Reason for accumulating Draft Picks in 2004 ?

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

Blaise said:

I'm not sure I agree with your assessment of the Rangers' situation. They dumped a load of payroll but they could just as easily load up again, especially since UFAs won't be asking for as much this time around. In addition, the Rangers still have a few stars. Somehow I don't see them finishing in the bottom 5.

The Rangers situation is they try to buy a team of mersonaries. They take the best looking individuals and attempt to mold them into a team of superstars. It works in baseball for the Yankees, but not in hockey or football where teamwork and courage are more important than individual play.
It's like trying to buy the best looking girl walking down St. Catherine St. A good way to get superstar performance, but a bad way to build a long term team.
The Rangers lost a lot of talent. They have money to rebuild, but they will never build through the draft like Tampa Bay or teamwork like Calgary.
The Rangers looked great on paper, but not on the ice. Now they look great on the golf course.
I see the Rangers falling on lean times.

[HabbaDasher]

I don't see why the Rangers can't rebuild in fairly short time frame.
They freed up a lot of salary and acquired a bunch of picks.
A good GM should be able to make them competitive soon.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

HabbaDasher said:

I don't see why the Rangers can't rebuild in fairly short time frame.
They freed up a lot of salary and acquired a bunch of picks.
A good GM should be able to make them competitive soon.

1. Using that rationale, an expansion team with a lot of money should be competitive immediately since they don't have any expensive veterans and they have the cash to acquire new talent.
2. Sather was a good GM. Now, I'm not so sure.

I really believe I could have coached and GM's the Oilers with Gretzky, Messier, Huddy, Fuhr, Coffee, and Anderson in their youth. Hold the gate open and let them play.and

[HabbaDasher]

Habs_fan_in_LA said:

1. Using that rationale, an expansion team with a lot of money should be competitive immediately since they don't have any expensive veterans and they have the cash to acquire new talent.
2. Sather was a good GM. Now, I'm not so sure.

I really believe I could have coached and GM's the Oilers with Gretzky, Messier, Huddy, Fuhr, Coffee, and Anderson in their youth. Hold the gate open and let them play.and

1) How many expansion teams have the money the Rangers have? If the Rangers have finally learned their lesson about overpaying FAs, they have the resources to put a good team together quickly.

2) Sather seemed to excel with a low budget and young, cheap talent.

[Skilly]

Habs_fan_in_LA said:

I wish!

After the lottery has been decided it will be hard to get the #1.
Prior to the lottery, Chicago, Washington and Pittsburg would be much more amenable to trading a #1 pick than a sure thing Crosby. I see the Rangers fighting for the basement and Sather willing to deal to save his job. He's spent more money than a mistress with a credit card.

Columbus is always a safe beat to be competing for last, but I would love to have Tampa Bay's or Calgary's 2005 pick.

The reason? For the last 3 years, at least one of the teams in the Stanley Cup finals finished near the bottom, and in Carolina's case the very bottom, of the league.

[seventeen]

Right on, Skilly. If others think it can't happen, what if Tampa's 21 man games lost to injury turns into 700 man games lost to injury? Suddenly they're icing their farm team...who just might be good enough to finish last.

[MC Habber]

seventeen said:

Right on, Skilly. If others think it can't happen, what if Tampa's 21 man games lost to injury turns into 700 man games lost to injury? Suddenly they're icing their farm team...who just might be good enough to finish last.

Of course it can happen, but I wouldn't bank on it. Both TB and Calgary have much better teams than Carolina had, and this is not TB's first time in the playoffs and they did finish first in the conference. Calgary is more surprising, and I could see them not making the playoffs next year (though I think they probably will at least manage to squeak in at 8th), but I'd be very surprised if they're in the bottom 5 in the league.

I expected Carolina to be one of the worst teams in the league the year following their trip to the finals (which they were) because I never thought much of that team and I thought with expectations raised so high they would have a bad year. I thought Anaheim would make the playoffs this yearand the main reason they didn't was that Giguere wasn't so hot, but they still finished 22nd in the league (tied with Carolina) - not low enough to get the top pick.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

Lettermans Top Ten "Reasons for Accumulating Draft Picks"

#1. You don't have to pay them.

You can placate your fans as you trade away your best (mo$t expen$ive player$) for draft picks.

...ie. Linden costs $5M, #1 pick costs nothing until he's signed and then he still costs less than an ageing veteran. Fans are told that the team is doing the right thing and building for the future internally instead of going to the UFA (read Expen$ive market) to buy a mersonary.

#2, If the pick turns into a Lecavallier or Thornton, you have young talent upon which to build for the future instead of ageing veterans who cost more and have shorter careers.

#3. If the pick is a dud, you don't have to pay them and tell the fans that you tried. (Wyckenheiser, Bilodeau etc.)

#4. If you have enough picks, a couple of them have to produce. Even a blind pig finds a truffle once in a while.

#5. It's fun for an owner to have your picture taken with a pimpled young stud who's wearing your sweater. Like religeon and politics nobody can prove you are wrong and by the time your judgement was shown to be impaired, hardly anybody remembers.

#6. If the pick doesn't turn out, you can look like a hero by firing his sorry ass and appear to be decisive, Everyone will blame the kid for not working hard enough or drugs or women.

#7. This is a throwback to the old days of slave auctions. You are the plantation owner with the money and the slaves have no rights to toil for anybody else.

#8. It's more fun than collecting stamps.

#9. It's more fun than collecting empty beer bottles, unless you buy full ones and drink the beer.

#10. Once in a long while a gem is found in the 9th round and it makes you look like a genius. Everyone remembers that you picked a slow skating Luc Robitaille in the ninth round, not that you passed over him eight times to choose lesser lights that never panned out.

[blaise]

Habs_fan_in_LA said:

Lettermans Top Ten "Reasons for Accumulating Draft Picks"

#1. You don't have to pay them.

You can placate your fans as you trade away your best (mo$t expen$ive player$) for draft picks.

...ie. Linden costs $5M, #1 pick costs nothing until he's signed and then he still costs less than an ageing veteran. Fans are told that the team is doing the right thing and building for the future internally instead of going to the UFA (read Expen$ive market) to buy a mersonary.

#2, If the pick turns into a Lecavallier or Thornton, you have young talent upon which to build for the future instead of ageing veterans who cost more and have shorter careers.

#3. If the pick is a dud, you don't have to pay them and tell the fans that you tried. (Wyckenheiser, Bilodeau etc.)

#4. If you have enough picks, a couple of them have to produce. Even a blind pig finds a truffle once in a while.

#5. It's fun for an owner to have your picture taken with a pimpled young stud who's wearing your sweater. Like religeon and politics nobody can prove you are wrong and by the time your judgement was shown to be impaired, hardly anybody remembers.

#6. If the pick doesn't turn out, you can look like a hero by firing his sorry ass and appear to be decisive, Everyone will blame the kid for not working hard enough or drugs or women.

#7. This is a throwback to the old days of slave auctions. You are the plantation owner with the money and the slaves have no rights to toil for anybody else.

#8. It's more fun than collecting stamps.

#9. It's more fun than collecting empty beer bottles, unless you buy full ones and drink the beer.

#10. Once in a long while a gem is found in the 9th round and it makes you look like a genius. Everyone remembers that you picked a slow skating Luc Robitaille in the ninth round, not that you passed over him eight times to choose lesser lights that never panned out.

The same "reasoning" would also apply to 2005, a draft that will be richer in "truffles" than 2004.

[PTH]

I wonder why this thread is still a sticky, when it's pretty much been shown that the Habs are doing no such thing as "assumulating picks in 2004"

[rhabdo]

PTH said:

I wonder why this thread is still a sticky, when it's pretty much been shown that the Habs are doing no such thing as "assumulating picks in 2004"

You'll have to ask M. Beaux-Eaux. He's the one who dredged up a thread that was last active on January 25, 2003.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

1. Washington Capitals
2. Pittsburgh Penguins
3. Chicago Blackhawks
4. Columbus Blue Jackets
5. Phoenix Coyotes
6. New York Rangers
7. Florida Panthers
8. Carolina Hurricanes
9. Anaheim Mighty Ducks
10. Atlanta Thrashers
11. Los Angeles Kings
12. Minnesota Wild
13. Buffalo Sabres
14. Edmonton Oilers
15. Nashville Predators
16. New York Islanders
17. St. Louis Blues
18. Montreal Canadiens
* 19. Calgary Flames
20. Dallas Stars
21. Colorado Avalanche
22. New Jersey Devils
23. Ottawa Senators
24. New York Rangers (from Toronto) ** Leetch deal
25. Edmonton Oilers (from Philadelphia) ** Comrie deal
26. Vancouver Canucks
27. Washington Capitals(from Boston) ** Gonchar deal
28. San Jose Sharks
* 29. Tampa Bay Lightning
30. Washington Capitals (from Detroit) ** Lang deal

*Stanley Cup winner automatically picks 30th.

[rhabdo]

So is there a good reason for accumulating draft picks in 2004? None unless Gainey can get something for Dagenais.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

rhabdo said:

So is there a good reason for accumulating draft picks in 2004? None unless Gainey can get something for Dagenais.

Dagenais can score. We don't have many scorers.
Dagenais is big. We don't have any who is 6'5".
Dagenais is young. We need young.
Dagenais produced last year. He was a leader in +/- among forwards.
Dagenais scored despite not getting a lot of playing time.
Dagenais is a team player who worked better with Ribeiro, our leading scorer than anyone else.
Dagenais has a good attitude.
Dagenais improved over his previous performances.
I don't know why so many fans are so anxious to see him go?

[rhabdo]

Habs_fan_in_LA said:

Dagenais can score. We don't have many scorers.
Dagenais is big. We don't have any who is 6'5".
Dagenais is young. We need young.
Dagenais produced last year. He was a leader in +/- among forwards.
Dagenais scored despite not getting a lot of playing time.
Dagenais is a team player who worked better with Ribeiro, our leading scorer than anyone else.
Dagenais has a good attitude.
Dagenais improved over his previous performances.
I don't know why so many fans are so anxious to see him go?

I didn't say buy him out, I said trade him. Dagenais was benched for being catatonic in the playoffs. The other series have given us a perspective on what real hockey players do in the crunch, as though we need reminders. Do you recall anything Dagenais did right?