Quote:
Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan
You'll get your wish, but you'll be watching a basement team for a long time before they ever get a chance at being good, and maybe never.
Just look at the Sabres for example. Since 2013 they've been 8th in their division 4 of 6 seasons, with one season of 7th, and one season of 6th (last year).
They've had Jack Eichel (a franchise center and 2nd only to McDavid) since 2015, but they've had little success as a team. Funnily enough, they tanked super, super hard that year only to lose the draft lottery to Edmonton. It's never a guarantee. They got lucky that they only dropped one spot and still landed Eichel.
In their worst tanking years they had seasons of 48, 52, and 54 points, and they only broke 80 points once since 2013. Are you honestly going to stick with a team through a stretch like that? I call B.S.
The whole premise is stupid. No team should actively try to lose because the process of team building is so uncertain.
Look at the Bruins. Pastrnak was drafted 25th overall. Bergeron was drafted in the 2nd round. Marchand was drafted in the 3rd round. Rask was drafted 21st overall by Toronto. That's 4 of the best players in the game drafted after 20th.
Tanking isn't the answer. Good long-term drafting, trading, and free agent signing is the only answer. Unfortunately, that has a lot of variables involved, making it a somewhat random process as well.
Basically, there's no simple solution to team building. If there was, it would be obvious and every team would do it.
|
Like what you said, never go full Oiler - which is great! However, like winning the Lotto Max, you have to at least try to get yourself to be lucky. The only difference between the way Oilers, Sabres, and Avs tankings is that Oilers broke the bank and won the biggest jackpot ever on back to back years or picking up 2-franchise players! You can look back in history and look at the Pens for doing that. For the Caps, they've pretty much did the same thing and had pretty successful teams building with Ovechkin and Backstrom.
If you look at the Sabres and the Avs, Sabres got Eichel and Avs got McKinnon - for these teams, they don't have their other wingman like what Oilers and Pens got. So, the process continues. I would almost say that with all the Oilers picks that they had, their teams could've been really could had they not have some attitude and leadership problems. Getting Draisaitl and McDavid changed all that as the organization knew that they can't f-up a once-in-a-lifetime jackpot.
Also, the lottery system changed after the McDavid sweepstakes, but the chances are still good to get the top 3 or 5 picks. If you're unlucky (forgot who it was - the Senators???) where a team drop several spots down. However, if the draft for that year is deep, it's not a problem. But if a draft year is skimpy on high end talent and you have a generational player that comes around every 20-30 years, you damn right you should tank unless you know your team is good enough to win the cup within the next couple of year. For a team like the Flames to say they don't need a McDavid or a Draisaitl to build from the bottom is pure BS, IMO! If any organization has the right mind to want to build to their best extent and was giving the opportunity to do so, then do it! The worst thing you can do is build from mediocre and end up in being mediocre for a longer period of time. The Flames had every opportunity to tank that year for the McDavid sweepstakes, but instead, they unexpectedly did well after a couple years of rebuild and went into the playoffs only to be devastated by the Ducks. Half of the teams in the NHL that year positioned themselves to see if they can get a shot at McDavid.
Sure, you can use the example of the Bruins getting their talents from later round picks as well. They've made some key moves and some that costed them a few years (Thorton trade) as well. It all comes down to management of assets. However, in managing those assets, you need to get in position to acquire the assets that's required to build a successful team. Without good potential assets, acquiring other assets may be more difficult. This is why it's good to be lucky and lucky to be good and you always try to get to be lucky by putting yourself in the right place at the right time in order to be lucky. If that means tanking to the bottom, you do it! Managing assets sometimes required good moves and sometime bold moves. Good example is Cliff Fletcher getting guys like Mullen for a bag of pucks, Ramage for Hull and Bozek, or Gilmour and Mark Hunter for Mike Bullard. That was pretty awesome wizardry and unloading of good and bad assets to become great! Treliving is not so bad in the current day, but if he would've been brave unloaded Bennett early instead of holding on that potential, I think the Flames might have been in a better position going forward.
