Brian Burke Fired by the Leafs

Hoags wrote:james duthie ‏@tsnjamesduthie
Sources say no recent incident led to Burke's firing. New ownership did not like his "style".

Who cares about your record, it's all about "style" in TO.

He has a pretty abrasive style, and it's possible that didn't sit well with the new ownership.

Who was the face of the franchise during Burke's tenure? Not Phaneuf or Kessel, the answer is Burke himself. Maybe ownership wanted to take a step away from that and instead focus on the on-ice product for once (crazy thought I know) and that all starts with Nonis behind the reigns and Luongo in nets.

The timing is ridiculous and will cause a ton of questions to start the season, but I think this is the better move in the long-term.

Trending: #Nonnis

Granted that Luongo can help the Leafs -- but he wasn't exactly stellar last season or the Canucks would not have replaced him with Schneider in the playoffs.

If they go after Luongo.. that contract could become as issue should he falter. Then who would trade for him then?

Didn't see it, but is Nonis also the Pres? Or are they leaving that blank for now? Burke was Pres and GM.

Via Gurdeep:

"That didn't take long. RT @MrButterChicken Burkie's Doghouse @ ACC - sign is gone, body isn't even cold. http://pic.twitter.com/lH84u75g"

https://twitter.com/GurdeepA/status/289162473897074691

Hilarious!

Haha, that's quick stuff.

Don Cherry chimes in:

"WHAT THA HELL IS GOING ON IN TARANNA? MY BOY BURKIE IS GONE. MAKES NO SENSE I TELL YA. I WILL TELL YA THIS, LALONGO IS A LEAF BY NEXT WEEK. OH BOY YOU CAN BET ON THAT."

MLSE found out today Burke is with Telus and gets internet from Teksavvy

Just heard Francois Allaire on TVA Sports. He sounded really pissed talking about how the goaltending was handled. Told the panel Giguere and Reimer was the perfect combination, getting rid of Giguere was the worst thing they've ever done because Reimer had all the tools but was rushed. THat's why he left the organization. Also said Wilson was fired because of that (bad goaltending).

Another reason why I think Bishop is probably the one to trade and not Anderson

LeKid wrote:
Another reason why I think Bishop is probably the one to trade and not Anderson

There's no substitute for experience and Anderson has way more than Bishop or Lehner.

I really hope they don't go with Bishop/Lehner because that'd be a disaster like in TO, you need a veteran in there.

Hoags wrote:

LeKid wrote:
Another reason why I think Bishop is probably the one to trade and not Anderson

There's no substitute for experience and Anderson has way more than Bishop or Lehner.

I really hope they don't go with Bishop/Lehner because that'd be a disaster like in TO, you need a veteran in there.

I don't think Murray'd do that. I wouldn't be totally surprised if he moved Lehner, though. It sounded like he might have been willing to package him last year during the Nash sweepstakes. They might be high on Bishop and see Lehner as a way to get a top player.

Hoags wrote:

LeKid wrote:
Another reason why I think Bishop is probably the one to trade and not Anderson

There's no substitute for experience and Anderson has way more than Bishop or Lehner.

I really hope they don't go with Bishop/Lehner because that'd be a disaster like in TO, you need a veteran in there.

It would not be a disaster anything like in TO. Bishop and Lehner are both superior to Reimer.

spader wrote:

Hoags wrote:

LeKid wrote:
Another reason why I think Bishop is probably the one to trade and not Anderson

There's no substitute for experience and Anderson has way more than Bishop or Lehner.

I really hope they don't go with Bishop/Lehner because that'd be a disaster like in TO, you need a veteran in there.

I don't think Murray'd do that. I wouldn't be totally surprised if he moved Lehner, though. It sounded like he might have been willing to package him last year during the Nash sweepstakes. They might be high on Bishop and see Lehner as a way to get a top player.

I would be floored if they kept Bishop over Lehner. The price in getting someone like Nash with Bishop over Lehner should be a good (not great) prospect and we have a great many good prospects. And if the difference is a great, top-level prospect, then there's got to be a reason for that, right?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that *if* the difference is just a prospect then hang on to the guy you drafted, the guy who came in as a rookie and stopped a penalty shot in an elimination game, double-overtime, then led his team to the cup; the guy who came in and blanked the mighty Boston Bruins; the guys with the swagger who talks about "going hunting" after Anderson.

Lehner isn't going anywhere; any discussion to the contrary is foolish.

tim1_2 wrote:Lehner isn't going anywhere; any discussion to the contrary is foolish.

Exactly. Especially in this thread.

So, on the Fan590 this morning, word was that the new Bell/Rogers ownership did not like Burke at all from the start. They didn't care for his methods and his overall behaviour/personality. He was very combative with the media in Toronto, which is largely owned by Bell and Rogers so I'm sure that didn't help too much. Sounds like they wanted a more "corporate" person in there to be the face of the team, for whatever reason.

Burke's record in Toronto speaks for itself. I don't think anyone doubted his time in Toronto was coming to an end sooner or later. The biggest surprise in all this was the timing. Why now? Why not a few months ago?

I can understand wanting to start the season with the GM you want, but that should have been done long ago as it sounds like these discussions have been going on for some time with ownership.

If they let it go this far, they at least deserved to give Burke the benefit of a 48-game season to try and do something with what he put together. The new CBA has Burke's finger prints all over it.

The Luongo "situation" may have played into this but I don't think it was the main factor, if one at all. He may have told ownership he has no interest in trading for Luongo or that the price that was being asked was way too high (which Nonis agrees with from what I hear) or that the contract was way too long etc... but the GM is the guy that should be making those decisions. Ownership should not be getting into those details and trying to control those decisions.

I'm sure pieces of the truth will leak out eventually. Some media have mentioned that since his son's death, he has not been the same, which is understandable. Some mentioned that he was more aggressive and angry with the media. Maybe that was a factor too. Who knows.

As always, never a dull moment here in Toronto. The donkey rodeo continues...

This was, as mentioned, a corporate decision. Every "hockey person" knows it is just dumb to fire your GM right before the season begins, when you've had something like 6 months to do it (since new ownership took over). This was a decision made by a bunch of suits who know diddly about running sports teams. This is just a massive sideshow for the team, including the players, at the worst possible time.

Pretty much every hockey insider on TV yesterday was pretty much dumbfounded by the situation. No one could justify the timing of this at all. Right move, worst possible time. A typical Maple Leaf situation. Good god I'm glad to be a Sens fan.

tim1_2 wrote:This was, as mentioned, a corporate decision. Every "hockey person" knows it is just dumb to fire your GM right before the season begins, when you've had something like 6 months to do it (since new ownership took over). This was a decision made by a bunch of suits who know diddly about running sports teams. This is just a massive sideshow for the team, including the players, at the worst possible time.

Pretty much every hockey insider on TV yesterday was pretty much dumbfounded by the situation. No one could justify the timing of this at all. Right move, worst possible time. A typical Maple Leaf situation. Good god I'm glad to be a Sens fan.

This is all quite delicious.