Confirmed with Link: Maple Leafs & AGM Mark Hunter Part Ways, Effective Immediately

[93LEAFS]

I h

I hope it’s a false leak, because why would Dubas, in one of his first major moves, just scrap Hunter’s draft rankings completely? It sounds like something Brian Burke or some d-bag like that would do, not a guy who was apprenticing under Lou Lamoriello

It's pretty clearly a puff piece designed to make someone look favorable. I also don't think its false, because what happens if we draft Ryan McLeod. If it was just the statement that Dubas and Hunter disagreed after Dubas altered draft strategy is one thing, but to link specific names and how the article is written makes me highly skeptical.

 

[Leafs at Knight]

Just because what is convenient for you as a viewer doesn't mean its the best option for the organization. We've seen guys take steps forward, such as Woll in his 2 years so far at BC.

What does it matter if guys like Bracco, Korostolev and Timashov are exciting to watch at the OHL level if they fizzle out in the pro-ranks?

I don't know what to make of Korshkov, I don't think he's a great pick, but I'll wait until I see him on NA ice to completely right it off. Obviously, I would prefer Girard or Debrincat in retrospect, but so would a bunch of teams that drafted after 10th overall. Grundstrom looks like a solid pick. He isn't Jesper Bratt in the 6th, but he looks to be a solid player, with a solid chance of being an NHLer. I don't care where a guy plays or what his passport says as long as he can play. I've said this about the Montreal coaching and GM situation before, if the Leafs GM and Coach only spoke Tagalog but were the best possible available I'd openly embrace it.

The 2015 draft saw us taking skull over everything else, and it looks like it'll be our best draft in awhile. The next 2 drafts saw us taking a lot of over agers and giant defenceman in hopes of them being late bloomers but it looks like that won't happen. It's no secret that those 2015 picks played well in junior and are playing well in pro. Bracco and Timashov have made it further than our big dman and over agers have, except Brooks who was a skilled junior player anyhow. Skill should be a priority,, and I'm excited for Dubas' draft.

 

[93LEAFS]

The 2015 draft saw us taking skull over everything else, and it looks like it'll be our best draft in awhile. The next 2 drafts saw us taking a lot of over agers and giant defenceman in hopes of them being late bloomers but it looks like that won't happen. It's no secret that those 2015 picks played well in junior and are playing well in pro. Bracco and Timashov have made it further than our big dman and over agers have, except Brooks who was a skilled junior player anyhow. Skill should be a priority,, and I'm excited for Dubas' draft.

It doesn't matter how far they make it unless its to the NHL where they provide value and/or are traded for something of value previously.

Currently, Grundstrom looks to have a better shot of being an NHLer than either Bracco or Timashov. Korshkov odds are probably similar. You seem to be continually ignoring these two guys.

 

[Sypher04]

Idk Dermott and grundstrom both look good but there's a legit argument to be made about how involved in the scouting of grundstrom Hunter would have even been.

I don't think just because he's head scout that we can just attribute all good (and bad) picks to him. Theres an entire staff that goes into these choices.

Beyond that... it's pretty widely accepted that Dubas and Hunter, as co-interim GMs both had significant say in our 2015 draft

 

[Gary Nylund]

Idk Dermott and grundstrom both look good but there's a legit argument to be made about how involved in the scouting of grundstrom Hunter would have even been.

I don't think just because he's head scout that we can just attribute all good (and bad) picks to him. Theres an entire staff that goes into these choices.

Beyond that... it's pretty widely accepted that Dubas and Hunter, as co-interim GMs both had significant say in our 2015 draft

Yup.

 

[Leafs at Knight]

It doesn't matter how far they make it unless its to the NHL where they provide value and/or are traded for something of value previously.

Currently, Grundstrom looks to have a better shot of being an NHLer than either Bracco or Timashov. Korshkov odds are probably similar. You seem to be continually ignoring these two guys.

I think Bracco will make the NHL, and I wouldn't say Korshkov has a good of a chance as Grundstrom, Grundstrom has a better year and quickly adapted to NA ice. Hunter probably had some say in Grundstrom but it's hard to not attribute any Swedish drafters to Bergman. There's also Dermott from the 2015 draft which was a skilled 2 way defender over the giant defenders we drafted in the following year.

 

[thewave]

Idk Dermott and grundstrom both look good but there's a legit argument to be made about how involved in the scouting of grundstrom Hunter would have even been.

I don't think just because he's head scout that we can just attribute all good (and bad) picks to him. Theres an entire staff that goes into these choices.

Beyond that... it's pretty widely accepted that Dubas and Hunter, as co-interim GMs both had significant say in our 2015 draft

Everyone knows Lou is a control freak. Look at the 15 draft compared to 16/17. Huge difference.

 

[93LEAFS]

I think Bracco will make the NHL, and I wouldn't say Korshkov has a good of a chance as Grundstrom, Grundstrom has a better year and quickly adapted to NA ice. Hunter probably had some say in Grundstrom but it's hard to not attribute any Swedish drafters to Bergman. There's also Dermott from the 2015 draft which was a skilled 2 way defender over the giant defenders we drafted in the following year.

I think Korshkov has as good a shot as Bracco and Timashov. I think Grundstrom has a better chance than them all.

Yes, Bergmann deserves credit for any Swedish player we draft, but since we don't exclusively draft off a Swedish list and tell Bergman he gets this pick, we have to create a combined list with the input of everyone, and Mark Hunter oversees the creation of that list and balanced opinion. So, while he may not be the main guy on that pick, at the end of the day it was his call. Every single pick we make is a collaberative effort, except maybe picks in the very late rounds, where we run out of names of the board (NHL teams typically don't have more than 100 players on their draft list), so a scout may argue for a guy who we didn't get enough viewings of (typically teams want 20 reports over a 2 to 3 year time period on a prospect to even put him in the discussion for the board) and you'll take that kid. The kid we drafted out of SAC in the 7th seemed like that type of pick.

 

[diceman934]

But what you are missing from the replies is that will and desire will show up in the analytics.
Analytics are a support tool.
A player can have all the will and desire, leaves it all on the ice every shift, and still be a no good player.
Analytics support the eyes. End of statement.

Lol Will and Desire is not measurable as there is no way to adjust based in usage and QOC or QOTeam mate. You simply can not measure compete but you can sure see it. It does not show up in the collected data as there is no way to dissect the data and point to stats and say that is will and desire.

 

[diceman934]

So your issue has actually nothing to do with how the analytics perform their purpose? You just think it lacks a different stat measuring something in particular?

What I am saying is data is a tool that if used in conjunction with other pieces of information it has some worth. Not everything is measurable.

 

[saltming]

Lol Will and Desire is not measurable as there is no way to adjust based in usage and QOC or QOTeam mate. You simply can not measure compete but you can sure see it. It does not show up in the collected data as there is no way to dissect the data and point to stats and say that is will and desire.

Nobody is saying will and desire are measured. What they are saying if said player has will and desire AND are good hockey players their numbers will show that.
Nobody believes you can look at a spread sheet and find that out.

 

[saltming]

What I am saying is data is a tool that if used in conjunction with other pieces of information it has some worth. Not everything is measurable.

I believe that's what's been said the whole time.

 

[diceman934]

Nobody is saying will and desire are measured. What they are saying if said player has will and desire AND are good hockey players their numbers will show that.
Nobody believes you can look at a spread sheet and find that out.

That simply is not true as like all data there are many variables that need context to deseminate a correct view point. And not all players will see there number reflect there will and effort as this is not tennis but a team sport and your data is highly affected by your team and your opponents.

All anyone has to do is have been watching Las Vegas this year and particularly in the playoffs as they are simply winning by out working and executing their systems better then their opponents. They are filled with players who are out competing their opponents as they are always the second most skilled team in the playoffs but the will and effort is winning over skill as that has always been true but this is the first time it has been clearly visible for all to see.

 

[diceman934]

I believe that's what's been said the whole time.

No that is not what has been said the whole time.

 

[Menzinger]

Agree to disagree and leave it at that. Not interested in debating a point based on things I'm not comfortable taking about on here.

It’s not really an agree or disagree situation though is it, Because that would imply it’s a matter of opinion. He either does or he doesn’t. And so far there doesn’t seem to be any credible evidence that he does.

 

[saltming]

That simply is not true as like all data there are many variables that need context to deseminate a correct view point. And not all players will see there number reflect there will and effort as this is not tennis but a team sport and your data is highly affected by your team and your opponents.

All anyone has to do is have been watching Las Vegas this year and particularly in the playoffs as they are simply winning by out working and executing their systems better then their opponents. They are filled with players who are out competing their opponents as they are always the second most skilled team in the playoffs but the will and effort is winning over skill as that has always been true but this is the first time it has been clearly visible for all to see.

I would say they have enough skill to balance their will but I agree you need both in spades to win.
My point is I think that's what @Nithoniniel was saying. I think you're both agreeing.
I could be wrong there

 

[saltming]

No that is not what has been said the whole time.

Then my apologies. But that was the way I read their posts

 

[The CyNick]

It’s not really an agree or disagree situation though is it, Because that would imply it’s a matter of opinion. He either does or he doesn’t. And so far there doesn’t seem to be any credible evidence that he does.

Sure, fair enough. If you think his work is worth the money, then I don't judge you. Everyone makes their own judgment based on what they see or hear. We all have our own experiences and make our judgments accordingly.

 

[Nithoniniel]

What I am saying is data is a tool that if used in conjunction with other pieces of information it has some worth. Not everything is measurable.

No argument here. Don't really know anyone who disagree with that assessment though.

 

[Michel Beauchamp]

Agree to disagree and leave it at that. Not interested in debating a point based on things I'm not comfortable taking about on here.

OOOH !

How mysterious !

I know things !

 

[HoweHullOrr]

To put it in perspective, here are the players after Hunter's highest pick not to be in the NHL, who are currently NHLers.

So in 2015 the highest pick no currently a viable NHLer is Bracco. So the players taken after him are Denis Malgin and Markus Nutrivarra (a double re-entry). A couple other have got games such as Dominick Simon who like Nutivarra is a double re-entry, no one else has lost Calder eligibility.

In 2016, the only people drafted after Korshkov who are NHLers are Samuel Girard, Debrincat, Mete, Jesper Bratt and Maxim Mamim (a Double Re-entry).

Thanks for your feedback. I like your methodology.

For the 2015 & 2016 drafts, there are others not on your list who were both selected after our selection (and our guy hasn't played any NHL games) who have seen action in NHL games including:

Sprong, Chiapik, Greenway, Guhle, Anderson, Dunn, Cirelli, Bean, Hill, Miranov, Wolanin, Gaudette & Mangiapane

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Early days. Matthews and Marner are the only ones with full NHL seasons to their name, and Dermott hasn't arrived to that extent but looks really promising for a non 1st rounder. Some more of Hunter's picks should eventually be on the way to either hopefully help the Leafs or maybe to acquire other help via trade.

Brown and Johnsson were late round Burke era picks, so the book on Hunter's Leaf tenure can't be fully written yet even though he's no longer part of the organization.

See post #1346 for more info.

 

[Mess]

Analytics is useful in 2 ways.

Firstly it eliminates natural human biases based on irrelevant things like place of birth or exposure for example.

Not something Hunter will ever be able to claim because a few months after leaving the London Knights of the OHL as GM to join the Leafs, he uses his status as interim GM/head scout to draft Mitch Marner from his London Knights team whom he had years of exposure to.

Had Dubas been running the draft on analytics vs Hunter on natural human bias would the Leafs draft results have been the same?. A question we will never know the answer to.

There is video evidence of Dubas on the phone with Columbus trying to trade back from #4 to #8 and add multiple 2nd round picks in the process. In what was said the 2015 draft in a decade analytics likely suggesting moving back 4 spots in the draft to turn 1 pick into 4 X picks in the top 60 was the more advantages move, even if you really like the player available at #4.

 

[Mess]

Now had I been Leafs head scout instead of Hunter the Leafs would have taken

Kale Clague Dman from Brandon at #31 instead of Yegor Korshkov an overager passed over in 2 previous drafts, whom I still fear has little interest in the NHL and coming to NA.

Clague just completed his season 54 games 11-60-71 points

• 2017-2018
  • U20 WJC Gold Medal
  • WHL (East) First All-Star Team
  • WHL Most Assists by Defenseman (60)
  • WHL Top Defenseman (Bill Hunter Trophy)

In 2015 it would have been Matty Barzal #8OA a PPG NHL centre (my pick in 2015 + multiple 2nds #34 Centre Sebastian Aho, #38 Goalie Mackenzie Blackwood & #61 Winger Blake Speers with trade back scenario ) over Mitch Marner #4. Or Dman Jacob Larsson #24OA instead of trade back out of the 1st round).

So comparing 1st and 2nd round results including trade back scenarios
Hunter
#4 Mitch Marner (RW) + #34 Travis Dermott (D) + #61 Jeremy Bracco (RW) + #68 Martins Dzierkals (RW)
Mess
#8 - Mathew Barzal (C) + #24 Jacob Larsson (D) + #34 Sebastian Aho (C/RW), + #38 Mackenzie Blackwood (G) + #61 Blake Speers (RW)

Last year 2017 I had Eeli Tolvanen (RW) the sniper as my BPA @ #17OA over Timothy Liljegren (D) as BPA, but because of the need for Dmen for the Leafs and that I know D >> Wingers in value I may have also have done as Hunter did taking the falling Liljegren (but I was hoping Dman Cal Foote taken #16 by TB would have fallen to the Leafs instead).

Time will tell if my amateur scouting eye was better than Hunter but its fun to measure as an amateur draft junky my pre-draft BPA rankings vs Leafs actual draft results.

 

[Gary Nylund]

There is video evidence of Dubas on the phone with Columbus trying to trade back from #4 to #8 and add multiple 2nd round picks in the process.

You've mentioned this a number of times. A couple of questions:

You have said the trade would have added 3 2nd round picks for us. Is there a source for this or are you just assuming that "multiple 2nd round picks" means 3?

If Columbus said no to the trade, what's the point of comparing what would have happened to what did happen? I could see the point if we said no but if they were the ones who said no then we never had the choice anyway.