Wait, there was a draft this weekend?

Back from cottage country, I had to listen to AM 640 on the radio, then rely on text messages when that cut out.

Some thoughts:

We actually managed to have a draft where we didn't give up any picks during or directly before the day. Regardless of who we picked, that's a huge step in the right direction for the franchise. I know there was a lot of talk of moving up, but we need quantity period.

If Burke didn't make a move, I fully believe it's because there was no good one to be made. The Flyers were definitely the most active team in terms of trade talks out there, and once they made the Pronger deal before the draft started there was no other real player movement.

There's still potential out there. A load of teams are still in cap hell, and (apparently) Burke's intention all along was to wait until the big names in free agency were gone to unload some of our guys. Considering that somehow the Flyers managed to trade and not lose any salary in the process while actually losing two players that made up their roster last year, desperation is going to set in some time.

I'm disappointed we didn't pick up a single goaltender, if history is anything to go by it's worth taking a flyer on someone; if the draft is a crapshoot then drafting goaltenders is like trying to fish from the CN Tower. Maybe the lack of a goalie is an indication of his expectations regarding Gustavsson, though I doubt it.

Say hello to... Wade Redden? What?

I'd kind of like to know what Tim Wharnsby is smoking in this article right here.

"There is belief the Maple Leafs have been zeroing in on New York Rangers defenceman Wade Redden and forward Peter Schaefer of the Boston Bruins"

This is why I hate offseason coverage, by the way. "There is belief by my son Zack and his Buzz Lightyear doll that the Leafs are coveting PJ Axelsson, in an effort to become more Swedish."

But seriously, Redden? We're talking about possibly one of the worst defensive contracts in the league Redden? The Redden who has been steadily depreciating in value since the lockout Redden?

If we're going after him, it better be because we're getting New York's 1st and Evgeny Grachev with him.

And on another note, Peter Schaefer? A 31 year-old who peaked when the Sens did, he spent all of last season buried in the minors because Boston can make better use of Shawn Thornton. The Leafs need many things, but if we need 30 year old checkers to put up 30 points why don't we just hang on to Devereaux and Hamilton? At least with Boyd we're supporting Toronto's indie music scene.

Is the logic there that Boston would love to get rid of Schaefer's 2.1 million (good lord who would pay him that much? Right, Bryan Murray) salary ? Because they didn't seem to have a problem just burying him in the minors ala Mark Bell.

The article goes on to talk goaltending, mentioning Burke's interest in JS Giguere. I hope he means he's interested in asking how his son's therapy is going, because there's no way we're paying 10 million for goaltending next year if Brunnstrom doesn't work out. Apparently the Leafs are on the list of teams that Giggy would accept a trade to, despite being about geographically as far away as you can get from his family (and son's medical needs). I guess making the teams you'd accept a trade to public is now de rigueur for players with a no trade clause.

*********

Filtering out all the BS, it's pretty obvious that these deals are being postulated because they help cap-tight teams shed salary. But the Redden deal would break Burke's previous statements about not wanting to carry salary past two years from now, as he's getting paid until 2014 (lol) and is of questionable value. The Giguere deal would work great... if we could sucker anybody into paying for a constantly injured and often average goalie in Toskala.

What I will say is I will be greatly surprised if the Leafs are still picking 7th come draft time. Burke has mentioned moving up, he's mentioned moving down, and someone out there will be willing to move with him. It's Burke's big chance to really put the pressure on other GMs and change the face of this team, and I can't believe he'll allow it to pass by.

Y'all take Brian Burke way too seriously

I haven't updated in a while, school has been keeping me fairly busy and there's enough Leaf coverage out there that I can get my fix leaving snide comments on other blogs.

But Burke's been getting a lot of exposure lately, and for once I don't really see a post out there that echoes my point of view: That Burke is laughing at each and every single person giving his claims serious exposure.

Since the offseason started Burke has said two things: Our goal next year is the playoffs, our goal this year is to move up as much as we can to try and get the guy we want most. That's simply it, and the amount of writing being given to those simple concepts is baffling.


But let's put some things in perspective here:

1. Burke said this: "The goal for next year is to make the playoffs," Burke said. "If that's not the goal of every GM, they should get out of the business."

Burke is not guaranteeing the Leafs a playoff spot next year (we leave that to coaches who desperately love the taste of crow). He is not saying he will build our club into a contending team overnight. He's saying that our guys will be expected to do their best to win every game, regardless of circumstances. They won't win, but that's irrelevant; the point is that even though next year will be a losing season for us Burke is making it clear that losing will never be acceptable to this organization. It sounds like a bold claim, but it's really just a very simple affirmation of some basic values.

2. Burke also said this: "We'll immediately attempt to move up," Burke said during a morning news conference. "We're going to talk to everyone between us and the first pick and see what the landscape is.

"We're going to see what it costs and we're going to try and move up."

Is that claiming Tavares as Leaf property? No. We'll see what it costs? Try to move up? Burke sounds like a guy prospecting nicer apartments. This statement doesn't say anything significant either. Every GM in the league that isn't picking #1 should be looking to move up. Every GM in the league should want to pick #1. They usually don't because the asking price is often unreasonable. The fact that Burke has vocalized this sentiment doesn't somehow make it a prophecy.

Saying that when we play we'll play to win and when we pick high we want to pick the highest isn't exactly throwing down a gauntlet here, it's simple stuff. Burke is making a statement, but it's not a statement for the Isles, or for anyone else in the league. It's a statement for the fans and players that the organization will never be satisfied with mediocrity, and it's a sad reflection on the state of this franchise that those words somehow seem shocking or bold.

Remember, Burke knows the media well and is a guy with a sense of humour when it comes to people shoving microphones in his face. Near the end of the season he was asked about signing NCAA free agents on Hockey Night in Canada. When Tyler Bozak's name came up Burke said "Who?" The name was repeated and Burke said "Ah... yeah, I think I've heard of him." with a chuckle before launching into his response. Weeks later, Bozak was signed by the club, along with Christian Hanson. I have no doubt the guy right now is having a little chuckle over the furor that his basic statements have caused.

Furor which has spread out into the blogosphere, such as some smug articles here and here. Look, the media's tendencies to blow little things out of proportion when Toronto is involved are almost legendary, do we really need to do this all over again? I also love that posts specifically directed towards media coverage still manage to take the usual cheap shots at the franchise, just because. Did anybody stop to think that maybe Burke was stating the obvious? That maybe this stuff was important for Leafs players and fans to hear? Or that maybe, just maybe, Burke knew this stuff would blow up in the papers and he's having a little fun with all of you?

Tank update!

Well the All-Star weekend has passed and the Leafs are finally, unequivocally a losing club. The past little while has been tough, but at least now finally we can look to the future with a clear mind free of the rollercoaster that is the lead-up to the playoffs.

With that in mind, just what picture is shaping up in the standings? Are we close to a lottery pick with the roster we've got now, or do we need a helpful push?

As it stands, the bottom 10 teams are (worst to best):

New York Islanders: 35 pts
Atlanta Thrashers: 39 pts
Ottawa Senators: 41 pts
St. Louis Blues: 44 pts
Tampa Bay Lighting: 44 pts
Nashville Predators: 45 pts
Toronto Maple Leafs: 46 pts
LA Kings: 47 pts
Colorado Avalanche: 47 pts
Vancouver Canucks: 52 pts (lol Sundin)

We're currently sitting in 7th, which is pretty funny considering that's where we ended up last year. Wait, you mean we were trying to make the playoffs last year? And Paul Maurice guaranteed it? Oh. That's actually pretty sad then.

Now being two spots out of the top 5 is pretty unacceptable considering that maybe 3 of the teams below us still had playoff aspirations in mind at the beginning of the season. We can't afford to burn more picks moving up, either.

*****

If I had to guess the movers in our little group of misery, I'd say that it's doubtful any of the teams currently above us in the standings will drop down below our standing, Colorado will get Stastny and maybe Sakic back at some point, the Kings are simply better than us, and Vancouver has to shake out of it's funk sometime. All of the teams above the bottom ten are looking to make a playoff push and I'd bet most of them get more competitive as the season wears on.

As for the teams below us, the Nashville Predators have got the talent to rise above us. The question lies with their ownership, whether they feel the market can take failure and whether they can even afford to pay the players they have.

Tampa Bay appears to finally be gelling as a team after a huge summer turnover and a laughable coaching mess. They've won 6 of their last 10 and generally Lecavalier, St. Louis, and Smith are enough to beat our entire team. If our boys in blue do their part and lose on the 12th I think there's a good chance we'll see ourselves sinking a spot in the standings.

St. Louis lost their stud dman over the break and weren't impressed enough with Alex Pietrangelo to keep him up (the concussion Hollweg gave him likely didn't help). Steen and Carlo have been getting them points, but not wins, and I think we'll be in a dogfight with the Blues over draft positioning. Still, they're not far away and have two games in hand on us.

Ottawa. Excuse me while I chuckle quietly to myself for a little while.

Alright, despite the Sens protestations that they were turning a new leaf after the break the team has continued floundering, with a losing record in it's last 10. They have three games on us, and could rise above the Leafs if those turn into three wins. Unfortunately the Sens, much like the Leafs, haven't strung three wins together all season. With their depth becoming suspect and their goaltending issues still not solved, it remains to be seen if they're actually any better than the Leafs this year. Like the Preds, the Sens will need to decide if they're selling hard at the deadline and that will have the greatest impact on their draft.

The Atlanta Thrashers and New York Islanders are just terrible. Awful. We could sell off everyone above 23, call up the entirety of the Marlies and I doubt we'd be able to pass either at this point. Well, maybe Atlanta.

*****

Now, considering all that I can see us maybe sliding down two more spots to land in 5th, enough for a slim lottery chance and probably a damn good player. There are three teams within two points of us but it's hard to imagine all three putting together good streaks when they'll likely want to become deadline sellers just like us. And no matter how hard we sell, the bottom three looks too tough to crack at this point.

So, who wants to come rig the draft lottery with me?

Did anyone see Sifers at all?

So Sifers played just under 7 minutes last night with only one shift in the third period, despite playing over 20 earlier in the season and playing decently well at that. He took some heavy hits but no mention of an injury was made, nor did he leave the bench at any time.

Wilson in his post game noted that a virus has been making the rounds through the team, the defense especially, and he tapped Finger as an example. Except Finger played 18 minutes last night, despite taking two penalties that resulted in 5-on-3's. How did Finger deserve almost triple Sifers' ice time? He certainly wasn't any good on the power play.

So why was Sifers effectively benched for the game? He didn't stand out particularly, either good or bad. He certainly didn't put us in as many rough spots as Finger and Kubina did tonight. And if it was a virus tearing him up and causing lazy play from our vets, why wasn't one or both of Stralman or Kronwall called up to provide fresher bodies? If we needed the "toughness" that Deveaux and I'm supposing Newbury were to provide why haven't we given Phil Oreskovic, a 6' 3" defenseman from North York who has 56 PIMs in 32 games in the AHL, a tryout?

Also, upon the subject of the Leafs' decent amount of blueline scoring in the postgame, Wilson named White as someone whose contributions have been pleasantly surprising. White has 4 points in 20 games as a blueliner, and his assist tonight was so ghostly it might have been given to Alexei Cherepanov (too soon?). What is White slipping into Wilson's beverages to him believe he's contributing offensively? Especially as our power play has been atrocious during White's tenure on D. How does a productive tenure at forward justify the offensive minutes given to White on the blueline?

Ian White should be a forward right now.

Alright, first off: Full Disclosure. I am a White hater; I've stated repeatedly and emphatically how, statistically and physically speaking, there simply isn't enough there to warrant the ice time he's getting over just about anybody else in the organization.

But he's been playing pretty well lately as a steady presence on our blueline, and though I still cringe to see him out there at crucial times in either zone, his screw-ups haven't resulted in as many goals as most of the guys making somewhere between 5 and 10 times the money he's making have allowed.

But all that needs to change.

When White clawed his way out of the press box he had to do it as a forward. He promptly scored a goal his first shift in, then a couple games later went on an impressive 6 game point streak, netting 7 points in his first 8 games back.

He then put two 8 game pointless streaks together around a pair of goals in his time afterwards, almost all of which has been spent as a defenseman. Since his hot streak, White's production has been three points in 19 games, and his shooting percentage has been creeping closer and closer to his career average (0.042), residing at 0.082 after a 0.32 clip during his point streak (a fact that makes the stat nerd in me inexplicably pleased).

I think he's terrible at shooting from the point. He tends toward double-clutching close to the blue line when he shoots. He's way too far away for the shot that he's got to fool anybody, he never moves to change his angle, and he takes just a little too long to get it off, giving a goalie enough time to make the save.

His two goals as a defenseman? One was off a beautiful faked shot from Anton Stralman (the last good thing he did before being sent down) in which White had actually crept down to the top of the circle, leaving less ice between him and the goalie. The second was a shot that actually lost power from the blue line, striking the ice early and skipping over Ryan Miller. I think I can put this more succinctly: White is not a good enough shooter to keep on taking the shots he trends towards. He's the Jason Blake of offensive defensemen. If he's going to grow into his offensive potential he needs to either change the way he takes shots from the point, or he needs to not be there at all.

*****

Now, there's nothing wholly wrong about White not producing points if he keeps on providing stable blueline play, right? Not necessarily.

First off, he's second in shots for only to Pavel Kubina, impressive considering White has played 11 games less than him. However, White has half the points Kubina does, and from the blueline he has something like one sixth the offensive production. Or, 2 goals on 44 shots since his first 8 games (for a shooting percentage of 0.045, which happens to be his career average. Hmm...). Or, 1 assist on 42 shots in 19 games while averaging over 20 minutes. If White isn't producing any points while taking this many shots in this time it means he's not creating many offensive chances, which means he's killing our offense, especially on the power play.

Second, this team is a little bit strapped for reliable offense, especially with injuries mounting. We've scored 8 goals in 5 games after our two game blowout streak over Atlanta and Pittsburgh. White's production at forward could be a boon if he were to rediscover it.

Third, we need to figure out White's value on the trade market. If he shows he can be a productive third liner and a steady 20+ minute blueliner then he may actually be one of the best bargaining chips we have at his salary and age. We may even want to keep him if he can keep it up, although if it's the difference between White or a lottery pick at this year's draft I know which I'd make in a heartbeat. I'm also pretty sure that Ian likes scoring goals.

So for our sake, and Ian's, please Ron Wilson: make him a forward when Schenn comes back.

Good for Mats

I'm happy for the guy. He was playing too well to retire, and it was plainly obvious for all to see that a) his presence on the Leafs would be detrimental to the team moving forward and b) he wasn't particularly wanted here.

There's been a lot of flack flying around about the guy since the summer. Frustrations have been (slightly) justified, and I made my position clear that Mats can do whatever he wants. It's a shame that the media had to turn this into the fiasco that it did, but this sort of thing is to be expected. I can't imagine what the Gaborik or Kovaklchuk situations would look like today if Mats had signed over the summer, but I guarantee you we'd be just as sick of that talk too.

*****

Mats is a lying dirtbag

First off, Mats and his word. He said last season that he believed in the total journey from camp to playoffs. Of course, he obviously hasn't followed through on that belief. But that's the funny thing about the future, it looks a whole lot different when it becomes the present. Mats was faced with the fact that his Leafs likely wouldn't need him come next season. As a recently married man of advancing age for a hockey player, I'm sure there was also some retirement pressure.

In the end, nobody can really speak to how they will feel about a situation until they have themselves mired in it. How many players retire and then come back? Is Jeremy Roenick to be villifieds for his lack of decision making on his career? Scott Niedermayer? Scott's indecision probably did more damage to the Ducks than Mats could have ever one to this Leafs team. Mats' statement was probably ill-advised to begin with, but perspective changes things, and all adults know that.

He owes us!

Second, the idea that Mats owed the Leafs the right to trade him, or at least an explanation of why he did what he did. I'm not going to lie, I'm pretty pissed about the lack of return on a possible asset, but that's JFJ's fault, not Mats'. I'd love to have Higgins, a first, a second, and Greg Pateryn back. Then again, I'd also like Tuuka Rask, a first, second, and fourth, Brad Boyes, Mike Cammalleri, and Roberto Luongo.

Mats chose to invoke a clause that our club had given him to block any potential moves, he completed the length of his contract, and he signed as a free agent at a point in the season that is well within his right to do. Nothing that he's done so far is wrong, or abusive of the system of NHL player contracts. I can't claim that there is somehow still a debt, or "deserving" to be had, I think that's an unrealistic view of the way the world works. I'd probably be a pretty unhappy guy if I thought I deserved anything more from instances where all formal agreements have been fulfilled.

He is a greedy moneybag

First off, he's not making 10mil off this deal, it's pro-rated at 10mil. He'll make roughly 5.5 when the season ends. Second, Mats already has about as much money as I can ever conceive of existing, and I refuse to believe that he actually needed an extra $5 million to throw on his log for Christmas. It does get chilly in mansions, though.

The Canucks are a competitive team, the Sedins are an automatic scoring line, Wellwood and Demitra are both streaky, oft-injured scorers, and adding Sundin will cement the scoring and depth of that team. Defensively and in goal (once Lou's back) the team is already set.

The other "front runners"? New York? They have no cap room, and three natural centers that should be producing close to a point a game. The assertions by the press that the Rags could move enough salary off to other teams, call up rookies to take the place of vets, and basically sabotage their team to add Sundin were ridiculous. This is a team that just ditched an aging superstar in order to focus on their organizational depth, did anyone actually believe they would burn off their depth to add an aging star? No team in the league is taking a salary dump without also taking a pick or prospect, a fact that Brian Burke and Cliff Fletcher are both well aware of.

Chicago? Once again, even less cap space, and a team who doesn't really need to worry about offense regardless. This team is still a couple of seasons away from contending, their captain and top scorers have never sniffed the playoffs. Chicago did well to learn a lesson from Pittsburgh and not blow it's load too early on veteran add-ons.

Thank god he didn't sign with Montreal or Ottawa.

Him signing with other competitive, cap-strapped teams (the rumours of him signing with the Sharks, a team paying Kyle McLaren 2.5 million to play in the AHL, were too funny) were interesting in the discussions they launched, but ultimately unrealistic. We've all seen how hard it is for GMs to make moves in this league, let alone multiple ones. Vancouver actually had the cap room, had a good team, and had players Mats was familiar with.

*****

In the end, I'll never attribute malice to actions that I can understand within a logical framework. Mats didn't want to move at the deadline, he didn't want to retire, and then he had to face the cold reality of a completely open future. When he signed with a team he signed with a good one, and he did so with the only team that made logistical sense from a salary cap perspective. Vancouver loses nothing adding Sundin. Most of the other teams rumoured in the running for him had a lot to lose, and a lot more complications, and so a deal wasn't done.

Adding a conspiracy or ulterior motives to these moves makes the entire situation make less sense, not more, and so I'm willing to side with the simple explanation. Sometimes, that's just how life works.