130 replies to this topic

[PuQ]

In all honesty, I did not predict them to finish 2nd last either. But I do not get paid the big bucks to make those kind of decisions, :-). Maybe if I did, I would have considered that Seguin and Hall were in that years draft. Its a risk that did not pay off for us and maybe one I would not of taken, but what the hell do I know, :-).

Strange though that you thought they were a much better team and you still supported Wilson through this?

Not sure where you get that I think they were a much better team when what I actually said was...

"My guess had them finishing in a similar place to where they finished one season before that one. (Give or take 2 places,"

And also I never said I supported Wilson, I always just shot down fabrications about him.

Again this is the type of stuff that causes alot of the arguements around here that cause the mods to step in.

You read what I say then disreguard it and make up my arguement for me

[Early90sLeafs]

That list is only number picks though. Mankin, doughty, toews, Seguin, heatley, duchene, etc... We're all picked with early picks in that time frame. Yu don't needed the #1 pick. You need a bunch of early picks, good scouting and some luck.

You what's harder to do? Convince the ducks to trade you getzlaf, and more so if you a re not willing to move your top young players for him

Look at the number 2 picks in those years as well, for example. Heatley, Spezza, Seguin, Malkin, Doughty, Heatley, E Staal, Toews. I am not trying to be picky here, but its not just the 1st overall pick.

I realize that a franchise player can be grabbed at number two, or even at number 30. I am guilty of oversimplifying, to be sure. But at the number two spot, the odds of getting that player drop, then they drop much further at 3, 4, etc.

I'm saying you could tank 5 years, and lose the lotteries, and finish those years with picks at, say, 4, 5, 3, 6, 4 or something. Even with the current rebuild (and I call it that because only something like 3 players remain from before Burke's arrival), we've had a number 5 pick.

So yes, with a first or second pick, there's a DECENT chance of a franchise player, but not a great chance. But then to get lucky and get one of those picks is also a risk. And beyond that, we could get a franchise player through good drafting without such a high pick. So I DO agree that this method is better, I just don't know if the disparity is as great as it seems at first glance.

In a perfect world, we maybe would have finished last one year, grabbed the first overall picked, and drafted our next superstar. But it's also pretty likely that it wouldn't have happened. I mean, we've tanked almost every year anyway and still don't have one. We would have gotten Seguin, but I'm not convinced he's a franchise player anyway...

[sluggo]

I realize that a franchise player can be grabbed at number two, or even at number 30. I am guilty of oversimplifying, to be sure. But at the number two spot, the odds of getting that player drop, then they drop much further at 3, 4, etc.

I'm saying you could tank 5 years, and lose the lotteries, and finish those years with picks at, say, 4, 5, 3, 6, 4 or something. Even with the current rebuild (and I call it that because only something like 3 players remain from before Burke's arrival), we've had a number 5 pick.

So yes, with a first or second pick, there's a DECENT chance of a franchise player, but not a great chance. But then to get lucky and get one of those picks is also a risk. And beyond that, we could get a franchise player through good drafting without such a high pick. So I DO agree that this method is better, I just don't know if the disparity is as great as it seems at first glance.

In a perfect world, we maybe would have finished last one year, grabbed the first overall picked, and drafted our next superstar. But it's also pretty likely that it wouldn't have happened. I mean, we've tanked almost every year anyway and still don't have one. We would have gotten Seguin, but I'm not convinced he's a franchise player anyway...

You could absolutly tank for 5 years and not get a franchise guy. As i said, it took the Hawks 4 years to get 2 guys. But what chance do you have of getting Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, Stamkos, Doughty, etc... without tanking and getting those early picks?

They've tanked for 4 years and not gotten that player because of Burkes impatince. Signing Gerber and trading 2 picks kinda screwed that up.

[Early90sLeafs]

You could absolutly tank for 5 years and not get a franchise guy. As i said, it took the Hawks 4 years to get 2 guys. But what chance do you have of getting Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, Stamkos, Doughty, etc... without tanking and getting those early picks?

They've tanked for 4 years and not gotten that player because of Burkes impatince. Signing Gerber and trading 2 picks kinda screwed that up.

I definitely agree. I just seem to have gone about a long-winded way of saying that I prefer attempting to draft a franchise player, but that it has its risks as well. Currently we have a good prospect pool, as we would if we had done a traditional rebuild, but we don't have the franchise player we could have picked. But then we may not have gotten one anyway. So the odds of succeeding were better going that route, but we have done pretty well considering we went a different, and may have not been much better off anyway.

Foregoing the draft, we could be a lot worse off. We could be an aging team with little to no prospects who tried to make the playoffs the last 4 years at the risk of our youth, instead of also nurturing a young core.

[jockdent]

I realize that a franchise player can be grabbed at number two, or even at number 30. I am guilty of oversimplifying, to be sure. But at the number two spot, the odds of getting that player drop, then they drop much further at 3, 4, etc.

I'm saying you could tank 5 years, and lose the lotteries, and finish those years with picks at, say, 4, 5, 3, 6, 4 or something. Even with the current rebuild (and I call it that because only something like 3 players remain from before Burke's arrival), we've had a number 5 pick.

So yes, with a first or second pick, there's a DECENT chance of a franchise player, but not a great chance. But then to get lucky and get one of those picks is also a risk. And beyond that, we could get a franchise player through good drafting without such a high pick. So I DO agree that this method is better, I just don't know if the disparity is as great as it seems at first glance.

In a perfect world, we maybe would have finished last one year, grabbed the first overall picked, and drafted our next superstar. But it's also pretty likely that it wouldn't have happened. I mean, we've tanked almost every year anyway and still don't have one. We would have gotten Seguin, but I'm not convinced he's a franchise player anyway...

Nothing is a sure thing; remember Daigle?

But I'd still rather do it like the Oilers.

Burke is trying to hit a homerun; but he;s batting with his eyes closed.

Sorry Burkie, only Mr. Miyagi can do that.

[Early90sLeafs]

Nothing is a sure thing; remember Daigle?

But I'd still rather do it like the Oilers.

Burke is trying to hit a homerun; but he;s batting with his eyes closed.

Sorry Burkie, only Mr. Miyagi can do that.

I agree entirely. I think I'm just not as pessimistic of the results we have achieved by going a different way. I still wish we had played the Oilers' game, but I think considering we didn't I am thankful that we are where we are and not somewhere much worse, because it could have been much more disastrous than it has been.

[sluggo]

I agree entirely. I think I'm just not as pessimistic of the results we have achieved by going a different way. I still wish we had played the Oilers' game, but I think considering we didn't I am thankful that we are where we are and not somewhere much worse, because it could have been much more disastrous than it has been.

Given the kind additions and changes Burke will most likely be able to make, this season might be worse. Unless he can pull off something just......mind blowing, my fear will be that he improves just enought o finish 9th.

[sluggo]

I definitely agree. I just seem to have gone about a long-winded way of saying that I prefer attempting to draft a franchise player, but that it has its risks as well. Currently we have a good prospect pool, as we would if we had done a traditional rebuild, but we don't have the franchise player we could have picked. But then we may not have gotten one anyway. So the odds of succeeding were better going that route, but we have done pretty well considering we went a different, and may have not been much better off anyway.

Foregoing the draft, we could be a lot worse off. We could be an aging team with little to no prospects who tried to make the playoffs the last 4 years at the risk of our youth, instead of also nurturing a young core.

The core isn't that young, they all prime aged guys who aren't going to improve. If your team isn't good enough, whats teh difference if they are 25 or 35? Not good enough is not good enough.

Nothing is a sure thing; remember Daigle?

But I'd still rather do it like the Oilers.

Burke is trying to hit a homerun; but he;s batting with his eyes closed.

Sorry Burkie, only Mr. Miyagi can do that.

I wouldn't say he is batting with his eyes closed, he knows excatly what he is doing. He is swining at everything, trying to hit the home run rather then work the count.

[jockdent]

The core isn't that young, they all prime aged guys who aren't going to improve. If your team isn't good enough, whats teh difference if they are 25 or 35? Not good enough is not good enough.



I wouldn't say he is batting with his eyes closed, he knows excatly what he is doing. He is swining at everything, trying to hit the home run rather then work the count.

Sluggs, you're right.

That is a more accurate description of what Burke is doing!

[Early90sLeafs]

The core isn't that young, they all prime aged guys who aren't going to improve. If your team isn't good enough, whats teh difference if they are 25 or 35? Not good enough is not good enough.



I wouldn't say he is batting with his eyes closed, he knows excatly what he is doing. He is swining at everything, trying to hit the home run rather then work the count.

The Leafs finishing 9th is always a distinct possibility, unfortunately...

Still, I think our team is pretty young, so not good enough doesn't mean only not good enough. With youth comes potential, and I do see some potential here.

Also, I know you hate Kessel, but he is really good. He doesn't have the presence or attitude to make him one of my favourite players, but he is the perfect complimentary winger to a franchise centre, and he is very young. If, and I know it's a big if, but if we can get that franchise centre, I think the core suddenly looks pretty good.

I'm hopeful that a new coaching strategy can solidify what has the potential to be a good defensive core. Along with that, we will have to see. I'm not saying we might not be awful next year, but I think there's also a chance things don't work out so poorly. We need to see what trades and free agent signings Burke makes before the new season though...

In any case, I'm curious. Let's say we land a good first line centre, maybe 1 to 2 character, gritty players to fill out the bottom 6, and Carlyle drastically improves our defense. What sort of potential do you see for the Leafs? (I realize this scenario may very well not happen, but just for the sake of conversation, I'm curious to know what you would think of the team then).

[jockdent]

The Leafs finishing 9th is always a distinct possibility, unfortunately...

Still, I think our team is pretty young, so not good enough doesn't mean only not good enough. With youth comes potential, and I do see some potential here.

Also, I know you hate Kessel, but he is really good. He doesn't have the presence or attitude to make him one of my favourite players, but he is the perfect complimentary winger to a franchise centre, and he is very young. If, and I know it's a big if, but if we can get that franchise centre, I think the core suddenly looks pretty good.

I'm hopeful that a new coaching strategy can solidify what has the potential to be a good defensive core. Along with that, we will have to see. I'm not saying we might not be awful next year, but I think there's also a chance things don't work out so poorly. We need to see what trades and free agent signings Burke makes before the new season though...

In any case, I'm curious. Let's say we land a good first line centre, maybe 1 to 2 character, gritty players to fill out the bottom 6, and Carlyle drastically improves our defense. What sort of potential do you see for the Leafs? (I realize this scenario may very well not happen, but just for the sake of conversation, I'm curious to know what you would think of the team then).

I've never liked the terminology, top 6, bottom 6.

I think you need toughness and grit on every line; otherwise the opposition takes advantage of you.