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

Leafs are a disaster

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-16-2012, 02:54 PM
  #151
Frankie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeball11 View Post
So you figured a guy from Sweden wouldn't have a bias towards a Swedish player?
i figure it because he's comparing him to another swedish player. perhaps he saw them both play in sweden at the same age and can make the comparison.

or maybe he's totally biased and doesn't have a clue what he's talking about. we don't know. you said yourself he's not a leaf fan, so we know he's not biased in favour of leaf prospects and thus wouldn't hype them based on that.

Quote:
If you are portraying yourself someone who is interested in "non-biased" opinions, how is it you buy the Swedish guy's opinion and use it to prop up your argument yet you ignore the Leaf's organizational ranking (done by a group of people representing different teams who have reached a concensus) when comparing prospect pools (which shows the Leafs rising from 17 to 8th overall)? Sort of flies in the face of the argument, no?
it sort of does. again, i have no idea of the biased or unbiased nature of whoever does those rankings.

i would love to see some non-biased opinions, but i think that's pretty much impossible.

Frankie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 02:56 PM
  #152
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 12,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfanz View Post
The Marlies in 07-08 were 50W 21L 9OTL for 109 PTS and Division champs. The following season they were 39W 29L 12OTL for 90 PTS

This year they are 34W 21L 7OTL...for 75pts (97 PT pace)


What are you getting at? The Marlies were actually better when Burkie arrived. They steadily declined and now are on the uprise. So what? The Leafs stink all the meanwhile and the Leafs were awful when the Marlies were ripping up the AHL. And your point is.....?
This may come as a shock to you but Brian Burke was in Anaheim in 2007-08. He inherited the 08-09 team.

Now that I've explained that to you, you explain to me the difference in organizational prospect rankings.

eyeball11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 02:57 PM
  #153
exporta
Registered User
 
exporta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,208
vCash: 500
Highest paid third line or liners?

Horcoff and Smyth say hello.

exporta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 03:06 PM
  #154
Frankie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeball11 View Post
This may come as a shock to you but Brian Burke was in Anaheim in 2007-08. He inherited the 08-09 team.
so what? most, if not all, of those kids on the 07-08 marlies team were still in the organization when burke arrived.

you're using ahl standings to back your argument (which is ridiculous), and now its backfired on you.

point remains, burke had many good prospects to work with when he arrived. the cupboard was not bare, as many are saying it was. his apparent "restocking" of the prospect system is widely over-blown.

Frankie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 03:08 PM
  #155
DirtyDion03
**** Brooklyn
 
DirtyDion03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,022
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by exporta View Post
Highest paid third line or liners?

Horcoff and Smyth say hello.
Scott Gomez says what up.

DirtyDion03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 03:10 PM
  #156
JackJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebluemachine View Post
The Leafs did play excellent for a long run. The biggest reasons we did not hold up over the full course is because we are young, inexperienced and had inconsistent goal tending.

Liles is also a very good dman, he's capable of putting up 40-50 points, can run the PP and brings invaluable veteran leadership. Considering we only gave up a 2nd round pick to acquire him it's pretty much a home run.
@3.875 he's an absolute steal. He allows Gardiner to develop at his own pace before becoming the go to guy for offensive. God only knows what will happen to Gardiner heading into year #2.

JackJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 03:54 PM
  #157
hockeyfanz*
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie View Post
so what? most, if not all, of those kids on the 07-08 marlies team were still in the organization when burke arrived.

you're using ahl standings to back your argument (which is ridiculous), and now its backfired on you.

point remains, burke had many good prospects to work with when he arrived. the cupboard was not bare, as many are saying it was. his apparent "restocking" of the prospect system is widely over-blown.
Exactly my point. The Marlies were peaking when Burke inherited the team. Under his watch they plummetted but are now on the upswing. If the Marlies were hot stuff doesn't it imply that they had some pretty good players? Im happy that someone gets it around here, Frankie.

hockeyfanz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 04:28 PM
  #158
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 63,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeball11 View Post
This may come as a shock to you but Brian Burke was in Anaheim in 2007-08. He inherited the 08-09 team..
Right you are the Marlies team previous to Burke's arrival went to the final 4 of the Calder playoffs, so he gets no credit for its success while in Anaheim.

However upon his arrival the teams decent began and went to hell in a hand basket, while plummeting to the bottom of the AHL standings and missed the playoffs consecutive times thereafter. For that Burke gets full credit, and no one is denying him that honour. This years playoffs will determine if he has brought the team back to where it was before he arrived.

Kind of like how Burke inherited a "clearing the slate" team that finished 2007-08 with 83 points, and then Burke traded for Kessel, Phaneuf and Giguere and signed Komisarek, Beauchemin, Orr, Bozak, Gustavsson etc over the course of the 2009-10 season and took the team to 29th overall in the process in his first full season on the job. Two years later now 2011-12 the team has 70 points after 71 games and is on pace for 81 on the season. Still coming in below the team he inherited in the standings.

__________________
Signature: There is no greater demonstration of Fan patience then to suggest to "Play the Kids " and be willing to accept the consequences of those actions..
Mess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 04:41 PM
  #159
Gatorade*
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,579
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie View Post
so what? most, if not all, of those kids on the 07-08 marlies team were still in the organization when burke arrived.

you're using ahl standings to back your argument (which is ridiculous), and now its backfired on you.

point remains, burke had many good prospects to work with when he arrived. the cupboard was not bare, as many are saying it was. his apparent "restocking" of the prospect system is widely over-blown.
It is very over blown. He traded the second overall and another top ten pick in his first three drafts.

Considering 8 years without a playoff appearance the Leaf system is far below where it should be. I believe they traded four first round picks during this down period and you can make it five when you consider the trade for Luke Schenn.

Gatorade* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 05:22 PM
  #160
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 12,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie View Post
so what? most, if not all, of those kids on the 07-08 marlies team were still in the organization when burke arrived.

you're using ahl standings to back your argument (which is ridiculous), and now its backfired on you.

point remains, burke had many good prospects to work with when he arrived. the cupboard was not bare, as many are saying it was. his apparent "restocking" of the prospect system is widely over-blown.
Given the prospects are still developing, what other level would you like to discuss?

I'm not sure how you figure anything backfired? You said yourself "most of those kids were in the organization when Burke arrived". Which kids do you mean?

The defense corps that went to the final four featured Muir 34, Walser 29, Wozniewski 27, Harrington 25, Sifers 24, Harrison 24, Kronwall 23. How many names do you see in there that were considered great prospects? The goaltending featured NHL veteran Scott Clemmensen, he of 30 years of age. Pogge split regular season and warmed the bench in the playoffs. Do you think Burke inherited anything there?

The top 12 regular forwards that year? Ling 32, Mitchell 22, Earl 22, Foster 23, Newbury 25, Murphy 27, Williams 23, Ondrus 25, Battaglia 31, Boyce 23, Aubin 21, Leveille 26. I don't know about you guys but I see one player in all of that who was thought to have an outside shot at a 2nd line role.

Last but not least, I'll ask the question yet again that you, Hockeyfanz and Mess don't want to touch: Why is it that a ranking of multiple individuals from multiple team fanbases has the group Burke inherited ranked 17th overall and the group he has built ranked 8th overall?

eyeball11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 06:09 PM
  #161
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 58,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeball11 View Post
Given the prospects are still developing, what other level would you like to discuss?

I'm not sure how you figure anything backfired? You said yourself "most of those kids were in the organization when Burke arrived". Which kids do you mean?

The defense corps that went to the final four featured Muir 34, Walser 29, Wozniewski 27, Harrington 25, Sifers 24, Harrison 24, Kronwall 23. How many names do you see in there that were considered great prospects? The goaltending featured NHL veteran Scott Clemmensen, he of 30 years of age. Pogge split regular season and warmed the bench in the playoffs. Do you think Burke inherited anything there?

The top 12 regular forwards that year? Ling 32, Mitchell 22, Earl 22, Foster 23, Newbury 25, Murphy 27, Williams 23, Ondrus 25, Battaglia 31, Boyce 23, Aubin 21, Leveille 26. I don't know about you guys but I see one player in all of that who was thought to have an outside shot at a 2nd line role.

Last but not least, I'll ask the question yet again that you, Hockeyfanz and Mess don't want to touch: Why is it that a ranking of multiple individuals from multiple team fanbases has the group Burke inherited ranked 17th overall and the group he has built ranked 8th overall?
The thing is the Marlies are not a NHL team, so does it really matter a great deal about AHL players?

We can project about them, but that doesn't mean anything with regards to the Maple Leafs.

We have to have patience to see if the re-stocked pantry includes choice cuts of meat, or hotdogs and hamburger.

__________________
http://kuklaskorner.com/index.php/ps...e_corsi_issues

Desjardins estimates that about 40% of the game is captured by Corsi analysis.
ULF_55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 06:52 PM
  #162
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 12,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
The thing is the Marlies are not a NHL team, so does it really matter a great deal about AHL players?

We can project about them, but that doesn't mean anything with regards to the Maple Leafs.

We have to have patience to see if the re-stocked pantry includes choice cuts of meat, or hotdogs and hamburger.
Of course they aren't an NHL team. We can't fully judge for another couple years. That said, overwhelming concensus has them projected as significantly better - and that's non-Leaf concensus, given my understanding of the rankings. If people want to judge "results", they need to judge them where they are currently available.

eyeball11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 07:45 PM
  #163
Frankie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeball11 View Post
Given the prospects are still developing, what other level would you like to discuss?
well, given that many (most) prospects don't play for the ahl team (junior, ncaa, europe), i don't see the ahl standings as much of a measuring stick. the best ahl teams year after year are usually not loaded with top nhl prospects, so i don't see how we can associate ahl standings with a good prospect system.

st. john's icecaps are doing great, better than the marlies. i don't think anyone would suggest the jets have many prospects in st.john's.

Quote:
I'm not sure how you figure anything backfired? You said yourself "most of those kids were in the organization when Burke arrived". Which kids do you mean?
you point towards ahl team success as a measuring stick for a good prospect system. burke inhereted a good ahl team. yet, apparently he inhereted hardly a single legitimate prospect. that doesn't add up, thus it backfired on you.

burke inhereted tlusty, mitchell, earl, stralman, kronwall, oreskovic, pogge. all played for that 07-08 marlies team. all contributed to its success. all were widely-hyped as good prospects at the time, and some have had nhl success. this doesn't include the kids playing junior at the time, and those in europe. i don't see a bare cupboard.

Quote:
Last but not least, I'll ask the question yet again that you, Hockeyfanz and Mess don't want to touch: Why is it that a ranking of multiple individuals from multiple team fanbases has the group Burke inherited ranked 17th overall and the group he has built ranked 8th overall?
i touched this question, in fact i answered it directly. it does fly in the face of what i'm saying. it is absolutely an argument you have in your favour. doesn't mean we have to buy it.

i believe whoever does these rankings likely also falls for the burke hype. burke is his greatest promoter. i'd say most here believe the prospect base is significantly improved simply because burke says it is.

i don't trust those rankings, and i don't buy into the notion that burke has turned the prospect system around and greatly improved it. doesn't matter to me if its a leaf fan saying it or not. there's no evidence to support that theory. the cupboard was far from bare when burke arrived, and the current group doesn't look any better than the group of 4 years ago.

Frankie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 07:49 PM
  #164
NeverGoingToWin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,653
vCash: 500
They actually signed AHL pros to make a run at attracting fans the last year Pogge was considered a prospect. They were good because of the mature players on the team and not the prospects.

NeverGoingToWin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2012, 08:41 PM
  #165
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 63,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie View Post
well, given that many (most) prospects don't play for the ahl team (junior, ncaa, europe), i don't see the ahl standings as much of a measuring stick. the best ahl teams year after year are usually not loaded with top nhl prospects, so i don't see how we can associate ahl standings with a good prospect system.

you point towards ahl team success as a measuring stick for a good prospect system. burke inhereted a good ahl team. yet, apparently he inhereted hardly a single legitimate prospect. that doesn't add up, thus it backfired on you.

burke inhereted tlusty, mitchell, earl, stralman, kronwall, oreskovic, pogge. all played for that 07-08 marlies team. all contributed to its success. all were widely-hyped as good prospects at the time, and some have had nhl success. this doesn't include the kids playing junior at the time, and those in europe. i don't see a bare cupboard..
Burke also inherited prospects Luke Schenn, Carl Gunnarsson, James Reimer, Matt Frattin, Nikolai Kulemin, Korbinian Holzer, Juraj Mikus, Victor Stalberg etc etc and none of those were on the Marlies team that had success prior to Burke's arrival.

Some of those are not even prospects any longer but key Maple Leafs from the prospect pool Burke inherited. Who has Burke added equal to "bare cupboard" prospects Schenn, Frattin, Kulemin, Reimer, Gunnarsson etc?

Bare cupboard is something Burke supporters like to toss out in support but the reality of the situation says otherwise.

Also current prospects Stuart Percy, Brad Ross, Josh Leivo etc are all new prospects credited to Burke, but were directly obtained through previous Leaf prospects Jimmy Hayes, Viktor Stalberg, Chris DiDomenico, Jiri Tlusty etc most of which are playing in the NHL now themselves. So instead of having Stalberg who has 17-17-34 points & Jiri Tlusty 15-16-31 NHL points Leafs have Stuart Percy & Josh Leivo. I'd suggest that doesn't scream prospect improvement to me.


Last edited by Mess: 03-16-2012 at 08:47 PM.
Mess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2012, 10:34 AM
  #166
Busher Jackson
4x 1st Team Allstar
 
Busher Jackson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 464
vCash: 500
Axxx


Last edited by Busher Jackson: 03-17-2012 at 10:46 AM.
Busher Jackson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2012, 12:57 PM
  #167
Whydidijoin*
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,812
vCash: 500
Since our 81 point team in 2008-2009 was so much better than the team we have today, not at all a result of veterans with experience playing at their peak/above their level because of increased ice time, we should have just kept it!

Even though 13 players that played 10+ games for us that year are no longer in the league, they had so much room to improve, unlike our team this year. We could be icing a super-awesome line-up like:

Blake (6 goals, 11 points) – Grabovski (22 goals, 49 points) – Stempniak (12 goals, 24 points)
Ponikarovsky (12 goals, 27 points) –Tlusty (15 goals, 31 points) – Frattin (6 goals, 12 points)
Hagman (9 goals, 21 points) – Mitchell (5 goals, 15 points) – Mayers (5 goals, 14 points)
Kulemin (7 goals, 28 points) – Stajan (6 goals, 15 points) – Deveaux (0 goals, 1 point)

Kubina (3 goals, 13 points) – Kaberle (3 goals, 31 points)
White (7 goals, 30 points) – Schenn (2 goals, 20 points)
Stralman (2 goals, 16 points) – Gunnarsson (4 goals, 19 points)

Reimer (3.03 GAA, 0.901 SV%)

Like wow. We could have 126 goals by now, only 24 goals behind the worst team in the league for GF, and 79 goals behind our current production!

But then we could have got a top-10 pick, where we are GUARANTEED to draft an impact player, just like Svitov, Chistov, Blackburn, Upshall, Nystrom, Taticek, Barker, Olesz, Picard, Valibik, Lee, Skille, Brule, Pouliot, Sheppard, Frolik, Ellerby, Hamill, Hickey, Filatov, Bailey, Paajarvi, or even Komisarek in the last decade.

Man, the future would have been bright. Top-10 picks are ALWAYS elite players. Instead we have Kessel, Lupul, Phaneuf, Connolly, Schenn, Komisarek and Kadri, who are all useless because they were drafted in the... wait, what?

Whydidijoin* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2012, 01:03 PM
  #168
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 58,690
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whydidijoin View Post
Since our 81 point team in 2008-2009 was so much better than the team we have today, not at all a result of veterans with experience playing at their peak/above their level because of increased ice time, we should have just kept it!

Even though 13 players that played 10+ games for us that year are no longer in the league, they had so much room to improve, unlike our team this year. We could be icing a super-awesome line-up like:

Blake (6 goals, 11 points) – Grabovski (22 goals, 49 points) – Stempniak (12 goals, 24 points)
Ponikarovsky (12 goals, 27 points) –Tlusty (15 goals, 31 points) – Frattin (6 goals, 12 points)
Hagman (9 goals, 21 points) – Mitchell (5 goals, 15 points) – Mayers (5 goals, 14 points)
Kulemin (7 goals, 28 points) – Stajan (6 goals, 15 points) – Deveaux (0 goals, 1 point)

Kubina (3 goals, 13 points) – Kaberle (3 goals, 31 points)
White (7 goals, 30 points) – Schenn (2 goals, 20 points)
Stralman (2 goals, 16 points) – Gunnarsson (4 goals, 19 points)

Reimer (3.03 GAA, 0.901 SV%)

Like wow. We could have 126 goals by now, only 24 goals behind the worst team in the league for GF, and 79 goals behind our current production!

But then we could have got a top-10 pick, where we are GUARANTEED to draft an impact player, just like Svitov, Chistov, Blackburn, Upshall, Nystrom, Taticek, Barker, Olesz, Picard, Valibik, Lee, Skille, Brule, Pouliot, Sheppard, Frolik, Ellerby, Hamill, Hickey, Filatov, Bailey, Paajarvi, or even Komisarek in the last decade.

Man, the future would have been bright. Top-10 picks are ALWAYS elite players. Instead we have Kessel, Lupul, Phaneuf, Connolly, Schenn, Komisarek and Kadri, who are all useless because they were drafted in the... wait, what?

Hmmm?

You think that team would be drafting outside the top 3?

2009 - Matt Duchene
2010 - Tyler Seguin
2011 - Adam Larsson
2012 - Grigorenko

See easy.

And they would have played the same number of playoffs games.

ULF_55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2012, 01:09 PM
  #169
Edgeworth*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,847
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Burke also inherited prospects Luke Schenn, Carl Gunnarsson, James Reimer, Matt Frattin, Nikolai Kulemin, Korbinian Holzer, Juraj Mikus, Victor Stalberg etc etc and none of those were on the Marlies team that had success prior to Burke's arrival.

Some of those are not even prospects any longer but key Maple Leafs from the prospect pool Burke inherited. Who has Burke added equal to "bare cupboard" prospects Schenn, Frattin, Kulemin, Reimer, Gunnarsson etc?

Bare cupboard is something Burke supporters like to toss out in support but the reality of the situation says otherwise.

Also current prospects Stuart Percy, Brad Ross, Josh Leivo etc are all new prospects credited to Burke, but were directly obtained through previous Leaf prospects Jimmy Hayes, Viktor Stalberg, Chris DiDomenico, Jiri Tlusty etc most of which are playing in the NHL now themselves. So instead of having Stalberg who has 17-17-34 points & Jiri Tlusty 15-16-31 NHL points Leafs have Stuart Percy & Josh Leivo. I'd suggest that doesn't scream prospect improvement to me.
Sorry. Let us go steal Toews, Sharp, Kane and Hossa so that Stalberg can put up those numbers in Toronto. Not saying he isn't fast, but give credit to his linemates.

Jiri Tlusty is a ****ing bum, why do we care?

Edgeworth* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2012, 01:22 PM
  #170
Sokil
Ukraine Specialitsky
 
Sokil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 6,233
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeafsFan2342 View Post
Exactly. Also I played hockey with his kid. He was the coach. They finished bottom 3 in the league. That should tell you something about his hockey knowledge
seriously? we're correlating his hockey knowledge to the performance of a team of little kids? come on

Sokil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2012, 01:24 PM
  #171
Beleafer4
Registered User
 
Beleafer4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Burke also inherited prospects Luke Schenn, Carl Gunnarsson, James Reimer, Matt Frattin, Nikolai Kulemin, Korbinian Holzer, Juraj Mikus, Victor Stalberg etc etc and none of those were on the Marlies team that had success prior to Burke's arrival.

Some of those are not even prospects any longer but key Maple Leafs from the prospect pool Burke inherited. Who has Burke added equal to "bare cupboard" prospects Schenn, Frattin, Kulemin, Reimer, Gunnarsson etc?

Bare cupboard is something Burke supporters like to toss out in support but the reality of the situation says otherwise.

Also current prospects Stuart Percy, Brad Ross, Josh Leivo etc are all new prospects credited to Burke, but were directly obtained through previous Leaf prospects Jimmy Hayes, Viktor Stalberg, Chris DiDomenico, Jiri Tlusty etc most of which are playing in the NHL now themselves. So instead of having Stalberg who has 17-17-34 points & Jiri Tlusty 15-16-31 NHL points Leafs have Stuart Percy & Josh Leivo. I'd suggest that doesn't scream prospect improvement to me.
For such a stats man, you really like to manipulate them now do you?
1)Was schenn part of the core (a player) or part of the cupboard? You seem to interchange him depending on the arguement. Same with kulemin. Pick one.
2)What has holzer and Mikus done to help burke in the last 4 years? They havent even cracked the team yet!
3) Frattin helped burke for 40 games this year. Registered some massive point totals. Not.
4) Jiri Tlusty and victor stalberg are 4+ years older than percy and leivo. I would think that they should be in the nhl right now. And no I wouldnt have stalbergs 34 inflated points and Tlusty's 31 points on my team. We have enough tweeners.
5)You include Didomenico just so that you can make the list bigger, but he is just a career ahl''er.

Beleafer4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2012, 01:35 PM
  #172
Beleafer4
Registered User
 
Beleafer4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorade View Post
It is very over blown. He traded the second overall and another top ten pick in his first three drafts.

Considering 8 years without a playoff appearance the Leaf system is far below where it should be. I believe they traded four first round picks during this down period and you can make it five when you consider the trade for Luke Schenn.
Lmao

moving up the draft= trading a first round pick away. Bravo!

I also like how you conveniently miss the fact that burke acquired 2 firsts in percy and biggs.

And If I want to reach and manipulate stats, I can also also say he acquired another two firsts in colborne and gardiner.

edit: forgot ashton as a former first, too


Last edited by Beleafer4: 03-17-2012 at 01:50 PM.
Beleafer4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2012, 01:46 PM
  #173
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 63,935
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beleafer4 View Post
For such a stats man, you really like to manipulate them now do you?
1)Was schenn part of the core (a player) or part of the cupboard? You seem to interchange him depending on the arguement. Same with kulemin. Pick one.
2)What has holzer and Mikus done to help burke in the last 4 years? They havent even cracked the team yet!
3) Frattin helped burke for 40 games this year. Registered some massive point totals. Not.
4) Jiri Tlusty and victor stalberg are 4+ years older than percy and leivo. I would think that they should be in the nhl right now. And no I wouldnt have stalbergs 34 inflated points and Tlusty's 31 points on my team. We have enough tweeners.
5)You include Didomenico just so that you can make the list bigger, but he is just a career ahl''er.
Point of my rebuttal post was all successful picks and prospects eventually become NHLers, and can't be excluded from the former prospect inheritance pool by graduation to the NHL.

So if you want to claim Burke increased the Leafs prospect pool from the previous "bare cupboard" one in comparison, than its easily explainable by the fact Schenn, Reimer, Gunnarsson, Kulemin and Frattin etc are all on the current Leafs team and in the NHL (graduated prospects) but where nonetheless inherited by Burke as former Leaf drafted prospects.

Similarly Stalberg and Tlusty were successful Leaf picks and former prospects now NHLers that Burke inherited and turned into Percy and Leivo in his new fan overflowing prospect pool claim. The reason Burke has those shiny new prospects is because the inherited ones had value, and presented him with the opportunity to stock his cupboard by using them as currency. Similar story to Jimmy Hayes (former inherited Leaf 2nd round selection) traded for Brad Ross.

The same former prospects that refute the claim that the cupboard was essentially bare when Burke arrived. Leaf nation can only hope Burke's new prospects have as much NHL success as the ones he inherited with the job.

Mess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2012, 01:49 PM
  #174
Beleafer4
Registered User
 
Beleafer4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
Hmmm?

You think that team would be drafting outside the top 3?
2009 - Matt Duchene
2010 - Tyler Seguin
2011 - Adam Larsson
2012 - Grigorenko

See easy.

And they would have played the same number of playoffs games.
That team was projected to finish 9-10 in the East, so thats a pretty big assumption you have going there. I would predict Schenn instead of Duchene.

Seguin vs. Kessel
Schenn vs. Lupul
Larsson vs Gardiner
Grigorenko vs. Phaneuf + whoever we pick now

Bolded are the winners imo

Beleafer4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2012, 02:06 PM
  #175
Beleafer4
Registered User
 
Beleafer4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Point of my rebuttal post was all successful picks and prospects eventually become NHLers, and can't be excluded from the former prospect inheritance pool by graduation to the NHL.

So if you want to claim Burke increased the Leafs prospect pool from the previous "bare cupboard" one in comparison, than its easily explainable by the fact Schenn, Reimer, Gunnarsson, Kulemin and Frattin etc are all on the current Leafs team and in the NHL (graduated prospects) but where nonetheless inherited by Burke as former Leaf drafted prospects.

Similarly Stalberg and Tlusty were successful Leaf picks and former prospects now NHLers that Burke inherited and turned into Percy and Leivo in his new fan overflowing prospect pool claim. The reason Burke has those shiny new prospects is because the inherited ones had value, and presented him with the opportunity to stock his cupboard by using them as currency. Similar story to Jimmy Hayes (former inherited Leaf 2nd round selection) traded for Brad Ross.

The same former prospects that refute the claim that the cupboard was essentially bare when Burke arrived. Leaf nation can only hope Burke's new prospects have as much NHL success as the ones he inherited with the job.
All good points.

I guess what it comes down to is us having patience to wait burke's drafts through. Problem is, many people here are not patient enough to do that.

How do you know you would rather have stalberg and tlusty than percy and Leivo? How do you know that you would rather have hayes than ross? Percy, before his injury was among the point leading defensemen and a leader in +/- as well. Leivo was just rated as a great defensive forward and very underrated by OHL coaches (might be a better third liner than tlusty). Ross has 42 goals (scoring at a 1.21 ppg although a bit inflated by his linemates) and is one of the biggest pests in the junior game.

They are all young, so you have to wait them through before you can say that you would rather have tlusty, stalberg or hayes over them.

Beleafer4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 06:13 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.