Kadri Misses Meeting - Sent Home

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

I agree with you for the most part Mr. G, but Bobby Mac made an interesting comment, that whatever the issue is, they've likely tried to address it internally and it has not worked, hence the 'public shaming' for lack of a better term, they hope this will give him the shake he really needs to round out his off ice issues.

 

[mr grieves]

Also, the impulse to dump Kadri because you're rebuilding and need to clear out some "culture" just feels a like setting yourself to be lamenting the reprise of the Alex Steen in a couple years.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

Also, the impulse to dump Kadri because you're rebuilding and need to clear out some "culture" just feels a like setting yourself to be lamenting the reprise of the Alex Steen in a couple years.

For what it's worth, I think Kadri is twice the player Steen is, offensively at least.

 

[Kin]

That's where I am. Teams discipline players for breaking rules. Kadri broke some rules and got disciplined. The end -- but this idea that, because it's being done publicly, the infractions must be so horrible that they can only be symptoms of a deeply flawed, fundamentally and irretrievably immature -- no, selfish -- character that we just can't have on this team is... a bit weird. Because I look at what he's done on the ice, and I see a guy I'd want on my team. Full stop.

I agree that it's hard to buy that the public nature of this adds to the gravitas of it. If the situation was such that Kadri needed to be benched for three games in the eyes of management then no matter what the media in this city would know that was a story that needed following up on regardless of whatever stated reason they gave. It's just smarter for the team to get out in front of that and give an official version of things before you started getting stories in the paper that started with "whispers say" or "word has it" about why Kadri was benched.

So we're left with "well, management knows the full story, way more than they're letting on, and we couldn't possibly..." and I dunno. Didn't I hear a lot, when curious personnel decisions were made over the last several years, about smart professionals with access to all the relevant information making sound judgments based on things we couldn't possibly know? And the team got worse and worse?

That seems about as fair a categorization of "what you heard" as me saying that you seemed pretty certain that the team would drastically improve once Carlyle was gone.

It's just fundamentally true that this decision is being made with more information than what we have. That doesn't mean it's the right one, just that our criticisms of it are being made while largely in the dark.

 

[Chris]

Also, the impulse to dump Kadri because you're rebuilding and need to clear out some "culture" just feels a like setting yourself to be lamenting the reprise of the Alex Steen in a couple years.

Maybe...but it depends on (1) what they can get for Kadri, and (2) what is really going on behind the scenes. None of us have enough information to really assess that.

And...it's possible that Kadri would mature more quickly in a different environment (more stable/mature team, think Detroit for example) than here. If he really is unprofessional in his approach, the negative impact of that on other young players might outweigh the risk that he matures and develops once traded elsewhere. Kind of like a player with a bad contract, you may have to accept less than "fair market" to trade him and free up the cap space. Only in this case, you're not freeing up cap space but removing a possible negative influence. You might have to sacrifice on the trade return but might be better off for a team of developing young players in the long term.

 

[freer]

Also, the impulse to dump Kadri because you're rebuilding and need to clear out some "culture" just feels a like setting yourself to be lamenting the reprise of the Alex Steen in a couple years.

For what it's worth, I think Kadri is twice the player Steen is, offensively at least.

Are you kidding, when has Kadri come close to 30 goals never, and never will.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Also, the impulse to dump Kadri because you're rebuilding and need to clear out some "culture" just feels a like setting yourself to be lamenting the reprise of the Alex Steen in a couple years.

For what it's worth, I think Kadri is twice the player Steen is, offensively at least.

Are you kidding, when has Kadri come close to 30 goals never, and never will.

Just to remove that silly reasoning, new argument is that Kulemin is twice the player Steen is, offensively at least.

 

[mr grieves]

It's just fundamentally true that this decision is being made with more information than what we have. That doesn't mean it's the right one, just that our criticisms of it are being made while largely in the dark.

Except I haven't criticized the decision. Only this tendency to make the vacuum created by the asymmetry of knowledge a place to project their darkest thoughts about Kadri or greatest resentments about the team's run of futility. My point is that whatever it is we don't know mightn't actually be related to what we care about -- watching a good hockey team -- so all we can do is evaluate what we see. That Kadri-- good, gritty, skilled, competitive Ontario boy, eh?

 

[Coco-puffs]

Also, the impulse to dump Kadri because you're rebuilding and need to clear out some "culture" just feels a like setting yourself to be lamenting the reprise of the Alex Steen in a couple years.

For what it's worth, I think Kadri is twice the player Steen is, offensively at least.

Are you kidding, when has Kadri come close to 30 goals never, and never will.

2012-2013 (lockout shortened season) He was on pace for a 30 goals. Not saying he ever will (especially if he doesn't improve his professionalism), but he has the talent to do it.

 

[sampson]

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=62760

Look at Steen's early numbers. Similar

 

[mr grieves]

Also, the impulse to dump Kadri because you're rebuilding and need to clear out some "culture" just feels a like setting yourself to be lamenting the reprise of the Alex Steen in a couple years.

Maybe...but it depends on (1) what they can get for Kadri, and (2) what is really going on behind the scenes. None of us have enough information to really assess that.

And...it's possible that Kadri would mature more quickly in a different environment (more stable/mature team, think Detroit for example) than here. If he really is unprofessional in his approach, the negative impact of that on other young players might outweigh the risk that he matures and develops once traded elsewhere. Kind of like a player with a bad contract, you may have to accept less than "fair market" to trade him and free up the cap space. Only in this case, you're not freeing up cap space but removing a possible negative influence. You might have to sacrifice on the trade return but might be better off for a team of developing young players in the long term.

I'm less concerned about "possible negative influences" than actual negative influences on the team's chances at being successful -- not having enough good hockey players. Did Lee Stepniack bring a greater maturity to Toronto? Did it matter in the least?

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=62760

Look at Steen's early numbers. Similar

Yep.  So Kadri's first real season was the shortened one when he was 22.

Kadri's first 3 seasons PPG: 0.92, 0.64, 0.56

Steen PPG from age 22 on: 0.43, 0.55, 0.35, 0.35 (traded), 0.69, 0.71, 0.65, 0.68, 0.91, 0.84

Obviously that is without a lot of context.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Also, the impulse to dump Kadri because you're rebuilding and need to clear out some "culture" just feels a like setting yourself to be lamenting the reprise of the Alex Steen in a couple years.

Maybe...but it depends on (1) what they can get for Kadri, and (2) what is really going on behind the scenes. None of us have enough information to really assess that.

And...it's possible that Kadri would mature more quickly in a different environment (more stable/mature team, think Detroit for example) than here. If he really is unprofessional in his approach, the negative impact of that on other young players might outweigh the risk that he matures and develops once traded elsewhere. Kind of like a player with a bad contract, you may have to accept less than "fair market" to trade him and free up the cap space. Only in this case, you're not freeing up cap space but removing a possible negative influence. You might have to sacrifice on the trade return but might be better off for a team of developing young players in the long term.

I'm less concerned about "possible negative influences" than actual negative influences on the team's chances at being successful -- not having enough good hockey players. Did Lee Stepniack bring a greater maturity to Toronto? Did it matter in the least?

It's one of those things that people always want to believe is true without a lot of evidence to back it up.  Like it's just accepted and if you are a successful team that must mean everyone is a positive influence, etc.  I don't know if it's true or not, just that nobody ever seems to bring up anything concrete to back it up other than "this team is losing + this player has issues, therefore bad influence," to simplify it.

 

[Chris]

Also, the impulse to dump Kadri because you're rebuilding and need to clear out some "culture" just feels a like setting yourself to be lamenting the reprise of the Alex Steen in a couple years.

Maybe...but it depends on (1) what they can get for Kadri, and (2) what is really going on behind the scenes. None of us have enough information to really assess that.

And...it's possible that Kadri would mature more quickly in a different environment (more stable/mature team, think Detroit for example) than here. If he really is unprofessional in his approach, the negative impact of that on other young players might outweigh the risk that he matures and develops once traded elsewhere. Kind of like a player with a bad contract, you may have to accept less than "fair market" to trade him and free up the cap space. Only in this case, you're not freeing up cap space but removing a possible negative influence. You might have to sacrifice on the trade return but might be better off for a team of developing young players in the long term.

I'm less concerned about "possible negative influences" than actual negative influences on the team's chances at being successful -- not having enough good hockey players. Did Lee Stepniack bring a greater maturity to Toronto? Did it matter in the least?

It's one of those things that people always want to believe is true without a lot of evidence to back it up.  Like it's just accepted and if you are a successful team that must mean everyone is a positive influence, etc.  I don't know if it's true or not, just that nobody ever seems to bring up anything concrete to back it up other than "this team is losing + this player has issues, therefore bad influence," to simplify it.

Admittedly difficult to quantify and again, we don't know the whole story. I'm not saying he's a problem, or that he should be traded. Just that it might be better for the team in the long term, especially if they go the full tear-down and rebuild route.

And...some teams might be better able to handle a "bad influence" or two. It depends on the makeup of the team, if there are strong leaders, etc.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Also, the impulse to dump Kadri because you're rebuilding and need to clear out some "culture" just feels a like setting yourself to be lamenting the reprise of the Alex Steen in a couple years.

Maybe...but it depends on (1) what they can get for Kadri, and (2) what is really going on behind the scenes. None of us have enough information to really assess that.

And...it's possible that Kadri would mature more quickly in a different environment (more stable/mature team, think Detroit for example) than here. If he really is unprofessional in his approach, the negative impact of that on other young players might outweigh the risk that he matures and develops once traded elsewhere. Kind of like a player with a bad contract, you may have to accept less than "fair market" to trade him and free up the cap space. Only in this case, you're not freeing up cap space but removing a possible negative influence. You might have to sacrifice on the trade return but might be better off for a team of developing young players in the long term.

I'm less concerned about "possible negative influences" than actual negative influences on the team's chances at being successful -- not having enough good hockey players. Did Lee Stepniack bring a greater maturity to Toronto? Did it matter in the least?

It's one of those things that people always want to believe is true without a lot of evidence to back it up.  Like it's just accepted and if you are a successful team that must mean everyone is a positive influence, etc.  I don't know if it's true or not, just that nobody ever seems to bring up anything concrete to back it up other than "this team is losing + this player has issues, therefore bad influence," to simplify it.

Admittedly difficult to quantify and again, we don't know the whole story. I'm not saying he's a problem, or that he should be traded. Just that it might be better for the team in the long term, especially if they go the full tear-down and rebuild route.

And...some teams might be better able to handle a "bad influence" or two. It depends on the makeup of the team, if there are strong leaders, etc.

I just don't think it's something we can accurately pass judgments on, especially when each situation is likely unique.

 

[cw]

The Leafs could get more out of Kadri if he were a true professional.  Even not getting enough sleep is letting himself, the team, and fans down.  Must be awful tempting to be partying at his age, with his money, with his notoriety.

He's 24 years old, 25 next October. I realize in some respects, that's still somewhat young but they're paying him millions to perform. Shanahan is basically saying "grow up". And the fact that they've effectively been saying this to him for years without a reliable response ... that's sad. Doesn't speak well for his character. Some talent appears to be there but it's currently not a solid character you can reliably build around. That's something this team needs.

I'm close to concluding: sign him to a short term deal and trade him before it's over so you recover something of value.

My impression is that he doesn't lack for self-confidence, and maybe has an excess of it.  Not necessarily a bad thing in an ultra-competitive environment, but if it translates into a sense of entitlement and thus to lack of work effort, you have a problem.  And in Kadri's case, it needs to be tempered by the fact that his achievements to date have been modest at best.  He's far from having proved Burke right for taking him so high.

Kadri is a puzzler.  One part of me agrees with you, but the fact that he's put in more of a consistent effort game in and game out this season (IMO) also speaks to some character solidity.  Of course, I don't know what Shanahan knows and whatever Kadri's doing that's getting him hot water is not what you want to see out of a guy that we all hoped would be a cornerstone. 

I guess for me, if the return was very very good, I'd move him.

This team isn't likely to accomplish much over the next three years so to me, I'd be looking at the long range. Is Kadri an integral part of their future? Internally, I have to wonder if they're convinced he is. He has talent but does he have the mental make up? Externally, they've said he is a key part of their future. They have to.

If I were them, what I might do, even if I intended to eventually move him: is make him the #1 center, let him rack up points and along with them, his trade value and then dump him if he's not going to work out mentally. something like that.

I might also do that for some of the others who do not appear to have a long term future - like Kessel and Phaneuf. I don't think either of those guys would return much right now. But a year or two from now, if the team is performing better, their value would be up while their contract risk lessened because it's shorter.

As this group hasn't been very generous with their efforts, I have little trouble being a little more mercenary with them and their futures. And that goes for Kadri as well.

That also gives Kadri the option to grow up and perform as an elite player in this league. It's still up to him. But if he's to remain an immature enigma, then there's nothing wrong with positioning the club to go through the motions to maximize a return on his talent.

That's a hunk of the consideration I'd be making for next year's roster - to maximize talent return - because so few of the current roster will be around by the time a rebuild makes them competitive. And we're in no gigantic rush because they're not going to be contending for a Cup anytime soon.

 

[Kin]

Except I haven't criticized the decision. Only this tendency to make the vacuum created by the asymmetry of knowledge a place to project their darkest thoughts about Kadri or greatest resentments about the team's run of futility. My point is that whatever it is we don't know mightn't actually be related to what we care about -- watching a good hockey team -- so all we can do is evaluate what we see. That Kadri-- good, gritty, skilled, competitive Ontario boy, eh?

Sure and for the record I'm not in the trade Kadri camp. But I think the people that are would look at this in a slightly bigger picture sense than simply whether or not Kadri is a good player and are looking at things that fall into your most hated of realms, hard to quantify but still real.

 

[Highlander]

Lets hope he gets it together, as he does have the potential to be a great player.
Hopefully the new coach will be able to reach him.
Even Shanaplan admitted he was off the beam at one point.

 

[Chris]

Lets hope he gets it together, as he does have the potential to be a great player.
Hopefully the new coach will be able to reach him.
Even Shanaplan admitted he was off the beam at one point.

I agree but Shanahan said he was 19 when it happened with him.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Lets hope he gets it together, as he does have the potential to be a great player.
Hopefully the new coach will be able to reach him.
Even Shanaplan admitted he was off the beam at one point.

I agree but Shanahan said he was 19 when it happened with him.

Yeah but in NEW JERSEY. Eech.  You stay younger in Toronto.  Shanahan probably lived in the suburbs with 2 kids and a minivan by then.