The New and really Improved , Kyle Dubas Discussion Thread

[justashadowof]

The one thing so far about Ritchie is that he hasn't been a liability as he isn't scoring. As long as someone else is producing while Ritchie's drought continues, it doesn't matter all that much. I'm suspecting that he'll break out with something like a hat trick soon. Still, he's a major disappointment as it was hoped that he'd flourish with the opportunities afforded him here.

 

[kb]

The one thing so far about Ritchie is that he hasn't been a liability as he isn't scoring. As long as someone else is producing while Ritchie's drought continues, it doesn't matter all that much. I'm suspecting that he'll break out with something like a hat trick soon. Still, he's a major disappointment as it was hoped that he'd flourish with the opportunities afforded him here.

Exactly my thoughts. He's doing his job, and no one would be saying much if he had 3-5 more goals right now. He's responsible, and is a nuclear deterrent. He'll come around....I have this feeling he will break out with a little run.

 

[zeke]

While I fully agree with most of your post, saying McCann is worth Hallander and a 7th is a bit disingenuous. He was only available at that price because of the ED.

Not one team in the league thought he was worth more than that to put on their protected list.

 

[Buds17]

Kerfoot would have been selected if they had a chance to do so and McCann wasn't made available.

Fair enough. Such a scenario wasn't going to exist though. The 7-3-1 protects both and the 4-4-1 sees both up for grabs.

 

[29Potvin]

I'd be curious to know who you think is an "equivalent" player to Alex Kerfoot, that makes $2m, that wouldn't cost an arm and a leg to acquire?



Going one step further... let's say the Leafs went 7F, and protected both McCann, Kerfoot, and Engvall.

You're now in a position where you've got both Kerfoot & McCann on your left wing, which probably isn't ideal being that they're similar players, or having to put one at 3rd line C, which basically prevents you from building the shutdown line that the Leafs have around David Kampf.

It also means that unless you go out and subsequently trade Kerfoot, you cannot sign Nick Ritchie to improve this team's toughness & size.

Assuming you still sign Kampf, you're then shopping in UFA to replace Holl with with $1.5m (as McCann is ~$450k more expensive than Ritchie).

If you trade Kerfoot and sign Ritchie, yes, you can go and try to replace Holl with about $2.5m in cap space to do so, but still, not a lot of Holl-replacements out there for that kind of money. I struggle to think of any, to be honest.

Bottom line... you want to argue that the Leafs would have been better off with McCann over Kerfoot? I don't think many will argue with you, they probably would have been, especially if Tavares/Matthews are able to remain healthy all year, and the $550k in cap space is not insignificant.

But, the difference really isn't all that big, and certainly not as big as what the Leafs could have reasonably projected to be between Justin Holl and his replacement.

As much as people like to hate on Kerfoot and the fact that he isn't flashy and the only remaining pieces of the Kadri trade and having him over McCann gave the Leaf's cap certainty beyond this year. Say the Leaf let lost Kerfoot and had McCann you are hoping that McCann becomes an upgrade over Kerf.
McCann is only signed for this season and is a RFA with Arb rights and $3.38 million QO. Cap Friendly’s contract prediction tool, based only on their record to date, estimates that McCann will be considerably more expensive in the future than Kerfoot. They forecast a four-year $4.6 million contract for McCann next year.
So unless McCann is a clear cut upgrade on Kerfoot you would ultimately have been trading Kerfoot/Hallander/seventh-round pick for one year rental of McCann that we would most likely not be able to afford beyond this season

 

[ACC1224]

Kerfoot has been great, fits this team perfectly.
McCann would be a great player to have no doubt.
We do tend to pine for what we don't have around here.

IMO, this team, at the moment, needs nothing more than an upgrade on Holl.

 

[Gary Nylund]

As much as people like to hate on Kerfoot and the fact that he isn't flashy and the only remaining pieces of the Kadri trade and having him over McCann gave the Leaf's cap certainty beyond this year. Say the Leaf let lost Kerfoot and had McCann you are hoping that McCann becomes an upgrade over Kerf.
McCann is only signed for this season and is a RFA with Arb rights and $3.38 million QO. Cap Friendly’s contract prediction tool, based only on their record to date, estimates that McCann will be considerably more expensive in the future than Kerfoot. They forecast a four-year $4.6 million contract for McCann next year.
So unless McCann is a clear cut upgrade on Kerfoot you would ultimately have been trading Kerfoot/Hallander/seventh-round pick for one year rental of McCann that we would most likely not be able to afford beyond this season

What if we had Kadri though instead of Kerfoot?

 

[zeke]

Pure class, dubey.

 

[29Potvin]

What if we had Kadri though instead of Kerfoot?

What game would he have been suspended in vs the Jackets??

 

[leafsfan5]

The one thing so far about Ritchie is that he hasn't been a liability as he isn't scoring. As long as someone else is producing while Ritchie's drought continues, it doesn't matter all that much. I'm suspecting that he'll break out with something like a hat trick soon. Still, he's a major disappointment as it was hoped that he'd flourish with the opportunities afforded him here.

His screens are a perfect example. He may not have put the puck in the net but him screening the goalie led to the goal

Have a feeling he’ll be huge in the playoffs. We need greasy goals where the goalie can’t see. Make it tough for the other team

 

[29Potvin]

His screens are a perfect example. He may not have put the puck in the net but him screening the goalie led to the goal

Have a feeling he’ll be huge in the playoffs. We need greasy goals where the goalie can’t see. Make it tough for the other team

Having guys like him, Cliff, Wayne and lesser extent bunting has made ever player on the team play bigger as each shift other teams have a worry about who is coming over the boards.

 

[Pi]

Dubas gets full credit on Kampf, Bunting, Kase

Ritchie and Mrazek a bit suspect. Ritchie had the smaller term and I could see the "boom" potential with it. Mrazek...yea no explaining that away.

How is there no explaining Mrazek? The Leafs were in no way going to start the season with an inexperienced Campbell who could easily have just been on a hot streak. We've seen many goalies get hot at the right time and then crash and burn. Remember the goalie Ottawa had for a bit who was nicknamed McBurglar or something stupid like that before he fell apart and was out of the league...I can't even remember his name.

You also couldn't have Woll as his backup. The Leafs needed a capable goalie who has played well at this level as a 1a/1b to take over in case of injury and in the event Campbell crashed and burned.

 

[Pi]

Pure class, dubey.

If I was a player for Dubas, I would do whatever he wants. He has his players back, whether they are superstars or players who don't even play or will ever play for the Leafs. So many examples with both the Marlies and the Leafs.

Apparently he's done a favor to Clifford as well in getting him to Toronto that Clifford said he will get around to talking about when the time is right.

 

[Gary Nylund]

How is there no explaining Mrazek? The Leafs were in no way going to start the season with an inexperienced Campbell who could easily have just been on a hot streak. We've seen many goalies get hot at the right time and then crash and burn. Remember the goalie Ottawa had for a bit who was nicknamed McBurglar or something stupid like that before he fell apart and was out of the league...I can't even remember his name.

You also couldn't have Woll as his backup. The Leafs needed a capable goalie who has played well at this level as a 1a/1b to take over in case of injury and in the event Campbell crashed and burned.

You're obviously correct in that we could not start the season with just Campbell and Woll and signing Mrazek made complete sense. The mistake Dubas made IMO was not extending Campbell in the summer when he would have come so cheap that the risk would have been minimal and the upside would have been huge. Oh well.

 

[Pi]

You're obviously correct in that we could not start the season with just Campbell and Woll and signing Mrazek made complete sense. The mistake Dubas made IMO was not extending Campbell in the summer when he would have come so cheap that the risk would have been minimal and the upside would have been huge. Oh well.

That I kind of agree with, I would have given him 4-4.5 over 4-5 years to get him signed before this season and even if he didn't live up to it, it's not an immovable contract if you front load it. Now you are looking at upwards of 5M on a 5+ year deal similar to the Andersen deal so we will definitely be lean in the back up role and have to hope Woll is for real.

That is definitely one criticism for Dubas, he's been slow to sign key players and as a result, they were overpaid. Marner could have been cheaper if he was signed a year prior and by all indications they were interested in a Draisaitl type deal at the time but the Leafs didn't engage.

He got lucky with Rielly, despite the fact that he was signed late, he signed a reasonable deal to stay with Toronto instead of chasing a Hamilton type contract which he could have gotten.

 

[The Podium]

Not one team in the league thought he was worth more than that to put on their protected list.

Well it would be the cost of acquiring + the player they expose in lieu of McCann. So that alone makes it disingenuous.

 

[Dekes For Days]

The mistake Dubas made IMO was not extending Campbell in the summer when he would have come so cheap that the risk would have been minimal and the upside would have been huge.

Why would Campbell have signed for that cheap, given what you just said? So many people forget that it takes two to sign a contract.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Well it would be the cost of acquiring + the player they expose in lieu of McCann.

No, it would be the cost of acquiring and the difference between their 7th and 8th best non-exempt forward, which for most teams, was essentially nothing. No team thought McCann was worth acquiring for more than a Hallander-level prospect as recently as a few months ago.

 

[Apex Predator]

Why would Campbell have signed for that cheap, given what you just said? So many people forget that it takes two to sign a contract.

I think 4.5 per season would be intriguing offer for him considering how little he had played. That would have been a huge risk for us at that time. I think the Leafs offered him an extension but it wasn’t 4.5 per season. Hindsight is 20/20 and I really think that applies to this situation. The leafs only played 6 teams last year still a risk to commit long term to Campbell based on that.

 

[Gary Nylund]

That I kind of agree with, I would have given him 4-4.5 over 4-5 years to get him signed before this season and even if he didn't live up to it, it's not an immovable contract if you front load it. Now you are looking at upwards of 5M on a 5+ year deal similar to the Andersen deal so we will definitely be lean in the back up role and have to hope Woll is for real.

That is definitely one criticism for Dubas, he's been slow to sign key players and as a result, they were overpaid. Marner could have been cheaper if he was signed a year prior and by all indications they were interested in a Draisaitl type deal at the time but the Leafs didn't engage.

He got lucky with Rielly, despite the fact that he was signed late, he signed a reasonable deal to stay with Toronto instead of chasing a Hamilton type contract which he could have gotten.

Whatever the exact numbers are for Campbell, they are obviously much higher today then they were in the summer.

With the benefit of hindsight, signing Marner earlier would have worked out well but at the time, his ask was too high based on his career to that point and Dubas would have been raked over the coals for agreeing to it. His mistake was agreeing to overpay him when he did sign him, he basically gave him UFA money instead RFA money. Anyway, what's done is done, we can only hope Dubas has learned from his mistake and he'd have to pretty dense not to learn from it, considering what an obvious mistake it was. Not using leverage when you have it because you think of the players as your friends is not acceptable, your first loyalty as a GM has to be to the team.

 

[Dekes For Days]

I think 4.5 per season would be intriguing offer for him considering how little he had played. That would have been a huge risk for us at that time. I think the Leafs offered him an extension but it wasn’t 4.5 per season. Hindsight is 20/20 and I really think that applies to this situation. The leafs only played 6 teams last year still a risk to commit long term to Campbell based on that.

Agreed. He may have taken 4.5m - we don't know - but that's certainly not "so cheap that the risk would have been minimal and the upside would have been huge", as Gary suggested.

 

[Mess]

Why would Campbell have signed for that cheap, given what you just said? So many people forget that it takes two to sign a contract.

With Dubas giving his backup goalie Mrazek (who never plays) $3.5 mil X 2 years one can only imagine what Campbell his starter is now going to cost him to re-sign?

 

[Dekes For Days]

Not using leverage when you have it because you think of the players as your friends is not acceptable, your first loyalty as a GM has to be to the team.

Dubas did use his leverage, and the resulting contract was a reasonable post-ELC contract based on what Marner had shown. Dubas isn't horrible to his players like some GMs, but his first loyalty is obviously to the team.

 

[Gary Nylund]

With Dubas giving his backup goalie Mrazek (who never plays) $3.5 mil X 2 years one can only imagine what Campbell his starter is now going to cost him to re-sign?

I don't even want to think about it. But I can't help it.

 

[zeke]

Well it would be the cost of acquiring + the player they expose in lieu of McCann. So that alone makes it disingenuous.

Did you see some of the names protected?