Analyzing Dubas's Performance - III

[Phion Keneuf]

I am more upset for Kadri not helping our team, at all, in back to back playoff series. Thanks Nazeem. Thanks for nothing.

This put wheels in motion.

Wheels are in motion, but they are going in reverse.

 

[All Mod Cons]

so wheres the issue?

[MOD]

Barrie (50% Retained) + Kerfoot for Kadri is 100% a steal for Toronto. it just sucks that Barrie couldnt adapt to the system and play like he should of. win some, lose some.

It's a very short sighted deal. It also shows that Kyle very much misinterpreted where the team was at. Not unlike Brian Burke.

 

[Menzinger]

No, I think everyone knows we gave up probably our most tradeable asset for what will soon be nothing but Kerfoot. People are arguing he wouldn’t be doing what he’s doing in Colorado here though so whatever to the trade? I think that’s the point they’re trying to make for reasons that only makes sense in their minds

Two things can be true at the same time:

1) the trade was a complete flop for the Leafs and would have been best if it hadn't happened
2) Kadri wasn't a difference maker his last couple seasons with the Leafs, especially in the post season

 

[BertCorbeau]

Two things can be true at the same time:

1) the trade was a complete flop for the Leafs and would have been best if it hadn't happened
2) Kadri wasn't a difference maker his last couple seasons with the Leafs, especially in the post season

I'd add a third:

3) Barrie is a better than what he showed with the Leafs this season

If he scored 15 goals and 60 points, it probably wouldn't been as crucified.

For me it's the fact that Dubas dealt our best asset for only 1 year of a RHD. I mean given how it turned out, it's a blessing that he's not here for more than 1 season. But that still leaves a big hole on the blue line.

 

[sparxx87]

@sparxx87 I don't think the Pageau acquisition was bad in a vacuum. But I think giving him a big long term deal before locking up Barzal/Pulock is a big pointer as to why Lou is no longer here. Made a move that makes the team better in the short run, but spent himself into a corner with no priority to lock up his true core. If we look back to his NJ days to see what to expect it's not a long term low value extension, it's squeezing them (by necessity) in to a series of short term bridges until they leave via UFA, then overpaying a far more mediocre player to backfill. I think that was his plan with our guys. "No player is bigger than the team, this is the team, it has xx (well below market for anything but a bridge) for you, sign it"

Looking strictly at the decision to switch, and three motivators

Dubas is a fantastic conman / Shanny is an idiot

Shanahan believes Dubas was already all-around better as a GM in terms of component skills

Shanahan decided that adhering to the long term vision (building around AM/MM) trumped GM "skills", that in the long run strategy was more important than tactics.

I strongly believe that number 3 was a big (the biggest) part of it, and that Shanahan was less betting on Dubas vs. Lamioriello than he was betting on himself (and by extension AM/MM) vs. Lamioriello.

They have some money coming off the books and he could always move some via trade. He’s got a year until Seattle comes into play where he’ll likely try to attach an asset to the Andrew Ladd contract, the only real dead weight on the cap.

I’m still taking the wait and see approach. I get what you’re saying but he obviously values the players he’s signed to these deals and there’s still several years left on most so we’ll have to wait and see. I hear you on the ages of some of this money too, but I’m inclined to believe he’s got a plan. Re; the Malkhov trade you referenced earlier - that was also very early in the cap era. I think he’s done a pretty good job recently of moving or making bad contracts disappear. I only looked briefly at their cap but again, one year until Seattle.

I think all the Dubas/Shanahan stuff is bang on. As much as I bash Dubas for his missteps, they’ve all happened on Shanahan’s watch. Dubas may hold value to the organization in the analytics department but he was never ready to be the GM. Although you point to Lou squeezing on the bridge deals, I can’t for the life of me understand why he thought someone who’d never negotiated a contract was going to be better. A terrible decision to begin with but extrapolated with the timing of the 3 upcoming RFA’S.

I think Lamoriello should have been given the standard 5 years. If they lost Dubas to Colorado, so be it. Shanahan is the idiot. Don’t know if he’s on the clock yet, but he absolutely should be. Especially if it doesn’t turn around soon... You mentioned Lou needed to pull a rabbit out of the hat, I think so does Kyle Dubas.

 

[biotk]

I think you're talking about this right?

Having listened to what Pierre said, I think that the tweet is dishonest.

Pierre: "I wonder what they are thinking in Toronto right now when they see Nazem Kadri go through the hand shake line."
Other person: "Oh boy"
---
pause
---
Pierre: "I am not sure it is wise to run your team through analytics."

That is very different from: "He then said that is why teams should not let analytics play a part in their decisions."

 

[Gallagbi]

It's a very short sighted deal. It also shows that Kyle very much misinterpreted where the team was at. Not unlike Brian Burke.

Wasn't as much short sighted as trying to do too much with 1 deal.

 

[Faltorvo]

It's funny though. Some of the same ppl chastising Dubas for the Kadri/Barrie trade are spamming this forum w Marner/Nylander proposals in the exact same move.

Honestly, outside of Jones/Johansen -- when did the team trading away the skilled forward ever win?

I'm not saying don't go out and try to trade for a defenseman... But we may be eating the same exact same dish we're eating now in regards to these two... Likely would be worse since they're better and younger..

well if making a trade scares the pants off you

then the team you cheer for has the wrongggggggggg GM

 

[Faltorvo]

In hindsight, possibly. Barrie predictably did not do well with Babcock and flopped in the playoffs.

It is still fair trade value and maximized a declining asset while trying to fix a weakness, so there should not be regrets. Just motivation for guys who are still here.

ya he flopped playing for a coach that took the eastern finalist to 7 games

and improved with a coach that could not even make it to the POs ,,,,against a team that got crushed in 5 games in the first round

oh and his PIs under keefe was a unmitigated disaster

it's almost like babcock was trying to turn Barrie into a Dman you can count on in a limited knock out series

 

[fahad203]

The flip side of course is the team has had plenty of experienced GM's over the past half century and they managed to bring the same number of cups home as those rookie executives

None of which had team like this and a fresh start. None of which landed a FA like Tavares
Mogilny was later in his years, Roberts was in his mid 30s, Thomas, same. You name it

At least those so called experienced GM's assembled a team of men, not boys.


Oh yeah, let's not forget those GM's had to deal with a guy name Harold Ballard. So no bro, it's not the same comparable

 

[HellasLEAF]

Tavares
Marner
Nylander
Johnsson
Kapanen &
Kerfoot

Are all overpaid to some degree based on performance.

 

[Gallagbi]

None of which had team like this and a fresh start. None of which landed a FA like Tavares
Mogilny was later in his years, Roberts was in his mid 30s, Thomas, same. You name it

At least those so called experienced GM's assembled a team of men, not boys.


Oh yeah, let's not forget those GM's had to deal with a guy name Harold Ballard. So no bro, it's not the same comparable

Burke very much had a fresh start. I'd even say the Quinn teams did.

Wouldn't the GM signing a huge UFA be a good sign for them instead of an excuse for the others who failed to land one?

 

[fahad203]

Burke very much had a fresh start. I'd even say the Quinn teams did.

Wouldn't the GM signing a huge UFA be a good sign for them instead of an excuse for the others who failed to land one?

Well, any positive memory this team has it's from Quinn's era. So I guess that's a positive. I mean the last time we won a playoff series was during his time.

At least that team gave us some false hope

 

[93LEAFS]

I'd add a third:

3) Barrie is a better than what he showed with the Leafs this season

If he scored 15 goals and 60 points, it probably wouldn't been as crucified.

For me it's the fact that Dubas dealt our best asset for only 1 year of a RHD. I mean given how it turned out, it's a blessing that he's not here for more than 1 season. But that still leaves a big hole on the blue line.

If it was one year of Trouba, I would have got it. He perfectly fit alongside either Muzzin or Rielly. The real issue with Dubas's remaking of our right-side is neither fit. Ceci can't eat tough minutes or he melts down and you live in your own end, and Barrie can't deal with tough usage either. It left us in no man's land, with the pairings with them having limited identity. It basically led to us having to use Holl with Muzzin in a shut-down role, Ceci with Rielly in all-situations, and Barrie sheltered. It was not only a misjudgement on what we needed, but how he fit.

 

[Antropovsky]

If it was one year of Trouba, I would have got it. He perfectly fit alongside either Muzzin or Rielly. The real issue with Dubas's remaking of our right-side is neither fit. Ceci can't eat tough minutes or he melts down and you live in your own end, and Barrie can't deal with tough usage either. It left us in no man's land, with the pairings with them having limited identity. It basically led to us having to use Holl with Muzzin in a shut-down role, Ceci with Rielly in all-situations, and Barrie sheltered. It was not only a misjudgement on what we needed, but how he fit.

I think Dubas thought that he had built such a strong offensive team, it didnt matter if his defense couldn't play defense....they werent gonna need to play it often. Which may be the case, IF your players match the work ethic of their opponents.

Dubas should have kept Brown and Kadri... cast away Kapanen and stayed away from Kerfoot. Brown and Kadri bring grit, work ethic, defensive work with a blend of skill. Kerfoot and Kapanen have the appeal of a souped up honda...they go up and down the street really fast but they arent helping you score.

I like kapanen... but im getting tired of waiting for his hands and brain to catch up with his feet.

 

[saffronleaf]

I thought Kadri's response to the Tavares signing and subsequent demotion to 3C was disappointing. He was coming off a great couple of years and seemed to be rounding out as a good veteran center, but when Tavares came in and stole his job, he would sleepwalk in his new role at times. Less engaged, not always throwing his weight around, sometimes would force tunnel vision plays and just go about things kind of passively. Just feels like if he kept digging (and that DeBrusk hit didn't happen) he would have maybe emerged again as a 2C option for us under Keefe under line stacking scenarios.

Love Kadri but this is true. I thought he could feast on lesser competition but he kind of became disengaged a bit.

Wish we had Keefe back then he would have tried out different line combinations to keep Kadri engaged and contributing.

E.g.,

Tavares - Matthews - Marner
Hyman - Kadri - Nylander

or

Hyman - Matthews - Nylander
Kadri - Tavares - Marner

 

[Menzinger]

None of which had team like this and a fresh start. None of which landed a FA like Tavares
Mogilny was later in his years, Roberts was in his mid 30s, Thomas, same. You name it

At least those so called experienced GM's assembled a team of men, not boys.


Oh yeah, let's not forget those GM's had to deal with a guy name Harold Ballard. So no bro, it's not the same comparable

His ownership of the Leafs ended 30 years ago...

The subsequent management groups won the same level of cups as those rookie executives.

The team has had poor experiences with vet and rookie GMs.

 

[93LEAFS]

His ownership of the Leafs ended 30 years ago...

The subsequent management groups won the same level of cups as those rookie executives.

The team has had poor experiences with vet and rookie GMs.

Our best periods/most excitemetn in the post Ballard era all came at the hands of veteran GM's, especially Cliff Fletcher and Quinn who had a ton of experience. Burke is really the only established veteran GM who failed. Nonis was on his 2nd gig, but I'd call him a retread more than a veteran. Lou had a very promising 3 years. All 3 are in the hall of fame and for good reason. Doesn't mean we can't have a good experience with a rookie GM, but for most of my lifetime the two first time hires we had were either a disaster (JFJ) or currently not trending particularly well given the expectations for the team when they were hired.

 

[Dekes For Days]

It is pretty clear it should be measured on the first year of the contract relative to the cap, since the contract never takes place in the previous cap.

Contract signings are measured by when they are signed; not by future unknown cap numbers or production. The only one to actually sign under an official projection was Matthews, which would have put him at 14%. Teams have general ideas of how the cap projects forward, but 2017 was the biggest jump it had had in years, which was not immediately expected.

If you want to ignore post-signing production, Point outproduced Matthews last year.

Point did not outproduce Matthews' pace when he signed, even in his only inflated year with numerous relative advantages that I've already discussed. Contracts are based on more than single season raw points anyway.

You are legit telling me that Matthews 5th year is worth 18.2 million, unless you don't think Matthews is worth more than Eichel at 4 years than Eichel is at 8. Which would mean Matthews is worth 14.10 over 8. Which is ridiculous. We valued Matthews at over 10mx4, which was absolutely ridiculous.

I have no idea where you get 18.2m from. McDavid's contract is the equivalent of 13.6m x 8 years (negotiated to 14.4m x 8 years). Matthews on an 8 year contract would probably be somewhere just under 13.5m. Matthews was way way better than Eichel when he signed.

Sure, just post the numbers. Why not?

ES Points/60

McDavid: 2.89
Matthews: 2.72
Eichel: 1.64

ES Primary points/60

Matthews: 2.36
McDavid: 2.20
Eichel: 1.29

ES Goals/60

Matthews: 1.59
McDavid: 1.01
Eichel: 0.69

PP Points/60

Matthews: 6.47
McDavid: 6.44
Eichel: 6.30

PP Primary points/60

Matthews: 5.06
Eichel: 4.76
McDavid: 3.61

PP Goals/60

Matthews: 2.95
Eichel: 2.52
McDavid: 0.94

Matthews was 1st in everything except ES P/60, where he is pretty close to McDavid. Eichel was miles behind at ES.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Well some posters seem to actually hate the guy personally. Me? I don't care. I was a Dubas fan when he came on, he's slowly losing me, but I think one more year to see if he can fix shit up.
If he were to get canned in the off-season, I wouldn't shed a tear, nor would I be planning a parade. I just hope the next guy coming in does the job well.

This is more or less where I'm at as well.

in fact we probably would have been lucky if someone offer sheeted him, it would have been less than what we gave him

This indeed seems possible. It's hard to see anyone offering Marner more than Dubas did, that's for sure.

The flip side of course is the team has had plenty of experienced GM's over the past half century and they managed to bring the same number of cups home as those rookie executives

Fair point.

 

[BrannigansLaw]

Having listened to what Pierre said, I think that the tweet is dishonest.

Pierre: "I wonder what they are thinking in Toronto right now when they see Nazem Kadri go through the hand shake line."
Other person: "Oh boy"
---
pause
---
Pierre: "I am not sure it is wise to run your team through analytics."

That is very different from: "He then said that is why teams should not let analytics play a part in their decisions."

You're very right. I heard it live and it definitely wasn't as absolute a statement as that tweet implied.

 

[ShaneFalco]

Dude has a point......

 

[fahad203]

Dude has a point......

Failed to mention that Canes missing Svechinkov or that Canes lack depth to begin with

Canes are a good team but they don't have fire power of the Leafs.

Leafs last year had 2 40 goal scorers down the middle and 2 chances to close out the series and one at home

 

[4thline]

Although you point to Lou squeezing on the bridge deals, I can’t for the life of me understand why he thought someone who’d never negotiated a contract was going to be better. A terrible decision to begin with but extrapolated with the timing of the 3 upcoming RFA’S.

I think it comes down to a conflict of objectives.

Shanny -> remediate the relationship, we want them to be here for the next 12+ years
Lou -> get them to the number I need in the short term, all players are replaceable

It's pure conjecture on my part, but I think Lou and Shanahan were in direct philosophical conflict when it comes to how to handle the core, and the strategic direction of the team. Looking back since the 95 lockout, more cups have been won and sustainable success had by the teams with long term high end duo's then those with "offence by committee, no clear star up front" teams.

Lou's devils were the exception to the rule, but is that replicable without Marty Brodeur?

 

[sparxx87]

Failed to mention that Canes missing Svechinkov or that Canes lack depth to begin with

Canes are a good team but they don't have fire power of the Leafs.

Leafs last year had 2 40 goal scorers down the middle and 2 chances to close out the series and one at home

Don’t forget Brett Pesce.