Dont forget, Auston Matthews gets to play with a really good player also. (Nylander)
- senstroll

close but no cigar

Can't say the same about half the people here though, just look at this past page.











Repeated insults.
- Unholy_Goalie

and yet here you are

*sigh*

Because to be a contender you have to prove you are a contender. A team like Chicago has won multiple Cups and their core players are all still there. They had terrible goaltending because Crawford was injured. But they're a contender because they've proven they can win and/or contend. Same goes with the Penguins, the Capitals and the Kings. The Lightning, the Predators and the Jets have all gone deep in the playoffs multiple times.

The Leafs have not proven anything yet. They could finish #1 in the standings next year and if they lose in the 1st round, what have they done? So until they can prove it, you can't pencil them in as a top five contender. The Leafs are a playoff team, of that we can all be pretty sure but after that, whether or not they can compete in the playoffs, that needs to be proven before we can say they are a legit contender or not.
- Unholy_Goalie

being favored to win the cup before the year starts = contender

but who cares.

Wendel Clark 🥇

being favored to win the cup before the year starts = contender

but who cares.
- Garnie

That's a poopty way to define a contender when you consider Vegas had terrible odds to win the Cup and yet there they were in the Finals.

Wendel Clark 🥇
- mr.sir

Would love one of those on the team right now. And a Gary Roberts.

Because to be a contender you have to prove you are a contender. A team like Chicago has won multiple Cups and their core players are all still there. They had terrible goaltending because Crawford was injured. But they're a contender because they've proven they can win and/or contend. Same goes with the Penguins, the Capitals and the Kings. The Lightning, the Predators and the Jets have all gone deep in the playoffs multiple times.

The Leafs have not proven anything yet. They could finish #1 in the standings next year and if they lose in the 1st round, what have they done? So until they can prove it, you can't pencil them in as a top five contender. The Leafs are a playoff team, of that we can all be pretty sure but after that, whether or not they can compete in the playoffs, that needs to be proven before we can say they are a legit contender or not.
- Unholy_Goalie

If Tavares had signed in Tampa, you'd be calling them the cup favorite, whether you felt they were already the favorite before acquiring him or not. Even though JT had never played a game for them yet, you'd likely upgrade their chances to win simply because it was obvious they'd gotten better.

You can absolutely evaluate and upgrade how you think of a team based on their moves during the offseason before they actually "prove" anything. If you see a team make good moves to improve, then you say, "gee, they've improved", you don't say, "well I'm not sure they're better yet, we'd better wait to see them prove it the next season".

For that matter, what is your exact criteria for when a team proves they're a contender? Tampa hasn't won a cup yet with this current team. Are they automatically a contender because they led the conference last year? Is that a qualifier? Have they won the presidents trophy recently? Is it cause they made it a few rounds this year? What exact credentials are you actually basing your contender status on?

Once we all know, we can happily remind you once the Leafs fulfill those criteria.

If Tavares had signed in Tampa, you'd be calling them the cup favorite, whether you felt they were already the favorite before acquiring him or not. Even though JT had never played a game for them yet, you'd likely upgrade their chances to win simply because it was obvious they'd gotten better.
- Thecakeisalie

Yes because that team went to the Cup Finals not too long ago. Last year they went to the Conference Finals and were 1 game away from beating the Capitals. This year, they have lost nobody. So adding Tavares is just a pure addition onto an already stacked team that has proven they can win series and go deep in the playoffs.

The Leafs have potential but they have proven (frank) all. They lost a bunch of goals that Tavares will be replacing, not adding to. The Leafs also have a poop blueline and an overworked goalie who shat himself in game 7, Tampa Bay has a Norris winner and a Vezina candidate.

There are clear differences.

You can absolutely evaluate and upgrade how you think of a team based on their moves during the offseason before they actually "prove" anything. If you see a team make good moves to improve, then you say, "gee, they've improved", you don't say, "well I'm not sure they're better yet, we'd better wait to see them prove it the next season".

I already said, yes, odds are, if they play Boston again, Tavares makes the difference and the Leafs beat the Bruins. But then they have to play and beat the Lightning. Odds of that are still long and the Leafs would likely be out in the 2nd round. Not until they prove otherwise and Tampa Bay has proven it before, the Leafs haven't.

Being a contender in the Atlantic means you have to beat Tampa Bay. It doesn't matter that you're better than everybody in the East because if you can't get past Tampa Bay in the 2nd round, you aren't going anywhere. It's like Washington always losing in the 2nd round to Pittsburgh. With the 1 vs. 8 format, it would be a different story but it's not like that anymore.

For that matter, what is your exact criteria for when a team proves they're a contender? Tampa hasn't won a cup yet with this current team. Are they automatically a contender because they led the conference last year? Is that a qualifier? Have they won the presidents trophy recently? Is it cause they made it a few rounds this year? What exact credentials are you actually basing your contender status on?

Once we all know, we can happily remind you once the Leafs fulfill those criteria.

Tampa Bay has done many things to prove they're a contender. They have legit star players on their team that have proven they can lead the league in goals, points, both individually and as a team. Norris winner on the blueline, Vezina candidate in net. They went to the Cup Finals with a solid number of guys still on the team. They won the division and haven't lost anybody on the roster and still looking to add to it. All of this is more than the Leafs have shown, top to bottom.

and yet here you are

*sigh*
- Garnie

Of all the things I’ve said, he quotes that?

Yes because that team went to the Cup Finals not too long ago. Last year they went to the Conference Finals and were 1 game away from beating the Capitals. This year, they have lost nobody. So adding Tavares is just a pure addition onto an already stacked team that has proven they can win series and go deep in the playoffs.
- Unholy_Goalie

You totally missed my point.

The Leafs have potential but they have proven (frank) all. They lost a bunch of goals that Tavares will be replacing, not adding to. The Leafs also have a poop blueline and an overworked goalie who shat himself in game 7, Tampa Bay has a Norris winner and a Vezina candidate.

There are clear differences.
- Unholy_Goalie

You are once again, kind of missing my point. You said before that "to be a contender you have to prove you are a contender", and I was pointing out that since we are intelligent individuals (perhaps I'm being overly optimistic about the people that frequent hockeybuzz here lol) when we see a team make smart moves we can absolutely reevaluate where they stand, and thus declare them contenders without them actually having to play and "prove" anything.

If you want to simply argue you don't think Tavares is enough to make the Leafs contenders, that's cool. My point was that if they improve the roster enough, we should be able to consider them contenders without needing to see them actually win the cup first or even go to the cup finals.

Hockey analysts are often idiots, and wrong, but give them credit, they don't wait until a team makes the finals before saying they are a contender and just might win this year.

I already said, yes, odds are, if they play Boston again, Tavares makes the difference and the Leafs beat the Bruins. But then they have to play and beat the Lightning. Odds of that are still long and the Leafs would likely be out in the 2nd round. Not until they prove otherwise and Tampa Bay has proven it before, the Leafs haven't.



Tampa Bay has done many things to prove they're a contender. They have legit star players on their team that have proven they can lead the league in goals, points, both individually and as a team. Norris winner on the blueline, Vezina candidate in net. They went to the Cup Finals with a solid number of guys still on the team. They won the division and haven't lost anybody on the roster and still looking to add to it. All of this is more than the Leafs have shown, top to bottom.
- Unholy_Goalie

Yeah, Tampa are definitely contenders, I was mentioning them mainly because they were in on Tavares and I know you already thought them a good team before getting him. The point was simply we'd all evaluate them to be even better if they'd gotten JT, without having to watch them play the games and prove anything.

Once again though, I was wondering what your actual qualifications for a contender are? Do you have something in mind, or do you just make it up as you go, while arguing with other Leafs fans?

It'd be nice to know what your qualifiers are, so if the Leafs manage those qualifiers, I can refer to them and remind you, in case you move the goalpost after next season.

You totally missed my point.
- Thecakeisalie

No I didn't. If anything, you missed mine.

You said Tampa Bay, if they added Tavares, would automatically be a contender in my eyes. And that's true but that's because they didn't lose almost 50 goals and then try to replace them with Tavares. The Leafs lost goals and replaced them. Tampa Bay would simply be adding to their already stacked team, not to mention the superior goalie and blueline.

You are once again, kind of missing my point. You said before that "to be a contender you have to prove you are a contender", and I was pointing out that since we are intelligent individuals (perhaps I'm being overly optimistic about the people that frequent hockeybuzz here lol) when we see a team make smart moves we can absolutely reevaluate where they stand, and thus declare them contenders without them actually having to play and "prove" anything.

If you want to simply argue you don't think Tavares is enough to make the Leafs contenders, that's cool. My point was that if they improve the roster enough, we should be able to consider them contenders without needing to see them actually win the cup first or even go to the cup finals.

Hockey analysts are often idiots, and wrong, but give them credit, they don't wait until a team makes the finals before saying they are a contender and just might win this year.

Again, the Leafs signed Tavares to replace other players. The Leafs also have holes in their lineup, like on the blueline. They overachieved in the points standings considering Bozak and JVR won them 5 shootouts. Tavares won 1 for the Islanders. These are all factors that may cause the Leafs to lose points compared to last year. And they've done little to nothing to improve the blueline either.

They'll probably still finish 2nd or 3rd and play Boston again and that's where they'll probably be able to beat Boston. But to say they've surpassed Tampa Bay just because they signed Tavares is being overly optimistic. Tampa Bay has still proven to be a powerhouse and if they add Karlsson, it shouldn't even be a question.

Yeah, Tampa are definitely contenders, I was mentioning them mainly because they were in on Tavares and I know you already thought them a good team before getting him. The point was simply we'd all evaluate them to be even better if they'd gotten JT, without having to watch them play the games and prove anything.

Same thing over and over again. If Tampa Bay added Tavares, they'd be adding him without losing anything. The Leafs lost JVR and Bozak who combined for 47 goals and 5 SO wins. Tavares replaces them, he doesn't add to them the way he would have added to Tampa Bay who would have exactly the same roster plus Tavares. It makes a huge difference.

Once again though, I was wondering what your actual qualifications for a contender are? Do you have something in mind, or do you just make it up as you go, while arguing with other Leafs fans?

I listed some of them before; Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh, Washington, Nashville, Winnipeg, Vegas, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Jose, Anaheim. Maybe even Edmonton considering McDavid is arguably the best player in the NHL now and can carry his team further than they deserve on his back.

Cup winners, Cup Finalists, Conference Finalists, 1st place teams, (all of these considering the core of the team is still there and in prime years) in addition to leading goal scorers, leading point producers, Norris winners, Vezina winners etc. The Leafs have none of these things. They have players who have the potential to get these things but they haven't actually proven they can yet. It's hard to logically pencil them in ahead of other teams and say they're definitely a top 5 team and a contender when clearly there are other teams who have better cases to be considered ahead of them. Look how good Edmonton looked last year and look at them this year. And they have McDavid and it still happened.

It'd be nice to know what your qualifiers are, so if the Leafs manage those qualifiers, I can refer to them and remind you, in case you move the goalpost after next season.

Cute of you to make assumptions but if the Leafs have guys who lead the league in goals, points, come in 1st in the division, the league, go to the Conference Finals or further, yeah, we can start talking about them being legit contenders. Otherwise, for now, they're a playoff team with a lot of scoring potential, a weak blueline and an overworked goalie who may or may not wear out or buckle under playoff pressure.

No I didn't. If anything, you missed mine.

You said Tampa Bay, if they added Tavares, would automatically be a contender in my eyes. And that's true but that's because they didn't lose almost 50 goals and then try to replace them with Tavares. The Leafs lost goals and replaced them. Tampa Bay would simply be adding to their already stacked team, not to mention the superior goalie and blueline.



Again, the Leafs signed Tavares to replace other players. The Leafs also have holes in their lineup, like on the blueline. They overachieved in the points standings considering Bozak and JVR won them 5 shootouts. Tavares won 1 for the Islanders. These are all factors that may cause the Leafs to lose points compared to last year. And they've done little to nothing to improve the blueline either.

They'll probably still finish 2nd or 3rd and play Boston again and that's where they'll probably be able to beat Boston. But to say they've surpassed Tampa Bay just because they signed Tavares is being overly optimistic. Tampa Bay has still proven to be a powerhouse and if they add Karlsson, it shouldn't even be a question.



Same thing over and over again. If Tampa Bay added Tavares, they'd be adding him without losing anything. The Leafs lost JVR and Bozak who combined for 47 goals and 5 SO wins. Tavares replaces them, he doesn't add to them the way he would have added to Tampa Bay who would have exactly the same roster plus Tavares. It makes a huge difference.



I listed some of them before; Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh, Washington, Nashville, Winnipeg, Vegas, Chicago, Los Angeles, San Jose, Anaheim.

Cup winners, Cup Finalists, Conference Finalists, 1st place teams, (all of these considering the core of the team is still there and in prime years) in addition to leading goal scorers, leading point producers, Norris winners, Vezina winners etc. The Leafs have none of these things. They have players who have the potential to get these things but they haven't actually proven they can yet. It's hard to logically pencil them in ahead of other teams and say they're definitely as top 5 team and a contender when clearly there are other teams who have better cases to be considered ahead of them.



Cute of you to make assumptions but if the Leafs have guys who lead the league in goals, points, come in 1st in the division, the league, go to the Conference Finals or further, yeah, we can start talking about them being legit contenders. Otherwise, for now, they're a playoff team with a lot of scoring potential, a weak blueline and an overworked goalie who may or may not wear out or buckle under playoff pressure.
- Unholy_Goalie

It's like talking to a wall, you still don't get my point. No, you really don't, UG.
Forget we're even talking about the Leafs or Tampa.
All I was saying was you can evaluate and alter your opinion about teams that make moves, without having to see them actually play and prove anything. That's it. You don't need to watch them play to judge if they are better, or hell, have even reached contender status.

have guys who lead the league in goals, points, come in 1st in the division, the league, go to the Conference Finals or further

If that's your criteria for a contender, then you'd only have 1 or two each year. Kinda ridiculous. More teams than that have a legit shot at winning.

It's like talking to a wall, you still don't get my point. No, you really don't, UG.
Forget we're even talking about the Leafs or Tampa.
All I was saying was you can evaluate and alter your opinion about teams that make moves, without having to see them actually play and prove anything. That's it. You don't need to watch them play to judge if they are better, or hell, have even reached contender status.
- Thecakeisalie

You're talking about only evaluating the additions and I'm telling you the subtractions matter too. Yes, the Leafs made additions but they also had subtractions. Tampa Bay didn't have subtractions. That's why Tavares going to Tampa Bay makes them legit contenders more so than they already proved they are and why Tavares on the Leafs is an improvement but how much of an improvement is unknown considering they did lose a pair of guys who can be directly linked to goals and points the team earned. It would be nice if hockey had an accurate WAR system so you could at least guess how many wins they lost and added but the rookies would be another unknown that couldn't be accounted for using the same metric.

And like I said about Edmonton, yes, they have McDavid and he can carry the whole team to 100+ point season and into the 2nd round of the playoffs but they also fell flat on their face this year, even with his performance. It goes to show that the Leafs being a 100+ point team last year could still have them regressing a bit this year considering how young they still are. It's not a shameful thing, it's just part of the process because progress isn't usually linear.

That's not to say the Leafs are going to tank this year, but finishing with 100 points instead of 105 or something like that isn't out of the question either.

If that's your criteria for a contender, then you'd only have 1 or two each year. Kinda ridiculous. More teams than that have a legit shot at winning.

The list of actual contenders is (and should be) pretty short. It's like the word "generational" that gets thrown around a lot. If every 2nd player is a generational talent, it diminishes the word. The same with contenders.

Every year, 16 out of 31 (soon to be 32) teams make the playoffs. That's almost half the league. Of those 16 teams, roughly half of them are pretenders. A couple were lucky to make it and get bounced in the 1st round immediately. A couple others are stuck in tough divisions and get bounced early. Occasionally a weak division will produce an overachiever. But generally, the top 8 of the 16 teams go further than the bottom 8. And the top 4 out of that top 8 generally go further. And so on. So yes, being a legit contender is indeed an exclusive club of a few teams and it's hard to get there and prove that your team belongs there but that's why the Stanley Cup is so incredibly hard to win and thus equally prestigious.

UG you do realize that JT is only replacing Bozak. He isn't replacing both. He will have a winger replacing JVR and i will bet my account that JT and winger will out perform bozac and JVR's numbers.

UG you do realize that JT is only replacing Bozak. He isn't replacing both. He will have a winger replacing JVR and i will bet my account that JT and winger will out perform bozac and JVR's numbers.
- willdjr75

He's replacing Bozak at C in the face-off dot but he's replacing JVR on the PP.

But the point was that if he had joined Tampa Bay, they wouldn't be losing other guys, they'd only be adding Tavares unlike the Leafs who are losing a bunch of goals and SO wins and hoping to replace that with Tavares.

UG you do realize that JT is only replacing Bozak. He isn't replacing both. He will have a winger replacing JVR and i will bet my account that JT and winger will out perform bozac and JVR's numbers.
- willdjr75

I tried arguing about this with him a few weeks ago with poor results. He doesn't seem to understand when you take out two players, you get to add two new ones instead of just one.

He's replacing Bozak at C in the face-off dot but he's replacing JVR on the PP.

But the point was that if he had joined Tampa Bay, they wouldn't be losing other guys, they'd only be adding Tavares unlike the Leafs who are losing a bunch of goals and SO wins and hoping to replace that with Tavares.
- Unholy_Goalie

why don't you just leave to the Tampa or Boston thread and hype those two superior teams on there?

Leafs have a great team right now, and will make playoffs and could compete for the SC.
So many things that can happen during season and playoffs - there is no 'magic recipe'.
your negativity is really bad, for starters for your own health (mental and physical).

Nothing of consequence.
- Unholy_Goalie

Sadly, you still, still, do not understand. I don't care about your assertion that the Leafs aren't contenders. I never did.

All I cared about was the logic you used to reach that conclusion, not the conclusion itself.

I think you are probably correct that the Leafs aren't quite deserving of being labelled contenders. There, happy?

What I cared about was your argument that they needed to somehow prove they were contenders before they could be labelled as such. My argument is that if the right moves are made, it would make perfect sense to label a team as a contender without them actually having to prove it.

If a team has a stacked offense and a poopty defense, then somehow magically managed to improve their defense by a mile (without giving up other important roster pieces), then you could theoretically label them a contender, without needing to wait for the season to start and have them prove it.

Do you get it? I merely have a problem with your logical argument about proving it. That's it. Nothing really specific about the Leafs at all. Just your logical argument is flawed, and it bugged me enough I spoke up on it. I'm sorry I wasted so much time just trying to explain to you what I'm even arguing with you about.

The list of actual contenders is (and should be) pretty short. It's like the word "generational" that gets thrown around a lot. If every 2nd player is a generational talent, it diminishes the word. The same with contenders.

Every year, 16 out of 31 (soon to be 32) teams make the playoffs. That's almost half the league. Of those 16 teams, roughly half of them are pretenders. A couple were lucky to make it and get bounced in the 1st round immediately. A couple others are stuck in tough divisions and get bounced early. Occasionally a weak division will produce an overachiever. But generally, the top 8 of the 16 teams go further than the bottom 8. And the top 4 out of that top 8 generally go further. And so on. So yes, being a legit contender is indeed an exclusive club of a few teams and it's hard to get there and prove that your team belongs there but that's why the Stanley Cup is so incredibly hard to win and thus equally prestigious.
- Unholy_Goalie

Every year there are at least 2 or 3 teams in each conference with a good chance to win. Your qualifiers for a contender are so stringent you'd label only 1 or 2 teams in the whole league as contenders. If you tried to predict who'd win the cup and got two choices, I'd bet you'd be wrong 4 out of 6 tries.

I tried arguing about this with him a few weeks ago with poor results. He doesn't seem to understand when you take out two players, you get to add two new ones instead of just one.
- Thecakeisalie

You are right, he is daft and ignores what others are saying.

Can't say the same about half the people here though, just look at this past page.

Repeated insults.
- Unholy_Goalie

Did you ever consider that maybe it’s something you’re doing to generate this kind of reaction?

Also, the “this many points/goals out” argument is moronic. Adding an elite 2-way Center is going to make matchups that much harder, which will increase scoring accross the roster, not to mention you’re discounting the defensive upgrade, and ignoring that it opens up two more spots. Even if you’re just doing the basic addition and subtraction, without considering the other benefits having a player of this caliber brings... his average goal production going all the way back to his rookie season is 33. That means that the two new full time players(Kap and Johnsson) that come in have to combine for 17 more goals to make up the difference. Either of them could eclipse that number given a bigger role this year.


You make arguments in bad faith all the time, this is just another example. That’s why you get the reaction you do.

So Dubas' and Babcock's strategy to decrease average shots against / game for Leafs is to increase puck posession time. I like it. No good d-men available, so just make sure opponents have way less control over the puck; they'll be able to shoot less as well.

We might see Toronto Maple Leafs - "Big 'Blue' Machine" type of posession game with Marner-Marleau-Tavares-Kadri-Rielly as an incredible powerplay unit.

(Gardiner-Nylander-Brown-Matthews-Kapanen being (almost?) as good as second PP unit).

Would love to see that 1st PP unit.

Marleau-Kadri-Tavares
Rielly-Marner

Kapanen-Brown-Nylander(faceoffs)
Matthews-Gardiner

He's replacing Bozak at C in the face-off dot but he's replacing JVR on the PP.

But the point was that if he had joined Tampa Bay, they wouldn't be losing other guys, they'd only be adding Tavares unlike the Leafs who are losing a bunch of goals and SO wins and hoping to replace that with Tavares.
- Unholy_Goalie

Hoping? Really?


How is it that Tampa with 3mil in cap space were going to add 11mil but we're not going to lose anything off their roster?

There should be a block option on HB. If the Pope can block FCN on Twitter, I should be able to block UG on here.
- Steven_Seagull

(frank) I'm in!
(frank)in blowhard female genitalia make reading Leaf threads unpossible!

Also, the “this many points/goals out” argument is moronic. Adding an elite 2-way Center is going to make matchups that much harder, which will increase scoring accross the roster, not to mention you’re discounting the defensive upgrade, and ignoring that it opens up two more spots. Even if you’re just doing the basic addition and subtraction, without considering the other benefits having a player of this caliber brings... his average goal production going all the way back to his rookie season is 33. That means that the two new full time players(Kap and Johnsson) that come in have to combine for 17 more goals to make up the difference. Either of them could eclipse that number given a bigger role this year.


You make arguments in bad faith all the time, this is just another example. That’s why you get the reaction you do.
- Feeling Glucky?

This