• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

BOOK REVIEW: Burke' Law: A Life in Hockey

I love the idea the Leafs are some mess for "not winning a round". I get that they have to win when it counts, but the organization is in very good shape overall. Many teams that have "won rounds" are a fucking mess. I still hear Oilers 1st round win from 2017 boasted about.

I don't feel first round wins were thought of as anything special until the Leafs stopped winning them.
 
There's no question we need to get it together in the playoffs this year.

I'd just much rather have a very talented team trying to put it together when it matters than an untalented team scraping their way in and going on some fluky run where they likely still fall short of the ultimate goal anyway. It's fun for a bit, absolutely. But you're still left with crap afterwards.
 
hockeylover said:
There's no question we need to get it together in the playoffs this year.

I'd just much rather have a very talented team trying to put it together when it matters than an untalented team scraping their way in and going on some fluky run where they likely still fall short of the ultimate goal anyway. It's fun for a bit, absolutely. But you're still left with crap afterwards.
Click to expand...
Like this:

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/islanders
 
hockeylover said:
There's no question we need to get it together in the playoffs this year.

I'd just much rather have a very talented team trying to put it together when it matters than an untalented team scraping their way in and going on some fluky run where they likely still fall short of the ultimate goal anyway. It's fun for a bit, absolutely. But you're still left with crap afterwards.
Click to expand...

Pretty damn close to 100% of the time, it requires an elite skill level to win the whole thing. Yeah, I'd much, much rather be constructed similarly to past cup winners and be trying to "figure it out" in the playoffs than be a plucky, gritty bunch of underdogs that only have a small handful of cup winning contemporaries that are built similarly.
 
Chances are they will have some breaks go for them in the playoffs. They are due more than anyone. And they don't need a #1 C being out like the Habs got for every team they beat. Simply no injuries to core players on their team.
 
JackBurton said:
Chances are they will have some breaks go for them in the playoffs. They are due more than anyone. And they don't need a #1 C being out like the Habs got for every team they beat. Simply no injuries to core players on their team.
Click to expand...
chances are we make the cup finals and get covided out of them somehow
 
I like how we tried having a bad team for the better part of 50 years and it didn't work, so now we're trying having an elite team for a only a few years and you think *THAT'S* the insanity part.
 
JackBurton said:
I love the idea the Leafs are some mess for "not winning a round". I get that they have to win when it counts, but the organization is in very good shape overall. Many teams that have "won rounds" are a fucking mess. I still hear Oilers 1st round win from 2017 boasted about.

I don't feel first round wins were thought of as anything special until the Leafs stopped winning them.
Click to expand...
They aren't special, they are merely necessary in order for next steps to occur. Prevailing in these first round series, for elite teams at least, is taken for granted. it is assumed that they will advance. It only becomes a thing when it doesn't happen. If it doesn't happen once, it can be dismissed as a fluke. But when it keeps not happening year after year, it becomes a thing. It becomes what that team is. It defines them.

For example, until the Sens beat the Leafs in the playoffs, they will always be that team that could never beat the Leafs in the playoffs.
 
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou said:
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different result.
Click to expand...

That's actually not the definition of insanity and no, Einstein never said that.

It's attributed to Einstein because of opinions that he had regarding quantum mechanics that turned out to be completely wrong.

Read more books.
 
hockeylover said:
I like how we tried having a bad team for the better part of 50 years and it didn't work, so now we're trying having an elite team for a only a few years and you think *THAT'S* the insanity part.
Click to expand...

Yep. We finally build a team modelled on the majority of the cup winning teams of the last decade+ (Pittsburgh, Chicago, Tampa) but because it hasn't worked before Auston Matthew's 25th birthday, it's insane to continue trying it.
 
hockeylover said:
I like how we tried having a bad team for the better part of 50 years and it didn't work, so now we're trying having an elite team for a only a few years and you think *THAT'S* the insanity part.
Click to expand...
They didn't TRY to have a bad team for 50 years. And not all their teams were bad. Their biggest impediment to success was always with ownership putting short term profit ahead of on ice success and the front office being incompetent and hiring incompetent coaches and scouts.

I don't care what else a franchise is doing well. If ownership and management only know the cost of everything and the value of nothing that franchise is doomed. Back when Quinn was around the Leafs had a chance to get Gretzky and when it was brought to the Board their only comment was "Meh. How many more tickets would he really sell?" When money matters more than winning Cups you make money and you don't win Cups.

It's no secret why the Habs and Leafs don't win championships anymore. It's because they aren't really trying that hard to win them anymore. The Leafs began not caring a couple of decades earlier than the Habs but the two franchises are today basically the same in the way they approach the business. They like making money and they've both found ways to do that which are not dependent upon how well the team on the ice does. So the on ice product, instead of driving revenue, just becomes a cost of doing business. And like any business these days, companies try to minimize costs to maximize profits.

The teams that win Cups nowadays are the ones who need to win in order to make money, stay relevant, and add to their franchise value. The Habs and Leafs make money hand over fist and the value of their franchises goes only in one direction. And that happens whether they go to the finals or miss the playoffs. They are licenses to print money simply because they exist. They don't have to actually do anything. That's great news if you're a shareholder but not so great news if you're just a fan.
 
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou said:
They didn't TRY to have a bad team for 50 years. And not all their teams were bad. Their biggest impediment to success was always with ownership putting short term profit ahead of on ice success and the front office being incompetent and hiring incompetent coaches and scouts.

I don't care what else a franchise is doing well. If ownership and management only know the cost of everything and the value of nothing that franchise is doomed. Back when Quinn was around the Leafs had a chance to get Gretzky and when it was brought to the Board their only comment was "Meh. How many more tickets would he really sell?" When money matters more than winning Cups you make money and you don't win Cups.

It's no secret why the Habs and Leafs don't win championships anymore. It's because they aren't really trying that hard to win them anymore. The Leafs began not caring a couple of decades earlier than the Habs but the two franchises are today basically the same in the way they approach the business. They like making money and they've both found ways to do that which are not dependent upon how well the team on the ice does. So the on ice product, instead of driving revenue, just becomes a cost of doing business. And like any business these days, companies try to minimize costs to maximize profits.

The teams that win Cups nowadays are the ones who need to win in order to make money, stay relevant, and add to their franchise value. The Habs and Leafs make money hand over fist and the value of their franchises goes only in one direction. And that happens whether they go to the finals or miss the playoffs. They are licenses to print money simply because they exist. They don't have to actually do anything. That's great news if you're a shareholder but not so great news if you're just a fan.
Click to expand...

Yeah, maybe the Habs aren't but the Leafs sure are. Shame you can't see anything except your narrow prospective.
 
Last edited:
I mean, if your argument is that Shanahan doesn't want to win a cup and doesn't have the autonomy to do whatever he wants with MLSE money to win one, well...that's a pretty fucking stupid argument that died a painful death back at the end of the Peddie era.

Ever since the corporate reorganization and the hiring of Burke, the Leafs have been a different animal entirely. Burke/Nonis just fucked up their end of it. That had nothing to do with MLSE, which largely gets the fuck out of the way and lets the hockey people run the hockey team how they see fit.
 
WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou said:
They didn't TRY to have a bad team for 50 years. And not all their teams were bad. Their biggest impediment to success was always with ownership putting short term profit ahead of on ice success and the front office being incompetent and hiring incompetent coaches and scouts.

I don't care what else a franchise is doing well. If ownership and management only know the cost of everything and the value of nothing that franchise is doomed. Back when Quinn was around the Leafs had a chance to get Gretzky and when it was brought to the Board their only comment was "Meh. How many more tickets would he really sell?" When money matters more than winning Cups you make money and you don't win Cups.

It's no secret why the Habs and Leafs don't win championships anymore. It's because they aren't really trying that hard to win them anymore. The Leafs began not caring a couple of decades earlier than the Habs but the two franchises are today basically the same in the way they approach the business. They like making money and they've both found ways to do that which are not dependent upon how well the team on the ice does. So the on ice product, instead of driving revenue, just becomes a cost of doing business. And like any business these days, companies try to minimize costs to maximize profits.

The teams that win Cups nowadays are the ones who need to win in order to make money, stay relevant, and add to their franchise value. The Habs and Leafs make money hand over fist and the value of their franchises goes only in one direction. And that happens whether they go to the finals or miss the playoffs. They are licenses to print money simply because they exist. They don't have to actually do anything. That's great news if you're a shareholder but not so great news if you're just a fan.
Click to expand...
except basically none of the above is true any longer with the Leafs.
 
MindzEye said:
I mean, if your argument is that Shanahan doesn't want to win a cup and doesn't have the autonomy to do whatever he wants with MLSE money to win one, well...that's a pretty fucking stupid argument that died a painful death back at the end of the Peddie era.

Ever since the corporate reorganization and the hiring of Burke, the Leafs have been a different animal entirely. Burke/Nonis just fucked up their end of it. That had nothing to do with MLSE, which largely gets the fuck out of the way and lets the hockey people run the hockey team how they see fit.
Click to expand...
and for further evidence, I direct @WeHaveMoreCupsThanYou to Ujiri, Masai, and Raptors, Toronto.
 
Yeah the last thing these current Leafs have done is take the easy, uncritiziable, traditional old school no-risk approach to building this team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top