Top 10 teams with the darkest future 2018

[itwasaforwardpass]

Weird the Islanders have more votes than the Rangers.

IMHO..

Islanders current roster>>>>Rangers current roster
Islanders current prospects>Rangers current prospects

Its because right now people are more focused on what the NYI just lost this offseason rather than what remains.

 

[Critical13]

Its because right now people are more focused on what the NYI just lost this offseason rather than what remains.

Agreed. They might be one of these teams we look back on and shake our heads at their ranking.

 

[Sstroh84]

Columbus: When Panarin leaves their offense will likely take a huge hit. They have Jones and Werenski on D which is awesome, but their forwards are all pretty underwhelming, though that’s not to say they don’t have some good pieces, just nothing that really stands out.

Just my opinion, don’t mean to offend any fans by it.

Not being offended, but just curious how you can reach this opinion.

Columbus is one of the youngest teams in the league and has made the playoffs each of the last two years losing to the eventual cup winner who came out of their same division. Glad you recognized the strength on the bank end with a Norris Trophy potential top pairing both under the age of 25. On offense all the discussion is around Panarin, who is a great player and a driver of the offense, but Cam Atkinson is a fine top line forward who can score 30+ goals per season. Pierre Luc Dubois showed high end potential this season and the bulk of the forwards are just starting to reach their potential. Josh Anderson, Oliver Bjorkstrand, and Alexander Wennberg are under 25 and have top 6 skills.

Putting one of the youngest teams in the league who has made back to back playoff appearances as one of the team with the worst futures is completely uninformed.

 

[Mrb1p]

Voted Anaheim, SJ, Pittsburgh, Chicago, LA, Minny, Calgary, Detroit and Vancouver.

Im looking five years down the road, Detroit and Vancouver are there to troll butthurt fans.

 

[Mrb1p]

Who didn't choose Habs and Sens? :thinking:

The Habs and Sens rebuild already started, both have deep prospect pools and the Habs likely havena top 5 pick next year, if the future is the next three years, ill agree with you, if its 5 or more, its not them.

 

[Mrb1p]

A year ago I guarantee Colorado is a Top 5 vote getter in this poll. Now they don't have a single vote to this point.

Goes to show it's hard to predict 5 years ahead (since it's often hard to predict a year ahead)

Its because people are stupid. You dont vote "bleakest future" on a team with Mackinnon, Rantanen, Makar, Timmins, Bowers, Landeskog, Duchene, etc.

These threads are for cores that are either 30 and older (Pittsburgh, Sj, STL, Washington, LA, ANA, Boston, Chicago) or teams that have some good pieces but are just never going to be good enough (Minny)

 

[Jtown]

Minnesota is my darkhorse for darkest future.

 

[HabsForHire]

The Habs and Sens rebuild already started, both have deep prospect pools and the Habs likely havena top 5 pick next year, if the future is the next three years, ill agree with you, if its 5 or more, its not them.

The term deep prospect pools and habs dont belong in the same sentence. Maybe after a few tank years that will change but kota and poehling are the only good prospects we have..

 

[Falco Lombardi]

Its because people are stupid. You dont vote "bleakest future" on a team with Mackinnon, Rantanen, Makar, Timmins, Bowers, Landeskog, Duchene, etc.

These threads are for cores that are either 30 and older (Pittsburgh, Sj, STL, Washington, LA, ANA, Boston, Chicago) or teams that have some good pieces but are just never going to be good enough (Minny)

Which Blues core member is 30+?

 

[lakai17]

9 teams.

Arizona - still young
Chicago - defence and goaltending
Dallas - No legit depth overall
Detroit - Zetterberg past his prime, young team developing
Montreal- Not enough depth.
NY Islanders- Young team
New York Rangers - A team attempting quick rebuild mode
Ottawa Senators-
Vancouver- No depth

 

[stl76]

Its because people are stupid. You dont vote "bleakest future" on a team with Mackinnon, Rantanen, Makar, Timmins, Bowers, Landeskog, Duchene, etc.

These threads are for cores that are either 30 and older (Pittsburgh, Sj, STL, Washington, LA, ANA, Boston, Chicago) or teams that have some good pieces but are just never going to be good enough (Minny)

Which Duchene is on Colorado's roster?

 

[Mrb1p]

Which Duchene is on Colorado's roster?

It was for last years roster.

The term deep prospect pools and habs dont belong in the same sentence. Maybe after a few tank years that will change but kota and poehling are the only good prospects we have..

If you really believe the only good prospect we have are Poehling and Kotkaniemi, you just need to be better informed. Theres plenty of info on the main habs board, read up.

Which Blues core member is 30+?

I admit I shouldnt have put them in that one. They are all primed, mostly.

 

[Algernop Kreider]

Did you read the post? Just curious.

It states that you are looking at success over the next 5 years. Teams like NYI, NYR and DET all have bright 10 year futures, but for the next 2-3, I expect them to be under 500. So much so that it will be hard to catch the mediocre teams who sat around 500 during that time, in the 5 year limit.

Also asked that you vote 10.

There is no such thing as a 10 year future. A given team might have 3 guys on their roster in 10 years that are currently in their organization, if they're lucky. Those few guys might be superstars that the entire core is built around for a decade, but even in that best case it's a completely different team from what we could envision now, and impossible to project that far into the future.


A lot of guys here are wildly underestimating the amount of turnover that happens over a 5 year period in the NHL.

 

[stl76]

It was for last years roster.

Ahhh missed that, my bad for not fully reading the post you were responding to.

Still, it would not have been stupid to consider Colorado as a team with a dark future last year IMO. The avs were coming off a historically bad season, lost the draft lottery, many people were beginning to doubt it MacKinnon would ever have a season like he just did, the cloud of trading Duchene was hanging over the team, they yet didn't have the pieces they received for Duchene like Girard/Bowers/Kamenev/OTT 1st, Sakic was being widely criticized, their defense was highly questionable, Timmins/Makar were less proven as prospects (tho still very good), etc.

Honestly, it would have been stupid to NOT have Colorado on a list of 10 teams with the darkest future last offseason. Their turn around this past season was as remarkable as it was unexpected.

 

[Mrb1p]

There is no such thing as a 10 year future. A given team might have 3 guys on their roster in 10 years that are currently in their organization, if they're lucky. Those few guys might be superstars that the entire core is built around for a decade, but even in that best case it's a completely different team from what we could envision now, and impossible to project that far into the future.


A lot of guys here are wildly underestimating the amount of turnover that happens over a 5 year period in the NHL.

True. Ten years is gigantic.

Ten years ago the Habs were still lead by Kovalev and Koivu

 

[Mrb1p]

Ahhh missed that, my bad for not fully reading the post you were responding to.

Still, it would not have been stupid to consider Colorado as a team with a dark future last year IMO. The avs were coming off a historically bad season, lost the draft lottery, many people were beginning to doubt it MacKinnon would ever have a season like he just did, the cloud of trading Duchene was hanging over the team, they yet didn't have the pieces they received for Duchene like Girard/Bowers/Kamenev/OTT 1st, Sakic was being widely criticized, their defense was highly questionable, Timmins/Makar were less proven as prospects (tho still very good), etc.

Honestly, it would have been stupid to NOT have Colorado on a list of 10 teams with the darkest future last offseason. Their turn around this past season was as remarkable as it was unexpected.

I guess it depends on how you define future.

Its just a normal circle of life in hockey. Compete suck suck maybe suck again compete

 

[stl76]

I guess it depends on how you define future.

Its just a normal circle of life in hockey. Compete suck suck maybe suck again compete

Uhh, ok. You could say that about almost any team in the league.

My point was that you were wrong to imply that it would have been stupid to rank Colorado as one of the teams with the darkest future last off season.

 

[Mrb1p]

Uhh, ok. You could say that about almost any team in the league.

My point was that you were wrong to imply that it would have been stupid to rank Colorado as one of the teams with the darkest future last off season.

How can your future be dark when youre set at 1C 2C 1LW 1RW 1LD and 1RD? There has to be some massive f***ing up for it not to work. Now they flipped their 2C for plenty of picks so its even better. People just have a hard time disassociating current success and future success or failures.

 

[Critical13]

There is no such thing as a 10 year future. A given team might have 3 guys on their roster in 10 years that are currently in their organization, if they're lucky. Those few guys might be superstars that the entire core is built around for a decade, but even in that best case it's a completely different team from what we could envision now, and impossible to project that far into the future.


A lot of guys here are wildly underestimating the amount of turnover that happens over a 5 year period in the NHL.

No one here is really taking this seriously.

 

[stl76]

How can your future be dark when youre set at 1C 2C 1LW 1RW 1LD and 1RD? There has to be some massive ****ing up for it not to work. Now they flipped their 2C for plenty of picks so its even better. People just have a hard time disassociating current success and future success or failures.

You're acting like all those positions were sure things to succeed, when the truth is very much the opposite.

Last off season there were a lot of legit questions about their 1C ever reaching his potential and their 2C being traded (their 2C certainly was not "set"). Their "#1RW" was a 20 year old relatively unproven kid coming coming off his rookie season (admittedly a bright spot but far from a sure thing long term). Their #1LW was coming off a 33 point season and had seen his point totals decline each of the last 3 seasons. Their #1LHD was a 22 year old kid with a ton still left to prove. Their #1RHD was a good player but had missed 80 games the previous 3 seasons due to injury. Further, the avs roster still had huge questions outside their top line and top pairing D, not to mention the fact that many folks questioned their GM's ability to address said questions.

If you want to imply that people who doubted the avs' future last offseason were stupid, that's your prerogative. However, prior to MacKinnon having the breakout year he did and Sakic getting the incredible return for Duchene, there were plenty of people I'd consider intelligent who thought the avs' future was bleak.

You seem to be having a difficult time disassociating current success from past failures.

 

[MasterMatt25]

Winnipeg isn't an option in the poll

I voted:

Montreal: starting a rebuild, only 1 real bluechip prospect, needs a new GM
Ottawa: management running them further and further underground
Detroit: weak prospect pool, beginning of a rebuild
Chicago: trying to relive the past, moved Hossa, but still too much cap taken up and not many good prospects to build around
Anaheim: their forward core is screwed going forward, Kesler (if he'll play again) and Perry are shells of their former selves and Getzlaf is only getting older
San Jose: core is really old, Jones and Couture are in their primes, but they can't do it all + no bluechip prospects
Minnesota: team is getting older, stuck to some pretty lengthy and bad contracts, don't seem to be really improving = recipe for stagnation
Vancouver: have some great prospects in the pipeline, but I don't see them going far in the next 5 years
NY Rangers: came out and straight up said they're rebuilding
NY Islanders: their all-star player just left for nothing, will need time to recover

 

[Algernop Kreider]

No one here is really taking this seriously.

I'm not really sure what your point is here. You started this thread.

And I'm telling you that if teams like NYR, NYI and DET aren't back in the playoffs within 5 years, then their rebuilds are considered failures. I think NYR and NYI look better in that regard than DET, but that doesn't change the fact that a lot of this discussion seems out of touch with the realities of roster construction in the league.

 

[Peggy]

Montreal and ottawa
Then arizona

Wouldve said buffalo, but they draft dahlin

 

[HabsForHire]

It was for last years roster.



If you really believe the only good prospect we have are Poehling and Kotkaniemi, you just need to be better informed. Theres plenty of info on the main habs board, read up.



I admit I shouldnt have put them in that one. They are all primed, mostly.

I actually follow prospects quite a bit and i am very informed on my teams prospects thank you very much, sure yolonen and a few others are good but we dont have that sure fire talent. Maybe we just have different definitions of "deep"

 

[Mrb1p]

I actually follow prospects quite a bit and i am very informed on my teams prospects thank you very much, sure yolonen and a few others are good but we dont have that sure fire talent. Maybe we just have different definitions of "deep"

Juulsen, Mete, Ylonen, Oloffson and Brook are all similar to Poehling in quality. Kotkaniemi is a top 15 prospect in the league.