Alflives Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 3 minutes ago, spook007 said: Well that give them another 2 years, Yes? One more draft, and then until September 2018 to have their new core in place. Didnt they take over in 2013? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolboarder Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 A rebuild is a building of a team without actually ruining our prospects. If they are not ready, we just simply fill in a UFA as a temporary stop-gap until they are fully ready for a big league. Examples: Vanek, Gagner, Burmistrov signings. If Sedin is in a serious decline and there are nothing we can do about it until their contract is off the books. We want to separate Sedin's influence from their decline so that our young prospects do not fall into a bad +habit by their example/play and ingrain them with a losing mentally because of the Sedins. If there are a potential strong team in Utica then we might as well take advantage of it, ingrain them with the winning culture for our prospects and when the Sedin is gone, the winning mentality would still be there when they finally make the team. That's the rebuilding, not a shortcut route, aka the Oilers for a decade. Drafting prospects takes 3-7 years before starting their impact on this team slowly if you are starting from a bare cupboard which we did when we hired Benning. That is what I'm trying to figure out what Benning is thinking and could be that answer without actually saying it out loud in public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrCanuck94 Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 Unless you have the chance to draft a McDavid/Matthews esque player, a quick rebuild is impossible. "Do it like TO, EDM, BUF did" Well yea they tanked and got the top picks. We tank and drop till #5, but let's blame JB on that? Take McDavid and Matthews off their teams and EDM is still a crap team and TOR is competitive, but not as good as they are right now. I've supported about 95% of Lindenning's moves but I do agree on the fact that we have too many "vets" on the roster. I am all for earning spots but a couple more spots would be nice, BUT to say that we haven't been rebuilding is nonsense. Yeah we should've started in 2013 but JB and his crew made a decision to try for the twins and it didn't work out, they recognize that. Our prospect pool is the best it's EVER been and at the same time we accumulated a lot of good players in their mid 20's as well. Once all our youngin's start making the team, that's when the fruition of JB's work will show, have patience. That said, if the hockey gods are with us in the next couple of drafts and we draft an elite forward and defence man, mixed with a couple of high end signings with the cap we will be gaining, and some trades, things will start looking up sooner than later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 Take every opportunity you can to transition and improve your team. Draft Trade market Free agent market Make certain that you balance your assets - and by that, I mean don't put all your eggs in a few shiny forwards you take high in the draft. That is nowhere near enough - nowhere near a 'rebuild' - at least not one that has a hope in hell of being successful. Numerous mediocre examples of this failed approach. It's not a simple linear process. Ie you don't forego signing veteran free agents because you have your mind set on a simplistic, reductive conception of what a transition/rebuild is - ie. simply 'stockpiling' picks is not a rebuild strategy - it's like conceiving of a team's hockey systems as 'dump and chase' - it's nowhere near that simple. No team in the real world operates that way. Every Deadmonton, Toronto, Buffalo, etc sign free agents, some of them veterans, for different purposes. Every rebuilding team needs to take advantage of the free agent market - young and old, college, veteran UFA or otherwise. Some of them are simple place holders, some of them simply don't pan out, some of them are flipped eventually for picks, some of them are to provide leadership/mentorship, some to protect youth from being overexposed, or targetted, some to up the level of internal competition - or w.h.y. (there are numerous reasons to sign vets, even in a 'rebuild'. Every team needs to take advantage of the trade market - plain and simple - when opportunities, particularly good, calcultated risks, present themselves. Every team needs to draft and develop well. This is not and should not be the exclusive means utilized - no real world team depends solely on their drafting, but it needs to be done well, and those players need to have a good development system to prepare them for NHL readiness. Needless to say, it's a good idea to prioritize hanging onto your 1st round picks. There is no simple formula - it's an ongoing process which requires taking effective advantage of every opportunity possible to build asset value, depth and quality in your organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook007 Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 6 minutes ago, Alflives said: One more draft, and then until September 2018 to have their new core in place. Didnt they take over in 2013? JB was hired by Canucks May 23, 2014... So I'd say 2 more drafts, but definitely at least 1 more draft followed by a season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingofsurrey Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 A proper rebuild is NOT loading up on older washed up UFA's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 6 minutes ago, Alflives said: One more draft, and then until September 2018 to have their new core in place. Didnt they take over in 2013? 2018 you'll start to see Benning work. It certainly doesn't mean "the core" will be in place. You'd likely need 12 first rounds picks (several of those in top 10) in 4 years to accomplish a set core in that time frame. Or have had several young players on the roster to start with. Core players reveal themselves over time in the NHL. Granlund could become a core player or a trade piece, Time decides that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 Just now, kingofsurrey said: A proper rebuild is NOT loading up on older washed up UFA's. You need somebody to replace all those aging vets moved out. We didn't have a prospect pool to replace them with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuardian_ Posted October 15, 2017 Author Share Posted October 15, 2017 3 hours ago, TheGuardian_ said: is any different than what lets say Columbus, Nashville or Chicago is doing now. Would you say that these teams are rebuilding? And yet they have more rookies playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alt kilgore Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 Like has been said, you need a big stable of prospects / draft picks combined with some veteran leadership still playing. I think Benning has been giving away too many draft picks for the amount he is getting back. Its been about 6 draft picks he has traded away since being here. I don't think he has even broken even on that score. But the prospects he has gotten may balance that out. The twin elephants in the dressing room are the Sedins. And now we might include Eriksson as well. They chew up 20 million in cap space, and yet Benning and Linden still see the need to get more vets in the lineup. If the Sedins were even 2/3 what they once were, and Eriksson was as well, Benning may not have felt the need to bolster up the vet contributions. It is eating away the ice time of our prospects at at time when they should be playing. Virtanen and Goldy should be playing. I'd like to have seen Archibald in the line up as well. I think Benning and Linden still have not embraced the rebuild enough. The balance of prospects to vets is off. And one of the reasons is the untradable (even if they were willing) big 3 on the team. In an ideal rebuild, these 'superstars' would take up much more of that veteran skill and production so that we could have more kids in the lineup, and would not feel compelled to stack the team with more vets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Odd. Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 1 hour ago, Baggins said: We've been rebuilding since Linden/Benning took over. What would have been unfair tio the Sedins was intentionally tanking the team. Of course during any form of rebuild there's the risk of hitting bottom. The Sedins have said themselves they're fine with going through a rebuild. Just because you didn't get the rebuild you wanted (intentional tank) doesn't mean we haven't been rebuilding all along. No we haven't. The rebuild did not begin when Linden/Benning took over. The idea at the time of their arrival was to be competitive again and compete for the playoffs. The 'rebuild' I would say started mid-way last season by trading Burrows and Hansen. 7 minutes ago, kingofsurrey said: A proper rebuild is NOT loading up on older washed up UFA's. Yep, let's just throw the youth to the wolves and hope that they learn to survive on their own. Cause that's definitely how you build a team. Vanek, Gagner, Burmistrov are all temporary stop gaps until our next wave of prospects (Pettersson, Juolevi, Dahlen, Goldobin, etc) are ready. Then they're off loaded for picks and more prospects! Gee, great asset management, isn't it? But nooo, let's just do what the Oilers did that made them suck for 10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolboarder Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 9 minutes ago, coolboarder said: A rebuild is a building of a team without actually ruining our prospects. If they are not ready, we just simply fill in a UFA as a temporary stop-gap until they are fully ready for a big league. Examples: Vanek, Gagner, Burmistrov signings. If Sedin is in a serious decline and there are nothing we can do about it until their contract is off the books. We want to separate Sedin's influence from their decline so that our young prospects do not fall into a bad +habit by their example/play and ingrain them with a losing mentally because of the Sedins. If there are a potential strong team in Utica then we might as well take advantage of it, ingrain them with the winning culture for our prospects and when the Sedin is gone, the winning mentality would still be there when they finally make the team. That's the rebuilding, not a shortcut route, aka the Oilers for a decade. Drafting prospects takes 3-7 years before starting their impact on this team slowly if you are starting from a bare cupboard which we did when we hired Benning. That is what I'm trying to figure out what Benning is thinking and could be that answer without actually saying it out loud in public. I would like to add my thoughts. Since teams development program in the NHL are different. No development are all the same method of developing their prospects. If we are taking advantage of the trade market. Had we traded for that prospect three years ago with Kesler trade rumor, example: Pouliot as our target and develop him in Utica, I doubt that he would be the player he is today. Sometimes it's better to let our targeted player develop in other minor league teams and when we feel that he might be ready, we make a move for him. I mean, he really looked good in his debut last night, helping our team in different way and could be an impact player for us down the road. Sometimes it doesn't work out for the Pens but could be working out well for us. We add a little bit here and there and make a few tinkering moves and who knows, he could pan out well for us and be a keeper. Trading and drafting are the key to building a team. It's like putting together a puzzle on many needs one at a time. If the puzzle piece doesn't fit in our plan, we hold that piece for later when puzzle begins to show its picture and fit in a missing puzzle to complete our rebuild. I feel that we are at about 50% of the puzzle being completed and have long ways to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 2 minutes ago, kilgore said: Like has been said, you need a big stable of prospects / draft picks combined with some veteran leadership still playing. I think Benning has been giving away too many draft picks for the amount he is getting back. Its been about 6 draft picks he has traded away since being here. I don't think he has even broken even on that score. But the prospects he has gotten may balance that out. The twin elephants in the dressing room are the Sedins. And now we might include Eriksson as well. They chew up 20 million in cap space, and yet Benning and Linden still see the need to get more vets in the lineup. If the Sedins were even 2/3 what they once were, and Eriksson was as well, Benning may not have felt the need to bolster up the vet contributions. It is eating away the ice time of our prospects at at time when they should be playing. Virtanen and Goldy should be playing. I'd like to have seen Archibald in the line up as well. I think Benning and Linden still have not embraced the rebuild enough. The balance of prospects to vets is off. And one of the reasons is the untradable (even if they were willing) big 3 on the team. In an ideal rebuild, these 'superstars' would take up much more of that veteran skill and production so that we could have more kids in the lineup, and would not feel compelled to stack the team with more vets. I think someone posted before JB traded away 12 picks, and most of those were 2nd and 3rds. That’s not my biggest issue though. As others have correctly pointed out, JB has two more years for his youth to emerge. My concern is he’s missed on too many of his top picks in round one. When the rebuild is done, it’s often those top picks that make the difference between a competitive team, and needing to rebuild again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 Just now, coolboarder said: I would like to add my thoughts. Since teams development program in the NHL are different. No development are all the same method of developing their prospects. If we are taking advantage of the trade market. Had we traded for that prospect three years ago with Kesler trade rumor, example: Pouliot as our target and develop him in Utica, I doubt that he would be the player he is today. Sometimes it's better to let our targeted player develop in other minor league teams and when we feel that he might be ready, we make a move for him. I mean, he really looked good in his debut last night, helping our team in different way and could be an impact player for us down the road. Sometimes it doesn't work out for the Pens but could be working out well for us. We add a little bit here and there and make a few tinkering moves and who knows, he could pan out well for us and be a keeper. Trading and drafting are the key to building a team. It's like putting together a puzzle on many needs one at a time. If the puzzle piece doesn't fit in our plan, we hold that piece for later when puzzle begins to show its picture and fit in a missing puzzle to complete our rebuild. I feel that we are at about 50% of the puzzle being completed and have long ways to go. There is a time limit on finishing the puzzle though. We need our next core to around the same age, or the Cap and other issues come into play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggins Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 1 minute ago, Odd. said: No we haven't. The rebuild did not begin when Linden/Benning took over. The memo at the time of their arrival was to be competitive again and compete for the playoffs. The 'rebuild' I would say started mid-way last season by trading Burrows and Hansen. No, we've been rebuilding from day 1. Get younger (rebuild), while trying to remain competitve for a playoff spot. They tried to move Hamhuis and Vrbata the year before. Why wasn't that an indication of rebuilding? Just because Hansen and Burrows were more agreeable with their ntc's doesn't mean we weren't rebuilding prior to that. Prior to that Booth and Higgins were bought out, and Kesler, Garrison, and Bieksa were traded. Those weren't indications of a rebuild under way? Then of course there were young players that hadn't established themselves in the NHL that they traded for. Vey, Etem, Baertschi and Granlund all fall into that category. Those were rebuilding moves as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CeeBee51 Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 9 minutes ago, Alflives said: I think someone posted before JB traded away 12 picks, and most of those were 2nd and 3rds. That’s not my biggest issue though. As others have correctly pointed out, JB has two more years for his youth to emerge. My concern is he’s missed on too many of his top picks in round one. When the rebuild is done, it’s often those top picks that make the difference between a competitive team, and needing to rebuild again. It's not only how many were traded away but how many came back in trades. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolboarder Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 2 minutes ago, Alflives said: There is a time limit on finishing the puzzle though. We need our next core to around the same age, or the Cap and other issues come into play. Yes but time limit should be longer for a GM with prospect cupboard being bare. 7-8 drafting years should be a timeframe because it's a realistic time frame plan because teams can go a decade without a playoff spot in their rebuilding years and it should be a new norm, not 3-4 years. It takes 23 man roster to complete a roster turnover, not 4-8 drafted players in 3-4 years. 10 years with 2 NHLers produced per draft year would yield 20 players. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 Just now, CeeBee51 said: It's not only how many were traded away but how many came back in trades. How about keep them all, and have more prospects competing with each? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 29 minutes ago, TheGuardian_ said: Would you say that these teams are rebuilding? And yet they have more rookies playing. You're talking to yourself Guardian. And you're conflating two things - having rebuilt, whether that ever really took place (when?) and rebuilding. Columbus: Ryan Murray = 2nd overall Zach Werenski = 8th overall PL Dubois = 3rd overall Alex Wennberg = 14th overall Seth Jones = 4th overall / RJo= 4th overall Artemi Panarin = elite free agent signing acquired for / Saad, acquired for / Anisimov acquired for / Rick Nash = 1st overall = also equals Brandon Dubinsky. Adding a Boone Jenner (2nd round pick) via the draft Adding Bobrovsky for a 2nd and 2x 4ths don't hurt either Sonny Milano = 16th overall Nick Foligno acquired for Marc Methot. Sprinkle in a couple late picks like Atkinson, Bjorkstrand, and Savard.... Jake Vorachek = 7th overall - use him to acquire Jeff Carter - deal him for Jack Johsnon = 3rd overall.... Nah, they're not presently 'rebuilding'. Wonder how they got those young assets on their roster though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alflives Posted October 15, 2017 Share Posted October 15, 2017 1 minute ago, coolboarder said: Yes but time limit should be longer for a GM with prospect cupboard being bare. 7-8 drafting years should be a timeframe because it's a realistic time frame plan because teams can go a decade without a playoff spot in their rebuilding years and it should be a new norm, not 3-4 years. It takes 23 man roster to complete a roster turnover, not 4-8 drafted players in 3-4 years. 10 years with 2 NHLers produced per draft year would yield 20 players. Just saying. True, but It’s those top picks that really make the difference IMHAO. JB can’t be missing on those. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.