Analyzing the Leafs Last Final-4 Appearances

[WordsOfWisdom]

I thought this would make a good topic in and of itself:

 

I can remember when the Leafs made it to the conference finals (the past four times: Carolina, Buffalo, Vancouver, Los Angeles). Whenever the Leafs made it that far, they were defeated convincingly in the conference final. And each time, the team that the Leafs lost to, went on to lose in the Stanley Cup final! You always knew (as a Leafs fan) that the Leafs were one or maybe two tiers below championship calibre. Year after year they went into the playoffs with the same flaws (usually weak defensively) and those flaws were eventually exploited by superior teams. The Leafs were never the favourite going into the playoffs in any of those years. They always positioned themselves to be good, but not good enough. Thoughts? 

 

Recapping the Leafs final fours:

 

• Losing to Carolina in 2002. Carolina would get swept (I think) by Detroit in the final.
• Losing to Buffalo in 1999. Buffalo would lose to Dallas in the final (the famous Brett Hull toe in the crease goal).
• Losing to Vancouver in 1994. Vancouver would lose to the Rangers in 7.
• Losing to Los Angeles in 1993. The Kings would lose to the Canadiens on the famous stick measurement penalty.

 

FYI:

 

The Stanley Cup finals in those years could have been:

 

• Toronto vs Detroit in 2002. Original six match-up.
• Toronto vs Dallas in 1999. (Who really cares?)
• Toronto vs New York Rangers in 1994. Another original six match-up.
• Toronto vs Montreal in 1993. The most epic original six match-up.

 

None of those happened because Toronto refused to acquire an elite defenceman (and in that era they could have bought one through free agency).  

 

Quick: Name the top defenceman on each of those Leafs teams and compare that guy with the competition. Where does the Leafs top defender of those eras rank among the list of all-time greats?

[Holymakinaw]

Well, Detroit had Lidstrom, who was one of the best ever.  No argument there.  And the Rangers had Leetch.  Same deal.

 

But Dallas?  Hatcher?  He was nothing special.  Neither was Sydor.  They won without an elite D-Man.

 

Montreal?  Had absolutely nobody special on D that year.  Desjardins?  Brisbois?  Schneider?  Puh-lease.  They DEF. won without an elite D-Man.

 

There's no question that Toronto could use a legit Norris Trophy calibre Defenceman.  We've never ever had one.  But you can win without them.  I'm hoping that Rielly can become ours.  There's a real chance at least.

[WordsOfWisdom]

At the height of the "dead puck era", the Dallas Stars were the strongest defensive team in the NHL. Hatcher, Sydor, et all were a powerhouse defensive unit and they had Ed Belfour in net. The Sabres countered with the best goalie of all time in Dominik Hasek, but were otherwise an overachieving team relying too heavily on one player.

 

The Leafs had Curtis Joseph, and the Leafs "D" was:

• Sylvain Cote
• Dimitri Yushkevich
• Alexander Karpotsev
• Tomas Kaberle
• Bryan Berard
• Danil Markov

Sundin, Thomas, and Berezin were the top forwards. 

 

 

Reinforcing the fact that you can't win without strong "D" in the playoffs, the #7 ranked Sabres (175 GA - 1st in East) dispatched the Leafs (231 GA - 12th East) easily:

 

Toronto (4) vs. Buffalo (7)

Date Away Home Score

1. May 23 Buffalo Toronto 5 – 4
2. May 25 Buffalo Toronto 6 – 3
3. May 27 Toronto Buffalo 4 – 2
4. May 29 Toronto Buffalo 5 – 2
5. May 31 Buffalo Toronto 4 – 2

Buffalo wins series 4–1 and Prince of Wales Trophy

[Holymakinaw]

Those teams played much better D systems than we did........no argument there.  I thought you were suggesting that each one had a totaly elite D-Man leading the way, and two of those teams definitely did not.  

 

But yes, I agree that we'll never win squat until we learn how to play in our end of the ice.  Why we can never seem to do that is beyond me.

[WordsOfWisdom]

Those teams played much better D systems than we did........no argument there.  I thought you were suggesting that each one had a totaly elite D-Man leading the way, and two of those teams definitely did not.  

 

But yes, I agree that we'll never win squat until we learn how to play in our end of the ice.  Why we can never seem to do that is beyond me.

 

Agreed. They don't always have a legendary defencemen on their team, but they usually do.  

 

My main point was, the Leafs went into the playoffs in those years with serious flaws. Imagine being 12th best in the Eastern Conference in goals against. Not 12th best OVERALL, 12th best in your own CONFERENCE!!! The Leafs were shoddy defensively in 1998-99, relied too heavily on offence, and eventually they ran into a team that they couldn't "out-goal-tend" in the Sabres. The outcome was predictable. The Leafs had the chance to correct these flaws via trade or free agency and chose not to. And they can't say they didn't know they were weak defensively because the numbers don't lie. 

[WordsOfWisdom]

Where the Leafs finished in the standings:

 

• 1992-93: 3rd in the Norris division with 99 pts. 288 GF, 241 GA. This was the strongest defensive team that the Leafs have ever iced... and it was the closest to winning it all.
• 1993-94: 2nd in the Central division with 98 pts. 280 GF, 243 GA. Another solid Leafs team that (on paper) should have been able to handle the Canucks.
• 1998-99: 2nd in Northeast division with 97 pts. 268 GF, 231 GA. As discussed above, 231 GA in 1998-99 was good for 12th best in the Eastern Conference.
• 2001-02: 2nd in Northeast division with 100 pts. 249 GF, 207 GA. With a team that was #1 in GF and #5 in GA in the East, the Leafs **** their pants against a very average Hurricanes team.

 

[Holymakinaw]

1992-93: 3rd in the Norris division with 99 pts. 288 GF, 241 GA. This was the strongest defensive team that the Leafs have ever iced... and it was the closest to winning it all.

 

That was 22 years ago, coming up on 23.  How sad is THAT?  

 

The only "positive" in all that futility, is that there hasn't been a single Canadian team since that year that has come close to winning a Cup.  We've all spun our wheels.

[ScottM]

That was 22 years ago, coming up on 23. How sad is THAT?

The only "positive" in all that futility, is that there hasn't been a single Canadian team since that year that has come close to winning a Cup. We've all spun our wheels.

Actually, I can think of three close calls by Canadian teams in that time span. The 1994 Canucks, the 2004 Flames, and the 2011 Canucks were each within a single game of winning the Cup. In fact, the teams in 2004 and 2011 even had a 3-2 advantage in the Finals series.

All in all though, I agree that 22 (might as well say 23 since it'll be at least next year) years is too long. Canadian hockey fans deserve better than having to wait that long.

Edit: four. I inexplicably left out the 2006 Oilers who also had a 3-2 lead.

[Holymakinaw]

Actually, I can think of three close calls by Canadian teams in that time span. The 1994 Canucks, the 2004 Flames, and the 2011 Canucks were each within a single game of winning the Cup. In fact, the teams in 2004 and 2011 even had a 3-2 advantage in the Finals series.

All in all though, I agree that 22 (might as well say 23 since it'll be at least next year) years is too long. Canadian hockey fans deserve better than having to wait that long.

Edit: four. I inexplicably left out the 2006 Oilers who also had a 3-2 lead.

 

Meh.  I never felt like any of those series were in doubt, really.  Credit to the teams for making it as far as they did, but I never believed for a second that they were going to win, and they didn't.

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

You said it at the beginning of this thread, @WordsOfWisdom :

 

Just poor defense...and not really a legit number one goaltender in all that time either.

Two things any team needs to win a Cup.

 

Cujo was good, but I always felt he was one of those goalies who was perhaps a B+ type goalie.....good enough to make the post season with, just not good enough to win it ALL with.

And after him, there was a carousel of goalies of varying abilities.

 

I don't think a team NEEDS to have a single, dominant elite defenseman (although that certainly helps!), so long as the defense corp as a unit plays very well.

A team could win a championship with a bunch of number 2 or 3's playing at their best.

 

Fast forward your Leafs teams from the years you mentioned to today....same problem exists:

Poor defense and STILL not a number one goaltender (unless Jonathan Bernier somehow steps up to be that guy this year).

 

For as long as I have followed hockey (since about 1994-95), I have always known the Maple Leafs to be a tough, forechecking, aggressive team with a penchant for goal scoring.

But NEVER have I associated Toronto with stellar defense or Cup caliber goaltending.

That still holds true today.

 

Fix those two things, and maintain what makes Leafs teams good (the aggressive offense), and perhaps a Cup could possibly come to Toronto.

Also, while gaining an elite defenseman would be hugely beneficial, again, it isn't necessary if they can gather together a nice group of next tier guys committed to playing team D.

[yave1964]

@Holymakinaw

Did you just say Hatcher was no big deal? Really? Let me tell you for a few years there in Dallas he was one of the very elite top of the pack d-men in all of hockey. His style wore him down rather quickly, but for a few years he was the man. He was what Dion Phaneuf is supposed to be.@WordsOfWisdom The Leafs defense tho, is indefensible. Just awful, the goalies, Cujo and the rest should be able to sue Toronto for non support.

 

 One thing Babs brings is a demand for excellence. We have a kid named Pulkinnen who led the AHL in goals scored, in ONLY 46 GAMES!  Babs called him up, the kid has a serious shot but he does not backcheck, he is not responsible away from the puck, so he was buried. First a healthy scratch and then sent back to Grand Rapids for the Calder playoffs. I guarantee you that by next year the kid will learn what it takes to play in the NHL. It is not just about how hard you can shoot the puck.

 

 He will hold the Leafs players accountable to his standards, they play hard and his way or they sit. He does not care who it is. We signed Stephen Weiss two years ago and Babs buried him and his five year 25 million dollar contract becauise he is not good away from the puck. I bet dollars to donuts Weiss plays more next year under the new coach because Babs has the highest standard of anyone in the game and being gone Weiss will slither into a top nine, possibly a top six role.

 

 Off subject, my point is, whoever is playing defense for Babs better bring it every night or get used to the seat in the press box. He does it to highly touted rookies, he does it to overpriced signees. Bring it every night or he buries you. The Leafs defense will be better than it has been for decades, take it to the bank.

[ScottM]

Meh.  I never felt like any of those series were in doubt, really.  Credit to the teams for making it as far as they did, but I never believed for a second that they were going to win, and they didn't.

 

Whether you believed in them or not, the fact remains that they got close. Very close.

[Holymakinaw]

@Holymakinaw

Did you just say Hatcher was no big deal? Really? Let me tell you for a few years there in Dallas he was one of the very elite top of the pack d-men in all of hockey. His style wore him down rather quickly, but for a few years he was the man. He was what Dion Phaneuf is supposed to be.

 

LOL.  Yes, really.  D. Hatcher was a big, physical Defenceman who was good for 20-30 points a year.  Good player, but that never made him "elite".

 

Raymond Bourke was an elite player.  Nik Lidstrom was elite.  

 

Hatcher.........not quite.

[WordsOfWisdom]

LOL.  Yes, really.  D. Hatcher was a big, physical Defenceman who was good for 20-30 points a year.  Good player, but that never made him "elite".

 

Raymond Bourke was an elite player.  Nik Lidstrom was elite.  

 

Hatcher.........not quite.

 

I got my Hatcher brothers mixed up. 

 

In all fairness, the Dallas Stars had the best defensive unit in the NHL when they won the Stanley Cup. Derian Hatcher, Darryl Sydor, Sergei Zubov, Richard Matvichuk, and Craig Ludwig, were absolutely lights out. Derian Hatcher was the equivalent of Chris Pronger. Zubov was the highest scoring D man in the NHL. They had punishing, physical guys and Eddie the Eagle in net to make every game a 2-1 Dallas win. 

 

Toronto entered the playoffs that year with six guys named who. Cujo, who did his best to bail them out every night, couldn't carry the team on his shoulders. Unfortunately that was the Leafs defensive "plan"... absolutely no different than it is today in 2015. Let the opposing team get 60 shots until their arms fall off and then we'll counterattack! As @TropicalFruitGirl26 pointed out, nothing has changed! 

[jammer2]

I got my Hatcher brothers mixed up.

 

 Honestly, I do the same thing quite often. It's even more confusing being an OHL fan, cause they both played for North Bay....and were both towering.

[WordsOfWisdom]

 Honestly, I do the same thing quite often. It's even more confusing being an OHL fan, cause they both played for North Bay....and were both towering.

 

I think Kevin Hatcher was a key piece in Pittsburgh's early 90's Cup wins. But his brother Derian became a Chris Pronger-like defensive force in the NHL. 

 

But who needs Derian Hatcher when you've got Dmitri Yushevich right?    

And who needs Sergei Zubov when you've got Tomas ("I don't shoot") Kaberle?

 

MLSE........  

[flyercanuck]

Meh.  I never felt like any of those series were in doubt, really.  Credit to the teams for making it as far as they did, but I never believed for a second that they were going to win, and they didn't.

 

Nobody (other than some delusional leaf fans) thought any of those Leaf teams, that couldn't even win a conference championship, were going to win a cup. So really those 3 teams were a lot closer than any Leafs team since 1967.

[WordsOfWisdom]

Nobody (other than some delusional leaf fans) thought any of those Leaf teams, that couldn't even win a conference championship, were going to win a cup. So really those 3 teams were a lot closer than any Leafs team since 1967.

 

1993 would have been their best chance. The Leafs were as good as the Montreal Canadiens that year. They (almost) beat the Kings, and the Kings almost beat Montreal. A Leafs/Canadiens final would have been a coin toss.

 

In 1994, the Rangers were head and shoulders above the competition. Had the Leafs made it to the final, the Rangers would have squashed them eventually, although they had a surprisingly difficult time against Vancouver.

 

In 1999, the Leafs wouldn't have faired any better than Buffalo against Dallas, and probably a lot worse.

 

In 2002, the Red Wings would have crushed the Leafs in four games. They had no difficulty beating Carolina. 

 

[ScottM]

1993 would have been their best chance. The Leafs were as good as the Montreal Canadiens that year. They (almost) beat the Kings, and the Kings almost beat Montreal. A Leafs/Canadiens final would have been a coin toss.

 

In 1994, the Rangers were head and shoulders above the competition. Had the Leafs made it to the final, the Rangers would have squashed them eventually, although they had a surprisingly difficult time against Vancouver.

 

In 1999, the Leafs wouldn't have faired any better than Buffalo against Dallas, and probably a lot worse.

 

In 2002, the Red Wings would have crushed the Leafs in four games. They had no difficulty beating Carolina. 

 

 

i agree with most of that, but the Habs handled L.A. in only five games in 1993. I suppose that series could be considered closer than most 4-1 series with the three OT games, but Montreal more or less kept things in hand, so I wouldn't say the Kings almost beat the Habs. The way Patrick Roy stepped up his game in the playoffs, I don't think anyone was going to beat Montreal that year. Don't take that as a knock on the Leafs, though. It's only intended to praise the top caliber play of Montreal in that postseason.

[flyercanuck]

1993 would have been their best chance. The Leafs were as good as the Montreal Canadiens that year. They (almost) beat the Kings, and the Kings almost beat Montreal. 

 

 

See, herein lies the difference between Leaf fans and reality. My team has lost plenty of conference finals...and Stanley Cup finals. None of those make them a champion.. If the team that beat them lost 4-1 in the following series, I also wouldn't consider that "almost beat". Losing a best of 7 in 5 is not close. Only in Leafland. I hear it all the time. Remember that 93 team?

 

Philly has played in SIX conference finals and two Stanley Cup finals since that legendary Leaf team of 93. I'd like to forget the results of those.

[jammer2]

   I was just reminiscing about the Leafs trade for Tom Kurvers. At the time the Leafs had a playoff team (lol...I know, crazy....huh?) and the common belief, both among the fans and Leaf management was that the Leafs were one dependable stand out d-man away from a legit Cup run...SO...the Leafs traded their first rounder that year to Devils. The Devils kept that pick and selected Scott Niedermayer....ahhh, good times I say!

[WordsOfWisdom]

i agree with most of that, but the Habs handled L.A. in only five games in 1993. I suppose that series could be considered closer than most 4-1 series with the three OT games, but Montreal more or less kept things in hand, so I wouldn't say the Kings almost beat the Habs. The way Patrick Roy stepped up his game in the playoffs, I don't think anyone was going to beat Montreal that year. Don't take that as a knock on the Leafs, though. It's only intended to praise the top caliber play of Montreal in that postseason.

 

Oh crap. I thought it went more than five games!    The way the media describes it, the stick measurement was the difference in the series. 

 

Okay scratch that... Leafs weren't all that close in 1993 either. 

[WordsOfWisdom]

See, herein lies the difference between Leaf fans and reality. My team has lost plenty of conference finals...and Stanley Cup finals. None of those make them a champion.. If the team that beat them lost 4-1 in the following series, I also wouldn't consider that "almost beat". Losing a best of 7 in 5 is not close. Only in Leafland. I hear it all the time. Remember that 93 team?

 

Philly has played in SIX conference finals and two Stanley Cup finals since that legendary Leaf team of 93. I'd like to forget the results of those.

 

I updated my post. I thought the final went longer. The media sells it as though the stick measurement was the only difference between the Kings and certain victory. So I didn't look back at how many games that final went.

 

I do know that Montreal was not the best team entering the playoffs that year. They overachieved and won a bunch of games in OT. I wouldn't say it's a stretch that the Leafs (on paper) were as good as Montreal that year.

[jammer2]

@WordsOfWisdom  That was the year John LeClair put the Habs on his back and had an ungodly 6 OT goals in one playoff year....he was nothing short of remarkable.

[Holymakinaw]

See, herein lies the difference between Leaf fans and reality. 

 

 

I didn't realize his comment represented ALL Leaf fans, everywhere.  Good to know.