Of Nonis, Babcock & who the heck is going to be running this asylum on draft day

[Kin]

For instance, if Chiarelli really wants him in Edmonton, I'm sure their talks will sort out that they're on the same page and negotiations that Babcock will have the input he wants

.

Except to me that just reads like saying the same thing in another way. What you're essentially saying there is "If Chiarelli wants Babcock so much that he's willing to forgo the sort of traditional authority/management structure that a GM has, he could probably use that as a selling point" which, while true, is a pretty big if.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

There are only 30 teams. He's a smart guy. He'll figure it out. But I doubt his first choice would be Toronto with Shanahan's management structure and lack of talent needed to contend.

Well, as Carlton's post pointed out the extent to which any management structure is the one Babcock wants to be in is very much a bone of contention right now. Personally, I think if he just wanted to be in a place with a good roster, under a smart GM in full control and where he could make a lot of money, he'd already be extended in Detroit.

To my mind, the fact that he's not there says that of those three things, he wants a differing set of circumstances in at least two. Either he wants a better roster, more control over player-personnel decisions or he wants to go somewhere for the money. To me, two of those favour the Leafs.

I think he'd like to raise the bar for coaches financially. But he's made all kinds of money - I doubt it's at the top of his list.

ESPN: Babcock won't address his future, but questions Wings' composition
Babcock did not explicitly address the situation, but he still might have tipped his hand with some of the remarks he made regarding the future of the organization.

He compared the Wings with the Lightning to hammer home his point: ?We are what we are. They have a young team that, they were bad here for long enough that they were able to rebuild and get good young players, and young players at key positions. Three of our best players are 34 [Niklas Kronwall], 35 [Henrik Zetterberg] and 37 [Pavel Datsyuk]. So any way you look at it, we?re a team that?s changed a ton of players, we?re a team that?s added a lot of youth to our lineup and, right now on the outside they don?t pick us as a Stanley Cup contender.?

And Babcock seems at least somewhat concerned about the composition of the team down the road.

?We have lots of good, young players, no question about it. And we?ve got some good ones coming. But who?s going to replace [Datsyuk]?? he asked. ?I don?t think [Datsyuk] is going anywhere right away, but that?s what you?ve got to do. You?ve got to have big time players up the middle and on the back to be successful. So those are questions that our organization works toward, we?ve been drafting good, we?ve been developing good, but we?ve been winning too much. That?s the facts.?

And the problem with the Leafs is: they're not much if at all closer to "replacing Datsyuk, Zettterberg & Kronwall" than the Wings are (ignoring the fact that the Leafs don't have three players like that). Anyone suggesting Kessel would probably just make Babcock smile nicely and politely with grave apprehension. Kessel as a one way player is no Datsyuk or Zetterberg and he never will be. And even if he was, the Leafs don't have the depth of talent to surround him before he's well past his prime.

Babcock's a winner. Like Bowman, I think he really wants to win. The aging Wings talent is what is primarily discouraging him - not the size of his paycheck. If Toronto were further along with Shanahan's rebuild, it might have made sense but I doubt that makes much sense to Babcock now - it's too long and bumpy a road when there are so many other seemingly smoother or more attractive or more likely paths for him to get back to the Cup finals.

To me that reads as if he sees the writing on the wall in Detroit. Basically he's good enough to coach an aging roster with few blue chip players (young ones anyway) into a first round birth most years, but their contention window is over.

Teams like Tampa, the Rangers and some others will be better for some time to come, and Detroit will only get worse as Kronwall, Datsyuk and Zetterberg age/retire.

He's a smart guy. IMO he's looking to jump ship before DET becomes a stagnant team (maybe they already have) and then needs to re-build and get some high picks. That's a long process.

Toronto has a few things going for it. They're already, effectively, 3 years into a re-build (Rielly, Nylander and this years #4 overall), they have some pieces that are high-end/movable for good pieces, and they can offer a combination of lots of money and, should they choose, management input.

The draw back is the team will suck for a couple more years, but there aren't a lot of teams that can offer Babcock what he's reportedly looking for. I would've said EDM, but hiring Chiarelli is a massive roadblock IMO.

 

[mr grieves]

For instance, if Chiarelli really wants him in Edmonton, I'm sure their talks will sort out that they're on the same page and negotiations that Babcock will have the input he wants

.

Except to me that just reads like saying the same thing in another way. What you're essentially saying there is "If Chiarelli wants Babcock so much that he's willing to forgo the sort of traditional authority/management structure that a GM has, he could probably use that as a selling point" which, while true, is a pretty big if.

I just don't think we can look at teams and their existing management set ups and say Babcock definitely won't be a fit. If he's as sought after as many here think, I'm sure some teams that don't presently have the set up we think he wants won't make room for him.

 

[jdh1]

In my view..I think Babcock is coming to the Leafs.To win a cup here would be like the top of the mountain.Why go anywhere else...this is the center of the hockey universe.

 

[Kin]

I just don't think we can look at teams and their existing management set ups and say Babcock definitely won't be a fit. If he's as sought after as many here think, I'm sure some teams that don't presently have the set up we think he wants won't make room for him.

Well, I do think some people are exaggerating how much he'll be sought after. I definitely think that with some pretty good coaches like McLellan, Bylsma and potentially someone like Hitchcock available there will be a lot of teams who will ask whether Babcock is right for them as much as whether they're right for him. He's a good coach, maybe the best in the league, but that doesn't mean teams will move heaven and earth for him.

 

[Bill_Berg]

I just don't think we can look at teams and their existing management set ups and say Babcock definitely won't be a fit. If he's as sought after as many here think, I'm sure some teams that don't presently have the set up we think he wants won't make room for him.

Well, I do think some people are exaggerating how much he'll be sought after. I definitely think that with some pretty good coaches like McLellan, Bylsma and potentially someone like Hitchcock available there will be a lot of teams who will ask whether Babcock is right for them as much as whether they're right for him. He's a good coach, maybe the best in the league, but that doesn't mean teams will move heaven and earth for him.

I'm not sure how big a difference there is between the best coach in the league and the 20th best coach. Is the getting Babcock the equivalent of getting a top line center or a quality back-up goalie. I don't know, but I find myself not putting much stock in who the coach is these days, not when it comes to judging the team's on ice performance. I certainly have my favorites for post game interviews.

 

[cw]

Like Bowman, I think he really wants to win.

That's not really a point of contention though. For me, when I read what you linked and what CtB linked, the impression I keep coming away with is that this is a guy who is frustrated by the direction of his club and wants a bigger role in how a team operates. Not a departure from coaching, no, but having something added to his portfolio. That's what I think is the primary appeal in a situation like Toronto. He would, or could, come in and have a great deal of say in how the team gets built.

More specifically to your bolded sentence (but quoted so context isn't lost):

I don't think so. He didn't complain about direction as a matter of management choice. He complained about it as a matter of circumstance. He stated why their stars are older: you keep winning, you don't get to draft the obvious stars available early. So it's hard for management to replace them (if you keep showing up in the playoffs for 24 years in a row ...)

He recognizes the franchise is in a bit of a pickle - not so much through mismanagement but much more so as a result of their successes.

Bowman did that in the early 80s with the Habs and he moved on.

No, the Leafs don't present the immediate challenge or opportunity of coaching McDavid or Crosby but I think you're underselling what Toronto could be in a year or two building around Rielly, Nylander and one of Hanifin or Strome just as a starting point. If there are deals out there for Kessel/Phaneuf that can yield legitimate assets in terms of picks/prospects there's a lot of clay there.

But to clarify, I'm not really making the case for what I think Babcock will do. I think it would be impossible to lay reasonable odds because what goes into his decision is something I don't really think is knowable to any of us. I just think it's undeniable that there are just as many potential reasons for him to take the job in Toronto as there are anywhere else.

In the last 60-70 years, I think Bowman is the only head coach to win a Cup in more than one city. I think Babcock really wants to join him - that's the big deal. There's a bunch of teams who can offer him a better shot at that than Toronto.

 

[Kin]

He recognizes the franchise is in a bit of a pickle - not so much through mismanagement but much more so as a result of their successes.

Except I'm not saying he thinks the Red Wings have been mismanaged, although it's clear that there are decisions that he disagrees with, what I'm saying is that, from just about everything I've read, he wants to be the one who makes those decisions. I'm sure he knows Ken Holland is relatively good at his job, I just don't think it's possible to read what's been written about that situation and think that increased control isn't something that's at issue in Detroit.

In the last 60-70 years, I think Bowman is the only head coach to win a Cup in more than one city. I think Babcock really wants to join him - that's the big deal. There's a bunch of teams who can offer him a better shot at that than Toronto.

I don't get the sense that Babcock is in anyway impatient and I think your definition of "better shot" might differ from his. I think there's every chance that he thinks that the team with the best chance at winning a cup, now or in the future, is the one that he has the most input into.

But again, what you or I think isn't really the issue. The issue is what he thinks and I'm not claiming any special clairvoyance into how he thinks or how he'll weigh what's important to him. We don't know how much money will come into it or quality of life or input or what have you. All I know is that in some of the important categories that could matter to a coach, Toronto is in as good a position as any.

 

[Kin]

I'm not sure how big a difference there is between the best coach in the league and the 20th best coach. Is the getting Babcock the equivalent of getting a top line center or a quality back-up goalie. I don't know, but I find myself not putting much stock in who the coach is these days, not when it comes to judging the team's on ice performance. I certainly have my favorites for post game interviews.

I agree and I think one only needs to look at something pretty elementary to prove that. Right now there are pretty severe restrictions on what individual hockey players can earn and the best hockey players in the world earn about 10 million dollars a season. There are no restrictions on what NHL coaches can make and an unfettered market has decided that, more or less, the best ones are worth...a third of that? Half? Roughly as much as what a decent checking centre or middle pairing defenseman will make as a free agent?

One of the reasons that I think Babcock to Toronto makes a certain degree of sense is that Babcock's potential desire to have more control of the team is something that could be as valuable to Toronto as it is to Babcock. The Leafs might want him to have a major voice in how the franchise is built from the ground up. Other teams won't. Other teams might be ok with it but that won't be the job he'll be asked to do.

Think about Edmonton. They don't need Babcock to come in and tell them who to pick or what sort of team he wants to coach. A lot of the players are already there. Is Babcock on upgrade on Eakins? Probably. Is there a drawback to giving young players what would be their 4th coach in 4 years? Potentially. Is one worth the other? It's impossible to say.

A team with a really good roster might see Babcock as the best coach available but they'll also see other good coaches who might do just as well and come at half the price. Heck, the Leafs might too.

 

[cw]

There are only 30 teams. He's a smart guy. He'll figure it out. But I doubt his first choice would be Toronto with Shanahan's management structure and lack of talent needed to contend.

Well, as Carlton's post pointed out the extent to which any management structure is the one Babcock wants to be in is very much a bone of contention right now. Personally, I think if he just wanted to be in a place with a good roster, under a smart GM in full control and where he could make a lot of money, he'd already be extended in Detroit.

To my mind, the fact that he's not there says that of those three things, he wants a differing set of circumstances in at least two. Either he wants a better roster, more control over player-personnel decisions or he wants to go somewhere for the money. To me, two of those favour the Leafs.

I think he'd like to raise the bar for coaches financially. But he's made all kinds of money - I doubt it's at the top of his list.

ESPN: Babcock won't address his future, but questions Wings' composition
Babcock did not explicitly address the situation, but he still might have tipped his hand with some of the remarks he made regarding the future of the organization.

He compared the Wings with the Lightning to hammer home his point: ?We are what we are. They have a young team that, they were bad here for long enough that they were able to rebuild and get good young players, and young players at key positions. Three of our best players are 34 [Niklas Kronwall], 35 [Henrik Zetterberg] and 37 [Pavel Datsyuk]. So any way you look at it, we?re a team that?s changed a ton of players, we?re a team that?s added a lot of youth to our lineup and, right now on the outside they don?t pick us as a Stanley Cup contender.?

And Babcock seems at least somewhat concerned about the composition of the team down the road.

?We have lots of good, young players, no question about it. And we?ve got some good ones coming. But who?s going to replace [Datsyuk]?? he asked. ?I don?t think [Datsyuk] is going anywhere right away, but that?s what you?ve got to do. You?ve got to have big time players up the middle and on the back to be successful. So those are questions that our organization works toward, we?ve been drafting good, we?ve been developing good, but we?ve been winning too much. That?s the facts.?

And the problem with the Leafs is: they're not much if at all closer to "replacing Datsyuk, Zettterberg & Kronwall" than the Wings are (ignoring the fact that the Leafs don't have three players like that). Anyone suggesting Kessel would probably just make Babcock smile nicely and politely with grave apprehension. Kessel as a one way player is no Datsyuk or Zetterberg and he never will be. And even if he was, the Leafs don't have the depth of talent to surround him before he's well past his prime.

Babcock's a winner. Like Bowman, I think he really wants to win. The aging Wings talent is what is primarily discouraging him - not the size of his paycheck. If Toronto were further along with Shanahan's rebuild, it might have made sense but I doubt that makes much sense to Babcock now - it's too long and bumpy a road when there are so many other seemingly smoother or more attractive or more likely paths for him to get back to the Cup finals.

To me that reads as if he sees the writing on the wall in Detroit. Basically he's good enough to coach an aging roster with few blue chip players (young ones anyway) into a first round birth most years, but their contention window is over.

Teams like Tampa, the Rangers and some others will be better for some time to come, and Detroit will only get worse as Kronwall, Datsyuk and Zetterberg age/retire.

He's a smart guy. IMO he's looking to jump ship before DET becomes a stagnant team (maybe they already have) and then needs to re-build and get some high picks. That's a long process.

Toronto has a few things going for it. They're already, effectively, 3 years into a re-build (Rielly, Nylander and this years #4 overall), they have some pieces that are high-end/movable for good pieces, and they can offer a combination of lots of money and, should they choose, management input.

The draw back is the team will suck for a couple more years, but there aren't a lot of teams that can offer Babcock what he's reportedly looking for. I would've said EDM, but hiring Chiarelli is a massive roadblock IMO.

I agree with a bunch except at the bottom. I don't see Chiarelli as necessarily a terrible thing for Babcock. He's a pretty capable GM that would allow Babcock to focus more on doing what he does well: coaching. If Babcock is really about what Babcock says he is: being a coach who won more than once, then having a capable GM might be just the tonic he wants.

I believe any contending team can pick up some decent 3rd/4th line forwards and 5/6/7 dmen on the UFA market. Contenders attract players like that.

With McDavid, I think he gives them a 1/2 center setup with Nugent-Hopkins such that with Hall, Eberle and others, they have ample talent in their top 6 to contend.

They already have some good, promising D talent in Shultz, Klefbom & Nurse plus maybe guys like Ference help short term.

If they can add a coach like Babcock, they're a decent starting goalie and stud/good dman away from serious contention.

Maybe Draisaitl and Yakupov are spare assets that can be flipped to get a top dman. And if they do what, what goalie would want to pass on a shot with all that talent and good coaching?

If I'm a coach who wants to win another Stanley Cup, I've got the Oilers way ahead of the Leafs right now and them having Chiarelli isn't entirely a bad thing.

 

[rdowdall]

In the last 60-70 years, I think Bowman is the only head coach to win a Cup in more than one city. I think Babcock really wants to join him - that's the big deal. There's a bunch of teams who can offer him a better shot at that than Toronto.

Since 1927, only Scotty Bowman, Dick Irvin and Tommy Gorman have won cups coaching different teams.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Blatantly stealing this off twitter, but Babcock, Lidstrom, Datsyuk and Zetterberg only won 1 Stanley Cup together.  Crosby/Malkin have only won 1 Cup together.  St. Louis has barely made it out of the 1st round.

I try to think about how far the Leafs have to go to get a roster with pieces as talented as some of these teams have.  To think some of those combinations have only won once (which itself is a great accomplishment) I think speaks to how difficult it really is.  Any of those teams are arguably good enough to win it in multiple seasons since the first lockout.

 

[Boston Leaf]

If he wants to help a team win a cup soon then St. Louis could be the best destination

 

[Kin]

If he wants to help a team win a cup soon then St. Louis could be the best destination

I really don't think the problem in St. Louis is coaching.

 

[cw]

He recognizes the franchise is in a bit of a pickle - not so much through mismanagement but much more so as a result of their successes.

Except I'm not saying he thinks the Red Wings have been mismanaged, although it's clear that there are decisions that he disagrees with, what I'm saying is that, from just about everything I've read, he wants to be the one who makes those decisions. I'm sure he knows Ken Holland is relatively good at his job, I just don't think it's possible to read what's been written about that situation and think that increased control isn't something that's at issue in Detroit.

I've seen plenty of media speculation that increased control "might" be something that interests him but nothing from Babcock himself. So I can't get too excited about media speculation and rumours.

In the last 60-70 years, I think Bowman is the only head coach to win a Cup in more than one city. I think Babcock really wants to join him - that's the big deal. There's a bunch of teams who can offer him a better shot at that than Toronto.

I don't get the sense that Babcock is in anyway impatient and I think your definition of "better shot" might differ from his. I think there's every chance that he thinks that the team with the best chance at winning a cup, now or in the future, is the one that he has the most input into.

But again, what you or I think isn't really the issue. The issue is what he thinks and I'm not claiming any special clairvoyance into how he thinks or how he'll weigh what's important to him. We don't know how much money will come into it or quality of life or input or what have you. All I know is that in some of the important categories that could matter to a coach, Toronto is in as good a position as any.

Toronto has money, history and is a very interested market.

But the cap has reduced the money aspect some - it's a more level playing field. History is good if we can skip the last 48 years. And the market has good and bad: interest is good, media attention isn't such a great thing - has some bad to it.

After that, of the four bottom feeders, I'd probably swap the franchise rosters of any of the Oilers, Coyotes or Sabres over Toronto. This is a pretty ugly situation right now and will be for a while. I doubt Babcock wants to go through that

 

[cw]

In the last 60-70 years, I think Bowman is the only head coach to win a Cup in more than one city. I think Babcock really wants to join him - that's the big deal. There's a bunch of teams who can offer him a better shot at that than Toronto.

Since 1927, only Scotty Bowman, Dick Irvin and Tommy Gorman have won cups coaching different teams.

Gorman 1924 Chicago and 1925 Montreal
Irvin 1932 Leafs, 1944, 1946 & 1953 Habs.

So aside from Bowman, no NHL head coach has won in more than one city in 62 years. That's not speculation - that's something Babcock has effectively declared he'd like to do and isn't likely to be able to do any time soon with Detroit's aging stars.

 

[rdowdall]

In the last 60-70 years, I think Bowman is the only head coach to win a Cup in more than one city. I think Babcock really wants to join him - that's the big deal. There's a bunch of teams who can offer him a better shot at that than Toronto.

Since 1927, only Scotty Bowman, Dick Irvin and Tommy Gorman have won cups coaching different teams.

Gorman 1924 Chicago and 1925 Montreal
Irvin 1932 Leafs, 1944, 1946 & 1953 Habs.

So aside from Bowman, no NHL head coach has won in more than one city in 62 years. That's not speculation - that's something Babcock has effectively declared he'd like to do and isn't likely to be able to do any time soon with Detroit's aging stars.

Gorman was 1934 and 1935...not a big deal.

 

[Kin]

I've seen plenty of media speculation that increased control "might" be something that interests him but nothing from Babcock himself. So I can't get too excited about media speculation and rumours.

That would be a lot of smoke without any fire.

Toronto has money, history and is a very interested market

But the cap has reduced the money aspect some - it's a more level playing field. History is good if we can skip the last 48 years. And the market has good and bad: interest is good, media attention isn't such a great thing - has some bad to it.

There are lots of things beyond that. Toronto is, quite frankly, a very different city than Edmonton, Buffalo or Phoenix. That could have some appeal. It's physically close to Detroit, which could make a big deal if Babcock isn't interested in uprooting his family.

I mean, let's not forget that one of the reasons that Edmonton has been so bad is because they've had a lousy track record of getting people to want to live there.

 

[Kin]

So aside from Bowman, no NHL head coach has won in more than one city in 62 years. That's not speculation - that's something Babcock has effectively declared he'd like to do and isn't likely to be able to do any time soon with Detroit's aging stars.

Well, it would be impossible to do at all with Detroit's aging stars unless he brought them to a different team.

 

[mr grieves]

Maybe Draisaitl and Yakupov are spare assets that can be flipped to get a top dman. And if they do what, what goalie would want to pass on a shot with all that talent and good coaching?

Phaneuf, and Leafs eat salary?