2021-22 Toronto Maple Leafs General Discussion

[Bill_Berg]

What if it's bad goaltending that loses them the first series?

I think Dubas is culpable there.

Yeah I don't disagree, but I remember liking letting Andersen go and leaning on Campbell.
They couldn't afford Andersen, and it wasn't like he was saving the day in the playoffs in previous years anyway.

Mrazek was a gamble that didn't pay off. Perhaps there were better options there.

It's certainly a Dubas miss to some degree, but I don't think it's fire worthy.

 

[ZBBM]

My question to you all is: at some point you have to win in the playoffs to have "success" in this league.  When is that, for you?  How many more R1 exits are you willing to accept before you agree that it's time to pull the plug on the top managers?  Serious question, I'd be interested in what different folks think.

I've reached my limit; for those who disagree, you apparently haven't.  There's no right answer, and that's all we are disagreeing about.

I don't really think it's as simple as "number of R1 exits to be fired = x". Dubas should be fired when he's no longer demonstrating the ability to make the team better and regardless of what happens in round 1 of the playoffs this season I simply can't believe he's at that point after building a team that quite literally set new franchise records in wins and points in a season. All while among other things managing a completely unforeseen flat cap, rebuilding the defence to easily be the best we've seen in the cap era (and arguably beyond), and also finally having some draft picks/prospects in the system that are showing some promise.

So here's a question to you: is a 1st round exit an automatic firing for Dubas? There's absolutely no room for any context/debate there? I can see if they get swept in 4 games but how about if they go the distance and losing in game 7 in OT? What if we have the Lightning or Bruins on the ropes in game 6 and we get Kerry Fraser'd? What if we absolutely dominate in every single game but Vasilevskiy decides to go super-human and steals the series with a .950 save percentage?

Well, there's always room to debate but outside of getting screwed by the refs all your scenarios come down to the other team playing better.  If the argument is,  it's a parity league, or there's all this randomness inherent in the game, etc., then my response is ... yes, it is.  And the other team won under the very same conditions. 

The other team won.

At some point you can't keep accepting / conjuring up excuses. 

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

https://www.tsn.ca/NHL/video/i-was-pissed-random-video-session-helped-nylander-get-back-on-tr~2425772

"particularly the first two teams we will be seeing in the play-offs"  - William Nylander

 

[L K]

My question to you all is: at some point you have to win in the playoffs to have "success" in this league.  When is that, for you?  How many more R1 exits are you willing to accept before you agree that it's time to pull the plug on the top managers?  Serious question, I'd be interested in what different folks think.

I've reached my limit; for those who disagree, you apparently haven't.  There's no right answer, and that's all we are disagreeing about.

I don't really think it's as simple as "number of R1 exits to be fired = x". Dubas should be fired when he's no longer demonstrating the ability to make the team better and regardless of what happens in round 1 of the playoffs this season I simply can't believe he's at that point after building a team that quite literally set new franchise records in wins and points in a season. All while among other things managing a completely unforeseen flat cap, rebuilding the defence to easily be the best we've seen in the cap era (and arguably beyond), and also finally having some draft picks/prospects in the system that are showing some promise.

So here's a question to you: is a 1st round exit an automatic firing for Dubas? There's absolutely no room for any context/debate there? I can see if they get swept in 4 games but how about if they go the distance and losing in game 7 in OT? What if we have the Lightning or Bruins on the ropes in game 6 and we get Kerry Fraser'd? What if we absolutely dominate in every single game but Vasilevskiy decides to go super-human and steals the series with a .950 save percentage?

I think my concern if the Leafs get Vasilevskiy'd with our team not being able to score is that is in and of itself a problem.  We built a top heavy team (and then Dubas has done an amazing job building up value depth) but if our top heavy team gets shut down again, I think that's a huge problem.  It's a two-way street on the other team still being able to outplay Toronto but I think it's a problem if our stars get outplayed three years in a row.

 

[Redleaf]

My question to you all is: at some point you have to win in the playoffs to have "success" in this league.  When is that, for you?  How many more R1 exits are you willing to accept before you agree that it's time to pull the plug on the top managers?  Serious question, I'd be interested in what different folks think.

I've reached my limit; for those who disagree, you apparently haven't.  There's no right answer, and that's all we are disagreeing about.

I don't really think it's as simple as "number of R1 exits to be fired = x". Dubas should be fired when he's no longer demonstrating the ability to make the team better and regardless of what happens in round 1 of the playoffs this season I simply can't believe he's at that point after building a team that quite literally set new franchise records in wins and points in a season. All while among other things managing a completely unforeseen flat cap, rebuilding the defence to easily be the best we've seen in the cap era (and arguably beyond), and also finally having some draft picks/prospects in the system that are showing some promise.

So here's a question to you: is a 1st round exit an automatic firing for Dubas? There's absolutely no room for any context/debate there? I can see if they get swept in 4 games but how about if they go the distance and losing in game 7 in OT? What if we have the Lightning or Bruins on the ropes in game 6 and we get Kerry Fraser'd? What if we absolutely dominate in every single game but Vasilevskiy decides to go super-human and steals the series with a .950 save percentage?

I think my concern if the Leafs get Vasilevskiy'd with our team not being able to score is that is in and of itself a problem.  We built a top heavy team (and then Dubas has done an amazing job building up value depth) but if our top heavy team gets shut down again, I think that's a huge problem.  It's a two-way street on the other team still being able to outplay Toronto but I think it's a problem if our stars get outplayed three years in a row.

If they get out hustled and lose then yeah. You have a problem. You might say they got out hustled by the blue jackets and the Canadians in the last two playoffs but I truly think (and sincerely hope) they've improved upon that since then. Either way, I don't see you getting rid of Dubas if that turns out to be the case again. Maybe Keefe ? Dubas has improved this team every year and all they need to do is get over the playoff hump to prove it transcends to the playoffs. Thats clearly Keefe's job.

When you improve every year and keep improving every year after, eventually you'll get past the first round and make a splash. Unless the organization makes an emotional decision, at which point they can Dubas and were back to complete uncertainty as to which track and direction this team takes.

 

[princedpw]

https://www.tsn.ca/NHL/video/i-was-pissed-random-video-session-helped-nylander-get-back-on-tr~2425772

Cool

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I think my concern if the Leafs get Vasilevskiy'd with our team not being able to score is that is in and of itself a problem.  We built a top heavy team (and then Dubas has done an amazing job building up value depth) but if our top heavy team gets shut down again, I think that's a huge problem.  It's a two-way street on the other team still being able to outplay Toronto but I think it's a problem if our stars get outplayed three years in a row.

I mean maybe it's just me but I think there's a difference between getting Vasilevskiy'd/goalie'd and our stars being shut down/outplayed. Last year for instance I think Matthews/Marner got shut down by the Danault & Weber & co more so than Price standing on his head and stealing the show. My very hypothetical question was about what happens if Matthews and Marner are playing elite hockey but Vasilevskiy just decides to go on a 2 week hot streak where he stops anything and everything. I think that would be a very different situation to what happened against Montreal.

Now, if we do encounter another playoff run where the opposing team is able to basically smother Matthews and Marner like Montreal did and the consensus decision is that's why we lost I don't think that's a problem as easily solved as just firing the GM. Is it the GMs fault that a top-2 centre/player and top-5 winger on the planet were unable to elevate their game in the playoffs? How does a GM fix that?

This is maybe my biggest reason for why I don't necessarily think a 1st round exit should fall at the feet of Dubas: my general belief around playoff success is that this team is quite simply only going to go as far as Matthews and Marner take them. The best thing a GM can do for this team is put a lot of really good players and coaching staff around those two and that's something that I think Dubas has absolutely excelled at. Especially this season.

 

[princedpw]

Yes, I think it does.  You can't exit in the first round 5, 6, 7 times in a row or whatever it's been and say to yourself, OK, let's hope for the best with the same core (including the management team) next year.  I mean, you could, but it wouldn't be tolerated in any other business.

I know everybody is going to just point at the big 3/4 and say that's the "core" but has the team not changed drastically throughout these long stretches of first round exits? We've seen pretty controversial GM and head coach changes, a starting goalie change, a complete overhaul of the defence, we've seen key forwards in Kadri/JVR/Bozak/Hyman and to a lesser extent Kapanen/Johnsson/Brown get moved/let go. The idea that we're just throwing out the exact same team year in and year out and wondering why it keeps losing is pretty nuts. Let's even just lessen the scope the argument by looking at the Dubas-era team: 6 players remain on the roster of the team that lost game 7 to the Bruins in his first season as GM.

With all due respect ? seriously ? my response is, you are kind of making my point.  Results are what count.  And if you don't get them, in any enterprise, changes get made.  And if you've had the same management team presiding over several failures in a row after changing personnel/tactics again and again, well ... that's where you look to make changes.

Look, I like Shanny and Dubas.  I would love to see the team have some success in the playoffs and keep them at the helm because I like them as people and think they have a lot of integrity.  But if the team loses again in R1, one or both should be replaced.  That's the hard reality in a results-based business.

See, I feel that really good management looks at what each employee can control and hires or fires based on how that employee has managed the things they can control.  You don?t fire a guy in April 2020 because your stock tanked due to Covid.  You don?t fire people for things they can?t control.  The reason is that doing so does not help a company or team do better in the future.  And that?s our goal ? we want to do better in the future. Firing talent out of anger you didn?t win in the past doesn?t improve your odds in the future.

Everyone acknowledges that there is a huge amount of luck in any hockey game.  The leafs have lost for several reasons, but one of them is most certainly just not getting the bounces in game 7s (as well as top players always being out due to various things way beyond GM control or foresight).  Because even teams that are playing bad sometimes get bounces and win when they don?t deserve to. Leafs definitely haven?t been on the good side of that.

 

[princedpw]

Yes, I think it does.  You can't exit in the first round 5, 6, 7 times in a row or whatever it's been and say to yourself, OK, let's hope for the best with the same core (including the management team) next year.  I mean, you could, but it wouldn't be tolerated in any other business.

I know everybody is going to just point at the big 3/4 and say that's the "core" but has the team not changed drastically throughout these long stretches of first round exits? We've seen pretty controversial GM and head coach changes, a starting goalie change, a complete overhaul of the defence, we've seen key forwards in Kadri/JVR/Bozak/Hyman and to a lesser extent Kapanen/Johnsson/Brown get moved/let go. The idea that we're just throwing out the exact same team year in and year out and wondering why it keeps losing is pretty nuts. Let's even just lessen the scope the argument by looking at the Dubas-era team: 6 players remain on the roster of the team that lost game 7 to the Bruins in his first season as GM.

With all due respect ? seriously ? my response is, you are kind of making my point.  Results are what count.  And if you don't get them, in any enterprise, changes get made.  And if you've had the same management team presiding over several failures in a row after changing personnel/tactics again and again, well ... that's where you look to make changes.

Look, I like Shanny and Dubas.  I would love to see the team have some success in the playoffs and keep them at the helm because I like them as people and think they have a lot of integrity.  But if the team loses again in R1, one or both should be replaced.  That's the hard reality in a results-based business.

See, I feel that really good management looks at what each employee can control and hires or fires based on how that employee has managed the things they can control.  You don?t fire a guy in April 2020 because your stock tanked due to Covid.  You don?t fire people for things they can?t control.  The reason is that doing so does not help a company or team do better in the future.  And that?s our goal ? we want to do better in the future. Firing talent out of anger you didn?t win in the past doesn?t improve your odds in the future.

Everyone acknowledges that there is a huge amount of luck in any hockey game.  The leafs have lost for several reasons, but one of them is most certainly just not getting the bounces in game 7s (as well as top players always being out due to various things way beyond GM control or foresight).  Because even teams that are playing bad sometimes get bounces and win when they don?t deserve to. Leafs definitely haven?t been on the good side of that.

The gutsy call in my opinion would be to fire Dubas now, before the playoffs. I wouldn?t let the luck involved in a short playoff series decide my GM. (Which is what tons of other folks are saying. They?d analyze the circumstances.)

But the argument perhaps actually hinges on how much control you feel a GM really has in these situations.  I?m a bit skeptical it is all that much in a short playoff series in hockey.  But perhaps you think it is lots?.

 

[Bullfrog]

The most lawyerly thing I can say is: "it depends." All decisions should be based on the totality of circumstances. When you get to the elite level, any team can beat any team. There are so many factors and complexities involved. A round one exit, on its own, doesn't mean too much. It's frustrating, for sure, but it really depends on why.

 

[Joe S.]

Ok this has been bugging me for a while, and this is probably the wrong audience to share this with, but I?m tired of these first round exit jokes and the sins of past iterations of the jays. In my mind, the clock started ticking last season, and I truly believe you have to look at each season in context.

2005-2012: that?s just pathetic that they missed the playoffs this many years in a row. Incompetent management for the most part. Deserves mockery (except for those 2 Maurice years. Those team were better than they get credit for).

2012-13: lose in 7 games to Boston, the infamous 4-1 game. Ok so yes, that game was disappointing but that bruins team was miles ahead of the leafs and the leafs really had no business even being in the playoffs. This was a lockout shortened season and I?m convinced over 82 games the leafs would not have made the playoffs. Literally no connection to the current leafs. Also worth noting that the bruins went to the finals this season.

2013-16: incompetence + a rebuild

2016-17: Matthews first season. Leafs surprisingly make the playoffs. Contention starts early. They play the 118 point capitals in the first round. No one expects the leafs to get out of the first round. The leafs play a fantastic series. 6 1 goal games, 5 go to OT. Washington makes it to the ECF. By all accounts this was a step forward and an impressive series.

2017-2018: disappointing first round loss in 7 games to the bruins. Did they choke? Maybe.

2018-19: another disappointing loss in 7 to the bruins, who went on to the finals. Again a disappointment.

2019-20: ok this is where things get weird. Babcock fired. Team in disarray. Covid. Season stopped. Bubble. Lose in 5 games to the blue jackets. Sucks, but I don?t think anyone expected anything from this team that season. Had it gone 82 there?s a chance they don?t even make the playoffs.

2020-21: we all know what happened. I won?t mince words, this is the most embarrassing first round playoff loss in franchise history. And quite frankly every team that lost to the habs should be embarrassed of themselves. However, I will say that the leafs were missing Tavares and Mathews was clearly injured. But they were deep enough to overcome this and didn?t.

So what?s my point? Well that to me the clock on the Matthews/Marner era really starting ticking last season, it?s kind of unfortunate/pleasant surprise that the rebuild ended so quickly. Other than last season, you can?t convince me that the leafs were the superior team in any of those series.

I hope some if you found my ramblings interesting.

 

[herman]

Just adding to the two Bruins series losses: the Leafs got jobbed by officiating, leading to Kadri seeing red mist and DoPS dropping the hammer for funsies. Leafs still push them to the brink until Andersen decides he just can?t possibly stop anything anymore.

 

[L K]

https://twitter.com/NHLPlayerSafety/status/1517543459875401729

That should have been a suspension IMO.

 

[herman]

https://twitter.com/NHLPlayerSafety/status/1517543459875401729

That should have been a suspension IMO.

Clifford also was fined $2500 for the high stick to helmetless Corey Perry.

 

[Guilt Trip]

https://twitter.com/NHLPlayerSafety/status/1517543459875401729

That should have been a suspension IMO.

What Segachev's punch to the back of Bunting's head? Maybe. The Simmonds hit? No.
https://twitter.com/twistedleafs/status/1517305282484965377

No fine for the Kucherov kick on Marner...nobody convincing Marner it wasn't on purpose.
https://twitter.com/timandfriends/status/1517331044759916546

 

[Frank E]

https://twitter.com/mirtle/status/1517319644457181184

 

[L K]

Just so we are clear Simmonds - fined.  Clifford - fined.

Sergachev with a punch that is banned in professional fighting let alone hockey - nothing
Foote elbowing Kerfoot - nothing
Kucherov swinging his skate at Marner's knee - nothing

I don't think we are going to like the officiating against Tampa in the psotseason any more than against Boston.

 

[Joe S.]

I dislike Kypreos so much. Sorry just turned in the radio thinking I missed his show and he?s on. God he sucks.

 

[Guilt Trip]

I dislike Kypreos so much. Sorry just turned in the radio thinking I missed his show and he?s on. God he sucks.

Too many hits to the head for that clown.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

https://twitter.com/dalter/status/1518940908808515590
https://twitter.com/dalter/status/1518942433740005380