Keefe on Klingberg; 'We need to protect hm better'

I actually feel for Keefe on this one. He has to deal with this absolute.disaster his GM dropped in his lap.
- fifty__missions

I saw this comment and thought: You don't protect a $4m defenseman. They are supposed to provide value.

And then it sort of hits me . . . they say Dubas wanted Karlsson but Shanahan squashed it. We had Gustafsson, who Keefe refused to play.

So Treliving and Shanahan go get Klingberg - who is basically the same as either of Karlsson or Gustafsson. An offensive player who isn't good on defense.

If Keefe didn't want to play Gustafsson, why would he want Klingberg? How do you look at a defensive group with Rielly, Brodie, Giordano, Liljegren, Timmins, McCabe and think, "You know what that group needs? A guy who can't play defense that the other guys who already can't play defense will have to insulate and protect!"

This isn't all on Klingberg - the absence of McCabe, Liljegren and Timmins have pushed up Benoit and Lagesson, who are tweeners are best. But it's exposed Klingberg more, and his piss poor play is on full display whenever the puck enters our zone regardless of the level of competition he faces.

If you want to protect Klingberg - put him in the pressbox.

On a last note: I don't feel for Keefe because if Treliving is to be believed, he was a part of this decision. They had conversations about what he needed and what his vision was and so on - and Treliving bought in enough to extend him and presumably get him the pieces he was looking for. But if that's the case, why didn't he play Gustafsson more? I am confused by all of it!

Small sample size I guess. If this one doesn't statistically correct itself soon, it might lend some credence to the notion that "goalies are voodoo".

(frank)ing Reimer putting up 1.52 and .944% numbers. Who had that on their bingo card?
- GalacticStone

What i wanna know is, who still has bingo cards?

The last thing any contender needs is Kane.

Kane needs a contender more than a contender needs Kane.
- GalacticStone

If his hips don't lie, I think he would be a help to any team in the league. Even on one leg he was better than most of the Rangers when they blew up

As disgusting as that video is he clearly has some pretty serious issues I agree and he needs help. Will he get it over in mother Russia?

To someone else's point not sure we ever see him in the NHL again after that.

Good lord.
- Cush29

He's American

He's American
- AdamFrench

You are technically correct.

Which is the best kind of correct.

You are technically correct.

Which is the best kind of correct.
- Scabeh

Going on a drunken incoherent rampage on a police officer is pretty iconically American in its nature.

At least he isn't still in love with his sister.

He's American
- AdamFrench

He's in Russia playing in the KHL right now and his issues exist right now.

Going on a drunken incoherent rampage on a police officer is pretty iconically American in its nature.

At least he isn't still in love with his sister.
- AdamFrench

No surprise that his dad also seems involved somehow in the whole debacle.

His story is very sad and pathetic. That young man could have been a star if he had been surrounded by good people and made better decisions.

He's in Russia playing in the KHL right now and his issues exist right now.
- Cush29

He should watch the drunk driving in Russia. Not for the police, but for the insurance frauds who will jump out at your car and demand cash.

It's hard to remember a time when the Leafs didn't play down to opponents who are not top teams (or terrible teams) and by play down I mean generally poop the bed and lose.
.
.
.


- Cush29

This might be your point - but I didn't feel they played down to the Senators yesterday. I felt they were just beat. They aren't a team - at least not yet. The Leafs, with the notably exceptions of Rielly, Tavares, Matthews and Nylander - have not been playing well. They aren't gelling yet, they aren't competing yet, and a lot of the plays and positioning has been poor.

Most notably the guys we _need_ to be better are Marner and Brodie, I think - because they absorb so much ice time and play such important roles.

Marner has been fighting the puck more often than not. I'm sure some guys are going to crap on me for it (he has 17 points in 13 games, and 11 5v5 points!), but Marner has 10 points in 3 games, and 7 points in the other 10. In those 10 games he's -4 @ 5v5. There's been lacking observable consistency in his game - pucks skipping over his stick, missed assignments, lack of focus - and through it, it seems like his dreaded "trying too hard" forced passes have actually been reduced - but he seems to be shooting less, a bit more tentative and as a result he's making more uncharacteristic mistakes.

Brodie I wonder the most about. Last year at times he looked like he lost a step. This year it looks like he's lost two. Add in some of the noticeable elements in his game that show less confidence with the puck - not shooting in terrific shooting situations or shooting lazy wristers from the point with no traffic for no reason. He's making more mistakes in his own zone and reacting more chaotically under pressure.

In a year where JT looks more motivated, Nylander is playing for $10m, Matthews wants to regain his status as the goal leader and Morgan Rielly is carrying on from the great play we saw in the playoffs last year - there are opportunities for this team to excel, but I don't think happens without finding at least one or two pieces on that back end.

He should watch the drunk driving in Russia. Not for the police, but for the insurance frauds who will jump out at your car and demand cash.
- AdamFrench

He should brush his teeth every day and get a solid 8 hrs of sleep too.

I saw this comment and thought: You don't protect a $4m defenseman. They are supposed to provide value.

And then it sort of hits me . . . they say Dubas wanted Karlsson but Shanahan squashed it. We had Gustafsson, who Keefe refused to play.

So Treliving and Shanahan go get Klingberg - who is basically the same as either of Karlsson or Gustafsson. An offensive player who isn't good on defense.

If Keefe didn't want to play Gustafsson, why would he want Klingberg? How do you look at a defensive group with Rielly, Brodie, Giordano, Liljegren, Timmins, McCabe and think, "You know what that group needs? A guy who can't play defense that the other guys who already can't play defense will have to insulate and protect!"

This isn't all on Klingberg - the absence of McCabe, Liljegren and Timmins have pushed up Benoit and Lagesson, who are tweeners are best. But it's exposed Klingberg more, and his piss poor play is on full display whenever the puck enters our zone regardless of the level of competition he faces.

If you want to protect Klingberg - put him in the pressbox.

On a last note: I don't feel for Keefe because if Treliving is to be believed, he was a part of this decision. They had conversations about what he needed and what his vision was and so on - and Treliving bought in enough to extend him and presumably get him the pieces he was looking for. But if that's the case, why didn't he play Gustafsson more? I am confused by all of it!
- Monkeypunk

I went through this same thought process. I put myself in Tree's position and took at look at the summer signings ....there was (frank) all out there on the open market in terms of top 4 defensive blue liners. Ian Cole? Mayfield signed for 7 years! Schenn got 3 x 2.75 (love him but that won't age well). Holl 3 x 3.4 ...

I think he signed Klingwrap b/c it was that or nothing. In hindsight I would have preferred the later or even toss that money at Ian Cole ...i guess.

I think he targeted Bertuzzi and Reaves. But the others - it was probably too quick/soon to really get a trade organized so he stuck some bandaids where he could (Domi and Klingberg).

This might be your point - but I didn't feel they played down to the Senators yesterday. I felt they were just beat. They aren't a team - at least not yet. The Leafs, with the notably exceptions of Rielly, Tavares, Matthews and Nylander - have not been playing well. They aren't gelling yet, they aren't competing yet, and a lot of the plays and positioning has been poor.

Most notably the guys we _need_ to be better are Marner and Brodie, I think - because they absorb so much ice time and play such important roles.

Marner has been fighting the puck more often than not. I'm sure some guys are going to crap on me for it (he has 17 points in 13 games, and 11 5v5 points!), but Marner has 10 points in 3 games, and 7 points in the other 10. In those 10 games he's -4 @ 5v5. There's been lacking observable consistency in his game - pucks skipping over his stick, missed assignments, lack of focus - and through it, it seems like his dreaded "trying too hard" forced passes have actually been reduced - but he seems to be shooting less, a bit more tentative and as a result he's making more uncharacteristic mistakes.

Brodie I wonder the most about. Last year at times he looked like he lost a step. This year it looks like he's lost two. Add in some of the noticeable elements in his game that show less confidence with the puck - not shooting in terrific shooting situations or shooting lazy wristers from the point with no traffic for no reason. He's making more mistakes in his own zone and reacting more chaotically under pressure.

In a year where JT looks more motivated, Nylander is playing for $10m, Matthews wants to regain his status as the goal leader and Morgan Rielly is carrying on from the great play we saw in the playoffs last year - there are opportunities for this team to excel, but I don't think happens without finding at least one or two pieces on that back end.
- Monkeypunk

Fair enough I didn't see more than the first 2 goals last night so I can't say they played down to the Sens or if they were just outplayed etc. It is something we have seen more often than not in the past few years though when they play a team who is much lower than them in the standings or a terrible team they just seem to play down to that level.

Agreed fully on Marner looking off. Sure he is getting his points but how much of that is Matthews and assists? I hope Marner finds his game because he doesn't look like a guy worth his current contract right now never mind a raise.

Brodie looks done to me too, that sucks because the Leafs need him to be a top 4 guy and not a fringe top 4 guy.

I'm hoping for a big mix up to at least change the D look and feel. Not sure if it can/will happen but I guess we will see. Feels like the Leafs will have to trade off some of the young future for the now, just don't trade Knies please!

I saw this comment and thought: You don't protect a $4m defenseman. They are supposed to provide value.

And then it sort of hits me . . . they say Dubas wanted Karlsson but Shanahan squashed it. We had Gustafsson, who Keefe refused to play.

So Treliving and Shanahan go get Klingberg - who is basically the same as either of Karlsson or Gustafsson. An offensive player who isn't good on defense.

If Keefe didn't want to play Gustafsson, why would he want Klingberg? How do you look at a defensive group with Rielly, Brodie, Giordano, Liljegren, Timmins, McCabe and think, "You know what that group needs? A guy who can't play defense that the other guys who already can't play defense will have to insulate and protect!"

This isn't all on Klingberg - the absence of McCabe, Liljegren and Timmins have pushed up Benoit and Lagesson, who are tweeners are best. But it's exposed Klingberg more, and his piss poor play is on full display whenever the puck enters our zone regardless of the level of competition he faces.

If you want to protect Klingberg - put him in the pressbox.

On a last note: I don't feel for Keefe because if Treliving is to be believed, he was a part of this decision. They had conversations about what he needed and what his vision was and so on - and Treliving bought in enough to extend him and presumably get him the pieces he was looking for. But if that's the case, why didn't he play Gustafsson more? I am confused by all of it!
- Monkeypunk

110%.

I just don't see the logic behind that move. What was the perceived need and what did they expect Klinger to do? Fancy stats or not, he is a very well known quantity at this stage in his career. While one can never have too many "puck moving" defensemen, did that need outweigh the other obvious areas of concern (keeping the slot clean, being more physical, etc).

Honestly, from an eye test perspective, one area of concern is the corner battles and that first pass out of the zone. Most of the Leafs defense (outside of Rielly) have trouble in that regard. And maybe the thinking was - Klinger can skate it out. Then the obvious problem becomes - to skate it out, he has to be good at retrieving it and maintaining possession long enough to do something with it. He doesn't seem very good at the latter....at all.

This might be your point - but I didn't feel they played down to the Senators yesterday. I felt they were just beat. They aren't a team - at least not yet. The Leafs, with the notably exceptions of Rielly, Tavares, Matthews and Nylander - have not been playing well. They aren't gelling yet, they aren't competing yet, and a lot of the plays and positioning has been poor.

Most notably the guys we _need_ to be better are Marner and Brodie, I think - because they absorb so much ice time and play such important roles.

Marner has been fighting the puck more often than not. I'm sure some guys are going to crap on me for it (he has 17 points in 13 games, and 11 5v5 points!), but Marner has 10 points in 3 games, and 7 points in the other 10. In those 10 games he's -4 @ 5v5. There's been lacking observable consistency in his game - pucks skipping over his stick, missed assignments, lack of focus - and through it, it seems like his dreaded "trying too hard" forced passes have actually been reduced - but he seems to be shooting less, a bit more tentative and as a result he's making more uncharacteristic mistakes.

Brodie I wonder the most about. Last year at times he looked like he lost a step. This year it looks like he's lost two. Add in some of the noticeable elements in his game that show less confidence with the puck - not shooting in terrific shooting situations or shooting lazy wristers from the point with no traffic for no reason. He's making more mistakes in his own zone and reacting more chaotically under pressure.

In a year where JT looks more motivated, Nylander is playing for $10m, Matthews wants to regain his status as the goal leader and Morgan Rielly is carrying on from the great play we saw in the playoffs last year - there are opportunities for this team to excel, but I don't think happens without finding at least one or two pieces on that back end.
- Monkeypunk

AA will be in here to defend Marner in 5 . 4. 3. 2 .. . . . . . . . . .

I went through this same thought process. I put myself in Tree's position and took at look at the summer signings ....there was (frank) all out there on the open market in terms of top 4 defensive blue liners. Ian Cole? Mayfield signed for 7 years! Schenn got 3 x 2.75 (love him but that won't age well). Holl 3 x 3.4 ...

I think he signed Klingwrap b/c it was that or nothing. In hindsight I would have preferred the later or even toss that money at Ian Cole ...i guess.

I think he targeted Bertuzzi and Reaves. But the others - it was probably too quick/soon to really get a trade organized so he stuck some bandaids where he could (Domi and Klingberg).
- The Law

I think the big stinker is that Klingberg was overpaid hoping he would change and be his older self even with warts, when Gustafsson literally was right here and the same player but signed for league min and does the exact same thing.

110%.

I just don't see the logic behind that move. What was the perceived need and what did they expect Klinger to do? Fancy stats or not, he is a very well known quantity at this stage in his career. While one can never have too many "puck moving" defensemen, did that need outweigh the other obvious areas of concern (keeping the slot clean, being more physical, etc).

Honestly, from an eye test perspective, one area of concern is the corner battles and that first pass out of the zone. Most of the Leafs defense (outside of Rielly) have trouble in that regard. And maybe the thinking was - Klinger can skate it out. Then the obvious problem becomes - to skate it out, he has to be good at retrieving it and maintaining possession long enough to do something with it. He doesn't seem very good at the latter....at all.
- GalacticStone

No defenseman can shoot on the entire team and system. That was the hope. That and it frees Gio up from the 2nd PP so he can play less minutes.

(frank) doodz, I looked at the TV in the pub and Robuston scored to tie up. I ate a wing. Poutine, next time I look she's 5-3. Luckily I had yoga brain at the time so I wasn't guilty of going megadown on the poop. But gotta pump up Kool Aid supply dude mang, Leafs are a pain in my Bozak.

I think the big stinker is that Klingberg was overpaid hoping he would change and be his older self even with warts, when Gustafsson literally was right here and the same player but signed for league min and does the exact same thing.
- AdamFrench

I agree ...it was extremely wishful thinking to think they could convert Klingberg back into a top 4 guy by "protecting him". Who was going to protect him in the top four defensively? McCabe?

Rielly
Brodie
McCabe
Klingon
Giordano
Liljegren
Timmins
Benoit
Lagesson
Lajoie
Niemela

From a depth perspective, we are fine
Just need someone to clear the net/PK
https://youtube.com/short...03Uc8?si=fH60iEQlTRgrQ_QN

Jenner, Anderson and Savard
- mr.sir

The d depth is "fine"?


😂

The Leafs were getting CAVED when Holl was playing 5v5. Paying the guy 3.4x3 to maybe be an effective penalty killer is something else.
- mjones242

Oh I know. The move was always to keep Schenn and let Holl walk.

The d depth is "fine"?


😂
- fifty__missions

You can make a pile of po op as big as you want, it’s still po op.

This team needs 2 top 4 d. ANd they need big guys, not soft cant-clear-the-net guys…

I agree ...it was extremely wishful thinking to think they could convert Klingberg back into a top 4 guy by "protecting him". Who was going to protect him in the top four defensively? McCabe?
- The Law

At least his actual salary is only 2M and with 13 games in its only going down by the day.

Lily will be out a long time and with his injury I am not expecting anything above sheltered 3D or press box injury guy for playoffs.

Timmins and McCabe coming back should slide Klingberg right out.

I went through this same thought process. I put myself in Tree's position and took at look at the summer signings ....there was (frank) all out there on the open market in terms of top 4 defensive blue liners. Ian Cole? Mayfield signed for 7 years! Schenn got 3 x 2.75 (love him but that won't age well). Holl 3 x 3.4 ...

I think he signed Klingwrap b/c it was that or nothing. In hindsight I would have preferred the later or even toss that money at Ian Cole ...i guess.

I think he targeted Bertuzzi and Reaves. But the others - it was probably too quick/soon to really get a trade organized so he stuck some bandaids where he could (Domi and Klingberg).
- The Law

Yeah this is it, obviously wasn't there.

McCabe and Timmins coming back helps...

A November trade is really (frank)ing difficult when no teams want to deal and rightfully so. Klingberg is probably a Leaf until December/January.

You can make a pile of po op as big as you want, it’s still po op.

This team needs 2 top 4 d. ANd they need big guys, not soft cant-clear-the-net guys…
- Hockey_Reverend

You could have at least said sh it.

Lawsie, I don't buy the "there was no one else" argument. Surely GMs are smart enough to know that the cap space is more valuable than taking a flier on a big ticket guy you're not sure about.

Or maybe they're not that smart? 🤔