|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Nov 14, 2019 12:49:02 GMT -4
His 4th line plays roughly the same minutes as most 4th lines do..... the rest of your post is fair but that comment is simply not true and needs correction.. the 4th line guys are all averaging 9-10 minutes per night.... most teams 4th lines do the same I'm talking last season when his 4th line should have probably played the least in the league 5 on 5 due to the depth they had in their top 9. And without looking maybe they did but it feels like he just rolls 4 lines 5 on 5 every night from game 1 right down to 10 mins to go in a game 7. This season the 4th line should play more then last year because without Kadri (and Hyman until last night) the depth isn't quite the same. Kerfoot has been a bit of a disappointment for me...that trade in general is looking pretty bad because Babcock has no plans on playing Barrie on PP1 which makes one wonder why the trade was made in the first place. If the PP is on fire with Rielly and 4 forwards...I get it. But it hasn't been. So why hasn't Barrie seen an increased role in that area? I'm not going to be right on all my comments but how he deploys his team and then defends it is enough reason for Dubas to fire him almost by itself. Especially if the results aren't there. I don’t think trading Kadri was a bad strategy but getting back another offensive d-man instead of a guy that stabilize things was a mistake IMO, I mentioned it in the summer. Barrie is like Reilly but not as good defensively, if he isn’t running your PP, he loses a lot of value. As much as puck possession is important in today’s game, so is playing without the puck, and they have issues there on D, plus as many have said Bacbcock is simply not getting them to buy in to a real defensive system. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Nov 14, 2019 12:50:56 GMT -4
His 4th line plays roughly the same minutes as most 4th lines do..... the rest of your post is fair but that comment is simply not true and needs correction.. the 4th line guys are all averaging 9-10 minutes per night.... most teams 4th lines do the same I think he’s talking more about last season though, where they had Matthews/Tavares/Kadri.. who were all capable of playing 18-20 minutes a night and I’d argue probably should have been but yet Babcock insisted on sending Gauthier/Lindholm out there more often then necessary. In theory if you have those 3 guys down the middle, depending on how special teams is going, your 4th line C really only needs to be playing like 5 minutes a night at most. What a lot of coaches would do is have a #4 C that is basically a faceoff specialist and double shift one of the other 3 with 4th line wingers instead of 4 lines. Pittsburgh did it when they had Crosby-Malkin-Staal. |
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Nov 14, 2019 12:57:35 GMT -4
I'm talking last season when his 4th line should have probably played the least in the league 5 on 5 due to the depth they had in their top 9. And without looking maybe they did but it feels like he just rolls 4 lines 5 on 5 every night from game 1 right down to 10 mins to go in a game 7. This season the 4th line should play more then last year because without Kadri (and Hyman until last night) the depth isn't quite the same. Kerfoot has been a bit of a disappointment for me...that trade in general is looking pretty bad because Babcock has no plans on playing Barrie on PP1 which makes one wonder why the trade was made in the first place. If the PP is on fire with Rielly and 4 forwards...I get it. But it hasn't been. So why hasn't Barrie seen an increased role in that area? I'm not going to be right on all my comments but how he deploys his team and then defends it is enough reason for Dubas to fire him almost by itself. Especially if the results aren't there. I don’t think trading Kadri was a bad strategy but getting back another offensive d-man instead of a guy that stabilize things was a mistake IMO, I mentioned it in the summer. Barrie is like Reilly but not as good defensively, if he isn’t running your PP, he loses a lot of value. As much as puck possession is important in today’s game, so is playing without the puck, and they have issues there on D, plus as many have said Bacbcock is simply not getting them to buy in to a real defensive system. Agreed. Rielly is flexible and can play a PP2. But if I was a coach my PP2 would have Rielly and Tavares on it to try and spread out the depth onto 2 units so that my PP doesn't feel like a 1 minute PP where I score or else which is how it feels when you load it up. Barrie with Matthews, Marner, Johnsson/Kapanen and Nylander while Rielly with Muzzin, Tavares, Johnsson/Kapanen, Kerfoot, Spezza is the kind of mix i'd be looking for with my 2 units. Some guys can be changed depending on how they're playing any given night. And you still have your "big 5" option if you need a big goal in a close game. But bringing in Barrie and not playing him in situations like PP1 is just a waste of his skills. |
|
|
|
Post by scotiahockey on Nov 14, 2019 13:07:50 GMT -4
I think he’s talking more about last season though, where they had Matthews/Tavares/Kadri.. who were all capable of playing 18-20 minutes a night and I’d argue probably should have been but yet Babcock insisted on sending Gauthier/Lindholm out there more often then necessary. In theory if you have those 3 guys down the middle, depending on how special teams is going, your 4th line C really only needs to be playing like 5 minutes a night at most. What a lot of coaches would do is have a #4 C that is basically a faceoff specialist and double shift one of the other 3 with 4th line wingers instead of 4 lines. Pittsburgh did it when they had Crosby-Malkin-Staal. Exactly, that’s what you’d think would happen but that wasn’t how we saw it play out. Which to me is a waste of being so deep down the middle. |
|
|
|
Post by scotiahockey on Nov 14, 2019 13:10:12 GMT -4
I don’t think trading Kadri was a bad strategy but getting back another offensive d-man instead of a guy that stabilize things was a mistake IMO, I mentioned it in the summer. Barrie is like Reilly but not as good defensively, if he isn’t running your PP, he loses a lot of value. As much as puck possession is important in today’s game, so is playing without the puck, and they have issues there on D, plus as many have said Bacbcock is simply not getting them to buy in to a real defensive system. Agreed. Rielly is flexible and can play a PP2. But if I was a coach my PP2 would have Rielly and Tavares on it to try and spread out the depth onto 2 units so that my PP doesn't feel like a 1 minute PP where I score or else which is how it feels when you load it up. Barrie with Matthews, Marner, Johnsson/Kapanen and Nylander while Rielly with Muzzin, Tavares, Johnsson/Kapanen, Kerfoot, Spezza is the kind of mix i'd be looking for with my 2 units. Some guys can be changed depending on how they're playing any given night. And you still have your "big 5" option if you need a big goal in a close game. But bringing in Barrie and not playing him in situations like PP1 is just a waste of his skills. I’d like to see more flexibility with how he coaches too, if something isn’t clicking don’t be afraid to change it up. Unfortunately, we see all too often that he won’t do that and sticks to his guys no matter what.. which to some degree I respect but when you have guys that are “feeling it” on that particular night, you shouldn’t be afraid to play them more. A couple of weeks ago, Nylander had a hell of a game and was looking real dangerous but when the goalie was pulled to try and go for the GTG, he was stapled to the bench. It’s clear how Babcock wants to play and coach but the players he has just aren’t geared to play that way. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Nov 14, 2019 14:33:01 GMT -4
Right now, Babcock is coming across as a guy whose past success has gone to his head ... seems rather egotistical. Does not seem willing to adapt to his personnel, or perhaps even to evolutions in the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Nov 14, 2019 14:45:06 GMT -4
Right now, Babcock is coming across as a guy whose past success has gone to his head ... seems rather egotistical. Does not seem willing to adapt to his personnel, or perhaps even to evolutions in the game. Yeah almost seems like he wants to appear to “not give in to the media” and make changes. |
|
|
|
Post by cb67 on Nov 15, 2019 23:24:18 GMT -4
This team is a tire fire right now.
I wonder how much longer this goes on before there's a shake up of some sort.
|
|
|
|
Post by eagleeye on Nov 18, 2019 11:35:34 GMT -4
coach goes after xmass
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Nov 18, 2019 12:37:38 GMT -4
I don’t think he has that much rope left, if they have a bad road trip he may not survive. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Nov 20, 2019 8:49:39 GMT -4
7th loss in a row for Toronto, how much rope does Babcock have?
|
|
|
|
Post by Score on Nov 20, 2019 10:28:57 GMT -4
7th loss in a row for Toronto, how much rope does Babcock have? Time for Dubas to bring up his boy, Keefe. |
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Nov 20, 2019 14:54:34 GMT -4
7th loss in a row for Toronto, how much rope does Babcock have? 1) Babcock is a good coach 2) All coaches have a shelf life I believe both of the above are true statements. For whatever reason, Babcock's message is not getting through to the Leafs. Has he become too stubborn in his ways? Part of coaching is being able to adapt to changing circumstances - what worked for you last time might not work next time. Is he having a hard time connecting with a younger generation of players? It is often said that today's kids are being coddled from a young age - perhaps the young Leafs stars do not appreciate his tough love. Is he a victim of poor roster construction? Likely to some extent - it is not his fault that the team has no cap space left to find a decent backup goalie, or that choosing to tie up a large percentage of cap money on a handful of forwards has left the roster lacking in experience and quality depth in other areas. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Nov 20, 2019 15:14:06 GMT -4
7th loss in a row for Toronto, how much rope does Babcock have? 1) Babcock is a good coach 2) All coaches have a shelf life I believe both of the above are true statements. For whatever reason, Babcock's message is not getting through to the Leafs. Has he become too stubborn in his ways? Part of coaching is being able to adapt to changing circumstances - what worked for you last time might not work next time. Is he having a hard time connecting with a younger generation of players? It is often said that today's kids are being coddled from a young age - perhaps the young Leafs stars do not appreciate his tough love. Is he a victim of poor roster construction? Likely to some extent - it is not his fault that the team has no cap space left to find a decent backup goalie, or that choosing to tie up a large percentage of cap money on a handful of forwards has left the roster lacking in experience and quality depth in other areas. I don’t necessarily think he is a bad coach, but I don’t think he is as good as his reputation. He won with powerhouse teams and since he’s been with Toronto if anything he has underachieved. I also see a bit of arrogance with him and unwillingness to change and adapt. |
|
|
|
Post by bois on Nov 20, 2019 15:22:43 GMT -4
7th loss in a row for Toronto, how much rope does Babcock have? 1) Babcock is a good coach 2) All coaches have a shelf life I believe both of the above are true statements. For whatever reason, Babcock's message is not getting through to the Leafs. Has he become too stubborn in his ways? Part of coaching is being able to adapt to changing circumstances - what worked for you last time might not work next time. Is he having a hard time connecting with a younger generation of players? It is often said that today's kids are being coddled from a young age - perhaps the young Leafs stars do not appreciate his tough love. Is he a victim of poor roster construction? Likely to some extent - it is not his fault that the team has no cap space left to find a decent backup goalie, or that choosing to tie up a large percentage of cap money on a handful of forwards has left the roster lacking in experience and quality depth in other areas. no but it is his fault he refuses to waiver from the Anderson cant start back to backs and he must always start game one i also don't think the roster is lacking at all in experience or depth.... you can certainly question the composition of the roster and the heavy reliance on pure skill and speed at the expense of any sort of grinding physical style of play...... but it's not because it's full of rookies or non NHL calibre players |
|
