Kyle Dubas Discussion

[Dekes For Days]

Your statement was Dubas was looking for a right SHOT d man. Now you're moving the goal posts and mentioning a guy who has played the right side.

Meaningless difference. We're talking about somebody that plays the right side. A right-handed defensemen would be preferred, but a left-handed one who has played the right side his whole career is not much different. Either way, that is a rare commodity, and they were not widely available last offseason, or any offseason.

When Muzzin was acquired he was meant to play on the right side with Reilly.

No he wasn't. He was acquired because he was a great defenseman. The possibility was thrown around, like literally everything in this market, but it really didn't matter anyway and wasn't really tried, because Gardiner fell off a cliff with injury not long after, and could barely handle 3rd pairing.

 

[tmlfan98]

Your statement was Dubas was looking for a right SHOT d man. Now you're moving the goal posts and mentioning a guy who has played the right side. Lots of guys have played the right side. When Muzzin was acquired he was meant to play on the right side with Reilly. That didn't go well. Dubas didn't do his homework on how ineffective Muzzin would be on the right side. Remains to be seen how Brodie works, but your narrative that Brodie and Barrie were the only options out there is just false. Dubas made a horrible horrible trade and you can't admit it. Sad.

Brodie is one of those rare LHDs that is actually better on the RS than LS. Someone else mentioned Hjalmarsson as well, another good example.

Also Muzzin was never meant to play the RS, his numbers there are much worse than LS. Rielly was meant to move back to the RS like he did earlier in his career but then Babs all of a sudden insisted that the primary puck mover has to play his strong side, even though he was perfectly fine with occasionally using a Gardiner-Rielly pair in the past.

 

[Ziggdiezan]

That's not Barrie. Not before he came, or while here. He was important to have, even in a down year for him. He brought valuable aspects to the team, and helped us hang on while everybody was injured.

What you think these players are (which is wildly off) is irrelevant in this discussion. We're discussing what these players did for us this year, and if they would have been missed.

If you're certain, please name them.

We know there was one better option (that would have come with a significant downgrade in the other asset acquired). We also know that option was not an option. By your logic, wouldn't you agree that Barrie was the 2nd best option, as Barrie was the second player he targeted?

What do you think Barrie was for the leafs? Clearly Keefe (through the way he used Barrie) thought his best role was a sheltered 3rd pairing scoring defender who got a bunch of PP time.

Notice how I said his role on the leafs was a 3rd pairing scoring defender when everyone was healthy. Not that he is a 3rd pairing defender now or at any point in the past.

Obviously Leafs would have missed Barrie during all of injures, they would have missed any warm body as at that point they just needed healthy players.

So you think Brodie and Barrie were the only options? Or can you use a tiny bit of logic and assume there were other targets via trade or free agency? Off the top of my head I would have rather targeted Savard, a guy like Manson, even Tanev. All much much better fits with the left defenders the leafs had on the roster. You could argue they are worse overall but their fit would have been much better and that was obvious to anyone who looked at the leafs defenders.

The brodie trade was the only one that leaked so we have no idea if Dubas pursued other options so no I wouldn't say Barrie was the 2nd best option as I dont have enough information to make an informed decision.

 

[Dekes For Days]

What do you think Barrie was for the leafs?

He's a quality defenseman who had a bit of a rough year, in large part due to Babcock's insane attempt to completely change him. He still ended up providing valuable qualities to the team that were previously lacking (which is partially why our defensive results improved), and was an upgrade over any known possible alternatives. Holl came out of nowhere, and Dermott played well after his surgery, which lessened just how crucial Barrie was to have, but then he still ended up being very important to have, even with his struggles, due to the complete decimation of the rest of our defense. He helped us hold on during that period that made up a good portion of the season.

Barrie can struggle with certain aspects of defensive play when within his own zone (which is why he gets barraged with hyperbolic complaints), but people completely ignore that Barrie helped us not be in our own zone as much to start with.

So you think Brodie and Barrie were the only options?

I don't know. Unlike you, I'm not claiming to know. What we do know is a lack of options in FA, and that any trade we made had to match fairly specific criteria for it to work, for the rarest position in hockey. Quite frankly, the fact that we even had two good options is surprising.

Off the top of my head I would have rather targeted Savard, a guy like Manson, even Tanev.

Well first off, we don't know if they wanted to trade those players. Next, Manson had 3 years left and Savard had 2 years left. Teams weren't going to retain 50% for multiple years. Third, none of these players would have worked, even at 50%, without Kadri outgoing, and not only do we not know if these teams wanted Kadri, we don't know if they would have had a 3C to include in the deal.

Also, after seeing how our defense was decimated last year, you think the better option was Tanev coming off 3 straight seasons of 55 games or less?

 

[The CyNick]

Are you seriously pushing this nuance? What does it even matter? RHD and RHS are used interchangeably all the time. Hjalmarrson in Chicago was one of the best shutdown D of last era and he was a LHD who played the right side.

It makes a big difference to the discussion. The poster I quoted was making a big deal that Dubas had this really limited number of targets to go after. When in reality, the evidence suggests that assertion is incorrect.

 

[The CyNick]

Meaningless difference. We're talking about somebody that plays the right side. A right-handed defensemen would be preferred, but a left-handed one who has played the right side his whole career is not much different. Either way, that is a rare commodity, and they were not widely available last offseason, or any offseason.

No he wasn't. He was acquired because he was a great defenseman. The possibility was thrown around, like literally everything in this market, but it really didn't matter anyway and wasn't really tried, because Gardiner fell off a cliff with injury not long after, and could barely handle 3rd pairing.

It was more than just thrown around. It was the focal point of discussions of everyone involved when he came here. Tons of people on here were adamant he could play the right side because he had "done it before", but they and Dubas were wrong.

 

[Dekes For Days]

It makes a big difference to the discussion. The poster I quoted was making a big deal that Dubas had this really limited number of targets to go after. When in reality, the evidence suggests that assertion is incorrect.

The evidence does not suggest that. The possible transactions would have been very limited, for the stated reasons. Including players that have played basically their whole career on the right side (but aren't right-handed) doesn't open up many more if any options than the already mentioned players.

It was more than just thrown around. It was the focal point of discussions of everyone involved when he came here.

It was not the focal point of discussions, and it was not why he was acquired. Muzzin did not play much on the right side. It was just something thrown around as a possibility after he was acquired, because every idea is thrown around in this city. Hell, we had people wanting to turn Kaberle and Gardiner into forwards. With Gardiner dropping off with injury and barely being able to handle 3rd pairing, it was better to have Muzzin anchor the 2nd pairing anyway.

 

[Fogelhund]

It was more than just thrown around. It was the focal point of discussions of everyone involved when he came here. Tons of people on here were adamant he could play the right side because he had "done it before", but they and Dubas were wrong.

Yes, some fans, and media suggested this might be a right D solution... (Muzzin). That being said, there were a number of fans saying, this is a LD guy.. including a few Kings fans. Yes, these (Muzzin will be a RD) people made the wrong assumptions.

Dubas at no point declared this was a solution for RD.

When directly asked, Dubas responded as follows.

As for the question on what side of the ice he is going to play, we are obviously going to have a player or two that are going to have to play their off-side. I’ve talked it over with Mike and I think that is more of a question and a discussion that we will have with all of our players once we all get back from the break. Mike and his coaching staff will [have a discussion] with Jake Muzzin, Jake Gardiner, and the rest of our — not to just list those two — defense to find what might be the best fit to have everybody play to their best potential.

The bigger suggestion, was that Reilly was going to move to the right side, and be Muzzin's partner... that didn't happen. [Dreger]

Many fans didn't assume Muzzin was for the right side though... and they were right.

i am a kings fan and i have never seen Muzzin play the right side in his time in la

Someone likely goes to their off side. Both Rielly and Gardiner have played on the right before.

If you go through the old trade threads, not many assumed he would be a RD for us, though some pointed out he could play both sides... more questions about whether it would be Gardiner, or Reilly moving to the right side.

If you read carefully through these threads, and paid attention, you knew this wasn't the RD guy..

This is mostly some revisionist thinking.

 

[hobarth]

Brodie is one of those rare LHDs that is actually better on the RS than LS. Someone else mentioned Hjalmarsson as well, another good example.



Is this an assumption or somehow factually verifiable?

 

[Dekes For Days]

Is this an assumption or somehow factually verifiable?

Brodie has put up better results on the right side over his career, though his limited time on the left hasn't usually been in the best situations.

 

[KyleDubasBoyGeniua]

The funny thing is so many wanted Nylander traded at age 22 when his value was at it's lowest for a D worse than TJ Brodie.

 

[KyleDubasBoyGeniua]

My take is that players should be paid based on what they’ve proven to become by the end of their elc. Pastrnak was clearly leagues better than Nylander (pasta was pacing for 37 goals/78 point his final elc year), yet because Nylander was better (lol) 2 years earlier as a rookie, he got paid similarly (with more in signing bonuses. More front loading, and one less ufa year).

NYlander had 2 60 point seasons and a better PPG.

 

[LeafsOHLRangers98]

I don't think it was offbase to look at Pastrnak's last elc year (pacing for 37 goals/78 points) and conclude he would be FAR better than 20 goal/60 point Nylander... regardless of Willie's better (lol) rookie year where he received MUCH more opportunity than Pastrnak did. And the proof is in the pudding. Inflating a players worth based on having a better (lol) rookie year is not boding well for Dubas when we compare bang for buck to leaf comparables last year...

Gee, who could have seen that coming?

Pastrnak made the choice after coming off that 70 point season to take the guaranteed term and money after posting just a 45 point pace after each of the first two seasons.

Boston got extremely lucky with both Pasta and Marchand that both players got significantly better after signing fair market deals.

Nylander likely willook like a steal too if he does get any kind of puck luck. If we ever have a full season again his underlying numbers suggest that he isn't too far away from a Kucherov/Panarin level breakout.

 

[hobarth]

Brodie has put up better results on the right side over his career, though his limited time on the left hasn't usually been in the best situations.

I don't know much about Brodie other than he was usually partnered with Giordano who has won the Norris so I would think he would struggle playing LD because that would also mean he wasn't playing with Giordano. I don't think TO has a Giordano.

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

Marchand that both players got significantly better after signing fair market deals.

Marchand got significantly better? Meh. Can you locate which season in which Marchand all of a sudden "became an elite player"?

 

[Rants Mulliniks]

I don't know much about Brodie other than he was usually partnered with Giordano who has won the Norris so I would think he would struggle playing LD because that would also mean he wasn't playing with Giordano. I don't think TO has a Giordano.

In fairness, did Giordano ever enter into a Norris discussion his entire career prior or since? I haven't looked it up but don't remember it.

 

[LeafsOHLRangers98]

Marchand got significantly better? Meh. Can you locate which season in which Marchand all of a sudden "became an elite player"?

View attachment 377046

Yes he got more powerplay time, but I just meant in terms of production. Obviously the numbers were a byproduct of this but he signed his deal in September of 2016 and then followed that up with 4 straight 80+ point seasons after a career high of 61.

I was trying to make the point that the Bruins got significantly better production after Marchand and Pasta signed their deals than their previous history would suggest they were capable of.

 

[KyleDubasBoyGeniua]

Marchand had 1 60 point season when he signed his deal. Nylander had better stats. Perspective people...
Marchand got every penny he coould at the time.

 

[BoredBrandonPridham]

Yes he got more powerplay time, but I just meant in terms of production. Obviously the numbers were a byproduct of this but he signed his deal in September of 2016 and then followed that up with 4 straight 80+ point seasons after a career high of 61.

I was trying to make the point that the Bruins got significantly better production after Marchand and Pasta signed their deals than their previous history would suggest they were capable of.

i know what you meant. but it wasnt this lucky revelation or transformation of a player. same player that had same ability, they just changed how they used him. that’s why it’s always important to consider the replacement value of these players when you sign them to contracts, and just looking at their flat production in comparison to their contract value doesnt really mean anything.

 

[nuck]

i know what you meant. but it wasnt this lucky revelation or transformation of a player. same player that had same ability, they just changed how they used him. that’s why it’s always important to consider the replacement value of these players when you sign them to contracts, and just looking at their flat production in comparison to their contract value doesnt really mean anything.

Marchand was also signed because of more than scoring stats. He was a pest and a shit disturber who could play in the top 6. Nothing like that in Willie's game and few of that sort in the whole league. The below is what the Bruins thought they were paying for.

Brad Marchand – NHL Prospect

Marchand was the Bruins’ third-round selection in the 2006 NHL Entry Draft. His scouting report painted the picture of an undersized grinder with above-average skill. Marchand even talked about himself in that manner. In an interview with Hockey’s Future, he prioritized qualities like “energy,” “strength,” and “work ethic” ahead of his scoring ability.
Ted Nolan, his coach in Moncton of the QMJHL and amateur soothsayer, was one of the few who saw the kid’s potential. “I’ve never seen a guy more determined to get a puck in all the years that I coached junior hockey,” he told Hockey’s Future. “He’s going to be a dynamite steal. People might say he’s too small, but with the way the game’s changing, everything’s revolving around skill and speed and Brad Marchand is a perfect prototype for that new era of hockey.”

 

[ACC1224]

Marchand was also signed because of more than scoring stats. He was a pest and a shit disturber who could play in the top 6. Nothing like that in Willie's game and few of that sort in the whole league. The below is what the Bruins thought they were paying for.

Brad Marchand – NHL Prospect

Marchand was the Bruins’ third-round selection in the 2006 NHL Entry Draft. His scouting report painted the picture of an undersized grinder with above-average skill. Marchand even talked about himself in that manner. In an interview with Hockey’s Future, he prioritized qualities like “energy,” “strength,” and “work ethic” ahead of his scoring ability.
Ted Nolan, his coach in Moncton of the QMJHL and amateur soothsayer, was one of the few who saw the kid’s potential. “I’ve never seen a guy more determined to get a puck in all the years that I coached junior hockey,” he told Hockey’s Future. “He’s going to be a dynamite steal. People might say he’s too small, but with the way the game’s changing, everything’s revolving around skill and speed and Brad Marchand is a perfect prototype for that new era of hockey.”

Marchand and Nylander are polar opposites. Not comparable in the least.

 

[KyleDubasBoyGeniua]

Marchand and Nylander are polar opposites. Not comparable in the least.

Nylander is better at the same age.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

Pastrnak made the choice after coming off that 70 point season to take the guaranteed term and money after posting just a 45 point pace after each of the first two seasons.

Boston got extremely lucky with both Pasta and Marchand that both players got significantly better after signing fair market deals.

Nylander likely willook like a steal too if he does get any kind of puck luck. If we ever have a full season again his underlying numbers suggest that he isn't too far away from a Kucherov/Panarin level breakout.

Ok, so Pastrnak paced for 37 goals/78 points... but just once. So they can't pay him as a 37 goal/78 point player.

So why, pray tell, was Marner paid as a 93 point player? He only did it once and averaged 64 points the two prior seasons?

Notice how these arguments only apply to NON leaf players? The second I apply these arguments to leaf players, the argument gets thrown out the window and an entirely new argument materializes.

 

[ACC1224]

Nylander is better at the same age.

In some ways yes, in other ways no. They aren’t really comparable.

 

[KyleDubasBoyGeniua]

In some ways yes, in other ways no. They aren’t really comparable.

Marchand was really a late bloomer. He had his first 60 point season in year 7