[Trade] VGK get Marcus Kruger from CHI for future considerations & flips him to CAR for a 5th

[getbak]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

Any "deals" that were made, were gentleman's agreements until they actually happened.

Just because they weren't announced publicly until the night of the Awards show doesn't mean they weren't officially filed with the league beforehand.

In fact, based on media reports, we know they were completed beforehand and the league chose to hold off on announcing them until the expansion picks were announced.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

Any "deals" that were made, were gentleman's agreements until they actually happened.

I actually don't think that's correct, every deal that Vegas made was an actual deal registered with the NHL.

In any event, it would be insane to think that he could simply have ignored his deals, and rely upon his trickery and deceit in fooling the other GM's.

I actually can't believe you are truly being serious, it is that ridiculous a proposition.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Better to have some chance than no chance.

Keith was a 2nd round pick. Seabrook wasn't a high first rounder.

Chicago had a 1st and 3rd pick, but it was other picks and trades that gave them an elite team.

I don't think that trading Marc Methot will cost Vegas any Stanley Cups.

I didn't say that, but being honest neither the Pens or Hawks had some shrewd plan...they fluked out, I just hate how everyone brings that up as the model to follow.

Vegas has done okay, they could have done better so far IMO

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I didn't say that, but being honest neither the Pens or Hawks had some shrewd plan...they fluked out, I just hate how everyone brings that up as the model to follow.

Vegas has done okay, they could have done better so far IMO

I wasn't talking about either team's plan, per se.

All I was saying is that it you want to be a very good team, you need to build through the draft.

That's the model, get lots of trade picks and try and find elite talent that way. Obviously drafting well plays a big part.

But get as many of those lottery tickets (draft picks) as possible increases your chance of getting some elite talent.

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Originally Posted by StrykerSteve

Any "deals" that were made, were gentleman's agreements until they actually happened.

I don't believe that to be the truth

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I didn't say that, but being honest neither the Pens or Hawks had some shrewd plan...they fluked out, I just hate how everyone brings that up as the model to follow...

I get what you are saying and I might agree, but this does beg the question: which team has successfully implemented a model, and seen it through to a championship?

If we must eliminate luck as a factor necessary for building a Stanley Cup winning team, then it is fair to say that there has never been a successful model seen through to completion, no? Luck is extremely important to this process, but I think the right approach is to reduce the need for good fortune by as much as possible. According to this measure I would take small issue with your insistence that the Blackhawks were as lucky as the Penguins. It looks to me like Chicago's success came from being more shrewd and not quite as fortunate as Pittsburgh, who landed ass-backwards into the two best centres in the world in successive drafts.

[TheScorpion]

Cɑrolinɑ is gonnɑ be good next yeɑr. I'm really liking the wɑy thɑt teɑm looks.

[StrykerSteve]

Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher

I don't believe that to be the truth

I could absolutely be wrong. I'm just a guy typing thoughts on a cellphone.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

It looks to me like Chicago's success came from being more shrewd and not quite as fortunate as Pittsburgh, who landed ass-backwards into the two best centres in the world in successive drafts.

Pittsburgh may have even been luckier than most know.

Washington won the draft lottery the year they drafted Ovie, pushing Pittsburgh down to #2 and Chicago down to #3.

If Washington had not won it, Pittsburgh would have presumably drafted Ovie #1, and Chicago would have gotten the Malkin consolation prize.

Chicago would have subsequently gotten Toews, but Malkin's contribution in his first season would have undoubtedly taken them out of the Patrick Kane sweepstakes.

You can argue that Washington winning the draft lottery and getting Ovie was responsible for getting the 6 Cups for the Penguins and Hawks.

Although it might have been nice to see Crosby and Ovie together and Malikn and Toews.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

I get what you are saying and I might agree, but this does beg the question: which team has successfully implemented a model, and seen it through to a championship?

The team that probably most-successfully executed a burn-it-to-the-ground rebuild was George McPhee's own Washington Capitals.

In 2003-04, they traded away 5 of their top 9 leading scorers. Among the return for those players were Brooks Laich plus the picks they used to pick Jeff Schultz and Mike Green. Then, they got lucky and won the lottery to move up from 3rd to 1st and got Ovechkin.


They haven't won the Cup, but they have won 3 President's Trophies since then, which is the most of any team post-lockout.

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by getbak

The team that probably most-successfully executed a burn-it-to-the-ground rebuild was George McPhee's own Washington Capitals.

In 2003-04, they traded away 5 of their top 9 leading scorers. Among the return for those players were Brooks Laich plus the picks they used to pick Jeff Schultz and Mike Green. Then, they got lucky and won the lottery to move up from 3rd to 1st and got Ovechkin.


They haven't won the Cup, but they have won 3 President's Trophies since then, which is the most of any team post-lockout.

There is that word again.

[Oling_Roachinen]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Pittsburgh may have even been luckier than most know.

If Washington had not won it, Pittsburgh would have presumably drafted Ovie #1, and Chicago would have gotten the Malkin consolation prize.

Although it might have been nice to see Crosby and Ovie together and Malikn and Toews.

Except that wouldn't be the case. If Pittsburgh 'wins' the 2004 lottery and drafts Ovechkin first overall, they lose a ball in the 2005 draft lottery. Instead of three balls, and the greatest chance of drafting Crosby (along with Columbus, New York Rangers and Buffalo), they would have had only two balls and likely don't end up with Crosby. You know, assuming that the draft wasn't rigged.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by getbak

The team that probably most-successfully executed a burn-it-to-the-ground rebuild was George McPhee's own Washington Capitals.

In 2003-04, they traded away 5 of their top 9 leading scorers. Among the return for those players were Brooks Laich plus the picks they used to pick Jeff Schultz and Mike Green. Then, they got lucky and won the lottery to move up from 3rd to 1st and got Ovechkin.


They haven't won the Cup, but they have won 3 President's Trophies since then, which is the most of any team post-lockout.

Lombardi in LA wasn't too shabby on his rebuild.

He made some ballsy trades involving solid, core-level players too.

To me that is more impressive than McPhee who mostly relied on drafting, and only tinkered around the edges with trades.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Oling_Roachinen

Except that wouldn't be the case. If Pittsburgh 'wins' the 2004 lottery and drafts Ovechkin first overall, they lose a ball in the 2005 draft lottery. Instead of three balls, and the greatest chance of drafting Crosby (along with Columbus, New York Rangers and Buffalo), they would have had only two balls and likely don't end up with Crosby. You know, assuming that the draft wasn't rigged.

I didn't know that.

At any rate, Chicago and Pittsburgh ended up just fine having Washington win the Ovie sweepstakes.

[JohnnyTitan]

I was also in the "Vegas is going to suck when they could be good!" crowd...but am slowly convincing myself that maybe GMGM is doing an OK job.

The final kicker for me was concluding what an earlier poster also mentioned -> many of the picks can be used as currency in the next three drafts.

Hmm. Could that work? Would teams trade young / cost-controlled assets for picks?

Dougie Hamilton. (#15OA, 2x2nds)
Travis Hamonic (1st rounder, 2x2nds)
Michael Stone for a 2nd.
etc etc.

So as a previous poster showed, Vegas has done better at accumulating picks than past expansion teams. And they will likely use some of them to make picks and the rest of them to make trades. The team will suck for 2 years thus netting a couple of top-3 overall picks and by year #3 or #4 will be better than the team I would have built by taking "Better" players in the expansion draft.

So I'll cut GMGM some slack...until 2020!

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

If we must eliminate luck as a factor necessary for building a Stanley Cup winning team, then it is fair to say that there has never been a successful model seen through to completion, no?

Not since the draft became the major source of new talent, for sure. The Habs' old model – ‘own all the players coming out of minor hockey in Quebec, as if you were a feudal overlord’ – was bound to succeed even without luck. A bit harder to pull that off nowadays.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by JohnnyTitan

So as a previous poster showed, Vegas has done better at accumulating picks than past expansion teams. And they will likely use some of them to make picks and the rest of them to make trades. The team will suck for 2 years thus netting a couple of top-3 overall picks and by year #3 or #4 will be better than the team I would have built by taking "Better" players in the expansion draft.

So I'll cut GMGM some slack...until 2020!

It turns it into much more of a gamble. Most picks don't turn out as well as we expect them to, and Vegas probably won't be in a position to be trading away first rounders for players like Calgary did. It's different to trade a 15th or 16th pick then a 4th.

If Vegas had put together a better team, that might have made them more able to attract free agents, and keep themselves off of NTC lists. What they have done basically forces them to draft their way out of a hole.

Not really what the NHL wanted as far as I can tell. If that is what a GM is going to do with a new expansion team, they should just give them a bunch of extra picks in the first few drafts and let them pick some scrubs from the teams.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

If Vegas had put together a better team, that might have made them more able to attract free agents, and keep themselves off of NTC lists. What they have done basically forces them to draft their way out of a hole.

You don't build SC teams on the backs of UFA's, way too expensive.

A better team would have been better for a few years, when those older guys would have regressed and cost too much for what they brought to the table.

Vegas needed to do whatever was possible to hoard draft picks.

That's how you build a winner.

Once you have some cheaper elite talent in place, you can then sign a few key UFA's.

[SuperMatt18]

What I don't understand about some of these deals is that there is probably better asset management here.

They need forwards on the lineup and outside of contract Kruger is still a decent player, wouldn't it be better to wait until the trade deadline to get more than a 5th for the player.

[powderjunkie]

The NHL missed a great opportunity to deal with the tanking problem for a few years, by giving VGK guaranteed 1OA, 3OA, and 1 OA for the next 3 years. I'd have also given them the 17th pick in every other round. 11 picks each year, no excuse to not select the BPA and build a winning culture from the get go. At the very least, VGK could have been guaranteed top odds in the lottery for the next 3 years.

No teams should have any incentive to not try to make themselves better. Other teams may not like it, but maybe they just shouldn't suck so bad.