Hard to Take NHL Seriously With Vegas Success

[chet1926]

McPhee and the Knights have just done a really exceptional job so far. That doesn't mean it is necessarily the norm for an expansion team. And only time will tell if they win a Cup.

But so far it's a hell of a story and I'd rather see an expansion do well and grow the sport rather than just fail. Players who felt like "cast offs" written off to the cellar playing with a chip on their shoulder with a chance of winning it all is a hell of a story.

There is no denying that the team is a great story. But there is also no denying that it's very difficult for fans of teams that have been bad for extended periods of time to stomach what is going on there as well.

It's easy for a Pittsburgh fan who has watched his team win back to back Cups to call it a good story. But what about Buffalo fans who try and cheer on a team that is consistently poor or St Louis fans whom have never won a Cup since 1967 or even Avs fans who have watched all of 3 playoff series in the past 10 years.

It's frustrating to see quality players like Fleury, Neal, Marchessault, Perron, Smith, Karlsson, Tuch, Schmidt etc. go to Vegas for free, when they'd never been available otherwise. Don't you think that some of the above mentioned teams would have loved to inject some of that talent to their rosters for free? You bet. I know the Avs would have loved to get a player like Marchessault for free, it would drastically help our scoring depth problem, but nope we have to try and fix it internally or hope that some quality UFA (which is starting to become something that is more and more rare) is willing to come to town. Or even a guy like Schmidt would have been excellent and would instantly have become the Avs 3rd best dman, but we have to hope and pray that some of our young guys develop into a player as good as him.

It's frustrating as an Avs fan (I'm only speaking on their behalf because I don't know the whole stories going on with other poor teams) that Vegas out of the gates had a better defense on paper than the Avs and a better goaltending situation. That's tough for me as a fan to accept from an expansion team. And in my personal opinion should never happen. Expansion rosters IMO shouldn't be better than teams that have been trying for a decade to improve themselves.

 

[Pilky01]

they don't
teams like the Sabres [missed for 8 straight seasons, no playoff series wins in 12 years, Carolina [no playoffs for 9 straight seasons] and Zona [no playoffs for 6 straight] should only be pissy with their own management for being so inept with so many high draft picks and nothing to show for it in a league where over half the teams make the postseason every year.

In a cap structured league it isn't that simple.

Vegas is demonstrating just how punishing the salary cap is and how it can bury organizations for a decade or more. They're benefiting from the complete lack of any salary commitments and demonstrating that actually signing players is a net negative for teams.

I supposed people just assume Vegas is going to succeed forever because of GMGM's superior intellect....or something.

 

[sabresEH]

We(Buffalo) should have fires Bylsma and hired Gallant the day after he was fired. He is a great coach and while our roster is still a couple pieces away I have no doubt we would at least compete on a nightly basis with GG as coach.

 

[YEM]

In a cap structured league it isn't that simple.

Vegas is demonstrating just how punishing the salary cap is and how it can bury organizations for a decade or more. They're benefiting from the complete lack of any salary commitments and demonstrating that actually signing players is a net negative for teams.

I don't totally disagree with you here
& I think the real challenges for Vegas begin this offseason with their UFAs/RFAs
I just think any jealousy is severely misplaced

 

[Pilky01]

I don't totally disagree with you here
& I think the real challenges for Vegas begin this offseason with their UFAs/RFAs
I just think any jealousy is severely misplaced

Jealousy can't be misplaced, its a natural human emotion.

 

[The Shovel Penguin]

It's easy for a Pittsburgh fan who has watched his team win back to back Cups to call it a good story.

For the record, I'm a she, and outside of hockey I grew up with Seattle sports where losing has often been a way of life for us. I'm still not sure how I'm supposed to feel sorry for other fans, I've never expected people to feel sorry for me over the Mariners or losing the Sonics. It's sports. If people are going to get that upset and worked up about it and put that much of their suffering into it, maybe they should consider their level of emotional investment. I'm watching the Seattle expansion very closely and I seriously doubt this process is going to be the same for us as far as level of success. People should just give them a little credit where it's due.

 

[The Red Helmet]

I just want to state one last time in this thread, by no means does my opinion have anything to do with jealousy or bitterness. If people want to make that connection because I am a Sabres fan the go ahead but it does not exist. If I were a Pens fan I would feel the same way.

I am a basketball fan as well and have no favorite NBA team. I happen to think when free agents get together to build super teams in the NBA, that is terrible for their league as well. It hurts the integrity of the game. What is the point of building a team through the draft when 3 players can pick a city, go their and turn it from the worst team in the league into Champions the next year. It totally makes what franchises are doing to build teams through the draft and free agency look pointless and hurts the integrity of the game. That is how I feel about the Vegas situation.

I love sports and am a die hard Buffalo sports fan. I am a bigger Bills fan than a Sabres fan and I would take 1 Super Bowl win over 100 Stanley Cup victories. When the Bills lose, it bothers me for about 5 minutes and then I move along with my life. The Bills and Sabres have brought me a lot of joy and a lot of pain in my life, but for people to suggest I made this post because I am bitter about the Sabres, well that just says to me that some people want to be heard even though they really have nothing to say.

The many people in this thread that have talked about me being bitter or jealous missed the point and are really offering nothing to this thread. Some people just can't wait to create their own narrative and label the poster that they disagree with as something negative.

 

[haveandare]

There is no denying that the team is a great story. But there is also no denying that it's very difficult for fans of teams that have been bad for extended periods of time to stomach what is going on there as well.

It's easy for a Pittsburgh fan who has watched his team win back to back Cups to call it a good story. But what about Buffalo fans who try and cheer on a team that is consistently poor or St Louis fans whom have never won a Cup since 1967 or even Avs fans who have watched all of 3 playoff series in the past 10 years.

It's frustrating to see quality players like Fleury, Neal, Marchessault, Perron, Smith, Karlsson, Tuch, Schmidt etc. go to Vegas for free, when they'd never been available otherwise. Don't you think that some of the above mentioned teams would have loved to inject some of that talent to their rosters for free? You bet. I know the Avs would have loved to get a player like Marchessault for free, it would drastically help our scoring depth problem, but nope we have to try and fix it internally or hope that some quality UFA (which is starting to become something that is more and more rare) is willing to come to town. Or even a guy like Schmidt would have been excellent and would instantly have become the Avs 3rd best dman, but we have to hope and pray that some of our young guys develop into a player as good as him.

It's frustrating as an Avs fan (I'm only speaking on their behalf because I don't know the whole stories going on with other poor teams) that Vegas out of the gates had a better defense on paper than the Avs and a better goaltending situation. That's tough for me as a fan to accept from an expansion team. And in my personal opinion should never happen. Expansion rosters IMO shouldn't be better than teams that have been trying for a decade to improve themselves.

Eh, the team I pull for has been close a bunch and fallen short a bunch, hasn't won since 94. I still think Vegas is a good story.

Those quality players you're mentioning were absolutely available otherwise. If there weren't an expansion draft going on, I'm sure PIT would have loved to move Fleury instead of paying a backup goalie that kind of money. Perron has been moved many times already, Karlsson is having a year absolutely nobody predicted, Tuch was a well regarded prospect but certainly not priceless, Schmidt was a good depth d but again definitely available for a nice but probably not unreasonable price. No, no other team was getting them for free, but no team ever gets anyone for free, Vegas got them because they just came into existence and had no players at all.

Vegas had to pick from every other teams' cast offs. If the Avs couldn't build a d that good, that's their own fault because Vegas chose from players that all other teams felt were expendable and they were, and still are, not a great team on paper. They're very well coached and they have pretty unreal chemistry.

 

[The Red Helmet]

Also, those making the argument that Vegas spent $500 million for their team and should be able to have that kind of success.... So what are we saying? The Cup and/or playoff spots are for sale. If you come in as an expansion team and are willing to pay $500 million, we'll make sure your team is at least pretty good. I think those making this argument are just proving my point further.

 

[ColdSteel2]

Maybe the NHL should institute a Rule 5 draft like MLB so there would be a mini expansion draft every year where all teams would have a chance at unprotected talent provided they stayed on the NHL roster all year.

 

[The Red Helmet]

Eh, the team I pull for has been close a bunch and fallen short a bunch, hasn't won since 94. I still think Vegas is a good story.

Those quality players you're mentioning were absolutely available otherwise. If there weren't an expansion draft going on, I'm sure PIT would have loved to move Fleury instead of paying a backup goalie that kind of money. Perron has been moved many times already, Karlsson is having a year absolutely nobody predicted, Tuch was a well regarded prospect but certainly not priceless, Schmidt was a good depth d but again definitely available for a nice but probably not unreasonable price. No, no other team was getting them for free, but no team ever gets anyone for free, Vegas got them because they just came into existence and had no players at all.

Vegas had to pick from every other teams' cast offs. If the Avs couldn't build a d that good, that's their own fault because Vegas chose from players that all other teams felt were expendable and they were, and still are, not a great team on paper. They're very well coached and they have pretty unreal chemistry.

There is a big difference between available for a price and free. Cast-offs is definitely the wrong word. If you are a team with 4 good veteran aged defensemen and want to keep them all, you then can only keep 4 of 12 forwards. If the rules were you could only protect 2 defensmen total, would every team in the league's 3rd and 4th defensemen be cast-offs? No, it would just mean the NHL set in a ridiculous standard for players you were allowed to keep and many good players were available for the Knights to choose from.

The NHL set the expansion rules up so Vegas would be good out of the gate. This left many NHL teams with tough decisions on who to protect and who to make available. Saying these players that were selected by Vegas were cast-offs from other teams is simply not true. There were many good players available that established teams absolutely hated to make available but had little choice.

 

[pbgoalie]

Based on the expansion draft day comments on how badly McPhee and Vegas managed the draft, could you imagine this thread if they did a GOOD job in the ED?

 

[ChanceVegas]

There is a big difference between available for a price and free. Cast-offs is definitely the wrong word. If you are a team with 4 good veteran aged defensemen and want to keep them all, you then can only keep 4 of 12 forwards. If the rules were you could only protect 2 defensmen total, would every team in the league's 3rd and 4th defensemen be cast-offs? No, it would just mean the NHL set in a ridiculous standard for players you were allowed to keep and many good players were available for the Knights to choose from.

The NHL set the expansion rules up so Vegas would be good out of the gate. This left many NHL teams with tough decisions on who to protect and who to make available. Saying these players that were selected by Vegas were cast-offs from other teams is simply not true. There were many good players available that established teams absolutely hated to make available but had little choice.

And VGK didn't even take the best players they could. They worked out several deals with teams to keep some players they couldn't protect, and take a bad contract off of their hands along with a draft pick. VGK was in the market for more assets than just the best players available. Many teams worked out these deals (bad contract plus draft pick) with VGK, and it was because of this that most pundits felt like VGK wouldn't be that good at all to start the season.

So yes, teams were put in a tough position, but this is necessary when creating an expansion team. I don't think you hear many owners or even GM's complaining about cashing that expansion fee check, while they were able to offload a few bad contracts for some draft picks. But yes, those teams who valued their draft picks more than the players they were forced to expose had to suck it up and let the player go. Plus it's not like we gutted every team. We can only carry so many players.

Now the question becomes, is the NHL, overall, better for expanding to Vegas? And if one player, who subsequently was dealt to Vegas, would really have been so crucial to the success of their team, shouldn't fans be upset with their GM and not the NHL? GM's had decisions to make in this process. Some chose wisely, some it would seem did not.

Even the best prognostications had Vegas as a fringe playoff team, fighting for a wildcard spot. If this had been what really happened, would we still here so much whining? Neither Vegas nor the NHL has anything to do with GM's making bad decisions regarding overpaying marginal players or not drafting/trading for the right ones. In that light, it hardly reflects badly on the NHL that Vegas has had the success it has. The blame goes on all the other teams for not managing their clubs well. And even as a VGK fan, I feel it is highly unlikely we win the cup this season, so it will be some other team who suffered through the expansion draft and still manages to win in spite of that pain. Maybe they just have a good GM on that team?

 

[haveandare]

There is a big difference between available for a price and free. Cast-offs is definitely the wrong word. If you are a team with 4 good veteran aged defensemen and want to keep them all, you then can only keep 4 of 12 forwards. If the rules were you could only protect 2 defensmen total, would every team in the league's 3rd and 4th defensemen be cast-offs? No, it would just mean the NHL set in a ridiculous standard for players you were allowed to keep and many good players were available for the Knights to choose from.

The NHL set the expansion rules up so Vegas would be good out of the gate. This left many NHL teams with tough decisions on who to protect and who to make available. Saying these players that were selected by Vegas were cast-offs from other teams is simply not true. There were many good players available that established teams absolutely hated to make available but had little choice.

There is a bigger difference between a team that has a roster and a team that doesn’t. Vegas had to get players for free - they had no players. You can’t move nothing for something, talking as if them getting players for free and a franchise with a team getting players for free is even remotely the same is silly.

I didn’t hear anyone singing this tune when they built their team and hadn’t played games yet. Nobody thought they had a good roster. Nobody thought they’d be competitive. Nobody thought they got too sweet a deal. Now that they’re succeeding suddenly they were handed a great team. They really weren’t. They’re doing a great job being a ton more that the sum of their parts be it due to coaching, chemistry or what.

 

[Newsworthy]

Eh, the team I pull for has been close a bunch and fallen short a bunch, hasn't won since 94. I still think Vegas is a good story.

Those quality players you're mentioning were absolutely available otherwise. If there weren't an expansion draft going on, I'm sure PIT would have loved to move Fleury instead of paying a backup goalie that kind of money. Perron has been moved many times already, Karlsson is having a year absolutely nobody predicted, Tuch was a well regarded prospect but certainly not priceless, Schmidt was a good depth d but again definitely available for a nice but probably not unreasonable price. No, no other team was getting them for free, but no team ever gets anyone for free, Vegas got them because they just came into existence and had no players at all.

Vegas had to pick from every other teams' cast offs. If the Avs couldn't build a d that good, that's their own fault because Vegas chose from players that all other teams felt were expendable and they were, and still are, not a great team on paper. They're very well coached and they have pretty unreal chemistry.

The point that gets lost is the fact that how favorable this expansion draft was as opposed to past years.

 

[haveandare]

The point that gets lost is the fact that how favorable this expansion draft was as opposed to past years.

I don’t think Vegas got a good team on paper let alone a great team. They’re performing well beyond any and all reasonable expectations.

I will say though that doing this process again with Seattle soon is pushing it.

 

[chet1926]

For the record, I'm a she, and outside of hockey I grew up with Seattle sports where losing has often been a way of life for us. I'm still not sure how I'm supposed to feel sorry for other fans, I've never expected people to feel sorry for me over the Mariners or losing the Sonics. It's sports. If people are going to get that upset and worked up about it and put that much of their suffering into it, maybe they should consider their level of emotional investment. I'm watching the Seattle expansion very closely and I seriously doubt this process is going to be the same for us as far as level of success. People should just give them a little credit where it's due.

I just don't take Pittsburgh fans serious in this conversation as they've been treated to a lot of good hockey for a good 10+ years now. It's very easy to call a expansion team that is winning a good story when things are going well for the team you follow as well. Ask a Buffalo fan if they feel all warm and fuzzy about Vegas tearing up the league and I'd bet most of them would be semi-frustrated by Vegas doing so well.

I don't deny that it is a good story, it is, but it doesn't mean that it still somewhat frustrates me as well, as my team has been trying hard to get better for 10 years and still haven't achieved anything close to what Vegas has this year. My team wasn't gifted 30 goal scorers, a Stanley Cup caliber goalie, and some nice young players. We've had to build through the draft, UFA (but lets be real, good UFAs don't sign with bottom feeders they take discounts to go play in places like Pittsburgh), and trades. And we're getting there, very slowly, but it's been a long road that has required lots of patience from our fanbase.

The fact you've dealt with losing from other franchises is somewhat a mute point, as I think every fan in here cheers for some team that has had prolonged struggles it's just part of professional sports. I don't expect anyone to feel "sorry" for me or my team. I know my team is trying to fix the problems and at some point we'll get back there. Doesn't mean I have to like how the expansion process went this time around and feel as though the NHL gave them a really good chance to be better than some of the teams around the league that have been trying to rebuild and become more competitive.

 

[Newsworthy]

imo there is no problem with the draft process. The lesson of Vegas' success is not that the expansion process is too generous. It's that you could take a team that's bad on paper, and with just a little luck, and maybe a good coach, they could be a contender.

I also totally agree that the previous expansions were bad, and that it is good that Vegas could be a success. It was wrong to make new teams like Columbus, SJ, Ottawa etc have to endure total destitution for a huge period of time, all while trying to build a fanbase. It's just that it would have been just as exciting and imo more meaningful if the story of Vegas this season was that they were underdogs who fought and clawed their way just to earn a wild card spot, rather than jump right into the contender role despite having no superstar talent.

Edmonton didn't lose anything of significant value in the draft

 

[chet1926]

Eh, the team I pull for has been close a bunch and fallen short a bunch, hasn't won since 94. I still think Vegas is a good story.

Those quality players you're mentioning were absolutely available otherwise. If there weren't an expansion draft going on, I'm sure PIT would have loved to move Fleury instead of paying a backup goalie that kind of money. Perron has been moved many times already, Karlsson is having a year absolutely nobody predicted, Tuch was a well regarded prospect but certainly not priceless, Schmidt was a good depth d but again definitely available for a nice but probably not unreasonable price. No, no other team was getting them for free, but no team ever gets anyone for free, Vegas got them because they just came into existence and had no players at all.

Vegas had to pick from every other teams' cast offs. If the Avs couldn't build a d that good, that's their own fault because Vegas chose from players that all other teams felt were expendable and they were, and still are, not a great team on paper. They're very well coached and they have pretty unreal chemistry.

I don't deny that it's a good story. But I don't have to like how it went down either.

As for the players they got Fleury is about the only one that would have been available. But don't you think a goalie hungry team would have paid a pretty penny to get him? Don't you think Pittsburgh would have much preferred to trade him for assets instead of losing him for nothing? Absolutely. Due to the ridiculous expansion protection rules Pittsburgh was basically forced to ask him to waive his NTC so they could protect Murray. In the old expansion rules they could have easily protected both guys and then traded Fleury if they wanted to down the line for assets.

No way are guys like Marchessault, Neal, Schmidt, Tuch, Theodore etc. available except for massive overpayments. Those teams didn't want to give up these guys but they didn't have a choice if they wanted to keep their other top end guys.

Calling the guys that were available in the expansion draft "castoffs" is a gross exaggeration, as a lot of the guys that were selected were guys teams didn't want to give away but didn't have any other options due to the expansion protection rules.

 

[ChanceVegas]

I just don't take Pittsburgh fans serious in this conversation as they've been treated to a lot of good hockey for a good 10+ years now. It's very easy to call a expansion team that is winning a good story when things are going well for the team you follow as well. Ask a Buffalo fan if they feel all warm and fuzzy about Vegas tearing up the league and I'd bet most of them would be semi-frustrated by Vegas doing so well.

I don't deny that it is a good story, it is, but it doesn't mean that it still somewhat frustrates me as well, as my team has been trying hard to get better for 10 years and still haven't achieved anything close to what Vegas has this year. My team wasn't gifted 30 goal scorers, a Stanley Cup caliber goalie, and some nice young players. We've had to build through the draft, UFA (but lets be real, good UFAs don't sign with bottom feeders they take discounts to go play in places like Pittsburgh), and trades. And we're getting there, very slowly, but it's been a long road that has required lots of patience from our fanbase.

The fact you've dealt with losing from other franchises is somewhat a mute point, as I think every fan in here cheers for some team that has had prolonged struggles it's just part of professional sports. I don't expect anyone to feel "sorry" for me or my team. I know my team is trying to fix the problems and at some point we'll get back there. Doesn't mean I have to like how the expansion process went this time around and feel as though the NHL gave them a really good chance to be better than some of the teams around the league that have been trying to rebuild and become more competitive.

Any fans of an underperforming team should be frustrated with their GM's. Placing anger on the NHL for the expansion draft rules are misguided. As I stated before, VGK did plenty of deals with team to take a draft pick in order to ensure that a certain targeted player was taken (mostly for salary cap reasons). Heck, Pittsburgh gave us a pick to take Fleury. As did CBJ to take Wild Bill! It's not like the NHL was dictating what players VGK took from which teams. It was up to the GM's. I get that nobody wanted to part with any player, but it had to happen to build a team.

The NHL is not responsible for years of futility in Buffalo or Colorado or anywhere else. Anger towards them is misplaced. Vegas has simply greatly exceeded expectations and now people are salty and looking at the wrong people to point blame.

 

[KingBran]

Yeah. Because the blues were morons and protected reaves over perron.

Ended up trading Reaves for basically a 1st and got Kostin sooooo. I don't think of protecting reaves as a bad thing at all.

 

[MikeK]

I think this is flat out disrespectful to the players. They've earned every bit of their success this season. Coming into it they were considered by many to be a lottery team. The NHL didn't gift them a damn thing.

 

[zetajerk]

I think this is flat out disrespectful to the players. They've earned every bit of their success this season. Coming into it they were considered by many to be a lottery team. The NHL didn't gift them a damn thing.

No, you see, they were supposed to finish 31st overall for the first couple years, then relocate to Canada.

 

[TheNumber4]

16 pages in counting. Has anyone agreed with OP's really bad take yet?

 

[Bizz]

Refs handed them 15-20 or so wins easily.