Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Stars trade Jaromir Jagr to Bruins


  • Please log in to reply
86 replies to this topic

#81 St. Michael (the Red Wing)

St. Michael (the Red Wing)

    Heavenly With the Puck

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,822 posts
  • Location:Mankato, MN

Posted 02 April 2013 - 06:46 PM

Makes my Tuesday that we didn't get Jagr!

 

WOO-HOO.



#82 Red Crazy

Red Crazy

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 639 posts
  • Location:Manitoba, Canada

Posted 02 April 2013 - 07:35 PM

And I tell you that the days of unlimited spending are over, and that there's no way in the salary-cap era for teams to always succeed. Sharper planning and more involved decision-making are involved, and the mechanics are constantly working against the more successful teams. Guess what? BECAUSE the Wings are successful, KH gets no high picks of any sort to work with. Chicago and Pittsburgh are so successful now in large part because they were horrible enough to get some very high draft picks. Would you like to pay that price? Probably not. But it's necessary the Wings to develop from within if they're going to continue to have any modicum for success while also building for the future.

 

 

 

It is the goal of EVERY TEAM in EVERY SPORT to win the championship every year, so I don't see your point.

 

 

 

This is debatable. If a deadline acquisition plays for your team, does not win the Cup, and leaves in the offseason, then you have lost your prospects and/or picks for nothing. Many teams make deadline deals every season, but ultimately only one team wins the Cup. As for prospects, the team has nine (Sproul, Ouellet, Tatar, Nyquist, Sheahan, Frk, Pulkkinen, Jurco, and Mrazek) that at present would be foolish to give away. As others have said---and it is true---this is a team that is rebuilding on the fly. Buying success is no longer possible. The teams that have won the Cup in the past four seasons have done so mainly on the strength of players whom they drafted and developed, and they drafted many of those players from high picks that were achieved from bottom-feeding seasons.

 

I'll list these players (first-rounders noted):

 

Pittsburgh (2009): Crosby (1st overall), Malkin (2nd overall), Staal (2nd overall), Fleury (1st overall), Orpik (18th overall), Letang, Kennedy, Scuderi, Talbot

Chicago (2010): Kane (1st overall), Toews (3rd overall), Seabrook (14th overall), Hjalmarsson, Keith, Brouwer, Byfuglien, Bolland

Boston (2011): Seguin (2nd overall), Bergeron, Krejci, Lucic, Marchand

Los Angeles (2012): Kopitar (11th overall), Brown (10th overall), Doughty (2nd overall), Voynov, Lewis (17th overall), Bernier (11th overall), Quick, King, Martinez

 

The above players, most particularly (italicized for emphasis) those drafted high in the 1st round, provided the meat for those Stanley Cup-winning teams. The contributions of Toews, Kane, Kopitar, Brown, Crosby, and Malkin require no explanation, and the highest pick used to select one of those was #11. For that matter, the lowest 1st-round-drafted player I listed above went at #18. In contrast, the highest pick that Holland has had (Kindl) since he has been with the Wings was #19. The highest pick that the Wings had before that? 10th overall... in 1991.

 

That's just how things go now. Want the Wings to remain successful? Great, but be aware that it'll come at the cost of never having any of these superstar draft picks unless KH and his team get very fortunate (as they often have). That's something the organization will always need to contend with. But in the salary cap era, it's doubly vital to develop the good prospects that the team does obtain. On that subject, consider if Datsyuk, Zetterberg, or Kronwall had been sent away as a part of a deadline deal when they were still prospects. This team would look very different now, almost certainly for the worse. And at this stage of time, KH can even more not risk sending away the next potential superstar prospect, because there's no longer the buffer of higher spending.

 

Like it or not, that's how it is. KH & company have been able to maintain the team's momentum since the lockout better than any other team in the league, but the system is constantly working against them in this.

My point is that if the Red Wings really want to take a run at winning the Cup then why stand pat and do nothing that improves this team. And No it is not every teams goal to win a Championship every year. Some teams are just happy to make the playoffs and I never want to see the Red Wings become one of these teams.



#83 Crymson

Crymson

    Ninjelephant

  • Gold Booster
  • 11,032 posts
  • Location:Denver, CO, USA

Posted 02 April 2013 - 08:36 PM

My point is that if the Red Wings really want to take a run at winning the Cup then why stand pat and do nothing that improves this team. And No it is not every teams goal to win a Championship every year. Some teams are just happy to make the playoffs and I never want to see the Red Wings become one of these teams.

 

Every team wants to win the championship, and they put in their efforts toward making that a fact. Some know that they have a smaller or a larger chance than others.

 

Adding players at the deadline is a calculated risk. This team doesn't appear to be in a position by which introducing one or two players will put the team in Cup contention, so the risk is not presently worth it. 



#84 Red Crazy

Red Crazy

    2nd Line Scorer

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 639 posts
  • Location:Manitoba, Canada

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:08 PM

Every team wants to win the championship, and they put in their efforts toward making that a fact. Some know that they have a smaller or a larger chance than others.

 

Adding players at the deadline is a calculated risk. This team doesn't appear to be in a position by which introducing one or two players will put the team in Cup contention, so the risk is not presently worth it. 

Really? I think that adding a couple of pieces would make this team a contender. Not sure if those pieces will be available though. Louis Erickson would even go a long way.



#85 stillwater

stillwater

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 829 posts
  • Location:ontario

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:14 PM

Really? I think that adding a couple of pieces would make this team a contender. Not sure if those pieces will be available though. Louis Erickson would even go a long way.

 

Really? What do you think it would take to land one of Dallas' best players, who is signed to a team friendly cap hit for the next 3 seasons?

 

Why would Dallas trade Loui Eriksson?


Edited by stillwater, 02 April 2013 - 09:14 PM.


#86 Crymson

Crymson

    Ninjelephant

  • Gold Booster
  • 11,032 posts
  • Location:Denver, CO, USA

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:27 PM

Really? I think that adding a couple of pieces would make this team a contender. Not sure if those pieces will be available though. Louis Erickson would even go a long way.

 

Loui Eriksson is untouchable.

 

Really? What do you think it would take to land one of Dallas' best players, who is signed to a team friendly cap hit for the next 3 seasons?

 

Why would Dallas trade Loui Eriksson?

 

I think he is their best. A guy who can regularly put up 70-point seasons on a mediocre team while playing a very solid two-way game? Yes, please!



#87 stillwater

stillwater

    1st Line Sniper

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 829 posts
  • Location:ontario

Posted 02 April 2013 - 09:32 PM

For me it's Jamie Benn, but I concur that Eriksson is untouchable.







Similar Topics Collapse

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users