HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Oldest Core/Team In Worst Condition for the Future?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-16-2013, 12:57 PM
  #201
HenriquesJawLine
Registered User
 
HenriquesJawLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetsGoBLUES91 View Post
My pick is the Devils. No one excites me from that prospect pool and the current core is old.

Calgary and San Jose may be in trouble also.
The current core is old?

David Clarkson (28)
Adam Henrique (23)
Andrei Loktionov (22)
Stefan Matteau (19) On the team now but doesn't have a big role
Travis Zajac (27)
Patrik Elias (36) but hasn't showed signs of slowing down
Steve Bernier (27)
Ilya Kovalchuk (29)
Mark Fayne (25)
Andy Greene (30)
Adam Larsson (20)

With two goalie prospects in Keith Kinkaid and Scott Wedgewood


Seriously how does anybody think that is an old core? We also have two D prospects in Eric Gelinas and Jon Merrill ready to step in for Zidlicky and Tallinder

Also have Reid Boucher who has 63 goals for Sarnia this season

HenriquesJawLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 01:06 PM
  #202
DevilChuk*
(not that -chuk)
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 7,879
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HenriquesJawLine View Post
The current core is old?

David Clarkson (28)
Adam Henrique (23)
Andrei Loktionov (22)
Stefan Matteau (19) On the team now but doesn't have a big role
Travis Zajac (27)
Patrik Elias (36) but hasn't showed signs of slowing down
Steve Bernier (27)
Ilya Kovalchuk (29)
Mark Fayne (25)
Andy Greene (30)
Adam Larsson (20)

With two goalie prospects in Keith Kinkaid and Scott Wedgewood


Seriously how does anybody think that is an old core? We also have two D prospects in Eric Gelinas and Jon Merrill ready to step in for Zidlicky and Tallinder

Also have Reid Boucher who has 63 goals for Sarnia this season
Well Marty is 40 and even though he's a systems goalie, he's also considered the core of the Devils. When he retires, we won't miss him because his skill level isn't that extraordinary but we will also miss him because his skill level is that extraordinary.

DevilChuk* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 01:11 PM
  #203
Step
GO SENS GO
 
Step's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,826
vCash: 50
Sorry, but I fail to realize why Jersey's even being mentioned in the thread..

__________________
Step is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 01:13 PM
  #204
HenriquesJawLine
Registered User
 
HenriquesJawLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 1,796
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilChuk View Post
Well Marty is 40 and even though he's a systems goalie, he's also considered the core of the Devils. When he retires, we won't miss him because his skill level isn't that extraordinary but we will also miss him because his skill level is that extraordinary.
Of course we'll miss him but we still have some good looking G prospects. The Wings developed Jimmy Howard. People also forget we were the same team with Scott Clemmensen as the starter in 08 when Brodeur missed most of the season and put up 100 points or close to it.

HenriquesJawLine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 01:26 PM
  #205
GoldenJet89
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 478
vCash: 362
just wanted to say the jets prospect pool is pretty lacking outside of a few guys (trouba,sheifele,lowry)

but i get why they arent in the discussion. the team itself is very young, and most of the core is just approaching their prime. so with a few complimentary pieces and another good draft year they should be set for the near-medium future

GoldenJet89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 01:41 PM
  #206
ARSix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 983
vCash: 500
How anyone can say Van has a declining core... Sedins and Burrows are all only 31, so the top line should have 3-4 good years left.

Kesler's 27. Raymond is 26. Booth is 27. Higgins is 29. Hansen is 26. Kassian is 21. Edler is 26. Garrison is 27. Hamhuis is 29. Tanev is 22. Schneider is 26. That's a lot of guys who can play in the top 6 F and top 4 D, and a starting goalie, all in their 20's.

If Vancouver has a problem in terms of succession planning to the "next generation" of their team, the horizon isn't approaching yet - they still have 3-4 years to get that sorted out. A lot can happen in that time. And whoever they trade Luongo for, you'd have to expect will be well under 30 years old as well.

ARSix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 02:05 PM
  #207
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,319
vCash: 500
People don't realize that if your current roster is all in their prime currently that means teams that have cores of guys not yet in their primes will soon overtake them. NBD. I'm sure Oilers and Islanders fans thought their success would last forever in the 1980s as well. Not everyone can be the Red Wings (hint: it's actually very rare).

WarriorofTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 02:53 PM
  #208
Drop the Sopel
Feaster famine
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: calgary
Posts: 14,421
vCash: 500
Not sure why Vancouver has been mentioned so much. Just look at the backend...

Hamhuis(30) Bieksa(31)
Edler(26) Tanev(23)
Garrison(28)

Schneider(26)

Nobody on the team over the age of 32...

If we're talking 5 year down the road, then yeah. But as everyone probably knows by now, teams look radically different over 5 year spans.

Drop the Sopel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 03:01 PM
  #209
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Not sure why Vancouver has been mentioned so much. Just look at the backend...

Hamhuis(30) Bieksa(31)
Edler(26) Tanev(23)
Garrison(28)

Schneider(26)

Nobody on the team over the age of 32...

If we're talking 5 year down the road, then yeah. But as everyone probably knows by now, teams look radically different over 5 year spans.
Worst teams/core For the future.

WarriorofTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 03:07 PM
  #210
Elbows of Bure
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 432
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarriorofTime View Post
Worst teams/core For the future.
What future are we talking about? The OPs analysis/premise is terrible at best, as it doesn't even ask a focused question. Are talking about the immediate future? The next three years? The next five?

For the next 2-4 years, Vancouver is still going to compete, after that, sure, things will change. But "worst condition for the future" is not synonymous with old. I'd like to throw out names of the regular offenders for "worst condition for the future" like Columbus, NYisles, et al, before I start throwing out names like San Jose and Vancouver.

Elbows of Bure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 03:28 PM
  #211
BayStBullies
Burn the Boats!
 
BayStBullies's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: @BayStBullies
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,786
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elbows of Bure View Post
What future are we talking about? The OPs analysis/premise is terrible at best, as it doesn't even ask a focused question. Are talking about the immediate future? The next three years? The next five?

For the next 2-4 years, Vancouver is still going to compete, after that, sure, things will change. But "worst condition for the future" is not synonymous with old. I'd like to throw out names of the regular offenders for "worst condition for the future" like Columbus, NYisles, et al, before I start throwing out names like San Jose and Vancouver.
Stop taking it so personally; everyone can have an opinion. I'm sure the Vancouver organization doesn't need/want anyone running around this forum, refreshing the page to defend their honour.

If you need to nitpick about what is considered the "future"; to not seem like it is a problem... it's a problem.

BayStBullies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 03:55 PM
  #212
Elbows of Bure
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 432
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BayStBullies View Post
Stop taking it so personally; everyone can have an opinion. I'm sure the Vancouver organization doesn't need/want anyone running around this forum, refreshing the page to defend their honour.

If you need to nitpick about what is considered the "future"; to not seem like it is a problem... it's a problem.
Meh, I just take one liners passed off as argument offensive. But you're right, I should leave proper dialogue out of this.

As for your second point, the definition of future is important. Vancouver, along with other teams being brought into this, are fine for the immediate future. The OP asks what team is in the "worst condition;" a lot can change in the next two to three years, teams can make moves to shore up their long-term deficiencies. While you are right in pointing out that those deficiencies are problems, they don't correlate to "worst conditions."

Elbows of Bure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 04:01 PM
  #213
justinboo*
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 298
vCash: 500
sharks will be fine, they have great coaches behind them, and they could always trade marleau/thornton for some young guns

justinboo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 04:09 PM
  #214
Seto
New Jersey 5000
 
Seto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 5,600
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Step View Post
Sorry, but I fail to realize why Jersey's even being mentioned in the thread..
People think of Elias, Salvador, and Broduer and jump the gun thinking we are an old team. We have young forwards and defenseman but we are ****ed when Broduer retires.

Seto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 04:10 PM
  #215
Hyack57
Registered User
 
Hyack57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Airdrie, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,809
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HankieDankie View Post
Canucks need some top end offensive prospects to help once the Sedins decline/retire. We have some top 6 hopefuls like Jensen, Kassian and Gaunce, but those guys are most likely 2nd line players. Defensively, we look pretty good, and in net we are set with Schneider and Lack. It's just first line talent that is nowhere to be found in the Canucks system.
Sort of have to have a pick in the top 5 in a deep draft to snag an elite #1 guy like Chicago (Kane, Toews, Keith) etc. The Canucks will likely have to develop those top guys from late round picks and in a few years when the core ages more (Luongo and the Sedins are still under 34) the middle rounds.

You guys make me feel old if the Sedins are considered over the hill. Luongo and I are the same age. (Why am I not a millionaire too... )

Hyack57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 04:11 PM
  #216
Hyack57
Registered User
 
Hyack57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Airdrie, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,809
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nova III View Post
People think of Elias, Salvador, and Broduer and jump the gun thinking we are an old team. We have young forwards and defenseman but we are ****ed when Broduer retires.
Schneider/Tanev to NJ for Larsson.

Hyack57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 04:12 PM
  #217
Hyack57
Registered User
 
Hyack57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Airdrie, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,809
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drop the Sopel View Post
Not sure why Vancouver has been mentioned so much. Just look at the backend...

Hamhuis(30) Bieksa(31)
Edler(26) Tanev(23)
Garrison(28)

Schneider(26)

Nobody on the team over the age of 32...

If we're talking 5 year down the road, then yeah. But as everyone probably knows by now, teams look radically different over 5 year spans.
Luongo will be 34 next month. I'll be 34 in August.

Hyack57 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 04:36 PM
  #218
ARSix
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 983
vCash: 500
The point is that you can't really predict 5 years out. It's basically impossible to project player development for an entire team on that kind of range. When assessing teams that are going downhill, it needs to be a 1-2 year window - you can tell the current players just don't have it anymore, and it's too short a turnaround for their young guys to develop. I.e. Calgary, Iginla's not Iginla anymore, Kiprusoff doesn't have the stamina to play 70 games in a season consistently, but Baertschi, Backlund and Brodie just aren't top-end NHL players quite yet and Gaudreau and Wotherspoon are a few years away at least.

Vancouver's average age is 28, about the same as Boston's. The thing is, it's not because they have a few young guys and a few old guys and it balances at 28 - everyone on the team is within a few years of 28, older or younger. Even if the team didn't change or re-tool at all, it could play for 4 years being roughly as good as it is now, i.e., a playoff team. And what team does no re-tooling at all for 4 years?

ARSix is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-16-2013, 05:14 PM
  #219
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ARSix View Post
The point is that you can't really predict 5 years out. It's basically impossible to project player development for an entire team on that kind of range. When assessing teams that are going downhill, it needs to be a 1-2 year window - you can tell the current players just don't have it anymore, and it's too short a turnaround for their young guys to develop. I.e. Calgary, Iginla's not Iginla anymore, Kiprusoff doesn't have the stamina to play 70 games in a season consistently, but Baertschi, Backlund and Brodie just aren't top-end NHL players quite yet and Gaudreau and Wotherspoon are a few years away at least.

Vancouver's average age is 28, about the same as Boston's. The thing is, it's not because they have a few young guys and a few old guys and it balances at 28 - everyone on the team is within a few years of 28, older or younger. Even if the team didn't change or re-tool at all, it could play for 4 years being roughly as good as it is now, i.e., a playoff team. And what team does no re-tooling at all for 4 years?
Boston has Seguin and Hamilton to be optimistic about. Canucks have nobody even close to that. A team composed entirely of players on UFA contracts can only be successful if they sign cheap players and get them to all conform to a strict system (like Phoenix). As of next year, the only Canuck regulars not on UFA contracts will be Tanev (meh), Kassian, and Schneider (two more years at $4.0 which isn't cheap considering Luongo's contract). They're not in a good salary cap situation and don't have exciting prospects to fill roles on the cheap. They need their prospects like Schroeder, Gaunce, Connauton, and Jensen to all come through which probably isn't going to happen (that's not a good list compared to the rest of the league). Or they need to strike gold with some unknown prospects but given Gillis is a sucky drafter this doesn't seem all that likely either. Since their whole core is already in their prime they need everyone to age well (non-All Stars often don't do that well post-30). They can remain a contender as long as the Sedins are 100 point players but that won't last much longer since they're nearing the end of their prime (most players don't put up huge point totals in their mid-30s). With the Sedins as merely PPG players Vancouver is probably more of a middle playoff team than a top contender as is. They also need someone to bite on Luongo to take his big cap hit off (or else Schneider walks instead of staying in a permanent timeshare) and get some prospects. The longer Luongo remains the more of a burden his contract will be and the less likely some team will take him (he's getting up there in age). It will probably end up with the Canucks just trading him away for nothing just to get his cap hit/term off the books (like the Hawks with Campbell, another solid player but with an untouchable contract). So counting on some mega-prospect return for him is probably not going to lead to much.

So yeah, relying on your expensive above-average group of Defensemen to all age remarkably and keep you competitive is probably not going to work in the Canucks favor. Just accept that teams have good stretches of years and then go through natural declines. Canucks have had (still are I guess) a good run. They have a couple more chances to bring home a Cup but that window is definitely closing.

WarriorofTime 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 08:03 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.