This got me thinking last night while putting the boy to sleep, butterfly effect and all that, and trying to find the one thing that sets this all sideways. I came down do the surprise win of the Babcock sweepstakes.
H1- Matthews isn't an inherently bad or selfish person. I won't begrudge any player/person the willingness to use the (above board) leverage available to them. The problem was that he was unnecessarily pissed off by a coach that got increasingly wrapped up in his own brand.
H2- Marner was always going to end up pissy and demanding to be treated as Matthews' equal
H3- Shanny split from Lou over disagreement as to how to handle a pissed off M&M moving forward. Lou wanted standard "you shall conform, no one is irreplaceable", Shanny thought they're the future of the franchise and wanted long term reconciliation.
H4- Babs ego + disproportionate influence (for a HC) as a board hire unbalanced management working relationships.
If we lost on Babs:
We end up with a Boucher, someone that develops Matthews without going out of they way to piss him off. With one less voice demanding to stand pat and draft at 4 ( Hunter wanting Marner, Babs Hanifin) Dubas' plan to trade back sways Shanny. We trade back and end up with one of Rantanen/Barzal/Connor/Werenski.
End result: Matthews isn't throwing his weight around trying to get every dollar in order to play unhappily under Babcock. Our 2nd big piece isn't out for blood with small man syndrome trying to get the same as Matthews. We have two picks in that 24-34 range because we'd already have CBJ 34 from the tradeback from 4-8, maybe we have a Carlo/Aho in addition to Dermott. Without the prospect of contentious negotiations with M&M Shanny has no reason to move on from Lou. Both take decent contracts. Without the simmering conflict between Babs and Dubas Kyle and Lou have a better relationship, and draw upon both of their strengths.
We win a cup. I wake up having fallen asleep with my son.