The Brian Burke Thread

[maplesyrup]

Draft schmaft... I want a franchise player. We haven't had one since Sundin. If there isn't a franchise player available in the draft, I easily deal the pick if it means getting the player I want.

 

[Deebo]

In principle, just Kessel + the pick (post lottery.) If it's 4/5 down... Yes. Maybe it would need to be massaged a bit but yes, I'd deal those two assets for Nash.

Holy crap that would basically leave us at 3 first rounders and a high 2nd round for one Rick Nash.  Not a winning formula.  I'd take Seguin over Nash already the other picks just pile up in the loss column.

However this is exactly the type of crap I'm worried that Burke will do.  A few losing years later we look back at that as yet another 1st squandered.

You can't look at it that way though. Your'e trading away your asset(s.) Not the assets(s) you previously traded away.

I know you can't look at individual trades that way, but you can evaluate a GM's series of mis-steps by the overall results.

BTW Kessel and our 1st for Nash is a terrible deal IMO regardless.

As the general framework, I really don't think it is. We'd be getting the better player for a longer term.

I guess it depends on how much better you think Nash is than Kessel.

I don't think the gap between the 2 is enough to add 2.4 million in salary and what could be a top 5 draft pick.

 

[Mikhail Bloodnovsky]

In principle, just Kessel + the pick (post lottery.) If it's 4/5 down... Yes. Maybe it would need to be massaged a bit but yes, I'd deal those two assets for Nash.

Holy crap that would basically leave us at 3 first rounders and a high 2nd round for one Rick Nash.  Not a winning formula.  I'd take Seguin over Nash already the other picks just pile up in the loss column.

However this is exactly the type of crap I'm worried that Burke will do.  A few losing years later we look back at that as yet another 1st squandered.

You can't look at it that way though. Your'e trading away your asset(s.) Not the assets(s) you previously traded away.

I know you can't look at individual trades that way, but you can evaluate a GM's series of mis-steps by the overall results.

BTW Kessel and our 1st for Nash is a terrible deal IMO regardless.

As the general framework, I really don't think it is. We'd be getting the better player for a longer term.

I guess it depends on how much better you think Nash is than Kessel.

I don't think the gap between the 2 is enough to add 2.4 million in salary and what could be a top 5 draft pick.

The only way I'm moving that top 5 draft pick if its straight up for Getzlaf.

 

[pnjunction]

You know we have something like 7 first round picks from the last 4 drafts, right?

Yeah and clearly all of those guys are ready to go so we should start shipping picks out for veterans?  Not seeing it.

A couple of late picks from last year pump up that stat, then 3 of them are conveniently in the earliest year of your set drafted 4 years ago.

Also I'm starting to wonder if Schenn and possibly Kadri are plain busts.  Schenn costs big bucks already and drops grenades constantly.  It's hard to be high on Kadri, 2 whole years in the A is that typical of an elite prospect?

 

[Rebel_1812]

He said just looking at the top 10 scorers (he arbitraily picked that number).... every single one of those guys is embraced, respected, well loved by their teams' fans, other teams, etc.  There is no debating them really.  Their teams wouldn't even consider trading them.  Giroux, Stamkos, Malkin, Tavares, etc....

Really? Ottawa wouldn't even think about trading Spezza? Kovalchuk is universally embraced? How things change.

It's a weird year for scoring leaders. Usually there are guys in the top scorers who get criticism for their overall play. Don't believe me? How much money would you give Alex Semin as a UFA?

No, I don't think Ottawa would think about trading their best player (not named Karlsson).

Kovalchuk has come a long, long way.  Just see what Devils fans say about the guy.  He's well liked.

I don't know what you are getting at but if I was a GM I wouldn't even consider signing Semin unless he came very cheap.  Like... $4M on a 1 year deal cheap.

Of course not now, but there was plenty of "trade Spezza" talk before this season.

Because they were:

a)  Rebuilding... which leads to ...
b)  He's their best chip/asset to trade.


The Sens chose not to trade him even while rebuilding.  Leads me to believe they would not consider trading him (who knows about several years from now but certainly not in the forseable future).

Read an interesting article comparing Brian Burke and Bryan Murray, and the notion that the Leafs were "2 years ahead" of Ottawa's rebuild according to Burke's own words to Murray.  They outlined their respective moves and how mostly things have worked out for Murray when he was under the gun just over a year ago.  He makes no hesitation in going out and getting goalies when he needs them, and lord knows Ottawa has had goalie issues in previous years.  They mentioned that there were calls to fire Murray even as late as last year and he managed to turn it around so there was "hope" for Burke.

I'll agree however I think Murray has a luxury that Burke doesn't really have.

Murray's team sucked last year, however a large part of that was because of guys underperforming.

Gonchar and Kuba were atrocious (and booed repeatedly), Spezza was well below a PPG until the last 15-20 games or so (and only played in 62), Alffy was hurt and missed the last 30 games or so, Fisher/Kelly underperformed, Michalek had 18 goals all year last year and their is NO contest between Karlsson last year vs. Karlsson this year.

Fast forward a year, Gonchar and Kuba are playing MUCH better, Spezza is back to a PPG and healthy, Alffy is healthy, Karlsson has progressed to the point of being elite and Michalek will score close to 30.

I don't think the Leafs really have many guys underperforming like that.  Kulemin and Schenn absolutely... maybe Connolly a bit but that's about it.  In fact, I'd say Lupul actually overachieved this year and theres no guarantee he will be a PPG guy next year or revert back to his 50-55 point norm.

The best moves Murray made was the ones he didn't (i.e. not trade Spezza).

Yeah a good coach and solid goaltending can make alot of players appear better. 

 

[skrackle]

What I want to see Burke do from here on is use the hockey think-tank of an office staff he's assembled to get an accurate read on keeper players going forward, and start getting rid of the dead wood.

How Burke is going to get rid of some of those players, let alone get anything of value back I don't know, but that's his problem to solve. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the worst contracts just end up expiring. If it means the Leafs remain awful for another year or two but are able to draft and develop well, at least I could think they are setting up for the future. That time is going to pass, anyway.

I also don't know what Burke can do as far as additions go, but bringing in a veteran goaltender should be a priority.

What I hope Burke doesn't do is make panic moves. Trading the 1st round pick plus other young assets for Rick Nash would fall into that category.

JFJ failed to establish an identity for the leafs other than 'bad'. Burke spoke grandly of the identity he wanted for the Leafs when he was hired, but there are few signs of it so far. Now that he's got 'his' coach, I hope they get on the same page and start building the team Burke spoke of.

I personally don't care if it takes a few years longer than I'd like. Your mileage may vary on what is an acceptable length of time. I think the Leafs as an organization need to take a George Costanza 'do the opposite of what they normally do' approach.

 

[Jalili]

You know we have something like 7 first round picks from the last 4 drafts, right?

Yeah and clearly all of those guys are ready to go so we should start shipping picks out for veterans?  Not seeing it.

A couple of late picks from last year pump up that stat, then 3 of them are conveniently in the earliest year of your set drafted 4 years ago.

Also I'm starting to wonder if Schenn and possibly Kadri are plain busts.  Schenn costs big bucks already and drops grenades constantly.  It's hard to be high on Kadri, 2 whole years in the A is that typical of an elite prospect?

Neither of them are busts. Schenn has been a considerable disappointment though considering the expectations and how so many players drafted after him have surpassed him. The jury is still out on Kadri. I think he'll put up points but might not be the ideal kind of player you'd want.

 

[LuncheonMeat]

What I want to see Burke do from here on is use the hockey think-tank of an office staff he's assembled to get an accurate read on keeper players going forward, and start getting rid of the dead wood.

How Burke is going to get rid of some of those players, let alone get anything of value back I don't know, but that's his problem to solve. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the worst contracts just end up expiring. If it means the Leafs remain awful for another year or two but are able to draft and develop well, at least I could think they are setting up for the future. That time is going to pass, anyway.

I also don't know what Burke can do as far as additions go, but bringing in a veteran goaltender should be a priority.

What I hope Burke doesn't do is make panic moves. Trading the 1st round pick plus other young assets for Rick Nash would fall into that category.
JFJ failed to establish an identity for the leafs other than 'bad'. Burke spoke grandly of the identity he wanted for the Leafs when he was hired, but there are few signs of it so far. Now that he's got 'his' coach, I hope they get on the same page and start building the team Burke spoke of.

I personally don't care if it takes a few years longer than I'd like. Your mileage may vary on what is an acceptable length of time. I think the Leafs as an organization need to take a George Costanza 'do the opposite of what they normally do' approach.

I think it depends on the assets that you give up in addition to the first (obviously).  Nash can score, he can hit, he can play defence and he's a big tough guy that can fight if need be.  I get the desire to draft, I'm right there with you, but Nash would make an instant impact on a team that's sorely lacking in what he brings.  I can't remember the last time the Leafs developed a player like that and don't know of anyone in the organization that's on that path right now.

 

[cw]

Burke is responsible for some key mistakes:

He built the back end around Gustavsson and Reimer. He overalued them and the Leafs are paying for that mistake. This is the easiest one to fix. Gus will not be resigned and a veteran will come in to mentor Reimer.

He built the D around Phaneuf and made Phaneuf the captain. $6 million tied up in a D man who cannot play D. The trade was no big deal because the Leafs did not give up anything of any real value, but the problem exists now that they have a captain and a cornerstone of the D who is not worth anywhere close to what he is being paid.

He overvalued the team (thus underestimating the draft picks in 2010 and 2011) and traded for Kessel. The Leafs offense is built around a complimentary player who looks like a hobbit and looks like someone afraid of his own shadow. Often with teams it can be held true that as their best players go so goes the team. With that in mind you can forget about beating Boston anytime in the future while Kessel remains a Leaf. Burke now has to acknowledge this mistake and go get whatever he can for Phil and move on in another direction.

In order for the Leafs to take the next steps forward one of two things has to happen. Either Burke acknowledges his mistakes and deals with them or MLSE finds someone else to do it.

I give Burke a pass on the Gus/Reimer decision.  It was a big gamble but one that I supported, and still do, because we are finding out whether they have the right stuff or not.  That was the point of going with the young tandem.  I think we have that verdict now.  The question is, which of them do you want to get rid of -- or both?

The rest of your analysis is absolutely correct, less the cheap shot at Kessel's appearance.  My contention that Phaneuf and Kessel are fatally flawed as cornerstones amounts to the same thing.

I would like to hear cw on this specific point -- IIRC I think he agreed (in passing) with me some time ago when I said something to the effect of this team will never be successful if it's built around those two.  If this is correct, I wonder if he has any more detailed thoughts on that.

If they're the two best players on the club, I can't see that club winning anything of significance.

Like many, I had higher hopes that Phaneuf would attain stud status while realizing it was far from a sure thing he would. That is very unlikely to happen.

As many have claimed, Phaneuf is over paid but I don't think that was such a terrible deal either. He's ok within a top 4.

As for what they should do to be successful, my feelings haven't changed since before Pat Quinn was GM: build from the draft. If they land an Alexandre Daigle, take the mulligan and keep drafting until they've got a system teaming with youth. That never guarantees success but it gives them the best chance to win a Cup because they'll get several cracks.

I'm disappointed Burke didn't choose that path and said so before the Kessel deal. This franchise has tried the short cut route for 45 years and have as little as any team in hockey to show for it. It won't happen on Burke's watch now so all we can hope for is that Brian gets lucky.

 

[Champ Kind]

Draft schmaft... I want a franchise player. We haven't had one since Sundin. If there isn't a franchise player available in the draft, I easily deal the pick if it means getting the player I want.

Is Nash that player?  I agree with you that Nash > Kessel, but in no way, shape, or form is Nash > Kessel + Top 5 pick. 

 

[bbt]

Agree, jury still out on Kadrie, but you can't tell me Schenn is NOT a bust at +$4m per year.  Let's not kid ourselves, this guy is no top 5 defensiveman, on any team.  Turn him into a 4th line forward grinder and try to recover some of your investment but in the meantime, the coaches are doing the right thing by reducing his ice time and minimizing the number of bone head plays this defensive core is famous for.

 

[ZBBM]

Burke is responsible for some key mistakes:

He built the back end around Gustavsson and Reimer. He overalued them and the Leafs are paying for that mistake. This is the easiest one to fix. Gus will not be resigned and a veteran will come in to mentor Reimer.

He built the D around Phaneuf and made Phaneuf the captain. $6 million tied up in a D man who cannot play D. The trade was no big deal because the Leafs did not give up anything of any real value, but the problem exists now that they have a captain and a cornerstone of the D who is not worth anywhere close to what he is being paid.

He overvalued the team (thus underestimating the draft picks in 2010 and 2011) and traded for Kessel. The Leafs offense is built around a complimentary player who looks like a hobbit and looks like someone afraid of his own shadow. Often with teams it can be held true that as their best players go so goes the team. With that in mind you can forget about beating Boston anytime in the future while Kessel remains a Leaf. Burke now has to acknowledge this mistake and go get whatever he can for Phil and move on in another direction.

In order for the Leafs to take the next steps forward one of two things has to happen. Either Burke acknowledges his mistakes and deals with them or MLSE finds someone else to do it.

I give Burke a pass on the Gus/Reimer decision.  It was a big gamble but one that I supported, and still do, because we are finding out whether they have the right stuff or not.  That was the point of going with the young tandem.  I think we have that verdict now.  The question is, which of them do you want to get rid of -- or both?

The rest of your analysis is absolutely correct, less the cheap shot at Kessel's appearance.  My contention that Phaneuf and Kessel are fatally flawed as cornerstones amounts to the same thing.

I would like to hear cw on this specific point -- IIRC I think he agreed (in passing) with me some time ago when I said something to the effect of this team will never be successful if it's built around those two.  If this is correct, I wonder if he has any more detailed thoughts on that.

If they're the two best players on the club, I can't see that club winning anything of significance.

Like many, I had higher hopes that Phaneuf would attain stud status while realizing it was far from a sure thing he would. That is very unlikely to happen.

As many have claimed, Phaneuf is over paid but I don't think that was such a terrible deal either. He's ok within a top 4.

As for what they should do to be successful, my feelings haven't changed since before Pat Quinn was GM: build from the draft. If they land an Alexandre Daigle, take the mulligan and keep drafting until they've got a system teaming with youth. That never guarantees success but it gives them the best chance to win a Cup because they'll get several cracks.

I'm disappointed Burke didn't choose that path and said so before the Kessel deal. This franchise has tried the short cut route for 45 years and have as little as any team in hockey to show for it. It won't happen on Burke's watch now so all we can hope for is that Brian gets lucky.

Thanks for the response cw.  I had believed in the possibility of shortcuts, and to Burke's (and JFJ's) credit there are some decent, if not brilliant, prospects and young players in the fold right now.  But BB didn't go for a true rebuild, and the results have finally shown me that the conventional wisdom, in this case, is correct.  It takes some exceptional luck (see: Pens as opposed to CBJ) but realistically the only way to get franchise players is to draft them.

Here's hoping we have a top 5 pick this year.  And, sad to say, next year.  And maybe the year after.

 

[lc9]

Agree, jury still out on Kadrie, but you can't tell me Schenn is NOT a bust at +$4m per year.  Let's not kid ourselves, this guy is no top 5 defensiveman, on any team.  Turn him into a 4th line forward grinder and try to recover some of your investment but in the meantime, the coaches are doing the right thing by reducing his ice time and minimizing the number of bone head plays this defensive core is famous for.

Luke Scheen would be the new Wade Belak then.  Which I don't think is far off.  Scheen is just terrible, he gives away the puck like McDonalds gives away toys in happy meals.

 

[maplesyrup]

Draft schmaft... I want a franchise player. We haven't had one since Sundin. If there isn't a franchise player available in the draft, I easily deal the pick if it means getting the player I want.

Is Nash that player?  I agree with you that Nash > Kessel, but in no way, shape, or form is Nash > Kessel + Top 5 pick.

Yes. I truly believe Nash is a franchise player. I think folks are being too fussy on the actual draft slot. I'm not saying this is the case but if it were deemed that the only true franchise player was gone at #1, then I'd even consider moving the #2 pick. Also, if the draft were 5 franchise players deep then obviously, I'd keep the pick if it were #5 and up.   

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

It takes some exceptional luck (see: Pens as opposed to CBJ) but realistically the only way to get franchise players is to draft them.

In the span of about 20 years they were able to have a #1 overall pick to draft not just an excellent player, but a generational talent (Lemieux and Crosby) twice. 

 

[pnjunction]

Agree, jury still out on Kadrie, but you can't tell me Schenn is NOT a bust at +$4m per year.  Let's not kid ourselves, this guy is no top 5 defensiveman, on any team.  Turn him into a 4th line forward grinder and try to recover some of your investment but in the meantime, the coaches are doing the right thing by reducing his ice time and minimizing the number of bone head plays this defensive core is famous for.

Luke Scheen would be the new Wade Belak then.  Which I don't think is far off.  Scheen is just terrible, he gives away the puck like McDonalds gives away toys in happy meals.

Hey now, let's be fair...Belak could win a fight.

 

[Guru Tugginmypuddah]

It takes some exceptional luck (see: Pens as opposed to CBJ) but realistically the only way to get franchise players is to draft them.

In the span of about 20 years they were able to have a #1 overall pick to draft not just an excellent player, but a generational talent (Lemieux and Crosby) twice. 

Not to mention some other exceptional talents in Jagr, Malkin, just off the top of my head.

 

[Kin]

It takes some exceptional luck (see: Pens as opposed to CBJ) but realistically the only way to get franchise players is to draft them.

Yeah, I know this is an argument that gets kicked around a lot but the reason that Doug McLean is hosting radio shows as opposed to running an NHL team is not because he had bad luck.

I think people tend to overstate the kind of draft picks that Columbus has had. Columbus has had a top 3 draft pick exactly once. They've had top 5 draft picks only 4 times.

The reality of it is that they just haven't drafted in places where you'd expect franchise talent to automatically be and they've done a crummy job of drafting. Columbus isn't a cautionary tale about the luck needed to rebuild, they're a cautionary tale of doing it half-donkeyed.

 

[Champ Kind]

Draft schmaft... I want a franchise player. We haven't had one since Sundin. If there isn't a franchise player available in the draft, I easily deal the pick if it means getting the player I want.

Is Nash that player?  I agree with you that Nash > Kessel, but in no way, shape, or form is Nash > Kessel + Top 5 pick.

Yes. I truly believe Nash is a franchise player. I think folks are being too fussy on the actual draft slot. I'm not saying this is the case but if it were deemed that the only true franchise player was gone at #1, then I'd even consider moving the #2 pick. Also, if the draft were 5 franchise players deep then obviously, I'd keep the pick if it were #5 and up. 

I'm happy to agree to disagree with you here, Sarge.  Perhaps my view is being tainted by the fact that I think a better player MAY be available without sacrificing player assets.  I think the Leafs need to go balls-to-the-wall for Parise first and foremost.  Then, Kessel + XXX for Nash makes sense to me.

Still, though, no way I'm including a Lottery pick.  Last year, the draft was supposedly mediocre.  Yet I find myself looking at Ladeskog in COL and I begin salivating, in a hypothetical Pavlovian way of course

 

[maplesyrup]

Draft schmaft... I want a franchise player. We haven't had one since Sundin. If there isn't a franchise player available in the draft, I easily deal the pick if it means getting the player I want.

Is Nash that player?  I agree with you that Nash > Kessel, but in no way, shape, or form is Nash > Kessel + Top 5 pick.

Yes. I truly believe Nash is a franchise player. I think folks are being too fussy on the actual draft slot. I'm not saying this is the case but if it were deemed that the only true franchise player was gone at #1, then I'd even consider moving the #2 pick. Also, if the draft were 5 franchise players deep then obviously, I'd keep the pick if it were #5 and up. 

I'm happy to agree to disagree with you here, Sarge.  Perhaps my view is being tainted by the fact that I think a better player MAY be available without sacrificing player assets.  I think the Leafs need to go balls-to-the-wall for Parise first and foremost.  Then, Kessel + XXX for Nash makes sense to me.

Still, though, no way I'm including a Lottery pick.  Last year, the draft was supposedly mediocre.  Yet I find myself looking at Ladeskog in COL and I begin salivating, in a hypothetical Pavlovian way of course

Hey, I'm happy to keep Kessel too. I just want that franchise player and Kessel isn't him.