The Identity (Politics) of Leaf Fans (Not actual politics)

[conFABulator]

You used caps lock too much exaggerating that he built a team. So bias is obvious. Moreover, stop dragging us in a quagmire of the US politics by making these needless and irrelevant comparisons on the sports related forum. It’s kind of silly. People come here to talk about hockey, not Rep/Dem bs.

There is actually no pulling anyone into US politics and I even changed the title to be sure.

Identity politics is a term. It has to do with once you declare you support something you fully support it and only support it. I thought some people might not be familiar with the concept so I used a current example that people would be familiar with; some people think Trump can do no wrong and others believe he can do no right. The truth is on the middle, as it almost always is. Reading this thread I would suggest for some this is an apt analogy.

As for Dubas not having built a team...can you expand on this? I mean he was GM for five years, how long does a GM have to be at the helm to get credit? How many contracts does he have to renew? It's a serious question. He seems to have been their long enough to get blame form many. What's the "build" threshold? Who built these Maple Leafs?

 

[BobClarkesfrontteeth]

Yeah, I'm not taking sides or have a real opinion, I'm not in either camp (Shanny/Dubas), nor do I hold strong feelings positive or negative about either.

I'm one of the few on here that don't have a huge issue with how top-heavy this team is, I see it as a risk/reward strategy that so far has been coming up 7s.

I'm a huge believer that luck has a lot to do with NHL success, and all you can do is build a roster that can theoretically compete and hope it works out, and if you succeed you get the credit, and if you fail (which you're going to literally 95% of the time) you're going to get shat on, no matter what you did really.

Agreed. Having 3 top 25 talents in the NHL should never be seen as a bad thing.

Coaching was about 70 to 80 % of the issue and then 20% was the Leafs have had the losing goalie on thier side for each playoff round. They have changed both issues so lets see what happens.

Which one do you think I was referring to?

No idea hence the question.

 

[Dave92]

I am pretty sure I will have no positive impact here and was going to post this in another thread that triggered this thought for me. I decided that would have hijacked the other thread, so I am starting this fresh. I really don't want this to be about Dubas, Treliving and their respective moves. There are plenty of threads for that, I am more interested in discussing the fans that are polarized and seemingly obsessed by the topic. I am hopeful this can be done in a productive way.

We really have to let the Dubas stuff go. For the record, I liked Dubas, but was happy he was let go. I didn't like Tre as the next guy, and now I am starting to come around.

Clearly a case can be made that Dubas built a strong and solid hockey team. Yes, both of those elements are defensible. He BUILT the team and it was/is SOLID and STRONG. A case can also be made that his teams fell short of their potential.

Debating this stuff and what could have been is fine with me. I like the discussion, it's what fans do. We are almost two years out now and the debate continues to be as much about the person as the product he produced.

It all feels a bit too Republican/Democrat to me. The identity politics of some (many) on here cause some people to feel they have to disagree with and hate on everything Dubas did, and others defend everything he did and make excuses. Neither end of the spectrum is true, it never is. He wasn't perfect and he wasn't terrible. We were one of the best teams in the NHL under him, we have the longest streak of playoff appearances, and we haven't had the playoff success we feel we should have by now.

Does anyone want to weigh on this? Do the two ends of the spectrum make this place spicy or exhausting for you? Should we try to find more common ground and take a more balanced view or are the extremes just a fact of life in every fandom? Perhaps exacerbated in our massive and passionate one?

Well the Dubas era is now historical record. Playoffs were the focus the entirely of his tenure, He was convinced he had a championship caliber playoff team but what he actually had was one of the worst playoff teams in the history of professional sports.

I don't think there is any argument to be made that he build a quality team when it comes to playoff hockey.

 

[Gabriel426]

That's interesting, what are examples of doubling and tripling down on advanced stats? I know we didn't have a bunch of big dmen or even enough high end dmen and maybe we ran too long with Sandin and Liljegren?

Obviously Malgin for Marchment is one, but NO ONE saw Marchment coming at that level, also not sure I would want him on our roster at his $4.5M cap hit. Regardless, Malgin was nothing and I can't imagine advanced stats made a case for him.

Kerfoot may have been one? That cap and ice time could have been invested better.

It is not just big Dmen or physical forwards or hits in games…..but more to do with guys Dubas assembled and also the style Keefe’s played(pretty sure that’s what Dubas wants to play too).
Quite a few of them are not bad players for their roles on the team but it seems like they all play the same style.

 

[conFABulator]

Well the Dubas era is now historical record. Playoffs were the focus the entirely of his tenure, He was convinced he had a championship caliber playoff team but what he actually had was one of the worst playoff teams in the history of professional sports.

I don't think there is any argument to be made that he build a quality team when it comes to playoff hockey.

Yep. Did anything in my initial post suggest otherwise?

As I said, I am not interested in re-litigating the Dubas era so much as interested in why he causes such anger in some people. You are not wrong about his playoff record but this could be an example of what I am talking about. If you ask ChatGPT who the best teams in the NHL were in 2018 to 2023, the Leafs are top six. This is obviously not based on playoff performance but it didn't even get mentioned in your summary there.

Further to this, I had someone challenge my statement that he built a solid and strong team. He challenged the word built and said Dubas didn't build anything. Hmmm ..but he is responsible for not building a team that had playoff success.

I know you didn't make both comments so I am not holding your accountable for the specific inconsistency. In your opinion, does Dubas get credit for building a team that was a top team and made the playoffs all five years he was GM?