Pavels Dog
Registered User
Yet there's only 3 teams in the East with a playoff streak longer than 1 year, and 6 teams league wide that have 5 years or longer.
Making it once it isn't that difficult. Making it consistently is extremely difficult.
The Official Tank Thread III
- Thread starter SoupNazi
- Start date
Making it once it isn't that difficult. Making it consistently is extremely difficult.
Where Zetterberg started from? An NHL rookie coming off being the youngest member of the 2002 Swedish Olympic hockey team alongside guys like Sundin, Alfredsson, and Lidstrom. Yeah, Z became a better NHLer as his career went on, but he wasn't exactly low profile when he came to camp.
This isn't to say Larkin or whoever can't get better, but we haven't had a guy step in with the sort of expectations that Zetterberg had since, arguably, Zetterberg.
This isn't to say Larkin or whoever can't get better, but we haven't had a guy step in with the sort of expectations that Zetterberg had since, arguably, Zetterberg.
How about a guy like Mantha working hard to improve? Does that theory hold? Not just physically killing himself but actually learning? There's plenty of talented kids who get nowhere either due to inability or desire to engage or lack of guidance.
One thing is for sure, without the intelligence of hindsight, none here and other scouts as well, would have never picked Datsyuk ahead of Stefan. That decision was made at the time for a reason. Datsyuk wasn't even remotely as good as he turned out to be. Flashes of brilliance, sure, no other evidence outside of that however.
Well, for starters, Sweden had some top end talent, sure but they weren't exactly very deep in comparison to Canada. Their choices were much more limited. More importantly, you're forgetting that the year he went to Olympics isn't the same year when he was drafted either. He developed into what he became. Before that, plenty of guys went ahead in the draft.
Guess the similarity, largely, what made them as good as they were was due to the fact that both Datsyuk an Zetterberg played a complete game. That derived from development, not just talent.
The problem isn't wanting the Wings to win a Cup. Everybody wants that. It's the complete rejection of any outcome which isn't that.
Red Stanley
Registered User
You can talk about Sweden's 2002 depth, but Zetterberg was considered by some as the best player not in the NHL before he ever played a game with the Wings. He was getting Forsberg comparisons. Detroit has not had a prospect as hyped as him since then and rightfully so.
WingedWheel1987
Registered User
People aren't rejecting the Wings because they don't win the cup every year.
They are rejecting them because they are intentionally building a team that has no chance of winning a cup now or in the long run.
At least when Edmonton sucked they were able to look forward to the draft. Detroit fans get a potential 7-10 draft pick. Wooooooooo!!!!!!!! Time to draft that generational 2nd line center or 2nd pairing defenseman...
They are rejecting them because they are intentionally building a team that has no chance of winning a cup now or in the long run.
At least when Edmonton sucked they were able to look forward to the draft. Detroit fans get a potential 7-10 draft pick. Wooooooooo!!!!!!!! Time to draft that generational 2nd line center or 2nd pairing defenseman...
Do you think Toronto fans are completely rejecting this past season and the current standing of their organization because they didn't win the Cup?
What about Edmonton fans if they don't make it past this round?
If we had a direction of actually building a contender other than "sneak into the playoffs and hope we draft the next Datsyuk/Zetterberg," a heck of a lot of us would be much more hopeful/optimistic.
What about Edmonton fans if they don't make it past this round?
If we had a direction of actually building a contender other than "sneak into the playoffs and hope we draft the next Datsyuk/Zetterberg," a heck of a lot of us would be much more hopeful/optimistic.
Again, IMPORTANT FACTOR that you're forgetting. Zetterberg on draft day isn't quite as promising as what he became. PLAYER DEVELOPMENT had a lot to do with it. Without knowing much about it, I guarantee you that if we go into this years draft without hindsight, we will see dozens of players that look more promising than Zetterberg did on draft day in 99. At the same time, I'm also confidant in saying that most, if not all, won't have quite as much, or even close, the success that Z has had. There are many factors besides talent at play in life, not just NHL.
I'm not forgetting anything. I'm responding directly about your comment about Sweden's lack of depth being part of a reason why Zetterberg was playing high level hockey/extremely highly rated.
Less than 3 years after being drafted, Zetterberg was considered one of if not the top prospect in the world.
An IMPORTANT FACTOR that you're forgetting is that the draft and NHL scouting - particularly in Europe - was a whole lot different in 1999 than it is today.
There will always be steals and late round gems because players don't develop in a linear fashion, but do a little exercise for me: go through the Cup winners and their Top 3 skaters during those runs. Outside of 2008 Detroit and 2011 Boston (who won on a historic goaltending performance,) see how many teams' cores didn't have a high pick in there.
Less than 3 years after being drafted, Zetterberg was considered one of if not the top prospect in the world.
An IMPORTANT FACTOR that you're forgetting is that the draft and NHL scouting - particularly in Europe - was a whole lot different in 1999 than it is today.
There will always be steals and late round gems because players don't develop in a linear fashion, but do a little exercise for me: go through the Cup winners and their Top 3 skaters during those runs. Outside of 2008 Detroit and 2011 Boston (who won on a historic goaltending performance,) see how many teams' cores didn't have a high pick in there.
even the 08 team had Brad Stuart, a former 3rd overall pick. Yeah, you're never going to be technically wrong to say a guy can develop into a better player than when he was drafted, but it's not like they aren't ungodly talented when they were drafted. If all thirty teams had seen Datsyuk before that draft, I bet he goes a bit higher than where he did. If Sweden was as heavily scouted then as now, Z probably goes a bit higher. Part of the reason I'm sure Detroit sat on picking them is because they knew other teams just hadn't done the homework on them.
And while talented guys can bomb out, lugs are not going to develop into star first liners (though some might get carried there, eh, Gator?). Mantha, for all of his warts and question marks, was also undoubtedly talented. No one said the kid lacked skills. You can't develop chewing gum into diamonds.
I decided to do the exercise for myself. I went back to Detroit's 1st Cup of the run. Note that these numbers would probably be even more so if not for some scouting issues back in the day: for example, Fedorov was considered one of if not the most talented player in his draft class, but the Russian factor impacted his draft position and thus he's not a top pick.
So here are the teams who won the Cup ever since we did in 97 and if they had a player drafted in the Top 5 as one of their core/best 3-5 players:
Year: Where core player was drafted
16: 1st overall, 2nd, 5th (Crosby, Malkin, Kessel)
15: 1st, 3rd (Kane, Toews)
14: 2nd (Doughty)
13: 1st, 3rd (Kane, Toews)
12: 2nd (Doughty)
11: None
10: 1st, 3rd (Kane, Toews)
09: 1st, 2nd (Crosby, Malkin)
08: None
07: 2nd, 3rd (Pronger, Niedermayer)
06: 2nd (Staal)
04: 1st (Lecavalier)
03: 3rd, 5th (Niedermayer, Stevens)
02: 2nd, 4th (Shanahan, Yzerman)
01: None
00: 3rd, 5th (Niedermayer, Stevens)
99: 1st (Modano)
98: 2nd, 4th (Shanahan, Yzerman)
97: 2nd, 4th (Shanahan, Yzerman)
So going back 19 years, only 3 years did a team win where they didn't have a Top 5 pick as one of their core/best players.
Boston won in 2011 over Vancouver (Sedins; 2nd and 3rd overall). Boston won in large part because of a historic goaltending performance by Thomas.
Detroit won in 2008 over Pittsburgh (Crosby, Malkin; 1st and 2nd overall) thanks to the Lidstrom/Datsyuk/Zetterberg core which we were blessed with, but should never expect to happen again from a drafting standpoint.
And Colorado won in 2001 over NJ (Niedermayer, Stevens; 3rd and 5th overall) without a Top 5 pick as a top player.
Seems pretty obvious to me that many elite players come from the top of the draft. They can be added via FA/trade, such as Pronger/Niedermayer with Anaheim, Kessel with Pittsburgh, and Shanahan with Detroit, but Detroit isn't landing elite FA anymore (even if we had room) and is Holland going to make an impact trade? Laugh out loud.
So here are the teams who won the Cup ever since we did in 97 and if they had a player drafted in the Top 5 as one of their core/best 3-5 players:
Year: Where core player was drafted
16: 1st overall, 2nd, 5th (Crosby, Malkin, Kessel)
15: 1st, 3rd (Kane, Toews)
14: 2nd (Doughty)
13: 1st, 3rd (Kane, Toews)
12: 2nd (Doughty)
11: None
10: 1st, 3rd (Kane, Toews)
09: 1st, 2nd (Crosby, Malkin)
08: None
07: 2nd, 3rd (Pronger, Niedermayer)
06: 2nd (Staal)
04: 1st (Lecavalier)
03: 3rd, 5th (Niedermayer, Stevens)
02: 2nd, 4th (Shanahan, Yzerman)
01: None
00: 3rd, 5th (Niedermayer, Stevens)
99: 1st (Modano)
98: 2nd, 4th (Shanahan, Yzerman)
97: 2nd, 4th (Shanahan, Yzerman)
So going back 19 years, only 3 years did a team win where they didn't have a Top 5 pick as one of their core/best players.
Boston won in 2011 over Vancouver (Sedins; 2nd and 3rd overall). Boston won in large part because of a historic goaltending performance by Thomas.
Detroit won in 2008 over Pittsburgh (Crosby, Malkin; 1st and 2nd overall) thanks to the Lidstrom/Datsyuk/Zetterberg core which we were blessed with, but should never expect to happen again from a drafting standpoint.
And Colorado won in 2001 over NJ (Niedermayer, Stevens; 3rd and 5th overall) without a Top 5 pick as a top player.
Seems pretty obvious to me that many elite players come from the top of the draft. They can be added via FA/trade, such as Pronger/Niedermayer with Anaheim, Kessel with Pittsburgh, and Shanahan with Detroit, but Detroit isn't landing elite FA anymore (even if we had room) and is Holland going to make an impact trade? Laugh out loud.
Okay fine, go ahead and name me just a few names that Sweden passed on in favor of Zetterberg. Lets see how much star-power Sweden had to scratch their head over. (Forsberg was injured.)
What's your definition of high? Anaheim didn't win on the back of top draft picks. Unless ofcourse you want to count guys like Niedermayer, Selanne and Pronger in which case, kind of a long time between the events to be even considered. Carolina had Staal but won mostly on the backs of veterans and luck to a large extent. How about instead we expand the field. Let's not limit to just the winners but contenders. Does top 4 sounds like a reasonable consideration? See how that argument holds up then.
On the flip side, again, why don't you account for teams like the Islanders, Avalanche, Dallas, Arizona, Philadelphia. (who either drafted high or acquired a player that was draftet high recently) Some teams seem to jump up and down. Some teams are struggling despite having talent...
You also forget that most teams that are now enjoying the benefits of drafting high, have been drafting high for a long time before 'the player' landed on their lap. You won't find me a single team that hasn't gone through it. Toronto has had a pretty high pick (they famously traded the Seguin pick) since how long??? They happened to draft first last year and happen to get a guy you won't get most years. It might have been Shanahan's brilliance to recognize the moment but opportunity being there was pure luck.
Again, how about the teams that missed out. How many high draft picks did they have? Most teams will have a high draft pick (whether they drafted him or at some point traded for him) You're limiting the scope without realizing that the same goes for the losing teams.
Staal led the team in regular season by nearly 25 pts and then went on to lead the entire NHL playoffs in scoring the year they won.
And if Staal doesn't win, guess who does? Edmonton on the backs of 2nd overall pick Chris Pronger. And when 2nd overall pick Pronger leaves Edmonton, how'd that go? Meanwhile, his new team alongside 3rd overall Niedermayer wins the Cup the following year.
And you're point about teams that have high picks, but don't win or contend. Yeah, because it often times takes more organizational building and managing than just a couple of high end picks to develop a winner....
But guess what? If you don't have those high end, elite (often high pick players), you practically have no chance at all.
So that entire argument seems insanely stupid to me. "Not every team that has elite players wins, so let's not get elite players." I mean, really?
Get elite players and hope you have all of the pieces to build something upon that foundation. Winning takes more than a high player. You need the right depth players, coaching, luck/staying healthy for it to all come together. But if you don't have the elite pieces than you have no chance. And again it's been proving time and time again that the elite pieces come from the top of the draft far more often they don't.
My argument is that not every team that chases a high pick gets the payoff.
In all of that, what you just said was pretty much along the lines that you can built a great team without chasing a top pick. Through free agency, through trades and most importantly, you can ACTUALLY GET GREAT PLAYERS THROUGH FREE AGENCY OR TRADE OR LATER IN THE DRAFT.... DING, DING, DING...
You don't get to use a Pronger or whomever as an example when that player was drafted over a decade ago and BY A DIFFERENT TEAM. Those teams became competitive as a result of free agency and trades. Not burning down a team to start the search.
Holly crap, keep your options open and constantly try and improve. That's pretty much been my argument from the start.
Z got on the world stage before he was drafted I believe. I'm pretty sure that plenty of scouts had a very good look at him.
Frk It
Mo Seider Less Problems
- Jul 27, 2010
- 36,221
- 14,719
There's 3 ways a team can improve. Let's look at them as it pertains to the Red Wings:
Trades - We have a GM who has made significantly less trades than the rest of the GM's in the league, and we don't have a surplus of young skilled players to actually be able to afford to trade a Larkin or Mantha, which are our only players that would return something worth a damn in a trade.
Free agency - We have a large amount of cap space tied up in a bevy of mediocre players, and we are no longer a free agency hot spot because we aren't a contender or premium destination to live.
Draft - This should be what we are banking on, and hopefully we make use of our likely first top 10 pick in many years... but our GM is saying he wants to be a playoff team next year, and any year after. If he gets his way we will be drafting in the 12-18 range multiple times, which is NOT a likely method to build a core of new elite players. You can say good players are found late in the draft, that's true, but it doesn't make it likely for you to be able to repeat it. It's a statistical anomaly. You are essentially banking on a miracle if that is your actual plan.
So when you actually look at our situation, your vague plan doesn't look all that effective.
Shaman464
No u
The European Juniors was his only real 'world stage' that included Z prior to the draft and that's not where nations showcase a lot of their best of the best talent like the WJCs.
AND WHEN IS THE LAST TIME KEN HOLLAND GOT GREAT PLAYERS THROUGH FREE AGENCY OR TRADE OR LATER IN THE DRAFT???? DING, DING, DING.
1) Detroit is no longer a free agency destination. Players like prime Marian Hossa are no longer telling their agent to call Detroit because they want to play for the team they feel give them the best chance to win a Cup.
2) Trade? Laugh out loud. Who is the last impact player that Ken Holland traded for? And more specifically, who is the last impact player that Holland traded for that wasn't a deadline deal?
3) Later in the draft? Detroit hasn't drafted an elite player since 1999, nearly 20 years ago. The closest they've come to drafting another elite player since then was drafted in 2000. The kids who will be drafted this summer were in diapers or not even born yet when we last drafted an elite or even borderline elite player.
None of these things are working!
And for the love of whatever don't bring up players like Nyquist in the draft. Great pick, but a complimentary piece. Not a core piece and not even close to an elite piece needed to win a Cup.
And those elite pieces are exactly what we need to have a chance to build a contender again.
And you think Holland's going to do it via free agency, trade, or later in the draft? BASED ON WHAT EXACTLY???
So where do we go from here to get those elite pieces? DING, DING, DING.
Whats your acceptable return for a Tatar or Nyquist... Next, are there teams willing to pay what you ask? Third, if you are willing to live with a lets say a second round choice or a late first, what's the realistic return are you expecting. Is that return likely to turn into a better player you just currently traded? If not, and most likely it isn't, you just wasted a bunch of time to be back at the place you started from. At the same time, you also see the possibility of Larkin, Mantha and I'm assuming Svechnikov becoming those elite guys eventually. You know, the guys we got without the chase of a top pick. If that happens, do you think Tatar, Nyquist, Sheahan can be complimentary or depth players on the team?
Well, I think given the Detroit state of affairs, (the city, the team) I tend to agree with you about it being somewhere below where most players would want to play. Then again, in a cap world, how much can Holland do in regards of attracting free agents?
If any of our current guys pan out, how long would it be before they get a significant raise? There's also a likely chance of trading one of our goaltenders or losing one to Vegas. Some players can be moved as well. Even though Helm's contract is despised, I'm pretty confidant that there would be a lot of takers. (Nothing significant in return, but many teams will do it with open arms) Cap can be moved around if the need arises. Other teams have done it when need it. I'm not sure there's any evidence of Holland being incapable of it.
Once again, I never said or even implied that you are somehow not less likely to find great players in later drafts. However, it's also about development more so than just drafting. It's all a learning curve. Outside of some notables, (Crosby, Ovechkin, McDavid...) where their game is so developed, there's hardly much to improve upon, top 10 is also pretty much a crap shoot. Those notables don't come around that often either. I can sure throw out a lot more names on that front then you can. That's just a historical fact. You're failing to account for Kadri's of the world. Good player but, hardly a core piece. (Whatever that is) I also think that some of the same players that were drafted high, whether they made is as a core piece or not, actually got there through help of their environment. (Succeed or fail) Meaning, it wasn't laid in stone for whether they end up being great players or not.
Oh and once again, will one of you, for once, just please, account for your theory up against the teams that failed to get anywhere! Explain to me the wonders of how a teams like Colorado and Arizona seem to be getting nowhere? Funny thing is, they probably will hit a couple of home runs (assuming they stay the course) sooner or later and people will say 'I told you so," Even if it happens 10 years from now. Now, lets count how many times Toronto and Buffalo and Edmonton drafted high? Year after year you say is a bad plan? Do you see the problem in yours? Vague versus unfounded, apparently.
Last edited:
Who is this impact player that you'd have traded in for another imapct player in Hollands shoes in the first place? ( Welcome to the real world buddy? He's not playing EA sport now, is he? Alot of say and input goes in from different bodies, doesn't it? Go ahead, look up how many here wouldn't have given up Nyquist for anything after the 2014 season. Hollands position isn't an easy one and is also made harder by: a) injuries,or plain dealting like Datsyuk did. b) Players playing (More like producing) well below their abilities. Players like Nyquist, Tatar, Sheahan and I'd argue in regards of DeKeyser and Smith as well. (Though, Smith has proven to be a pretty chronic pea-head; a shame really)
I think most agree that Green is a pretty good signing. Nielsen, Abdelkader, Helm and Glendening seem to all have the consensus that the money isn't bad but the term is. I agree with that as I feel it limits the options in the future but it also seems like the options are limited now. Many teams last year signed players to long terms and it has been that way for a while too. Just less cap circumvention thanks to NJ and Kovalchuk. That seems to be what the NHL market warrants. Probably because many players prefer to have some stability in their life and put an emphasis on actually getting a home along with being on a specific team. (This isn't necessarily true but I'm adding a human element to the EA minded GMs here who don't get it.) So, maybe Hollands options now are either pursue a player you want long-term or wait for an opportunity that will take an unknown time.
As far as where to get them, well, I wouldn't be trading my own top picks and in case you haven't noticed, neither is Holland. I don't think the team needs a top 10 pick as there are plenty of talent that can be found in the later part of round one or even two and focus on developing them well. As far as I see, this team has done well of squeezing out the best out of players. How many teams have gotten quality players (not top end perhaps) in the same quantity as Detroit has with better picks in those rounds? We traded top picks when the teams was still very dangerous and it made sense to ad tweaks here and there... Outside of that, keep developing what you can. Just the same, you'll get those top guys but if they don't come early, the team will be already in place as oppose to chasing the guy to built the team around. However, you're also open to free agency. Meaning, a star free agent might be interested. When you're tanking, what's the point of signing a top player?
Do you know that scene in The 40 Year Old Virgin where he's at the speed dating thing and he just keeps asking that first lady questions? How she responds, that's how I feel right now.
What in the actual... is going on?
YOU are the one who brought up trades as a real possibility. I asked you to point out which trades Holland has made to make anyone believe that he's capable of it.
You respond with "welcome to the real world buddy... he's not playing EA sports"?
I mean, really?
I didn't make it past that part.
Here's all you need to know: we need elite players and Holland hasn't been doing a very good job at getting them.
He doesn't trade and we probably don't even have the pieces to make a necessary trade, top FA aren't coming here (they like to go to contenders or teams they see as going in that direction), and Holland hasn't drafted an elite player in nearly 20 years now.
So yeah, I'm a little concerned about the direction of the organization.
What in the actual... is going on?
YOU are the one who brought up trades as a real possibility. I asked you to point out which trades Holland has made to make anyone believe that he's capable of it.
You respond with "welcome to the real world buddy... he's not playing EA sports"?
I mean, really?
I didn't make it past that part.
Here's all you need to know: we need elite players and Holland hasn't been doing a very good job at getting them.
He doesn't trade and we probably don't even have the pieces to make a necessary trade, top FA aren't coming here (they like to go to contenders or teams they see as going in that direction), and Holland hasn't drafted an elite player in nearly 20 years now.
So yeah, I'm a little concerned about the direction of the organization.
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
-
Skelleftea AIK @ Frolunda HC - Skelleftea leads series 3-2Wagers: 3Staked: $95.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
TO ADVANCE Barcelona vs Paris St-Germain - 2nd leg. 1st leg result: Barcelona 3-2 - CBSWagers: 2Staked: $4,250.00Event closes- Updated: