Hey....I'm a Leaf fan. I think they are pretty good.

I just find the whole wore the B's down thing....amusing.
- stormeyAlterEgo

indeed, but they were pretty impressive against the Bruins and dictated the play for large parts of the series.

Most teams will do that at one point or another against superior opposition. I guess the difference between the elite teams and the middle of the pack is how much you can take advantage of the periods where you're controlling the flow.

i thought your point was specifically about Colton Orr and Fraser McClaren?
- Fountain-San

habs fans brought them up and insinuated I said all sorts of things to counter my arguments

Yes.....yet somehow they managed to beat the Rangers in 5 and sweep the Pens.

WORN DOWN!!!
- stormeyAlterEgo

Forget advanced stats and lets talk basic stats.

The Leafs are 3-0 and they have a winning record last year.

End.
- twiztedmike

the whole point of advanced stats is having a large enough sample size to make them accurate. and they are not meant to be the end all be all of evaluating hockey teams. obviously, you can have poopty advanced stats and be a good team and vice versa. but the better you are in these areas, the more likely it is that you're a good team. that's it. that's the whole thing. just because the stats contradicted Toronto's winning percentage last year, doesn't make them useless.

Whatever man my point was that the Leafs were good enough to be competing against Boston and they put up a hell of a fight and, using Boston as a measuring stick for a successful team, I am saying that the Leafs are a competitive team and its no longer funny to laugh at the words Leafs and playoffs next to each other.

The fact that the Pens and Rangers went down to Boston much faster and easier than the Leafs just adds to my point that the Leafs were a good team.
- twiztedmike

Nice counter argument.

the whole point of advanced stats is having a large enough sample size to make them accurate. and they are not meant to be the end all be all of evaluating hockey teams. obviously, you can have poopty advanced stats and be a good team and vice versa. but the better you are in these areas, the more likely it is that you're a good team. that's it. that's the whole thing. just because the stats contradicted Toronto's winning percentage last year, doesn't make them useless.
- DoubleDown

I think hockey is a game of ebb and flow so stats are not as meaningful as they would be in say baseball which is more of a situational game.

the whole point of advanced stats is having a large enough sample size to make them accurate. and they are not meant to be the end all be all of evaluating hockey teams. obviously, you can have poopty advanced stats and be a good team and vice versa. but the better you are in these areas, the more likely it is that you're a good team. that's it. that's the whole thing. just because the stats contradicted Toronto's winning percentage last year, doesn't make them useless.
- DoubleDown

The leafs are not useless.

Toronto is.

the whole point of advanced stats is having a large enough sample size to make them accurate. and they are not meant to be the end all be all of evaluating hockey teams. obviously, you can have poopty advanced stats and be a good team and vice versa. but the better you are in these areas, the more likely it is that you're a good team. that's it. that's the whole thing. just because the stats contradicted Toronto's winning percentage last year, doesn't make them useless.
- DoubleDown

Ignoring basic stats like W-L and G-A-P and looking at advanced stats instead and calling a team bad is (frank)ing laughable

No one is saying advanced stats don't have merit (at least I'm not), but to weigh them and act like they are the holy grail of stats that influence outcome is a joke.

Nice counter argument.
- Scabeh

You learn that one in law school. I could teach you one day.

Watched all the games.

Boston was so worn out that they beat the rangers in 5 games and pittsburgh in 4 games.

Chara had 15 pts in 22 payoff games.

Completely destroyed physically.
- Pecafan Fan

I think hockey is a game of ebb and flow so stats are not as meaningful as they would be in say baseball which is more of a situational game.
- dt99999

Definitely agree.

I think hockey is a game of ebb and flow so stats are not as meaningful as they would be in say baseball which is more of a situational game.
- dt99999

I stopped reading there.

Whatever man my point was that the Leafs were good enough to be competing against Boston and they put up a hell of a fight and, using Boston as a measuring stick for a successful team, I am saying that the Leafs are a competitive team and its no longer funny to laugh at the words Leafs and playoffs next to each other.

The fact that the Pens and Rangers went down to Boston much faster and easier than the Leafs just adds to my point that the Leafs were a good team.
- twiztedmike

it really means nothing at all. again, i point to the 2011 Habs. took Boston to OT of game 7. Boston went on to sweep Philly and then won the Cup. the next season, Montreal finished dead last. you're reading way too much in to small sample sizes. the Leafs are a decent team, but they proved nothing against Boston.

it really means nothing at all. again, i point to the 2011 Habs. took Boston to OT of game 7. Boston went on to sweep Philly and then won the Cup. the next season, Montreal finished dead last. you're reading way too much in to small sample sizes. the Leafs are a decent team, but they proved nothing against Boston.
- DoubleDown

Merci.

it really means nothing at all. again, i point to the 2011 Habs. took Boston to OT of game 7. Boston went on to sweep Philly and then won the Cup. the next season, Montreal finished dead last. you're reading way too much in to small sample sizes. the Leafs are a decent team, but they proved nothing against Boston.
- DoubleDown

Colton Orr destroyed Chara.

Ignoring basic stats like W-L and G-A-P and looking at advanced stats instead and calling a team bad is (frank)ing laughable

No one is saying advanced stats don't have merit (at least I'm not), but to weigh them and act like they are the holy grail of stats that influence outcome is a joke.
- twiztedmike

no one says this. don't know where you guys get it.

it really means nothing at all. again, i point to the 2011 Habs. took Boston to OT of game 7. Boston went on to sweep Philly and then won the Cup. the next season, Montreal finished dead last. you're reading way too much in to small sample sizes. the Leafs are a decent team, but they proved nothing against Boston.
- DoubleDown

it really means nothing at all. again, i point to the 2011 Habs. took Boston to OT of game 7. Boston went on to sweep Philly and then won the Cup. the next season, Montreal finished dead last. you're reading way too much in to small sample sizes. the Leafs are a decent team, but they proved nothing against Boston.
- DoubleDown

I think it means a lot. Before the series, Boston dominated the Leafs in the regular season. They shut Phil Kessel out. Tyler Seguin was eating the Leafs alive. The Leafs goaltending got raped. Boston rolled 4 lines that outmatched the Leafs' other four.

But once that series started the gap wasn't so large.

I stopped reading there.
- habs12

and I just put a lock on the compost bin.

Merci.
- Pecafan Fan

Montreal beat Washington and Pittsburgh in 2010. did anyone really believe that they were anywhere near as good as those teams?

Montreal beat Washington and Pittsburgh in 2010. did anyone really believe that they were anywhere near as good as those teams?
- DoubleDown

fredobface.

and I just put a lock on the compost bin.
- dt99999

FFS Dan. I have a family to feed.

Montreal beat Washington and Pittsburgh in 2010. did anyone really believe that they were anywhere near as good as those teams?
- DoubleDown

- Fredobbface

Montreal beat Washington and Pittsburgh in 2010. did anyone really believe that they were anywhere near as good as those teams?
- DoubleDown

Montreal that year was the definition of "make it to the playoffs and anything can happen".