Jyrki21 Rebel Sell + Moneyball = Life

Joined: 18 Oct 2007 Posts: 1722 Location: Ottawa, ON  |
Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 1:10 pm Post subject: MacLean's Magazine: Why the Leafs Stink |
|
|
Continuing the proud tradition of Canadian media at the national level thinking that the whole country is really, really interested in the Toronto Maple Leafs, MacLean's tackles the age-old question of why nothing goes their way.
Nothing that hasn't already been done to bits including on this board, (guaranteed sellouts, unwavering fan base, media kid gloves while the team can't draft/develop talent), but it's kind of funny that it's the cover story in the country's best known magazine.
http://www.macleans.ca/canada/national/article.jsp?content=20080402_25296_25296&page=1
Some excerpts:
| Quote: |
| To be precise, however, the Leafs wield what economists call "monopolistic market power" — not quite the same as being a monopoly, but similar. Colin Jones, professor emeritus at the University of Victoria, has spent much of his career studying the economics of pro hockey. "Pretty much any study you look at, you'll find a very strong correlation between attendance and winning." But the Leafs, he says, are different. "They can do whatever the hell they like and the attendance and merchandise sales go up, and TV and radio contracts hold up. In terms of competitive performance, this monopolistic power is a very bad thing." |
| Quote: |
The Leafs have relied on the pro sports equivalent: signing veteran free agents to compensate for their woeful record in drafting and developing players. Over the past 20 years, the Leafs have drafted just two players — Tomas Kaberle and Felix Potvin — who went on to play in the NHL all-star game. Over the same period, Montreal drafted eight future all-stars. Currently, 17 of the Habs' 25 players, including virtually all of its nucleus of young talent — Carey Price, Andrei Markov, Andrei Kostitsyn, Tomas Plekanec, Chris Higgins — were acquired through the draft.
This is due in part to the fact that the Habs have been subject to a healthy boom/bust cycle common to most teams. When the team falters, it uses high draft picks and a strong development system to rebuild. The Leafs organization, behaving like a true monopoly, has opted to use its money for a series of short-term fixes — Ed Belfour, Owen Nolan, Brian Leetch, Jason Blake to name a few. These moves keep the team suspended in a kind of permanent stasis. Not good enough to fight for the Cup, not bad enough to effectively rebuild. |
| Quote: |
| The Maple Leafs' history of toxic boardroom politics can be traced back to the late 1960s, when Harold Ballard began his Machiavellian climb from director and minority shareholder to absolutist overlord of Maple Leaf Gardens. In 1971, already facing fraud charges over his misuse of team money, Ballard managed to force his former partner John Bassett out of the ownership group, then gained full control just weeks later, when his erstwhile ally Stafford Smythe died. Under Ballard's often bizarre stewardship, the Leafs were in a constant state of disarray. In the 20 years between 1970 and Ballard's death in 1990, the Leafs changed head coaches 15 times, and a succession of star players, including Dave Keon, Bernie Parent, Lanny McDonald and Darryl Sittler, finally left the increasingly abysmal team. |
| Quote: |
| Peddie formed a three-person hiring committee with Quinn and Dryden (two men who both thought they could do the job perfectly well). According to people familiar with the situation, Quinn wanted one candidate, Dryden another, and neither man would budge. Ferguson — a 36-year-old who'd never been an NHL general manager — was finally hired as a compromise candidate, backed by Peddie and Tanenbaum. In other words, nobody really thought Ferguson was the best man for the job, he was merely the one person everybody could live with. That's neither a ringing endorsement nor a recipe for success, but that's how arrogant and fractious organizations often do business. |
_________________
 |
|