Commandant

Yes, but based on the fact they used Petry as the D on both PP units, they are expecting Weber back. Seems to me they will start him with Romanov based on those pairs.

Caps already on their third goalie and its 39 year old Craig Anderson.

I don't think its lighting a fire or any games being played. I just think hes doing the typical coach thing.

I think Caufield sitting makes more sense than KK. Don't get me wrong, I'd play Caufield. But I see why they want Armia to play physical and wear down the Leafs. KK can be just as physical as Staal with better skating, and as much as he's struggled offensively has still scored more than Staal.... so I don't get that.

2-1 bad guys now.

Given the fact that all of Toronto's big guns have skating that leave him in the dust, I'm more scared of Staal vs their big guns than I am of KK. At least he can keep up.

The Oilers are likely to go with 11 fwds and 7 defencemen. This means kris russell and james neal will play while kailer yamamoto sits. Again these are the kinds of stupid decisions coaches around the league make.

I agree that this is a mistake I think its a mistake that most NHL coaches fall into though. If they lose cause a rookie made a mental mistake, that gets blamed on coaching. If the player loses a battle cause he's in the right position but not good enough, that gets blamed on the player and he can say I did all the coaching correct. So they lean on the vets who won't make rookie mistakes even if it doesn't necessarily give them a better chance to win.

Lets hope cause that would be more encouraging for future years. I don't know that it helps the team now though. He shouldn't play if he can't pass and shoot.

From the clips we've seen, Gallagher, Price and Danault look to be practicing hard and no limitations. Weber doesn't seem like he can use his left hand.

This is a Ducharme decision. Interim coach with his butt on the line trusting veterans over 20 year olds.

Look around the NHL, 80% of NHL head coaches (maybe more) play veterans cause they trust them over 20 year olds. Yes this is a hockey decision. Its a bad decision, but its still a hockey decision. Coaches don't want to lose cause someone made a rookie mistake. Staal won't make rookie mistakes. He'll be in the right position, will still lose his battle cause he's lost about 3 steps and physically isn't good enough to compete, but hey at least it wasn't a mental mistake that he made. Its dumb, but its the way most coaches operate. This isn't

Price had a concussion at the end of the 2012 season (he missed 3 or 4 games at the end) when we drafted Chucky. But nothing since then that I know of. His stuff has been knee/hip.

Called it

Meh, every division has 2 or 3 shitty teams, Buffalo, New Jersey, chicago, Columbus, Detroit, the three california teams, so I don't see the no competition thing. The difference is the turnover of players and relying more on guys like Suzuki, Romanov, KK, etc... than they did at that point. They took a step back last year, and now are taking steps forward with the younger players. Again, I dont think this earns five years, but I think you give him a short extension to let it play out.

I never claimed they were a winner. I merely put nuance into the conversation. Of course a "realist" should be able to understand that things arent so black and white all the time, otherwise their posting is junk. Are you ever able to actually debate things without resorting to insults? It seems not since Im not the first person youve attacked. It doesnt make you seem smarter when you attack others. That shows real signs of lack of intelligence to be honest.

The winner of Colorado/Vegas in Round 2 wins the cup. I'll take the Avs

I think what does matter though is that the 2019 team had the most points ever for a team that didn't make the playoffs. That certainly indicates that team was good enough to be a playoff team, as it would have been in every other year.

I agree they werent' going to make the playoffs last year. Being happy with being a playoff team this year doesn't mean I'm happy and consider this year to be the end result. Teams typically progress in steps. I didn't expect to go from last year's team to cup winner right away, and no one should have. That said the extension I'd give would be short term and we'd need to see the team take another step next year (and that step would likely need to be as a result of further development of Suzuki, KK, Romanov, Caufield's) You want to see the team make the playoffs cause that is p

Sure, but saying six straight both ignores this year, and 2017. Two years where they legit made the playoffs. Even if you consider last year a miss... its 3 straight, not 6. If you want to consider when the exits were, and they were first round, then fine... do that. Just don't be disingenous and say, it'd be six straight if we ignored the years they made it.

Again, none of that changes my point... you can't just say, if these years didn't happen, the streak would be 6. Its the same thing as that Leafs website tweeting last week that if Matthews didn't struggle for like 2.5 weeks in the middle of the season, he'd challenge McDavid for the Hart..... well yeah, that might be true (I still doubt it), but even if it is true, that's just the way things are. You can't remove those weeks from the season, they happened. Just like making the playoffs in 3 of the last 6 seasons happened and we can't just ignore them.

All of that is debateable. saying, if they didn't make the playoffs they would have missed 6 in a row... is just not a good argument. Yes, its technically correct, but at the same time, if we ignore the 4 years the leafs made the playoffs they would have missed 10 in a row is also true, but again a bad argument cause if you have to ignore some years to make your point, its not that effective.

Yes, if we ignore years that playoffs were made.... the number of straight years missing the playoffs goes up.

Merrill is terrible as a RD. He is not bad on the left side. He's the best of the 4 defencemen. Gudbranson and Cobourn are at the same level as say Jack Johnson. They are supposed to be good defensive defencemen with no offence, but they are actually bad defensively too. We saw the Habs exploit Johnson last year in the bubble against Pittsburgh. Gustafsson is a PP specialist who is useless defensively. I'd still put him ahead of Gudbranson and Cobourn though cause at least he does one thing well. They don't. But overall, one of these D is passable a

Agreed, the Sens D were bad, even if people are willing to trade for Gudbranson and Cobourn, they are still bad defencemen.