Your summer 2012 strategy?

[Kin]

Maybe not, but, when it's a virtually unanimous opinion that the talent level essentially falls off a cliff after the first 10-12 guys, I'm not exactly left in awe of the potential of the guys likely to be drafted in the 20s -

But that's kind of where I get hung up on not putting stock in it unless we have a better idea of what that means. In '96, which I think is widely and correctly regarded as the worst draft in the last 25 years, probably the best player in the entire first round was taken at #24. I appreciate the argument that says that's a long shot but I think the counter is that, right now, the Leafs need those long shots to pan out and that taking as many as you can is the way to go.

Because it's tough to see how drafts from the past were perceived beforehand there's no way to definitively say this but I've always sort of felt that in drafts that scouts aren't sure about lower round picks should actually increase in value because everyone's more of a question mark.

Many of the guys who were not dealt at the deadline will have similar (or possibly greater) value in the summer for teams looking to improve and not feeling there are UFAs that are available (or affordable) to help them. Burke can very likely pick up more tangible assets for guys like MacArthur in the summer (prospects, young players, etc), package them for upgrades or, at the very least, pick up equivalent picks in the 2013 draft.

I don't agree with this. I think you're wildly underestimating the frenzy that teams can find themselves in at the deadline and what that can mean for a player's value. Especially in a deadline like we just saw where so few teams were real sellers. I also think, as a rule, teams are going to be way more hesitant to deal a first round pick if they're not sure where that pick is going to be.

For a guy like Mac, who adds questionable value to a random team's top 6, there's no way a team offers up a sight unseen first round pick for him.

 

[maplesyrup]

As a general rule of thumb, anything that comes from outside the organization (or from an unnamed source) has to be viewed with a fair amount of skepticism, regardless of who it's from - it still has a high probability of being inaccurate, while anything that comes directly from the organization on this type of subject has to be taken with a pinch of salt, so to speak, as it's likely painted with hyperbole or an agenda.

Well sure. I agree.

 

[Zee]

I don't have it but I'm 100% sure on this. - I'm 90% that the conditional pick was for Mac while two of the other players we were offered 1sts for were Grabs and Kulemin. The 4th was either Reimer or Schenn... I don't recall.

The most specific thing I recall Burke saying was that he had a solid offer for Reimer, whatever that means. He also said he could have "traded the entire second line for 1st rounders," which was likely hyperbole on his part.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bs1Td21cDU

"We turned down four first round picks for players on the team....we turned down trade offers on, I think a total of 12 players"

So, from Burke's own mouth and you want to put your own spin on it?  Everything is hyperbole?  If you can't take his word on what he was offered, how are you defending anything he does or doesn't do?

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I don't have it but I'm 100% sure on this. - I'm 90% that the conditional pick was for Mac while two of the other players we were offered 1sts for were Grabs and Kulemin. The 4th was either Reimer or Schenn... I don't recall.

The most specific thing I recall Burke saying was that he had a solid offer for Reimer, whatever that means. He also said he could have "traded the entire second line for 1st rounders," which was likely hyperbole on his part.

Think I've found where it all started:

Darren Dreger ‏ @DarrenDreger

I missed Burke presser, but can tell you Tor could have traded Schenn,Kulemin,MacArthur and Grabovski for 1st round picks. #tradecentre

 

[maplesyrup]

Awesome. Thanks.

 

[bustaheims]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bs1Td21cDU

"We turned down four first round picks for players on the team....we turned down trade offers on, I think a total of 12 players"

So, from Burke's own mouth and you want to put your own spin on it?  Everything is hyperbole?  If you can't take his word on what he was offered, how are you defending anything he does or doesn't do?

Look at the context he said that in - it was clearly part of his agenda. It was a rehearsed, canned answer to allow him to get into talking about his blueprint, his group of young players, building a for a championship, etc. It's also only part of the story. Sure, he maybe he could have picked up those 4 picks, but, were they straight up for the players or did they include quality prospects or other picks being packaged with them? All you can really base your defences or criticisms on are his actions or inactions, because, everything else comes with inaccurate information, incomplete information, spin, hyperbole, agendas, speculation and out-and-out lies.

 

[Zee]

Yup, late first round picks in an extremely shallow draft and cap space for what is probably the worst UFA crop since this style of free agency was introduced into the NHL . . . that's what will turn this team around.

I don't necessarily disagree but, honestly, I really don't think you can base a ton on the perception of the draft as a whole. Scouts are dodgy enough in their evaluation of one player, so trying to peg the collective value of an entire round of the draft vs. years past doesn't really strike me as something to put a ton of stock into.

Especially when you see teams that are able to draft quality players later in the draft.  "Weak" drafts are only weak for scouts that can't do their homework.

 

[bustaheims]

Especially when you see teams that are able to draft quality players later in the draft.  "Weak" drafts are only weak for scouts that can't do their homework.

So, I should be putting my faith in the Leafs' ability to beat the odds?

 

[Zee]

Especially when you see teams that are able to draft quality players later in the draft.  "Weak" drafts are only weak for scouts that can't do their homework.

So, I should be putting my faith in the Leafs' ability to beat the odds?

Part of the spin and hyperbole that Burke has put in his years here is how he's justified all the money the Leafs are spending in the front office.  They can't spend beyond the cap on players, so they spend more on management and scouting then any other organization just because they can.  Given all that, they SHOULD be able to beat the odds if they have the best management in place. 

This is going to be the most interesting summer by far under Burke.  Up until now he's almost gotten a free pass in the eyes of fans and media, saying the Leafs were a mess before he got here, and he had to rebuild the system.  Now, 4 years in and after showing SOME promise late last season and early this season, the Leafs are no further ahead then before Burke got here.  Sure, the prospect cupboard appears better stocked, but until those prospects pan out and prove they can do it at the NHL level, it's all spin.  Many fans and media are starting to point the finger at Burke, to prove his "plan" is actually working.  He's firmly on the hot seat going forward.  Will be interesting to see what he does.

 

[Kin]

Anyways, to kind of bring it back to what I was saying, it doesn't really seem as we have a handle on the specifics of any of these trades so it seems like a weak basis for a criticism to me.

 

[Zee]

Anyways, to kind of bring it back to what I was saying, it doesn't really seem as we have a handle on the specifics of any of these trades so it seems like a weak basis for a criticism to me.

We'll never have a handle on the specifics of what the trades would have been.  The basic choice is, do you believe in the core of this team and hang onto them, or do you trade a bunch of players for first round picks and start over?  Given how they all played collectively, I would have had no problem with Burke trading away players on the roster for picks, even if they're deemed as "core" pieces like Schenn. 

 

[sneakyray]

this is my idea

trade kessel, lupul, gardiner, TO 1st pick, + kadri/colborne

for Nash and COL 1st  pick

dump salary (connelly, bozak, macarthur, lombardi, armstrong, komi)

sign parise and schultz

trade schenn + for JVR

sign a veteran goalie to share the load with reimer.

 

[Erndog]

Did anyone just listen to hockeycentral at noon with Mclean/Millard/John Shannon.

Man, did they just paint the worst picture imaginable.  Honestly, they obliterated the team.  Surprisingly, McLean was the most level headed but John Shannon was the biggest troll I've ever heard.

He basically said, and I'm paraphrasing a bit:

-  Phil Kessel is impossible to trade.  Not because we don't want too.  But because nobody would want him. 
-  He said 'did nobody see Kessel was a healthy scratch in Boston during the playoffs.'  Maybe he got Kessel and Seguin mixed up?


McLean said he likes the Carlyle hire and that if we got a goalie we would be 10 points higher.  He also said that most of the players we brought on recently were talented but for whatever reason haven't worked (he pointed out Beauchemin and Komisarek specifically... which I agree with).


Anyways, they (mostly Millard and Shannon) drilled the team top to bottom.

 

[ZBBM]

I don't have it but I'm 100% sure on this. - I'm 90% that the conditional pick was for Mac while two of the other players we were offered 1sts for were Grabs and Kulemin. The 4th was either Reimer or Schenn... I don't recall.

The most specific thing I recall Burke saying was that he had a solid offer for Reimer, whatever that means. He also said he could have "traded the entire second line for 1st rounders," which was likely hyperbole on his part.

As I said in a post above my recollection is Mac, Schenn, Reimer, and the 4th was possibly Kulemin.  I'd have moved them all, Schenn and Reimer with deep regrets, Mac and Kuly with mild ones.

 

[Erndog]

this is my idea

trade kessel, lupul, gardiner, TO 1st pick, + kadri/colborne

for Nash and COL 1st  pick

For crying out loud, come on?    COME ON!

Awful, absolutely bleeping awful idea bud. 

Kessel and Nash are roughly equivalent.  Kessel is 2 years younger and 2.5M cheaper.  And even if you did think Nash is better (thats fine) do you justify it by giving up LUPUL, GARDINER, one of our top prospects! 

Not to mention we swap firsts and get the "worst" of that one as well.

 

[ZBBM]

Anyways, to kind of bring it back to what I was saying, it doesn't really seem as we have a handle on the specifics of any of these trades so it seems like a weak basis for a criticism to me.

I disagree.  All the names being talked about, plus several others, could have been usefully traded straight up for a single 1st.  Huge error on Burke's part.

 

[Kin]

We'll never have a handle on the specifics of what the trades would have been.

But then we can't attach a value to them and judge them. I'm not happy with the performance of the team but the answer to it is not to make bad value trades. Even if the argument is that the team needs to be blown up you still should get good value for the assets you're trading.

If you're unhappy with your car the answer isn't to drive it into a tree. It's to sell it for the best price you can get.

  The basic choice is, do you believe in the core of this team and hang onto them, or do you trade a bunch of players for first round picks and start over?  Given how they all played collectively, I would have had no problem with Burke trading away players on the roster for picks, even if they're deemed as "core" pieces like Schenn.

Well, unfortunately, I'm not in the basic class. The advanced question is "Who on this team should be traded and, if so, what should they be traded for". Anyone who would take a 25-30 first round pick for Grabo should have their head examined.

Personally, I feel the same way about Kulemin and Schenn. Kulemin because I don't want to sell low on him and Schenn because A) I don't think we've seen enough of him as a player to sell and B) I think you can get better and more immediate assets for him if you do trade him. Mac, sure, I'd lean towards dealing him for a first rounder because I don't really see how he fits onto the team next year but even then there's not even consensus in this thread that the first offered for him was a concrete thing.

 

[bustaheims]

As I said in a post above my recollection is Mac, Schenn, Reimer, and the 4th was possibly Kulemin.  I'd have moved them all, Schenn and Reimer with deep regrets, Mac and Kuly with mild ones.

That's still all based on speculation from outside sources, and, without actually knowing the specifics of the potential deals, I certainly can't say with any degree of certainty that I would have moved any of them.

 

[sneakyray]

this is my idea

trade kessel, lupul, gardiner, TO 1st pick, + kadri/colborne

for Nash and COL 1st  pick

For crying out loud, come on?    COME ON!

Awful, absolutely bleeping awful idea bud. 

Kessel and Nash are roughly equivalent.  Kessel is 2 years younger and 2.5M cheaper.  And even if you did think Nash is better (thats fine) do you justify it by giving up LUPUL, GARDINER, one of our top prospects! 

Not to mention we swap firsts and get the "worst" of that one as well.

no, we're giving up 2 of those players for nash (lets say kessel and gardiner) and 2 players (we'll say lupul and kadri) plus our crappy 1st for the first overall.

its moreso a "blow the team up" idea but come  on to get nash and the first overall...you gotta give up some heavy lifters.

 

[ZBBM]

As I said in a post above my recollection is Mac, Schenn, Reimer, and the 4th was possibly Kulemin.  I'd have moved them all, Schenn and Reimer with deep regrets, Mac and Kuly with mild ones.

That's still all based on speculation from outside sources, and, without actually knowing the specifics of the potential deals, I certainly can't say with any degree of certainty that I would have moved any of them.

I see Dreger reported that the 4th one was Grabs, not Reimer.  Although somewhere later than that I could swear Burke said he was offered a first for Reimer.

Anyway, I would not have done Grabs for a 1st alone, knowing that he was about to re-sign.

For me, Mac is a no-brainer.  Any first for him.  Ditto Kulemin.  Schenn, I would have done too, but would have at least tried to get an additional pick,

Schenn is the one I'm most conflicted about.  But I still would have done it and pin my hopes on Holzer becoming that type of shutdown guy.