detectColorScheme();
Edit Avatar
  • png, jpeg
  • Recommended minimum size 800px by 800px
  • Maximum size: 1MB
Drag image to reposition
Save
Cancel

JaredOfLondon

Member Since
May 25, 2019
Favourite Team
Toronto Maple Leafs
Forum Posts
7857
Posts per Day
9.78
Forum Threads
6
Forum: Armchair-GM17 hours ago
Forum: Armchair-GM18 hours ago
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Juiceman</b></div><div>Again, points done mean anything for a defensive first player. We are going to pay Dickinson to shut down other teams lines. You don’t understand rolls. You have 4 very good point producers and a bunch of other random role players. Garland is by no means known to be a point producer. He is known to be a scrappy winger with extreme work ethic and playmaking ability. 25 is also not even that old. You could make the case and say Kaprizov is not that good cause he only has one season under his belt at 25. I also never said that Marner was bad defensively so I don’t know what that’s about. Pettersson Miller Horvat Hoglander Garland and Boeser all have good defensive awareness and defensive game. I will do as another person has said and that is to let the play do the talking. If the Leafs can win a round this next year then I don’t know what to say…</div></div>

Points have everything to do with how good a player is when you are considering everything a player does. If a guy is better defensively AND scores significantly more, he is a much better player. Danault is a much better player than Dickinson, and a guy who barely scores but is good defensively is a 4th liner.
And Garland is 100% known as a point producer, that's literally his entire thing, he may be scrappy or whatever, but people like him because he scored on a bad team while getting sweatheart zone starts and favourable sheltering. He's a nice little complementary piece.
Weird how you bring Karpitzov into the situation because that's a terrible comparison considering he only has one NHL season and he some how managed to get 11 more points in it than Garland ever has, on top of his history of producing well in the KHL.
And you said points werent everything, so i pointed out how no, they were not. In fact the leafs also have more than points going for their core.

And the Leafs might be trying to win a round, but the canucks will be trying to stay ahead of the sharks and ducks for dead last in the pacific
Forum: Armchair-GM18 hours ago
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Wqrrior</b></div><div>Put it this way, would you rather have Campbell in your net, or Demko?

We know Campbell had a pretty darn good team in front of him, and although good, it was inflated by that winning streak that you tried to argue inflated Demkos game.

Vancouver was hot trash absolutely everywhere OTHER than the net last year. Minimal defensive help, and certainly no offensive help - we were always stuck in our own zone. Demko stole multiple games that should have been the other team's win. Our success almost entirely relied on him being in that net.

So yes, if you want to pick and choose needles out of haystacks to back your claim, go ahead. It only takes logic to know which goaltender is better.</div></div>

I'd be about the same with either of them for a variety of reasons, that doesnt change the fact that by all the numbers the Leafs had better goaltending last year. And the streak i was talking about wasnt wins, it was a streak of good play that seems to have cemented Demko as the next Price or whatever in lots of minds. Is he a good goalie? Maybe, but he needs to do more than a couple hot streaks over 18 months to cement that. That's why the Leafs brought Mrazek in, he has a longer track record of being a good goalie in case Campbell turns into a pumpkin and the Canucks dont have that back up in case Demko isnt that guy.
As far as using the defensive team in front of them, that doesnt effect the numbers. Goalies stop the same percentage of shots no matter the team in front of them, that's why we dont use GAA or wins to evaluate goalies, because they factor in the team. SV% HDSV% and GSAA remove the team in front of them and focus on how good a job the goalie does of stopping the shots.
these arnt needles, they are cold hard stats and if you want to pretend that your guy is better because of some reason that cant be sussed out from your own expectations, that's on you/
Forum: Armchair-GM18 hours ago
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Juiceman</b></div><div>How did Demko have a 8.09GSAA and Campbell have a 7.82…
I think your numbers are wrong.

You are clearly in denial and to call a top defensive center a fourth liner is sad. Is Danault a fourth line center? They are basically similar players… Pettersson was injured for 30 games this season. He is in the same league as Matthews when he is healthy and will cost about 4 million cheaper. Garland is not known for his poor producer. You can’t use points for everything which I guess makes sense you think that as a Leafs fan. The only thing bad about the Canucks is the defense and once they clears up, they will have a much better time in the playoffs than the no depth leafs…</div></div>

Danault is one of the best defensive players in the league, and his worst offensive season is better than Dickinson's best. He's a much better player than Dickinson. So yes, a guy who can only defend and only has one season with a positive Corsi Rel is not as good as him, and by proxy not similar to him.
And again, Pettersson is not in matthews league, he isnt. Matthews is just that good and you're gonna have to deal with it. Garland is know to be a point producer and yet he still hasnt produced 40 of them or a season where his pace was above a 2nd liner. He's 25 now, not 21, he is what he is.
Oh and if you want to talk about things other than points, all 4 of the leafs big 4 are, at worst, good defensive players. Marner in particular is a very good PK guy on top of being a top play maker in the game who can still score 20 goals.
Forum: Armchair-GM18 hours ago
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Juiceman</b></div><div>I run? Ok bud don’t talk to me about 1 good run because that is all Campbell had last year in an even more embarrassing North Division. Demko is and elite goalie and Campbell is at most a fringe starter…. If you bother to look at analytics, Demko has one of the highest GSAA on a terrible Canucks team. If you actually think that Campbell is better than Demko then I don’t know what to tell you. Vancouver has way more depth than the Leafs. Pettersson is at Matthews level. He will become a top 5 center in the league. Boeser and Miller are also great. Tavares is gonna start declining and Boeser is gonna hit his prime soon. Garland is extremely underrated and was on pace for 60 points this season. Hoglander and Podkolzin are better than any of your young players in your middle six. Dickinson is one of the best defensive centers in the entire league. You really mean to tell me that the Leafs forwards depth is better. All jokes man you must not know a lot about other teams…</div></div>

How wonderful you brought up GSAA! Demko did do pretty good, he was 9th in the league. One thing you shoulda checked when you looked that up, however, was that 7th and 8th were Campbell and Mrazek. Yeah, I bothered to look at analytics. So yes, Campbell and Mrazek were better than Demko, one in the same division and one in another 'harder' division or whatever garbage north narrative you wanna try to spin there.
Pettersson is not at Matthews level. He's very good, but he's not, and to think otherwise is hilarious. Matthews leads the league in every single goalscoring metric that exists except one since he entered the league. And that is just raw totals because Ovie has 6 more goals in 20 more games played.
Boeser and Miller are good, but they're about as good as Nylander. Garland is also good, but a 60 point pace at 25 years old isnt exactly eye popping when you realise that Nylander did that in his 1st full NHL season at 5 years younger. Hoglander and Podkolzin are unproven kids who may or may not be good. And a defensive 4th line C counts as depth now? You're really scraping the bottom of the barrel here.
Yes, i mean to tell you that the canucks are bad and not even close to the leafs especially at forward.
Forum: Armchair-GM19 hours ago
Forum: Armchair-GM19 hours ago
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Juiceman</b></div><div>We’ve never won a cup yet our cup drought is still shorter than yours 💀 💀 💀…. You literally went out of your way to compare the Leafs to Tampa by saying Tampa lost depth and no you’re calling them the best team in the league now…. Your argument lacks consistency bud. Teams have every right to make fun of a team that has 40 million dollar core 4 group and has yet to win any rounds since 2004… Vancouver Canucks have a better forward group than Toronto. Our defense sucks but that doesn’t matter. We have done more in the last 2 years that the Leafs have failed to do since 04 and that is to win a round. How exactly are we being driven to the ground. Our forward group has depth unlike the Leafs and we have a very good shot at the playoffs….</div></div>

no, never is longer than any set period of years.
And i did compare them to the leafs in the way that they lost an entire line, a very important one and yet no one seems concerned about their depth, then you took them being still better as the leafs as some sort of victory worth throwing around. So I simply pointed out that if that was the only point you were able to successfully make, then you havent made much of a point.
And if you think the vancouver canucks have a better forward group than the leafs, i dont know what to tell you. Vancouver is nowhere near as good as the leafs at any position, and the only way vancouver makes the playoffs is because they are in a laughably terrible division, one at which they are a bottom 3 team in.
Forum: Armchair-GM19 hours ago