[News] Burke to ANA as a Pro Scout

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by kipperfan

Even if the ownership was entertaining the idea of ditching Feaster, do you really think King and Edwards would ever agree to give Burke the anatomy he demands? I would personally say hell friggen no. Burke's worried about a third hand on the wheel, he'd have about five hands on the wheel if he ever decided to come here.

[Stay Golden]

I'm not a fan of Burke's demeanor but he definatly would be building a tougher team then Feaster is.
Combine both Gm's and you would have a nice blend of skill and grit.

Give thenm seperatly 1 simple test question.
Comeau is going to be available to resign or let go to FA what do you do?

Hire or keep the GM with the right answer.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by Hemi-Cuda

between Feaster and Burke, i'd take Burke

i'd rather have someone else entirely (i think the Blue Jackets scored with Jarmo Kekalainen), but i have zero faith in Feaster to rebuild this team

Under Burke's watch the Leafs have finished the following in the conference:

• 2008-09 12th
• 2009-10 15th
• 2010-11 10th
• 2011-12 13th

In the three prior seasons they were 9th twice and 12th. I don't see any results from that blowhard. I'm not saying the Flames have been good. I'm saying Burke talks a huge game, treats people like crap and has a huge ego. All that has gotten him in the last 15 years was the Anaheim Cup, which he inherited. Other than that, nothing.

You can like or not like Feaster; I don't care. To say Burke is the answer, in my opinion, is ridonkulous.

[moon]

Originally Posted by squiggs96

All that has gotten him in the last 15 years was the Anaheim Cup, which he inherited. Other than that, nothing.

Do people really still believe this "inherited" crap about Burke and that team?

[Stay Golden]

I still feel Feaster requires more than just 1 full season to right this ship. But that doesn't mean he hasn't made his share of a few mistakes.

Babchuk
Coma
Thinking that converting 4 different wingers to Center's or to take various faceoffs is going to be good work.
and the Regehr trade i still firmly believe there was better deal than Byron and Butler horrible return.

Hudler
Cervenka
resigning Stempniak
Wideman
all good moves.

[Ark2]

Originally Posted by Stay Golden

Hudler
Cervenka
resigning Stempniak
Wideman
all good moves.

How are these good moves exactly? I realize that a player is only required to have 2 consecutive good games before his acquisition is deemed a roaring success and a "freakin" thread is created for him, but looking beyond that, I just don't see it. Right now, Feaster just seems to be signing players that are skilled and not worrying about how they fit into the build of this team or if they address our actual needs.

Coming into this season, the last thing that we needed were more small, soft wingers. We were pretty good on that front. Yet, since there were only small, soft wingers available, that's what we got. It doesn't seem like there is any real plan in place other than make some minor tweaks and hope and pray that it is good enough to get this team a playoff berth.

The way that I see it, Feaster is a smart guy. He realizes that this is his last NHL GM gig before he gets fired. Making the playoffs likely extends his shelf life by 1-2 years and that seems to be what he is going for.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by moon

Do people really still believe this "inherited" crap about Burke and that team?

Well, go on.

[Calgary4LIfe]

People really want Burke?

Wow, he really put together a great team in TO.

If the Flames are going to fire Feaster, it is going to be because there will be a rebuild. Burke is not the 'rebuild' kind of guy, imo.

[Meers]

Originally Posted by Calgary4LIfe

Wow, he really put together a great team in TO.

In all fairness, the team Burke put together is playing pretty well these days and is ahead of the Flames in the standings.

[moon]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Well, go on.

Well he brought in Pronger, Niedermayer, Beauchemin, Selanne, Marchant.

All guys that played a huge role in the team winning the Cup.

Seems like he did a lot more than walk into a Cup winning team without making any changes to improve the team. I have a hard time believing they win the cup without their top 3 defensemen and leading scorer.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by moon

Do people really still believe this "inherited" crap about Burke and that team?

Do people really believe he built that team in one year?

[moon]

Originally Posted by squiggs96

Do people really believe he built that team in one year?

Who said he built that team in one year?

[FAN]

Originally Posted by DeluxeMoustache

Here is a quote from Burke that should provide some colour as to what may have happened:

"Every job I've ever take, I've told the owner 'Look, there are only two hands on the steering wheel if you hire me. They're both mine. If I ever look down and there's a third hand on the steering wheel, you've got a problem. So unless you're willing to give that much autonomy to me, I'll help you find someone else. Not everyone needs that much autonomy. I need to be in charge. You can ride in the front and get out and push if we get stuck, if you want, but you don't touch that steering wheel.'"


Suppose he negotiated that autonomy up front. Then suppose the Luongo rumours have validity... as soon as the CBA is closing, he is out the door. If ownership does not want that deal, then there is your third hand on the wheel...

Burke has his principles but he's ultimately an employee. There aren't many jobs where the owner would simply sign the checks Burke wants him to sign. Burke is full of #### if he's trying to tell people that he's had 100% autonomy in every NHL GM job he took.

[Psytic]

He would walk onto the Flames GM job bring an Iginla trade to ownership that he claims has to happen or he quits and be fired all in the same day.

[AR_Six]

1. Without the moves Burke made Anaheim doesn't win that year;
2. He also built nearly the entire core (give or take a goalie and a Hamhuis) of what is currently a very good Vancouver team;
3. The Leafs are actually turning the corner the last couple of years. The problem is in net. It's not consistent. When they're getting league-average goaltending, they're a playoff team - a low seed but a playoff team nonetheless. Then when the netminding falls apart they're a lottery pick contender. It's the entirety of the difference.

I think Burke is a pretty good GM who has a couple of terrible policies (like setting up arbitrary rules that can't possibly make his team better) who will have a GM position again in the not too distant future.

[afc wimbledon]

I actually think Burke would be a great choice for GM in Calgary, he has shown a great deal of talent at putting deals together, he is a loud mouth, but generally only to take the heat off the team when things are a bit shaky which is frankly brilliant.
I think, given the absoloute lack of team assetts in Calgary, his one weakness, impatience, would be checked.

I think Burke would probably do a good job of extracting the maximum value for Iginla and Kipper in a rebuild.

[FAN]

Originally Posted by AR_Six

1. Without the moves Burke made Anaheim doesn't win that year;
2. He also built nearly the entire core (give or take a goalie and a Hamhuis) of what is currently a very good Vancouver team;
3. The Leafs are actually turning the corner the last couple of years. The problem is in net. It's not consistent. When they're getting league-average goaltending, they're a playoff team - a low seed but a playoff team nonetheless. Then when the netminding falls apart they're a lottery pick contender. It's the entirety of the difference.

The problem with Burke is he knows how to add key pieces, but doesn't know how to complete a team or acquire good goaltending. You can use poor netminding as an excuse for the Leafs struggles, but poor netminding was also what also doomed Burke's Canuck teams. And ya Burke inherited Giguere in Anaheim.

With that said, I too think Burke is a good GM who needed to be humbled. He is better off being the GM of a small market team.

[DeluxeMoustache]

GMs don't always see dramatic results the first year or two. Burke has a blueprint, he builds from the defense.

He has a very good d corps in Toronto. 4 guys over 210 who play like they are over 210, even on the third pairing Fraser hits as much as Phaneuf and can scrap, and Franson is no pushover. Liles is smaller but brings puck moving ability and offensive production. And Phaneuf is one of the oldest at 27 years old.

He drafted Bieksa and Pronger was a key addition for him in Anaheim. You are not in for an easy Bouw type night when you are playing against a Burke team.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by moon

Who said he built that team in one year?

Since Anaheim won the Cup in the 2nd year Burke was there, he either built it in one year or inherited the team. I'm not saying he didn't make some good moves during that time, but he inherited most of that team. He didn't build it.

[Vinny01]

I can see Burke getting a shot in Calgary if the Flames bottom out this year. Edwards wants to win now and Burke is impatient and wants the same when he runs a team. The fact Burke wants autonomy is the only thing I could see being a problem.

I am not sure if Feaster's job is at risk but if it is I would rather they promote Weisbroad than bring in Burke.