Sypher04
Registered User
- Jan 20, 2011
- 12,952
- 11,873
"Change for the sake of change' is not what is being suggested, nor should we believe that whomever decides on who the next GM will be is thinking that way. If MLSE believes that Dubas' vision for building a championship team is flawed then they should try to bring in someone who has a different view. Of course, preferably someone with a track record of success.
And no change at any level is going to guarantee success but if you keep rewarding failure, i.e. extending Dubas if the Leafs have another disappointing post-season, it could be interpreted in the locker room (the only place that really matters) that success is optional.
At no point have the Leafs rewarded failure. That’s a strange way of spinning things. They have stayed the course, built on their team and placed faith in their best players figuring it out and getting to that next level.
And on the management side, Shanahan has simply not made an emotional, reactionary type move that a fan would make.
There is a limit to how long that can last, and we can see that by Dubas’ lame duck status this season. Whether it’s the right/wrong move is free to debate, but nobody has been rewarded for failure here
Also, people won’t like it, but there is still a conceivable path ahead where the Leafs fail to advance and Kyle Dubas remains GM. It’s going to come down to his own work performance, and what you deem that you can put on him vs the players not playing to their capabilities. A GM can only assemble the team, but it’s ultimately up to them to perform how they have shown capable. GMs get fired all the time due to player underperformance, so he may well go still if that happens, but whether it’s the right call is a matter up for debate
Last edited: