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
05-02-2012, 08:08 PM
  #76
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StarBurns View Post
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.
It's not just time. It's progress over time. But, a hockey professional has more metrics for measuring progress than only the final standings. Surely at some point the final standings must show progress as well. 10 years is a long time, and you sure as heck better be a playoff team in year 4-5 depending on the starting point.


If Bourke were to be fired today, and a new guy moved in, what would be the expected time frame for contention?

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 08:25 PM
  #77
eyeball11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 12,715
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.
We should certainly be bright enough to judge them on more than standings in the interim, given the decades of info available on prospect development rates. Apparently many aren't though as they credit the Shero's, Chiarelli's and Bowman's of the world while ignoring the people responsible for the bulk of the building who get removed before the pieces mature.

eyeball11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 08:30 PM
  #78
StarBurns RIP
No Agenda
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,906
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke meat pete View Post
It's not just time. It's progress over time. But, a hockey professional has more metrics for measuring progress than only the final standings. Surely at some point the final standings must show progress as well. 10 years is a long time, and you sure as heck better be a playoff team in year 4-5 depending on the starting point.


If Bourke were to be fired today, and a new guy moved in, what would be the expected time frame for contention?
Certainly not 5 years since the rebuilding process has been happening for at least 4 years before this theoretical new GM came here unless he can convince everyone that the previous GM completely messed up the process and everything has to start from square one again.

BTW, what are these metrics you speak of that aren't wins and losses? And keep in mind that metrics refers to some sort of quantitative measure not someone's subjective, probably self-serving perception.

StarBurns RIP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-02-2012, 09:16 PM
  #79
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StarBurns View Post
BTW, what are these metrics you speak of that aren't wins and losses? And keep in mind that metrics refers to some sort of quantitative measure not someone's subjective, probably self-serving perception.
I can't speak for every team and how they might measure success or failure, but if wins and losses are the only measure, GM's and coaches won't last one bad season.

Metric may ve the wrong word, but all teams have goals with defined measurements they want to reach. It could be tied to $, or depth charts or cap space or future cap space, or prospect depth or development. Anyway, I'm just curios if people only use the final standings or if they look at other measurements to rate success.

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 05:36 AM
  #80
hullsy47
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,002
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kulie View Post
Sounds reasonable enough
no one but maybe a few posters on this board would be surprised if burke loses his job
first time i ever saw a coach get an extension and get fired 3 months later
too many flaws in burkes current portfolio to go unoticed by bell /rogers ...i think dudly will be the first of a few front office guys to leave if they can
one more major f up by burke and any one associated with him will wait a long while to get back into hockey ....he was a mediocre GM at best

hullsy47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 06:45 AM
  #81
ACC1224
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 31,061
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hullsy47 View Post
no one but maybe a few posters on this board would be surprised if burke loses his job
first time i ever saw a coach get an extension and get fired 3 months later
too many flaws in burkes current portfolio to go unoticed by bell /rogers ...i think dudly will be the first of a few front office guys to leave if they can
one more major f up by burke and any one associated with him will wait a long while to get back into hockey ....he was a mediocre GM at best
Doesn't seem too rare as I recall.

Didn't the same thing happen to the current Leaf Coach?

Quote:
Carlyle coached the Ducks to their only Stanley Cup title in 2007, but struggled to get his talented club's attention this season. Carlyle agreed to a three-year contract extension through the 2013-14 season in August, but Anaheim got off to a perplexing 7-13-4 start.

ACC1224 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 07:26 AM
  #82
Frankie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,178
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeball11 View Post
We should certainly be bright enough to judge them on more than standings in the interim, given the decades of info available on prospect development rates. Apparently many aren't though as they credit the Shero's, Chiarelli's and Bowman's of the world while ignoring the people responsible for the bulk of the building who get removed before the pieces mature.
the standings in the interim of what?

they give a stanley cup ring to the winning team's current gm, not past gms.

Frankie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 09:51 AM
  #83
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 63,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeball11 View Post
We should certainly be bright enough to judge them on more than standings in the interim, given the decades of info available on prospect development rates. Apparently many aren't though as they credit the Shero's, Chiarelli's and Bowman's of the world while ignoring the people responsible for the bulk of the building who get removed before the pieces mature.
Catch 22

The reason the so called "people responsible for the bulk of the building who get removed before the pieces mature" are fired is because they don't get concrete results in the standings in the present.

Owners are not are interested in prospect pools or individual transactions, to them they're running a business so profitability and performance of the current team are the 2 highest priorities. That is why they say its a results oriented business and a GM measured directly by them.

In Toronto they're paying Burke $3 mil a season to deliver results. To them paying Beauchemin $4 mil or Lupul $4 mil per and the team finishing in the bottom 5 is the same poor effect and failure. Ditto if they're paying Kubina, Pony, Stajan or Komisarek, Connolly or Lombardi to perform in non playoff seasons. It does not increase profit margins nor deliver on ice success, both of which are predicated on playoff games.

They didn't wait around when JFJ was running the team for Kulemin, Reimer, Gunnarsson, Frattin to arrive and mature nor are they patient enough to wait for Ross, Olden, Blacker and Rynnas etc. The key component required is the GM must deliver success in the short term to keep his job, and buy himself time to allow his long-term transactions like drafting to start paying dividends. That is why Kessel type trades "draft schmaft" transactions of trading picks/prospects for immediate help is always the guiding force behind transactions in Toronto. However if a GM is willing to make that sacrifice he must also show how it moves the team forward in the present and that is done based on the NHL standings as the gauge.

__________________
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
05-03-2012, 10:13 AM
  #84
hockeyfanz*
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,913
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Catch 22

The reason the so called "people responsible for the bulk of the building who get removed before the pieces mature" are fired is because they don't get concrete results in the standings in the present.

Owners are not are interested in prospect pools or individual transactions, to them they're running a business so profitability and performance of the current team are the 2 highest priorities. That is why they say its a results oriented business and a GM measured directly by them.

In Toronto they're paying Burke $3 mil a season to deliver results. To them paying Beauchemin $4 mil or Lupul $4 mil per and the team finishing in the bottom 5 is the same poor effect and failure. Ditto if they're paying Kubina, Pony, Stajan or Komisarek, Connolly or Lombardi to perform in non playoff seasons. It does not increase profit margins nor deliver on ice success, both of which are predicated on playoff games.

They didn't wait around when JFJ was running the team for Kulemin, Reimer, Gunnarsson, Frattin to arrive and mature nor are they patient enough to wait for Ross, Olden, Blacker and Rynnas etc. The key component required is the GM must deliver success in the short term to keep his job, and buy himself time to allow his long-term transactions like drafting to start paying dividends. That is why Kessel type trades "draft schmaft" transactions of trading picks/prospects for immediate help is always the guiding force behind transactions in Toronto. However if a GM is willing to make that sacrifice he must also show how it moves the team forward in the present and that is done based on the NHL standings as the gauge.
To think otherwise is just naive Mess.....In any business the owners will demand results. You cannot spend somebody's else's money indefinitely without showing some positive ROI.......I cannot tell the owner of the business to keep trusting me...that things will eventually get better but I will keep spending his money without any progress.

hockeyfanz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 10:15 AM
  #85
JackJ
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 4,750
vCash: 500
Goaltending cost him his job in Vancouver and again will cost him in toronto.

JackJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 10:38 AM
  #86
ForSpareParts*
agreement
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorityRules View Post
I've always maintained that the continuous call for Burke's firing on these boards will lead to yet another complete overhaul of the team and a few years of anticipation from the fans only to continue down the same road as the new GM would make moves that the fanbase doesn't agree with eventually leading to them calling for his head and we start the process all over again. It had me questioning just how often the Leafs change GM's compared to some of the other teams. I picked some teams at random including who is considered the most successful GM at this time. I found it interesting but I'll let you draw your own conclussions.

Detroit Red Wings

Ken Holland has had the job for 15 years beginning in 1997, however he shared duties with Jim Devellano and Scotty Bowman from 94 - 97. He's also been with the organization for 29 years. Talk about consistency

Pittsburgh Penguins

1989 - 2006 Craig Patrick
2006 - present Ray Shero

Boston Bruins

1972 - 2001 Harry Sinden
2001 - 2006 Mike O'Connell
2006 - present Peter Chiarelli

Washington Capitals

1982 - 1997 David Poile
1997 - present George McPhee

New Jersey Devils

1987 - present Lou Lamoriello

and now the Leafs. I went back a little further but I still think you'll get the picture

Toronto Maple Leafs

1979 - 1981 Punch Imlach
1981 - 1982 Punch Imlach/Gerry McNamara
1982 - 1988 Gerry McNamara
1988 - 1989 Gord Stellick
1989 - 1991 Floyd Smith
1991 - 1997 Cliff Fletcher (6 years and considered the Leafs most successful since their cup)
1997 - 1999 Ken Dryden
1999 - 2003 Pat Quinn
2003 - 2008 John Ferguson Jr
2008 - 2008 Cliff Fletcher
2008 - present Brian Burke

That's an awful lot of turnovers and changes in direction. Doesn't really surprise me that there hasn't been much success. I've been told it's a results orientated business but I guess here in Toronto it's really a results within 5 years or your gone business.
Go Fletcher Go!

Don't listen to the Alex Steen fans.

Woot woot!

--------

Great topic. Love this thread so far.


ForSpareParts* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 10:50 AM
  #87
ForSpareParts*
agreement
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dukes72 View Post
I think the bottom line is that when an organization consistently trades away the future for the present, it eventually catches up to you.

In the case of MLSE, it may have been compounded by having so many older, highly paid players after the lockout. The climate a cap system created forced teams to have young talent with cap friendly contracts to step in to give relief to the cap. The Leafs have not had this (but that is -has changed? - changing). Teams that had drafted and developed previous to the cap system were clearly going to be ahead.

Look at Chicago, St. louis as examples.
Good point. I would add that someone like JFJ thought he had a winning core, and if he just got the right goalie/vet combo the leafs could keep contending. JFJ is known for his goalie mistakes (trading the future for potential wild cards) when he really should have been known as the guy that didn't trade Sundin.

ForSpareParts* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 11:09 AM
  #88
egd27
#freethebigpicture
 
egd27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForSpareParts View Post
JFJ is known for his goalie mistakes (trading the future for potential wild cards) when he really should have been known as the guy that didn't trade Sundin.
Didn't or couldn't ?

egd27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 11:10 AM
  #89
Stephen
Registered User
 
Stephen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 34,378
vCash: 500
The more I think of it, the more it doesn't matter if a franchise "trades away its future" for immediate gains at all, or any asset for any other asset. The key is to simply get back value whenever you make a trade.

A good example of this is Boston, who was able to turn Barry Pederson into Cam Neely and Glen Wesley, and Glen Wesley into Samsonov, Aitken and McLaren, who turned, partially, into Milan Lucic.

Or a team like Philadelphia, who trades four first rounders to the Lightning for Chris Gratton and then gets those first rounders back by giving them Mikael Renberg, then trades Gratton back to Tampa altogether for a better young center in Daymond Langkow and gets Renberg back yet again, then converts Langkow into a single first rounder to get Jeff Carter and then turns Carter into Voracek and Couturier.

These teams just sort of preserve value, whereas the Leafs, in a fit of range turned Antropov, Ponikarovsky, McCabe, Kubina, Raycroft, Wellwood and Tucker into mostly nothing because they had to "make changes".

Stephen is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 11:18 AM
  #90
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hockeyfanz View Post
To think otherwise is just naive Mess.....In any business the owners will demand results. You cannot spend somebody's else's money indefinitely without showing some positive ROI.......I cannot tell the owner of the business to keep trusting me...that things will eventually get better but I will keep spending his money without any progress.
But you can go to your owner and outline a detailed plan, with short term and long term goals. And inbetween the initiation and the target date, you have a number of markers for the long term plan, and different markers for the short term plan.

There is no question Bourke's short term plan of being successful quicker did not come to fruition, but, he did not at any time stray from his long term plan, just to satisfy the short term plan, as that would have been potentially disasterous.

I make small errors in expectation at work all the time and don't get fired, because the benefit of the work I do in the long term is invaluable to the Society. Because I am a forward thinker who learns from my mistakes and create a better long term environment for staff and clients, my boss doesn't let me go when I go over my mileage budget for a month, or a year.

Spending to the cap and not making the playoffs is not a travesty in Toronto. Burke has used his asset $ to add Jake Gardiner and Joffrey Lupul (outstanding move) and also to add Matthew Lombardi and Cody Franson (short term, even, long term, could be a great move).

The worst mistake Bourke could have made was committing this team long term to bad players. Grabs is overpaid and may be that player, but, he's committed until 32 or 33 and not 43. Liles is quite similar.

But Lombardi, Army, Connolly, Komi, Beauch etc etc are a means to an end. Soon enough, they will be effective and re-sign, or they will be effective and get traded or they walk as a UFA soon enough.

Bourke has done enough in his long term plan to warrant more time. JFJ did not. He left here with nothing to show for 1st round picks in 2005 and 2006. JFJ was moving in the wrong direction (I won't get into whether or not he had any choice) but he sure had choice in Rask for Raycroft, 1st,2nd and 4th for Toskala and Bell, and a 2nd for Yannick Perreault.

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 11:23 AM
  #91
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackJ View Post
Goaltending cost him his job in Vancouver and again will cost him in toronto.
Reading articles from 2004 and threads from 2004, it seems clear to me, he lost his job for reasons unrelated to the on ice product, or the results in the stands.

He turned that franchise around on the ice and in the bank account in 5 years, and were cup contenders his last year. Canuck fans had "re-sign Bourke" petitions and many were upset when he wasn't renewed. He pissed people off and it came back to hurt him.

And ironically enough, it was an injury to Cloutier in round 1 against Calgary that turned the series in Calgary's favour.

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 11:37 AM
  #92
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 63,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke meat pete View Post
But you can go to your owner and outline a detailed plan, with short term and long term goals. And inbetween the initiation and the target date, you have a number of markers for the long term plan, and different markers for the short term plan..
Burke did exactly that as Richard Peddie (Leafs CEO and chairman of the board) told us on June 14th 2010, two years ago now at a MLSE press conference.

Quote:
Richard Peddie: "We (MLSE) expect the Toronto Maple Leafs to make the playoffs this season."
June 14, 2010

“Brian said last year he felt we were capable of doing it, but this season? We expect it,” Peddie said. “The tearing down is done. Now we’re building up with youth and adding some players in free agency this summer.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/hockey/a-new-captain-to-burnish-the-maple- leaf-brand/article1604189/
Pretty hard not to see the markers and expectations that Ownership had for Management prior to the 2010-11 season already, when they addressed Leaf Nation publicly to inform them of the teams expected direction in the short term. Two full seasons later as June 2012 is about to arrive Leafs are about to select 5th overall in the entry draft as a direct witness to the failures of the plan and the performance of the GM to deliver on expectations of the past.

Mess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 11:37 AM
  #93
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen View Post
The more I think of it, the more it doesn't matter if a franchise "trades away its future" for immediate gains at all, or any asset for any other asset. The key is to simply get back value whenever you make a trade.

A good example of this is Boston, who was able to turn Barry Pederson into Cam Neely and Glen Wesley, and Glen Wesley into Samsonov, Aitken and McLaren, who turned, partially, into Milan Lucic.

Or a team like Philadelphia, who trades four first rounders to the Lightning for Chris Gratton and then gets those first rounders back by giving them Mikael Renberg, then trades Gratton back to Tampa altogether for a better young center in Daymond Langkow and gets Renberg back yet again, then converts Langkow into a single first rounder to get Jeff Carter and then turns Carter into Voracek and Couturier.

These teams just sort of preserve value, whereas the Leafs, in a fit of range turned Antropov, Ponikarovsky, McCabe, Kubina, Raycroft, Wellwood and Tucker into mostly nothing because they had to "make changes".
Awesome work and good point. To add to those examples, when Philly dealt Langkow for Carter, and drafted Richards, Toronto traded a 1st, MacAulie + for Owen Nolan who turned into nothing.

When Philly signed and then moved Peter Forsberg for Hartnell, Timmonen, +++, and drafted JVR, and signed Briere, the Leafs traded 1st,2nd 4th for Toskala who turned into nothing, and added Jason Blake.

Luongo for Clarke and Schneider, no return.

Stempniak for Cola and Steen.

We have had next to no value returned to us for anything in the past 15-20 years.

Does that make us a graveyard?

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 11:40 AM
  #94
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Burke did exactly that as Richard Peddie (Leafs CEO and chairman of the board) told us on June 14th 2010, two years ago now at a MLSE press conference.



Pretty hard not to see the markers and expectations that Ownership had for Management prior to the 2010-11 season already, when they addressed Leaf Nation publicly to inform them of the teams expected direction in the short term.
Did you miss the part where I said he failed with the short term plan?

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 11:43 AM
  #95
smoke meat pete*
VoiceofReason
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,905
vCash: 500
Who were the free agents we signed in 2010 that Peddy was talking about?

smoke meat pete* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 11:51 AM
  #96
ForSpareParts*
agreement
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 5,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by egd27 View Post
Didn't or couldn't ?
Do any of us know the facts in that relationship? You're suggesting that JFJ was a puppet? Going by the fact that JFJ signed what he thought was a winning core to long-term NTC's, I'd say he didn't.

ForSpareParts* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 12:07 PM
  #97
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 63,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by smoke meat pete View Post
Did you miss the part where I said he failed with the short term plan?
This past off-season Larry Tanenbaum, chairman of the board and the chief operating officer Tom Anselmi, had go public and issue apologies on behalf of the organization to season ticket holders and the fan base for the failures of management and the hockey team.

That confirms the short term failure of the management team as that was a humbling but essential requirement of Ownership that they felt compelled to address and appease Leaf Nation fans directly.

When you have a confirmed "failed" plan that puts the job security of the management team that delivered those poor results directly on the firing line.. Time is now short and patience running thin of behalf of ownership and the fan base to start seeing positive results.

You can be sure that Tannenbaum does not plan on taking out another full page add in the local papers and be issuing another formal apology next season, without him also having to serve up those that are accountable for the failure of it, as it will not satisfy the disappointment and anger of the fan base by simply saying "sorry we failed" again.

Next season is "Playoffs or Burke" in Toronto, and if management fails again to deliver on expectations than they will join the ever increasing trend and list of previous Leafs GM management, of recording short term longevity only in the position, as a direct result of measurable failure in the NHL standings short term of a failed plan.

Mess is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 12:10 PM
  #98
MajorityRules
Sior Gaisgeil
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,951
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
Catch 22

The reason the so called "people responsible for the bulk of the building who get removed before the pieces mature" are fired is because they don't get concrete results in the standings in the present.

Owners are not are interested in prospect pools or individual transactions, to them they're running a business so profitability and performance of the current team are the 2 highest priorities. That is why they say its a results oriented business and a GM measured directly by them.

In Toronto they're paying Burke $3 mil a season to deliver results. To them paying Beauchemin $4 mil or Lupul $4 mil per and the team finishing in the bottom 5 is the same poor effect and failure. Ditto if they're paying Kubina, Pony, Stajan or Komisarek, Connolly or Lombardi to perform in non playoff seasons. It does not increase profit margins nor deliver on ice success, both of which are predicated on playoff games.

They didn't wait around when JFJ was running the team for Kulemin, Reimer, Gunnarsson, Frattin to arrive and mature nor are they patient enough to wait for Ross, Olden, Blacker and Rynnas etc. The key component required is the GM must deliver success in the short term to keep his job, and buy himself time to allow his long-term transactions like drafting to start paying dividends. That is why Kessel type trades "draft schmaft" transactions of trading picks/prospects for immediate help is always the guiding force behind transactions in Toronto. However if a GM is willing to make that sacrifice he must also show how it moves the team forward in the present and that is done based on the NHL standings as the gauge.
And if they continue with this line of thinking, bringing in a new GM every few years to wipe the slate clean and start over again, then I guarantee the Leafs will be living in mediocrity for a very long time. So I guess it's not the Burke supporters who are satisfied with mediocrity, it's those that want to start the process over every few years.

Personally, I believe the owners are patient enough to wait. It's a select group of fans that aren't.

MajorityRules is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 12:15 PM
  #99
egd27
#freethebigpicture
 
egd27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,073
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForSpareParts View Post
Do any of us know the facts in that relationship? You're suggesting that JFJ was a puppet? Going by the fact that JFJ signed what he thought was a winning core to long-term NTC's, I'd say he didn't.
I was simply suggesting that Sundin's NTC prevented JFJ from trading him, so it wasn't that he didn't, but that he couldn't.

egd27 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-03-2012, 12:36 PM
  #100
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 63,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorityRules View Post
And if they continue with this line of thinking, bringing in a new GM every few years to wipe the slate clean and start over again, then I guarantee the Leafs will be living in mediocrity for a very long time. So I guess it's not the Burke supporters who are satisfied with mediocrity, it's those that want to start the process over every few years.

Personally, I believe the owners are patient enough to wait. It's a select group of fans that aren't.
4 straight bottom 10 finishes, including 2 X bottom 5 overall results does not constitute mediocrity but much less that that. Mediocrity is what Burke has failed to even achieve yet as GM, as that refers to being average and finishing among the middle of the pack, and 2nd and 5th last overall the past 2 of 3 seasons are bottom of the league returns, as he was unable to finish out of the bottom 10 in any season to date. With Burke in charge mediocrity even, would be a nice change of pace and an actual improvement on performance.

Mediocre Leafs roster I'll give you, as that doesn't take much effort to show the L.A.C.K. of return many of his moves are delivering. New GM would have his work cut out for him cleaning up the mess he inherited in some of these high priced nearly unmovable contracts of aging under-performing vets . You seem to agree that a new GM would constitute a restart/cleansing process yourself which clearly then speaks directly to the poor performance of the current GM if one is required, because if a overhaul is the belief of the new direction needed.

However it would be hard to imagine any GM allowed full autonomy and unlimited financial resources, while given free reign to spend as he sees fit to the Cap upper limit, who could produce so little in tangible results in the NHL standings by his body of work.

What would Leaf Nation have to lose by replacing the GM, fear of more bottom 10 finishes just like the current one is serving up consistently?.


Last edited by Mess: 05-03-2012 at 12:47 PM.
Mess 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 10:54 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.