2022/2023 Trade Speculation and Rumours

[BlueCharlton]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Please show me one recent Stanley Cup winner that tanked within 7 years of winning.

12 of the last 14 teams who have won the cup drafted a key player at #1/2 overall.

Avs, Lightning, Penguins, Blackhawks, Capitals, Kings

Even the Blues and Boston (the two teams who didn't draft a player 1/2 ) had high picks.. Pietrangelo at #3, Seguin and Wheeler for Boston (though they were lower role players at the time)

Tanking for success still requires player development, and time to gather secondary talent and build a competitor (explains your random 7 year deadline for success). But you have to squint really hard to pretend that drafting at the top isn't a key component of winning a cup, though its not the only requirement (still need complementary players and competent management/coaching)


Is tanking the right thing for the Flames NOW, no, we have players signed to long term deals that are essentially unmovable. This ensures we wont be at the bottom for a few years. Last summer was it a path we could have taken? yes absolutely and it may have been worth it, though at the time I was optimistic with the moves Brad made, and we are locked into that direction now for a least a few years. But to say tanking doesn't lead to winning is wrong, I would say its actually a critical step.

I for one hope the flames make it, and if we do I think we could be a tough out. Go flames go!

[The Cobra]

When teams are in certain situations, unloading its movable assets for draft picks, and ensuring that you’ll receive top draft picks is simply smart management.

Look at Chicago. They have a ton of drafts picked coming up over the next 3 years, a decent prospect pool, and a great chance of one of the top 3 picks this year.

And if they hit on some if they’re picks, they have a destination players want to go to and stay.

They may be really bad now, but their future looks realistic.

I’m not sure if any other strategy made sense.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

When teams are in certain situations, unloading its movable assets for draft picks, and ensuring that you’ll receive top draft picks is simply smart management.

Look at Chicago. They have a ton of drafts picked coming up over the next 3 years, a decent prospect pool, and a great chance of one of the top 3 picks this year.

And if they hit on some if they’re picks, they have a destination players want to go to and stay.

They may be really bad now, but their future looks realistic.

I’m not sure if any other strategy made sense.

Not so sure I would pick Chicago as the tanking poster boy. Yes, they are tanking, but only after an inexplicably dumb trade for Seth Jones, after which they gutted the team of DeBrincat, Dach, and Kane. Draft picks are nice, but they have a horrible team (and I could be wrong on this) not much in the pipeline other than picks. If they don’t get Berard, I would think they have at least 5 years of misery. Even if they luck out, it could still be a really long haul.

Edit: And most importantly, they were pretty terrible before the full on tank. This wasn’t giving up on a mediocre team.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Please show me one recent Stanley Cup winner that tanked within 7 years of winning.

wtf does 7 years have to do with anything?

Stop looking for shortcuts.

You need high end picks, and then you need to be one of the best managed teams in all of hockey. That’s what it takes to win. Building a winner takes a lot of time, lots of excellent management, and some friggin’ patience.

[1qqaaz]

Hasn't every cup winning team this millenium had a top 3 pick?
Haven't 90%+ of them had a top two pick?
Haven't most of them had a 1st OA pick?
Haven't most of them had multiple top picks?

St. Louis is the only real exception, and even they had a 3OA and 4OA on their team.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

Hasn't every cup winning team this millenium had a top 3 pick?
Haven't 90%+ of them had a top two pick?
Haven't most of them had a 1st OA pick?
Haven't most of them had multiple top picks?

St. Louis is the only real exception, and even they had a 3OA and 4OA on their team.

Yeah, but you can't PLAN anything. You need to accidentally stumble into it out of complete incompetence, apparently - and no other option is noble, or whatever. Your organizational PRIDE is a virtue, patience is not.


You MUST mismanage your way into it, it's the only way. No planning allowed.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

wtf does 7 years have to do with anything?

Stop looking for shortcuts.

You need high end picks, and then you need to be one of the best managed teams in all of hockey. That’s what it takes to win. Building a winner takes a lot of time, lots of excellent management, and some friggin’ patience.

TBF, 7 years seems like a reasonable amount of time for tanking to pay dividends. After that you are running out of room with those high draft picks, especially in markets like Calgary.

[TheScorpion]

Planning to be bad at the right times is a necessity in today's NHL. Failing to do so in the name of respectability is just terrible strategy.

[Snuffleupagus]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Please show me one recent Stanley Cup winner that tanked within 7 years of winning.

Chicago?

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Snuffleupagus

Chicago?

Not sure they tanked as opposed to just being really bad for a decade. They actually had a worse record the two seasons before the one that got them Kane.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by Macindoc

Please show me one recent Stanley Cup winner that tanked within 7 years of winning.

Kings announced a rebuild after the 05/06 season and then won the Cup in 2012.

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Fighting Banana Slug

Not so sure I would pick Chicago as the tanking poster boy. Yes, they are tanking, but only after an inexplicably dumb trade for Seth Jones, after which they gutted the team of DeBrincat, Dach, and Kane. Draft picks are nice, but they have a horrible team (and I could be wrong on this) not much in the pipeline other than picks. If they don’t get Berard, I would think they have at least 5 years of misery. Even if they luck out, it could still be a really long haul.

Edit: And most importantly, they were pretty terrible before the full on tank. This wasn’t giving up on a mediocre team.

Which is why tanking was their only reasonable move.

They were already terrible.

They have a decent prospect pool.

And Bedard is not the only gem available this year.

[TOfan]

Curious to know what people’s thoughts are on a team like Dallas as it relates to rebuilding.

From the sounds of it, in most cases, a team must have multiple top three picks, or at least one elite/generation player acquired with a top 3 pick to win a cup. Although Dallas has one top 3 in Hiskanen and he looks to be an exceptional talent, I don’t think he has elevated himself to Makar/Fox/Josi levels. Interesting to note that the Stars didn’t tank to get Hiskanen, they won the lottery. I’ll leave Seguin out do to age and hip issues. As well, he was acquired through trade, not draft.

Can the Stars win, or do they need to start planning for a rebuild?

What about Detroit? Tanked for years and not one top three pick to show for it. Should they just keep trying their luck at the plinko machine, or try to compete? Is one more likely to get them a cup than the other?

There are far too many scenarios outside the control of a GM to blindly put your trust into ‘tanking’. Especially seeing as most GM’s have, what, 3-5 year contracts?

[Flamesfan05]

Tank or not you need a legit superstar to lead the team to win the cup. Although tank is the best way to win one of those.

Yeah the Blues won without one but they are not the norm

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

Planning to be bad at the right times is a necessity in today's NHL. Failing to do so in the name of respectability is just terrible strategy.

I wouldn’t word it as “planning to be bad”.

The key is not unnecessarily adding players when you are bad. I don’t think the Avs or Lightning ever planned to be bad and the people associated with putting teams in those situations get replaced anyway.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by BlueCharlton

12 of the last 14 teams who have won the cup drafted a key player at #1/2 overall.

Avs, Lightning, Penguins, Blackhawks, Capitals, Kings

Even the Blues and Boston (the two teams who didn't draft a player 1/2 ) had high picks.. Pietrangelo at #3, Seguin and Wheeler for Boston (though they were lower role players at the time)

Tanking for success still requires player development, and time to gather secondary talent and build a competitor (explains your random 7 year deadline for success). But you have to squint really hard to pretend that drafting at the top isn't a key component of winning a cup, though its not the only requirement (still need complementary players and competent management/coaching)


Is tanking the right thing for the Flames NOW, no, we have players signed to long term deals that are essentially unmovable. This ensures we wont be at the bottom for a few years. Last summer was it a path we could have taken? yes absolutely and it may have been worth it, though at the time I was optimistic with the moves Brad made, and we are locked into that direction now for a least a few years. But to say tanking doesn't lead to winning is wrong, I would say its actually a critical step.

I for one hope the flames make it, and if we do I think we could be a tough out. Go flames go!

What percentage of teams (all teams) has a #1 or #2 pick?

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

Kings announced a rebuild after the 05/06 season and then won the Cup in 2012.

So that's 1.

The Oilers also tanked after the 05/06 season, and they won the Cup in... I mean, they made the playoffs in...

[Fighting Banana Slug]

Originally Posted by The Cobra

Which is why tanking was their only reasonable move.

They were already terrible.

They have a decent prospect pool.

And Bedard is not the only gem available this year.

Agreed, but that does not apply to a team like the Flames.

[Flamesfan05]

On purpose or not, the Flames did tank and got a bunch of high picks that got them Monahan, Bennett , Tkachuk and the pick that got Hamilton. On top of that they got Gaudreau, a legit star level player. Treliving just couldn’t fill out the rest of the team to win. Wasted resources on Brouwer, Neal, Hamonic and garbage goalies.

That era is over. They will try with the current bunch for a couple years and go in tank mode whether they like it or not

[memphusk]

Originally Posted by Flamesfan05

On purpose or not, the Flames did tank and got a bunch of high picks that got them Monahan, Bennett , Tkachuk and the pick that got Hamilton. On top of that they got Gaudreau, a legit star level player. Treliving just couldn’t fill out the rest of the team to win. Wasted resources on Brouwer, Neal, Hamonic and garbage goalies.

That era is over. They will try with the current bunch for a couple years and go in tank mode whether they like it or not

No they won't. They haven't and won't. This isn't Oiler bull####.