Quote:
Originally Posted by OptimalTates
I would bank on building through the draft over any other strategy, yes.
Seems like drafting impactful players in the top 5 of the draft is nearing a requirement.
Stamkos, Hedman, Drouin (Sergachev)
Pietrangelo
Ovechkin, Backstrom
Crosby, Malkin, Staal, Fleury
Kane, Toews
Doughty, Schenn (Richards)
Potentially Mackinnon, Landeskog, Makar, Byram
The only Cup winner to not have a super impactful player drafted by them in the top 5 since 2009 was Boston. (They had Kessel drafted fifth who was traded for Seguin though I think it's obvious they win without rookie Seguin.)
It may, usually does, take more than one bullet. If the Kings grabbed Hickey at 4 then decided to go for it, they don't get Doughty. The Hawks don't have Kane if they're happy building around Barker and signing a bunch of UFAs in 2004-2006. So the idea that the Flames (or any team) tanks and drafts top 2 this year then instantly becomes contender is not reasonable, but a real multi-year rebuild.
|
This argument gets trotted out enough. It bears repeating that you need to be consistently bad for years to get those types of players and the draft lottery has changed to avoid the No Good approach to building a team. Every team mentioned above gets those players before the draft lottery changes. NYR drafted first overall and there is discussion of him being traded. He isn’t an immediate franchise altering player. A high draft pick isn’t a guarantee of even an impact player and certainly not a guarantee of a franchise player.
As a fan, I prefer a team that consistently drafts well regardless of where their picks are and Flames have consistently done so for a few years now. We may have our next starting goalie from the last pick in the draft.
The crowd that thinks the team should burn the whole roster down isn’t wrong per se. I just think that it is over estimated how easy it is to draft and develop all these start players with high draft picks.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk