The New and really Improved , Kyle Dubas Discussion Thread

[Gary Nylund]

Just caught some of doobie being interviewed and questioned. He still seems like a super smart guy which I always said he was. I'm still skeptical that not adjusting to the flat cap and going forward with this top heavy salary structure is the best move. On the other hand, I'm not arrogant enough to think I'm always right so I will hope that I'm wrong, and that this path gives us the best chance for success. We'll see.

Keefe is now on the podium, hoping someone asks him if perhaps he's re-thinking how much ice time to give our stars, especially Marner.

 

[Zybalto]

Greiss having the best numbers in franchise history doesn't seem suspicious to you?

It's not defense of Freddy, it's an honest assessment. I've been critical of him when he deserves it but I don't believe that to be the case very often. I mean, when you're ridiculous enough to blame Anderson for not coming out to stop the puck behind the net (didn't have time) or Marty Marincin for not attacking the puck (d men outnumbered supposed to be in the middle) when 4 players look like novice houseleaguers and hang them out to dry in a critical moment then we're probably not going to agree.... Seeing an egregious mistake that costs the team in a critical moment then blaming it on the goalie or the one d man who didn't would make you a terrible teammate. I question your experience in team sports if thats your idea of accountability.

Anderson in Carolina will be interesting. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he posted career high sv% behind much better team defense but your concerns about health and where that may have him trending is fair. Hard to say without more insight.

Babcock got fired because the team stopped playing for him. For better or for worse, that couldn't continue. I still say that performance against Pittsburgh in Kasmir Kaskisuo's NHL debut is the most pathetic performance I've ever seen by pro athletes.... the age of this core quitting on their coach before they'd won a damn thing should have been the first of many red flags. Many said this at the time.

FOH with those numbers. I've wasted my time engaging with you if you actually think the Leafs and Islanders are comparable defensively. These numbers literally miss far, far more data than they actually record... and when we consider how 'danger' of shots is calculated with no consideration of who, how, and what the landscape in front we then start to see how far these numbers can be skewed. They provide zero insight as to how or why the chance happened, which is what we need to know. Any attentive fan can identify a shot attempt.

There's an interesting case study to be had about theory vs delusion as it pertains to analytics in hockey. No matter how many times some are told that teams don't use these numbers, and that these numbers are a business for websites to make money off hockey fans, people still pump them like they're gospel. In reality, they're snake oil... Having you out here thinking a Sheldon Keefe team defending as well as Barry Trotz.

Jezzus, where do I begin....I guess by first not engaging in more talk about that goal scored on Freddy (maybe Marincins last time seeing the NHL ice? He hasnt played a game since then.). Just gonna lead to opinionated BS back and forth that goes nowhere and you've already started with the insults.

Screw analytics then OK.

Speaking from strictly traditional end result universally accepted ways to look at team D and goaltending. Shots against, Goals against and team save%. You do accept these have real value right?

Lowest goals against average in the NHL last year:

1. Knights
2. Islanders
3. Avalanche
4. Hurricanes
5. Bruins
(8. Leafs)


Fewest shots against in the NHL last year:

1. Avalanche
2. Stars
3. Bruins
4. Knights
5. Leafs


Best team save% in the NHL last year:

1. Islanders
2. Knights
3. Hurricanes
4. Predators
5. Bruins
(15. Toronto)

So the Leafs had the 8th lowest goals against, allowed the 5th fewest shots but were only 15th in team save%. These arnt a conspiracy theory. These are what most people look at to judge team D and goaltending. I think theres more nuance using more advanced shot quality stats that actually make the Leafs look worse than that (you know, the ones that actually try to analyze distance, angles, locations, current score, rebounds etc.) but we are going to stick to your rules here. The Leafs had the 5th best D in the league last year and would have had a better goals against than their 8th place if it wasnt for the poor play of Andersen. Disagree? Carolina is another good defensive team and maybe the change of scenery will do him well but his numbers are troubling when already on a good defensive team and he was getting badly outplayed by Campbell and Hutch this year.


As far as the Babcock thing goes, team save% fell from 5th best in the NHL the previous 3 years to 23rd in the league for the 2 months before he was fired while team D looked exactly the same (awful) as in previous years. You can say the team "gave up on Babcock" but it sure looks like goaltending may have been an issue doesnt it?


I mean, this last season, the Leafs big strengths were:
Team D
Top end 5v5 scoring


....and their problems were:
wildly inconsistent PP
Andersen
Injuries

Personally, I'm not ready to say the Leafs are at the same level as the Isles but I'm fairly confident in saying the Isles are a top 5 defensive team in the league and the Leafs are a top 10 defensive team in the league......

Oh, and Greiss was a really good keeper for the Isles. Was he propped up by the great D a bit, sure, but his performance as a well above average keeping over that time was invaluable.

 

[egd27]

Do you have any actual reasons beyond "lol leafs sukz!" ??

The poster the above comment is responding to is one of the more articulate and balanced folks on this board.

It's unfortunate that you are unable to realize that because posters don't worship at the altar of Kyle Dubas, that the only other opinion must be "leafs sukz".

 

[Gary Nylund]

Personally, I'm not ready to say the Leafs are at the same level as the Isles but I'm fairly confident in saying the Isles are a top 5 defensive team in the league and the Leafs are a top 10 defensive team in the league......

Oh, and Greiss was a really good keeper for the Isles. Was he propped up by the great D a bit, sure, but his performance as a well above average keeping over that time was invaluable.

The bolded seems accurate.

 

[WTFMAN99]

The bolded seems accurate.

I want to see how they hold up in a 32 team season vs just the Canadian division.

Years prior to that it wasn't a good look but a lot of people put it all on Andersen...with him not being here next season, no more excuses, even though Dubas has had ample time to assemble the team he likes.

 

[Dekes For Days]

The poster the above comment is responding to is one of the more articulate and balanced folks on this board.

Hilarious. The "articulate and balanced" one in that discussion was Zybalto, who can (and did) actually back up his positions.

 

[zeke]

The poster the above comment is responding to is one of the more articulate and balanced folks on this board.

It's unfortunate that you are unable to realize that because posters don't worship at the alter of Kyle Dubas, that the only other opinion must be "leafs sukz".

Well given he insulted everyone who disagreed with him in his post, while providing zero arguments of his own, we disagree on the meaning of the word "balanced".

 

[zeke]

Greiss had one big year under trotz and one mediocre one - neither out of line with what he did in his career before or since.

And since Keefe entered the league, the Isles have had a worse GAA with Greiss in net than the leafs have had with any goalie in net.

 

[sparxx87]

Jezzus, where do I begin....I guess by first not engaging in more talk about that goal scored on Freddy (maybe Marincins last time seeing the NHL ice? He hasnt played a game since then.). Just gonna lead to opinionated BS back and forth that goes nowhere and you've already started with the insults.

Screw analytics then OK.

Speaking from strictly traditional end result universally accepted ways to look at team D and goaltending. Shots against, Goals against and team save%. You do accept these have real value right?

Lowest goals against average in the NHL last year:

1. Knights
2. Islanders
3. Avalanche
4. Hurricanes
5. Bruins
(8. Leafs)


Fewest shots against in the NHL last year:

1. Avalanche
2. Stars
3. Bruins
4. Knights
5. Leafs


Best team save% in the NHL last year:

1. Islanders
2. Knights
3. Hurricanes
4. Predators
5. Bruins
(15. Toronto)

So the Leafs had the 8th lowest goals against, allowed the 5th fewest shots but were only 15th in team save%. These arnt a conspiracy theory. These are what most people look at to judge team D and goaltending. I think theres more nuance using more advanced shot quality stats that actually make the Leafs look worse than that (you know, the ones that actually try to analyze distance, angles, locations, current score, rebounds etc.) but we are going to stick to your rules here. The Leafs had the 5th best D in the league last year and would have had a better goals against than their 8th place if it wasnt for the poor play of Andersen. Disagree? Carolina is another good defensive team and maybe the change of scenery will do him well but his numbers are troubling when already on a good defensive team and he was getting badly outplayed by Campbell and Hutch this year.


As far as the Babcock thing goes, team save% fell from 5th best in the NHL the previous 3 years to 23rd in the league for the 2 months before he was fired while team D looked exactly the same (awful) as in previous years. You can say the team "gave up on Babcock" but it sure looks like goaltending may have been an issue doesnt it?


I mean, this last season, the Leafs big strengths were:
Team D
Top end 5v5 scoring


....and their problems were:
wildly inconsistent PP
Andersen
Injuries

Personally, I'm not ready to say the Leafs are at the same level as the Isles but I'm fairly confident in saying the Isles are a top 5 defensive team in the league and the Leafs are a top 10 defensive team in the league......

Oh, and Greiss was a really good keeper for the Isles. Was he propped up by the great D a bit, sure, but his performance as a well above average keeping over that time was invaluable.

No personal insults but I think it's fair to question the experience of one in a team dynamic when 4 make an egregious error at a critical time in the game to leave two teammates in a vulnerable position where one then chooses to seemingly blame the two who showed up and critique how they played it. If I made a dumb mistake that put you in deep water, how silly would I sound for criticizing how you play it with no awareness that eliminating my dumb mistake avoids the entire situation? Accountability is important. Not to us as fans but within the team so I hope the coaching staff chose to place accountability on those whose egregious mistake created the whole situation.

I agree that it's an opinion, but one thats generally shared - especially the one where d man is supposed to play the middle of an odd man rush, try to take away the pass and rebound and let the goalie see the shot while still staying close enough to play the shooter if they try to take it to the net. Marincin did what he was supposed to do in that very bad situation. Freddy should have had it, but Foudy also made a smart play under the circumstances. He capitalized on a mistake and took advantage... If not for the pee wee line change the whole situation is averted.

Most relevant data can be useful to some degree as long as the proper context is applied. Every single stat collected is a result that doesn't account for the dozens of variables that impacted these results in the moments leading up to it. Not much science or math to do when you've literally missed more data than you've recorded. You know the end result but no way of knowing how or why unless you watch it.

The misapplication and fundamental misunderstanding of these stats is far worse than the stats themselves.

Shots can be misleading because they're about quality, not quantity. Islanders make so few mistakes (opposite of the Leafs) and they seem to give up a lot lower percentage shots more consistently (not necessarily location but I hope you agree that the threat assessment is different with Matthews vs Engvall) They rarely turn the puck over (even rarer in the dangerous spots) and rarely find themselves in bad position because of it. Overall the totals may be similar, but the Islanders don't have players like Justin Holl in their top 4 who routinely get puck watching and lose their check. Not boxing out or bodying up and not tying up that stick. They do a great job making life easy on their goalies and thats why you've seen such consistent numbers almost regardless who they run out there. Anyone half decent in net will do on most nights and this is what allows 1B goalies like Greiss to put up such good numbers. Lehner is the best goalie they've had by far and he was only there for a year. The two conference finals were behind Varlamov, a guy who lost the net for terrible goals in round 1, and now on a 3rd team where backbreaking goals in the playoffs have been a constant concern... something you don't see reflected in any stats.

 

[sparxx87]

Well given he insulted everyone who disagreed with him in his post, while providing zero arguments of his own, we disagree on the meaning of the word "balanced".

Insulted? I questioned experience in team dynamic for attempting to hold 2 players accountable for a situation created by an egregious mistake by 4 others. A good teammate holds people accountable for their mistakes and won't blame others for not bailing them out.

I don't repeat myself over and over. I've posted at length with what I think is wrong with the team and organizational culture so I'm not going to write it into every post. I've tried with you but you refuse to believe its an art and discuss the theory and philosophy. You're trying to turn the art into a science and I've learned its not a good use of my time to try and change your mind.

 

[Dekes For Days]

when 4 make an egregious error at a critical time in the game to leave two teammates in a vulnerable position where one then chooses to seemingly blame the two who showed up and critique how they played it.

It wasn't an "egregious error". Both teams were changing. There was a defenseman there to block off the one opponent forechecking, who was at a bad angle to shoot, with nobody to pass to. That's not a very vulnerable situation. Andersen just let in a bad goal.

Shots can be misleading because they're about quality, not quantity.

And yet you arbitrarily dismiss all quality-based analytics. And you arbitrarily dismiss all quantity-based analytics. And you arbitrarily dismiss all opposing eye tests, that are actually supported by all of the metrics. So essentially, you've somehow concluded that your personal eye test is infallible and the only thing that can be trusted. Because... um... reasons...

 

[zeke]

Insulted? I questioned experience in team dynamic for attempting to hold 2 players accountable for a situation created by an egregious mistake by 4 others. A good teammate holds people accountable for their mistakes and won't blame others for not bailing them out.

I don't repeat myself over and over. I've posted at length with what I think is wrong with the team and organizational culture so I'm not going to write it into every post. I've tried with you but you refuse to believe its an art and discuss the theory and philosophy. You're trying to turn the art into a science and I've learned its not a good use of my time to try and change your mind.

You insultingly dismissed all the factual counterarguments presented to you without actually responding to them on their merits, and presented no counterarguemtns of your own.

 

[Pookie]

Hilarious. The "articulate and balanced" one in that discussion was Zybalto, who can (and did) actually back up his positions.

Two people can have an articulate and balanced discussion and be on opposite sides of the issue.

Try it sometime.

 

[Dekes For Days]

this is what allows 1B goalies like Greiss to put up such good numbers.

For the record, Greiss put up almost identical numbers a couple years earlier when the Islanders sucked defensively.

2015-2016: 0.925 SV%
2016-2017: 0.913 SV%

 

[zeke]

For the record, Greiss put up almost identical numbers a couple years earlier when the Islanders sucked defensively.

2015-2016: 0.925 SV%
2016-2017: 0.913 SV%

yup.

and of course, he posted a .912 with the awful red wings this past year, basically the same as the .913 he posted under trotz the year before.

 

[ottomaddox]

Q: Is Kyle Dubas defiant?

 

[The CyNick]

Just caught some of doobie being interviewed and questioned. He still seems like a super smart guy which I always said he was. I'm still skeptical that not adjusting to the flat cap and going forward with this top heavy salary structure is the best move. On the other hand, I'm not arrogant enough to think I'm always right so I will hope that I'm wrong, and that this path gives us the best chance for success. We'll see.

Keefe is now on the podium, hoping someone asks him if perhaps he's re-thinking how much ice time to give our stars, especially Marner.

It's not arrogance if it's right.

Dubas has been wrong on virtually everything so far. Leafs fans should hope for a 180 from him.

 

[FreeBird]

wow, even better than his brother DJ?

Cant believe I made a mistake must have had a senior moment first time in 75 years

 

[sparxx87]

You insultingly dismissed all the factual counterarguments presented to you without actually responding to them on their merits, and presented no counterarguemtns of your own.

I guess our definition of factual is very different. The facts are on the game sheet. Anything else is subjective and open for interpretation.

 

[zeke]

I guess our definition of factual is very different. The facts are on the game sheet. Anything else is subjective and open for interpretation.

the game sheet includes goals and shots, correct?

 

[Gary Nylund]

It's not arrogance if it's right.

Dubas has been wrong on virtually everything so far. Leafs fans should hope for a 180 from him.

He's done a ton of good things IMO. Trades especially, Muzzin and Campbell for what we gave up is maybe my favourite.

 

[sparxx87]

the game sheet includes goals and shots, correct?

Touche. There's a lot of nuance to this conversation but I'd also include that the 'why' is always debatable, too. The number of shots is almost black and white, but why they happened and how dangerous they were are open for debate.

Goals are facts, but there's a number of different ways to determine good from bad. Some are good defense and goaltending getting beat by great offense, others are paying for mistakes... Again, all things you need to intently watch for to determine. Stats aren't answering any of my questions as to how and why which are the two most important factors in determining how likely they are to be repeated.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Two people can have an articulate and balanced discussion and be on opposite sides of the issue.

Absolutely. It's just unfortunately quite rare around here. I sympathize with Zybalto, as I know the feeling of bringing articulate, balanced, and substantiated discussion, only to be met with arbitrary dismissal and insults.

 

[Zybalto]

Most relevant data can be useful to some degree as long as the proper context is applied. Every single stat collected is a result that doesn't account for the dozens of variables that impacted these results in the moments leading up to it. Not much science or math to do when you've literally missed more data than you've recorded. You know the end result but no way of knowing how or why unless you watch it.

The misapplication and fundamental misunderstanding of these stats is far worse than the stats themselves.

Shots can be misleading because they're about quality, not quantity. Islanders make so few mistakes (opposite of the Leafs) and they seem to give up a lot lower percentage shots more consistently (not necessarily location but I hope you agree that the threat assessment is different with Matthews vs Engvall) They rarely turn the puck over (even rarer in the dangerous spots) and rarely find themselves in bad position because of it. Overall the totals may be similar, but the Islanders don't have players like Justin Holl in their top 4 who routinely get puck watching and lose their check. Not boxing out or bodying up and not tying up that stick. They do a great job making life easy on their goalies and thats why you've seen such consistent numbers almost regardless who they run out there. Anyone half decent in net will do on most nights and this is what allows 1B goalies like Greiss to put up such good numbers. Lehner is the best goalie they've had by far and he was only there for a year. The two conference finals were behind Varlamov, a guy who lost the net for terrible goals in round 1, and now on a 3rd team where backbreaking goals in the playoffs have been a constant concern... something you don't see reflected in any stats.

This is sort of why I don't think you should be harping on the analytics guys so much. They are trying to figure out how to calculate all this data and come to the very same conclusions as you are writing pretty much.

Looking at the Islanders, they allowed the 8th fewest overall shots but allowed the 3rd fewest "High Danger" shots on net while the Leafs allowed the 5th fewest overall shots but only the 8th fewest "High Danger" shots. Both teams are overall good defensively but it's those things you notice while watching them that is certainly reflected in the data that makes a difference.

My original point is that it's certainly helped them to have good goaltending in net as well. The fact that Varlamov has let in a couple of stinkers during a series doesnt take away from the fact he's been top end #1 for his team and even finished 5th in Vezina voting this year while being on the losing end of a 1-0 game in game 7 of a semi-final against the eventual cup champs.....as opposed to Andersen who has been one of the worst starters in the league this year behind the best D he's ever had with the Leafs.

Lots of people in the analytics community just go by the catch-all team xGA/60 (expected goals against) to come up with a teams D but I'm pulling back a bit (unless it's a part of some greater sample) when making definite conclusions in the crazy covid season but here is how that shook out:

Top 5 defensive teams:
1. Avs
2. Stars
3. Bruins
4. Leafs
5. Islanders

(15. Hurricanes)

Worst 5 defensive teams:
27. Sabres
28. Jets
29. Kings
30. Blackhawks
31. Canucks

Note I put the Hurricanes in there to show you the reason why it's concerning for Andersen to be heading over there as even though they allowed the 6th fewest shots in the league (fewer than the Islanders) but the 17th fewest high danger shots. They are pretty much everything you think the Leafs are but maybe even worse. I'm not sure thats a great place for Freddy to go other than maybe its a change of scenery and he did seem to thrive constant high danger shots being thrown at him. I'm pretty sure the Leafs are better defensive team than the Hurricanes right now though.

I think we all should have seen enough sample by now to see that Keefe is a really good defensive coach. Now just gotta stay healthy and get more clutch scoring, especially from depth players. (provided Mrazek works out as at least average)

 

[Gary Nylund]

This is sort of why I don't think you should be harping on the analytics guys so much. They are trying to figure out how to calculate all this data and come to the very same conclusions as you are writing pretty much.

Looking at the Islanders, they allowed the 8th fewest overall shots but allowed the 3rd fewest "High Danger" shots on net while the Leafs allowed the 5th fewest overall shots but only the 8th fewest "High Danger" shots. Both teams are overall good defensively but it's those things you notice while watching them that is certainly reflected in the data that makes a difference.

My original point is that it's certainly helped them to have good goaltending in net as well. The fact that Varlamov has let in a couple of stinkers during a series doesnt take away from the fact he's been top end #1 for his team and even finished 5th in Vezina voting this year while being on the losing end of a 1-0 game in game 7 of a semi-final against the eventual cup champs.....as opposed to Andersen who has been one of the worst starters in the league this year behind the best D he's ever had with the Leafs.

Lots of people in the analytics community just go by the catch-all team xGA/60 (expected goals against) to come up with a teams D but I'm pulling back a bit (unless it's a part of some greater sample) when making definite conclusions in the crazy covid season but here is how that shook out:

Top 5 defensive teams:
1. Avs
2. Stars
3. Bruins
4. Leafs
5. Islanders

(15. Hurricanes)

Worst 5 defensive teams:
27. Sabres
28. Jets
29. Kings
30. Blackhawks
31. Canucks

Note I put the Hurricanes in there to show you the reason why it's concerning for Andersen to be heading over there as even though they allowed the 6th fewest shots in the league (fewer than the Islanders) but the 17th fewest high danger shots. They are pretty much everything you think the Leafs are but maybe even worse. I'm not sure thats a great place for Freddy to go other than maybe its a change of scenery and he did seem to thrive constant high danger shots being thrown at him. I'm pretty sure the Leafs are better defensive team than the Hurricanes right now though.

I think we all should have seen enough sample by now to see that Keefe is a really good defensive coach. Now just gotta stay healthy and get more clutch scoring, especially from depth players. (provided Mrazek works out as at least average)

What is a high danger shot? Who decides and how consistently are these decisions made? Is there even such a stat or are we talking about high danger scoring chances? Or are these tracked separately? Not trying to give you a hard time here and I appreciate your posts and how much thought you put into them. Just saying there's a fair bit of ambiguity in these stats.

A good example of skewed stats was the empty net Tavares missed against CLB. I was told that this was a high danger scoring chance and I was saying that the CLB goalies weren't THAT good, and that was I thought an example of where the stats flattered them - a high danger chance for sure, but the goalie had nothing to do with the fact that no goal was scored on the play.