Seven games to go, three teams to leapfrog, will the Leafs make it?
Here are several great places to check-in and see how the math adds up for the Leafs (and the odds don't seem to be in the Leafs' favour, unless you were hoping they'd finish 11th.)
James Mirtle's Playoff Push
Hockey Numbers' Conference Projections
Zorak's Magic (and Tragic) Numbers
Hockey Analysis Projected Standings
10. I realize Maurice has more hockey knowledge in just one of those deep dark circles under his eyes than I will ever hope to acquire no matter how much hockey I watch, but as the Leafs game went up like a four alarm blaze in Tonawanda, why didn't Maurice call a time-out or swap out Raycroft? Anything to stop the bleeding. Instead, wave after wave of Sabres came at them, the Leafs got gut-punch crushed and Raycroft will have to be back between the pipes in 20 or so hours (watch that glove-hand Andy, it's a bitch).
9. I'm a little confused - the Leafs were supposed to be life and death to make the playoffs. The experts said it; the coach said it; many fans said it and the GM may have even said it. So what's with the injury story angle? If the Leafs were healthy, are we to believe they'd be protecting these leads, winning in shoot-outs, not choking? Only Peca's hurt at the moment and this team still looks like a 10 spot club or worse...
8. When discussing the Perrault deal, why do so many fans think Bell would have been lost to waivers? At the Trade deadline, the Leafs had the flexibility to acquire one player without having to pass anyone through waivers. Once the trade deadline passes, there is no roster limit (CBA 16.4a). If Bell was going to be lost to waivers (and there's no knowing if this is true or not) the earliest he would have been lost is October 2007. Seven months after the trade deadline. FWIW, Bell has more points since the trade than Perrault, although he's getting about twice the ice-time of Perrault (and what's up with #94 logging 6 to 10 minutes/game?)
7. It seems common knowledge that Ferguson will be fired if the Leafs miss the playoffs again this year (here, here, hell - everywhere) but I've never found a source for this. Does any one have a citation on this? A quote from Peddie, Tannenbaum or anyone at MLSE? I have a bad feeling Ferguson has at least another year left in him. I guess MLSE wants at least one more trade deadline to pass so they can sit on their hands.
6. The polarizing effect of Raycroft. He's not as good as the wins total crowd would have you believe (check out his total losses, his win percentage and the shoot-out wins compared to Eddie and Cujo) and on the other hand he's not as dreadful as some of the stats might suggest (his ES SV% is solid; his PK SV% is lower than a Sens fan's self-esteem each June.) Would he be such a divisive figure if he wasn't a JFJ acquisition and if the price paid for him wasn't so high?
5. If the Refs really had a bias against the Leafs, wouldn't they be the most penalized team in the league, not the 7th most. Sometimes refs (Hello Kerry Fraser!) are just the suck, no matter what colour jersey the teams happen to be wearing. And how on earth did Cola get away with that trip in the Jersey game if the zebras have it in for the Blue and White?
4. I always presumed the Leafs were bottom of the barrel at the shoot-out because of their shooters. Surprisingly, the shooters are decidedly average - ranked 16th overall - scoring at just a fraction less than the league average (a 0.8% difference). Raycroft's sv% on the shoot-out, on the other hand, is dipping towards the Caps' win percentage...
3. Why do fans bring up dumb things Leafs may have done when discussing the current rash of meat head plays in the NHL? What do any of Domi's past transgressions (Samuelson, Niedermayer, Arvedson, marital infidelity) have to do with what I might think of as appropriate discipline for Neil, Janssen, Simon and Tootoo?
2. What does this team really need in the off-season? Let me clarify that, what minor tinkering will MLSE undertake as part of their master plan? It's clear they can generate sufficient offence off the back-end (and there's such little flex with those contracts it seems the top 6 spots are locked down) but the club can't keep the puck out of their own net. Maybe a solid back-up goalie, someone that can eat PK minutes and a new special teams coach behind the bench to take a fresh approach to a moribund pk.
1. How many "must win" games can a team lose before the term must-win has no currency? Seems to me, the Leafs have lost three of the last four must-win games, which of course means Saturday night's match-up against the Sabres at the ACC is a must-win game.
...add another item to the list of bad stats that leaves me cold when I think of Raycroft holding the Leafs' single season win record: Raycroft's terrible record in the shoot-out. I'm not talking win/loss, I'm talking save percentage.
Raycroft has been beaten 13 times on 32 shots for a .594 sv%
That puts him 30th among goalies who've faced at least 10 shots and well below the league average of .678%
===
Gotta wonder what Maurice is thinking when he picks his shooters.
Poni went 0 for 7 before Maurice looked elsewhere, Tucker was 1 for 5 before he was blanked against the Habs tonight (he's now a lumbering 1 for 6). Given how O'Neill and Steen buried the biscuit against NJ, you'd think Coach Maurice would go back to them...
When the Perrault deal went down, I had two issues with it (discussed in detail here and here) in short:
If there's one-lesson to be learned from last year's playoffs it's that there's no such thing as having too many D (c.f. Buffalo).
Now with injuries to Kaberle, Colaiacovo and Hal Gill (who did return to the game after getting stitched up) the Leafs had to rush back an injured Pavel Kubina and dress a healthy Wade Belak. McCabe logged 29 minutes against the Caps and will have to be good to go again Saturday night. I'd much rather have Bell available to fill-in on the blueline right now, but instead we have Perrault and his bum shoulder...
So to recap, that's our suddenly much needed depth on D and a second round pick for this:
| Game | G | A | +/- | Total TOI | PP TOI | PK TOI | FO% |
| at Washington | 0 | 0 | -1 | 7:47 | 00:38 | 00:00 | 100% |
| Tampa Bay | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6:24 | 00:58 | 00:00 | 37.5% |
| Ottawa | - | - | --- | ---- | Scratched | ---- | --- |
| at Ottawa | 0 | 0 | 0 | 10:53 | 2:14 | 00:00 | 50% |
| Washington | 1 | 0 | +1 | 6:51 | 00:45 | 00:00 | 75% |
| Buffalo | 0 | 0 | 0 | 13:10 | 2:53 | 00:00 | 56.2% |
| at New Jersey | 0* | 0 | -1 | 13:38 | 4:16 | 00:00 | 87.5% |
Dressed for six out of seven games, one goal, no assists, -1, avg. 09:47 ice time per game. Wow. Nice work JFJ!
Raycroft, Maurice and Aubin
Given that Raycroft seems to struggle when he's tired/ plays too much hockey and given that the Washington match-up was allegedly the easier of the two back-to-back games this weekend, was anyone else surprised that Maurice gave Raycroft the start?
Wouldn't it have made more sense for Aubin to face the Caps and keep Raycroft fresh for the Habs?
Instead, Raycroft has to play back-to-back after another erratic start (goal #1 was horrible and I'm sure he'd like a mulligan on #4) in a big, pressure filled game in a city where his last start resulted in a .688 sv% and an early trip to the showers.
This speaks to a larger question: if Maurice and MLSE have such little faith in Aubin (9 starts out of 71 this season) why did the team decide to move Telly and knowing Raycroft breaks down under a heavy workload, why haven't they found an adequate back-up to help spell-off Raycroft?
Posting may get a bit more sparse around here and the typos might become even more prevalent as I suffered an undisclosed upper body injury last night.
Or in more simple terms: I busted my clavicle.
Caught a rut near the crease on the forecheck and kissed the end boards hard. I knew something was busted as soon as I got up and headed for the bench...the right side of my chest felt like an accordion, swinging and swaying as I skated off the ice. Six to eight weeks in a sling (that's 2 months of typing one-handed) and bi-weekly visits to the fracture clinic.
Raycrot's Record
A big topic in Leaf Land is Raycroft's chance to break the single season wins record, currently held by Ed "billion dollar" Belfour.
Eddie posted 37 wins in 62 matches back in 2002-03, breaking Cujo's mark of 36 wins in 63 games set in 1999-00. The Star, Sun and CP have all filed on this in the past few days.
I really hope Raycroft smashes the record as the Leafs need every win they can get (seems like this team has been in a must-win situation since Christmas). That said, I find it very interesting that my first reaction to this news is to dismiss it by looking at the math.
If Raycroft sets a new Leaf record, and given how erratic his play has been this season it's by no means a certainty, the number of games he's played certainly needs to be factored in. With 12 games left to go, I imagine Raycroft will break Eddie's record around the 68 or 69 game mark. That's nearly 10% more hockey than Eddie needed to set the record.
Also to be considered: three (or four?) of Raycroft's wins have come in the shoot-out, which didn't exist when Cujo and Belfour set their respective records.
So, Raycroft may set the record, but he'll do it with a poorer winning percentage and the added assistance of the shoot-out...
Sundin and Sittler
With his next goal, Sundin will match Darryl Sittler's record of 388 goals as a Leaf. I think this is just fantastic news and I really hope the mighty Swede breaks the record in Montreal on Saturday night. Nothing like bagging the historic goal in a big game between such storied rivals in such a great hockey town.
Compare and Contrast
Unlike Raycroft's record, my first reaction to Sundin's news wasn't to question the math (Sittler played 844 games for the Leafs, by Saturday night Sundin will have played 850). Nor did I immediately think about how the introduction of regular season overtime in 1983-84, two years after Sittler left the Leafs, might have affected Sundin's stats.
Why the different reactions?
I think first and foremost it's because Raycrofts other stats, which I would argue are more indicative of a goalie's play, are terrible: his save percentage and goals against are among the worst in the league. Sundin, meanwhile, has been one of the most consistent players in the NHL during his career.
Secondly, there's a stink of PR desperation to the media coverage surrounding Raycroft and the potential record - especially the piece by Jody Vance. Ugh.
And finally, and perhaps not fairly, I can't help but wonder where this team might be had they received a higher calibre of goaltending. They certainly wouldn't be in 9th place, having to play desperate hockey each and every night. Raycroft has been nothing if inconsistent this year, which has really hurt the club, so it's rather ironic that such inconsistent play may result with his name in the record books.
Or as A.J. Liebling so eloquently said, "I think it's immoral for a man without talent to get too far."
My sister and I were exchanging emails today and she was amazed that I had no recollection of Free to Be You and Me. Apparently we owned the record and we were big fans of the television special too. (In my defence, I was about three when the whole thing hit. I doubt deep hypnosis could turn up any knowledge of it - though hypnosis might reveal why I was so freaked out by Big Foot when he took on the Six Million Dollar Man).
So I looked up Free to be You and Me and I quickly wondered, how bad can anything featuring all-pro defensive tackle Rosie Grier and a young Michael Jackson be?
Have a look for yourself and enjoy:
Now what does this have to do with hockey?
This video is clearly calling out for a remake - some NHL tough guy needs to put on his best silk shirt with a collar that could hide Garth Snow's shoulder pads, get an acoustic guitar (that he can pretend to play, badly) and belt out this wonderful song. Of course, the clips of folks crying would have to be updated with more modern content like, oh I don't know, maybe...
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
 |  |  |
Three somewhat related thoughts about the Leafs...
1. David Johnson over at Hockey Analysis has a must read post suggesting that the Leafs really aren't that bad a team, that in fact it's shoddy goaltending that's hurting this club. He correctly points out that the Leafs much maligned D (oh, I've heaped my share text their way - guilty as charged) has done a great job limiting shots (8th overall in the NHL - same as the Devils). On the other side of the blue line, the Leafs are top 10 in scoring.
2. Further to Johnson's post, I'd love to know how much of the Leafs penalty killing woes are attributable to the poor goaltending. As the sporting cliche goes, your goalie is the most important penalty killer. The Leafs are 26th in the PK and 27th in SHG. When you consider they've taken the 7th most penalties in the league, no good can come from this.
3. With the Leafs woes between the pipes and on the PK, the Perrault deal appears curious at best and a total waste of resources at worst.
Perrault played 13 minutes in his first two games, just six minutes against Washington and only 10 against the Sens. (Considering the Leafs had 8 PPs, why is it this face-off specialist only saw about two minutes on the ice with the extra man?)
MLSE coughed up some nice defensive depth in Brendan Bell (the 2003 CHL defenceman of the year and CHL first-team all-star) and a second round pick in a great draft year (2008) for a guy who's logging about 10 minutes a night who doesn't kill penalties and as far as I know can't play net. I'm ok with the sacrificing those two resources, but when you examine the return and when you look at what this club still needs, the opportunity cost is staggering.
One of the things that I hope this blog offers is an alternative to what you can get in the papers, on sports radio and from the TSN's and Sportsnets of this world.
I'd like to think of it as a really engaging conversation among people who love hockey. And like any good conversation it will have funny parts, controversial bits, occassional lulls (well maybe more than the occassinal one) and even disagreements. I'd also like to think that this space moves above and beyond the two-dimensional qualities and false dichotomies that marr so much sports coverage and so many exchanges (yeah, I know the Leafs suck, thanks for posting).
With that in mind, I really wanted to know what a fan of the Devils made of the Kaberle hit (as Winnie the Pooh says to Tigger in one of my daughter's books, "Good manners are mostly about looking at things from someone else's point of view.") so I fired an email to Tom at The Out Route (he and I have exchanged music tips over at Glorious Noise for years) and asked him if he wanted to send a paragraph or two my way.
He did, and here it is:
OK, let’s get this out of the way: I’m a Devils fan. I’m the enemy.
But take pause, Leafs fans, before you sling your iBarbs into my skin. I know we haven’t been at harmony over the recent years. We dislike you because you remind us a little too much of the Rangers, with your tradition, free-spirited spending, and blue jerseys. You dislike us because we win Stanley Cups and you don’t. Kidding, kidding. I just had to get that one out of the way.
I know that tensions are high after Tomas Kaberle’s injury, and that someone defending Cam Janssen is probably the last person you’d want to hear (read?) from. ANYWAY, I ask that you look at me today not as a Devils fan, but as a beacon of logic.
Was Janssen’s hit illegal? It was, in the sense that it came just a teensy bit too late. When watching the play develop, there seems an eternity between the pass and the check in which anxiety sets in, because you can see disaster ahead and are helpless to stop it. It’s that feeling you get watching a foolish victim in a horror movie open the closet door (the killer is always in the closet) or when a rollercoaster reaches the top of its initial ascent. In reality, it was 1.2 seconds. Certainly late, and certainly illegal by NHL rules.
In my mind, that’s the extent of Janssen’s wrongdoings. Go back and check the tape – the elbow is down, the players are facing each other, Janssen is gliding and not striding. All the benchmarks of a good, clean hit. The rest is circumstantial. Kaberle wasn’t looking and thus had no way to brace himself which, combined with the proximity to the boards, made the hit about 10 times more devastating than it would have been under normal circumstances. Because of the injury, I think a game misconduct or one-game suspension would have sufficed. But honestly, Janssen’s infraction typically costs a player two minutes. Suspensions should come with intended malice, I just don’t see that being the case here. I mean, it wasn’t like he intentionally elbowed Scott Niedermayer in the face at the end of a certain second-round playoff game (cough. cough.).
The logical reader now asks him or herself this: Well, smarty-pants, even if, fundamentally, Janssen’s hit was legal, why did he throw it? It wasn’t necessary in the context of play. That’s a good question. And I know you assume that it was intentional because of the role Janssen plays on the team and because of people’s natural instinct to think their worst of their peers. I’ve got no factual evidence to dissuade you, but I can say with a straight face that Janssen is not a dirty player.
I hate the term “goon.” It’s derogatory towards a group of hockey players that help define the sport. Janssen is a role player. His role is to be physical and to bring energy to the ice. He’s also young and on the periphery of this league. With the new rules, players of his ilk are being eradicated. He’s fighting (literally) for a job, and he gets precious few minutes on the ice to prove his worth. In this instance, he got overzealous and made a mistake. He is not the type of player to deliberately injure a player, and he showed genuine concern for Kaberle’s well-being and contrition after the game. It should be noted he hasn’t protested the check or tried to defend himself. The Devils have always been unapologetically physical, which may or may not be boring to watch, but they’ve never been a dirty team. I wouldn’t support one.
I’ve heard a lot of hyperbole about the hit, using it as a way to blast the NHL – because, I’m sure even we can agree, the only time the U.S. media touches hockey is to complain about its physical nature – and throwing Janssen to the lions. Frankly, I just don’t get it. This isn’t to undermine Kaberle’s injury – I hate to see anyone injured, and I hope Kaberle’s recovery is of the speediest kind. But to me it seems that this pales in significance to the Todd Bertuzzi and Marty McSorely incidents, as well as the one earlier this season that sparked a brawl between Buffalo and Ottawa.
The exaggerated punishment is a clear attempt at further eradicating the physical element of hockey, and that’s something I can’t stand for. Forget about Janssen. Doesn’t everyone love a good fourth-liner? I’m sure the Leafs will want revenge, and though I don’t necessarily believe the hit warrants it, I’m not objecting because I understand that’s the way hockey is, and that’s how I like it.
If we are going to be suspending players for hits with clean intentions, we are changing one of hockey’s core functions. Players will forever be afraid to throw a good body check because of the potential ramifications. That’s worse than bigger nets, shootouts, or tighter jerseys. It’s castrating the sport as we know it. Janssen’s suspension is the starting point on a slippery slope. If we continue on this path, the NHL will lose the roguish charm that attracted us all. It will be run with an iron first, a place where unintentional high sticks are sins and fights are viewed with the same affection as a malevolent tumor. The NHL will become a Nazi state, or something far worse – the NBA.
Feel free to post your comments here or to visit Tom over at The Out Route...
The Hit
The Janssen hit came 1.33 seconds after Kaberle moved the puck to Cola and the play had clearly moved up ice (I didn't time it, but the low-talking ever quiet Steve Kouleas and his partner Ludzik had telestrated the entire play on the Score).
Janssen barely left his feet on the hit and it didn't look to me like an explicit elbow. Had Kabs not been admiring his pass, he wouldn't have been so vulnerable. The majority of the damage seemed to be done when Kaberle slammed into the boards after absorbing the initial hit.
I wonder what Leafs Nation would be saying this morning if the skates were on the other foot- if it was Wade Belak finishing a hit on Colin White? Would there be calls for suspensions? How would Leafs fans feel about the refs not calling it - a sign of incompetence or further defence for the guy in the blue and white? Would Maurice have put Belak back on the ice for another shift?
I'd like to see Janssen handed a multi-game suspension for this. It might be my Leaf blood talking, but it certainly seemed like a late hit with some intent to injure thrown in for good measure.
There really needs to be a disincentive administered by the league for these late hits before someone is seriously injured - either from the event or the retribution.
**UPDATED** And three games it is for Mr. Janssen...
The Quip
I'm not a huge fan of Jeff O'Neill (although 20 goals for his $1.5M salary is great value) - but I'm hoping JFJ resigns him next year just so we can get some refreshing quotes.
On the Janssen hit,
O'Neill called Janssen a "meathead" after the game, adding: "It's just more proof that some of these younger idiots in our league have no respect for what's going on out there. [Janssen] is probably a classic example, and the best defenceman in the NHL -- I think -- will be out for awhile. It's disappointing."
"It's not like he is not noticeable out there, he's the best player on the ice, he's six-foot-five and he gets high-sticked in front of four referees. It's just kind of weird that there's not a call."On Kerry Fraser and the myster goal:
"What's concerning to me is I don't know how [Fraser] makes that call with such conviction. It's a terrible call and it's unacceptable at this time of the year. The replay is clearly evident that it's not f---ing goalie interference. If it is goalie interference, call a penalty. We have to answer to people when we screw up, but I don't know what these guys have to do. It's a goddamn joke to be honest with you."Sure beats the usual tripe we get in post game reports...
Chris Zelkovich reported in today's (02/03/07) Star that:
You may not have to pay for Leafs TV much longer. The Leafs are trying to negotiate a new deal with Rogers that would make the channel available to everybody free of charge. The catch is that you'll only get it if you have a digital box
Hey Ottawa,
How are things?
I know it’s been a while since we talked. Seems every time we try to have a conversation it just turns into a shouting match.
Listen, I know you claim we broke your heart four times and I’m willing to take some of the blame for that, but maybe if you hadn’t gotten involved with that Lalime fellow last time around things might have turned out differently.
Sorry, let’s not go down that road right now…
We may still have our differences. Let’s be honest, I still think you’re cold and distant and not a lot of fun. And, yeah, there may be some truth to that whole “centre of the universe” thing that you just can’t seem to let go of, but that’s not why I’m writing to you.
I heard about what you did to Carolina this week and even though you’ll likely deny it, I’d like to think that part of that was about us. So, I just want to say thanks. Even if it wasn't about us, I really appreicate it.
I hear there’s a big dance coming up in April. We haven’t received our invitation yet but I'm still somewhat hopeful. I know we didn’t get to go last year either (you really don’t have to bring it up, please don’t, it’s something that still stings) but the reason we can’t go comes down to some plan or something. It’s really not clear…
If you do go to the dance, I just hope for your sake you haven’t pinned your hopes on another last minute date with someone like Tyler Arnason or Oleg Saprykin, if that’s who you have your eye on I think we both know how this is going to end.
Anyways, maybe once you’ve gotten over another heart break in May we can go golfing together…it’s likely we’ll be hitting the greens come April 1 but even with a three to four week head start I’m sure you’ll beat us again. Seems you can’t get enough of winning when the stakes don't matter.
This work by M. Forbes is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Canada License.
