How have the Leafs made out this off-season?

[maplesyrup]

I've always felt the mistake with the Kessel deal was the timing of it rather than the trade itself. It was too early in the process to make that kind of move.

Yup. Too early with far too many other pressing needs. The net being at the front of that.

 

[Kin]

I've always felt the mistake with the Kessel deal was the timing of it rather than the trade itself.

Can you really separate the two though? Like, yeah, if the Leafs were established as one of the top teams in the league then you can deal first round picks away with less caution but isn't the whole reason the trade was a mistake because the Leafs weren't a good team yet?

 

[dappleganger]

My apologies as I didn't mean to reopen this discussion, but maybe he's picking positionally? or based on other factors beyond raw talent?

Maybe, but I don't think it's a stretch to say he was probably exaggerating to make Rielly feel good about himself and maybe to feel really valued.

I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that Rielly becomes the best player of the draft.

His ACL injury, playing only 17 games definitely hurt his draft.   

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I don't want to get into what anyone particularly sees for the future because the person who says they see clear skies and smooth sailing has an opinion as valid as the guy who sees big waves and bolts of lightning. Personally, I'm just trying to deal in the cold facts of the matter.

I'm not predicting the future as a guaranteed success. I simply stated that the building stones are in place.

 

[Kin]

I'm not predicting the future as a guaranteed success. I simply stated that the building stones are in place.

Ok. What I just said there was that the people who come along and say the opposite, like:

The bottom line in summarizing Burke's tenure is that the Leafs are no closer to being contenders than they were when he started. 

Are dealing with the exact same information. My interest isn't really who's right or who's wrong there because I don't want to argue with anyone's individual perceptions. Me personally, I'm only going to be interested in something tangible.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

I'm not predicting the future as a guaranteed success. I simply stated that the building stones are in place.

Ok. What I just said there was that the people who come along and say the opposite, like:

The bottom line in summarizing Burke's tenure is that the Leafs are no closer to being contenders than they were when he started. 

Are dealing with the exact same information. My interest isn't really who's right or who's wrong there because I don't want to argue with anyone's individual perceptions. Me personally, I'm only going to be interested in something tangible.

Such as Nik?

A playoff appearance?

An improvement over last year?

A playoff round victory?

A Stanley Cup?

When do you deem it tangible?

 

[Kin]

Such as Nik?

A playoff appearance?

An improvement over last year?

A playoff round victory?

A Stanley Cup?

When do you deem it tangible?

Well, yes, any of those things would qualify.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Such as Nik?

A playoff appearance?

An improvement over last year?

A playoff round victory?

A Stanley Cup?

When do you deem it tangible?

Well, yes, any of those things would qualify.

And in order to reach those goals, is a proper building of a team not needed?

IMO(yes you don't deal in opinions, just cold, hard facts) those blocks are being put into/have been put into place.

It's all one goal at a time.

Goal 1:

Create a team that is competitive for the playoffs.

Goal 2:

Create a team that competes while in the playoffs

Goal 3:

Create a team that can contend for going deep in the playoffs

Goal 4:

Create a team that can contend for the Stanley Cup

Burke tried to skip a few steps his first season or two here. This I will fully admit. Since then, and yes it feels like it's taking forever, I believe a team is being shaped to compete for the playoffs. Evolution is a crazy thing.




Note: Some of the statements above do contain my own personal beliefs. My thoughts are this is a 'fan' discussion board, put together to offer one's opinion. Not a board dealing with mathematics and science where all we have is facts.

Thanks

 

[Kin]

And in order to reach those goals, is a proper building of a team not needed?

Sure. Obviously, though, what constitutes the proper building of a team is something that everyone is going to have their own opinion on.

Note: Some of the statements above do contain my own personal beliefs. My thoughts are this is a 'fan' discussion board, put together to offer one's opinion. Not a board dealing with mathematics and science where all we have is facts.

There's no need to be defensive about it. I'm not saying not to or that it's wrong, just that it's not what I'm responding to.

 

[caver]

It's tough to label Burke's time here as successful because the team is still not in the playoffs or contending for the Cup. I think most would agree that Burke has "the house in order" to a much greater degree than when he arrived. I certainly think that is key to becoming a winning franchise but i expected more by this point. I am a Burke fan but he has had middling success at best. 

 

[iwas11in67]

Burke turned an aging 80 point team into the youngest (or top 3 anyways) 80 point team. Gotta be worth something.

 

[L K]

Such as Nik?

A playoff appearance?

An improvement over last year?

A playoff round victory?

A Stanley Cup?

When do you deem it tangible?

Well, yes, any of those things would qualify.

I think that's my thing.  He traded for Kessel because he misjudged some of the other players on the team and while Kessel was a good player to acquire, his arrival didn't coincide with the rest of the team progressing - hence, the roster had to be torn down. 

There are prospects in the system, but none of them have made an NHL impact at this point so while there are guys sitting in the wings, it means nothing until they actually show something.  Morgan Rielly's career could start out like Luke Schenn and people would be calling for his head in 3 years.

We have cap space next year.  But we have had cap space before and that hasn't amounted in free agents coming here.  If the NHL gives in and doesn't restrict contracts to 5 years or less, does Burke still hold his arbitrary "I won't do that" approach?  If so, we aren't signing Getzlaf/Perry or any other potential 1st line player.  Or maybe it just ends up being like every other offseason where most of the UFAs get re-signed before July 1st and even with a restricted contract length, it becomes a financial bidding war for the handful of scraps that make it to the table.

The Leafs *might* be heading in the right direction, but there is nothing to suggest that they will get tangible results until those potentials actually turn into realities.

 

[#1PilarFan]

I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that Rielly becomes the best player of the draft.

His ACL injury, playing only 17 games definitely hurt his draft. 

Well it's not impossible, but as of what we know now, the statement is untrue. So, why say it?

i agree. But based on what I've read since the draft, it doesn't sound like it was much of an exaggeration. Rielly seems to be extremely talented.

Oh I'm sure he is. I'm sure most of the NHL draftees are. But in terms of pre-draft rankings, it was a very large exaggeration. In most cases, Rielly was picked ahead of where he was ranked. Now that in itself isn't a terrible thing, and it is possible for him to have the best career out of any in the draft, but nobody else thought he should go #1 or even close to it. That tells me that he probably shouldn't go #1 (which he didn't) and that, following that logic, it is disingenuous to say that he should have.

I don't think we do know that, fwiw, there are arguments to be made but we won't know who the best player in that draft is for a while yet.

I don't really see anything wrong with Burke claiming he'd take him first overall either, it hardly matters.

I mean, I'm not ruling out that he has the best career, but he was ranked by most scouts in the bottom half of the top 10. So either Burke is lying or he has beliefs that run contrary to what the rest of the hockey world thinks - which would be fine if we had seen ANY tangible results from Burke's ill-conceived beliefs.

As for your second comment, what if Burke said that he thinks Reimer has the potential to be the best goaltender in the league? Would that bother you? If it wouldn't, can you see how statements like that would bother someone?

 

[bustaheims]

I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that Rielly becomes the best player of the draft.

His ACL injury, playing only 17 games definitely hurt his draft. 

Well it's not impossible, but as of what we know now, the statement is untrue. So, why say it?

Well, as of what we know now, it's impossible to say who the best player in the draft is. The general feeling is that it will likely be Yakupov, but, it's certainly not anything that's known.

And, for what it's worth, a number of scouts said that, had Rielly not been injured, he likely would have been seriously involved in the discussion as for who should have gone 1st overall.

 

[L K]

I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that Rielly becomes the best player of the draft.

His ACL injury, playing only 17 games definitely hurt his draft. 

Well it's not impossible, but as of what we know now, the statement is untrue. So, why say it?

Well, as of what we know now, it's impossible to say who the best player in the draft is. The general feeling is that it will likely be Yakupov, but, it's certainly not anything that's known.

And, for what it's worth, a number of scouts said that, had Rielly not been injured, he likely would have been seriously involved in the discussion as for who should have gone 1st overall.

Isn't it kind of an empty statement though?  I mean, Rielly could have had a big regression in his season and dropped in the draft rankings too.  Sure, he could have been in the consideration for 1st overall, but I'm sure Angelo Esposito would have killed to have a season-altering injury in his draft year too.

He's a really good prospect, but he was drafted where he was based on his potential.  Whether he's a #1 overall kind of prospect, or a top-20 kind of guy, it really doesn't matter much at this point.  He has a good chance to be an impact player but until he cracks the NHL roster, we have to wait and see.

 

[Kin]

I think the Rielly thing is really just a reflection on each individual fan and their perception of Burke's job as a whole. I mean, if you have a buddy call you up and say "Boy, do I have a deal for you" then if he's done right by you in the past you'll listen. If he's sold you more than a few lemons in the past you'll probably think that what he's pushing has a bit of a smell to it.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

But are we taking what Burke said as an attempt to appease the Leaf fans, or an attempt to compliment and boost Rielly's confidence?

If it's the latter, I have no issue with it. If it's the former, I think he insults our intelligence.

 

[Kin]

But are we taking what Burke said as an attempt to appease the Leaf fans, or an attempt to compliment and boost Rielly's confidence?

If it's the latter, I have no issue with it. If it's the former, I think he insults our intelligence.

I don't have an issue with it either way but there is a part of me that would wonder about the rationale for doing the latter in public. If, in the course of the many times the team talked to him before and after the draft, they'd said to Rielly that they consider him to be the best player in the draft or whatever that strikes me as having the exact same impact on him without any of the potentially increased expectations put on him by fans.

 

[#1PilarFan]

Well, as of what we know now, it's impossible to say who the best player in the draft is. The general feeling is that it will likely be Yakupov, but, it's certainly not anything that's known.

Well no one has a crystal ball, but as of right now, the vast consensus is that Yakupov was the best player in the draft - and that hasn't changed. I don't want to get bogged down in this argument because I only used it as an example of Burke's nonsense, but this is a great example of what I'm talking about. Rielly's ranked 8th here. I'm not saying Burke reached on the pick, but saying that Rielly is worthy of the 1st overall selection goes against what pretty much everybody else believes. Which, again, would be fine, if this was a one-off statement. My problem is that it's a reflection of a larger problem that Burke has.

And, for what it's worth, a number of scouts said that, had Rielly not been injured, he likely would have been seriously involved in the discussion as for who should have gone 1st overall.

Well, the problem with that is that I can't find any evidence to support what you're saying. What I can find, is pre-draft rankings that do not support this assertion. I'm not saying you're wrong or that I don't believe you, but from what I can find, I'm clearly not seeing the same things you're seeing.

 

[pnjunction]

But are we taking what Burke said as an attempt to appease the Leaf fans, or an attempt to compliment and boost Rielly's confidence?

If it's the latter, I have no issue with it. If it's the former, I think he insults our intelligence.

It must be the latter because Burke would never do that except for all of the time.