I'll never get the "plenty of time" or "finally" stuff. He's literally done all of this in about 2 1/2 years. How fast is he supposed to go? 1 G, 2 C (1 C on most teams), completely rebuilt D, depth at all positions, rebuilt prospect pool, shedding of bad contracts.....in 2.5 years. While in a pandemic with a flat cap. His done all of that in less time than it took the previous regime to address our biggest need with.....wait for it.....Hainsey and Zaitsev.
I'm not criticizing him for going slow, I never said that at all. I'm just saying that he's changed a lot of things but he never changed the goalile so can't really complain about being stuck with him
Self-respect is important. Agreed. It requires admitting when you are wrong.
More falsity. You have in fact angrily ATTACKED those of us who have ever brought up opponent quality before.
And now you believe it is more important than, as you call them, "wins".
Dubas is far, far from the only GM to inherit elite talent, as you falsely claimed.
Many, many other GMs have inherited elite talents, but with the benefit of inheriting them for dirt cheap, while at the same time not being saddled with a buttload of horrendous contracts by their predecessor.
I've never seen you admit you're wrong about anything. If you say that means you don't have any self-respect then I won't argue with you.
I've never attacked anyone for bring up opponent quality, more lies. Go ahead and show me where I ever did so, you can't do it because it never happened.
Believe ...more ... important ... what are you even talking about now? Winning is always the goal, quality of opponent only helps give context to how big an achievement winning is or how big a disappointment losing is. It's not complicated, at least it doesn't seem that way to me. What part are you having trouble with?
I never said Dubas is the only GM to inherit elite talent, more lies.
That's an awful lot of lies in a very short time. But since you admitted you don't have any self-respect, I guess there's no reason to be surprised.
The claim was that he was lucky to inherit a good #1 goalie.
He did not. He inherited a goalie that was decent for one year (half a year really) and then quickly fell off.
The only thing I "claimed" was that if he didn't like the goalie, he's had years to replace him. The fact that he hasn't done so speaks for itself.
The team had almost zero prospect pipeline, two terrible contracts, a terrible d-corps (if you want to go far) etc. Having to correct that many problems is no easy feat. Why aren't teams like Edmonton flourishing? I mean...McDavid, Draisaitl, RNH, right?
Also, why are you limiting your criteria to "rookie" GM (other than the obvious answer which is that it's your only way to push an agenda)? I provided you with several other examples of GMs walking into better positions (although come to think of it I believe Chiarelli was also a rookie GM).
OK forget"rookie" if that bothers you. I guess we'll just agree to disagree on this one. 6th overall with some of the brightest young stars in the world, seems like the situation was pretty rosy to me. Pretty much the entire hockey world saw the Leafs as a young team on the rise, not at all the bleak picture you're painting, not even close.
