HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Toronto Maple Leafs (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=17)
-   -   Speculation: If this season resumes, do you you think we have a better shot at playoffs? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1280723)

iArts 11-07-2012 09:39 PM

If this season resumes, do you you think we have a better shot at playoffs?
 
I mean if the season is much shorter than regular. Leafs usually do well for a while until collapsing eventually. I'm curious what you guys think.

JMcLeaf 11-07-2012 09:42 PM

Probably a perfect amount of time right now to start well but then crash and finish 9th

iArts 11-07-2012 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMcLeaf (Post 55612319)
Probably a perfect amount of time right now to start well but then crash and finish 9th

That's the spirit! :laugh:

charliolemieux 11-07-2012 09:44 PM

If we repeated last season, we could even have home ice advantage for the 1st round.

rdawg1234 11-07-2012 09:46 PM

Depends if this Luongo rumor is true.

IF it's true and the trade doesnt hurt the core(as in it's a soft trade i.e 2nd rounder+franson+prospect etc.) then yes, 100% I say we get 6th or 7th in the conference.

I have even less faith in our goaltending now, scrivens is NOT playing well on the marlies right now.

Reimer is a huge toss-up, you're literally flipping a coin if you go in with those two guys.

Grant 11-07-2012 09:51 PM

Depends. I believe that the teams with the most young players currently in the AHL will start the strongest. Depends on how many of our prospects are making the jump. Gardiner but anyone else? Kadri, Colborne etc are questionable and Frattin hasn't played yet so not including him. Teams with many people overseas I think will also start a little stronger but I don't think that will have as big of a difference due to having to readjust to NA game also you're not playing with teammates over seas in most cases.

Penalty Kill Icing* 11-07-2012 09:57 PM

The following tweet by DownGoesBrown says we should be safe for playoffs if a shortened season is played.

Quote:

A condensed schedule would make backup goalies crucial, which would be great news for teams like the Leafs who have two.
:naughty:

BayStBullies 11-07-2012 10:24 PM

It could go one of two ways:

1 - Horrible start; then turn it around when it is too late, pushing them out of a great draft spot.

2 - Great start; with some hope. Then the big rig crashes off a cliff; missing the playoffs, out of a good draft range.

If you condense both those scenarios to suit the lockout revised schedule; either they make the playoffs, or get a great pick. The lockout can't hurt... :P

With that said; they will mess it up; somehow.

Hopefully this lockout; reverts the skid from the last one, that this team had.

Lucbourdon 11-07-2012 10:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penalty Kill Icing (Post 55612685)
The following tweet by DownGoesBrown says we should be safe for playoffs if a shortened season is played.


:naughty:

Okay, I laughed, that was funny.

It's funny tho, one season the leafs start out STRONG and fade late, Other years they start off crappy and storm on late.

So it's 50/50, Honestly about the same.

exporta 11-08-2012 06:38 AM

We'll probably make it, then haters will say the Leafs only made it because of a shorter season.

416Leafer 11-08-2012 07:11 AM

Smaller sample size = less likely to represent the "true" rankings of the teams....

So I'd say yes! If there are only 50 games, one extended hot streak (by us) or extended cold streaks (by projected lower seeded playoff teams) could be enough to land us in. Not that we'd get anywhere once in the playoffs... but still!

But, if the season starts by December, they'll probably still get a solid ~65 games in would be my guess. Long enough for most of the bad teams to settle out near the bottom.

legendinblue 11-08-2012 07:12 AM

Yes, I believe so.

FlareKnight 11-08-2012 07:20 AM

I doubt it'll make a huge impact either way. If they want to they can probably fit 70+ games so plenty of time for the Leafs to blow it if they want to. Really it's hard to say. Look at the positive that a good start would make it harder for us to miss this time. But the teams that went through a long playoff run are now really rested.

Can only hope.

Hawaiinleaf 11-08-2012 07:22 AM

Making the playoffs means we lose the chance to draft the franchise top centre in Barkov or Monahan

Let that soak in

Both would play after being drafted and improve this team leaps and bounds short term and truly long term


Sorry to say but we need this draft more than any in the last decade to grab a top 5 pick. A centre loaded top 6 draft.

ACC1224 11-08-2012 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 416Leafer (Post 55616835)
Smaller sample size = less likely to represent the "true" rankings of the teams....

So I'd say yes! If there are only 50 games, one extended hot streak (by us) or extended cold streaks (by projected lower seeded playoff teams) could be enough to land us in. Not that we'd get anywhere once in the playoffs... but still!

But, if the season starts by December, they'll probably still get a solid ~65 games in would be my guess. Long enough for most of the bad teams to settle out near the bottom.

A condensed schedule would make each game more meaningful with less "throw away games", where as a longer schedule allows for more dips.

This is what makes the NFL so great. The shorter schedule makes every week a big game.

ACC1224 11-08-2012 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawaiinleaf (Post 55616891)
Making the playoffs means we lose the chance to draft the franchise top centre in Barkov or Monahan

Let that soak in

Both would play after being drafted and improve this team leaps and bounds short term and truly long term


Sorry to say but we need this draft more than any in the last decade to grab a top 5 pick. A centre loaded top 6 draft.

What happens after it soaks in?

birddog* 11-08-2012 07:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iArts (Post 55612243)
I mean if the season is much shorter than regular. Leafs usually do well for a while until collapsing eventually. I'm curious what you guys think.

No. Both Reimer and Scrivens were below average goalies in the NHL last year. Simply put the Maple Leafs have arguably the worst goaltending in the NHL. Being the worst at the most important position in the game is not getting you anywhere. Leafs suck -- face it. All the blind optimism in the world isn't going to change reality -- this club was the 5th worst in the league and has been around that mark for years. Talk to me when Burke brings in a real goalie.

KesselLooksLikeRadar* 11-08-2012 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ACC1224 (Post 55616927)
What happens after it soaks in?

Your moistness will be increased.

Hawaiinleaf 11-08-2012 07:31 AM

Were not strong enough to start getting mid round draft picks again, we have elite prospects on D but lack elite talent on forward lines still.

Getting Monahan lands us the elite centre we have not had since Sundin. Another first this year might land another top 6 prospect and then it wont matter if we dont draft top 6

ACC1224 11-08-2012 07:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawaiinleaf (Post 55616957)
Were not strong enough to start getting mid round draft picks again, we have elite prospects on D but lack elite talent on forward lines still.

Getting Monahan lands us the elite centre we have not had since Sundin. Another first this year might land another top 6 prospect and then it wont matter if we dont draft top 6

This isn't a tank thread.

chilfactor 11-08-2012 08:11 AM

With the roster as it is now - no.
But I think changes will be made when things resume

It will be interesting to see how Carlyle's system works with this team.

Christ 11-08-2012 08:14 AM

All depends on our goaltending. If we recieve consistant, solid goaltending we are a playoff team. If we get what we got last season, I don't think we are any closer to a playoff spot.

416Leafer 11-08-2012 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ACC1224 (Post 55616917)
A condensed schedule would make each game more meaningful with less "throw away games", where as a longer schedule allows for more dips.

This is what makes the NFL so great. The shorter schedule makes every week a big game.

Definitely. I would much prefer significantly less games. More games also means more injuries.

I'd be pretty happy with a season that was ~2 months shorter with less games per week, and ended up with like ~40 games in a season. The fact that from pre-season to SC Finals goes September-June is a bit ridiculous. And like you said, with more games, each game becomes less meaningful.

ULF_55 11-08-2012 08:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iArts (Post 55612243)
I mean if the season is much shorter than regular. Leafs usually do well for a while until collapsing eventually. I'm curious what you guys think.

Oh yeah.

I expect the playoffs this year.

Don't you?

How many years is it possible for one team to miss in a row?

No doubt playoffs or bust this year.

Over half the teams get in. Over half!!! It isn't even a huge accomplishment.

Hurt 11-08-2012 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ULF_55 (Post 55617711)
Oh yeah.

I expect the playoffs this year.

Don't you?

How many years is it possible for one team to miss in a row?

No doubt playoffs or bust this year.

Over half the teams get in. Over half!!! It isn't even a huge accomplishment.

Well Florida missed them for like 10 years in a row, I think. Couple of years away from that milestone for our boys.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:57 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.