Confirmed with Link: Shanahan, Dubas, Keefe all staying

[ToneDog]

Agreed, that Kadri trade is the reason I cannot get behind Dubas fully. I was so shocked to see a majority of people on here were really happy with the trade at the time, the idea of getting a Kadri "replacement" in Kerfoot to go along with Tyson Barrie. We just saw how another offensive minded D-man in Jake Gardiner was for us, so instead of learning from that he goes on to trade our best cost controlled asset for another one? The idea that Dubas thought adding Ceci and Barrie into our top 4 would improve our poor defence was mind boggling. Glad to see Kadri proving a lot of people wrong here.

Dubas has done some great things, but he has also made some rookie mistakes that have cost this team unfortunately. We can't afford to have a GM that is still learning on the job.

Gotta get it wrong before you can get it right. Seems to be the Dubas MO.

Sparks->Hutch->Soup
Barrie->Brodie
Kadri->Kerfoot+->??
Ceci->Bogo
Foligno->Ritchie+->Lub
Mrazek+-> ??
Simmonds->Simmonds->??
Jumbo->Bunting
Gally->Kase

 

[Mess]

I think one of the issues was the 4th line had zero identity. What was it supposed to be?.. A scoring line because of Spezza or a hitting line because of Clifford and Simmonds? This was the problem...they just assumed by putting a hodge-podge group together that had elements of both skill and sandpaper that it would work...it didn't.

A team has to have an identity and its players need to know their roles and responsibilities.

Matt Martin is a perfect example, of a 4th line player perfect for his role. .. Leafs management didn't know how to utilize him, but then NYI snap him up and create and entire "Identity line" along with Clutterbuck and Cizikas and the trio forms one of the best 4th lines in the NHL now used in all roles but know what they need to do. NYI went to the final 4 before bowing out to Tampa Bay twice the past few years.

You need to form a cohesive trio as lines and not just toss random physical players out there claiming you're "addressing to physicality" and learning..

Tampa Bay is successful in part because their 4th line has its own identity and Perry -- Maroon and Bellemare stay and play together all year and provide that depth needed on a successful team. That also insulates it stars in the process when the going gets tough.

So while Leafs were putting their big physical guns away for the season after game #2, because they were running around aimless taking useless penalties, we see in Game #4 where TB hammers the Leafs 7-3 and all 3 of the TB 4th line contribute a goal in the beat down, and after that it turned the series in their favour on the way to winning 3 of the last 4 games.

This is the kind of knowledge that separates a spreadsheet GM from an experienced successful GM.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Agreed, that Kadri trade is the reason I cannot get behind Dubas fully. I was so shocked to see a majority of people on here were really happy with the trade at the time

Majority of the hockey community (including many who now vehemently argue against it) thought it was a slam dunk win for Dubas. Understandably so, since regardless of how one feels about the specific players involved, it was objectively good value.

We just saw how another offensive minded D-man in Jake Gardiner was for us, so instead of learning from that he goes on to trade our best cost controlled asset for another one?

Gardiner was decent for us when he was healthy, and Barrie offered things we lacked that Gardiner didn't, and was coming off a great playoffs. Kadri was also not even close to our best cost controlled asset.

The idea that Dubas thought adding Ceci and Barrie into our top 4 would improve our poor defence was mind boggling.

We did improve defensively after adding Ceci and Barrie though... Even with our defense experiencing a ton of injuries that year, we improved from a bottom-of-the-league defensive team to a middle-of-the-pack defensive team.

 

[Dreakmur]

Advanced stats are just data.

Alone, they mean nothing in sports.
You can't score a goal by taking 10 shots where each shot is worth 0.1 expected goals, that's just not how it works in real life.

However, they can be extremely useful when combined with real world data as well.

If a player takes 300 shots in a season and scores 45 goals, that's a real good season.
How can we delve a little deeper to see whether this is an outlier year, or if these stats are sustainable year to year?

We can look into where the shots are coming from on the ice, what kind of shots they are, etc.

Say the player took 200 shots from the slot. Those are always going to be higher danger shots and you would expect more of said shots to go into the net.

VS

The player taking 200 shots from the perimeter where there is a much lower chance of the puck going in.

At the end of the year, one player could have an expected goal tally of say 50, and the other of 30.

When you compare the 2, they both scored 45 goals, had 300 shots in total, but it's more likely that the player who shot more from in close will replicate that season whereas the other player had a really lucky year.

The biggest problem is not with the stats themselves, but with how people interpret and use them. Information is always good. Misinterpretation of any information is always bad. No one stat accounts for all contexts. Regardless of what stat you want to look at, you’re missing a huge part of the picture.

200 shots from the slot is usually better than 200 shots from the perimeter, but there are exceptions. It’s important to identify and understand those exceptions.

It seems that Dubas is learning that he can’t build a team with a spreadsheet. He seems to be learning that there are certain immeasurables that help teams succeed - character, leadership, toughness, roles, etc. It would be a shame to lose a a smart and creative GM after he’s gone through the growing pains.

 

[Kalaish26]

Majority of the hockey community (including many who now vehemently argue against it) thought it was a slam dunk win for Dubas. Understandably so, since regardless of how one feels about the specific players involved, it was objectively good value.

That's fair, I definitely agree that many people who are against the trade now, were happy about it when it happened. I disagree about the fair value though, Barrie was always going to be a 1 year rental, whereas Kadri was controlled for few more years. Even if it was good value, the players you are acquiring have to make sense and I just think the last thing we needed at the time was another offensive minded defensemen that wasn't great in their own zone. Notice how our defence has been a lot better these last 2 seasons after Dubas has gone after guys like Brodie, Bogosian, and Gio instead of the Gardiners/Barries? I don't think that is a coincidence.

Gardiner was decent for us when he was healthy, and Barrie offered things we lacked that Gardiner didn't, and was coming off a great playoffs. Kadri was also not even close to our best cost controlled asset.

Which players would you say were our better cost controlled assets then that we could trade?

We did improve defensively after adding Ceci and Barrie though... Even with our defense experiencing a ton of injuries that year, we improved from a bottom-of-the-league defensive team to a middle-of-the-pack defensive team.

Thats fair, I didn't realize our team defence actually improved slightly that year. I still think adding those guys were a sideways move at best.

 

[Nylanderthal]

Kadri trade alone should have been enough to fire Dubas
Zamboni lost alone should have been enough to fire Keefe

But we don't do that stuff

This is a safe space

This is extreme hyperbole, how many shot attempts did Carolina even give the leafs that last period? A one off instance isn’t worthy of an entire performance review, he also literally had just been hired 2-3 months prior to that Carolina game.
Other teams have lost games their opponents use an EBUG we just get trolled for it cuz it’s the leafs

 

[Dreakmur]

Thats fair, I didn't realize our team defence actually improved slightly that year. I still think adding those guys were a sideways move at best.

This is one of those statistical misunderstandings that I referred to in my earlier post. I have yet to see a defensive metrics that actually measures defensive play. They all just measure possession and chances for and against as if that reflects defensive ability. The development of Matthews and the deployment of Tavares were the two main reasons for the actual improvement in our defensive play.

 

[Hoglund4MvP]

Most points in franchise history and Keefe got minimal recognition in Jack Adam's voting. We are not the only ones who think there's nothing special about him.

 

[Dekes For Days]

That's fair, I definitely agree that many people who are against the trade now, were happy about it when it happened. I disagree about the fair value though, Barrie was always going to be a 1 year rental, whereas Kadri was controlled for few more years.

But it wasn't just 3 years of Kadri for 1 year of Barrie. It was 3 years of Kadri for 4 years of Kerfoot and 1 year of Barrie at 50% retention. I think people undervalue the package we got back, and overvalue what Kadri - as a middle-six below average defensive player coming off a disappointing 44 point season and 2 consecutive playoff suspensions - was actually worth around the league.

Even if it was good value, the players you are acquiring have to make sense and I just think the last thing we needed at the time was another offensive minded defensemen that wasn't great in their own zone.

I understand the perception that it wasn't the ideal target, but I think people forget that trading in the NHL doesn't usually involve getting your ideal target. This is especially true when your initial trade for an ideal target (Brodie) is blocked by the player being traded.

That said, while maybe not ideal, there was sound reasoning behind the Barrie acquisition. We were simultaneously losing an offensive-minded defenseman, so it wasn't so much adding another as much as it was maintaining the level of offense from the backend that we had, or even improving it but from the same number of sources. And this one had a point shot for our PP, which people have been wanting for years. We should also remember that we had zero right-side defensemen at the time, and we had lost the previous two playoffs in part because Boston heavily targeted the right side of our defense, who were so inept at moving the puck that we'd get stuck in our own zone for ages. Barrie could help this.

Barrie himself was coming off a great playoffs where he was playing over 24 minutes a night - 5 minutes more per game than any other defensemen on the team. Colorado was willing and able to retain 50%. The 1 year term meant that we could also get a replacement for Kadri in the deal, and it allowed us to pursue our initial ideal target (Brodie) when they hit UFA - and we did, signing him to a good contract.

Beyond that, I think exchanging a more offensively-minded middle-six forward and good PP player for a younger, cheaper, longer signed middle-six forward who is more defensively-minded, versatile, and a good PKer made a lot of sense for our team composition and what we needed.

Notice how our defence has been a lot better these last 2 seasons after Dubas has gone after guys like Brodie, Bogosian, and Gio instead of the Gardiners/Barries? I don't think that is a coincidence.

I agree that we are more defensively competent with guys like Brodie and Giordano, but that doesn't mean that the Gardiners and Barries of the world don't have things to offer as well. For the record, I'm pretty sure Barrie is the only offensively-oriented defenseman that Dubas has acquired in 4 years, and he was 2nd choice, and directly replacing an outgoing offensive defenseman. You can't completely remake a defense overnight.

Which players would you say were our better cost controlled assets then that we could trade?

Well, that's different. I would agree that Kadri was the most expendable asset of value, and that's why he was the one traded.

Thats fair, I didn't realize our team defence actually improved slightly that year.

Yeah, our defense has actually improved every year under Dubas, and quite drastically overall over his tenure. A lot of people struggle to evaluate defensive play, especially when goaltending is trending in the opposite way at the same time.

 

[usernamezrhardtodo]

The biggest problem is not with the stats themselves, but with how people interpret and use them. Information is always good. Misinterpretation of any information is always bad. No one stat accounts for all contexts. Regardless of what stat you want to look at, you’re missing a huge part of the picture.

200 shots from the slot is usually better than 200 shots from the perimeter, but there are exceptions. It’s important to identify and understand those exceptions.

It seems that Dubas is learning that he can’t build a team with a spreadsheet. He seems to be learning that there are certain immeasurables that help teams succeed - character, leadership, toughness, roles, etc. It would be a shame to lose a a smart and creative GM after he’s gone through the growing pains.

Management seems to price high hockey IQ above anything else when maybe, just maybe, they should be looking for guys with Insane compete levels because that seems to trump our uber skilled high IQ guys every single time they have a win or go home game.

 

[Dreakmur]

Management seems to price high hockey IQ above anything else when maybe, just maybe, they should be looking for guys with Insane compete levels because that seems to trump our uber skilled high IQ guys every single time they have a win or go home game.

I think you'd have a hard time trying to argue that either one of IQ or compete is more important. Those are two of the absolute most important aspects of an elite hockey player.

Outside the core 4, we have far too many forwards who lack BOTH of those vital traits. I don't think many would argue that our depth hasn't lacked the compete level that is important, but how many would you describe as high IQ?

 

[ToneDog]

I think you'd have a hard time trying to argue that either one of IQ or compete is more important. Those are two of the absolute most important aspects of an elite hockey player.

Outside the core 4, we have far too many forwards who lack BOTH of those vital traits. I don't think many would argue that our depth hasn't lacked the compete level that is important, but how many would you describe as high IQ?

You can probably say the same about our D. If they decide to move Muzz and replace him with Sandin, they need do something to compensate on the right side.

Rielly RH Muzzin
Gio Brodie
Sanding Lily

That RH Muzzin is gonna have to be a top 2 dman that can log a ton of hard minutes or it could go south if Gio and the kids can't handle their minutes.

 

[Captain Crunch]

Building a strong defensive team is exactly what Dubas has done. We've improved defensively every year under Dubas, and we were the 3rd best defensive team in the league this year.

Okay, so we were 3rd best defensively, and are really good offensively as well. So why are we still unable to get by the 1st round? Was it because of the core 4 (the ones Dubas will live and die with)? Was it because of Campbell, who fared quite well in the series? Was it our defence (some might argue that Liljegren rather than Holl should have been playing)? Was it the players we obtained before the season began? We better go deep in the playoffs with this core and management team sooner rather than later, because we’re starting to run out of excuses for them.

 

[ACC1224]

Okay, so we were 3rd best defensively, and are really good offensively as well. So why are we still unable to get by the 1st round? Was it because of the core 4 (the ones Dubas will live and die with)? Was it because of Campbell, who fared quite well in the series? Was it our defence (some might argue that Liljegren rather than Holl should have been playing)? Was it the players we obtained before the season began? We better go deep in the playoffs with this core and management team sooner rather than later, because we’re starting to run out of excuses for them.

Never!

 

[Bomber0104]

Okay, so we were 3rd best defensively, and are really good offensively as well. So why are we still unable to get by the 1st round? Was it because of the core 4 (the ones Dubas will live and die with)? Was it because of Campbell, who fared quite well in the series? Was it our defence (some might argue that Liljegren rather than Holl should have been playing)? Was it the players we obtained before the season began? We better go deep in the playoffs with this core and management team sooner rather than later, because we’re starting to run out of excuses for them.

Yes so basically you can have the 3rd best defence (lol) and an even better offence (lol), but all it can take is a 3rd rate goalie like Joonas Korpisalo getting himself in a groove (one example/excuse (depending on your view)) for it all to come crashing down...

What a story.

 

[Gabriel426]

Most points in franchise history and Keefe got minimal recognition in Jack Adam's voting. We are not the only ones who think there's nothing special about him.

I guess Keefe didn’t earn any respects from the press, maybe he didn’t shake their hands or something.

 

[Gabriel426]

Okay, so we were 3rd best defensively, and are really good offensively as well. So why are we still unable to get by the 1st round? Was it because of the core 4 (the ones Dubas will live and die with)? Was it because of Campbell, who fared quite well in the series? Was it our defence (some might argue that Liljegren rather than Holl should have been playing)? Was it the players we obtained before the season began? We better go deep in the playoffs with this core and management team sooner rather than later, because we’re starting to run out of excuses for them.

The excuses were as follows and in no particular orders:
Out goalied
Unlucky with bounces or matchups
Injury
Players were too tired from the regular season
Fans putting pressure on them
Refs
PP becoming COLD

But never, they boys didn’t elevate their game, or coaching just ain’t good enough or simply bc the team just ain’t as good as we(Media and fans) think.

Having said all that, I don’t think they used any excuses this season, it was more we got beat by a better team.

 

[zeke]

The excuses were as follows and in no particular orders:
Out goalied
Unlucky with bounces or matchups
Injury
Players were too tired from the regular season
Fans putting pressure on them
Refs
PP becoming COLD

But never, they boys didn’t elevate their game, or coaching just ain’t good enough or simply bc the team just ain’t as good as we(Media and fans) think.

Having said all that, I don’t think they used any excuses this season, it was more we got beat by a better team.

1. Lost to better elite team
2. Lost to better elite team
3. Lost to better elite team
4. Choked, but bubble BS too
5. Super Epic Choke
6. Got epically bumblasted by the refs

 

[zeke]

Gonna go way out on a limb and say that when coach and execs of the year votes are added up the Leafs finish lower than their standings rank more than any other team in hockey. By far.

 

[keonsbitterness]

1. Lost to better elite team
2. Lost to better elite team
3. Lost to better elite team
4. Choked, but bubble BS too
5. Super Epic Choke
6. Got epically bumblasted by the refs

What bubble BS did we face that Columbus didn't?

 

[Trapper]

We currently have a Shanahan/Dubas construct who’s greatest priority is not to lose a 7th in a row 1st round playoff series again.
That’s the reality of where we are.
I don’t think that’s very good. That’s just me I guess.

 

[hockeywiz542]

MLSE chairman Larry Tanenbaum feels Leafs fans’ pain, promises a Stanley Cup

Simon Houpt talks to the 25-per-cent owner of the Leafs, Raptors, TFC and Argos about his plans – which include ownership of womens sports teams

www.theglobeandmail.com

The usually media-shy billionaire spoke on the eve of an announcement that he had donated $20-million to kick-start the Tanenbaum Institute for Science in Sport at the University of Toronto and Sinai Health, a global centre of excellence for high-performance sport science and sports medicine.

Everyone – certainly everyone in Toronto – reading about the new institute is going to ask, ‘Will this help the Leafs win a Stanley Cup? Or even get past the first round?’

Well, let’s put it this way: My vision has always been that the Stanley Cup is what we are absolutely working for, each and every day. I know that we can achieve that goal, and I promise you we will achieve it. I know we’re close.

And do you think this undertaking is going to help?

It’s absolutely going to help us. It’s actually going to help all sports teams.

But if it’s going to help everyone, where’s the advantage for the Leafs? At least give us one year with whatever discoveries the institute makes? Just hold back something?

Something? Okay, you got it.

I know you’re joking, and I’m sorry if I sound exasperated, but, you know, it’s been a long time.

Well, of course it has, but I’m telling you, we are totally dedicated. I have president Brendan Shanahan, who feels his No. 1 mission is to bring us that Stanley Cup. We deserve better than getting knocked out in the first round, I can tell you that, between you and I.

Well, presumably not just between you and I – everyone feels that. But tell me, on a personal level, you’ve been associated with this team for 26 years, so how does it feel when it seems so close – but it just doesn’t happen, again?

Two words: disappointed, but hopeful. Hopeful, because I really feel we are close. And you know, this is not about a one-year journey, this is a multiyear journey that we’re on. And, granted, it’s been way too long, it’s been way too long since Canada has had a Stanley Cup. But we’re close. We’re close – just the result of going seven games with Tampa, and you saw Tampa beat Florida, the President’s Trophy winner.

Are the same motivations that brought you into investing in the Leafs still there for you?

It’s interesting that you mentioned that, because I’ve just finished some months of trying to – we put a bid on Chelsea [Football Club], and it was exactly the same motivations that got me interested in Maple Leaf Gardens Ltd. You had an iconic franchise, one of the best in its area. Chelsea, I would say, ranks among the top three clubs in the EPL. The Toronto Maple Leafs back in ‘95 was arguably the No. 1 or No. 2 [most storied] clubs in the NHL. It was probably 75 years old at the time. Chelsea is 104, 105 years old. Those franchises are, as I described to our people – it’s like buying a piece of the Rock of Gibraltar. So, that still motivates me, the idea of creating and buying teams that are in good leagues, and building them. …I’ve always felt I hold a public trust here, and that’s why I’m so anxious to win championships for our fans.

 

[Leaf Fans]

We currently have a Shanahan/Dubas construct who’s greatest priority is not to lose a 7th in a row 1st round playoff series again.
That’s the reality of where we are.
I don’t think that’s very good. That’s just me I guess.

Their greatest priority is to win a Stanley Cup. It has to start with winning a first round though.

 

[fahad203]

1. Lost to better elite team
2. Lost to better elite team
3. Lost to better elite team
4. Choked, but bubble BS too
5. Super Epic Choke
6. Got epically bumblasted by the refs

It's all ok. We broke the franchise record for most points
Our coach was fastest to 100 wins

 

[Racer88]

Looks like the Rangers are going to sweep the super duper awesome Tampa team. When did they start their rebuild and how many 11 million dollar players do they have;