HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Burke gone in Van...

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-04-2004, 11:01 AM
  #26
Mizral
Registered User
 
Mizral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Earth, MW
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,122
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
What exactly has Burke done in Vancouver?

Not being an ass by any stretch, but everytime I hear of a move it's "No, that wasn't Burke, that was so and so..."

I mean Jovonovski wasn't Burke. Naslund wasn't. Bertuzzi wasn't. Ohlund wasn't. That is the major core of the Canucks, and Burke didn't have a hand in any of it.

I know he brought in the Sedins, Linden and Malik, which are all part of the 2nd tier group of guys. I can't remember if Cloutier was a Burke thing or not...

But I mean he has one of the top groups of 4 in the league, and he hasn't added anything to them.
The Canucks were a 58-point team when Burke was hired back in 1998.

Now they are a 100+ point team that makes the playoffs every year.

Jovanovski was Burke actually. Remember the Pavel Bure trade?

Cloutier was a Burke deal. Sedin's, Linden, Malik were all Burke deals. As was Salo. Chubarov, Ruutu, Kesler, Bryan Allen were all pickups of Bryan Burke in the draft. He also traded a 2nd round pick for Alex Auld.

Hasn't added anything to the Canucks?

Mizral is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 12:34 PM
  #27
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
The Canucks were a 58-point team when Burke was hired back in 1998.

Now they are a 100+ point team that makes the playoffs every year.

Jovanovski was Burke actually. Remember the Pavel Bure trade?

Cloutier was a Burke deal. Sedin's, Linden, Malik were all Burke deals. As was Salo. Chubarov, Ruutu, Kesler, Bryan Allen were all pickups of Bryan Burke in the draft. He also traded a 2nd round pick for Alex Auld.

Hasn't added anything to the Canucks?

GMing isn't a one year endevour.

Even when they were a 58 point team you could see some of thier talent emerging.

Is John Ferguson Jr a good GM because the Leafs are a 100 pt team? Hardly, he let the team he inherited run its course. Yes this example is with a team that is more mature in its evolution but the point is still just as valid.

If Lowe was fired today and Joe Schmoe was hired and kept 20 of the 23 guys that were there this year and the team did as well as some people here believe they can, then is Joe Schmoe a great GM because he was at the helm for the actual season despite not doing much work with the team?

Burke inherited a large part of his team and tweeked it but ultimately, by his own admission, he was giving the core he already had a chance to succeed.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 12:37 PM
  #28
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
The Canucks were a 58-point team when Burke was hired back in 1998.

Now they are a 100+ point team that makes the playoffs every year.

Jovanovski was Burke actually. Remember the Pavel Bure trade?

Cloutier was a Burke deal. Sedin's, Linden, Malik were all Burke deals. As was Salo. Chubarov, Ruutu, Kesler, Bryan Allen were all pickups of Bryan Burke in the draft. He also traded a 2nd round pick for Alex Auld.

Hasn't added anything to the Canucks?
Nothing more then the average GM. Burke is over-rated - it's that simple, the team has a good group of stars, but he has failed over the last few years to be able to get the right pieces in place for the team to get past the SECOND round. Vancouver has accomplished no more in the last 2-4 years then the Oilers did in the mid/late 90's.

thome_26 is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 12:51 PM
  #29
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,580
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thome_26
Nothing more then the average GM. Burke is over-rated - it's that simple, the team has a good group of stars, but he has failed over the last few years to be able to get the right pieces in place for the team to get past the SECOND round. Vancouver has accomplished no more in the last 2-4 years then the Oilers did in the mid/late 90's.
But I suppose K-Lowe is a great GM for his 4 playoff wins in 4 years.

Burke is a very good GM one of the top 5 in the game. He took a struggling 58 point team and it became a conference powerhouse. He backs his players instead of slagging them. He got Naslund and others to sign fair deals before they became free agents. He understands the importance of stud Defenceman and took a lot of heat for the Bure trade. Yeah he inherited some good players but he was smart enough to keep those players happy and fill the rest of the team with a pretty good supporting cast.

I hate Vancouver and I especially hate their swarmy ridiculous fans. But even I will swallow my hatred for them to admit that with Bertuzzi the Canucks would beat the Flames and last year they played 14 playoff games (thay's two more than we've played in four years of K-Lowe) and lost in a hard fought battle to trap-specialist Minnesota. Ownership pulled the shoot way too fast relegating the Canucks to the uncertainty and unstability that has marked most of their 30+ year history.

HotToddy is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 01:13 PM
  #30
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mizral
The Canucks were a 58-point team when Burke was hired back in 1998.

Now they are a 100+ point team that makes the playoffs every year.

Jovanovski was Burke actually. Remember the Pavel Bure trade?

Cloutier was a Burke deal. Sedin's, Linden, Malik were all Burke deals. As was Salo. Chubarov, Ruutu, Kesler, Bryan Allen were all pickups of Bryan Burke in the draft. He also traded a 2nd round pick for Alex Auld.

Hasn't added anything to the Canucks?
Thanks Miz, it was a question because I didn't know, so thanks for proving once again why this smilie was added

I couldn't remember if Burke became GM in 98 or 99, which is why I said Jovo.

I also mentioned the Sedins, Linden and Malik, but thanks anyways. So aside from Jovo, he hasn't added anyone that is a big impact and could take them over the top and to the cup(which was the real point of the question)?

dawgbone is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 02:47 PM
  #31
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,067
vCash: 500
to Burke's defense, he probably accomplished the best salary dump deal ever in the NHL. Jovo was an incredibly risky payment for a top 3 player in the NHL but has turned out great.

To Burke's detriment, he overpaid for the sedins and Linden. His biggest failure is that he emulates Bobby Clarke when it comes to goaltending. A very good team with a good goalie will usually lose to a good team with a very good goalie.

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 03:40 PM
  #32
thome_26
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,860
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to thome_26
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy
But I suppose K-Lowe is a great GM for his 4 playoff wins in 4 years.

Burke is a very good GM one of the top 5 in the game. He took a struggling 58 point team and it became a conference powerhouse. He backs his players instead of slagging them. He got Naslund and others to sign fair deals before they became free agents. He understands the importance of stud Defenceman and took a lot of heat for the Bure trade. Yeah he inherited some good players but he was smart enough to keep those players happy and fill the rest of the team with a pretty good supporting cast.

I hate Vancouver and I especially hate their swarmy ridiculous fans. But even I will swallow my hatred for them to admit that with Bertuzzi the Canucks would beat the Flames and last year they played 14 playoff games (thay's two more than we've played in four years of K-Lowe) and lost in a hard fought battle to trap-specialist Minnesota. Ownership pulled the shoot way too fast relegating the Canucks to the uncertainty and unstability that has marked most of their 30+ year history.
You're missing my point entirely. What have those few extra playoff games got them in the last few years? A bit more money - that's it - and they have a higher pay roll, so that pretty much nullifies that. But the Nux also have very little depth now and are slightly below average in the amount and quality of prospects they have. You have to judge a GM by what they're trying to do. Lowe is trying to stockpile young assets for 2004 while staying competative (and in the playoffs hopefully). He's done that with flying colors. Burke was trying to win a cup the last couple of years..... and did he? No, not even close. Burke hasn't really added anything of consequence for some time (all the way back to the Jovo deal).

thome_26 is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 04:12 PM
  #33
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,067
vCash: 500
it is really unfair to compare Lowe and Burke. Burke inheritted a team that was poised to challenge. He then led the team into financial losses in 4 of his 6 years. Lowe had to immeditely turn around the losses by trading hammer in his first month and weight less than a year later. (Bure was not a true salary dump as he just plain didn't want to be in Vancouver any longer and Burke was unable to convince him otherwise)

Lowe's job was to rebuild the org, Burke's job was to win a cup. According to a very repsected website, (hockeysfuture.com) or organizational prospects are 3rd best in the league while vancouver's are 18th.

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 04:38 PM
  #34
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,580
vCash: 500
The name of the game is not "who has the best organizational prospect depth at the end of the year" its who's making the playoffs and who's holding Lord Stanley.

The future may prove that K-Lowe has rebuit the organizational talent. The past has proven that Burke can build a team that is a Cup contender.

This Canuck team hasn't laid down and died in the playoffs. They lost a hard fought 7 game series withe trap happy Wild and lost an emotional rollercoster series with the Flames minus their premier power forward. If the myopic fans and managment in Vancouver grabbed some patience this team with a little tweaking would get 100 points for the next three years and probably make at least one decent run to the cup.

HotToddy is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 04:48 PM
  #35
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy
The name of the game is not "who has the best organizational prospect depth at the end of the year" its who's making the playoffs and who's holding Lord Stanley.

The future may prove that K-Lowe has rebuit the organizational talent. The past has proven that Burke can build a team that is a Cup contender.

This Canuck team hasn't laid down and died in the playoffs. They lost a hard fought 7 game series withe trap happy Wild and lost an emotional rollercoster series with the Flames minus their premier power forward. If the myopic fans and managment in Vancouver grabbed some patience this team with a little tweaking would get 100 points for the next three years and probably make at least one decent run to the cup.
HotToddy, the Nucks haven't held up Lord Stanley either, and the teams are in different situations, so having the best organizational depth is pretty much 2nd.

Burke hasn't built the team as a cup contender... they have been to the 2nd round once. They haven't addressed the biggest hole that they have had in that time either, which is critical for a "cup contender".

dawgbone is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 05:05 PM
  #36
Mr Sakich
Registered User
 
Mr Sakich's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Motel 35
Posts: 8,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy
The name of the game is not "who has the best organizational prospect depth at the end of the year" its who's making the playoffs and who's holding Lord Stanley.

The future may prove that K-Lowe has rebuit the organizational talent. The past has proven that Burke can build a team that is a Cup contender.

This Canuck team hasn't laid down and died in the playoffs. They lost a hard fought 7 game series withe trap happy Wild and lost an emotional rollercoster series with the Flames minus their premier power forward. If the myopic fans and managment in Vancouver grabbed some patience this team with a little tweaking would get 100 points for the next three years and probably make at least one decent run to the cup.
I may be wrong but it seems to me that the only team that Burke has ever beat in the playoffs was the Blues who were up 3 games to 1 and then got ravaged by a flu. Scott Mellanby's kid start the epidemic which had as many as 13 guys simultaneously very very ill.

Mr Sakich is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 05:40 PM
  #37
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Sakich
Scott Mellanby's kid start the epidemic which had as many as 13 guys simultaneously very very ill.
hehe... man, imagine growing up with that on your back...

"I cost my dad the Stanley Cup"

dang...

dawgbone is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 05:46 PM
  #38
Cerebral
Registered User
 
Cerebral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,697
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
hehe... man, imagine growing up with that on your back...

"I cost my dad the Stanley Cup"

dang...
I don't know why but it seems like it would form a good plot for an episode of Family Guy..

Cerebral is offline  
Old
05-04-2004, 11:47 PM
  #39
YKOil
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 1,232
vCash: 500
I have always thought, and will continue to, think that Burke is an excellent GM.

He got lucky, to be sure, with Naslund (deciding he would get his game together), with trading for Jovo (deciding he would get his game together) and Bertuzzi (see the other two) BUT that is no different than:

Sutter: Kiprusoff (yay! a great goalie for nothing) & Donovan (kind of like finding a free power-forward in a krackerjack box)
or
Lowe: Bergeron (guys.. I don't think we need that pp qb quite so badly anymore) or Ulanov (yeehaw! he really CAN still play) or Torres (of course Isbister was the REAL throw-in...)
or
Feaster: St. Louis (sure, I have 150k in spare change floating around) and Stillman (see - the Flames & the Blues had me all WRONG!)
or
Clarke: Johnsson (get yer headcase, get yer headcase here!) and Pitkanen (I knew those photos of Feaster and the goat would come in handy one day)

Every GM has good and bad karma - nature of the game. What I look at though is the overall effect and record.

He did more with the Bure trade/salary dump than Lowe has ever accomplished with like trades (final upside on Torres notwithstanding). He absolutely stole Marek Malik (Horacek?? Hahahahaha!) - equivalent for Lowe would be getting Fischer for Isbister - and I would take Salo over Schaeffer anyday. The Cloutier trade is debateable (I love Aucoin) BUT Cloutier DID become a successful #1 goaltender who is a considerable asset right now. Auld was an excellent trade as well - no one can say Burke wasn't trying to take care of his goaltender problem. Morrison wasn't a bad deal at all in a salary dump of Mogilny.

Organizationally:

- his draft picks have been pretty good
- his contract work, it couldn't have been all Nonis, has been exemplary (Cooke for four years at low, low dollars comes to mind) - the best Lowe got out of Smyth was 2 years after all
- the Canucks have had 86 straight sell-outs
- he brought in a Coach that took the team to a high level (though I think it is time for Crawford to go)
- his team salary has never been out of whack and has been closer to that of the Oilers - with the Canucks getting better results - than most of us would like to admit

His ego is, definitely, big but that is no worse a flaw than Lowe's Alberta-boy fetish. Burke is/was/will be a great/good GM somewhere else soon (I am thinking the Rangers if Sather tanks again).

One thing I want to take issue with - the idea that Lowe has built up a better prospect/team depth than Burke.

This is baloney.

Naslund, Bertuzzi, Morrison, Jovo and Ohlund could be traded for better assets than the Oilers have right now EASILY. Even after all those players were moved the Canucks would have a playing depth quite comparable to ours (with a tonne of salary room with which to fill the gaps) while organizationally they would have a prospect depth that would blow ours away.

The Canucks have high-value assets coming out of their ears while the Oilers have Smyth and, maybe, Smith. Naslund could get almost as much in trade, by himself, as those two combined.

Anyways - the Canucks just lost the guy that gave that team an identity. Hopefully he doesn't take it with him.


YKOil

YKOil is offline  
Old
05-05-2004, 12:06 AM
  #40
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 15,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by YKOil
Sutter: Kiprusoff (yay! a great goalie for nothing) & Donovan (kind of like finding a free power-forward in a krackerjack box)
or
Lowe: Bergeron (guys.. I don't think we need that pp qb quite so badly anymore) or Ulanov (yeehaw! he really CAN still play) or Torres (of course Isbister was the REAL throw-in...)
or
Feaster: St. Louis (sure, I have 150k in spare change floating around) and Stillman (see - the Flames & the Blues had me all WRONG!)
or
Clarke: Johnsson (get yer headcase, get yer headcase here!) and Pitkanen (I knew those photos of Feaster and the goat would come in handy one day)
This is the greatest summary ever, in the history of ever!

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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

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



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:14 PM.

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

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