Sporting Charts takes a look at rebuilds

[Bingo]

Originally Posted by Phil Russell

And he would have more teams to look at if he added additional criteria beyond high-draft picks including draft stockpiling, trades of high-profile veterans, lack of FA signings. All of these criteria could be modeled statistically. And, rigor of rebuild could be ranked (full-rebuild attempt to re-tool attempt).

Almost wonder if you could look at year over year salary totals as well ... drop in payroll likely signals a rebuild

[Robbob]

After reading the article I think it is pretty laughable that he is comparing the Oilers to the Future Aves because they also had 3 first picks. Last I looked the Oilers didn't parlay Yakipov into a monster of a deal and I don't think Scrivens is going to be confused with Roy anytime soon (Well mudcrunch may floats some advanced stats to compare them like he did with Broduer and Conklin). There isn't enough panic buttons in the world to push for Oilers fans.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Bingo

Almost wonder if you could look at year over year salary totals as well ... drop in payroll likely signals a rebuild

While true, the Oilers buck that trend as well. They were a cap team at the start of their rebuild and then last year had to trade Smid to fit Bryzgalov under the cap.

They are rebuilding, they're just terrible at it.

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern

I agree with this but I would add the .25 this guy uses, that seems semi legit. Basically at the trade deadline this team was forever changed by sending out Captain Jerome Imgla. We can't just discredit the fact that the 2013 draft was a huge part of this rebuild and trading away so many assets at the deadline helped cement our Monahan pick, so I would say it officially started the day we traded Iggy. So as of right now we are 1.25 seasons into the rebuild and moving in a very strong direction.

It was also .25 of a 48 game season, prorated that's about .15 of a full season. So essentially 1.15 seasons into the rebuild.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by MisterJoji

It was also .25 of a 48 game season, prorated that's about .15 of a full season. So essentially 1.15 seasons into the rebuild.

rebuilds are based on drafts. Sure the flames dismantled at the trade deadline but it didn't start until the draft. So flames IMO are just one season in, with year two starting shortly.

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by Robbob

rebuilds are based on drafts. Sure the flames dismantled at the trade deadline but it didn't start until the draft. So flames IMO are just one season in, with year two starting shortly.

Well I don't know how you can say rebuilds are based on drafts as if this is a consensus standard, especially since the draft picks used are acquired at or close to the trade deadline. But whatever, we're talking about a 15% difference. Round down and say we're entering year 2.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Bingo

He'd get more teams to look at if he adjusted the criteria to three top ten picks in 5 years and went from there.

Then the Oilers would move to failed, the Flames would have 2 picks of their three and this year would be the third, and their rebuild would be I guess on year old with June 2013 and Monahan being the start of the clock.

The first sentence of your second paragraph probably explains why he used the criteria he did. It seems rather obvious that he went in with a conclusion in mind ("The Oilers rebuild is not yet failed") and found an arbitrary set of criteria that suits his purpose.

Though he did explain the Oilers without intending to:

To start, it's important to distinguish between successful and unsuccessful rebuilds. Some teams are just run poorly and are really in a perpetual rebuild.

No team exemplifies this statement like the Oilers over the last 20 years.