Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Debunking the Detroit model myth?


Recommended Posts

There is the widely accredited concept that Detroit is the epitome of developing players?

To be fair; Detroit has always had the fortune to find stars in the draft. Scouting is most certainly one of, if not the biggest factors in their long term success.Yzerman, Fedorov, Lidstrom, Datsyuk, Zetterberg... Some late round finds legit stuff of legend for their scouts. But they have also had 4 or 5 year stretches where only one, maybe two draft picks made their squad. Yeah, that they were stacked was a factor.

So lets look at that, I don't see that it is fair to add development to that credit?

Being stacked, players have had to seriously outplay vets to get on the squad. I suppose that is a pretty good development problem, or message? And as above, the ones who passed mustard were in fact stars. I suggest coups of modern scouting, not development. But a lot of picks and prospects ended up moving on cuz they could not pass the test. See Ville Leino. They just ended up being what they actually were; mediocre prospects!

The real truth? For as long as I can remember they rounded out their team with veterans. No team has been better at signing / hanging on to or acquiring by trade veteran stars (sometimes fading elsewhere) who became remarkably productive again with reduced roles to extend their careers. Rafalski, Vyacheslav Fetisov, Bertuzzi, Shanahan, Chelios, Dallas Drake, Brett Hull, Hasek, Luc Robitaille, Fredrik Olausson, Larionov, Larry Murphy..., even role players like Cleary and Kris Draper are all examples. More recently guys like Modano and Brad Stuart. Alfredsson and Weiss in todays world are live examples of the real Detroit model!

Not all worked out, see the return of Samuelsson who was brought back to push promising Nyquist for a roster spot in 2012/13. Nor has Nyquist yet developed into one of those stars.Those veterans all took roles a prospect pencilled themselves in to.

In my opinion suggesting Detroit is built on player development is a bit of an overrated myth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think the "Detroit model" isn't as simple as "good player development".

It's more about minimizing the width and depth of the valleys while maximizing the peaks in the natural growth of a team core as it starts, improves/matures and declines/ages. Ideally you have overlapping cores so that as one's peaking another's just declining.

To do that you need smart management, good drafting/development, signing/retaining quality vets etc.

It's not just one thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JR that is exactly why the Canuck have never won; Management can't do anything right

Got Em Right

Ehrhoff

Sundin

Samuelson

Torres

Malhotra

Hamhuis

Garrison

Lapierre

Higgins

Hodgson

Stanton

Santorelli

Richardson

Tanev

Lack

Promise Players

Shinkaruk

Horvat

Kassian(just beginning)

Gaunce

Lain

Jensen(just beginning)

McNally

Dalpe

Schroeder

Mistakes

Ballard

Booth

Sturm

Roy

Pahlson

That's just off the top of my head. Please go into any previous canucks management and find that many good finds, good signings and good trades. People over criticize gillis for his few mistakes and want him fired but trust me this guy finds way more good players compared to bad. If gillis ever gets fired you will see him land a job quickly and go onto more success elsewhere. Vancouver fans never know what they have till it's gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In regards to the veteran thing, Babcock talked a bit about that on the recent 24/7. He said that one of the biggest things he stresses is the older players impressing upon the rookies the importance to work as hard as possible every time they are on the ice, whether its a game or a practice or just a skate. He also said it applies to himself and the management as well, to show the veterans/star players that they are always working hard to put them in the best position to win, and they showed him jogging around the concourse.

I remember it got a real LOL out of me because directly afterwards they cut to that scene of Randy Carlyle failing to operate a toaster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JR that is exactly why the Canuck have never won.

To be fair though, they have only started using this model in recent years. We haven't seen the second wave fully come in yet. If Horvat makes the team next year our second wave will be looking pretty decent, with Kassian, Horvat, Lack, Tanev, Stanton, and possibly Gaunce or Jensen we don't look bad for young players. A possible young UFA might be signed this offseason as well.

We also have some extra pieces that may or may not fit in next season, but still are assets of this point (of varying values). These being Shroeder, Dalpe, Welsh, Lain, Archibald, and such. None of these are high value prospects, but still have some value either to keep or add into a trade deal.

The Sedins, although their offense has detoriated this season (no sign whether this is injuries, slump, lack of chemistry/ moral, just an anomaly, or indicitive of the future yet), are still producing 65-70 pts, decent first line numbers. Our lack of secondary scoring is the real killer at the moment from the second line.

But the cap goes up next season and I think we will see the start of either the last portion of the Sedin era or the final portion. Whether they are superstars for 4 more years or just team leaders and offense producers remains to be seen, but this team is not done yet. Hopefully by the time they retire the team will have rebuilt as new (4 years to do that without tanking hopefully).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being stacked, players have had to seriously outplay vets to get on the squad. I suppose that is a pretty good development problem, or message? And as above, the ones who passed mustard were in fact stars.

Mustard? Awesome. Never seen that before. Made my day.

Edit: I was with you up until then but now that's all I can think about so I can't really say whether I agree with the whole thing or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ehrhoff

Sundin

Samuelson

Torres

Malhotra

Hamhuis

Garrison

Lapierre

Higgins

Hodgson

Stanton

Schroeder

Santorelli

Richardson

Tanev

Lack

Promise Players

Shinkaruk

Horvat

Kassian(just beginning)

Gaunce

Lain

Jensen(just beginning)

McNally

Mistakes

Ballard

Booth

Sturm

Roy

Pahlson

That's just off the top of my head. Please go into any previous canucks management and find that many good finds, good signings and good trades. People over criticize gillis for his few mistakes and want him fired but trust me this guy finds way more good players compared to bad. If gillis ever gets fired you will see him land a job quickly and go onto more success elsewhere. Vancouver fans never know what they have till it's gone.

Are you Jesus? I think you're Jesus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No real myth here that's been 'debunked' imo.

Is it a myth that Detroit excels in player development? Don't think you've really made your case. Look at the players they've drafted that are on their roster.

Do they add some moneyball veterans that are undervalued but come back and produce in Detroit? Apparently, and that would indicate the ability to see value where others don't necessarily - not unlike their ability to find gems late in the draft. It would also suggest a coaching staff that knows how to get the best out of players, knows how to use those players to their strengths, and a scouting staff that identifies players that are probably being under/mis-utilized.

Making the playoff for a few decades in a row - many times as very high seeds - and generally picking in the bottom half of the draft for 21 straight years - while perenially managing to retool their team nevertheless - that is pretty solid evident that the Detroit model is anything but a myth.

The proof is in the pudding. They've been pudding themselves in the playoffs since Tomas Tatar was born.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I think the "Detroit model" isn't as simple as "good player development".

It's more about minimizing the width and depth of the valleys while maximizing the peaks in the natural growth of a team core as it starts, improves/matures and declines/ages. Ideally you have overlapping cores so that as one's peaking another's just declining.

To do that you need smart management, good drafting/development, signing/retaining quality vets etc.

It's not just one thing.

I agree with Chris below; JR's point is one of the shrewdest I've seen on CDC.

Possibly / probably what MG was trying to accomplish (possibly 1 year late?) when he mentioned "reset"at the beginning of last off season. Some misinterpreted that as we would blow up the core. In fact we were just prioritizing setup of the next peak?

And that may take till next year or 2015.

JR that is exactly why the Canuck have never won.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No real myth here that's been 'debunked' imo.

Is it a myth that Detroit excels in player development? Don't think you've really made your case. Look at the players they've drafted that are on their roster.

Do they add some moneyball veterans that are undervalued but come back and produce in Detroit? Apparently, and that would indicate the ability to see value where others don't necessarily - not unlike their ability to find gems late in the draft. It would also suggest a coaching staff that knows how to get the best out of players, knows how to use those players to their strengths, and a scouting staff that identifies players that are probably being under/mis-utilized.

Making the playoff for a few decades in a row - many times as very high seeds - and generally picking in the bottom half of the draft for 21 straight years - while perenially managing to retool their team nevertheless - that is pretty solid evident that the Detroit model is anything but a myth.

The proof is in the pudding. They've been pudding themselves in the playoffs since Tomas Tatar was born.

What are their impact players currently whom they have drafted?

Zetterberg, Datsyuk, Howard, Kronwall and perhaps Franzen... Thats not crash hot, elite status of Zetterberg and Pavel already noted.

Nor is their vault of picks (hailed on CDC) coming to any rescue ATM. Tatar, Abdelkader, Eaves, Nyquist, Jurco, Emmerton?

Their last cup? Definitely better; add Lidstrom, Filppula, McCarty, Samuelsson, Hudler, Ericsson, Kopecky...

02'Cup winner was anchored by Yzerman, Federov and Lidstrom. But its core had Hasek, Shanahan, Robitaille, Hull and Chelios. Thats 5 hall of famers not drafted by Detroit. Sure Datsyuk had 35 points, Holmstrom 25. I'm not calling that a cup built on player development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's another one: is the so-called "Detroit model" even a "model"? It's not like they pioneered the concept of having competitive teams year in and year out rather than tanking. Every team wants to do this and has wanted to do this since the beginning of time, it's just that Detroit has been successful at it due to good drafting and acquisitions. They don't rebuild because they don't have to.

It's harder for a team to do this nowadays due to the salary cap and draft format obviously, but I don't think you can call it a "model" when really it's just being good at what you do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What are their impact players currently whom they have drafted?

Come on Surfer, you haven't done your homework.

9 of their top 10 scorers are their own draft picks. Their starting goaltender is their own pick.

Zetteburg

Datsyuk

Kronwall

Franzen

Tatar

Abdelkader

Nyquist

Andersson

Smith

Kindl

Helm

Dekeyser undrafted fa

Ericsson

Sheahan

Jurco

Glendening

Emmerton

Lashoff

Almquist

Marchenko

Ouellet

Howard

Mrazek

All their own 'products'. 22 players on their roster.

As for their 'vault' of prospects that you belittle, I'm going to venture to say that you aren't qualified to assess it - and probably don't have quite the idea of who the 'no names' (ironically) in their prospect pool are that their scouts, with a record that speaks for itself, do.

Their playoff success speaks for itself as well. I guess you missed last year's playoffs where their failing impact players and lack of young talent merely put them in a 7th game overtime with the Hawks in the second round. Some folks around here had already pencilled in their demise midseason.

I don't really see your point, or why you'd try to make one like this.

Call it a 'system', 'model', approach, group, braintrust, or whatever you want - they've made it work with a consistency that any team would want to emulate.

Anthony Mantha at 20th overall is the highest pick they've had since Kindl at 19th in 2005, the one time they've had a pick in the top 20 since 1991.

So you can go with the Edmonton 'model' if you want Surfer, but Detroit's would be more than welcome here.

Yeah, they make the most of what they have to work with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got Em Right

Don't forget LUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!

Mistakes

Ballard

Booth well, we bought low on him for Sturm and Sammy, so it's more of a calculated gamble; the 3rd rounder's also Cassels

Sturm

Roy

Pahlson

That's just off the top of my head. Please go into any previous canucks management and find that many good finds, good signings and good trades. People over criticize gillis for his few mistakes and want him fired but trust me this guy finds way more good players compared to bad. If gillis ever gets fired you will see him land a job quickly and go onto more success elsewhere. Vancouver fans never know what they have till it's gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the main thing that Detroit does right is that they place value in skill. Over the last decade they have consistently had the ability to out-talent teams that were clearly less skilled and less poised than them. These are things that can not happen when your depth players include Santorelli, Higgins, Richardson, Booth and a bunch of fourth liners. Sometimes grit and heart just isn't good enough.

Moral of the story?

Aging Skill > Gritty Youth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...