arbitrary? not at all. they're pretty crucial elements in assessing teams' records imo.
the leafs are in a group of team's with a similar overall record clumped behind tampa, but when we look closer we see a number of those teams are being boosted by SO/OTL points, which are much more luck based. in addition, goal differential indicates even more so that the leafs haven't been as dependant on close-game luck as the others. and lastly, the only other team that beats the leafs in either category, Calgary, is playing in the worst division in hockey and the much weaker conference.
it has translated into regulation wins. it doesn't say anything about shootouts though.
because they've managed to squeeze out 7 more SO/OTL pts.
There are hundreds of "elements" you could look at, it's arbitrary IMHO to say that these couple you picked are somehow more crucial than the others. For example:
Are you sure that winning close games is really just luck?
OT wins are to me not only not crucial but irrelevant considering 3on3 hockey is a regular season gimmick and doesn't exist in the playoffs.
As for the West being "much" weaker, I'm curious as to what you're basing this on.
That’s for Dubas to figure out.
This isn’t a new thing. Earlier in the season the Marlies tried out a 5 person powerplay. It didn’t work so well, and Dubas told Keefe to knock it off. Keefe wanted to keep going with it. It was one of the Marlies reporters on the SDP, which said it’s the worst argument Keefe and Dubas ever had.
GM’s do care how the players they bring in are used, believe it or not.
Of course GM's care, who said they didn't?
Go read my post again an tell me:
Who has the final work on defence pairings, the GM or the coach?
Who decides on line combos and PP units, the GM or the coach?
Who decides who gets how much ice time, the GM or the coach?
The GM can offer input of course but I'm pretty sure the coach has the final say here.