Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
I believe the best franchises acquire their talent though a commitment to the draft and then trade pieces away that they don't think fit their mold for more picks, in a constant restocking of assets. (Then, during those rare periods where it all comes together, you can trade assets for missing pieces).
IMO, the best examples of this philosophy are Philadelphia nad Boston (some would say Detroit). People talk about them having quick rebuilds - there are no quick rebuilds, they simply had bad years. But they are constantly willing to trade pieces that they didn't think fit their team mold or philosophy, to continue to acquire more assets through the draft.
|
I agree that is a sound approach. We need to keep in mind that those teams are willing to sustain short-term pain (Kessel, Carter, Richards deals) in order to get the younger assets to renew the roster. I have a tough time thinking of the last time Flames management had done that voluntarily. Even with the Niewendyk and Fleury deals their hands were forced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enoch Root
To me, that is how a franchise should be run. There is no set blueprint for rebuilds and I don't think a well run franchise should ever have to talk about rebuilds.
|
Once you
become a well-run franchise with short-term, mid-term, and long-term talent, you shouldn't have to rebuild. The question is how you turn a badly-run, asset-poor team into a good team.