Cherry vs. Burke: Round 2

[Mack674]

Cherrys just pissed Burke tried to influence (or whatever he did) CBC to get him off the air and predictably he explodes on the air in a tirade that half makes sense while the other half is ... who knows what.

Without taking sides, I often find though that while Cherrys heart is in the right place, he's not the greatest at delivering anything but very right wing or extreme descriptions of his feelings. It's just the way he talks.

I highly doubt he actually belives the leafs suck because nobody from Ontario plays there. His point is really just shouldnt Ontarios and arguably Canadas biggest hockey market have some players from Ontario playing there? I never realized this and yeah, it is kinda strange - akin to the Habs having no francophone players.

I can respect his feelings that he would think the NHL and in particular the Canadian teams should have some kind of responsibility or loyalty to the youth of this country before American or overseas born players.

Not agreeing or disagreeing just yet and you can get on the "immigrants dey took our jorrbsz!" train if you like but he's not as crazy as he sounds sometimes.

 

[Frank E]

I'd like to know more about the details of what Don is claiming though, that Burke tried to get him fired with the CBC and went to the governors about him, cause that's almost equally ridiculous to me if there's substantive truth to it and I could see why he'd be pissed off about it.

Burke admitted to filing a complaint with the CBC. He said he tried to deal with the issue behind closed doors and was upset it was leaked. I think saying Burke tried to get Cherry fired though is a little extreme. This would be the first time I've heard anything about Burke going to the governors about it though.

There was an article in the G & M, I think, about it and it said that Vancouver and Ottawa have also complained to CBC about Cherry/HNIC.

Who cares, and screw them.

I don't want my hockey coverage censored by NHL teams, thank you very much.

And for the record, I'm not suggesting that you do either.

 

[princedpw]

I don't think it's a big deal or even necessarily something tangible but I wouldn't outright dismiss the idea of there being some value to having local players on the team.

I wouldn't dismiss it as impossible, but if I was GM, I also wouldn't act on it until I had some evidence that being Ontario-born improved the productivity of a player when that player played for Toronto.

I'd also add that I'm sufficiently skeptical that it makes a difference that if GM, I also wouldn't bother dedicating any resources to trying to analyze the data to determine if it makes a difference.  I'd focus my attention and resources on attributes of players that I thought were much more likely to be predictive of their performance in Toronto.

 

[bustaheims]

Who cares, and screw them.

I don't want my hockey coverage censored by NHL teams, thank you very much.

And for the record, I'm not suggesting that you do either.

I don't either, but, at the same time, I certainly wouldn't be upset if my hockey coverage contained 0% Don Cherry.

 

[Sudafederov]

Burke seems like the kind of guy that would pick up the phone and call Cherry directly if he had a problem.

I'm not sure why he opted to add all these layers to the process which probably won't result in anything.

Lodging formal complaints with the CBC and expecting results is likely akin to leaving the porch light on for Jimmy Hoffa.

 

[L K]

If anything, I'm more disappointed that Burke wouldn't be there complaining about Cherry when he makes Ponikohontas comments about his players.  I find that aspect of Don far more disrespectful than him reaming out Wilson for not standing/applauding the troops (not that I think it should be an obligation but at the same time there really wasn't a good reason not to).  That Burke would only run and complain about Cherry when he's calling out his coach instead of when he is calling out his players and insulting them I find more disappointing to be honest. 

Overall though, this is just Cherry trying to desperately stay relevant when most of his staple commentary is getting ignored.  Having Ontario-born guys in the lineup is great.  And then Rick Nash signs a long-term extension in Columbus.  And John Tavares re-signs with New York.  And all the other Ontario-born players don't give the Leafs a "home-town discount".  I want a winner and that is it.  I couldn't give a damn where the guy was born.  The guys I like most on the team are Kulemin and Grabovski.  Neither are from North America, let alone Ontario.

 

[Bender]

Exactly. I mean, do you think the Rush Limbaugh of hockey is a good ambassador for the game? I don't. Censorship is bad, but outright bigotry and misguidance of the public is pretty bad in and of itself as well. Garbage in garbage out.

 

[Mack674]

If anything, I'm more disappointed that Burke wouldn't be there complaining about Cherry when he makes Ponikohontas comments about his players.  I find that aspect of Don far more disrespectful than him reaming out Wilson for not standing/applauding the troops (not that I think it should be an obligation but at the same time there really wasn't a good reason not to).  That Burke would only run and complain about Cherry when he's calling out his coach instead of when he is calling out his players and insulting them I find more disappointing to be honest. 

Overall though, this is just Cherry trying to desperately stay relevant when most of his staple commentary is getting ignored.  Having Ontario-born guys in the lineup is great.  And then Rick Nash signs a long-term extension in Columbus.  And John Tavares re-signs with New York.  And all the other Ontario-born players don't give the Leafs a "home-town discount".  I want a winner and that is it.  I couldn't give a damn where the guy was born.  The guys I like most on the team are Kulemin and Grabovski.  Neither are from North America, let alone Ontario.

I agree with alot of that and yeah, Don deliberately mispronouncing peoples names because hes thinks its funny or whatever is just childish. You know the mans name isnt ponikohontas Don, come on.

As for the Ontario players thing I agree as well - Rick Nash in Columbus, Tavares in New York... come to think of it, the only guys that I can remember (in my short years going back to 1990 as a fan) that actually made an obvious attempt to go to the Leafs or give them a discount in order to play for Toronto were Sundin and Eric Lindros.

Mighty short list.

The old days of getting all the best FA werent because they liked Toronto so much as the bottomless pit of money they had to shell out...

So yeah, the hell with it, if the guy doesn't want to play here that badly then I don't want him here. I'd gladly take a skilled Russian player who would be thrilled to play here over somebody from Ontario who is perfectly content signing 10 year extensions in Columbus or New York or Minnesota, Dallas, whereever.

I would turn down more money if it meant I could play for the Leafs, but that's me.

 

[WalterSobchak]

It seems everyones favourite columnist agrees with most here.

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Toronto/2012/03/05/19462481.html

 

[Kin]

I wouldn't dismiss it as impossible, but if I was GM, I also wouldn't act on it until I had some evidence that being Ontario-born improved the productivity of a player when that player played for Toronto.

I don't know that it's something that you could ever really have anything by way of definitive evidence for. It'd be one of those intangible things that carry such weight in hockey. 

I'd also add that I'm sufficiently skeptical that it makes a difference that if GM, I also wouldn't bother dedicating any resources to trying to analyze the data to determine if it makes a difference.  I'd focus my attention and resources on attributes of players that I thought were much more likely to be predictive of their performance in Toronto.

Well, I'm relatively sure that in this day and age of sports analytics an organization like the Leafs don't need to be resource conscious to the point that they couldn't put someone on it but, as I said above, that'd be like putting someone on trying to pin down leadership as a provable quantity. Nobody's done that but it doesn't stop anyone from putting stock in leadership as if it were a valuable quality in players.

 

[Tigger]

The guys I like most on the team are Kulemin and Grabovski.  Neither are from North America, let alone Ontario.

Me too. Funny, Cherry was giving Grabovski some compliments after the game, and his favourite player for quite a stretch recently was a Russian as well.

The way I see it Don was stretching a point way too far for a wholly self serving reason, he admitted part of that is true already, but I also think he's been somewhat consistent in that he enjoys a certain brand of hockey that he identifies mostly with Ontario boys and is invariably protectionist about that pov, at least within hockey.

Truth be told, anyone playing 'that' game seems to get his approval.

That doesn't mean I enjoyed that broadcast, I thought he rambled too much and that he was betrayed by emotion some, his 'point' about Burke became foggy to me and maybe that was the actual point? I think it's about attention for both of them, sure Burke went behind closed doors but did he seriously think that would remain hidden? I doubt it.

I can't remember who called it but Burke sure did wear his tie a certain way on deadline day, did it again during the exchange with Ron before Carlyle's first game as coach, these guys don't miss a trick.

They're both wrong in this case to me but it's largely just a distraction.

Marketing gold proposal, Don and Brian make up in a couple months with Don endorsing the 'You Can Play Project' and Burke espousing Kadri as an NHL'r next year...

 

[lamajama]

I heard Dave Poulin today talk about since the 2009 draft (Burke's first with the Leafs), the Leafs lead the league with 8 Ontario born players drafted.  He was asked the question so he had to reply, but it's telling and shows that they do go for the players they think are the best at their draft positions.

Again, I'm not accusing Burke of avoiding Ontario born players. I'm just saying there may be some truth to having Ontario born/raised, and specifically Toronto born/raised, players on the team.

I agree with you. Perhaps BB should also cease to use it as an "explanation" as to the performance of his team at the ACC. He should also cease to worry about the Christmas trade freeze and possibility  :
of instituting an earlier trade deadline. He could worry more then about icing a team that doesn't freeze up playing in the Centre of the Universe.

 

[lamajama]

Burke seems like the kind of guy that would pick up the phone and call Cherry directly if he had a problem.

I'm not sure why he opted to add all these layers to the process which probably won't result in anything.

Lodging formal complaints with the CBC and expecting results is likely akin to leaving the porch light on for Jimmy Hoffa.

You obviously don't know Burke's history. When he was in Vancouver here he was always trying to get the local rag's writers fired and going to the top to do so. A few were like the idiots in TO and probably deserved to be hammered but IMO Cherry was fine with his remarks on Wilson - or Napoleon as it were......

 

[cw]

I'd like to know more about the details of what Don is claiming though, that Burke tried to get him fired with the CBC and went to the governors about him, cause that's almost equally ridiculous to me if there's substantive truth to it and I could see why he'd be pissed off about it.

Burke admitted to filing a complaint with the CBC. He said he tried to deal with the issue behind closed doors and was upset it was leaked. I think saying Burke tried to get Cherry fired though is a little extreme. This would be the first time I've heard anything about Burke going to the governors about it though.

There was an article in the G & M, I think, about it and it said that Vancouver and Ottawa have also complained to CBC about Cherry/HNIC.

He also had the French Canadians outraged with his remarks in 2004 or so.

 

[Jalili]

From an outsider perspective, I know a lot of fans of other teams who consider Burke to be a joke, because of his history of doing stuff like this.

But from an inside perspective, Burke is such a fiercely loyal guy, that he's the exact kind of person you want to have on your side. If one of his guys is taking a lot of criticism he'll do what he can to shift that negative spotlight from the player to himself.

 

[princedpw]

I wouldn't dismiss it as impossible, but if I was GM, I also wouldn't act on it until I had some evidence that being Ontario-born improved the productivity of a player when that player played for Toronto.

I don't know that it's something that you could ever really have anything by way of definitive evidence for. It'd be one of those intangible things that carry such weight in hockey. 

I'd also add that I'm sufficiently skeptical that it makes a difference that if GM, I also wouldn't bother dedicating any resources to trying to analyze the data to determine if it makes a difference.  I'd focus my attention and resources on attributes of players that I thought were much more likely to be predictive of their performance in Toronto.

Well, I'm relatively sure that in this day and age of sports analytics an organization like the Leafs don't need to be resource conscious to the point that they couldn't put someone on it but, as I said above, that'd be like putting someone on trying to pin down leadership as a provable quantity. Nobody's done that but it doesn't stop anyone from putting stock in leadership as if it were a valuable quality in players.

... Well, I'm consistent (or at least try to be) in that I don't personally put much stock in "leadership" either -- except perhaps leadership by example, which can be seen on the ice.  (But I have difficulty even with leadership by example as I have difficulty separating it simply from being good or not good).  To sum up, I try not to "put stock" in things I can't verify.

Though I will admit that I can see a GM, who has deep, personal experience with the personalities, relationships and emotions of his players, making a trade or acquiring a player for personality or emotional reasons.  Still, as fans, we just don't have the info to analyze or speculate about trades made for such reasons.  In general, I find the one-phrase analysis of such intangibles ("this guy has great leadership skills") in the media or on message boards far too shallow to be of any significant predictive value.

Incidentally, when compared with testing leadership, it would be relatively easy to check whether being Ontario-born and playing in Toronto had an impact.  Just examine the statistical trends before and after on all Ontario vs. non-Ontario born players traded to and from Toronto over the last 40 years.  There is perhaps enough data there to observe a trend if one exists.

 

[Kin]

... Well, I'm consistent (or at least try to be) in that I don't personally put much stock in "leadership" either -- except perhaps leadership by example, which can be seen on the ice.  (But I have difficulty even with leadership by example as I have difficulty separating it simply from being good or not good).  To sum up, I try not to "put stock" in things I can't verify.

Though I will admit that I can see a GM, who has deep, personal experience with the personalities, relationships and emotions of his players, making a trade or acquiring a player for personality or emotional reasons.  Still, as fans, we just don't have the info to analyze or speculate about trades made for such reasons.  In general, I find the one-phrase analysis of such intangibles ("this guy has great leadership skills") in the media or on message boards far too shallow to be of any significant predictive value.

That's fair. I'm not quite at the point that I disregard anything I can't quantify or observe in part because I think there's sort of a universal understanding of group dynamics that informs me about things like that. I've done enough things within a group, sports related and not, that I know that things like leadership and chemistry and heart for lack of better words do have an impact albeit a hard one to get a grip on.

To that point I do put some stock in the unending stream of people within the hockey business who have mentioned those qualities as ones that they look for/have value. As you say, you or I saying that Player X is a good or a bad leader doesn't mean much. Scotty Bowman saying that about someone? I give it some weight. Not a ton, but a bit.

Incidentally, when compared with testing leadership, it would be relatively easy to check whether being Ontario-born and playing in Toronto had an impact.  Just examine the statistical trends before and after on all Ontario vs. non-Ontario born players traded to and from Toronto over the last 40 years.  There is perhaps enough data there to observe a trend if one exists.

I think there are two fundamental problems with that. The first is the relatively poor quality of hockey metrics. There simply isn't good statistical information on players before 2000 and I don't know that there's good defensive statistical information even now. We'd get virtually nothing looking at defensemen.

Even if we only looked at offense and, even then, only looked at goals/assists there's still the reality of having to account for the different roles a player can have from year to year, the relative quality of linemates, the different styles a team can play and so on and so forth. Even an examination of the one thing that we do have accurate statistical information on(number of goals and assists) would require a massive leap forward in hockey metrics to be particularly informative.

The other problem there is that what I've been talking about, and admittedly someone else may have another perspective, is a relatively modern phenomenon. A lot of the argument you hear about why playing for the Leafs is difficult is the omnipresent media and 40 years ago the media certainly wasn't what it is today. Even in Toronto you're still just talking about newspapers and the occasional game on HNIC.

So if my argument is that coming through the craziness that is the Toronto minor hockey system might make the transition to the craziness of the Toronto NHL market easier then you really only have a limited stretch of time to examine to see if there could be evidence for that.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

I wonder about Don's opinion on the 'You Can Play' movement?

 

[Etiam Vultus]

I am surprised that no one has commented on Mr. Cherry's record as General Manager of the Mississauga Ice Dogs.  He was very public in his insistence that he was going with 100% Canadian boys and none of those dang foreigners.  His team was an embarrassment and showed how out of touch Mr. Cherry has become with the reality of assembling a good team.

It is one thing to watch Coach's Corner for entertainment, but does anyone seriously watch it for enlightenment?

 

[Corn Flake]

I am surprised that no one has commented on Mr. Cherry's record as General Manager of the Mississauga Ice Dogs.  He was very public in his insistence that he was going with 100% Canadian boys and none of those dang foreigners.  His team was an embarrassment and showed how out of touch Mr. Cherry has become with the reality of assembling a good team.

Cherry has been real good at sweeping that whole mess under the carpet.  I did some website and network support work for them back in those days and got to see some first hand things that were pretty mind blowing.  What I didn't see, the staff told me about.  I was in the dressing room one day when Don walked in and starts cracking jokes and taking shots at Rick Vaive who at the time was still the coach.  It was bizarre. 

He wasn't actually ever GM but he was the loudest voice in the room by far.  He hired his buddies, I believe his agent was GM at one point (who only worked part time as GM) and his kids in key roles in the team.  They were making insane trades left right and centre.  The front office staff who weren't family or buddies just shook their heads. 

When he took over as coach it never got better.  That 11-47 record they had the year he coached, when he supposedly was going to fix everything Vaive had done wrong was hilarious. Well I guess if going from 3 wins to 11 is your idea of improvement then pat yourself on the back, Don.