Toronto Maple Leafs TIDBITS & QUICK HITS!

Burke presser today at 11am...

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/04/09/brian_burke_press_conference_live/

Getcha popcorn ready.

shabbs wrote:Burke presser today at 11am...

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/2012/04/09/brian_burke_press_conference_live/

Getcha popcorn ready.

If they are truly committed to turning this around, Burke should be announcing his resignation. In olden days he would be coming to the presser with a sword to fall on.

So do you think he is resigning? Moving up (Peddie is retiring, isn't he)? Special adviser role? Or probably a new coaching staff, maybe new heads of scouting.

I fully expect Burke to blame everyone and everything apart from himself and the team for this season.

He'll go on about "the plan" but never really explain what "the plan" is...

Leaf fans should expect more of the same... lather, rinse and repeat.

The plan is to rig the lottery.

wprager wrote:The plan is to rig the lottery.

I would not be surprised... I guess we'll find out tonight.

GO JETS GO!!!

The Presser was interesting... Carlyle handled the media well and was in a good mood. Talked about getting some more veteran leadership in to support Phaneuf. He didn't bite on any of the media's prying questions.

Burke's presser started off as expected and then went off the rails when he started getting irritated and said he's more disappointed than the fans and that they could have made they playoffs in any of his 4 years through trades but doesn't believe in the "1 and done" route. Says he only wants to go into the playoffs as a champion. Says he will build through trades and not UFAs and that the team needs to get bigger and tougher to play Carlyle's style of game. He still believes in Reimer and came just short of blaming Gionta for all of the Leafs issues in net due to his hit on Reimer.

I can't see the Leaf fans being too pleased with what they heard today.

#delicious

I missed the P/C but apparently Burke said something like "Pittsburgh model, my Donkey". I guess he isn't a believer in drafting 4 top 2 players then winning a cup?

To be fair, Pittsburgh kinda lucked into one important draftee.

Riprock wrote:I missed the P/C but apparently Burke said something like "Pittsburgh model, my Donkey". I guess he isn't a believer in drafting 4 top 2 players then winning a cup?

Like everyone has said to you numerous times before. The Pens won the lotto to get Crosby, that's it. They didn't play a single game.

They are the exception to everything in hockey, that's it. Edmonton is just rolling along aren't they!?

What does this have to do with me? Did I say that? Nope, Brian Burke did.

tim1_2 wrote:To be fair, Pittsburgh kinda lucked into one important draftee.

Yeah, I think people forget that the lottery in 2005 where Sidney Crosby was selected was not your standard lottery. This was a post-lockout lottery where everyone was in the mix and able to win it. Take away the lockout, and they may not have had the #1 pick. So, the "Pittsburgh Model" would have to be "Suck for a few years and get a couple of high draft picks (Fleury, Malkin) and then hope for a lockout, followed by a Draft Lotto that we'll win and choose the best player in the NHL to come along since Gretzky."

So, I agree with Burke's "my Donkey" comment on the Pittsburgh model. You can't use that as a template.

shabbs wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:To be fair, Pittsburgh kinda lucked into one important draftee.

Yeah, I think people forget that the lottery in 2005 where Sidney Crosby was selected was not your standard lottery. This was a post-lockout lottery where everyone was in the mix and able to win it. Take away the lockout, and they may not have had the #1 pick. So, the "Pittsburgh Model" would have to be "Suck for a few years and get a couple of high draft picks (Fleury, Malkin) and then hope for a lockout, followed by a Draft Lotto that we'll win and choose the best player in the NHL to come along since Gretzky."

So, I agree with Burke's "my Donkey" comment on the Pittsburgh model. You can't use that as a template.

Sure doesn't stop people from saying it IS, again and again.

Aside from Crosby, they got Malkin, Fleury and Staal.

Chicago drafted Toews (3rd) and Kane (1st).

Would Chicago have won a cup without those two?

There's also a good chance Edmonton could be the next Canadian team to win a cup.

This, is a whole bunch of awesome... the Leafs letter, with some annotations...

http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1051926/letter.pdf

#delicious

Riprock wrote:What does this have to do with me? Did I say that? Nope, Brian Burke did.

It was based on your comment about not believing in drafting 4 top players. You have stated before how that should be the way to build a team or is at the very least a good way when everything aside from the Pens situation in the early to mid 2000's state otherwise.

Burke is right about it. The Pens won the lotto and that's why they are where they are. They were seconds from moving the team, no rink in place to be build, but all of the sudden then hand of God touched them and they were GIVEN Crosby. That's it. Without Crosby they don't win a cup, who knows if Malkin develops the way he did, Fluery is probably considered a 1st overall bust, and Staal is an average 2nd line center.

Losing breeds losing, that's it. It's why Toronto continues to suck, it's why no matter how many top picks Edmonton gets they will continue to suck, it's why Columbus is a joke, it's why Minny can't get to the playoffs, it's why Calgary is probably in the worst shape of any organization in the NHL, etc, etc, etc.

Might as well be saying the earth is flat when people say the Pens model works.

rooneypoo wrote:

shabbs wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:To be fair, Pittsburgh kinda lucked into one important draftee.

Yeah, I think people forget that the lottery in 2005 where Sidney Crosby was selected was not your standard lottery. This was a post-lockout lottery where everyone was in the mix and able to win it. Take away the lockout, and they may not have had the #1 pick. So, the "Pittsburgh Model" would have to be "Suck for a few years and get a couple of high draft picks (Fleury, Malkin) and then hope for a lockout, followed by a Draft Lotto that we'll win and choose the best player in the NHL to come along since Gretzky."

So, I agree with Burke's "my Donkey" comment on the Pittsburgh model. You can't use that as a template.

Sure doesn't stop people from saying it IS, again and again.

But it is one way. You absolutely cannot deny that a team can build a winner around a young talent.

Seriously, look at Tampa and Los Angeles. Where would Tampa be without Stamkos and LA without Doughty?

Riprock wrote:Aside from Crosby, they got Malkin, Fleury and Staal.

Chicago drafted Toews (3rd) and Kane (1st).

Would Chicago have won a cup without those two?

There's also a good chance Edmonton could be the next Canadian team to win a cup.

Chicago is different even though they had 2 top picks. One, they were a mess from the ownership down... it took the old man dying before they could win anything. The culture had to change there. Yah, they got a top pick but it wasn't the reason they got over the top. In fact, the 3rd overall pick (which isn't a sure bet at any time) is probably a top 3 player in the league.

As for the Pens, like I said, without Crosby there is no way those players you mentioned develop or turn out like they have. Crosby was a gift from God (or Bettman depending who you ask).

As for Edmonton, LOL, at them winning a cup. They are so far away from even making the playoffs it's a joke that you could possibly say they could be the next Canadian team to win a cup. Maybe the next team from Alberta but that's about it.

I would take Ottawa, Vancouver, and Montreal's rosters over Edmonton's and it's not even close. You win from the crease and blueline out. Edmonton doesn't have a goaltender or anything resembling a top 2 D man. They have Smid and Whitney who are ok in the 3, 4 role at the best of times and then just a bunch plugs. They are 5 years away from even being close and that's if everything goes right from here on out.

NEELY wrote:

Riprock wrote:What does this have to do with me? Did I say that? Nope, Brian Burke did.

It was based on your comment about not believing in drafting 4 top players. You have stated before how that should be the way to build a team or is at the very least a good way when everything aside from the Pens situation in the early to mid 2000's state otherwise.

I never aid it was the way to build a team. I said that it is one way. I also said that if I had the chance I would take the #1 overall pick anyday over 1th and use that player to turn around the season. It can be done, you are ignorant if you don't believe that. A good team will still be a good team if they get one #1 overall pick.

Losing breeds losing, that's it. It's why Toronto continues to suck, it's why no matter how many top picks Edmonton gets they will continue to suck, it's why Columbus is a joke, it's why Minny can't get to the playoffs, it's why Calgary is probably in the worst shape of any organization in the NHL, etc, etc, etc.

Senators were once a bottom team, then they went to the playoffs for a dozen straight years. Pittsburgh too. Chicago. Florida is in the playoffs after having numerous bottom finishing seasons.

Calgary was in the SC finals a few years ago. Minnesota has been a playoff team and hasn't had a top pick recently if at all. Edmonton's only had a top pick for 2 going on 3 seasons. They could very well be in the playoffs by next year for all we know.

Might as well be saying the earth is flat when people say the Pens model works.

Wow, that might be the worst analogy ever. EVER. Congratulations.