How many successful rebuilds kept their aging stars?

[5H4RK5]

I would keep one but too many is not good especially if they make as much as the younger guys. Come on DW.

 

[Evincar]

Boston got a top-5 pick in between trading Thornton and winning a Cup.

Well Boston had no ageing stars.

I would say Detroit is the only successful rebuild I can think of.

 

[hohosaregood]

Well Boston had no ageing stars.

I would say Detroit is the only successful rebuild I can think of.

Zdeno was like 34 at the time. Thomas was about 37. Two aging stars, that's what we got too.

 

[Evincar]

Zdeno was like 34 at the time. Thomas was about 37. Two aging stars, that's what we got too.

Chara was the big reason for their post-Thornton turnaround. He was their big FA signing and was 30 when he signed. Thomas wasnt a star at the time either.

 

[Juxtaposer]

Chara was the big reason for their post-Thornton turnaround. He was their big FA signing and was 30 when he signed. Thomas wasnt a star at the time either.

Thomas wasn't a star at the time but he and Chara, both 34+ years of age, were the two biggest reasons that the Bruins won the Cup. And that's why the Boston model isn't realistic to follow.

They did some excellent drafting for a few years getting Bergeron, Lucic, Krejci, and Marchand in the 2nd round or later and made a smart trade with Horton. But they don't touch the Cup without Chara and Thomas.

 

[hohosaregood]

Thomas wasn't a star at the time but he and Chara, both 34+ years of age, were the two biggest reasons that the Bruins won the Cup. And that's why the Boston model isn't realistic to follow.

They did some excellent drafting for a few years getting Bergeron, Lucic, Krejci, and Marchand in the 2nd round or later and made a smart trade with Horton. But they don't touch the Cup without Chara and Thomas.

Thomas was kind of a star at the time, just not that year. He did have a Vezina winning season in 2009. Otherwise, agreed. At this point, I'm willing to let next season go by the wayside and wait and see what happens with prospect development for the year after.

 

[SJeasy]

Thomas wasn't a star at the time but he and Chara, both 34+ years of age, were the two biggest reasons that the Bruins won the Cup. And that's why the Boston model isn't realistic to follow.

They did some excellent drafting for a few years getting Bergeron, Lucic, Krejci, and Marchand in the 2nd round or later and made a smart trade with Horton. But they don't touch the Cup without Chara and Thomas.

It's a different animal because the age of dmen is usually not a factor for winning. You generally need younger players for the top forward positions.

Goalies are usually younger and Thomas does stand out as an exception.

 

[WantonAbandon]

It's a different animal because the age of dmen is usually not a factor for winning. You generally need younger players for the top forward positions.

Goalies are usually younger and Thomas does stand out as an exception.

Dominik Hasek?

 

[hohosaregood]

Dominik Hasek?

One other example doesn't make it not an exception.

 

[SJeasy]

Dominik Hasek?

Maybe. He got benched for his last run, but he was still over the 31-32 mark in 01.

Top playoff scorers (forwards) usually top out at 27-28.

Goalies, 31-32.

Top Dmen can go up to 35-38.

 

[Juxtaposer]

It's a different animal because the age of dmen is usually not a factor for winning. You generally need younger players for the top forward positions.

Goalies are usually younger and Thomas does stand out as an exception.

I would agree with that. Doesn't really have anything to do with my post though. I wasn't trying to make a point comparing Thomas and Chara's age to Thornton and Marleau's. I was just pointing out that they were the two biggest factors in Boston's Cup win.

I think you should have quoted Hoho or something.

 

[Coy]

I would agree with that. Doesn't really have anything to do with my post though. I wasn't trying to make a point comparing Thomas and Chara's age to Thornton and Marleau's. I was just pointing out that they were the two biggest factors in Boston's Cup win.

I think you should have quoted Hoho or something.

Not disagreeing with you about Chara and Thomas being the biggest pieces for them winning the Cup but their top 5 scorers in the playoffs all were 25 or younger.

 

[HipCzech]

Sure the Sharks may be set back, but the question is for how long?

Right now, I can't see that roster beating LA or ANA in a 7 game series, blame the coach, goalie & forwards all you want. Its the fact that the other teams have better players than we do. Getzlaf/Perry & Doughty/Kopitar are all in or approaching the prime of their careers. Thornton/Marleau had their shot 4 or 5 years ago and they couldn't get it done.

The next question is do you fans want a quick death or a long gut bleeding death? Speaking in terms of rebuilding the team. Right now this team has two solid centers (Couture/Hertl) they can build around along with a handful of complimentary wingers (Nieto/Wingels) and a decent defense core (Vlasic/Burns/Braun/Demers) that most teams would love to have. Aside from the depth at the wing position the Sharks have quite a bit to work with to expedite a full on rebuild, that would include sending Thornton/Marleau/Pavelski for whatever they can get through trade.

Or the Sharks can bleed through the gut and keep what they have and continue to have post season disappointments. There isn't much difference in having regular season success and losing in the first round than having mediocre regular season success and losing in the first round.

Excellent post. Quick death for me, because I want this team to improve long term, and it ain't happening with Thornton/Marleau here.

 

[Bizz]

I think the real question is 'How many successful rebuilds traded their aging stars?'

Trading Bourque didn't turn Boston into a powerhouse.
Getting rid of Sundin didn't turn the Leafs into a contender.
The Blues traded Pronger, they have 0 Cups to show for it.
The Oilers traded Pronger as well, they haven't even come close to making the playoffs since.
Trading Iginla still hasn't paid any sort of dividends for the Flames.

It's one thing to lose a franchise player to retirement or Free Agency, but if you think getting rid of one for a "brighter future" is the way to go, you are seriously wrong.

 

[CanadienShark]

One other example doesn't make it not an exception.

You didn't not put that awkwardly.