The Brian Burke Thread

[rdowdall]

Top 10 scorers that could be held responsible for almost as many goals against as they score are sort of just there.

Franchise/Superstar players usually play a more complete game.

While I'm not calling Kessel a franchise or superstar player, to say he's responsible for almost as many goals against as for is a slight exaggeration no?

Probably a slight exaggeration, but Jonathan Toews he is not.  I can think of several times where he didn't commit fully to stopping the oppositions offense.  One in particular against Zdeno Chara and the Bruins, where he just kind of made this flyby attempt at trying to stop him.

 

[rdowdall]

Top 10 scorers that could be held responsible for almost as many goals against as they score are sort of just there.

There's no way you can prove this.

No more than you can prove that he is a superstar or a franchise player.  I tried www.is.my.favourite.player.a.franchise.player.com, and it doesn't exist.

 

[rdowdall]

Top 10 scorers that could be held responsible for almost as many goals against as they score are sort of just there.

I challenge you to find that many goals from last season that Kessel could, by realistic standards, be held responsible for.

Kessel may not be a defensive stalwart, but, that part of his game has shown improvements and his deficiencies have been blown out of proportion.

Okay, answer me this.  The Leafs are playing a game.  Two scenarios.  One is that they are up a goal with a minute left and the other is that they are down a goal with a minute left.  Who do you want on the ice, Sundin or Kessel?

 

[bustaheims]

Okay, answer me this.  The Leafs are playing a game.  Two scenarios.  One is that they are up a goal with a minute left and the other is that they are down a goal with a minute left.  Who do you want on the ice, Sundin or Kessel?

I'm not sure what you think you're trying to prove by this. Sundin and Kessel are two completely different types of players, who play different positions and have different strengths and weaknesses. Sundin being a better defensive player than Kessel does not mean Kessel shouldn't be given the arbitrary titles of "superstar" or  "franchise player."

 

[Kin]

Okay, answer me this.  The Leafs are playing a game.  Two scenarios.  One is that they are up a goal with a minute left and the other is that they are down a goal with a minute left.  Who do you want on the ice, Sundin or Kessel?

Probably Kessel. I mean, in fairness, Sundin is 41 years old.

 

[bustaheims]

Okay, answer me this.  The Leafs are playing a game.  Two scenarios.  One is that they are up a goal with a minute left and the other is that they are down a goal with a minute left.  Who do you want on the ice, Sundin or Kessel?

Probably Kessel. I mean, in fairness, Sundin is 41 years old.

And hasn't played an NHL game in more than 3 years. Can't see him being particularly helpful.

 

[Rebel_1812]

I guess this is as good of a place to put this as any. 

2012 draft so far

Yakupov 2012-13 Nizhnekamsk Neftekhimik KHL 20 10 8 18
Galchenyuk  2012-13 Sarnia Sting OHL 28 20 29 49
Grigorenko 2012-13 Quebec Remparts QMJHL 27 25 21 46
Forsberg 2011-12 Leksands IF Swe-1 43 8 9 17

Murray 2012-13 Everett Silvertips WHL 23 2 15 17
Rielly 2012-13 Moose Jaw Warriors WHL 30 6 20 26
Dumba 2012-13 Red Deer Rebels WHL 28 6 9 15

Rielly doesn't seem like a bad pick for dman, but I can't see how so many teams passed up on Grigorenko.  He is the big skilled center teams need.

 

[rdowdall]

Okay, answer me this.  The Leafs are playing a game.  Two scenarios.  One is that they are up a goal with a minute left and the other is that they are down a goal with a minute left.  Who do you want on the ice, Sundin or Kessel?

I'm not sure what you think you're trying to prove by this. Sundin and Kessel are two completely different types of players, who play different positions and have different strengths and weaknesses. Sundin being a better defensive player than Kessel does not mean Kessel shouldn't be given the arbitrary titles of "superstar" or  "franchise player."

One in my mind obtained and deserved the mantle of being called a super star because he played in all areas of the ice and did everything that he could to win hockey games.  The other, as I have stated, is good at scoring goals, but still lacks conviction in the defensive zone.  That is all I was trying to prove from that statement. 

How many times have we seen Kessel go down the ice and miss a chance to score and then come back to the bench and put his head down in frustration?  How many times has he done it after he has been on the ice when a goal was scored against the Leafs?  I haven't seen him do it to many times in the latter situation. 

I am glad that he does get frustrated when he doesn't score because this points to a level of caring about winning or at least contributing, but I believe that he needs to show that commitment at both ends of the rink.  He reminds me a lot of Ed Olczyk.  If Eddie O didn't get a point in a game, he would sort of sulk after the game.  He needed to realize that just because he didn't contribute on the score sheet didn't mean that he couldn't have contributed in other areas of the game.

I am not saying that Kessel will never get it.  He may very well mature in to a player that understands that preventing a goal is just as important as scoring a goal, along the same lines as Steve Yzerman, but he is in no way there yet, and I think it's a reach to call him a franchise or superstar player due to his lack of defensive commitment.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Top 10 scorers that could be held responsible for almost as many goals against as they score are sort of just there.

There's no way you can prove this.

No more than you can prove that he is a superstar or a franchise player.  I tried www.is.my.favourite.player.a.franchise.player.com, and it doesn't exist.

Perhaps try using one's own cognitive functions and available statistics then?

You can prove he is a superstar by looking at things like actual statistics.  It won't be agreed on by everyone (as these things rarely are), but you can at least point to something tangible and say 'this this and this proves he is a superstar.'

You're dealing in vagueries (sp?) that you cannot hope to substantiate.  How do you determine when a player is at fault for a goal?  How do you determine that he's been at fault for almost as many goals as he's scored?  I highly doubt you've spent the time to re-watch every Leafs game involving Kessel to note down when you think he's been directly at fault for a goal.  If you have, my apologies.

So how is anyone supposed to take anything away from a general, unsubstantiated statement other than to call you out on how baseless it is?

 

[Kin]

Perhaps try using one's own cognitive functions and available statistics then?

You can prove he is a superstar by looking at things like actual statistics.  It won't be agreed on by everyone (as these things rarely are), but you can at least point to something tangible and say 'this this and this proves he is a superstar.'

No, you can't. "Super-star" is a largely meaningless term that certainly doesn't have any agreed upon definition. No matter what statistics you have you're going to be arguing about something entirely subjective.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

What I mean is you can point to something (like statistics) to make your argument that he is a superstar, not that you can point to an agreed-upon definition of the word superstar.

 

[rdowdall]

Top 10 scorers that could be held responsible for almost as many goals against as they score are sort of just there.

There's no way you can prove this.

No more than you can prove that he is a superstar or a franchise player.  I tried www.is.my.favourite.player.a.franchise.player.com, and it doesn't exist.

Perhaps try using one's own cognitive functions and available statistics then?

You can prove he is a superstar by looking at things like actual statistics.  It won't be agreed on by everyone (as these things rarely are), but you can at least point to something tangible and say 'this this and this proves he is a superstar.'

You're dealing in vagueries (sp?) that you cannot hope to substantiate.  How do you determine when a player is at fault for a goal?  How do you determine that he's been at fault for almost as many goals as he's scored?  I highly doubt you've spent the time to re-watch every Leafs game involving Kessel to note down when you think he's been directly at fault for a goal.  If you have, my apologies.

So how is anyone supposed to take anything away from a general, unsubstantiated statement other than to call you out on how baseless it is?

If you cannot determine when a player is or is not at fault for a goal as you have said in the statement "How do you determine when a player is at fault for a goal?" then you cannot throw my statement out the window either.  The inability to conclusively prove one way or another a players fault when it comes to a goal scored lends credence to my statement.  You cannot prove that he was not at fault, and therefore your opinion that he is not at fault is no more valid than mine that he is.  The opinion that he is a superstar or a franchise player is just as subjective as my opinion that he can do more in his own end.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Hey I know, let's have this debate in 2 months..then 2 months after that...then 2 months after that...

This has been spun into the ground. Some think Kessel is better than he is. Some think Kessel is worse than he is...I think it will be better when you all come to realize he's exactly what I think he is as I'm generally correct in assessing talent

 

[rdowdall]

Hey I know, let's have this debate in 2 months..then 2 months after that...then 2 months after that...

This has been spun into the ground. Some think Kessel is better than he is. Some think Kessel is worse than he is...I think it will be better when you all come to realize he's exactly what I think he is as I'm generally correct in assessing talent

Nice.  If you could put up a website that would greatly help us out .

Part of the reasons these discussions exist though is the varying opinions on a players talent level.  While the lockout is on, I suppose it makes for a good diversion. 

 

[drummond]

I guess this is as good of a place to put this as any. 

2012 draft so far

Yakupov 2012-13 Nizhnekamsk Neftekhimik KHL 20 10 8 18
Galchenyuk  2012-13 Sarnia Sting OHL 28 20 29 49
Grigorenko 2012-13 Quebec Remparts QMJHL 27 25 21 46
Forsberg 2011-12 Leksands IF Swe-1 43 8 9 17

Murray 2012-13 Everett Silvertips WHL 23 2 15 17
Rielly 2012-13 Moose Jaw Warriors WHL 30 6 20 26
Dumba 2012-13 Red Deer Rebels WHL 28 6 9 15

Rielly doesn't seem like a bad pick for dman, but I can't see how so many teams passed up on Grigorenko.  He is the big skilled center teams need.

Russian factor aka attitude issues... simple as that. This must have outweighted all the signs of the apparent skill and talent.

 

[Bullfrog]

After everything I had read, I was really hoping they would select Grigorenko. Knew he was going to still be available. They took Rielly, so they weren't afraid of taking a chance (injury.) I'm really happy for the Rielly pick, but really wanted Galchenyuk or Grigorenko.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Hey I know, let's have this debate in 2 months..then 2 months after that...then 2 months after that...

This has been spun into the ground. Some think Kessel is better than he is. Some think Kessel is worse than he is...I think it will be better when you all come to realize he's exactly what I think he is as I'm generally correct in assessing talent

Nice.  If you could put up a website that would greatly help us out .

Part of the reasons these discussions exist though is the varying opinions on a players talent level.  While the lockout is on, I suppose it makes for a good diversion.

Website is located here:

www.whatdoesOldTimeHockeyThink.com  Feel free to link this on your websites.














I know why the discussion happens. I just think we're spinning in circles. Some are overexagerrating how great he is. Others are exagerrating how poor he is defensively.

He's a sniper with above average hockey skills that continues to work on his defensive game I think is the best way to describe him.

 

[rdowdall]

Hey I know, let's have this debate in 2 months..then 2 months after that...then 2 months after that...

This has been spun into the ground. Some think Kessel is better than he is. Some think Kessel is worse than he is...I think it will be better when you all come to realize he's exactly what I think he is as I'm generally correct in assessing talent

Nice.  If you could put up a website that would greatly help us out .

Part of the reasons these discussions exist though is the varying opinions on a players talent level.  While the lockout is on, I suppose it makes for a good diversion.

Website is located here:

www.whatdoesOldTimeHockeyThink.com  Feel free to link this on your websites.














I know why the discussion happens. I just think we're spinning in circles. Some are overexagerrating how great he is. Others are exagerrating how poor he is defensively.

He's a sniper with above average hockey skills that continues to work on his defensive game I think is the best way to describe him.

Alright, I will agree with that statement.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

See, wasn't it easier to just agree with me  ;D

 

[Corn Flake]

Rielly doesn't seem like a bad pick for dman, but I can't see how so many teams passed up on Grigorenko.  He is the big skilled center teams need.

Russian factor aka attitude issues... simple as that. This must have outweighted all the signs of the apparent skill and talent.

If Grigorenko was in any other league than the Q I think his shortcomings would be a lot more obvious. When this guy gets to the AHL I think it will shine through.

IMO (and in other's opinions as well) - the problem with evaluating talent from the Q is how those players will react to more defensive and physical players in higher leagues.  The Q is pretty much a wacky, offensive pond hockey league with turnovers galore all game long.  Great for offensive players, not great for defense.