2020/2021 Trade Speculation and Rumours

[The Cobra]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Interestingly the Panthers have finished with a higher winning percentage than the Flames in 4 of the last 6 seasons. And they have only had one season in the last 7 that they have finished in the bottom 10 of the league, whereas the Flames have had two. But you are right, a long time ago they were pretty bad and they have the misfortunate of playing in a tougher conference as a general rule which hurts them.

I think the big difference in the Panthers is having Barkov.

Having that #1 centre that can score and shut down the other teams best players cannot be ignored.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by dino7c

How often does this actually happen?

For every example like this there are many more teams that just suck for a decade plus. How long did the Oilers suck? Buffalo?

CPs new fav team the Panthers have been bottom 5-10 the majority of the last 20 years.

The Leafs recently did it fairly quickly after tanking and the Rangers look like the next great young team. They Leafs made some astute first round picks in Marner, Nylander, and of course winning the draft lottery helps but if you want to win the draft lottery or pick top 3 you have to commit to the tank and the Flames have never really done that. The organization has only really been committed to one thing and that's to try to get into the playoffs at all costs and it's resulted in decades of mediocrity.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Aarongavey

Interestingly the Panthers have finished with a higher winning percentage than the Flames in 4 of the last 6 seasons. And they have only had one season in the last 7 that they have finished in the bottom 10 of the league, whereas the Flames have had two. But you are right, a long time ago they were pretty bad and they have the misfortunate of playing in a tougher conference as a general rule which hurts them.

Probably 4 of the last 20 seasons too...but cherry pick if you want

The Panthers have finished bottom 10 15 times in the last 20 years and missed the playoffs 17 times in the last 20 years

shrewd rebuild

[CliffFletcher]

Successful rebuilds:

Penguins
Blackhawks
Capitals

Looking promising:

Leafs
Avs

Jury’s out:

Panthers
Oilers

Too soon to tell:

Red Wings
Senators
Devils
Rangers

Fails:

Coyotes
Sabres

[dino7c]

I suppose if you ignore time every rebuild is successful eventually

3 to 5 years is highly unlikely though IMO

Chicago missed the playoffs 9 of 11 years before they won a cup

Pittsburg was a quick one but the Crosby lottery was the biggest win of all time, the entire league had a shot

[TheIronMaiden]

Where does Vancouver fall on that list? Too soon to tell?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden

Where does Vancouver fall on that list? Too soon to tell?

Yes.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by dino7c

People think teams rebuild in 3-5 years...its usually takes 15-20 though

At first I was going to join the incredulous chorus and boo you until my lungs were hoarse...but you're not actually wrong (depending on how you count things).

PIT, VGK, DET (sustained success) are obviously exceptions.

CHI - contended '89-95; two years of playoffs and then only once more before 2009. 14 years between conf. finals; 17 for SCF.


LAK - peaked in '93; missed 4 years; made playoffs 4/5 yrs from '98-'02 with 1 rd win; peaked again in 2012 after just 2 playoffs the preceding years. 19 yrs SCF-SCC

TBL - peaked 2004; two first rd outs, missed 3 yrs, then a run to game 7 of conf. finals; then 3 more years without a playoff victory (swept once) before SCF run in 2015 (and steady contendership since then). So 11 year trough with one anomaly season.

STL - competitive through the 90's, peaking with a Conf finals run in 2002, and a steady decline the next 3 years into the lockout. Competitive again by 2011, but not a legit contender until 2016 (CF). ~6 year trough between bubble team status, but 14 years between conf. finals (2 series wins in that time, leading to sweep and 4-1 outs in 2nd round).

WAS - cinderella run in '98. bubble team until the lockout; only 3 years of bottom out before becoming competitive/borderline contenders by 2008 through 2017 (missed PO's once, otherwise never out before game 7), but one could argue that was all still building to 2018, as they didn't make it to the 3rd rd until then.



BOS* - contended '88-'92; competitive through the 90's with series wins in '94, '98, '99. Missed 2 years; then 3 decent years before the lockout (strong reg. seasons, no series wins). Missed 2 years out of the lockout, and steadily rose from 2008 to cup win in 2011. 10 yrs between series wins; 18 (20) between CF(SCC) and SCF.



So I'd say a 15-20 year trough between peaks isn't at all unusual, with brief period(s) of bubble time in between.

Off the top of my head, NYI, CAR, VAN, COL, DAL, TOR, PHI are all following this kind of pattern.


It may not be fair to say that a 'rebuild' takes 15-20 years, but rebuilding from a contender to a contender generally takes that long. Teams like DET, PIT, SJ, and maybe NJD/ANA managed to maintain contendership for 10-20 years, but it looks like they'll likely need a long period to reach that level again.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by dino7c

I suppose if you ignore time every rebuild is successful eventually

3 to 5 years is highly unlikely though IMO

Chicago missed the playoffs 9 of 11 years before they won a cup

Pittsburg was a quick one but the Crosby lottery was the biggest win of all time, the entire league had a shot

Long rebuilds don’t necessarily mean the team is terrible for a long time before they reach the summit. The Capitals rebuild was capped by their Cup win in 2018, and it was kicked off with the drafting of Ovechkin in 2004 and Backstrom in 2006. But they were a very good team for a long time before they won the Cup. Same with the Lightning. They don’t win the Cup without Stamkos and Hedman.

It’s extremely difficult to win it all or have a sustained period of being elite in this league without at least a couple superstar players drafted in the top 5. Those players make take only 3 or 4 seasons to bring you a championship (Crosby/Malkin/Kane), or they may take 10+ years (Ovechkin/Backstrom/Hedman). But without them you’re almost guaranteed to flail around the middle of the standings indefinitely.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

The Leafs recently did it fairly quickly after tanking and the Rangers look like the next great young team. They Leafs made some astute first round picks in Marner, Nylander, and of course winning the draft lottery helps but if you want to win the draft lottery or pick top 3 you have to commit to the tank and the Flames have never really done that. The organization has only really been committed to one thing and that's to try to get into the playoffs at all costs and it's resulted in decades of mediocrity.

The Leafs were rebuilding from 2004-2016 basically with one playoff appearance that came in a lockout shortened season and included 8 bottom 10 finishes in 9 years.

It is like saying the Oilers didn’t start rebuilding until they got McDavid. Sure it was the picks from 14-16 that pushed the Leafs forward but they had key pieces from previous failed years like Kadri and Rielly.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

The Leafs were rebuilding from 2004-2016 basically with one playoff appearance that came in a lockout shortened season and included 8 bottom 10 finishes in 9 years.

It is like saying the Oilers didn’t start rebuilding until they got McDavid. Sure it was the picks from 14-16 that pushed the Leafs forward but they had key pieces from previous failed years like Kadri and Rielly.

The Leafs were very actively not rebuilding in 2004-2016.

They were actively sucking and being managed terribly. They friggin' traded away what would be 9th and 2nd overall picks in attempts to compete.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

The Leafs were very actively not rebuilding in 2004-2016.

They were actively sucking and being managed terribly. They friggin' traded away what would be 9th and 2nd overall picks in attempts to compete.

It doesn’t erase the fact they drafted top 10 a few times before they tanked and those assets allowed them to rebuild quickly like EE is stating.

Edmonton tried to pull themselves out of the tank before they drafted McDavid as well it just didn’t work.

If a new GM comes in here and trades Gaudreau and Gio goes to Seattle and this team has a couple of top 10 picks in the next 2 years and they get back to the playoffs is that a rebuild?

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Long rebuilds don’t necessarily mean the team is terrible for a long time before they reach the summit. The Capitals rebuild was capped by their Cup win in 2018, and it was kicked off with the drafting of Ovechkin in 2004 and Backstrom in 2006. But they were a very good team for a long time before they won the Cup. Same with the Lightning. They don’t win the Cup without Stamkos and Hedman.

It’s extremely difficult to win it all or have a sustained period of being elite in this league without at least a couple superstar players drafted in the top 5. Those players make take only 3 or 4 seasons to bring you a championship (Crosby/Malkin/Kane), or they may take 10+ years (Ovechkin/Backstrom/Hedman). But without them you’re almost guaranteed to flail around the middle of the standings indefinitely.

Exactly this. If a team rebuilds and is reasonably competitive (a string of playoff appearances and winning a few rounds along the way), then I think that is a successful rebuild. If the only thing that makes a rebuild successful is a SCF appearance or a Cup, then of course rebuilds take a long time for most teams. That seems like a pretty unreasonable bar to set success at though.

If the Flames don't rebuild and just start trying to trade a paper clip for a house by retooling with what we have, I wouldn't be surprised if it take 15-20 as well. We aren't really that far ahead of teams that are currently rebuilding.

[SuperMatt18]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

The Leafs were very actively not rebuilding in 2004-2016.

They were actively sucking and being managed terribly. They friggin' traded away what would be 9th and 2nd overall picks in attempts to compete.

Thing is this is a lot of the teams on that list.

LAK didn't really try to tank. They had signed guys like Roenick, Conroy, etc coming out of the lockout. Traded for Dan Cloutier. Hired Mark Crawford as head coach. They tried to win, sucked, and then really just the Doughty draft year was the year they did "tank"

TBL is similar. They made the playoffs for two seasons coming out of the lockout. They were sucking in 07-08 even though they still had Lecavalier, St. Louis, Richards, and Boyle. They realized they couldn't afford Richards anymore so traded him. But they sucked and got Stamkos.

Same thing in 08-09. They had cap issues so moved out Boyle for a 1st, but flipped that 1st for Andrej Meszaros (not a sign of rebuilding). They still had Lecavalier, St.Louis, and signed Vrbata, Recchi, and Kolzig in the offseason too. But they still sucked again and got Hedman.

None of it was planned, and they didn't tear it all down, they just sucked and were rewarded with Stamkos and Hedman.

Teams that did go scorched earth and truly "Tanked" have had more mixed results. Edmonton(V1), Arizona, Buffalo, Florida didn't work out.

Chicago is probably the most successful case but even that took a stretch of 9 out of 10 years with no playoffs, and they were a bit lucky that Erik Johnson, and Jordan Staal were selected before Toews in his draft year.

Flip Toews and Johnson in that draft and do the Blackhawks even win one cup?

Lots of luck involved in re-building through the draft too. Edmonton got a "Re-do" on their tank by sucking into McDavid. But where are the Oilers right now if Arizona wins the lottery instead of them and they pick 3rd overall?

[Calgary4LIfe]

I don't see the point in arguing rebuild vs retool.


You know what retools didn't work? Those made by poorly managed teams.


You know what rebuilds didn't work? Those made by poorly managed teams.


You know what scorched-earth rebuilds didn't work? Those made by poorly managed teams.


Without doing any research, I posit that teams doing a scorched-earth type of rebuild were either poorly run organizations to begin with, or they were the Penguins trying to draft Lemieux.


I don't think there is much merit in pointing at some teams for doing it one way, and saying that it can't (or shouldn't) be done that way because they failed at doing so.



Florida has been a poorly managed team for most of its' existence - you can't point at them and follow their lead or avoid what they did.



Oilers are a terribly run organization. You laugh at them, but you don't regard what they did or didn't do as something to emulate or avoid.


Teams like Arizona, Toronto, etc., - those were all teams that have floundered under poor management or difficult circumstances.



Buffalo has been a cesspool of an organization since the new owner bought the team, and tried to make Buffalo 'competitive' again, and then burned it down to the ground trying to get McDavid. There management has been a revolving door of nobodies without any direction. You can't point at them and say: "Scorched earth rebuilds don't work".


Be a well-run organization. That's it. Make sure you have the right fitness guys, the right coaches, the right scouts. Treat your players right and make the organization a good organization that can attract talent based on how personnel are treated.



I think the Flames are a 'mostly' well-run organization. They became a laughing stock around the end of the Sutter year, but especially during the Feaster years. I think they are a fine organization. I also think that they draft very well. I don't think they necessarily are great at developing (Bennett!!) and aren't patient enough. I think the impatience has been an issue. Could it be from Burke, however, who is famous for wanting an accelerated rebuild? Maybe that's where the pressure actually came from? Everyone assumes it is the owners, but maybe it was from the president? Just an idea.


I think the Flames will be fine (depending on who the GM ends up being). I like the drafting that this team does - it finds players in the draft regularly now. I don't care where it ranks on whomever's list - go back and see how some higher-ranked teams didn't add as many or as good of players even in the last 4 or 5 years (post Gaudreau-Monahan-Bennett). I trust that in a retool, rebuild, or total scorched-earth build, that this organization will continue to find good players, instead of what poorly run teams like Edmonton have done.


I hope that from now on, this team will not make a habit of hiring terrible coaches. Playfair, Keenan, Brent Sutter, Gulutzan, Peters and Ward - that's a terrible list. Worse yet if you go back even further. Page, Hay, Gilbert.. They have mostly hired terrible coaches. Johnson, Sutter, Hartley (and even Hartley seems to divide opinion, and that's telling, no?), and arguably Crisp (the only cup-winning coach in an organization, and he is not highly thought of for the most part).


I think that's the biggest weakness on the Flames in their history - a long and troubled history of hiring bad coaches.


In most other respects, this team was well managed, even when they were almost moved. Some hiccups some years, but generally never thought of as one of the worst franchises.


I have confidence that in whatever they decide to do, they will come out of better than most other franchises. I think they can retool well and be rather competitive (though I think it will be hard to become a contender, but I won't rule it out). I think they can do varying levels of rebuilds - from a more gentle rebuild to a scorched-earth type. I know this team will find enough players through the draft, and I think they have enough good young pieces on the team and in the organization overall to really supplement it.


Point is, you can't point at how an organization failed at doing something, but ignoring that the organization is generally a poorly run organization anyway.

[CliffFletcher]

Yes, some teams just sucked their way to lottery picks. But in the post-lockout/cap league, many teams have deliberately chosen to trade away veterans for picks and plunge down to the bottom of the standings.

Of the bottom 10 teams in the league at the moment, 5 are deliberately rebuilding: Ottawa, LA, Detroit, Vancouver, New Jersey (though it could be argued the Canucks stumbled into their rebuild). They won’t all succeed. But given the elite talents available in the next three drafts, there’s pretty good odds a couple of those teams will be elite in 4-6 years. Better odds than teams like Nashville, Philadelphia, Montreal, and Calgary.

[flames_fan_down_under]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Successful rebuilds:

Penguins
Blackhawks
Capitals
Kings


Looking promising:

Leafs
Avs

Jury’s out:

Panthers
Oilers
Carolina

Too soon to tell:

Red Wings
Senators
Devils
Rangers

Fails:

Coyotes
Sabres

I would add that the Kings are a team that successfully rebuilt in a fairly short amount of time. In the years they missed the playoffs from '03-'09 they drafted Doughty, Kopitar, Quick, Simmonds, Martinez, Brayden Schenn, Kyle Clifford, all in the first three rounds of their respective drafts.

Hurricane are a team that seems to be on the precipice of a long run of success. But of course things change quickly in a salary cap world.

[Vinny01]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Yes, some teams just sucked their way to lottery picks. But in the post-lockout/cap league, many teams have deliberately chosen to trade away veterans for picks and plunge down to the bottom of the standings.

Of the bottom 10 teams in the league at the moment, 5 are deliberately rebuilding: Ottawa, LA, Detroit, Vancouver, New Jersey (though it could be argued the Canucks stumbled into their rebuild). They won’t all succeed. But given the elite talents available in the next three drafts, there’s pretty good odds a couple of those teams will be elite in 4-6 years. Better odds than teams like Nashville, Philadelphia, Montreal, and Calgary.

LA and the Canucks are rebuilding because their veteran teams from the previous decade aged and they could no longer carry a team. New Jersey has been trash pretty much since their run to the finals in 2012. The Wings are like the Canucks and Kings they were an old team that needed to be turned over.

Outside of Ottawa which team sold off their high end pieces for futures?

When has a team whose top 5 forwards are 23-27 and 2 of their top 4 D under 25 and a long term goalie locked up decided to go into veteran sell off mode to start over?

[dino7c]

LA still has a lot of their top players from the cup runs they just aren't as good anymore

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Vinny01

LA and the Canucks are rebuilding because their veteran teams from the previous decade aged and they could no longer carry a team. New Jersey has been trash pretty much since their run to the finals in 2012. The Wings are like the Canucks and Kings they were an old team that needed to be turned over.

Outside of Ottawa which team sold off their high end pieces for futures?

When has a team whose top 5 forwards are 23-27 and 2 of their top 4 D under 25 and a long term goalie locked up decided to go into veteran sell off mode to start over?

Ottawa and the Rangers both sold off multiple core players in their prime. LA had the smarts to realize they weren’t going to get it done with that roster and traded away a bunch of good players (Muzzin, Martinez, Pearson, Toffoli, Carter) to aid their plunge in the standings.

One of the Flames’ top 2 players over the last 6 years is 37. Giordano’s decline over the last couple seasons is a major factor in the team’s decline. Gio’s age is also probably the biggest reason the team’s management regarded 2017-20 as the team’s window. Without him, the Flames don’t have an NHL top 50 defenceman.