Speculation: NHL Draft History (2008-Present) for Stanley Cup Final Teams

[Larkin2AA]

I hope you have a cup of coffee and something to snack on while digesting all of this lol, but I want to use this as something of use for us to compare to see where we are at during our rebuild. Fans have been up and down these last few weeks about the Wings winning and how it is damaging our ability to get the best draft pick as possible, some are even saying that it will keep us stuck in limbo for many years ahead.

This table can give us an idea of all the teams who have been in the Stanley Cup finals since 2008 and the notable players on their rosters that helped them get there. Most teams only have 1-2 players that they drafted on their team from the top 10, while others have more (i.e. most noticeably Pittsburgh). You will notice that a lot of other teams acquired talent from other teams who were also drafted in the top 10, or you'll find that a majority of the players that were of great help/leaders of the SCF teams were those players drafted outside the top 10.

So my question to everyone here is, do we think that we are on the right path with the players in our system now, that we could afford a pick outside the top 2 in this upcoming draft and still continue to build a solid Playoff/Stanley Cup contender in the next 3-5 years? Discuss.

Click to read more...

 

[Larkin2AA]

Here is a list of players from our team currently for guidance as well:

 

[Hen Kolland]

I'd be more interested if you were able to refine the year over year to top 3 picks, instead of top 10 (even though I can comb through it on my own), just because it reflects the debate that we have been making. Maybe like categories of TOP 3 and 4-10 side by side, just to isolate what the lottery has contributed vs what the other 7 top 10 picks have contributed.

 

[Larkin2AA]

I'd be more interested if you were able to refine the year over year to top 3 picks, instead of top 10 (even though I can comb through it on my own), just because it reflects the debate that we have been making. Maybe like categories of TOP 3 and 4-10 side by side, just to isolate what the lottery has contributed vs what the other 7 top 10 picks have contributed.

I mean, isn't the debate we are having whether or not a top 5 draft pick will help get us to the SCF, as compared to how many points Top 5 Prospect A has compared to B? I thought the debate was whether or not we need a top 5 player to be a team capable of a SCF run, not a top player that will put up large points and would be nice to have.

 

[Frk It]

I'd be more interested if you were able to refine the year over year to top 3 picks, instead of top 10 (even though I can comb through it on my own), just because it reflects the debate that we have been making. Maybe like categories of TOP 3 and 4-10 side by side, just to isolate what the lottery has contributed vs what the other 7 top 10 picks have contributed.

I made a thread with some data on this:
Crunching the Numbers: Why Re-Building is Harder than Ever

 

[Ezekial]

I was confused about Blake Wheeler for a little bit, then I remembered he was traded during that season and wasn't on their team in the playoffs.

 

[TheOtherOne]

Good post. I'm not going to argue with anyone at the moment, but I want to just add a few things that you can do whatever you want with. None of this is meant as criticism, it's just context.

1. This is not a very big sample size. 10 years means only a third of the league maximum (2/3 with runner-ups). You could go back further, but the NHL changes every year so it gets fuzzier the farther back you go.

2. If Nashville ('17) made it to runner-up, that means they could have won the Cup, given some lucky bounces, lucky calls, will of the hockey gods, in some alternate universe. Meaning it's possible to go all the way with 8th, 11th, 11th.

3. Those big 0s in '08 and '09 are a big source of pride for me. Winning Cups with low draft picks, to me, is a lot more impressive than doing it with lottery picks. As a biased DRW fan for life I'll say for that reason Pittsburgh's success in this era was a lot less impressive than DRW's. They won a few Cups, but they did it on the backs of the best players in the world who they were handed for free.
- I'll take any Cup I can get and be happy, but given the choice I'd rather win with what we have now than get a 1oa first to do it with, even if it is less likely.

 

[TheOtherOne]

oops, delete

 

[haulinbass]

One thing is for sure, almost all of those teams have a top 1 or 2 pick, maybe even a 3rd overall which in some drafts can be as good as the 2nd. Without those players they wouldn't likely be on this list because they wouldn't have won a cup. Most of the teams rosters is pretty much interchangeable around those couple key elite players.

Obviously we do know elite players can be found still almost anywhere in the draft, it's just extremely rare. D much more likely than forwards.

Basically this is a good example to prove how important it is to draft in the top 2. Once you get those couple key players you can then start adding Mantha's, AA's and Bertuzzi's around these guys with later picks in the draft.

 

[obey86]

One thing is for sure, almost all of those teams have a top 1 or 2 pick, maybe even a 3rd overall which in some drafts can be as good as the 2nd. Without those players they wouldn't likely be on this list because they wouldn't have won a cup. Most of the teams rosters is pretty much interchangeable around those couple key elite players.

Obviously we do know elite players can be found still almost anywhere in the draft, it's just extremely rare. D much more likely than forwards.

Basically this is a good example to prove how important it is to draft in the top 2. Once you get those couple key players you can then start adding Mantha's, AA's and Bertuzzi's around these guys with later picks in the draft.

So should the Red Wings have forfeited their draft picks instead of using them to draft players when they picked Bertuzzi, Mantha, etc....because they hadn't had a top 3 pick yet?

 

[haulinbass]

3. Those big 0s in '08 and '09 are a big source of pride for me. Winning Cups with low draft picks, to me, is a lot more impressive than doing it with lottery picks. As a biased DRW fan for life I'll say for that reason Pittsburgh's success in this era was a lot less impressive than DRW's. They won a few Cups, but they did it on the backs of the best players in the world who they were handed for free.
- I'll take any Cup I can get and be happy, but given the choice I'd rather win with what we have now than get a 1oa first to do it with, even if it is less likely.

Do you think we would have ever been in the position to win cups in 08 and 09 if we hadn't become this world class franchise from the pay-to-win years pre-cap? You don't think any of that success trickled down? Do you think Datsyuk and Zetterberg would have became what they were hadn't they had the opportunity to learn from hall-of-famers and be part of such an organization?

I would never discredit any teams success no matter what road they took to get there, I just thought it was off that you are sort of shitting on the idea of winning with lottery picks and completely ignoring the reality that made the Wings a dominate franchise.

 

[haulinbass]

So should the Red Wings have forfeited their draft picks instead of using them to draft player when they picked Bertuzzi, Mantha, etc....because they hadn't had a top 3 pick yet?

It is absolutely amazing how you could possibly try to shove such a ridiculous concept onto me. Yes, they should have went up and announced that instead of drafting players they are going to forfeit their picks.

Actually, I have been calling for a rebuild for 5 years. We would already very likely have atleast 1 maybe even couple top 2 picks on this roster. Do you deny that it would have been in our best interest to begin rebuilding correctly years ago? Now at this point, I would have made sure this team was broken down enough to not finish outside the bottom 3. Just like any team thats serious about the rebuild would do. Next year I would do the same, even if that met sending a young guy thats not a D or named Larkin down the road for a nice trade package.

 

[Hen Kolland]

One thing is for sure, almost all of those teams have a top 1 or 2 pick, maybe even a 3rd overall which in some drafts can be as good as the 2nd. Without those players they wouldn't likely be on this list because they wouldn't have won a cup. Most of the teams rosters is pretty much interchangeable around those couple key elite players.

Obviously we do know elite players can be found still almost anywhere in the draft, it's just extremely rare. D much more likely than forwards.

Basically this is a good example to prove how important it is to draft in the top 2. Once you get those couple key players you can then start adding Mantha's, AA's and Bertuzzi's around these guys with later picks in the draft.

The problem you have is you are confusing "importance" (which implies obligation) with "value". Nobody will debate the value of a top 2/3 pick, but you frame it in a way that reflects as it being a requirement, intentionally or not.

 

[obey86]

It is absolutely amazing how you could possibly try to shove such a ridiculous concept onto me. Yes, they should have went up and announced that instead of drafting players they are going to forfeit their picks.

Actually, I have been calling for a rebuild for 5 years. We would already very likely have atleast 1 maybe even couple top 2 picks on this roster. Do you deny that it would have been in our best interest to begin rebuilding correctly years ago? Now at this point, I would have made sure this team was broken down enough to not finish outside the bottom 3. Just like any team thats serious about the rebuild would do. Next year I would do the same, even if that met sending a young guy thats not a D or named Larkin down the road for a nice trade package.

You seemed to imply the only way to rebuild is to acquire a top 3 pick or two prior to drafting a Mantha or a Bertuzzi. I'm trying to understand how that would have been feasibly possible given the Red Wings situation. How could they have avoided drafting Mantha/Bertuzzi in 2013 when they had the ~20th pick or whatever after they nearly made it to the conference finals (1 win away) the season before.......to make your plan work? Draft a worse player that won't make the NHL so they aren't on the team now? I guess I don't understand. I asked a ridiculous question because it's a ridiculous premise.

Also, the Leafs drafted Kadri (#7), Rielly (#5), Nylander (#8), and Marner (#4) prior to acquiring their 1st top 3 pick (Matthews). Why could that sequence of events work for them, but not for the Red Wings? Is #9 (Rasmussen), #6 (Zadina), and then #~5ish (2019 pick) really that different than that the Leafs drafting positions prior to their #1 pick?

 

[TheOtherOne]

I just thought it was off that you are sort of ****ting on the idea of winning with lottery picks

No, I'm not. At all.

As I said before, I'm happy to win with lottery picks. I'm happy to win any way we can. I just said it's MORE impressive to win without lottery picks.

This is like those perennial arguments where someone says "Crosby is better than Ovechkin" and someone else interprets that as them saying Ovechkin sucks. A>B doesn't mean B is worthless. It just means A is better.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

Yes. I can deny that.

Look at Buffalo.
Look at Edmonton.

To tank for top picks, Detroit would have had to tear down their 2012 roster to be that bad. To do that, they would have had to excise almost all of their experience all at once. To do that, they'd be putting Franzen and Zetterberg on other rosters where they'd essentially be locking in the cap recapture without the way to mitigate it with LTIR.

And Jesus christ... the team has added in this winning streak

Jake Chelios
Martin Frk
Taro Hirose
Ryan Kuffner
Christoffer Ehn
Matt Puempel
Dylan McIlrath

The only guy who is a revelation and probably a plus player going forward is Hirose. The rest are AHL lifers or AAAA players. They traded Nyquist, they traded Jensen. Like half their roster is on the IR. They've done just about everything they can to be bad right now.

The forfeiting picks argument is ridiculous, but equally ridiculous is this "I'd have burned down this roster in 2013" nonsense. To get the team bad enough to compete for top picks, you'd be wheeling and dealing all sorts of picks and just hoping to god that the cap would work out. Also... what would anyone give you for broken down Datsyuk? For Zetterberg with a balky back and a recapture laden contract (that they would be hit with too)?

 

[izlez]

One thing is for sure, almost all of those teams have a top 1 or 2 pick, maybe even a 3rd overall which in some drafts can be as good as the 2nd. Without those players they wouldn't likely be on this list because they wouldn't have won a cup. Most of the teams rosters is pretty much interchangeable around those couple key elite players.

Obviously we do know elite players can be found still almost anywhere in the draft, it's just extremely rare. D much more likely than forwards.

Basically this is a good example to prove how important it is to draft in the top 2. Once you get those couple key players you can then start adding Mantha's, AA's and Bertuzzi's around these guys with later picks in the draft.

It's funny that we can look at this and come away with completely different conclusions...

Obviously we do know elite players can be found still almost anywhere in the draft, it's just extremely rare. D much more likely than forwards.

Kronwall (29th)
Chelios (40th)
Lidstrom (53rd)
Rafalski (N/A)
Letang (62nd)
Keith (54th)
Byfuglien (245th)
Chara (56th)
Burns (20th)
Vlasic (35th)
Josi (38th)
Subban (43rd)
Ekholm (102nd)
Carlson (27th)

 

[haulinbass]

You seemed to imply the only way to rebuild is to acquire a top 3 pick or two prior to drafting a Mantha or a Bertuzzi. I'm trying to understand how that would have been feasibly possible given the Red Wings situation. How could they have avoided drafting Mantha/Bertuzzi in 2013 when they had the ~20th pick or whatever after they nearly made it to the conference finals (1 win away) the season before.......to make your plan work? Draft a worse player that won't make the NHL so they aren't on the team now? I guess I don't understand. I asked a ridiculous question because it's a ridiculous premise.

Also, the Leafs drafted Kadri (#7), Rielly (#5), Nylander (#8), and Marner (#4) prior to acquiring their 1st top 3 pick (Matthews). Why could that sequence of events work for them, but not for the Red Wings? Is #9 (Rasmussen), #6 (Zadina), and then #~5ish (2019 pick) really that different than that the Leafs drafting positions prior to their #1 pick?

Both Nylander and Marners real rookie season was in the same year as Matthews rookie season. Pretty big difference there opposed to Mantha and AA both already being 24 years old and us still waiting to land a top pick in the future. Rielly is a D and just started hitting full stride over the last 2 seasons, basically the same time Matthews joined.

Personally, the first thing I would do with all of my assets in the scenario of a full rebuild is trade for picks (late 1sts, 2nds, etc) that I would then use to heavily target D with over the first couple seasons. Then I would cross my figures for their development to go well and do anything required to secure top lotto odds and try to land those franchise forwards. I would certainly keep a guy or two around like Kadri or Larkin. Toronto did an excellent job in this window you are referring to.

Again, if we started the rebuild 5 years ago. Mantha and Bertuzzi might have been perfect picks to compliment our team at this point. Since we didn't do that, I would possibly consider moving one of these players or keep them and do a better job of unloading the Greens and Vaneks.

I'm not sure how all of my basses aren't covered here? What more can I explain.

 

[Frk It]

So my question to everyone here is, do we think that we are on the right path with the players in our system now, that we could afford a pick outside the top 2 in this upcoming draft and still continue to build a solid Playoff/Stanley Cup contender in the next 3-5 years? Discuss.

Realistically speaking, no. The odds of (re)building a team without the use of any top 3 picks is just not good enough to bank on. We are going to need one eventually, it's just a matter of how long we fight it, or if we get some lottery luck.

 

[haulinbass]

Yes. I can deny that.

Look at Buffalo.
Look at Edmonton.

To tank for top picks, Detroit would have had to tear down their 2012 roster to be that bad. To do that, they would have had to excise almost all of their experience all at once. To do that, they'd be putting Franzen and Zetterberg on other rosters where they'd essentially be locking in the cap recapture without the way to mitigate it with LTIR.

And Jesus christ... the team has added in this winning streak

Jake Chelios
Martin Frk
Taro Hirose
Ryan Kuffner
Christoffer Ehn
Matt Puempel
Dylan McIlrath

The only guy who is a revelation and probably a plus player going forward is Hirose. The rest are AHL lifers or AAAA players. They traded Nyquist, they traded Jensen. Like half their roster is on the IR. They've done just about everything they can to be bad right now.

The forfeiting picks argument is ridiculous, but equally ridiculous is this "I'd have burned down this roster in 2013" nonsense. To get the team bad enough to compete for top picks, you'd be wheeling and dealing all sorts of picks and just hoping to god that the cap would work out. Also... what would anyone give you for broken down Datsyuk? For Zetterberg with a balky back and a recapture laden contract (that they would be hit with too)?

Edmonton has completely failed at drafting D, Edmonton has failed at putting depth around McDavid and Draisitl. Edmonton traded away Taylor Hall. Buffalo isn't that deep into the current rebuild attempt. They have 2 cornerstone pieces they need going forward. They just need depth now.

Nobody ever said there are any sure path to success. Nothing is 100%, especially when you do a horrible job at executing it. The reality is, full rebuilds are the most proven way to success. Is this how you guys evaluate stuff? Because sometimes things don't work out it must not be viable? How does this even make any sense to you people. Look at the chart at the top of this page. It is right there! 1-3rd overall picks leads to championships at a significantly higher rate than anything else.

???? Really

 

[TheGelatinousCube]

Brad "Tom Brady" Stuart was drafted 3rd overall and was a key contributor in 2008 and 2009, scoring three goals in the finals over those two years.

 

[haulinbass]

It's funny that we can look at this and come away with completely different conclusions...


Kronwall (29th)
Chelios (40th)
Lidstrom (53rd)
Rafalski (N/A)
Letang (62nd)
Keith (54th)
Byfuglien (245th)
Chara (56th)
Burns (20th)
Vlasic (35th)
Josi (38th)
Subban (43rd)
Ekholm (102nd)
Carlson (27th)

I literally said that D are much more likely than forwards to find. Do you need me to explain why that is as well? I mean I literally seem to have to draw out every single detail here for some people to see whats undeniable and right in front of them.

Never once did I ever say we need to tank to draft a D. We need to tank to draft a center. I have made that clear in many posts now. Can we still find a center outside top 2? Yes, just rare. My entire point is that our odds of success in the future will be much greater if we are doing everything possible now to draft as high as possible. Somehow people want to argue about this.

 

[izlez]

I literally said that D are much more likely than forwards to find.

I did read that backwards

 

[izlez]

Realistically speaking, no. The odds of (re)building a team without the use of any top 3 picks is just not good enough to bank on. We are going to need one eventually, it's just a matter of how long we fight it, or if we get some lottery luck.

When you realize that a 40 year old Marleau or a super young Van Riemsdyk/Seguin are far from elite and very replaceable, the results of this sample is right about 50/50.

 

[haulinbass]

I did read that backwards

All good.

Admittedly I am getting frustrated responding as I have dished out about way to many responses in a short period of time.

Sorry if my posts have become offending and the quality deteriorating as a result, not my intentions. Probably should just walk away now lol.

Just extremely passionate about hockey and want to see the Wings winning again someday. I believe Holland is doing everything he can to get this team to lose by rostering rookies every night. So I don't really blame him if we land a 7th this year. But it is frustrating to see fans wanting us to win these games and claiming it doesn't hurt our chances of success in the draft this year. What is scary is that our core of guys might be to good to lose again like this next year. The only problem is I don't think our current core is good enough to do much damage in the future. I would feel a lot better if atleast got the best player possible while we are this close to it.