Ug...

Has anyone else had just about enough of the Toronto media? Like, entirely? Well okay, if not entirely, how about tired of hearing about how winning a Stanley Cup in backwater noplaces like Anaheim, Carolina, and Detroit is fine, really, well done, nice job, but if you really want to cement yourself in hockey, really really really want people to notice and care and not hit you intentionally in parking lots then what you should do is break contract, uproot your family, leave organizations you've handbuilt into the envy of the entire league and submit your resume for the Best Damn Job In Sports: President and GM of the Toronto Maple Leafs. Only helming the Leafs to a Stanley Cup can bring you true hockey immortality. Like the third brother paraphrased to Indiana Jones, "You [will] have chosen wisely."

Honestly. That's enough. The Leafs are not exactly a team with any history of organizational functionality. Since their last Cup win in 1967 they've made the finals exactly, and this is rounding up, zero times. In that time the Oilers, Canucks, Flames, Canadiens and Senators have each lost in the finals more times than the Leafs have even played in it. I guess that isn't anything for those franchises to be proud of, but they've also combined to win sixteen Cups in that time. That's compared with eight finals losses, for a winning percentage of roughly .750. That's kind of inaccurate of course, since some of those finals were against each other, but it still shows an impressive showing for the rest of Canada's teams compared with the Leafs. This is a crappy organization that hasn't won and seems fine with that. Great working environment, eh?

Of course, in the eyes of the Toronto media, that's what makes the Leafs challenge so enticing: a chance to break a forty-year record of ineptitute in the biggest hockey market in the world. There's certainly truth to that, a challenge that big is always desirable. Just ask Sir Edmund Hillary. My issue is with the three names the media keep throwing out (Brian Burke, Jim Rutherford, Ken Holland) are so preposterously unattainable. That and degrading their accomplishments because they weren't leading the Leafs at the time is just flat-out rude.

If I'm wrong about anything here I'll gladly bake up a big fat apology blog, but I'm pretty sure these statements won't be disproved. Brian Burke keeps telling everyone who will listen (which are not the same people who are asking him, since they're Toronto media) that he and his wife are happy in Anaheim. His team is the defending champs, he has the best set of defensemen in the world (second place goes to last year's blueline) who will lead a serious charge to defend said Cup, and he is currently discussing a long-term contract. He's said many times that he won't take the job, and remember, this is one stubborn guy. He's still won't talk to Kevin Lowe after Lowe handed him a top-five pick in this year's draft. Imagine if Lowe had done something bad to Burke...

I don't even really see the Leafs actually going after Jim Rutherford, despite the name coming up frequently. Since 1994, he's been the team president, GM, and even part-owner, I was surprised to learn. Seems pretty rooted to me. Besides, the Leafs seem like they really want to hit a homerun, namewise, and won't settle for a guy who may have a Cup and a finals appearence, but also managed a lot of crummy Whalers/Hurricanes teams since 1994. Since 1997-1998 (9 seasons), the Hurricanes' first season after moving from Hartford, the team has missed the playoffs five times and lost in the first round in two others. That's two great playoff runs mixed into a lot of mediocrity. That 2006 team was truly a very good team, finishing second in the Eastern Conference with Eric Staal emerging as a true star. They did, however, catch some breaks in the playoffs run. They were down 2-0 to Montreal who then lost Saku Koivu which, from watching most of that series, was devestating and ended up costing them the series. They legitimately beat the Devils badly, a big surprise, before needing seven games to beat a Buffalo team that was missing its best FOUR defensemen, and then needed seven games to beat an eighth-seeded Oiler team that was missing its ridiculously hot goalie. Look, winning the Stanley Cup is always impressive and a credit to everyone in the organization, but can you really claim to be a great teambuilder if your Stanley Cup-winning team misses the playoffs the next season? In the weaker Eastern Conference, no less? I'll whittle down the Hurricanes a little further just by looking at their 2002 season where, after winning the worst division in hockey, actually had the second fewest points of ALL playoff-bound teams. This was a case of a very average team riding hot goaltending and trapping defense to the Finals, where after winning the first game and taking the Wings to triple-overtime in Game 2, were soundly beaten by a great team. Then missed the playoffs the following year. It seems to me that this is probably not the track record the Leafs are looking for if they're serious about building a team that can continually challenge for the Cup year after year. Not that they could get him anyways.

Ken Holland runs one of the premier teams in the entire league, a team with a legacy equal to or greater than that of the Leafs. Saying that the Leafs' job has more prestige is like telling Ted Thompson to ditch the Packers and get a REAL job with the Cowboys. He's not moving, you can't have him, stop looking. There. A short paragraph.

Leaf fans can forget about the boatload of prospects and picks that Mats Sundin will fetch, because they won't trade him either. He won't let them. He's said over and over, to the same reporters who won't listen to Brian Burke, that he won't waive his no-trade clause and wants to finish his career in Toronto. Since he's an unrestricted free agent after this season, it's possible the Leafs won't resign him and use the money elsewhere. Actually, the more I think about it, the more I see the Leafs doing that. Can you image the blowback if they let him walk away for nothing, after all the talk about first rounders and top prospects he'd bring in a deadline deal? Hilarious. My guess is they will re-sign him, maybe mid-season, to a two-year extension. The Leafs are very concerned with "legacies" and "history" and "tradition" and certainly won't let "winning" get the way, and it'll look good to have the highest-scoring player in team history retire there. That's really the best option, fans appreciate stuff like that (don't they, Mr. Lowe?). Trading him is the best team option of course, but failing that they're a better team with him. Trade some overpaid defensemen, clear salary, let the kids play out the season.

My guesses then are that the Leafs don't get any of those GMs, all of which are impossible and one that, in my rightfully-ignored opinion, isn't that good of a choice anyways. Sundin stays, no team can afford (or fit under their cap) any of the rest of the Leafs' undesirables, and the team stays intact for years to come and continues their cycle of ineptitude. It's best to end on a note of hope, isn't it?