Author Topic: Armchair GM 2018-2019  (Read 50549 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Frank E

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 4896
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #150 on: April 30, 2018, 11:40:20 AM »
As for Kadri leaving, not happening unless they sign another centre.

Which is fine enough to say but then if they don't add another C then we're back to the reality of them not having much in the way of assets to move for a significant upgrade on D that wouldn't ultimately be zero-sum. And even if they do add another C Kadri is still a valuable piece they wouldn't have to move.

So, again, being as mismanaged as they were this year will put them in a lousy situation this offseason that was largely avoidable.

If I could just jump in here, the Leafs are also short a 2nd round pick for Plec.

And I think it was pretty universal around here that doing that made no sense if they didn't address the D-man problem...and they didn't end up addressing the d-man problem.

Even at the trade deadline, most pundits had them as underdogs against either TB or Boston.  Understanding where the weaknesses were, they should have addressed those if they really wanted to take a run.  Keeping JVR and the other expiring contracts was only a smart option if they addressed those weaknesses. Instead, they decided to burn a high pick on a depth centreman, keep all the UFA contracts, and not address their biggest need.

I said it at the time, the deadline activity of the Leafs was mismanaged, and now they've got to act from a position of less-strength than they would have had if they'd done what most of us wanted done.  You either go for it, or you don't, but the Leafs tried to go down the middle, and the result is pretty much what I thought it would be.

Now the Leafs are left with UFA's walking for nothing, and down a 2nd round pick, and have the same weaknesses to address, plus the holes to fill of the departing UFAs.

I can't imagine this result is what was "planned" for, but it's the result that first came to mind to me when the deadline buzzer went at 3pm on Feb 26th.

Offline WhatIfGodWasALeaf

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 6972
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #151 on: April 30, 2018, 11:54:18 AM »
Lou Gone per @LeafsPR

TMLfans.ca

Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #151 on: April 30, 2018, 11:54:18 AM »

Offline Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 19371
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #152 on: April 30, 2018, 12:25:15 PM »
The failure to trade JVR is a sign that Shanahan isn't as fully committed to the long-term plan as he says he is publicly.  Three years ago it was, "there will be pain."  And there was.  But what they should have kept emphasizing is, "there must be patience."  That mantra got reduced to lip service after we hit the AM34 jackpot.

It depends on what the front office considers long term value, and I think it's pretty clear they highly value playoff experience (even when, and maybe especially when, you get burned). Through their lens, it can be argued they were looking short-term on this season, but long-term for the development of their core.

They should have traded JvR two seasons ago but the injury during the tank drive derailed that opportunity and then nothing really landed in offseasons thereafter. After a certain cut-off, there was more value in keeping JvR/Bozak to 'insulate' (haha) the kids.

If this is the reality then all I can say is that I hope the Dubas Eraź means the end of this kind of Fancy Dan psychologizing.

Offline Nik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 26946
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #153 on: April 30, 2018, 01:48:10 PM »
I mean, if JVR torched the Bruins and/or was an integral piece of a long playoff run would it still be considered a mismanagement? I don't know, I can certainly understand wanting to use JVR as a deadline asset

For the record, they had a long time to trade JVR. I don't think the criticism here is just "they didn't trade him at the deadline" but rather that they never traded him despite having two whole years where it would have made sense to.

to ultimately improve the defense but that assumes a lot of things about a) what the return specifically is for JVR

Not really. Unless you're going to make the argument that for some reason the return on JVR would have been, effectively, the lowest return in history for a 30 goal scorer as opposed a reasonable median return then it's still better than nothing.

, and b) what defender is available and at what cost? Is it not possible that a deal for a significant d upgrade just wasn't available/feasible?

At the deadline? Sure. But, again, A) I'm not saying the only time they should have dealt him was at the deadline and B) I'm not saying they needed to make a direct "JVR for a defenseman" trade. They could trade JVR for picks/prospects and then hang onto those valuable picks/prospects until a suitable defenseman became available. There wasn't a limited window of time here.

And then you add in the fact that you'd be shipping out JVR to strengthen a potential opponent/rival.

And what? If, say, JVR had been dealt to a Western conference team then the downside is...that somehow people would regret it if the team that was already a longshot to make it out of the first round somehow made it to the Stanley Cup finals and just happened to play the team they traded him to? Or to a Metro team they made it to the ECF against?

I'm pretty critical of the Leafs management here but I think presenting that as a serious issue that they considered and let influence their "Should we get anything for JVR" decision makes them look worse than anything i'm accusing them of.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

Offline A Weekend at Bernier's

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1106
  • Gender: Male
  • TMLfans Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #154 on: April 30, 2018, 02:38:14 PM »
Wondering if OEL might be a reasonable option for the Leafs to pursue this summer.  Seems to tick a lot of boxes, can likely fill 1'st pairing, eats minutes, relatively young (27 in July), and acquisition cost might not be the over-the-moon variety.  I would think a deal would revolve around a non-16/29/34 piece sprinkled liberally with draft picks and non-Liljegren Marlies.

Offline Nik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 26946
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #155 on: April 30, 2018, 02:47:55 PM »
Wondering if OEL might be a reasonable option for the Leafs to pursue this summer.  Seems to tick a lot of boxes, can likely fill 1'st pairing, eats minutes, relatively young (27 in July), and acquisition cost might not be the over-the-moon variety.  I would think a deal would revolve around a non-16/29/34 piece sprinkled liberally with draft picks and non-Liljegren Marlies.

He's a LHD so unless Babcock has a big change of heart about these things his being a 1st pairing guy would depend on him being better than Rielly and Gardiner which might be true but doesn't seem like a sure thing.

Also, I think if he could be had for that sort of return I don't think he'd still be in Arizona. Just about everything I'd read when sporadic rumours of his availability came up was that the Coyotes wanted a pretty heavy price for him.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

Offline A Weekend at Bernier's

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1106
  • Gender: Male
  • TMLfans Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #156 on: April 30, 2018, 02:56:06 PM »
Wondering if OEL might be a reasonable option for the Leafs to pursue this summer.  Seems to tick a lot of boxes, can likely fill 1'st pairing, eats minutes, relatively young (27 in July), and acquisition cost might not be the over-the-moon variety.  I would think a deal would revolve around a non-16/29/34 piece sprinkled liberally with draft picks and non-Liljegren Marlies.

He's a LHD so unless Babcock has a big change of heart about these things his being a 1st pairing guy would depend on him being better than Rielly and Gardiner which might be true but doesn't seem like a sure thing.

Also, I think if he could be had for that sort of return I don't think he'd still be in Arizona. Just about everything I'd read when sporadic rumours of his availability came up was that the Coyotes wanted a pretty heavy price for him.

Thanks, Nik.  Your assessment of the Leafs mishandling of their pending UFAs, to me, is bang on and relevant here.  And while I suppose there is somewhat of an argument to be made in the Leafs' case - ie. playoff run and all - the same can't be said for the current incarnation of the Coyotes.  My limited experience of watching OEL notwithstanding, I do like the player and left-handed shot aside I think would fit in just about perfectly.

Offline Guilt Trip

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 5085
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #157 on: April 30, 2018, 03:02:28 PM »
Wondering if OEL might be a reasonable option for the Leafs to pursue this summer.  Seems to tick a lot of boxes, can likely fill 1'st pairing, eats minutes, relatively young (27 in July), and acquisition cost might not be the over-the-moon variety.  I would think a deal would revolve around a non-16/29/34 piece sprinkled liberally with draft picks and non-Liljegren Marlies.

He's a LHD so unless Babcock has a big change of heart about these things his being a 1st pairing guy would depend on him being better than Rielly and Gardiner which might be true but doesn't seem like a sure thing.

Also, I think if he could be had for that sort of return I don't think he'd still be in Arizona. Just about everything I'd read when sporadic rumours of his availability came up was that the Coyotes wanted a pretty heavy price for him.
Hainsey is a left shot and was our top RD this season....And yeah it wasn't ideal being a lefty but it did force Babs to use him there. Gord Miller, on Leafs Lunch, said a similar thing today regarding his favourites like Komarov, Polak. The GM can somewhat dictate who he wants to play by taking away his options by removing the favs from the team.

Offline Nik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 26946
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #158 on: April 30, 2018, 03:08:20 PM »

Fair point re: Hainsey but the way I recall it was that he was fairly used to playing his offside. I'm sure you could acquire any LHD and ask them to do that but I'm not sure all of them would be equally proficient there.

Also, I think you'd agree, that whoever eventually is the GM making those decisions here it would be a pretty bold move to force that sort of thing on Babcock as one of their opening gambits.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

Offline Guilt Trip

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 5085
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #159 on: April 30, 2018, 03:32:34 PM »

Fair point re: Hainsey but the way I recall it was that he was fairly used to playing his offside. I'm sure you could acquire any LHD and ask them to do that but I'm not sure all of them would be equally proficient there.

Also, I think you'd agree, that whoever eventually is the GM making those decisions here it would be a pretty bold move to force that sort of thing on Babcock as one of their opening gambits.
Definitely agree it would be bold but ultimately it has to be his choice. Would make for some interesting board meetings tho! I do get what Miller was saying tho. I think it's easier now that some of Babs' favs are UFAs. If Dubas doesn't like Leo, he simply doesn't bring him back. I think the best thing is Dubas knows the Marlies inside and out and probably the ECHL guys to, as he's been watching them all year.

Offline Andy

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1681
  • TMLfans Newbie
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #160 on: April 30, 2018, 06:09:48 PM »
I mean, if JVR torched the Bruins and/or was an integral piece of a long playoff run would it still be considered a mismanagement? I don't know, I can certainly understand wanting to use JVR as a deadline asset

For the record, they had a long time to trade JVR. I don't think the criticism here is just "they didn't trade him at the deadline" but rather that they never traded him despite having two whole years where it would have made sense to.

to ultimately improve the defense but that assumes a lot of things about a) what the return specifically is for JVR

Not really. Unless you're going to make the argument that for some reason the return on JVR would have been, effectively, the lowest return in history for a 30 goal scorer as opposed a reasonable median return then it's still better than nothing.

, and b) what defender is available and at what cost? Is it not possible that a deal for a significant d upgrade just wasn't available/feasible?

At the deadline? Sure. But, again, A) I'm not saying the only time they should have dealt him was at the deadline and B) I'm not saying they needed to make a direct "JVR for a defenseman" trade. They could trade JVR for picks/prospects and then hang onto those valuable picks/prospects until a suitable defenseman became available. There wasn't a limited window of time here.

And then you add in the fact that you'd be shipping out JVR to strengthen a potential opponent/rival.

And what? If, say, JVR had been dealt to a Western conference team then the downside is...that somehow people would regret it if the team that was already a longshot to make it out of the first round somehow made it to the Stanley Cup finals and just happened to play the team they traded him to? Or to a Metro team they made it to the ECF against?

I'm pretty critical of the Leafs management here but I think presenting that as a serious issue that they considered and let influence their "Should we get anything for JVR" decision makes them look worse than anything i'm accusing them of.

Sorry about this large post but I actually don't know how to break up the quotes and reply to them individually  :-\

Just to clarify, I was not only in the 'move JVR this deadline' camp but also in the 'move him two years ago' one. Maybe it's just when I hear the use of mismanagement I begin to think of the Komisarek, Liles, Lupul, Phaneuf and Clarkson deals of recent years, and the crazy amount of bungling the years preceding those. Anyway I guess until these misfires or missed opportunities begin to pile up, I'm a bit wary of throwing out too much criticism on a situation that though ultimately mishandled, wasn't too egregious imo. It's not like they missed they playoffs by a long shot and still kept the Sedins  :-X

Online herman

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 19546
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #161 on: April 30, 2018, 06:32:30 PM »
You can break up the quote however you want using the quote tags
#BeBlessed

Offline Nik

  • Sittler Status
  • ******
  • Posts: 26946
  • All posts approved by CCP
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #162 on: April 30, 2018, 07:27:45 PM »
Just to clarify, I was not only in the 'move JVR this deadline' camp but also in the 'move him two years ago' one. Maybe it's just when I hear the use of mismanagement I begin to think of the Komisarek, Liles, Lupul, Phaneuf and Clarkson deals of recent years, and the crazy amount of bungling the years preceding those.

There's no right or wrong, really, with how one might individually categorize how the team's being run but personally I feel ok with saying they weren't very well run last year while leaving the possibility open that they may be well run again in the future. I don't think we need to lock ourselves into binaries of good or bad management. Like I said, I think last year the team got ahead of itself and thought they could start skipping important steps on the road to competing seriously. Hopefully getting knocked out of the first round(and certain people not being there anymore) will take the team back to more of the smart/creative thinking we've seen in the past.

Anyway I guess until these misfires or missed opportunities begin to pile up, I'm a bit wary of throwing out too much criticism on a situation that though ultimately mishandled, wasn't too egregious imo. It's not like they missed they playoffs by a long shot and still kept the Sedins  :-X

I very much understand looking at what a reasonable return might have been for JVR, say a mid-late 1st and prospect, and saying that not having either of those things isn't a catastrophe but I do think that's a little bit like not really caring about your credit card bill until payment's due.

The reason I brought it up in this thread is that with a few looming questions for the team in terms of improvement from where they are to where they want to be and internal options looking limited to say the least the Leafs are in sort of a tricky position. In looking at how to add a top tier D or improvements up the middle we're not saying "Look at all of these surplus assets from dealing pending UFA's" but rather "Maybe they'd take Kadri and some draft picks".

It's only when some of those moves actually get made(or not) and we see the resulting holes on the roster they leave that the real opportunity cost of not moving JVR and his pals will really become apparent.
Nothing can have value without being an object of utility
-Karl Marx

Offline mr grieves

  • Veteran
  • ****
  • Posts: 1764
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #163 on: May 01, 2018, 02:59:23 AM »
Wondering if OEL might be a reasonable option for the Leafs to pursue this summer.  Seems to tick a lot of boxes, can likely fill 1'st pairing, eats minutes, relatively young (27 in July), and acquisition cost might not be the over-the-moon variety.  I would think a deal would revolve around a non-16/29/34 piece sprinkled liberally with draft picks and non-Liljegren Marlies.

He's a LHD so unless Babcock has a big change of heart about these things his being a 1st pairing guy would depend on him being better than Rielly and Gardiner which might be true but doesn't seem like a sure thing.

Also, I think if he could be had for that sort of return I don't think he'd still be in Arizona. Just about everything I'd read when sporadic rumours of his availability came up was that the Coyotes wanted a pretty heavy price for him.

I hope GM Dubas starts every Babcock meeting with an hour long presentation from the stat nerd department that demonstrates Rielly or Dermott on his 'wrong' side better than any of Zaitsev, Hainsey, Polak, or whatever other plug the coach has fall in love with next year.

Offline Guilt Trip

  • All Star
  • *****
  • Posts: 5085
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair GM 2018-2019
« Reply #164 on: May 01, 2018, 11:43:44 AM »
Wondering if OEL might be a reasonable option for the Leafs to pursue this summer.  Seems to tick a lot of boxes, can likely fill 1'st pairing, eats minutes, relatively young (27 in July), and acquisition cost might not be the over-the-moon variety.  I would think a deal would revolve around a non-16/29/34 piece sprinkled liberally with draft picks and non-Liljegren Marlies.

He's a LHD so unless Babcock has a big change of heart about these things his being a 1st pairing guy would depend on him being better than Rielly and Gardiner which might be true but doesn't seem like a sure thing.

Also, I think if he could be had for that sort of return I don't think he'd still be in Arizona. Just about everything I'd read when sporadic rumours of his availability came up was that the Coyotes wanted a pretty heavy price for him.

I hope GM Dubas starts every Babcock meeting with an hour long presentation from the stat nerd department that demonstrates Rielly or Dermott on his 'wrong' side better than any of Zaitsev, Hainsey, Polak, or whatever other plug the coach has fall in love with next year.
Dubas can do this by simply not signing the plug in the first place.