Agreed.The Doctor said:"Wholistic" is not actually a word, but if you use "holistic" around here we're going to get wrong whole piping in from the massage forum wanting to know pricing on Goober's BS...and we don't need that.
Coaches are pretty grumpy, for the most part. In any case, Quinn's assessment, and the assessment of most everyone who watched the series, was probably accurate - the Leafs skaters need to play better.The Doctor said:I like to think that the coaches are more realistic and not self-effacing. As well as many of the professional analysts who work for the networks take a more impartial view of the game, who unlike the rabid fan, is paid to be objective. And those objective observers, believe that the Leafs were outplayed and were lucky to walk away with the series victory.
If the Leafs are to win in Philly, they will require better efforts from the forwards and defense and not just relative to their round 1 performances, but relative to the Philly forwards and defense that are on the ice with them.
That having been said:
the Leafs, MINUS ED BELFOUR, were badly outplayed - swap the two goalies, and the Leafs are probably destroyed;
the Leafs, INCLUDING ED BELFOUR, were the better team.
The better team won. This is all I have ever said.
I agree with your last paragraph entirely.
AARGG! Here we go again - "Bottom line, a poor team effort!"
*sigh*
You realize, of course, that MOST of this argument is semantic.
If you mean to imply that MOST of the Leafs players put in a poor effort - perhaps. If you mean to imply that the Leafs ON THE WHOLE played poorly - well, they limited the best offensive team in the league to a paltry number of goals and pulled what many people consider an upset. This would imply that it WASN'T a poor team effort, despite the poor effort of many on the team.