Sporting Charts takes a look at rebuilds

[Bingo]

interesting read for sure ... but the fact the guy is an Oiler fan and doesn't call Edmonton a failed rebuild is somewhat questionable.

He does in all fairness point out that they are moving that way under his criteria if they don't make the playoffs this year.

His key was 3 picks in the top 5 in 5 years to find teams that are rebuilding. From that point he averaged 4.25 years to make the playoffs.

Monahan wasn't a top 5 pick, so the Flames need two more top five picks in the next three years or they won't be considered a rebuild at all. Should they achieve that then this is the first of 4.25 years out of the playoffs.

http://www.sportingcharts.com/articl...uild-take.aspx

[handgroen]

Originally Posted by Bingo

interesting read for sure ... but the fact the guy is an Oiler fan and doesn't call Edmonton a failed rebuild is somewhat questionable.

He does in all fairness point out that they are moving that way under his criteria if they don't make the playoffs this year.

His key was 3 picks in the top 5 in 5 years to find teams that are rebuilding. From that point he averaged 4.25 years to make the playoffs.

Monahan wasn't a top 5 pick, so the Flames need two more top five picks in the next three years or they won't be considered a rebuild at all. Should they achieve that then this is the first of 4.25 years out of the playoffs.

http://www.sportingcharts.com/articl...uild-take.aspx

hilarious revisionist history there. basically a justification of the oil. could you imagine if after 2 more top 5 picks over the next 4 years, that the flames would be on pace to make the playoffs 4.25 years later?
playoffs 2022 everybody!
puke

[DOOM]

Originally Posted by Bingo

interesting read for sure ... but the fact the guy is an Oiler fan and doesn't call Edmonton a failed rebuild is somewhat questionable.

He does in all fairness point out that they are moving that way under his criteria if they don't make the playoffs this year.

His key was 3 picks in the top 5 in 5 years to find teams that are rebuilding. From that point he averaged 4.25 years to make the playoffs.

Monahan wasn't a top 5 pick, so the Flames need two more top five picks in the next three years or they won't be considered a rebuild at all. Should they achieve that then this is the first of 4.25 years out of the playoffs.

http://www.sportingcharts.com/articl...uild-take.aspx

Sorry, but I have a hard time taking anyone serious that considers a rebuild just drafting in the top 5..

[ForeverFlameFan]

So, Monahan isn't a good rebuilding piece because he is 6th OA? Okay.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Bingo

interesting read for sure ... but the fact the guy is an Oiler fan and doesn't call Edmonton a failed rebuild is somewhat questionable.

He does in all fairness point out that they are moving that way under his criteria if they don't make the playoffs this year.

His key was 3 picks in the top 5 in 5 years to find teams that are rebuilding. From that point he averaged 4.25 years to make the playoffs.

Monahan wasn't a top 5 pick, so the Flames need two more top five picks in the next three years or they won't be considered a rebuild at all. Should they achieve that then this is the first of 4.25 years out of the playoffs.

http://www.sportingcharts.com/articl...uild-take.aspx

Fat freaking chance!

Oilers will be lucky if they're out of the bottom 5, I dont see a slim hope in hell they even have a sniff of the playoffs this season.

[TheDebaser]

Oiler fans feel the need to define rebuilds in strange ways because they don't want to admit that they've been rebuilding since 2006 when they missed the playoffs, drafted 6th overall, and drafted an additional two times in the first round.

By this guys definition the bruins/kings/hawks never went through a rebuild.

It sucks that this article was written from such a biased perspective, because this is a very fertile topic that should be given more thought IMO. On the fan a week or two ago Treliving said he had been giving a look towards how teams like Philly and LA had stocked up on talent, I wonder what his thoughts on how to rebuild a franchise are.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by DOOM

Sorry, but I have a hard time taking anyone serious that considers a rebuild just drafting in the top 5..

Its a dopey methodology just because top 5 isn't a static total.

The 2009 Kings got a top 5 pick with 79 points. The Flames had 79 points last year but don't count.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by TheDebaser

Oiler fans feel the need to define rebuilds in strange ways because they don't want to admit that they've been rebuilding since 2006 when they missed the playoffs, drafted 6th overall, and drafted an additional two times in the first round.

By this guys definition the bruins/kings/hawks never went through a rebuild.

It sucks that this article was written from such a biased perspective, because this is a very fertile topic that should be given more thought IMO. On the fan a week or two ago Treliving said he had been giving a look towards how teams like Philly and LA had stocked up on talent, I wonder what his thoughts on how to rebuild a franchise are.

The Kings (Hickey, Doughty and Schenn) and Chicago (Barker, Toews and Kane) do fit the criteria

[Caged Great]

The methodology they used is not good. The Oilers have picked, 6th, 10th, 1st, 1st, 1st, 7th, and 3rd. All of those picks are the picks of a rebuilding team even if 3 of them were not top 5.

[MisterJoji]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

The Kings (Hickey, Doughty and Schenn) and Chicago (Barker, Toews and Kane) do fit the criteria

I wouldn't try to make your point by adding those 2. Big-time flops for top 5 picks. Using top 5 picks for justification is flat-out ######ed. Right now I'd take Gaudreau over 2011 top 5 picks Nuge, Strome, Larsson and possibly even Huberdeau given his sophomore slump last year.

[Gaskal]

I considered the 2013-14 the first official year of the Flames because we blew up oud core at the end of the previous season.

Iggy was traded. Tanguay and Sarich gone. Bouwmeester gone. Kipper retired. Feaster under heavy scrutiny and Burke on board.

Basically the Flames team I knew was effectively dismantled. That signaled the start of the rebuild - not just that we acquired a few 1st round picks. Basing that criteria on how high your draft picks are is just Oilers being little slimy greaseballs.

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by MisterJoji

I wouldn't try to make your point by adding those 2. Big-time flops for top 5 picks. Using top 5 picks for justification is flat-out ######ed. Right now I'd take Gaudreau over 2011 top 5 picks Nuge, Strome, Larsson and possibly even Huberdeau given his sophomore slump last year.

Totally, but the criteria was 3 top 5 picks in 4 years, which they are

[CliffFletcher]

It's hilarious the way the author crunches the numbers to prove the Oilers aren't a failed rebuild.

Rebuilding is a strategy of moving out depreciating assets and moving in appreciating assets. It's where you make decisions based on their likely outcome 3+ years in the future, rather than over the next two seasons.

Picking high in the draft is often a consequence of rebuilding; it isn't the actual point of rebuilding. You can rebuild without drafting top-five, and you can draft top-five without rebuilding.

[bluloc]

Thanks for the quick summary. Pretty sure the article is garbage though. Edmonton's been rebuilding for 7 years now not sure why he can't admit they've failed, and just because you dont have top 5th picks doesn't mean your not rebuilding.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

I considered the 2013-14 the first official year of the Flames because we blew up oud core at the end of the previous season.

Iggy was traded. Tanguay and Sarich gone. Bouwmeester gone. Kipper retired. Feaster under heavy scrutiny and Burke on board.

Basically the Flames team I knew was effectively dismantled. That signaled the start of the rebuild - not just that we acquired a few 1st round picks. Basing that criteria on how high your draft picks are is just Oilers being little slimy greaseballs.

I agree.

I don't know how a person could describe the end of the 13/14 Flames season any other way.

[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.

[Phil Russell]

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.

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).

[Vulcan]

What I get is you don't want to be a bottom feeder for long as it gets to be a habit which is hard to break. For myself I'd rather we move into a playoff contender this season than go for the top pick.

[GreenLantern]

Originally Posted by Gaskal

I considered the 2013-14 the first official year of the Flames because we blew up oud core at the end of the previous season.

Iggy was traded. Tanguay and Sarich gone. Bouwmeester gone. Kipper retired. Feaster under heavy scrutiny and Burke on board.

Basically the Flames team I knew was effectively dismantled. That signaled the start of the rebuild - not just that we acquired a few 1st round picks. Basing that criteria on how high your draft picks are is just Oilers being little slimy greaseballs.

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.

Honestly I wonder how many teams saw this much improvement (I would argue last years team was better than the 2012-2013 team despite finishing lower) this quickly.

[Robbob]

I don't buy it having to be top five to be considered a rebuild. I see rebuilds based on drafts and I completely see the flames in year 2 of a rebuild. To rebuild you don't have to do what Edmonton did. The combination of bad management and horrid drafting from their first rebuild turned their current rebuild into a re-expansion franchise rather then a rebuild.

Most teams are semi competent and manage some depth players or assets so they do't become a expansion caliber team. That is why even picking 6th I think it was the first year of the rebuild. Just because we have some young assets to not make us a dumpster or grease fire doesn't mean it isn't a rebuild.