Nah maybe if there lucky 1st round

I think it depends on where they are located. If they are in the East i'd wager no, but if they were in the West (or the Pacific to be even more specific) I think they would have a decent chance.
Tuch is about to break out, Kadri is a little underrated due to being burried in Toronto and being backedup by Danault and Brown down the middle is great depth. I really like Vrana as a player and think he could do well in top minutes.
Murray was quietly having a great season last year and was playing at the level of a #2-3 Dman. Having DeHaan is good also. Stecher is actually decent (even though he plays on VAN) and Jensen is a good bottom 4 option. In limited games (50:50 split) the goalies should be fine as well. I think they could have a good shot in the west, and be playing for a WC in the east/ metro.

No. Spreading talent throughout your roster is not how you win hockey games. Uneven usage is a thing. If you play Colorado, Toronto, or Winnipeg, you should expect to see those top two lines about 35-38 minutes of ice time. That means that your team is being dominated for more than 50% of the game on paper.

Ideally a fourth line should be cheap, and passable. Guys on ELCs or good veterans on discounts ideally. Right now, as a Jets fan, I am super happy with Mason Appleton and Jack Roslovic on my 4th line.

Yeah probably

Well, that's not necessarily true. With some better player choices, especially on defense, it can be done.

You're going to have to give me a recent example of a team that's had success in the cap era without at least an above average top 6. I can't think of any off the top of my head but I can think of countless examples in which the opposite is true, and strong top 6s and top 4s seem the clearest correlation to winning.

Lots of teams have strong top 6's and top 4's. The teams that also have quality third lines, checking lines and depth in defense win plenty. The Blues certainly had an excellent top 2 lines and top d-men, but the back half of their roster contributed a helluva lot, too. Certain recent star-studded teams haven't won the Cup because their squad balance is so poor: San Jose, Toronto, Winnipeg, Nashville, etc.

You aren't really calling Toronto s squad balance poor are you?
Forward depth for ages and a massively underrated d core (when healthy) plus one of the best goalies in the league.

Again gonna have to disagree with that one. The Blues don't have a bad roster top to bottom, but the Blues top 6, top 4, and goaltending was absolutely the reason they won the cup. Tyler Bozak and Sundqvist were the only two bottom 6 forwards to crack the top 10 even strength points in their roster, and finished 5th and 9th in scoring respectively. That's pretty par for the course from what you would expect a front loaded team to look like. Especially when you consider Bozak averages 10 minutes of even strength per game. That reads more like a statistical anomaly than the Blues bringing a completely rounded roster.

I'm not really counting this season, as we're only two games in so no Cup to be won. But yes, Toronto has had weak D pairings and lines that get taken advantage of. For the quality they've had at the top of the line-up the last few years, they still haven't won a division or got out of the first round.

Try measuring by more than just points. The Blues 3rd line and checking line were huge in the spring, while D-men like Gunnarson and Bortuzzo played aces throughout the playoffs, even chipping in with vitally important goals.

That is because they are in the same division as the 1st and 2nd best team in the league lol. We have been (statistically) playing ~the 4th best league wide but in a division where 1&2 are it doesn't matter.

D wise (especially last year) I wont argue with the weak spots bit but your are REALLY underrating Toronto's forward depth man.

It's funny you mention they had to play the "best two teams" the last two playoffs because very balanced Washington beat Tampa Bay, and then the very balanced Blues were able to beat Boston.

I'm aware of the three-line F depth, but who was the supposed shutdown checking line last year? And how well-rounded are some of those top line wingers with all the points anyway? When Gauthier, Ennis and Leivo play over 160 total games, there's some deep line weakness going on.

Let's look at this year because it is more relevant (and most of the guys are the same).
Trevor Moore is on our 4th line making 775k for two years and is already playing as well as a 3rd liner.
Mik looks like he was made in a lab by babs and can play the Hyman role well.
Kerfoot is a good defensive centre (replacing Kadri who was a very underrated defensive centre).

We don't throw a line away to play 100% defense unless the line happens to be the Bergeron line (and they did that well I'd like to point out). We have the puck all game and don't give them a shot.

The top 6 is undeniable and the bottom 6 is hugely underrated.

Ennis was good in a 4th line role last year, goat has turned himself into an NHL player and leivo is an NHL player. He is playing middle 6 with the nucks. On a good team like ours he was barely a 4th liner and that shows you our depth. Hell dude you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

lol what exactly would you measure by? Corsi? Sure, but having positive corsi at 10 minutes of even strength is even less impressive, since the stat devalues with less ice time, but it gets even better since Gunnarson and Bortuzzo had -3 and -6 relcorsi respectively.

Heh, okay then.