What I learned from Babcock is that being a "better" or "good" coach is subjective because having success, doesn't always mean you're the right coach for a particular team.
To me a good coach is a guy that looks at what his GM gives him and figures out how to get the most out of it. Look at Sullivan in Pittsburgh with all those injuries and lack of good defensemen (yes Letang, Dumo, Marino are good). How is that team one of the best defensive teams in hockey this season? What about RBA in Carolina. That team last season was one of the best teams at creating high danger and good chances of any team ever. Sure he's got an insane defense, Aho, Svech, etc, but you still need to have the right coaching for the right players.
Torts has done a good job in CBJ, especially this season with Bob, Panarin, Duchene, etc leaving, but I was completely unsurprised that he was fine because his coaching strategy has pretty much always been "play defense, wait for the other team to make a mistake". That's a great way to coach an unskilled team. Him coaching the Leafs though would give us the same issues that we had with Babcock because no matter how you try and force it, our team isn't made to be traditionally defensive. I've been saying it for years, we need to be a team that plays defense by almost never being in the defensive zone.
It's why I love Keefe so much because his style (reminds me of RBA in many ways) meshes almost perfectly with our GM and it's perfect for the team we have. When he took over we became a top-half of the league defensive team (Fred was horrible) while still being able to keep up our insane offense.