Say again? Olympic fantasy camp

Think about this. I am old. You're not supposed to say that but this comment needs context of actual witness.
... Bid for the Olympics is an okay move. Just avoid winning. Honorable mention is great.
... A sidebar. This observation applies to the huge Summer Games not to the Winter Games.
... Since Montreal's Olympics, those cities that succeeded in getting the
games aren't doing as well economically. Its sort of an economic
hangover. Gargantuan economic resources and human effort goes into holding the
modern games. Such a demand to the exclusion of any other thing on that city's agenda impairs the city's future economic vitality.
The city is burdened with the weight of enormous debt. Municipal
taxation rates remain high to pay off the burden.
... Every supporter says Legacy this. Legacy that. That is total horseshit
and a complete fabrication of reality. If your city, especially a city
the size of Toronto, supports sport, build an arena, build an Olympic
pool, or build a cycling velodrome. Its definitely worth the investment.
These facilities promote active healthy lifestyles and a preferred focus for youth.
... Building them because of a specific sporting event such as the Olympics
is a sample of utter foolishness. Construction schedules are sped up.
Construction quality usually is good, but more often than not, there is a
high percentage of facilities with poor construction. Rushing a facility construction on a specific deadline generates construction short cuts. Any shortcut in any construction never portends to any quantity or quality of good. The descriptive term is "White Elephant". The prime example of that description is definitely the Montreal Stadium. It was never completed to the original design and the construction turned out to be poor.
... Getting the Olympics hurt Montreal, and they were stuck paying off for
their facilities for decades. At the time they got their bid, Montreal
was the biggest world class city in Canada. After Toronto and other Canadian cities have economically thrived.
... Perhaps Toronto lost out in its bid to Atlanta but simply observe that
after Toronto bids on the games for the next decade foreign investment
into the city is stimulated. Now without getting the summer games,
Toronto benefits from the advertising efforts that went into making an
Olympic bid, without being burdened by actually winning the games.
... Indeed one indirect result of making the bid is that the city's
name is put out there. People are aware of its emergence. And every time
that Toronto made a bid, subsequently the local economy surged. Almost
every time that Toronto made a bid, it wound up in the ideal short list. That is good.
... Why is this? Making a bid, necessitates the city to promote itself on
the international stage. The members of the International Olympic are
chosen because they are influential.
... Suppose you had a plan for a major project and was
looking for a host city, would you want to proceed into a city where the
commercial activities are solely focused on a singular goal set of
economic priorities to the exclusion of you project? Or put that project
into a city with all the capabilities to hold an Olympics but would be
focused on your project. And you the investor is going to consult with professional and influential people who are familiar with the feature of each city. IOC members visit those cities. A venture capitalist will consult that source often.
... A major cause leading to the very serious recent Greek economic problems was their successful winning bid. People warned that Greece could not afford to hold the games. But the IOC got all traditional and shwarmy over the Athens bid. Those who tendered the warning have been proven right.
... Presenting the moral to all this. Making an Olympic bid is a very good idea. It seems absurd but the $10M to &20M spent on the bid promotion targets the international elite. Winning the Olympic bid... an economic disaster. Every city on the Olympic short list that didn't win the bid, did commercially better in thepost bid era compared to the winner. The winning city, not so much as what they hoped.
... Make the bid. But because winning it is actually losing and losing is actually winning. Just don't win the bid.



http://www.torontosun.com/poll/should-toronto-make-a-bid-for-the-2024-olympic-games

DA Boom - Sonic shock

By the Lard Tundrin Jaysus. Didn't na see that storm a coming. This isn't a rebuild. This got run over by a hurricane.

Truculence persona. I took chemistry. Mix 1 part Lamoriello, 1 part Shanahan, 1 part Babcock into 1 executive meeting. Don't shake. Stir. Kaboom.

Tune in Bob McCown later today. For sure. Betcha his jaw is on dat studio floor. Lou is, or rather was, one of his idols.

A winning trade idea - almost

REPORT: Maple ‪#‎Leafs‬ offered 4th overall to the ‪#‎BlueJackets‬ for picks #8, 34, 38 and 58 at the draft table according to theScore.

Things are looking up at the Leafs. While the trade effort failed, it does display the future plans of the Leafs. The attempted trade move is a crazy idea. On the surface it seems such. It is not the norm. The offer displays the future intent of the Leaf's managers. Columbus is right up against the CAP. Trading for Clarkson didn't help, although it is easy to understand why they would turn down the idea no matter how tempting. And it was tempting. The world of the Blue Jackets should have made that trade offer a solid.

,,, At the moment, the poor Blue Jackets are full of long term, overpriced player signings. The Leaf-Jackets trade provided a sour taste because the major component was David Clarkson. Hard to forget that burn. But keeping a solid core of players on a pro team is another strategy. Its another approach common in middle America where one tries to keep a unit of players together for a long time to provide competitive play. The offer for one of the top five picks this year must have been terribly tempting. Its a devil's offer. You have a long term core team, with a splashy flashy young affordable forward.

... For the Leafs its a smart offer. Its an all win, all lose scenario. And probably this trade was on the table in discussions with a lot of other teams. Dangling Marner was almost an irresistible trade lure. Those were a lot of draft picks. To pass on a potentially solid franchise player like Marner by trading him away for lesser picks seems strange unless your management is looking towards the free agent market of 2016. The trade offer tips MLSE hand going forward into next year.

... Getting all those lower positioned draft picks shows just how much power Babcock has. He brings a lot of the Detroit team management philosophy here. The target is probably going to be Stamkos. Now supporting Stamkos with a solid young skating team players seems a good approach. Marner will be a good partner on the top line but he is only one guy.

... Marner's future NHL career is almost a certainty. Yet play in the big league is much different than the minors. There is a very good chance that he might not perform up to hopes. So here comes the chance to get Stamkos who is going to demand and deserves a salary befitting his talent which would be in the ball park of $12 to 14M per for 4yrs and an option. With Stamkos the winner would need a lot of CAP room. Like gravy, the plot thickens.

... Tampax Bay is in big CAP trouble at the moment, although their team GM is also a former Detroit operative so he'll manage. No matter what happens or for which team he plays for, in the fall of 2016 Stamkos salary doubles. It isn't even a matter of guesswork. $14M is the max contract value in the NHL at the moment. Stamkos is going to get that.
... The Lightening might want to sign and trade for Stamkos if they can. If they can't keep him due to contract problems they will attempt to auction him off. This means the other team might have to put up a plentiful number of young players in that event. The larger the prospect stable of the Leafs, the more likely a sign and trade with Tampa. Hence the Leafs ambition to get as many draft picks through one year of professional experience suddenly becomes smart. Its the bait.

... So if the Leafs target is Stamkos, having all these draft picks signed and playing in their development organizations gives them the best chance. If Stamkos decides not to play along with Tampa, deciding to move to the Leafs, in that event, from the brutal statistic point of view, there would be a lot of potentially fast young legs in support. Remember, most draft picks (including Marner) may not be good enough to make it to the NHL level. Many are picked, few survive the competition.

... If Stamkos doesn't sign to the club, the Leafs still have Marner in their stable, albeit with a smaller talent pool under development. Understand the new philosophy brought in by Shanacock from Detroit. There is a very good chance that Marner, unless he is very talented, with excellent defensive skills and very tough will spend a one or two year apprenticeship in the minors. He would have to impress Babcock to make the rookie season, the very next one.

... So it would be at least 2016 before any other top forward steps up to replace the play of Kessel without the hassle. Knowing this, one now understands what was behind the lowering of the boom on Kadri last season. It was a very serious public message to Kadri. The team administration likes Kadri. A Stamkos, Kadri, Van Riemsdyk line would be a potent number one line.

... Try to understand the thinking of Maple Leaf's new management. They want a team that can go very deep into the playoffs every season. To do this, they have a choice, go with a Kadri, Marner, JVR line or a Stamkos, Kadri, JVR front line. One would naturally pick the latter as a sure thing.

... Columbus would have benefited from the proposed trace but the reality of the Clarkson trade left a sour note in their minds. It makes sense to trade with Columbus because in any scenario their ability to be in the hunt for Stamkos is not on the table. Their CAP situation leaves little flexibility to be a future suitor.

... Either way the Leafs would have won but the additional draft picks would have literally secured their goal in any scenario, if that goal of the Leafs is to put them into a position to challenge for getting Stamkos. The absolute best scenario for the Leafs would be to get Stamkos with Marner and JVR with Kadri leading the second line. The trade idea would have provided the Leafs with a lot more choices.

... The trade offer simply means that the Leafs will be one of the teams in the hunt for Stamkos, and having a pile of minor league prospects would have solidified their chances. That was the rationale behind that idea. And something like that might happen. ie. Since the Tampax are up against yee old CAP, the Leafs might sign and trade using Marner as bait, instead of the small platoon of players conceived in the Jackets trade.