The Vision of Kyle Dubas

[ACC1224]

Took him a while to catch up.
I’ve been doing that since the Islander game.

lol, was watching with my daughter at the cottage.
They made it 4 -2 and we were both, "the comeback is on" followed shortly after by "Sparkie, where you going?....argh".

 

[ninetyone]

wouldn't rush to give Dubas a report card just yet. Let's give him one playoff, one offseason and see what adjustments he can make based on how the playoffs go. Dubas' job is not to ensure there are no slumps during the season and no team has BOTH incredible high-end talent and great depth (except for Tampa) - so all teams are flawed.

The Leafs already knew that Holl, Marincin can't play NHL minutes, and hopefully they won't have to if they want to win playoff games. But you don't build a team around your #7-8 dmen or your awful back-up goalie - you live with that until the playoffs.

Nylander and Kadri have taken a major step back from what was expected, Marleau's slowed a bit as well, but this is a much better team than who almost beat BOS last year. Now we go into April and take our chances.

 

[TheScandal89]

I'm not sure Nylander would be happy being relegated to the 3rd line centre position permanently? I think he'd want a bigger role if for no other reason than financially going forward?

Possibly, the minutes are what matter and realistically the top 9 should all be 15+ minutes a game regardless. I think getting him to do that with talented wingers and top line pp minutes might be best for him

 

[RLF]

do the math of what you just suggested.

12.5 *8 = 100
9*4 + 14.75*4 = 95

Reconciling a 12.5x8 with RFA = 9 requires valuing UFA at a sky high 16 million, resulting in a 10.4 5 year deal.
It's a closed system. If you agree that ~12.5x8 is fair than any dollar removed from RFA gets added to UFA. You can't agree to 12.5 and 14.75UFA value while disagreeing with a 10.149 RFA value

How did you miss this part?

"If you add a little cap inflation per year of bought UFA years, we would end up at about 8 X $12.5M per."

In other words; if I go by one year of UFA being at the value you suggest $14.75M(not that I am saying you are right) and subsequent years costing a little more...you could end up with a total of 4 UFA years being worth about $5M more based on cap inflation compared to simply adding the value of the first year X 4. UFA years typically escalate or decrease in value depending on age of player.

I am not saying it is or would be done this way. I am disagreeing with your evaluation of how the contract would or is likely structured.
If there was an actual formula for all contracts that every GM and agent used, there would be a conclusive breakdown of how the contract is structured. Since there isn't, your math is simply opinion and not fact. Based on other bridge contracts signed that take up only RFA years, I believe your evaluation of the RFA years are high. It seems like you are trying to find a way to show Matthews contract is in perfectly in line. There is no conclusive right or wrong, even though you seem to be arguing that there is a right way-yours.

 

[Trapper]

Possibly, the minutes are what matter and realistically the top 9 should all be 15+ minutes a game regardless. I think getting him to do that with talented wingers and top line pp minutes might be best for him

Marleau plays 16 minutes/night from that 3rd line compared to the 14-15 Nylander has been getting.

There is no reason (with special teams) that Willy can’t pull 18 minutes from 3C + playing with Matthews when we need him too.

 

[rumman]

Possibly, the minutes are what matter and realistically the top 9 should all be 15+ minutes a game regardless. I think getting him to do that with talented wingers and top line pp minutes might be best for him

well, he's not bumping Mathews or JT from the top two spots, and there will be little money available to upgrade the 3rd line wingers if the Leafs want to ice a D that can actually defend. It's third line centre or be happy riding Mathew's wing, which is probably where he should slot in seeing how he's yet been unable to drive a line and/or make the players on his line better.

 

[RLF]

Marleau plays 16 minutes/night from that 3rd line compared to the 14-15 Nylander has been getting.

There is no reason (with special teams) that Willy can’t pull 18 minutes from 3C + playing with Matthews when we need him too.

Willy has only been under 15mins a game 3X in his last 18 games. His ice time has been increasing.

 

[Trapper]

Willy has only been under 15mins a game 3X in his last 18 games. His ice time has been increasing.

Thanks large in part to injuries forcing Babcock's hand.
Again I see no reason why he couldn't be a C + RW (when needed) and lose minutes.

 

[RLF]

Thanks large in part to injuries forcing Babcock's hand.
Again I see no reason why he couldn't be a C + RW (when needed) and lose minutes.

Personally I like him better with Matthews as Willy needs finishing talent to play with and I don't see him having that if he plays 3rd line centre. That said, I don't think Johnsson is the right guy on their wing. I think Matthews/Nylander need a heavy player to create loose pucks and space for them in the O-zone. A guy that goes to the net allowing them to move around and create. We just don't have enough of those guys on this team to compliment the skill.

 

[Trapper]

Personally I like him better with Matthews as Willy needs finishing talent to play with and I don't see him having that if he plays 3rd line centre. That said, I don't think Johnsson is the right guy on their wing. I think Matthews/Nylander need a heavy player to create loose pucks and space for them in the O-zone. A guy that goes to the net allowing them to move around and create. We just don't have enough of those guys on this team to compliment the skill.

Sometimes (maybe not popular), I'd like to see Matthews on the wing with Nylander at center. You know the times we talk about Matthews looking disinterested?
Nylander gives us a right shooting/right passing C to a guy who sometimes can focus on just shooting.
Then if you found a Ferland or Anderson to flank on the right.
Maybe not all the time, but it's definitely worth a try.

I don't have the stats, I'm not sure what Nylander's numbers are (possession/shots per 60/zone entries/whatever) at center and at RW. It's limited at C but where is he most dangerous?

 

[RLF]

Sometimes (maybe not popular), I'd like to see Matthews on the wing with Nylander at center. You know the times we talk about Matthews looking disinterested?
Nylander gives us a right shooting/right passing C to a guy who sometimes can focus on just shooting.
Then if you found a Ferland or Anderson to flank on the right.
Maybe not all the time, but it's definitely worth a try.

I don't have the stats, I'm not sure what Nylander's numbers are (possession/shots per 60/zone entries/whatever) at center and at RW. It's limited at C but where is he most dangerous?

I can see what you are saying about switching Matthews/Nylander...not sure it would work, but I can see why.

As for Nylander - most dangerous where? Our end or theirs? jk

Right now, I think most dangerous on Matthews wing.

 

[Trapper]

I can see what you are saying about switching Matthews/Nylander...not sure it would work, but I can see why.

As for Nylander - most dangerous where? Our end or theirs? jk

Right now, I think most dangerous on Matthews wing.

I would have to agree with the way Babcock deploys at the moment.
When you are getting your a$$ handed to you for a stretch now, you've got to try some things to break the funk.
When we were discussing Ehlers/Nylander/Pastrnak contracts, Nylander can be more valuable because he can play center and wing. The others can't.
Now when you are down by quite a bit, you also have options of:

Matthews...Tavares...Marner
Hyman/Johnsson...Nylander...Kapanen

Or get Nylander coming down the offwing with Matthews and getting someone heavier on the right side.

We have weapons and options to explore. I might not like the lack of aggressive/forechecking aspect of the team but I still want to win. Take advantage of the things others don't have the options for.

 

[Budsfan]

 

[KE19]

Backing up the brink's truck is very complex.

Could only be done by a true intellectual.

 

[4thline]

It seems like you are trying to find a way to show Matthews contract is in perfectly in line. There is no conclusive right or wrong, even though you seem to be arguing that there is a right way-yours.

Actually I explicitly stated that I think it is 0.5-1.0 million high per year. Justifying every dollar of 11.63 x5 requires assumptions that I disagree with. (Primarily his 8 year value)

You are right though, applying the value of the UFA years as a straightline average is an assumption. But only a very slight one given the years run through his prime and the hypothetical difference should be only from inflation. It simply cannot be avoided the if you have a 4 year value based on RFA year, and an 8 year value based on the blend, the difference is equal to the sum value of the 4 UFA years. If it places the UFA value unjustifiably high it means that either the RFA number is too low, or the 8 year aggregate too high. It is simple inescapable math. The sole point I am making with this line of thinking is shedding light on just how highly certain posters are implicitly valuing years 6-7-8 when suggesting that 10x5 and 12+x8 exist on the same scale of "fairness", because I 've seen a definite disconnect.

And for what it's worth, I really do think OS leverage played a much larger role in this than many want to accept. If Matthews/Moldaver drew a line in the sand at 10.149 x4 and said "that's the only contract we're signing", someone would have given it too him.

 

[Menzinger]

Which is exactly the right perspective to take.

Reactionary moves is the worst thing a GM can ever do. Develop a strategy, stick with it, and make adaptations when need be

 

[Lupuls Grit]

Leivo is a puck-winning boards beast, will fist fight not back away when confronted, is a keep-my-mouth-shut-and-take-one-for-the-team guy, knew Babcock's system, and will always earn less than $1M per year.

Sounds just like what we need.

Vancouver fans are at least as critical and impatient as Leaf fans, and even they have only good things to say.

I have watched numerous Canucks games since the Leivo trade. Leivo is better than I expected. The Canucks badly needed some grit in their Top 9 and Leivo can really play anywhere from the 1st to 4th lines (though probably better suited for the 3rd line; 2nd PP unit). He skates much better than I expected and has a high compete level. I have no idea why Babcock would not play him more - seems to me that the Leafs could really benefit from Leivo's physical presence now and in the playoffs.

 

[RLF]

I would have to agree with the way Babcock deploys at the moment.
When you are getting your a$$ handed to you for a stretch now, you've got to try some things to break the funk.
When we were discussing Ehlers/Nylander/Pastrnak contracts, Nylander can be more valuable because he can play center and wing. The others can't.
Now when you are down by quite a bit, you also have options of:

Matthews...Tavares...Marner
Hyman/Johnsson...Nylander...Kapanen

Or get Nylander coming down the offwing with Matthews and getting someone heavier on the right side.

We have weapons and options to explore. I might not like the lack of aggressive/forechecking aspect of the team but I still want to win. Take advantage of the things others don't have the options for.

We have options for sure, especially when needed to come back from being down a goal or two...or 5.
It seems to me, the players don't want to play Babcocks way and therefore Babcock doesn't trust going too top heavy as either he feels they would be exposed defensively and/or lines 3 and 4 would not have enough offence and would be on their heels all the time.
It can seem great to go all offence, but when many of those offensive players are also the biggest cheaters defensively, you can find yourself down a goal or two pretty quickly...or vice versa. It can be a crap-shoot.

 

[Trapper]

We have options for sure, especially when needed to come back from being down a goal or two...or 5.
It seems to me, the players don't want to play Babcocks way and therefore Babcock doesn't trust going too top heavy as either he feels they would be exposed defensively and/or lines 3 and 4 would not have enough offence and would be on their heels all the time.
It can seem great to go all offence, but when many of those offensive players are also the biggest cheaters defensively, you can find yourself down a goal or two pretty quickly...or vice versa. It can be a crap-shoot.

Maybe they get exposed but if you never give an individual the experience in that situation they are never ready. Or you never know. At least be given the opportunity to fail.
Give a man a fish...
Marner is now on the PK and that’s great.

 

[RLF]

Maybe they get exposed but if you never give an individual the experience in that situation they are never ready. Or you never know. At least be given the opportunity to fail.
Give a man a fish...
Marner is now on the PK and that’s great.

I'm not against trying it, hell, that is what the regular season is for...just saying why I think Babcock doesn't.
Ultimately, until we find a system that works that the players will buy into or get them to truly buy into the current one...we really don't know what we have or what this team can do or who can play with who and be successful.

 

[thewave]

Which is exactly the right perspective to take.

Reactionary moves is the worst thing a GM can ever do. Develop a strategy, stick with it, and make adaptations when need be

Ultimately you are judged on the fruits of your efforts though. Complex but right may indeed prove to be wrong.

 

[Daisy Jane]

I have watched numerous Canucks games since the Leivo trade. Leivo is better than I expected. The Canucks badly needed some grit in their Top 9 and Leivo can really play anywhere from the 1st to 4th lines (though probably better suited for the 3rd line; 2nd PP unit). He skates much better than I expected and has a high compete level. I have no idea why Babcock would not play him more - seems to me that the Leafs could really benefit from Leivo's physical presence now and in the playoffs.

Dubas didn't need to trade him though.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Which is exactly the right perspective to take.

Reactionary moves is the worst thing a GM can ever do. Develop a strategy, stick with it, and make adaptations when need be

which he isn't doing so. there you go.

Backing up the brink's truck is very complex.

Could only be done by a true intellectual.

 

[HarrySPlinkett]

I actually don't think the shorter Matthews contract will damage the Leafs at all. He gets his retirement contract at 26 and is only 34 when it ends.

True elite forwards like Matthews are only beginning to decline around that age. So the Leafs will end up with a player who is actually a $12-$14M player for more of his contract, if not all of it. Alternatively, extending him at 28 means you're likely going to have to account for a few years when you aren't getting what you paid for.

 

[Throw More Waffles]

I actually don't think the shorter Matthews contract will damage the Leafs at all. He gets his retirement contract at 26 and is only 34 when it ends.

True elite forwards like Matthews are only beginning to decline around that age. So the Leafs will end up with a player who is actually a $12-$14M player for more of his contract, if not all of it. Alternatively, extending him at 28 means you're likely going to have to account for a few years when you aren't getting what you paid for.

Even if Matthews resigns with the leafs in 5 seasons, he'll likely sign (all ufa years with a cap ceiling approx $15 million higher) for damn near $20 million a season. All while McDavid will still have three more seasons at 12.6.
Matthews contract is not merely a bad contract, it's a flat out disaster of a contract.