Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Random
Based on the fact that so many teams in the past have tried and failed. Having a bad team gives you high draft picks, but having high draft picks, all by itself, does not give you a consistently good team. For recent examples, look at Edmonton and Buffalo; a bit earlier, Mad Mike Milbury's Islanders and several others.
Detroit remained in contention for over 20 years, despite not having any top draft picks after 1990, because Jimmy Devellano built an entire management system that was superbly competent at every facet of the job. They drafted shrewdly, developed well, and used trades and free agency to improve their talent base and not squander it. They went on doing this even into the cap era, making back-to-back finals in '08 and '09.
To paraphrase Gilbert Shelton, good management will get you through times of bad draft picks better than good draft picks will get you through times of bad management.
|
So if they have good management and bottom out they can't succeed? Isn't that exactly what Colorado and TB did (to counter the Edmonton and Buffalo examples)?
If Edmonton with Lowe, Mac-T and Chiarelli had decided not to bottom out do you think they would have done well? Competed for anything?
They need good (or great ideally) management but even the top GM's can't do anything if they don't have talent.