|
|
Post by Willie Dog on Feb 10, 2017 21:27:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 10, 2017 22:14:37 GMT -5
I could barely make it to "Current Assets". For a website called 'the hockey writers', Nick's a horrible writer. "More from that point"? I think he means, "more to the point", and it's no way to start a paragraph.
Writing ability aside, he completely ignores the fact that the Hawks success goes well beyond the core group they drafted. There were a slew of trades along the way. Key contributors like Sharp, Hossa, Campbell (for a spell) were acquired either through trade or free agency. The rosters that won three cups simply didn't fall into the laps of the executive group. They were put together through the three areas teams are built: drafting, trading, and signing.
That core group he lauds over are, I assume, Kane, Toews, Keith, Seabrook, and Crawford. Kane and Toews were the direct result of being a bottom feeder two years in a row. Sure, you have to pick the right players. Who knows where they are if they don't pick Kane and Toews. The former was the clear cut #1. They weren't picking anyone else. #2 was JVR. The year before they could have foregone Toews for Kessel or Backstrom. Seabrook was a strong mid first round pick, and Keith was a very shrewd second rounder. The same goes for Crawford. Let's just focus on Kane and Toews though, because it goes to a theory I've long held to. If you're going to go to the basement, best to do it for a couple of seasons. Do everything you can to get two very high picks in successive years. Chicago did it with Toews and Kane. Pittsburgh did it the two previous seasons with Malkin and Crosby. I suppose you could argue that the Pens did it three years in a row because they picked MAF #1 in 2003. Regardless, tanking that second year is a significant part of the process if you're focused on the draft.
Montreal had the chance to do that. They caught lightning in a bottle in the lockout year when they should have tanked to get another player to go with Galchenyuk. Forgetting about thoughts on how Therrien uses kids, imagine a world where we had one of MacKinnon, Barkov or Drouin to go with Alex. That goes a long way to setting up your club. The pieces you don't/can't get in the draft you acquire.
***As a complete aside, Toronto is making that same mistake this year. Sure, the sum of their forward group isn't just Matthews. However, if they'd tanked this year they'd be staring directly at a shot at landing Patrick. Patrick isn't as flashy as Matthews. In fact, he could be very much like a Toews. If they managed to end up in a scenario where they landed Matthews AND Patrick, that sets them up with two elite level center prospects and gives them a likely corner stone pair for 10 years.***
Chicago made moves to supplement their core group. Hossa was a UFA. Oduya was a tdl acquisition (trading away a 2nd and 3rd in 2013). Sharp was a shrewd trade with the Flyers where they made out like bandits. There were others, but those are a cross-section. Montreal already had the goalie, the elite pmd, and a talented scoring forward in Price, Subban, and Pacioretty. They had capable secondary pieces. Where Berg has failed is not in over valuing prospects. He's over valued those secondary pieces on his team.
He's given excessive contracts to players he shouldn't have WHEN he shouldn't have (or was under no pressure to do so). He's jerked the chains of the players he should be bending over backwards for and bent over backwards for the ones he shouldn't. He's tried to address scoring from the wing through free agency. Where Semin was a failure, Radulov has worked.
I could go on, but I'm running out of steam lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Feb 11, 2017 2:20:57 GMT -5
Another really important point is tanking at the right time. Tank when a McDavid, Eichel or Matthews is available. Don't tank the year the top picks are merely serviceable, or just good players. You have go get a star or generational player. Crosby and Malkin fit the bill. Galchenyuk, (who I still like) just isn't in that class. In 2012 the top guys were Yakupov, Ryan Murray, Chucky, Griffin Reinhart and Morgan Rielly. Three of the 4 are good players, but how often do 2 of the top 5 just fail? Not often, so make sure you're really bad in a really good year.
|
|
|
|
Post by blny on Feb 11, 2017 8:32:32 GMT -5
Galchenyuk may not be in that class, but it's not like he's been given free reign to go out and learn on the job either. He's been on a leash from day one. Anyone who can score 30 goals in this environment isn't far off. I still believe his ceiling is a virtual ppg player. That may not be face of the league material, but it's damn good.
You're right though. Tanking at the right time is beneficial to the process.
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Feb 11, 2017 12:26:41 GMT -5
I never looked at it as tanking consecutive years, but my dream for a team has always been one with 2 top centers. Once you have that, you have a chance each and every year, and can rebuild on the fly.
Colorado with Sakic and Forsberg... Pittsburgh with Crosby and Malkin... if Saku had been able to stay healthy, with him and Damphousse or Turgeon, we could've had a nice stretch...
Both Colorado and Pittsburgh could get by with journeyman players in all kinds of roles over the years, whereas when your top lines aren't terrific, you can't have 4th liners who never contribute, you have to constantly reach for the stars, and hope you can squeeze a few more goals out of role players...
With 2 top centers, you pretty easily have 2 succesful offensive lines, getting a mix of 3d and 4th liners and defensemen is possible. It's better to have a #1 D of course, but Colorado got by with Foote's and Zubov's and Ozolinsh's...
|
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jun 28, 2020 18:02:32 GMT -5
Galchenyuk may not be in that class, but it's not like he's been given free reign to go out and learn on the job either. He's been on a leash from day one. Anyone who can score 30 goals in this environment isn't far off. I still believe his ceiling is a virtual ppg player. That may not be face of the league material, but it's damn good. You're right though. Tanking at the right time is beneficial to the process. I never considered tanking until we got Bergevin. He does it so well! |
|
|
|
Post by GNick99 on Jun 30, 2020 5:26:02 GMT -5
Article was pretty bang on |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jul 5, 2020 15:13:32 GMT -5
I could barely make it to "Current Assets". For a website called 'the hockey writers', Nick's a horrible writer. "More from that point"? I think he means, "more to the point", and it's no way to start a paragraph. "The Hockey Writers" is a website that reminds me of when HabsRus joined "Rivals" way back in the day ... like THW, we had members who regularly contributed with their own columns and I remember it being fun ... that said, while they may have some entertaining opinions, I'm not sure they're a reliable reference ... most of them are bloggers who look like they're having fun with it ... that's just me, though, fellas ... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Aug 22, 2020 10:47:35 GMT -5
Galchenyuk may not be in that class, but it's not like he's been given free reign to go out and learn on the job either. He's been on a leash from day one. Anyone who can score 30 goals in this environment isn't far off. I still believe his ceiling is a virtual ppg player. That may not be face of the league material, but it's damn good. You're right though. Tanking at the right time is beneficial to the process. Bergevin isn’t taking chances, so he tanks evry year! |
|
:quality(70)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/archetype/6F6VF25GCFF2HFJCOITRJSGNPE.jpg)
