The New and really Improved , Kyle Dubas Discussion Thread

[Zybalto]

I think that’s the joke…

knew I should have thrown in an emoji or something. Tough to pull of sarcasm in here sometimes.

 

[Zybalto]

Trades are evaluated on results. Muzzin has been a failure in the sense of he can't answer the bell when the games are most important.

You're on a roll....

 

[The CyNick]

ergo, every trade made by a team that doesn't then win the cup is a failure.

Never said that.

I laid out my points. IMO the price paid was average to a tad high for the quality of the player.

In hindsight, the trade looks worse because Muzzin has been a no show when it counts. In theory you pay top assets to get a player to help in the playoffs. Muzzin has this far been invisible in the playoffs. Granted due to injury, but getting an injury prone player is nothing to brag about.

 

[The CyNick]

So Dubas made a poor trade because he should have known that Muzzin wouldn't be able to answer the bell, got it.

Yes. You shouldn't trade quality assets for players who get hurt. Again, it's all hindsight. But no different than being critical of a draft pick that didn't turn out. At the time you thought it was a good pick, but ultimately you get judged by what that player turns into. In this case, the player has had multiple ill-timed injuries, so you can't say the trade benefited the team.

As I stated to the other poster, at the time I thought the trade was average to slight overpayment. And I would have targeted an RHD instead, which was, and continues to be the team need. I definitely wouldn't tout it as an amazing trade for Dubas. So far the logic for saying this trade was great was that Muzzin rode shotgun with Doughty in Doughty's prime.

 

[Cams]

Did Muzzin have a history of injuries for elimination games in his Kings career? How his injuries in the last 2 playoffs make the trade bad to average is a weird take. I guess we all don't have a crystal ball. Maybe Amirov was a bad pick.....should have foreseen him getting injured in a pre-season KHL game. Why draft a guy like that!!!!

 

[Zybalto]

Did Muzzin have a history of injuries for elimination games in his Kings career? How his injuries in the last 2 playoffs make the trade bad to average is a weird take. I guess we all don't have a crystal ball. Maybe Amirov was a bad pick.....should have foreseen him getting injured in a pre-season KHL game. Why draft a guy like that!!!!

Muzzin didnt play less than 74 games in his previous 6 season before his injury issues....most of which are freak injuries, not recurring ones. Been a real playoff warrior for us when he has been healthy though. Massive loss when he was hurt the last two years.

 

[Dekes For Days]

getting an injury prone player is nothing to brag about.

Muzzin played over 97% of his team's available games in the 3 and a half years prior to the trade.

 

[The CyNick]

Muzzin played over 97% of his team's available games in the 3 and a half years prior to the trade.

Great. It still didn't work out. Or at least hasn't yet. Until it does, I wouldn't brag about the success of the trade.

 

[Cams]

Yes. You shouldn't trade quality assets for players who get hurt. Again, it's all hindsight. But no different than being critical of a draft pick that didn't turn out. At the time you thought it was a good pick, but ultimately you get judged by what that player turns into. In this case, the player has had multiple ill-timed injuries, so you can't say the trade benefited the team.

As I stated to the other poster, at the time I thought the trade was average to slight overpayment. And I would have targeted an RHD instead, which was, and continues to be the team need. I definitely wouldn't tout it as an amazing trade for Dubas. So far the logic for saying this trade was great was that Muzzin rode shotgun with Doughty in Doughty's prime.

Do you know that there was a deal available for a RHD at the time, for a similar cost? Did they maybe try? Playing the hindsight game is silly. But for the armchair GM it is probably a good way to "I told you so". It's like browsing a later round pick that excels and saying GM should've taken X instead with their earlier pick, well so should 29 other GM's.....

And really.....how do you trade for a player who doesn't get hurt? If you look at Muzzin's career it would appear that he "didn't get hurt" during his time with the Kings. So it appears that the Leaf did in fact trade for a player who hadn't been hurt. Hockey is a physical game and players do get hurt.

Although I must admit I feel this a debate with somewhat suspect intentions.

 

[Cams]

Muzzin didnt play less than 74 games in his previous 6 season before his injury issues....most of which are freak injuries, not recurring ones. Been a real playoff warrior for us when he has been healthy though. Massive loss when he was hurt the last two years.

Exactly - how do you do a trade for a guy who won't get a freak injury in the future!

 

[Dekes For Days]

Great. It still didn't work out. Or at least hasn't yet. Until it does, I wouldn't brag about the success of the trade.

It's worked out pretty great actually. It was an excellent trade.

 

[The CyNick]

Do you know that there was a deal available for a RHD at the time, for a similar cost? Did they maybe try? Playing the hindsight game is silly. But for the armchair GM it is probably a good way to "I told you so". It's like browsing a later round pick that excels and saying GM should've taken X instead with their earlier pick, well so should 29 other GM's.....

And really.....how do you trade for a player who doesn't get hurt? If you look at Muzzin's career it would appear that he "didn't get hurt" during his time with the Kings. So it appears that the Leaf did in fact trade for a player who hadn't been hurt. Hockey is a physical game and players do get hurt.

Although I must admit I feel this a debate with somewhat suspect intentions.

As I stated, all GMs are judged based on what ends up happening after an acquisition not what happened before it. Most people were critical of the Oilers signing Lucic because they got a terrible version of the player. But you could look at him in his Boston days and go "what a stud". But that doesn't stop people from being critical of the move in hindsight.

Again, it's important to read everything I write. I said the trade at the time was average to a high price to pay. The debate is around was it an example of a great trade that Dubas made that would be used to call him a good, very good, or God help us if anyone thinks this, but an excellent trader. My point is if the player hasn't delivered any value when it counts, then it hurts the quality of the trade.

 

[The CyNick]

It's worked out pretty great actually. It was an excellent trade.

Players who don't show up for the playoffs are great in your opinion?

 

[Dekes For Days]

Players who don't show up for the playoffs are great in your opinion?

Muzzin does show up for the playoffs. He literally has a cup. He's an excellent defenseman, and part of the reason we're now one of the better defensive teams in the league. Paid a good price for him too.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Yes. You shouldn't trade quality assets for players who get hurt. Again, it's all hindsight. But no different than being critical of a draft pick that didn't turn out. At the time you thought it was a good pick, but ultimately you get judged by what that player turns into. In this case, the player has had multiple ill-timed injuries, so you can't say the trade benefited the team.

As I stated to the other poster, at the time I thought the trade was average to slight overpayment. And I would have targeted an RHD instead, which was, and continues to be the team need. I definitely wouldn't tout it as an amazing trade for Dubas. So far the logic for saying this trade was great was that Muzzin rode shotgun with Doughty in Doughty's prime.

As I stated, all GMs are judged based on what ends up happening after an acquisition not what happened before it. Most people were critical of the Oilers signing Lucic because they got a terrible version of the player. But you could look at him in his Boston days and go "what a stud". But that doesn't stop people from being critical of the move in hindsight.

Again, it's important to read everything I write. I said the trade at the time was average to a high price to pay. The debate is around was it an example of a great trade that Dubas made that would be used to call him a good, very good, or God help us if anyone thinks this, but an excellent trader. My point is if the player hasn't delivered any value when it counts, then it hurts the quality of the trade.

 

[The CyNick]

Muzzin does show up for the playoffs. He literally has a cup. He's an excellent defenseman, and part of the reason we're now one of the better defensive teams in the league. Paid a good price for him too.

Not for Leafs though. Dubas didn't acquire him to just show off his ring

 

[Dekes For Days]

Not for Leafs though. Dubas didn't acquire him to just show off his ring

He has shown up in the playoffs for the Leafs as well. He was brought in to be an effective top-4 defenseman, and he has been that and more. It was an excellent trade.

 

[The CyNick]

He has shown up in the playoffs for the Leafs as well. He was brought in to be an effective top-4 defenseman, and he has been that and more. It was an excellent trade.

How did he do in game 7 against Montreal? And the series with Columbus?

 

[Dekes For Days]

How did he do in game 7 against Montreal? And the series with Columbus?

He's been very good in the 15 playoff games he's played here. The fact that he was injured in a few doesn't change the fact that he's a great defenseman and it was a great trade.

 

[Menzinger]

How did he do in game 7 against Montreal? And the series with Columbus?

Holding two random unrelated injuries against a guy is a pretty lousy way to evaluate a player.

They tell you literally nothing about their on ice.impact or their preparedness for the post season.

Of all the things to try and criticize Dubas' on this is probably the worst/strangest one can try to do it.

 

[acrobaticgoalie]

It's more could you have used the assets for someone better (ie a RHD which was the team need and still is). And also in terms of value it's a normal to a slightly high price (essentially a first and two seconds) for a middle pair D.

Muzzin is only a top pair D if hes with a top ten D in the league, like Doughty. The other problem with him is he's been with the team for three "playoff" runs and been unable to answer the bell in two of them. Not good return for the assets paid.

If he ever anchors the top pair to lead the Leafs to a Cup, I will admit I was 100% wrong. So far he's done nothing with the Leafs worth talking about. A big hit every five games. That's usually the big highlight.

1. Why do we need a RHD. Brodie has been an amazing addition and Holl has been holding his own as a number 4. Muzzin is a solid all around,cup winning D man. 3 B prospects for that is nothing to be criticizing over. If you are looking at where they were drafted as their value, thats like saying any trade involving Yakupov is trading a 1st overall pick.

2. The last time I checked a pair means TWO. There only so many true number one superstar D men in the League and they usually have a rock steady partner to help stabilize their game and handle heavy minutes against top opposition. Thats Jake Muzzin, a career number 2. There is a reason our team is better defensively and thats because we've added two solid number 2 D men in he and Brodie. Using injuries as a knock against the trade is a poor criticism. One being a freak neck injury and a pulled groin.

 

[hockeywiz542]

LeBrun: What's at stake for the Maple Leafs this season? 'I don’t think we can hide from it' - The Athletic

In canvassing rival team executives around the league, I got some mixed responses on that. One said he would have shopped Mitch Marner to at least see what was out there. Another said he was surprised William Nylander hasn’t been dealt by now.

But I will tell you that for the most part, the team executives I chatted about this with the last little while respected Dubas for doing what was the most difficult thing: standing pat with his core. Sticking to his belief in the team he built.

As one team executive told me this week, he thinks if Jake Muzzin is healthy in 2020, the Leafs beat Columbus and if Muzzin stays healthy last spring, the Leafs hold on to beat Montreal.

Which is to say, Muzzin getting hurt in back-to-back playoffs is no one’s fault.

So staying the course is also what this particular team executive would have done.

Which isn’t easy.

And believe me, other teams called the Leafs about Marner and Nylander. I asked Dubas on Wednesday how he reacted when those calls came this summer on some of his top forwards.

“I’m not going to get into specific calls we get on specific guys, as I’ve said in the past, my belief in that group in there … in the entire core, is immense and unwavering,” said Dubas. “In this job, you always have to consider anything that’s going to make your team better. There was nothing that came along from the end of our series to today that I felt was even to be considered in terms of making our team better. We would have been different, and maybe that would provide some cover and appease the masses a little bit, but we wouldn’t be better. That’s why my belief in that group is so large, is that I feel when these big moments come again, that they are going to be at their best and they are going to have success.

“I believe in them as players, they’re obviously really talented players, but also as people and what they’re about. I know they take this stuff personally and that they’ll be ready to roll this season.”

A little takeaway there, Dubas is acknowledging that he could have made a deal that would have at least been a wash, in other words, a deal for the sake of shaking up the core that while not improving the team, would not have set it back, either.

 

[zeke]

A little takeaway there, Dubas is acknowledging that he could have made a deal that would have at least been a wash, in other words, a deal for the sake of shaking up the core that while not improving the team, would not have set it back, either.

Eh that's not how I read this sentence at all:

"There was nothing that came along from the end of our series to today that I felt was even to be considered in terms of making our team better."

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

Love the fact he ditched the glasses at the preseason presser to make us think he's different this year. He has to change a lot more than his eyewear to convince me he knows what he is doing. Also, the players, except Tavares, all talked about themselves. There was no regard for the fans that they clearly care nothing about. Let's hope when they tank early, they clean house this year and don't ride out the contracts of the slugs they now have.

You forgot the beard. Never forget the beard.

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

LeBrun: What's at stake for the Maple Leafs this season? 'I don’t think we can hide from it' - The Athletic

In canvassing rival team executives around the league, I got some mixed responses on that. One said he would have shopped Mitch Marner to at least see what was out there. Another said he was surprised William Nylander hasn’t been dealt by now.

But I will tell you that for the most part, the team executives I chatted about this with the last little while respected Dubas for doing what was the most difficult thing: standing pat with his core. Sticking to his belief in the team he built.

As one team executive told me this week, he thinks if Jake Muzzin is healthy in 2020, the Leafs beat Columbus and if Muzzin stays healthy last spring, the Leafs hold on to beat Montreal.

Which is to say, Muzzin getting hurt in back-to-back playoffs is no one’s fault.

So staying the course is also what this particular team executive would have done.

Which isn’t easy.

And believe me, other teams called the Leafs about Marner and Nylander. I asked Dubas on Wednesday how he reacted when those calls came this summer on some of his top forwards.

“I’m not going to get into specific calls we get on specific guys, as I’ve said in the past, my belief in that group in there … in the entire core, is immense and unwavering,” said Dubas. “In this job, you always have to consider anything that’s going to make your team better. There was nothing that came along from the end of our series to today that I felt was even to be considered in terms of making our team better. We would have been different, and maybe that would provide some cover and appease the masses a little bit, but we wouldn’t be better. That’s why my belief in that group is so large, is that I feel when these big moments come again, that they are going to be at their best and they are going to have success.

“I believe in them as players, they’re obviously really talented players, but also as people and what they’re about. I know they take this stuff personally and that they’ll be ready to roll this season.”

A little takeaway there, Dubas is acknowledging that he could have made a deal that would have at least been a wash, in other words, a deal for the sake of shaking up the core that while not improving the team, would not have set it back, either.

“I’m not going to get into specific calls we get on specific guys, as I’ve said in the past, my belief in that group in there … in the entire core, is immense and unwavering,” said Dubas.

Ummm...was Freddie Andersen not part of the core not that long ago? Kind of a hollow statement in that context. "I believe in the core until they're not the core."