mudcrutch79 said:
There's an argument on the Oilers board that "producing" talent isn't all it's cracked up to be, and it's actually a function of having high draft positions, and then getting lucky after that. I don't want this debate here, but assuming this is true, is there any argument that teams like Vancouver should be able to benefit for 13 years if they luck out with the 20th pick of the draft?
I don't have that much difficulty with parts of the premise, but on balance it is wrong in my view. Ron Delorme once told me the draft was a crapshoot after the second round. I laughed and told him it was a crapshoot after the first 15 picks. He said, "Shhh!"
But Delorme will also tell you that producing talent is not the same as drafting it. It is the player development system that produces talent and what happens after the draft is more important than the draft itself. I do not believe it is a fluke that some teams do well and others do not, but it is a complicated process. I think the most important thing is the opportunities the team plans for the player between draft day and his first NHL games.
But okay, let's assume for the moment that the entire premise is correct. The reason Vancouver has produced players while New York and Edmonton have not is that Vancouver has been lucky and the Rangers and Oilers have not. Why should Vancouver be allowed to enjoy that good fortune for a decade or even more?
First, even if the production of the player is the result of luck, the team must invest significant resources in him between draft day and the time the player peaks. I'm not just talking money, I'm talking games. Bertuzzi was not a net positive for the Islanders. He wasn't even a very good player when the Canucks got him. Vancouver fans wanted to trade Markus Naslund for years before he finally exploded as a player. These guys did not help Vancouver win. They helped them lose until they took leaps forward as players and dragged the team forward with them.
There are roughly three phases to every players career - the developmental phase, the prime years and the decline phase. The old CBA allowed teams to keep the player through the best part of his career. I think that is very good for the small markets (in terms of their ability to compete) and it is also very good for the league because it provides an incentive for teams to invest ice time in young players. I wonder which teams in the Gary Bettman universe will make those investments if the fruits are enjoyed by another team.
Second, one player a year is par, two is excellent work. If a good team needs to find half the core in the draft, that's five players to be found in a relatively short period. By tying the player to a team for a decade or so, teams get a decade to accumulate enough good players. If you go from an entry level system directly into free agency, the window is much smaller.
Third, more parity is not a good thing. Earlier free agency would mean a more equal distribution of talent throughout the league, but that will also encourage an even more defensive outlook. It isn't like the Canucks did not try to trap the old Oilers. They did, but it did not work because the talent gap was too large. Parity made the strategy effective. (Another example was watching teams try to trap Canada during the WJC. It didn't work. Canada had too much.) Today there are way too many ties, and frankly, too many close games if we want to see the return of firewagon hockey.
Fourth, even great young teams often take quite a while to win. The Senators have been a legitimate threat for several years without doing it. The Red Wings were favoured every year from about 1994 on, but waited to 1998 to win.
Fifth, even if we assume that luck builds an elite team, what is a good solution? Eliminate elite teams? If the Gary Bettman vision becomes reality everyone starts out the season as an average minus to an average plus team. Luck will play a much larger role than it does today. Things that are important factors today will become paramount. Injuries, suspensions, schedule, referees, and hot goalies make a big difference today. In Gary's NHL, they become even more important.
Tom