The Brian Burke Thread

[BlueWhiteBlood]

I saw two teams in the finals that were built for the playoffs. That's all that matters really.

So when Philly went deep into the playoffs, into game 6 of the finals behind Michael Leighton, you were the one guy in the world who saw that coming? Give me a break.

I saw Vancouver and Boston in the finals last year.

 

[Mack674]

At this point I'd be willing to throw kadri in there and give him top 6 minutes and let him play. I don't think Wilson gave him a fair shake but that's just me.

 

[Kin]

I saw Vancouver and Boston in the finals last year.

So last year is the only thing that matters? There's nothing to take from prior years?

 

[cw]

Sorry to be so bleak but I've seen plenty of Leafs playoffs over the last 40 years. I'd rather pass on a playoff round to two for a better chance to win a Cup.

I agree in general and, as I've said, I don't even think making that MacArthur trade drastically reduces their chances of making the playoffs/making a run in those playoffs.

Well I probably wouldn't have stopped at MacArthur. The top end of this draft is supposed to be pretty good. If the Leafs get #15-20 from their finish and padded that with #22 and #25 to get a top 5 pick, that might get them a good shot at an elite prospect - for example.

I would probably be relentless at rolling over the roster until I got a couple of those guys. It wouldn't guarantee a Cup but it would substantially improve their chances at winning one. And all they're doing is rolling over the talent assets they have to make a bigger snowball of quality prospects down the road. It's hardly rocket science. And I don't think it would take that long - about half the time that the BS approach they've put themselves through since the lockout took.

 

[Kin]

Well I probably wouldn't have stopped at MacArthur. The top end of this draft is supposed to be pretty good. If the Leafs get #15-20 from their finish and padded that with #22 and #25 to get a top 5 pick, that might get them a good shot at an elite prospect - for example.

I would probably be relentless at rolling over the roster until I got a couple of those guys. It wouldn't guarantee a Cup but it would substantially improve their chances at winning one. And all they're doing is rolling over the talent assets they have to make a bigger snowball of quality prospects down the road. It's hardly rocket science. And I don't think it would take that long - about half the time that the BS approach they've put themselves through since the lockout took.

I can't disagree. I don't think this group of players has anything close to the kind of building blocks you really want going forward.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

So last year is the only thing that matters? There's nothing to take from prior years?

I don't get your point really, you want to argue over grey area stuff? Philly had a pretty good team, they lacked a goalie. Toronto has many more things wrong with it than one area, so I don't really see the comparison.

You want the GM to go out and trade someone just to do it, to send some kind of message to his team. I just disagree with you is all, I would agree with doing the Mac deal if one of our younger players was knocking on the door, or if their was a better trade on the table to upgrade Mac , but by Burke's account, there wasn't.

 

[Mack674]

It didn't take Chicago long.

All the cup teams have one thing in common the last 10 years and they have elite top level talent like has been mentioned. We have "maybe" kessel, and that's it.

 

[Bender]

What? That we're giving up on the season?

MacArthur is on pace for 49 points. Dealing him wouldn't be "giving up on the season". Neither would Kulemin. It would be a clear message to the rest of the team that what they're doing, ain't enough. You trade MacArthur and call up Kadri, which is theoretically the plan at some point anyway, and at least nobody is accusing you of sitting on your thumbs while the team's season circles the drain.

Or someone accuses you of giving up on the season. It`s a you`re damned if you do, damned if you don`t situation when you`re in a position the Leafs are in now.

You add: You gave up futures when the team clearly isn`t good enough to contend. This is a waste of assets.
You subtract: There is no vote of confidence in this team when they could make the playoffs and Burke has thrown in the towel.
Do nothing: Burke`s given a vote of confidence to a team that isn`t good enough.

People can and will make any logical conclusion they can come up with in order to justify criticism.


I was actually thinking that the Leafs might bring in Sammy Pahlsson, but it really doesn`t make sense given his age. Maybe you could make the argument that it`s important to have veteran presence on the team a la Gary Roberts for the Pens a few years ago, but a couple of picks and a prospect for a guy who`s 34 and a pending UFA... sorry but I`m not that interested.

Just looking at Paul Gaustad go for a 1st makes me think that maybe we made the right choice and better options and deals could be had in the off season.

 

[Kin]

I don't get your point really, you want to argue over grey area stuff?

It's pretty simple. There's no way to say with any certainty who will or won't go deep in the playoffs. We've seen teams with "bad" goaltending go deep into the playoffs or even win the cup because they get hot at the right time. Both Toronto goalies have shown they can go on very good runs.

Saying that pulling out the stops to make the playoffs is pointless because we know how the playoffs will turn out does not bear a close relationship to reality.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

Well I probably wouldn't have stopped at MacArthur. The top end of this draft is supposed to be pretty good. If the Leafs get #15-20 from their finish and padded that with #22 and #25 to get a top 5 pick, that might get them a good shot at an elite prospect - for example.

I would probably be relentless at rolling over the roster until I got a couple of those guys. It wouldn't guarantee a Cup but it would substantially improve their chances at winning one. And all they're doing is rolling over the talent assets they have to make a bigger snowball of quality prospects down the road. It's hardly rocket science. And I don't think it would take that long - about half the time that the BS approach they've put themselves through since the lockout took.

That's a magic bullet approach IMO. Sure it's great to trade up with lots of picks and stuff, but you are forgetting about developing time. Your plan only works if that method works perfectly and the sexy picks are all hits, otherwise, you still have to develop those players.

Burke picked his route and has had to change on the fly, we've all been over this conversation, no sense rehashing it now. These kids still have to be developed and games still have to be played, you need players for that.

 

[Jalili]

Call me crazy but if your goal is to long term win a cup and you've got 1st rounders being handed out for gaustad, Its clearly an overpriced sellers market and I'm going to buy as many picks/prospects that I can.

Not just for the sake of doing it ,but would anyone have traded MacArthur for a 1st rounder in july? I would like to hope so.

Like Nik said, he's expendable anyway and is eventually most likely going to be replaced by frattin or kadri or someone in the system anyway.

Not building through the draft is just dancing around in circles.

Absolutely. The main goal should be acquiring elite talent, and getting a 1st does much more to improve those chances rather than holding on to MacArthur.

If a 1st is still on the table in June for MacArthur, then all is good. Otherwise, it's a wasted opportunity to move up in the draft. Ditto for the other guys if the picks on the table were high enough.

 

[Kin]

You add: You gave up futures when the team clearly isn`t good enough to contend. This is a waste of assets.
You subtract: There is no vote of confidence in this team when they could make the playoffs and Burke has thrown in the towel.
Do nothing: Burke`s given a vote of confidence to a team that isn`t good enough.

With all due respect, you could say the exact same thing in reverse. There seem to be people who won't criticize Burke no matter what he does or how little he delivers. There are always going to be different ways to look at a situation. That doesn't make for an impossible situation.

 

[Tigger]

Well I probably wouldn't have stopped at MacArthur. The top end of this draft is supposed to be pretty good. If the Leafs get #15-20 from their finish and padded that with #22 and #25 to get a top 5 pick, that might get them a good shot at an elite prospect - for example.

I don't have an answer for this but how likely is it to trade up into the top 5 like that?

Also, given that plan, Burke would be sort of in no man's land at this point, not making that choice back when he traded for Kessel.

When I look at Edmonton now a lot of things still have to go right even with consecutive top picks.

 

[cw]

Well I probably wouldn't have stopped at MacArthur. The top end of this draft is supposed to be pretty good. If the Leafs get #15-20 from their finish and padded that with #22 and #25 to get a top 5 pick, that might get them a good shot at an elite prospect - for example.

I would probably be relentless at rolling over the roster until I got a couple of those guys. It wouldn't guarantee a Cup but it would substantially improve their chances at winning one. And all they're doing is rolling over the talent assets they have to make a bigger snowball of quality prospects down the road. It's hardly rocket science. And I don't think it would take that long - about half the time that the BS approach they've put themselves through since the lockout took.

That's a magic bullet approach IMO. Sure it's great to trade up with lots of picks and stuff, but you are forgetting about developing time. Your plan only works if that method works perfectly and the sexy picks are all hits, otherwise, you still have to develop those players.

Nope because you keep rolling it over until you've developed a critical mass of elite prospects. If you're unlucky, it just takes longer.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

I don't get your point really, you want to argue over grey area stuff?

It's pretty simple. There's no way to say with any certainty who will or won't go deep in the playoffs. We've seen teams with "bad" goaltending go deep into the playoffs or even win the cup because they get hot at the right time. Both Toronto goalies have shown they can go on very good runs.

Simple yeah, all those Cinderella teams that always win cups. Just because you say it's simple, doesn't make it anymore prudent to think that that is a good way to win a cup or manage a team. I think Burke agrees, or he probably would have sold the farm today.

 

[cw]

Well I probably wouldn't have stopped at MacArthur. The top end of this draft is supposed to be pretty good. If the Leafs get #15-20 from their finish and padded that with #22 and #25 to get a top 5 pick, that might get them a good shot at an elite prospect - for example.

I don't have an answer for this but how likely is it to trade up into the top 5 like that?

Also, given that plan, Burke would be sort of in no man's land at this point, not making that choice back when he traded for Kessel.

When I look at Edmonton now a lot of things still have to go right even with consecutive top picks.

The Sens in the 90s went that route, got to a Cup final and fell short. There are plenty of examples where a team taking that approach won't make it. Washington is flirting with that outcome now. So there's no guarantee - and there never was or will be.

But this franchise has spent that last 40 plus years avoiding that approach and they don't have a Cup final to show for it.

If Edmonton stays the course, they will eventually be something to talk about in term of a true contender about the time we're looking for a new GM.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

Nope because you keep rolling it over until you've developed a critical mass of elite prospects. If you're unlucky, it just takes longer.

I would have got behind that approach if Burke came in and said that was the route they were going to take. He didn't and I doubt he's going to start that now, besides, you're also assuming that other GM's are just going to give up their top picks, which to me is pie in the sky type stuff.

 

[Tigger]

you've made it pretty clear that the only way you'd fire a coach is with Doc Brown's guarantee of future success.

Right, that's why, if they miss the playoffs, I want him fired.

 

[bustaheims]

Well I probably wouldn't have stopped at MacArthur. The top end of this draft is supposed to be pretty good. If the Leafs get #15-20 from their finish and padded that with #22 and #25 to get a top 5 pick, that might get them a good shot at an elite prospect - for example.

THat's being awfully optimistic about being able to make a deal at the draft. In the last 20 years, not a single team that went into the draft with a top 5 pick traded down to move out of the top 10. A small handful were traded (essentially) straight up for players, but, outside of that, it took another top 10 pick plus other assets to move into the top 5, and I can only imagine that will hold even more true in what is supposed to be a very shallow, top heavy draft.

EDIT: In fact, you have to go all the way back to 1984 to find an instance of a team trading up into the top 5 without a top 10 pick.

 

[cw]

Nope because you keep rolling it over until you've developed a critical mass of elite prospects. If you're unlucky, it just takes longer.

I would have got behind that approach if Burke came in and said that was the route they were going to take. He didn't and I doubt he's going to start that now, besides, you're also assuming that other GM's are just going to give up their top picks, which to me is pie in the sky type stuff.

Teams have traded up in the draft for as long as the draft has existed. If you have collected excess picks and prospects, you can afford to throw enough at it to make it worth another team's while. Getting the first pick overall is likely a pipe dream but getting into the top 5-10 isn't.