Skip to content

The Leafs have been really bad, according to chart

Jan 10, 2014, 11:35 AM EDT

Toronto Maple Leafs v Carolina Hurricanes Getty Images

For the first time this season, the Toronto Maple Leafs are out of the playoff picture. Their 6-1 loss last night in Carolina means it’s now the streaking Hurricanes who hold down the final wild-card spot in the Eastern Conference.

Since starting the season 10-4-0, the Leafs have won just four times in regulation and once in overtime. They’ve dropped their last three by a combined score of 18-5.

The Globe and Mail’s James Mirtle was so kind to put Toronto’s struggles since the start of November in chart form:


As you can see, no team has fewer regulation/OT wins than the Leafs, and only the Sabres, Flames and Oilers have amassed fewer points.

Toronto’s in Washington to play the Capitals tonight.

  1. beergold - Jan 10, 2014 at 12:18 PM

    The Leafs are really bad, nothing new here folks, same old same old year after year after year.

    • davebabychreturns - Jan 10, 2014 at 1:39 PM

      Paging the “the Leafs have beat the advanced stats crowd” folks..

      • elvispocomo - Jan 10, 2014 at 1:56 PM

        They might actually still be using pagers.

  2. zwilhelm16 - Jan 10, 2014 at 12:35 PM

    Go Blues!!!

  3. stepanup - Jan 10, 2014 at 1:26 PM

    That chart makes me hate the current system. Washington has 10 ROW but is on pace for more than 100 points. That’s obscene. The system has to be changed. Make regulation/OT wins worth 3 points. The fact that a team surviving through the shootout is on pace for the playoffs makes me seriously pissed off.

    • ibieiniid - Jan 10, 2014 at 2:12 PM

      know what, I pondered the 3 point thing yesterday. I think it’s a good idea. 3 for ROW, 2 for SOW (assuming we’re keeping the shootout, which I’m opposed to), 0 for a loss, period. aside from the 0 for OTLs, it’s basically the same as now, just reducing the value of a SOW to 1.33 points instead of 2 in the current system… but f*** decimals, so make Ws 3 points.

      • ibieiniid - Jan 10, 2014 at 2:57 PM

        on second read, I guess that’s exactly the scenario you were proposing (aside from the 0 for OTLs). I just didn’t pick up the implication that you’d leave SOWs at 2 points.

  4. thomasvanek - Jan 10, 2014 at 1:51 PM


  5. snipedanglecelly13 - Jan 10, 2014 at 2:08 PM

    My wings are just bad this year…..

    • Lupy Nazty Philthy - Jan 10, 2014 at 7:48 PM

      Yeah, but them being bad makes a bit of sense. Datsyuk and Zetterberg are aging, they don’t really have any up and coming stars like they did when Yzerman and Shanahan retired. Every team has their ups and downs and Detroit is clearly headed towards a rebuild when #13 and #40 retire. Detroit playing bad is forgivable, they’ve done quite well for 20+ years.

      Leafs on the other hand are supposed to be on the upswing of a post-rebuild… but they’re regressing back to how they played before Carlyle was here. It’s pathetic. It looks even worse now that it’s happening after everyone signs their big longterm deals. Now the team is screwed cap-wise and the future looks extremely bleak. Unless something drastic changes soon, it doesn’t look like it’s going to be getting any better.

  6. germanflyerfan - Jan 10, 2014 at 3:12 PM

    @Jason Brough: I hate to be that guy, but honestly?

    “As you can see, no team has fewer regulation/OT wins than the Leafs, and only the Flames and Sabres have amassed fewer points.”

    I see 1 more team which has amassed fewer points

    • ibieiniid - Jan 10, 2014 at 3:16 PM

      “I hate to be that guy, but honestly?” isn’t a question. you and Brough are tied.

      • germanflyerfan - Jan 10, 2014 at 4:44 PM

        what would be the correct term? (in my native tongue that sentence makes sense ;))

      • ibieiniid - Jan 10, 2014 at 5:38 PM

        apologies. didn’t see “german” in your name.

        But just for the education, you could informally use : or … instead of ‘?’.

    • Jason Brough - Jan 10, 2014 at 5:26 PM

      Fixed. Thanks.

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kane (2033)
  2. P. Kessel (1271)
  3. M. Richards (1215)
  4. N. Backstrom (1113)
  5. M. Giordano (999)