The Brian Burke Thread

[Zee]

Right now the anger is because we've mortgaged the future and the fixer-upper house we bought is falling apart.

Wait, Kessel aside how did the Leafs mortgage their future under Burke?

I see little patience for a true rebuild though, not pointing at you when I say that either, just in general. There are definitely people on this site that have promoted it and could live with some awful hockey to that end but I don't see the average Leafs fan thinking like that, fwiw.

I have to disagree with the "little patience for a true rebuild".  When Burke was first hired I think the general consensus of fans was that Burke would be a true leader, know what it takes to build a winner and the fanbase would be willing to live through the years of pain.  Burke came right in and started to sell the "quicker ways to a rebuild" and it hasn't panned out 4 years later.  Had he come in and said "we're going to build through the draft" and started to acquire top 5 picks the last few seasons, I think the fans would be a lot more optimistic at this point in time, especially if we had a great center prospect.

I'm wondering though if the "quicker ways to a rebuild" wasn't a mandate sent down from the board at MLSE? If it was, than what recourse did he really have?

It most likely was.

"Stripping down to the chassis and rebuilding it is certainly not what ownership has asked me to do. We're not rebuilding here, we're retooling." - Burke

I'm pretty sure it also came out after Ferguson was fired that he had supposedly proposed a rebuild plan to them after the lockout ended.

Who the hell in ownership is making these decisions anyway?  If that's really the case and he was told not to "strip it down to the chassis", why??  Why would anyone on the board of directors care?  All they care about is the bottom line, and that's not changing regardless of whether the Leafs "re-tool" or "rebuild" totally.  Blows my mind.

 

[Tigger]

Leafs fans are revolting because of lack of direction with this team right now.  What's the plan?  Burke's words over the last few seasons have been constantly changing.  From "build from the net out", to "top 6, bottom 6", do you see ANY of that on the current Leafs roster?  He then changed his stance this year saying the NHL game "has changed" since the days of "top 6,  bottom 6" and the Leafs are changing with it and are now a "speed team".  It seems like he's making it up as he goes.

A couple things. As I said in my last post, aside from Kessel this has been mostly a rebuild. Burke came in with a 'winning plan' based on success he had with Carlyle, the game evolved and he admitted it. The only reason we really know this is because Burke did that. Being a GM means constant flux and adaptation, that's not a bad thing.

Ask guys on a construction crew if following a blueprint means everything goes according to plan.

 

[Kin]

It most likely was.

"Stripping down to the chassis and rebuilding it is certainly not what ownership has asked me to do. We're not rebuilding here, we're retooling." - Burke

I'm pretty sure it also came out after Ferguson was fired that he had supposedly proposed a rebuild plan to them after the lockout ended.

But Burke had a ton of leverage when he was being pursued. If he was being asked to do anything he didn't want to do, or that ran contrary to what he thought would work, he could have not taken the job.

 

[Tigger]

Wait, Kessel aside how did the Leafs mortgage their future under Burke?

Obviously people's definitions are going to differ on the subject matter but it's not like the Kessel trade is the only move Burke made that would run contrary to a traditional rebuild.

There are others that would fall under 'mortgaging the future'? Not with any like drama that I can think of. In fact I think the balance is quite the opposite.

 

[Kin]

There are others that would fall under 'mortgaging the future'? Not with any like drama that I can think of. In fact I think the balance is quite the opposite.

Well, I'm not going to argue what did or didn't fall under the pretty poorly defined concept of "mortgaging" the team's future. I think there are various moves he made that were made in the pursuit of immediate improvement at the expense of the traditional rebuild though.

 

[Redleaf]

Right now the anger is because we've mortgaged the future and the fixer-upper house we bought is falling apart.

Wait, Kessel aside how did the Leafs mortgage their future under Burke?

I see little patience for a true rebuild though, not pointing at you when I say that either, just in general. There are definitely people on this site that have promoted it and could live with some awful hockey to that end but I don't see the average Leafs fan thinking like that, fwiw.

I have to disagree with the "little patience for a true rebuild".  When Burke was first hired I think the general consensus of fans was that Burke would be a true leader, know what it takes to build a winner and the fanbase would be willing to live through the years of pain.  Burke came right in and started to sell the "quicker ways to a rebuild" and it hasn't panned out 4 years later.  Had he come in and said "we're going to build through the draft" and started to acquire top 5 picks the last few seasons, I think the fans would be a lot more optimistic at this point in time, especially if we had a great center prospect.

I'm wondering though if the "quicker ways to a rebuild" wasn't a mandate sent down from the board at MLSE? If it was, than what recourse did he really have?

It most likely was.

"Stripping down to the chassis and rebuilding it is certainly not what ownership has asked me to do. We're not rebuilding here, we're retooling." - Burke

I'm pretty sure it also came out after Ferguson was fired that he had supposedly proposed a rebuild plan to them after the lockout ended.

Who the hell in ownership is making these decisions anyway?  If that's really the case and he was told not to "strip it down to the chassis", why??  Why would anyone on the board of directors care?  All they care about is the bottom line, and that's not changing regardless of whether the Leafs "re-tool" or "rebuild" totally.  Blows my mind.

Its always about playoff revenue. Get us to the playoffs on a regular basis. We don't want to rebuild for 5-10 years.

Didn't that back fire in their faces?

 

[Redleaf]

It most likely was.

"Stripping down to the chassis and rebuilding it is certainly not what ownership has asked me to do. We're not rebuilding here, we're retooling." - Burke

I'm pretty sure it also came out after Ferguson was fired that he had supposedly proposed a rebuild plan to them after the lockout ended.

But Burke had a ton of leverage when he was being pursued. If he was being asked to do anything he didn't want to do, or that ran contrary to what he thought would work, he could have not taken the job.

These seem to be the perimeters for this position for whomever takes hold of the reigns until MLSE deems otherwise. It doesn't seem like a particularly conducive way to operate, but I don't see how electing someone else right now would make much of a difference. Had he refused who would have done any better under the circumstances?

 

[Zee]

It most likely was.

"Stripping down to the chassis and rebuilding it is certainly not what ownership has asked me to do. We're not rebuilding here, we're retooling." - Burke

I'm pretty sure it also came out after Ferguson was fired that he had supposedly proposed a rebuild plan to them after the lockout ended.

But Burke had a ton of leverage when he was being pursued. If he was being asked to do anything he didn't want to do, or that ran contrary to what he thought would work, he could have not taken the job.

These seem to be the perimeters for this position for whomever takes hold of the reigns until MLSE deems otherwise. It doesn't seem like a particularly conducive way to operate, but I don't see how electing someone else right now would make much of a difference. Had he refused who would have done any better?

When Bell/Rogers *officially* take control this summer, perhaps they can clean the slate so to speak.  Say they fully support Burke, are behind whatever direction he wishes to take with the team, *even if it requires a tear-down and traditional rebuild*.  Something to that effect to say that Burke has complete free reign to overhaul the roster once again. 

I dunno, I'm just grapsing at straws now.

 

[Kin]

These seem to be the perimeters for this position for whomever takes hold of the reigns until MLSE deems otherwise. It doesn't seem like a particularly conducive way to operate, but I don't see how electing someone else right now would make much of a difference. Had he refused who would have done any better?

That auto-correct is a tough one to snake, huh?

 

[Redleaf]

These seem to be the perimeters for this position for whomever takes hold of the reins until MLSE deems otherwise. It doesn't seem like a particularly conducive way to operate, but I don't see how electing someone else right now would make much of a difference. Had he refused who would have done any better?

That auto-correct is a tough one to snake, huh?

I don't need auto correct anymore. I have you. Too bad you just can't make the corrections for me? 

 

[Kin]

When Bell/Rogers *officially* take control this summer, perhaps they can clean the slate so to speak.  Say they fully support Burke, are behind whatever direction he wishes to take with the team, *even if it requires a tear-down and traditional rebuild*.  Something to that effect to say that Burke has complete free reign to overhaul the roster once again. 

I dunno, I'm just grapsing at straws now.

I don't buy that this strategy is something that's been stuffed down Burke's throat. I think he went into this job preaching the quick turnaround. I think that's why MLSE hired him but it's still his plan. I don't think a change at the top changes things that much.

If the question the becomes who'd be better at a quick turn-around...I don't know but we've seen some examples of quick turn-arounds.

 

[Redleaf]

It most likely was.

"Stripping down to the chassis and rebuilding it is certainly not what ownership has asked me to do. We're not rebuilding here, we're retooling." - Burke

I'm pretty sure it also came out after Ferguson was fired that he had supposedly proposed a rebuild plan to them after the lockout ended.

But Burke had a ton of leverage when he was being pursued. If he was being asked to do anything he didn't want to do, or that ran contrary to what he thought would work, he could have not taken the job.

These seem to be the perimeters for this position for whomever takes hold of the reigns until MLSE deems otherwise. It doesn't seem like a particularly conducive way to operate, but I don't see how electing someone else right now would make much of a difference. Had he refused who would have done any better?

When Bell/Rogers *officially* take control this summer, perhaps they can clean the slate so to speak.  Say they fully support Burke, are behind whatever direction he wishes to take with the team, *even if it requires a tear-down and traditional rebuild*.  Something to that effect to say that Burke has complete free reign to overhaul the roster once again. 

I dunno, I'm just grapsing at straws now.

I wonder what Burke would do under those circumstances? Do you think he'd rip it all apart and start over with draft picks?

 

[Zee]

It most likely was.

"Stripping down to the chassis and rebuilding it is certainly not what ownership has asked me to do. We're not rebuilding here, we're retooling." - Burke

I'm pretty sure it also came out after Ferguson was fired that he had supposedly proposed a rebuild plan to them after the lockout ended.

But Burke had a ton of leverage when he was being pursued. If he was being asked to do anything he didn't want to do, or that ran contrary to what he thought would work, he could have not taken the job.

These seem to be the perimeters for this position for whomever takes hold of the reigns until MLSE deems otherwise. It doesn't seem like a particularly conducive way to operate, but I don't see how electing someone else right now would make much of a difference. Had he refused who would have done any better?

When Bell/Rogers *officially* take control this summer, perhaps they can clean the slate so to speak.  Say they fully support Burke, are behind whatever direction he wishes to take with the team, *even if it requires a tear-down and traditional rebuild*.  Something to that effect to say that Burke has complete free reign to overhaul the roster once again. 

I dunno, I'm just grapsing at straws now.

I wonder what Burke would do under those circumstances? Do you think he'd rip it all apart and start over with draft picks?

No idea.  This all goes under the assumption that he was somehow mandated by MLSE to do a "quick re-tool" in hopes of getting playoff revenue sooner rather than later.  If on the other hand it was his idea that he sold to MLSE then all bets are off and it's truly Burke's fault.  If that's the case then I wouldn't even trust him to do a proper rebuild and would rather that the new owners fire him.

 

[Redleaf]

When Bell/Rogers *officially* take control this summer, perhaps they can clean the slate so to speak.  Say they fully support Burke, are behind whatever direction he wishes to take with the team, *even if it requires a tear-down and traditional rebuild*.  Something to that effect to say that Burke has complete free reign to overhaul the roster once again. 

I dunno, I'm just grapsing at straws now.

I don't buy that this strategy is something that's been stuffed down Burke's throat. I think he went into this job preaching the quick turnaround.

But, was that before or after his first meeting with MLSE?

 

[Tigger]

There are others that would fall under 'mortgaging the future'? Not with any like drama that I can think of. In fact I think the balance is quite the opposite.

Well, I'm not going to argue what did or didn't fall under the pretty poorly defined concept of "mortgaging" the team's future. I think there are various moves he made that were made in the pursuit of immediate improvement at the expense of the traditional rebuild though.

Well, ok sure but you're taking issue with a classification I was responding to there.

Also, rebuilding teams still make trades for immediate help, I mean this isn't Pittsburgh trading Kovalev over finances and winning 5 of it's last 26 in 02/03.

 

[Kin]

Well, ok sure but you're taking issue with a classification I was responding to there.

Fair enough. I read the original post as the "mortgaging" referring to the strategy as a whole rather than move by move.

Also, rebuilding teams still make trades for immediate help, I mean this isn't Pittsburgh trading Kovalev over finances and winning 5 of it's last 26 in 02/03.

I mean, they do in the sense that they add players, but I don't know that they do things like...sign multiple free agents to long term deals.

 

[Zee]

Well, ok sure but you're taking issue with a classification I was responding to there.

Fair enough. I read the original post as the "mortgaging" referring to the strategy as a whole rather than move by move.

Also, rebuilding teams still make trades for immediate help, I mean this isn't Pittsburgh trading Kovalev over finances and winning 5 of it's last 26 in 02/03.

I mean, they do in the sense that they add players, but I don't know that they do things like...sign multiple free agents to long term deals.

Bingo.  Traditional rebuilds also don't trade for guys with a $6.5M salary for multiple years and insist he's your captain.

 

[Zee]

I think this entire mess started with Burke misjudging the team when he first took over and made the Kessel trade.

Burke traded away his first round pick, and THOUGHT it wouldn't turn into a lottery pick, i.e. he thought the Leafs weren't as bad as they turned out to be.  When the season got underway and it was apparent the Leafs were terrible and headed for lottery pick territory, Burke then tried to salvage the season and improve the team in the standings with the mega trades for Phaneuf and Giguere in Jan 2010.

Ultimately it had no effect on that season and the Leafs finished 2nd last overall, and Seguin went to the Bruins.  The problem began to escalate. 

 

[Erndog]

This may sound ridiculous, but to this day I say it all went downhill when Burke didn't sign the Sedins.

He flew to Sweden the day of free agency but the Sedins signed at the 12th hour.  They took a very good 5 year deal too, one that Burke for sure could have matched/beat.  Not one of those "lifetime contracts".

Anyways, from that point on, it was misjudged.  He then made the Kessel deal.  I'm pretty sure that had he signed the Sedins he wouldn't have made the Kessel trade.  OR even if he did, he would have the Sedins plus Kessel and for sure we wouldn't have been bottom 2.

People are going to laugh this off or dismiss it but I am pretty darn sure it all went downhill when the Sedins re-signed in Vancouver.  Even more reason to hate the Canucks.

 

[maplesyrup]

I think this entire mess started with Burke misjudging the team when he first took over and made the Kessel trade.

I think that's becoming more and more the common line of thinking. It's also possible that Kessel was just one prong of a two or three (or more) pronged plan and the others just didn't happen.