The Brian Burke Thread

[Kin]

Bottom line is any the goal of any business is to max out their revenue streams. MLSE has not done that with any of their franchises and I am sure they would love to.

Sure. But the people running MLSE are smart enough to know that they're in a business where out of 30 teams only 1 gets to max out their revenue per season and that what determines that 1 often has a lot to do with luck. They also know that they have other areas of potential revenue growth besides making the playoffs and Burke may be doing gangbusters in that regard.

And, more to the point, they know I'm sure that there are some fundamental differences between running a sports franchise and just about any other business. Nobody's livelihood is tied up in whether or not the Leafs make an extra million or two.

 

[Bender]

Bottom line is any the goal of any business is to max out their revenue streams. MLSE has not done that with any of their franchises and I am sure they would love to.

Sure. But the people running MLSE are smart enough to know that they're in a business where out of 30 teams only 1 gets to max out their revenue per season and that what determines that 1 often has a lot to do with luck. They also know that they have other areas of potential revenue growth besides making the playoffs and Burke may be doing gangbusters in that regard.

And, more to the point, they know I'm sure that there are some fundamental differences between running a sports franchise and just about any other business. Nobody's livelihood is tied up in whether or not the Leafs make an extra million or two.

Sorry, this might've been asnwered somewhere else, but if they weren't interested in competing then why would they spend to the cap?

I dunno, I think this is one of those cases where the arguments on either side both carry weight, but are impossible to verify with any degree of accuracy.

 

[Kin]

Sorry, this might've been asnwered somewhere else, but if they weren't interested in competing then why would they spend to the cap?

I'm not saying that they're not interested in competing.

In fact, that line of reasoning kind of lends itself to what I'm saying. If the Leafs spent less on the cap they'd make more money. If they didn't allow Burke to bury big contracts in the minors they'd make more money. But they do. Because they have competitive interests that can override their interest in making as much money as they possibly can from year to year.

So if Burke is in hot water for not making the playoffs, I think the motivation at MLSE is more competitive than financial.

 

[Corn Flake]

You don't think a 10-20% profit increase would be substantial to a billion dollar company? Um...

Sorry if I got it wrong Nik, but, I think he was saying it would add to their operating income. That's not a huge amount of dough for these guys.

I'm saying it is when you look at the percentages.  Any large corporation that can gain 10-20% net profit is going to bend over backwards to make that money. 

I have worked for many large corporations and I work for one now.  10-20% is huge. No question.

You guys hiring?

Anywho, I'm not sure those kind of numbers are going to have a serious effect on Burke's tenure, I don't know for sure obviously but it seems lower order in the scheme to me, fwiw.

I don't think the pressure was on Burke to make the playoffs this year. I think this year was the "maybe yes, maybe no" season. 

Next year? I think he has to make it.  Its year 5 of his existence here and for him to not make it would certainly put into question his plan working or not.  If they don't make it, MLSE will have gone 8 seasons without any playoff revenue.  Whether or not you think 10-20% on a bottom line is peanuts in one year, multiply that by 8 years and it is a huge.  I think MLSE agreed to finally be patient and let their GM take the time to build a team using prospects and development, but at some point that patience is going to run dry, and that playoff money talks.

 

[jonlleafs]

Bottom line is any the goal of any business is to max out their revenue streams. MLSE has not done that with any of their franchises and I am sure they would love to.

Sure. But the people running MLSE are smart enough to know that they're in a business where out of 30 teams only 1 gets to max out their revenue per season and that what determines that 1 often has a lot to do with luck. They also know that they have other areas of potential revenue growth besides making the playoffs and Burke may be doing gangbusters in that regard.

And, more to the point, they know I'm sure that there are some fundamental differences between running a sports franchise and just about any other business. Nobody's livelihood is tied up in whether or not the Leafs make an extra million or two.

Sorry, this might've been asnwered somewhere else, but if they weren't interested in competing then why would they spend to the cap?

I dunno, I think this is one of those cases where the arguments on either side both carry weight, but are impossible to verify with any degree of accuracy.

I also don't buy that the organization is too profitable to care about winning.  Sure if the seats were half empty it would give them additional motivation, but they are spending to the cap and their front office is being paid big bucks AND they just gave Wilson a golden parachute with his extension.  If the intent was to only make money, they wouldn't be wasting all this cash.

 

[#1PilarFan]

Sure. But the people running MLSE are smart enough to know that they're in a business where out of 30 teams only 1 gets to max out their revenue per season and that what determines that 1 often has a lot to do with luck. They also know that they have other areas of potential revenue growth besides making the playoffs and Burke may be doing gangbusters in that regard.

And, more to the point, they know I'm sure that there are some fundamental differences between running a sports franchise and just about any other business. Nobody's livelihood is tied up in whether or not the Leafs make an extra million or two.

I think icing a winning team goes farther than just providing playoff revenue. Winning would build the Leafs brands and help the Leafs expand into other markets.

I'm not saying that happens after one failed playoff push, which is why MLSE has never seen too desperate to make the playoffs, but I have no doubt that they are committed to building a long-term winner. They are just really, really bad at it.

 

[Tigger]

Next year? I think he has to make it.  Its year 5 of his existence here and for him to not make it would certainly put into question his plan working or not.  If they don't make it, MLSE will have gone 8 seasons without any playoff revenue.  Whether or not you think 10-20% on a bottom line is peanuts in one year, multiply that by 8 years and it is a huge.  I think MLSE agreed to finally be patient and let their GM take the time to build a team using prospects and development, but at some point that patience is going to run dry, and that playoff money talks.

That's fair, the multiplier is a consideration. I'd counter that Burke has sold them, somewhat, on long term competitiveness balancing that out.

It's a good point and something princedpw noted about having a GM under the gun possibly having a negative effect is ringing true to me here too.

 

[Kin]

I think icing a winning team goes farther than just providing playoff revenue. Winning would build the Leafs brands and help the Leafs expand into other markets.

I'm not saying that happens after one failed playoff push, which is why MLSE has never seen too desperate to make the playoffs, but I have no doubt that they are committed to building a long-term winner. They are just really, really bad at it.

Well, keep in mind my original post here was me just saying that I don't think the gap between where the Leafs are right now in terms of profitability(which, let's remember, is far and away the best in their industry) and where they could be after the playoffs is going to be the driving factor in who they want to be the GM of their hockey club.

And right now, as we've seen with the Blue Jays, the issue is going to be further confused by the reality of the Maple Leafs profitability taking a back seat to the value that they can add to the owners' other concerns.

So, yeah, these are just my doubts that the owners, all of whom are wealthy from their other businesses, are going to look at the Leafs at 81.9 million instead of, say, 90 million and say "Things need to change".

 

[pnjunction]

I don't think things are running completely on the fly over there.

Who is saying this?  You're arguing against a point nobody is making.

They have a plan.  Everybody has a plan.  It's a meaningless reassurance.

 

[pnjunction]

So?  My point was that plans in any situation are only good if they actually happen and work out.  Also when they don't you can just make up a new plan and still say you have a plan.  All of the worst GMs ever had plans.

You're the last person I'd want as partner entrepreneur.

LOL.  Excuse me for caring about the quality of the plan and not just that they have one like everybody does.

"I have a business plan."
"Is it a good plan?  Have you had to change it time and time again because it keeps blowing up in your face?"
"I don't want to do business with you anymore."
"Good riddance."

 

[maplesyrup]

I don't think things are running completely on the fly over there.

Who is saying this?  You're arguing against a point nobody is making.

They have a plan.  Everybody has a plan.  It's a meaningless reassurance.

Well, you've implied the plan has failed...  "miserably" is the word I think you used. Poulin claims the plan is still going forward... If it's failed, it can be also be going forward, can it?

 

[pnjunction]

I don't think things are running completely on the fly over there.

Who is saying this?  You're arguing against a point nobody is making.

They have a plan.  Everybody has a plan.  It's a meaningless reassurance.

Well, you've implied the plan has failed...  "miserably" is the word I think you used. Poulin claims the plan is still going forward... If it's failed, it can be also be going forward, can it?

Right but how long have they been on this particular plan?  The "not a 5-year rebuild" plan has clearly crashed and burned, unless somebody really thinks we're going to contend next year.  That plan was also going forward until its failure was obvious, like most bad plans do.  That's where I'm coming from.

 

[pnjunction]

Hey maybe Burke really is a genius and tanking this year for a high draft pick has been part of his master plan from the beginning LOL.

 

[maplesyrup]

I don't think things are running completely on the fly over there.

Who is saying this?  You're arguing against a point nobody is making.

They have a plan.  Everybody has a plan.  It's a meaningless reassurance.

Well, you've implied the plan has failed...  "miserably" is the word I think you used. Poulin claims the plan is still going forward... If it's failed, it can be also be going forward, can it?

Right but how long have they been on this particular plan?  The "not a 5-year rebuild" plan has clearly crashed and burned, unless somebody really thinks we're going to contend next year.  That plan was also going forward until its failure was obvious, like most bad plans do.  That's where I'm coming from.

Ah... I see.

 

[Tigger]

I don't think things are running completely on the fly over there.

Who is saying this?  You're arguing against a point nobody is making.

They have a plan.  Everybody has a plan.  It's a meaningless reassurance.

Well, you've implied the plan has failed...  "miserably" is the word I think you used. Poulin claims the plan is still going forward... If it's failed, it can be also be going forward, can it?

Right but how long have they been on this particular plan?  The "not a 5-year rebuild" plan has clearly crashed and burned, unless somebody really thinks we're going to contend next year.  That plan was also going forward until its failure was obvious, like most bad plans do.  That's where I'm coming from.

Well, I don't think you're going to see a team contend in the 4th year of a 5 year rebuild anyways barring some real luck. In theory the Leafs are in year 3 of a plan that had to adjust due to the lack of free agents.

The last 4 weeks have been truly horrific but I don't think the plan is as flawed as that stretch was in practice. I disagreed with the Kessel trade at the time ( before it happened really ), though I didn't predict the Leafs would have landed Seguin etc., but in spite of that I think the moves made since then have been decent on the whole, even with a 'rebuild' pov as Burke switched gears last deadline quite effectively.

Kessel is also a pretty good goal scorer so that mitigates the damage quite a bit for me.

I don't mind what happened at this deadline either, with the prices the way they were. It may have been a good time to sell but aside from, maybe, the first rounder for MacArthur there weren't any deals that I was upset about that the Leafs were realistically in on. Hodgson would have been great but the Leafs didn't have a Kassian to do it.

Really, a huge chunk of this plan hasn't shown it's face yet, the kids that have been traded for, drafted and developed are just showing up and the Marlies are a pretty good team.

 

[Bender]

So?  My point was that plans in any situation are only good if they actually happen and work out.  Also when they don't you can just make up a new plan and still say you have a plan.  All of the worst GMs ever had plans.

You're the last person I'd want as partner entrepreneur.

LOL.  Excuse me for caring about the quality of the plan and not just that they have one like everybody does.

"I have a business plan."
"Is it a good plan?  Have you had to change it time and time again because it keeps blowing up in your face?"
"I don't want to do business with you anymore."
"Good riddance."

See that makes more sense. Before the argument I saw was "Plans don't necessarily work". Which I would say, yeah, nothing necessarily does unless you're talking physics and math, and even then things get wonky in the right situations.

Maybe it's time someone had another shot, but just like the coaching change, I don't think it'll make a lick of difference unless the mandate from MLSE is "let's rebuild properly" over "get us into the playoffs as fast as you can."

 

[hockeyfan1]

Sure. But the people running MLSE are smart enough to know that they're in a business where out of 30 teams only 1 gets to max out their revenue per season and that what determines that 1 often has a lot to do with luck. They also know that they have other areas of potential revenue growth besides making the playoffs and Burke may be doing gangbusters in that regard.

And, more to the point, they know I'm sure that there are some fundamental differences between running a sports franchise and just about any other business. Nobody's livelihood is tied up in whether or not the Leafs make an extra million or two.

I think icing a winning team goes farther than just providing playoff revenue. Winning would build the Leafs brands and help the Leafs expand into other markets.

I'm not saying that happens after one failed playoff push, which is why MLSE has never seen too desperate to make the playoffs, but I have no doubt that they are committed to building a long-term winner. They are just really, really bad at it.

Wouldn't it all change if suddenly there is another Toronto NHL outfit to rival the Leafs (such as the one being proposed for the GTA, new arena & all)?

 

[Leaflifer]

I have no idea what the plan is, but I do know this. If you disagree with Burke's plan, he will get all red and defensive.

 

[Zee]

I don't think things are running completely on the fly over there.

Who is saying this?  You're arguing against a point nobody is making.

They have a plan.  Everybody has a plan.  It's a meaningless reassurance.

Well, you've implied the plan has failed...  "miserably" is the word I think you used. Poulin claims the plan is still going forward... If it's failed, it can be also be going forward, can it?

Right but how long have they been on this particular plan?  The "not a 5-year rebuild" plan has clearly crashed and burned, unless somebody really thinks we're going to contend next year.  That plan was also going forward until its failure was obvious, like most bad plans do.  That's where I'm coming from.

I have to agree with you.  When Burke took over in 2008, it doesn't take a wild guess to assume he would have thought we'd contend for the playoffs by 2012.  His team building has been an utter failure so far kicked off by the initial summer signing of Komisarek who's a microcosm of all that's wrong with the Leafs right now.

 

[sickbeast]

Brian Burke needs to be fired immediately.  He has made some good trades like the Phaneuf and Gardiner deals, but he should have done a proper rebuild and the Kessel trade was really, really bad.

His bad moves have far outnumbered his good moves unfortunately.  I was excited when the Leafs signed him, but at this point I'm frustrated and it's obvious that his efforts have been misguided.

I agree with Don Cherry - we need more Ontario born players on the team.