The Brian Burke Thread

[Kin]

Simple yeah, all those Cinderella teams that always win cups.

When Carolina won the cup their two goalies had regular season SV% of .906 and .882 and it was the guy with the .882 who got hot. Their top 3 defenders were Bret Hedican, Glen Wesley and the lesser Kaberle.

Teams that aren't great go deep in the playoffs. It's just a fact. It's a by-product of parity.

I think Burke agrees, or he probably would have sold the farm today.

I know Burke calls it the Vatican of hockey but you should know that even the real Vatican did away with the notion of infallibility at the top.

 

[Bender]

Sorry to be so bleak but I've seen plenty of Leafs playoffs over the last 40 years. I'd rather pass on a playoff round to two for a better chance to win a Cup.

I agree in general and, as I've said, I don't even think making that MacArthur trade drastically reduces their chances of making the playoffs/making a run in those playoffs.

Well I probably wouldn't have stopped at MacArthur. The top end of this draft is supposed to be pretty good. If the Leafs get #15-20 from their finish and padded that with #22 and #25 to get a top 5 pick, that might get them a good shot at an elite prospect - for example.

I would probably be relentless at rolling over the roster until I got a couple of those guys. It wouldn't guarantee a Cup but it would substantially improve their chances at winning one. And all they're doing is rolling over the talent assets they have to make a bigger snowball of quality prospects down the road. It's hardly rocket science. And I don't think it would take that long - about half the time that the BS approach they've put themselves through since the lockout took.

The way it`s shaping up I doubt they would get Yakupov. The others aren`t clear cut stars. Going through the drafts from 1995-2007, I`ve noticed that in general the best players are taken first overall and the rest is, more or less, a crapshoot unless you`re in a special year like in 2003. The chances of getting a good player in the first round is better than in most, but you`re talking about a proper franchise player, which aren`t guaranteed even if you`re top 5, and even worse if you`re top 10 outside of a couple of high percentage years like in 2003 and 2006, and for every 2003 you`ve got a 2001 or 2002.

My point is to some extent you need some luck unless you`re picking 1st overall, MAYBE 2nd and 3rd as well.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

Teams have traded up in the draft for as long as the draft has existed. If you have collected excess picks and prospects, you can afford to throw enough at it to make it worth another team's while. Getting the first pick overall is likely a pipe dream but getting into the top 5-10 isn't.

Sure but as Busta is pointing out, it's becoming rare. All I'm saying is that you still have to develop your players, because I don't see many great drafts anymore and this one isn't going to be either. I just feel that the brain trust is going about things differently, as we've argued before, they are still building a team, they just aren't tanking out. I think that is where this discussion is going again.

 

[bustaheims]

Sure but as Busta is pointing out, it's becoming rare.

It's not just rare. Trading into the top 5 just doesn't happen unless you have a player one of those teams really really wants or you have a top 10 pick yourself.

 

[Kin]

The chances of getting a good player in the first round is better than in most, but you`re talking about a proper franchise player, which aren`t guaranteed even if you`re top 5, and even worse if you`re top 10 outside of a couple of high percentage years like in 2003 and 2006, and for every 2003 you`ve got a 2001 or 2002.

But as cw already said, you keep at it until you get what you want. I don't know why some people are so gung ho about saying that any change in strategy has to come with guarantees when nobody is saying that they come with any.

What we do know, what we've seen from the Maple Leafs time and again, is how not to build up a stable of elite prospects. Going with what you know doesn't work over what might does not make for a convincing argument.

 

[BlueWhiteBlood]

It's not just rare. Trading into the top 5 just doesn't happen unless you have a player one of those teams really really wants or you have a top 10 pick yourself.

I'm with you....

I think Leafs nation needs to roll one up after today and take a deep breath. Definitely inhale!

 

[Kin]

It's not just rare. Trading into the top 5 just doesn't happen unless you have a player one of those teams really really wants or you have a top 10 pick yourself.

That strikes me as a bit of a dodge because then you can just say that any case of it happening was a case of a team really wanting a particular player. Burke traded a future #1 and Bryan McCabe to Chicago to move into the top 5 in the Sedin draft and Chicago dealt McCabe the next year.

 

[crazyperfectdevil]

When Carolina won the cup their two goalies had regular season SV% of .906 and .882 and it was the guy with the .882 who got hot. Their top 3 defenders were Bret Hedican, Glen Wesley and the lesser Kaberle.

Teams that aren't great go deep in the playoffs. It's just a fact. It's a by-product of parity.

what you seem to be saying is that by virtue of making the playoffs anything could happen.  which is of course true. sports are played simply because the outcome is always in doubt. 

the thing is this could be said about all aspects of the season and not just the playoffs.  so if the leafs are just going to toss their hands up in the air and leave it to fate then why bother changing anything?  this team could make the playoffs ...at which point they could go deep ..they could even win the stanley cup.....

I tend to think though that we both agree that this is rather unlikely. 

So are you advocating that they try and change their odds of doing one thing ie. make the playoffs but assume that the latter is just a maelstrom of unpredictability? 

 

[bustaheims]

That strikes me as a bit of a dodge because then you can just say that any case of it happening was a case of a team really wanting a particular player. Burke traded a future #1 and Bryan McCabe to Chicago to move into the top 5 in the Sedin draft and Chicago dealt McCabe the next year.

That doesn't mean they didn't really want McCabe at the time and it ignores the situation surrounding the deal that brought McCabe to Toronto. And, even then, there are really only a handful of cases where picks known to be in the top 5 were dealt for players.

 

[Mack674]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hB7u7CYW1U

 

[ZBBM]

It was obvious in Burke?s deadline postmortem presser that he was operating in a buyers market, and his best trade options, value for value, involved selling off pieces and hurting the playoff goal this season (per Dreger, he could?ve collected firsts in return for MacArthur, Grabovski, Kulemin, and Schenn).

From the Brownscombe article.

This is just frustrating.  A first for Mac and he didn't bite?  For Kulemin?  Those seem like no-brainers to me -- unless you are trying to protect your buddy the coach who you gave an undeserved extension to.

If Dreger's correct Burke put loyalty to an underachieving coach ahead of the long-term good of the team.

 

[Kin]

the thing is this could be said about all aspects of the season and not just the playoffs.  so if the leafs are just going to toss their hands up in the air and leave it to fate then why bother changing anything?

I think you're missing the point. The point is that the value of getting into the playoffs is unknowable because anything can happen in the playoffs. Are you seriously asking me why then they should try to make the playoffs?

 

[Mack674]

Not just getting the picks themselves but say he managed to collect a first rounder for kulemin and macarthur each and then spun that around into another deal, what would Schenn and 2 first rounders land you?

I wish it would leak what the offer for Nash was from New York. I get the feeling Howson thinks hes worth the Moon with 40% interest.

 

[Mack674]

Edmonton crawled over the finish line into 8th place into the playoffs and wound up in the cup final. Im a firm believer that it really is anyones cup to win once the playoffs begin so yeah, if youre close to the bubble you should be going for it.

 

[Kin]

That doesn't mean they didn't really want McCabe at the time and it ignores the situation surrounding the deal that brought McCabe to Toronto.

No, it doesn't mean they didn't really want him it just means that there's no way to gauge whether a team "really, really wanted" a player or if they were just amenable to him being in the deal. McCabe wasn't a star, he was just a promising young defenseman. The Leafs have promising young defensemen to build a trade like that around.

 

[crazyperfectdevil]

the thing is this could be said about all aspects of the season and not just the playoffs.  so if the leafs are just going to toss their hands up in the air and leave it to fate then why bother changing anything?

I think you're missing the point. The point is that the value of getting into the playoffs is unknowable because anything can happen in the playoffs. Are you seriously asking me why then they should try to make the playoffs?

I'm saying that you can extend that logic to anything can happen at any point in time.  It doesn't require the magic of the playoffs.  There are teams that make the playoffs every year that weren't picked to do so.  This year Ottawa looks like one of those teams.  So I guess I don't get the point of making the distinction between the two, treating the regular season as if it's ruled by the iron fist of probability and then the playoffs as a complete crapshoot. 

So I guess in an attempt to be more clear.  I think if you're going to take the approach that the path to the cup is unknowable, which it definitely is,  that you can say the same thing about the whole year.  So a move or a lack of one now shouldn't really matter.  With that logic anyway. 

With this team or even a slightly modified version of this team  I tend to think favorable outcomes were unlikely but I admit this is only in the same way that one would look at Boston right now and think they're favored to go deep.  It doesn't mean they will it just seems like they have a lot more things in the right place to do so.

 

[bustaheims]

No, it doesn't mean they didn't really want him it just means that there's no way to gauge whether a team "really, really wanted" a player or if they were just amenable to him being in the deal. McCabe wasn't a star, he was just a promising young defenseman. The Leafs have promising young defensemen to build a trade like that around.

And maybe they get lucky and pull off one of the few trades that involve a top 5 pick without a top 10 pick. From 1985 until now, there have been 6 instances of a known top 5 pick being moved without a top 10 pick being part of the package going the other way - and one was compensation for a head coach, which, as we both know, is no longer allowed.

 

[Jalili]

Not sure why it's so unfathomable that the Leafs could move into the top 5 if they play their cards right. They have a pick that right now is located in the 10-12 range and is unlikely to fall below 15th, and it could very well find itself in the top 10 when all is said and done.

In addition they could have had at least one additional 1st to use as a chip to move up, so there is really no way of saying whether or not they could feasibly move into the top 5 range or not, had they chosen to take that route.

 

[Kin]

I'm saying that you can extend that logic to anything can happen at any point in time.  It doesn't require the magic of the playoffs.  There are teams that make the playoffs every year that weren't picked to do so.  This year Ottawa looks like one of those teams.  So I guess I don't get the point of making the distinction between the two, treating the regular season as if it's ruled by the iron fist of probability and then the playoffs as a complete crapshoot. 

Well, in what's becoming a delightful pattern with you, you're tripping your logical feet over your own hyperbole. If I'd said that the Playoffs were entirely random and the regular season had no elements of random chance then you'd be right, it'd be a logical gap. Being as I didn't say either of those things, however, I'm relatively good on that front.

All hockey games have an element of the random there. It doesn't take a math major to know that the element of unpredictability has it's greatest impact in small sample sizes. The things that aren't random are more likely to win out over the course of an 82 game season than they are in a race to 16 wins(or, more to the point, a series of 4 races to 4 wins).

But even then, so long as you acknowledge that things aren't entirely random, you still address the things that are in your control. I'd never advocate that a coach in the playoffs stop trying to make adjustments because it's all random.

 

[bustaheims]

Not sure why it's so unfathomable that the Leafs could move into the top 5 if they play their cards right. They have a pick that right now is located in the 10-12 range and is unlikely to fall below 15th, and it could very well find itself in the top 10 when all is said and done.

In addition they could have had at least one additional 1st to use as a chip to move up, so there is really no way of saying whether or not they could feasibly move into the top 5 range or not, had they chosen to take that route.

Because, historically, it doesn't tend to happen with the assets the Leafs are likely to have available to them. It's really that simple.