Matthews or BUST
- Thread starter ZBBM
- Start date
bustaheims
Active member
Potvin29 said:
Exactly. One way or another, this will get done, and, in all honesty, it's probably not worth being concerned about until training camp gets underway. Whether he signs today or the day camp starts doesn't really change anything.
Potvin29 said:
Maybe. But I think that Shanahan has shown that he generally leaves the GM'ing to the GM. We've seen 3 pretty distinctive phases of the Leafs under his watch: when Nonis was the GM, when Dubas was the de facto-GM, and when Lou was the GM.
But yes, if this WAS the hold-up, I would really hope/think this would be where Shanny puts his foot down.
herman
Well-known member
Zee said:herman said:
Ultimately they have no requirement to share info with the public about how they do business, but it does get frustrating not knowing. You're right, it's easy to come up with millions of scenarios in your head when we constantly obsess about this stuff.
Nik the Trik said:
Who's to say the information vacuum isn't deliberately designed to generate content for ownership? ;D
There are certain aspects of Lou's media policies that I'm okay with: no in-game interviews of rookies. Lots of post-game, or off-game-day availability. Basically, he doesn't want to report to the media about things in progress, only things that have been signed off on. Doesn't change that some of his other 'laws' are a bit dated, but it worked for him in the past and they haven't fully convinced him to change them yet.
Some examples that comes to my mind of the media/fanbase going a bit crazy with the lack of information were Nylander at WJs, and Stalock's situation at the end of last season. Lots of media speculation, but none all that close to the truth where the Leafs truly did the right thing for the player in my opinion.
Zee
Active member
Nik the Trik said:
That's still a far better performance than any Leafs team in 50 years so I don't know what you're getting at. Lou's tactics might be outdated, but I can't go back and say he was bad for the Devils despite what that team currently looks like. I would have enjoyed a Leafs Cup anytime in my life let alone 3 that the Devils won.
Kin
New member
Zee said:
Well, one, that "being better than most Leafs teams" isn't really a metric we should be using and two that we're not trying to win the 2003 Stanley Cup and that tactics that may have been effective 20 or so years ago don't necessarily translate and should be judged on their own merits.
L K
Active member
I've said it before so I'm just repeating myself but for all the experience Lou brings, what got me excited about the Leafs future was Dubas/Hunter/Shanahan. I'm less thrilled with some of the things that have gone on since Lou came aboard. Not that things have been remotely bad and are certainly still in a positive direction but my enthusiasm on certain moves has certainly blunted my thought that the Leafs are ahead of the curve on all of their decision making.
Zee
Active member
L K said:
Lou brought in the credibility of his past and his culture building, but he's not the final word on all things Leafs. As it's been pointed out, Lou has 2 years left on his deal, so he might sail off into the sunset at that time and the Leafs have Dubas step in. I think that was the plan from the start, and who knows if Lou has other ideas, but at the end of the day I'm sure Shanahan drives the ship forward.
Zee
Active member
Bullfrog said:
I can't answer that, but the idea of "the team first" is what drives those decisions. I don't think there's anything wrong with telling players that the logo on the jersey and the accomplishment on the ice as a team is far more important than any 1 player. Working together as a team, you have certain rules, everyone falls in line or you're the odd man out. They're trying to make a clear distinction that everyone is treated equally, even though in reality we know that's not the case. I agree some of his rules are stupid, but I'd rather the team build up a structure and identity than every player thinking they can do or act as they see fit.
Kin
New member
Zee said:
Except you're presenting an entirely false choice there. Do you think that in the absence of these rules teams don't build structure? Do you think that a team without these rules ignores the concept of unity or team progress? Do you think there's been a front office in the history of the NHL that didn't try to stress team accomplishments?
Anyone can make up authoritarian nonsense and then try to link it to a collective value. In the absence of any actual reason behind the link though, just the act of wanting policy to translate into effective results isn't terribly persuasive.