Can the Flames become a contender without tanking?

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by YyjFlames

I don't see the Flames moving Andersson unless they get that young top line centre back, and if they get that guy, they are more likely to maintain their position in the standings (and just outside the playoff picture) as that centre position remains their biggest need.

Conroy could trade Andersson for futures, but unless Rasmus is making noise that he wants out -- which doesn't appear to be the case right now -- the leadership group will probably be pretty pissed off if he's moved, and it would undermine Conroy's credibility with them... likely forcing a full rebuild, which doesn't seem to be where the Flames are trying to go.

Andersson's future is the most intriguing of all the current Flames as what happens to him likely charts the Flames next steps (if he resigns, they're going to keep trying to contend; if he's traded for a young centre they're going to keep trying to contend; if he's traded for futures, they're going to rebuild.)

A team looking to contend and trading for Andersson won’t want to give up a current producing asset.

[Inferno]

Originally Posted by Yanda

I dont think the old core was ever considered a contender, or favorite to win the cup.

It depends on who you ask. I can't remember who exactly but I remember members of the media picking them to win in 2019 and 2022. Not just Bissonnette either.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by just_tim

Here’s the list of Number One overall NHL draft picks who have gone on to win the Stanley Cup:
- Guy Lafleur (1971 - Montreal Canadiens) Stanley Cups: 5 (1973, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979)
- Mario Lemieux (1984 - Pittsburgh Penguins) Stanley Cups: 2 (1991, 1992)
- Patrick Kane (2007 - Chicago Blackhawks) Stanley Cups: 3 (2010, 2013, 2015)
- Alex Ovechkin (2004 - Washington Capitals) Stanley Cup: 1 (2018)
- Sidney Crosby (2005 - Pittsburgh Penguins) Stanley Cups: 3 (2009, 2016, 2017)

That’s 14 cups shared by 5 players over 53 years. It’s a simplified way to illustrates that drafting high is in no way a guaranteed way to build.

Potvin?
Modano?
Lecavalier?
Mackinnon?
Stamkos?
MAF?
Gretzky would have counted if not for WHA.


thats just off the top of my head.
You even do any homework on that post?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Yanda

Why are you looking at this more than this season specifically? The question was "Would you consider the current version of the Leafs to be competitive?"

Because a lot of the people who are saying the Flames' last core wasn't competitive are also saying the team has been constantly mediocre for the last 35 years. If the Flames were mediocre, what does that make the Leafs?

[Yanda]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Because a lot of the people who are saying the Flames' last core wasn't competitive are also saying the team has been constantly mediocre for the last 35 years. If the Flames were mediocre, what does that make the Leafs?

Like I said, there is a difference between being competitive and being a contender. Being competitive isnt enough, being a bubble team sucks. The Flames last core was JUST competitive. Maybe a contender 1 year if you want to argue it.. sure

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Yanda

Like I said, there is a difference between being competitive and being a contender. Being competitive isnt enough, being a bubble team sucks. The Flames last core was JUST competitive. Maybe a contender 1 year if you want to argue it.. sure

But you think the Leafs are a contender because…?

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Leafs probably need more top 8 picks LOL. Having 4 homegrown ones and one traded for one on their roster over the past 6 seasons has won them one playoff series. Maybe they just needed more.

To answer the question, of course a team can be competitive without tanking.

The Leafs obvious problem is goaltending, defense, and depth. They absolutely nailed their top picks landing Nylander, Marner, Matthews, in three consecutive drafts. They have never drafted higher than 15th since. They almost got to lucky to fast.

Where would they be without these guys?

To build a true contender you need to nail your high picks, draft well beyond these picks, make savvy trades and signings. The Leafs did one but failed at most of the others.

The problem I foresee for the Flames is they might do a good job in the areas the Leafs didn't, but landing those superstars to carry the team will be a challenge unless they get a few high picks. The whole point of the thread was to show how highly unlikely it is to land superstars outside of the top 5. For every Kucherov there are 1000 other guys who never amounted to anything.

[mikephoen]

Originally Posted by just_tim

Here’s the list of Number One overall NHL draft picks who have gone on to win the Stanley Cup:
- Guy Lafleur (1971 - Montreal Canadiens) Stanley Cups: 5 (1973, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979)
- Mario Lemieux (1984 - Pittsburgh Penguins) Stanley Cups: 2 (1991, 1992)
- Patrick Kane (2007 - Chicago Blackhawks) Stanley Cups: 3 (2010, 2013, 2015)
- Alex Ovechkin (2004 - Washington Capitals) Stanley Cup: 1 (2018)
- Sidney Crosby (2005 - Pittsburgh Penguins) Stanley Cups: 3 (2009, 2016, 2017)

That’s 14 cups shared by 5 players over 53 years. It’s a simplified way to illustrates that drafting high is in no way a guaranteed way to build.

Your post has already been thoroughly debunked on earlier pages, but just to put a final nail in the coffin I found the following stat:

Since the lockout (19 seasons) only two teams haven't had a player drafted either 1st or 2nd overall on their roster. The St. Louis Blues in 2019 (and they had a 4th and 5th overall pick on the roster) and the 2008 Detroit Red Wings. That Red Wings team is unlikely to ever be replicated as it hinged on players like Zetterburg, Datsyuk and Lindstrom being late round finds.

Only Vegas and Anaheim didn't draft the 1st or 2nd overall player on their cup winning roster. Only Boston had a player who was drafted 1st or 2nd, but wasn't a major contributor to the win.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Yanda

I dont think the old core was ever considered a contender, or favorite to win the cup. They were competitive and had 1 good year, and players underperformed in the playoffs.. probably because they were hurt (ie: Monahan)

They won 2 division titles and were 2nd overall one season. 2nd to the greatest regular season record of all time.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

Your post has already been thoroughly debunked on earlier pages, but just to put a final nail in the coffin I found the following stat:

Since the lockout (19 seasons) only two teams haven't had a player drafted either 1st or 2nd overall on their roster. The St. Louis Blues in 2019 (and they had a 4th and 5th overall pick on the roster) and the 2008 Detroit Red Wings. That Red Wings team is unlikely to ever be replicated as it hinged on players like Zetterburg, Datsyuk and Lindstrom being late round finds.

Only Vegas and Anaheim didn't draft the 1st or 2nd overall player on their cup winning roster. Only Boston had a player who was drafted 1st or 2nd, but wasn't a major contributor to the win.

You do realize the Flames have a #3 overall on their roster right now...most teams have top 5 picks on their roster

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by dino7c

They won 2 division titles and were 2nd overall one season. 2nd to the greatest regular season record of all time.

and they never got past the 2nd round, and missed the playoffs every second season.

Is that the level of success you desire?

Originally Posted by dino7c

You do realize the Flames have a #3 overall on their roster right now...most teams have top 5 picks on their roster

Yeah, prime aged Alex Pietrangelo is the same as mediocre post-apex $10.5M Jonathan Huberdeau.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

and they never got past the 2nd round, and missed the playoffs every second season.

Is that the level of success you desire?

Does that have anything to do with whether they were a contender or not? There are multiple contenders every year. Only one team wins the championship.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

Does that have anything to do with whether they were a contender or not? There are multiple contenders every year. Only one team wins the championship.

Define “contender”. Every time the Flames came up against an actual contender in the playoffs, they got their faces punched in. The Flames never accomplished enough to be considered a true “contender”. They were never consistent enough, their peak play was never good enough. When they came up against top teams in the playoffs, it was never even a close series.

The Flames were much closer to pretenders than contenders.

They absolutely believed they were a contender, and acted as if they were, but they didn’t actually prove themselves in any meaningful way to be one.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by Hackey

The Leafs obvious problem is goaltending, defense, and depth. They absolutely nailed their top picks landing Nylander, Marner, Matthews, in three consecutive drafts. They have never drafted higher than 15th since. They almost got to lucky to fast.

Where would they be without these guys?

To build a true contender you need to nail your high picks, draft well beyond these picks, make savvy trades and signings. The Leafs did one but failed at most of the others.

The problem I foresee for the Flames is they might do a good job in the areas the Leafs didn't, but landing those superstars to carry the team will be a challenge unless they get a few high picks. The whole point of the thread was to show how highly unlikely it is to land superstars outside of the top 5. For every Kucherov there are 1000 other guys who never amounted to anything.

You can skip the nailing your high picks (or really almost any picks) if you are Vegas (I know they don’t count as a NHL team for this argument but I believe they are one). They have never had a top 5 picks and their drafting is horrific. They just nailed their trades and signings and outside of one player in their franchise history have never drafted a player who has averaged more than 0.5 points per game (41 point player) and outside of those two studs have never drafted a player who has averaged more than 0.3 points per game (25 point player). For at least one team all you need to do is make savvy trades and signings.

There literally is a team that demonstrates the answer to the question in the thread title is “yes”

[dino7c]

I mean they beat Dallas who was a contender...Bad goaltending and injury hurt them in round 2...they were a better team than the Oilers and proved it all year.

Tanev injury and Markstom's play were huge blows, it should have gone 6 anyway if not for the league cheating and who knows. Markstom got outplayed by Mike Smith, it is what it is but they were contenders IMO. Leafs and Oilers had massive tanks and incredible luck...where are their cups? Its hard. Panthers had a 10M goalie they were trying desperately to get rid of suddenly turn into one of the best in the NHL.

[Aarongavey]

Originally Posted by mikephoen

Your post has already been thoroughly debunked on earlier pages, but just to put a final nail in the coffin I found the following stat:

Since the lockout (19 seasons) only two teams haven't had a player drafted either 1st or 2nd overall on their roster. The St. Louis Blues in 2019 (and they had a 4th and 5th overall pick on the roster) and the 2008 Detroit Red Wings. That Red Wings team is unlikely to ever be replicated as it hinged on players like Zetterburg, Datsyuk and Lindstrom being late round finds.

Only Vegas and Anaheim didn't draft the 1st or 2nd overall player on their cup winning roster. Only Boston had a player who was drafted 1st or 2nd, but wasn't a major contributor to the win.

Anaheim never drafted the 1st or 2nd overall player on their Stanley Cup roster, it was built through trades and signings. They had 4 players on their entire roster that they had even drafted. There is definitely more than one way to build a contender.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

Only if they can pull off an Eichel-like trade.

Is that Pettersson? I don't know.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I mean they beat Dallas who was a contender...Bad goaltending and injury hurt them in round 2...they were a better team than the Oilers and proved it all year.

Tanev injury and Markstom's play were huge blows, it should have gone 6 anyway if not for the league cheating and who knows. Markstom got outplayed by Mike Smith, it is what it is but they were contenders IMO. Leafs and Oilers had massive tanks and incredible luck...where are their cups?

You still seem to think those who think the Flames need to draft at the top of the draft to win are saying it's some sort of guarantee.

Sure, Toronto and Edmonton don't have Stanley Cups (although, they historically have a lot more than we do) - but you know who do have Stanley Cups in the modern era? Chicago, Colorado, Tampa Bay, Florida, Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, Boston, and St. Louis.

Why not analyze their success and say hey - what's the best way to replicate teams like that?

St. Louis? Tough to replicate, but they could try. They just need a once in a decade goaltending performance, and an elite #1 defenceman (which they selected at the top of draft). Tough to plan for.

Boston? Well, you need a generational defenceman via free agency, and one of the best two way centres to ever play the game. You also need to build a heck of a team throughout the draft.

Chicago, Colorado, Tampa Bay, Florida, Los Angeles, and Pittsburgh? Well, draft superstar talent at the top of the draft, compliment it with excellent drafting throughout the draft, make some excellent trades, and manage your salary cap well. This is the outcome the Flames fans who want the Flames to bottom out want to follow.

You know why Toronto and Edmonton have failed? Because they've been poor at drafting throughout the draft, poor at trading, and poor at managing their salary cap. Why do you think that people who want the Flames to tank want this outcome or that we're blind to the risks?

You know why Flames fans want the Flames to bottom out? It's because we believe the management of this team can actually make it work. We believe that if they can draft the superstars at the top of the draft, that the management in Calgary is actually good enough to draft well throughout the draft to compliment those superstars, and that the management in Calgary is good enough to make some perfectly timed trades, and that they can manage their salary cap well.

Those who want the Flames to bottom out is because they believe the Flames can do it and succeed at it. You just go to worst case scenario and think all doom and gloom.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

You still seem to think those who think the Flames need to draft at the top of the draft to win are saying it's some sort of guarantee.

They are saying it's guaranteed that you can't win if you don't draft at the top of the draft. A negative guarantee is still a guarantee.

Sure, Toronto and Edmonton don't have Stanley Cups (although, they historically have a lot more than we do)

Toronto hasn't even been to the SCF since 1967. They have never built a championship team through the draft. They did not have a single drafted player on their most recent Stanley Cup winner.

[dino7c]

There are so few teams that haven't drafted in the top of the draft and even fewer that don't have a top pick on their roster it kinda makes it pointless.

Every team is basically run the same way, some get lucky and some don't. Oilers were trying to compete when they got Drai and McDavid.

The thread, which is basically the same question is multiple other threads is basically is it possible...I think it is but a team needs to be bold. No big retirement contracts, no untouchables, no high end UFAs leaving for nothing ect. ect. Do those and you are already better off than most teams. I don't think the difference between top teams and the bottom feeders has ever been closer.

Wolf will be a STAR IMO, its not the worst start in the world