off the puck. So they turn to their skill.
Winning in the playoffs is about everything. Having a hot goalie is definitely number one in getting a team far in the playoffs, but both good defense and offense is pretty much equally important where you can't win if you don't score and you also can't win if you can't stop the other team from scoring. Looking at the Leafs playoffs this season they're suffering more from not being able to score than keeping the puck out of their own net when outside of the two blowout games against the Lightning, 6 out of the other 8 games they've played were one goal wins and losses.
Sure keeping goals out is very important, but so is scoring them and the Leafs had a very hard time generating quality scoring chances against Tampa, but they capitalized on the chances that they got. With the Panthers they've gotten many more good chances to score, but conversely haven't buried those chances and as a result are down in the series. They could easily be up 3-1 rather down down 3-1 if they could've scored on even a fraction of the prime scoring chances that they got.
I go back to my original point. Defense wins championships. Even great offensive teams finally break through when their defense catches up. Whereas great defensive teams only need a little bit of offense to win. They only need 1 goal to win. Last couple decades has more than proven this point.
Matthews is a great player, but I don't think he should be compared to Malkin let alone Crosby who are a level or two above him in their primes. Perhaps if he gets better then maybe he can be compared to them. We can only hope that Matthews can end up with a Malkin kind of career let alone a Crosby kind of career.
Whether Matthews is ever able to deliver like those players is a question still to be answered. But coming into the league and to this point, Matthews is discussed along the lines of McDavid, being the next generation of superstars in the league. But his game is probably more like Ovie's than either Crosby or Malkin, in that he is looking for his own shot most of the time.
That's the chance you take with signing a star level free agent. It may or may not payoff just like with any other player. As I said the Leafs were pursuing Stamkos when he was going to free agency before they then targeted Tavares so its clear they wanted to sign a star free agent and didn't mind paying for it. Sure in retrospect it was probably better not to sign him, but at the time few people thought it was a bad idea to get him and have that one, two punch of Matthews and Tavares down the middle.
Once Dubas signed the 4, and refused to trade any of them, he set his path. If it ends in the 2nd round, he probably doesn't need to worry about this anymore.
That's EXACTLY what the Leafs were doing with Matthews and Tavares and yet you criticise them for trying to build with 2 strong centers down the middle. Sure Matthews didn't sign the full 8 years and Drai is vastly better and cheaper than Tavares, but that was the plan that Dubas also had where two star centers would be leading the team. Matthews and Tavares aren't nearly as good as McDavid and Drai, but they're still pretty damn good.
Problem was their money was then spent on Marner and Nylander, tying up their flexibility to balance their roster. I'm suggesting moving Matthews because of the 4 he has the greatest value to other teams, and therefore the Leafs would get more in return. I can't imagine teams would offer up much for Marner. Very talented offensively, but at $11M and needing a top line C, why would a team trade talent to bring that back?
As long as MacKinnon can stay healthy I don't think his play will drop off significantly because he's a superstar level player. I think its more likely that he'll have a Crosby type career where he'll still play great well into his 30s than falling off a cliff like Brad Richards did after signing his big deal with the Rangers back in the day. The Avs were hit hard with injuries this year and even then they made it into the playoffs pretty easily. Outside of Rantanen most of their other good players are already signed to longer term deals so I think they'll just pay for Rantanen and stay being a top team for years to come.
Point was MacKinnon will age like every other player and his impact will begin to lessen. Combined with them losing talent as the large salaries they have given to their core squeeze out other players (such as Kadri), the talent level of the team overall will drop causing them to drop off as a playoff contender.
I disagree. You make it sound like a winger is forced to stay only on his side of the ice rather than going everywhere like any other player does. Marner influences and controls the game FAR MORE than Matthews does when he's on the ice. These days a winger or center is mostly a label except for a couple of differences where if you're good in the faceoff circle and can play decent defense then you can play center.
Also while goalies influence a game the most, they're also the most unpredicable which is why any team that pays out big money for their goalie even if they're young is always taking a huge gamble. One year they can play lights out then another year fall off a cliff and then come back the next year and play great again. Or they can be like Bob and suck for most of the regular season and then start playing well in the playoffs.
While some wingers might have more leeway to free lance on the ice, and Marner is a player like that, they still have responsibilities defensively. If the puck is in their end in the corner, the C is expected to support the D (wingers are supposed to cover the points). If Marner was more physically capable of filling all the roles of a C, he would probably have been put in that role at an early age. Best players are usually put at C or D, from an early age. Marner may have started off as a C when he was younger, and then was moved to wing later on when his size dictated it.
While goaltenders may seem less predictable now, I think it is because they are all becoming more uniform in their size and style of play. And so whether they are on or off becomes more of a focus. Back in the day, there were more individual goaltenders that tended to carry teams (Roy, Hasek, Belfour, Brodeur, Joseph), and I think because the variability of goaltenders was so great in terms of their play, those that were more consistently good stood out, and appeared more consistent.
I'm saying Toronto or most every other Canadian city has a tougher time attracting good players because they're in Canada, often have higher taxes and also the weather sucks for many cities here. That's why I said if you moved LA to Toronto's location and Toronto to LA's location that LA would suddenly have trouble attracting good players because of location/taxes/weather and not because of the city itself. And 'being creative and bold' often means paying more for a player and/or trading for a good player and hoping they like it enough to stay.
I was just joking. I get that the weather and taxes dictate desire of players to go to locations, not names of cities.
