Toronto Maple Leafs: Forward Combinations And Possession

The Toronto Maple Leafs have run through several (sixteen) different forward combinations so far this season at 5v5.

Which of those combinations have actually driven success for the Toronto Maple Leafs, though?

combos /

*numbers from Corsica.Hockey

Well, to no surprise, a Nazem Kadri line leads the way out of combos that have been together for at least 50 minutes at 5v5 – 53.58 for this particular group – with over 57% of the shot attempt differential going in Toronto’s favor.

That line happens to be, perhaps, the most annoying line in hockey. Each of the three players (Komarov-Kadri-Soshnikov) are tasked with driving the opposition insane, and they’re all good at it.

If we assume that Matthews’ line is the top unit and Marner’s group is the second, then is the 47-43-26 line the best third line in hockey? It’s not unreasonable to believe so. They generate chances, limit the oppositions, and cause a major distraction for the other team.

The second best group is Hyman-Matthews-Nylander. This group finds itself missing a man – #29 – because of frequent trips to Mike Babcock’s doghouse, but there’s no denying the success when they are all together.

They generate six percent more control of the play than when Nylander is removed and Connor Brown is inserted. That’s a big jump. They’ve also spent the second most amount of time together at 5v5, echoing consistency.

More from Editor In Leaf

The third ranked group is the Marner-Bozak-JVR line, which has been together the most of all the Leafs forward lines at 5v5. That crew controls over 52% of the shot attempts while they’re on the ice.

What’s significant about these three lines ranking tops among Leafs combos? None of them include a repeat player, meaning they can all be rolled out for each game the Leafs play. That’s three lines – three scoring lines – that control at least 52% of the shot attempts.

That’s impressive, though there’s a pretty big elephant in the room right now. Connor Brown.

Brown doesn’t factor in either of the three top line combinations, but there’s nothing wrong with that right now. He’s a victim of the current roster makeup. I advocated earlier in the year for him to get better linemates than he was being given, and he has received said better linemates.

Brown, though, isn’t one of the Leafs better possession players. However, he happens to be a functional player when he’s on a good line.

Even though his numbers are lower than most Leafs, Brown still has a 50% CF and gels enough with Matthews that he remains at 50% in the combination with 34/11 as well as produces offensively. That’s also hard to ignore.

Going back to Nylander.

Where does he fit? Anywhere, really, for this season at least. He produces when he’s on top lines and he creates chances that fourth line players destroy on him. But that’s OK.

Connor Brown has more 5v5 points than William Nylander does. Nylander does the majority of his scoreboard damage on the powerplay. That’s something that can continue while Brown continues to produce on higher lines, even though the combination percentage of possession isn’t quite as high – it’s still 50%.

After all of that, what’s the point of all this?

Well, what I get from it all is that 47-43-26 and 16-42-25 are lines that shouldn’t be tampered with. They simply don’t have the same amount of success when those lines are broken.

The Matthews line is the wildcard, and it’s a wildcard because Matthews does with his linemates just what Sidney Crosby does with his ragtag group of variables: he makes them better.

Next: The Brass Are Into It, And That's Great

Matthews can score with Hyman/Brown and Hyman/Nylander. It doesn’t really matter, just like Crosby can score with a list of players as long as the quarterbacks of the Cleveland Browns over the last decade.

If you want pure domination of shot attempts at 5v5, you roll the top three lines from the chart above. If you want regular domination, and potentially more 5v5 scoring, then maybe you put Nylander down and let him have significant PP time when it comes around.

In the end, it’s a beautiful problem to have.

Home/Analysis