Pre-Game Talk: All Purpose Off Day Thread | Ruhwedel to W-B/S for Conditioning

[Gurglesons]

Eh, I actually thought Tangradi was decent as a net front guy. Granted, when I say "decent", I don't mean anything that special. I do think that's the second biggest reason Tangradi busted, after his comically bad skating. It's like when they converted (or tried to convert) Pouliot from an OFD to a 2-way defenseman, he was decent defensively by the end of it. He had just lost a vast majority of his offensive talent and he was only decent defensively.

Looking back on it, the Penguins had a vast history of mismanaging prospects from like 2010-2014. That may explain why their draft picks ended up so bad from 2006-2009, they were horribly mismanaging those guys in the minors.

Most successful team in the past ten years “mismanaged” prospects.

If only we were the Hawks or Kings.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Most successful team in the past ten years “mismanaged” prospects.

If only we were the Hawks or Kings.

I don't know if this is a sarcastic comment, but if the Penguins were better at managing prospects, maybe they would have won another cup between 2010 and 2015. I could read your comment as a sarcastic comment or a serious comment, because the Hawks and Kings were both really good at developing players.

 

[Gurglesons]

I don't know if this is a sarcastic comment, but if the Penguins were better at managing prospects, maybe they would have won another cup between 2010 and 2015. I could read your comment as a sarcastic comment or a serious comment, because the Hawks and Kings were both really good at developing players.

Were they?

The Hawks sure. But they also barely made the playoffs two years in a row and have literally none of those developed players on their roster. I also think their developing gets far overrated. They followed the Pens model of having a ton of picks for years and then finally getting two generational talents in Hossa and Kane.

Tampa and Nash are the best developers in the league and look where it’s got them.

I don’t really lament the players we lost during 2010-15 outside of Despres and Kapanen. Everyone else is either at best a bottom six forward, bottom pairing D. And those trades won us a cup in 15-16.

I think the Pens have done the best job of using picks and prospects as assets. See Esposito, Sprong, Kapanen, Morrow, etc.

The bigger issue in 10-15 was falling in love with our roster and not allowing room for developing players.

 

[Randy Butternubs]

Ouellet had pictures of Therrien.

 

[ColePens]

I don't know if this is a sarcastic comment, but if the Penguins were better at managing prospects, maybe they would have won another cup between 2010 and 2015. I could read your comment as a sarcastic comment or a serious comment, because the Hawks and Kings were both really good at developing players.

Ummm what? The Pens would have 3 Stanley Cups pretty much no matter how you slice it. DB's usage of older players was an issue, not how they handled prospects. I do not think even for a second they left a Stanley Cup on the table.

And man I get it.. the first rounders didn't pan out. That happens a lot. But why are we so quick to ignore all the good prospects that did pan out? Did Detroit get shit on because they got Zets/Datsyuk late in the draft? Nope... they celebrated it. Only a few people here shit on our drafting because they weren't all first round mega picks.

I can't believe anyone here thinks we left a Cup on the table. It is so damn difficult to win a Cup. Everything that happened, ended up happening for the better of the organization. At least IMO.

 

[Malkinstheman]

As long as MAF was our starter and Bylsma our coach, I dont think we had much hope of winning a cup. This is between 2010-2015 of course, MAF seems to have improved in the playoffs.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Were they?

The Hawks sure. But they also barely made the playoffs two years in a row and have literally none of those developed players on their roster. I also think their developing gets far overrated.

I don’t really lament the players we lost during 2010-15 outside of Despres and Kapanen. Everyone else is either at best a bottom six forward, bottom pairing D.

Oh god yes, for sure. I'm going to ignore high 1st round picks for this, so no Kopitar, Doughty, Schenn, Toews, Kane and such. I'm only going to list drafted and developed players that were on at least 1 cup winning team or were traded for big contributors on a cup winning team.

The Kings drafted and developed Quick (3rd rounder 2005), Lewis (1st rounder 2006), Simmonds (2nd rounder 2007, who was traded for Richards), Martinez (4th rounder 2007), King (4th rounder 2007), Voynov (2nd rounder 2008), Clifford (2nd rounder 2009), Nolan (7th rounder 2009), Forbort (1st rounder 2010, although he only played in 14 games for the 2014 team), Toffoli (2nd rounder 2010) and Pearson (1st rounder 2012) that played for either the 2012 or 2014 cup winning team. From 2005-2010, they drafted 13 players who have played in 300 or more games in the NHL, and it would be 14 had Voynov not gotten deported.

For the Hawks, you had just a ton of players. I don't even need to go into much detail because it's over a dozen, it's just so many guys.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Ummm what? The Pens would have 3 Stanley Cups pretty much no matter how you slice it. DB's usage of older players was an issue, not how they handled prospects. I do not think even for a second they left a Stanley Cup on the table.

And man I get it.. the first rounders didn't pan out. That happens a lot. But why are we so quick to ignore all the good prospects that did pan out? Did Detroit get **** on because they got Zets/Datsyuk late in the draft? Nope... they celebrated it. Only a few people here **** on our drafting because they weren't all first round mega picks.

I can't believe anyone here thinks we left a Cup on the table. It is so damn difficult to win a Cup. Everything that happened, ended up happening for the better of the organization. At least IMO.

...what are you even talking about? Where did I ever mention the first round picks not panning out? This is pure hindsight solely because the Penguins ended up winning in 2016 and 2017. Pretend that you can go back in time to 2012 and try to argue this to yourself, what do you think you old self would say? Outside of 1st rounders, the best player the Penguins got out of a draft pick from 2006-2010 was Robert Bortuzzo.

The problem isn't that they didn't get 1st round picks to pan out, the problem was that they got borderline no one to pan out before 2010. That's why they didn't win from 2010-2015, that is the biggest overall reason. This is pure revisionist history based on what happened after 2015, we shouldn't try to rewrite what happened in the past before because nice things happened after. I don't know if this is nostalgic positivity towards Shero or what, but it's super wrong

 

[Tom Hanks]

I think they probably want to see if Simon can work as one of our LW's asap. If he can't, we really need to add a LW. If he can, we probably still should.

I think he can but unless it the right circumstances he’s limited at this stage (he’s still developing) and I don’t think Hornqvist is the right opposite winger for him.

I’d rather see him go back with Sid as it gets much more out of Simon than the other lines. That does add another RW though to the already crowded RW depth. Although if you get the right LW’er Rust can still be very effective on the 4th line and will get extra minutes on the PK and the first guy to move up if we need to change things up during games.

Guentzel-Crosby-Simon
XXXX-Malkin-Hornqvist
Pearson-Brassard-Kessel
Sheahan-Cullen-Rust

 

[Gurglesons]

Oh god yes, for sure. I'm going to ignore high 1st round picks for this, so no Kopitar, Doughty, Schenn, Toews, Kane and such. I'm only going to list drafted and developed players that were on at least 1 cup winning team or were traded for big contributors on a cup winning team.

The Kings drafted and developed Quick (3rd rounder 2005), Lewis (1st rounder 2006), Simmonds (2nd rounder 2007, who was traded for Richards), Martinez (4th rounder 2007), King (4th rounder 2007), Voynov (2nd rounder 2008), Clifford (2nd rounder 2009), Nolan (7th rounder 2009), Forbort (1st rounder 2010, although he only played in 14 games for the 2014 team), Toffoli (2nd rounder 2010) and Pearson (1st rounder 2012) that played for either the 2012 or 2014 cup winning team. From 2005-2010, they drafted 13 players who have played in 300 or more games in the NHL, and it would be 14 had Voynov not gotten deported.

For the Hawks, you had just a ton of players. I don't even need to go into much detail because it's over a dozen, it's just so many guys.

And when we are in the bottom of the league we had Letang, Christensen, Talbot, Carcillo, Moulson, Gogo, Kennedy, Vitale, Muzzin, Bortuzzo, Johnson from 2002 - 2007. Not to even go into our 1st round picks in Whitney, Orpik, Fleury, Armstrong and of course the trinity Malkin, Sid and Staal.

The reason we had no one pan out from 2010-2014 is because we had been in win now mode for nearly 6 years at that point. The Hawks and Kings window barely lasted that long. The Hawks were not contenders in 2011 (I guess this is arguable) and 2012.

 

[Shrimper]

 

[Malkinstheman]

Oh god yes, for sure. I'm going to ignore high 1st round picks for this, so no Kopitar, Doughty, Schenn, Toews, Kane and such. I'm only going to list drafted and developed players that were on at least 1 cup winning team or were traded for big contributors on a cup winning team.

The Kings drafted and developed Quick (3rd rounder 2005), Lewis (1st rounder 2006), Simmonds (2nd rounder 2007, who was traded for Richards), Martinez (4th rounder 2007), King (4th rounder 2007), Voynov (2nd rounder 2008), Clifford (2nd rounder 2009), Nolan (7th rounder 2009), Forbort (1st rounder 2010, although he only played in 14 games for the 2014 team), Toffoli (2nd rounder 2010) and Pearson (1st rounder 2012) that played for either the 2012 or 2014 cup winning team. From 2005-2010, they drafted 13 players who have played in 300 or more games in the NHL, and it would be 14 had Voynov not gotten deported.

For the Hawks, you had just a ton of players. I don't even need to go into much detail because it's over a dozen, it's just so many guys.

Considering how many picks the pens have traded, their list isnt exactly bad either. These are all the homegrown guys that contributed to the back to back cups:

Sheary, Guentzel, Murray, Kuhnackl, Rust, Dumo, Maatta, Letang, Wilson.

Then you could include Kessel who was acquried from a couple prospects and a pick. Maybe throw lovejoy in there.

Theyve done really well with reclamation projects like Cole/ Schultz as well.

 

[Empoleon8771]

And when we are in the bottom of the league we had Letang, Christensen, Talbot, Carcillo, Moulson, Gogo, Kennedy, Vitale, Muzzin, Bortuzzo, Johnson from 2002 - 2007.

Yeah, that's why they won in 2009 and made the finals in 2008. I don't know what that has to do with what I'm talking about. Had the Penguins drafted and developed better, maybe they would have had another cup from 2010-2015.

I don't know why people on this ****ing site argue over completely non-controversial statements. My statement was literally textbook out of 2014, what happened since doesn't change what happened before. It's just stupid, I wouldn't change anything based on what has happened since, but that doesn't mean that bad things in the past weren't bad.

Considering how many picks the pens have traded, their list isnt exactly bad either. These are all the homegrown guys that contributed to the back to back cups:

Sheary, Guentzel, Murray, Kuhnackl, Rust, Dumo, Maatta, Letang, Wilson.

Then you could include Kessel who was acquried from a couple prospects and a pick. Maybe throw lovejoy in there.

Their drafting and developing went from terrible to terrific starting around 2010, they got insanely good contributions from draft picks from 2010-2015. It's just that they got virtually nothing from 2006-2009, which is why those teams constantly had problems with bad depth and scoring struggles beyond their top guys.

 

[ColePens]

How is it not f***ing hindsight, Emp. You never know how the prospects are going to go until they actually play. So yes... the only way to analyze the picks is to do it by looking back. I don't give a flying shit what they were "ranked" by the pundits. I care about what they did.

Whether it was luck or not, I don't care. The results cannot be changed. Everything that happened panned out perfectly. It doesn't matter anymore. You can bitch about DP, or any of the PMDs that didn't pan out but all the trades, failures, picks turned in to 3 Cups.

And you can't sit there and ignore the guys like Murray, Guentzel, Kuhn, Sheary, Rust, Wilson, etc. Hell.. even Despres/Lovejoy ended up laughably working out perfect.

So ummmm yeah. What the f*** are you on about here?

 

[Gurglesons]

Yeah, that's why they won in 2009 and made the finals in 2008. I don't know what that has to do with what I'm talking about. Had the Penguins drafted and developed better, maybe they would have had another cup from 2010-2015.

I don't know why people on this ****ing site argue over completely non-controversial statements. My statement was literally textbook out of 2014, what happened since doesn't change what happened before.

2009 - top four D - Despres after winning the cup.
2010 - Beau Bennett - 100+ GP and Bryan Rust, Kuhnhackl
2011 - Joe Morrow and Harrington, both used in solid deadline deals and both still in the NHL. Wilson and Archibald as well.
2012 - Matt Murray.
2013 - Guentzel

Our drafting was fine tbh. Outside of 2007 and 2008 when we were pushing hard to be a contender.

I hate this narrative people like to write about the Pens being a horrible drafting team. We certainly weren’t great, but given the fact we’ve been trying to be a contender since 2007 that certainly has effected it.

 

[Empoleon8771]

How is it not ****ing hindsight, Emp. You never know how the prospects are going to go until they actually play. So yes... the only way to analyze the picks is to do it by looking back. I don't give a flying **** what they were "ranked" by the pundits. I care about what they did.

I have no idea what you're even saying right now. Go back and re-read my posts, because I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Whether it was luck or not, I don't care. The results cannot be changed. Everything that happened panned out perfectly. It doesn't matter anymore. You can ***** about DP, or any of the PMDs that didn't pan out but all the trades, failures, picks turned in to 3 Cups.

Okay, so I'm going to waste my time discussing anything in the past with you if your response is "3 CUPS!!!!!!". You can talk about faults they had in the past while still saying "I am happy with how everything has turned out". If you're only going to reply to any past criticisms of the team with "WE WON 3 CUPS!!!", I'm just not going to waste my time discussing anything with you.

And you can't sit there and ignore the guys like Murray, Guentzel, Kuhn, Sheary, Rust, Wilson, etc. Hell.. even Despres/Lovejoy ended up laughably working out perfect.

So ummmm yeah. What the **** are you on about here?

I wasn't talking about that. Jesus, read what I'm ****ing writing.

2009 - top four D - Despres after winning the cup.
2010 - Beau Bennett - 100+ GP and Bryan Rust, Kuhnhackl
2011 - Joe Morrow and Harrington, both used in solid deadline deals and both still in the NHL. Wilson and Archibald as well.
2012 - Matt Murray.
2013 - Guentzel

Our drafting was fine tbh. Outside of 2007 and 2008 when we were pushing hard to be a contender.

I hate this narrative people like to write about the Pens being a horrible drafting team. We certainly weren’t great, but given the fact we’ve been trying to be a contender since 2007 that certainly has effected it.

You're intentionally picking a window I'm not talking about. I have said time and time again 2006-2009. Their drafting got way better in 2010, or maybe they just started getting lucky then.

Their drafting from 2010-2015 was incredible, which is why they won back to back cups. Their drafting from 2002-2005 was great, which is why they made back to back cups in 2008 and 2009. Their drafting from 2006-2009 sucked, which is why they constantly had depth problems after the 2009 cup run and before the 2016 cup run. This isn't a controversial statement. The fact that anyone is arguing this just blows my mind.

 

[ColePens]

You are mad about 2006 - 2009. As the game was evolving crazy fast and one of the drafts where we literally make a trade to get Hossa who led us to the Cup Finals.

Sheeeeesh. Out to freaking lunch. Pick any team and in the last 15 years i'm pretty sure you can find a laughable 3 year period. One in which they probably didn't make a trade to get to the Cup finals and then the next year WIN the Cup.

This is one of the all-time brutal arguments of all HF. This is just simply someone who wants to take a negative approach and will not budge.

 

[Pancakes]

AHL is pro hockey, and Tangradi was, and still is, very good at it because of his skill level. He’s a highly skilled guy teams forced to change his game and play like ZAR and it was pure stupidity. I’ll always believe the Pens botched his development big time, by forcing him to be a brain dead power fwd that played straight line hockey.

ZAR is only playing in the NHL because this org has it in their heads they need a Tom Wilson type, and it’s bananas to me they have their heads stuck in the past.

Mango was way better in front of the net, scored a lot of goals, and many of us kept saying he’d be out of the league soon... and within a few yrs he was playing for the Hamburg Freezers, because like ZAR, he had zero offensive abilities. **** was obvious.

ZAR is more defensively responsible than Mango, so not sure I agree with that comparison.

ZAR could easily carve out a role as tweener type in the league. Mango was top six or bust, and he wasn't quite good enough to stay consistently in the top six.

 

[Empoleon8771]

You are mad about 2006 - 2009. As the game was evolving crazy fast and one of the drafts where we literally make a trade to get Hossa who led us to the Cup Finals.

Sheeeeesh. Out to freaking lunch. Pick any team and in the last 15 years i'm pretty sure you can find a laughable 3 year period. One in which they probably didn't make a trade to get to the Cup finals and then the next year WIN the Cup.

This is one of the all-time brutal arguments of all HF. This is just simply someone who wants to take a negative approach and will not budge.

Where am I mad about 2006-2009? I'm mad about you being ****ing obnoxious in your replies to me to a completely non-controversial statement that shouldn't spark any sort of disagreement.

If you're not willing to actually have a discussion without being obnoxious, I'm just going to put you on ignore. You are doing closer to trolling than adding anything of value. I was never complaining, I just said "maybe their drafting from 2006-2009 was as bad as it was because they were mismanaging prospects".

 

[Gurglesons]

I have no idea what you're even saying right now. Go back and re-read my posts, because I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.



Okay, so I'm going to waste my time discussing anything in the past with you if your response is "3 CUPS!!!!!!". You can talk about faults they had in the past while still saying "I am happy with how everything has turned out". If you're only going to reply to any past criticisms of the team with "WE WON 3 CUPS!!!", I'm just not going to waste my time discussing anything with you.



I wasn't talking about that. Jesus, read what I'm ****ing writing.



You're intentionally picking a window I'm not talking about. I have said time and time again 2006-2009. Their drafting got way better in 2010, or maybe they just started getting lucky then.

Their drafting from 2010-2015 was incredible, which is why they won back to back cups. Their drafting from 2002-2005 was great, which is why they made back to back cups in 2008 and 2009. Their drafting from 2006-2009 sucked, which is why they constantly had depth problems after the 2009 cup run and before the 2016 cup run. This isn't a controversial statement.

So 2006 we got Jordan Staal. Won us a cup and moved for Dumoulin and Sutter both essential pieces in the back to back cup wins. Strait and Johnson were also decent NHLers.

2007 we got Bortuzzo and Esposito. Esposito was the main piece in the Hossa deal. Bort was a decent #5 here and part of the Cole trade. So two pieces essential to three cup runs.

2008 we had 4 picks. That draft sucked. We sold the farm to make it to the finals and were two games away from winning. I’ll agree with you though. That draft sucked.

2009 we drafted Despres and Hanowski. Despres was a solid #4-5 for us moved for Lovejoy for a cup win. Hanowski was one of the pieces moved for Iginla resulting in a solid performance on the way to an embarrassing ECF. And we won the cup that year.

Isn’t the rule to get a NHLer that plays 300 games every year?

We did that every year but one in the span right? I guess 2008 we didn’t but Despres should have played 300+ if it wasn’t for Colorado.

I guess I could see you being annoyed with 2006 and 2008 in terms of depth picks.. seems a little pointless though.

 

[Empoleon8771]

So 2006 we got Jordan Staal. Won us a cup and moved for Dumoulin and Sutter both essential pieces in the back to back cup wins. Strait and Johnson were also decent NHLers.

2007 we got Bortuzzo and Esposito. Esposito was the main piece in the Hossa deal. Bort was a decent #5 here and part of the Cole trade. So two pieces essential to three cup runs.

2008 we had 4 picks. That draft sucked. We sold the farm to make it to the finals and were two games away from winning. I’ll agree with you though. That draft sucked.

2009 we drafted Despres and Hanowski. Despres was a solid #4-5 for us moved for Lovejoy for a cup win. Hanowski was one of the pieces moved for Iginla resulting in a solid performance on the way to an embarrassing ECF. And we won the cup that year.

Isn’t the rule to get a NHLer that plays 300 games every year?

We did that every year but one in the span right?

Compare 2006-2009 to 2010-2015, or if you want to, 2002-2007. Sure, you can pick out examples of draft picks that either panned out (Staal and Despres are basically it) or guys you ended up making good trades with. That doesn't mean they got good contributors out of those drafts. It's a huge reason why they were so shallow after Crosby and Malkin were off their ELCs, they weren't getting any young contributors from the AHL.

This isn't me complaining, this isn't me saying "dammit, I'm pissed at how things turned out" or anything like that. It's a completely non-controversial statement, in a discussion about how the Penguins have drafted and developed players in a certain period. You can say the Jagr trade was bad, but you wouldn't go back and change it because it ended up working out with Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, Staal and such.

 

[Gurglesons]

Where am I mad about 2006-2009? I'm mad about you being ****ing obnoxious in your replies to me to a completely non-controversial statement that shouldn't spark any sort of disagreement.

If you're not willing to actually have a discussion without being obnoxious, I'm just going to put you on ignore. You are doing closer to trolling than adding anything of value. I was never complaining, I just said "maybe their drafting from 2006-2009 was as bad as it was because they were mismanaging prospects".

I mean, if you take out 1st rounders a lot of drafting looks really bad for teams. Like I said we either got a 300 GP player out of each of those years or used those assets to get pieces that resulted in post season success (getting us to at minimum an ECF).

 

[Gurglesons]

Compare 2006-2009 to 2010-2015, or if you want to, 2002-2007. Sure, you can pick out examples of draft picks that either panned out (Staal and Despres are basically it) or guys you ended up making good trades with. That doesn't mean they got good contributors out of those drafts. It's a huge reason why they were so shallow after Crosby and Malkin were off their ELCs, they weren't getting any young contributors from the AHL.

This isn't me complaining, this isn't me saying "dammit, I'm pissed at how things turned out" or anything like that. It's a completely non-controversial statement, in a discussion about how the Penguins have drafted and developed players in a certain period. You can say the Jagr trade was bad, but you wouldn't go back and change it because it ended up working out with Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, Staal and such.

Yeah, but you’re criticizing a time period where they were all in for essentially three years. It just is odd.

Further more.

The Kings got Pearson, Miller and Kempe in 2012 and 2014.

The Hawks got Hayes and Hartman in 2010, 2013, and 2015.

So if you remove first rounders they basically got Miller.

I’d also put Despres in that range. So 2008 was pretty bad. But we basically did as good as the Hawks and Kings did after their cup runs.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I mean, if you take out 1st rounders a lot of drafting looks really bad for teams.

The point is that cup winners got a lot out of non-1st round picks, hence why they won cups. My comment was that had they drafted or developed better, or even just got luckier, they could have gotten another cup in an era when they had issues with depth. Almost every cup winner since 2006 has won the cup because they had a great run of drafts a couple years before the cup win. The Penguins just didn't get that from 2006-2009, hence why they struggled between the 2009 cup and the 2016 cup.

Like I said we either got a 300 GP player out of each of those years or used those assets to get pieces that resulted in post season success (getting us to at minimum an ECF).

I don't give them credit for that unless those guys end up NHLers, personally. I don't think trading a prospect less than a year after drafting him is an example of good drafting and developing by a team. Same thing with trading Hanowski in his rookie year in the AHL.

Yeah, but you’re criticizing a time period where they were all in for essentially three years. It just is odd.

The problem is that I'm looking at 4 drafts where they were only "all in" for 1 of them. They traded more picks per draft from 2010-2014 than they did from 2006-2009. Outside of the 2008 deadline, they didn't really start splurging at the deadline until 2010. They averaged like a pick less a draft from 2010-2014, and the only reason it's only a pick less a draft is because they hosted the 2012 draft and had 9 picks. Oddly enough, you can argue that is a result of their drafting, too. They didn't need to in the past because they had so many cheap contributors.

 

[Gurglesons]

The point is that cup winners got a lot out of non-1st round picks, hence why they won cups. My comment was that had they drafted or developed better, or even just got luckier, they could have gotten another cup in an era when they had issues with depth. Almost every cup winner since 2006 has won the cup because they had a great run of drafts a couple years before the cup win. The Penguins just didn't get that from 2006-2009, hence why they struggled between the 2009 cup and the 2016 cup.



I don't give them credit for that unless those guys end up NHLers, personally. I don't think trading a prospect less than a year after drafting him is an example of good drafting and developing by a team. Same thing with trading Hanowski in his rookie year in the AHL.



The problem is that I'm looking at 4 drafts where they were only "all in" for 1 of them. They traded more picks per draft from 2010-2014 than they did from 2006-2009. Outside of the 2008 deadline, they didn't really start splurging at the deadline until 2010. Oddly enough, you can argue that is a result of their drafting, too. They didn't need to in the past because they had so many cheap contributors.

The Penguins didn’t struggle from 2010-2016 though.

They had three second round series go to seven games. They took Tampa to seven games without Sid and Geno and then made an ECF. 2012 and 2015 were the only disappointments there.

Chicago either made the Cup or were knocked out in the first round, not in the playoffs every year from 2010-2017 outside of a WCF in 2014. Kings had a similar thing happen outside of a WCF in 2013.

Chicago lost to Arizona and swept by Nash. LA was essentially a joke outside of those three years. So like what exactly did they develop?