HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

4th year anniversary

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-04-2012, 08:34 PM
  #551
Kingstonian84*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,411
vCash: 500
The team as a whole needed to toughen up

- But thats just it I really dont think this team has toughened up. When I say "toughened up" I don't mean a bunch of goons going out there and throwing down, I mean a team that is physical, a team that is good defensievely and a team that can beat you using more then one tactic

- The leafs right now are only good at one area and that is attacking off the rush, I'll give them that when they have room to skate they are a deadly team to play against. However they are very easy to shut down, all the opposing team has to do is clog up the NZ, take the puck off the leafs and pin them down in their own end. The leafs are very weak along the walls, not a dump/chase team, they aren't aggressive in their own end either. I really don't think much has changed between 2007 and now in that "were a tough team" approach.

Kingstonian84* is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:35 PM
  #552
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingstonian84 View Post
I feel like this topic could keep going round in circles forever, the people who support Burke think he has done a good job with this team and are trying to convice the anti-Burke side to bend to their way of thinking and on the other side the anti-burkies are trying to convince the pro side how terrible Burke has been. I think both sides just need to respect the fact that both sides have strong views on it and not try to change the others way of thinking.

The only two things I do know for sure are a) Burke himself has admitted publicly that he has failed as a GM and B) we have been a lottery team or closed to it every year since he has taken over.
a) Terrible quality to have. Imagine taking ownership of your decisions.
b) The email was down and the other 29 teams missed the memo where they were supposed to stand still and let the Leafs catch up.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:39 PM
  #553
Duke Silver
Truce?
 
Duke Silver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,007
vCash: 450
Lots of people like to just point to the standings as if it's some sort of bulletproof indication of Burke's success. That's such an incredibly simplistic argument.
  • They don't take into account the quality of hand Burke was dealt.
  • They don't take into account that other GMs likely would have had an even tougher time righting this ship.
  • They don't take into account that this team likely would not have placed any better four years later if we had not made the Kessel deal.
  • They don't take into account the vast improvement in our prospects compared to 2008.
    --> And it goes well beyond the "reward-for-failure" picks like Rielly. Kadri was drafted after Burke came in mid-season (unless you want to blame Burke for a 7th-last place finish after coming in in late November). Gardiner, Colborne, Biggs, Percy, Aulie, Ashton all came in via trades. Scrivens and Rynnas were free agent pick-ups that totally rebuilt our goalie depth.
  • They don't take into account that Burke has routinely spun straw into gold via trades
  • They don't take into account that 22 games does not reflect a season.
  • They don't take into account the future pieces we've added, instead lamenting about what we don't have.
  • They don't take into account how difficult it is to add a #1C or #1G without decimating your prospect depth or backing yourself into a corner salary cap-wise.
  • They don't take into account we don't yet have the prospect depth yet to decimate our prospect depth for quick results.
  • They don't take into account that we can't acquire everyone -- sometimes GMs just want to send their players to other conferences/divisions, or they're offered better packages.

But you know what, at least I can admit that he isn't perfect.
  • His free agency moves have been underwhelming.
  • He talks too much for his own good, and gives his detractors too much to use against him.
  • He held onto Wilson too long.

And I can give him reprieve for a few other things:
  • This team is not as bruising as he had advertised it would be, but instead of forcing brawn into our lineup he chose skill instead.
  • We don't have a #1C or #1G, but has smartly backed away when UFA contract talks or trade offers got too ludicrous.
  • He hasn't gotten attached to his shiny new toys, instead swallowing his pride and making up for poor signings/trades (Beauchemin, Versteeg) by quickly flipping them for new parts.
  • Things haven't turned around as quickly as he had thought, but this team has a brighter future than it has in a decade.

People who look at this as a black-and-white "only the standings matter" are too chicken[blank] to stick their necks out and really form a decent argument. They lack perspective and context.

I'm not saying this to change anyone's mind. I'm saying it to those who continue to waste their time trying to beat brick walls in a game of tennis. It's not going to get through.

Duke Silver is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:40 PM
  #554
hockeyfanz
Registered User
 
hockeyfanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveT83 View Post
Tell me do you determine if a movie is good based on what star actors were in it?
Maybe your the kind of guy that just dolls out money at the theatre because Jennifer Anistan is in it?

In 5 years from now do you honestly believe looking back people are going to be in Awe of players such as Clark MacArthur and Leo Komorov? Are prospects the likes of Percy/Ross ever going to amount to anything more than Tlusty/Devereaux ... the truth is that HORRIBLE ROSTER you have highlighted was BETTER than any team Brian Burke has been able to assemble in Toronto. You were probably preaching the same GREAT things about JFJ's team's back then as you do today with Burkes.

We have the wonderful ability of hindsight when comparing the current team to JFJ's - what you and all Burke supporters lack is the vision/objectivity to assess this current team in the future.

Whats worse is that the microscope is only showing 2 teams - one of which doesn't exist anymore lol - what happens when we finally decide its time to start including the other 29 teams in NHL into the equation - the other 29 GM's performance - the other 29 prospect pools ... But similar to the mentally ill almost every excuse/conspiracy theory will be created to avoid dealing with the truth - with reality - that this team is just as bad if not worse than what we had 5 years ago.
LMFAO.....true....

hockeyfanz is online now  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:40 PM
  #555
Durkin67
Leaf Opinionist
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada/Africa
Posts: 3,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by diceman934 View Post
Just one small error we traded a second round pick to move up 8 spots to get Biggs......that second round pick was used to pick John Gibson do you think we could use a prospect like him?
Are you saying you'd rather have John Gibson, plus Rynnas, Owuya, Scrivens and Sparks over Tyler Biggs?

Durkin67 is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:44 PM
  #556
Kingstonian84*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,411
vCash: 500
People who look at this as a black-and-white "only the standings matter" are too chicken[blank] to stick their necks out and really form a decent argument. They lack perspective and context.

- I'm not a pure Burke supporter nor do I hate the man. I think he has done some good for this team, he has taken this team from a aging one to a youthful one as well as he as unloaded a lot of the bad hanfcuffing contracts, he deserves credit for that. I also like the Kessel trade (one of his best IMO), the Phaneuf trade and lastly the Gardiner/Lupul one too. However at the end of the day its been 4 years, and we are still a lottery team and we have not made any progress in the standings, I'm not saying we have to be a contender or even a team that goes deep in the playoffs but by now we should have at least made it to the dance and even if we got bounced in the 1st or 2nd round it would have been progress.

Kingstonian84* is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:46 PM
  #557
Leo Trollmarov
I was in the pool!!
 
Leo Trollmarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke Silver View Post
Lots of people like to just point to the standings as if it's some sort of bulletproof indication of Burke's success. That's such an incredibly simplistic argument.
  • They don't take into account the quality of hand Burke was dealt.
  • They don't take into account that other GMs likely would have had an even tougher time righting this ship.
  • They don't take into account that this team likely would not have placed any better four years later if we had not made the Kessel deal.
  • They don't take into account the vast improvement in our prospects compared to 2008.
    --> And it goes well beyond the "reward-for-failure" picks like Rielly. Kadri was drafted after Burke came in mid-season (unless you want to blame Burke for a 7th-last place finish after coming in in late November). Gardiner, Colborne, Biggs, Percy, Aulie, Ashton all came in via trades. Scrivens and Rynnas were free agent pick-ups that totally rebuilt our goalie depth.
  • They don't take into account that Burke has routinely spun straw into gold via trades
  • They don't take into account that 22 games does not reflect a season.
  • They don't take into account the future pieces we've added, instead lamenting about what we don't have.
  • They don't take into account how difficult it is to add a #1C or #1G without decimating your prospect depth or backing yourself into a corner salary cap-wise.
  • They don't take into account we don't yet have the prospect depth yet to decimate our prospect depth for quick results.
  • They don't take into account that we can't acquire everyone -- sometimes GMs just want to send their players to other conferences/divisions, or they're offered better packages.

But you know what, at least I can admit that he isn't perfect.
  • His free agency moves have been underwhelming.
  • He talks too much for his own good, and gives his detractors too much to use against him.
  • He held onto Wilson too long.

And I can give him reprieve for a few other things:
  • This team is not as bruising as he had advertised it would be, but instead of forcing brawn into our lineup he chose skill instead.
  • We don't have a #1C or #1G, but has smartly backed away when UFA contract talks or trade offers got too ludicrous.
  • He hasn't gotten attached to his shiny new toys, instead swallowing his pride and making up for poor signings/trades (Beauchemin, Versteeg) by quickly flipping them for new parts.
  • Things haven't turned around as quickly as he had thought, but this team has a brighter future than it has in a decade.

People who look at this as a black-and-white "only the standings matter" are too chicken[blank] to stick their necks out and really form a decent argument. They lack perspective and context.

I'm not saying this to change anyone's mind. I'm saying it to those who continue to waste their time trying to beat brick walls in a game of tennis. It's not going to get through.
Easily the 2nd best post of the thread.


Would be 1 if I didn't pull out the Burke/Kessel poop and wiener post... sorry.

Leo Trollmarov is online now  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:47 PM
  #558
Durkin67
Leaf Opinionist
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada/Africa
Posts: 3,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingstonian84 View Post
The team as a whole needed to toughen up

- But thats just it I really dont think this team has toughened up. When I say "toughened up" I don't mean a bunch of goons going out there and throwing down, I mean a team that is physical, a team that is good defensievely and a team that can beat you using more then one tactic

- The leafs right now are only good at one area and that is attacking off the rush, I'll give them that when they have room to skate they are a deadly team to play against. However they are very easy to shut down, all the opposing team has to do is clog up the NZ, take the puck off the leafs and pin them down in their own end. The leafs are very weak along the walls, not a dump/chase team, they aren't aggressive in their own end either. I really don't think much has changed between 2007 and now in that "were a tough team" approach.
Exactly what Komisarek was brought in to do. Did you predict him blowing out his shoulder again? Nobody did. I was ecstatic to learn that Komo had signed with Toronto, knowing that several teams were reportedly in on him, and driving the price up. Had he been healthy, Kaberle would have been back to his old self and Komo would have been blocking shots and punishing the guilty at regular intervals. In short, the blueprint was well-designed. The luck that went with it was terrible. Leaf fans should come to expect as much.

Durkin67 is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:49 PM
  #559
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingstonian84 View Post
It is my opinion of why he did what he did that first 2 year.....why the signing of two D man who both did not work out....a rebuilding team does not act the way we did. He set out to prove that he could rebuild the Leafs in two years or so.....and he failed terribly. A rebuilding team does not trade 2 first and a 2nd for one player, and proceed to sign and trade for the players he did if he was not trying to retool and compete right away.

- I agree with the Beauchimen/Komi signings, I don't know what he was thinking! He knew Wilson wanted a ballerina style team with his defencmen pinching in every chance, Beauch and Komi are horrible skaters and not at all good at jumping up into the rush, not just that but the Komi contract was horrible.

- I disagree about the Kessel trade though and here's why. Kessel was the #6 overall pick in 2006 and he had just come off a near 40 goal campaign at the time the trade went down, I can see why Burke was interested in him and lets face it Kessel was and still is a very valuable player, to get a guy like him you need to give up value in return. I MO two firsts and a 2nd for a guy of his calibre is a very fair tradeoff, to be fair to Burke he had no way of knowing the first rounders would both be top 10 picks.

- I'm with you on the rebuild thing, Burke was very assumptious and arrogant when he came in, he thought in his mind this team could be comptetive in less then 5 years, Burkes fault is he did not properly evaluate the roster, he did not and has not brought in a true #1 goalie, and he has also shot his mouth off countless times each time failing to deiliver on his promises.
Kessel was #5 and was at one point ranked as high as #1 iirc.

YA Burke's a blowhard get past it. Just cause he's a butt hole doesn't mean he can't do the job.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Explorer View Post
I don't post very often but I lurk a lot. I have to say, I always enjoy reading your posts. Like this one, they are bang on.

My opinion on Burke is that we aren't much better off than where we were when he took over. We have 1 elite sniper-great play maker in Kessel who may walk in 2 years, Morgan Rielly who might turn out to be elite(or might suck), and Gardiner who looks promising.

Other than those 3 players every single player on the Leaf is utterly replaceable via free agency or small time trades. It should not take GM 4 rock bottom finishes to end up with those 3 players. Don't get me wrong, I love those guys but you should have a lot more to show for 4 years of failure than those 3 players.

Burke doesn't know how to assemble a team to win, then he sucks at using his advantage for sucking.

Edit: and no I'm trying to say players like phaneuf and grabovski suck. It's just at the end of the day there are players like them available every off season as UFA's, you know it's true.
Burke doesn't know how to assemble a team?

Vancouvers 3 best forwards are thanks to Burke.

KEssel won't walk in 2 years. That is chicken little "the sky is falling" mumbo jumbo.

IF Burke can't get him re-signed to an extension then he has a 25yr old 4 time 30 goal scorer who has proven that he is also one hell of a playmaker, to trade.

I hope we keep him but it is a no lose situation.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:51 PM
  #560
Durkin67
Leaf Opinionist
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada/Africa
Posts: 3,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kessly Snipes View Post
Easily the 2nd best post of the thread.


Would be 1 if I didn't pull out the Burke/Kessel poop and wiener post... sorry.
agreed. excellent post.

Durkin67 is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:52 PM
  #561
diceman934
Registered User
 
diceman934's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NHL player factory
Posts: 6,195
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durkin67 View Post
Are you saying you'd rather have John Gibson, plus Rynnas, Owuya, Scrivens and Sparks over Tyler Biggs?
I'm saying that we traded away a 2nd pick which the Ducks used to select John Gibson.....a goalie prospect that is considered among the best young goalie prospects.....

We should have kept our pick and drafted there as well as our second....now time will tell if it pays off.

It is just that Biggs is included in the Kabs trade and that is not at all true, as we traded that pick along with our second to Drafted Biggs.

diceman934 is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:53 PM
  #562
Frankie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
That's always been my point. Maybe if you weren't used to twisting peoples words and making stuff up, you could read what is actually said.
i haven't twisted any words or made anything up. i don't have to. you're spelled out your hypocritical, illogical argument for all to see.

burke is responsible for the positives, but not for the negatives. that's how you see it, and how you think it should be. you've spelled that out.

Quote:
I got more left than you can handle.

The only illogical thing is why I bother to respond to you.
you can see the hyposcrisy in your argument and the outrageousness of your logic. you have nowhere else to turn other than to insult people and claim they're not understanding you. its not illogical for you to respond, although responding in this fashion is probably illadvised. everyone can see what you're doing.

Frankie is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:53 PM
  #563
Kingstonian84*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 1,411
vCash: 500
Kessel was #5 and was at one point ranked as high as #1 iirc.
- Sorry, I was off by one, I was wrong on that part.

YA Burke's a blowhard get past it. Just cause he's a butt hole doesn't mean he can't do the job.
- I actually dont think hes a "butthole", I think Burke the human is a great guy always helping out in charities and wanting his teams to engage in the community, props to him. However Burke the GM IMO is doing a very questionable job here.

Kingstonian84* is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 08:56 PM
  #564
Durkin67
Leaf Opinionist
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Canada/Africa
Posts: 3,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by diceman934 View Post
I'm saying that we traded away a 2nd pick which the Ducks used to select John Gibson.....a goalie prospect that is considered among the best young goalie prospects.....

We should have kept our pick and drafted there as well as our second....now time will tell if it pays off.

It is just that Biggs is included in the Kabs trade and that is not at all true, as we traded that pick along with our second to Drafted Biggs.
That 2nd was used to pick up Biggs, IIRC. So, the question is, given the fact that we have several very good goalies, including the guy with the best GAA in the A last year, would you prefer Gibso or Biggs? Because you can't take em both. I like the Biggs pick, myself. We need a talented, menacing power forward like him who can take a regular shift.

Durkin67 is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 09:00 PM
  #565
Frankie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Right it's all about the Kessel deal.

NOt the Phaneuf deal. Or The Gardiner/Lupul deal. Or the deal to get Biggs.

The KEssel deal is the only thing that matters. IT is going to define his tenure? That's just sad.
actually, its all about the standings and on-ice results of the team.

the kessel deal, love it or hate it, is a massive deal and will have a huge impact on this team for years to come. i don't see how anyone can downplay that fact. i think its of a much bigger magnitude than anything else burke has done with the leafs.

the fact that you want everyone to stop talking about it, and the fact you think its sad that it'll define burke's tenure really tells us everything about how you truly feel about the trade and the job burke has done so far.

Frankie is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 09:03 PM
  #566
diceman934
Registered User
 
diceman934's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: NHL player factory
Posts: 6,195
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durkin67 View Post
That 2nd was used to pick up Biggs, IIRC. So, the question is, given the fact that we have several very good goalies, including the guy with the best GAA in the A last year, would you prefer Gibso or Biggs? Because you can't take em both. I like the Biggs pick, myself. We need a talented, menacing power forward like him who can take a regular shift.
The options you present are not the the full option....as we gave up Boston's first and our Second to Draft Biggs. So it would have to be at least Rickard Rakell and John Gibson or Biggs as that was the results of that trade.

At this point I would take Rickard Rakell and John Gibson over just Biggs.

PS I do not believe we have a great deal of goaltending depth as well.

diceman934 is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 09:10 PM
  #567
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie View Post
i haven't twisted any words or made anything up. i don't have to. you're spelled out your hypocritical, illogical argument for all to see.

burke is responsible for the positives, but not for the negatives. that's how you see it, and how you think it should be. you've spelled that out.
I've never said that. Sorry if you misunderstood what was being said but that is dead wrong.

Quote:
you can see the hyposcrisy in your argument and the outrageousness of your logic. you have nowhere else to turn other than to insult people and claim they're not understanding you. its not illogical for you to respond, although responding in this fashion is probably illadvised. everyone can see what you're doing
Where is the HYpocracy?
Because I can see more than just the surface of the issue?
Because I understand that this isn't just black and white?
Because I understand that nobody is perfect.
BEcause I understand you don't have to like someone for them to be the best person for the job?

Where is my HYpocracy?


Last edited by MoreMogilny: 12-05-2012 at 08:13 PM.
charliolemieux is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 09:10 PM
  #568
Frankie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke Silver View Post
Lots of people like to just point to the standings as if it's some sort of bulletproof indication of Burke's success. That's such an incredibly simplistic argument.

People who look at this as a black-and-white "only the standings matter" are too chicken[blank] to stick their necks out and really form a decent argument. They lack perspective and context.
i'd just ask this....

is the nhl incredibly simplistic when they decide who makes the playoffs, and ultimately wins the stanley cup?

should they take into account all those handicaps you've listed that you feel burke has had to deal with? should they put the leafs into the playoffs because you feel burke has "routinely spun straw into gold via trades"? should they ignore the crazy 22-game slump the leafs had, and let burke's team into the playoffs?

for the nhl, only the standings matter. it is that "black and white".

they don't take into account your opinion of all the "good" things burke has done, or the "bad hand" he was dealt when he took over, or the "bad luck" he's had along the way.

fact is, it is all about the standings, and ultimately playoff success. the rest is just opinion.

Frankie is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 09:18 PM
  #569
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie View Post
actually, its all about the standings and on-ice results of the team.

the kessel deal, love it or hate it, is a massive deal and will have a huge impact on this team for years to come. i don't see how anyone can downplay that fact. i think its of a much bigger magnitude than anything else burke has done with the leafs.
Yes you are right. Kessel's PPG carreer will have a huge impact on this franchise for years to come.

We still have a young elite talent. Get over it.


Quote:
the fact that you want everyone to stop talking about it, and the fact you think its sad that it'll define burke's tenure really tells us everything about how you truly feel about the trade and the job burke has done so far.
I don't think it's sad that the KEssel trade will define BUrkes tenure here. I don't think it will define his tenure here at all. I think it's sad you feel it will be the one reason he will be remembered.

I've already said 50 times in this bloody thread alone (500 elsewhere) what I think about the Kessel trade. Hasn't changed.

This is where I get my perception about your comprehension level. I've probably mentioned what I thought of the trade in 5 posts where I quoted you. C'mon man.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 09:20 PM
  #570
Frankie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
I've never said that. Sorry if you misunderstood what was being said but that is dead wrong.
here's what you've said....

if burke makes a trade that you feel is a good trade, but the players do not play as well as you (and presumably burke) hope, then that's not his fault. he is not responsible or accountable for their execution after he acquires them.

despite saying this, you've given him much credit for his stanley cup ring, and you feel his resume is great. you've also said that if the players he has acquired play up to or beyond expectations, then that's a good deal and he gets credit for their on-ice execution.

you can't have it both ways. either he's responsible and accountable for his deals, and the execution of the players after the trades, or he isn't. you can't decide only after you see whether or not they play as well as you had hoped.

there's the hypocrisy of your argument, and the massive flaw in your logic.

Frankie is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 09:25 PM
  #571
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingstonian84 View Post
- I actually dont think hes a "butthole", I think Burke the human is a great guy always helping out in charities and wanting his teams to engage in the community, props to him. However Burke the GM IMO is doing a very questionable job here.
I thought your biggest beef with BUrke was he was a blowhard?
That he made promises he couldn't/didn't deliver?

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 09:25 PM
  #572
Frankie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
I've already said 50 times in this bloody thread alone (500 elsewhere) what I think about the Kessel trade. Hasn't changed.
you've said it a bunch of times, but the fact that you want people to "get over it" and stop talking about it tells us how you really feel about the kessel trade. you know it was a disaster, and will define burke's tenure and impact the franchise for years to come. you want to brush it under the rug in your attempt to defend burke.

Frankie is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 09:36 PM
  #573
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie View Post
here's what you've said....

if burke makes a trade that you feel is a good trade, but the players do not play as well as you (and presumably burke) hope, then that's not his fault. he is not responsible or accountable for their execution after he acquires them.
The Players have to play. The Coaches have to coach. Burke's job is to bring in he best poeple available. Recognizing talent and then actually being able to bring them in is what he gets credit for.


Quote:
despite saying this, you've given him much credit for his stanley cup ring, and you feel his resume is great. you've also said that if the players he has acquired play up to or beyond expectations, then that's a good deal and he gets credit for their on-ice execution.
FALSE!!!

IF you had read an earlier response to DAveT83 where he made the same BS made -up statement you would already know.

I'm on record on these boards saying Burke doesn't deserve all the credit he gets for the win in Anaheim.

Guess you'll be ignoring that one.

Quote:
you can't have it both ways. either he's responsible and accountable for his deals, and the execution of the players after the trades, or he isn't. you can't decide only after you see whether or not they play as well as you had hoped.
AS I said above Recognizing talent and actually getting it here is Burke's job. How they do on the ice is up to them and the coaching staff.
Ofcourse if it turns out good you're going to call it a good trade. What else would you call it?
A CharlioLemieux?
Sounds good to me.

Quote:
there's the hypocrisy of your argument, and the massive flaw in your logic.
Where?

I think you are seeing things.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 09:45 PM
  #574
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Durkin67 View Post
That 2nd was used to pick up Biggs, IIRC. So, the question is, given the fact that we have several very good goalies, including the guy with the best GAA in the A last year, would you prefer Gibso or Biggs? Because you can't take em both. I like the Biggs pick, myself. We need a talented, menacing power forward like him who can take a regular shift.
Biggs is showing he can play in a scoring role, as well as be a guy who can drop the mitts when needed.

If it translates to the NHL we have a gem.

Was't he supposed to go way sooner?

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
12-04-2012, 10:02 PM
  #575
EDDIE20*
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Disgruntled Observer View Post
The problem is that leaf fans simply dramatically over value their prospects.
Got news for ya. Most other teams' fans overvalue their prosepcts too. Nice try though.

EDDIE20* is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:56 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.