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

[ObscureAlien]

Columbus declined the deal so your hypothetical is meaningless Mess.



Not to mention, if you don't specifically have a post as the draft was happening referencing who your preferred picks were, we can only assume that this is an exercise in hindsight. If you do, no one will stop you from posting it.

 

[Beleafer4]

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.

Obviously glad we stuck with marner.

But analytics isnt 100% wrong. Imagine marner was taken at 3 and we had to choose from Strome and Hanifin. I would definitely have preferred getting some extra picks + one of provorov, rantanen and barzal.

I guess rule of thumb is, if there isnt a guy there that you are really bull-ish on, trade down and collect extra assets. If there is a guy your scouts are really high on, then trust your guys and pick the player.

 

[PromisedLand]

Obviously glad we stuck with marner.

But analytics isnt 100% wrong. Imagine marner was taken at 3 and we had to choose from Strome and Hanifin. I would definitely have preferred getting some extra picks + one of provorov, rantanen and barzal.

I guess rule of thumb is, if there isnt a guy there that you are really bull-ish on, trade down and collect extra assets. If there is a guy your scouts are really high on, then trust your guys and pick the player.

Ohhh you used Barzal with @Mess in a discussion I think Mess will agree with you now

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

After the 2nd half of the season + playoffs that Marner had, why would anyone even think about how we should have gotten someone else?

 

[Buds17]

See post #1346 for more info.

Nice work and there are some good players on that list, no doubt. I'd say though that first impact doesn't always equate to best impact. They're all ahead now by virtue of having NHL time, but that doesn't mean all of them will remain ahead over the long term.

Don't know who in the organization to credit for this when it pans out, and certainly it isn't a method exclusive to any one team, but I like that we're also trying to derive value from undrafted free agents. Have to see how those end up working out as well over time.

 

[93LEAFS]

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

I'm aware, for those guys, I felt it was long enough to be of note they had to have lost Calder status instead of just being a late-season addition or a short-term call-up. I mentioned it for the 2017 guys, just because their opportunity is so short, and it is rare for non-top 5 picks to make it for the entire year. That's why for 2015 and 2016, I decided to use calder eligibility as the cut-off point. Even then, its a real question if that should even qualify as graduation, but since I felt someone like Dermott had graduated, I felt that 25 NHL games was a good benchmark considering they've only had 3 seasons. I'm sure next year we will see more people taken after Bracco and Korshkov graduate.

 

[Beleafer4]

Ohhh you used Barzal with @Mess in a discussion I think Mess will agree with you now

Lol ya, it was mentioned in mirtles article that the leafs were interested in those three guys (right at the end).

Mirtle: Maple Leafs’ divided front office pushes for Marner and Hanifin

 

[AllDay28]

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.

oh ya.. NHL players dont have will and desire. Being the best of the best and the 0.0000000001%, they dont have that will, desire, heart, etc that you want to make up to compete. lolll.

 

[IBeL34f]

As insufferable as Mess' love for Barzal can certainly be, no one can accuse them of retrospect and hindsight as far as Barzal is concerned - They were just as big a fan of them then, before the Draft, as they are now after Barzal's rookie season.

It's less an instance of hindsight and more someone being unable to stop talking about how "right" they were. (Given that the 2015 class is still very much undeveloped, I think it's too early to say definitively who will be better than who - Mess obviously would've been happier with Barzal, while most Leafs fans are, not surprisingly, thrilled with the Marner selection thus far.)

 

[IBeL34f]

oh ya.. NHL players dont have will and desire. Being the best of the best and the 0.0000000001%, they dont have that will, desire, heart, etc that you want to make up to compete. lolll.

Something not being tangible doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I don't believe Diceman was ever claiming that those attributes don't exist, simply that they're intangible.

If you can provide a stat for giving a shit, then feel free to laugh at others - otherwise, your comprehension might need a little work.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Something not being tangible doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I don't believe Diceman was ever claiming that those attributes don't exist, simply that they're intangible.

If you can provide a stat for giving a ****, then feel free to laugh at others - otherwise, your comprehension might need a little work.

These intangibles are an interesting. To summarize a few thoughts I've seen here, I think it goes something like this:

Diceman thinks that Marner has them and that's part of why he says he is a franchise player, even if that seems to some people to be saying a bit too much at this time. Nithoniniel asks that if these intangibles impact performance, then shouldn't that impact be measurable somehow? Then Diceman gave an example of something that's not measured. Then I think OK but still, if intangibles have no measurable effect than how impactful are they really?

I have a feeling Diceman is right though, there is just something about Marner and even if the numbers aren't there yet, he will be a franchise player but ... what are these intangibles that he has and how can we measure them. How about this possibility - Marner's intangibles will result in him being far more likely to reach his absolute maximum potential then he would be if he didn't possess these intangibles. So while we can't measure them (and analytics can't help us here), a good scout who may not know the first thing about analytics could perhaps still pick out a Marner and say I don't care what your numbers say, this kid is the real deal and is much better than your "numbers based" evaluation says.

Not sure how much sense this makes but I really sense something special in Marner to the point where if I was offered Eichel for Marner today I think I say no.

 

[ULF_55]

As insufferable as Mess' love for Barzal can certainly be, no one can accuse them of retrospect and hindsight as far as Barzal is concerned - They were just as big a fan of them then, before the Draft, as they are now after Barzal's rookie season.

It's less an instance of hindsight and more someone being unable to stop talking about how "right" they were. (Given that the 2015 class is still very much undeveloped, I think it's too early to say definitively who will be better than who - Mess obviously would've been happier with Barzal, while most Leafs fans are, not surprisingly, thrilled with the Marner selection thus far.)

I wanted a big center whoops ... unless he came in the 2nd. round after trading back and getting Werenski.

I'm just going to pretend I wanted: Werenski, Carlo and Nutivaara in 2015, with my 1st. 3 picks, and then wanted Malgin, Niku and Cotton.

 

[Gary Nylund]

As insufferable as Mess' love for Barzal can certainly be, no one can accuse them of retrospect and hindsight as far as Barzal is concerned - They were just as big a fan of them then, before the Draft, as they are now after Barzal's rookie season.

It's less an instance of hindsight and more someone being unable to stop talking about how "right" they were. (Given that the 2015 class is still very much undeveloped, I think it's too early to say definitively who will be better than who - Mess obviously would've been happier with Barzal, while most Leafs fans are, not surprisingly, thrilled with the Marner selection thus far.)

True enough, gotta give Mess credit here - I do remember him hyping Barzal before the draft and he looked amazing last season. I know a lot of people have been saying yeah well NYI doesn't play D and so on but I think a lot of that is due to people wanting to pump our guys. I was super impressed when I saw him play, I think Barzal is amazing.

PS - not saying I'd rather have him than Marner, that's not the point here at all.

 

[ULF_55]

True enough, gotta give Mess credit here - I do remember him hyping Barzal before the draft and he looked amazing last season. I know a lot of people have been saying yeah well NYI doesn't play D and so on but I think a lot of that is due to people wanting to pump our guys. I was super impressed when I saw him play, I think Barzal is amazing.

PS - not saying I'd rather have him than Marner, that's not the point here at all.

With a top 4 pick it's going to take some doing to trade back 12 spots isn't it?

You'd probably be looking at 16th. + 3 picks in the top 60. Remember when the Leafs moved up to take Schenn, what was that moved about 3 spots for a 2nd. and a 3rd.? Just going from memory ...

Islanders - Leafs trade at the draft:

1. Barzal
2. 28th. - Aho / Dunn / Carlo / ??
3. Previous drafts: Ho-Sang / Sorokin (prospect)

or

1. Marner

Would you?

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

True enough, gotta give Mess credit here - I do remember him hyping Barzal before the draft and he looked amazing last season. I know a lot of people have been saying yeah well NYI doesn't play D and so on but I think a lot of that is due to people wanting to pump our guys. I was super impressed when I saw him play, I think Barzal is amazing.

PS - not saying I'd rather have him than Marner, that's not the point here at all.

I don't want to insult Barzal as I think he's shown to be at least as good as Marner, and I'm extremely high on Marner. to get a player like that at 16th overall is incredible for the Islanders and they should be thrilled.

The point is more that the Leafs hit on a franchise winger in the top 5 and we should also be thrilled, rather than nit-picking that maybe we should have gotten the different franchise forward. Carolina and Arizona are examples of teams who should be lamenting their top 5 selections. Certainly not the Leafs.

 

[Leafs at Knight]

As insufferable as Mess' love for Barzal can certainly be, no one can accuse them of retrospect and hindsight as far as Barzal is concerned - They were just as big a fan of them then, before the Draft, as they are now after Barzal's rookie season.

It's less an instance of hindsight and more someone being unable to stop talking about how "right" they were. (Given that the 2015 class is still very much undeveloped, I think it's too early to say definitively who will be better than who - Mess obviously would've been happier with Barzal, while most Leafs fans are, not surprisingly, thrilled with the Marner selection thus far.)

No its hindsight that he'd choose all the other different players instead that seem to be doing better than our counterparts.

 

[Menzinger]

Oh, Steve....

 

[IBeL34f]

No its hindsight that he'd choose all the other different players instead that seem to be doing better than our counterparts.

I'm not speaking about the other players, strictly Mess' infatuation with Barzal, which was well documented around here before the Draft. I've seen a couple people (not just today, or in this thread) accuse Mess of jumping on the bandwagon once Barzal emerged as a legitimate young star in the NHL, which is simply incorrect.

 

[Leafs at Knight]

I'm not speaking about the other players, strictly Mess' infatuation with Barzal, which was well documented around here before the Draft. I've seen a couple people (not just today, or in this thread) accuse Mess of jumping on the bandwagon once Barzal emerged as a legitimate young star in the NHL, which is simply incorrect.

Oh trust me I know about his love for Barzal and the opposite for Marner. We've had to sift through that garbage for a couple of years now.

 

[Kiwi]

Oh, Steve....

Meh

Simmons has his guy in Hunter and Mirtle and the Athletic are big Dubas backers which isn't really surprising since Simmons is more "old school" and Mirtle is more new age analytics driven

It kind of reminds me of political media quite honestly, reporters giving guys friendly coverage for information and pushing the guys that tend to favour there own view on how things should be done

 

[Gary Nylund]

With a top 4 pick it's going to take some doing to trade back 12 spots isn't it?

You'd probably be looking at 16th. + 3 picks in the top 60. Remember when the Leafs moved up to take Schenn, what was that moved about 3 spots for a 2nd. and a 3rd.? Just going from memory ...

Islanders - Leafs trade at the draft:

1. Barzal
2. 28th. - Aho / Dunn / Carlo / ??
3. Previous drafts: Ho-Sang / Sorokin (prospect)

or

1. Marner

Would you?

Probably ...

Would I? Firstly, I would say that the deal is a bit different that you say - there is no guarantee that Barzal would be available when the time came to pick so not much point in thinking about a hypothetical that we don't know the exact parameters of. I also don't study junior players too much so TBH, my opinion isn't worth much in this case. I'm glad we have Marner though.

 

[93LEAFS]

Meh

Simmons has his guy in Hunter and Mirtle and the Athletic are big Dubas backers which isn't really surprising since Simmons is more "old school" and Mirtle is more new age analytics driven

It kind of reminds me of political media quite honestly, reporters giving guys friendly coverage for information and pushing the guys that tend to favour there own view on how things should be done

The thing in this case is, Simmons never really broke anything. The closest he came was saying that there was disharmony last June. Simmons isn't in the buisness of breaking things, he's an op-ed writer.

 

[Kiwi]

The thing in this case is, Simmons never really broke anything. The closest he came was saying that there was disharmony last June. Simmons isn't in the buisness of breaking things, he's an op-ed writer.

Simmons certainly favours Hunter as seen in those two tweets, those two tweets side by side don't paint a very pretty picture of his impartiality in the Hunter and Dubas debate

Mirtle is unapologetically a Dubas backer

I take both of those guys with a grain of salt personally but it's hard to complain to loudly about Mirtle and his Dubas backing (besides him getting fed information which i hate) when you've got guys in the media with biases the other way

 

[93LEAFS]

Simmons certainly favours Hunter as seen in those two tweets, those two tweets side by side don't paint a very pretty picture of his impartiality in the Hunter and Dubas debate

Mirtle is unapologetically a Dubas backer

I take both of those guys with a grain of salt personally but it's hard to complain to loudly about Mirtle and his Dubas backing (besides him getting fed information which i hate) when you've got guys in the media with biases the other way

I'm more talking about the implication Hunter is feeding Simmons info, which I really don't see strong evidence for (like I do with the Dubas/Mirtle situation). The only thing I can remember Simmons breaking was that there was a rift in the front office, which was an open secret at that point.

 

[Kiwi]

I'm more talking about the implication Hunter is feeding Simmons info, which I really don't see strong evidence for (like I do with the Dubas/Mirtle situation). The only thing I can remember Simmons breaking was that there was a rift in the front office, which was an open secret at that point.

Those two tweets weren't really about who's feeding information to who, which I completely agree is coming from the Dubas side of the organization to Mirtle, more who Simmons is inclined to side with

I think both those reporters are biased and go into there articles with that belief

Simmons opinions are going to be pro Hunter and Dubas facts in Mirtle articles are going to be extremely favorable to Dubas like the McLeod Gauthier thing which was ridiculous, and I don't really like McLeod