TSN: McKenzie's Take On The Habs

[Sorinth]

Most cup winners are rebuilds dude.



And nobody is suggesting we get rid of the young nucleus, we're suggesting that we add to it. We're not winning anything this year anyway man. Accept it. We won't be contenders next year either.

That's why it makes sense right now to realize this and do something about it. Nobody is suggesting 5 years at the bottom. You're right our young nucleus is good. Even if we do trade the vets that nucleus won't stay at the bottom for long plus we'll have the extra picks and prospects to go along with it.

It's nice to have vets but not at the expense of getting young talent. If you are not in a position to win you need to look towards the future and do what you can to win down the road. We'll still have vets, just not as many.

Since the lockout 7 teams have won the cup 2 are pure rebuilds (Pit, Chi).

I agree we are not likely to challenge for the cup this year, probably not next year either. But we would only get late firsts or equivalent prospects for our vets. Since most guys drafted 20-30 don't have big impacts in the NHL, you are basically hoping to get lucky.

It sounds good in principle but if you trade away too many vets then you risk hurting the development of our young core. Not many players can do what Subban did and jump into the fire and excel. Are those extra picks worth possibly stunting Galchenyuk's development?

 

[DAChampion]

Since the lockout 7 teams have won the cup 2 are pure rebuilds (Pit, Chi).

Drew Doughty (2nd overall), Anze Kopitar (11th overall), and Mike Richards (acquired via a former 5th overall) say hello.

I agree we are not likely to challenge for the cup this year, probably not next year either. But we would only get late firsts or equivalent prospects for our vets. Since most guys drafted 20-30 don't have big impacts in the NHL, you are basically hoping to get lucky.

The other high 1st will be the Habs own draft pick in 2013. The late 1sts (possibly mid 1sts) we acquire by trading our vets will be to complement the future core. I remind you Pacioretty was drafted at 22 and Subban at 43.

It sounds good in principle but if you trade away too many vets then you risk hurting the development of our young core. Not many players can do what Subban did and jump into the fire and excel. Are those extra picks worth possibly stunting Galchenyuk's development?

Nobody is proposing we trade all six of Markov, Plekanec, Cole, Gionta, Kaberle, Bourque; we could try, but I *really* doubt there's that kind of demand in the trade market.

But let's say we did and got three 1st rounders and three 2nd rounders (at worst). Aside from getting an inside-the-park grand slam in the deep 2013 draft, we'd also clear 28 million dollars in cap space and six roster spots. We could then easily acquire new UFAs on the trade market in the 2013/2014 UFA market, we have no trouble signing supportive players on the UFA market.

In all honesty, if we get one more 1st, I'll probably be satisfied, it might be a tough selling market this year. Two additional 1sts and I'll be thrilled.

Galchenyuk's development will be optimized if he's given ice time rather than benched in favor of some mediocre veteran every time he does the slightest mistake by a coach who wants to make 8th place.

 

[Sorinth]

Drew Doughty (2nd overall), Anze Kopitar (11th overall), and Mike Richards (acquired via a former 5th overall) say hello.



The other high 1st will be the Habs own draft pick in 2013. The late 1sts (possibly mid 1sts) we acquire by trading our vets will be to complement the future core. I remind you Pacioretty was drafted at 22 and Subban at 43.


Nobody is proposing we trade all six of Markov, Plekanec, Cole, Gionta, Kaberle, Bourque; we could try, but I *really* doubt there's that kind of demand in the trade market.

But let's say we did and got three 1st rounders and three 2nd rounders (at worst). Aside from getting an inside-the-park grand slam in the deep 2013 draft, we'd also clear 28 million dollars in cap space and six roster spots. We could then easily acquire new UFAs on the trade market in the 2013/2014 UFA market, we have no trouble signing supportive players on the UFA market.

In all honesty, if we get one more 1st, I'll probably be satisfied, it might be a tough selling market this year. Two additional 1sts and I'll be thrilled.

Galchenyuk's development will be optimized if he's given ice time rather than benched in favor of some mediocre veteran every time he does the slightest mistake by a coach who wants to make 8th place.

Not that I want to go to much into who rebuilt and who didn't, but we have a 3rd and 5th overall pick. If we win the cup within a couple of years would you use us as an example of a team that went into a rebuild?

If we can trade our vets and then turn around and sign a bunch of equally good UFAs then sure I'm all for it but that's unlikely.

Trading our good vets should depend on how we do this year, if we are near the basement then sure we can look at trading one or two. If we are in/or very close to a playoff spot then it's not worth it. Let the season play itself out and make the big decisions this offseason when we have a much clearer picture of what is going on. Also note our guys are not UFA and with the cap going down, I think most teams would be hesitant to pick up players that they will be on books next year.

If Galchenyuk is getting benched/limited ice time he should be sent back. All I'm saying is that if he's being sent out against the oppositions best players with the expectation of carrying his line offensively it could go very badly. Guys like Cole/Gionta/Plekanec are safeguards against Galchenyuk being thrown to the wolves.

 

[ECWHSWI]

Drew Doughty (2nd overall), Anze Kopitar (11th overall), and Mike Richards (acquired via a former 5th overall) say hello.



The other high 1st will be the Habs own draft pick in 2013. The late 1sts (possibly mid 1sts) we acquire by trading our vets will be to complement the future core. I remind you Pacioretty was drafted at 22 and Subban at 43.


Nobody is proposing we trade all six of Markov, Plekanec, Cole, Gionta, Kaberle, Bourque; we could try, but I *really* doubt there's that kind of demand in the trade market.

But let's say we did and got three 1st rounders and three 2nd rounders (at worst). Aside from getting an inside-the-park grand slam in the deep 2013 draft, we'd also clear 28 million dollars in cap space and six roster spots. We could then easily acquire new UFAs on the trade market in the 2013/2014 UFA market, we have no trouble signing supportive players on the UFA market.

In all honesty, if we get one more 1st, I'll probably be satisfied, it might be a tough selling market this year. Two additional 1sts and I'll be thrilled.

Galchenyuk's development will be optimized if he's given ice time rather than benched in favor of some mediocre veteran every time he does the slightest mistake by a coach who wants to make 8th place.

5 of the 6 players you named have some form of NTC/NMC...

So what you're saying is Galchenyuk will developp better playing with Scrubs 20 minutes a night than if he has to play 10/15 with guys like Plekanec (for example) ?

 

[DAChampion]

- delete -

 

[Scintillating10]

I got a feeling Habs aren't trying to win this year. Maybe not to place or show either. They don't seem concerned to sign PK as they should be. Signed a safe coach never went after the big names. Vet coach who knows what it is like to build a team here. Signed energy players in free agency. Never heard major trade rumours this off season

 

[muzion]

Since the lockout 7 teams have won the cup 2 are pure rebuilds (Pit, Chi).

I agree we are not likely to challenge for the cup this year, probably not next year either. But we would only get late firsts or equivalent prospects for our vets. Since most guys drafted 20-30 don't have big impacts in the NHL, you are basically hoping to get lucky.

It sounds good in principle but if you trade away too many vets then you risk hurting the development of our young core. Not many players can do what Subban did and jump into the fire and excel. Are those extra picks worth possibly stunting Galchenyuk's development?

Trade 2 firsts, for a higher first, and you enhance the likelihood of drafting a superstar.

 

[Sorinth]

Trade 2 firsts, for a higher first, and you enhance the likelihood of drafting a superstar.

Easier said then done. If you had a top-5 pick are you going to trade it for 2 mid to late 1st rounders?

 

[Monctonscout]

The thing most people need to understand with the "Pittsburgh/Chicago model" is that both had major cash flow/ownership issues that contributed to icing a ****** team. They didn't choose not to try and ice a good team it was forced on the GM because the money wasn't there, and at times both had ****** mangement to boot.

 

[Scintillating10]

You can almost tell who will be cup winners in near future by watching the draft. Common sense tells ya within a year or two Oilers will be a good team winning at least one cup if not multiply.

 

[BubbleGumPlant]

You can almost tell who will be cup winners in near future by watching the draft. Common sense tells ya within a year or two Oilers will be a good team winning at least one cup if not multiply.

Well they drafted well with Eberle at 22nd overall. Had they picked a bust with that 22, you're looking at RNH, Hall and Yakupov to lead the way. I wouldn't call that a major contender. Besides, we have no idea how they will perform in the playoffs. They got lucky with J. Schultz; loopholes like that should not exist.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Since the lockout 7 teams have won the cup 2 are pure rebuilds (Pit, Chi).

You might want to check your calculator.

Carolina had Staal (2nd overall) leading the way
Pens and Blackhawks.
The Kings were absolutely a rebuild (Doughty, Kopitar)

I was talking about the Kings eventually winning cups years ago. I was laughed at. And now they've leapfrogged us and won a cup.

But yeah, rebuilding doesn't work...

I agree we are not likely to challenge for the cup this year, probably not next year either. But we would only get late firsts or equivalent prospects for our vets. Since most guys drafted 20-30 don't have big impacts in the NHL, you are basically hoping to get lucky.

It sounds good in principle but if you trade away too many vets then you risk hurting the development of our young core. Not many players can do what Subban did and jump into the fire and excel. Are those extra picks worth possibly stunting Galchenyuk's development?

Mid to late first in a deep draft is just fine. Plus we can trade up in the draft dude.

The thing most people need to understand with the "Pittsburgh/Chicago model" is that both had major cash flow/ownership issues that contributed to icing a ****** team. They didn't choose not to try and ice a good team it was forced on the GM because the money wasn't there, and at times both had ****** mangement to boot.

Right, they didn't choose to rebuild. But they rebuilt anyway and it led to cups.

Bottomj line rebuilding worked. The WHY doesn't matter. We have tons of cash and can afford to do it intentionally.

Stop with the straw man arguments.

 

[habsfanatics*]

The kings are the only legitimate rebuild out of the bunch imo.

Lombardi did a true rebuild, stockpiled picks and traded the access when he thought they were on the cusp.

The rest had outside influences, ie poorly managed, financial problems, winning a draft lottery and on and on. Their successes aren't repeatable, half of them were trying to win, but had inept management and/or ownership that was incapable of supporting them. There is nothing strawman about stating the facts.

We have similarities from last year, we were trying to win, but failed miserably to do so, the why matters a great deal.

 

[habsfanatics*]

You might want to check your calculator.

Carolina had Staal (2nd overall) leading the way
Pens and Blackhawks.
The Kings were absolutely a rebuild (Doughty, Kopitar)

I was talking about the Kings eventually winning cups years ago. I was laughed at. And now they've leapfrogged us and won a cup.

But yeah, rebuilding doesn't work...

Mid to late first in a deep draft is just fine. Plus we can trade up in the draft dude.


Right, they didn't choose to rebuild. But they rebuilt anyway and it led to cups.

Bottomj line rebuilding worked. The WHY doesn't matter. We have tons of cash and can afford to do it intentionally.

Stop with the straw man arguments.

You're arguments are completely disingenuous too. If columbus becomes a legit cup contender down the road are you going to refer to Ryan Murray as proof that rebuilding works, ignoring the the fact that they traded for Jeff Carter, by removing youth and signing the wiz to his long term deal. Context matters, losing doesn't mean you rebuilt, it means you lost. The context is important, because there are owners, stakeholders, gms all vying to get a return on their investment, sure getting number one picks is going to improve your team, but it's not a business model followed by anybody, except the oilers now and Dean Lombardi did a heck of job completing the only true re-build in the last 20 years.

Sucking =/= re-building. In order to prove re-building works, you should provide real examples where it actually took place. I'm not disagreeing that it can work and or even has worked, but it's certainly not the only recipe. You know what works without a doubt, having good players.

The Red Wings, the epitome of success has been trading picks and prospects for 15 years and haven't resulted in rebuilding during that time. I suppose you'll throw out that Yzerman was a top pick, I'm not sure how that matters in 2013, but whatever. Drafting is a key component to winning, it's not the only way.

 

[Scintillating10]

Well they drafted well with Eberle at 22nd overall. Had they picked a bust with that 22, you're looking at RNH, Hall and Yakupov to lead the way. I wouldn't call that a major contender. Besides, we have no idea how they will perform in the playoffs. They got lucky with J. Schultz; loopholes like that should not exist.

It wasn't just the Kings/Pens/Hawks to build a cup team by drafting high. Sam Pollock did it way back in the day building the '70s Canadiens dynasty!

Habs drafted 1st overall in 1971, 4th overall in 1972, 2nd overall in 1973. Lafleur, Gainey and Shutt were core pieces to 70s championship teams. If he doesn't make those trades Habs don't win those Cups. They might of had a good team, but not a Cup team. The difference now is teams are not stupid enough to trade their top picks.

Habs have 2 players who were top picks. Price and Galchenyuk. Why stop at 2/3 there? We need a Jones then we have the core to build a great team around

 

[DAChampion]

The Red Wings, the epitome of success has been trading picks and prospects for 15 years and haven't resulted in rebuilding during that time. I suppose you'll throw out that Yzerman was a top pick, I'm not sure how that matters in 2013, but whatever. Drafting is a key component to winning, it's not the only way.

Who on this board is against finding Lidstrom in the 3rd round, finding Franzen in the 3rd round, finding Zetterberg in the 6th round and finding Datsyuk in the 7th round?

I love how people who attack rebuilding on the basis that it's too risky say that we should instead try and draft Lidstrom in the 3rd round.

 

[Teufelsdreck]

Who on this board is against finding Lidstrom in the 3rd round, finding Franzen in the 3rd round, finding Zetterberg in the 6th round and finding Datsyuk in the 7th round?

I love how people who attack rebuilding on the basis that it's too risky say that we should instead try and draft Lidstrom in the 3rd round.

Rare souls win millions of dollars in the lottery. Millions of people throw their losing lottery tickets in the trash. In case you haven't noticed, Detroit hasn't hit the jackpot in ages.

 

[LaTenderness*]

Bob was right

 

[DAChampion]

Rare souls win millions of dollars in the lottery. Millions of people throw their losing lottery tickets in the trash. In case you haven't noticed, Detroit hasn't hit the jackpot in ages.

Yup, they have not hit the jackpot in ages, and they're a team on the decline. They're not a contender this year.

They risk being out of the playoff picture within the near-future if they don't improve somehow.

 

[habsfanatics*]

Who on this board is against finding Lidstrom in the 3rd round, finding Franzen in the 3rd round, finding Zetterberg in the 6th round and finding Datsyuk in the 7th round?

I love how people who attack rebuilding on the basis that it's too risky say that we should instead try and draft Lidstrom in the 3rd round.

Fine, change Detroit to the NJD. There is more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

You're arguments are completely disingenuous too. If columbus becomes a legit cup contender down the road are you going to refer to Ryan Murray as proof that rebuilding works, ignoring the the fact that they traded for Jeff Carter, by removing youth and signing the wiz to his long term deal. Context matters, losing doesn't mean you rebuilt, it means you lost.

If Columbus drafts high and lands superstars that lead to a cup... Absolutely they will be a rebuild. That hasn't happened for them though partly because they've been terrible with their prospects.

They absolutely ruined Steve Mason and threw Ken Hitchcock under the bus to appease him. THAT's what's wrong with the franchise over there.

The context is important, because there are owners, stakeholders, gms all vying to get a return on their investment, sure getting number one picks is going to improve your team, but it's not a business model followed by anybody, except the oilers now and Dean Lombardi did a heck of job completing the only true re-build in the last 20 years.

I talked about Lombardi when the rebuild was just beginning. Folks came in and said (they haven't won anything yet) and now they've won...

Go figure, rebuilding worked for them.

Sucking =/= re-building. In order to prove re-building works, you should provide real examples where it actually took place. I'm not disagreeing that it can work and or even has worked, but it's certainly not the only recipe. You know what works without a doubt, having good players.

You're right sucking doesn't necessarily mean rebuilding. The Leafs are proof of that.

A rebuild means trading for picks and prospects. It means drafting as high as possible and it means not sacrificing the future for the present. In many cases teams have tried to deal for the present and they still sucked and still got high picks... those are unintentional rebuilds. But they are rebuilds nontheless.

High picks result in (on average) better players. The higher the better. If you have a high pick and hold onto him, you're rebuilding. If you don't you're either a contender or you're the Leafs.

Top picks generate superstars and superstars generate cups. It only makes sense to try to get as many superstars as you can.

The Red Wings, the epitome of success has been trading picks and prospects for 15 years and haven't resulted in rebuilding during that time. I suppose you'll throw out that Yzerman was a top pick, I'm not sure how that matters in 2013, but whatever. Drafting is a key component to winning, it's not the only way.

I won't bother with the Yzerman years. We'll just focus on the latest team to win the cup which would not be a traditional rebuild. (We could talk about how that winning culture started with a rebuld but for this discussion we'll skip it) Even there their best three players were drafted.

The problem with that Wings cup winning team is that it can't be emulated.

Look, I love the idea of getting superstars in the 3rd and 4th round like the Wings did but its just not realistic. No other team has been able to consistently draft superstars the way they did in the later rounds and there's no realistic way to expect us to be able to do it. If we could, I'd be all for it. I mean drafting Lidstrom (arguably a top six blueliner of all time) in the 3rd or 4th round or wherever he went... that's crazy. And the Wings were extremely lucky with that pick. If they'd have known how good he was you think they would've left him out there? No.

Sometimes you get lucky. But you can't plan for luck, you can only take advantage of it when it comes.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Fine, change Detroit to the NJD. There is more than I one way to skin a cat.

Are you suggesting New Jersey wasn't a rebuild?

I've posted this a few times over the years. I posted it back in 2007 when I suggested that we should deal Koivu and Souray and company (and of course we didn't and went nowhere)

Here are the Multi-cup winners since the advent of the modenr draft:

Montreal (1970s) 3 top 4 picks in four years. Including two number ones.
Key picks: Lafleur number one. Shutt number four.

Islanders (1980s) 3 straight years with top four picks including two number ones.
Key picks: Potvin number one.

Oilers (1980s) Difficult to assess because they were a WHL team. They had Gretzky (would've been no. 1) and a team before the draft. Afterwards:
Key picks: Coffey 6th. Fuhr 8th.

Pittsburgh (1990s) 3 straight years with top 5 picks. 6 top five picks in 7 years.
Key picks: Lemieux number one. Jagr number five. Pittsburgh went on to win a cup with another rebuild years later.

New Jersey (1990s) 7 out of 10 years with top ten picks. Including 4 straight years with top 6 picks. In that span they had 5 top five picks.
Key picks: Niedermeyer, Muller, Maclean, Guerin, Shanahan... all top five. Shanahan lost in the Stevens fiasco.

Quebec/Colorado 5 straight years with a top 5 pick including 3 straight number ones. Included in that span: 7 straight years of top ten picks.
Key picks: Sundin, Lindros... number one. Many of these picks were dealt off for other prospects including Forsberg (6th). And later, Roy.

Detroit 5 top ten picks in seven years including 3 top five picks and a number one. They also had two 11th overall picks in that span.
Key picks: Yzerman number four. Primeau number 3. Primeau dealt for Shanahan. The Wings went on to win a cup after this post and it didn't include rebuild picks.

Montreal 1980s The only multi cup winning team that was not a rebuild. Montreal drafted Patrick Roy in the 2nd round and he lead the team to 2 cups. Peter Svoboda was a top five pick but not integral to the team's success.


And these are just the multi cup winners. If we include cup winners almost all before the lockout had top picks leading the way. Since the latest lockout we've seen 4 out of 7 rebuilding teams win cups. Even if it were only 50% of the time though (and it's been far better than that) it's still a repeatable strategy.

 

[Sorinth]

You might want to check your calculator.

Carolina had Staal (2nd overall) leading the way
Pens and Blackhawks.
The Kings were absolutely a rebuild (Doughty, Kopitar)

One top pick doesn't mean you rebuilt. Even when you try for the playoffs every year like we have you will still get some top picks because sometimes we will fail and get 10th, sometimes we'll fail spectacularly like last year. That doesn't make us a rebuild

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

One top pick doesn't mean you rebuilt. Even when you try for the playoffs every year like we have you will still get some top picks because sometimes we will fail and get 10th, sometimes we'll fail spectacularly like last year. That doesn't make us a rebuild

The purpose of rebuilding is what?

To find superstars right? To win cups right? The whole point is to find players who are good enough to lead you to a cup. Sometimes a team will have three top five picks and get one superstar out of it. Look at the Dead Things. They drafted high for years but it only netted them Yzerman until much later with Primeau. Other times a team can do it quickly Dallas (Minnesota) did this with Modano for example.

Up until Price in 2005 (which was a once in a lifetime lottery pick) we hadn't drafted top 5 in 20 years. And coincidentally we hadn't had a top ten scorer in 30 years or a cup since Roy... there's a correlation there man.

Superstars win cups. Without them you're going to have a seriously hard time winning one. The Canes don't win without Staal. He didn't just happen to be on that team the way Svoboda was, he lead the team to victory. And they don't get him without drafting high.

Fortunately for us, we've started down this path ourselves. Yeah, it was unintentional but at least we've got a potential superstar to go with Price. We've needed one forever and adding more picks and prospects is only going to help.

You think it's coinicdence that Malkin and Crosby were on cup winning teams? Was it coinicidence that Yzerman won the Conn Smythe for the Wings? Those superstars lead their teams to cups. No they can't do it by themselves but without them it becomes very difficult to win. Most cup winning teams have multiple superstars on them. The more you have, the better off you are.

 

[ECWHSWI]

every single team in the league get a top 5 pick at some point (we had two against the Leafs Saturday).

from worst to best, ALL OF THEM have top 5 picks...


once people get that trough their head, they may realize how Pejorative Slured it is to claim that top 5 picks are needed in order to win the SC...