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

What is Toronto to the League ...?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-03-2012, 02:05 AM
  #26
Urban Explorer*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West T.dot
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Ya.

So.

They spent and didn't always win.

Just look at all the teams, lower budget teams, that have been in the mix.

Spend and win. If you can't afford to spend and win, then use Money ball.

Why the hell should we be penalized if we want to spend 6M on Shane Doan and then sit him in the press box? It's my $95 for a mid-level ticket, and then $10 a beer to watch this bloody gong show. I need a top cable package to see these guy lose to a team that can't put 5000 ***** in the seats. Why the hell can't my favorite team use that money but Tampa and Florida can?

Atleast with a luxury tax some of my money would go to improving MY team.
Chill man I'm on your side! He was trying to make the point that spending doesnt really help a team be successful, I was trying to prove that it DOES help a team be succesful. We're on the same page for this! I support a luxury tax, not this parity crap.

Urban Explorer* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 02:11 AM
  #27
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,573
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Explorer View Post
I think it would be more to the 5-6 games. You would have less clutchers and grabbers in the league and more skilled players. It would be like the all-star game effect on scores, obviously not to that degree but I think if you only had skilled shooters on the ice goals would go up. I think defensive specialist 3rd and 4th liners would be not drafted in support of players with more offensive upside. If you had a team of 12 phil kessels vs 12 phil kessels and elite dmen on each team do you think the score would be 2-1? If you got rid of 6 teams and 150 of the worst players in the league, how could the game not be more exciting? You wouldn't have as many players lying on the ice to block shots with their faces(because that's all they're good for). What's your argument for games being less scoring with more talented players? Maybe I'm wrong, enlighten me.
The logic behind the argument is that a more concentrated talent pool, will lead to more Parise v. Crosby as opposed to Talbot v. Crosby.

The talented players with smaller weaknesses to expose would produce less.

charliolemieux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 02:11 AM
  #28
Urban Explorer*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West T.dot
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
Which market do you suggest? Another canadian one? Most would love that, until the dollar goes down. Then we're pretty screwed.

There's the option of just removing the teams entirely but dropping 6/30(aka 20%) won't sit well with anyone. The fans of those teams, the players of those teams and the owners of those teams.

There will always be small markets, no one will be like the original 6 franchises. Even if nashville does better and better and continues to improve, they will never catch us. If you want to remove small market teams, teams like edmonton almost come into the mix. Ottawa was doing bad, hell buffalo uses video scouting to save money.

It's not to say a stronger league is a bad thing. It obviously is, just saying, in regards to the big markets there will ALWAYS be guys who can't keep up.
I really dont think our dollar will ever go down again. It's not that the canadian dollar has risen, it's that the US dollar has dropped like a stone and it's only getting worse in the USA. That's beside the point though, yes it would suck for fans of those small market teams to lose their teams but if it meant a better and more exciting NHL I'm all for it.

The 6 teams id get rid of would be
Phoenix
Florida
Anaheim
Nashville
Carolina
Columbus

All perennial money losers

Urban Explorer* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 02:13 AM
  #29
Urban Explorer*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West T.dot
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
The logic behind the argument is that a more concentrated talent pool, will lead to more Parise v. Crosby as opposed to Talbot v. Crosby.

The talented players with smaller weaknesses to expose would produce less.
But when you have a skill vs skill player they are both going to try to score goals which can lead to mistakes. When you have a plug vs crosby the plugs only goal is to stop crosby from scoring(by using his face to block shots or clutching and grabbing). You know what I'm saying?

Urban Explorer* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 02:19 AM
  #30
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,573
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Explorer View Post
Chill man I'm on your side! He was trying to make the point that spending doesnt really help a team be successful, I was trying to prove that it DOES help a team be succesful. We're on the same page for this! I support a luxury tax, not this parity crap.
Sorry.

When I re-read the post it totally had the wrong Vibe.

Meant it to be more of a continuation and not a contradiction. If that makes sense.

More along the lines of: "Yes, exactly, and there were still plenty of other teams involved in the post season..."

charliolemieux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 02:25 AM
  #31
Urban Explorer*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West T.dot
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Sorry.

When I re-read the post it totally had the wrong Vibe.

Meant it to be more of a continuation and not a contradiction. If that makes sense.

More along the lines of: "Yes, exactly, and there were still plenty of other teams involved in the post season..."
Yea of course it would be lame if spending big bucks GUARANTEED a team to win. But I think spending big bucks should at least make the Leafs a competitive team every year and justify me spending $200 on a ticket and $18 on a beer to see a game, instead of worrying about them losing to as you said a "team that can't get 5000 people in their arena". Totally agree.

Urban Explorer* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 02:29 AM
  #32
MorriPage
Registered User
 
MorriPage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Earth
Country: Canada
Posts: 720
vCash: 500
As far as I'm concerned, being a big market team with financial superiority is a massive advantage. And that advantage should be allowed to be utilized. I'm sorry to all the Coyotes, Panthers and Blue Jackets fans but hockey is a regional game and the regions that have the advantages should not be handcuffed in the name of forced parity.

MorriPage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 02:34 AM
  #33
Urban Explorer*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West T.dot
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MorriPage View Post
As far as I'm concerned, being a big market team with financial superiority is a massive advantage. And that advantage should be allowed to be utilized. I'm sorry to all the Coyotes, Panthers and Blue Jackets fans but hockey is a regional game and the regions that have the advantages should not be handcuffed in the name of forced parity.

Urban Explorer* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 02:36 AM
  #34
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,573
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Explorer View Post
But when you have a skill vs skill player they are both going to try to score goals which can lead to mistakes. When you have a plug vs crosby the plugs only goal is to stop crosby from scoring(by using his face to block shots or clutching and grabbing). You know what I'm saying?
I hear what you are saying but unfortunately history shows that unless the player is a Tikkanen, Draper, Madden, Zezel type player a more offensive 2 way player like Yzerman, Messier, Fedorov or Parise is more effective and more likely to lead to lower scoring.

Just look at when scoring exploded in the NHL. It was during expansion.

The league opened up so fast it HAD to start bringinig in Europeans.

Eventually Even Russians came over.

Right now we have reached an equalibreum.

The best evidence for my argument is 1992-93. I rest my case.

charliolemieux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 02:42 AM
  #35
Urban Explorer*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West T.dot
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
I hear what you are saying but unfortunately history shows that unless the player is a Tikkanen, Draper, Madden, Zezel type player a more offensive 2 way player like Yzerman, Messier, Fedorov or Parise is more effective and more likely to lead to lower scoring.

Just look at when scoring exploded in the NHL. It was during expansion.

The league opened up so fast it HAD to start bringinig in Europeans.

Eventually Even Russians came over.

Right now we have reached an equalibreum.

The best evidence for my argument is 1992-93. I rest my case.
I stand by my opinion that the league would be higher scoring if their was contraction, but I can't prove this, just like you can't prove it would be lower scoring. Since contraction is never going to happen I guess this is a pointless debate (even though those are good points you gave, but I have a rebuttal for all of them that I dont care to type out). Maybe we could do a Sim in NHL 13 or something? The results wouldnt prove anything, but it would be interesting none the less.

Urban Explorer* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 02:43 AM
  #36
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,125
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MorriPage View Post
As far as I'm concerned, being a big market team with financial superiority is a massive advantage. And that advantage should be allowed to be utilized. I'm sorry to all the Coyotes, Panthers and Blue Jackets fans but hockey is a regional game and the regions that have the advantages should not be handcuffed in the name of forced parity.
I'm sure big market teams can just buy trophies you know, it's cheaper and worth about the same if they indeed use their "massive advantage". There's a big difference between slight and massive and using a massive advantage makes the Stanley cup just a piece of metal. The fact there's a level playing field helps but it's never really identical is it? I bet leafs can spend more on staff, training facilities, managers, scouting, etc... Than other teams anyway. That counts no? Obviously not massive but it counts. You could afford to bury guys in minors, others can't either.

Besides leafs and other big markets love the cap. They sell out anyway but pay a fraction of player costs the fans would request. More profit, lets not kid ourselves...owners may be fans but they're businessmen first.

LyricalLyricist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 04:59 AM
  #37
Pyrophorus
Registered User
 
Pyrophorus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Eastern GTA
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,057
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Pyrophorus Send a message via Yahoo to Pyrophorus Send a message via Skype™ to Pyrophorus
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leaffan16 View Post
They (NHL) want parity, but sometimes it's fun to watch the top teams dominate. I really don't see why we don't spend millions on scouting/development/coaching/etc.. when we have the money to. Funny how the NHL complains about losing 100M b/c of preseason cancelled, when it was them who cancelled them.
We do spend the most on scouting and player development, but only
for the past 3 years. The fruit will come.

Pyrophorus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 05:55 AM
  #38
Borjes Baumingdyk
OurFanbaseIsTheEnemy
 
Borjes Baumingdyk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: in turmoil..
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,226
vCash: 500
The Leafs have become the NHL's equivalent of the NFL's Dallas Cowboys. Prestigious past but haven't really been relevant in a long time.

Borjes Baumingdyk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 06:05 AM
  #39
legendinblue
LEAFS SUCK
 
legendinblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,110
vCash: 500
Toronto is the league's backbone - highest revenue and profits, biggest fan base. The league will fold before the Leafs do.

I'm fine with the salary cap. Is it fair? Depends on the point of view. I prefer not to buy a championship.

legendinblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 06:11 AM
  #40
Urban Explorer*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: West T.dot
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by o0Leaf fan0o View Post
Toronto is the league's backbone - highest revenue and profits, biggest fan base. The league will fold before the Leafs do.

I'm fine with the salary cap. Is it fair? Depends on the point of view. I prefer not to buy a championship.
You'd prefer to luck into one as the 8th seed?

Urban Explorer* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 07:23 AM
  #41
7even
Deus Ex Machina
 
7even's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Georgia
Country: United States
Posts: 8,688
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen View Post
Parity is for bed wetters.

Legendary franchises in sports like the Canadiens, Original Six Leafs, Manchester United, Celtics, Yankees, whomever built programs of excellence and redefined greatness in the talent they could assemble and mold into winners. That really embodies excellence in sports in a way that an "anybody can win if things go well" system of parity does not.

It's a lot easier to build a "legendary" team when you're only competing with 5 other teams for the best talent on the continent.

7even is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 08:08 AM
  #42
legendinblue
LEAFS SUCK
 
legendinblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Explorer View Post
You'd prefer to luck into one as the 8th seed?
Every championship win requires a little bit of luck.

Do you suggest that the only way an 8th seed can win a SC is to luck into it?

I mean with the salary cap the playing field should be even for every team in the league. A team's success should be based on how well the team is managed, not on the ability to overpay big UFA's because we're a big market team. In reality, however, it's not the case as many teams operate on internal budgets.

As a big market team we should still have a slight advantage, even with the salary cap. We can shell out more money on scouts, coaches, medical staff, front office, facilities etc; allowing the organization to attract and retain the best talent available. Do we do that? I wouldn't bank on it.

Do we need to use the advantage of being a rich team to win it all? Can't we do well with the salary cap in place, as other teams do? The Rangers, Wings, Canucks, Canadiens, Blackhawks, Flyers, Bruins don't seem to struggle.

legendinblue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 08:08 AM
  #43
Duke Silver
Truce?
 
Duke Silver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Toronto, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stephen View Post
I say good. It seems so natural that the New York Yankees, Real Madrid, Barcelona FC, Los Angeles Lakers, Manchester United etc. are the richest and most powerful flagship teams in their respective sports. Their fans pay top dollar and they are rewarded with a bevy of superstars every year. Why are we so hyper-sensitive to the needs of crap markets? Why shouldn't the Leafs be stacked with Stamkos, Toews, Tavares, and dominate the league every season?

I'd love it if the Leafs were a power house in a luxury tax league. Sure we pay room and board for those pauper teams if the league insists on their continued existence, but the market that's paying the bills should have the best product, or at least the economic powers to make Ed Snider in Philadelphia look like a conservative cheapskate.

It's not PC to say, but who cares about an even playing field? How many people stay up at night worrying whether Nashville will ever get their cup? I don't care. I want a cup for Toronto. I want many cups for Toronto in fact. And a great team every year. And a modern day Conn Smythe to ensure the fanbase is well taken care of. I don't care about the economics that keep Phoenix on life support.
To me, it feels like cheating. It isn't, but I can't swallow it. It's cheap. It's a shortcut to success, which is exactly what got us into this mess. It's the same reason I don't like the Yankees or the Red Sox. I don't support the idea of buying success. Never have. I appreciate the craft of general managing, where the smartest man's team usually wins as opposed to the richest man's team.

I'd prefer a system that forces us to be prudent and calculated with our moves as opposed to becoming the New York Rangers of the pre-lockout era. There's no skill in that, and worst of all it's not even a guarantee for success.

Maybe it's just me.

This is all a moot discussion because it's NEVER going to happen anyways.

Duke Silver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 08:26 AM
  #44
Happy Fan
nifty
 
Happy Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,297
vCash: 500
Taken for granted and spit on by anyone who isn't a Leafs fan.

Happy Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 08:29 AM
  #45
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MorriPage View Post
As far as I'm concerned, being a big market team with financial superiority is a massive advantage. And that advantage should be allowed to be utilized. I'm sorry to all the Coyotes, Panthers and Blue Jackets fans but hockey is a regional game and the regions that have the advantages should not be handcuffed in the name of forced parity.
I find it interesting that you include the Blue Jackets in a discussion of non-hockey regions. You do realize that they are located in Columbus, Ohio not Columbus, Georgia, right? While I will agree that Columbus hasn't exactly been a success story, is placing a team about halfway between two significant US hockey markets (Detroit and Pittsburgh) really moving that far out of hockey's region?

rojac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 08:42 AM
  #46
Faltorvo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 11,927
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke Silver View Post
To me, it feels like cheating. It isn't, but I can't swallow it. It's cheap. It's a shortcut to success, which is exactly what got us into this mess. It's the same reason I don't like the Yankees or the Red Sox. I don't support the idea of buying success. Never have. I appreciate the craft of general managing, where the smartest man's team usually wins as opposed to the richest man's team.

I'd prefer a system that forces us to be prudent and calculated with our moves as opposed to becoming the New York Rangers of the pre-lockout era. There's no skill in that, and worst of all it's not even a guarantee for success.

Maybe it's just me.

This is all a moot discussion because it's NEVER going to happen anyways.
Full loss of the cap? No i agree but a modification on what the spread is from the floor, ya i can see that.

Faltorvo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 08:54 AM
  #47
Patty Lee
I hate the Habs
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
2 Quick Yankee facts


Made the post season 17 of 18 years.

Only won 1 World series in 12 years.

Doesn't sound as bad as the Red Wings.
17 of 18 years is more impressive than the Red Wings making the playoff record

Patty Lee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 09:45 AM
  #48
robdicks
Registered User
 
robdicks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Welland ON
Posts: 5,518
vCash: 500
One thing people don't seem to be bringing up enough is that there is no evidence that Toronto ownership would want a luxury tax system. Make no mistake, MLSE has profited largely under the post-lockout system. Last year the Toronto Maple Leafs would have easily had a payroll over 80 mil if there was no cap. The cap has forced them to have a much lower payroll which directly relates to profits. They like it.

A lot is made about how the Leafs only care about money, and although I think they do genuinely want to win, I mostly think that the reason they do is profit related. (higher ticket prices, more merch sales, playoff revenue etc.) If they could go wihtout paying an extra 20 million I am sure they are plenty happy with that.

robdicks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 09:48 AM
  #49
Grant
LL Genius
 
Grant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,106
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by robdicks View Post
One thing people don't seem to be bringing up enough is that there is no evidence that Toronto ownership would want a luxury tax system. Make no mistake, MLSE has profited largely under the post-lockout system. Last year the Toronto Maple Leafs would have easily had a payroll over 80 mil if there was no cap. The cap has forced them to have a much lower payroll which directly relates to profits. They like it.

A lot is made about how the Leafs only care about money, and although I think they do genuinely want to win, I mostly think that the reason they do is profit related. (higher ticket prices, more merch sales, playoff revenue etc.) If they could go wihtout paying an extra 20 million I am sure they are plenty happy with that.
I agree with everything you said.

Grant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-03-2012, 09:50 AM
  #50
robdicks
Registered User
 
robdicks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Welland ON
Posts: 5,518
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grant View Post
I agree with everything you said.
well thank you haha

robdicks 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 03:15 AM.

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.