Has Dubas failed at his job?

[hotpaws]

Three one word answers please. Have the stones.

your question is better asked to a Bolts fan since i don't follow the team that closely

but how about San Jose ? you said it's cup or bust so i guess that organization should have cut their losses and fired Wilson years ago

which leads me to ask the question about how your certain Dubas will win the cup if we give him a decade or more as our GM

 

[4thline]

your question is better asked to a Bolts fan since i don't follow the team that closely

Lol coward. That's answer enough.

At some point the Sharks should have moved on from Wilson, maybe the they could have finished the job like in Washington. In neither case was the right time 3 years into their tenure to satsify man-children having a tantrum.

To answer your question, I'm not. But 4 for the last 4 stanley cups were won by teams either with tenured gm's or right after making a change after a stretch of serious tenure. I don't want to be Dallas firing Armstrong with Ericsson/Neal/Niskanen/Grossman/Benn waiting in the wings to spend the next 7 years wandering around.

 

[Twine Tickler]

that's great but Tampa and Tor have nothing in common outside of us both having a first overall pick which 1 team gets every year so basically every team which has drafted first overall can say "look at Tampa" and believe they'll win multiple cups in the future which we know by historical trends is highly unlikely

The comparison has nothing to do with roster composition. It has everything to do with maintaining your core through the rough patch. WASH and TB both would not have won shit if they moved core pieces. It obviously cannot be proven, but I'd say that's a fair assumption.

but if we don't want to look at those examples, what about a historical comparison of Philly giving up Mike Richards and Jeff Carter in their primes? They were labeled the same losers that Mitch and Auston currently are. Only to win it together the year after the deal was done and were major pieces the 2 cups LA won in 3 years. Mike Richards also went on the record with spittin chicklets saying that in his mind there was no way they wouldn't have won in Philly if given more time.

What about ROR, complete loser in Buffalo, Conn Smythe the following year.

there are many examples of where it was unwise to part with core talents as well examples where holding onto them eventually paid off. Not every Stanley Cup takes a linear approach like Chicago. In fact, most don't. Our rough patches have been worse than any team to ever win the cup before, that is for sure. But the talent is there.

To say that this group of 20 somethings will never get over the hump is not necessarily fair or logical. It's an opinion based on hurt and is largely emotional. That time where we can confidently write this group off will come. And when it does, there will be no stone left unturned, and we will be able to liquidate quite comfortably, and say goodbye to the most talented Leaf team that never was.

Again, that time is not now.

 

[hotpaws]

Dubas could lose his job tomorrow and i couldnt care less, any GM is easy to replace.
but, he hasnt 'failed' at his job!
his team is one of the most competitive in the league and a cup contender, and will continue to be one for the foreseeable future.
in what world is that failing?
Buffalo would love to be as big a failure as we are.
damn, imagine if we had Holland as our GM with the $$ he's throwing at players that are not quite up to the level of an overpaid Marner/Nylander/Tavares/Matthews.
people freaked that he gave Simmonds 1.5x2 and call Lou a genius giving Cizikas 2.5+ for 6 and gave an RFA who has never hit 40 points 4.15 on a 3 year bridge

we were barely in a playoff spot in our regular division 2 seasons ago and have been knocked out by weak teams the last 2 years so while we want to believe we're cup contenders are we really or is our Leaf bias clouding our judgement

also Dubas didn't build our core pieces so why should he get credit for them ?

and i don't give a damn about Holland or Chia since it has nothing to do with our situation but i will say trying to attract/keep players in Edm is a lot harder than it is in Toronto

Simmonds has been cooked for years so comparing him to a solid bottom 6 player like Czikas is absurd .

Lou isn't perfect but he's done a hell of job on the Island and the deals he handed out today were all solid regardless on how some people are trying to spin them .

as far as this year goes , with have a shit load of ? on this team

-Bunting is in his mid 20's and barely has played in the NHL
-Ritchie is a cast off from the Bruins that we hope will play better for us
-Kase we're hoping can recover from multiple concussions and even if he does we have no idea how he'll play
-Mzerak/Campbell , who the f*** knows how they'll play for us and the former has been brutal in the playoffs
-can Sandin or Lilly be full time NHLers
-how will JT and Muzzin play one year older
-does Spezza have another good year in him

this team can go a lot of ways and many of the paths aren't pretty

 

[hotpaws]

The comparison has nothing to do with roster composition. It has everything to do with maintaining your core through the rough patch. WASH and TB both would not have won shit if they moved core pieces. It obviously cannot be proven, but I'd say that's a fair assumption.

but if we don't want to look at those examples, what about a historical comparison of Philly giving up Mike Richards and Jeff Carter in their primes? They were labeled the same losers that Mitch and Auston currently are. Only to win it together the year after the deal was done and were major pieces the 2 cups LA won in 3 years. Mike Richards also went on the record with spittin chicklets saying that in his mind there was no way they wouldn't have won in Philly if given more time.

What about ROR, complete loser in Buffalo, Conn Smythe the following year.

there are many examples of where it was unwise to part with core talents as well examples where holding onto them eventually paid off. Not every Stanley Cup takes a linear approach like Chicago. In fact, most don't. Our rough patches have been worse than any team to ever win the cup before, that is for sure. But the talent is there.

To say that this group of 20 somethings will never get over the hump is not necessarily fair or logical. It's an opinion based on hurt and is largely emotional. That time where we can confidently write this group off will come. And when it does, there will be no stone left unturned, and we will be able to liquidate quite comfortably, and say goodbye to the most talented Leaf team that never was.

Again, that time is not now.

your the one who said to trade the young core so i have no idea what your babbling about now

 

[hotpaws]

Lol coward. That's answer enough.

At some point the Sharks should have moved on from Wilson, maybe the they could have finished the job like in Washington. In neither case was the right time 3 years into their tenure to satsify man-children having a tantrum.

To answer your question, I'm not. But 4 for the last 4 stanley cups were won by teams either with tenured gm's or right after making a change after a stretch of serious tenure. I don't want to be Dallas firing Armstrong with Ericsson/Neal/Niskanen/Grossman/Benn waiting in the wings to spend the next 7 years wandering around.

so now your saying we;re not a lock to win the cup if we keep Dubas

and the reason most GM's who win the cup have tenure is because they've taken over bottom feeders and built them up , not because letting GM's fail endlessly will eventually lead to a cup

Dubas took over a quality team unlike most GM's , he won't get to endlessly fail for years to try to build a winner .

 

[Twine Tickler]

teams don't win on the backs a few players trying to carry a roster filled with bargain bin players

Tampa was a very deep team top to bottom with the best goalie in the league backstopping them , if you believe the Leafs roster looked anything like theirs then you should take a much closer look at there team .

but hey , some us are fans of the game and follow a certain team while others get their entertainment by cheering for a GM so who am i to disagree with what people find enjoyable

no one is cheering for a GM dude.

We cheer for the Leafs. The same Leafs you do. The same Leafs who were severely f***ed over by JFJ, Brian Burke, Dave Nonis, and to a lesser degree Lou Lamerello. GM's who made Hail Mary type moves to save their jobs, or ones who would double down on their bad decisions to justify them. At this point what mess would the successor to KD have to clean up? I can tell you there isn't a Zaitsev or Marleau level f*** up on this roster.

We are still paying Phil Kessel for f*** sakes... We paid Phil Kessel 1.2 million per year to win cups elsewhere... give that some thought for a second. Just for the record, we have Amirov and 1.2Mill less to spend every year to show for Phil's 2 cups in PITT.

No Dubas supporter is saying that he hasn't made mistakes. We are saying he is not the problem. He has always exercised his reasoning with the purpose of sustained success. Which is something no GM prior has even given an ounce of thought to. They'd much rather mortgage the future for the now. Despite the ramifications. In the end, it wont be their mess to clean up right?

If we are going to go in a different direction, I'd much rather it be from a GM that has always had the future of this organization as the priority and not making shoot from the hip decisions to prolong their own tenure.

 

[supermann_98]

Dubas a victim . lol .

and your solution is too sell off the kids and do a full rebuild because Dubas overpaid everyone and now can't add solid pieces to compliment the young core he inherited ?

Dubas f***ed this team and he has no one to blame but himself , signing JT ruined whatever potential this team had and that's on him .

Unfortunately this is true, and I was one of the ones on this board anxiously awaiting every tweet and bit of news about Tavares possibly signing here.

Difference is I also was hoping it would be for around $10m, but when I heard it was $11m I wasn't too upset, little did I know that our greedy young guys would use that contract as leverage to line their own pockets.

I mistakenly figured and Shanny obviously did too, that they would take a discount to remain on the team and ice a competitive balanced team. Instead of keeping things in check Dubas said we can and we will, then he wanted to be their buddy ... letting them grow their hair, beards, moustaches ... and THEN he bent over a barrel and said "stick it to me".

The team I grew up cheering for, guys like Gilmour, Clark, Sundin, Roberts ... replaced by a bunch of greedy millenials who care more about their hair and that their fedora matches their suit than they care about winning and putting in the grunt work to get that accomplished.

Thanks Dubas, and please don't trade away all our remaining 1st round picks and prospects to squeak into the playoffs this year only to once again get pumped in the first round

 

[Leaf Fans]

the spin is endlessly praising Dubas in the off season for improving the team then making excuses that he's still the goat GM even though the team fails every year under his watch

the problem your having is you believe Dubas and the team are one and the same when in fact he's just an employee

That is just made up nonsense. I don't have that belief.

 

[Dreakmur]

E

I can tell you there isn't a Zaitsev or Marleau level f*** up on this roster.

If those are the two 'big mistakes', then we should be celebrating that person's tenure. Lou made some bad choices, but if those are the worse of them, he did a really good job.

No Dubas supporter is saying that he hasn't made mistakes.

Unfortunately, there are some. There are morons on the periphery of both sides that taint valid points made by each.

 

[Marmoset]

no one is cheering for a GM dude.

We cheer for the Leafs. The same Leafs you do. The same Leafs who were severely f***ed over by JFJ, Brian Burke, Dave Nonis, and to a lesser degree Lou Lamerello. GM's who made Hail Mary type moves to save their jobs, or ones who would double down on their bad decisions to justify them. At this point what mess would the successor to KD have to clean up? I can tell you there isn't a Zaitsev or Marleau level f*** up on this roster.

We are still paying Phil Kessel for f*** sakes... We paid Phil Kessel 1.2 million per year to win cups elsewhere... give that some thought for a second. Just for the record, we have Amirov and 1.2Mill less to spend every year to show for Phil's 2 cups in PITT.

No Dubas supporter is saying that he hasn't made mistakes. We are saying he is not the problem. He has always exercised his reasoning with the purpose of sustained success. Which is something no GM prior has even given an ounce of thought to. They'd much rather mortgage the future for the now. Despite the ramifications. In the end, it wont be their mess to clean up right?

If we are going to go in a different direction, I'd much rather it be from a GM that has always had the future of this organization as the priority and not making shoot from the hip decisions to prolong their own tenure.

I understand what you're saying in most of your post and I agree to a point, although it seems like you're basically saying Dubas isn't as bad as the guys before, rather than saying he's good. But about the bolded part - trading away almost your entire collection of draft picks for two consecutive years certainly seems like something you could argue he is doing to prolong his own tenure rather than for the future of the organization.

 

[DarkKnight]

Games yes. Management, no. Managers don't play games, they manage multi-million dollar organizations from the top down. Changing the course of multi-million dollar organizations every couple years based on the results of a couple of games at the end of the year is terrible practice.
Hence the qualifier "that people use to assess sports management". Legacy's are decided by championships, but making decisions based on short term "round wins" is asinine.

Short term, man okay.

 

[Gary Nylund]

If we are going to go in a different direction, I'd much rather it be from a GM that has always had the future of this organization as the priority and not making shoot from the hip decisions to prolong their own tenure.

The last couple of TDL's say hi. And the most recent one is jumping up and down waving his arms yelling as loud as he can - "how did you miss me"?

One thing I loved about Dubas is that he said that he didn't believe in rentals. Awesome I thought, a man after my own heart. And then ...

 

[Twine Tickler]

E

If those are the two 'big mistakes', then we should be celebrating that person's tenure. Lou made some bad choices, but if those are the worse of them, he did a really good job.

In all honesty there wasn't a whole lot he could have done to f*** things up. He was hired in 2015 after the Leafs had already selected Mitch, Willy and Mo. He and Shanny acquired a HHOF level coach who served as a major building block in our early development IMO. Together they devised an all time level tank job to have a chance at AM34. It worked. The Freddy deal was great for what it was worth. Freddy really gave us stability for 3.5 out of those 5 years. Something we hadn't had for over a decade prior. He made a couple deadline acquisitions in Boyle and Plecanec I believe. Both high prices, but the deals made sense to reward the team at the time. The Marleau deal was idiotic, and the Zaitsev Contract was a calculated risk that failed. I am less upset about Zaitsev as he did perform really well as a rookie, and just shit himself thereafter. It was a swing and a miss, but it really could have been a home run at the time. Marleau was a contract that was a known issue the day it was signed as it had that 3rd year. It did end up f***ing us as expected, and we lost draft capital to offload it. All n all I am not sure what he did that was so ground breaking in either direction. The best thing he ever did was orchestrate a tank job for a chance to win a lottery to select Matthews. I wouldn't say his tenure was poor either, he did set a culture I think we could use a bit more of nowadays. But he was not the savant some people make him out to be.

His work on the island is hella impressive no question. But lets not forget he was prepared to sign JT to that exact same deal. The same deal the Dubas haters criticize to no end. Ultimately the best thing he did was hire Trotz. Trotz gets the absolute most out of every player. Its remarkable. Together they have made a strong team, but its really a case of the whole being greater than the sum of its parts. A great team mindset to have, but there will come a time when that mindset shifts, and the talent on paper is just not good enough to keep them afloat. The culture they have created and enforce needs to be applauded, not necessarily the team that has been assembled. Because if you put that roster with any other coach and GM, I am not even sure they make the playoffs.

 

[Dreakmur]

The Freddy deal was great for what it was worth. Freddy really gave us stability for 3.5 out of those 5 years. Something we hadn't had for over a decade prior.

Acquiring Andersen gave us stability in net, which allowed our young team to play with confidence. As you said, he was great for most of the contract, but faltered at the end.

He made a couple deadline acquisitions in Boyle and Plecanec I believe. Both high prices, but the deals made sense to reward the team at the time.

I think those were Lou's two biggest mistakes, along with not trading Bozak and van Riemsdky.

I totally understand why he did it, but it was the wrong time. We should have kept building a foundation for the future.

The Marleau deal was idiotic

Disagree. They wanted a good veteran to lead the room. I've said it before, I don't think it's a coincidence that the room went to hell as soon as Marleau left.

the Zaitsev Contract was a calculated risk that failed. I am less upset about Zaitsev as he did perform really well as a rookie, and just shit himself thereafter. It was a swing and a miss, but it really could have been a home run at the time.

Even now, that 4.5 for Zaitsev isn't bad. Most of his comparables signed for 3.5+ million, and some signed for well over 4.

Marleau was a contract that was a known issue the day it was signed as it had that 3rd year. It did end up f***ing us as expected, and we lost draft capital to offload it.

Unless we expected to sign Tavares, that's not true. The rushed rebuild cause a lot of issues. Everyone knew Marleau would decline, I think what he brought off the ice was worth it.

Paying a premium to unload Marleau just to keep Kapanen and Johnsson for 1 more season compounded the issue.

 

[Twine Tickler]

I understand what you're saying in most of your post and I agree to a point, although it seems like you're basically saying Dubas isn't as bad as the guys before, rather than saying he's good. But about the bolded part - trading away almost your entire collection of draft picks for two consecutive years certainly seems like something you could argue he is doing to prolong his own tenure rather than for the future of the organization.

Ya absolutely. We lost a lot of picks this last draft and next only because we were in a position to compete for a cup. It was also somewhat mitigated by selecting 12 players in the 2020 draft. So the pool is still stocked.

I don't like spending high draft picks for rentals either, but there was an appetite to win within the organization. Rightfully so. They took their shot and missed. Obviously in retrospect it was a horrible deal, but that is sometimes the cost of going for it.

Not to mention, KD's job really hasn't been in question until this offseason. I am not sure he made that deal to save his job, but more or less to go for it. I think there is a difference personally.

I think a lot of GM's in Kyle's current position would feel the pressure to make a bold move this offseason. Maybe even resigning Hyman to what almost certainly will be a dud contract. Those are the anchor's I was referring to when I said mortgaging the future. But ya spending valuable draft capital is also a a way to mortgage the future. But the prospects we have drafted recently appear to be tracking in the right direction, which makes losing draft capital more manageable. Its a delicate balance to maintain competitiveness and continually add, while also establishing a good prospect pool. I think he has done that just fine so far

 

[Blowfish]

we were barely in a playoff spot in our regular division 2 seasons ago and have been knocked out by weak teams the last 2 years so while we want to believe we're cup contenders are we really or is our Leaf bias clouding our judgement

also Dubas didn't build our core pieces so why should he get credit for them ?

and i don't give a damn about Holland or Chia since it has nothing to do with our situation but i will say trying to attract/keep players in Edm is a lot harder than it is in Toronto

Simmonds has been cooked for years so comparing him to a solid bottom 6 player like Czikas is absurd .

Lou isn't perfect but he's done a hell of job on the Island and the deals he handed out today were all solid regardless on how some people are trying to spin them .

as far as this year goes , with have a shit load of ? on this team

-Bunting is in his mid 20's and barely has played in the NHL
-Ritchie is a cast off from the Bruins that we hope will play better for us
-Kase we're hoping can recover from multiple concussions and even if he does we have no idea how he'll play
-Mzerak/Campbell , who the f*** knows how they'll play for us and the former has been brutal in the playoffs
-can Sandin or Lilly be full time NHLers
-how will JT and Muzzin play one year older
-does Spezza have another good year in him

this team can go a lot of ways and many of the paths aren't pretty

Good honest take.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Ya absolutely. We lost a lot of picks this last draft and next only because we were in a position to compete for a cup. It was also somewhat mitigated by selecting 12 players in the 2020 draft. So the pool is still stocked.

People have been saying that for the last four years and we have four 1st round exits to show for it.

I don't like spending high draft picks for rentals either, but there was an appetite to win within the organization. Rightfully so. They took their shot and missed. Obviously in retrospect it was a horrible deal, but that is sometimes the cost of going for it.

People have been saying that for the last four years and we have four 1st round exits to show for it.

 

[Twine Tickler]

The last couple of TDL's say hi. And the most recent one is jumping up and down waving his arms yelling as loud as he can - "how did you miss me"?

One thing I loved about Dubas is that he said that he didn't believe in rentals. Awesome I thought, a man after my own heart. And then ...

well it would have been a bit foolish to get anything but a rental this year given the expansion draft and how we would have paid a premium for a player who we either would have to pay again to protect or just lose in general. So no matter the term on whatever player we acquired this TDL it would have been potentially a rental . The only other rental that we have ever acquired under Dubas is Clifford, who was accompanied with Campbell. So really that was not a true rental, but more so a throw in. Rittich, who was acquried at a time when both of our starting tendies were f***ed with injury. And hutton, who was used as depth in a season where a single positive test result could have put Marincin in game action for 10 days....


The trades made this TDL were done to make a serious pyush for the cup. Something we all thought this team could do. The Foligno deal was a particularly steep price no question. It was that way to get double retention and have no active players go the other way. We were a truly dominant team, ready to compete for the cup, KD made a move to add without subtracting. That was the price unfortunately.

Also there were 3 teams rumored to get him, all of which were willing to put up a hefty price for Nick's service. It's the price to seriously compete. The results weren't there. We still have a bright prospect pool and future. You can't win every trade. This was a calculated risk that didn't work out, but also doesn't handcuff us going forward. It's really only for the "told ya so" crowd to stew over at this point.

 

[Twine Tickler]

People have been saying that for the last four years and we have four 1st round exits to show for it.



People have been saying that for the last four years and we have four 1st round exits to show for it.

Yes, But not @Gary Nylund

Gary knew all along that this team was not built right...

Also @Gary Nylund in april 2021

If goaltending is a problem then IMHO, we should do everything we possibly can to fix it even to the point of overpaying to a certain extent. Everything else is nowhere near as important, I like our team as it is. I don't mind adding something if the cost isn't too high but my mantra is make sure the goaltending situation is good, if we don't have that then everything else is pointless.

Nope thats definitely not a man who thought this team was fit to compete...

 

[GordieHoweHatTrick]

He's failing at his job but as long as he's the active GM of the Maple Leafs he hasn't yet failed.. always an opportunity at redemption.

 

[Sniper99]

Two months later and you guys are still complaining? Hope you folks enjoyed your summer

Are we not allowed to?

 

[Sniper99]

Dubas could lose his job tomorrow and i couldnt care less, any GM is easy to replace.
but, he hasnt 'failed' at his job!
his team is one of the most competitive in the league and a cup contender, and will continue to be one for the foreseeable future.
in what world is that failing?
Buffalo would love to be as big a failure as we are.
damn, imagine if we had Holland as our GM with the $$ he's throwing at players that are not quite up to the level of an overpaid Marner/Nylander/Tavares/Matthews.
people freaked that he gave Simmonds 1.5x2 and call Lou a genius giving Cizikas 2.5+ for 6 and gave an RFA who has never hit 40 points 4.15 on a 3 year bridge

Cup contenders get out of the first round, not win the first 3 of 4 games and take the rest of the series off. Not a week or two later a few of them were hanging out with Biebs at a UFC fight.
If we can get out of the 1st round for once then i'll start to have faith in the "cup contender" bullshit
Playoff contender sure, Cup contender? not with snowflakes like Rielly as our "#1 dman"

 

[Gary Nylund]

well it would have been a bit foolish to get anything but a rental this year given the expansion draft and how we would have paid a premium for a player who we either would have to pay again to protect or just lose in general. So no matter the term on whatever player we acquired this TDL it would have been potentially a rental . The only other rental that we have ever acquired under Dubas is Clifford, who was accompanied with Campbell. So really that was not a true rental, but more so a throw in. Rittich, who was acquried at a time when both of our starting tendies were f***ed with injury. And hutton, who was used as depth in a season where a single positive test result could have put Marincin in game action for 10 days....

Like I said, Dubas said he doesn't believe in rentals, then he went out and got a bunch of rentals. Seems like a really dumb move to me but hey, that's just my opinion. I've said it many times, rentals are bad in general and the only time it makes sense is when your cup window is closing is if you think there's a really good chance that the rentals will put you over the top. That's why I was happy to hear that Dubas doesn't believe in rentals, and I'm unhappy that his actions have shown his words to be worthless.

The trades made this TDL were done to make a serious pyush for the cup. Something we all thought this team could do. The Foligno deal was a particularly steep price no question. It was that way to get double retention and have no active players go the other way. We were a truly dominant team, ready to compete for the cup, KD made a move to add without subtracting. That was the price unfortunately.

Also there were 3 teams rumored to get him, all of which were willing to put up a hefty price for Nick's service. It's the price to seriously compete. The results weren't there. We still have a bright prospect pool and future. You can't win every trade. This was a calculated risk that didn't work out, but also doesn't handcuff us going forward. It's really only for the "told ya so" crowd to stew over at this point.

Sound like you're speaking on behalf of all Leaf fans, you should know better than that. I dunno what a "pyush" is but I think we need to at the very least, show that we can win one round before we talk about being a serious threat to go all the way.

Yes, But not @Gary Nylund

Gary knew all along that this team was not built right...

Also @Gary Nylund in april 2021

Having trouble quoting you so that the words actually show up but whatever. Yes, I said make sure the goaltending situation is good, if we don't have that then everything else is pointless.

Not sure if picking up Rittich qualifies, well OK, I don't think it does.

 

[Marmoset]

Ya absolutely. We lost a lot of picks this last draft and next only because we were in a position to compete for a cup. It was also somewhat mitigated by selecting 12 players in the 2020 draft. So the pool is still stocked.

I don't like spending high draft picks for rentals either, but there was an appetite to win within the organization. Rightfully so. They took their shot and missed. Obviously in retrospect it was a horrible deal, but that is sometimes the cost of going for it.

Not to mention, KD's job really hasn't been in question until this offseason. I am not sure he made that deal to save his job, but more or less to go for it. I think there is a difference personally.

I think a lot of GM's in Kyle's current position would feel the pressure to make a bold move this offseason. Maybe even resigning Hyman to what almost certainly will be a dud contract. Those are the anchor's I was referring to when I said mortgaging the future. But ya spending valuable draft capital is also a a way to mortgage the future. But the prospects we have drafted recently appear to be tracking in the right direction, which makes losing draft capital more manageable. Its a delicate balance to maintain competitiveness and continually add, while also establishing a good prospect pool. I think he has done that just fine so far

I don't think we lost so many picks simply because were trying to compete for a Cup. It's also a sign that our development system has been failing. If you have prospects coming up through the system to fill depth positions, you don't need to trade away all of those picks because you already have your replacements in the system. Granted, a lot of this falls on the previous administration since this is a time when Hunter's picks should be stepping into prime time, and there simply isn't much beyond the first round guys who have already been here for a while.

Perhaps Dubas' picks will pan out in this way - we just don't know yet.

I agree with you that it's probably more of a case of 'going for it', but I wanted to present the case. There is no way to know for sure. Whatever the case, I think everyone expects that if the team does not at least win a round this year, there will probably be major changes in the front office. There is no way to consider it anything but a failure if this team goes six straight seasons with the type of talent it has and fails to win a playoff round. As I've pointed out for comparison before, the Leafs have gone five straight seasons not winning a round while the Raptors went five straight seasons winning at least one round!