Is it really "tanking" if what you do is trade all of the currently producing superstars for near future assets and focus on playing and developing younger talent (a la mangiapane) into bigger fixture roles?
This would almost assuredly result in a sharp decline in team point totals for the next two years, but under no circumstance would the direction be to go out and suck. On the contrary, you tell Sutter to try and get these young guys to win with literally no talent. Then, as they get used to playing like that, you start drafting and bringing guys up with higher chances to be that elite, elite talent that really pushes you through.
The Following User Says Thank You to Monahammer For This Useful Post:
I did the research about how many teams drafted in the top 3 in the last little while, or have players playing for them that were drafted in the top 3. You might find it interesting. I looked at all the drafts from 2003, with a couple of HMs.
HM:
2001.2 Spezza – OTT -> TOR
1997.1 Thorton – BOS -> TOR
1997.2 Marleau – SJS
Just drafted in the top 3 - 26/31 teams.
Currently have a player that was drafted in the top 3 – 24/31 teams.
Either or – 29/31 teams.
As a result I don't think you can quantify that having a top 3 pick is a requirement. Chances are that one random team with a top 3 draft pick winning are 84%. Chances for a team that either has a top 3 pick or acquired one are 94%.
This is a very solid rebuttal. But- Who are the two teams with 0? If you took out the last 4 years of top 3s (those wouldn't have had enough development time to impact the roster significantly enough) does that impact the numbers quite a bit?
The flames have 0 and here we are out of playoffs again.
This all seems like a weird argument to have. The key to a Stanley Cup is Bobby Ryan?
__________________
"We don't even know who our best player is yet. It could be any one of us at this point." - Peter LaFleur, player/coach, Average Joe's Gymnasium
This is a very solid rebuttal. But- Who are the two teams with 0? If you took out the last 4 years of top 3s (those wouldn't have had enough development time to impact the roster significantly enough) does that impact the numbers quite a bit?
The flames have 0 and here we are out of playoffs again.
I believe the two teams with 0 are the Flames and the Wild. As for how it would impact the numbers if you omit the last 4 years, you'd lose NYR from the list(unless you count Johnson playing for them). OTT still drafted Spezza, LA have Doughty, etc.
I think the numbers would be 25/31 drafted in the top 3 and 29/31 for either or.
Last edited by gvitaly; 05-28-2021 at 11:48 AM.
Reason: Omitted the last 4 years
The Following User Says Thank You to gvitaly For This Useful Post:
What I'm saying is that deliberately making your team the laughing stock of the league is not some sure fire way to get your team back into the mix of SC contention.
I don't believe anyone said it's a surefire way to get your team back into the mix.
However, it's also the way most correlated to acquiring the talent - especially at forward and in particular center - necessary to take full advantage of the other strong methods of talent acquisition (later rounds drafting, trade, free agency). Those other methods are how you build around a strong framework, but they're all a poor way of building the framework itself.
It's only part of the solution, but it's the one part of the solution that's been notoriously absent in this Flames organization for my lifetime.
1) No, not all high draft picks are successful
2) Nom not all teams are able to support successful high draft picks with adequate rosters
3) No, not all rebuilds follow linear progression
4) No, not all Stanley Cup champions fit a perfect box on how to rebuild
5) However, the Flames' model of maximizing spending (both in terms of assets and cap) around cores lacking critical, excruciatingly tough-to-acquire pieces, especially at center, is the exact path to a treadmill team that finishes between 11th and 20th in the league, almost invariably.
__________________
"May those who accept their fate find happiness. May those who defy it find glory."
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to GranteedEV For This Useful Post:
Fair enough- it becomes statistical noise, no doubt. But my gut is telling me that deeper analysis into recent pick position and those players playing for the team would yield a correlation to probability of Stanley cup victory.
If you look at the Teams that are still in the playoffs here are the top 3 draft picks playing for each:
Team (players in top 3 + players drafted that aren't playing for them)
COL (3 + 1)- MacKinnon (1), Landeskog (2), Johnson (1- drafted by STL), Duchene (3).
VGK (1) - Fleury (1 - PIT)
MIN (0) - N/A
Edit: out of those 10 teams, I would argue that COL/TBL/TOR and maybe CAR are really benefiting from having a top 3 pick. For the rest its more of a complementary piece, and not a piece around which the team was built.
Last edited by gvitaly; 05-28-2021 at 12:50 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to gvitaly For This Useful Post:
What I'm saying is that deliberately making your team the laughing stock of the league is not some sure fire way to get your team back into the mix of SC contention.
In fact, it can breed continuous misery for the organization and its fans.
I am all about drafting and developing to the point where you get close to the elite level and at that point, sure...push the chips in and trade futures for the final pieces.
But in the mean time you do what you can to develop a winning attitude among those guys you want to grow and win with so they can pass it on to all newcomers and veteran acquisitions.
"Tanking", as it were, is the complete and utter opposite of that.
Everything else equal, that works. But the Flames' situation being short picks and an adequate prospect pipeline, they're starting from an extreme deficit, thus playing out to an extended window of mediocrity (at best).
I think this is where there's a growing sense a more full-blown rebuild is needed. Never a guarantee it will work, but I think it's easy to see how the chips are likely to unfold if they stay the course, much like how things have gone for the last ~30 years.
There is also a ton of luck when it comes to drafting. Out of all the teams in the league there is usually only 1 or 2 at any given time really hitting on later round picks. Detroit did it for a period but they've been pretty average for the past 10-15 years. Tampa did it recently but over the next 10 years I could see them regressing back to normal. To expect the Flames to be able to find 2 or 3 franchise players in later rounds seems very optimistic. We did it with Johnny but he's pretty much the only guy in the last 20-30 years. Banking on that type of drafting fortune seems like a recipe for mediocrity unless you get insanely lucky.
There is also a ton of luck when it comes to drafting. Out of all the teams in the league there is usually only 1 or 2 at any given time really hitting on later round picks. Detroit did it for a period but they've been pretty average for the past 10-15 years. Tampa did it recently but over the next 10 years I could see them regressing back to normal. To expect the Flames to be able to find 2 or 3 franchise players in later rounds seems very optimistic. We did it with Johnny but he's pretty much the only guy in the last 20-30 years. Banking on that type of drafting fortune seems like a recipe for mediocrity unless you get insanely lucky.
Flames did it with Johnny, Fox and potentially Mangiapane if he keeps progressing. I would also say Brodie who is a top pairing D for the better part of a decade is also a late round steal
Flames did it with Johnny, Fox and potentially Mangiapane if he keeps progressing. I would also say Brodie who is a top pairing D for the better part of a decade is also a late round steal
Yeah, I think the Flames have generally done a great job drafting from their draft positions. There is lots of good work being done.
…and look at the lack of success. It’s because the foundation of the team is built on 6th overall picks, rather than 1st and 2nd overall picks. There’s the major difference.
Yeah, the free agent work has been abysmal at times, but the lack of game breaking talent in a few spots kills this team. Imagine if Monahan was Mackinnon or Barkov. Imagine if Bennett was Bennett or Draisaitl, or if Tkachuk was Matthews. There’s no blame on the Flames for who they took in the spots they took them, it’s just that they didn’t draft where they needed to draft. The talent level available to them at the draft spots they pick almost make them an underdog right from the get-go.
The difference a few draft spots can make is huge. When we see the lack of top end talent on the roster, it’s no big secret as to why - it’s just the difference between picking 1st/2nd or 6th.
Last edited by ComixZone; 05-28-2021 at 01:53 PM.
The Following User Says Thank You to ComixZone For This Useful Post:
What I'm saying is that deliberately making your team the laughing stock of the league is not some sure fire way to get your team back into the mix of SC contention.
In fact, it can breed continuous misery for the organization and its fans.
I am all about drafting and developing to the point where you get close to the elite level and at that point, sure...push the chips in and trade futures for the final pieces.
But in the mean time you do what you can to develop a winning attitude among those guys you want to grow and win with so they can pass it on to all newcomers and veteran acquisitions.
"Tanking", as it were, is the complete and utter opposite of that.
Might be the case.
But you can't deny that this team would be a lot further ahead if the Flames had been able to pick up an Aleksander Barkov or a Leon Draisaitl. The Flames had to be bad enough for at least 1 year to have drafted #2 or #3 which we have never. Bennett was the closest at #4 and unfortunately he didn't work out here.
If one of those 2 centers though were our #1 though, we could've pushed our other centers down another slot and been really deep down the middle. We'd also have a play driving center who can carry his line and make average wingers look much better.
But you can't deny that this team would be a lot further ahead if the Flames had been able to pick up an Aleksander Barkov or a Leon Draisaitl. The Flames had to be bad enough for at least 1 year to have drafted #2 or #3 which we have never. Bennett was the closest at #4 and unfortunately he didn't work out here.
If one of those 2 centers though were our #1 though, we could've pushed our other centers down another slot and been really deep down the middle. We'd also have a play driving center who can carry his line and make average wingers look much better.
Imagine a 1-2-3 punch of Barkov - Lindholm - Backlund?
The Following User Says Thank You to ComixZone For This Useful Post:
But you can't deny that this team would be a lot further ahead if the Flames had been able to pick up an Aleksander Barkov or a Leon Draisaitl. The Flames had to be bad enough for at least 1 year to have drafted #2 or #3 which we have never. Bennett was the closest at #4 and unfortunately he didn't work out here.
If one of those 2 centers though were our #1 though, we could've pushed our other centers down another slot and been really deep down the middle. We'd also have a play driving center who can carry his line and make average wingers look much better.
Barkov and Draisaitl could just as easily have been Drouin and Reinhart. It's a lot easier when you know the future. I remember a lot of fans here making fun of Edmonton for picking Draisaitl instead of Bennett...
Also, you make an assumption that players develop equally on different teams. I have no idea how Barkov would've developed here, or how would Draisaitl. It has a lot to do with the coaches, veteran players, and player development.
Finally, I think that the Flames are missing top forwards(even past their prime) to give pointers to younger players. That was one of the reasons I was so excited to have Jagr come here. I also think that Hudler(even though not a top player) was a very good influence on Monahan and Gaudreau in developing their offensive game. I also think that Gio played a good part in helping develop young D on this team. That's why if this team is going to go the rebuild route, I really hope they get a couple of stars past their prime. Players like Thorton, Spezza, Perry, Getzlaf, you get my point.
Barkov and Draisaitl could just as easily have been Drouin and Reinhart. It's a lot easier when you know the future. I remember a lot of fans here making fun of Edmonton for picking Draisaitl instead of Bennett...
Also, you make an assumption that players develop equally on different teams. I have no idea how Barkov would've developed here, or how would Draisaitl. It has a lot to do with the coaches, veteran players, and player development.
Finally, I think that the Flames are missing top forwards(even past their prime) to give pointers to younger players. That was one of the reasons I was so excited to have Jagr come here. I also think that Hudler(even though not a top player) was a very good influence on Monahan and Gaudreau in developing their offensive game. I also think that Gio played a good part in helping develop young D on this team. That's why if this team is going to go the rebuild route, I really hope they get a couple of stars past their prime. Players like Thorton, Spezza, Perry, Getzlaf, you get my point.
Reinhart and Drouin would both have been superior to Bennett, for what it's worth.
Reinhart is a RHS (Something we desperately need) with 30 goal pace the last two seasons and consistently pots 20. Would have looked great next to Johnny-Mony.
Reinhart and Drouin would both have been superior to Bennett, for what it's worth.
Reinhart is a RHS (Something we desperately need) with 30 goal pace the last two seasons and consistently pots 20. Would have looked great next to Johnny-Mony.
Drouin would've been a Monahan replacement(2013 draft).
Barkov and Draisaitl could just as easily have been Drouin and Reinhart. It's a lot easier when you know the future. I remember a lot of fans here making fun of Edmonton for picking Draisaitl instead of Bennett...
Also, you make an assumption that players develop equally on different teams. I have no idea how Barkov would've developed here, or how would Draisaitl. It has a lot to do with the coaches, veteran players, and player development.
Finally, I think that the Flames are missing top forwards(even past their prime) to give pointers to younger players. That was one of the reasons I was so excited to have Jagr come here. I also think that Hudler(even though not a top player) was a very good influence on Monahan and Gaudreau in developing their offensive game. I also think that Gio played a good part in helping develop young D on this team. That's why if this team is going to go the rebuild route, I really hope they get a couple of stars past their prime. Players like Thorton, Spezza, Perry, Getzlaf, you get my point.
Yeah I don't really understand that, they both rated pretty much right next to eachother, Bennett might have been rated a little higher by most associations, but it's not like Draisaitl was a reach. He was also rushed to the NHL which was a foolish decision by the Oilers, but that probably spoke more about their lack of depth than anything else. Also, power forwards like Draisaitl take longer to develop, but there was not doubt he was going to be a dam good player. He always played heavy, had tons of power and was basically impossible to move off from the puck. In hindsight, his abilities definitely translated better to the NHL more so than Reinhart or Bennett.
I probably look at things a little differently, but elite players like Barkov and Draisaitl I think would've always made an impact with any NHL franchise that drafted them because they're straws that stir the drink on a line. I don't think of Sam Bennett in that way, I think Sam is the more of a complimentary forward to a driver like Jonathan Huberdeau. Sam can absolutely be a great piece to any top 6 line because he plays in the guts of the game, hits hard and plays a power game. But I think in order for Bennett to have reached his full potential here, he probably would've needed to play on a line with I don't know, maybe Gaudreau-Bennett-Tkachuk or something along those lines.
Yeah I don't really understand that, they both rated pretty much right next to eachother, Bennett might have been rated a little higher by most associations, but it's not like Draisaitl was a reach. He was also rushed to the NHL which was a foolish decision by the Oilers, but that probably spoke more about their lack of depth than anything else. Also, power forwards like Draisaitl take longer to develop, but there was not doubt he was going to be a dam good player. He always played heavy, had tons of power and was basically impossible to move off from the puck. In hindsight, his abilities definitely translated better to the NHL more so than Reinhart or Bennett.
I probably look at things a little differently, but elite players like Barkov and Draisaitl I think would've always made an impact with any NHL franchise that drafted them because they're straws that stir the drink on a line. I don't think of Sam Bennett in that way, I think Sam is the more of a complimentary forward to a driver like Jonathan Huberdeau. Sam can absolutely be a great piece to any top 6 line because he plays in the guts of the game, hits hard and plays a power game. But I think in order for Bennett to have reached his full potential here, he probably would've needed to play on a line with I don't know, maybe Gaudreau-Bennett-Tkachuk or something along those lines.
Yeah, I used to think the same way you do about player development. Then the Vegas expansion happened. I think that in order to stick in the NHL a player needs to carve himself a role. That role largely depends on the team, and veterans already in place. I think that Calgary is a more difficult place to develop an offensive game. For example, Mangiapane is still not seeing PP1 time despite being one of the team's better weapons 5 on 5. Backlund was also never given the opportunity on the top PP(I am thinking about his career year offensively).
I think that Jagr had a lot of influence on the development of Barkov and Huberdeau. As for Draisaitl I think McDavid definitely helped in taking the pressure off him, and being fed PP time was huge with building his confidence.
That's a part of the reason why I think Monahan had a much more successful career in Calgary than Bennett. I think he was given a much longer leash, and had no pressure to succeed right away.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to gvitaly For This Useful Post:
Yeah, I think the Flames have generally done a great job drafting from their draft positions. There is lots of good work being done.
…and look at the lack of success. It’s because the foundation of the team is built on 6th overall picks, rather than 1st and 2nd overall picks. There’s the major difference.
Yeah, the free agent work has been abysmal at times, but the lack of game breaking talent in a few spots kills this team. Imagine if Monahan was Mackinnon or Barkov. Imagine if Bennett was Bennett or Draisaitl, or if Tkachuk was Matthews. There’s no blame on the Flames for who they took in the spots they took them, it’s just that they didn’t draft where they needed to draft. The talent level available to them at the draft spots they pick almost make them an underdog right from the get-go.
The difference a few draft spots can make is huge. When we see the lack of top end talent on the roster, it’s no big secret as to why - it’s just the difference between picking 1st/2nd or 6th.
Which is why I think the Flames have no plan, or not a very good one. Seems like every year they have an opportunity to gain a good draft position but go ahead and win a few games here and there. Had they lost a few more this season maybe that first is more attractive to Buffalo; But this is the Flames pretty much everyone knew they were going to go ahead and win instead of going for a better draft position.
The sad reality is this lack of strategy leaves us with lower, or declining assets which are harder to trade. Is it really ownership, or is Brad just stubborn, shortsighted?
Seriously for a team with bare cupboards these guys don't have a clue. What if we miss the playoffs again next season and do what we have always done, would anyone be surprised? I am worried we may make trades that end up worse than what we have now, especially with the organizations inability to scout the incoming players properly.
Last edited by DazzlinDino; 05-28-2021 at 05:56 PM.
Flames did it with Johnny, Fox and potentially Mangiapane if he keeps progressing. I would also say Brodie who is a top pairing D for the better part of a decade is also a late round steal
Johnny and Fox yes. Mangiapane has a long ways to go to be considered an elite player. Likely never will be. He's a strong depth pick but those I think are a lot easier and a lot of teams have those. Brodie was 13 years ago and was never an elite player. Again a good depth player but he's far from a player leading your team.
If we look at the next 5 year window I think you can count on a few strong depth picks. MAYBE you get lucky and find an elite player. But this is why I think you need those top picks to supplement strong drafting because its the highest probability to find the stars that will lead the team.
As for how it would impact the numbers if you omit the last 4 years, you'd lose NYR from the list(unless you count Johnson playing for them). OTT still drafted Spezza, LA have Doughty, etc. 
