Speculation: Accumulating Asset Wealth vs. Traditional Team Building

[Backhandshelf81]

Good post.

I'd like to think this is "obvious" information, but based on many posts made recently, it's not. People whining about the size of the players drafted recently obviously don't get the point of this post.

 

[Stephen]

This is not your fathers rebuild guys. We're not doing traditional BPA at the draft, and we're not doing the traditional build by trying to stockpile by position to pencil guys into your roster.

This was started by Jimmy D in Detroit, taken a step further by Yzerman in Detroit - but I think we're watching the 'Money-Puck' evolution here.

Sorry, hate to break it to you but this is what a rebuild looks like in all cities that are doing it that way.

Trading down from Konecny is a normal draft strategy that all teams employ, even rebuilding teams. The Panthers repeatedly traded down in the years they drafted guys like Horton and Bouwmeester, and that was in the top five.

Chicago drafted loads of players year after year with little regard to a preconceived plan of what the roster would look like between 1999 and 2007.

The New York Islanders traded themselves out of the Luke Schenn pick, then the Colin Wilson pick to land Josh Bailey and extra picks in the 2008 and 2009 drafts.

 

[tooncesmeow]

Sorry, hate to break it to you but this is what a rebuild looks like in all cities that are doing it that way.

Trading down from Konecny is a normal draft strategy that all teams employ, even rebuilding teams. The Panthers repeatedly traded down in the years they drafted guys like Horton and Bouwmeester, and that was in the top five.

Chicago drafted loads of players year after year with little regard to a preconceived plan of what the roster would look like between 1999 and 2007.

The New York Islanders traded themselves out of the Luke Schenn pick, then the Colin Wilson pick to land Josh Bailey and extra picks in the 2008 and 2009 drafts.

It can work sometimes, but take Florida's rebuild for example and you learn that sometimes you should just cash in and go for it. 2010 NHL Entry draft Florida traded Horton, Booth and Gregory Campbell and managed to draft Gudbranson with their pick, Bjugstad at 19, and Quinton Howden with Vancouver's pick. All three of those guys look like they'll be apart of Florida's future long term and Bjugstad is a top 6 center with size, Gudbranson a hulking Top 4 defender, and Shore looks to be a good power forward for them. That's 3 guys in 1 round to fill out your Top 6 and Top4. Not counting Barkov, Huberdeau, Kulikov, Ekblad, etc.

There's never one set way to do things and Philadelphia might have a draft that provides more value then Toronto's and they were the ones that moved up to take our pick. You never know. Preds moved up to take Wilson and armed with our 1st and 2nd, they got Wilson and Josi.

 

[Bobs your uncle]

Well thought out article by OP but while this is new to the Leaf organization numerous other clubs have operated in this manner for years IMO.

 

[Stephen]

It can work sometimes, but take Florida's rebuild for example and you learn that sometimes you should just cash in and go for it. 2010 NHL Entry draft Florida traded Horton, Booth and Gregory Campbell and managed to draft Gudbranson with their pick, Bjugstad at 19, and Quinton Howden with Vancouver's pick. All three of those guys look like they'll be apart of Florida's future long term and Bjugstad is a top 6 center with size, Gudbranson a hulking Top 4 defender, and Shore looks to be a good power forward for them. That's 3 guys in 1 round to fill out your Top 6 and Top4. Not counting Barkov, Huberdeau, Kulikov, Ekblad, etc.

There's never one set way to do things and Philadelphia might have a draft that provides more value then Toronto's and they were the ones that moved up to take our pick. You never know. Preds moved up to take Wilson and armed with our 1st and 2nd, they got Wilson and Josi.

I'm just saying teams do this all the time.

 

[Semantics]

Yeah sorry OP but I find everything you posted pretty obvious. I can't think of any team that does not try to improve it's players. The only defining characteristic I see about our new regime is skill is placed ahead of other factors like size and position.

A lot of people around here don't find it obvious though. I still see people arguing we should commit to good-but-not-superstar players like Kadri, JVR, Bernier, etc. until their mid-30s, usually "because they're good enough to be key pieces in the future", or something like that. That's exactly the old Burke/Nonis philosophy of starting with a vision of your team and working backwards that OP is arguing against. The same principle applies to assets already on the team, free agents, and so on and so forth.

 

[JackJ]

A lot of people around here don't find it obvious though. I still see people arguing we should commit to good-but-not-superstar players like Kadri, JVR, Bernier, etc. until their mid-30s, usually "because they're good enough to be key pieces in the future", or something like that.

or worse because no one in the system can replace his minutes. Phaneuf with his monstrosity of a contract is a prime example of this.

 

[Daisy Jane]

A lot of people around here don't find it obvious though. I still see people arguing we should commit to good-but-not-superstar players like Kadri, JVR, Bernier, etc. until their mid-30s, usually "because they're good enough to be key pieces in the future", or something like that. That's exactly the old Burke/Nonis philosophy of starting with a vision of your team and working backwards that OP is arguing against. The same principle applies to assets already on the team, free agents, and so on and so forth.

I agree.
I know that a lot of people have varying feelings about a lot of the players above - and people want to argue we can't be Edmonton (which, I agree) but there is a difference between Not Being Edmonton and signing everyone because "they are good."

and that's got us in trouble like you mentioned.

or worse because no one in the system can replace his minutes. Phaneuf with his monstrosity of a contract is a prime example of this.

exactly. exactly, exactly, exactly.

 

[DD03]

People saying that teams do this all the time, aren't wrong.

The biggest difference is.. THE LEAFS ARE DOING IT.

It's the fact that they're finally doing things right, even though there's plenty of people that are on this board that want to doubt management already.

 

[snizzbone*]

Ok - I obviously failed to properly articulate my point.

I am not talking about BPA - what the Leafs are doing is subtly different and expands beyond drafting.

Traditionally - a rebuilding team would have entered this draft and focused on getting BPA centers and defense - build from the back end and up the middle. The vision of the final roster (and what is perceived as needed) would bias and drive the decision on who BPA is.

A traditional rebuilding team would have stayed at #24 and taken Konecny. The Leafs, on the other hand, turned Konecny into Dermott, Bracco, and Dzierkals. From a BPA perspective - Konecny would be likely choice hands down - but with the Leafs new "program" of trying to identify undervalued or overlooked players with high end potential - they turned the tables.

I think the thing the Leafs are doing, and I believe Shanny or someone said this, is stockpiling draft picks. It has nothing to do with BPA or anything. It's that they feel like the more draft picks you have, the more chances you have at hitting a homerun with the pick. Drafting in the NHL is such a crap shoot that your odds increase when you have more selections, so why not get as many as you can?

 

[CDN24]

Ok - I obviously failed to properly articulate my point.


This is not your fathers rebuild guys. We're not doing traditional BPA at the draft, and we're not doing the traditional build by trying to stockpile by position to pencil guys into your roster.

This was started by Jimmy D in Detroit, taken a step further by Yzerman in Detroit - but I think we're watching the 'Money-Puck' evolution here.

This may be a new approach in Toronto but it is not new it has been happening since the inception of the draft. The Leafs have largely ignored building through the draft for well ever. Guys like Sam Pollack were doing their version of moneypuck from day one.

Pollack`s theroy was to have as many assets as possible keep the best and trade the rest for futures (draft picks) He did not keep guys beyond their prime trading them when he could still extract great value. His draft manipulations made trading down from the 24th look like amatuer hour.

He first acquired the Golden Seals 1st round pick in 1971 for his 1970 1st round pick and a player. He fully expected them to be close to the worst team in the league in the next year. When it looked like the kings might be in the running to be worse than the Seals he traded players to the Kings that would help them finish ahead of the Seals ensuring the Seals got the no pick- previously traded to him and allow him to draft some guy named lafleur.

The chicago model seems to mirror that of Pollock to a degree (common theme being Bowman I guess) If you compare the approach to team building of the Hawks and pens it is complete opposites. Hawks acquire assets when the cap forces them to trade kep opieces of their cup winnir they trade them for futures that will help win the next cup. Pens in a sililar position to the Hawks with big $$ tied up in 2 key guys have spent their time trading assets away to find guys to play with their big 2. Easy to see which approach is best. Leafs are on the right track but it is not a new or novel approach and they have a long way to go. Not all these moves will be home runs but like pollack if you acquire enough quanity you will hit on enough to build a good team.

 

[AcerComputer]

The most brilliant thing Brian Burke ever said was that "If you're team is not rapidly ascending that it should be rapidly descending". Although he failed to do either of those things, the statement stands true for building a hockey team.