WTFetus
Marlov
You're really obsessed with that "back-to-back top-5 picks" thing, huh.
I don't see you offering up any better solution. You wanna suggest something, I'm all ears. But if you're just going to whine about back-to-back top-5 picks, I've got no interest.
You ever think that maybe, just maybe, we don't have to copy past teams to win? Look at Nashville. Where's their back-to-back top-5 picks? Or are you just gonna call them a fluke. Nashville has one top-5 pick in their core: Johansen via Jones. The rest of their core was traded for (Subban, Forsberg, Neal) or picked in the late rounds (Josi, Ekholm, Arvidsson). Look at LA: you can complain that they had three straight top-5 picks, but one of them was a bust, and the other was traded for Mike Richards. Richards was vital to their first Cup, but what about the second? He was useless by then. But LA won because of great scouting (Kopitar, Toffoli, Muzzin, Martinez, Pearson). You can point out that Jack Johnson got Jeff Carter, but that was well after Johnson was drafted and he was a mediocre player than Columbus just happened to be obsessed with; his draft spot was irrelevant at that point. Carter was acquired because Lombardi made a great trade and nothing else.
I'm obviously all for a complete revamp of our front office if this were to happen, because our scouts are not suitable to picking in the 1st round (ie they absolutely would have taken Virtanen over Nylander/Ehlers). But that should be a given.
Also? Where was St. Louis' back-to-back top-5 picks? Are you really gonna count the Sedins, who were drafted in 1999, for the Canucks? Because if so, you'd have to count Thornton and Marleau as well. The Kings, again in 2014, did not have back-to-back top-5 picks on their roster.
Agree with this. It's disingenuous to call Boston and possibly Nashville a fluke, while using the "Top-5 picks" argument when you're only really talking about Pittsburgh and Chicago.
Not to mention the whole Sensitivity vs. Specificity argument.