Why the Maple Leafs Bought Out Grabovski

[Mowerman]

All we have to go on is a small sample size. Yes that doesn't tell us as much as if they had played more minutes together, but it's a far better sign than if they had poor production, no?

Do you have any objective measure that they were not good together? And "my eyes" and "the leafs coaching decisions" don't count.

You've used one incredibly basic metric comparing a handful of games to multiple seasons. It isn't a better sign. It isn't a sign. It is nothing.

I'm not going to make a statistical argument because I have some self-respect and do not want to be one of those people that make a serious attempt to cherry pick from such a pathetic sample size. I can probably quite easily find some numbers to suit my point, but they don't actually have any value in supporting it. It's just not an accurate objective measure in any sense. Doing so would just be a complete waste of time.

There's a reason the sample size was so small. You can disagree as to why that is & you can say that you saw different or whatever you want to do. I don't really care because at the end of the day Grabovski is gone because the organization saw things the same way I do. I just find it laughable that you would try to spout off an "objective measure" between Bozak and Grabovski with that sample size and expect to be taken seriously.

 

[ponder]

I liked Grabo a lot, he was probably my favourite Leaf while he was here, but I'm fine with his buyout. He was overpaid a bit, and wasn't suited for a bottom 6 role, he's a clear top 6 or bust type of player. In the top 6 you can make arguments for any 2 of Grabo, Bozak and Kadri, but ultimately Grabo's game fit the worst with Carlyle's style. Grabo's a run and gun player, not a grinding/cycle player, and we're trying to transition into a team that is better at grinding and cycling.

With that being said, none of this justifies the Clarkson contract. Clarkson is a good 3rd liner, but giving him 7 years at $5.25 mil per year was absolutely insane. Buying out Grabo made some sense, but giving Clarkson that horrendous contract made no sense at all.

 

[thewave]

The only way the Grabo contract made sense was if you had a 1c ready to sign. If you had that sure get rid of him but between Liles and Komi the money could have been made up minus 2m or less. No big deal I think you can differ cap to the next year but honestly we could have let go one of our brawlers. 1m and that would hav made it all pretty much fit.

Truth, Randy obviously didn't like him = run out of town.

 

[Trainspotter]

The only way the Grabo contract made sense was if you had a 1c ready to sign.

It only makes sense to can a 3rd line center if you have a 1C ready to sign?

 

[thewave]

It only makes sense to can a 3rd line center if you have a 1C ready to sign?

Yes because 1c replaces Bozak, Kadri remains 2c and Bolland is 3c. Bozak would be not be on the team.

Just imagine, Staal, Kadri, Bolland

 

[veedubn1]

Nonis understood that we needed to add a physical element into the top 6 and that one was available without giving up any assets in free agency but cap space was needed and there was only a couple ways to go about doing it.

If the cap didn't shrink, we likely would have kept Grabo (and not traded for Bolland) or found someone else to take the contract... but it is what it is. Just bad timing for all involved. I liked Grabo on the Leafs but he was definitely replaceable.

With that said.. I kinda wish there was a forum specifically for the folks who continue to moan about he past, week after week... we could make Disgruntled Observer the mod there. It would leave the main Leaf forum for folks who enjoy talking about what's currently happening with the team and what could happen with the team in the future so that each thread wouldn't be derailed with crying and moaning about things that can not be changed.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Nonis understood that we needed to add a physical element into the top 6 and that one was available without giving up any assets in free agency but cap space was needed and there was only a couple ways to go about doing it.

If the cap didn't shrink, we likely would have kept Grabo (and not traded for Bolland) or found someone else to take the contract... but it is what it is. Just bad timing for all involved. I liked Grabo on the Leafs but he was definitely replaceable.

With that said.. I kinda wish there was a forum specifically for the folks who continue to moan about he past, week after week... we could make Disgruntled Observer the mod there. It would leave the main Leaf forum for folks who enjoy talking about what's currently happening with the team and what could happen with the team in the future so that each thread wouldn't be derailed with crying and moaning about things that can not be changed.

In the interest of fairness - this entire thread is about something that happened in the past. He's only expressing his opinion on it as is everyone else in including you.

You could start a thread I suppose for those wearing rose coloured glasses and make it clear that only positive comments are welcome. Sounds pretty boring and pointless to me though.

 

[bunjay]

Good thing I didn't argue that. The question was whether or not we were left with a dirth of speed and skill at center due to the departure of Grabovski. Kadri's production and that of Bozak and Bolland suggests otherwise. Adding Holland gives us more speed and skill at the position. We've hardly gone away from a philosophy of speed and skill by taking away Grabovski and MacArthur and adding Mason Raymond and Dave Bolland and increasing Kadri's icetime. That's just laughable. Our opponents continue to observe that we are one of the fastest teams they play.



And it doesn't matter. Who cares if he's "faster and more skilled" if it doesn't result in increased production? You build a hockey club to produce and win not so you can say, "ooooh, isn't Grabo fast, and look at those dangles..." Of course, based on last year's results Grabovski's speed and skill were not integral to the team's success and playoff berth, regardless of the role goaltending played. He simply didn't score much and he didn't play enough to have that great an impact. Those minutes are better given to a player better suited to the role who has demonstrated they can continue to produce offense while doing it. And all that at a pretty hefty discount from Grabovski's 5.5 million for 15:34 and McClement-esque production.

You'd love it to be true that the loss of Grabovski has hampered the club in some way, but whether it be their place in the Standings, in their style of play, or on the scoresheet, he simply hasn't been a big loss. That's just the facts.

Third in the Conference v. 5th. (Better) They're still a team known for quick strike offense and ability to score on the rush. (No change, much to my chagrin) A very high G/G before losing Bozak, Kadri and Bolland. (Is Grabo immune to injuries?) Based on early returns, the impact simply hasn't been that great no matter how fast Grabovski skates.

Remove a 3rd line player = total change of team building philosophy.

Giggles.

You're putting a lot of effort into refuting something that most people think is obvious. They brought in Bolland and Clarkson. Everything else aside those are grinders brought in to play a certain style of game. That style is a dump-and-chase, extremely low-risk game through the neutral zone which -- surprise! -- we are seeing a whole lot of.

And the reason I think that's an overreaction to the game 7 collapse is because the "low-risk" just-throw-the-puck-down-the-ice strategy is exactly what the Leafs were doing once they went up by three goals. Also known as turtling. And that's why they lost, because they handed the puck over to a dangerous team over and over and sat back while they came at us in waves. And Carlyle is still having his team do exactly the same thing, and we're seeing a lot of games where the Leafs get dominated after taking the lead and are only bailed out by fantastic goaltending. And having Clarkson and Bolland don't magically make this a sound strategy.

 

[veedubn1]

In the interest of fairness - this entire thread is about something that happened in the past. He's only expressing his opinion on it as is everyone else in including you.

You could start a thread I suppose for those wearing rose coloured glasses and make it clear that only positive comments are welcome. Sounds pretty boring and pointless to me though.

Yes, this thread is specifically about the past which is fine. My issue is how many other threads are derailed by people constantly crying about the past... to the point where it may be beneficial to make a forum specifically for those who want to regurgitate the same tripe over and over.

They could talk about Fletcher trading away Steen for garbage and even discuss how the Owen Nolan trade set us back. Harold Ballard would get a sticky at the top of the page. All past, all the time! This goes for the folks who are both for and against anything that happened with Bozak/Grabo/Clarkson this summer. People are free to discuss it... but confine it to one area so that it doesn't pollute other conversations. Maybe this post is a thinly veiled shot at the mods who are incapable of policing the discussions. If you post speed limits on highways but fail to enforce them, people are going to drive as fast as they please, amirite?

Negative comments are welcome when it comes to what's currently happening with the club (ie: why the offense on our top line has dried up the past two weeks), but I can't be the only one who is tired of the same folks repeating themselves in multiple threads.

Leave the past in the past and focus the discussion on how to make the current situation better... it's really simple and would lead to fresh conversation.

 

[leafs in five]

"wasn't a fit" oh great that settles it. i am certain that at least a couple of these things are true of Nonis:

- favourite restaurant is Milestone's
- favourite movie is Forrest Gump
- favourite book is magazines
- thinks "political correctness" has gone a bit too far

 

[diceman934]

The only way the Grabo contract made sense was if you had a 1c ready to sign. If you had that sure get rid of him but between Liles and Komi the money could have been made up minus 2m or less. No big deal I think you can differ cap to the next year but honestly we could have let go one of our brawlers. 1m and that would hav made it all pretty much fit.

Truth, Randy obviously didn't like him = run out of town.

What....

You can not defer cap to the next year.
Grabo was let go because he was our 3rd line center at a cap hit of $5.5 Million.

He played his way off the team and was not ran out of town......

 

[zeke]

Q: Why did the Leafs buy out Grabovski?

A: Because they didn't want to pay a one-dimensional 50pt centre $5.5m longterm.


not complicated.

 

[Leaf Army]

Do you not realize that the (stupid) +/- stat has a lot to do with who you play against (and with)? Bozak played with two great linemates, and still only managed 2 points in five games. Grabovski played on a checking line (for some reason) against the other team's best. He was still very effective, despite the lack of point production.

Grabovski was "very effective" in the playoffs last year?!?

No.

But I do agree that Grabovski is not a good fit to be playing on a checking line. That's exactly why he was bought out.

 

[leafs in five]

^ nope it's because he didn't fit in with the team

 

[Eb]

... which is due to his large contract in terms of production, and being a onedimensional centre

 

[kennymoney]

Bozak @ 4.2 >>>>>>>>>>>>> Grabo @ 5.5...just sayin'...

Bozie is a good player. Solid in every facet of the game IMO. And honestly, we got a bit of a discount compared to what's out there. Stephen Weiss for 4.9?? Are you kidding me?? Yeah Grabo was a "possession monster" but it seemed like his favorite play - especially last year - was to skate around in circles deep in their zone until he lost it, then dog it on the back check. If you have to choose one or the other, you get WAY more value with Bozak oh his deal than Grabo on his.

 

[leafs in five]

plus Bozak is a good fit on the team, Grabo on the other hand was not a good fit.

 

[Gary Nylund]

plus Bozak is a good fit on the team, Grabo on the other hand was not a good fit.

LOL all this fit garbage. Kessel, Riemsdyk, Lupul, Clarkson, Bozak, Kadri, Holland, Raymond, Orr, Mclaren, McClement ... all these guys fit. But Grabo, nope, he's the one forward on who for some mysterious reason ... doesn't fit. What nonsense.

Just amazed how many people here are OK with buying out Grabo when we could have bought out Liles instead. I was like 99% sure they were going to buy out Liles, still having a hard time believing they did this.

 

[leafs in five]

right i was just playin. i've made many posts criticizing the Grabo buyout, the idea that the choice was Grabo or a true third line C, etc

you can count on the response being something like "Grabo was a not a fit here." not really a surprise that Nonis would share this completely speculative gut-feeling type of rationale for making decisions.

 

[Wheels]

Q: Why did the Leafs buy out Grabovski?

A: Because they didn't want to pay a one-dimensional 50pt centre $5.5m longterm.


not complicated.

Better than paying a no-dimensional 40 pt. centre $4.2 million longterm.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Better than paying a no-dimensional 40 pt. centre $4.2 million longterm.

And better than paying Liles to play for the Marlies.

 

[bunjay]

I don't know how much of it was about "fit" within the structure of the team, I think it has more to do with Carlyle's personal preference. He just didn't like MacArthur or Grabovski. That's his prerogative as a coach, but I don't think it's reasonable to think MacArthur didn't "fit" into the lineup when we ended up filling a top 9 winger spot with an inferior player who came into training camp on a tryout basis.

There's a better argument for Grabovski not "fitting" but then you go down that well-worn path of Grabo vs Bozak and his imaginary chemistry, speculation he was signed so Kessel would sign, etc etc.

Personally I think Bolland as your shutdown C and Kadri/Grabovski playing interchangeably on the top 2 lines looks better than Bolland, Kadri, and Bozak glued to Kessel. And I also think Macarthur is considerably better at left wing than Raymond.

 

[usun]

oh my... again. just let it go. Grabo didn't fit a new system and new coach in particular. He was brutally misused previous season. His legacy contract couldn't fit with his new role.

It happens, tough luck. He did much for this club to be treated with respect at least.

Yes, it's really bad he said what he said about RC, it was unprofessional, it's the only thing he did wrong for the last several years from his side. The only explanation is that he was very happy in Toronto, we wanted to play here, and he didn't expect such wedding gift from the management (it was not communicated to him in advance may be?) so he just flipped out.