Jump to content

Photo

The Edmonton Oilers Bottom Out


  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#21 thecoffeecake

thecoffeecake

    Rookie Devil

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 424 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 12:41 PM

I gained a ton of respect for Scrivens after watching an interview with him about the jersey incident.


  • 0

Just call me RingDings: Mike Brown's dirty bottom bitch.


#22 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,543 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 12:47 PM

Firing Kreuger was fine - that team was not good and not going anywhere fast.  The Oilers issue is that they don't have players who play defense and there's very little accountability for the young players.  They've also signed some pretty bad veteran players over the years and retained others who were awful.  

 

I have a baseball simulation game called Baseball Mogul - one of the interesting things it did is that if you didn't spend money on scouting, your players' ratings would be something like 70 (out of 100), +/- 6.  This means that the player could be better or worse than your scouts think he is, but because your scouting stinks, you don't know (and since baseball stats are fickle like hockey ones, luck can be a large driver of single season performance).  That's the problem the Oilers have had for years - they cannot accurately judge the ability of any of their players and consequently the rest of the league.  They've got 2 defensemen - Petry, and Martin Marincin who looks like a Henrik Tallinder clone.  It's just really hard to build a good team when that's the kind of thing you're working with.


  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#23 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,656 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:07 PM

Firing Kreuger was fine - that team was not good and not going anywhere fast.  The Oilers issue is that they don't have players who play defense and there's very little accountability for the young players.  They've also signed some pretty bad veteran players over the years and retained others who were awful.  

 

I have a baseball simulation game called Baseball Mogul - one of the interesting things it did is that if you didn't spend money on scouting, your players' ratings would be something like 70 (out of 100), +/- 6.  This means that the player could be better or worse than your scouts think he is, but because your scouting stinks, you don't know (and since baseball stats are fickle like hockey ones, luck can be a large driver of single season performance).  That's the problem the Oilers have had for years - they cannot accurately judge the ability of any of their players and consequently the rest of the league.  They've got 2 defensemen - Petry, and Martin Marincin who looks like a Henrik Tallinder clone.  It's just really hard to build a good team when that's the kind of thing you're working with.

 

Who have they passed up in the draft that would have made the team much better than it is?  I mean, I'm sure there were those later round gems that they have never seemed to get.  But ultimately, they've done pretty well with their first round picks, with perhaps the exception of Yakupov, who was still widely considered the best player in that draft.  They also did pretty well by signing Schultz, and look to be addressing the defense finally with drafting Nurse, and probably taking Eklbad if he's available.

 

In the end, I think it just comes down to bad luck in not having those number 1 picks in years where there was a real stud talent.  I guess you can say Hall has come pretty close to living up to the billing as a number 1 pick, but he's been hurt a lot.   

 

That's of course, the problem with tearing it all down.  Even if you end up taking the best player that is in fact available in a particular draft year, it's only as good as the draft class, which seems to fluctuate remarkably at the edges.  Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.  And most of the teams that successfully rebuild don't seem to do so based on any great scouting insight.  At best, it just seems that you can avoid doing something very silly with your pick, like drafting Rick Dipietro. 

 

Maybe Buffalo has it right in stock piling a ton of picks.  If they get two relative diamonds in the rough with the picks they've traded for, in addition to the strong players that they should be getting by virtue of their own suckness, they might be in very good shape. 


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#24 sundstrom

sundstrom

    Hall of Famer

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,258 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:16 PM

the issue is that edmonton is not surrounding their high draft picks with quality talent and their coaching has clearly been suspect in that there is no discernible team strategy for a defensive game.

 

sure chicago drafted kane and toews and keith and seabrook. they also traded/acquired sharp, oduya, hossa, etc.


  • 0

"This team was never the same once we lost Patrik Sundstrom"- Lou Lamoriello


20082719943.png
_________________________________________________________________
“They’re the ones that makes it happen,” Lemaire said. “It’s not us. It’s not me. It’s not the other guy. It’s not the guy before. It’s not the guy after. It’s them. And they have to take care of business.”
-
"I guess I just miss my friend" (#28)


#25 squishyx

squishyx

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,281 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:18 PM

I gained a ton of respect for Scrivens after watching an interview with him about the jersey incident.

+1

link to save others from googling
http://www.cbssports...-throws-it-back


  • 1

#26 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,656 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:24 PM

the issue is that edmonton is not surrounding their high draft picks with quality talent and their coaching has clearly been suspect in that there is no discernible team strategy for a defensive game.

 

sure chicago drafted kane and toews and keith and seabrook. they also traded/acquired sharp, oduya, hossa, etc.

 

Yeah, but how good is Chicago if the stars don't allign correctly, and instead of Kane and Toews, they have RNH and Yakupov.  Or if Chicago has the number 1 pick in 2006, and goes with Erik Johnson, who was Central Scouting's BPA at the time.

 

I can't speak to Edmonton's coaching or global philosophy, but I don't see any shrewd moves that were plausible that would have made them much better than they are.   


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#27 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,543 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:30 PM

Who have they passed up in the draft that would have made the team much better than it is?  I mean, I'm sure there were those later round gems that they have never seemed to get.  But ultimately, they've done pretty well with their first round picks, with perhaps the exception of Yakupov, who was still widely considered the best player in that draft.  They also did pretty well by signing Schultz, and look to be addressing the defense finally with drafting Nurse, and probably taking Eklbad if he's available.

 

In the end, I think it just comes down to bad luck in not having those number 1 picks in years where there was a real stud talent.  I guess you can say Hall has come pretty close to living up to the billing as a number 1 pick, but he's been hurt a lot.   

 

That's of course, the problem with tearing it all down.  Even if you end up taking the best player that is in fact available in a particular draft year, it's only as good as the draft class, which seems to fluctuate remarkably at the edges.  Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.  And most of the teams that successfully rebuild don't seem to do so based on any great scouting insight.  At best, it just seems that you can avoid doing something very silly with your pick, like drafting Rick Dipietro. 

 

Maybe Buffalo has it right in stock piling a ton of picks.  If they get two relative diamonds in the rough with the picks they've traded for, in addition to the strong players that they should be getting by virtue of their own suckness, they might be in very good shape. 

 

Buffalo runs the risk of not having any good players once those picks become NHLers.  They should be trading some of those picks for NHL players, otherwise they could end up just like Edmonton.  


  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#28 Triumph

Triumph

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 27,543 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:33 PM

Yeah, but how good is Chicago if the stars don't allign correctly, and instead of Kane and Toews, they have RNH and Yakupov.  Or if Chicago has the number 1 pick in 2006, and goes with Erik Johnson, who was Central Scouting's BPA at the time.

 

I can't speak to Edmonton's coaching or global philosophy, but I don't see any shrewd moves that were plausible that would have made them much better than they are.   

 

They traded Lubomir Visnovsky for Ryan Whitney.  Whitney is a horrible defenseman, Visnovsky could've won a Norris Trophy in Anaheim.  Ryan Whitney left for nothing.

 

They traded Kyle Brodziak for a 5th round pick.  Kyle Brodziak was a 3rd line center in Minnesota.  Why is this player not useful to Edmonton?

 

The list of moves they've made while getting basically nothing back are staggering - players who can play NHL hockey get moved out, players who can't get brought in.  It's why they are still in a total mess.  It's not about the draft picks at all.  It's about managing your team, and Edmonton is a complete failure in this regard.  It's why when people want Lou to be canned, I think about how Edmonton is run and wonder about how the next guy is going to do things.  Lou may be a lot of things, but he is rarely swindled in trades.


Edited by Triumph, 24 March 2014 - 01:35 PM.

  • 0

http://drivingplay.blogspot.com - The blog with three first lines
 


#29 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,656 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 01:35 PM

Buffalo runs the risk of not having any good players once those picks become NHLers.  They should be trading some of those picks for NHL players, otherwise they could end up just like Edmonton.  

 

I get it.  And they didn't go completely with acquiring all draft picks.  Chris Stewart is pretty nice player.  And they might be pretty well served by re-signing someone like Tallinder.  Sometimes though, good NHL players just aren't available for the assets that you have.


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#30 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,656 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 02:00 PM

They traded Lubomir Visnovsky for Ryan Whitney.  Whitney is a horrible defenseman, Visnovsky could've won a Norris Trophy in Anaheim.  Ryan Whitney left for nothing.

 

They traded Kyle Brodziak for a 5th round pick.  Kyle Brodziak was a 3rd line center in Minnesota.  Why is this player not useful to Edmonton?

 

The list of moves they've made while getting basically nothing back are staggering - players who can play NHL hockey get moved out, players who can't get brought in.  It's why they are still in a total mess.  It's not about the draft picks at all.  It's about managing your team, and Edmonton is a complete failure in this regard.  It's why when people want Lou to be canned, I think about how Edmonton is run and wonder about how the next guy is going to do things.  Lou may be a lot of things, but he is rarely swindled in trades.

 

I'm not really saying that Edmonton has been that well managed.  In fact, I'm more or less agreeing with you that blowing it up, or in the Devils case, bringing in a new GM to fundamentally change things, is a risky strategy, even if it turns out we do relatively well with the draft picks and even if the GM isn't Mike Milbury bad. 

 

That said, some of the criticisms from the link are a little unfair.  Hemsky and Smyth were impending UFAs, so you can't really expect to get anything better than picks or prospects in return.  (Although you could call it bad asset management in letting them get that far).  A lot of those guys were traded again, and not for much of a return.


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#31 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,656 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 03:07 PM

In bolded:  for me, the rebuild alarm goes off when a team bottoms out, Devils 2010-11-style, over the course of at least one full season (I say 'at least' because some teams might think a singular disastrous season might be a fluke), and the GM decides that he is no longer spending more money to augment a bad core that is either aging or simply run its course. 

 

Clearly, the Devils are not in this kind of position (big difference between being 5 points out of a playoff spot, as opposed to 15+ and never being a factor), but you do wonder what this core is going to be going forward:

 

Schneider (if he re-signs, and we don't really know what kind of playoff goalie he is yet)

Zajac

Henrique

Clowe (due to contract)

Greene

Merrill

Gelinas

Larsson

 

A lot of guys who are here now won't be much longer (especially all of the 30-somethings), which is why I don't have them listed .  Zids and Jagr could be gone this offseason.  Elias has two years left after this one...maybe he re-signs after that...too soon to tell, impossible to predict the future of late 30-somethings.  Zubrus also has two years after this one and is almost certain not to get re-signed.  Won't surprise me if Lou tries to move him this offseason.   

 

The big question is does this list look like the beginnings of a "you can build around this" kind of core.  If all of the defenseman pan out (Greene has quietly become a nice reliable vet, which is why I have him on the core list...I get the feeling Lou will keep him here), then you can argue that it does.  But some of the current forwards clearly have to go. 

 

One thing to keep in mind:  a LOT of the current contracts on the books come off within two years.  This is good, in that it won't be as hard for Lou (or whomever) to change this team up as it sometimes feels: 

 

UFAs in 2014:  Jagr, Zids, Carter, Bernier, Gionta, Fayne, Brodeur   RFAs:  Josefson, Gelinas

UFAs in 2015:  Schneider, Ryder, Brunner, Sestito, Salvador, Greene, Harrold  

 

It's funny, if you look at the forwards that figure to be around for a while (most of whom you've listed, although I think Elias has a lot more left in the tank than people give him credit for, I'll also take Lou and Jagr at their word that he'll be back at least next year), it's not all that different from what the Rangers had at forward anyway in getting the ECF in 2012, and having a very good regular season to boot.  We're supposed to have a goalie that's pretty much as good as Lunqvist, and a defense corps that's as good top to bottom as what the Rangers had that year. 

 

I know we want all want to go back to the early 2000s where it was Cup or bust, but there has to be some degree of realism when it comes to saying whether the team has been successful. 


  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#32 Colorado Rockies 1976

Colorado Rockies 1976

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,364 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 03:23 PM

It's funny, if you look at the forwards that figure to be around for a while (most of whom you've listed, although I think Elias has a lot more left in the tank than people give him credit for, I'll also take Lou and Jagr at their word that he'll be back at least next year), it's not all that different from what the Rangers had at forward anyway in getting the ECF in 2012, and having a very good regular season to boot.  We're supposed to have a goalie that's pretty much as good as Lunqvist, and a defense corps that's as good top to bottom as what the Rangers had that year. 

 

I know we want all want to go back to the early 2000s where it was Cup or bust, but there has to be some degree of realism when it comes to saying whether the team has been successful. 

 

I'm sure the Devils will love it if Boucher soon becomes part of that core, to the tune of 25-30 goals by next season (would be awesome) or the season after (better chance of this).  I can't make him a part of anything until he sticks for a full season though and produces. 

 

Jagr went on record yesterday basically saying that if the Devils don't make the playoffs this year, he's probably not sticking around.  That of course can change if Lou can convince him that changes are coming, and that he's going to unload some of the deadwood.  The great news is that only Zajac, Henrique, and Clowe are signed long-term (beyond 2016).  There's some flexibility here.   


  • 0
THE NHL MUST LOVE THE DEVILS - from who else? A RANGER fan!
[Mark Messier]: A big, bald attention whore with a stupid Easter Island-lookin face. - from who else? DaneykoIsGod!

Even when Marty comes back maybe Larry should put Clemmensen to be on the goal during the shootouts.
Can the coach do that ? Switch the goalies 5 seconds to go in overtime?
- Most priceless quote ever posted on a message board.

Martin Brodeur: THE MOST ALL-TIME WINS!, 12 straight seasons of 30+ wins, 3 Stanley Cups, 4 Vezina Trophies, and zero respect from too many so-called Devils "fans" who are either too young or too bandwagon to remember the much darker days of Sean Burke, Craig Billington, Bob Sauve, Alain Chevrier, and the talented but overwhelmed Chico Resch, among many others.

It's easy to support a great player when he's playing at his very best. It takes a true fan to support that same player during those rare moments and stretches when he's not. Babe Ruth went 0-4 some games, and sometimes Wayne Gretzky was held pointless. There may be such a thing as greatness, but no such thing as absolute perfection every single night.

#30 FOREVER!

20 out of 1,946 njdevs.com members agree: CR1976 is the Most Knowledgable Poster of 2008! Victory is mine...oh yes, victory is mine!

#33 Daniel

Daniel

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,656 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 03:35 PM

I'm sure the Devils will love it if Boucher soon becomes part of that core, to the tune of 25-30 goals by next season (would be awesome) or the season after (better chance of this). I can't make him a part of anything until he sticks for a full season though and produces.

Jagr went on record yesterday basically saying that if the Devils don't make the playoffs this year, he's probably not sticking around. That of course can change if Lou can convince him that changes are coming, and that he's going to unload some of the deadwood. The great news is that only Zajac, Henrique, and Clowe are signed long-term (beyond 2016). There's some flexibility here.


Was not aware of Jagr's statements yesterday. Very scary if that's the way it turns out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • 0
Posted Image
I collect spores, molds and fungus.
Hello fellow American. This you should vote me. I leave power. Good. Thank you, thank you. If you vote me, I'm hot. What? Taxes, they'll be lower... son. The Democratic vote is the right thing to do Philadelphia, so do.
How do you spot risk? How do you avoid risk? And what makes it so risky?

#34 devilsrule33

devilsrule33

    A Legend

  • Mod
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,997 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 03:37 PM

I'm sure the Devils will love it if Boucher soon becomes part of that core, to the tune of 25-30 goals by next season (would be awesome) or the season after (better chance of this).  I can't make him a part of anything until he sticks for a full season though and produces. 

 

Jagr went on record yesterday basically saying that if the Devils don't make the playoffs this year, he's probably not sticking around.  That of course can change if Lou can convince him that changes are coming, and that he's going to unload some of the deadwood.  The great news is that only Zajac, Henrique, and Clowe are signed long-term (beyond 2016).  There's some flexibility here.   

 

That's some impressive back-peddling. I warned people not to take what Jagr said earlier and run with it, or they'd only be disappointed with the result and probably end up booing him next year. Didn't help that the media took his wanting to come back line and ran wild with it.

 

Jagr will be 43 next season. He should chose wisely where he wants to play. If he wants to win, then he probably shouldn't be back with the Devils. The man should be a supporting piece right now and not a player the team heavily relies on every night to be their best offensive weapon.


  • 0

logokx.jpg

"The Stanley Cup has fallen from the Stars. The new millennium has its first Stanley Cup Champion, and it's the New Jersey Devils." Mike Miller calling the Devils winning the Stanley Cup.

"It goes to the captain and then there are handoffs during a skate around the ice" Mike Emrick as Scott Stevens is being presented the Stanley Cup.


#35 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,399 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 03:46 PM

I'll expand on what I said about Jagr in the other thread by adding that people need to stop fawning over the players who know how to tell you what you want to hear and start respecting the players who are just honest. It's a lot harder to get hurt that way.


  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#36 Colorado Rockies 1976

Colorado Rockies 1976

    A Legend

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,364 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 03:49 PM

That's some impressive back-peddling. I warned people not to take what Jagr said earlier and run with it, or they'd only be disappointed with the result and probably end up booing him next year. Didn't help that the media took his wanting to come back line and ran wild with it.

 

Jagr will be 43 next season. He should chose wisely where he wants to play. If he wants to win, then he probably shouldn't be back with the Devils. The man should be a supporting piece right now and not a player the team heavily relies on every night to be their best offensive weapon.

 

Agree, Jagr doesn't owe the Devils anything and if he doesn't think he can win here (and if things remain roughly status quo, I can understand where he's coming from), it's pretty hard to get on him, especially since it's not like he's on a two-year deal and saying, "They'd better trade me if we don't make the playoffs."  The ball is 100% in his court. 


  • 0
THE NHL MUST LOVE THE DEVILS - from who else? A RANGER fan!
[Mark Messier]: A big, bald attention whore with a stupid Easter Island-lookin face. - from who else? DaneykoIsGod!

Even when Marty comes back maybe Larry should put Clemmensen to be on the goal during the shootouts.
Can the coach do that ? Switch the goalies 5 seconds to go in overtime?
- Most priceless quote ever posted on a message board.

Martin Brodeur: THE MOST ALL-TIME WINS!, 12 straight seasons of 30+ wins, 3 Stanley Cups, 4 Vezina Trophies, and zero respect from too many so-called Devils "fans" who are either too young or too bandwagon to remember the much darker days of Sean Burke, Craig Billington, Bob Sauve, Alain Chevrier, and the talented but overwhelmed Chico Resch, among many others.

It's easy to support a great player when he's playing at his very best. It takes a true fan to support that same player during those rare moments and stretches when he's not. Babe Ruth went 0-4 some games, and sometimes Wayne Gretzky was held pointless. There may be such a thing as greatness, but no such thing as absolute perfection every single night.

#30 FOREVER!

20 out of 1,946 njdevs.com members agree: CR1976 is the Most Knowledgable Poster of 2008! Victory is mine...oh yes, victory is mine!

#37 NJDevs26

NJDevs26

    All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,336 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 03:53 PM

It's hilarious anyone believed Jagr in the first place since he's a career merc.  Although if he wanted to play on a winner so badly he shouldn't have made a public spectacle over not wanting to be traded when the Devils were a few points out of a spot.


  • 0

#38 Neb00rs

Neb00rs

    Hall of Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,399 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 03:59 PM

I mean I'm not really angry at Jagr. The secret for me was that I just never became to attached, he's only been here for a few months. The minute he started saying good things about NJ, I said to myself "okay, let's see what you have to say at game 75." I have no issue here. Jagr is being Jagr; he gave us more than we could ever ask for out of him. If he wants to move on, I will salute his performance here and let him slip my mind.


  • 0

gallery_47_36_882.png of No One
Proud to be King of the Kovalnuts (Est. June 2010 by MantaRay)


#39 DJ Eco

DJ Eco

    Assistant Coach

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,393 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 04:05 PM

+1

link to save others from googling
http://www.cbssports...-throws-it-back

 

WHOA, what a response haha... Good for him, and spoken like a true fan.


  • 0

#40 CHIP72

CHIP72

    Prospect

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 81 posts

Posted 24 March 2014 - 04:19 PM

This thread is somewhat ironic considering the Devils franchise itself is an excellent example of both a rebuild (or more accurately, a build) not working and also rebuild done right.  Back in their nomadic days (i.e. the two years in Kansas City, the six years in Denver, and the first 2-3 years in north Jersey), the Scouts/Rockies/Devils franchise was perpetually looking to make a quick fix to acquire depth at the expense of keeping young, high end talent.  They'd trade quality for quantity, and also trade future draft choices (which usually ended up being very high picks) for solid but unspectacular current players.  Not coincidentally, during the franchise's first 10-11 years of existence, they usually had average-aged teams but were at best mediocre and often bad, never finishing the season with more than 59 points.  Then in about 1985 (a couple years before Lou Lamoriello joined the franchise), the Devils decided they were going to build with young players, focus more on scouting, and take some lumps but find out who could play, who couldn't play, and who could be useful trade assets.  That focus increased when Lamoriello came in.  They still weren't very good for a few more years, but they showed gradual improvement and finally had their first winning season in 1988 and after taking a step back in 1989, began their run of being consistently good to really good every year for two decades in 1990.  Three of those young 1980s players who suffered through the Devils' growing pains (Ken Daneyko, John MacLean, and Bruce Driver) were still there and contributed to the Stanley Cup win in 1995.

 

IMO, the big things the Devils need to do are 1) get younger in general and 2) make sure the older players on the team are character guys with at least moderate ability.  IMO, the Devils are doing #2 but aren't doing #1 enough.  A rebuild doesn't automatically mean you get rid of every veteran, but it does involve playing some younger guys and seeing what they can and cannot do.


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users