Tribute Kyle Dubas discussion

[The Iceman]

Are we better off when Dubas lets JVR, Bozak, Komarov, Gardiner etc etc all walk for nothing, and then turns around and trade 1st 2019 + 2 X former 2nds (Grundstrom + Durzi) for Muzz who might be a 1 year rental as pending UFA? If Dubas had acquired excess picks for JVR and Gardiner and then dealt those picks for Muzz the damage is offset of picks in vs picks out.

I personally can see the benefit of dealing vets for picks and then using those excess picks acquired to buy rental players to build up your Cup chances and not hurting your future, because its like playing with house or found money.

I don't see a difference.
Dealing your rental players for picks and acquiring rental players with those picks.

 

[zeke]

There's always one.
Tough to be disappointed when you have no expectations.

In a couple months, you'll admit it.

 

[ACC1224]

In a couple months, you'll admit it.

If the team exceeds my expectations I will happily admit it.
Falling way short at the moment.

 

[zeke]

If the team exceeds my expectations I will happily admit it.
Falling way short at the moment.

prepare to be happy, then.

 

[ACC1224]

prepare to be happy, then.

Is there any scenario where you will admit to being unhappy with the teams progress?

 

[DarkKnight]

He’s pretty much inherited the core and draft guys, elite goalie, so I’m not sure genius is on the table just yet. But I’m not a partisan so....

 

[zeke]

Is there any scenario where you will admit to being unhappy with the teams progress?

If the team doesn't continue to be one of the best teams in hockey under Keefe both in winning and in underlying performance (as they have been so far under him), then yes, I'll be dissappointed with the team's progress.

 

[Mess]

I don't see a difference.
Dealing your rental players for picks and acquiring rental players with those picks.

The difference is you're still making the same amount of draft picks and putting players into the prospect pool each round and not missing drafting.

Trading Winnik, Spaling and Polak all for 3 X 2nds, then dealing 2 of those picks for Boyle and Plekanc rentals but still drafting Korshkov and Grundstrom with the extra 2nd and your own 2nd is having your cake and eating it also as you added depth to a potential Cup run, and also put prospects in the pool for the future.

Dubas for example traded 1st 2019 & 2 X former 2nd Grundstrom and Durzi for Muzzin, as well as Leafs 1st in 2020/21 with Marleau.

If Muzzin is a 1 year rental only that walks as UFA the future has been mortgaged just for this year at a high price = 2 X 1sts and 2 X 2nds cost. Leafs will be paying the piper eventually for mortgaging the future for the present.

If say Dubas had dealt Gardiner pending UFA at last TD for a 1st round pick, and then used that manufactured pick to dump Marleau's contract Leafs would still be picking in the 1st round of 2020 & 2021. The impact on the future is minimized by still drafting as if that Marleau dump never happened. Right now Leafs might not have a 1st round picks in both 2019 & 2020. When you have high end players with high AAV those highend picks to fill out the roster with quality players is key to maintaining long-term consistent success.

Asset management.

 

[LeafingTheWay]

Is there any scenario where you will admit to being unhappy with the teams progress?

It's one thing to be unhappy if the team hasn't changed, but it HAS changed.

No point in being sad about the past, when we're one of the top teams now.

7th in the league since Keefe took-over with a .667 winning %. The way we've been playing under Keefe and this roster is fantastic for his system.

 

[IPS]

Are we better off when Dubas lets JVR, Bozak, Komarov, Gardiner etc etc all walk for nothing, and then turns around and trade 1st 2019 + 2 X former 2nds (Grundstrom + Durzi) for Muzz who might be a 1 year rental as pending UFA? If Dubas had acquired excess picks for JVR and Gardiner and then dealt those picks for Muzz the damage is offset of picks in vs picks out.

I personally can see the benefit of dealing vets for picks and then using those excess picks acquired to buy rental players to build up your Cup chances and not hurting your future, because its like playing with house or found money.

If say Dubas had dealt Gardiner pending UFA at last TD for a 1st round pick, and then used that manufactured pick to dump Marleau's contract Leafs would still be picking in the 1st round of 2020 & 2021. The impact on the future is minimized by still drafting as if that Marleau dump never happened. Right now Leafs might not have a 1st round picks in both 2019 & 2020. When you have high end players with high AAV those highend picks to fill out the roster with quality players is key to maintaining long-term consistent success.

Asset management.

I mean atleast you got the timeline right on this hindsight hypothetical unlike the last time

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

The difference is you're still making the same amount of draft picks and putting players into the prospect pool each round and not missing drafting.

Trading Winnik, Spaling and Polak all for 3 X 2nds, then dealing 2 of those picks for Boyle and Plekanc rentals but still drafting Korshkov and Grundstrom with the extra 2nd and your own 2nd is having your cake and eating it also as you added depth to a potential Cup run, and also put prospects in the pool for the future.

Dubas for example traded 1st 2019 & 2 X former 2nd Grundstrom and Durzi for Muzzin, as well as Leafs 1st in 2020/21 with Marleau.

If Muzzin is a 1 year rental only that walks as UFA the future has been mortgaged just for this year at a high price = 2 X 1sts and 2 X 2nds cost. Leafs will be paying the piper eventually for mortgaging the future for the present.

If say Dubas had dealt Gardiner pending UFA at last TD for a 1st round pick, and then used that manufactured pick to dump Marleau's contract Leafs would still be picking in the 1st round of 2020 & 2021. The impact on the future is minimized by still drafting as if that Marleau dump never happened. Right now Leafs might not have a 1st round picks in both 2019 & 2020. When you have high end players with high AAV those highend picks to fill out the roster with quality players is key to maintaining long-term consistent success.

Asset management.

He also traded single picks for multiples and handed us Sandin, Dermott, Bracco and SDA and went out and signed guys like Mikheyev.

Asset management.

 

[Menzinger]

The difference is you're still making the same amount of draft picks and putting players into the prospect pool each round and not missing drafting.

Trading Winnik, Spaling and Polak all for 3 X 2nds, then dealing 2 of those picks for Boyle and Plekanc rentals but still drafting Korshkov and Grundstrom with the extra 2nd and your own 2nd is having your cake and eating it also as you added depth to a potential Cup run, and also put prospects in the pool for the future.

Dubas for example traded 1st 2019 & 2 X former 2nd Grundstrom and Durzi for Muzzin, as well as Leafs 1st in 2020/21 with Marleau.

If Muzzin is a 1 year rental only that walks as UFA the future has been mortgaged just for this year at a high price = 2 X 1sts and 2 X 2nds cost. Leafs will be paying the piper eventually for mortgaging the future for the present.

If say Dubas had dealt Gardiner pending UFA at last TD for a 1st round pick, and then used that manufactured pick to dump Marleau's contract Leafs would still be picking in the 1st round of 2020 & 2021. The impact on the future is minimized by still drafting as if that Marleau dump never happened. Right now Leafs might not have a 1st round picks in both 2019 & 2020. When you have high end players with high AAV those highend picks to fill out the roster with quality players is key to maintaining long-term consistent success.

Asset management.

The only difference here is Lou had a few unneeded extra roster players at the very start of the rebuild. Otherwise he didnt trade ufas and traded futures for rentals. The "asset management" of Lou was the result of only his first season as GM of a team at the very start of its rebuild process.

When Dubas took over the team, there wasnt need for a teardown and so he wasnt given the same opportunity as Lou to get those extra assets

 

[hamzarocks]

The only difference here is Lou had a few unneeded extra roster players at the very start of the rebuild. Otherwise he didnt trade ufas andtraded d futures for rentals. The "asset management" of Lou was the result of only his first season as GM of a team at the very start of its rebuild process.

When Dubas took over the team, there wasnt need for a teardown and so he wasnt given the same opportunity as Lou to get those extra assets

Lou had some good moves and was willing to do the needed things during the tank year but he really did not give a damn about improving our defense.

His acquisitions were hainsey( a 4/5 defender) carrick(think he brought him though might be misremembering) hunwick ( a number 6 defender) and polak ( a number 5 defender before the leg injury).

Dubas has shown that he will atleast try and improve the weaknesses of the team. It is debatable if Barrie was the type of defender we should have dealt kadri for and whether the muzzin deal is worth it if we fail this year again and he walks but he got us a couple of 2/3 defenders. My only thing with him is he needs to start valuing contract term more. He seems to he content giving shorter term deals or trading for short term pieces.

That may be design if he has a target in mind (Pietrangelo?) But moving forward a guy like kadri should be dealt for a player with much more term than Barrie brought. The kadri deal will probably never be a outright win for us. But if Barrie can continue to improve and play at a high level and if we either win a couple of rounds or he signs back than it's a fair deal.

 

[Stephen]

I'm second guessing why he decided to go short term on Barrie for Kadri when he could have also considered moving Kadri for a younger defenseman on a cheaper contract. It seemed to accelerate the status of that asset as medium term control and good cap value to a one year critical window, with a cheaper 3C thrown in for good measure.

 

[Martin Skoula]

The difference is you're still making the same amount of draft picks and putting players into the prospect pool each round and not missing drafting.

Trading Winnik, Spaling and Polak all for 3 X 2nds, then dealing 2 of those picks for Boyle and Plekanc rentals but still drafting Korshkov and Grundstrom with the extra 2nd and your own 2nd is having your cake and eating it also as you added depth to a potential Cup run, and also put prospects in the pool for the future.

Dubas for example traded 1st 2019 & 2 X former 2nd Grundstrom and Durzi for Muzzin, as well as Leafs 1st in 2020/21 with Marleau.

If Muzzin is a 1 year rental only that walks as UFA the future has been mortgaged just for this year at a high price = 2 X 1sts and 2 X 2nds cost. Leafs will be paying the piper eventually for mortgaging the future for the present.

If say Dubas had dealt Gardiner pending UFA at last TD for a 1st round pick, and then used that manufactured pick to dump Marleau's contract Leafs would still be picking in the 1st round of 2020 & 2021. The impact on the future is minimized by still drafting as if that Marleau dump never happened. Right now Leafs might not have a 1st round picks in both 2019 & 2020. When you have high end players with high AAV those highend picks to fill out the roster with quality players is key to maintaining long-term consistent success.

Asset management.

We literally have too many NHL ready wingers, an NHL ready D pairing, and a boatload of lottery tickets that are progressing better than expected.

It's different when you're coming off a last place finish with no depth in the system and spending a 2nd on a 4th line C rental. Our program is only weak at C, something I'm not terribly worried about with Matthews and Tavares locked in.

 

[Menzinger]

I'm second guessing why he decided to go short term on Barrie for Kadri when he could have also considered moving Kadri for a younger defenseman on a cheaper contract. It seemed to accelerate the status of that asset as medium term control and good cap value to a one year critical window, with a cheaper 3C thrown in for good measure.

I think two factors were big influences 1) had to work around Kadris limited ntc and 2) they wanted 2 assets in return and both had to fit under the cap structure.

Though i do think its a fair "what if" to suggest in retrospect may have been better to try and target a single D man as a return instead of a package
Though that would have meant 1) having to roll with Spezza as 3c and not having a long term fill in for the 3c eole

 

[Stephen]

I think two factors were big influences 1) had to work around Kadris limited ntc and 2) they wanted 2 assets in return and both had to fit under the cap structure.

Though i do think its a fair "what if" to suggest in retrospect may have been better to try and target a single D man as a return instead of a package
Though that would have meant 1) having to roll with Spezza as 3c and not having a long term fill in for the 3c eole

Yeah I suppose the two for one is fair. I'm still surprised by how much I like Kerfoot and how little I like Barrie.

 

[egd27]

Lou had some good moves and was willing to do the needed things during the tank year but he really did not give a damn about improving our defense.

Perhaps, but Lou also took a crappy team, successfully tore it down, and started building it back up to a 100 point team in 3 years.

Sure Dubas is trying to address the D, because that's all Lou left him to do, as we were strong in goal and had ample forward talent and depth.

 

[hamzarocks]

Perhaps, but Lou also took a crappy team, successfully tore it down, and started building it back up to a 100 point team in 3 years.

Sure Dubas is trying to address the D, because that's all Lou left him to do, as we were strong in goal and had ample forward talent and depth.

Lou gets full credit for goaltending he went and got us a number one and found a solid enough backup.

Forward wise what major acquisition did Lou do? He inherited kadri, bozak, jvr, willy, marner(though they did develope under him/hunter/Babcock) brown, kapanen, komo, brown.

The only trade I can think of in which Lou added to our forward core was the Hyman deal ( worked out great for us so full credits to him), and the Marleau signing which was great for one year and average for the 2nd before coating us a 1st rounder.

The best thing Lou brought was a image of success and respectability. He was able to right the cultural issues in the organization. I did not like his strict policies back than but looking back am happier that they were in place. He was also a food negotiator in deals and got us rielly and kadri on steals.

His 2 major deals at the deadline were quite meh thought. Boyle and that POS plekanec both for 2nds was bad asset management.

Lou like dubas got/gets too much credit for the assembly of a team. One team is built from a series of GM moves. Nonis/burke moves and picks were big parts for Lou and same applies for Dubas just with some additional Lou pieces.

Dubas though shows to have a clearly outlined desired type of roster. His moves all follow the theme of skill and speed. His major moves are for these type of players and he does not value size+grit as much. It remains to be seen how good a roster designed the way dubas has built ours can be. Dubas said he staked his career on the line with the keefe hire. Hoping the dubas additions to the roster on top of the players developed under Lou and drafted from Nonis/burke can be a big part in helping us win the cup.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Perhaps, but Lou also took a crappy team, successfully tore it down, and started building it back up to a 100 point team in 3 years.

Sure Dubas is trying to address the D, because that's all Lou left him to do, as we were strong in goal and had ample forward talent and depth.

There's literally only about 5 pieces in the outfit that are Lou. He fell ass backwards into Matthews and Liljegren. His one coup (and to his credit it's a great one ) is Andersen. Guy seems to have a great eye for goalies.

 

[egd27]

Forward wise what major acquisition did Lou do? He inherited kadri, bozak, jvr, willy, marner(though they did develope under him/hunter/Babcock) brown, kapanen, komo, brown.

The only trade I can think of in which Lou added to our forward core was the Hyman deal ( worked out great for us so full credits to him), and the Marleau signing which was great for one year and average for the 2nd before coating us a 1st rounder.

The best thing Lou brought was a image of success and respectability. He was able to right the cultural issues in the organization. I did not like his strict policies back than but looking back am happier that they were in place. He was also a food negotiator in deals and got us rielly and kadri on steals.

There's literally only about 5 pieces in the outfit that are Lou. He fell ass backwards into Matthews and Liljegren. His one coup (and to his credit it's a great one ) is Andersen. Guy seems to have a great eye for goalies.

Maybe he didn't make any blockbusters (aside from Andersen I guess) but he took over a sad sack team that was going nowhere, tore it down, and turned it into a 105 point playoff team in 3 years. IMO you have to respect that.

Let's be honest, if Dubas accomplished the same results, half this board would be labeling him a genius.

 

[4thline]

The difference is you're still making the same amount of draft picks and putting players into the prospect pool each round and not missing drafting.

Asset management.

Some years you're in a position to sell. Like Lou was with Winnik et al.
Some years you're in a position to buy.

This was and continues to be a nonsense argument, just stop digging.

 

[4thline]

I think two factors were big influences 1) had to work around Kadris limited ntc and 2) they wanted 2 assets in return and both had to fit under the cap structure.

Though i do think its a fair "what if" to suggest in retrospect may have been better to try and target a single D man as a return instead of a package
Though that would have meant 1) having to roll with Spezza as 3c and not having a long term fill in for the 3c eole

The other fair what if is young 3C + futures and then dabbling in UFA for a cheap stop gap

We couldn't have known Shattenkirk would have come available (that would have been the home run), but we could have but in Hutton/Heed/Del Zotto/Benn for less than 2.75

 

[JT AM da real deal]

The difference is you're still making the same amount of draft picks and putting players into the prospect pool each round and not missing drafting.

Trading Winnik, Spaling and Polak all for 3 X 2nds, then dealing 2 of those picks for Boyle and Plekanc rentals but still drafting Korshkov and Grundstrom with the extra 2nd and your own 2nd is having your cake and eating it also as you added depth to a potential Cup run, and also put prospects in the pool for the future.

Dubas for example traded 1st 2019 & 2 X former 2nd Grundstrom and Durzi for Muzzin, as well as Leafs 1st in 2020/21 with Marleau.

If Muzzin is a 1 year rental only that walks as UFA the future has been mortgaged just for this year at a high price = 2 X 1sts and 2 X 2nds cost. Leafs will be paying the piper eventually for mortgaging the future for the present.

If say Dubas had dealt Gardiner pending UFA at last TD for a 1st round pick, and then used that manufactured pick to dump Marleau's contract Leafs would still be picking in the 1st round of 2020 & 2021. The impact on the future is minimized by still drafting as if that Marleau dump never happened. Right now Leafs might not have a 1st round picks in both 2019 & 2020. When you have high end players with high AAV those highend picks to fill out the roster with quality players is key to maintaining long-term consistent success.

Asset management.

We need to get a 1st round pick back in 2020. We can't miss out on best draft past 10 years. Maybe Johnsson or Barrie and a lower level pick for a 1st rounder 2020 and a backup goalie. Fix draft, fix CAP and fix backup tender all in 1 deal.

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

Maybe he didn't make any blockbusters (aside from Andersen I guess) but he took over a sad sack team that was going nowhere, tore it down, and turned it into a 105 point playoff team in 3 years. IMO you have to respect that.

Let's be honest, if Dubas accomplished the same results, half this board would be labeling him a genius.

But the whole point is, what exactly did he tear down and rebuild if there is so little in the organization that has his fingerprints? I posted a list at the start of the year of which players came in under which management and very little is/was his.

This happens all the time when people rate GMs. Prime cases were guys like Shero/Chiarelli/Bowman etc. On Bowman's first Cup, every single player was already in the organization before he took over. On Chiarelli's every core piece was already there. Pretty much the same with Shero.

I'm all for praise where deserved (like with Andersen) but believe in actually looking at the moves made within that person's tenure.

For future reference's sake, of all players to play at least 35 games on that 105 point team (not counting backup), Lou was only involved in the following:

Matthews (no brainer 1st overall), Marleau, Hainsey, Zaitsev, Moore, Carrick, Martin, Borgman, McElhinney, Andersen. As mentioned, Andersen was a coup and he does have an eye for goalies and Hainsey was shrewd. That said, 9 of his 11 top producers were already there. One of those two that weren't was first overall.