Game discussion thread GDT: Toronto at Buffalo, 7:00 PM ET, 11/03/2016

[K-9]

TO was in full Alamo mode nearly the whole 3rd period. Unfortunately w/ Eichel & Kane out the only guys that seem effective at bringing the puck in against 5 men back seem to be O'Reilly, Ristolainen, & McCabe. Not sure they had many other options at that point & it seemed TO just iced it anyway so the Sabres did end up w/ control on the ensuing faceoff typically.

 

On occassion even a blind squirrel finds a nut. (Dump & chase isn't ALWAYS the wrong plan.) Though it does seem that they have no clue what to do when either team has pulled the goalie and it never seemed like they'd score in the final 2 minutes.

I miss Eichel's zone entries. IIRC, he ranked pretty high in that regard last season. 

[Taro T]

I miss Eichel's zone entries. IIRC, he ranked pretty high in that regard last season.

 

They hugely miss them right now. HE could have gotten in the zone while the Loafs were in Alamo-mode.

[SwampD]

If Franson had any speed it may be true, but his simple old man skating puts him down a tier

It really is amazing how much energy it looks like he is using to generate absolutely no speed. On a positive note, the refs will never wave of icing because they think he is dogging it back.

[WildCard]

It really is amazing how much energy it looks like he is using to generate absolutely no speed. On a positive note, the refs will never wave of icing because they think he is dogging it back.

We did this in high school for practice. Run really slowly, but move your arms as fast as you can. Looks good, and no effort

[Randall Flagg]

I miss Eichel's zone entries. IIRC, he ranked pretty high in that regard last season. 

At one point it was something like

 

1.) Karlsson

2.) Eichel

3.) Doughty

 

In terms of players that got the puck in the d-zone and then skated for a controlled offensive zone entry, and how many times they did that. 

 

I wanted to wait until I finished watching the whole game before I commented on this.

 

McCabe is great,... from the blue line out. He still has a lot to be desired in his own zone, though. Franson is better at winning battles along the boards and is better at clearing the front of the net. He's also better at when to pinch on those 50/50s to keep the puck in the O zone (although McCabe got better at that as the game went on.) I find these things that happen dozens of times a game way more important than the one highlight reel hit a game in the neutral zone that we get out of McCabe (don't get me wrong, it was a great hit.)

 

He'll end up better than him, no doubt, but right now he's not. And seeing how much better he is playing from the start of the year, it's probably not going to be very long before he is.

 

 

Oh, yeah, ###### Toronto and ###### Babcock.

I disagree. Franson can never get to the boards in time, the play has already moved on :P But seriously, McCabe is way more than one highlight reel hit. He had several excellent transition plays and broke up plenty of Leaf chances. Keeping pucks in at the blue line? Franson? We've had more goals in the net as a direct consequence of a failure to keep a puck in this season from number 6 than from 29 (I believe that count is one to zero). Maybe Franson is a little better on the boards? But he gets engaged in more of those in the dzone because he can't pass or skate the puck up as well or as often as McCabe does before a forecheck closes in.

 

But I don't think we're going to convince each other here, and I think we're both fine with the way they've played as a pair (I saw a tweet that said in 50 minutes together, there were only 5 scoring chances against the Sabres?) so it's not really worth bickering over.

[K-9]

At one point it was something like

 

1.) Karlsson

2.) Eichel

3.) Doughty

 

In terms of players that got the puck in the d-zone and then skated for a controlled offensive zone entry, and how many times they did that. 

 

 

Gee, thanks. Now I have tears in my eyes. 

[Randall Flagg]

Gee, thanks. Now I have tears in my eyes. 

Hey man, we get two Christmases this December!

[K-9]

Hey man, we get two Christmases this December!

Well, there's that, hopefully. 

 

But as I've said, I'm expecting Jack to need a few weeks to get re-acclimated. We would all do well to remember that, too. I'm weary of high-ankle sprains and I think Jack is the type of simmering competitor who's already sick of hearing how good all these young players are and can't wait to become part of the conversation again and I worry he's not gonna give that injury the respect it deserves. 

[Randall Flagg]

Well, there's that, hopefully. 

 

But as I've said, I'm expecting Jack to need a few weeks to get re-acclimated. We would all do well to remember that, too. I'm weary of high-ankle sprains and I think Jack is the type of simmering competitor who's already sick of hearing how good all these young players are and can't wait to become part of the conversation again and I worry he's not gonna give that injury the respect it deserves. 

I remember Ennis's sprain. You could tell. I expect the same with Jack too - and would be totally fine if they let him heal a little longer than they say. I don't want to rush him back and have him miss half of March like Tyler did, IIRC. 

[K-9]

I remember Ennis's sprain. You could tell. I expect the same with Jack too - and would be totally fine if they let him heal a little longer than they say. I don't want to rush him back and have him miss half of March like Tyler did, IIRC. 

Exactly. And I hope the collective intelligence of our fan base understands this when Eichel is struggling in his first games back. 

[SwampD]

At one point it was something like

 

1.) Karlsson

2.) Eichel

3.) Doughty

 

In terms of players that got the puck in the d-zone and then skated for a controlled offensive zone entry, and how many times they did that. 

 

I disagree. Franson can never get to the boards in time, the play has already moved on :P But seriously, McCabe is way more than one highlight reel hit. He had several excellent transition plays and broke up plenty of Leaf chances. Keeping pucks in at the blue line? Franson? We've had more goals in the net as a direct consequence of a failure to keep a puck in this season from number 6 than from 29 (I believe that count is one to zero). Maybe Franson is a little better on the boards? But he gets engaged in more of those in the dzone because he can't pass or skate the puck up as well or as often as McCabe does before a forecheck closes in.

 

But I don't think we're going to convince each other here, and I think we're both fine with the way they've played as a pair (I saw a tweet that said in 50 minutes together, there were only 5 scoring chances against the Sabres?) so it's not really worth bickering over.

I know the play you are talking about with Franson and every player has pucks jump over their sticks. The only reason the ones that McCabe lets out of the zone don't end up in the net is because Franson is always there to bail him out. :nana:

 

I'm only half joking, because I do think they play pretty well together.

 

Offensive part of the game aside, I judge a defenseman on how nervous they make me in our own zone, and I get more nervous about McCabe than I do Franson.

[Thorner]

In his interview Murray said he doesn't expect to trade for a defenseman at the expense of the future. His goal may be playoffs but he isn't going to mortgage a cup run to appease the fan base. He says there is an organizational plan and any trade would have to fit into it long term. That was my take anyway.

I hate when GMs use that straw man. It doesn't have to be one or the other, the ROR trade being a perfect example. We traded away "future" assets, but brought in a player that will help now, AND for the foreseeable future.

 

There are myriad reasons why Murray may be unable to trade for a Dman, but there's no reason he necessarily has to mortgage the future to do so. Furthermore, if he thinks we have our future D already accounted for within our system, in his organizational plan, we are up shatz creek without a paddle. Acquiring a Dman isn't about appeasing the fan base, it's about constructing a winning hockey team.

 

The plan better not be to draft a top 4 RHD in the draft, that's 3 years away and a crapshoot to boot, or hoping that Bogosian somehow manages to stay healthy for the first time in 7 years. Hope is not a tactic.

 

Disclaimer: I'm posting assuming your summation of Murray's comments is accurate, 3putt. Just got home from work and haven't seen/read this interview yet :p

Edited November 5, 2016 by Thorny

[TrueBlueGED]

I remember Ennis's sprain. You could tell. I expect the same with Jack too - and would be totally fine if they let him heal a little longer than they say. I don't want to rush him back and have him miss half of March like Tyler did, IIRC. 

 

Absolutely. Let him heal.

 

 

I hate when GMs use that straw man. It doesn't have to be one or the other, the ROR trade being a perfect example. We traded away "future" assets, but brought in a player that will help now, AND for the foreseeable future.

 

There are myriad reasons why Murray may be unable to trade for a Dman, but there's no reason he necessarily has to mortgage the future to do so. Furthermore, if we thinks we have our future D already accounted for within our system, in his organizational plan, we are up shatz creek without a paddle. Acquiring a Dman isn't about appeasing the fan base, it's about constructing a winning hockey team.

 

The plan better not be to draft a top 4 RHD in the draft, that's 3 years away and a crapshoot to boot, or hoping that Bogosian somehow manages to stay healthy for the first time in 7 years. Hope is not a tactic.

 

Disclaimer: I'm posting assuming your summation of Murray's comments is accurate, 3putt. Just got home from work and haven't seen/read this interview yet :P

 

FWIW, Murray said he wasn't willing to mortgage the future for a player who wouldn't be on the team when we were winning the Cup, not that he wasn't willing to part with futures. You should have listened to the full interview before ranting :p

 

What I got out of it was that he didn't anticipate being able to accomplish it, hence the lack of plan to trade for a Dman.

[3putt]

Absolutely. Let him heal.

 

 

 

 

FWIW, Murray said he wasn't willing to mortgage the future for a player who wouldn't be on the team when we were winning the Cup, not that he wasn't willing to part with futures. You should have listened to the full interview before ranting :p

 

What I got out of it was that he didn't anticipate being able to accomplish it, hence the lack of plan to trade for a Dman.

I used "mortgage" to indicate any viable upgrade would require an overpayment of significant value. Perhaps next time I should transcribe his exact comments. I agree that a trade for a legitimate upgrade is unlikely, not because Murray isn't willing to trade futures, but rather he isn't willing to trade the future. This year is a development year by my impression and he isn't really worried if we don't make the playoffs.

[Thorner]

Absolutely. Let him heal.

 

 

 

 

FWIW, Murray said he wasn't willing to mortgage the future for a player who wouldn't be on the team when we were winning the Cup, not that he wasn't willing to part with futures. You should have listened to the full interview before ranting :p

 

What I got out of it was that he didn't anticipate being able to accomplish it, hence the lack of plan to trade for a Dman.

Absolutely :p

 

Still, it comes to the same thing doesn't it? If there is no plan to trade for one, what is the plan for getting one? Or is he really content with what we have on D?

I used "mortgage" to indicate any viable upgrade would require an overpayment of significant value. Perhaps next time I should transcribe his exact comments. I agree that a trade for a legitimate upgrade is unlikely, not because Murray isn't willing to trade futures, but rather he isn't willing to trade the future. This year is a development year by my impression and he isn't really worried if we don't make the playoffs.

Wasn't that last year?

[3putt]

Absolutely :p

Still, it comes to the same thing doesn't it? If there is no plan to trade for one, what is the plan for getting one? Or is he really content with what we have on D?

 

Wasn't that last year?

Last year was a throw away. We had know idea if Jack would live up to the hype and little reason to believe Sam would take the steps he would. New coach, system, additions of ROR and Lehner. Losing Jack and Kane right off the bat kind of extended that look. I do think if Jack didn't go down, the first half of this year would have been an evaluation to see what we could add in season to keep the momentum. Losing Jack and Kane put a thin team in a bind. I don't think TM is going to try and deal out of panic. JMHO.

[Thorner]

Last year was a throw away. We had know idea if Jack would live up to the hype and little reason to believe Sam would take the steps he would. New coach, system, additions of ROR and Lehner. Losing Jack and Kane right off the bat kind of extended that look. I do think if Jack didn't go down, the first half of this year would have been an evaluation to see what we could add in season to keep the momentum. Losing Jack and Kane put a thin team in a bind. I don't think TM is going to try and deal out of panic. JMHO.

He did say the goal was playoffs. I wonder if that's still the case.

[qwksndmonster]

He did say the goal was playoffs. I wonder if that's still the case.

uhhhhhh yes.

[Thorner]

uhhhhhh yes.

I just wonder if maybe he loosens up on that given the injuries. Or maybe it was an expectation before and less so now.

 

In reality I'm more concerned with his thoughts on the D situation. It reads like he's resigned to what we have on D, and an upgrade is something more less out of the equation (at least through trade)

[qwksndmonster]

I just wonder if maybe he loosens up on that given the injuries. Or maybe it was an expectation before and less so now.

I think Murray is done with losing.

 

 

(on purpose)

[Thorner]

I think Murray is done with losing.

 

 

(on purpose)

Oh, I wasn't supposing that he was thinking of tanking or anything close to. Just thought maybe there is a chance he revised his timeline.

 

I think he's done with losing as a strategy too, do you think he's done shaping the D core?

[qwksndmonster]

Oh, I wasn't supposing that he was thinking of tanking or anything close to. Just thought maybe there is a chance he revised his timeline.

 

I think he's done with losing as a strategy too, do you think he's done shaping the D core?

I don't really think Tim's timeline has been moving around much, even with the Eichel injury. Haha sorry for the sass, I was detecting a hint of the GMTM IS OBSESSED WITH PICKS meme that seeped into the board during the t***.

Edited November 5, 2016 by qwksndmonster

[Thorner]

I don't really think Tim's timeline has been moving around much, even with the Eichel injury. Haha sorry for the sass, I was detecting a hint of the GMTM IS OBSESSED WITH PICKS meme that seeped into the board during the t***.

Nah, just curious as to whether he's truly feeling playoffs are a reasonable expectation for the year, given the injuries. We can only guess.

[qwksndmonster]

Nah, just curious as to whether he's truly feeling playoffs are a reasonable expectation for the year, given the injuries. We can only guess.

I think he's an emotional, competitive human being despite also being analytical and calculating.  I think he knows that this team is capable of doing some damage in the regular season when at full strength, and they should be able to tread water for the next month or so.

Edited November 5, 2016 by qwksndmonster

[Thorner]

I think he's an emotional, competitive human being despite also being analytical and calculating.  I think he knows that this team is capable of doing some damage in the regular season when at full strength, and they should be able to tread water for the next month or so.

Probably an accurate reading.

 

I just continue to wonder what's he's thinking about the D situation. You can make a reasonable argument that we have 3/4 future top 4 on the team, I just wonder if he really thinks Bogosian can be that 4th guy, given his injuries. And what he plans to do with Kulikov.