News Article: Building a winner takes more than just top picks

[HometownHockey]

Building a winner takes more than just top picks

With the Stanley Cup Finals in full swing, Two in the Box offers a deconstruction of what it takes to make a winning team in the NHL, and what the most recent league winning clubs have done to earn the opportunity to hoist Lord Stanley's Cup.

READ MORE...
http://www.hometownhockey.ca/hockey/HH0557.php

Click to read more...

 

[Beerz]

IN other news ... sand is sandy.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Utterly facile.

While a winner might take more than just top picks; there haven't been many winners recently without top picks.

Since the Sabres currently have 0 top pick players can we get through Step 1: The Tank. Before we worry about UFA?

Whoever Tim Murray opts to take at 2nd overall at the end of the month will not come in, put the team on his back, and carry them to a top three finish (and automatic playoff spot) in the Atlantic Division. I’d venture to say that even if Murray were to acquire another top five pick in June (as Mike Harrington believes they should) they still would find themselves outside of the playoff picture.

This is a straw man. None of the recent Stanley Cup winner pursued or expected such quick turnaround. Why would the Sabres; and why would our authors present it as the dichotomy in question?

Maybe they just buried the lead. If their true thesis was this:

You’re right on that, 100%. Not to beat the dead horse too much, but I don’t want this to be misinterpreted as a piece that says picking first or second doesn’t matter because it does. It matters a whole lot. I just think that there’s a segment of fans, and perhaps pundits, who feel that simply picking a name out of the hat at the lottery will make all of the Sabres’ losing go away.

I'll grant them there's a portion of the whiner line who could stand to learn this. But there's no reaching those people. It's a fool's errand to try. I'm not sure who the pundits their referring to are; but I've not heard them.

 

[enthusiast]

I'll grant them there's a portion of the whiner line who could stand to learn this. But there's no reaching those people. It's a fool's errand to try. I'm not sure who the pundits their referring to are; but I've not heard them.

Funnily enough, that WGR blowhard whose name escapes me

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

Funnily enough, that WGR blowhard whose name escapes me

He thinks that with a top player in this draft the Sabres will suddenly be in the playoffs next year?

 

[enthusiast]

Nah, iirc his claim is that players drafted 1-3 are the sole or primary determinant of team success


the sort of person who points to LA because doughty and ignores kopitar, quick, carter, gaborik, richards, etc not to mention sutter and lombardi

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

We had a discussion in a previous thread about how the people around here are generally beyond mainstream media commentary. This entire article feels like something we did as a footnote to an old tank commander thread. I don't know many around here who hold the opinions that these gentlemen seam to be concerned about dispelling.

 

[Gabrielor]

We had a discussion in a previous thread about how the people around here are generally beyond mainstream media commentary. This entire article feels like something we did as a footnote to an old tank commander thread. I don't know many around here who hold the opinions that these gentlemen seam to be concerned about dispelling.

Yeah, I feel that this article had no new information we didn't talk about on here 2 years ago.

 

[JLewyB]

I'm pretty sure White's point is that it doesn't take a good GM to tank so it doesn't take a good gm to get a top pick in the draft.

 

[Jim Bob]

http://mmqb.si.com/2014/06/10/nfl-san-francisco-49ers-general-manager-trent-baalke/

Thompson and Baalke are kindred spirits. Each in his own way is a loner who would rather be on the road scouting instead of pushing papers in an office. “The passion’s in the hunt,†Baalke says. “Finding guys that can be contributors at every level. Not just frontline guys, but within every level of your roster. Building it from top to bottom and bottom to top. There’s an art to that.â€

This kind of reminds me of this article.

Basically, the top end picks are sexy. But, you need to be solid 1 to 23 and beyond to build a team that can really compete.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

I'm pretty sure White's point is that it doesn't take a good GM to tank so it doesn't take a good gm to get a top pick in the draft.

It takes a good GM to keep his job whilst tanking!

 

[kenfury]

Nah, iirc his claim is that players drafted 1-3 are the sole or primary determinant of team success


the sort of person who points to LA because doughty and ignores kopitar, quick, carter, gaborik, richards, etc not to mention sutter and lombardi

With examples such as Edmonton and Florida I dont know how anyone could disagree that high picks are the primary determining factor.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

With examples such as Edmonton and Florida I dont know how anyone could disagree that high picks are the primary determining factor.

you can win a cup with only elite players, if have great contributions from mediocre players

you cannot win a cup with great contributions from mediocre players, if you don't have elite players

you are more likely to win a cup with a well built roster then an unbalanced roster but players can have career years and push teams over the top, but a team without reliable elite talent isn't winning a cup

 

[Trobes]

a team without reliable elite talent isn't winning a cup

This is why I will gladly renew my seasons for what will no doubt be a horrible season. Bring on a top 2 pick next year.

 

[yahhockey]

It's difficult to build a Cup winning team solely from draft picks however, historically speaking, no team in the current NHL format has had the number of top 60 selections that we will have had between the 2012 and 2015 drafts. You can create a nucleus of talent and depth players that coupled with a couple of trades and/or signings is transformed into a Cup contender or winner. Possibly the team best positioned through the draft was Pittsburgh holding three #1s overall and the 2/3 for Staal however, outside of Edmonton and maybe Florida, most teams have a couple of down years then turn things around enough to no longer draft in the top five so they need to acquire players via trades and free agency to compliment their top five selections.

I don't think anyone on this forum believes that the Sabres will be hoisting Cups based solely on the current prospects and the ones taken in the next two drafts. Sometime in the next two to four years they will probably sign a big name UFA or make a blockbuster trade (in terms of acquiring talented player). Then if the Cup is in sight a year or two later maybe actually rent players at the deadline.

And yes having draft selections isn't the same as drafting NHL players so that's on the GM and scouts to make the next two years count. This will be the first draft without Darcy however most (if not all?) of the scouts are still with the team, correct? With selections like Grigo, Girgs, McCabe, Risto, Zads and Compher among others taken in the last two drafts the team simply needs to keep up the good draft mojo.

 

[haseoke39]

This is going to be one of those threads where everyone agrees on substance and one or two people get upset with how you phrase it.

We're all happy to be picking high. We all think it's a huge boon to our rebuild. We all agree a lot needs to be done around any potential franchise players we get.

Who cares whether you're more leaning towards the side that says the high picks are practically necessary or the side that says they're only really helpful.

 

[ADoubleD]

Nah, iirc his claim is that players drafted 1-3 are the sole or primary determinant of team success


the sort of person who points to LA because doughty and ignores kopitar, quick, carter, gaborik, richards, etc not to mention sutter and lombardi

With examples such as Edmonton and Florida I dont know how anyone could disagree that high picks are the primary determining factor.

I don't think anyone who looks at LA ignores the role that Kopitar, Carter, Quick, Richards, and Gaborik play in the team's success. And even though the Kings didn't draft him, Gaborik was a 3rd overall pick.

Now what I'd say is that most smart pro tank people believe that the key to being a contender, and to eventually winning a Cup is to have elite talent on your team. There are a few ways you can go about doing that, but drafting in the top 3 is probably the most sure fire way of landing elite players. I mean if your team is picking top 3 you'd hope to get a player of Kopitar or Carter's caliber.

Also the LA model is similar to what I think Murray wants to do. The only players of note on their roster that were free agent signings are Jake Muzzin and Willie Mitchell. The rest of the team was either drafted by the Kings, or acquired in trades, most of which were made with guys the Kings had drafted.

 

[ADoubleD]

It's difficult to build a Cup winning team solely from draft picks however, historically speaking, no team in the current NHL format has had the number of top 60 selections that we will have had between the 2012 and 2015 drafts. You can create a nucleus of talent and depth players that coupled with a couple of trades and/or signings is transformed into a Cup contender or winner. Possibly the team best positioned through the draft was Pittsburgh holding three #1s overall and the 2/3 for Staal however, outside of Edmonton and maybe Florida, most teams have a couple of down years then turn things around enough to no longer draft in the top five so they need to acquire players via trades and free agency to compliment their top five selections.

I don't think anyone on this forum believes that the Sabres will be hoisting Cups based solely on the current prospects and the ones taken in the next two drafts. Sometime in the next two to four years they will probably sign a big name UFA or make a blockbuster trade (in terms of acquiring talented player). Then if the Cup is in sight a year or two later maybe actually rent players at the deadline.

And yes having draft selections isn't the same as drafting NHL players so that's on the GM and scouts to make the next two years count. This will be the first draft without Darcy however most (if not all?) of the scouts are still with the team, correct? With selections like Grigo, Girgs, McCabe, Risto, Zads and Compher among others taken in the last two drafts the team simply needs to keep up the good draft mojo.

Actually you can build a great winning team using mainly draft picks in one way or another, just look at the Kings. They drafted Quick, Doughty, Kopitar, Voynov, Pearson, Toffoli, Martinez, Clifford, Nolan, Lewis, King, Dustin Brown etc. Also majority of the rest of their roster was acquired through trades. Jarret Stoll and Matt Greene were acquired in a trade for Visnovsky who was a Kings draft pick. They traded two guys they drafted in Schenn and Simmonds for Richards. The trades for Justin Williams, Gaborik, and Carter involved the Kings trading either picks or guys they had acquired via trade or the draft.

That might be simplifying things, but with the amount of prospects we already have, and the amount of picks we have coming up it's not hard to believe that we can do something similar.

 

[slip]

Any dingleberry can pick in the top three.

It's how you draft in the second round that defines you as a GM and your team's ability to win a cup in the future, IMO. That's the extra sauce that gets you over the hump between pretender and contender.

 

[Chad Thundercock]

Any dingleberry can pick in the top three.

It's how you draft in the second round that defines you as a GM and your team's ability to win a cup in the future, IMO. That's the extra sauce that gets you over the hump between pretender and contender.

Looking at Darcy's record, I think he's done very well hitting on later picks but missed on too many 1sts, hence the lack of high-end scoring talent. And you all think he's terrible.

High picks increase your chances of obtaining great talent. It's not a guarantee, and you still need a build a team around them.

 

[Push Dr Tracksuit]

Looking at Darcy's record, I think he's done very well hitting on later picks but missed on too many 1sts, hence the lack of high-end scoring talent. And you all think he's terrible.

High picks increase your chances of obtaining great talent. It's not a guarantee, and you still need a build a team around them.

1st Noronen, Kalinin, Barrett Heisten, Artem Kryukov, Jiri Novotny, Keith Ballard and Dan Paille, Vanek, Stafford, Zagrapan, Persson, Myers and Ennis, Kassian, Pysyk, Armia, Grigs and Girgs, Risto and Zads

hit on plenty, the only top 5 1st he had, he grabbed a 30 goal scorer

Hating Darcy is more on him being here so long that eventually everyone found a way to blame him for the teams failings. If he wins a cup in 99 or especially in 06 or 07 then I think he gets the same pass Ruff gets. The failings following the 07 season, Ill always think of ownership before Darcy.

As I far as I've seen very few people around blamed his ability to draft talent, we collected plenty of good NHLers, it was mostly his inability to recognize when the team wasn't good enough to take whatever the next step was. He dragged along trying to turn top 60 players into top 30 players, and when he finally realized it, he went full Pejorative Slur. You never go full Pejorative Slur. I still believe that if Darcy had brought in a competent coach who managed to hold the locker like Nolan did, he'd still be here.