After recovering from the initial shock of the Leafs trading yet another highly rated, potentially top end prospect (Tlusty in this case) for picks, prospects (Paradis in this case) or players who at best can be defined as “depth” acquisitions, I decided to sit back, absorb all of the feedback and coverage from this transaction and form an opinion based on rational thought processes and any available factual information. Past my initial, oh no, here we go again feeling, I was uncertain as to my actual opinion on this deal. After all, I have never seen the young Paradis play, knew very little about this prospect, and the only information I had available was that he was a late 1st round pick in last years entry draft. So, I decided to err on the side of caution and keep my initial opinion on this transaction to myself. After researching this prospect, reading the various scouting reports and watching some film, it became rather apparent that Mr Burke had traded a potential top 6 type of sniper for a 3rd-4th line character guy. Someone who was physical, had speed, was fearless and could become a real heart and soul leader on an NHL roster one day. Considering the intangibles this player could potentially bring down the road, I was willing to overlook the obvious imaginary offensive upside Mr Burke was touting with this prospect and the projections of a top 6 “power forward” type in the NHL and was settling in with a comfortable neutral, “Wait and See” decision on this transaction.
However, in listening to Mr Burkes assessment and explanation of this transaction, one thing became quite apparent. Maple Leafs management, going back some 15 years or more, somehow lack the ability to properly define and utilize a very simple word in the English language. Mr Burke, a Harvard graduate no less, seems to have forgotten the appropriate usage of the term and is obviously quite baffled as to its meaning and appropriate application – The word is “Opportunity” – and it is a definition Leafs management dearly need to grasp, otherwise, this 40+ year Cup drought is not going to end anytime soon….
Before continuing, I think it is important to actually define Opportunity..
1. a situation or condition favorable for attainment of a goal.
2. a good position, chance, or prospect, as for advancement or success.
We Leaf fans are continually told how our prospects were given every “opportunity” to succeed, and as a result of their inability to succeed with their “opportunities”, the trade of a top prospect from practically zero return is ultimately justified. Opportunity, as it pertains to an NHL prospect does not involve burying players in the minors and continually adding veterans with heavy contracts in front of them in the depth chart. Opportunity does not involve giving a player spot duty on an NHL roster, limited to zero minutes, zero tolerance for mistakes, and when mistakes do happen, result in a transplant of a wooden bench into the players ass. Opportunity does not involve a public flogging just before a demotion to the minors with the prospect fully aware they may never get another opportunity again with the big club, and even if they do, they will not really get a chance. With the exception of a select few “chosen” ones (99% of the time based on size), the Leafs organization has been completely and utterly dysfunctional with regards to managing and developing their prospects. Antropov and Ponikarovski for example were given real opportunities (both favourites of mine by the way). Despite continual set backs, these players were given opportunity after opportunity to succeed, and eventually, the organization was rewarded for their patience and development. Luke Schenn is another good example of how opportunity has been given to certain players and how prospects should in fact be handled. He was not benched at the first sign of trouble. There was no public flogging of Luke Schenn, no trips to the press box, no demotions to the minors. Luke Schenn was and is being developed properly. He was coached through his issues, he had his responsibilities slightly reduced, asked to simplify his game, put into positions to succeed and slowly built back up to a point when he can take on more responsibilities. This is what opportunity means.
What Mr Burke refers to as “continual opportunities” for a player like Tlusty is something else entirely, and is exactly the root cause of our inability to develop top end prospects and the continual pattern of watching our top end prospects go to other organizations and thrive. It is actually getting to a point of complete absurdity where top end prospects simply cannot wait to get into another system so that they have a chance and get a real opportunity in the NHL. There are literally 100’s of examples of NHL players who did not develop into the front line talent they ultimately became until playing 2 or 3 or even more seasons of pro hockey. Very few players step into the NHL and become stars. Many front line players took time to reach those levels – and they only get there with “opportunity”. People should spend some time listening to Mr Hollands analysis of talent. Listening to Mr Holland explain why he salvaged a player like Jeremy Williams off of the MLSE prospect junk pile – and ultimately come to understand how good, sustainable organizations identify talent and develop talent.
The typical Leaf prospect will receive the Ian White treatment. The kid had to sit in the press box to start last season. Then he needed to go in as a forward, he needed to succeed at that position, and then he was given a real opportunity? the kid is likely our best overall defenseman today. Was a force in junior, was a force in the AHL and short of an absolute miracle, would have been disposed of for absolutely nothing. It is not reasonable to expect a prospect to succeed under this definition of “opportunity”. Another current example of a player defying the odds is Kulemin. Scores 15 goals in his rookie season last year. Starts this season as a healthy scratch. When he does get an “opportunity”, it is 3rd and 4th line minutes. In order to simply stay alive on the roster, he has needed to produce with zero opportunity. He has more goals then Blake and Grabovski and 1 less goal then Stempniak while playing significantly less minutes, significantly less games, practically zero power play time and while being asked to take on a defensive role. Yet, here he is, buried behind veterans with expensive contracts and buried in the depth chart behind prospects brought in by the new regime who have yet to demonstrate a fraction of what he has already proven – again, with no real opportunity presented to him.
I often take some abuse in the comments section because of my focus on the past. Unfortunately, as far as the Maple Leafs go, history is continually repeating itself. Fans would do well to understand our past and understand how and why our franchise got to the point it is now. The new regime is currently doing EXACTLY what previous new regimes did. They are expunging the organization of the inherited prospects so that they can instill their own. This is a never ending, vicious cycle, as the average lifespan of a regime does not allow for a cleaning of house and starting again, as by the time the new regime comes in, the previous regimes prospects are just about ready. Dismissing them and replacing them with your own will just perpetuate this process. This process is easily recognizable. Mr Fletcher traded Doug Gilmour for a package that included Steve Sullivan and Jason Smith. He passed on other assets such as Modin, Markov, etc.. Mr Quinn took over the organization and summarily dismissed 90% or more of the assets he inherited in favour of his own (how is an organization going to be successful if they lose their star assets for zero return? it happened with the Gilmour trade, as the new regime simply disposed of the return and it happened again with Sundin with the entire no trade clause fiasco). Mr Burke takes over from the previous regime, and the first thing he does – expunges the organization of the inherited prospects? The real crime here is the justification down the road when these kids are successful someplace else and with real “opportunity”. I simply cannot get over how management teams in Toronto can sell these moves to the public and how on earth the public buys these explanations. Rather then admit that a trade was a mistake, or that the Leafs development system obviously failed with whatever specific player, or that the current management simply does not like this specific player, the most common excuse used by management is, “Hey, its not our fault, this player simply could not play in Toronto” – thereby absolving themselves of any blame while simultaneously indicating that the player was the issue and certainly not the organization or the management team or their development process.
Sorry Mr Burke, I for one am no longer buying the propaganda. If you want to expunge your organization of inherited prospects, then simply admit that. There is absolutely no need to further insult a player that your organization has stifled in the development process. You have after all taken actions which pretty clearly indicate you plan on breaking this cycle (actually, quite an impressive game plan if one takes the time to think about it). I would wager that you are fully aware of this cycle based on the moves you have completed. Acquiring older prospects like Bozak, Hanson and Gustavsson who are all NHL ready or very close to it. Acquiring a player like Kessel who is a young, obviously NHL ready sniper in exchange for draft picks that are unlikely to be in the NHL by the time your replacement is named if you are not more immediately successful, inherited assets are only maintained if they are proven NHL players or very close to being NHL ready while you still maintain contractual flexibility with them (ie Stalberg, Gunnarsson, Kulemin, Grabovski). All of the moves are completely indicative of your understanding of an NHL management teams lifecycle. I do have hope that your approach will ultimately be successful and will break the cycle here in Toronto. You have placed any chance of success and your future in Toronto ultimately in the hands of players like Bozak, Gustavsson, Hanson, Stalberg and Gunnarsson. What I do not understand is why you chose to expunge so many inherited prospects with high end potential rather then actually giving them a legitimate and real opportunity first? Hopefully, if Tlusty pans out as many (including myself) are predicting, you will not hide behind the “could not play in the Toronto spot light” mantra. This is a kid who was the captain on his national team as a child. He has had the weight of his entire town and country on his shoulders in a town and country where he was a star with massive expectations, wrapped around political tension and turmoil dropped on his shoulders at 16 years old or younger. This kid just needed an opportunity Mr Burke. And hopefully, when he gets that opportunity and if he is able to succeed, you will be capable of admitting that he succeeded because of the opportunity he was given by another organization, and not try and take away from his accomplishments by trying to fabricate a personality flaw to justify his lack of development in Toronto. It is not an issue to give up on prospects or decide you want to go in a different direction, however, it is not appropriate to claim a prospect has received “Repeated Opportunities” and failed – when that is clearly and obviously not the case…
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] Show All
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] Show All
You must be logged in to post a comment.
December 5th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
Neverlosehope wrote:
post of the century
December 5th, 2009 at 10:39 pm
@ Neverlosehope:
I think you’re on to something with Beau.
OK, I am officially calling for us to Make the playoffs this year book it and call me after game 82.
December 5th, 2009 at 10:40 pm
Since when did Howard Berger start writing blogs on MLHS???
.
Tlusty was given a real opportunity – repeatedly – in my opinion. I also believe, though, that you need to be more patient with your prospects. But success should not be measured via stats alone. There’s plenty of little things Schenn does that affords him the opportunity he has earned. To start the season Kulemin was missing those intangibles and effort (which he seems to have thankfully recovered a bit). I know if I were a coach or GM I wouldn’t give opportunity to a player that doesn’t do the little things even if they do chip in with points every once and a while or have “upside” (which is a very subjective term – Darcy Tucker once had high offensive upside based on his junior stats). Managing a hockey team is about more than stats… it’s about the culture of the team and I wouldn’t be surprised to hear Tlusty didn’t fit in the culture Wilson and Burke are looking to create.
December 5th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
@ Neverlosehope – you stole that theory from me!
Ha, just joking, but I believe I mentioned it a month or so back..it seems like Beauchemin is on the ice for every goal against..
December 5th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Go Canada Go!
December 5th, 2009 at 10:47 pm
I think Tlusty was given less opportunity to succeed because when he wasn’t scoring, he was doing ### all. And I think the fact that there are already stacked with those kind of players, moved him down the depth chart into the Burke Outhouse. He could turn out to be a late bloomer, but nothing about him seemed special. Fact is, his AHL point totals seemed at odds with how he lost looked when he was with the Leafs.
December 5th, 2009 at 10:52 pm
HHT wrote:
Alex wrote up a nice piece some time back where he listed off the players that wracked up as many points as Tlusty has in the AHL at his age. I think you would be surprised …
Leafs have absolutely zero clue about developing players.. this has been repeatedly proven, beyound a reasonable doubt.. I have a sincere hope Burke will fix this…
December 5th, 2009 at 11:42 pm
I’m not going to bother with reading the other 300 posts, but I read your blog and I must say thank you. It’s nice to hear what clearly needs to be said on a more regular basis.
December 5th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
@ Andrew R:
yes i remember that article here is the link below:
http://mapleleafshotstove.com/index.php/2009/08/26/food-for-thought-jiri-tlusty/
among those players that racked up the points in the AHL at Tlusty’s age are Radulov, Krejci, E.Staal, etc. But what is interesting about some of the names he mentions is that ryan getzlaf, corey perry and bobby ryan were all in there. and brian burke developed all 3 of these players with the ducks and ended up winning a cup with getzlaf and perry. so he did a very good job developing prospects in anaheim but why wouldnt he try and do the same thing with the leafs?? i dont understand it
December 5th, 2009 at 11:54 pm
you should all check out this article alex posted about Tlusty back in august.
http://mapleleafshotstove.com/index.php/2009/08/26/food-for-thought-jiri-tlusty/
December 5th, 2009 at 11:59 pm
Andrew
Just wanted to say nice article.It’s difficult to swim upstream on this site,but your bang on when it comes to the Leaf’s definition of “OPPORTUNITY”.
Tlusty may or may not turn out to be something special,but it won’t be known as a result of the chances/tutelege afforded him from this franchise.
To answer someone else’s Q;Luke Schenn was the Leaf’s best player tonite.No gaffs,nice transition passes,and three huge hits,with a couple more lesser board smears….Small mercies.
Finally,I’m surprised there wasn’t any rumblings of the anti-Kessel movement I have been predicting….Maybe it’s a little soon.
He simply stunk the joint out in his first real “pressure” game as a Leaf.
There is no questioning his skill set on potting goals.His playmaking skills aren’t as bad as prev. advertised too.
But everything I have seen spells spoiled malcontent with no character when the going gets tough.Giveaways that would make Kristich blush.
The kind of guy who pots a pile against the dregs season long,only to vanish once the big boys start post season and the ice gets smaller.
Tonite was your first preview.
Listen,I want to be wrong on this kid.But I have witnessed/posted re; character issues and he’s simply not the kind of player to pin your hopes on to save us from our 40 plus year drought.
I blame Burke for forcing a trade that wasn’t required,and overpaying as a result.Skill is important,but it needs character and guts to complete the franchise player mold.
I still say this time next year,if the Leafs aren’t in playoff contention,Phil(the thril,Dr,missle) Kessel becomes Bryan McCabe.
Cue the boos.
December 6th, 2009 at 12:10 am
I think this team, as Cox picks it, looks like a very poor squad, as far as Canada’s standards:
http://olympics.thestar.com/2010/article/734853–cox-five-in-the-fight-for-spots-on-team-canada
Marleau? Thornton? Heatley? They are virtually … what’s the opposite of ‘clutch’ ?
That trio alone gives me the willies! No thanks!
Not many vets inspire me at forward.
I would like Fisher for his overall utility and the fact we shouldn’t have 4 dedicated offensive lines.
But overall, I don’t think there is enough sandpaper up front either.
December 6th, 2009 at 12:25 am
HHT wrote:
I agree HHT.
Looks like 2010 could be titled “Revenge of the Russians”
We have to hope that the hockey God’s continue to smile on us….they always seem to be on our side when it matters.
December 6th, 2009 at 12:58 am
Excellent article!
December 6th, 2009 at 3:44 am
Andrew R wrote:
OK.. you disagree.. so lets put this in honest terms…your hockey knowledge comes from where? where you a GM? a Scout? You were a coach,minor league.. midget? sorry if I am wrong but from memory (failing at best in my old age) you are a University student who likes hockey and started to blog.. you were a poster on HB then moved over to here.. you are doing blogs now but you are starting to sound like someone who thinks their opinion comes from a source of knowledge.. you crap on MLSE management like you know more then they do..I gues you have more sources of information at your hands than BB and RW.. wow you must have some great inside info from the MSLE front office..or not…just saying
December 6th, 2009 at 8:41 am
I have to admit I was surprised at the deal. If one travels back through Tlusty’s handling in Toronto you would have to say that there were some poor decisions made that set him back in his development. He was coming around over the last year. Having said all that I do feel that their may have been some intangibles in his game that were lacking. Comparing Ian White is good. I agree that the Leafs handling of White could have been disasterous. Personally though I always saw things with White that made me take notice from his play in junior to his play in the AHL, to his first NHL game. I remember Doug Gilmour making some very positive comments about White early on. I could not understand why others didn’t see White’s upside. My point is that when it comes to Tlusty I have never really seen those intangibles. I know he was improving, and starting to show a bit with the Marlies but not to the degree needed. It was the same with Ponikarovski and Antropov. I remember watching them in the AHL in their first games there and thinking these guys got real potential. I actually was at Antropov’s first game at old Memorial Stadium in St John’s and you could see his quality. I have never seen that with Tlusty. Just sayin…
Still enjoyed the article, as it made some great points.
December 6th, 2009 at 9:18 am
So what you’re saying is that everyone is entitled to their opinion except Andrew? I’m sick of hearing the ‘Burke must have known something’ or ‘You’re not the GM’ comments because guess what, Burke might have known something, but I’ll bet you Rutherford knew something as well, just because a move was made by an NHL GM, it doesn’t make it the right move.
December 6th, 2009 at 11:40 am
CarltontheBear wrote:
Read it again….Andrew fired the first show by saying that Jordan’s assessment is wrong. His assessment is not wrong; Jordan was stating his opinion based on what he has seen…but Andrew clearly could not handle a dissenting voice, so GinOshawa called him on it. Why is it you feel that no one should be allowed to disagree with Andrew’s assessments? Andrew was the one who posted this blog….and I’m sure Andrew realizes that he’ll get called when he omits critical information and tries to rewrite history to make his point.
December 6th, 2009 at 11:43 am
GinOshawa wrote:
Absolutely freakin’ brilliant, GinOshawa! Succinct and spot on.
December 6th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
I never said that nobody could disagree with Andrew’s assessment, I just feel using the “You’re not an NHL GM so therefore you’re not a hockey expert” rebuttal is used way too often on this site, not just in this instance, and if that’s the case than none of our opinions are valid. To clarify, I wasn’t just commenting on this one argument.
December 6th, 2009 at 2:10 pm
fuck this drama. do I have to quote about three paragraphs before I say anything?
Tlusty is a bitch and will forever be one, we’ve got enough bitches on the team as it is. You know what I remember Tlusty for, in all the Leafs games I’ve seen him play? Nothing, can’t remember him even being out there.
No initiative, limited future.
December 6th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
CarltontheBear wrote:
OK – fair enough. However, Andrew could have said that they would agree to disagree on Stralman, but instead he just flat out told Jordan he was wrong. Yet Andrew is no better informed than many of the posters here either, and that’s what GinOshawa’s point was.
December 6th, 2009 at 2:14 pm
GinOshawa wrote:
“just saying” – ok, this is getting absurd.. lets put this in real terms.. Jordans statement was “Stralman is shit” and he justified this because he “has watched him play”. Well, last I checked, Stralman is 15th in scoring for NHL D and is QB’ing the leagues #1 PP unit. Sorry GinOshawa, it does not take an expert to say that the assessment of this player being “shit” is wrong. And if you do not believe me, why not ask Mr Howson or Mr Hitchcock? take as many personal shots at me if you like, I am entitled and dare I say, absolutely correct to label an assessment of this player as “shit” as completely incorrect.
kb wrote:
actually, I suggest you read it again. I simply stated that calling a player who is 15 in scoring for NHL D men and is the QB for the leagues best PP “shit” is incorrect – and it CLEARLY is..
CarltontheBear wrote:
Thanks bud, but, its ok.. its the nature of writing about the Leafs… write positive or else.. dare to speak about how and why the Leafs have not won in 40 years and why they are one of the weakest teams in the league, and well – people start attacking you personally.. Its ok, there is nothing any of these folks can post that would upset me..
On a related note, people who are attacking me should actually read the blog, because its obvious, based on your comments, that you have not. I actually never criticized the Tlusty trade and pretty clearly said I am taking a “wait and see” approach. I even gave Mr Burke loads of credit for the way he is approaching this in order to break the cycle that has been going on for the last 15 years or so. The only thing I was critical of was the Leafs management definition of “opportunity” and their ability to develop top end talent.. pssst – this is no great mystery.. one does not need to be Mr Holland to realize this is a true statement.. Mr Burke, more then anyone knows how poorly the Leafs have traditionally been at developing talent – and I am hopeful it is something he will fix…
December 6th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
kb wrote:
ummm kb.. Jordan said Stralman is “shit”. and he based this on “having watched him play”. I am well within my rights to say he is wrong.. the definition of “shit” does not leave much open to interpretation. I am not obligated to agree to disagree with that comment, as its flagrantly and obviously wrong.. again, 15th in NHL D scoring, QB of the #1 PP in the league is not “shit”. If you want to argue that hes playing over his head or that he isnt as good as his stats indicate or whatever – well, then we can debate that and “agree to disagree”.. calling an NHL player with those performance metrics “shit” is wrong.. absolutely, positively and conclusively – wrong.. sorry if that upsets you..
December 6th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Love the posts from Andrew R where he continually over values ex – Leaf players (Antropov, Stralman and now Tlusty). Well done. We just parted with 3 HOF’ers. But what is even funnier is how defensive he gets when someone disagrees with him. You lost me when when you said in a rebuttal to another poster that Kaberle’s contract was ‘restrictive’. Total nonsense = Kaberle’s contract was one of the only good things that JFJ could take cresdit for (besides drafting Gunnarson and Stralberg).
December 6th, 2009 at 3:02 pm
@Conn Smythe
I would imagine the restrictive part Andrew was referring to is the NTC…the NTC Kaberle invoked that cost us Carter and a 1st
December 6th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Stralman is 18th in the league in scoring for d – man. Ian White has 2 less points than he does in one less game (and White’s a plus 6).
December 6th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
ionsys Says:
toronto is a fishbowl compared to many other teams–some guys can’t cut it here period, regardless of whether or not they can succeed elsewhere–whether or not stralam or tlusty shine in columbus/carolina is IRRELEVANT—what is only relevant is they couldn’t cut it in Toronto and had lost/about to lose waiver exempt status–so time ran out unless we wanted to get nothing in return
This is a perceptive comment; playing in Toronto carries pressure unlike many smaller markets, and success elsewhere does not equal success in Toronto. I liked Tlusty when he first broke in; I recall a nice goal vs. Ottawa where he showed a lot of patience with the puck, but the bottom line is that he never did a thing after those pictures were published. He needed a change in scenery. Pierre McGuire thinks Rutherford won the trade, which means that Burke won the trade!
With the pasting Montreal put on Boston friday, the Leafs didn’t stand a chance saturday.
December 6th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Conn Smythe wrote:
no one has said that these players are HOF’ers..
as for Kaberles contract, the NTC makes it rather restrictive, would you not agree?
as for “Defensive” – sorry bud.. I do not agree.. if you mean I will actually “defend” myself, then yes, you are correct…
December 6th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Conn Smythe wrote:
he is actually tied for 16th if you look at the stats. I guess he slipped a spot from yesterday..
re white – no one is disputing White.. actually, funny enough, last year the mob was trying to run him out of town.. I pretty thoroughly covered my opinion of White and the challenges he faced developing in Toronto in the blog as well (at least my opinion of such anyway)..
thanks as always for reading Conn Smythe and for the conversation.. very much appreciated…
December 6th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
@Andrew R
Again….whether or not Stralman could cut the mustard in TO, he:
A) was out of options – he had to pass thru waivers to be demoted;
B) reportedly let BB know that he would leave and go back to Sweden if he wasn’t played full time;
C) had a hissy fit last year when sent down and took his time in reporting a few short km’s down the road, plus;
D) RW and BB would have lost all credibility within the dressing room if you reward this type of behaviour from a player who didn’t make the team. Do you really think that wouldn’t have affected the team and the dressing room if Stralman was rewarded by playing full-time after that?
Please answer those points first before anything else. I have brought up those points time and again, but you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge those issues. If you were truly a knowledgeable hockey observer, you would have considered those issues prior to complaining over his departure, plus you would have realized that Stralman’s departure was necessary to send a message that this type of garbage will not be tolerated. It may or may not have been a great trade, but it was a trade that had to be made.
Whether or not Jordan said Stralman was “shit” is a moot point, and is his prerogative – he expressed his opinion based on what he saw. Nothing wrong with that, and his assessment is equally as informed and valid as yours. Jordan watched Columbus and formulated his opinion based play of the player, while it is obvious you have only chosen to evaluate the stats.
December 6th, 2009 at 5:23 pm
@ionsys, Armchair
Exactly – Bravo. Nice posts…you guys went where I was going to go with regards to comparing relative successes in different hockey markets – numbers and play cannot be compared as simply as “he did well there, he would have done the exact same thing here”. My post was long enough already, and likely would have been irrelevant to Andrew anyway since he has been unable to answer the simple things I’ve been asking him to answer.
December 6th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
kb wrote:
actually KB, you have clearly demonstrated that you have missed my entire point.
all of your points are presumptive (except yes, IF the Leafs had demoted him, he would have had to pass through waivers).. – and if you actually read my blog, your points quite eloquently describe and illustrate the problem Toronto has with developing prospects. ie) burying them until the organization has very few options and prospects becoming disenchanted and wanting out. This is also what happened with Grabovski in Montreal for example, yet, he has fit in pretty nicely here. It is one thing to happen once in awhile (like Grabovski in Montreal), but, seems to happen here A LOT.. indicating there may be a problem.. to a point where players are happy to stay in the AHL, but, just want to move to a different organizations AHL affiliates so that they have a fresh opportunity. The list of players that have wanted out of Torontos development system is not short.. Again, it is ok if you disagree.. but, end of the day, 40 years of futility, lack of any track record in developing prospects, pretty long list of prospects that have gone on to have excellent careers elsewhere – well, at some point, even the most die hard must surely start to realize there is an issue here..
As for being a “Truly knowledgable hockey observer” – I apologize, however, I do not agree with your set of criteria, nor do I believe you are asking the correct questions to qualify that as it pertains to the conversation at hand.
thanks again for your comments and participation…
December 6th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
@ Conn Smythe:
And White is a Plus 6 on a worse than shit hockey team
December 6th, 2009 at 7:17 pm
@Andrew,
My points aren’t the least bit presumptive. This was all reported in the media. But let’s say for argument’s sake that they are all media fabrications. That still does not change the fact that you are being forced to play someone who did not played well enough to earn a spot on the team – but they have to play because they can be lost for nothing on waivers (Tlusty, Stralman). You can’t just hand them the role they were drafted for – that is entitlement at it’s finest….just hang around long enough without really showing anything, and you will still get your chance anyway. Do you think the Leafs were keeping these guys back even though they could help the team now – or in the future? For better and for worse, welcome to the wonderful new world of the CBA….you have a relatively small window to show what you can do, and if you haven’t shown enough to justify being kept by the time you can be lost on waivers – you have to be moved for other assets.
And in response to “happening a lot”….BB has moved exactly 3 prospects out – but only after keeping them for as long as he possibly could for evaluation. He didn’t jump all over them to move them at the first opportunity, it was almost 8 months before he moved Stralman. He could have moved him right away, but he evaluated what he had, and didn’t see a fit moving forward.
Using Montreal hurts your cause – this is the same team that traded a high end prospect (McDonagh) as part of a package for an absolute salary dump in Gomez. We essentially got a 2nd round pick and Wayne Primeau for Stralman, a nice return unless of course you feel that Colin Stuart will be a difference maker for Calgary.
What you aren’t getting is that the onus is still on the player to make the team believe there is a role for them in the future. If you get ice time – no matter how short – the onus is on you to show something…anything. Ben Ondrus sticks around the organization because BB sees the character this kid has. The onus was on him to prove his worth, and the same thing with Ian White. Why coddle your young kids – in today’s CBA world the the player has to put up and shut up. Work hard, show improvement, and you will get your chance.
December 6th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
@HHT – no one is disputing the value of Ian White. 2 years ago, when people were ready to run him out of town, I was also petitioning for the kid to get a real opportunity before we lost another one.. I am assuming you were one of the few clamoring for him to be maintained 2 years ago correct?
@kb – sorry man, we disagree.. and no matter how hard you try to convince me of your perspective, I simply do not agree with you. I would dissect all of your points, but, honestly, at this point, it is safe to say we disagree and neither of us will come around to the other persons position..
The only point I will comment on is this. I do agree that players need to earn opportunities. But, I also understand that players need proper opportunities. Each player is drafted with a specific role in mind. You do not ask a fighter to score 30 goals in order to stick, and you do not ask a sniper to fight the other teams enforcer in order to stick. You need to put prospects in proper positions and proper opportunities in order to succeed relative to their actual skill sets… This does not only hold true at the NHL level. I strongly suggest you take some time and listen to people like Mr Holland speak. Another excellent person to listen to is JFJ – who is very well spoken and very well respected on this topic (obviously many fans in Toronto hate JFJ so, I guess you would not consider him a credible source, but, I assure you, outside of the internet fan and media mob in Toronto, JFJ is a very well respected hockey mind)
Again, there is a reason Toronto has not won in 40 years and there is a reason the Leafs, with very very few exceptions, have not been able to develop and build their own talent.. my blog was one perspective and opinion on why this has occurred and continues to occur. I am hopeful that Mr Burke will correct this trend …
thanks again for the wonderful comments and feedback…
December 7th, 2009 at 11:40 am
@Andrew
It is ironic really because we do actually agree on one point. That is, you have to develop your youth, and I agreed on your other blog that it is time to play the youth. Again, you cannot just hand someone a role they didn’t play hard enough or well enough to earn. Does it not become obvious that the onus is on the player to make an impression? It’s not a terribly difficult concept to grasp, nor is it the wrong way to develop prospects. Sorry to burst your bubble, but that is exactly what Holland does – for example, Datsyuk started by playing on the 4th line getting limited minutes. In fact, almost every player brought up in that organization started out in a 4th line role….
And which new prospects brought in by the new regime was Kulemin buried behind at the beginning of the year? The only rookie or prospect who started the year was Stalberg, who was not one of BB’s guys. Incorrect for sure. I really take issue with the many fallacies and fantasies you keep portraying as reality.
Prospects have to make a positive impression by working hard shift in and shift out when they get any opportunity, plus show signs of maturity and improvement. Tlusty had not. Nor had Stralman or Pogge. Therefore, they were deemed expendable. If you have to coddle them or hand them undeserved opportunities for them to show any potential, you don’t want them on your team – simple as that.
Your blog is one huge paint brush, painting the Leafs last 40 years of developing prospects, yet you should realize that you can only hold the present regime responsible for their own tenure – they cannot undo the deeds of the past.
We’ll agree to disagree….
December 27th, 2009 at 9:33 pm
We guarantee we provide the cheapest ghd, ghd Hair Straighteners,ghd straighteners, ghd hair tools in the market and 100% Quality Guarantee.
January 7th, 2010 at 3:48 pm
percent reconstructions alone fall…
due live president country globally scientists…
February 1st, 2010 at 8:18 pm
Public Sector Tenders…
5 tips on finding contract opportunities for FREE…
February 27th, 2010 at 1:43 am
The best software online shop: http://www.software-hotbuy.com/
Microsoft Office 2007,only $110! Windows 7 only $139! No Tax and Free Shipping!
Office 2007 Professional
Office 2007 Ultimate
Office Professional 2007
office 2007 home and student
Flash CS4
Illustrator CS4
Photoshop cs4
Master cs3
Acrobat 9
Dreamweaver cs3
windows vista ultimate
Windows Vista Business
Windows 7 Professional
Windows 7 Ultimate