HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Nashville Predators
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Fault: Trotz or Poile

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-17-2014, 02:16 PM
  #301
Iron Duke
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: San Dimas, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,455
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
And if that's how the last 15 years of Predators hockey had gone, this conversation would be about how Poile and Trotz have "never drafted and/or developed a top-pairing defenseman ever", and you'd be talking about how losing 2-1 would be preferable because "it means the team can actually defend, something they don't know how to do right now, unless it's by accidentally getting in the shooting lane."
i.e. the Atlanta Thrashers. Having watched both teams over the span of years, it didn't suck any less to see a team not be able to play any defense than it does watching one that is deficient on offense.

Iron Duke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 03:11 PM
  #302
drwpreds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Duke View Post
i.e. the Atlanta Thrashers. Having watched both teams over the span of years, it didn't suck any less to see a team not be able to play any defense than it does watching one that is deficient on offense.
This is 1,000,000% true, and I say this as a former Thrashers fan.

The Thrashers had skill level (Kovalchuk, Heatly, Hossa, etc, etc) that we Preds fans would kill for, but the end result there was even worse than the Preds have ever dreamed of being. The bottom line- losing sucks no matter how its being done.


Last edited by drwpreds: 03-17-2014 at 03:17 PM.
drwpreds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 03:16 PM
  #303
drwpreds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PFL615 View Post
Oh goody do tell how the Preds are going to be challenging the Blues, Hawks and hell Minnesota and Colorado in two years under current coach, management, and philosophy?
Everyone seems to keep saying this- "we are never going to be able compete with the Hawks, Blues, etc"

I will just point out how quickly things can change- do you think any Colorado fans last year or the year before thought they were anywhere close the challenging the Blackhawks?? They had good young forwards and a horrible D- (pretty much the opposite of us).

But take a look at the standings- Colorado is ahead of the Hawks and only 6 points out of the division lead..........

Again, things can change quickly.........

drwpreds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 03:28 PM
  #304
I Will Son
An Army of One
 
I Will Son's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Nashville
Country: United States
Posts: 8,567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
Stalberg and Cullen were not signed as "grinders". If those two had played up to expectations nobody would have cared about Nystrom and Hendricks

I think it was a matter of Poile using the money he was given to what was available to him. Last summers UFA class appears to be a huge bust as far as forwards go, for everyone who dumped big money on players, but you can't fault him for getting proven NHL players rather than gambling that Beck and Watson would be able to step in from day 1.
Poile should of known Cullen is old and can no longer be relied on for offense.. Stalberg seemed like an ok signing, but he's been an absolute bust.

Would much rather of given the youngsters like Beck, Watson, and Forsberg the chance instead. Couldn't be any worse and it would be good for their development.


Gmdp and no neck need to gtfo

I Will Son is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 04:15 PM
  #305
Nothing Is New
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 523
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Duke View Post
i.e. the Atlanta Thrashers. Having watched both teams over the span of years, it didn't suck any less to see a team not be able to play any defense than it does watching one that is deficient on offense.
Of course, no one is saying 'no defense'. Nashville would and does have huge advantages over the Thrash. Weber and Jones on site for a while, good dedicated farm system. Core nucleus of upcoming offensive players.

You can't win without scoring many goals. Top seven scoring teams this year: Chicago, St Louis, Colorado, San Jose, Anaheim, Pitt, Boston. They also have the most wins.

Nothing Is New is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 05:56 PM
  #306
101st_fan
I taught Yoda
 
101st_fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Some Army fort
Country: United States
Posts: 6,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
Coyotes made it to the WCF the year of the Radu-splosion, where we got Mike-Smith-ed. They played the Kings.

There's only 3 teams in the NHL who have never made it to a conference finals - Atlantapeg, Columbus...and us.
So three of the four newest teams in the league. Hmmmmm. The team that rounds out that foursome made the conference finals once ... the only time they've made it past the first round ... missing the post season in six of the past nine seasons.

101st_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 07:13 PM
  #307
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 101st_fan View Post
So three of the four newest teams in the league. Hmmmmm. The team that rounds out that foursome made the conference finals once ... the only time they've made it past the first round ... missing the post season in six of the past nine seasons.
Sure, since you put it that way, we're an extremely successful team. Thanks to shrinking the same size to 4, we're probably the best team in that 4 team expansion league.

Unfortunately for us, we're actually competing against 29 other teams.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 08:35 PM
  #308
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 22,809
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
FWIW, wikipedia defines the most recent era as "Southward expansion (1992-2000)" on thier article on the history of the NHL. But heck with them, right - they don't meet Viqsi's definition of expansion era.
Every time I've seen it, "expansion brethren" implies teams that showed up at or about the same time.

I could also raise some objection to the title given to that era, seeing as though Ottawa, Minnesota, and Columbus are hardly "southern", but at that point we're just needlessly nitpicking.

__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 08:36 PM
  #309
101st_fan
I taught Yoda
 
101st_fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Some Army fort
Country: United States
Posts: 6,276
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
Sure, since you put it that way, we're an extremely successful team. Thanks to shrinking the same size to 4, we're probably the best team in that 4 team expansion league.

Unfortunately for us, we're actually competing against 29 other teams.
You earlier compared the Preds success to teams with 6-8 more seasons in the league ... then you get upset when teams that entered within two years are used as a comparative basis. The Northstars/Stars took over three decades to win a championship ... the Jets/Yotes made it to their first conference championship in 2012 after entering the league in 1979. The Blues, Sabres, and Canucks combine for zero Cups with over 120 combined seasons. The Rangers have one championship since the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. The Hawks went 49 years without winning it all (after going 23 years in the pre-expansion era without a Cup) ... the Bruins 39.

Yet in 15 years, the Preds haven't won it all ... woe is us.

101st_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 08:39 PM
  #310
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 22,809
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nothing Is New View Post
Of course, no one is saying 'no defense'. Nashville would and does have huge advantages over the Thrash. Weber and Jones on site for a while, good dedicated farm system. Core nucleus of upcoming offensive players.

You can't win without scoring many goals. Top seven scoring teams this year: Chicago, St Louis, Colorado, San Jose, Anaheim, Pitt, Boston. They also have the most wins.
Seven seems like a strangely arbitrary number. Why stop there?

* * *
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Will Son View Post
Poile should of known Cullen is old and can no longer be relied on for offense.. Stalberg seemed like an ok signing, but he's been an absolute bust.

Would much rather of given the youngsters like Beck, Watson, and Forsberg the chance instead. Couldn't be any worse and it would be good for their development.
I'm not sure where this particular axiom came from, but it's hogwash - at least insofar as its axiomatic nature goes. Throwing kids to the wolves like that can sometimes produce Great Things... but more often than not, it traps them into desperation mode and bad habits that they never really unlearn. It is tremendously bad for their development. You need vets out there to carry the load so that the kids have room to make mistakes and learn from them - then they can take over and put that talent to good use rather than just hoping that talent alone will make them into Instant Saviors.

now, the question of whether or not guys who were good enough were picked up last offseason is of course a very different debate, and one on which I probably agree with many of the folks here. That said, I still would urge restraint w/r/t jumping to conclusions because of same.

Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 08:47 PM
  #311
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 22,809
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Y'know, the more I watch these debates, the more convinced I am that the Liarpold/Balsillie disaster has done more damage here than previously thought. This team reloaded so quickly from that cluster**** - so much faster than any one would ever have the right to even dare to dream - that it seems to have gotten people thinking that that sort of rapid bounce-back is routine and/or regularly, easily achievable. It's like Doug MacLean and his habit of catching lightning in a bottle in the first year of any job he takes (first year as coach of the Panthers, went to the SCF; first year as GM of the Jackets, put up the best record for an expansion franchise in NHL history). It causes timeframe expectations to be perpetually unreasonable.

Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-17-2014, 10:45 PM
  #312
drwpreds
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 1,296
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 101st_fan View Post
You earlier compared the Preds success to teams with 6-8 more seasons in the league ... then you get upset when teams that entered within two years are used as a comparative basis. The Northstars/Stars took over three decades to win a championship ... the Jets/Yotes made it to their first conference championship in 2012 after entering the league in 1979. The Blues, Sabres, and Canucks combine for zero Cups with over 120 combined seasons. The Rangers have one championship since the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. The Hawks went 49 years without winning it all (after going 23 years in the pre-expansion era without a Cup) ... the Bruins 39.

Yet in 15 years, the Preds haven't won it all ... woe is us.
Just to add to this- was watching Blues game tonight, and it stated that tonight they got their 100th point- and that this was the franchise's SIXTH 100 point season. The Blues have been around for close to 50 years.

The Preds have FOUR 100 point seasons in their history (and one 99 pt one, too)- which of course is only 15 years....

Just another small example of how the Predators have had some pretty good success in a (relatively) short time....

15 years is nothing when it comes to a sports franchise- yet many seem to think we are a failure because we don't have a Cup or several conference finals appearances.......

drwpreds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 08:31 AM
  #313
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
Every time I've seen it, "expansion brethren" implies teams that showed up at or about the same time.

I could also raise some objection to the title given to that era, seeing as though Ottawa, Minnesota, and Columbus are hardly "southern", but at that point we're just needlessly nitpicking.
In a league that's 97 years old, teams that entered the league 6 years apart would probably qualify to a reasonable person to have "showed up at or about the same time".

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 08:40 AM
  #314
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 101st_fan View Post
You earlier compared the Preds success to teams with 6-8 more seasons in the league ... then you get upset when teams that entered within two years are used as a comparative basis. The Northstars/Stars took over three decades to win a championship ... the Jets/Yotes made it to their first conference championship in 2012 after entering the league in 1979. The Blues, Sabres, and Canucks combine for zero Cups with over 120 combined seasons. The Rangers have one championship since the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. The Hawks went 49 years without winning it all (after going 23 years in the pre-expansion era without a Cup) ... the Bruins 39.

Yet in 15 years, the Preds haven't won it all ... woe is us.
How about this - we stop paring sample sizes down to what fits our arguments, and go with how successful we have been WRT the entire NHL? Which is not that great, and downright embarassing when it comes to playoff success.

Next, how long it took the Rangers or Blues to win a Cup is irrelevant in this discussion - which is essentially whether or not 15 years is long enough for one management/coaching group to show some progress.

Your bring up the Blues and Rangers for futility, but there are also examples like Anaheim and Tampa - teams that won Cups and built playoff teams that have gone deep in the playoffs a relatively short time after they were born.

I'm not saying or demanding that a new coach/GM win a cup, all i'm saying is that after 15 years, we let someone else take a crack at it. Maybe they'll be successful. Maybe they're not.

With this coach/GM combination - we're very rapidly approaching the definition of insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 08:43 AM
  #315
PFL615
Registered User
 
PFL615's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Smashville, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 1,578
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drwpreds View Post
Everyone seems to keep saying this- "we are never going to be able compete with the Hawks, Blues, etc"

I will just point out how quickly things can change- do you think any Colorado fans last year or the year before thought they were anywhere close the challenging the Blackhawks?? They had good young forwards and a horrible D- (pretty much the opposite of us).

But take a look at the standings- Colorado is ahead of the Hawks and only 6 points out of the division lead..........

Again, things can change quickly.........

Great example and what has Colorado done recently to help with things changing quickly... Hmmmm...

PFL615 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 08:48 AM
  #316
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by drwpreds View Post
Just to add to this- was watching Blues game tonight, and it stated that tonight they got their 100th point- and that this was the franchise's SIXTH 100 point season. The Blues have been around for close to 50 years.

The Preds have FOUR 100 point seasons in their history (and one 99 pt one, too)- which of course is only 15 years....

Just another small example of how the Predators have had some pretty good success in a (relatively) short time....

15 years is nothing when it comes to a sports franchise- yet many seem to think we are a failure because we don't have a Cup or several conference finals appearances.......
All 100 point seasons are not created equal.

Points have been inflated since the lockout and the inception of the shootout (3 point game).

For example 1990-91 had 5 100-point teams. 2006-07 had 11.

1993-94 had 4 100 point teams. 2011-2012 had 10.

FWIW, all of the Preds 100 point seasons have come after the lockout/shootout changed up the rules. That's not a knock on the Preds, because i would consider the 5 years before that the expansion era and probably don't expect them to be amassing 100 points a year.

I just wanted to point out that our 100 point seasons are a little different (and probably easier to earn) than those that might have taken place before the lockout.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 09:10 AM
  #317
jwhouk
Cheesehead Pred
 
jwhouk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Country: United States
Posts: 3,521
vCash: 500
Some minor points:

1. Saint Louis has had seven "100-point equivalent" seasons since 1967. Had they played a full 82-game schedule last season, it would have been their seventh.

2. We're comparing apples to oranges in terms of franchise "success", due to a whole bunch of other factors. Saint Louis came into the league with five other teams in 1967; Nashville came into the NHL by itself in 1998. The Blues played 1,178 regular season games in their first 15 years; Nashville only played 1,114.

3. If you are going to play "apples to oranges", let's at least look at the first 15 seasons of every NHL/NHA/WHA/PCHA team since 1909. In that instance, yes, the Predators are far and away the most "successful" franchise 15 years in during the "Southern Expansion Era" (which, I will once again define as the 1990-present timeframe).

The NHL has gone through five "expansion periods" since its establishment in 1917: The 1920's, when the league expanded in to the US (and absorbed the existing PCHA/WHL teams into three new franchises); the Great Expansion of 1967; the 1970's expansion from 1970-74; the WHA "Expansion" in 1979; and the 1990's Expansion from 1990 to 2000. The most successful franchises from each of those eras, defined as "points per 82 games", are:
  • 1920's - Boston Bruins (96.1 PP82)
  • 1967 - Philadelphia Flyers (95.4)
  • 1970's - NY Islanders (95.0)
  • WHA - Edmonton Oilers (92.9)
  • 1990's - Nashville Predators (87.3)
Conversely, the worst teams:
  • 1920's - NY Americans (71.9 PP82; they went defunct two years later)
  • 1967 - Minnesota North Stars (71.8; moved to Dallas)
  • 1970's - New Jersey Devils (54.9; moved from Kansas City to Colorado)
  • WHA - Hartford Whalers (78.9; moved to Carolina)
  • 1990's - Tampa Bay Lightning (71.9)
Now, I'm going to point out the one thing about all ten teams in these lists: two of them have not won a Stanley Cup. And, for some reason, that seems to be all that matters to people in hockey.

jwhouk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 10:33 AM
  #318
PredsV82
No
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Grumpyville
Country: St Kitts and Nevis
Posts: 16,794
vCash: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by I Will Son View Post
Poile should of known Cullen is old and can no longer be relied on for offense.. Stalberg seemed like an ok signing, but he's been an absolute bust.

Would much rather of given the youngsters like Beck, Watson, and Forsberg the chance instead. Couldn't be any worse and it would be good for their development.


Gmdp and no neck need to gtfo
You say this stuff as if it is indisputable truth but actually it could have been very much worse. We had our horrible nosedive the last 15 games of last season when we were fored to play Beck, Watson, and other players who clearly were not ready for the NHL. Fielding that same team straight out of camp would have been much, much worse and could have negatively impacted their development.

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 11:20 AM
  #319
Byrddog
Registered User
 
Byrddog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 2,737
vCash: 142
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
You say this stuff as if it is indisputable truth but actually it could have been very much worse. We had our horrible nosedive the last 15 games of last season when we were fored to play Beck, Watson, and other players who clearly were not ready for the NHL. Fielding that same team straight out of camp would have been much, much worse and could have negatively impacted their development.
But but but

Any player in the preds pipeline can spend two weeks in Milwaukee and come right on to Nashville and be a point per player guy. What they do before Nashville does not matter. When they get here Moonbeams butterflys and unicorns will fly from there bums. We all know there is no correlation to how players play before getting to the Preds lineup the only constant is that Trotz will suck the offense right out of them and there creativity will be lost.

Byrddog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 11:30 AM
  #320
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 22,809
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
In a league that's 97 years old, teams that entered the league 6 years apart would probably qualify to a reasonable person to have "showed up at or about the same time".

I'm quite positive you know exactly what I meant.


Last edited by Viqsi: 03-18-2014 at 11:37 AM. Reason: a bit of self-moderation
Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 12:21 PM
  #321
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post

I'm quite positive you know exactly what I meant.
I now what you meant.

It just conveniently leaves out the fact that there are "new" teams that have been successful, but in the regular season and in the playoffs.

There's a whole spectrum of hockey being played other than BlueJackets-suckage and Preds-blah.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 12:40 PM
  #322
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 22,809
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
I now what you meant.

It just conveniently leaves out the fact that there are "new" teams that have been successful, but in the regular season and in the playoffs.

There's a whole spectrum of hockey being played other than BlueJackets-suckage and Preds-blah.
And as I've said in other threads, if you want something better than "blah", you probably shouldn't attempt it using the same methods and the same reasoning that said "suckage" used to get to that hellhole it threw itself into.

I'm not making the comparison due to a lack of awareness of other teams, hon.

Viqsi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 12:42 PM
  #323
PredsV82
No
 
PredsV82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Grumpyville
Country: St Kitts and Nevis
Posts: 16,794
vCash: 130
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaiderDoug View Post
I now what you meant.

It just conveniently leaves out the fact that there are "new" teams that have been successful, but in the regular season and in the playoffs.

There's a whole spectrum of hockey being played other than BlueJackets-suckage and Preds-blah.
while true a modicum of perspective is indicated. first it must be remembered that the NHL has been giving 16 playoff berths even when there were only 21 teams in the league.

San Jose made the playoffs in their 3rd and 4th years but didn't actually have a winning record for a season until their NINTH year.

it took them 12 seasons to tech the conference finals and they still haven't won a conference title.

Ottawa had their first winning season in year 6, made the conference finals in year 11, and won the conference in year 14

Anaheim had a winning season in year 4, but only made the playoffs three times in their first 11 years.

and while they did play in two SC finals, winning one, they have only made the playoffs in 9 of their 19 seasons.

Tampa has been even more up and down. One winning season in their first ten years of existence, then a 4 year period where they made the playoffs every year and won a cup but then only one playoff appearance in the next 6 years.

PredsV82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 01:02 PM
  #324
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viqsi View Post
And as I've said in other threads, if you want something better than "blah", you probably shouldn't attempt it using the same methods and the same reasoning that said "suckage" used to get to that hellhole it threw itself into.

I'm not making the comparison due to a lack of awareness of other teams, hon.

I haven't advocated doing anything like the Blue Jackets have done.

But I fail to see how you think that making a change at GM and/or coach after 15 years of trying a mostly failing at winning big in hockey will turn us into the Blue Jackets?

Many, many teams have changed coaches and management and gone on to win big.

Maybe we become the Colorado Avalanche - they got rid of a solid at best tandem in Greg Sherman and Joe Sacco, and in stepped Roy and Sakic, and they have a really bright future.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-18-2014, 01:09 PM
  #325
RaiderDoug
Registered User
 
RaiderDoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Knoxville
Country: United States
Posts: 1,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PredsV82 View Post
while true a modicum of perspective is indicated. first it must be remembered that the NHL has been giving 16 playoff berths even when there were only 21 teams in the league.

San Jose made the playoffs in their 3rd and 4th years but didn't actually have a winning record for a season until their NINTH year.

it took them 12 seasons to tech the conference finals and they still haven't won a conference title.

Ottawa had their first winning season in year 6, made the conference finals in year 11, and won the conference in year 14

Anaheim had a winning season in year 4, but only made the playoffs three times in their first 11 years.

and while they did play in two SC finals, winning one, they have only made the playoffs in 9 of their 19 seasons.

Tampa has been even more up and down. One winning season in their first ten years of existence, then a 4 year period where they made the playoffs every year and won a cup but then only one playoff appearance in the next 6 years.
I agree that there's can be a large variance of success (and failure) among all the expansion teams.

But, we've never reached the heights that any of those teams you mentioned have reached - regardless of how long it took them to reach it.

But this brings us back to the original point. It's irrelevant whether or not you expect a team to win a cup or reach a certain milestone in a given time period.

Considering that most teams in the NHL at least do have some playoff success in thier history - do you think that 15 years is long enough for a GM/Coach to at least show some playoff success? At what point do you not give someone else a chance?

We keep blowing up the team and rebuilding - yet we never actually get anywhere.

I go back to my point - are DP/Trotz not doing the same things over and over and over again that didn't work in 2005-06, they didn't work in 2011-12, and they're probably not going to work again.

RaiderDoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:07 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.