Kyle Dubas Discussion (continued) the 2021 edition

[The Podium]

So the bolded all came here with Lou and/or Hunter involved.

17 of the 24 on your list.

Can you Duba-fans have a huddle and let us know if we'd had success in promoting players or if it has been an empty cupboard experience?

Seems like you are walking both sides of the line on this one.

You are the one walking both sides...

Dubas was in charge of the Marlies a second ago and was to blame for the prospect development failures of the 2015-17 drafts and now Lou and Hunter were involved?

Also Lou had next to nothing to do with any of the bolded, Hunter arguably contributed Brooks, Dermott and Grundstrom

 

[Antropovsky]

Let's not play this silly game of twist.

The original quote I responded to was this:



To which I wondered how Hunter and Lou left the Cupboard empty.

Under them we were given 21 picks by the League. They went to the draft table 27 times, having made moves to acquire more assets. So that's a net gain.

They acquired more picks than those 27 though and parlayed them into assets to bring talent in such as Andersen and Kapanen. They were astute on the waiver wire picking up McElhinney.

On the draft front, they landed Marner, Matthews, Dermott and Liljgren who have all made positive contributions to the team.

From a Cupboard perspective... it was far from empty when Dubas got it. Most GMs would salivate over what they had.

Cupboard empty? No. Myth busted.

You then added a nuance to this:

To which I wonder - How has Liljegren is a player who has made a positive contribution to the team? In 11 NHL games he has 1 assist and is a -5. Please explain.

Dermott is currently a work in progress - might be a #6, or he may be a #3 (if he develops right). He's also a frustrating thought to me because we kept trading down and gained three picks - but all the players we missed on in the process is embarrassing. I compare it to drafting Hanifin and saying hey guys our gm left us in a pretty good spot LOOK WE GOT HANIFIN who is a serviceable player - yet ignore that Rantanen, Provorov and Werenski were taken after.

I'll give Lou credit, he did some good things.... Hunters drafting was outright trash - 2015 was a catastrophe in my opinion for the apparent "draft guru".

I still think Dubas has already performed better than Lou and Hunter in both their areas of work. I'm not saying Lou and Hunter were trash... but Dubas I feel has done better.

 

[Dreakmur]

So the bolded all came here with Lou and/or Hunter involved.

17 of the 24 on your list.

Can you Duba-fans have a huddle and let us know if we'd had success in promoting players or if it has been an empty cupboard experience?

Seems like you are walking both sides of the line on this one.

It's not a matter of just counting players. A GM is responsible to building the system and creating a culture. Lou inherited a good group of young players, but he also set them up to succeed.

I've said it before, BOTH Lou and Dubas have helped moved this team from bad to good. BOTH guys made mistakes along the way. Trying to name one guy or the other as the sole reason for our success is idiotic.

 

[Antropovsky]

Right.
Cause Kap is sooo good.
Barely an NHL guy.
Pft.

Doesn't really matter anymore.... what matters is Dubas turned Kapanen into Amirov and Hallander.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

We are going to find out how good of a GM Dubas is this year because this is HIS team now and honestly it looks pretty good thr offense is still there, the defensive depth is much better and between Andersen, Campbell and Dell the goalie depth is fantastic.

This is going to work and Kyle Dubas will get the credit or it will fail and it will be HIS fault.

There is no more protecting him he will either succeed or fail

 

[Dekes For Days]

I would also expect posters at HF to understand that as tempting as it may be, a player actually has to accomplish something in order to declare their development a success.

This is such a lazy way to avoid acknowledging good drafting. Good drafting isn't only recognized when the players play in the NHL. Good drafting has increased the value of our prospect assets in the present. That is beneficial for the team.

Under them we were given 21 picks by the League. They went to the draft table 27 times, having made moves to acquire more assets. So that's a net gain.

It's not a gain if those picks are wasted.

They acquired more picks than those 27 though and parlayed them into assets to bring talent in such as Andersen and Kapanen.

He did not bring in Kapanen. Dubas did. Dubas also brought in the 1st round pick that got Andersen.

They were astute on the waiver wire picking up McElhinney.

There was nothing astute about it. He fell in his lap, and was the only real option to replace the horrible failure Lou originally chose.

On the draft front, they landed Marner

Lou was not here for Marner.

From a Cupboard perspective... it was far from empty when Dubas got it.

It was pretty empty, and it's massively better now.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

This is such a lazy way to avoid acknowledging good drafting. Good drafting isn't only recognized when the players play in the NHL. Good drafting has increased the value of our prospect assets in the present. That is beneficial for the team.

It's not a gain if those picks are wasted.

He did not bring in Kapanen. Dubas did. Dubas also brought in the 1st round pick that got Andersen.

There was nothing astute about it. He fell in his lap, and was the only real option to replace the horrible failure Lou originally chose.

Lou was not here for Marner.

It was pretty empty, and it's massively better now.

The prospect pool buti wasn't empty with the exception of the Andersen trade Lou didn't trade 1st rounders

 

[Dekes For Days]

The prospect pool buti wasn't empty with the exception of the Andersen trade Lou didn't trade 1st rounders

The prospect pool was in much worse shape under Lou, and Lou traded away plenty of quality picks.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

The prospect pool was in much worse shape under Lou, and Lou traded away plenty of quality picks.

Look back on those "quality picks" they haven't turned into much

 

[Dekes For Days]

Look back on those "quality picks" they haven't turned into much

Not sure why it matters what the other teams did with those picks.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

Not sure why it matters what the other teams did with those picks.

Because if those players don't develop then it doesn't matter if they traded away "quality picks".

If they don't develop then they weren't quality picks

 

[Nineteen67]

The past two off-seasons, Dubas realized he needed to make changes and went out and did something about it. That’s all you can ask and I won’t fault him for trying.
Last year was somewhat of a failure and see about this year soon enough. He recognized that the team needed to be harder to play against and added what he believes are the right pieces, based on what was attainable.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

The past two off-seasons, Dubas realized he needed to make changes and went out and did something about it. That’s all you can ask and I won’t fault him for trying.
Last year was somewhat of a failure and see about this year soon enough. He recognized that the team needed to be harder to play against and added what he believes are the right pieces, based on what was attainable.

No you can ask for actual progress to be made

 

[Dekes For Days]

Because if those players don't develop then it doesn't matter if they traded away "quality picks".
If they don't develop then they weren't quality picks

We didn't trade the players; we traded the picks. The picks were valuable, even if another team's choices with them were not. By your logic, you could just give away all of your picks every year, and it would be fine as long as you gave them to a garbage drafting team.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

We didn't trade the players; we traded the picks. The picks were valuable, even if another team's choices with them were not. By your logic, you could just give away all of your picks every year, and it would be fine as long as you gave them to a garbage drafting team.

If those picks don't develop then e no damage done

 

[Nineteen67]

No you can ask for actual progress to be made

Don’t you have to wait and see?
I do agree that time is running out and he has to show improvement this season.

 

[ACC1224]

If those picks don't develop then e no damage done

They would have been excellent picks had they been retained.

 

[Dekes For Days]

If those picks don't develop then e no damage done

That is not true. The players that those teams ended up selecting have nothing to do with this - those selections are unique to that team, and are different than who the Leafs (or other teams) would have selected. The picks are just picks, not players, and they had value.

 

[Buds17]

We didn't trade the players; we traded the picks. The picks were valuable, even if another team's choices with them were not. By your logic, you could just give away all of your picks every year, and it would be fine as long as you gave them to a garbage drafting team.

Saying all or no draft picks are valuable would be a blanket statement either way. Things also never pan out that well or that poorly. We can at least attach a name to a pick that is traded away. There's really no way of definitely knowing the player a team would have drafted had they retained said pick. I know it wasn't a Lou or Dubas trade, but is the Kessel trade not viewed a bit differently if Boston selects Gudbranson instead of Seguin? It's never the be all and end all. It should account for something though. Trading an unknown draft pick sometimes comes with its own set of risks.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Saying all or no draft picks are valuable would be a blanket statement either way.

All draft picks are valuable, to varying degrees. They are an asset. What other teams do with it is irrelevant - when you trade it away, you are losing that choice for your own team.

We can at least attach a name to a pick that is traded away.

You cannot. A player was not traded. A draft pick was.

is the Kessel trade not viewed a bit differently if Boston selects Gudbranson instead of Seguin?

No, it's the exact same trade, regardless of what Boston did with it.

 

[Buds17]

All draft picks are valuable, to varying degrees. They are an asset. What other teams do with it is irrelevant - when you trade it away, you are losing that choice for your own team.

You cannot. A player was not traded. A draft pick was.

No, it's the exact same trade, regardless of what Boston did with it.

We might have to agree to disagree then. Perfectly fine.

 

[meefer]

To which I wonder - How has Liljegren is a player who has made a positive contribution to the team? In 11 NHL games he has 1 assist and is a -5. Please explain.

Dermott is currently a work in progress - might be a #6, or he may be a #3 (if he develops right). He's also a frustrating thought to me because we kept trading down and gained three picks - but all the players we missed on in the process is embarrassing. I compare it to drafting Hanifin and saying hey guys our gm left us in a pretty good spot LOOK WE GOT HANIFIN who is a serviceable player - yet ignore that Rantanen, Provorov and Werenski were taken after.

I'll give Lou credit, he did some good things.... Hunters drafting was outright trash - 2015 was a catastrophe in my opinion for the apparent "draft guru".

I still think Dubas has already performed better than Lou and Hunter in both their areas of work. I'm not saying Lou and Hunter were trash... but Dubas I feel has done better.

I'd agree, both 'regimes' have offered benefits. Dubas, imo, is proving to be better at drafting.

It's not a matter of just counting players. A GM is responsible to building the system and creating a culture. Lou inherited a good group of young players, but he also set them up to succeed.

I've said it before, BOTH Lou and Dubas have helped moved this team from bad to good. BOTH guys made mistakes along the way. Trying to name one guy or the other as the sole reason for our success is idiotic.

Better said than I just attempted.

We are going to find out how good of a GM Dubas is this year because this is HIS team now and honestly it looks pretty good thr offense is still there, the defensive depth is much better and between Andersen, Campbell and Dell the goalie depth is fantastic.

This is going to work and Kyle Dubas will get the credit or it will fail and it will be HIS fault.

There is no more protecting him he will either succeed or fail

I agree with the 1st bolded comment. The 2nd, I don't. If he has, as you and I agree, set the team up well, at what point do the players have to take responsibility for their success on the ice? Keefe is a part of the equation, too (though I think less so than the players). At the end of the day, the Leafs are a team that has elements of Lou and Kyle in its structural DNA. I think this is our most balanced, mature, and talented group in years. They should do well. If they don't, it's not the GM's fault, it's the players.

Look back on those "quality picks" they haven't turned into much

The players another team drafts and develops, and the subsequent success or failure of those players is not evidence that the picks did not have value. The use of those picks may have been poorly thought out decisions. We Leaf fans are familiar with that type of outcome.

If those picks don't develop then e no damage done

The damage is calculated by who the Leafs might have drafted with those picks, and how those players could have been developed.

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

I'd agree, both 'regimes' have offered benefits. Dubas, imo, is proving to be better at drafting.



Better said than I just attempted.



I agree with the 1st bolded comment. The 2nd, I don't. If he has, as you and I agree, set the team up well, at what point do the players have to take responsibility for their success on the ice? Keefe is a part of the equation, too (though I think less so than the players). At the end of the day, the Leafs are a team that has elements of Lou and Kyle in its structural DNA. I think this is our most balanced, mature, and talented group in years. They should do well. If they don't, it's not the GM's fault, it's the players.



The players another team drafts and develops, and the subsequent success or failure of those players is not evidence that the picks did not have value. The use of those picks may have been poorly thought out decisions. We Leaf fans are familiar with that type of outcome.



The damage is calculated by who the Leafs might have drafted with those picks, and how those players could have been developed.

I pu it on management because they built it, I think if this team goes down in round 1 again it's time to start looking at the people that put this group together

 

[LEAFANFORLIFE23]

I'd agree, both 'regimes' have offered benefits. Dubas, imo, is proving to be better at drafting.



Better said than I just attempted.



I agree with the 1st bolded comment. The 2nd, I don't. If he has, as you and I agree, set the team up well, at what point do the players have to take responsibility for their success on the ice? Keefe is a part of the equation, too (though I think less so than the players). At the end of the day, the Leafs are a team that has elements of Lou and Kyle in its structural DNA. I think this is our most balanced, mature, and talented group in years. They should do well. If they don't, it's not the GM's fault, it's the players.



The players another team drafts and develops, and the subsequent success or failure of those players is not evidence that the picks did not have value. The use of those picks may have been poorly thought out decisions. We Leaf fans are familiar with that type of outcome.



The damage is calculated by who the Leafs might have drafted with those picks, and how those players could have been developed.

If the Leafs go out and acquire David Savard at the deadline and it costs them 2 2nds and a prospect I don't care because I don't know what those 2 2nds are going to be.

But I know that David Savard would bump down Holl and solidly the top 4 and if that costs 2 2nds and a prospect that's fine those draft picks are magic beans David Savard is a proven asset

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

If the Leafs go out and acquire David Savard at the deadline and it costs them 2 2nds and a prospect I don't care because I don't know what those 2 2nds are going to be.

But I know that David Savard would bump down Holl and solidly the top 4 and if that costs 2 2nds and a prospect that's fine those draft picks are magic beans David Savard is a proven asset

draft picks and prospects have a lot of value, and the best teams in the league who stay good for a long period of time know that and take full advantage of them