Do you believe in Dubas?

[francis246]

Well, I can tell you that I recall both you and I also said last year that there was zero chance that Zach Hyman would leave the Leafs at the end of the year, and that debating the contrary was silly. (see below)

View attachment 483018

I guess you and I are the only thing that ended up being silly in hindsight....

To suggest a Matthews extension is almost an inevitability is naïve. Plain and simple. He has negotiated the right to speak with other teams come July 1, 2024. If we do not make significant strides going forward, he will explore his right to look elsewhere. Whether he actually does so or not is entirely up to Auston.

I want Auston to be a career Leaf as much as anyone on here, but I'd be lying to myself if I didn't think there was a possibility he'd want a change of scenery in 2024 if we continue to come up short in the post season.

wish I could like this post!!! but this is amazing

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Two cup rings? Yes, I'm familiar with what he went on to do in an organization that recognizes the value of a good backup goalie. Why do you ask?

Suggestion: dig up.

It takes a special kind of special to view 67th out of 67 and zero contribution to the Cup run the way you do!

That was better than shrooms for the laughs!

 

[Gary Nylund]

Well, I can tell you that I recall both you and I also said last year that there was zero chance that Zach Hyman would leave the Leafs at the end of the year, and that debating the contrary was silly. (see below)

View attachment 483018

I guess you and I are the only thing that ended up being silly in hindsight....

To suggest a Matthews extension is almost an inevitability is naïve. Plain and simple. He has negotiated the right to speak with other teams come July 1, 2024. If we do not make significant strides going forward, he will explore his right to look elsewhere. Whether he actually does so or not is entirely up to Auston.

I want Auston to be a career Leaf as much as anyone on here, but I'd be lying to myself if I didn't think there was a possibility he'd want a change of scenery in 2024 if we continue to come up short in the post season.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha that's awesome!

 

[Notsince67]

Doubt the leafs have big enough balls to trade Matthews unless McDavid asked for a trade and he was a piece.
Other than that, the decision of whether Matthews stays or goes is entirely up to Matthews. I'm ok with that.

 

[Twine Tickler]

This is wrong. I never argued that Hyman would never be let go.

I argued that we could fit him under the cap, and that we weren't forced to let him go - and that was absolutely true, and still is.

We chose to spend that $5.5m elsewhere. We could have spent it on Hyman.

I don't appreciate that wildly misleading screencap, tbh.

There is nothing misleading about you dismissing a concern someone would have with respect to a star player resigning. Last year, Hyman fitting into our cap was quickly dismissed because it was financially possible, albeit would have come with significant other moves. This time around the possibility of Matthews exercising his right to explore UFA in 2024 is dismissed because the fact that we drafted him and that most players resign with their drafted club would irrefutably void potentially 7 consecutive seasons of failure.

All I am saying is that not matter how silly things may sound in the present, they actually unfold as such in the future from time to time.

It's ok to be wrong. I was dead wrong with respect to Hyman resigning as well. Because I agreed with your logic, it was financially possible. Kyle made the logical decision to not give a physical, oft injured player an 8 year commitment. I completely understand that logic. Something I gave very little consideration to 1 year ago.

My original point was the 5 year extension of Auston Matthews was a not a good move from Dubas. Auston is a franchise player, a generational talent, and easily the best Maple Leaf of all time. We needed him to be locked in to a 8 year deal. That vulnerability of Auston leaving after this current deal would have been there whether it was 5 or 8 years in term. I just don't think that is a piece of business you risk losing 3 years prematurely. Could my concerns be a complete moot point? 100% never claimed he was guaranteed to leave. But neglecting that as a possibility is foolish IMO.

I think shit like this is where people on here get frustrated with Dubas supporters. Fearlessly advocating every move he's made as something great is not any in any way convincing the anti-dubas crowd to view things our way.

It's absolutely the exact same in reverse. Some people on here cannot get past the idea that 4 players make 40 million. All while suggesting a narrative that we have an unproductive bottom 6, and/or poor defense as a result. When in actuality both claims are statistically inaccurate.

As someone who is a massive Dubas fan myself, there is absolutely no way I can sit here and say he's made zero mistakes. He's made plenty. Dismissing any of his mistakes, or in this case vulnerabilities that he's left us with, is never going to convince someone on the other end of the spectrum that your belief is right.

 

[zeke]

There is nothing misleading about you dismissing a concern someone would have with respect to a star player resigning. Last year, Hyman fitting into our cap was quickly dismissed because it was financially possible, albeit would have come with significant other moves. This time around the possibility of Matthews exercising his right to explore UFA in 2024 is dismissed because the fact that we drafted him and that most players resign with their drafted club would irrefutably void potentially 7 consecutive seasons of failure.

All I am saying is that not matter how silly things may sound in the present, they actually unfold as such in the future from time to time.

It's ok to be wrong. I was dead wrong with respect to Hyman resigning as well. Because I agreed with your logic, it was financially possible. Kyle made the logical decision to not give a physical, oft injured player an 8 year commitment. I completely understand that logic. Something I gave very little consideration to 1 year ago.

My original point was the 5 year extension of Auston Matthews was a not a good move from Dubas. Auston is a franchise player, a generational talent, and easily the best Maple Leaf of all time. We needed him to be locked in to a 8 year deal. That vulnerability of Auston leaving after this current deal would have been there whether it was 5 or 8 years in term. I just don't think that is a piece of business you risk losing 3 years prematurely. Could my concerns be a complete moot point? 100% never claimed he was guaranteed to leave. But neglecting that as a possibility is foolish IMO.

I think shit like this is where people on here get frustrated with Dubas supporters. Fearlessly advocating every move he's made as something great is not any in any way convincing the anti-dubas crowd to view things our way.

It's absolutely the exact same in reverse. Some people on here cannot get past the idea that 4 players make 40 million. All while suggesting a narrative that we have an unproductive bottom 6, and/or poor defense as a result. When in actuality both claims are statistically inaccurate.

As someone who is a massive Dubas fan myself, there is absolutely no way I can sit here and say he's made zero mistakes. He's made plenty. Dismissing any of his mistakes, or in this case vulnerabilities that he's left us with, is never going to convince someone on the other end of the spectrum that your belief is right.

We had the cap to sign Hyman. We chose not to. I never at any point suggested that we would necessarily want to sign Hyman to his upcoming deal.

 

[Twine Tickler]

We had the cap to sign Hyman. We chose not to. I never at any point suggested that we would necessarily want to sign Hyman to his upcoming deal.

I think that kind of illustrates my point though. At the time, a more than healthy raise for Hyman was considered to be 5AAV. We believed that Hyman would want to stay for a figure that was equal to or below that. We drafted him after all, it just seemed like there was no way he'd want to leave his drafted club....

Yet Zach made a personal decision to go to EDM instead, even though Toronto was rumored to have offered a healthy raise offer on an 8 year term. Is it possible that Zach was tired of the perpetual failures of his team?

Or was the extra 1-4 million over the 8 years the key differentiator?

Needless to say, Zach left for a reason that you and I never believed would happen. We both considered this homegrown product to be fiercely loyal. And under no circumstance would we have predicted he would leave TOR over a NMC or an extra 4 mill...etc.

He did.

you can think Auston has an unwavering loyalty to the Leafs, I really truly hope you throw this in my face in 2 off-season's time. I will welcome it. I just won't believe it until I see it.

 

[zeke]

I think that kind of illustrates my point though. At the time, a more than healthy raise for Hyman was considered to be 5AAV. We believed that Hyman would want to stay for a figure that was equal to or below that. We drafted him after all, it just seemed like there was no way he'd want to leave his drafted club....

Yet Zach made a personal decision to go to EDM instead, even though Toronto was rumored to have offered a healthy raise offer on an 8 year term. Is it possible that Zach was tired of the perpetual failures of his team?

Or was the extra 1-4 million over the 8 years the key differentiator?

Needless to say, Zach left for a reason that you and I never believed would happen. We both considered this homegrown product to be fiercely loyal. And under no circumstance would we have predicted he would leave TOR over a NMC or an extra 4 mill...etc.

He did.

you can think Auston has an unwavering loyalty to the Leafs, I really truly hope you throw this in my face in 2 off-season's time. I will welcome it. I just won't believe it until I see it.

I at no point thought it was unrealistic that Hyman would leave. He was always a secondary player and we were never going to pay him the most. We could have signed him if we wanted to pay that contract or something close to it.

Comparing Hyman to a franchise player doesn't make sense on any level, which is why you never see a franchise player leave a good team. Good teams let secondary players go to the highest bidder all the time.

You are going to spend the entirety of Matthews' time here worrying about him leaving for no reason.

 

[Enga Olly]

But a team that can't get out of the first round is considered "top tier"?

tiers are determined by the regular season not playoffs

eg. Stanley Cup Finalists 2019-20 - Dallas Stars and SC Finalists 2020-21 Montreal Canadiens were not considered top top tier teams before, during or after their great PO success of those years

 

[Twine Tickler]

I at no point thought it was unrealistic that Hyman would leave. He was always a secondary player and we were never going to pay him the most. We could have signed him if we wanted to pay that contract or something close to it.

Comparing Hyman to a franchise player doesn't make sense on any level, which is why you never see a franchise player leave a good team. Good teams let secondary players go to the highest bidder all the time.

You are going to spend the entirety of Matthews' time here worrying about him leaving for no reason.

OK , so some of the players that fit your standard of franchise players not leaving their good teams include:

Malkin (won the cup un 2009) resigned in 2013
Crosby (won the cup un 2009) resigned in 2012
Stamkos (previous 2 seasons: SCF, ECF) signed in 2016
Kane (won 2 cups prior to signing) signed in 2014
Toews (won 2 cups prior to signing) signed in 2014
Bergeron (won cup in 2011) resigned in 2013
Perry (won cup in 2007) resigned 2 deals with ducks
Getzlaf (won cup in 2007) resigned 3 deals with ducks

JT - (signed 6 year deal out of entry level 2013-18, made it to the playoffs 1 time) Left in UFA to Toronto

tell me what situation most relates to Auston Matthews' current one.

I'll tell you right now, it's irrefutably JT's. That said, it could feasibly look like Steven Stamkos' in short order. Conveniently the only other player listed that made it to July 1 on this list.

Franchise players resigning with their drafted clubs is really only an inevitability when there is winning involved.

 

[justashadowof]

You are given a core team of Rielly, Matthews, Marner and Nylander but were also given all of the assets of Gardiner, Kapanen, Johnsson, Kadri, Connor Brown, Freddie Andersen, Zach Hyman, Dermott, expiring contracts of Bozak, Komarov and JVR, 4 years of draft picks, a couple of negative assets in Marleau and Zaitsev. How difficult do you think it would be to have built a team capable of qualifying for the playoffs?

My answer: not challenging for the average NHL GM. It would have taken gross incompetence to turn that inheritance into a non-playoff team. I propose that a superior NHL GM would have created a team that had gone deep in the playoffs several times if not won a Stanley Cup.

 

[zeke]

You are given a core team of Rielly, Matthews, Marner and Nylander but were also given all of the assets of Gardiner, Kapanen, Johnsson, Kadri, Connor Brown, Freddie Andersen, Zach Hyman, Dermott, expiring contracts of Bozak, Komarov and JVR, 4 years of draft picks, a couple of negative assets in Marleau and Zaitsev. How difficult do you think it would be to have built a team capable of qualifying for the playoffs?

My answer: not challenging for the average NHL GM. It would have taken gross incompetence to turn that inheritance into a non-playoff team. I propose that a superior NHL GM would have created a team that had gone deep in the playoffs several times if not won a Stanley Cup.

Comparing the Leafs to those Islanders is just silly.

But I've already given this stuff too much airtime here - if you need to pretend for the next 3 years that something very unlikely is likely, then go for it.

 

[justashadowof]

Comparing the Leafs to those Islanders is just silly.

But I've already given this stuff too much airtime here - if you need to pretend for the next 3 years that something very unlikely is likely, then go for it.

I thought at first you had quoted the wrong post. Then I realized that you instantly thought Lou L. when I mentioned about deep playoff runs. There are many other NHL GMs who have won several playoff series over the past 3 seasons. Undoubtedly several of them superior NHL GMs to the current Leafs' GM.

 

[Twine Tickler]

You are given a core team of Rielly, Matthews, Marner and Nylander but were also given all of the assets of Gardiner, Kapanen, Johnsson, Kadri, Connor Brown, Freddie Andersen, Zach Hyman, Dermott, expiring contracts of Bozak, Komarov and JVR, 4 years of draft picks, a couple of negative assets in Marleau and Zaitsev. How difficult do you think it would be to have built a team capable of qualifying for the playoffs?

My answer: not challenging for the average NHL GM. It would have taken gross incompetence to turn that inheritance into a non-playoff team. I propose that a superior NHL GM would have created a team that had gone deep in the playoffs several times if not won a Stanley Cup.

Part of why those complimentary pieces were gone were to fill voids in other areas. Mainly defense and in the cage. It's also not entirely fair to Kyle to suggest the prior GM who had all of Matthews, Marner, Nylander, Kappy, Johnsson, Brown, Hyman, Dermott all on ELC would have faired any better in retaining these players. It's an assumption that really has no backing. This was a GM that gave Matt Martin 4 years, and Zaitzev 7 years. I just don't know how much better he would have done TBH. Kyle has certainly overpaid the core 4. Marner and JT being the 2 clear and obvious overpayments. But he's found ways to mitigate that overspending time and time again. Despite this overspending and subsequent loss of good players, he has still been able to vastly improved our D-Corps as I illustrated yesterday:

Updated Team Statistics:
3rd in NHL at 2.25 GA/GP
T6th in NHL at Shots allowed/GP at 29.7
3rd in the NHL in PK% at 88.7%


to give you a bit of context of where theses results are now, from where hey were in years past lets just look at GA/GP and see where we ranked over the last 15 seasons:

2020: 7th
2019: 26th
2018: 20th
2017: 12th
2016: 22nd
2015: 24th
2014: 26th
2013: 26th
2012: 17th
2011: 29th
2010: 25th
2009: 29th
2008: 30th
2007: 27th
2006: 25th

IMO the overpayments of our core 4 overshadow the great work he's been able to do. And when you factor in an unforeseen flat cap era, I really think it speaks volumes to the quality of GM we have IMO

 

[zeke]

I thought at first you had quoted the wrong post. Then I realized that you instantly thought Lou L. when I mentioned about deep playoff runs. There are many other NHL GMs who have won several playoff series over the past 3 seasons. Undoubtedly several of them superior NHL GMs to the current Leafs' GM.

Heh ya I quoted the wrong post.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

IMO the overpayments of our core 4 overshadow the great work he's been able to do. And when you factor in an unforeseen flat cap era, I really think it speaks volumes to the quality of GM we have IMO

I think it is lost on a lot of people that no one predicted a pandemic and subsequent flat cap. That changes things a lot. Just using average growth the complexion changes significantly.

 

[Twine Tickler]

I think it is lost on a lot of people that no one predicted a pandemic and subsequent flat cap. That changes things a lot. Just using average growth the complexion changes significantly.

yup, and the flat cap so fittingly occurred months before our 2 best players (Mitch and Auston) deals commenced.

I'm not entirely sure if there was another team in the league who was impacted more drastically than the Leafs. Although admittedly I pay little attention to most of the league outside of the Leafs. But I do believe this would be a fair assumption.

 

[zeke]

I think it is lost on a lot of people that no one predicted a pandemic and subsequent flat cap. That changes things a lot. Just using average growth the complexion changes significantly.

Yeah the core 4 would be about 40% of the cap now under normal circumstances.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Yeah the core 4 would be about 40% of the cap now under normal circumstances.

It's gone up an average of about 2.8 M per year, so today it should be around $5.6 M higher.

This means if you deemed him worthy of the risk, you could have kept Hyman along with the rest. Or you could have gone shopping elsewhere.

 

[justashadowof]

Heh ya I quoted the wrong post.

No worries, I've quoted the wrong post before.

 

[hockeywiz542]

As Maple Leafs search for solutions on left wing, Zach Hyman is flourishing with the Edmonton Oilers | The Star

Zach Hyman signed in Edmonton for seven years, at $5.5 million (U.S.) a year. Though the Oilers may regret the last couple of years of that deal when Hyman is in his mid-30s, his acquisition has helped turned the Oilers into true Stanley Cup contender status.

The Leafs meanwhile are contenders thanks to the high-end performances of their star players, like Auston Matthews, Mitch Marner, John Tavares and William Nylander.

But throw Hyman back into that mix — especially on a team that needs to win now — and it would be hard to find a team with a better group of forwards.

In Dubas’s defence, he faced a fight on another front, in net. Frederik Andersen also left, for cap hit of $5 million, another price tag deemed too rich for the cap-strapped Leafs. Faced with the prospect of going with an unproven Jack Campbell in net, Dubas sought a reliable backup, or even someone who could handle half the load.

So Dubas invested heavily – relative to the amount available in their cap space — in two players: Nick Ritchie, at a cap hit of $2.5 million a year, for two years. And Petr Mrázek, at a cap hit of $3.8 million for three years.

It’s a decision Dubas may rue. That’s $6.3 million worth of players who have produced zero goals, three assists and one win through 20 games. Mrázek’s groin issues — which have dogged him the past few years — have kept him out of all but two games. He could have had Hyman for less.

Maybe Dubas didn’t want to get caught up in a seven- or eight-year deal for Hyman, fretting – as the analytically inclined tend to — what Hyman might look like at the tail end of the deal. It also would have meant going a different route in net, though “retreads” like Craig Anderson in Buffalo, Scott Wedgewood in Arizona, Brian Elliott in Tampa are all outperforming Mrázek. They’re playing, winning and cost less than $1 million each.

Hyman’s six goals on the left side is one shy of what all Leaf left wingers have produced: Michael Bunting with four, Alex Kerfoot with two and Pierre Engvall with one. And while Ritchie and Mrázek have been disappointments as newcomers, Bunting, David Kämpf and Ondřej Kaše are performing well above their pay grade.

But letting Hyman walk may end up being the decision Dubas regrets the most.

 

[notbias]

As Maple Leafs search for solutions on left wing, Zach Hyman is flourishing with the Edmonton Oilers | The Star

Zach Hyman signed in Edmonton for seven years, at $5.5 million (U.S.) a year. Though the Oilers may regret the last couple of years of that deal when Hyman is in his mid-30s, his acquisition has helped turned the Oilers into true Stanley Cup contender status.

The Leafs meanwhile are contenders thanks to the high-end performances of their star players, like Auston Matthews, Mitch Marner, John Tavares and William Nylander.

But throw Hyman back into that mix — especially on a team that needs to win now — and it would be hard to find a team with a better group of forwards.

In Dubas’s defence, he faced a fight on another front, in net. Frederik Andersen also left, for cap hit of $5 million, another price tag deemed too rich for the cap-strapped Leafs. Faced with the prospect of going with an unproven Jack Campbell in net, Dubas sought a reliable backup, or even someone who could handle half the load.

So Dubas invested heavily – relative to the amount available in their cap space — in two players: Nick Ritchie, at a cap hit of $2.5 million a year, for two years. And Petr Mrázek, at a cap hit of $3.8 million for three years.

It’s a decision Dubas may rue. That’s $6.3 million worth of players who have produced zero goals, three assists and one win through 20 games. Mrázek’s groin issues — which have dogged him the past few years — have kept him out of all but two games. He could have had Hyman for less.

Maybe Dubas didn’t want to get caught up in a seven- or eight-year deal for Hyman, fretting – as the analytically inclined tend to — what Hyman might look like at the tail end of the deal. It also would have meant going a different route in net, though “retreads” like Craig Anderson in Buffalo, Scott Wedgewood in Arizona, Brian Elliott in Tampa are all outperforming Mrázek. They’re playing, winning and cost less than $1 million each.

Hyman’s six goals on the left side is one shy of what all Leaf left wingers have produced: Michael Bunting with four, Alex Kerfoot with two and Pierre Engvall with one. And while Ritchie and Mrázek have been disappointments as newcomers, Bunting, David Kämpf and Ondřej Kaše are performing well above their pay grade.

But letting Hyman walk may end up being the decision Dubas regrets the most.

This post is hilarious but is pretty balanced at least, points out the good of letting Hyman and Andersen walk and the bad so far of Ritchie and Mrazek

 

[zeke]

Hyman 1st 10gms: 7gls, 10pts
Hyman last 8gms: 1gls, 4pts

5v5

Hyman 4gls, 7pts
Bunting 3gls, 7pts


Even Strength:

21-22: 18gl/36pt pace
20-21: 23gl/53pt pace
19-20: 27gl/48pt pace
18-19: 23gl/46pt pace


Zach's actually not flourishing at all at even strength over there - he's doing worse there than he did as a Leaf. And that's even while McDrai are hotter than the sun. Bunting is almost matching him even with the leafs' core 4 ice cold and while spending time on the 4th line.

Hyman is producing at a similar overall ~60pt pace as he did as a Leaf but that comes from a burst of special teams points - so he better hope they keep plopping him in front on their top pp unit, a place he wouldn't play here.

 

[m1ker]

No way to sign Hyman when we have Riley new salary, Campbell, Sandin, and Lilgren up next year.

 

[justashadowof]

Hyman was destined to do well in Edmonton as they signed him specifically to play with McDavid. As for the deal, the Leafs aren't structured to give another forward greater than $5M aav especially one whose deal won't look so great once the wear and tear starts paying its toll on the player. Remember another thing about Hyman: he's that rare player who plays every night at playoff game intensity and effort. While this is a highly laudable characteristic for any player, this also means that he does not seem to have an extra gear in the playoffs at a time when every grunt in the NHL develops Zach Hyman level effort.