It’s the second round of the playoffs, so it must be time for our annual “the Leafs were just eliminated” mailbag. This should be a million laughs, I can’t wait.
Note: Submitted questions have been edited for clarity and style.
Based on the one-way parasocial relationship between us as podcaster/listener, I hope you don’t find it weird that my only real question is “are you OK?” — Danny B.
I am, thanks. Honestly, this one barely stung at all.
I wrote a column about how difficult this version of the Leafs is to root for, and that was almost two full seasons ago. It’s fair to say it hasn’t got any easier. This is a talented group, but it’s not a particularly likable one, especially when the story always ends the same way.
So yeah, my reaction to Game 7 was a lot closer to a shrug than a tantrum. (And if you don’t believe me, here’s Ian Mendes opening Monday’s podcast with a description of what it was like to watch the game with me.)
Honestly, this is easily the least disappointment I’ve ever felt after a Leafs playoff loss, which is maybe not a great sign. And I’m guessing I’m not the only one, which is worse.
The conventional wisdom this day after another playoff flameout seems to be that Mitch Marner is done as a Leaf. If that’s the case, what’s a realistic trade return? He seems to be a “distressed asset” given his playoff performances and the Leafs’ situation. But he also seems to still be a damn good player … isn’t he?
What can the Leafs actually expect in return both in terms of value and what helps this team get better? — Matt H.
He’s a very good player, and the return will be less than you’d hope. And at this point, that might be OK.
The good: He’s a guy who flirts with 100 points, has been a first-team All-Star twice, can kill penalties and is still in his prime. The bad is the playoff record, plus that he’s a year away from UFA status and has a history of what can be, let’s just say, an interesting approach to negotiations.
He also has a full no-movement clause, which presumably eliminates most of the potential destinations. Maybe all of them, but for the sake of the exercise let’s assume he gives the Leafs a few teams to work with.
That all adds up to a tough bargaining position for Toronto, especially when you factor in a fan base begging for change. That means a smart team might see this as a chance to swoop in and get the sort of player who’s rarely available on the trade market while giving up less than expected.
But yeah, it will be less. Look, I fundamentally don’t accept the idea that these trades are impossible to pull off, or that we should resign ourselves to the Leafs getting absolutely fleeced. That’s loser talk, the sort of “anything that might be hard isn’t worth even trying” mentality that seems to have taken root in the organization. Dumb teams pre-emptively whine about the hand they’ve been dealt, while smart teams figure out how to make the best of bad situations.
But it is a bad situation, and I think the best-case scenario here is that you get back a package built around a cost-controlled but lesser player or two and some future assets, then see that lesser player blossom into something more than expected. That means a win from the pro scouting side, and the Leafs haven’t shown much to make us think they can pull that off. But it can be done. And if not, you’ve at least got some cap space and a message to everyone else that losing has actual consequences.
Let’s ignore no-trade clauses. Who would you 100% refuse to consider trading this summer? — Kristopher B.
Easy question. Nobody.
Would I want to trade somebody like Auston Matthews? No, obviously not. Is there any conceivable situation where that could happen? Not that I can think of.
But you asked if there’s anyone I wouldn’t even consider. There isn’t. I’m not hanging up the phone on anybody. Nobody here is untouchable. That’s something you earn, and there isn’t a player on the roster who’s come close to that.
I’m not trading everyone because I can’t, and it would be dumb. But is there anyone I wouldn’t even consider? Nope. This front office, or whatever’s left of it in a few days, needs to permanently get out of the business of preemptively ruling options out.
Nobody on the Leafs roster, including Auston Matthews, should be untouchable. (Bob DeChiara / USA Today)
Is the real issue the leadership? — Roy L.
There is no real issue, in the sense that the term implies there’s only one.
The issue is coaching. The issue is scoring. The issue is goaltending. The issue is the top of the blue line. This issue is a stubborn-bordering-on-pathological resistance to making changes. The issue is experience. The issue is the shambles in their brains.
And yes, some of the issue is leadership. It has to be. You never know how much, because none of us are in that room, and we know there’s a ton of things we never see. Maybe John Tavares is slamming doors and breaking sticks and getting in faces behind closed doors, then projecting cool and calm when the cameras are around. Or maybe he has the same blank stare in the room that he always seems to have on the bench. We don’t know, at least until he’s gone and the knives come out.
But yes, something is clearly broken with the leadership in this group. What do you do about it? I have no idea. Stripping a guy of the captaincy is a big dramatic move that will generate headlines, but might be more symbolic than anything else. That doesn’t mean you don’t consider it, but I doubt Matthews or Morgan Rielly or Ryan Reaves or whoever has had the answers all along but never spoke up because they had the wrong letter. A new coach will help, by elevating some voices and pushing back on others. Beyond that, leadership is a lot like a winning culture: The good teams always have it, the bad teams never do, but it’s not completely clear which way the causation arrow points.
How much can we blame this on Justin Bieber? I’m sure there’s a non-zero percentage of blame that can be assigned here, I’m just struggling to find out what that might total. — Andrew P.
Back on Feb. 28, 1994, Wendel Clark had a hat trick in Ottawa. A few days later in Detroit, he had another, with the third goal coming in overtime. A few months later, he was traded, after which the Leafs started missing the playoffs again. I think it’s fair to say it’s been all downhill from there.
Do you know what happened in between those two games? Justin Bieber was born.
This means something. I’m still working on what.
I’ve been reading about how “this is the year Leafs will blow this all up” for at least four years now. So far, the only change was not renewing Dubas (and that was because of a power struggle, not losing as far as I know). So based on that, what are the chances they don’t actually blow this all up? — Krzysztof L
Not zero, that’s for sure.
For one, there’s that whole pesky realism thing. How much can they actually do? The core players have no-movement clauses, and two of them just signed long-term extensions. Making big trades in the NHL is hard — not impossible, mind you, but difficult. It’s a hard-cap league. You know the drill.
Firing the coach wasn’t even low-hanging fruit anymore, because the fruit went rotten and fell on the ground years ago, but it was the one obvious move. Beyond that, who knows? Keith Pelley could take a wrecking ball to the whole organization. Or he could do that NHL thing where he kicks the can down the road and tells us he needs a year to get his bearings, just like Treliving did last summer. Brendan Shanahan has a year left on his deal and could make a solid case for getting one last shot at this.
Is there a world where Sheldon Keefe and his assistants go, maybe a few scouts or peripheral front-office types leave, we get the usual changes around the edges of the roster, and that’s it? Absolutely. It’s not a great world, but it’s out there and it would fit with this team’s identity.
Maybe it was just an outcome of the situation with Games 5 and 6 having a different feel from a pressure standpoint, but in your opinion, why did Toronto go 1-and-4 with Matthews in the lineup and 2-0 without him? Did they play a different style of hockey without him, did the lineup shift cause better matchups, or just a coincidence? — Scott K.
Mostly coincidence, with some element of a change in roles. When the best player is out, everyone knows there’s no margin for error, and sometimes you get their best. But wins and losses aside, it’s not like they were significantly better in Games 5 and 6 than they were in Game 7. And remember, two of those losses with Matthews in the lineup came when he was clearly less than 100 percent. The win was almost single-handedly his doing.
Long story short: Any kind of “maybe they’re better without Matthews” talk feels silly to me. That doesn’t mean he’s exempt from criticism, because he’s about to be the highest-paid player in the league. But let’s not pretend Nick Robertson or Noah Gregor or whoever would be an upgrade.
You’re allowed to give truth serum to one person before their end-of-season press conference. Who do you pick? — Terry P.
I’m giving the serum to Shanahan, and I’m asking one question: Just how pissed off are you at these players?
I mean, think about it. This guy has three Stanley Cup rings to go with a Hall of Fame plaque, and he earned all of it by scoring a bunch of goals while occasionally getting punched in the face. He fought for it. Bled for it. And it paid off.
And then when it was time to move to a front office, he bet his post-playing career on a young core. He and his front office protected them. They coddled them. They paid them. Good lord, how they paid them. And they did it all while sheltering them as much as you possibly could in Toronto. Years of people like me screaming for change from our couches, and Shanahan held firm. Just like in the Donald Brashear days, he did what he thought was the right thing for the team, even if he knew it would hurt.
And after eight years, they never paid him back. Time after time, when it was their turn to do the hard part, they backed down. They threw gloves, not hits. They chased raises, not scoring chances. And way too often, they really seemed like they somehow thought it was enough.
If this is it for him in Toronto, and maybe in any NHL front office, period, then I’d love to ask him how he really feels about these guys, and about the bet he made on them.
(It’s quite possible his answer would be “I’m completely fine with it, you little weirdo,” but it would be fun to find out.)
How angry could Brendan Shanahan be at the players and the bet he made on them? (Dan Hamilton / USA Today)
The Leafs have earned a reputation as a team that excels in the regular season but can’t perform in the playoffs. This frustrates me because the Leafs have not been as dominant in the regular season as the reputation suggests. They have never won the Atlantic Division despite the Canadiens, Bruins, Lightning and Panthers all having won since the Leafs’ playoff streak began. The best regular season they had placed them fourth, but other than that, they’ve generally been closer to the middle of the playoff pack.
Instead of focusing on building for the playoffs, should they instead be trying to be an elite regular-season team in hopes that dominance transfers to the playoffs? — James M.
First of all: No, this wasn’t Mirtle. I double-checked.
Second, I obviously agree with the general vibe here, as you already know from my piece last week about how this Leafs team has never been as good as we think.
Does that mean you build the team for the regular season instead of the playoffs? No, because you’re trying to win a Stanley Cup and we’ve all decided regular-season results are meaningless. I’m not even sure what building for the season would look like, but I doubt I’d like it. But sure, they have to be better, period, not just better for the playoffs.
Is this the worst it’s ever been? — Josh P.
More than a few of you have asked about this. For the 99 percent of you who weren’t reading me back in the Blogspot days, I wrote a multi-part feature way back in 2008 where I went back to the depths of the Ballard era and traced forward, asking which season was the low point. I added an update in 2014 — exactly 10 years ago today, as it turns out — that covered the Burke/Carlyle/Nonis years.
A decade later, a lot of you seem to want an update. And yeah, maybe we need one. But in short, no, I’m pretty sure this isn’t the worst it’s ever been. They have the best goal scorer in the league, a guy who recently won MVP. The talent level on this roster dwarfs anything from the ’80s. The regular-season consistency has been impressive. None of it has added up to anything great, but “worst” would feel like overkill.
So no, not the worst, maybe not even close. The most disappointing, frustrating, maybe even hard to watch? Yes, you could probably talk me into that.
Not a Leafs fan. Born and raised in Dallas, Stars die-hard for almost 30 years now. My best friend is a Mississauga boy and Leafs-lifer, so I’ve come to live and die with the Buds almost as if they were my own team. We watched Game 7 together (on his birthday no less!).
I don’t so much have a question as a message of hope: I’m also a die-hard Texas Rangers fan. For those that may not be familiar, the Rangers are one of the few sports franchises that could look at the Leafs’ history of heartbreak, disappointments, wild-ass characters, corrupt owners, etc. and say, “That’s cute.” Long story short, the Rangers have an almost unrivaled history of failures.
Until last Nov. 1. My Rangers finally overcame their many demons and won a championship. It was as glorious, emotional and just straight-up awesome as you’ve imagined a Leafs Cup would be and then some. As it will be when the Leafs finally break through.
For all the Leafs fans out there, real sports fans admire your dedication and stamina. Keep your heads up. The day will come. If the Texas Rangers can do it, the Toronto Maple Leafs sure as hell can. — Dustin K.
Thanks, Dustin.
Let’s close with one more from a rival fan base.
Sens fan here. Feeling a little conflicted.
On one hand, seeing the Leafs fail after constantly listening to their fans’ haughty disdain for Ottawa’s own futility is absolutely delicious. Every time Toronto’s season ends only a week or two after Ottawa’s, it is a salve for my own frustrations.
On the other, I’m feeling some sympathy as well. This much losing (when it really matters) and losing in this way … sucks. It’s funny for a little while, but no one who cheers for any team is looking to get emotionally abused for decades.
Is there room for my sympathy? Should rival fans just stick to gloating? — Mark P.
It’s really your call. I’m only going to make one request: Just try to be a normal person about it.
That’s it. That’s all. It’s a bit of advice for hockey fans, but it also applies to pretty much everything in today’s world. Like what you like, hate what you hate, but make sure you don’t let it become your entire personality.
Some of you have. No, you don’t think so, in the same way that people in zombie movies don’t realize they got bit in the first act. But you’re out there, you’re very weird and you’re already in the comment section of this very post, making everyone else feel uncomfortable. You know what every Leaf fan is like even though you’ve met three, you’ve got a list of absolute banger one-liners that hasn’t been updated since the 1970s, and you’re somehow mad that this site has posts about the Leafs even though you click on every single one and you can’t connect those dots without feeling dizzy.
Just try to be a normal person. We’re all sports fans because in theory it’s supposed to be fun, even though it never is. Rooting against another team is absolutely part of that, so go ahead. Go ahead and spike that football that some other fan base just fumbled at their own goal line. Just know when to say when.
A good test for whether you’re still having a normal one: Whether you ever find yourself like Mark here, wondering if there’s any room for empathy. Have that thought. Hold it in your brain.
And then reject it and go back to pointing and laughing. At least the Maple Leafs can know they’re bringing joy to somebody’s life. Just like the roster, the org chart and the philosophy, it’s one more thing that will probably never change.
(Top photo: Bob DeChiara / USA Today)
