Disagree of course. Give that Clarkson contract a few years and you'll be singing a different tune about Nonis. Also, aren't you one of the Bozak haters? You must be loving the fact he's here another 5 years as our #1 center.
Speculation: Real reason why Burke was fired (MOD #28)
- Thread starter mcleex
- Start date
Disagree of course. Give that Clarkson contract a few years and you'll be singing a different tune about Nonis. Also, aren't you one of the Bozak haters? You must be loving the fact he's here another 5 years as our #1 center.
The richest team in the league finishes 7th last, 2nd last, 9th last, and 5th last... twice without their first round ****ING PICKSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! under Burke... and people are making lame excuses for why he was fired.
It's inexcusable.
It's some of the most shameful human behaviour I've ever encountered.
It's inexcusable.
It's some of the most shameful human behaviour I've ever encountered.
If you're going to put it on Nonis for extending him, please credit Nonis with extending the rest.
I do. You have me mistaken for someone who doesn't like Nonis. I liked both.
therealkoho
Him/Leaf/fan
please post more I'm on the edge of my seat
yes because he started with an all-star team in toronto
jeebus man give it a rest
Unfortunately non of the things you listed made a difference. Everyone makes mistakes.
He took a loser team that had top centers of John Mitchell and Matt Stajan and his team made the playoffs and was actually competitive against the best team in the East.
That's mighty interesting crystal-ball analysis.
I personally know from my extensive experience hallucinating on mushrooms that Bernier is A-M-A-Z-I-N-G in the playoffs, having such a huge body of work to base a statement like that on.
Let me see... ah yes, according to TSN, he has a 0.00 GAA and a 1.000 S%
With numbers like that, surely the kid will be a license to print money. Money in the form of Stanley Cups.
(Psst. Let's ignore that he's only played once in the NHL playoffs and that was in relief for Quick, where he faced a mere 9 shots.)
While I personally really like Burke as a GM, and think the Leafs are better for him having been here, unfortunately DO's comments are a legit argument.
The cold hard truth on Burke is that he over-estimated the team's talent levels, ESPECIALLY with Vesa Toskala/Jonas Gustavsson.
However, I don't believe that Burke would've done things differently even had he known that those picks would be 2nd and 10th OA.
Kessel is world-class, and both teams got fairly rewarded in the trade.
Despite the legitimacy of Burke over-valuing his roster when he took over, the overall body of work was very, very good.
If the Leafs had had a conservative GM, like Chevaldayoff for example, and gone the build-slowly-through-the-draft route, the Leafs would very likely still have Stajan, White, and Beauchemin. No Phaneuf, no Kessel, no Lupul, no Franson, no Gardiner...
They'd quite possibly have Seguin, assuming that without Kessel they'd have been equally as bad (which there's no guarantee, but since Kessel should be better than no Kessel we will assume the Leafs would have Seguin).
IMO that hypothetical Leafs team is drastically worse than what is currently at hand.
Fortunately Nonis is still in play and he's basically an extension of Burke, with marginally more conservative evaluations, so I think the Leafs got what they needed and are moving forward.
But Burke is still probably one of the best modern GMs in (or out of) the NHL.
hotpaws
Registered User
- Nov 21, 2009
- 22,031
- 6,640
No one knows what a different GM would have done , he may have been better , he may have been worse . Also , whoever we had would have made different moves so while we may not have had a Beau to deal for Lupes/Gards we may have acquired someone else or drafted better than Burke did .
I do however disagree with you point about the Kessel trade . That deal cost us the 2nd and 9th as well as a 2nd and 3rd to reaquire our own 2nd . No sane GM would have made that move had they known we would have bottom fed for the next 3 years after that trade .
Well that's interestingly speculative.
You're assuming too much in that statement.
What if (and this is pretty likely), were never better in the standings WITHOUT Kessel than WITH Kessel.
If you contemplate that very realistic scenario, then the Leafs would have been bottom-feeders regardless of the Kessel trade.
Therefore, if you knew the potential outcomes one way or the other, then you could make a decision on which you would rather have for your team:
WITH BURKEPhil Kessel
WITHOUT BURKETyler Seguin
Dougie Hamilton
Brandon Saad
Michael Paliotta
Note that Jared Knight is omitted from the list because if the Leafs were not intending on making an offer sheet, they didn't need to trade their 2nd 2011 and 3rd 2011 for their own 2nd 2010 back from Chicago.
So that's all it is, a matter of personal preference.
Now while I admit, the "without Burke" group does look mighty tantalizing, Seguin was dumped from the Bruins for being a bad personality in the relatively modest media spotlight of Beantown.
It's no coincidence the team that traded for him is in media obscurity, where a player of his demeanour can flourish with the attention of the media. Does that strike you as someone that would excel in Toronto?
And is Brandon Saad really a legit NHLer on a team like Toronto, or does he benefit from playing with a SCC roster? Would he play as well on the Leafs?
So I maintain my position, I do believe that had Burke been given the forecast of the future, his decision would not have changed.
He'd want Kessel.
Further to the above, without Burke you'd also be giving up Phaneuf, Gardiner, Franson, Lupul, McClement, Clarkson, MacArthur, etc.
And probably Kadri too, since the Leafs grabbed him out of position.
And probably Kadri too, since the Leafs grabbed him out of position.
hotpaws
Registered User
- Nov 21, 2009
- 22,031
- 6,640
Well that's interestingly speculative.
You're assuming too much in that statement.
What if (and this is pretty likely), were never better in the standings WITHOUT Kessel than WITH Kessel.
If you contemplate that very realistic scenario, then the Leafs would have been bottom-feeders regardless of the Kessel trade.
Therefore, if you knew the potential outcomes one way or the other, then you could make a decision on which you would rather have for your team:
Phil Kessel
Tyler Seguin
Dougie Hamilton
Brandon Saad
Michael Paliotta
Note that Jared Knight is omitted from the list because if the Leafs were not intending on making an offer sheet, they didn't need to trade their 2nd 2011 and 3rd 2011 for their own 2nd 2010 back from Chicago.
So that's all it is, a matter of personal preference.
Now while I admit, the "without Burke" group does look mighty tantalizing, Seguin was dumped from the Bruins for being a bad personality in the relatively modest media spotlight of Beantown.
It's no coincidence the team that traded for him is in media obscurity, where a player of his demeanour can flourish with the attention of the media. Does that strike you as someone that would excel in Toronto?
And is Brandon Saad really a legit NHLer on a team like Toronto, or does he benefit from playing with a SCC roster? Would he play as well on the Leafs?
So I maintain my position, I do believe that had Burke been given the forecast of the future, his decision would not have changed.
He'd want Kessel.
It may be a matter of preference but most GM's don't view a scoring winger as the foundation of a team . A great piece to have yes but I've never heard a GM say he believes in building his team from the wingers in .
Seguin would have developed here as well as in any market . Do you actually think our player all run home after every game ? My son ended up partying at some vip club with 3 leafs last summer ( one of them was seeing a friends of his from high school ) and all of them were toasted . Our media for the most part leaves the players personal lives out of it .
We could play the what if game all night but the truth is any GM would have made moves , they wouldn't have been the same as Burkes but no one knows if we'd be better or worse off .
Last edited:
Those critical of Burke aren't saying he should have been replaced by nobody... there would have been another GM on the team with the most financial advantages and highest paid scouting department and front office making 5 years of trades/signings.
It's pretty easy to acquire some good players given 5 years to work with, having FOUR top 10 picks (2 top 5) as assets, and the most financial advantages in the league.
This argument will always come down to the same two groups. Those that correctly acknowledge the leafs DRAMATIC financial advantages over a substantial amount of the competition... and those that deny it with lame rationalizations.
I can think of another player that Boston "dumped" at the ripe old age of 21...
but i suppose lame excuses will be made when discussing HIM being dumped by Boston.
I just think that MLSE didn't want a GM becoming the brand for the Leafs, they just wanted someone more corporate and buttoned up like Nonis did.
Interesting that in one thread you can parrot this nonsense and in another claim that overpaying Clarkson by about 1 million is a colossal disaster.
...only you can take both sides of an argument and be wrong both times...
It's pretty simple...
The Clarkson contract isn't the leafs using their financial advantage...
it's the leafs WASTING their financial advantage.
MildlyAwesome
Rational Leaf Fan
It's pretty obvious that it was Rogers not liking his personality. Which is shame since Burke was doing fantastic in the community.
Rogers likes to be in control. Burke was a loose cannon. They figured they'd take the quiet reserved Nonis instead of the all fired up Burke. Terrible decision by Rogers.
Rogers likes to be in control. Burke was a loose cannon. They figured they'd take the quiet reserved Nonis instead of the all fired up Burke. Terrible decision by Rogers.
He was fired because he was a loud abrasive jerk who liked to fight with the media...which just happens to be the business of the new ownership. The losing team gave said ownership the opportunity to make the move. You think Burke would have been fired if the team had been winning? Of course not, it would have been absurd. They would have had to simply put up with it.
It didn't made sense to fire Burke and leave the entire rest of the operation intact, and then to extend Nonis when they didn't have to, if the problem as they saw it was Burke's hockey or hiring decisions.
So that just reinforces the notion that this was about a simple personality conflict. Ownership obviously prefers the low-key non confrontational and frankly more congenial style of people like Nonis, Claude Loiselle et al.
It didn't made sense to fire Burke and leave the entire rest of the operation intact, and then to extend Nonis when they didn't have to, if the problem as they saw it was Burke's hockey or hiring decisions.
So that just reinforces the notion that this was about a simple personality conflict. Ownership obviously prefers the low-key non confrontational and frankly more congenial style of people like Nonis, Claude Loiselle et al.
Derek Synak
Registered User
Burke did great with trades and good with drafting, FA's were a bust and they usually are for anyone who signs them.
It was clearly a personality issue, he did very good things for this team.
It was clearly a personality issue, he did very good things for this team.
That's the most shameful human behavior you've encountered?
It's times when people like you come out on this board you know its time to take a break.I agree with you!!! We had some really awesome assets to trade to kick start a super fast rebuild. And we should have been signing the best FA's to more money then they were asking for to make sure we got them. We can afford paying luxury taxes!!!
Oh wait, it's a hard cap. Never mind, just ignore my post.
