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

Comparing teams GM's

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-01-2012, 05:18 PM
  #51
The Apologist
Kessel Supporter
 
The Apologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Soviet Kanukistan
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,926
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=New Liskeard;49122135]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Not sure why Leafs are being compared to good/successful team's GM.

WIN and you're IN, LOSE and you're OUT, as sports in a results oriented business whereby the GM is evaluated on performance based on his teams results he has assembled.

Not sure giving more time to an under-performing GM is the conclusion that should be drawn. Good GMs keep their jobs longer because they deliver positive results.[/QUOTE]

So a GM who has won a cup, and recently compiled an olympic USA team, that nearly beat the heavily favoured Canadians , has not shown the ability to produce? Once the many put their biases aside, and desire for "shift disturbing aside" and have a real conversation on hockey, this would be a much more enjoyable place to visit.
I think he's right. And the sooner Ottawa let's Murray go, the better....

The Apologist is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2012, 06:16 PM
  #52
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,952
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Depends on Ownership expectations.. If they support a true draft rebuild, then they know and expect there to be lean years ahead until the talent pool can be assembled via high draft picks from losing seasons.

In Toronto that is not the case. You don't need the NHL highest paid GM and his dream team to deliver draft rebuild results when the goal and intention is to deliver playoffs home games instead.

Case in point.

JFJ missed the playoffs by 3 points combined over 2 seasons coming out of the lockout with 90 & 91 point seasons finishing 9th each time and was fired early into 3rd season for failing to deliver on expectations.

Burke has delivered 3 straight bottom 10 overall finishes, 2 of which were bottom 5 draft lottery end results. During Burke's time only Edmonton, Columbus and NYI have produced less wins and points as organizations over the course of the past 4 seasons. All of which have made the playoffs post lockout, leaving the Leafs with the longest losing record among all 30 teams.

Hard to imagine if JFJ (as bad as he was) if he were given more time, that he could have performed that poorly and delivered so little as his replacement has. The team today is under-performing even the inherited one, for which the previous GM was fired for.
So what if you choose a "fake" draft rebuild and simply build with whatever picks you get (rather than tanking) and supplement that through free agency and trades? Your picks still develop at the same general rate as the "true" rebuilders.

eyeball11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 10:03 AM
  #53
hockeyfanz
Registered User
 
hockeyfanz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmazedRink View Post
JFJ also had to deal with the first year of the salary cap, some 60 million in payroll had to be crushed into 39 million or something. It was a crazy feat by someone totally incompetent with expectations from above to make the damn playoffs. There was no way we were going to be able to retain any amount of quality players and chemistry with all the big contracts bought out (Tucker was a bittersweet day for me), and generally dumped. JFJ did have the idea of staying with the youth but the management forced him with their internal problems. JFJ was just a pawn, he's better off as a scout anyways.
Every GM has a unique situation when they take over an organization. Burke is not the only GM with this variable. JFJ had a very tough job. You are right, when JFJ took over he ran into the new CBA. I wonder how our genius would have handled that? Or as I mentioned in another post, how would the genius make-do with a limited budget...about 25 million under the cap? Like some GMs do? Ridiculous.

Look at GMs with REAL obstacles to cross and assess Burke against them. No contest. Burke has everything he needs to succeed. He is like the son of a very wealthy man with all the resources needed to become successful in life.


Last edited by Live in the Now: 05-02-2012 at 12:25 PM. Reason: removed general flaming
hockeyfanz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 10:22 AM
  #54
Rinzler
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mississauga
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfanz View Post
Every GM has a unique situation when they take over an organization. Burke is not the only GM with this variable. JFJ had a very tough job. You are right, when JFJ took over he ran into the new CBA. I wonder how our genius would have handled that? Or as I mentioned in another post, how would the genius make-do with a limited budget...about 25 million under the cap? Like some GMs do? Ridiculous.

Look at GMs with REAL obstacles to cross and assess Burke against them. No contest. Burke has everything he needs to succeed. He is like the son of a very wealthy man with all the resources needed to become successful in life.
Then whaddya say we give Burke an actual chance for a change? He's had 3 full seasons to completely rebuild this team, not enough time has passed to allow for his plan to come to fruition or fail. JFJ may not have gotten the same fair shake but that's water under the bridge.

Ownership clearly has bought into a complete rebuild so suck it up princess.


Last edited by Live in the Now: 05-02-2012 at 12:25 PM. Reason: removed stuff
Rinzler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 10:26 AM
  #55
LaPlante94
Registered User
 
LaPlante94's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Niagara Falls ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,478
vCash: 500
Where's JFJ working now? I hear the Habs might go for Dudley and JFJ could be a good assistant to Burke. Might not be the best GM but he's pretty damn good at scouting and finding pretty good players. Or do you think those were our scouts and they just told him to draft guys like Frattin and Kulemin?

LaPlante94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 11:18 AM
  #56
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 59,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeball11 View Post
So what if you choose a "fake" draft rebuild and simply build with whatever picks you get (rather than tanking) and supplement that through free agency and trades? Your picks still develop at the same general rate as the "true" rebuilders.
What is a "fake" draft rebuild?

Is it where a GM spends to the Cap ceiling, while intending on making the playoffs, but instead plunges his team to the depths of the NHL standings, while already having surrendered his top entry draft picks, of which now other teams benefit from as a result of his struggles to ice a competitive team by his moves?

If so, it sounds exactly like what is transpiring in Toronto and why Leafs GM should not be compared to other GM of teams when it comes to job security and rapid turnover at the position.

All draft picks develop at different rates, but the situations in which they're in effects their development directly. Playoff teams giving their youth/prospects playing time under high pressure situations are far better off than exposing them to perpetual losing environments year after year. All decisions have consequences and winning environments are usually better for everyone including the longevity of the GM himself.

__________________
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
05-02-2012, 12:20 PM
  #57
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
What is a "fake" draft rebuild?
.
It's a rebuild on the fly using recent 1st round picks from other teams. It usually involves trading stop gap UFA signings for players. Or trading our crap for younger, better players.

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 12:24 PM
  #58
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Playoff teams giving their youth/prospects playing time under high pressure situations are far better off than exposing them to perpetual losing environments year after year. All decisions have consequences and winning environments are usually better for everyone including the longevity of the GM himself.
Nah, I'd rather play the kids and live with the consequences. Look at how well the Oilers are developing without playoffs.

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 05:10 PM
  #59
hotpaws
Registered User
 
hotpaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,520
vCash: 1181
If GM's get 10 plus years shouldn't a coach as well ?

hotpaws is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 05:14 PM
  #60
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpaws View Post
If GM's get 10 plus years shouldn't a coach as well ?
Yes, they should.

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 05:42 PM
  #61
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 11,952
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
What is a "fake" draft rebuild?

Is it where a GM spends to the Cap ceiling, while intending on making the playoffs, but instead plunges his team to the depths of the NHL standings, while already having surrendered his top entry draft picks, of which now other teams benefit from as a result of his struggles to ice a competitive team by his moves?

If so, it sounds exactly like what is transpiring in Toronto and why Leafs GM should not be compared to other GM of teams when it comes to job security and rapid turnover at the position.

All draft picks develop at different rates, but the situations in which they're in effects their development directly. Playoff teams giving their youth/prospects playing time under high pressure situations are far better off than exposing them to perpetual losing environments year after year. All decisions have consequences and winning environments are usually better for everyone including the longevity of the GM himself.

Since you talked about a "true" rebuild, only you could define a "fake" one, no? I can only assume you think a "true" rebuild is a tanking one as opposed to the route taken by your most recent Cup champs.

eyeball11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 05:45 PM
  #62
Frankie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,163
vCash: 500
so, in other words, the key to success is to simply leave the gm in place for at least 15 years. that seems easy enough.

we can also reasonably conclude that jfj didn't get nearly long enough to prove himself and should still be the leafs gm.

Frankie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 05:46 PM
  #63
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Here's a question for you. What metrics do you use to judge a GM?

Is the final standings the final judgement?

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 05:49 PM
  #64
hotpaws
Registered User
 
hotpaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,520
vCash: 1181
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke meat pete View Post
Yes, they should.
Too bad for his number 1 star that Burke didn't beieve in the 10 plus year rule for his coach . I wonder if he feels it applies to him however ?

hotpaws is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 05:50 PM
  #65
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie View Post
so, in other words, the key to success is to simply leave the gm in place for at least 15 years. that seems easy enough.

we can also reasonably conclude that jfj didn't get nearly long enough to prove himself and should still be the leafs gm.
JFJ wasn't given all of the tools needed to rebuild a team, but there is not question we have nothing to show for our 2003 1st round draft, or our 2005 1st round, as well as a number of 2nd round picks. JFJ made choices with long, long, long term implications.

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 05:55 PM
  #66
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke meat pete View Post
JFJ wasn't given all of the tools needed to rebuild a team, but there is not question we have nothing to show for our 2003 1st round draft, or our 2005 1st round, as well as a number of 2nd round picks. JFJ made choices with long, long, long term implications.
Sorry, I meant to say 2005 and 2006. But, I'm not allowed to edit.

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 06:07 PM
  #67
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpaws View Post
Too bad for his number 1 star that Burke didn't beieve in the 10 plus year rule for his coach . I wonder if he feels it applies to him however ?
Yea, too bad.

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 06:30 PM
  #68
StarBurns RIP
No Agenda
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,906
vCash: 500
John Ferguson Jr. is currently employed by the San Jose Sharks as "Director of Pro Scouting". I just mention this as a little bit of mythbusting about his lauded status as an amateur scout. That title indicates that he has nothing to do with San Jose's amateur scouting and hence draft choices just as was the case in St. Louis. Before San Jose, his scouting experience amounts to a measly couple of years in the mid-90's in Ottawa scouting the NCAA and the pros. He's an administrative hockey guy not some super amateur scout wunderkind. But this myth won't die.

StarBurns RIP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 06:42 PM
  #69
Nitrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 298
vCash: 500
I remember hearing that Ken Holland believes GM's should be given 10 years to be evaluated... or something like that. We cant even get to five years before wanting someone fired.

Nitrock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 07:04 PM
  #70
Drew311
Catch The Taste
 
Drew311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrock View Post
I remember hearing that Ken Holland believes GM's should be given 10 years to be evaluated... or something like that. We cant even get to five years before wanting someone fired.
Pretty ridiculous isn't it. The impatience obviously stems from almost a decade of mediocrity, but Burke can't be blamed for most of this time. Hell, he's just starting to piece the team together the way he wants it, in an era where it gets harder and harder each year to acquire impact players. Considering how many fleecings Burke has pulled off in the last 3 years, he should at least be given some of credit for piecing together a decent core to go forward with.

People should realize that we're just beginning to reap the benefits of the JFJ drafts, with Gunnarsson, Kulemin, Frattin and Reimer taking on full time roles. How can we say Burke has done a bad job without giving him at least 5 years to show what his prospects can contribute to the team? If Burke is fired next season, and Kadri, Ross, Biggs and Percy become impact players in the near future, everyone will be saying he should have been given more time.

Drew311 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 07:12 PM
  #71
Frankie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrock View Post
I remember hearing that Ken Holland believes GM's should be given 10 years to be evaluated... or something like that. We cant even get to five years before wanting someone fired.
is that realistic? marc bergevin hired today in montreal, should he really be given until 2022 before he's judged or evaluated? that sounds absurd.

Frankie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 07:14 PM
  #72
StarBurns RIP
No Agenda
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrock View Post
I remember hearing that Ken Holland believes GM's should be given 10 years to be evaluated... or something like that. We cant even get to five years before wanting someone fired.
There is some truth to this but remember with most franchises there's often a >90% roster turnover in 5 years. In 5 years' time the team's roster is usually close to 100% the choice of the guy in charge when you factor in re-signing inherited talent. It's possible to judge the direction the team is heading especially by those who are detached from the process.

StarBurns RIP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 07:21 PM
  #73
StarBurns RIP
No Agenda
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frankie View Post
is that realistic? marc bergevin hired today in montreal, should he really be given until 2022 before he's judged or evaluated? that sounds absurd.
It's pretty crazy to expect that any franchise with any sort of rabid following would give up a decade to any one person regardless of interim results. That's half a generation. That's about 17% of an adult's life.

StarBurns RIP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 07:28 PM
  #74
Mojo19
He's Big, He's Bald
 
Mojo19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,953
vCash: 500
I'd be comfortable with Burke long term. I think, long term, he would be good. He has made some mistakes but overall he has improved the team.

Also, look at this:

Montreal GM's
1978-1983 Irving Grundman
1983-1995 Serge Savard
1995-2000 Rejean Houle
2000-2003 Andre Savard
2003-2010 Bob Gainey
2010-2012 Pierre Gauthier
2012 Marc Bergevin

Mojo19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 08:04 PM
  #75
nuck
Axis of Evil
 
nuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: North Korea
Posts: 5,011
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitrock View Post
I remember hearing that Ken Holland believes GM's should be given 10 years to be evaluated... or something like that. We cant even get to five years before wanting someone fired.
GMs like Ken Holland really do deserve 10 years. GMs that suck year after year don't. Nobody expected the Leafs to be winning the Cup this year. The failure to suck it up in the past and go through some low-finish and high-draft seasons doesn't disappear right away.

His trading tells us JFJ was a brutal GM but I believe the requirement to make the trades was not his agenda. Having said that, if he had been allowed to disperse the M5 rather than lock them all into NTs would he have gotten a decent return or would he have dealt them all for goalies?

BB has veiled marching orders so we won't know until his retirement biography whether he has had absolute leeway to build as he wished. I suspect he has but maybe not. I hardly think his tenure can be called a success so far, but for 50+ games this season it looked like they were a solid hockey club except against the Bruins (and yet not last season).

His biggest mistake to me was not Kessel, but rather RW. The Kessel deal he expected to give up picks around 10-12. I wouldn't have done the deal myself but I was not expecting the club to be any worse than the year before. Why would you figure adding a good young player would drop you 5 spots? Once he found out he was wrong, no way out. Trading is always a gamble.

Wilson knew how to get pretty solid results out of a very talented Sharks club but took years to figure out his Leafs couldn't play that way. BB should have cut his losses and found a coach who could work with what was here but he rode that horse right into the toilet. I still like his trades more than any Leafs GM I could remember. Not his fault Kadri isn't Skinner or Schenn isn't Suter. But at some point he needs to be accountable and to me, next season will either mark him as a success who was given a fair shot or a failure. Even if he goes, he will have left the club better than when he found it.

More GMs are failures than successes. Even as the Oilers are building what looks like a future powerhouse, I can't say "way to go Tambo". He has managed to build a team that sucks every year and when they start to rise out of the muck he wins a draft lottery. If they are Cup contenders in 2 years he will look like a star but he could also be fired by then if he doesn't start making better choices.

Calgary looks like TO from a few years ago as they stick to their aging stars until no value remains. After all the insanely bad Sutter deals the bar is pretty low there but still no sign they are willing to give up the fight for 9th place. Is the GM making these calls? The fans in Calgary would have accepted a blowup rebuild.

Montreal seems obvious but a year ago they almost rubbed out the eventual Stanley Cup champs in the playoffs.

Gillis should be the king in Vancouver. Look what he has built there. But his three best players were all courtesy of Burke, and he gave Luongo the ridiculous deal he has has today. After this years fold he isn't in trouble, but he is looking for answers and needs to make something happen while the twins are still at their peak. For now he has won with Burke's stars but needs to do something special or he will be the goat.

It really seems like, outside of Detroit, being a GM is mostly luck where you need to be on a club that was run poorly enough and had no money to keep it out of the gutter for a few years. Actually you need to be the guy that followed the fool who ran it into the gutter.

nuck 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 08:10 AM.

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.