Garland isn't even better than Kerfoot at 5v5. Lol

Then why is everyone trying to move Kerfoot if he is so damn good?

The good thing about the truth is that it’s true regardless of if you believe it.

Keep living in your fantasy land if you like

They are a hard team to play against. They gave Tampa very little in round one but lost partially due to bad reffing and partially because Vasilevsky was a couple saves better than Campbell. When the Leafs are on their game which is becoming more and more consistent, they are plain dominant. They have the puck, keep the puck and cycle you down until they get great chances from the dangerous areas. Then on defence they swarm their net and keep it outside. If they get rid of the odd man rushes against (their only Achilles heal) they would be utterly dominant. What team most resembles the Leafs? Colorado. They are just took the next step sooner. To think TO doesn't have a blueprint that works is plain anti leaf bias because Colorado does the same stuff TO does and they just won the cup. And Tampa's hardest round prior to the final was round 1.

Then why is everyone trying to move Kerfoot if he is so damn good?

right? someone here said garland was better than nylander at 5v5!

The good thing about the truth is that it’s true regardless of if you believe it.

Keep living in your fantasy land if you like

He was last year

He was last year

Colorado and Tampa have similar make ups, Tampa was able to smother teams with team defense while Colorado smothered teams with their speed (which even came off their backend) and putting the puck on net.

Speed is the Leafs memo, so perhaps they are better suited for that style, their PP could have been better but their PK needs to be as good as it was last year or better.

The Leafs are going to need to come up with a playoff style that works for them, it's going to have to involve speed+defense and you always need scoring from depth. If Matthews and Marner are shutting down a teams top guys, they are probably not scoring themselves, so line 2 and 3 need to be able to score, and they do need a line 3 that can be a shutdown line too, Kampf will be a good piece.

Had they faced any other team in the first round they would have advanced. Any other team. Tampa obviously is still an absolute top team. I think they finally got some karma in the final go against them. It was too many men in the game 4 OT winner. But they also were handed a 5 on 3 in game 6 vs the Leafs down a goal in the 3rd and then in game 7 had a goal overturned in their favor with an absolute disaster interference call vs the Leafs. So it was bound to swing the other way eventually. They also apparently have major major injuries for most of their team apparently. A couple of bounces and less injuries and I bet Tampa wins their 3rd straight. TO was absolutely right there with them. No one else in the east was. TO is pretty much Colorado. To think they won't be able to do what they did is ridiculous.

No he wasn't he was just luckier. Every underlying stat showed Nylander's "terrible defence" was entirely goaltending. Nylander gets the puck up ice and it stays there when he's on the ice. However last season he just got scored on a bunch but the sv% when he was on the ice was ridiculously low. Funny how only using stats that suit your bias always seem to add up eh?

oh wow, 0.2 p/60 better in a single year with no context outside that! he must be amazing!

They had 7 guys against Islanders on the lone goal scored in game 7 in the conference finals, and 6 were very far from the board unlike that Colorado guy.

Teams need to get lucky to win the cup, but Toronto could have been better on their powerplay

The biggest difference with Colorado and Toronto is that Colorado has defenders who skate in with speed and shoot the puck often. Colorado shoots a ton in general, I'm pretty sure MacKinnon set the record for most shots in a playoffs, he was close before the last game. Toronto shoots more than Tampa does but less than Colorado. Colorado did face Smith and the memo on him is to shot from any typical low risk places, crazy how he was blocking everything except what AHL goalies are expected to save.

Last year at EV garland had:
A better isolated xG+/- per 60 of 0.282 (WN had 0.153)
A better isolated CF+/- per 60 of 5.52 (WN had 1.85)
A much better isolated G+/- per 60 of 0.321 (WN had -0.215)

garland also had:
Team mate relative xGF +\- per 60 of 0.48 (WN had 0, meaning he was perfectly average compared to teammates)

Team mate relative CF +\- per 60 of 6.03 (WN had -0.05)

Team mate relative GF +\- per 60 of 0.91 (WN had -0.31)


So yes, when you add context, such as score and venue adjustments, teammates, and isolated impacts, garland was better 5v5 than Nylander in that he won his minutes by a bigger margin than Nylander did (in some cases nylander lost his minutes compared to his team mates). Even when you account for Nylander’s horrendous goaltending he got, garland still had better corsi and xG numbers.

And yes, JaredofLondon, he also scored points more often as well. Thanks for bringing that up.

Shooting from everywhere doesn't really mean anything. Especially when the team defends really well. TO shoots from the dangerous areas more than anyone I believe which is why they score so many goals. Get the puck, keep the puck and take it to the slot. That's a recipe for success. Colorado definitely does more rushing than TO does but they also do everything else TO is great at as well. I think the recipe the Leafs are going for is a good one.

When you bend everything for your own rhetoric you mean. Keep Garland. Nylander is better, Kerfoot is just as good and TO has zero interest in adding cap for a lateral move, or even gaining 2 million for a step backwards (Nylander vs Garland). The elite 5 million dollar Garland machine can stay in Vancouver and score 50 points a year.

Garland isn't even better than Kerfoot at 5v5. Lol

right? someone here said garland was better than nylander at 5v5!

Last year at EV garland had:
A better isolated xG+/- per 60 of 0.282 (WN had 0.153)
A better isolated CF+/- per 60 of 5.52 (WN had 1.85)
A much better isolated G+/- per 60 of 0.321 (WN had -0.215)

garland also had:
Team mate relative xGF +\- per 60 of 0.48 (WN had 0, meaning he was perfectly average compared to teammates)

Team mate relative CF +\- per 60 of 6.03 (WN had -0.05)

Team mate relative GF +\- per 60 of 0.91 (WN had -0.31)


So yes, when you add context, such as score and venue adjustments, teammates, and isolated impacts, garland was better 5v5 than Nylander in that he won his minutes by a bigger margin than Nylander did (in some cases nylander lost his minutes compared to his team mates). Even when you account for Nylander’s horrendous goaltending he got, garland still had better corsi and xG numbers.

And yes, JaredofLondon, he also scored points more often as well. Thanks for bringing that up.

Love it

Good then let's just not talk about his anymore. Garland is a Vancouver problem. Benning signed a depth forward for 1.5 more than he should have. Now enjoy losing Boeser and Miller because your former GM wanted to spend big on plugs like OEL and Myers.

It's known that the Tavares-Nylander line wasn't great last year 5v5 they were pretty much even for a good stretch. That's going to factor into those stats. If you look at the Gaudreau-Lindholm-Tkachuk lines metrics they probably have some incredible stats last year since there were so amazing on 5v5.

If you are going to compare players though, you can't look at a single year.

Enjoy losing Matthews in a couple years because you can’t make it out of the 1st round because your GM signed/traded for overpaid players like Tavares, Muzzin, and Mrazek while letting a top goalie leave in FA

Garland has averaged more P/60 at 5v5 than Kerfoot every season he’s been in the league, despite playing with worse linemates. Garland has great advanced stats metrics. Garland just finished 28th in the league in 5v5 P/60. Stop being a blind homer for once

You are by far the biggest Homer/slash leaf hater on this site dude. Someone could post Matthews for Miller straight up and you would decline it and say Matthews is too flashy Miller is better.

Nylander is a point a game player making 2 million more than Garland who is a 40+50 point winger making 1.5 more than Kerfoot who is the same player. This isn't just a little upgrade, it's a massive upgrade. You're ridiculous