Why I've been chatting shit about Toronto for weeks

[Victor 10,940]

Note: Wrote this a couple days ago for next week but now seems like an opportune moment to post it. RIP

 

 

You may have noticed I've been on a bit of a crusade against the management of the Toronto Legion. Be it in responses to Devise's Media Spots or in comments on trade threads, I think I've been pretty scathing in my review of Toronto's strategy. Here's why.

 

For context, I think Devise is one of the best GMs in VHL history. He's done it 3 times before and won cups each time, but there is one caveat. Both New York teams and the Cologne team he picked up and led to championships (in S32, S42, S52, and S53) had already gone through rebuilds – Devise just needed to make some final adjustments to push them over the edge. Each time he also left before the next rebuild had to begin. So this, his fourth GM stint, now in Toronto, is unique in that the Legion were more than a few tweaks away from the cup.

 

However, the approach hasn't changed and that is the concern. Devise has sold the farm yet again but for why? Toronto is probably now the fourth favourite (or not) for the cup this season, and then will lose Ironside, Stopko, Louth (Editor's note: LOOOOOL), and Kane (not even confirmed coming back) – basically all its stars and half its core. At that point, Toronto will have to decide whether to buy even more or sell what's left. There's a problem with buying – the Legion now have very little to offer and no one is expected to rebuild soon. But if they sell, they're then back to what Devise has been trying to avoid: tanking without having their own (S66 in this case) draft picks.
 

I understand the Legion has horrific luck in recent seasons. They lost the lottery twice when they had their own pick (missing out on Twinger and Kastelic), but their pick won it both times they didn't have it (Thompson and Sullivan Jr.). Dollar also complicated matters by trading Davis and Malenko before stepping down. But did they need to give up so much for Davos leftovers last off-season? Did they need to go for broke this off-season? I don't think so. I may be proven wrong – unfancied teams have won the cup before. But you can't say the odds are not very much against Toronto.

[Fire Tortorella 2,653]

chat shit get banged

[Victor 10,940]

1 hour ago, Fire Hakstol said:

chat shit get banged

Probably not by Toronto though let's be real.

[Devise 4,475]

If the impression is I"m just trying to do the typical Devise I think I totally think you missed how there was no avenue to rebuild? Had the Ironside ruling been different at the start, and not opened the can of worms it did re GMing I may not of made the decisions I made. I'm fully aware the team isn't in the best possible spot and I wasn't at any point attempting or did I say it was. In fact I often said we were pivoting to get more on a regular course of action. Which I actually what I think we did. Now instead of having to go fully down some long rebuild hole, we can retool in 65 and 66 and be a better team. And then likely push for rebuild again 67 or 68.

 

Because of the Rift creation, the goalie market, us not having our own pick in S64 when I took over the team, all those things led me to believe that the best course of action was to temporarily compete now while I still had older players and while the teams (CGY) were at a point where it made sense. Like had I  not bought this season, would CGY of been forced to compete? Like seriously, HSK had to get cap space just to sign Ko Kane when all was said and done. The league is FULL up right now, it's why expansion is a point of conversation in the BoG, but I don't need to tell you this Victor.

 

The reality here is that I'm here for 8+, I took over at a very inopportune time when the rules for GM transitions were still way different than they are now; for the record, I wouldn't of created a goalie and I'd of kept Ironside as the GM player until he retired if I could go back and make actions GM's are allowed to make now based on the current rulings. The current phase we are in is still better than not making the playoffs at all and having to wait just as long to compete because we were screwed either way with the state of the team when I took over combined with the early decisions I made that couldn't be taken back. (Although the Blue did say I could probably position switch Rift, honestly it's more losing out on a GM player already in the prime of his career that was bugging me.) 

 

I'd also like to point out how despite the fact it was the 10% of NY's TOR pick that won the lotto, getting the HSK S64 which is a 30% and giving up my 65 which is unlikely to be a lotto at all, are good moves. Again, do people think I traded my own lotto in S64? I did not trade that pick. McKnight, already on the team, had it. What logic is to to struggle as a team in S63, if we have no quality picks in the S64 draft? Again, not a great situation to be in but just sitting around and sucking for a season and then getting no good picks out of it and waiting and waiting is the lamest boringest approach ever. It'd probably of costed me any extensions with half the players I signed already because most of them said they'd much rather compete too. So yeah. 

Edited December 23, 2018 by Devise

[Victor 10,940]

It truly is the season of giving as Devise gifts us a FOUR paragraph retort.

 

You making the league more interesting is great but it's not your responsibility as Toronto GM to be bothered by what would have happened to Calgary if you don't buy their players.

 

Who are the players you might have lost if you didn't try to compete? Lew Bronstein? Everyone else is on entry level contracts.

 

Yes the situation wasn't ideal but I feel like you overthought it. There was no irreversible path until you made the Davos trade last season (out of which you now have just Warlock left). I think Toronto would be back sooner if you had tanked even without your S64 first (not like it was a one round draft) than whenever it'll be good again now.

 

but anyway that's just my opinion, at least one franchise is a bit different lol.

[Devise 4,475]

1 minute ago, Victor said:

It truly is the season of giving as Devise gifts us a FOUR paragraph retort.

 

You making the league more interesting is great but it's not your responsibility as Toronto GM to be bothered by what would have happened to Calgary if you don't buy their players.

 

Who are the players you might have lost if you didn't try to compete? Lew Bronstein? Everyone else is on entry level contracts.

 

Yes the situation wasn't ideal but I feel like you overthought it. There was no irreversible path until you made the Davos trade last season (out of which you now have just Warlock left). I think Toronto would be back sooner if you had tanked even without your S64 first (not like it was a one round draft) than whenever it'll be good again now.

 

but anyway that's just my opinion, at least one franchise is a bit different lol.

 

That is fair, but at the time without my own pick in S64 and with Ironside at the time being told if he was traded he'd have to auto-retire and be treated as a rental, my options were very limited. Note that before I made the Davos trade I actually hadn't drafted Tzuyu yet. 

 

I actually don't think it was the Davos deal that put me on that path. It was the recreation. I created a goalie pretty hastily when I realized Dollar still hadn't found a replacement because I figured "of course this is what I should do." Like I said, the rulings at the time were not what they are now, so it wasn't like I could just see Ironside as a S61 and go "lets just use him instead." Which is exactly what I can and would of done with the modern GM transition rules. That said I'll take solace being the final guinea pig that eventually broke that conversation so we could reform the GM transition rules in a way that makes more sense. I was talking about this with Fong but I always hated how GM's HAD to have a GM player. Obviously your at a disadvantage if you don't, but in my situation it'd of been very easy to just let Ironside ride out as GM player given his age and TPE. Another thing to consider too that I was juggling with, after I created Rift and assumed I didn't need a GM player or my own player, Pajari signed an extension with Riga. He'd of been a FA I think this off-season, and had I not had a GM player I don't know if I'd of stayed with Riga. All the rulings surrounding the GM fallout pretty much changed my entire perspective on how I would of handled the team upon taking it over, so it's really hard for me not to start there with why I'm in the position I'm in. Because once I committed to keeping Ironside for 2 seasons, competing while I had him and didn't have my own pick (in 64 or 65 at this point) just made logical sense. 

 

All that said, I'm still happy to be here GMing, and I'm happy to go through any ups and downs I may to get back on a more straight and narrow path, ergo a competitive window mixed with good timely rebuilds.