First round fodder

[yave1964]

  There are teams that every year manage to make the playoffs and lose in the first round, year in and year out. The Islanders, Prtedators, Capitals, the Jets, also the Kings. Every year they seem to be in the playoff convo, most make the playoffs, high hopes and lose in six games to a better team or a team that is more prepared for the playoffs.

 

  I mentioned a few years ago the Predators have a bad year when they lose in the first round on four, a good year is when they lose in the first round in six games. All of the teams above are going through it, they are good enough to make the playoffs, not good enough to do anything when they make it in. Pittsburgh was in the mix but stumbled out of the playoffs altogether this year.

 

 As a fan, would you rather have a team that is in that mix, making the playoffs year in and year out losing in the first round year in and out as well, or a team that has slumped to bottom feeder and is properly rebuilding towards a Stanley Cup run?

 

  I have to admit i am of two minds. The Wings lost the tiebreaker and the Capitals made it in. I would have loved to see the Wings in the playoffs, even getting spanked in four by the superior Rangers as the Caps did. But truthfully IMHO making the playoffs and losing in four or five would have possibly set the rebuild back a few years. It would have looked like a success and we might have signed a few of our free agents to longer deals that they didnt deserve. 

  My opinion is I would rather take the hit, get our teeth kicked in for a few years and rebuild the system and try to properly set up for a rebuild. Tampa did it masterfully a decade ago, Melrose and ownership destroyed the team, it went on for a few years as players got old and moved on, they took the hit, sucked for a few years drafted Stammer and Hedman and many others and turned into a fantastic team, one of the best in the game. It is the blueprint for how to rebuild. Simply a masterclass. Given the two, the Isles or Preds or a rebuild done right, give me the Tampa model any time.

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

Personally, I'd rather be the team that gets in all the time, even though they continually fall out in the first round.

The way I look at it, eventually, teams figure things out and can go from a perennial first round exiter, to a contender, Cinderella or otherwise, and maybe build enough confidence and resolve within that locker room and front office to try even harder next time around.

Hey, I get it....middling teams like that pick in the middle of the draft generally, and never will get a 'generational' type player.
But still...those scouts, people in charge of developing talent, and stats people and GM's who supposedly have an "eye on the league" have to earn their dollars too, and come up with ways to get competitive, even GOOD players on teams, even if they don't end up with generational talent. 

There are just too many outlets nowadays from where teams can get talent, not like it used to be where it was very limited, and teams could only get top tier players if they drafted Canadian, American, or Russian players, AND if they played in a big Major Junior program.

No sir....now teams can still get players from those places as well as the college ranks (those players overall abilities have gone up over the years!), the Euro leagues in Russia, Sweden Finland, and the Czech Republic...all of who do have players on par with some of the best in the AHL in North America and in Juniors.

And teams HAVE won Stanley Cups without  having a roster full of superstar players.

Why, as a fan, would I want my team to play terribly for about 4 or 5 years, just to get a generational player, then it may take another 2-5 years to get the rest of the team Stanley Cup ready....we are looking at 6-10 years of bad to just average hockey, to MAYBE, MAYYYYBE, win a Stanley Cup, then get stripped down slowly by the salary cap, then to have to start it all over again and be a suffering fan.

Being a hockey spectator is supposed to be fun.
And fun for me is watching every season where at least I know my team has a shot at the playoffs, can get in, and maybe go somewhere...... but I also would hope my team's front office has the brains to make the best of what they got and continually, tirelessly, look for talent everywhere they can find it, make no excuses, and continue to build a culture of pride and a winning attitude, even though first round exits seem to be the norm.

Maybe some fans out there (and for those reading, I am not singling anyone out...as usual, my postings are of the 'if the shoe fits, wear it' variety...YMMV) LIKE to piss n moan about their team continuously.
Maybe they are natural born complainers who aren't ever truly happy unless their sports teams give them something to crap on about.
Those types of people perhaps want their team to lose, lose, lose....tank even....just to try to get a top two pick (not guaranteed anyways, eh?), so they can perhaps win a Cup, can tell people "see I told you so" if the team does, but then, when the team goes back into the toilet for the next 6-10 years, they can go back to their happy place of bitchin, stinkin, complain, and tellin everyone one what the problem with the team is, because NO ONE BUT THEM has the answer...

No thanks!
Give me a god to honest front office who is doing all they can to ice a competitive team, doing what they need to behind the scenes to keep the team competitive, giving me the joy of seeing post season games and games to watch with some hope all along during the season, AND, if they happen to be terrible, and do fall into the fail tube that lasts a few years, then so be it, they will get some better draft picks, and if they have been doing their jobs right all along, will do even better with the better players.

But the whole time giving me, the fan, an honest and fun ride where the players, the front office, and ownership cares about the winning culture.
I just don't have the patience for prolonged losing, only to do well for a few short years, only to get dumped back into crap cycle for the next decade or so.

Red Wings two decades of playoffs? THAT is how you do it!
And oh, look...they won Cups along the way too because they had a saavy front office and people who wouldn't tolerate losing, tanking, or any other such nonsense that would cater to the pissin n moaning sect out there.

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

@yave1964

 

Regarding how the Bolts did it, yes, they were bad, got good picks, and went from there.
The Melrose ^%$# show was not by design...NO ONE at that time knew just what the hell they were doing!
The organization before Jeff Vinik took over was a complete clown act...an embarrassment....and one that almost got the team relocated.

When got Stamkos, things were looking up behind the scenes, and they didn't exactly tank...they just iced the best they had (admittedly, it wasn't so hot), and let sports nature take it's course.

But the idea since then has always been maintain the top spot....again, like your Wings did for over two decades.

And to top all that off, the Lightning, again, since Vinik, have ALWAYS invested in good hockey people, let them do their jobs, and come up with draft picks and players that no one gave a second look to, and either turned them into roster regulars, or used them to acquire such players.

That is all I really want from my teams....the best they can put out there, and the smarts behind the scenes to keep it going, without resorting to BS tank jobs and foisting (LOVE that word @JR Ewing  ) suffering on their fans in the meantime.

[yave1964]

4 minutes ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

@yave1964

 

Regarding how the Bolts did it, yes, they were bad, got good picks, and went from there.
The Melrose ^%$# show was not by design...NO ONE at that time knew just what the hell they were doing!
The organization before Jeff Vinik took over was a complete clown act...an embarrassment....and one that almost got the team relocated.

When got Stamkos, things were looking up behind the scenes, and they didn't exactly tank...they just iced the best they had (admittedly, it wasn't so hot), and let sports nature take it's course.

But the idea since then has always been maintain the top spot....again, like your Wings did for over two decades.

And to top all that off, the Lightning, again, since Vinik, have ALWAYS invested in good hockey people, let them do their jobs, and come up with draft picks and players that no one gave a second look to, and either turned them into roster regulars, or used them to acquire such players.

That is all I really want from my teams....the best they can put out there, and the smarts behind the scenes to keep it going, without resorting to BS tank jobs and foisting (LOVE that word @JR Ewing  ) suffering on their fans in the meantime.

I still prefer the full rebuild, the Wings had a terrible farm system with slugs on long term contracts we took the hit and have young talented players everywhere that very well could lead the team to serious contention.

   Every now and then a fodder team makes a run, Nashville did it when they made it to the SCF after trading for PK, i get it but looking at the Isles, Caps, Jets, Smashville, the Kings, even the Blues and Pens, all could easily make a run for playoff spots but I cannot see any of them making it out of the first round. I dont see them ever going deep and all need something. The Isles were bold trading for Horvat and changing coaches but there is something missing. The Peg signed their main two UFAs early and they built on that but again, sometyhing is missing. I just do not see them, any of them ever fighting for a cup which to me is the ultimate prize. It comes down to what is more valuable, playoffs or Stanley Cup and i get it as a Wings fan year after year making the playoffs but the last five years were tough losing in round two to the Sharks, losing in round one to everyone for three years and the bill finally came due. I think on top is fantatic, below is easy, just rebuild, the hardest spot in the league are teams 12 thru 20 in the middle once there it is so hard to move up.

[ruxpin]

12 hours ago, yave1964 said:

The Islanders, Prtedators, Capitals, the Jets, also the Kings. Every year they seem to be in the playoff convo, most make the playoffs, high hopes and lose in six games to a better team or a team that is more prepared for the playoffs.

 

Is it fair to add the Maple Leafs here?  They seem like maybe a different category that has the same result. 

 

To your basic question, put me in the tear it down/rebuild camp.  I'm driven by a desire to win.  I've been to parades. There is very little that beats that (there ARE things better; I said "little").  Shaking hands a fortnight later is little consolation. 

 

But tearing it down and never actually managing the rebuild is no fun.  And the Flyers, for example, have been so pathetic that at least some decent hockey for awhile was entertaining. The truth is  though, that I watched extremely little if it because it was ultimately always doomed.

 

Tear it down, proper rebuild, win (or have legitimate chance) for me, please.

[yave1964]

48 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

Is it fair to add the Maple Leafs here?  They seem like maybe a different category that has the same result. 

 

To your basic question, put me in the tear it down/rebuild camp.  I'm driven by a desire to win.  I've been to parades. There is very little that beats that (there ARE things better; I said "little").  Shaking hands a fortnight later is little consolation. 

 

But tearing it down and never actually managing the rebuild is no fun.  And the Flyers, for example, have been so pathetic that at least some decent hockey for awhile was entertaining. The truth is  though, that I watched extremely little if it because it was ultimately always doomed.

 

Tear it down, proper rebuild, win (or have legitimate chance) for me, please.

 Leafs, man, ugh. Yeah they are in here as well. Maybe the poster child. Every year they run over the weak sisters in the league then fold. God alone knows what they do now. Year after year they look amazing until some lesser talent team who is unafraid of getting dirty buries them. First round. 

  

[mojo1917]

If there was a great post emoji I would smash that button @TropicalFruitGirl26

 

If the losing comes about organically, then fine, scrape the bottom and see if a gem is available in that time frame.

 

Professional sports teams should be trying to win games.

 

Losing is for losers, and if a person or team does too much of it then that stench becomes too hard to clear.

 

 

Building a team designed to lose ? 

So a ping-pong ball can decide which boy can be picked first ? 

No thanks. 

 

 

 

[radoran]

I've spent a decade watching a middling, bubble playoff team.

 

It sucks. It has sapped my enthusiasm for the organization.

 

Not the sport. I am watching great hockey in the playoffs this year.

 

My team hasn't played great hockey for over a decade.

 

This year was better in that they seemed to be taking the right path - not "make the playoffs and anything can happen" but more of what @TropicalFruitGirl26 is talking about in terms of putting a deep team together on the ice and hoping it puts it all together.

 

Professional sports teams should be trying to win games. And the grit and determination can be a great attribute and endearing to see.

 

But it all comes down to the goal of winning games and that is winning a championship. If your goal is to be entertained, then bully for you. I'm entertained watching hockey teams trying to win championships.

 

It's the fundamental difference between the Lightning and the Wild. The Bolts got Stamkos and Hedman as 1/2 picks. The Wild got Parise and Suter as prized free agents.

 

The Bolts won two Cups. The Wild bought out Parise and Suter.

 

The path to legitimate competitive championship hockey goes through the draft. The game has fundamentally changed.

 

It may come down to time and perspective. I'm happier watching a team reach the playoffs with a legit shot to win it all - even if they don't.

 

2010 was a nice run, but exactly the Fool's Gold that @yave1964 mentions this year could have been for the Wings making the playoffs.

 

The Flyers had legitimately built a young talented core and set them up for a decade of competitive hockey. They then saw themselves as thisclose having gotten to the Final and impatiently blew the whole damn thing up and embarked on the worst decade of hockey in organizational history ALL THE WHILE insisting they were "definitely a playoff team."

 

No thanks.

 

You BUILD a winning team, you don't BUY it any more. And that building starts with drafting. When a team starts with 1/2 picks and adds to that with mid level picks as they grow - AND makes shrewd moves - you wind up with something that resembles the Panthers.

 

If the Flyers want to be the Islanders, Wild, Preds level team then they will get what "giving your team the best shot at the playoffs" got the Preds this year.

 

You don't INTENTIONALLY lose, but you don't strive for mediocrity. Otherwise you sit and watch other franchises move up and down past you.

 

YMMV.

 

[pilldoc]

25 minutes ago, radoran said:

I've spent a decade watching a middling, bubble playoff team.

 

It sucks. It has sapped my enthusiasm for the organization.

 

Not the sport. I am watching great hockey in the playoffs this year.

 

My team hasn't played great hockey for over a decade.

 

This year was better in that they seemed to be taking the right path - not "make the playoffs and anything can happen" but more of what @TropicalFruitGirl26 is talking about in terms of putting a deep team together on the ice and hoping it puts it all together.

 

Professional sports teams should be trying to win games. And the grit and determination can be a great attribute and endearing to see.

 

But it all comes down to the goal of winning games and that is winning a championship. If your goal is to be entertained, then bully for you. I'm entertained watching hockey teams trying to win championships.

 

It's the fundamental difference between the Lightning and the Wild. The Bolts got Stamkos and Hedman as 1/2 picks. The Wild got Parise and Suter as prized free agents.

 

The Bolts won two Cups. The Wild bought out Parise and Suter.

 

The path to legitimate competitive championship hockey goes through the draft. The game has fundamentally changed.

 

It may come down to time and perspective. I'm happier watching a team reach the playoffs with a legit shot to win it all - even if they don't.

 

2010 was a nice run, but exactly the Fool's Gold that @yave1964 mentions this year could have been for the Wings making the playoffs.

 

The Flyers had legitimately built a young talented core and set them up for a decade of competitive hockey. They then saw themselves as thisclose having gotten to the Final and impatiently blew the whole damn thing up and embarked on the worst decade of hockey in organizational history ALL THE WHILE insisting they were "definitely a playoff team."

 

No thanks.

 

You BUILD a winning team, you don't BUY it any more. And that building starts with drafting. When a team starts with 1/2 picks and adds to that with mid level picks as they grow - AND makes shrewd moves - you wind up with something that resembles the Panthers.

 

If the Flyers want to be the Islanders, Wild, Preds level team then they will get what "giving your team the best shot at the playoffs" got the Preds this year.

 

You don't INTENTIONALLY lose, but you don't strive for mediocrity. Otherwise you sit and watch other franchises move up and down past you.

 

YMMV.

 

[Icechipper]

My picks in work pool terrible. Only had Rangers, Canes and Panthers advancing.

[mojo1917]

7 hours ago, ruxpin said:

Is it fair to add the Maple Leafs here?  They seem like maybe a different category that has the same result. 

I think they are an interesting study for this conversation.

 

Their core of talented players is fantastic.

Auston Matthews? That guy can ball. Willie Nylander? yessir even Perimi-mitch Marner is an all-star caliber hockey player.

They've failed to build around that group effectively.

There's an allocation of cap resources to blame and maybe some poor scouting and development of defensive players.

Point here is that team has the high-end guys; and they've done nothing and gotten nowhere. They have okay depth at forward but they are a top-heavy, salary-strapped team. This group was built through the draft. Does it seem like they could win a cup? I mean if they don't have to play Boston then maybe, but the way the league is now, they have to play Boston.

 

Do the Leafs have the organizational courage to go in a different direction based on the playoff performance of this group? 

I think the only team that's done that successfully has been the Avalanche when they moved on from everyone but Landeskog in the early Sakic years.

But, it looks to me like a move like that needs to happen for the Leafs to go where the fan base wants them to go.

 

 

[mojo1917]

Edited May 5 by mojo1917

[flyercanuck]

21 hours ago, radoran said:

I've spent a decade watching a middling, bubble playoff team.

 

It sucks. It has sapped my enthusiasm for the organization.

 

Not the sport. I am watching great hockey in the playoffs this year.

 

My team hasn't played great hockey for over a decade.

 

This year was better in that they seemed to be taking the right path - not "make the playoffs and anything can happen" but more of what @TropicalFruitGirl26 is talking about in terms of putting a deep team together on the ice and hoping it puts it all together.

 

Professional sports teams should be trying to win games. And the grit and determination can be a great attribute and endearing to see.

 

But it all comes down to the goal of winning games and that is winning a championship. If your goal is to be entertained, then bully for you. I'm entertained watching hockey teams trying to win championships.

 

It's the fundamental difference between the Lightning and the Wild. The Bolts got Stamkos and Hedman as 1/2 picks. The Wild got Parise and Suter as prized free agents.

 

The Bolts won two Cups. The Wild bought out Parise and Suter.

 

The path to legitimate competitive championship hockey goes through the draft. The game has fundamentally changed.

 

It may come down to time and perspective. I'm happier watching a team reach the playoffs with a legit shot to win it all - even if they don't.

 

2010 was a nice run, but exactly the Fool's Gold that @yave1964 mentions this year could have been for the Wings making the playoffs.

 

The Flyers had legitimately built a young talented core and set them up for a decade of competitive hockey. They then saw themselves as thisclose having gotten to the Final and impatiently blew the whole damn thing up and embarked on the worst decade of hockey in organizational history ALL THE WHILE insisting they were "definitely a playoff team."

 

No thanks.

 

You BUILD a winning team, you don't BUY it any more. And that building starts with drafting. When a team starts with 1/2 picks and adds to that with mid level picks as they grow - AND makes shrewd moves - you wind up with something that resembles the Panthers.

 

If the Flyers want to be the Islanders, Wild, Preds level team then they will get what "giving your team the best shot at the playoffs" got the Preds this year.

 

You don't INTENTIONALLY lose, but you don't strive for mediocrity. Otherwise you sit and watch other franchises move up and down past you.

 

YMMV.

 

 

In other words...there's nothing wrong with rebuilding if it's done properly and with a good management team.

 

Of course we will never know what that's like... Because we never rebuild, we reload....so we can move up 4 or 5 spots before falling back 4 or 5 spots.....WINNING!

 

It's NEVER worked for us, but lets keep doing it!

[flyercanuck]

On 5/4/2024 at 7:07 PM, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

Personally, I'd rather be the team that gets in all the time, even though they continually fall out in the first round.

 

Spoken like a fan who's team has won 3 cups with 2- 1st overalls and 1 -2nd. 

[radoran]

Here's a good encapsulation of what a "perennial contender's" record looks like vs. a middling bubble playoff team

 

Flyers Division Finishes 1994-2004: 1st, 1st, 2nd, 2nd, 2nd, 1st, 2nd, 1st, 2nd, 1st

Flyers Division Finishes 2005-2024: 2nd, 5th, 4th, 3rd, 3rd, 1st, 3rd, 4th, 3rd, 6th, 5th, 6th, 3rd, 6th, 2nd, 6th, 8th, 7th, 6th

 

They didn't win a Cup from 1994-2004, but it was some pretty darn good hockey to watch.

 

They also haven't won a Cup since 2005, and it's been some of the worst hockey we've ever had to endure as Flyers fans.

[mojo1917]

@radoran

Jonesy was on some of those 94-2004 teams.

Danny was on the 2007-2013 teams which finished 4th ,3rd, 3rd, 1st, 3rd. He was around for 2 ECF appearances, 1 SCF appearance and a second-round exit. 

The guys building the team now probably remember being on good teams then.

I don't think they're delusional about what they're trying to do. I think they know this group isn't a good team.

 

 

[radoran]

50 minutes ago, mojo1917 said:

I don't think they're delusional about what they're trying to do.

 

Has nothing to do with being "delusional" - it's following the topic of the thread of "which would you rather be?"

 

I was looking around on another topic and noticed the rather striking change in fortunes once the ability to buy rosters went away.

 

I'd rather be the 1/2 in the Division team for a decade than be the middling, bubble playoff team some seem satisfied with (not you).

 

It's the response to "if all you want is a championship" - it's not. I want a legit shot at being one of the best teams in the league for an extended stretch.

 

We'll see if they get there.

 

#ontopic

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

I'm torn on this one. I'd love to be someone that wins, but at the same time, there are times when you have to tear it down because either you didn't win within your window, your team simply isn't constructed to win or your franchise is stuck in a perpetual state of mediocrity (think the Flyers and their one year in the playoffs, one year out, rinse and repeat). 

[OccamsRazor]

On 5/9/2024 at 4:47 PM, BobbyClarkeFan16 said:

I'd love to be someone that wins

 

Well to win it all you pretty much have to have a 1st and 2nd overall picks on your roster along with some top end talent around them.

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

On 5/5/2024 at 2:15 PM, mojo1917 said:

I think they are an interesting study for this conversation.

 

Their core of talented players is fantastic.

Auston Matthews? That guy can ball. Willie Nylander? yessir even Perimi-mitch Marner is an all-star caliber hockey player.

They've failed to build around that group effectively.

There's an allocation of cap resources to blame and maybe some poor scouting and development of defensive players.

Point here is that team has the high-end guys; and they've done nothing and gotten nowhere. They have okay depth at forward but they are a top-heavy, salary-strapped team. This group was built through the draft. Does it seem like they could win a cup? I mean if they don't have to play Boston then maybe, but the way the league is now, they have to play Boston.

 

Do the Leafs have the organizational courage to go in a different direction based on the playoff performance of this group? 

I think the only team that's done that successfully has been the Avalanche when they moved on from everyone but Landeskog in the early Sakic years.

But, it looks to me like a move like that needs to happen for the Leafs to go where the fan base wants them to go.

 

 

 

You hit the nail on the head. Allocation of cap resources, player development and poor scouting. When $46 million is tied up into four players, you've got to hope your scouting department and your player development system is top notch. Toronto failed to do that. And with Benoit Groulx leaving the Tampa Bay organization, we're probably going to see a decline there. People can say what they want, but Groulx was vital to Tampa Bay.