So... about the tank.

[HockeyinHD]

I was afraid of this. My biggest problem with the tank, under almost any application of the general strategies in any tank, is that it's a process that once begun it often never actually ends. The team just sucks forever, with a few sprinkled in years of decent play here and there. The franchise becomes one that always plays for the season 3 years from now.

Detroit is entering at least the third year of outright tankology and their fourth of just sucking... and I gotta say, it doesn't exactly feel like it's anywhere close to being done. I've lost much of my interest in following the day to day transactions because, really, it's not like any of them matter that much. 90% of those players aren't going to be here when (if?) the team is good.

I still watch many to most of the games, and I probably watch more hockey overall than ever... it's just that the Wings make up maybe 20-25% of that pie instead of 50%+ like they used to when the outcomes of the games mattered in a positive sense.

Yzerman coming back was nice, though.

So, questions.

1) How about you guys? I have no idea who is here now that was here substantially pre-tank, but for that group, how're things? Are you becoming used to the Wings being awful? What's teh viewing experience like for you all? Is it game watching, or occasional standings watching?

2) What's the general feeling on the timeline? IMO, we're going to be talking about how Larkin provides steady veteran influence before we're talking about anticipated playoff success, but 95 wins in 3 years has made me bitter regarding the teams prospects, literally and figuratively.

3) Speaking of timelines, what kind of one does Yzerman have before the rumblings start? I think it was smart to bring him in when they did, as this probably extends that grace period up through the time the franchise actually tries to win. I think that may have somewhat to do with whether we start seeing some actual rewards from the tanking, though. If the Wings just keep sucking and there's no infusion of good young players, that might change the algebra a little.

4) Lastly, if you could re-live the past 3-4 years and have a team going 1 or 2 rounds deep instead of being well out of everything by Christmas, how many of the prospects the team got via the tank would you relinquish?

Click to read more...

 

[Hammettf2b]

I think this will be the last year of bottoming out. We only get better from here as the older vets' contracts expire and or management moves certain contracts.

 

[marcmadsen]

I think this will be the last year of bottoming out. We only get better from here as the older vets' contracts expire and or management moves certain contracts.

I agree...or at least partially. I'm not convinced the blue line will be that much improved next year in the sense that, although more young D will have been phased in, they'll all still be green. So, I don't imagine the wings being out of the lower third of the league next year, but I don't see them being bottom 3 like I probably do this year

 

[ThankGord]

Personally I find the rebuilding process interesting and see it as inevitable, so I've enjoyed it to an extent (the scouting, drafting, and asset management). Obviously not as much fun to watch as winning a cup though. I'd say this is the last "tank" year and while we might not make the playoffs next year either, we'll at least be on an upward trajectory.

It'll be very interesting to watch what Yzerman does with the roster over the course of the next year once he feels he's familiar enough with our players and prospects.

 

[Solarion]

1) Prospect watching more than anything else. I know what guys like Green, Dayley, Ericsson bring, but when Hronek, Cholowski, Nemeth, Bowey are out there, I'm watching them. Same is true for new forward prospects, though it's still the defense that's a tire fire.

2) I believe this is the last year of complete suck-age. Yzerman himself has hinted at a two year timeline for turning things around, to say nothing of the fact that he's been signing plugs to 2x deals.

3) As stated above Yzerman seems to think 2 years is enough. That will change if there are some big acquisitions/departures, but two years is reasonable imo. If the team can at least consistently be in the running for a wildcard spot in a couple years, I'll consider that a win. The worst contracts(at least on the backend) are gone end of this season anyway(Ericsson/Daley).

4) That's tough as it's a hypothetical. I'd not change either of the last two drafts. Hronek, Seider, and Veleno are the prizes to my mind, though I like McIsaac, Cholowski, and Zadina as well. Giving up any of those guys to get booted in the first round again wouldn't work for me.

 

[Ricelund]

I still wouldn't call this a "tank". Holland was making additions to keep the team afloat (Green, Nielsen, Daley, Richards, etc.) over the past few years. The lack of talent eventually caught up with them. It's just not realistic to continue making the playoffs every year.

I don't watch games nearly as often as I used to.

I do think there's a chance one or two of the complementary guys (AA, Mantha, Bertuzzi) churn out (like Nyquist and Tatar) before they ice a contender again. They're a long way off.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I was afraid of this. My biggest problem with the tank, under almost any application of the general strategies in any tank, is that it's a process that once begun it often never actually ends. The team just sucks forever, with a few sprinkled in years of decent play here and there. The franchise becomes one that always plays for the season 3 years from now.

Detroit is entering at least the third year of outright tankology and their fourth of just sucking... and I gotta say, it doesn't exactly feel like it's anywhere close to being done. I've lost much of my interest in following the day to day transactions because, really, it's not like any of them matter that much. 90% of those players aren't going to be here when (if?) the team is good.

I still watch many to most of the games, and I probably watch more hockey overall than ever... it's just that the Wings make up maybe 20-25% of that pie instead of 50%+ like they used to when the outcomes of the games mattered in a positive sense.

Yzerman coming back was nice, though.

So, questions.

1) How about you guys? I have no idea who is here now that was here substantially pre-tank, but for that group, how're things? Are you becoming used to the Wings being awful? What's teh viewing experience like for you all? Is it game watching, or occasional standings watching?

2) What's the general feeling on the timeline? IMO, we're going to be talking about how Larkin provides steady veteran influence before we're talking about anticipated playoff success, but 95 wins in 3 years has made me bitter regarding the teams prospects, literally and figuratively.

3) Speaking of timelines, what kind of one does Yzerman have before the rumblings start? I think it was smart to bring him in when they did, as this probably extends that grace period up through the time the franchise actually tries to win. I think that may have somewhat to do with whether we start seeing some actual rewards from the tanking, though. If the Wings just keep sucking and there's no infusion of good young players, that might change the algebra a little.

4) Lastly, if you could re-live the past 3-4 years and have a team going 1 or 2 rounds deep instead of being well out of everything by Christmas, how many of the prospects the team got via the tank would you relinquish?

1) I have not had cable until this year (for about a decade). I'll start watching them again because it's available. But I still like watching. They're still playing hockey and hockey is awesome.

2) Timelines are kinda bunk. You judge it based off of progress, not some arbitrary "we're not good by 2021, we riot!" standard. The Wings are getting players in place who are making it hard to play against them. As long as they keep improving, the "competitiveness" of the team will work itself out. If you want to toss a timeline on it though, they've got to trending to make the playoffs in about two years. They can't still be in the wilderness when Larkin's contract is coming to an end. It's too good a value to waste with a non-competitive team.

3) I'll repeat #2 here. Any guy who says he's got a 3-5 year plan is trying to ensure his job security for 3-5 years. Morons will be calling for Yzerman's head this year. Some people will be stumping for him to be here forever even if we finished last the next six years. It comes down to the progress of the roster moreso than some arbitrary timeframe. Again, you want numbers, I'd say if the Wings aren't markedly better in 2-3 years, people will grumble in force. However, I don't agree with that as the barometer. Same deal with Harbaugh at U-M. People want him fired because "BLERG IT'S YEAR 5, HOW HASN'T HE WON A TITLE YET!?" If you want to grumble about it in a couple years because the Wings are still doing things like landing Adam Erne and thinking he's going to be a big piece or signing the 2022 equivalent of Matt Niskanen, then so be it.

4) Probably a good number of them? Because the whole point of it is if you're there and you can go 2 rounds deep, the nature of the playoffs means that you can trip yourself into a title (see St. Louis 2018-2019). The Wings had the issue because from 2014 on, they were getting jackhammered in the first round. They were first round jokes. If you can win a playoff series, you can make it through the whole magilla with luck. I mean, **** look at 2017's draft. Detroit already surrendered half their picks by non-tendering them. And realistically, who are you X'ing out because of the thing? Any of our firsts? Any extra picks from trading veterans because we're out of it? Because realistically, guys like Mantha, Bertuzzi, Veleno, Cholowski, Hronek, Larkin, and Svechnikov have literally nothing to do with tanking. Bertuzzi was an extra pick from trading back to get Mantha. Cholowski and Hronek happened because Datsyuk's contract needed to go more than the Wings trying to suck. Larkin and Svechnikov were 15 and 19OAs. So, giving up Rasmussen, Zadina, and Seider? I mean, if it made them an okay challenger in being a 2 round team, I could see it.

 

[TheOtherOne]

It is harder to watch games with enjoyment if I'm honest. That's partly because I have a toddler who takes up 110% of my free time. But it's also partly because it gets boring when nobody is competent to set up nice extended plays and I'm just watching constant puck retrieval with some AA breakaways in between.

But I have always been optimistic in a weird way. My belief is that the league is even more of a crapshoot than everyone else thinks. Sure a few teams are Edmonton or Ottawa or Arizona, but beyond that I really feel like anyone can contend unpredictably. So maybe I'm stupid but I think we could win a Cup next year.

Probably not this year. But next. Maybe.

But yea I think you just need the right combination of everyone overperforming by just enough at just the right time, and getting comfortable and confident with each other and with their system. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it WILL happen. I'm not even saying it's likely to happen. I'm just saying I honestly believe it CAN happen. I think there are too many unknowns between now and 1 year from now. So yea I guess I'm hoping for contention a lot earlier than you are.

Also I've decided to jump on the Seider train for somewhat arbitrary reasons. I hope he doesn't let me down!

 

[dangledangledeke]

1. I watch mostly for the progress of the youngish guys on the roster. Larkin, Mantha, AA, Hronek, Cholo, Bert. It's not fun hockey to watch for 70% of the game but you get moments of excitement. The only standings watching I do is hoping we have the best odds to get that lottery pick. A few of these guys will most likely be in their 30s when we are a true contender.

2. Yzerman has preached patience, something Holland wasn't exactly fond of. I expect the timeline to be longer than most here think it will be, aside from some massive luck in the draft and free agency.

3. I hope and believe Yzerman ignores most of the rumbling that may happen if we aren't a contender in 3 years, that just isn't realistic. We are completely devoid of star players and it's possible but unlikely we have one in our system. This will take time and patience. What he has shown so far is an ability to build out our formerly crippled front office with some amazing people. That's the first step in the right direction. I assume he will look more at player personal this upcoming season and start making minor tweaks there.

4. If you are a fan of Stanley cups, this would be the wrong approach. You can't plug holes on a sinking ship forever. This exact approach was attempted and failed by Ken Holland. We have a direct example of it. Lets do it the right way now.

 

[Flowah]

You called that a tank? That is a god awful tank job.

5 teams ahead of us in 2017, 4 in 2018, 3 in 2019. We're not even bottom 3 any of those years. That's not much of a tank.

And how many stop-gap veterans did we sign in that time? We just kept on doing it. We did worse and worse and worse. But that was more a function of guys like Datsyuk leaving, then Zetterberg, along with Kronwall's clear decline.

4) Lastly, if you could re-live the past 3-4 years and have a team going 1 or 2 rounds deep instead of being well out of everything by Christmas, how many of the prospects the team got via the tank would you relinquish?

If those are my only choices I'd take some playoffs.

But it's a false dichotomy. There's another choice. Fully embrace the tank instead of dipping one toe into the tank river. I'm talking 3 consecutive bottom 3 finishes. Give yourself an actual shot at a top3 pick 3 years in a row. Hughes, Kakko, Dahlin, Heiskanen, Kotkaniemi, Svechnikov. There was some real good talent in those top 3 spots. How many of them would instantly be our top prospect upon selection?

Last draft we had under a 30% chance of picking top3. Under 21% chance in 2017's draft. We never gave ourselves a chance.

Also what do you mean "well out of everything by Christmas?" We're not mathematically eliminated. And as non-tankers love to say "anything is possible." So what if we're a long shot to make the playoffs by Christmas. Until we're 100% eliminated, anything is possible and that's fun! Just like when we sneak into the playoffs with a <1% shot of winning the cup! Anything is possible!

Oh I guess you guys don't really believe that, do you? Yeah I don't either.

 

[griffs]

#1 My viewing habits have changed dramatically the last few years. I used to watch every game live when I was not at a Griffins game. Now I only make it a point to watch only if someone I like is making their debut otherwise I will have the game on in the background while I do other stuff if I remember that there is a game.
#2 1 more year at the very bottom and then a gradual climb to average. A little lottery luck could change things fast.
#3 Yzerman has a lot of good will so I would imagine it will be 3-4 years before any rumblings.
#4 Not really any as this would have led Holland to believe we were contenders and he would have signed more plugs.

 

[ArGarBarGar]

If anything, the last season of Holland's time here was more along the lines of "we understand we are rebuilding but we aren't just selling everyone" and not outright tanking. Last season was more of a tank but we still had Nyquist for most of the year and still have Howard who does well enough as a goaltender to earn a few wins for the team based on his presence.

1. I am of the opinion the team stinks, and would have still stunk if we tried to sign free agents and not look to "rebuild". The team would just stink a certain degree less and would be playoff fodder for a few seasons at the very least. And of course since the team is bad it isn't as entertaining to watch. I don't really NEED to have the Wings be good for me to entertain myself in general.

2. There is no timeline, there is a point when the team has enough pieces that Yzerman feels he can start to build through trades+free agency and focus on using the core pieces we have to build a contender. Right now the team isn't there, yet. They may be depending on how the prospects pan out that are already in the system, but it is presumptuous to assume that is the case.

3. I give Yzerman at least 5 seasons before there is discussion of him needing to be canned. If he can make progress he will have job security for basically as long as he wants. The biggest question will be how his draft picks work out and what moves he makes. Since he is slow-playing it, we don't have much to judge him on just yet.

4. None. I would prefer to take the guys taken higher than not. I'm not even sure what pieces you would add that would not only get the team competitive enough to make the second round (couldn't do that with both Datsyuk and Zetterberg since 2013), but also not completely keep the team from being able to add pieces to compliment guys like Larkin, AA, Mantha, which isn't guaranteed.

 

[HisNoodliness]

1. I was a big proponent of tanking pre-tank. Honestly I'm mostly worried that we've stuck to half measures too much by not actually tanking. We needed to start the process earlier and more extremely to maximize our chances of avoiding the cycle of perpetual mediocrity, but that may be what we're getting. I'm used to watching them suck and I mind it less than 2012-16.

2. Either our prospects become great and then we're likely on a timeline around: 2019-20:garbage, 20-21: garbage/bad, 21-22: turn around, 22+ trying to have real success.
Or our current set of prospects isn't going to be good enough and we're looking at 5+years and another rebuild.

3. If we're still this bad in 2021-22 I think Yzerman's seat starts to warm.

4. None. It horrifies me that anyone might want that. I don't enjoy watching the Wings lose in the first round anymore than watching them bottom out. Bottoming out can actually be more fun as I find those teams are sometimes willing to sacrifice defense for excitement, and generally have fun to watch, young talent. Mediocre teams trying to steal wins are by far the most boring IMO.

 

[Ghost of Ethan Hunt]

I think SY will be Pres/GM for a long time 10-15 yrs. Worst case scenario is we still stink in 5 yrs, then Maybe he'd be relieved of GM duties & still be Pres. or at minimum Sr. Exec. VP.

 

[mikerooooose]

We're moving in the right direction. With the new players and Yzerman in control, I'm excited to watch this year.

Hopefully the lottery is good to us this year.

 

[Run the Jewels]

I was afraid of this. My biggest problem with the tank, under almost any application of the general strategies in any tank, is that it's a process that once begun it often never actually ends. The team just sucks forever, with a few sprinkled in years of decent play here and there. The franchise becomes one that always plays for the season 3 years from now.

Detroit is entering at least the third year of outright tankology and their fourth of just sucking... and I gotta say, it doesn't exactly feel like it's anywhere close to being done. I've lost much of my interest in following the day to day transactions because, really, it's not like any of them matter that much. 90% of those players aren't going to be here when (if?) the team is good.

I still watch many to most of the games, and I probably watch more hockey overall than ever... it's just that the Wings make up maybe 20-25% of that pie instead of 50%+ like they used to when the outcomes of the games mattered in a positive sense.

Yzerman coming back was nice, though.

So, questions.

1) How about you guys? I have no idea who is here now that was here substantially pre-tank, but for that group, how're things? Are you becoming used to the Wings being awful? What's teh viewing experience like for you all? Is it game watching, or occasional standings watching?

2) What's the general feeling on the timeline? IMO, we're going to be talking about how Larkin provides steady veteran influence before we're talking about anticipated playoff success, but 95 wins in 3 years has made me bitter regarding the teams prospects, literally and figuratively.

3) Speaking of timelines, what kind of one does Yzerman have before the rumblings start? I think it was smart to bring him in when they did, as this probably extends that grace period up through the time the franchise actually tries to win. I think that may have somewhat to do with whether we start seeing some actual rewards from the tanking, though. If the Wings just keep sucking and there's no infusion of good young players, that might change the algebra a little.

4) Lastly, if you could re-live the past 3-4 years and have a team going 1 or 2 rounds deep instead of being well out of everything by Christmas, how many of the prospects the team got via the tank would you relinquish?

Well Ken Holland was never tanking. He talked wistfully about making the playoffs and he always put together a roster he hoped would make the playoffs. Alas, it didn't quite work out.

If anything, Chris Ilitch signaled he was ready to tank when he removed Holland as GM and replaced him with Yzerman. Yzerman made it clear that this is going to take time. So the tank officially became a thing during Yzerman's press conference announcing him as GM.

1.I've been here since 2006 so I've seen the absurdly great and the gawd awful. It's been obvious since Babs left that this franchise was headed down this path. The Red Wings have been mediocre or worse for 7 straight years. I am never going to consider being the 15th or 16th best team in the league some sort of bellweather for a great season. So yay, it took us a half dozen years to figure out we needed a new core to become good again! IMO that's a big part of the reason we moved on from Holland. Now the hard work begins!

2. As I mentioned before, the tank is only really becoming a thing this season. It is hampered by our mediocre drafting. We have only traded one first round pick in the past decade in order to re-acquire Kyle Quincey! All of those first round draft picks have resulted in one great player in Larkin and decent NHL'ers or worse, depending on how you rate Anthony Mantha. I'm not sure how else to view Yzerman cleaning out the NA scouting department. It certainly fits in line with how I've rated our NA drafting over the past 15 or so years under Holland. If we're lucky we can be where the Rangers are right now in <5 years. They have the #1 prospect pool according to Pronman, just got an elite talent in Kakko and signed Trouba. So that requires excellent drafting, a little lotto luck, and hitting on a big free agent fish.

3. I will not criticize Yzerman for the first 5 years. Of course he could do something I fully disagree with and think is absolutely crazy, but I will cross that bridge if/when I get there.

4. LOL. What a question. How many of the guys we drafted under Holland would you give up to get that playoff appearance Holland wanted above all else, yet couldn't achieve? A better question is where would we be right now if Holland stepped aside when Mike Ilitch asked him to do so in order for Yzerman to become GM before he left for Tampa? If you watch a lot of NHL hockey you probably have a good idea of how much fun the Bolts are to watch. Yes, they have their playoff demons, but that's a team that is entertaining as hell to watch, and they are still firmly in their window and still have a nice pool of prospects they are developing. I understand your desire to live in the past, but I am eager to see if Yzerman can build a beast in Detroit like he built in Tampa. And I'm willing to follow the journey for five years and see where it gets us.

 

[Lampedampe]

1) I watch way less hockey nowadays, I frankly don't find it appealing to stay up until 4am to watch the current iteration of the team (I'm from Sweden). I think I caught something like 15 games last season. Whenever I do watch it's mostly to see how the young guys are doing and in that sense I really enjoyed watching Larkin this season, Hronek gave me hope aswell.

2) If they continue to pick between 5-10 then we're in for a long a grindy tank, atleast 3 years without a play-off appearance at minimum. If they pick between 1-2#oa next year and add players through trade or free agency like a Krug for example, then we might see the wings atleast make it out of the bottom 10 as soon as next season, things can change fast with luck.

3) Depends, I don't have a timeline. If he makes bad moves that prove to be detrimental to the teams progress then I'll start to question him.

4) Impossible to say.

 

[MBH]

I was afraid of this. My biggest problem with the tank, under almost any application of the general strategies in any tank, is that it's a process that once begun it often never actually ends. The team just sucks forever, with a few sprinkled in years of decent play here and there. The franchise becomes one that always plays for the season 3 years from now.

Detroit is entering at least the third year of outright tankology and their fourth of just sucking... and I gotta say, it doesn't exactly feel like it's anywhere close to being done. I've lost much of my interest in following the day to day transactions because, really, it's not like any of them matter that much. 90% of those players aren't going to be here when (if?) the team is good.

I still watch many to most of the games, and I probably watch more hockey overall than ever... it's just that the Wings make up maybe 20-25% of that pie instead of 50%+ like they used to when the outcomes of the games mattered in a positive sense.

Yzerman coming back was nice, though.

So, questions.

1) How about you guys? I have no idea who is here now that was here substantially pre-tank, but for that group, how're things? Are you becoming used to the Wings being awful? What's teh viewing experience like for you all? Is it game watching, or occasional standings watching?

2) What's the general feeling on the timeline? IMO, we're going to be talking about how Larkin provides steady veteran influence before we're talking about anticipated playoff success, but 95 wins in 3 years has made me bitter regarding the teams prospects, literally and figuratively.

3) Speaking of timelines, what kind of one does Yzerman have before the rumblings start? I think it was smart to bring him in when they did, as this probably extends that grace period up through the time the franchise actually tries to win. I think that may have somewhat to do with whether we start seeing some actual rewards from the tanking, though. If the Wings just keep sucking and there's no infusion of good young players, that might change the algebra a little.

4) Lastly, if you could re-live the past 3-4 years and have a team going 1 or 2 rounds deep instead of being well out of everything by Christmas, how many of the prospects the team got via the tank would you relinquish?

I'm getting a bit sick of the tank myself, even though I've wanted a rebuild for a long time.
I was advocating rebuilding on the fly as early as the 2010 loss. By the time Holland started talking "rebuild on the fly," there was no chance it work. A full rebuild was required.
But honestly, there's no guarantee a rebuild on the fly would have worked back in 2010.
For all of the lousy draft pick trades, prospect trades, playing-vets-over-kids decisions - it's hard to say it cost us the guy who took the torch from Lidstrom or Datsyuk or Zetterberg.

What kills me about Holland's last decade is this.
In 2007, Holland drafted Brendan Smith in round 1.
How old was Lidstrom? Chelios? The next year we add Stuart and Rafalski, two guys who weren't exactly young.
We were going to need replacements.
Yet from 08 to 17 - Holland drafted one defenseman in round 1.
Even after Lidstrom and Rafalski retired and Stuart was gone, just one defenseman in what? 5 years?

And why does that matter?
Because, generally, defensemen mature a bit slowly. They peak older.

So, our rebuild is backwards.
Let's say Seider, Hronek, Cholowski and McIsaac form a solid top four one day.
When do you think that might be?

Do you really anticipate a defense with a 25 year old Hronek and Cholo leading a 22 year old Seider and 23 year old McIsaac to glory? Or even close to it?
Can you think of any cup contending defense in recent memory with a 25U top 4?
I can't.

So, I'm thinking more about age 27 or 28 for Hronek. 25 for Sider. 26 for McIsaac. Maybe about then.

Problem is, that means AA and Mantha are what? 32-33? Larkin 30. Bertuzzi 31? Veleno and Zadina would be 26 or whatever.

Maybe that's not so bad. Maybe that's a nice mix.

But still, that's 7 years away.

That's why I can't help but wonder if Stevie Yzerman should have been in on PK Subban.
You get that top flight defenseman who plays big minutes while the kids are learning.

Then again, you could still do that with whoever hits the trade market next year (Don't tell me Krug).

So - 2025-26 is about the earliest I see this team competing for a playoff spot unless they jump the line by trading young guys for veterans.
I think Yzerman gets one down year before people get antsy. They can finish 30th this year with no consequence. But if they follow that up with another 30th place finish, fans will get sick of that shit.

The real hard part for Wings fans ... the ones who lived through 70s and 80s and the heartbreak of the early and mid90s ... might be coming to grips with the notion that it's over. We can't expect the Red Wings will EVER be that kind of team that EXPECTS to contend every year. Ilitch and Holland and company used to say Stanley Cup or bust. Or at least Final 4 or bust. And Wings fans lived that for more than a decade.

Those days are long gone. With the salary cap in place, there's no roadmap for returning to that.

 

[wingerdinger]

This club is still two years away from competing and as painful as that feels, it's the brutal truth that this club needed to go through this revival to make up for all of the contractual sins of the past. Fear of wallowing in a culture of losing is real, but I'd argue that the complacent, losing culture manifested in the dying seasons of the streak era. And only now are we returning to a winning culture, because we are finally willing to sacrifice now for the future.

I'm optimistic about this group of young players, I do feel by the end Kenny was doing a decent job drafting. We now have a very deep promising group of defensmen, which is the foundation of any winning org. Only concern are that defensmen always take longer to adjust at the NHL level. Leaving potentially too big of a gap between the core of good young forwards that we currently have up performing, and said blueliners.

We're short on the forward front but I feel we can always piece together a competitive group together on the fly as long as we have at least Larkin and Veleno down the middle. If we can get one of the top three forwards in this upcoming draft I'm very excited for our chances to develop into legitimate contenders.

 

[TheClap]

With good management a tank can work. It worked for great for Pittsburgh, Chicago. Toronto has built a consistent playoff team. Washington built a consistent contender behind their Ovechkin and Backstrom high picks and eventually got over the hump.

It's obviously failed for Edmonton, Buffalo, Phoenix, Ottawa, others.

Usually you can look at the front office and figure out pretty quickly why tanking failed on a case by case basis.

 

[TheMule93]

Tank wont end until we hit on another a bona fide star or two. Gonna have to get lucky with our draft picks, or get lucky with the lottery draw.

Larkin ended up as one. Need more.

 

[Ezekial]

I'm gonna watch ~75 regular season Red Wings games again this year, I enjoy watching Red Wings hockey more than any other hockey even when they're trash.

 

[Lil Sebastian Cossa]

I'm getting a bit sick of the tank myself, even though I've wanted a rebuild for a long time.
I was advocating rebuilding on the fly as early as the 2010 loss. By the time Holland started talking "rebuild on the fly," there was no chance it work. A full rebuild was required.
But honestly, there's no guarantee a rebuild on the fly would have worked back in 2010.
For all of the lousy draft pick trades, prospect trades, playing-vets-over-kids decisions - it's hard to say it cost us the guy who took the torch from Lidstrom or Datsyuk or Zetterberg.

What kills me about Holland's last decade is this.
In 2007, Holland drafted Brendan Smith in round 1.
How old was Lidstrom? Chelios? The next year we add Stuart and Rafalski, two guys who weren't exactly young.
We were going to need replacements.
Yet from 08 to 17 - Holland drafted one defenseman in round 1.
Even after Lidstrom and Rafalski retired and Stuart was gone, just one defenseman in what? 5 years?

And why does that matter?
Because, generally, defensemen mature a bit slowly. They peak older.

So, our rebuild is backwards.
Let's say Seider, Hronek, Cholowski and McIsaac form a solid top four one day.
When do you think that might be?

Do you really anticipate a defense with a 25 year old Hronek and Cholo leading a 22 year old Seider and 23 year old McIsaac to glory? Or even close to it?
Can you think of any cup contending defense in recent memory with a 25U top 4?
I can't.

So, I'm thinking more about age 27 or 28 for Hronek. 25 for Sider. 26 for McIsaac. Maybe about then.

Problem is, that means AA and Mantha are what? 32-33? Larkin 30. Bertuzzi 31? Veleno and Zadina would be 26 or whatever.

Maybe that's not so bad. Maybe that's a nice mix.

But still, that's 7 years away.

That's why I can't help but wonder if Stevie Yzerman should have been in on PK Subban.
You get that top flight defenseman who plays big minutes while the kids are learning.

Then again, you could still do that with whoever hits the trade market next year (Don't tell me Krug).

So - 2025-26 is about the earliest I see this team competing for a playoff spot unless they jump the line by trading young guys for veterans.
I think Yzerman gets one down year before people get antsy. They can finish 30th this year with no consequence. But if they follow that up with another 30th place finish, fans will get sick of that ****.

The real hard part for Wings fans ... the ones who lived through 70s and 80s and the heartbreak of the early and mid90s ... might be coming to grips with the notion that it's over. We can't expect the Red Wings will EVER be that kind of team that EXPECTS to contend every year. Ilitch and Holland and company used to say Stanley Cup or bust. Or at least Final 4 or bust. And Wings fans lived that for more than a decade.

Those days are long gone. With the salary cap in place, there's no roadmap for returning to that.

25-26 to compete for a playoff spot? **** you. If the Wings forward core is shaping up to be a contender, they will undoubtedly add something big on the back end. If this team isn't competing for a playoff spot by 20-21 (so next season), something is drastically wrong. You want to say 25-26 for being a strong contender for a Cup, that's a bit more reasonable an argument. I mean, by 2025-2026, Larkin is on his third deal, Abby is gone, AA and Mantha are either gone or at the end of their extensions they sign this next offseason.. If the team is literally just fighting for a playoff spot by 25-26, that means that they either had a CATASTROPHIC injury (like Larkin or Seider losing a leg) that set them back or Yzerman is long gone.

There is no need to be so negative on it. 7 years to just be fighting for a playoff spot (which would indicate not a lot of progress has been made in that time) is asinine. I literally have no clue how you can simultaneously be so high on some things and just abjectly dismissive of others. If AA is half the player you think he is and Veleno is half of what you think he is, those two plus Larkin and Hronek are a core that can push for a playoff spot. Then if Seider, Mantha, and Bertuzzi show out and keep getting better, I mean, you've got to start expecting playoffs.

 

[Flowah]

With good management a tank can work. It worked for great for Pittsburgh, Chicago. Toronto has built a consistent playoff team. Washington built a consistent contender behind their Ovechkin and Backstrom high picks and eventually got over the hump.

It's obviously failed for Edmonton, Buffalo, Phoenix, Ottawa, others.

Usually you can look at the front office and figure out pretty quickly why tanking failed on a case by case basis.

Edmonton is a special case on its own. Everyone around the league knows what a joke they've been for how long with all the bad decisions they made.

Ottawa and Arizona. When was the last time they spent to the cap? And that situation with Alfredson, Karlsson, Hoffman. What a dumpster fire Melnyk is.

The teams that tanked and didn't pan out into consistent playoff teams (or outright winners) are typically bad for completely different reasons from tanking. Absolutely incompetent management and ownership that is obvious even from the outside.

 

[odin1981]

We are nowhere near done with the tank. Expect another 4-5 years and that's if miraculously are current d prospects all hit.

Most successful rebuilds have taken in the 7-9 range.