Quote:
Originally Posted by Aarongavey
Why would you need to draft top 3 to get those better players. The Stars clearly pulled it off later. So did Boston. They are already doing their absolute best to put the worst product on the ice, one would think that would count for something with team tank. Nobody who hopes we finish last really seems to care too much about what we get back for our assets, just that they leave the team so we can get that all important top 3 pick. Team rebuild is hoping that we get good picks and prospects back for the assets we have, that is the differentiating point I believe between team tank and team rebuild.
|
The higher the draft pick, the better the odds to draft an impact player. Which is why most of the top players in the NHL are drafted there. The Dallas strategy is essentially banking on being smarter or luckier than everyone else. Banking on that you see something 20-30 other teams don't. Another reason is that top picks can typically play in the NHL right away, this speeds up a rebuild compared to a pick in the 20s that's usually at least 3-4 years away from making an impact. In order to expedite the rebuild even further the Flames' strategy should be drafting both in the top 3-5, and getting as many picks in the 20-60 range as they possibly can.
As for team tank vs rebuild. I don't believe any fans want to trade players for pennies on the dollar just so they can secure the 32nd place. At the same time Kadri, and Coleman are depreciating assets. They will be worth less and play worse with each year that passes. That was also the reason people wanted to trade Andersson last year, but that would've sent the wrong message to the players. With hindsight it would've been pretty nice if we could get a haul for Andersson, and lost enough games to send MTL pick 32, while drafting in the top 10, as well as getting Reschney.