Can Carlyle now do what Pat Quinn did in his first season behind the Leaf bench—but with different methods?

With a new National Hockey League season finally under way after the lockout, here are some recent VLM posts you might have missed while you were away:

• On Rielly and Gardiner

• Where Brian Burke could end up

• What identity would you like to see the Leafs develop?

• On finally setting Kadri free

• Why I'm reasonably happy with the Leafs  as we start the new season

And for those who may be tuning in to the "Leaf Matters" podcasts with myself and  Matteo Codispoti from We Want a Cup, if you are enjoying the shows, I invite you to take a moment to leave feedback on iTunes.

As I've mentioned before, we aren't trying to be mainstream media 'broadcasters'.  We are simply trying to provide an alternative for Maple Leaf and hockey fans: a show by Leaf fans, for Leaf fans.

Just as with VLM, listeners/readers won't always agree with us, but isn't that part of what's fun about being a fan?  We all have our own opinions but still pull for the same side, while watching and following  a sport we all grew up loving.

For those who don't have iTunes, one click and you can catch the various episodes via the Podalmighty Network.

We've been fortunate to attract some great guests for the show- and the season has just started.  Already we've chatted on "Leaf Matters" with '80s Leaf netminder Allan Bester, long-time player and coach Pat Quinn, former first-round pick Laurie Boschman, Mark Osborne from the Pat Burns Leaf team of the  early '90s and 1980s star winger Mirko Frycer.  We have also chatted with play-by-play voice Joe Bowen, the extremely popular "Down Goes Brown", Adam Proteau from The Hockey News and Kevin McGrann from the Toronto Star. I'm probably forgetting someone, but every guest has been tremendous.  The ex-Leafs clearly had (and still have) a deep pride around having played for the blue and white, which is so great to hear.  It makes you feel as though it has always been worth cheering for this team- and still is.

****

The initial euphoria of an opening-night win in Montreal will no doubt morph into a more measured response by many Leaf fans as we accept the fact that the Habs were just not very good on Saturday night.  The Leafs were not flawless by any means but they did enough, from the goal out, to walk away with a well-deserved two points against an arch-rival.  It wasn’t like beating the ’77 Habs, but hey, it was a nice win, for sure.

We all know it’s “early” and a tendency to over-state the importance of a solitary win has become part of a Leaf fan’s trademark in recent years (or is that 45 years?).  Surely if we beat the not-quite-as-hated Sabres on Monday night, we won’t be planning parades, but we will be talking playoffs in these parts.  It’s just the way it is—and generally speaking, the way we are as Leaf fans.

If nothing else, we live in hope.  The Boston Red Sox finally won those two World Series, right, after decades of disappointment?  (Let’s not mention the Cubs…) You gotta believe.

In any event, what has crossed my mind is that teams often get a nice mental “bump” when a new coach comes to town.  The short-term jump in performance is as old as sports, I'm sure.  It seems to happen all the time. And Carlyle is indeed the "new" guy right now.

Usually this is the way it works:  a “player’s coach” replaces the tough task-master, and a disciplinarian takes over from a coach who was supposedly too easy on the players.  So in Wilson being replaced by the even crustier Carlyle, we are expected to see a response from the team.  That’s not a surprise.  (I tend to discount the team’s record under Carlyle at the end of last season.  That ship had sailed. He's still the "new" voice here.)  And for one night, we did—albeit under peculiar circumstances (after a lengthy lockout, no exhibition games, against a very mediocre team, etc.).

The expectation is that we will move from “run and gun” (or at least something proximate to that) under Wilson to a much tighter, defensive approach where each player is given a very specific role and is expected to play it—to the hilt.  (I should hasten to add that it's not exactly as though Wilson did not preach hard work or defense.  All coaches do, and he certainly did.  We shouldn't forget that.)  The fact that this is not exactly a star-studded lineup—and includes very few guys with lots of experience who are fully secure of their jobs—means that we should anticipate that players will do their best to abide by Carlyle’s demands. They want to stay in the lineup.

Is the roster that much different than what we had a year ago under Wilson? Well, yes and no.  There are some tweaks, of course.  The first two forward lines are identical, and that’s not a huge shock, given the relative "success" of those two lines. (I’m still not sure that “top-six” will be good enough, but we can debate that another day.)  The so-called “bottom-six” is where we see some new faces:  McClement, van Riemsdyk, Komarov and of course, Kadri. Each of those guys has something to prove this season—to themselves and of course to the Leafs or their former teams.

The back end looks a bit different with Scrivens in net and newcomer Kostka playing significant minutes already.  When Gardiner returns something will have to shake loose.  It won’t be Phaneuf, Gunnarsson or Liles.  Franson looked solid on opening night and I would be surprised if it was him, but who knows?  Maybe Komisarek, or Kostka slides up into the press box and one of Fraser or Holzer return to the Marlies.

All this said, it would be hard to argue that this is a massively over-hauled roster from last April.  But there are some adjustments, and for the moment, they appear to be positive additions.

I guess what I’m getting at today is a new coach usually brings an element of change in mindset, even if the roster is relatively familiar  And when change behind the bench creates a renewed environment and a positive outcome, that’s obviously a very good thing.

Many of us recall that  when Pat Quinn took over before the 1998-’99 season, he replaced one of the nice guys in the hockey world, Mike Murphy.  Everyone loved “Murph” in Toronto.  He had been a fine NHL player and worked as an assistant coach with the Rangers (when they won the Cup in ’94, I believe).  He had an OK roster in Toronto but one with somewhat limited high-end talent, or so he seemed to feel.  I don't want to misrepresent Murphy's thinking, but his view appeared to be that the Leafs needed to focus on defense and play a trap-oriented, shutdown game to win.  That approach, in the end, while well-intentioned and very much in line with what many successful NHL teams were trying, did not work effectively enough here in Murphy’s two years as head coach for the Leafs to make the playoffs.

When Quinn came in, he changed the philosophy and approach (and yes, attitude) around significantly.  A new goaltender in Curtis Joseph certainly helped, but Quinn’s view was that he could take much the same roster as Murphy had and to a certain extent, let them go.  He wanted them to play hard, be defensively responsible, but also wanted them to play some offense, have flow in their game, and create problems for the other team trying to contain the blue and white.

That squad immediately found its confidence—and its legs—and often played inspired hockey, all the way to making the “final four” in Quinn’s first season, despite having three rookies on the blueline.  The “system” of play had changed, for sure, but most importantly, Quinn had helped the players change their thinking.  He opened the doors to creativity, and the players responded for the most part.

Not insignificantly, they had re-discovered their confidence, individually and as a team.

Quinn was able to foster that approach for the next several years, always making the playoffs in the pre-cap era (and yes, I acknowledge that we should have expected that when we had the money to spend), some years having more playoff success than others.  (Another “final four” appearance in 2002 stands out—we were so close to making the finals again that spring.  It still stings.)

Fast-forward to the present, and Carlyle, another former Leaf defenseman, like Quinn, is doing something entirely different.  He is demanding a much tighter, defensive focus.  He wants a physical style (though we certainly played with a tough, physical edge when Quinn was in charge, too), and a very high “compete level”.  It’s not just that Carlyle feels it’s necessary because the Leafs don’t have enough talent.  He was this way in Anaheim as well, and they won a Stanley Cup with Niedermayer and Pronger on the blueline and Giguere, a top goaltender at the time, in goal. This is how Carlyle believes good teams have to play to win consistently in the NHL.

What is the bottom line similarity, despite the obvious differences in “systems” employed by Quinn and Carlyle?

Yes, it’s every player “buying in” to the team approach and the system, but maybe more than anything it’s about confidence.  Quinn helped restore that invaluable mental trait to his hockey club in the late ‘90s, and it carried over until Quinn was removed from the GM’s portfolio and the team eventually went south because of poor roster choices made by the new GM.

I believe you can with either way.  You can play the old New Jersey trap, you can play a more hybrid  “system” like the Red Wings generally have all these years, or, yes, a more offensive approach.  No one wins without playing defense, of course, in today’s NHL.  You need goaltending and you have to be hard to play against. 

But regardless of the system, if you play with confidence, it makes a huge difference.  If Carlyle can turn this ship around, helped by a few roster changes, yes, it will be about systems, sure, but it will also be because this team has begun to believe in itself.  That’s what happened in the late ‘90s under Quinn.

We can hope it happens again.