Is it possible/plausible for you to elaborate please?
- walshyleafsfan

Hey, I'll give Lou and Shanahan credit, they are selling their plan better than Linden and Benning. I personally think it's a terrible plan but I am just a casual Las Vegas hockey fan so what do I know. Marner, Matthews and Willie are going to develop just like Yak, Gagner, Eberle and Hall. Rough way to learn the pro game.

That is my point...the kids are being thrown to the wolves with a sad list of veterans like that. Other than Rielly (who is still a kid), it's a roster of plugs.
- CanuckDon

What are you talking about? What do you feel the role of veterans are?

Do you think you need elite veterans to turn promising kids into good players? Who did Tavares learn from? Jamie Benn? Kane? Toews?

There's so much more that veterans can do for the younger kids, than, "Hey, do what i do and you'll be fine".

The kids won't be thrown to the wolves at all. Matthews and Nylander will start on the same line according to Babcock. That line will be the 3rd. Giving them offensive zone stars, and trying to keep them away from the opponents top line (or two).

It's very hard with you Don. We all say we are open to dialect and discussion regardless of the team anyone follows, however, with yourself, it's very much 1967, Leafs suck etc.etc.

I'm more than willing to discuss the pros and cons of either a) the Leafs rebuild or b) the Nucks rebuild, but you have to be willing to have a discussion and not act like you have been doing.

Cheers

What are you talking about? What do you feel the role of veterans are?

Do you think you need elite veterans to turn promising kids into good players? Who did Tavares learn from? Jamie Benn? Kane? Toews?

There's so much more that veterans can do for the younger kids, than, "Hey, do what i do and you'll be fine".

The kids won't be thrown to the wolves at all. Matthews and Nylander will start on the same line according to Babcock. That line will be the 3rd. Giving them offensive zone stars, and trying to keep them away from the opponents top line (or two).

It's very hard with you Don. We all say we are open to dialect and discussion regardless of the team anyone follows, however, with yourself, it's very much 1967, Leafs suck etc.etc.

I'm more than willing to discuss the pros and cons of either a) the Leafs rebuild or b) the Nucks rebuild, but you have to be willing to have a discussion and not act like you have been doing.

Cheers
- walshyleafsfan

I wouldn't bring up 1967 as the Canucks haven't won a cup and were a terrible team last year. Personally, I like the fact that the Canucks have quality veterans around to teach the next generation. Sorry, I just think the Leafs have poor quality veterans and the kids won't be insulated. I understand that may come across as the "Leafs suck" etc. but that's not my intention.

Hey, I'll give Lou and Shanahan credit, they are selling their plan better than Linden and Benning. I personally think it's a terrible plan but I am just a casual Las Vegas hockey fan so what do I know. Marner, Gagner, Matthews and Willie are going to develop just like Yak, Eberle and Hall. Rough way to learn the pro game.
- CanuckDon

We don't have Gagner, but you may be right, i haven't followed him in a while.

Again, can you elaborate please? You seem to be just throwing out random statements, and there (as far as i can see) seems to be no basis for them.

The only thing i can see in common with the players you listed (not so much Gagner) is that they're young. What we can state with some confidence so far for Nylander and Marner, is that have had very different pathways to the NHL compared to Yak, Hall and Eberle.

Matthews are Nylander for sure. Doubtful on Marner.

They'll also have a mixture of Soshnikov, Hyman and Brown.

I'm sure you'll agree, teams can afford 3 or 4 rookies on a 23 man roster.

Veterans I'd say will be Laich, Polak, Bozak, Van Riemsdyk, Martin, Greening, Michalek, Lupul (for 18 or so games) and Hunwick.

Middle ground you'd be looking at Kadri, Holland, Rielly, Gardiner, Andersen, Enroth and an older rookie in Zaitsev.
- walshyleafsfan

I can see him getting the Virtanen/McCann treatment with the Leafs. I am not a fan of the kid, but he is way too good for Jr hockey. He at least needs to get to the 39 game mark (or whatever the max is before he gets credit for a full season). Pressbox, practice, gym and a few NHL games will be better than trying to score 200 points in 60 OHL games

I wouldn't bring up 1967 as the Canucks haven't won a cup and were a terrible team last year. Personally, I like the fact that the Canucks have quality veterans around to teach the next generation. Sorry, I just think the Leafs have poor quality veterans and the kids won't be insulated. I understand that may come across as the "Leafs suck" etc. but that's not my intention.
- CanuckDon

I think what might come back to bite them, is the veterans they have are not as invested with the team. The Canuck veterans have long term investment in the team and community, like Sedins, Edler, Hansen, Hamhuis (when he was here) etc. I get the feeling that a lot of the Leaf vets are expected to be traded, on expiring contracts, or signed for only a season, which is probably harder to get invested in what they are doing there

We don't have Gagner, but you may be right, i haven't followed him in a while.

Again, can you elaborate please? You seem to be just throwing out random statements, and there (as far as i can see) seems to be no basis for them.

The only thing i can see in common with the players you listed (not so much Gagner) is that they're young. What we can state with some confidence so far for Nylander and Marner, is that have had very different pathways to the NHL compared to Yak, Hall and Eberle.
- walshyleafsfan

I edited my previous post. Gagner was supposed to be with the Oilers players of course. Anyways, I suppose you are missing my point. I am drawing a comparison between the organizations as neither group of prospects will play with capable veteran players. Sure, the Leafs are showing more patience with their prospects but at the end of the day, stripping the team down to tank may result in a similar outcome. Stamkos would have been a great, talented veteran to guide the young players.

I think what might come back to bite them, is the veterans they have are not as invested with the team. The Canuck veterans have long term investment in the team and community, like Sedins, Edler, Hansen, Hamhuis (when he was here) etc. I get the feeling that a lot of the Leaf vets are expected to be traded, on expiring contracts, or signed for only a season, which is probably harder to get invested in what they are doing there
- WhiteLie

Excellent point. Most of the vets are rental players and they know it.

I can see him getting the Virtanen/McCann treatment with the Leafs. I am not a fan of the kid, but he is way too good for Jr hockey. He at least needs to get to the 39 game mark (or whatever the max is before he gets credit for a full season). Pressbox, practice, gym and a few NHL games will be better than trying to score 200 points in 60 OHL games
- WhiteLie

Yep. He's definitely outgrown junior, setting records left, right and centre. However, i don't think Lou will hesitate to send him back down.

In my opinion, he'll get his 9 games, go to the Worlds, back to junior, and then to the AHL (if the Marlies are still going), once the Knights season is done.

Excellent point. Most of the vets are rental players and they know it.
- CanuckDon

Vets, need to teach the kids how to be pros. Vets can be of differing ability levels while still teaching the kids how to be good pros and what's expected from them.

Matt Cullen is a good veteran. But his ability level is not elite.

It's painfully clear what the direction of the team is. Listen to what Linden and Benning are saying. The message is loud and clear.
- CanuckDon

That's the problem. I have been. And it's a sad state of affairs when Linden has to come out and clarify what his GM states publicly.

There has been some mixed messages. You can't deny that. So maybe it's been loud and clear of late but it took some time for these two to get on the same page.

The funny thing, and it's hard not to take part, is when you start treating the offseason like something that you can win or lose. I thought the Penguins were out of their minds last summer, which shows what I know.
- CubanBuffet

Same.

You seem more like a bald guy to me?
- LeftCoaster

Vets, need to teach the kids how to be pros. Vets can be of differing ability levels while still teaching the kids how to be good pros and what's expected from them.

Matt Cullen is a good veteran. But his ability level is not elite.
- walshyleafsfan

Yes, to an extent. I believe it's better for kids to develop in a winning environment with solid vets. You don't think it makes a difference? Differing perspectives on what is best for a prospects development. All good, I guess we will see in a few years!

That's the problem. I have been. And it's a sad state of affairs when Linden has to come out and clarify what his GM states publicly.

There has been some mixed messages. You can't deny that. So maybe it's been loud and clear of late but it took some time for these two to get on the same page.
- bloatedmosquito

Benning is a savant. Misunderstood because his thinking process is so far ahead of us regular folk when it comes to hockey. How dare you sir.

That's the problem. I have been. And it's a sad state of affairs when Linden has to come out and clarify what his GM states publicly.

There has been some mixed messages. You can't deny that. So maybe it's been loud and clear of late but it took some time for these two to get on the same page.
- bloatedmosquito

Just listen to Linden and ignore Benning Linden has been doing most of the talking recently as the organization has realized that Jim should focus on drafting and player evaluation and not on public speaking

Benning is a savant. Misunderstood because his thinking process is so far ahead of us regular folk when it comes to hockey. How dare you sir.
- thundachunk

- Scooby_Doo

Vets, need to teach the kids how to be pros. Vets can be of differing ability levels while still teaching the kids how to be good pros and what's expected from them.

Matt Cullen is a good veteran. But his ability level is not elite.
- walshyleafsfan

Yes I dont think skill level matters as much, but at the end of the day each player needs to look out for himself. If a player is on a multiyear deal, established and comfortable in the league (like Sedins, JVR), they can take the time to mentor. If youre nearly out of the league (like a Laich, Prust, Michalek, etc.) you want to show value otherwise you're not getting another NHL contract, so you need to focus on making sure you're bringing your best and not concerned with how the kids (who are taking their jobs) are doing IMO.

If you push the Sedins/Hansen/Sutter, they know their team will be better for it and reap the rewards, with the Leafs they are a few years away from being competitive so the vets only hope is it parlays into a chance on another team. (not saying the Canucks are competing for the Cup btw, but are possibly closer to playoffs)

At least Toronto has used their assets to maximize draft picks and haven't rushed their young talent into the NHL. That's not to say they will be successful, but those are both things that Edmonton didn't do.
- CubanBuffet

I truly believe Edmonton didn't have a "model" they were trying to follow, other than strip the team of any talent to finish last, which they did twice. Their management was the biggest hurdle they had to overcome.

People seem to forget they didn't finish last four times, they won the lottery twice, which was just poop-house luck! Follow-up plans after they'd drafted in good positions was non-existent.

I truly believe Edmonton didn't have a "model" they were trying to follow, other than strip the team of any talent to finish last, which they did twice. Their management was the biggest hurdle they had to overcome.

People seem to forget they didn't finish last four times, they won the lottery twice, which was just poop-house luck! Follow-up plans after they'd drafted in good positions was non-existent.

If you look at the history of the NHL Stanley Cup champions, after 1967, drafting is always first and foremost in building a winner.
- LeftCoaster

All GM's prior to Chirelli were Lowe's puppets and truly had no authority to do their job. He made them all look like idiots. MacTavish should have stuck to coaching. I think he was a great coach.

I truly believe Edmonton didn't have a "model" they were trying to follow, other than strip the team of any talent to finish last, which they did twice. Their management was the biggest hurdle they had to overcome.

People seem to forget they didn't finish last four times, they won the lottery twice, which was just poop-house luck! Follow-up plans after they'd drafted in good positions was non-existent.

If you look at the history of the NHL Stanley Cup champions, after 1967, drafting is always first and foremost in building a winner.
- LeftCoaster

once you strip the team of talent, it is hard to attract talent, unless you draft elite talent that ufa's will want to play with. McDavid-Lucic

All GM's prior to Chirelli were Lowe's puppets and truly had no authority to do their job. He made them all look like idiots. MacTavish should have stuck to coaching. I think he was a great coach.
- thundachunk

IMO their owner is just as much at fault. Him and Lowe were bum buddies and thought they could just recreate the 'boys on the bus' era of the early 80's when they drafted and put all those kids on their team. It was an impossible task, those kids they drafted and the team they built in the early 80's has only been duplicated two other times….they were complete idiots!

once you strip the team of talent, it is hard to attract talent, unless you draft elite talent that ufa's will want to play with. McDavid-Lucic
- hillbillydeluxe

Luck plays a HUGE role in all of this! The Oilers didn't finish last but they once again won the draft lottery and finally drafted an elite talent.

Luck now plays a part in a lot of Cup winning teams, Toews was drafted third overall, St. Louis and Pittsburgh could've taken him. Patrick Kane was drafted first overall by Chicago but they actually finished 5th overall that year, won the lottery and screwed Philly out of Kane.

Crosby, same thing, Pittsburgh won the dam lottery, suckage had nothing to do with them picking a generational talent like him.

This might be true, but then again, you need a mix of veterans who can mentor your young talent and bring them along so that they aren't thrown to the wolves before they've learned enough about the league to handle it.

I disagree, with the top 3 spots now all being drawn via lottery, your chances of getting that superstar are worse now than ever before. Just being 30th overall when drawing the balls, you have a better chance of finishing out of the top 3 than getting 1OA. Besides that, getting a superstar doesn't automatically guarantee success, look at the Oilers, Islanders and Colorado. They all have superstars but have yet to be able to put it all together to make runs to win the Cup for various reasons.

The sustained success was because they took a team that was largely competitive and they traded assets (draft picks/prospects/roster players not working out) to complement the core in place. A core which until then was mired in mediocrity alternating being knocked out of the first or second round or not making the playoffs at all. That is how you find success, identifying players you feel best fit your team's philosophy/makeup and then acquire them, whether it be via the draft, trade, waivers or FA signing.

You can't rely solely on drafting, because not all of your picks are going to turn out, you never really know what you have until you put them in NHL action. Not to mention situations and philosophies change depending on how much success the team has. You have to build your team any way you can and not rely on any one method, you have to improve constantly especially in the West or you are going to be stuck at the bottom of the standings for a long time to come.
- DariusKnight

I agree about the vets. Got to have them to balance out your roster but they are generally easy to find. Even Gillis was able to find aging vets to compliment his core. I never said the tank method required an all-rookie roster. So we'll put that one aside.

As for my point on obtaining a superstar player; I was coming from a point of a team trading a superstar off their roster. Not drafting one. We occasionally see these types of players (Hall, Subban, Weber being most recent) becoming available. To put together a package to obtain those players you need picks and prospects. You got to be bad to have those assets.

When I look at guys like Ohlund, Sedins, Bieksa, Kesler, and even Hansen I see how valuable good drafting is to create a cup contending team.
I think the days of drafting a Daigle are over. Drafting has become much more reliable in the top three to five.

I think drafting has become the only legitimate way to build a cup-challenging team. Having high draft picks improves your chances of assembling a quality core group of players. Therefor the tank has merit.