Do you believe Burke would draft Rielly first overall?
- Thread starter McPwnage
- Start date
ZBBM
Active member
Burke is pretty easy to understand, once you get the hang of him.
1. He's got a big ego, made almost insufferably so because he has a Cup on his resume. No problem there, many successful sports execs use that as an element of their success (though it should be noted that it's not a requirement, Holland, Poile, Rutherford, being good examples).
2. Like most people with egos, he likes to hear himself talk. There are 2 problems here: first, he literally doesn't know when to knock it off, and second, he constantly presents himself as a straight shooter, like he's being brutally honest 100% of the time. But like all of us, he equivocates, and exaggerates.
So when he comes out with patently absurd statements, some people are predisposed to believe him because he seems to be telling it straight.
1. He's got a big ego, made almost insufferably so because he has a Cup on his resume. No problem there, many successful sports execs use that as an element of their success (though it should be noted that it's not a requirement, Holland, Poile, Rutherford, being good examples).
2. Like most people with egos, he likes to hear himself talk. There are 2 problems here: first, he literally doesn't know when to knock it off, and second, he constantly presents himself as a straight shooter, like he's being brutally honest 100% of the time. But like all of us, he equivocates, and exaggerates.
So when he comes out with patently absurd statements, some people are predisposed to believe him because he seems to be telling it straight.
Corn Flake
New member
Ok I'll bite... a blathering post on why Rielly could truly have been atop the Leafs list:
What if Burke is 100% telling the truth? What reason would he have to lie in this case? What if they DID have Rielly ranked #1 on their list? What sort of illness or dysfunction would it be if they really did? Is it because we scoff at the notion that anyone would dare place any player in this draft ahead of Yakupov? Why? What guarantees Yak to be a stud above all others?
Is it Rielly's injury and relatively small amount of playing time last year? Well, many of us wanted Galchenyuk to be the Leafs pick despite most not seeing him play a lick and also recovering from a knee injury... so why should Rielly be treated any different?
If you take the hard and fast rule of "best player available" and completely ignore the Leafs circumstances (desperate need for a 1st line centre) for a second, having a d-man at the top is never a bad thing, especially one who has pretty much all the traits of a Brian Leetch. Yeah, I said it. I'm not saying he will be that good... I'm saying he has almost the same skill set. He could be that good.
Is a player with that set of skills and mental capacity not able to line up with the offensive skill of a Yakupov? If Rielly played the full year and put up PPG numbers along with everything else, there's a good chance he would have been right up there in the conversation for 1st overall with Yak and Murray.
Perhaps the Leafs got more of a view of him in his first WHL year than other teams did and they liked what they saw back then, only to have it solidified with his return from injury and play in the post season? Is that so far fetched that we assume Burke just made up his statement?
We know Burke heavily values character and leadership traits in his picks. He did before and he has probably concluded that the levels both of those traits need to be at to make it as a young player in Toronto, that he and his gigantic staff saw blemishes in other guys that dropped them down the list. With all of the meetings, interviews and psychological testing they put players through they no doubt concluded that Rielly was at a level higher than the others.
Outside of all that, for Burke to say what he said and have it NOT be true, he would be putting expectations on a kid that he personally didn't believe in. I don't think Burke is stupid enough to do that.
What if Burke is 100% telling the truth? What reason would he have to lie in this case? What if they DID have Rielly ranked #1 on their list? What sort of illness or dysfunction would it be if they really did? Is it because we scoff at the notion that anyone would dare place any player in this draft ahead of Yakupov? Why? What guarantees Yak to be a stud above all others?
Is it Rielly's injury and relatively small amount of playing time last year? Well, many of us wanted Galchenyuk to be the Leafs pick despite most not seeing him play a lick and also recovering from a knee injury... so why should Rielly be treated any different?
If you take the hard and fast rule of "best player available" and completely ignore the Leafs circumstances (desperate need for a 1st line centre) for a second, having a d-man at the top is never a bad thing, especially one who has pretty much all the traits of a Brian Leetch. Yeah, I said it. I'm not saying he will be that good... I'm saying he has almost the same skill set. He could be that good.
Is a player with that set of skills and mental capacity not able to line up with the offensive skill of a Yakupov? If Rielly played the full year and put up PPG numbers along with everything else, there's a good chance he would have been right up there in the conversation for 1st overall with Yak and Murray.
Perhaps the Leafs got more of a view of him in his first WHL year than other teams did and they liked what they saw back then, only to have it solidified with his return from injury and play in the post season? Is that so far fetched that we assume Burke just made up his statement?
We know Burke heavily values character and leadership traits in his picks. He did before and he has probably concluded that the levels both of those traits need to be at to make it as a young player in Toronto, that he and his gigantic staff saw blemishes in other guys that dropped them down the list. With all of the meetings, interviews and psychological testing they put players through they no doubt concluded that Rielly was at a level higher than the others.
Outside of all that, for Burke to say what he said and have it NOT be true, he would be putting expectations on a kid that he personally didn't believe in. I don't think Burke is stupid enough to do that.
Redleaf
Active member
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:
I have no problem with Burke's ego. So long as he starts to deliver on his promise of icing a big, tough-to-play-against, winning team. He has given himself 5 years to show us. By the end of next season I'll get in line to voice my overall happiness or displeasure of his 1st or last tenure, but not a day before.
Champ Kind
New member
Nik? said:
I've sought clarification on the this for a while now. Isn't it actually "the question begs"? After all, the question is begging to receive an answer. By begging the question, there's nothing to get. Right?
My interpretation is that this thread shows just how thin the ice on which Burke treads is. If the leafs don't make the playoffs, it seems unlikely the MSLE brass will be able to save Burke against the popular uprising against him, no matter how much they might like him as an executive.
By the way, I believe I read that the Calgary (? -- It might have been a different team, sorry if I got it wrong) GM said that they thought the guy they took would turn out to be the best player in the draft in a couple of years.
By the way, I believe I read that the Calgary (? -- It might have been a different team, sorry if I got it wrong) GM said that they thought the guy they took would turn out to be the best player in the draft in a couple of years.
Heroic Shrimp
New member
princedpw said:
My interpretation is that this thread shows just how much everything in Toronto hockey is brutally over-analyzed.
Redleaf
Active member
Corn Flake said:
Nice post, and not to diminish it at all, but what if Burke just didn't like the Russian forwards ranked ahead of Rielly? It makes more sense to have ranked Rielly > Murray & Forsberg if you believe Burke just didn't want either of the Russians. I know, I know Galchenyuk has an American passport, but Burke has always favored North American players. (born, bred and schooled) This draft is no different if you are of that mindset.
Corn Flake
New member
RedLeaf said:
Well I wouldn't say it's about him "not wanting the Russians" and more about certain elements identified in their character that had them a bit concerned. They also could have seen Yak as a one-trick pony who might be a bit of an off-ice handful, and from his twitter escapades last night, that could very well ring true.
I think there are lots of factors here both positive for Rielly and negative for Yak and Gally that came into play here. Far more than we would ever know without spending the time analyzing and meeting these guys.
Redleaf
Active member
Corn Flake said:
I wouldn't call it 'not wanting Russians' as much as 'prefers North Americans if given both options', if the options are similar in talent.
EDIT: I certainly wouldn't assume it was the only reason, but given his propensity to lean in this direction, it may have been a contributing factor.
Kin
New member
Champ Kind said:
No. Begging the question is a fallacious statement that uses its inherent premise as proof of its validity. So, like, "Apples are the most delicious food on the planet because they're so delicious" or "You're wrong about Burke being a blowhard because Burke isn't a blowhard."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question
This is where Aristotle would drop the microphone and walk offstage.
Champ Kind
New member
Nik? said:
I seem to recall through the fog of memory my old philosophy prof saying something about "to beggar thy neighbor", but I guess I didn't have that right, either. That said, I'm entirely sure I agree with your examples in this case.
But back on track: boy, that Rielly sure is something, eh?
Champ Kind
New member
Sorry, have to slip back to this. Nik, you should have just posted this and said "Stop it".
Many English speakers use "begs the question" to mean "raises the question," or "impels the question," and follow that phrase with the question raised,[12] for example, "this year's deficit is half a trillion dollars, which begs the question: how are we ever going to balance the budget?" Philosophers and many grammarians deem such usage incorrect.[13][14] Academic linguist Mark Liberman recommends avoiding the phrase entirely, noting that because of shifts in usage in both Latin and English over the centuries, the relationship of the literal expression to its intended meaning is unintelligible and therefore it is now "such a confusing way to say it that only a few pedants understand the phrase."[10]
Many English speakers use "begs the question" to mean "raises the question," or "impels the question," and follow that phrase with the question raised,[12] for example, "this year's deficit is half a trillion dollars, which begs the question: how are we ever going to balance the budget?" Philosophers and many grammarians deem such usage incorrect.[13][14] Academic linguist Mark Liberman recommends avoiding the phrase entirely, noting that because of shifts in usage in both Latin and English over the centuries, the relationship of the literal expression to its intended meaning is unintelligible and therefore it is now "such a confusing way to say it that only a few pedants understand the phrase."[10]
Kin
New member
Corn Flake said:
This is really the heart of the matter and, as I said elsewhere, in a lot of ways the general discussion about Rielly is more specifically a discussion about Burke.
What if Burke genuinely did have Rielly at #1? Well, the one thing it means for sure is that the way Burke(and, I guess, the Toronto scouting staff) saw the draft was pretty drastically different from the way just about everyone else saw the draft. McKenzie had Rielly at #8. The Hockey News at #6. ISS had him at #7. Central scouting had him as the 5th NAS.
So it's more than a slight dispute. It's not taking the guy projected by most or even some to go #2 instead of the #1. It's saying that a guy where the majority opinion had him outside the top 5 was, in fact, the #1.
But what does that all mean? I mean, a bunch of media folk and scouting services shouldn't be used as the bible either, right?
Again, it all comes back to how much faith or trust you have in Burke. It's like business. If someone comes to you with a proposal that bucks convention are you going to invest in it? You might, but you'd probably have to believe in the person proposing it or know that they had a track record of making unconventional decisions work. It's the difference between a climate scientist and a crazy person on the corner saying that the world is ending.
Burke's opinion, squared off against convention, holds sway with some and not so much with others. In light of his track record with the Leafs, I think that's more or less fair.
LeafsInSeven
New member
Tigger said:
Talk about taking something completely out of context. Yikes.
Corn Flake
New member
Tigger said:
I think Galchenyuk has a similar personality and based on what he spills on twitter I think I could be close there. Not really able to say a lot without hearing interviews with these guys but he did seem to be a bit of a goofball.
Burke & passports.. he has said that many times. He has Grabovski and Kulemin who he seems to have plenty of faith in... both possess a certain approach, intensity and mentality towards the game that you don't find in every Russian (Or Belarussian) player.
You don't find it in every Canadian or American player either for that matter. I think you just compare the number of players from each respective country and it gets touch to find the right character set you are looking for in countries with smaller hockey player production.