Of Nonis, Babcock & who the heck is going to be running this asylum on draft day

[Kin]

I don't think we can definitively say who will or won't be ready next year until next year comes around.

 

[Bullfrog]

Further to that point, they still have to ice a team next year, and while you can go out and sign a bunch of scrubs to play, you don't necessarily want to expose your young players to that losing environment.

It's going to be a losing environment for awhile though. That's the nature of a rebuild.

 

[Kin]

Further to that point, they still have to ice a team next year, and while you can go out and sign a bunch of scrubs to play, you don't necessarily want to expose your young players to that losing environment.

It's going to be a losing environment for awhile though. That's the nature of a rebuild.

And I've said this before but I don't buy that a losing environment in and of itself is a bad thing. I think it's different if the team makes decisions for the express purpose of losing but simply not being good enough isn't a terrible thing so long as there are good coaches around and progress being made.

 

[bustaheims]

Further to that point, they still have to ice a team next year, and while you can go out and sign a bunch of scrubs to play, you don't necessarily want to expose your young players to that losing environment.

Well, the point of signing the Winniks and Santorellis in the summer is so a lot of the young players don't spend significant time with the team. I also don't believe the argument that a losing environment is harmful. As long as the team's leadership and coaching are capable of instilling the right values and attitudes, the wins and losses aren't super meaningful to a player's development.

 

[Bullfrog]

Further to that point, they still have to ice a team next year, and while you can go out and sign a bunch of scrubs to play, you don't necessarily want to expose your young players to that losing environment.

It's going to be a losing environment for awhile though. That's the nature of a rebuild.

And I've said this before but I don't buy that a losing environment in and of itself is a bad thing. I think it's different if the team makes decisions for the express purpose of losing but simply not being good enough isn't a terrible thing so long as there are good coaches around and progress being made.

Agreed. While I think there is something to be said about organizational and team culture, being on a losing team (due to talent) shouldn't be damaging to an extremely motivated professional athlete. Frustrating maybe, but not damaging.

 

[Frank E]

So....how come we don't have a good list of GMs that we can all cut to shreads?

Is it still speculated that Babcock wants both hats?

 

[Kin]

So....how come we don't have a good list of GMs that we can all cut to shreads?

Is it still speculated that Babcock wants both hats?

I think it's more to do with the general perception that whoever ends up with the GM title will still ultimately be secondary to Shanahan and, as a result, the big name candidates won't be super interested in the job.

 

[cw]

Further to that point, they still have to ice a team next year, and while you can go out and sign a bunch of scrubs to play, you don't necessarily want to expose your young players to that losing environment.

Well, the point of signing the Winniks and Santorellis in the summer is so a lot of the young players don't spend significant time with the team. I also don't believe the argument that a losing environment is harmful. As long as the team's leadership and coaching are capable of instilling the right values and attitudes, the wins and losses aren't super meaningful to a player's development.

That's the one thing I'm concerned with with the existing roster. I question whether those who threw in the towel this season should be around the young guys next year. I'd take less in talent return to get rid of them.

Just cut their losses and move on with a truly fresh start towards developing a winning young core.

 

[Arn]

Can we have the word "Shanaplan" blocked by the swear filters or something please?

 

[Kin]

Can we have the word "Shanaplan" blocked by the swear filters or something please?

Seconded.

 

[Bender]

Can we have the word "Shanaplan" blocked by the swear filters or something please?

So you want the term Shanaplan to be Shanabanned?

 

[rdowdall]

Can we have the word "Shanaplan" blocked by the swear filters or something please?

So you want the term Shanaplan to be Shanabanned?

Oldie but goodie:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jq2AwjNHGbM

 

[rdowdall]

Further to that point, they still have to ice a team next year, and while you can go out and sign a bunch of scrubs to play, you don't necessarily want to expose your young players to that losing environment.

Well, the point of signing the Winniks and Santorellis in the summer is so a lot of the young players don't spend significant time with the team. I also don't believe the argument that a losing environment is harmful. As long as the team's leadership and coaching are capable of instilling the right values and attitudes, the wins and losses aren't super meaningful to a player's development.

I think in an environment like Toronto, losing can cause problems.  I think the media and fan pressure mounts causing confidence issues with the best of players.  The only guy I can think of that weathered it well in recent history was Sundin, and he was 25, 26 when it started to fall on his shoulders.  I don't think Phanuef has handled it well, and I don't like the chances of a 18 or 19 year old coming in and handling it well either.  Not saying that it couldn't happen, but I don't like their chances.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Further to that point, they still have to ice a team next year, and while you can go out and sign a bunch of scrubs to play, you don't necessarily want to expose your young players to that losing environment.

Well, the point of signing the Winniks and Santorellis in the summer is so a lot of the young players don't spend significant time with the team. I also don't believe the argument that a losing environment is harmful. As long as the team's leadership and coaching are capable of instilling the right values and attitudes, the wins and losses aren't super meaningful to a player's development.

I think in an environment like Toronto, losing can cause problems.  I think the media and fan pressure mounts causing confidence issues with the best of players.  The only guy I can think of that weathered it well in recent history was Sundin, and he was 25, 26 when it started to fall on his shoulders.  I don't think Phanuef has handled it well, and I don't like the chances of a 18 or 19 year old coming in and handling it well either.  Not saying that it couldn't happen, but I don't like their chances.

Very young players have never really fared well in Toronto throughout Leafs history.  Sundin, as you mentioned, was obviously quite different.  Mats had so much talent, so much confidence that he was virtually unstoppable on that ice.

I remember reading about a quote from former Maple Leaf forward Steve Sullivan (who was eventually traded to the Nashville Predators), when he said "I don't know how Mats does it (did it), I don't know how he can even think in that environment"... or something like that.  He was referring to the pressures of playing in Toronto, what with all the scrutiny that follows you, etc., as compared to playing in Nashville or elsewhere.

 

[bustaheims]

I think in an environment like Toronto, losing can cause problems.  I think the media and fan pressure mounts causing confidence issues with the best of players.  The only guy I can think of that weathered it well in recent history was Sundin, and he was 25, 26 when it started to fall on his shoulders.  I don't think Phanuef has handled it well, and I don't like the chances of a 18 or 19 year old coming in and handling it well either.  Not saying that it couldn't happen, but I don't like their chances.

Only when there's actually expectations of success - which there won't be for a few seasons. Truthfully, this is something the Leafs have never really gone through. They've never really truly attempted to rebuild patiently through the draft. This is virgin territory for the media here and the fan base. Basically everyone in the history of the team either had expectations of success laid upon them, or, it was the 80s and there was already fairly poisonous atmosphere around the team - and, for the record, a number of young players weathered the storm in the 80s pretty well because there were no expectations. Clark, Damphousse, Iafrate, Courtnall, etc, all developed into very good players and had pretty solid careers despite the fact the Leafs were a bad team for the entire decade.

 

[rdowdall]

I think in an environment like Toronto, losing can cause problems.  I think the media and fan pressure mounts causing confidence issues with the best of players.  The only guy I can think of that weathered it well in recent history was Sundin, and he was 25, 26 when it started to fall on his shoulders.  I don't think Phanuef has handled it well, and I don't like the chances of a 18 or 19 year old coming in and handling it well either.  Not saying that it couldn't happen, but I don't like their chances.

Only when there's actually expectations of success - which there won't be for a few seasons. Truthfully, this is something the Leafs have never really gone through. They've never really truly attempted to rebuild patiently through the draft. This is virgin territory for the media here and the fan base. Basically everyone in the history of the team either had expectations of success laid upon them, or, it was the 80s and there was already fairly poisonous atmosphere around the team - and, for the record, a number of young players weathered the storm in the 80s pretty well because there were no expectations. Clark, Damphousse, Iafrate, Courtnall, etc, all developed into very good players and had pretty solid careers despite the fact the Leafs were a bad team for the entire decade.

Yeah, but Damphouse, Iafrate and Courtnall didn't really hit their peaks until they got out of Toronto.  Was it because they left, or was it because the Leafs weren't patient, it's hard to say.  I put Clark in that special category.  He was injured a lot early on, and he really hit his stride once Gilmour got here, and that is when the culture started to change.  They brought an outside winner in, and people started to believe that it was possible.  I think people should be prepared for when Kessel leaves the Leafs and ends up tearing up the league goal scoring wise once he is in a different environment. 

I agree that this is all quite new, but look at some of the posts on this site alone about it being a fast turnaround.  In order to do this right, it can't be a fast turnaround.  It has to be built systemically, and that will take time.  I hope that it works out, but I have my doubts that the euphoria that people are feeling right now that "Yes the Leafs are going to do it the right way" is going to last through two more hellishly bad seasons.  Plus, if upper management makes a mistake, it's going to be "Here we go again" which will snowball.

Shanahan has to get these replacements for the firings that he conducted today right.  He can't make a mistake.  It is crucial that as this goes forward, the right people are put in to the proper places.  You can say that that is a given, but as we have seen from the Leafs in the past, they are bad at making these sorts of decisions, and we have no past experience with Shanahan to go on to see if he will get it right.

 

[bustaheims]

Yeah, but Damphouse, Iafrate and Courtnall didn't really hit their peaks until they got out of Toronto.  Was it because they left, or was it because the Leafs weren't patient, it's hard to say.  I put Clark in that special category.  He was injured a lot early on, and he really hit his stride once Gilmour got here, and that is when the culture started to change.  They brought an outside winner in, and people started to believe that it was possible.  I think people should be prepared for when Kessel leaves the Leafs and ends up tearing up the league goal scoring wise once he is in a different environment. 

I agree that this is all quite new, but look at some of the posts on this site alone about it being a fast turnaround.  In order to do this right, it can't be a fast turnaround.  It has to be built systemically, and that will take time.  I hope that it works out, but I have my doubts that the euphoria that people are feeling right now that "Yes the Leafs are going to do it the right way" is going to last through two more hellishly bad seasons.  Plus, if upper management makes a mistake, it's going to be "Here we go again" which will snowball.

Shanahan has to get these replacements for the firings that he conducted today right.  He can't make a mistake.  It is crucial that as this goes forward, the right people are put in to the proper places.  You can say that that is a given, but as we have seen from the Leafs in the past, they are bad at making these sorts of decisions, and we have no past experience with Shanahan to go on to see if he will get it right.

All the players mentioned had excellent years in Leaf uniforms. They may have had career seasons elsewhere, but, they developed well on a Leafs' team that was rife with losing. The point here is that a losing environment is not an issue when there are no expectations. It's an environment of failure that can cause issues, and, without any real expectations of success, that failure won't be an issue. For the next few seasons, success for the Leafs won't be measured in wins and losses, but rather in progress and development.

 

[Chev-boyar-sky]

I would really like to see what Tallon could/would do with this team.

 

[KW Sluggo]

Further to that point, they still have to ice a team next year, and while you can go out and sign a bunch of scrubs to play, you don't necessarily want to expose your young players to that losing environment.

It's going to be a losing environment for awhile though. That's the nature of a rebuild.

I have no problems with that scenario, after all t has been a losing environment for a while.

The difference now is that this is planned rebuild.

The message from these mass firings is that someone besides the fans is fed up with the losing, the lack of strategic thinking and the utter lack of accountability both off and on the ice.

We traded up to get Tyler Biggs and we pass? twice on Gallagher?

No one in the scouting staff should be safe after that.

 

[Kin]

We traded up to get Tyler Biggs and we pass? twice on Gallagher?

No one in the scouting staff should be safe after that.

Those are two different drafts. Biggs was 2011. Gallagher was taken in 2010 and technically the Leafs "passed" on him more than twice.

And should every team in the league fire their scouting staff? Because Gallagher was a 5th round pick. Hell, Montreal had two 4th round picks and passed on him with both.