Ken Holland has been rebuilding through the draft for nearly 15 years

[Run the Jewels]

Since the Robert Lang trade, he's traded exactly one first round pick outright: that was done to acquire Kyle Quincey. I wasn't a fan of that trade and said as much in the HF Boards thread that announced the trade. However, it's been clear since the salary cap was implemented that Ken Holland has consistently held onto his first round pick or swapped it for multiple later picks. The goal has clearly been to rebuild through the draft. Or Retool on the Fly if you've been around for the past decade or so.

So how's that going?

Well, we've gone from being a top 5/Stanley Cup winner to a bottom 5 team. Not great Bob. I point this out simply because if you truly believe in your heart that Ken Holland is just the guy to buck the odds and return this franchise back to the top of the NHL through his drafting acumen, well we've got close to 15 years of data that says it's not going to happen.

Here's a short list of what he hasn't accomplished since he's become reliant on the draft to restock the pipeline:

• He hasn't drafted a defenseman that can consistently play on a top pairing and not look out of place.
• He hasn't drafted a forward capable of scoring anywhere near a PPG.
• He hasn't drafted a goalie capable of stealing a playoff series.

These are not big asks like expecting him to draft a Norris caliber d-man or a Hart caliber forward or goalie. These are all fairly reasonable expectations for a guy who has spent more than a decade with the draft as his primary source for replenishing the talent in Detroit. And what do we have? Bupkis.

The biggest disparity here is how he and his supporters do not want to draft near the top of the draft despite the fact Holland has never done particularly well with draft picks outside the top 5. Holland has also traded first round picks to get multiple second rounders, which would make sense if he was great at drafting. After all, Shea Weber and PK Subban were both drafted in the second round!!

However as stated above the Wings haven't so much as drafted a top pairing d-man over the past 15 years. Hopefully Hronek ends that streak, but we really don't know and may not know before Holland's current contract ends.

So the point to all this is to point out that if you expect Ken Holland to overcome the odds and draft his way back to relevance - with the understanding he will do everything in his power to avoid drafting in the top 5 - well, we have a lot of data to say it's not gonna go so well.

Click to read more...

 

[Claypool]

David Poille has been the GM of Nashville since 1997 and has never drafted a #1 Center.

 

[Stephen]

I've been tracking the Detroit Red Wings for a long time, first as a model franchise and then later as a study in a dynasty in decline. Super interesting stuff, but I also wonder if some of the draft failure can also be attributed to the developmental model, which was said to have "over ripened" players.

At first you could point to Datsyuk and Zetterberg as physically immature guys who were allowed to mature into their bodies and skills over a longer duration. Created the thesis that if you incubate players long enough, you might just be rewarded with Hall of Famers. Then guys like Filppula, Franzen and Hudler came along, and after that Nyqvist, Tatar, etc. Obviously other copy cat franchises started drinking from the same well as the Wings, so the quality of late rounders has gone down over the years.

But it always seemed like the Wings developmental formula didn't work quite as well for defensemen. We saw a lot of really hyped Red Wings defenders come up over the years, Smith, Kindl, Ouellet, Sproul, etc. and at some point they just didn't mature into the defensemen everyone thought they'd be. Is this a function of bringing them along slowly, or improperly and being so complacent with the formula for so long until it was too late?

 

[dragonballgtz]

But it always seemed like the Wings developmental formula didn't work quite as well for defensemen. We saw a lot of really hyped Red Wings defenders come up over the years, Smith, Kindl, Ouellet, Sproul, etc. and at some point they just didn't mature into the defensemen everyone thought they'd be. Is this a function of bringing them along slowly, or improperly and being so complacent with the formula for so long until it was too late?

With our defense prospects I think it's multiple things but the biggest thing is we just don't know how to scout good defensemen, That being said, I don't agree with the slow ripen process with defense prospects.

Jensen is a good example of being held back too long IMO. For as good of a skater Jensen is he always seems to think he has more time then he does, then ends up getting wrecked in the corners by the oncoming forecheck. He will be 28 at the start of the season and the speed of the game, thinking wise, still gets to him... hard to change habits so late into a career.

Smith I believe was ruined by Babcock. Smith showed he had a mind to be an offensive defensemen early on, but for some reason it seemed like Babcock just wanted to play a more stay-at-home style.

 

[member 105785]

David Poille has been the GM of Nashville since 1997 and has never drafted a #1 Center.

He has, however, drafted like 5 elite #1D

 

[Ishad]

He has, however, drafted like 5 elite #1D

And won zero cups.

 

[Flowah]

And won zero cups.

The Cup is hard to win. The question is, does he assemble a team that has a reasonable chance of it. He certainly does.

Process matters too. If you were consistently a finalist in the SCF that'd be the sign of a damn good team, even if you never won. It happens. Not every team that fails to win is badly assembled. Some are really good. But when you can only have one winner by definition, someone's gotta lose. And that someone can be a well built team.

That doesn't apply to us.

 

[member 105785]

And won zero cups.

How many current NHL GM's have won the cup as a GM? Like 6?

 

[kliq]

The Cup is hard to win. The question is, does he assemble a team that has a reasonable chance of it. He certainly does.

Process matters too. If you were consistently a finalist in the SCF that'd be the sign of a damn good team, even if you never won. It happens. Not every team that fails to win is badly assembled. Some are really good. But when you can only have one winner by definition, someone's gotta lose. And that someone can be a well built team.

That doesn't apply to us.

Very good post, I 100% agree with this!

I hate when people use ONLY Chicago, Pittsburgh, and LA as the templates to win the cup. You can just as easily take a team like San Jose, Nashville etc. and use them as a blueprint A GM doesn't score or stop goals, all you can ask of a GM is to put a team in a position where they have a very good chance at winning a cup, and getting to the finals and going on multiple deep runs shows you did that.

For example, in 2004 when TB faced Cgy in the finals, in game 6 Cgy was a goal in OT away from winning the cup. You can't tell me that if one of those shots in OT goes in, their GM is great, but since it didnt, he's nothing special. Khabibulin making or not making a save, should not impact how you feel about the Cgy GM.

Now maybe this team is not the best example because they were a Cinderella story, I'm just using them in my example because they are only team I can think of off the top of my head that was a goal away from the cup, but you get the point. Point being, a cup win doesn't define a GM.

 

[kliq]

How many current NHL GM's have won the cup as a GM? Like 6?

That's a tough question to answer, because do you credit the GM who was there for the win? Or the GM who built the team? Take Chicago for example, who deserves more credit for the first cup win, Bowman or Tallon?

 

[avssuc]

David Poille has been the GM of Nashville since 1997 and has never drafted a #1 Center.

Then why did Holland pay so much for Legwand?

 

[kliq]

Then why did Holland pay so much for Legwand?

Did he though? He traded a future 3C for a guy he thought would be a difference maker in getting into the playoffs. Bad trade in retrospect, i 100% admit that, but we're not talking Tyler Seguin here.

 

[Flowah]

Then why did Holland pay so much for Legwand?

The streak was really important.

 

[Bench]

Very good post, I 100% agree with this!

I hate when people use ONLY Chicago, Pittsburgh, and LA as the templates to win the cup. You can just as easily take a team like San Jose, Nashville etc. and use them as a blueprint A GM doesn't score or stop goals, all you can ask of a GM is to put a team in a position where they have a very good chance at winning a cup, and getting to the finals and going on multiple deep runs shows you did that.

For example, in 2004 when TB faced Cgy in the finals, in game 6 Cgy was a goal in OT away from winning the cup. You can't tell me that if one of those shots in OT goes in, their GM is great, but since it didnt, he's nothing special. Khabibulin making or not making a save, should not impact how you feel about the Cgy GM.

Now maybe this team is not the best example because they were a Cinderella story, I'm just using them in my example because they are only team I can think of off the top of my head that was a goal away from the cup, but you get the point. Point being, a cup win doesn't define a GM.

This is all true. And I think it's great for discussion you pointed it out. But... the devil is in the details. While those champions you listed won by leveraging high picks, so did Tampa (a #1 overall pick in Lecavalier) and San Jose (trading a #3 overall Brad Stuart in a package for Joe Thornton, a former #1 overall himself). Calgary is an interesting case for sure, they traded a Hall of Fame player in Joe Nieuwendyk for young holdout Jarome Iginla (#11 overall from Dallas).

And of course, the same holds true for our 90s Red Wings, who became the dynasty with The Captain #4 overall pick Yzerman.

So here's a handful of things I take from this:
1) The Red Wings need another blue chip, Zadina-level prospect or two in the next few years.
2) I don't blame Ken Holland for not having that elite talent with his draft picks.
3) I do blame Ken Holland for not putting more emphasis on acquiring top picks years ago. Keeping the roster floating in purgatory with veteran stopgaps has only slowed our fall.
4) And I also think it's pure incompetence an organization and Holland could fail to improve a completely awful blueline via draft, trade, or free agency since 2012. We're not talking Lidstrom 2.0, we're talking about having a top 15 blueline rather than bottom 5.

Honestly, it feels like too much pride. A level of hubris that they could beat the odds.

 

[HockeyinHD]

3) I do blame Ken Holland for not putting more emphasis on acquiring top picks years ago. Keeping the roster floating in purgatory with veteran stopgaps has only slowed our fall.
4) And I also think it's pure incompetence an organization and Holland could fail to improve a completely awful blueline via draft, trade, or free agency since 2012. We're not talking Lidstrom 2.0, we're talking about having a top 15 blueline rather than bottom 5.

Honestly, it feels like too much pride. A level of hubris that they could beat the odds.

If Detroit 'tanked' from 2012 forward do they get $324,000,000 from the government for the LCA in 2014?

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

If Detroit 'tanked' from 2012 forward do they get $324,000,000 from the government for the LCA in 2016?

Probably not, and that's a victory for everyone not named Ilitch.

 

[Pavels Dog]

He has, however, drafted like 5 elite #1D

He passed on Erik Karlsson twice which is a worse mistake than anything Holland has ever done in the draft.

But it shows the value of having multiple high picks and high draft position. Trying to paint the last 15 years as if there’s no difference between a year where your first draft pick is around #100, or a year where you have 7 picks in the first 100 including multiple 1sts and a top 6 pick should get you laughed out of any statistical discussion.

 

[Oddbob]

David Poille has been the GM of Nashville since 1997 and has never drafted a #1 Center.

Or done what is that other thing, oh yeah, I got it now, win the Cup! Who cares if he drafts the top 50 defenceman in league history, without a cup what good is it?

 

[Oddbob]

The Cup is hard to win. The question is, does he assemble a team that has a reasonable chance of it. He certainly does.

Process matters too. If you were consistently a finalist in the SCF that'd be the sign of a damn good team, even if you never won. It happens. Not every team that fails to win is badly assembled. Some are really good. But when you can only have one winner by definition, someone's gotta lose. And that someone can be a well built team.

That doesn't apply to us.

How many times has Nashville really been a threat? I count twice in their entire franchise history, so lets slow the NSH hype train here.

 

[Oddbob]

Then why did Holland pay so much for Legwand?

In what game let alone season was Legwand ever our #1 center, it never happened? He played 3rd line and 4th line with us as far as I can remember, and did so very underwhelmingly.

 

[abbbaron]

How many current NHL GM's have won the cup as a GM? Like 6?

And how many of those won the cup with a roster salary ranking in the bottom 5 in the league, which is what Poile has had to work with during most of his tenure. What's more, compare that with blank check/spend to the max budgets that Holland has had to play with every year of his career as GM...

 

[Fil Larkmanthanasiou]

KFH

 

[obey86]

Looking at a team like Toronto, are Gardiner and Reilly truly 50 pt defensemen good? Or are they putting up 50+ points because they play with such an excellent forward group that can actually score and make things happen on their own...by default leading to bunch of assists for these defensemen?

I think we can all agree that the Wings need better defensemen on the roster (obviously) but wouldn't we all think our defensemen are much better players if we upgraded our forward group substantially over the next few offseasons? For example, say we get lucky and get Hughes next season and Zadina is everything he's hyped up to be, like a 35/35 player or something like that.......isn't it possible that a couple of Green/Cholowski/Hronek are putting up 40-50 points just by default because the forward group is so good and talented? Does that change our perception of how hopeless the defensive roster is moving forward?

Even no offensive talent Dekeyser has shown he can put up 30+ points with little PP points when the forward group is good and can score on their own.

 

[njx9]

Having great forwards won't make up for 3+/6 defensemen being incapable of passing to a stick instead of a skate, or passing forwards into a breakout.

That said, I think you make a good point that, if we get a couple more elite forwards (or maybe just Hughes), you might be able to get by without a Doughty-type #1. But you still need to improve on some of the garbage we're currently cycling (edit: I should be clear, I'm not saying that isn't happening as E and Kronwall and whoever retire and guys like Jensen and XO (who, thankfully, left already) leave, but it's not going to happen while they're still around).

 

[Frk It]

Looking at a team like Toronto, are Gardiner and Reilly truly 50 pt defensemen good? Or are they putting up 50+ points because they play with such an excellent forward group that can actually score and make things happen on their own...by default leading to bunch of assists for these defensemen?

I think we can all agree that the Wings need better defensemen on the roster (obviously) but wouldn't we all think our defensemen are much better players if we upgraded our forward group substantially over the next few offseasons? For example, say we get lucky and get Hughes next season and Zadina is everything he's hyped up to be, like a 35/35 player or something like that.......isn't it possible that a couple of Green/Cholowski/Hronek are putting up 40-50 points just by default because the forward group is so good and talented? Does that change our perception of how hopeless the defensive roster is moving forward?

Even no offensive talent Dekeyser has shown he can put up 30+ points with little PP points when the forward group is good and can score on their own.

On paper, yeah. But I think that is still kind of Toronto's achilles heel and the reason they have not gone to the next level as of yet, even with the 50 pt seasons.