HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Notices

If We Sign Schultz Does That Mean We Go All Small Defence?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-25-2012, 07:27 AM
  #1
MarcWagz
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 827
vCash: 500
If We Sign Schultz Does That Mean We Go All Small Defence?

Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.

MarcWagz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 07:29 AM
  #2
ACC1224
Burke was right.
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 26,925
vCash: 500
Lots can happen between now and the start of the Season.

ACC1224 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 07:33 AM
  #3
Leaf For Life
Registered User
 
Leaf For Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mississauga
Country: Canada
Posts: 305
vCash: 500
Gunnarson and Schenn are the same height but Schenn just weighted about 30 more pounds.
And Rielly is 6 feet as an 18 year old so he still has time to grow.

Leaf For Life is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 07:36 AM
  #4
Leaf Rocket
Leaf Fan Till I Die
 
Leaf Rocket's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Fredericton, NB
Country: India
Posts: 69,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaf For Life View Post
Gunnarson and Schenn are the same height but Schenn just weighted about 30 more pounds.
And Rielly is 6 feet as an 18 year old so he still has time to grow.
If he grows an inch or two it definitely would be great for us.

__________________
Leaf Rocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 07:37 AM
  #5
dubplatepressure
Registered User
 
dubplatepressure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 5,713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcWagz View Post
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
You no longer need to be 6'5" to win the Norris.


IMO the mix between big defensive stay at home guys and smaller, mobile offensive guys is changing. You no longer require 3-4 big bruisers complimented with 1-2 puck movers - you can successfully run 3-4 puck movers offset with a couple beasts who don the defensive responsibilities, clearing the net, blocking shots, etc.

It's a good system that other teams will have issues with provided we have sizeable forwards who provide support.

dubplatepressure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 07:37 AM
  #6
Fearless Leaf*
Playiffs 2013!!!!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Markham and Lawrence
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcWagz View Post
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
U don't think Phaneuf(6"3) and Gunnarsson(6"2) are big enough? And I wouldn't call Gardiner and Schultz who are an inch above 6" ft small either.

I think your definition of small is a little too unrealistic, perhaps even bizzare.

Fearless Leaf* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 07:41 AM
  #7
MarcWagz
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lupes View Post
U don't think Phaneuf(6"3) and Gunnarsson(6"2) are big enough? And I wouldn't call Gardiner and Schultz who are an inch above 6" ft small either.

I think your definition of small is a little too unrealistic, perhaps even bizzare.

im not talking height I'm talking musulature

MarcWagz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 07:45 AM
  #8
IBeL13f
Registered User
 
IBeL13f's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcWagz View Post
im not talking height I'm talking musulature
Their musculature has an even better chance of growing than their height does. People can get bigger with time, and if these guys choose to (obviously not if it sacrifices speed), then they will.

Rielly's a gym-rat, my guess is that he could very well put on some pounds in his mid-20s and keep his dynamic skating. Mobility's the name of the game now. These days, everyone on the ice needs to be able to play hockey. I love it.

IBeL13f is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 07:51 AM
  #9
Fearless Leaf*
Playiffs 2013!!!!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Markham and Lawrence
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcWagz View Post
im not talking height I'm talking musulature
Well, even then Phaneuf(215 lbs) is pretty good in that department.

Fearless Leaf* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 08:00 AM
  #10
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,742
vCash: 500
Detroit's defense a few years back:

6'1" 192
5'10" 194
6'0" 190
5'9" 195
6'2" 213
6'3" 220

HOW you play is more important than how big you are.

eyeball11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 08:04 AM
  #11
satyr9
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 247
vCash: 500
With the If Schultz included and not knowing who might be out if he's added, this is the top 8 by size (obviously these are just what posted on TML.com, so buyer beware):

Komisarek 6'5" 243
Franson 6'5" 213
Phaneuf 6'3" 214
Holzer 6'3" 205
Gunnarsson 6'2" 196
Schultz 6'1" 185
Gardiner 6'0" 184
Liles 5'10" 185

The concern is really that there aren't any enough massive hitter types, known as "stay at home" guys, not so much just size isn't it? I ask because that looks plenty large to me. To me it's really a question of smaller offensive guys who need compensators types to balance out a pairing. I'd argue Gardiner has enough positional awareness and size he doesn't really need a heavy beside him. Liles is the only one who can be said to need a true stay at home monster next to him IMO and Komisarek certainly fits that for now. There's also Phaneuf and Franson who are pretty darn huge, although Phaneuf is too reckless for that pairing and Franson doesn't use his size explosively, but I do think he uses it effectively for the most part. Liles/Franson (if Komi were gone or just in the press box) wouldn't work last year, but I like Franson and think he may be on his way to being capable that way (and it's a pretty nice PP combo too).

If Schultz is added (and I can't say what Schultz would need in the NHL) then the defense would be a little light on the rough and tumble types (aside, can we put away the word truculence for a while?), but I'll take a bit of a loss there if we're above average at getting out of the zone quick and having dmen that can keep up with forwards both ways. Sure, I don't want to end up getting cycled against indefinitely because there isn't enough physicality to take the puck away on the boards, but the pure size is there no question, it'll be up to Carlyle to teach them how to use it.

satyr9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 08:58 AM
  #12
mooseOAK*
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 42,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcWagz View Post
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
Where did you get that gem from?

mooseOAK* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 09:06 AM
  #13
diceman934
Registered User
 
diceman934's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NHL player factory
Posts: 4,719
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooseOAK View Post
Where did you get that gem from?
From watching him play would be my guess. I agree as well.

diceman934 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 09:08 AM
  #14
Tie Domi Esquire
;;
 
Tie Domi Esquire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 1,598
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mooseOAK View Post
Where did you get that gem from?
People on the internet. The same ones championing Schenn's defense.

Tie Domi Esquire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 09:09 AM
  #15
G51 K81*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,556
vCash: 500
Holzer?

G51 K81* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 09:10 AM
  #16
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 30,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcWagz View Post
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
Detroit Red Wings weren't exactly big with Lidstrom, Rafalski, etc. leading the charge a few years ago.

Stephen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 09:12 AM
  #17
Duffman955
Registered User
 
Duffman955's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,096
vCash: 500
We still have Phaneuf, Franson, Komiserek, and Holzer as big defensemen. I think Franson can become a lot more physical under Carlyle.

Duffman955 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 09:27 AM
  #18
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 30,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dubplatepressure View Post
You no longer need to be 6'5" to win the Norris.


IMO the mix between big defensive stay at home guys and smaller, mobile offensive guys is changing. You no longer require 3-4 big bruisers complimented with 1-2 puck movers - you can successfully run 3-4 puck movers offset with a couple beasts who don the defensive responsibilities, clearing the net, blocking shots, etc.

It's a good system that other teams will have issues with provided we have sizeable forwards who provide support.
I would make the argument that bruisers haven't been necessary for years, but the Leafs have been caught in a bit of a time warp about that. We still have Komisarek and we'll have Holzer in the system too. Honestly, we lost the slowest, least reliable dman in the group, it's not a huge loss.

Stephen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 10:04 AM
  #19
cynicism
Registered User
 
cynicism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,460
vCash: 500
Yeah, because having a team loaded with slow, untalented, physical defensmen was working just fine

cynicism is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 10:37 AM
  #20
Kessely Snipes
Great White North
 
Kessely Snipes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,362
vCash: 500
Holzer definitely comes to mind, if he actually plays in the NHL this year.

Kessely Snipes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 11:12 AM
  #21
Interactif
Meet The New Boss
 
Interactif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcWagz View Post
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
The league is going towards puck movement and transition, also having D able to be the 4th attacker is a must.

Finn was described to me as a Adam Foote clone, very smart, doesn't make mistakes, makes the right play, is not Flashy with one more important trait, he is very competitive.

Really liking the way how our D is shaping up.

Interactif is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 11:15 AM
  #22
Phion Keneuf
Top Dawg Ent.
 
Phion Keneuf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vaughan, Ontario
Country: Italy
Posts: 27,075
vCash: 500
call it "small" or whatever you want to call it, but speed is more important for a dman than size.

Phion Keneuf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 11:25 AM
  #23
facey
Registered User
 
facey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,104
vCash: 500
Small is definitely a poor word choice.

We have some young guys who have yet to physically mature, but over 6' is not vertically challenged.

We still have Dion who is the best open ice hitter in the NHL, I may not like it, but we also still have Komi who is a big hitter as well. With the speed Reilly, Gardiner and Schultz all have, if they ever get angry they can throw some momentum based hits, LOL.

facey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 11:25 AM
  #24
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 57,720
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcWagz View Post
Not that Gardiner and Reilly are small, but they certainly aren't big or strong in the mold Schenn was. Neither is Gunnarson. Phaneuf is but he's hardly positionally sound.
As much as I hate to say it it seems like we need Komisarek to stay if we are going to keep drafting and signing these small offensive defensemen.
Its a valid question, & one I have asked myself as to this very question.

In the course of the past 5 months Leafs have shipped out Schenn and Aulie in trade for wingers. They were unquestionable the organizations best 2 best young defensive Dmen with size and grit.

For a team that has consistently finished at the bottom of the league in goals against, you would think that building around these kinds of defensive defenders would make sense if goal prevention was a factor, as well as strength, size and physicality including hits and shot blocking.

A defense that consists of JM Liles, Jake Gardiner, Morgan Rielly and perhaps Justin Schultz (if lucky) would be building an all small(er), non physical, puck moving Defense..

As we saw with the Kings and Bruins recent Cup winners size and strength among their forwards too much for some teams defenses to handle. Leafs by dealing Schenn and Aulie and going with a smaller defense core is going to struggle even more to compete in their own end and prevent other teams forwards from going hard to the net.

__________________
Signature: There is no greater demonstration of Fan patience then to suggest to "Play the Kids " and be willing to accept the consequences of those actions..
Mess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-25-2012, 11:37 AM
  #25
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 30,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Its a valid question, & one I have asked myself as to this very question.

In the course of the past 5 months Leafs have shipped out Schenn and Aulie in trade for wingers. They were unquestionable the organizations best 2 best young defensive Dmen with size and grit.

For a team that has consistently finished at the bottom of the league in goals against, you would think that building around these kinds of defensive defenders would make sense if goal prevention was a factor, as well as strength, size and physicality including hits and shot blocking.

A defense that consists of JM Liles, Jake Gardiner, Morgan Rielly and perhaps Justin Schultz (if lucky) would be building an all small(er), non physical, puck moving Defense..

As we saw with the Kings and Bruins recent Cup winners size and strength among their forwards too much for some teams defenses to handle. Leafs by dealing Schenn and Aulie and going with a smaller defense core is going to struggle even more to compete in their own end and prevent other teams forwards from going hard to the net.
IMO, it is a thankless chore to develop young defensive defensemen, because all their lessons learned end up in the back of your own net. When you look at guys like Matt Greene, Rob Scuderi, Hal Gill, Willie Mitchell, Luke Richardson, Sylvain Lefebvre, Bob Rouse, etc. they're affordable guys you can get on the UFA market that you can sprinkle into a contending organization without having to develop them yourself.

I'd never ever target a defensive defenseman in the first round.

Stephen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:13 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.