Kadri Discussion Thread: ''I never felt that Nazem ever listened to me'' - RW

[Menzinger]

Oh please. A massive set back to the team that could contend in 2016 for last place even with Kadri?

Replaceable.

Every player is replaceable- that doesn't mean every player should be traded.

This team's biggest problem since Sundin has left has been trying to find decent top six centres - why are we so eager to trade away the home grown, drafted one we have?

Nobody on these boards even knows what went on to lead to Kadri's recent benching. All of this speculation is all just pure conjecture at this point.

 

[TLeafsFan]

Gotta love that all the debate against Kadri is all based on intangibles, assumptions and character.

Yet EVERY "modern, fancy, advanced" stat out there proves that currently he's the BEST hope in the near future to ice a successful, possession driven, non defensively liable top line on a rebuilding Leafs team.

That fact shouldn't even be debatable anymore even if it sounds bleak to some.

 

[ECanuck]

This is true, he was the same way in London. Hunter benched him repeatedly for that kind of behavior, to try to right the ship. It apparently didnt work. You have to ask yourselves, is this a guy we want as part of the core going forward? He is not that entire problem, but he sure is a part of it.

Some guys just have a different approach to them. Say someone like Richards might seem arrogant. If you said something the wrong way and you had the authority to do so, don't be surprised if Mike Richards gives you a condescending laugh. He won't be the warmest body around or might be late here and there.

Now, someone like Bozak is different. Great guy and all positive response. Always on time and all. Great behaviour and awesome for the core right?

Who would you want going into battle conference final?

Richards or Bozak?

Easily Bozak right?

 

[Pookie]

You keep repeating that last word like it is relevant. Everyone is replaceable

Good. Then we don't need to get hung up on player 43.

Part of the team or not. Either or the team moves on.

 

[Red Piller]

Every player is replaceable- that doesn't mean every player should be traded.

This team's biggest problem since Sundin has left has been trying to find decent top six centres - why are we so eager to trade away the home grown, drafted one we have?

Nobody on these boards even knows what went on to lead to Kadri's recent benching. All of this speculation is all just pure conjecture at this point.

Where there is smoke, there is fire. As as the saying goes. The thing is though, its not just one isolated incident. He has been like this his entire career. And is likely not going to change. Nobody is saying the kid is not talented. He is. But you want team guys. You want your kids coming up learning from team guys, and guys who will put in a lot of work off the ice, and play the right way. Nazem Kadri does not strike me as that guy.

I get the argument for keeping him. I really do understand why you would want to. But from everything that has gone on, if it was my team, i would be fine with a trade as long as it brought back someone of similar skills and age.

 

[Pookie]

Every player is replaceable- that doesn't mean every player should be traded.

This team's biggest problem since Sundin has left has been trying to find decent top six centres - why are we so eager to trade away the home grown, drafted one we have?

Nobody on these boards even knows what went on to lead to Kadri's recent benching. All of this speculation is all just pure conjecture at this point.

There is a common theme between management regimes though.

What incentive would there be on the part of management...including new management... to continue to publicly spout this conjecture?

This player is good. But clearly the common themes amongst management regimes is that player has baggage.

If we go on a limb and accept that this stuff, common to multiple experienced hockey executives is unfair conjecture... What possible incentive do multiple regimes have to continue to perpetrate this sentiment?

 

[Menzinger]

Where there is smoke, there is fire. As as the saying goes. The thing is though, its not just one isolated incident. He has been like this his entire career. And is likely not going to change. Nobody is saying the kid is not talented. He is. But you want team guys. You want your kids coming up learning from team guys, and guys who will put in a lot of work off the ice, and play the right way. Nazem Kadri does not strike me as that guy.

I get the argument for keeping him. I really do understand why you would want to. But from everything that has gone on, if it was my team, i would be fine with a trade as long as it brought back someone of similar skills and age.

In general I think trading players for "character reasons" is almost always a terrible idea and usually results in the team getting burned.

Kadris on ice performance has been good - that's what matters most of all.

Nobody on this board has any real idea of what he's like in the dressing room.

 

[Red Piller]

Some guys just have a different approach to them. Say someone like Richards might seem arrogant. If you said something the wrong way and you had the authority to do so, don't be surprised if Mike Richards gives you a condescending laugh. He won't be the warmest body around or might be late here and there.

Now, someone like Bozak is different. Great guy and all positive response. Always on time and all. Great behaviour and awesome for the core right?

Who would you want going into battle conference final?

Richards or Bozak?

Easily Bozak right?

Id take Richards in a heartbeat. I dont think Richards was that way though. He is a guy that would go through the boards to win, and thats why id take him. I understand what youre saying though. But the fact remains, you need to cut out the infection and move on from it. And like it or not, Kadri falls into that catagory.

 

[Menzinger]

There is a common theme between management regimes though.

What incentive would there be on the part of management...including new management... to continue to publicly spout this conjecture?

This player is good. But clearly the common themes amongst management regimes is that player has baggage.

If we go on a limb and accept that this stuff, common to multiple experienced hockey executives is unfair conjecture... What possible incentive do multiple regimes have to continue to perpetrate this sentiment?

I'm not saying there isn't a perceived issue with Kadri (there is obviously something to some degree) - what is unclear is 1) how serious it is 2) how is it really impacting his on ice performance and 3) is it enough of an issue for managment to want to trade him.

Nobody on here has an answer to any of those things.

 

[Red Piller]

In general I think trading players for "character reasons" is almost always a terrible idea and usually results in the team getting burned.

Kadris on ice performance has been good - that's what matters most of all.

Nobody on this board has any real idea of what he's like in the dressing room.

Its true. Nobody does. But when things like this come out about a guy literally ALL the time, something is going on. And that something is not a good something. When you have ex coaches coming out and saying this kind of stuff about them (bad form on his part or not) SOMETHING is wrong. And its not just him, it was being said about Phil too. There comes a point in time where no matter how skilled these guys are, its time to cut and run. For the betterment of the team.

 

[TLeafsFan]

Its true. Nobody does. But when things like this come out about a guy literally ALL the time, something is going on. And that something is not a good something. When you have ex coaches coming out and saying this kind of stuff about them (bad form on his part or not) SOMETHING is wrong. And its not just him, it was being said about Phil too. There comes a point in time where no matter how skilled these guys are, its time to cut and run. For the betterment of the team.

Shany has said SPECIFICALLY that he views Kadri as a key part of the team's future. Has he ever said that about Kessel or Phaneuf.

Future leaders get pushed the hardest (the ones that actually earn their letter, anyway), this is a good thing.

 

[Giuseppe Sallo]

Kadri ain't going nowhere. I'm glad he will be a part of the new core.

 

[Red Piller]

Shany has said SPECIFICALLY that he views Kadri as a key part of the team's future. Has he ever said that about Kessel or Phaneuf.

Future leaders get pushed the hardest (the ones that actually earn their letter, anyway), this is a good thing.

Well, lets just say people in that position tend to say all the right things. I guess time will tell.

 

[TLeafsFan]

Well, lets just say people in that position tend to say all the right things. I guess time will tell.

Shanahan has to deal with the biggest challenge of any in the role before him where the team is concerned. A rabid fan base that is finally fed up with management. We've had enough.

He better means what he says. If he fails to do so, this time it cost much of Leafs Nation.

 

[Snow Dog]

Shany has said SPECIFICALLY that he views Kadri as a key part of the team's future. Has he ever said that about Kessel or Phaneuf.

Future leaders get pushed the hardest (the ones that actually earn their letter, anyway), this is a good thing.

kessel and Phaneuf have nothing to do with this situation.For what reason would their names have been brought up?

 

[TLeafsFan]

kessel and Phaneuf have nothing to do with this situation.For what reason would their names have been brought up?

Just in the fact of Shanahan never matching their names with HIS future core. Never.

 

[Snow Dog]

Just in the fact of Shanahan never matching their names with HIS future core. Never.

true

 

[yubbers]

To be fair, Shanahan has also never said a rebuild is happening since we're talking bout things he has said. Which isn't much.

But I agree that's a vote of confidence for Kadri

 

[Pookie]

I'm not saying there isn't a perceived issue with Kadri (there is obviously something to some degree) - what is unclear is 1) how serious it is 2) how is it really impacting his on ice performance and 3) is it enough of an issue for managment to want to trade him.

Nobody on here has an answer to any of those things.

No one has an answer but we can assume if it is common to all management teams it is something that is still a current concern.

 

[Deez Nuts]

Gotta love that all the debate against Kadri is all based on intangibles, assumptions and character.

Yet EVERY "modern, fancy, advanced" stat out there proves that currently he's the BEST hope in the near future to ice a successful, possession driven, non defensively liable top line on a rebuilding Leafs team.

That fact shouldn't even be debatable anymore even if it sounds bleak to some.

I guess the fact he is ranked #140 in scoring and his 45% FO average are irrelevant? It seems to me both his on and off ice actions are not desirable.

 

[Snow Dog]

No one has an answer but we can assume if it is common to all management teams it is something that is still a current concern.

There were posters here years ago questioning Kadri's character.Looks like they may have been on to something.

 

[Duke Silver]

I guess the fact he is ranked #140 in scoring and his 45% FO average are irrelevant? It seems to me both his on and off ice actions are not desirable.

I guess if we completely ignore minutes played and situational context...

 

[Hockey Talker29]

If Wilson meant he told Kadri to put it deep and Kadri instead carried it across the blue line trying to beat 3 guys we can infer that Kadri didn't listen... can't we?

He didn't listen one time. Did he never listen? Obviously not, from the story provided. So, one can actually infer that Wilson lied.

I'd bet $100,000 that Kadri listened to Wilson at least once, which would obviously refute Wilson's assertion that Kadri never listened. Furthermore, it's obvious that Kadri listened to Wilson a lot. Which is why he remained a member of the team.

Anyways, I'm done pointing out just how stupid and illogical Wilson's comment was. Some people get it.

 

[leafs in five]

There is a common theme between management regimes though.

What incentive would there be on the part of management...including new management... to continue to publicly spout this conjecture?

This player is good. But clearly the common themes amongst management regimes is that player has baggage.

If we go on a limb and accept that this stuff, common to multiple experienced hockey executives is unfair conjecture... What possible incentive do multiple regimes have to continue to perpetrate this sentiment?

another common theme amongst management regimes has been terrible management

 

[leafs in five]

anyway of course player #43 is replaceable you just get another player to wear #43