Post-Game Talk: Somewhat entertaining at least!

[HockeyinHD]

i count about 10 guys who at their best wouldn't (too soon to tell on some players and some are past their prime now) the best player on their current wings team.

"If I removed just 7 of those 50 players selected from the pool (Ovechkin, Doughty, Crosby, Kane, Towes, Stamkos and Price), would getting any of the other 43 substantially change the nature of the Wings?"

Is there a difference between what you've said (which I mostly agree with, 10's a little to low) and what I said (which I also agree with)?

assuming the BS that those 7 you mentioned are the only elite players picked in top 5 between that period, then there are NO other elite players in the NHL, except maybe erik karlsson. what do you think the chances of landing erik karlsson are/were? probably heck of a lot less than 14%.

A) Do you think it is accurate to compare the odds of landing any elite player in the draft with landing one elite player via FA or trade?
B) Why would you think a list of elite players in the top 5 picks is implicit to a claim that those are the sum total of all elite players in the NHL?

 

[InjuredChoker]

"If I removed just 7 of those 50 players selected from the pool (Ovechkin, Doughty, Crosby, Kane, Towes, Stamkos and Price), would getting any of the other 43 substantially change the nature of the Wings?"

Is there a difference between what you've said (which I mostly agree with, 10's a little to low) and what I said (which I also agree with)?

yes.

A) Do you think it is accurate to compare the odds of landing any elite player in the draft with landing one elite player via FA or trade?
B) Why would you think a list of elite players in the top 5 picks is implicit to a claim that those are the sum total of all elite players in the NHL?

A) didn't you originally bring up the whole thing? like when you said

On the other hand, when an organization looks at draft patterns and sees in the best case a 14% chance at landing an elite player and a 50% chance there isn't even one there to land in a given year, it's not hard to suss out why they might think they'd have around that same type of chance to land an elite player via trade or FA

B) who are those other elite players in the NHL that weren't picked in the top 5 and are better than seguin, malkin, hedman etc.???

 

[obey86]

better add seguin, hedman, tavares, malkin, kessel and bäckström to that list of 7 players since all of them are better than at least one player on that list of 7 you made. malkin is better than 2 or 3 of them.

galchenyuk, hall have solid case too.

I believe we are talking about picking a player that will make a substantial difference to the Red Wings future. Just adding a Tavares, Kessel, or Hall gets the Red Wings back to the playoff bubble at best.

*Tavares has missed the playoffs 5 out of 8 years and has never made it past the 2nd round.
*Kessel's teams accomplished nothing until he was traded to a team with two superstar generational players.
*Hall has never even made the playoffs.

Adding those guys to the Red Wings is going to make them Stanley Cup contenders again? Yes, the Wings would be better with those players. And in 2 years the same people wanting to tank now would want to tank again in hopes the Wings get lucky and find a Crosby rather than a Taylor Hall.


Add most of the top 5 picks mentioned in the previous post and at best we're right back in the position (playoff bubble, not a true contender) where none of the tank crowd wants to be....are we not?

It's almost like constructing a competitive team involves singiifcantly more than tanking for a few great players and then everything turns around. Who woulda thunk it?

 

[InjuredChoker]

how many players are there that have been available in FA, trade market or later in the draft that are better than tavares, kessel or hall? and what are the chances we can find those players, without top5 picks?

and i'm not sure if many/any of those guys save for guys like crosby, malkin etc were so great in their rookie or in first couple of seasons that they'd immediately be so good that wings would be back in playoff bubble.

 

[Syckle78]

I didn't realize we only get to draft one year and that being block at an important position wouldn't make a substantial difference going forward. Suppose that changes things.

 

[Winger98]

It's all about how desperate you are to move a contract though. Do I see us winning 3 cups in the next couple of years and Larkin/Mantha getting 10 million dollar contracts? Not really. I think by the time our new core starts earning their big payday, guys like Kronner/Howard/Ericsson/Green will be gone, and guys like Abby/Helm/Glendening will be a smaller part of the total cap.

I don't really disagree with how long we'll likely go before a kid needs a massive deal (though we have $68m committed to next year and need to sign Tatar...how close will his contract alone take us to the cap ceiling unless it moves significantly?), just this idea that we'll just shuttle these deals off when/if they are inconvenient to us.

I never really saw the problem being something with re-signing our own guys, though. Part of it is opportunity cost. We haven't been drafting high, so we need to make up for that with quantity. People want to drag down the value of our guys when we talk of moving them, but guys like Helm, Quincey, etc. could have netted us at least extra picks in the first three rounds - something that comes in handy when we're having to rely more heavily on luck than being able to simply draft players with fewer shortcomings.

It also limits us in the trade market. Again, people have knocked Teravainen, but he'd be one of our better players. And all it cost Carolina was a 2nd, a 3rd, and taking on Bickell for two years. I would trade Helm for Bickell and Teravainen. And I know I'm probably spelling that name wrong. Oh well.

And I'm not even in the crash and burn camp. I'm all for taking the occasional shot in the dark with guys like Vanek, or can even see the justification in signing Nielsen (Z looked cooked last year, and we desperately needed someone to step into a top6 C spot assuming Z was having to be moved to wing). I think the balance we've had in weighing our moves with the present versus the future needs to be rethought a bit.

how many players are there that have been available in FA, trade market or later in the draft that are better than tavares, kessel or hall? and what are the chances we can find those players, without top5 picks?

and i'm not sure if many/any of those guys save for guys like crosby, malkin etc were so great in their rookie or in first couple of seasons that they'd immediately be so good that wings would be back in playoff bubble.

Here's a link from a few years ago. I know there have been similar, and more recent, looks at the draft on the boards, but I'm betting the numbers turn out the same. The short of it is that the chances of drafting a top end player are substantially better higher in the draft. And I really don't get using Hall, Kessel, and Taveras as arguments against drafting high. I don't even like Kessel but all of those guys would be significant adds for this club going forward.

 

[obey86]

how many players are there that have been available in FA, trade market or later in the draft that are better than tavares, kessel or hall? and what are the chances we can find those players, without top5 picks?

and i'm not sure if many/any of those guys save for guys like crosby, malkin etc were so great in their rookie or in first couple of seasons that they'd immediately be so good that wings would be back in playoff bubble.

How many top 5 draft picks didn't make an immediate impact/near immediate impact (1-2 years) yet their team still turned into a perennial cup contender (which is the goal here)?

2003: MAF, E. Staal, Horton, Zherdev, Vanek.
2004: Ovechkin, Malkin, Barker, Ladd, Wheeler.
2005: Crosby, Ryan, J. Johnson, Pouliot, Price.
2006: E. Johnson, J. Staal, Toews, Backstrom, Kessel.
2007: Kane, Van Riemsdyk, Turris, Hickey, Alzner.
2008: Stamkos, Doughty, Bogosian, Pietrangelo, L. Schenn.
2009: Tavares, Hedman, Duchesne, Kane, B. Schenn.
2010: Hall, Seguin, Gudbranson, Johansen, Niderreiter.
2011: Nugent-Hopkins, Landeskog, Huberdeau, Larsson, Strome.
2012: Yakupov, Murray, Galenchuk, Reinhart, Reilly.

I would argue the bold above are the only 7 players who's teams have turned into perrenial cup contenders....and they all had huge impacts in their draft or draft +1 season. So if the Wings draft a player top 5 and (as you said) he wasn't great his first season or two then the odds of him ever leading the Wings anywhere are slim to none.

I just think people need to temper their expectations when it comes to the affect the majority of these top 5 players have actually had on their teams chances of winning cups. Most of the teams above who have drafted these players have won less than the Red Wings have.

 

[obey86]

I didn't realize we only get to draft one year and that being block at an important position wouldn't make a substantial difference going forward. Suppose that changes things.

If you draft a player that truly makes a substantial difference he is either:
A) A superstar near immediately and in that case hurray for the Wings! (what are the odds the Wings draft a Crosby or Malkin? Very slim.) or
B) Not a superstar and just good enough to get the Wings back to the playoff bubble so people can call for tanking again.

 

[InjuredChoker]

I would argue the bold above are the only 7 players who's teams have turned into perrenial cup contenders

bit of a problem that there are no impact players like that drafted outside of top, no?

kopitar is one of the few but that team wouldn't be what it is without doughty.

can you or HiHD address this? how else are we going to find those elite players without drafting in top 5? chances fidning franchise changers in the top 5 aren't very good, as you said finding crosby or malkin in the top 5. chances finding them somewhere else other than top 5 are even worse. are we going to find our crosby/malkin/doughty in the trade/FA/drafting in the teens?

hedman has had bigger impact turning tampa into cup contender than stamkos has. hedman also wasn't a great, impact player until year 4.

malkin had not played an NHL game until it was his draft +2 year

toews didn't play in the NHL until his draft +1 year. it looked like this

64gp 24g 30a 54p

pretty good year for a rookie. not a huge impact year.

 

[obey86]

Here's a link from a few years ago. I know there have been similar, and more recent, looks at the draft on the boards, but I'm betting the numbers turn out the same. The short of it is that the chances of drafting a top end player are substantially better higher in the draft. And I really don't get using Hall, Kessel, and Taveras as arguments against drafting high. I don't even like Kessel but all of those guys would be significant adds for this club going forward.

Yes, just good enough to get us back to the playoff bubble and therefore no more chances at top picks/top players. I thought that's what everyone was trying to avoid?

The proof is in the pudding that those guys alone can't impact a team's Stanley Cup chances much. Tavares missed playoffs 5/8 seasons, Hall never made the playoffs, Kessel 1 playoff in Toronto I believe.

Is it somehow better to be annual playoff bubble team with Kessel than it is with Nyquist and Larkin?

 

[obey86]

bit of a problem that there are no impact players like that drafted outside of top, no?

kopitar is one of the few but that team wouldn't be what it is without doughty.

can you or HiHD address this? how else are we going to find those elite players without drafting in top 5? chances fidning franchise changers in the top 5 aren't very good, as you said finding crosby or malkin in the top 5. chances finding them somewhere else other than top 5 are even worse. are we going to find our crosby/malkin/doughty in the trade/FA/drafting in the teens?

Giroux
Karlsson
Benn
Keith
Subban
Weber
Josi
Gaudreau
Tarasenko
Burns
Panarin
Pavelski

Just a few off the top of my head.

Hell, look at the top 5 Norris finalists and their draft positions each of the past 5 years:
#2
#15
#20
3rd round
2nd round

#15
#2
2nd round
2nd round
2nd round

2nd round
3rd round
2nd round
#7
#4

2nd round
#7
3rd round
3rd round
3rd round

#15
2nd round
3rd round
#4
3rd round

There are plenty of impact players found later in the draft.

 

[InjuredChoker]

Giroux
Karlsson
Benn
Keith
Subban
Weber
Josi
Gaudreau
Tarasenko
Burns
Panarin
Pavelski

none of those players have led their team to perennial cup contenders (save for keith; which wouldn't have happened without kane and toews). burns and pavelski are probably closest but neither of them is the best player on his team. some of those have never been on teams that got past the 2nd round.

karlsson is the only one who is significantly better than the likes of hall/tavares/hedman/kessel.

impact players can be found later in the draft. but what are the chances the DRW find them, enough of them (1 isn't usually enough) and can develop into top contender without high picks?

 

[obey86]

bit of a problem that there are no impact players like that drafted outside of top, no?

kopitar is one of the few but that team wouldn't be what it is without doughty.

can you or HiHD address this? how else are we going to find those elite players without drafting in top 5? chances fidning franchise changers in the top 5 aren't very good, as you said finding crosby or malkin in the top 5. chances finding them somewhere else other than top 5 are even worse. are we going to find our crosby/malkin/doughty in the trade/FA/drafting in the teens?

hedman has had bigger impact turning tampa into cup contender than stamkos has. hedman also wasn't a great, impact player until year 4.

malkin had not played an NHL game until it was his draft +2 year

toews didn't play in the NHL until his draft +1 year. it looked like this



pretty good year for a rookie. not a huge impact year.

Don't get me wrong, I do think a Tavares could be an important piece for a Wings cup run and I do think it would be possible to draft him and then build the rest of the team with 15th or later picks if the Wings are a playoff bubble team from that point. But I do think they would just become a playoff bubble team if they drafted Tavares (which is what the tanking crowd hates) because the rest of their roster isn't as bad as someone like Buffalo (for example) who completely gutted everything to get to the top of the draft.

I don't think the strategy itself is wrong, I think the strategy has been poorly executed (no trades, poor drafting in the 1st round for a good 5 year stretch).

 

[obey86]

none of those players have led their team to perennial cup contenders. burns and pavelski are probably closest but neither of them is the best player on his team. some of those have never been on teams that got past the 2nd round.

karlsson is the only one who is significantly better than the likes of hall/tavares/hedman/kessel.

You seem to be misunderstanding me. I personally don't have a problem building around a Tavares or a Kessell and then trying to build the rest of the team from that point with later picks.

My whole point was that I just don't understand why the "you need top 5 picks to get talent!!!" crowd is ok with drafting a Tavares caliber player and likely returning to playoff bubble status shortly after if they don't think good players can ever be found outside of the top 5.

 

[Syckle78]

You seem to be misunderstanding me. I personally don't have a problem building around a Tavares or a Kessell and then trying to build the rest of the team from that point with later picks.

My whole point was that I just don't understand why the "you need top 5 picks to get talent!!!" crowd is ok with drafting a Tavares caliber player and likely returning to playoff bubble status shortly after if they don't think good players can ever be found outside of the top 5.

Nobody has ever said good players can't be found outside the top five.

 

[InjuredChoker]

You seem to be misunderstanding me. I personally don't have a problem building around a Tavares or a Kessell and then trying to build the rest of the team from that point with later picks.

My whole point was that I just don't understand why the "you need top 5 picks to get talent!!!" crowd is ok with drafting a Tavares caliber player and likely returning to playoff bubble status shortly after if they don't think good players can ever be found outside of the top 5.

i'm not pro tanking (for red wings right now, not yet) and i think good players can be found outside of top 5.

i think the chances finding good players and finding enough of those good players outside of top 5 are way, way smaller than it is in top 5.

disagree?

 

[obey86]

Nobody has ever said good players can't be found outside the top five.

then why do we need to tank?

 

[Syckle78]

If you draft a player that truly makes a substantial difference he is either:
A) A superstar near immediately and in that case hurray for the Wings! (what are the odds the Wings draft a Crosby or Malkin? Very slim.) or
B) Not a superstar and just good enough to get the Wings back to the playoff bubble so people can call for tanking again.

I wish I had a buzzer noise for every time someone that's anti-rebuild misrepresents an argument. Nooooooooobody would have a problem if the wings were a bubble team if the wings were rebuilding and were on the way up. Everything in context,laddie.

 

[Invictus12]

Excuse me for intruding but perhaps our problems don't stem from not playing the odds on getting 'top end talent', whatever the hell that is... One player never makes that big an impact. One player won't even get you to the playoffs. Plently of lone super stars failed to do so in the past so I'm not sure where this mentality even derives from.

As far as our forward group goes, our misfortunes currently lie in the fact that our once highly touted forwards seemed to have gone completely south. I don't know the reason for it but it is what it is. If Nyquist, Tatar, Sheahan didn't just went downhill as far as production goes, I'd say the future is really bright because we still have young guys such as Mantha and Larkin that just made the jump. If the former three can get their production go up like before and Larks with Mantha improve into atleast 75 percent of what we hope, we'd actually have a pretty potent forward group. Defence is a bit more concerning but with a good forward group, you're actually have a lot more options in making sensible trades.

Overall, really, I would hope this team can fix whatever it is that's going on with the players. Not sure it's the coaching but that's possibly a problem.

Whatever it is, I don't think Holland made a wrong move or anything like that as far as transition is going. Things just seem to have went wrong and I don't buy that it hangs on our lack of drafting in the early rounds. Our promising players just seem to have gone south. I would rather this teams management tried and identified why that is and fix it. I think the team would be fine going forward.

 

[Syckle78]

then why do we need to tank?

Because you have a better chance at getting elite young talent than any other strategy. Ya,know,what we've said a gajillion times. And it's rebuild not tank.

 

[Frk It]

You seem to be misunderstanding me. I personally don't have a problem building around a Tavares or a Kessell and then trying to build the rest of the team from that point with later picks.

My whole point was that I just don't understand why the "you need top 5 picks to get talent!!!" crowd is ok with drafting a Tavares caliber player and likely returning to playoff bubble status shortly after if they don't think good players can ever be found outside of the top 5.

Yeah, if you find a #1 center in the draft and nothing else you might not become a Cup contender.

Not sure anyone is saying that's what they want us to do.

And not sure why you're dogging Tavares
Tavares- .91 ppg
Toews- .86 ppg

It's not Tavares fault he doesn't have a better supporting cast.

 

[obey86]

i'm not pro tanking (for red wings right now, not yet) and i think good players can be found outside of top 5.

i think the chances finding good players and finding enough of those good players outside of top 5 are way, way smaller than it is in top 5.

disagree?

I definitely agree that you will likely get a better player top 5 than at #20. I just don't think you should go out of your way to draft top 5 by purposely tanking.

If it happens naturally like this year, sure no problem. And once the Wings draft a non franchise saving talent with their top 5 pick this coming draft and become a playoff bubble team again, I'm ok with building from there and not tanking to again get back into the top 5 for multiple years in a row.

I don't believe completely gutting the team and tanking is the right way to build a team.

 

[obey86]

Because you have a better chance at getting elite young talent than any other strategy. Ya,know,what we've said a gajillion times. And it's rebuild not tank.

Plenty of people have said Holland should have gutted the team and went for a top pick well prior to this season.

 

[Syckle78]

Plenty of people have said Holland should have gutted the team and went for a top pick well prior to this season.

Yea it's called rebuilding. It's what teams have done in sports since like forever when they recognize their window for competing has closed.

 

[obey86]

Yeah, if you find a #1 center in the draft and nothing else you might not become a Cup contender.

Not sure anyone is saying that's what they want us to do.

And not sure why you're dogging Tavares
Tavares- .91 ppg
Toews- .86 ppg

It's not Tavares fault he doesn't have a better supporting cast.

Ugh, im not dogging on Tavares and i'm certainly not blaming him. Would obviously love to have him on the team.

People have said numerous times we won't be able to find great players outside of the top 5 to replenish the talent on the team. For those people I'm asking....why would drafting Tavares top 5 and then returning to the playoff bubble with him change anything about our ability to upgrade the rest of the team and return to a championship contender?