Line Combos: GM/Coaching criticism

[Bomber0104]

How is it his fault Marner didn’t show up?

He didn’t make Keefe play Thornton more minutes than Spezza

Maybe someone else could have shown up that we could have paid more than $750k to?

But unfortunately when you hand $11M to a playmaking winger, you kind of put yourself/the coach/player(s) in that bind.

 

[hamzarocks]

I just don’t understand how anyone can criticize Dubas for this.

We have two franchise centres. We needed defence he went a got us defence. We needed goaltending and he went and got that. We needed grit and he went and got that.

On paper this team is good. That’s all a GM can do.

Keefe and the players have failed. If we lose game 7 it all falls on certain players and coaches. We all know who they are.

Dubas hired keefe, he has him running the systems we currently use.

Dubas signed Simmonds, Thornton who are being overused right now by our coach

Dubas overpaid for stars who are 2nd line playoff performers which hurt our ability to get the strong depth that can help carry the offense.

These are some arguments people can use if they want to have Dubas fired. Overall, he will be judged on results, not intentions and the team he made on paper. I'm fine with him getting one last chance like Babcock got after 2019, but he should be fired instantly like Babcock was in 2019-2020 if we are struggling 20 games into the year.

Another 1st round exit next year makes it impossible to justify keeping Dubas no matter what moves he has made. His team has to deliver and he has to be held accountable if we fall short for a 4th time in his tenure next year. But, I only keep him and give that chance if he deals Marner, if he keeps marner and shuffles the deck than we are destined to be doomed again. Dubas has to cut ties and accept he got taken to the cleaners by Marner. He needs to pay what it takes to get Eichel/Couterier+/Meier++ etc. He needs a star who isn't built like a teenager who can elevate his play in the playoffs as neither Matthews, nor Marner nor a healthy JT were that

 

[usernamezrhardtodo]

the problem is now half our roster is abysmal offensively and it's not because of the cap, he's just gone too far in targeting defensive players and vets. Matthews and Marner deserve every bit of criticism they're getting but it would be nice to have more skill in the lineup now outside of them, Nylander and Spezza.

Like you can have a Mikheyev, or a Foligno, or a Thornton, or a Simmonds but if you have them all then it's hard to be a good offensive team unless everyone else is firing on all cylinders (obviously not the case)

Dubas said many times that teams that win...win with their stars and the rest is just basically stuffing around them. Well...how does it look when the stuffing is basically just plain shit and your stars (except for Willy and Spezza who are not like stars) don't do anything and don't score? They are pseudo skill players in that they are not skilled enough to really do something and not belligerent either to cause havoc...they are kind of like 'meh' all the way through the bottom 2 lines...There is no identity on the 2 bottom lines...not anything you could put your finger on anyways.

 

[Dave92]

Dubas said many times that teams that win...win with their stars and the rest is just basically stuffing around them. Well...how does it look when the stuffing is basically just plain shit and your stars (except for Willy and Spezza who are not like stars) don't do anything and don't score? They are pseudo skill players in that they are not skilled enough to really do something and not belligerent either to cause havoc...they are kind of like 'meh' all the way through the bottom 2 lines...There is no identity on the 2 bottom lines...not anything you could put your finger on anyways.

Dubas' doesn't know what wins NHL playoff hockey. What he has said in the past is irrelevant, he was wrong.

 

[Mickey Marner]

So inspiring:

"It’s so hard in any sport to say that it’s X or bust. I know there’s a lot of talk about winning a playoff round or bust, or winning a Stanley Cup or bust, but I don’t, uh, I think those can be very day-to-day-type endeavours and I think especially in this role it has to be more long term and can’t get caught up in how the short-run results impact that, and it’s about trying to build a program that can be a team that has a high level or performance every single year …”

It's funny because his deadline moves suggest the exact opposite of that quote, that this is a win a round or bust year and actions speak louder than rhetoric. Regardless, losing in round one in perpetuity isn't my idea of a high level performance every single year.

 

[usernamezrhardtodo]

Agreed. Foligno was damaged goods and they overpaid.

One of 2 things happened with the Foligno trade...he was either told he was perfectly healthy and got ripped off. Which I honestly hope is the case. Or...he was told that he has a nagging back injury that was minor and he has been dealing with it all season.

If he was told about it and he still traded for him...he should be fired into the sun. That's like buying a Corvette that the seller says "It runs great except when the transmission acts up and it won't get out of the driveway..but other than that..she's a beauty"....and you go ahead and buy it.

 

[Gallagbi]

Maybe someone else could have shown up that we could have paid more than $750k to?

But unfortunately when you hand $11M to a playmaking winger, you kind of put yourself/the coach/player(s) in that bind.

Honestly our depth has been pretty solid so far. The Kerfoot, Miks, Engvalls, Spezza, Galchenyuks are far from the problem.

You could argue Sandin and Thornton have been issues, but that's not due to lack of options. We were supposed to be 3 deep on the LH bottom pair with Dermott, Sandin and Hutton. Joe has Nash and Robertson as options behind him.

 

[RoadWarrior]

One of 2 things happened with the Foligno trade...he was either told he was perfectly healthy and got ripped off. Which I honestly hope is the case. Or...he was told that he has a nagging back injury that was minor and he has been dealing with it all season.

If he was told about it and he still traded for him...he should be fired into the sun. That's like buying a Corvette that the seller says "It runs great except when the transmission acts up and it won't get out of the driveway..but other than that..she's a beauty"....and you go ahead and buy it.

What compounds the problem is that Keefe seems determined to put Foligno in the lineup when it's clear he can't skate right now. Same with Marner on the first line.

Babcock got tons of criticism for not adapting to various situations but now we're starting to see the same patterns from Keefe. His stubbornness could cost them this series.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

 

[Stonehands1990]

If I may... I think he's saying that if you think the coach is bad... have a listen to the GM

Ah. I don’t have an issue with Dubas, I believe he’s done a excellent job adding players. He did hire Keefe however

 

[Gallagbi]

Ah. I don’t have an issue with Dubas, I believe he’s done a excellent job adding players. He did hire Keefe however

Keefes coached this team into good spots. When you look at the issues you see

1. Unforced errors in good positions
2. Lack of finish

Neither of those issues fall on him. He can't make Marner ice it instead of flip it. He can't waive a wand and have Dermott handle the puck like a sane person (and he did all game) instead of overskating the OTG.

We've lost games on simple bad decisions and lack of finish. It's really that simple.

 

[Nylander88]

I think we can all agree that Jumbo isn't coming out of the lineup, no matter how bad we want it. Likely nobody is coming in either. Keefe is going to refuse to split up the top line. It sounds like he understands that Kerfoot has been great as the 2C...so likely what we see tomorrow is:
Hyman-Matthews-Marner
Galchenyuk-Kerfoot-Nylander
Engvall-Foligno-Mikheyev
Thornton-Spezza-Simmonds

I think these are the most likely game 7 lines. 4th line will barely get played, which isn't fair to Spezza at all. I'd rather see the bottom 6 with Foligno-Spezza-Mikheyev and Thornton-Engvall-Simmonds but it's doubtful. Hopefully the boys find a way tomorrow. I truly am not ready for another first round exit

 

[Matthews4Calder]

You are probably right in retrospect, but I still think adding Tavares was a good decision at the time. Really, this team has been built well enough to win. They just have to actually, like, do that

I said it back then on another site and got roasted. I was in agreement signing Tavares. Here's why. Signing a FA doesn't cost you anything so when you can pick up a talent like that for solely cash don't see any issues going for it. Having said that whether true or not there were reports that the big 3 could have been signed for a tad less in order to go after JT. Nylander held out and that's where the problems started. He should have been shipped out. Instead Dubas caved in and paid him what he wanted. 1st mistake. Then he overpays for AM in my opinion and then to make matters worse makes a bigger mistake with the money handed out to MM. Yes you can argue they're elite players but seriously what did they accomplish in their first 3 years. Sure the numbers were good but my opinion after 3 years in the league these young stars don't deserve the money they get. Said it a million times it left the team in trouble as far as filling the bottom 6. People bitching about Thornton, Simmonds etc. What did you people expect? Other than some veteran leadership what else do they bring to the table? Dubas should of stood pat with Nylander as that set the table for the big 2. More frustrating when you see other stars and their salaries. Did they take a pay cut to try and help their teams? Our 3 seem like it's all about them and soaked management for as much as they could get. That's where Dubas failed and left the team in a situation where he couldn't do much to help the team. felt all season this team doesn't have what it takes to win 16 games in the playoffs. Win or lose changes need to happen and I think it starts with if possible trading Mitch.

 

[Gallagbi]

I said it back then on another site and got roasted. I was in agreement signing Tavares. Here's why. Signing a FA doesn't cost you anything so when you can pick up a talent like that for solely cash don't see any issues going for it. Having said that whether true or not there were reports that the big 3 could have been signed for a tad less in order to go after JT. Nylander held out and that's where the problems started. He should have been shipped out. Instead Dubas caved in and paid him what he wanted. 1st mistake. Then he overpays for AM in my opinion and then to make matters worse makes a bigger mistake with the money handed out to MM. Yes you can argue they're elite players but seriously what did they accomplish in their first 3 years. Sure the numbers were good but my opinion after 3 years in the league these young stars don't deserve the money they get. Said it a million times it left the team in trouble as far as filling the bottom 6. People bitching about Thornton, Simmonds etc. What did you people expect? Other than some veteran leadership what else do they bring to the table? Dubas should of stood pat with Nylander as that set the table for the big 2. More frustrating when you see other stars and their salaries. Did they take a pay cut to try and help their teams? Our 3 seem like it's all about them and soaked management for as much as they could get. That's where Dubas failed and left the team in a situation where he couldn't do much to help the team. felt all season this team doesn't have what it takes to win 16 games in the playoffs. Win or lose changes need to happen and I think it starts with if possible trading Mitch.

All reports have Nylander signing for our offer, not his.

Marner's contract is the big issue and Dubas had an opportunity to go 8x8.5/yr before the season. It was a mistake not to do that and an even further mistake not to simply outline that he was a tier below Matthews.

And our depth has been better this year than it was when we were spending more.

 

[Stephen]

Keefes coached this team into good spots. When you look at the issues you see

1. Unforced errors in good positions
2. Lack of finish

Neither of those issues fall on him. He can't make Marner ice it instead of flip it. He can't waive a wand and have Dermott handle the puck like a sane person (and he did all game) instead of overskating the OTG.

We've lost games on simple bad decisions and lack of finish. It's really that simple.

I'd love to hear a candid rebuttal from a real NHL coach about the idea of puck possession as part of the Leafs progressive thinking. From what I see as a fan, I think the constant regrouping and bumping back has a number of issues which aren't really discussed at a tactical level and is usually taken for granted as a smart move without any critical breakdown. Here's my amateur fan attempt:

1) The Dermott Game 6 error shows us not every player is good enough in every situation to turn back with the puck and retreat into higher danger areas when safer outlets are available. This isn't the only time, but I can recall a number of occasions when a Pierre Engvall might curl back in the neutral zone when he can just flip it in and retrieve. The desire to create a play by bumping back is also part the Galchenyuk blunder. He could have taken the hit or just shoveled it in deep to initiate a puck pursuit, but got fancy trying to connect with Muzzin like they're Lidstrom Ralfalski back there.

2) Moving the puck backwards kills momentum and creates higher danger situations when there are turnovers.

In scenario a, the forward puck carrier gathers a ton of steam and skates up the ice with the puck, either to make a play upon zone entry by skating it in, pass it off and also pushing the defense backwards. Think about Nathan Mackinnon torpedoing in.

In scenario b, the forward can flip it in and have numbers to support a puck retrieval in the corner or along the boards. Think Ryan O'Rielly.

In scenario c in Toronto's case, the primary puck carrier skates full steam ahead only slow down in traffic and drops the puck back down the ice and waits for the next puck carrier. By the time this regrouping happens a few times, the guy carrying the puck is looking at a massive traffic jam of 9 players loaded up on either side of the blueline and has to thread the needle for an entry. He also has no one back to support if there's turnover. Wouldn't that make you nervous as the last man back and the rusher?

A lot of these tactics are taken as new age dogma, but they don't really work in the field all that often.

Also, his spamming random video game line combinations looks less like Nick Nurse and more like Xbox.

 

[Gallagbi]

I'd love to hear a candid rebuttal from a real NHL coach about the idea of puck possession as part of the Leafs progressive thinking. From what I see as a fan, I think the constant regrouping and bumping back has a number of issues which aren't really discussed at a tactical level and is usually taken for granted as a smart move without any critical breakdown. Here's my amateur fan attempt:

1) The Dermott Game 6 error shows us not every player is good enough in every situation to turn back with the puck and retreat into higher danger areas when safer outlets are available. This isn't the only time, but I can recall a number of occasions when a Pierre Engvall might curl back in the neutral zone when he can just flip it in and retrieve. The desire to create a play by bumping back is also part the Galchenyuk blunder. He could have taken the hit or just shoveled it in deep to initiate a puck pursuit, but got fancy trying to connect with Muzzin like they're Lidstrom Ralfalski back there.

2) Moving the puck backwards kills momentum and creates higher danger situations when there are turnovers.

In scenario a, the forward puck carrier gathers a ton of steam and skates up the ice with the puck, either to make a play upon zone entry by skating it in, pass it off and also pushing the defense backwards. Think about Nathan Mackinnon torpedoing in.

In scenario b, the forward can flip it in and have numbers to support a puck retrieval in the corner or along the boards. Think Ryan O'Rielly.

In scenario c in Toronto's case, the primary puck carrier skates full steam ahead only slow down in traffic and drops the puck back down the ice and waits for the next puck carrier. By the time this regrouping happens a few times, the guy carrying the puck is looking at a massive traffic jam of 9 players loaded up on either side of the blueline and has to thread the needle for an entry. He also has no one back to support if there's turnover. Wouldn't that make you nervous as the last man back and the rusher?

A lot of these tactics are taken as new age dogma, but they don't really work in the field all that often.

Also, his spamming random video game line combinations looks less like Nick Nurse and more like Xbox.

Toronto hasn't played much of a heavy possession game all series, they've been keen to give it up and Dermott's play last game is a basic D to D for basically anyone in the league. He just botched it. We saw similar mistakes from the Habs D, like Petry to Matthews late in the third, but it didn't cost them. Same with the Sandin issues.

Galchenyuks was just a poor choice with other possession alternatives.

I'd get the concern if we were making errors turning back instead of dumping pucks for changes, but we've given the puck up too easily this series for a possession team.

Basically their reputation is influencing your comments more than the actual plays. Your A-B-C scenario doesn't really apply anywhere outside the PP for how we play.

 

[egd27]

On paper this team is good. That’s all a GM can do.

Keefe and the players have failed. If we lose game 7 it all falls on certain players and coaches. We all know who they are.

But isn't that one of the major knocks on Dubas....he seems to think the game is played on paper?

If Keefe and the players have failed, then surely the individual that placed them there must shoulder a significant ownership share of that failure.

 

[Stonehands1990]

Keefes coached this team into good spots. When you look at the issues you see

1. Unforced errors in good positions
2. Lack of finish

Neither of those issues fall on him. He can't make Marner ice it instead of flip it. He can't waive a wand and have Dermott handle the puck like a sane person (and he did all game) instead of overskating the OTG.

We've lost games on simple bad decisions and lack of finish. It's really that simple.

That’s not what I see. I see a coach who demoted Kerfoot (the 2nd leading scorer) for no reason and a coach who plays 34 & 16 to the point that they have zero gas in the tank

 

[weems]

Toronto hasn't played much of a heavy possession game all series, they've been keen to give it up and Dermott's play last game is a basic D to D for basically anyone in the league. He just botched it. We saw similar mistakes from the Habs D, like Petry to Matthews late in the third, but it didn't cost them. Same with the Sandin issues.

Galchenyuks was just a poor choice with other possession alternatives.

I'd get the concern if we were making errors turning back instead of dumping pucks for changes, but we've given the puck up too easily this series for a possession team.

Basically their reputation is influencing your comments more than the actual plays. Your A-B-C scenario doesn't really apply anywhere outside the PP for how we play.

I dont like how we manage the puck.

It's insane how reckless we are with the puck in dangerous areas of the ice. Heck Galchenyuk actually tried another high risk pass last night in the offensive zone but was lucky it wasnt knocked down.

We throw tons of high risk pass's right in front of our own net. You can see this is a systemic issue because you have role players doing it and its not really something that players of this ilk should ever be trying.

Puck management and puck support are two area's all good teams excel in and I would say we're below average.

This team needs to learn that less can be more especially at this time of the year.

 

[Gallagbi]

That’s not what I see. I see a coach who demoted Kerfoot (the 2nd leading scorer) for no reason and a coach who plays 34 & 16 to the point that they have zero gas in the tank

Kerfoot was reunited with our best line to spread out our scoring threats. He Mik and Engvall were fantastic together and have been all year. They kickstarted us in Game 2 and through Folignos injury.

I think Marner and Matthews are attached too closely personally and I think they're better apart, but overuse hasn't been an issue since game 1. Hell I want to see Matthews used more, not less. Rotate him through some other lines.

 

[usernamezrhardtodo]

I'd love to hear a candid rebuttal from a real NHL coach about the idea of puck possession as part of the Leafs progressive thinking. From what I see as a fan, I think the constant regrouping and bumping back has a number of issues which aren't really discussed at a tactical level and is usually taken for granted as a smart move without any critical breakdown. Here's my amateur fan attempt:

1) The Dermott Game 6 error shows us not every player is good enough in every situation to turn back with the puck and retreat into higher danger areas when safer outlets are available. This isn't the only time, but I can recall a number of occasions when a Pierre Engvall might curl back in the neutral zone when he can just flip it in and retrieve. The desire to create a play by bumping back is also part the Galchenyuk blunder. He could have taken the hit or just shoveled it in deep to initiate a puck pursuit, but got fancy trying to connect with Muzzin like they're Lidstrom Ralfalski back there.

2) Moving the puck backwards kills momentum and creates higher danger situations when there are turnovers.

In scenario a, the forward puck carrier gathers a ton of steam and skates up the ice with the puck, either to make a play upon zone entry by skating it in, pass it off and also pushing the defense backwards. Think about Nathan Mackinnon torpedoing in.

In scenario b, the forward can flip it in and have numbers to support a puck retrieval in the corner or along the boards. Think Ryan O'Rielly.

In scenario c in Toronto's case, the primary puck carrier skates full steam ahead only slow down in traffic and drops the puck back down the ice and waits for the next puck carrier. By the time this regrouping happens a few times, the guy carrying the puck is looking at a massive traffic jam of 9 players loaded up on either side of the blueline and has to thread the needle for an entry. He also has no one back to support if there's turnover. Wouldn't that make you nervous as the last man back and the rusher?

A lot of these tactics are taken as new age dogma, but they don't really work in the field all that often.

Also, his spamming random video game line combinations looks less like Nick Nurse and more like Xbox.

I hate the regrouping thing because of the loss of speed. It totally negates any speed you might have built up when everyone is doing loops around the zone waiting for the puck carrier to do something. It very rarely ends up being favorable to us where you can actually say that it tricked the other team into a mistake. Why get all these 'Fast' players if you're going to slow it down to a crawl anyhow?

I am sure there is a propeller head geek somewhere that found an inefficiency in dumping it versus regrouping and here we are. I hated the first season of Keefe when they kept doing it 50x a game to just end up dumping it in...with no speed to retrieve it.

 

[rumman]

I'd love to hear a candid rebuttal from a real NHL coach about the idea of puck possession as part of the Leafs progressive thinking. From what I see as a fan, I think the constant regrouping and bumping back has a number of issues which aren't really discussed at a tactical level and is usually taken for granted as a smart move without any critical breakdown. Here's my amateur fan attempt:

1) The Dermott Game 6 error shows us not every player is good enough in every situation to turn back with the puck and retreat into higher danger areas when safer outlets are available. This isn't the only time, but I can recall a number of occasions when a Pierre Engvall might curl back in the neutral zone when he can just flip it in and retrieve. The desire to create a play by bumping back is also part the Galchenyuk blunder. He could have taken the hit or just shoveled it in deep to initiate a puck pursuit, but got fancy trying to connect with Muzzin like they're Lidstrom Ralfalski back there.

2) Moving the puck backwards kills momentum and creates higher danger situations when there are turnovers.

In scenario a, the forward puck carrier gathers a ton of steam and skates up the ice with the puck, either to make a play upon zone entry by skating it in, pass it off and also pushing the defense backwards. Think about Nathan Mackinnon torpedoing in.

In scenario b, the forward can flip it in and have numbers to support a puck retrieval in the corner or along the boards. Think Ryan O'Rielly.

In scenario c in Toronto's case, the primary puck carrier skates full steam ahead only slow down in traffic and drops the puck back down the ice and waits for the next puck carrier. By the time this regrouping happens a few times, the guy carrying the puck is looking at a massive traffic jam of 9 players loaded up on either side of the blueline and has to thread the needle for an entry. He also has no one back to support if there's turnover. Wouldn't that make you nervous as the last man back and the rusher?

A lot of these tactics are taken as new age dogma, but they don't really work in the field all that often.

Also, his spamming random video game line combinations looks less like Nick Nurse and more like Xbox.

this has advance statistics written all over it, it must look good on paper........much like the Leafs look good on paper..........

 

[Gallagbi]

I dont like how we manage the puck.

It's insane how reckless we are with the puck in dangerous areas of the ice. Heck Galchenyuk actually tried another high risk pass last night in the offensive zone but was lucky it wasnt knocked down.

We throw tons of high risk pass's right in front of our own net. You can see this is a systemic issue because you have role players doing it and its not really something that players of this ilk should ever be trying.

Puck management and puck support are two area's all good teams excel in and I would say we're below average.

This team needs to learn that less can be more especially at this time of the year.

Our big danger issue is the opposing Blueline. I'm fine in our own end and how we support.

At their Blueline were too cute and I almost died when I saw Gally try that pass again lat night. But honestly it's just Marner and now Thornton (when that wasn't there before) that continually make the poor decisions at the blueline. Since it's only them and not our other handlers, and Thornton's really only crept up on playoffs and arguably the 1 game, I dont see it as a system issue.

 

[Stephen]

I hate the regrouping thing because of the loss of speed. It totally negates any speed you might have built up when everyone is doing loops around the zone waiting for the puck carrier to do something. It very rarely ends up being favorable to us where you can actually say that it tricked the other team into a mistake. Why get all these 'Fast' players if you're going to slow it down to a crawl anyhow?

I am sure there is a propeller head geek somewhere that found an inefficiency in dumping it versus regrouping and here we are. I hated the first season of Keefe when they kept doing it 50x a game to just end up dumping it in...with no speed to retrieve it.

Just skate in clean direct routes to scoring areas and funnel pucks there with your high skilled puck handling abilities and throw things on net looking for rebounds. It's not soccer, you don't need to complete 15x touches of the puck and maintain the puck for X amount of seconds before a shot attempt. If you lose possession, have the courage to go get it back.

 

[Menzinger]

But isn't that one of the major knocks on Dubas....he seems to think the game is played on paper?

If Keefe and the players have failed, then surely the individual that placed them there must shoulder a significant ownership share of that failure.

The front office fundamentally must bare the brunt of responsibility for any failures or successes.

That said, though there are also such thing as reasonable/unreasonable predictions. I doubt you'd be able to find me a single serious pre-series claim that Matthews would have as few goals as he currently has.

 

[egd27]

I doubt you'd be able to find me a single serious pre-series claim that Matthews would have as few goals as he currently has.

So just another Maple Leaf anomaly?

Like his one 5v5 goal against CBJ last series?