: Prospect Info:
Official 2014 NHL Draft Discussion, Suck for Sam or Play Bad For Ekblad?
View Single Post
10-22-2013, 08:45 AM
Join Date: Dec 2012
Originally Posted by
You want to blow up the team, so that we get high draft positions, right? That's the usual way of a full rebuild. You say Pittsburgh and Chicago, here are some more examples of top 10 picks by teams from the last ten years:
Columbus Blue Jackets: Nik Zherdev (4th overall), Alexandre Picard (8th), Gilbert Brule (6th), Derick Brassard (6th), Jakub Voracek (7th), Nikita Filatov (6th), Ryan Johanson (4th),
Ryan Murray (2nd)
Edmonton Oilers: Sam Gagner (6th), Magnus Paarjavi (10th),
Taylor Hall (1st), Ryan Nugent-Hopkins (1st), Nail Yakupov (1st), Darnell Nurse (7th)
Florida Panthers: Nathan Horton (3rd), Rostislav Olesz (7th), Michael Frolik (10th), Keaton Ellerby (10th), Erik Gudbranson
(3rd), Jonathan Huberdeau (3rd), Aleksander Barkov (2nd)
New York Islanders: Kyle Okposo (7th), Josh Bailey
(9th), John Tavares (1st)
, Nino Niederreiter (5th), Ryan Strome (5th),
Griffin Reinhard (4th)
Phoenix Coyotes: Blake Wheeler (5th), Peter Mueller (8th), Kyle Turris (3rd), Mikkel Boedker (8th),
Oliver Ekman-Larsson (6th)
Winnipeg Jets (Atlanta Thrashers): Brayden Coburn (8th), Boris Valabik (10th),
Zach Bogosian (3rd)
, Alexander Burmistrov (8th),
Mark Scheifele (7th), Jacob Trouba (9th)
I'd argue, that none of the above teams got three better players with their top 10 picks than Lundqvist, Nash and Staal. Overall, there are maybe four players that are near the level of Lundqvist.
In the end, having high picks alone is just a little part of building a real contender, unless you get really lucky (like the Penguins for example). Far more important are all the other moves that are needed. That's why contenders aren't all build by tanking. There are many examples for teams, that did not rebuild over multiple years and are (or were) still among the best. It's not only the Red Wings and Devils, but also the Bruins, Sharks or Canucks, who each were bad for only one year.
I agree that this team needs some changes before we can contend again, but selling the few right pieces we have and going into full rebuild just isn't maximising the chances. Doing something different doesn't necessarily mean we have to blow it up, so that's a pretty lame reason to do it.
Again, completely ignoring the relevant facts that part of the rebuild is based on assets you acquire during the rebuild. Can't say I'm surprised you keep missing that at this point because it's clear you have a very base understanding of the whole thing.
You do realize that there are RIGHT ways to do a rebuild and WRONG ways to do one, right? It's not just one way and maybe it works maybe it doesn't. You must not understand that, because it's been told to you time and time again and you can't grasp that concept. Reinhart was the 1st D the Isles drafted in the 1st round since Wade Redden. And that's the prevailing theme up there. How many of those players are D-men in list above? The majority are forwards. The Isles also terribly mismanaged their prospects - also a prevailing them. And let's just add to the fact that ALL the teams you mentioned have problems signing UFAs. All of them. NYR are more comparable to Pitt and Chicago. Bolded players up there are complete studs and I would kill to have them on my team.
The players you are suggesting keeping are not getting younger. That is not how things work. I feel that I have to spell that out since comprehension of simple things does not come easy for you.
Blowing it up is the only doing something different we haven't done yet. Retooling doesn't work. That is proven. You can't properly rebuild with guys like Lundqvist and Staal on your roster. Staal will be a UFA after next year. Lundqvist is a UFA after this year, and looks horrible. Both of these players are not getting any younger.
This team isn't close to being a contender. The sooner you realize that the better.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Championship*