"This is a franchise player" (Luke Schenn)

[diceman934]

As mentioned previously by some, Luke's development was handled as poorly as can be. The team seemed clueless at the time. Everyone was so obsessed with prospects getting bigger and stronger that they lost sight of what actually got the players drafted in the first place. Instead of working on his conditioning and agility, Schenn got bigger and slower. Which was the last thing you needed in a speedier and evolving NHL. Not to mention all the extra crap that comes with being a top leafs prospect.

Watching the whole Like Schenn fiasco actually gives me such a deeper appreciation for having followed Nazem Kadri all the way through the juniors, AHL to the NHL. His development was not linear but the team really stuck it out with him and Babcock practically made his career these last few seasons by inspiring him to be an elite player in his role. Years past, Naz could do no right and was treated as a door mat.

Naz was handled as poorly as you can handle a prospect. It is all Naz that he overcame the poor treatment of him and Babcock giving him the benefit of doubt as he had little else in the way of a good player other then Gardiner and Rielly.

Luke was mishandled in a large way. Asked to get bigger and presented as the next Captain of the Leafs by Burke. He was fine at 215 pounds and gaining weight hurt his game to the point of ruining him. We could sure use a faster version of him right now.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

It's fine.

We drafted Luke(5) instead of some scrub in Erik Karlsson(15).

It's fine. The therapy has helped and I'm over it.

It's fine.

I remember Pierre mentioning that Karlsson would be really good at the time of the selection when most were saying wtf. Irony.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Except we did get something that fit quite well in the cap space he, Bozak, Komarov and Martin vacated. Guess who?

would have been nice to have those picks/prospects too though

Ya, getting nothing from these departures isn’t much of an “accomplishment”. That is a total backtrack (short/artful memory) from the hundreds of JVR (Bozak) + 2nd + AHL defender (Nielsen, whomever) for stud/top 4 defender trade proposals that we made. LOL.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Ya, getting nothing from these departures isn’t much of an “accomplishment”. That is a total backtrack (short/artful memory) from the hundreds of JVR (Bozak) + 2nd + AHL defender (Nielsen, whomever) for stud/top 4 defender trade proposals that we made. LOL.

Would have been nice if we dealt JVR around the time of the Kessel trade when his contract was still seen as a big value add. I guess it's all spilled milk now but good asset management is the difference between being Pittsburgh and being Chicago, at this point the Leafs are going to have a high peak and it's just a matter if it's for 5-6 years or 10-15 years

 

[Al14]

It's fine.

We drafted Luke(5) instead of some scrub in Erik Karlsson(15).

It's fine. The therapy has helped and I'm over it.

It's fine.

I'm glad you are over it.

Unfortunately, I witnessed the whole Schenn draft live. I still to this day don't understand why we had to trade up to get him either.

My Schenn jersey hasn't seen the light of day in a very long time!

 

[HoweHullOrr]

Would have been nice if we dealt JVR around the time of the Kessel trade when his contract was still seen as a big value add. I guess it's all spilled milk now but good asset management is the difference between being Pittsburgh and being Chicago, at this point the Leafs are going to have a high peak and it's just a matter if it's for 5-6 years or 10-15 years

Yes it’s spilled milk, but I have to wonder if any team will have a 15 year dynasty post CBA, or 10 years even. I think even an Oilers equivalent of 5 Cups in 7 years would be amazing. That was done PRE Cap as well.

I was all for trading JVR 2 years before he hit free agency and mentioned this many times. I would have taken less than those pie-in-the-sky proposals too. They were never going to happen and seem eirily reminiscent of the more recent ones that we see now.

Oh well.

 

[Menzinger]

The Leafs did have one of the worst player development systems in the NHL when they drafted him which did t help.

Of course that wouldn’t have helped his ultra low hockey iq and slowness.

With better development he may have become a reliable #5 sort of like Polak was able to be. But certainly was never going to be worthy of his draft selection

 

[Randy Randerson]

Yes it’s spilled milk, but I have to wonder if any team will have a 15 year dynasty post CBA, or 10 years even. I think even an Oilers equivalent of 5 Cups in 7 years would be amazing. That was done PRE Cap as well.

I was all for trading JVR 2 years before he hit free agency and mentioned this many times. I would have taken less than those pie-in-the-sky proposals too. They were never going to happen and seem eirily reminiscent of the more recent ones that we see now.

Oh well.

I start counting the Penguins' contention window in 2006/2007 when they had their first top 10 finish in the league, they've only missed the top 10 once in that window and haven't missed the playoffs. I think that's what a cap era dynasty looks like, always giving yourself a chance to win - and mathematically that's a way better way to build a winner than to be REALLY good for a year or two, your odds are way better being top 10 for a long time

I would have also taken a pick+prospect type deal to the highest bidder on JVR

 

[nsleaf]

I start counting the Penguins' contention window in 2006/2007 when they had their first top 10 finish in the league, they've only missed the top 10 once in that window and haven't missed the playoffs. I think that's what a cap era dynasty looks like, always giving yourself a chance to win - and mathematically that's a way better way to build a winner than to be REALLY good for a year or two, your odds are way better being top 10 for a long time

I would have also taken a pick+prospect type deal to the highest bidder on JVR

Agree, and sometimes that means management making unpopular and perhaps regretable moves to maintain the winning ways. We will see, Leafs are just getting started at this "winning" thing IMO.

 

[Randy Randerson]

Agree, and sometimes that means management making unpopular and perhaps regretable moves to maintain the winning ways. We will see, Leafs are just getting started at this "winning" thing IMO.

when you say "unpopular and regrettable" do you mean decisions like keeping JVR, or decisions like trading the JVR types for things that will help down the line?

agree that the window is just opening though

 

[nsleaf]

when you say "unpopular and regrettable" do you mean decisions like keeping JVR, or decisions like trading the JVR types for things that will help down the line?

agree that the window is just opening though

Yea, sometimes your damned if you do and damned if you don't. Roll the dice sort of thing.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

I start counting the Penguins' contention window in 2006/2007 when they had their first top 10 finish in the league, they've only missed the top 10 once in that window and haven't missed the playoffs. I think that's what a cap era dynasty looks like, always giving yourself a chance to win - and mathematically that's a way better way to build a winner than to be REALLY good for a year or two, your odds are way better being top 10 for a long time

I would have also taken a pick+prospect type deal to the highest bidder on JVR

There are so many definitions of “success” or a dynasty, so you could say it’s user definable.

I set a higher standard and think in terms of dynasties and/or multiple Cups within a tight window e.g., 4 Cups in 6 years, or 5 Cups in 7 years. I guess a team will eventually do (exceed this) it, but Chicago and Pittsburgh are the best so far in the NHL CAP era.

For me top 10 seed is a much lower bar (too low), but we all measure success differently.

Is Pittsburgh’s run over is a question. Chicago’s run has ended you’d think.

Re: JVR - Once we drafted Nylander JVR fell out as a core piece. The drafting of Marner was the exclamation point.

 

[Leafidelity]

Looking back I think it's obvious he was rushed. And coached by Ron Wilson

 

[Randy Randerson]

Yea, sometimes your damned if you do and damned if you don't. Roll the dice sort of thing.

I think we're getting to the point where you don't want to sell, but on a year like last year I would have tried to get something that would help down the line. If we'd gotten a mid-late 1st and a B+ prospect (like a Grundstrom) for JVR, I think we undoubtedly have enough spare non-roster parts to go get the defenseman we need without gutting the farm.

I'm definitely a planner and asset manager by nature, but in a year where you're not favoured to get out of the 1st round I would opt for the futures. I think we're in a similar position with Gardiner this year but it's even harder to deal him when you probably have home ice for a couple of rounds

There are so many definitions of “success” or a dynasty, so you could say it’s user definable.

I set a higher standard and think in terms of dynasties and/or multiple Cups within a tight window e.g., 4 Cups in 6 years, or 5 Cups in 7 years. I guess a team will eventually do it, but Chicago and Pittsburgh are the best so far in the NHL CAP era.

For me top 10 is a much lower bar, but we all measure success differently.

Is Pittsburgh’s run over is a question. Chicago’s run has ended you’d think.

For sure, it's all a spectrum. And honestly if we end up with comparable success to either of those franchises I think we're pretty happy.

I think its easier to track if you think about it in terms of the team cores, those stay relatively the same in the contention window of the franchise - Kane&Toews vs Sid&Geno. The parts around them change, and Pittsburgh has been successful enough at doing so that their contention window opened a few years earlier than Chicago's and is still going long after Chicago's has closed

in either case I think we're going to be very good for a while, but if we can find the revolving door of Neal/Kunitz/Jokinen/Dupuis/Guentzel/Sheary/Hornqvist/Schultz type supplements with good asset management, manage to draft well enough to get contributors like Maatta/Goligoski/Dumoulin with higher round picks from outside of the top 20 and get a few non-top 20 pick stars like Letang/Murray then I think our window could stay open longer.

I also think that Pittsburgh had a better core than Chicago to start with in that Sid&Geno>Toews&Kane, and that we're somewhere in between (Matthews>Toews, Marner=<Kane, our core beyond that > either, which I know seems like a grand claim since we haven't won anything yet but that's the way it looks to me right now). If we can add a little Detroit-style late-round star finding then this could be really sustainable

One thing I think we are falling prey to is that the guys who our team is built around that we've drafted are all high picks, and that draft pedigree propels them to bigger second contracts. If we can find some guys to supplement out of slots that aren't expected to be stars I think we could parlay that into some better second contract AAV's

 

[nsleaf]

I think we're getting to the point where you don't want to sell, but on a year like last year I would have tried to get something that would help down the line. If we'd gotten a mid-late 1st and a B+ prospect (like a Grundstrom) for JVR, I think we undoubtedly have enough spare non-roster parts to go get the defenseman we need without gutting the farm.

I'm definitely a planner and asset manager by nature, but in a year where you're not favoured to get out of the 1st round I would opt for the futures. I think we're in a similar position with Gardiner this year but it's even harder to deal him when you probably have home ice for a couple of rounds


For sure, it's all a spectrum. And honestly if we end up with comparable success to either of those franchises I think we're pretty happy.

I think its easier to track if you think about it in terms of the team cores, those stay relatively the same in the contention window of the franchise - Kane&Toews vs Sid&Geno. The parts around them change, and Pittsburgh has been successful enough at doing so that their contention window opened a few years earlier than Chicago's and is still going long after Chicago's has closed

in either case I think we're going to be very good for a while, but if we can find the revolving door of Neal/Kunitz/Jokinen/Dupuis/Guentzel/Sheary/Hornqvist/Schultz type supplements with good asset management, manage to draft well enough to get contributors like Maatta/Goligoski/Dumoulin with higher round picks from outside of the top 20 and get a few non-top 20 pick stars like Letang/Murray then I think our window could stay open longer.

I also think that Pittsburgh had a better core than Chicago to start with in that Sid&Geno>Toews&Kane, and that we're somewhere in between (Matthews>Toews, Marner=<Kane, our core beyond that > either, which I know seems like a grand claim since we haven't won anything yet but that's the way it looks to me right now). If we can add a little Detroit-style late-round star finding then this could be really sustainable

One thing I think we are falling prey to is that the guys who our team is built around that we've drafted are all high picks, and that draft pedigree propels them to bigger second contracts. If we can find some guys to supplement out of slots that aren't expected to be stars I think we could parlay that into some better second contract AAV's

I'm glad I'm not the GM, tough calls are likely required and maintaining a winning team will be difficult in a cap regulated NHL. I'll be watching and hoping for success.

 

[HoweHullOrr]

I think it’s a hard act to constantly year after year find the supporting cast out of later 1st round picks and shrewd + cheap trades. A couple of down years in the draft, or an overpayment, or some combination of both is all it takes. Chicago or Pittsburgh’s achievements shouldn’t be minimized as it isn’t as easy as it seems.

Also, was Keith part of Chicago’s core? You could make that argument. Keith was drafted long before Toews/Kane. Reilly would be our Keith. It’s kind of user definable.

Of course, we should at least win one playoff round before we get too carried away with success/dynasty talk too LOL.

 

[indigobuffalo]

Ron Wilson and Burke ruined his development

He was just too big. Today’s NHL is all about speed. You can’t ruin genetic makeup.

 

[The Iceman]

nothing. no picks, no prospects, nothing.

Was the team supposed to sell JVR of last year ahead of the playoffs?
That would not have gone over too well.

 

[RobBrown4PM]

Wilson was an idiot. He had Schenn not only playing on his off side, but he made it mandatory that all our defencemen played with both their hands on their sticks.

 

[Boutette]

Ya, getting nothing from these departures isn’t much of an “accomplishment”. That is a total backtrack (short/artful memory) from the hundreds of JVR (Bozak) + 2nd + AHL defender (Nielsen, whomever) for stud/top 4 defender trade proposals that we made. LOL.

And what team make that trade with the Leafs? The answer: not one of them.

 

[Boutette]

would have been nice to have those picks/prospects too though

And who replaces JVR heading into only the 3nd playoffs for the leafs in 14 years?

 

[Boutette]

would have been nice to have those picks/prospects too though

You do remember that he was key keeping the scoring going when Matthews got injured, right? GMs hoping to go far in the playoffs do not deliberately weaken their teams.

 

[Judas Tavares]

I remember the day of his draft well. I was at work and someone who was a former Toronto paper writer came in. I asked him about who he thought they would draft, basically asking who between Hodgson, Boedker and Wilson. He mentioned he felt they would trade up for "one of those defencemen". I remember thinking no way that would happen but if it did, it would be amazing.

When they traded up for Schenn, I absolutely thought this was the turning point. I was very excited.

 

[Orfieus]

I'm in awe with the narrow mindlessness in this thread and I do feel sorry for Luke. Luke would have been an amazing defenceman had the NHL kept the redline. He trained his entire career to be one type of defenceman and came into the league the moment when that type of defenceman was on the way out.

Maybe if Leaf management didn't rush him, maybe if Leaf management took closer care of his physical training, Luke could have been a good defenceman, the guy still made $20.5m in the NHL. And how come no one is putting any blame on Philly?

 

[Leafs87]

If he was developed properly he could of been much better