The Leafs won at home against the Jets on
Saturday night. A win is a win, right?
Except, I guess, when wins also mean you may end up with worse odds of winning the
draft lottery.
The truth is, while it would be nice to see
the Leafs win some games (winning always beats losing in pro sports), it’s just
awfully difficult to attach significant meaning to almost any results that
we see right now.
When the Leafs had an opportunity to build
on their home success of this past fall (remember the long run of home games,
and the victories that accompanied that stretch?) they didn’t get the job
done. The Leafs fired the coach,
thinking that would kick start a better, more consistent second half.
That hasn’t happened. When fans looked for
this group to prove they could win when it mattered, something went missing.
And while we can all theorize and speculate, I don’t think any of us know
exactly what has happened. We didn’t even
get that little initial kick lousy teams usually provide when a new coach takes over.
I have no answers, though the things we’ve
talked about here have all seemed to surface yet again and begged a lot of questions:
has the team played with heart consistently? Do they hate to lose enough? Have
they really tried to do what what the coaching staff asked of them? Do we have
enough veteran leadership to show the kids the way? Why does this team, after all these years,
still seemingly lack an identity?
All those things have seemed to conspire to
make this just another long, frustrating season.
Think for a moment about the number
of “good, experienced hockey men” who have been part of this franchise over the
past decade, while it has alternatively given us hope and spiraled downward: Cliff Fletcher, Paul Maurice, Ron Wilson,
Brian Burke, Francois Allaire, Dave Nonis, Dave Poulin, Randy Carlyle and now Brendan Shanahan.
Heck, there are some Stanley Cup winners in there. It’s not like those guys, as
players or managers/coaches, don’t know about winning.
And that’s just on the management and
coaching side.
In terms of players, we have had some
stellar performers over the past decade as well, eh? Some actual “stars”, many young
players with promise, goalies who played well elsewhere but not so much here. (I
often think about J.S. Giguere, who was a marvelous goalie with the Ducks and came
here toward the end of his career. He should have been the perfect mentor for
our young goalies. Somehow, it didn’t work out. Yet he went on to Colorado and had a fine end
to his career there as a respected veteran back-up.)
So we’ve had good hockey minds, individuals
with outstanding coaching credentials, talented players and yet,
notwithstanding a few exciting blips here and there, every season ends much the
same way as the one before: fans asking ourselves: what just happened? Who will we draft in June? Do
we have our goalie of the future or do we have to find another one? And then wondering, what happened to all
those great young prospects we’ve been talking about for years—how many have
actually had a real impact on the Leaf roster?
And, of course, we try to anticipate who might sign here as a free agent.
And, of course, we try to anticipate who might sign here as a free agent.
It’s all about hope for the future.
Every summer we draft a youngster who should
be really good some day. (Rielly seems to be showing he is that kind of player;
there are others showing us something, too, but
for me, the jury is still out as to whether any of them, beyond Rielly
and maybe Nylander, will be impact players here.) Each summer, we never get a star free agent,
unless we vastly overpay. We find a few
veteran diamond-in the-roughs to play on our third and fourth line, though many
of those players look good initially but overall don’t necessarily do a lot
more than the guys we had in the bottom-six before. We end up using them as
trade bait to maybe acquire a low draft pick.
It’s like watching the same movie over and
over, and somehow hoping for a different finish. It never happens.
And hey, it’s not like the aforementioned
hockey guys did not have a plan.
Fletcher had a plan. Burke had a plan, Nonis had a plan. Shanahan now
has a plan. Was any one of those guys a better hockey guy than the others? I
don’t think so. Will Shanahan, with nowhere near the managerial experience of
those I mentioned, somehow be able to find the answer by building the roster in
a different manner?
I have no idea.
We all still follow the Maple Leafs, though
by the sounds of the comments here the past few weeks, some of us less than before—or
at least not as intently. But the fans
still overwhelmingly support the blue and white, and want to see the team do
what, say, the Boston Red Sox have done in baseball, after that franchise had also gone many decades without
a championship.
It can happen. It’s not as though something
is preventing the Leafs from “being good”.
As I just said, different managers have tried to implement different
“plans”. We’ve had coaches with different systems. We have had (and still have)
players with talent. And off and on the last few years, we’ve actually had
goaltending at times, too.
But it’s just disappointing that as we come to the
end of February, when hockey should just be getting really exciting, the Leafs
are already playing out the string. I don't mean that the players don’t care,
but their hopes for a playoff berth have already long been dashed. In fact, many fans will be frustrated if the
Leafs start to (as they did Saturday night) play well enough to win
“meaningless” games, and end up drafting 10th or whatever this
summer, rather than second or third.
It’s a tough spot to be in, but I guess it
will make it all the more heartwarming and exciting if and when the Leafs do
get back to the playoffs, win some playoff series and actually get to the
finals and compete for the Stanley Cup. I know that, in the Toronto area, even
non-hockey people get caught up in the positive sentiment when the Leafs are
playing hockey in the spring and have a shot at success. I remember April and
May of 2002. I remember 1993. Many of you do, too. It was special. (Heck, I well remember the
four Cups in the 1960s, and I know I’m not alone in that regard here, either.
Some of you also saw Bower, Horton, Armstrong, Stanley, Pulford and Baun, etc.
Above right is a great old photo of Armstrong and a young Dave Keon after the
second of three Leaf Cup wins in the early 1960s.)
But here we are, watching other
organizations prepare for a trade deadline where they will be looking to
acquire players who may get them to that next level so they can compete right now for a Stanley Cup. It was fun when the Leafs were in that
situation in the late ‘90s and early 2000s.
Now, we sit, watch, and wonder who gets
shipped out of town so we can maybe grab a prospect or a draft pick that may
help us three, four or more years down the road.
And we wait for the draft.
Planning for the future can be fun, too.
And we wait for the draft.
Planning for the future can be fun, too.
But in Leafland, we too often think about a future
that, in recent years, hasn’t come.
Posts
I think a win is a win, regardless of chasing draft picks, Michael. Let's assume we're in full rebuild mode here, and let's contemplate what that actually means. You certainly can't move out ALL the players (even if you want to), and moving out 11 or 12 bodies represents a very meaningful rebuild, and a step in a new direction. My concern is about roughly half the squad that remains after a significant retool, and the work ethic and state of mind of those players as fresh and talented youngsters get added to the mix. The remaining players from the "dark days" aren't suddenly going to flip a switch, and double the work ethic and ferocity that they approach each game with. It's up to management to ice a lineup that's not conducive to winning if they want a high draft pick, but it's up to the coaches and players to offer a gigantic "middle finger" to that concept, and try to play hard and win each game, regardless of how that affects the team's draft position.
ReplyDeleteEdmonton is a great example of habitual indifference by the roster leading to high draft picks, and the new #1 picks entering that poisonous environment, only to see the cycle repeat itself. Jordan Eberle is close to 25 years old now, and the Oilers have consumed close to 7 years now, of Jordan being a useful asset. Kadri might be a similar example on the Leafs, while certainly not at Eberle's level, he's still a talented high draft pick that walked into a revolving door of coaches, and failed expectations.
The solution? As we talked about yesterday Michael, none of us are GM material (you mentioned your not-so-awesome record in hockey pools!), but I could offer one small idea, that might offer a small injection of direction at the player level. Get Shanahan more engaged with the roster on a day-to-day basis, offering very targeted feedback on work ethic, and how a young man builds himself into a solid NHL professional. Regardless of his high salary and executive expectations, Brendan has a very recent resume of tremendous success in the NHL, being a Hall of Fame player that was talented, but also wore his heart on his sleeve. Not a heck of a lot different than Wendel, but with a much more durable body that allowed him to play longer. I'd love to hear about Shanahan getting called into an executive meeting (there must be a LOT of them), and Brendan saying; "Sorry guys, just watched some game tape of JVR, and we have a lot of things to review". Not singling out JVR (just an arbitrary name), but more speaking of how to maximize Brendan's potential here in Toronto.
Edmonton does indeed seem to be a great example of "hoping" to win the lottery, winning it more than once, being able to draft the very best juniors available, and then somehow not being able to produce an culture that helps those players be as good as they should have been.
DeleteI sense some Leaf fans would like to see Shanahan draw on his playing experience, to a certain extent, in his role as an executive. He no doubt does that as he assesses the current roster. And you're right, he brings a pedigree as a talented but gritty player. He certainly knows what it takes to win at this level.
Hello Russ,
DeleteWhat do you mean none of us would make good GM material? I think InTimeFor62 has had more than a few good ideas for trades and that he could do as good a job as Nonis.
I have heard and read many times that EDM is a prime example of a rebuild gone bad, and I agree their results are bad, but they have taken a good plan and executed it poorly. A plan executed poorly does not mean it is a bad plan. EDM has forgotten, or chosen to ignore, that a rebuild involves two steps:
1. Drafting
2. Development
Through their terrible play over the past few years, they have been gifted with high draft picks. Point 1. - check.
Where they have failed miserably is in their development of their high draft picks. They have repeatedly rushed them into the NHL way before they should have under the misguided opinion that they would learn on the job. Point 2. - fail.
Now the obvious question is why have they kept doing the same thing in their development process and expected different results? Btw, isn't that the definition of insanity? As I have opined before, they are under different pressures in their market. Different pressures which to me would definitely involve keeping in close touch with MacT in case he decides to do the unthinkable and trade their 1st overall pick.
Wayne
Michael, as I ponder your comment about all the foregoing hockey professionals with a building plan, I'm reminded that the builders of the Titanic were also professionals with a plan! Of course, Shanahan, Dubas, et al. seem to be mere amateurs by comparison, but therein lies my steadfast hope for success, Noah's ark was built by amateurs and seems to have fulfilled its purpose quite admirably!
ReplyDeleteThe current malaise for Leaf fandom seems to derive from the milieu that has us 'playing out the string'. Whereas, in my younger days, I wanted to see the Leafs win no matter what the final draft order might look like (never pausing to consider the future), I have finally realized that my loyalty this team (and its history) has expanded my perspective to accept that the current mixture of players does not have any hope of becoming what they were given opportunity to become in the annals of Leaf history.
I already know that a cup run is impossible with this mixture, so I'm willing to buy in to the delayed gratification inherent in my desire for good trades for: more acceptable interim contracts; prospects with potential, and; the best draft picks we can cobble together. I'm also resigned to the underlying desire to make our own picks the best they can possibly become... hence my recent ambivalence when we lose - as it is tied to my mild 'distress' when this collection of players manages to win... they are not (all) the players that I would identify with as 'my Leafs' any more.
I find my temperate 'enjoyment' is best served by the desire for the players who are of greatest importance to our best future having some success within the context of a game that we lose (without going to overtime to potentially drop us out of the lottery picture whic is one of our brightest hopes going forward). At the same time, I accept that a game like we saw with Winnipeg could actually help us in the bigger picture, where Winnik and Jokinen were noticeable to a Jets team that may just covet them (or Lupul who reminded others that he is a legitimate top 6 guy when healthy). In the most recent instance, with the Jets losing, more pressure comes to bear on their possible need to 'fill some holes' or 'build some depth' for a playoff run.
The other successes I enjoy within any particular game, pertains to a balance of growth and successes for players who are in the mix for our future, like Rielly. When he scores or backchecks successfully, I find it hard to be disappointed since I don't want him 'damaged' by this losing culture. It's a hard thing to find some sort of 'honourable' balance in the midst of another low point with my team, but this is how I cope with where we find ourselves.
The players who may thrive elsewhere, but cannot fit here in the future, I hope to see move on where both sides of a trade will feel like winners. Yet I am more desirous of finding the right mix of players who will appreciate all that this team means to us and will do everything in their power to become a team of destiny.... this is my perspective beyond the drudgery beyond what this season has become.
Well said InTimeFor62. I think we, as fans, aim to find ways to enjoy a season gone awry- including some of the thoughtful perspectives you provided above. Thanks.
DeleteMichael,
ReplyDeleteYou know that I find myself rather conflicted watching the Leafs. Do I want them to be Cup contenders? Yes, unequivocally. Do I think that the most likely path to greatness is the draft? Yes, again. Winning games now, while feeling good in the moment, is not the best plan. Kind of like that extra piece of cake, sure tastes good now. Not so much later, I presume.
It sucks that they need to lose in order to one day win. They don't have Ken Hollland running this team. We are stuck with the forever, 'Good hockey guy', Ugh. I am forever hopeful that the Leafs will eventually figure out the salary cap world of todays NHL, not sure they will, just hopeful. Not only that but more importantly, deciding on a plan to move forward, and then sticking to it. Or even two plans, one includes winning the lottery and drafting McDavid, the other doesn't.
This has honestly been one of the most difficult seasons for me to watch, and I was a teenager cheering for them in the 80's. Good lord they were awful. They are awful again, more so of their own making. We all acknowledge that they have talent, they can't seem to figure out how to apply it though. Unless you are far and away the most talented in the world, Mario Lemieux comes to mind, you better be working really hard. It goes without saying that someone else is, and they just might pass you by, if you take things for granted.
There really is no present in Leafland, only the future. So I will cheer for that, and losses for now.
With regards to the Leafs figuring out the salary Cap, Jim, I'm as worried as you are. I don't see how the heck they manage that if Nonis remains employed, and it's a real head-scratcher that he's still here, while all these crucial decisions are being made to retool the roster. Nonis was the guy that offered Clarkson, Bozak, Lupul, Phaneuf, and Kessel those exact sort of contracts that get a GM fired in the first place. The Leafs have the identical Cap misery of Boston, Chicago and LA, with the obvious difference being that those teams were forced into crappy Cap situations based on Stanley Cup wins that lead to players getting rewarded financially. Nothing wrong with that, as those players deserve the financial gain that success offers. I guess we put the cart before the horse here, and handed out the rewards ahead of time. Like giving a kid a gold medal before a race, but still telling him to run the race as fast as he can.
DeletePeople speak about the fact Nonis remains employed because the Leafs need someone that knows how to navigate NHL offices, and understands how to get deals put together. Unfortunately that experience is pretty much all bad with Dave's tenure in Toronto, so what exactly does he have to offer, other than a handful of GMs on speed dial? Buy his cell phone off of him, if that's his ultimate value.
With the lack of experience that Shanahan, Dubas and Hunter have at the NHL level, maybe I'm just a little bit paranoid that they might defer to the guy the created a lot of the mess that currently exists. A fun article might be for us fans to put together a potential but realistic front office and coaching staff to run this team. Not a "dream list" where Scotty Bowman keeps showing up, but something that might be attainable if MLSE opens up the purse strings, and sprinkles the cash around wisely.
I'm with you all the way on this one Russ. I don't understand the recycling of coaches and GM's. To me its exactly like trusting the guy to drive you home after the tow truck pulls his car out of the ditch.
DeleteI would be much happier if they tried to identify the smartest person who is not currently a GM and go in that direction. Keeping Nonis for his contacts and knowledge of how transactions evolve is laughable to me. Besides, could they reasonably expect any grown adult with a cursory knowledge of hockey to do worse?
I don't disagree with you on many things Russ but I am going to on this one. Where Nonis has fallen down is on handing out contracts either to his own players or Clarkson. His ability to fill out the team the last 2 years with late UFA signings has gone pretty well. (Winnik, Santorelli, Raymond).
DeleteHis trading has actually been pretty good overall when you look at it as a separate body of work. Beauchamin didn't fit here and no matter how good he has looked back with the Ducks does anyone think getting Lupul and Gardiner for him was a bad trade? Frattin and a 2nd for Bernier I still think is a good trade. You don't get a crack at a good young goalie very often or for cheap. You can argue whether or not Franson should have been signed a year ago or not, but he literally stole him from Nashville originally. Gunnarson and a 4th for Polak was panned at first but as much as I like Gunnar he looked to be another Lupul and always going to be injured and we all know Polak has been an absolute warrior and leader since showing up. Peter Holland essentially cost a 3rd round pick (other bit parts moved both ways too) and he is a very good 3c with the potential to be a 2c in the league.
He hasn't been perfect. Having to give away Colborne for a 4th due to having to keep 2 face punchers for Carlyle hurt. Giving up a 2nd and a 4th for Bolland didn't turn out either great either. But then is there ANY gm in history that did well every trade? I don't think so but Nonis' trade history is pretty solid really.
You will note note since the start of the season there has not been a single player signed to a new contract or extension other than perhaps Marlies. But there has been 1 trade with more to come. I would suggest Nonis isn't gone yet perhaps because Shanahan is using him for what he perceives is his strength and limiting him on his on his weakness. Giving Nonis nothing but offensive zone starts if you will.
To be fair Pep, Dave Nonis' record of trading with other teams is much less than stellar. His propensity to constantly include draft picks is shameful. There are a vast number of examples including three picks for 23 games of Dave Bolland. Anyone remember Ryan O'Byrne? How about reacquiring Matt Frattin? Or the absolute best one ever, resigning J.M. Liles while on injured reserve, then trading him for Tim Gleason only to have Gleason play less than 40 games in Toronto before buying out his contract.
DeleteWait, it gets better. His willingness to retain salary in trades with just about anyone, while being charged an overage cap wise for this season. He still has to pay some of Gunnarsons' salary going forward.
I agree with Colleens post below. Can we let the potato run this team?
All fair points Jim. I am not on him as much on some of the picks as you are but I understand what you are saying. The cap purgatory is all on him no question.
DeleteThat Liles extension while he was injured was just truly bizarre and unneeded, Jim, I totally agree. A $15.5M extension for a 31 year old injured player that hadn't brought much to the table, but was apparently "good in the room", whatever that means. I remember hearing how BAD in the room Tim Thomas was the year he back-stopped the Bruins to a Stanley Cup. The lesson being that pro sports isn't some sort of bonding exercise, and players that are professionals can play hard for another talented individual, even if they'd rather not share a beer with him after the game. I heard the same "good in the room" mantra about Clarkson..... but how about being good on the ice, for a change?
DeleteI hope our ace in the hole going forward, is that Hunter and Dubas have a very intimate knowledge of the current OHL rosters, based on being active in that market just a year ago. Dale might potentially toss his brother the odd bit of advice as well, which would be welcomed. These two can hopefully lead our habitually failing scouting staff, and find a gem in the 2nd or 3rd round that we would have otherwise missed.
We acquired a 2nd and 4th rounder for Winnik today, so let's keep piling up those picks, but then get serious, and figure out how to actually develop young talent.
Hey Russ, part of the strategy that Dubas and Hunter employed in building their Junior rosters was to acquire as many draft picks as possible. Or, exactly the opposite of what Nonis has done since he got here. I for one, am thrilled at the change in philosophy.
DeleteI agree that the development aspect of the process is the decidedly trickier part of the equation. It will be interesting to watch and see if the Leafs can truly be patient with their picks and let them reach their potential. Other teams do this really well, Detroit has found something that I hope the Leafs emulate. The temptation will be huge to fast track, or let the young guys drafted play for the Leafs right away. I really hope that they think long term and let them figure their games out on the Marlies roster away from the bright lights and big city pressures.
I'm glad, as I'm sure everyone else is that the Leafs have traded their unrestricted free agents. All that is left is some real heavy lifting. If the rumours are true and they are trying to trade, Lupul, Bozak, Kessel, and/or Phaneuf. It will take a fair bit of astute work to get real value from some of those deals. Lupul would be just a salary dump, in my mind he isn't worth much more than a fourth rounder given his contract and his injury tendencies. I would be thrilled with a first rounder plus something for Bozak. No idea what the others would bring. Maybe by draft day, if not by trade deadline frenzy on Monday.
Competitive teams don't tank. Tanking is never a good idea because it promotes a losing culture. Except, in rare instances, when a team decides to commit to drafting one of the great generational talents such as Orr, Gretzky, Lemieux, Lindros, Crosby or McDavid. If this tank were to get us McDavid by whatever way of trading, luck, or back room machinations, then it will have been worth it. That's what I hope this management is doing.
ReplyDeleteWhat I think the management is doing, however, is trying to win the Corsi battle by acquiring as many good Corsi players as possible. They are also trying to stay young so that the team is competitive at the right time when the new generation led by Nylander and whoever we manage to get in the upcoming draft is ready. The untouchables, from this perspective, are Gardiner, Kadri, Rielly and Nylander. Everyone else is tradeable. I'm surprised Bozak, whom statisticians unanimously hate, hasn't already been traded for a bag of pucks. Kessel, JVR, Lupul and Phaneuf are also to be dealt.
If I were a GM of an NHL team right now I'd be drooling over a prospect of acquiring the JVR-Bozak-Kessel line. All three are super-talented, they have solid chemistry, and have proved beyond reasonable doubt that they can light it up offensively like very few top-lines in hockey. Could they land us McDavid? Would you do it? I really hope the management is aware of what they have here. Burke sure set us up for the future. We have the trading chips.
Horachek is a Corsi coach and he may well be here to stay. Babcock, however, also has good Corsi so, I wouldn't be surprised if a push was made to get him, and we can only hope that all those trophies he has amassed over his illustrious career have some, however secondary, value in the eyes of Shannahan and the stats boys.
I still lament the loss of good hockey work by the Burke-era management and coaching staffs. I think that they built a team that was playoffs bound and could have been contending this year and in the years to come. It was a team that was coming of age with a nice balance of upcoming talent, good veterans, good goaltending and a very special high-scoring offence. But the firing of Carlyle sent them into a tailspin. It signalled the end of an era and shifted 'the blame' onto 'the core' (i. e. our best players) who almost immediately became the object of relentless scorn and persecution of the media and the vocal blogosphere . Ultimately, the core did not respond with success, did not get wins and will not be trusted to carry on the Maple Leafs flag.
Everything is going according to the plan. If we were to learn one thing from this disaster I think it should be to let the new team (Shannahan and whoever he chooses as the GM, coach and players) see their plan through as should have been the case with Burke and co. Suits upstairs need to stay away from hockey.
I'm expecting a young, hard-working, light-weight, skilled team to emerge out of this; a team that throws a lot of shots on the net and 'plays the right way' from the perspective of zone time and shot totals. This is not my cup of tea but I will get behind a winning formula if that's what this turns out to be. What we need most of all now is consistency - a system that stays on place, a vision (and I feel that Shanny and the stats boys do have one) that is carried out.
Suits out of hockey. Let the hockey people do their thing. Let them build a system and a culture and let them play through growing pains, ups and downs, cold streaks and whatever. Just leave it alone.
Your screen name is especially relevant right now, leafdreamer, as dreams are pretty much all that we've been trading back and forth, the past few months. Your last comment about keeping those dreaded 'suits' out of the day-to-day operation of the team is crucial, if we're going to have any chance at turning this thing around.
DeleteIt's impossible to follow any sort of rebuild or retool plan, the way the past decade has presented itself. A new GM and coach every few years just leads to that never ending cycle of the Leafs management being in evaluation mode, and burning valuable years as management claims that the present mess clearly doesn't belong to them, which obviously keeps happening in Toronto. My big worry right now is with Leiwike leaving at the end of the year. Top end executives pretty much always bring in a trusted entity immediately below them, and we're right back to square one if the new CEO doesn't think Shanahan has the pedigree to be his team President going forward. The domino effect here is ominous, as the next step is the new team president not wanting the GM, and the new GM not liking the coach..... and on and on. MLSE needs to commit long term to whatever management group they think offers the best chance for success, then like you say, live with the ups and downs that the new regime will face as the team gets rebuilt. Some player acquisitions will work out, and others will fail, but at least give a stable executive team half a decade to realize the fruits of their labour.
I'll attempt a post, Michael. ( watching the tone, as my last one sounded downright snarky when I finally re-read it. Sorry about that. It wasn't intentional at all. I've heard of that happening but have never managed such a thorough job of it myself.)
ReplyDeleteThere was an amusing article a while back about who would make the better GM. Nonis or a potato.
The potato did very little -keeping MacA, Grabbo and Kulemin, not signing Clarkson-and had cap space left. The potato may have done better at the end of 2013, but I admit I wanted Clarkson, just not for 7 years.
The comparison was hardly fair to Nonis but standing pat at at more than one deadline is a concern and the few actual trades we've seen since then are lateral, bad contract for bad contract, bottom 6 for a pick with the same 5 or 6 teams. There have been some interesting trades in the last two years that Nonis has reportedly not been in on. There are times when no move may be safer than adding mistakes but I wonder about the lack of hockey trades, player for player, where the cap wouldn't have been an issue.
Thanks Colleen- there was no issue, as I recall, with any of your earlier posts. You've always been insightful and thoughtful- if sometimes frustrated, like the rest of us!
DeleteI remember that series of posts, Colleen, and it was just fine on my end. There are no wrong opinions, and you were as classy as always with your wording. Pep and I just disagreed on our opinion of Nonis slightly, and that's the great thing about us all having knowledge and a strong point of view, we will want to tug the rope in different directions, at times. It would be a dull experience if all we did was pat each other on the back and agree with each other, but more importantly, Micheal has created an environment where the differences of opinion are respectful, and never caustic or personal.
DeleteMichael just mentioned frustration being vented by the fan base, and that's spot on. I'm sure if you were to follow Habs or Preds fan sites, the talk is decidedly more positive, where discussions center around adding depth pieces, or maybe looking at potential first round playoff opponents. We don't have that luxury here sadly, so there will be the odd little bit of friction, dealing with our present day Leafs.
I'm on record as not being a Nonis fan, simply because he missed big on the things that cripple a team going forward, that being establishing the core of elite players and attaching big money and years to them. He did a decent job with some acquisitions on lower tier players, but ultimately created a mess with the Cap, when looking at the big picture.
I hope that next season, we'll be spending our time evaluating top end new talent, whether it's with the Marlies, or the big club.
I had no issue with your previous post either Colleen. And nothing wrong with different view points from different people from my point of view. Thought, I think we can ALL agree we are frustrated with where the team is at ...again...:)
DeleteWith a grateful nod to Wayne's assessment of my potential managerial trading skills ;) I proffer the following current proposal on the heels of Chicago's devastating loss of Kane for the next 3 months...
ReplyDeleteI would suggest a potential top 6 scoring winger might be just what their manager ordered and it struck me that Oduya is both (upper body) injured indefinitely and a UFA (widely rumoured to be the next cap casualty in the off-season). This may be a tailor-made situation for Lupul to slot in to the mix for Chicago.
My suggestion: Why not consider moving pending UFA, Oduya, right now in order to create the cap flexibility? This may partially facilitate Kane's return from injury (late in a playoff run) and the Hawks would bestrengthening an impending playoff run right now.
I don't know if they could just rely entirely upon LTIR to fill the hole and still allow Kane to return in the later rounds (thereby voiding the need to trade Oduya), but I don't know the severity of his injury, so this may be an offer (to relieve some dollars at least) that the Hawks may 'appreciate' if it can help them now... We could also package Holzer as a depth option for them.
My hope would be to acquire their late 1st rounder and, even, JVR's brother in the process.
I wonder how desperate things are in the Chicago management room these days?!
On MLHS, one of the posters (Maxwell Howe... who may be a lawyer) suggested that if another team was right up against the cap, we could trade for a player with a high dollar expiring contract on a team that wants him back right away... we would acquire that player as a part of the deal, then retain up to half his salary and trade him right back for a low pick.
DeleteThis would allow the Leafs to use our extra cap space to make a deal leading up to the deadline. There are rumours of Ranger interest in Bozak, but they need more room, so he suggested St. Louis going back and forth. The rules would only prevent the Leafs from re-acquiring the player NOT the Rangers. He suggested JT Miller and a pick being our initial take on the deal (plus the 7th to return St. Louis - I would suggest the higher pick for St. Louis, to keep the league from balking on the deal and just use the 7th with Miller for Bozak).
It looks like the kind of creative deal I would like to explore... perhaps the same idea could be pursued with Chicago, too.
I love to maximize the win-win possibilities that are within the rules (even if they 'rule them out' in the next CBA).
Hello InTimeFor62,
DeleteI really enjoy your creative ideas on possible trades.
There is one thing the Leafs have to be careful about now - as they have retained salary on Gunnarson and now Winnick, they are only able to retain one more salary for this year. Three's the limit.
As it now seems more likely that Phaneuf and Kessel are going to be moved in the off-season, this idea for a Bozak trade might be the one where they spend their last retained salary chip.
The only other contracts where retained salary could possibly come into play are Lupul and Clarkson.
As it stands right now, I might be more inclined to hold onto Lupul till the 2016 trade deadline, hope for a season where he has fewer or no injuries, and burn another year off his contract and hope that those two things increases his trade value.
Maybe another year burned off Clarkson's contract and hopefully improved play for him might establish a market for him. If not at least he helps the Leafs up to the cap floor, assuming they move Phaneuf and Kessel and don't take back other team's bad contracts.
Wayne
Greetings Wayne (and all who may also enjoy these musings),
DeleteI think these 'creative' ideas (that were not considered before the rules were put in place - presumably) are the kind of means we can utilize to recover from earlier contract mistakes and benefit from the deep pockets of MLSE (if they really want to 'right this ship').
In the absence a means to deal with 'underperforming' contracts (against which the teams have no recourse because of the guarantees), where the players are free to collect despite the invalidity of the pay for expected performance aspect.
Of course, we should have a better cap mechanism to deal with injury-related performance deficiencies (like concussions), where the cap could be adjusted (perhaps yearly) according to post injury performance with the remainder of the guaranteed contract paid through an off-the-cap means, but this is another subject to address under the next CBA :)
For now, I think we could judiciously utilize that last salary retention by the deadline on an expiring UFA contract that the other team would like back for the playoffs. Gunnarson's retention will extend for another year, but as soon as the last 2 retention contracts (Winnik and our theoretical final one) are removed (at season end or at UFA date, I do not know, but presume it's after the draft), then we can prepare to do the same again in the summer (twice or save one for the next Deadline day). Hopefully, we could get in the habit of only retaining for the current year, rather than tying up that mechanism for any extended timeframe.
Of course, there is another way to utilize MLSE financial clout in moving out any of the big contracts that have signing bonuses at the beginning of July... for example, we could wait 'til after the bonus is paid out for the coming year (Kessel, Clarkson) at the beginning of July, but put such a player into a draft day deal as 'a player to be named later' (even though both sides know who that player will be).
Therefore, rather than 'retaining salary' over the long term, we just pay the bonus up front and they take the cap hit on the contract. If we are willing to retain anything on top of that, to sweeten the deal or our return, then we use the idea to flip the other team's one-year-shy-of-UFA player back to them, while retaining up to half of that one-year deal.
Seems like a workable scenario to me and something that we could potentially do every year of the current CBA. Finally, we can be rewarded for our financial support of the team!
I agree that Lupul could well become a much more trade-able piece after another year (if he stays healthy), he could also be the kind of transitional leader who could help the young guys by dealing with the media and teaching them. Bozak seems to be the guy whose departure will spell the end of the current core/clique - perhaps what we will do with all the other pieces will 'fall into place' after that deal.
It seems unlikely that Chicago will pursue Lupul as I suggested, because they have some major cap crunches coming next year, so Bozak looks to be the only major change we might half 'expect' by Monday while Phaneuf's delayed return may portend another deal that has been 'simmering' while he heals (or 'rests up for the playoffs' if that was an ancillary beneficial part of the decision to delay his return, not to mention accruing cap space for the trade partner by putting off any trade until they could fit him in).
Of course, the remaining UFA's (Holzer, Booth, Jokinen, even Sill) plus Polak may all be part of minor deals that would cause little surprise, but I'd like to keep Polak to mentor the kids until the next deadline when he's facing UFA status (unless the deal is too good to pass up).
I wonder if they're finally reading some of our ideas or if someone on staff thinks like us! I remember including Horton in a deal to get Ryan Johanson... who woulda' thunk Clarkson would be off the books to be replaced by LTIR Horton with no insurance for his injury! Great financial muscle-flex MLSE!
DeleteNightmare era slowly waking up...
Hello InTimeFor62,
DeleteWhen the Leafs offer you a job in the front office, I'll work as your assistant for cheap!
Wow, I am at a loss for words.
I never thought the Leafs would be able to get someone to take over Clarkson's contract.
On the surface, this seems like a win for both teams.
Leafs free up the cap space.
Columbus gets a player who can actually lace up a pair of skates and play for his money.
I am glad for Clarkson and think he'll improve his game with Columbus.
Wayne
I''m going to stick with my Nonis sucks at contracts, cap management and isn't bad at trades position :)
ReplyDeleteNo one is happier to be out from under the David Clarkson era than I am. But, applauding Dave Nonis for this trade is kinda like thanking a friend for doing an admirable job cleaning your couch after he got drunk and puked on it.
DeleteFair enough. But there isn't a GM in history that didn't end up with a player or a contract they found out later wasn't what was advertised for some reason. Not even Ken Holland who has been referred to as one of the best. See the Stephen Weiss contract as an example.
DeleteI suppose it sounds to you guys like I am sticking up for Nonis. I called for him to be fired last summer with RC and he has made plenty of mistakes. But overall his trading ability has been, not great, but good. Not a lot of GM's can even say that around the league these days.
We don't think as one here, Pep. I'm always glad to see differing views, shared respectfully. Your comments on Nonis are fair in my view. All GM's make mistakes. I guess the "best" ones just seem to make a few less than others!
DeleteIt is fortunate that MLSE has the wherewithal to 'sweep this contract under the rug' -
DeleteClarkson, for his part: wanted a significant UFA contract; reportedly signed for less than he could have in Edmonton (by which he/his agent could leverage their interest into a cumbersome and, until yesterday, apparently untradeable contract) amongst some 20 total interested teams; signed where he always wanted to play (and we wanted to love him for that); while, possibly becoming distracted by his early celebrity (and attendant outside commitments), and; failed to play up to the value of the contract.
Nonis, for his part: Saw the chance to acquire a gritty Mimico guy who wanted to come here as a free agent; must have been aware of the desires of a large portion of the fan base (not to mention his own coach); participated in creating a buyout-flexibility nightmare of a contract (that I would argue seemed eminently trade-able at the time, if Clarkson had been able to play at his expected standard... at the time, I thought, 'Wow, that's creative. Heavy bonuses at the beginning of each year mean that we could help a budget team's bottom line if we trade him any time after paying the yearly bonus..." I doubt Nonis believed David's performance would drop so precipitously and, likely, did not consider that scenario at the time - and, quite frankly, neither did I!).
We don't even know whether there was pressure from ownership or Leiweke to make a splash, so if Nonis doesn't 'pay for this with his job' following the season, it may well be an indication that others are taking responsibility for the decision to sign Clarkson in the first place. If Nonis is 'kept on' after all this, we may well have the best evidence to demonstrate such pressure by the fact that they're paying so heavily to extract themselves from this mistake and not firing Nonis in the process.
Whether Columbus suggested this deal (or merely agreed/requested to present it this way in order to provide a positive framework/safe-haven for the asset they have acquired to 'move forward') or Nonis did, we will likely only have a chance to know well after David's career is over.
Even if it should be acknowledged as a creative idea, it is honourable and best for Columbus and for Clarkson (and his ongoing career), to 'see it this way' and both teams have created this framework for him. I don't think anyone will get the credit they 'deserve' in the public for how the deal came together.
In my view, there is a combination of 'blame', creativity and flexibility to be found in each of the principles partaking of this deal, so feel that I will just be thankful that everyone has the chance for a fresh start.
Everything's coming up Millhouse! I think Pridham had a lot to do with making this so easy and pain-free. It's good for the Leafs, good for Clarkson and no retained salary. I'm very impressed.
ReplyDeletefriends, citizens, leafs-men (and women).... i am so unbelievably ecstatic that clarkson is gone and the cap now has considerable space. possibly the most excited i've been about the leafs team in 2014/15. (jim love your analgies... intimefor62, the ideas you passed along were prodigious... michael, colleen, pep, russ, and the other regulars... you're all great! love this community! cheers!)
ReplyDeleteIt has become a community, hasn't it? Michael had made the site so unique. I'm very glad you're part of it.
DeleteHi Michael:
ReplyDeleteI also enjoy Jim's analogies. While I understand the joy related to the Clarkson move, I view it somewhat differently. While some view it as creative, I see the deal as covering up large mistakes by two GMs.
While both players made out like bandits by being overpaid, it appears that:
- Columbus made a large error in trying to save money by not insuring such a large contract. A lesson in the cost of being cheap?
- Toronto made a larger mistake in evaluating Clarkson's talent. VLMers have been questioning team's scouting ability for some time? I believe GM needs to be accountable. It is too easy to blame a committee (remember a committee invented the camel).
I have problems with both GMs getting kudos for making such a sharp deal when they should be chastised for making dumb decisions in the first place. They got lucky and it is unlikely that this type of deal will be allowed to happen next year. While Nonis has had trouble counting to $69 million in the past, thanks to the deep pockets of MLSE the Leafs have achieved a cap of $74 million. But the real cost is still $25 million. We tend to roll these numbers off our tongues like they were dimes or quarters (sad commentary).
You have suggested that the bar for the Leafs is very low? Now we are hearing that all GMs make mistakes. However, there are big ones and not so big ones. My wife would have trouble with me losing $1000 on a bet, let alone $37.5 million. The large financial institution I worked for would have had a lot of trouble with me losing this type of money, and would have reacted quite negatively I imagine.
I now follow two teams (Leafs, Braves) that are in heavy rebuild mode with no signs that they will actually be successful while I am still in my 70s?? Draft choices and prospects are maybes, not probables. In the meantime, both teams admit they have a shoddy product, but it is highly unlikely they will lower prices!!
Well said, RLMcC. Last night, I was reading all of the joyous responses on Leafs fans websites, and I decided to visit Columbus sites to see their take on the trade. It was the same thing... all high fives and giddy behaviour, for what's essentially two gigantic missteps by professional general managers.
DeleteAm I glad we're seeing the exit of Clarkson? Sure, and we all are, but it doesn't mitigate the train wreck of errors that it took for both Columbus and Toronto to get to this point in the first place. Nonis was posturing that if Horton gets healthy, we'll have a heck on an NHL player on our hands. Don't insult the fan base please, and just call it what it is..... a rich team that found a way to eat a big pile of cash while staying in compliance with the CBA.
Sorry for sounding negative, but imagine if two years ago, the Leafs would have invested $30M in a competent GM and coach, instead of using that cash towards some sort of financial bailout package with Columbus? Good management can save multiples of their pay scale, in saving their team from toxic contracts, and long term Cap issues. Just look at Nashville as an example, as they have no choice but to spend wisely, based on the marketplace.
I'm a die hard Leafs fan, RLMcC, but also budget conscious enough to applaud your comment about your wife being potentially angry about frivolous spending on gambling (not that you'd ever do that!). This Leafs team has felt like a rich kid's toy for a long time now, and I hope some level of responsibility is poking its much needed head out.
Russ, I keep imagining Nonis and co. sitting at the kiddie table with a big tray of monopoly money.
ReplyDeleteI can't get my head around spending that sort of money and having nothing to show for it, nothing good accomplished with it. I would like to hear a reporter ask the question "How do you feel about taking almost 30 million and basically burying it under the duck pen".
I was reading a bit on Horton. They knew with his shoulder injury he wouldn't be playing most of the season so they didn't want to pay for a whole year. When the extent of the back problem became known, it made him uninsurable--they couldn't insure him nor could he play. Apparently they made the call to the Leafs at the beginning of the season. Maybe the Leafs wanted to give Clarkson another chance, or maybe he wasn't ready to wave his NMC, though I find that hard to believe. As we all thought Clarkson's contract would never be moved, I'm still surprised they didn't jump on this opportunity sooner but I guess they hoped to get something of value back.