Post-Game Talk: Thank Hutch

[Kiwi]

Imagine being the Ottawa Senators

Besides their owner I like what they are doing

They realized the team wasn't good enough and decided to whole heartedly to go into full rebuild mode, draft and develop (which they have been good at historically)

You can mess that up but I do like the mentality

 

[LeafSteel]

Spezza provides everything Marleau did on and off the ice for 700k. There's 0 justification for the Marleau contract.

At the time and with the coach that we had, it was happening.

Spezza wasn't available and look how Babcock treated him. He was waiver fodder until Keefe was brought in.

Considering what was available at the time, Marleau was alright, as we had the cap space and there was a need to bring a steadying presence, and show the young guys the right way.

Remember, this was also before we brought in Tavares, who would have been looked to for that as well. If we'd had Tavares and Spezza, than yeah, Marleau wasn't needed. Otherwise, who was going to be there for the young guys, Kadri?

 

[Martin Skoula]

At the time and with the coach that we had, it was happening.

Spezza wasn't available and look how Babcock treated him. He was waiver fodder until Keefe was brought in.

Considering what was available at the time, Marleau was alright, as we had the cap space and there was a need to bring a steadying presence, and show the young guys the right way.

Remember, this was also before we brought in Tavares, who would have been looked to for that as well. If we'd had Tavares and Spezza, than yeah, Marleau wasn't needed. Otherwise, who was going to be there for the young guys, Kadri?

You don't spend 1st line winger money on a 3rd liner because he works out a lot and doesn't have a drug problem lol. There are other options every year that can be a good role model for 1/6th that price.

What specifically did Marleau teach our young guys? How to rob a team for every penny you can get and be a playoff ghost?

Babcock wanted Marleau and told Lou to get him no matter the cost. That was one of the many enormous mistakes those two made together, call it what it is. There's no sense defending a terrible move.

 

[LeafSteel]

That is one way and even a very common way of looking at it but not entirely fair imo.

That 2nd 1st given up is the only reason we still had cap room for Kapanen and Johnsson.
This was for the 3rd year of Marleau. Already said I didn't agree with the 3rd year given to Marleau, and would rather have over-paid the first 2 years.

And the 2nd for Boyle bought us invaluable playoff experience.

Playoff experience was something we were going to get anyways. We were going to the playoffs with or without Boyle. You get experience by getting there, and I really don't believe Boyle had that huge of an impact, imparting his wisdom and whatnot. Again, would have been all for re-signing him, but if we knew he was going to test UFA, which he did, a 2nd round pick for a few months of a 4C is not good asset management.

 

[LeafSteel]

You don't spend 1st line winger money on a 3rd liner because he works out a lot and doesn't have a drug problem lol. There are other options every year that can be a good role model for 1/6th that price.

What specifically did Marleau teach our young guys? How to rob a team for every penny you can get and be a playoff ghost?

Babcock wanted Marleau and told Lou to get him no matter the cost. That was one of the many enormous mistakes those two made together, call it what it is. There's no sense defending a terrible move.

I disagree.

While I wouldn't have lobbied for Marleau, the impact he had on Marner and Matthews specifically, with him taking them in, keeping them out of trouble, letting them see how he prepares, and saving teenage millionaires from being alone in a big city has value. Ask Joffrey Lupul, Tyler Seguin, and Patrick Kane.

We had the cap space, and it was an investment in their long-term personal development.

I don't like their contracts either, but you can blame Dubas and their agents for that. Marleau had nothing to do with it, and it's a little silly to imply he should have been whispering in their ear to take less money. That's on the player's, their families, and the agents.

 

[Dekes For Days]

One pick?

Whatever pick that is the hot pick at the time to be some travesty that we will never recover from.

And, I have the TSN article on picks and their chances of becoming an NHL player and/or a top 6 F, top 4 D.

And a late 2nd round pick is not much.

And, we weren't really talking throwing away the chance at making the playoffs. We were talking about winning more rounds by trading assets for 4Cs.

No, the year we traded for Boyle, it was to make the playoffs. Others were trades/signings to make ourselves more competitive, and we were. That doesn't mean you have to win the cup or those trades were stupid.

"Rounds" is such an arbitrary measure of success. We faced the 1st, 4th, and 3rd best teams in the league, and played well against them all.

 

[Martin Skoula]

I disagree.

While I wouldn't have lobbied for Marleau, the impact he had on Marner and Matthews specifically, with him taking them in, keeping them out of trouble, letting them see how he prepares, and saving teenage millionaires from being alone in a big city has value. Ask Joffrey Lupul, Tyler Seguin, and Patrick Kane.

We had the cap space, and it was an investment in their long-term personal development.

I don't like their contracts either, but you can blame Dubas and their agents for that. Marleau had nothing to do with it, and it's a little silly to imply he should have been whispering in their ear to take less money. That's on the player's, their families, and the agents.

And only Marleau could have provided this elite personal development, that's why we had to give him 6.25 and an NMC. He later proved his character by demanding a trade to only San Jose, ensuring we'd have to pay to get rid of his hideous contract.

Didn't Marleau tell Matthews not to tell the team about his legal issues? Marleau knew before the team did and didn't say anything, what a stand-up guy.

Also I'd much rather have Matthews learn from Kane than Marleau lol, Kane will actually be remembered in 20 years and doesn't disappear in the playoffs regardless of how many cabbies he punches.

 

[Kamiccolo]

Why are people saying we should have tanked another year? Lijegren was that guy, he fell to us.

But aside from that, we wouldn't be bottom 3 bad with the kids. And with the draft lottery, there is a better chance we were in the 5-10 range, which looking back, doesn't give any good D. We got the best one out of the top 5.

 

[LeafSteel]

And only Marleau could have provided this elite personal development, that's why we had to give him 6.25 and an NMC. He later proved his character by demanding a trade to only San Jose, ensuring we'd have to pay to get rid of his hideous contract.

Didn't Marleau tell Matthews not to tell the team about his legal issues? Marleau knew before the team did and didn't say anything, what a stand-up guy.

Also I'd much rather have Matthews learn from Kane than Marleau lol, Kane will actually be remembered in 20 years and doesn't disappear in the playoffs regardless of how many cabbies he punches.

I'm not saying anywhere that it was perfect, and I'm not saying Marleau was the only person walking the planet. I'm saying for what it was, there was value that he provided, and Matthews and Marner benefited. If you can provide another name that was available as a UFA, and what they ended up signing for, I'd be more than interested to hear it.

It's obvious we see value differently, so I'm just going to leave things at this.

 

[Martin Skoula]

I'm not saying anywhere that it was perfect, and I'm not saying Marleau was the only person walking the planet. I'm saying for what it was, there was value that he provided, and Matthews and Marner benefited. If you can provide another name that was available as a UFA, and what they ended up signing for, I'd be more than interested to hear it.

It's obvious we see value differently, so I'm just going to leave things at this.

Boyle, Williams, Sharpe, hell even Iginla. There was a ton of good wholesome vets that year.

Also I bet you could have found "some value" that the Clarkson deal provided.

 

[Sypher04]

Playoff experience was something we were going to get anyways. We were going to the playoffs with or without Boyle. You get experience by getting there, and I really don't believe Boyle had that huge of an impact, imparting his wisdom and whatnot. Again, would have been all for re-signing him, but if we knew he was going to test UFA, which he did, a 2nd round pick for a few months of a 4C is not good asset management.

Our 4c was a mess that year before acquiring Boyle and we got in by a single point. There is absolutely no way you can confidently claim we make it without that move.

A 2nd round pick for a rental who helped you make the playoffs is a perfectly reasonable price to pay

 

[LeafSteel]

Boyle, Williams, Sharpe, hell even Iginla. There was a ton of good wholesome vets that year.

Also I bet you could have found "some value" that the Clarkson deal provided.

Either quote me saying that, or don't quote things that weren't said.

I have no issues discussing and agreeing to disagree, but I don't appreciate words being put in my mouth that don't have any grain of truth to them.

Either way, we are done here apparently.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I'm not saying anywhere that it was perfect, and I'm not saying Marleau was the only person walking the planet. I'm saying for what it was, there was value that he provided, and Matthews and Marner benefited. If you can provide another name that was available as a UFA, and what they ended up signing for, I'd be more than interested to hear it.

It's obvious we see value differently, so I'm just going to leave things at this.

Legitimate question here. How can you be so sure that they did benefit?

Matthews and Marner were widely regarded as very good young boys who were extremely serious about their craft. Neither of them had any kind of controversy or bad reputation at any level. They weren't Ho-Sang. I'd argue that if anything we've seen a negative trend there. The Matthews saga from the summer, the Marner drama behind the scenes. If Marleau was a terrific role model and mentor, that stuff shouldn't happen.

We essentially have two young good boys that grew into two young, mostly good professionals in a league where that's par for the course, even without the veteran mentorship.

Personally, I would rather have had Leivo and the cap space as a further asset.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

so Marleau was the reason we continued to make the playoffs and not having a plethora of young players who were good enough to push us over the hump? should the leafs have benched these young players to tank more?

The Marleau signing was essentially an announcement of "The rebuild is over: we're going for it". Every move since has been all about "winning now".

My argument is that this all happened prematurely. There is literally no denying that the leafs would be in a better position right this moment if they focused on the rebuild one more season. Even if everything else failed that last rebuild year (which is unlikely), at the very least we'd still have our current first-round pick.

I was saying, even way back then, that the leafs should use the kids in a more limited role (other than Matthews), and rebuild one more season. This is pretty common for young players, btw (other than 'generational' first overall picks). They play a more limited role over their elc. This would have also helped in keeping their aav's down on their post elc contracts.

Every single thing about this would put the leafs in a better position at the moment.

And none of this is hindsight. I was saying the precise same things 2-3 years ago.

 

[Nithoniniel]

Personally, I think that if you build a team that looks like an almost perennial 100 point team, you really can't have rushed the rebuild. That happens by making moves to win when you don't even really have a core yet, so you end up handcuffing yourself to an average team. Rebuilds aren't rushed because the team isn't perfect.

 

[LeafSteel]

Legitimate question here. How can you be so sure that they did benefit?

Matthews and Marner were widely regarded as very good young boys who were extremely serious about their craft. Neither of them had any kind of controversy or bad reputation at any level. They weren't Ho-Sang. I'd argue that if anything we've seen a negative trend there. The Matthews saga from the summer, the Marner drama behind the scenes. If Marleau was a terrific role model and mentor, that stuff shouldn't happen.

We essentially have two young good boys that grew into two young, mostly good professionals in a league where that's par for the course, even without the veteran mentorship.

Personally, I would rather have had Leivo and the cap space as a further asset.

I don't think there is any definitive way to know one way or the other. All we can do is make assumptions.

Marleau represents a pretty good guy. Wholesome family life, clean living, and dedicated to his craft, but that's all on the outside. Who knows, maybe he had them doing lines in the basement and going to strip clubs and after hour parties and hosting orgies...

....... having said that, I'd rather young guys, with money, away from home, playing mini-sticks in Marleau's basement with this son's than have them out clubbing and getting into who know's what.

...... but that's just me.

 

[Stephen]

Why are people saying we should have tanked another year? Lijegren was that guy, he fell to us.

But aside from that, we wouldn't be bottom 3 bad with the kids. And with the draft lottery, there is a better chance we were in the 5-10 range, which looking back, doesn't give any good D. We got the best one out of the top 5.

If we had a 5-10 pick that year we would have had a shot at Elias Pettersson or Cody Glass which would have been very interesting. Plus Philadelphia and New Jersey both won the lottery, so we could have had a chance at Makar and Heiskanen too. Would have made the rebuild more complete but hindsight is whatever.

 

[Stephen]

I don't think there is any definitive way to know one way or the other. All we can do is make assumptions.

Marleau represents a pretty good guy. Wholesome family life, clean living, and dedicated to his craft, but that's all on the outside. Who knows, maybe he had them doing lines in the basement and going to strip clubs and after hour parties and hosting orgies...

....... having said that, I'd rather young guys, with money, away from home, playing mini-sticks in Marleau's basement with this son's than have them out clubbing and getting into who know's what.

...... but that's just me.

Curious to me how Babcock chose his favorite veterans. Seems like he was very loyal to Marleau but treated Spezza like garbage and wasn't a great guy to Mike Modano and others in Detroit. Just seems arbitrary.

 

[Big Muddy]

That doesn't mean you have to win the cup or those trades were stupid.

I see that exaggeration and hyperbole are part of some people's tool kit. Don't think anyone made that point.

And not sure people were talking about just one pick, but I think you know that. Its possible people were thinking of the long term impact of trading away 1st & 2nds while in the meantime not having won a single playoff round.

 

[LeafSteel]

Curious to me how Babcock chose his favorite veterans. Seems like he was very loyal to Marleau but treated Spezza like garbage and wasn't a great guy to Mike Modano and others in Detroit. Just seems arbitrary.

100% agree.

In retrospect and knowing what we know now, incredibly disappointed with Babcock and how he chose to do things here.

It's like his ego ran wild and his decision making seriously became questionable, both on and off the ice.

After Lou left, it really did feel like a personality conflict between Dubas vs. Babcock, with different visions, and Babcock making some decisions that seem just plain spiteful. Spezza was a case in point.

Babcocks comments after acquiring Muzzin were extremely perplexing. He should have welcomed the package that Muzzin brought with open arms, and he didn't have anything good to say about it.

Bab's had to go, and I'm glad he's gone.

 

[Dekes For Days]

Don't think anyone made that point.

That's precisely the point that's being made. Using hindsight, the trades are bad because we didn't win the cup yet. That's a flawed way to view those trades.

Its possible people were thinking of the long term impact of trading away 1st & 2nds while in the meantime not having won a single playoff round.

I think you mean while in the meantime making the team better in the short term being competitive with the very best teams in the league, and while in the meantime hitting on steals in the draft with the other picks, hitting on steals in UFA, hitting on steals from overseas, and having our prospects excel at an incredible rate, making the organizational loss attached to those picks relative to other teams fairly negligible at worst.

 

[666]

I want a better backup so Andersen isn’t burned out, also I want a backup that will be able to replace Andersen if needed. Hutchinson has been serviceable lately but apart from the Islanders all his wins are against bottom feeders.

Full credit to him though on his improved play, I just don’t think it’s enough if we want to make a deep run.

Backups rarely play in the playoffs so he isn't needed for a deep run.

 

[Kamiccolo]

If we had a 5-10 pick that year we would have had a shot at Elias Pettersson or Cody Glass which would have been very interesting. Plus Philadelphia and New Jersey both won the lottery, so we could have had a chance at Makar and Heiskanen too. Would have made the rebuild more complete but hindsight is whatever.

If we got Makar everyone here would rip him apart for his defensive play and for being soft. Heiskanen would have been torn apart here too. None of our kids are ever as good as the other kids. The grass is always greener in Toronto.

 

[Big Muddy]

That's precisely the point that's being made. Using hindsight, the trades are bad because we didn't win the cup yet. That's a flawed way to view those trades.

I think you mean while in the meantime making the team better in the short term being competitive with the very best teams in the league, and while in the meantime hitting on steals in the draft with the other picks, hitting on steals in UFA, hitting on steals from overseas, and having our prospects excel at an incredible rate, making the organizational loss attached to those picks relative to other teams fairly negligible at worst.

Your emphasizing that it was necessary to win it all, the Cup. I don't think people were going to that extreme, but whatever. You'll argue nonetheless and throw in tangents along the way.

As for your 2nd paragraph, if we are counting on non-NHL source players, getting steals in the draft, etc., its easy to see why all of those things won't continue to happen each year & that it won't be a great strategy long term. In blackjack, that would like hitting (getting another card) when you have 17 (or 17 - 20) while the dealer's card is between a 2 and a 6. You might get lucky once or twice, but long term its a good strategy to lose money.

 

[ToneDog]

If we got Makar everyone here would rip him apart for his defensive play and for being soft. Heiskanen would have been torn apart here too. None of our kids are ever as good as the other kids. The grass is always greener in Toronto.

I get it but "everyone" ?? I find that hard to believe.