Was Mike Babcock right all along about this Leafs core? | Page 2 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Was Mike Babcock right all along about this Leafs core?

Did he specifically say the core couldn't get it done?

Didn't he try to make Marner admit to being lazy and look at players' phones? The latter is simply shady behavior.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Summer Rose
If the question is whether Babcock was responsible for their failures, I would say no, he was not. I think I'd have said that at the time, though.

If the question is whether the Leafs would have done better in these last 6 years had they kept Babcock... the easy answer is 'yes', but only because this core has underperformed. In reality, I don't think he would have squeezed any more out of them. There is just something sour in the mix.
 
Honour Over Glory said:
I don't think the core was ever the issue, it's just not identifying how to use it imo. Their issue was depth and so their solve was not identifying it at all, adding more Defense, ignoring the paper tiger goaltending and assuming it would work and then blame players for it?

They stack Knies, Matthews, and Marner on one line, then the 2nd line is also stacked, but then it just turns into nothing after that. They've struggled all year to find a 3c solution and never felt comfortable with Domi there, not his fault really.

But then you have Stolarz get hurt during the season, your next up is Woll and then after that, Matt Murray? Was Carlo really that big of a need? It's unfortunate Marner gets shit on, because Matthews is just as big of a passenger as he is if that's the way they want to label it. Someone in the Leafs management really thought McMann, Domi, Holmberg was a suitable 3rd line to win it all this year?

Issues start there.

Domi did his part, worked his ass off, lad has no reason to feel bad for his play imo.
Click to expand...

Their forward depth isn't great, but they have so much money tied up elsewhere that it's hard to have good depth up front.

Maybe they did get too obsessed with bolstering the defense (adding Carlo after they had already brought in Tanev and OEL).

McMann was a 20 goal scorer in the regular season, but he stopped scoring goals after his 20th of the season. He went weeks without a goal. I think they figured he would be more productive in the playoffs.

Holmberg is a fairly solid bottom six guy but has very limited offensive ability. Berube keeps putting him on the second line for some reason.

They did add Laughton. He was pretty good against OTT but couldn't provide much offense in the playoffs.

I think the next step to try may be to be less top-heavy up front and to improve the forward depth.

FLA has some big names (Reinhart, Barkov, Tkachuk), but they're getting it done with three good forward lines that contribute. Marchand and Luostarinen, who play on the third line, lead the team in playoff scoring.
 
GlitchMarner said:
Their forward depth isn't great, but they have so much money tied up elsewhere that it's hard to have good depth up front.

Maybe they did get too obsessed with bolstering the defense (adding Carlo after they had already brought in Tanev and OEL).

McMann was a 20 goal scorer in the regular season, but he stopped scoring goals after his 20th of the season. He went weeks without a goal. I think they figured he would be more productive in the playoffs.

Holmberg is a fairly solid bottom six guy but has very limited offensive ability. Berube keeps putting him on the second line for some reason.

They did add Laughton. He was pretty good against OTT but couldn't provide much offense in the playoffs.

I think the next step to try may be to be less top-heavy up front and to improve the forward depth.

FLA has some big names (Reinhart, Barkov, Tkachuk), but they're getting it done with three good forward lines that contribute. Marchand and Luostarinen, who play on the third line, lead the team in playoff scoring.
Click to expand...
Other teams have had money tied up in their young stars before and found ways to add depth, the thing is, like I mentioned and you also mentioned - they focused on more of the same (Defense) when the other very glaring issues were right in front of them and mentioned several times.

Adding more D over adding depth to their 3rd and 4th lines to be more playoff ready and adding a veteran goalie was the move to make, Boston Pizza lad instead blew his wad on Carlo for some bizarre reason and then ignored everything else.

Leafs keeping Marner wouldn't be a bad thing, depending on the cap, but moving on from Tavares would be wise, especially from that cap hit to add a lot of depth from L3-L4. Players like McMann, sure on paper the 20 goals looks great, but as you mentioned, the bloke went dry AF the rest of the way, the others are more suited for 4th line duty like Holmberg, but even then, you could definitely find better upgrades over them. Domi to me would have been better suited as the winger on the 3rd line and adding a better 3C for depth, they gave up a ton to add Laughton to be the 4c, which was odd to me as well, not on Laughton but to make that big of a move and the usage (more on Berube I guess).
 
The Devilish Buffoon said:
If the question is whether Babcock was responsible for their failures, I would say no, he was not. I think I'd have said that at the time, though.

If the question is whether the Leafs would have done better in these last 6 years had they kept Babcock... the easy answer is 'yes', but only because this core has underperformed. In reality, I don't think he would have squeezed any more out of them. There is just something sour in the mix.
Click to expand...
The question is in the title and its neither of those.....

Not just this post but so many others in this thread are ignoring the question all together just to show how much they hate the guy. I get that it's all for good reason. But still, its pretty clearly laid out...

"Babcock is a bad guy, but with that already said, was the core weak and he knew/was right about it?"

"Babcock is a bad guy"
 
TrufleShufle said:
The question is in the title and its neither of those.....

Not just this post but so many others in this thread are ignoring the question all together just to show how much they hate the guy. I get that it's all for good reason. But still, its pretty clearly laid out...

"Babcock is a bad guy, but with that already said, was the core weak and he knew/was right about it?"

"Babcock is a bad guy"
Click to expand...
The question “was Babcock right all along” presupposes that Babcock had drawn a conclusion about the viability of the core four.

That’s an assumption made by the OP and not at all the consensus narrative, so I’m not surprised people are ignoring his question — the whole premise is flawed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ricky0034, DaveG, Summer Rose and 2 others
Mr Nogatco said:
The question “was Babcock right all along” presupposes that Babcock had drawn a conclusion about the viability of the core four.

That’s an assumption made by the OP and not at all the consensus narrative, so I’m not surprised people are ignoring his question — the whole premise is flawed.
Click to expand...
Aka clickbait title
 
I don't fully blame the players, the management should have moved one of those big salaries or high value players to better balance their roster or asset pool years ago. It's just too top heavy and no combination of those guys is equal to McDavid and Draisaitl where you can easily justify it
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG
They should have told the floaters who whined about him to suck it up and start playing like men instead of firing him for holding them accountable.
 
Danarqhy said:
He was mean to Mitchy, his hard ass methods were tuned out by the team and he was fired shortly after. He was too "tough" for this marshmallow soft core and basically got blackballed from the league as a result.
Click to expand...
He was hired by Columbus and then resigned amidst investigations of him creeping out the players with weird behavior, like asking for pictures from their phones.

He also caused Johan Franzen to break down. Someone who, you know, wasn't "marshmallow soft" as he won a cup with Detroit.

So, no. He wasn't blackballed. He did this himself by being a shitty and creepy person.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaveG
Danarqhy said:
Mike Babcock is an old school hard ass-type coach and the Leafs quit on him in 2019. Sure he's an ass and used questionable methods, but 6 years and multiple EMBARRASSING playoff exits and breakdowns later it looks like the same core players still can't get it done. They are slowly earning the crown as the biggest collection of chokesters in NHL playoffs history.

For all his faults, Babcock knew this Leafs core was rotten to the mushy soft core, and almost a decade later they still haven't matured and grown up. The more time passes, the more it looks like this rotten core was the problem in Toronto.
Click to expand...
Why? Because one of the top 10 teams in the league lost a close 7 game series to a top 5 team?
 
It's Leafs management that screwed up by babying Matthews and Marner.

They should have at least kept Lou long enough for the contract negotiations for those two.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ulysses31
Had no issues with what he did then, especially now. Dubas created this culture of babying their superstars. Now they are all still boys and not men
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

  • ... and 2 more.
    • Total: 9 (members: 5, guests: 4)

    Latest posts

    Ad

    Ad

    Top Bottom