Sheng Peng: Grading Golden Knights' Expansion Draft, Part 4 Final thoughts of George McPhee's Expansion Draft work. I gave him a B-...what do you think?

First... Only?

You say you "understand why Vegas didn't want to be competitive and win a playoff series/game and be bounced". No offense but there is no rationalization that can make that statement anything but grade A crazy.

The team you picked as win now would absolutely be in the mix for the playoffs. Would be a draw to free agents. Would build a winning culture right off the bat. Would bring fans in. Would bring money in from seats and merchandise. Would set up a foundation quickly before the NFL takes some/all of the spotlight.

McPhees strategy was flawed for the reasons above as well as:

-This years draft was considered one of the weakest ever.
-Legit top 3 defenseman are worth thier weight in gold but but bottom 3 defenseman are practically worthless and incredibly easy to get, especially with the cap space LV had.
-He drafted too many low end short term deals with a feeble idea to dump them at trade deadlines. But its hard to imagine him getting any value from players that will be playing on the leagues worst team. Barring maybe Colorado, and look how devalued thier players are now. No one takes beaten down losers at the deadline for Stanley cup playoff runs.
-Losing is expected but building a bottom 5 team with no real end in sight will push away fans and FA players. No fan base + tank + established NFL franchise coming may = colossal financial failure.
-Tanking, which what he is doing, doesn't work very well with the newer draft lottery odds.
-This expansion draft was designed to greatly increase the success/competitiveness of a expansion team.

His strategy was flawed and his execution poor. While obviously a monumentally difficult task his level of failure, so far on paper anyways, looks inexcusable to me. His only... And I mean only, chance of redemption lies in pure luck. Draft luck, development luck, dumb luck. Kinda funny he is obviously gambling with poor odds and he works for Vegas. Even assuming above average percentages of success for the prospects he did or will draft leaves him well shy of ever being a cup contender, and unlikely to be playoff worthy for a minimum of 5 years. Barring a miracle.

I would conservatively grade all the moves McPhee made at least one full grade lower than you have them. However, as you say, its impossible to say how much leverage he actually had to build the win now team you suggest. I of course have no clue what actually was possible and could give him a break. But with all the things I have mentioned it looks far too bad to just compliment him for collecting a decent amount of draft picks + getting a couple names that might sell a few jerseys.

There is no visible underlying plan to actually build a team that can win. He built a team with a bit of toughness and a bit of scoring but no reliable way to prevent goals against. The season could be nightmare and the following year most likely even more so.

First... Only?

You say you "understand why Vegas didn't want to be competitive and win a playoff series/game and be bounced". No offense but there is no rationalization that can make that statement anything but grade A crazy.

The team you picked as win now would absolutely be in the mix for the playoffs. Would be a draw to free agents. Would build a winning culture right off the bat. Would bring fans in. Would bring money in from seats and merchandise. Would set up a foundation quickly before the NFL takes some/all of the spotlight.

McPhees strategy was flawed for the reasons above as well as:

-This years draft was considered one of the weakest ever.
-Legit top 3 defenseman are worth thier weight in gold but but bottom 3 defenseman are practically worthless and incredibly easy to get, especially with the cap space LV had.
-He drafted too many low end short term deals with a feeble idea to dump them at trade deadlines. But its hard to imagine him getting any value from players that will be playing on the leagues worst team. Barring maybe Colorado, and look how devalued thier players are now. No one takes beaten down losers at the deadline for Stanley cup playoff runs.
-Losing is expected but building a bottom 5 team with no real end in sight will push away fans and FA players. No fan base + tank + established NFL franchise coming may = colossal financial failure.
-Tanking, which what he is doing, doesn't work very well with the newer draft lottery odds.
-This expansion draft was designed to greatly increase the success/competitiveness of a expansion team.

His strategy was flawed and his execution poor. While obviously a monumentally difficult task his level of failure, so far on paper anyways, looks inexcusable to me. His only... And I mean only, chance of redemption lies in pure luck. Draft luck, development luck, dumb luck. Kinda funny he is obviously gambling with poor odds and he works for Vegas. Even assuming above average percentages of success for the prospects he did or will draft leaves him well shy of ever being a cup contender, and unlikely to be playoff worthy for a minimum of 5 years. Barring a miracle.

I would conservatively grade all the moves McPhee made at least one full grade lower than you have them. However, as you say, its impossible to say how much leverage he actually had to build the win now team you suggest. I of course have no clue what actually was possible and could give him a break. But with all the things I have mentioned it looks far too bad to just compliment him for collecting a decent amount of draft picks + getting a couple names that might sell a few jerseys.

There is no visible underlying plan to actually build a team that can win. He built a team with a bit of toughness and a bit of scoring but no reliable way to prevent goals against. The season could be nightmare and the following year most likely even more so.
- Aerchon

Not so sure about that bolded. Compare LV roster to the teams that bubbled the WC (Kings, Jets, Stars) and you see that there is a big gap between their top end talent. The top six of LVs "competetive team" is nowhere near the level of those teams.

Sure they could have tried to make the playoffs for a few years, and maybe get in once in the coming 3 years. Then what? To win the cup (which would be the ultimate goal. Look at Tampas fanbase, it grew alot after their SC) they need a top line center that can produce 80+ points in a season. Should they bank on having that in their system based on their own picks? If the went for the best possible roster, they would not have 11 extra picks.

I feel like GMGM extracted to little future pieces. They could have gotten more for not taking Dumba and they could have gotten more from Tampa as well (Cap-dump in Garrison for a 2nd and 4th). Their team have a good mix of young good players and some older complimentary players. Its a serviceable team, but it needs to be a bottom 5 dweller for atleast 3 years to get that top end talent that is needed to make it far in the playoffs.

I think a B- for GM is reasonable and on track. He made some smart moves.

I agree that he kind of missed on his strategy to take more D-men and flip them for more picks. I figured he thought Methot would go for more.

Vegas got multi year commitments on season's tickets.

They are going to have amazing attendance (purchased tickets, not necessarily bums in seats) for at least the first 5 years.

It's clear from the expansion draft, as well as trades before and after it, that the goal is to be as bad as possible to start. The return they got for Marc Methot is case in point. I'm sure if they could have found a taker for Fleury's contract, they would have traded him for a bag of pucks as well.

The goal is the same as the Ottawa Senators when they first came into the league. Granted, Ottawa had a much worse expansion group to chose from (4th liners, 6th Dman, 3rd string goalies), but the idea remains.

In the first few years, whenever Ottawa had a decent player that wasn't a kid or they figured wouldn't be in the long-term plans (ie Bob Kudelski, Norm MacIver, Martin Straka) they traded him for nothing. They wanted to be as bad as possible for the first few years.

Now, the Sens never won a cup, but, starting in the late 90s, they were an elite NHL franchise.

If Ottawa's first overall wasn't in the worst NHL draft in history (1996) and instead of Chris Phillips, they got a phenom like a Crosby, Malkin, Ovie, or McDavid, they probably would have a cup.

Vegas sees that model and wants to replicate it. If Vegas does the same as Ottawa and gets that phenom in one of the multiple years they will get a top 3 pick, plus all the depth they will have from the plethora of draft picks they've stockpiled, they will be a cup contender. I don't see how they could screw it up, even if they tried.

As a previous poster said, if he wanted a competitive team, he could have got it. He didn't.

McPhee gets an A+ in my books. He knows the market. He knows the tickets are sold. The goal is to suck as badly as possible and he drafted a team to do just that. They'll be lucky to win 15 games this year.

Don't care. This should be a S2TP blog.

They went WAY too conservative. They could have had the 24th best prospect-pool (instead of the 14th) - but a team that did 15 points better in the standings. That's a small price to pay to move up that much.

Vegas should have hired a young guy who swung for the fences, instead of an old guy who played it as conservative as possible.

Think about it for a second...

With the conservative approach, they've guaranteed themselves being one of the worst teams in the NHL for many years.

But, what's the worst-case-scenario for swinging for the fences? Right, it's being one of the worst teams in the NHL for many years! Except, there's also an up-side: if it works, you aren't one of the worst teams in the NHL.

They chose an approach that guarantees them an awful team - with very little up-side.

Charliebox: I didn't know about multi year season ticket holders. If true that does mitigate some of the risk of their strategy.

However Stringerbell hits the nail on the head. It's completely irrational to build through a tank, especially with the new tanking draft rules, when you can just... start with a good team.

There are so many failed/partial fails of the tank rebuild/expansion draft methodology why even risk it?

Charliebox: I didn't know about multi year season ticket holders. If true that does mitigate some of the risk of their strategy.

However Stringerbell hits the nail on the head. It's completely irrational to build through a tank, especially with the new tanking draft rules, when you can just... start with a good team.

There are so many failed/partial fails of the tank rebuild/expansion draft methodology why even risk it?
- Aerchon

The new rules don't mitigate much. What we saw this year was an anomaly. If Vegas finishes last for three consecutive years, they'll probably pick 1, 4, 4 at WORST case scenario. If they finish 5th last or so, who knows where they'll pick. You can't finish from 5-10 and expect to get a top 5 pick.

And the lottery only applies to the first round. If you finish last, you get the first pick in all rounds after #1. There are usually still some good players in the early 2nd round.

Let's not forget how bad Colorado and Phoenix are going to be this year, either. If Vegas picked all the best available players and built for this season, they would have immediately been better than those two.

Actually, if I remember correctly it is statistically more likely that a team not in the bottom 3 gets the first overall. Last year is more of what you should expect moving forward.

Thus why tanking/following Ottawa's strat is a terrible for McPhee to be attempting now.

Again statistically speaking for a prospect to succeed in the NHL the chances are very minimal for second round picks and later.

great series sheng. b- is a bit harsh... I would say B maybe b+. most of the players you had as the better picks wouldn't have been available anyway if Mcphee didn't wheel and deal. to come out of an expansion with a top half future is mind boggling. I know the league gave him a lot of leverage but still... having one draft and being in the top half!?!? that's amazing. He got hosed in a few deals like Buff but overall did right by his team. team will win a few games, keep interest up and still draft well again next year. Vegas 1st round pick plus possible 1st rounder for neal. A minimal 5 first rounders in two years... maybe more is how to build a team. getting tuch and Theodore was a great use of his leverage... jersey and/or Arizona would have plucked d away from those teams if they were unable to deal with McPhee. still don't get why he accepted 2019 and 2020 picks and he overestimated the d market. three years might be a stretch but seeing a serious contender in 5 years? possible for sure.

Reasonable assessment, overall. I'd say you were a bit harsh on McPhee for the Washington (Schmidt) and Dallas (Eakin) picks. I'd give him an A for both of those

Conversely, the Anaheim decision gets a D from me. I still fail to see how Vatanen doesn't make the most sense there. If they decide to keep him, he's a top-four d-man on an incredible contract. If they decide to move him, they could get a hell of a lot more than Theodore and a cap dump

Reasonable assessment, overall. I'd say you were a bit harsh on McPhee for the Washington (Schmidt) and Dallas (Eakin) picks. I'd give him an A for both of those

Conversely, the Anaheim decision gets a D from me. I still fail to see how Vatanen doesn't make the most sense there. If they decide to keep him, he's a top-four d-man on an incredible contract. If they decide to move him, they could get a hell of a lot more than Theodore and a cap dump
- AxlRose91

because if vegas doesnt deal with ana they trade vatanen prior to expansion. vatanan was never going to be an option for vegas ever. it was an illusion.

because if vegas doesnt deal with ana they trade vatanen prior to expansion. vatanan was never going to be an option for vegas ever. it was an illusion.
- ChrisMS

You're an illusion

You're an illusion
- AxlRose91

the ghost of understanding how the expansion draft worked past.

You say you "understand why Vegas didn't want to be competitive and win a playoff series/game and be bounced". No offense but there is no rationalization that can make that statement anything but grade A crazy.

And I mean only, chance of redemption lies in pure luck. Draft luck, development luck, dumb luck.
- Aerchon

Thus why tanking/following Ottawa's strat is a terrible for McPhee to be attempting now.
- Aerchon

We're obviously not going to agree on everything.

But a couple things: There is rationalization in not wanting to having a mid-first round team (at best). You either want to be a true Cup contender or get higher picks. Otherwise, you're in limbo.

If Vegas had a shot at a true Cup contender to begin with, then I would've been on board with taking a big swing (and miss). But the best possible Vegas team really isn't a Cup contender. Even if they catch fire like say the '96 Panthers, just like that team, no long-term future.

Funny you bring up Ottawa. I don't think Vegas will be anywhere as bad this year. But anyway, their strategy ending up being far more effective than Florida's. The Sens had sustained long-term success mostly because of high picks and effective drafting, and sure, luck.

Now both franchises ended up with just one Finals appearance. So you can make that argument. But I think most GMs would rather take their chances with a consistently good team, built young for long-term success, than a long-shot veteran squad with a short-term future.

While there is a lot of luck involved in the Draft and development, it's not all luck. A strong scouting team + some luck + more picks than usual is a good combination.

They went WAY too conservative. They could have had the 24th best prospect-pool (instead of the 14th) - but a team that did 15 points better in the standings. That's a small price to pay to move up that much.

But, what's the worst-case-scenario for swinging for the fences? Right, it's being one of the worst teams in the NHL for many years! Except, there's also an up-side: if it works, you aren't one of the worst teams in the NHL.

They chose an approach that guarantees them an awful team - with very little up-side.
- stringerbell

15 points better means something when you're going from 10th place to the playoffs. 15 points doesn't mean much, at this stage in the franchise's development, if it just takes you from cellar-dweller to 10th place.

What does swinging for the fences this Expansion Draft get VGK? "You aren't one of the worst teams in the NHL" isn't much upside.

McPhee's chosen approach has little short-term upside, true, but can certainly pay off big long term.

I'd say you were a bit harsh on McPhee for the Washington (Schmidt) and Dallas (Eakin) picks. I'd give him an A for both of those

Conversely, the Anaheim decision gets a D from me. I still fail to see how Vatanen doesn't make the most sense there.

If they decide to move him, they could get a hell of a lot more than Theodore and a cap dump
- AxlRose91

Like I mentioned, good but fairly obvious picks like Schmidt were a B. Basically, picks which we could've made from our living rooms don't get an A in my book.

Eakin is interesting. If he returns to form, for sure, the pick deserves a higher grade. I'm not convinced that'll happen.

As for Anaheim, I think it depends on how much you value Theodore. Obviously, you don't much, but I do. I think he'll be roughly as good one day as Vatanen, he's younger, and because of that, cost controlled for longer.

great series sheng.

still don't get why he accepted 2019 and 2020 picks
- ChrisMS

Thanks for reading and all the comments!

I was thinking about this. Perhaps because he knew that he would fill his 2018 cupboard during the upcoming Trade Deadline? Obviously, other teams are also more willing to part with a 2020 high pick than a 2018. So say Dallas is offering a 2018 3rd or 2020 2nd for Methot? I have no problem with waiting on the better pick.

because if vegas doesnt deal with ana they trade vatanen prior to expansion. vatanan was never going to be an option for vegas ever. it was an illusion.
- ChrisMS

Is there concrete proof of this with Vatanen or Dumba or others? For sure, their respective GMs wouldn't want to lose them for nothing.

But look at Minnesota. Three very desirable assets in Dumba, Staal, and Scandella. You can't trade all of them to avoid losing them for nothing, can you? Because you're still trying to keep as strong a team as possible, so you may not get as good of a current asset back. You almost certainly have to lose one.

Anyway, that's why I'm wondering about sure proof that Vatanen and Dumba were never really available to McPhee. I've operated under the assumption that he liked Theodore more than Vatanen, Tuch + Haula more than Dumba, etc.. Welcome to be corrected on these points.

the ghost of understanding how the expansion draft worked past.
- ChrisMS

Good one. Cool

We're obviously not going to agree on everything.

But a couple things: There is rationalization in not wanting to having a mid-first round team (at best). You either want to be a true Cup contender or get higher picks. Otherwise, you're in limbo.

If Vegas had a shot at a true Cup contender to begin with, then I would've been on board with taking a big swing (and miss). But the best possible Vegas team really isn't a Cup contender. Even if they catch fire like say the '96 Panthers, just like that team, no long-term future.

Funny you bring up Ottawa. I don't think Vegas will be anywhere as bad this year. But anyway, their strategy ending up being far more effective than Florida's. The Sens had sustained long-term success mostly because of high picks and effective drafting, and sure, luck.

Now both franchises ended up with just one Finals appearance. So you can make that argument. But I think most GMs would rather take their chances with a consistently good team, built young for long-term success, than a long-shot veteran squad with a short-term future.

While there is a lot of luck involved in the Draft and development, it's not all luck. A strong scouting team + some luck + more picks than usual is a good combination.



15 points better means something when you're going from 10th place to the playoffs. 15 points doesn't mean much, at this stage in the franchise's development, if it just takes you from cellar-dweller to 10th place.

What does swinging for the fences this Expansion Draft get VGK? "You aren't one of the worst teams in the NHL" isn't much upside.

McPhee's chosen approach has little short-term upside, true, but can certainly pay off big long term.



Like I mentioned, good but fairly obvious picks like Schmidt were a B. Basically, picks which we could've made from our living rooms don't get an A in my book.

Eakin is interesting. If he returns to form, for sure, the pick deserves a higher grade. I'm not convinced that'll happen.

As for Anaheim, I think it depends on how much you value Theodore. Obviously, you don't much, but I do. I think he'll be roughly as good one day as Vatanen, he's younger, and because of that, cost controlled for longer.



Thanks for reading and all the comments!

I was thinking about this. Perhaps because he knew that he would fill his 2018 cupboard during the upcoming Trade Deadline? Obviously, other teams are also more willing to part with a 2020 high pick than a 2018. So say Dallas is offering a 2018 3rd or 2020 2nd for Methot? I have no problem with waiting on the better pick.



Is there concrete proof of this with Vatanen or Dumba or others? For sure, their respective GMs wouldn't want to lose them for nothing.

But look at Minnesota. Three very desirable assets in Dumba, Staal, and Scandella. You can't trade all of them to avoid losing them for nothing, can you? Because you're still trying to keep as strong a team as possible, so you may not get as good of a current asset back. You almost certainly have to lose one.

Anyway, that's why I'm wondering about sure proof that Vatanen and Dumba were never really available to McPhee. I've operated under the assumption that he liked Theodore more than Vatanen, Tuch + Haula more than Dumba, etc.. Welcome to be corrected on these points.
- Sheng Peng

I think its just common sense. teams would have approached mcphee and asked what it would take to keep most of their assets. if mcphee had set a bar so high or not worked with them at all arizona / new jersey were chompin at the bit with futures to move for a vatanan or a brodin/dumba. they had to balance the cost. either lose vatanan for nothing (not acceptable), trade vatanen for assets not needing to be protected and lose a scrub, or deal with mcphee. in dealing with mcphee they got to rid themselves of stoners contract. but I have no doubt vatanen is a devil right now if mcphee wouldnt deal. proof? none. but the results of the draft strongly point to this being the case with several teams.

I think its just common sense. teams would have approached mcphee and asked what it would take to keep most of their assets. if mcphee had set a bar so high or not worked with them at all arizona / new jersey were chompin at the bit with futures to move for a vatanan or a brodin/dumba. they had to balance the cost. either lose vatanan for nothing (not acceptable), trade vatanen for assets not needing to be protected and lose a scrub, or deal with mcphee. in dealing with mcphee they got to rid themselves of stoners contract. but I have no doubt vatanen is a devil right now if mcphee wouldnt deal. proof? none. but the results of the draft strongly point to this being the case with several teams.
- ChrisMS

and the pick thing... I get what you are saying but a 2020 2nd, if they make it to the nhl, isnt looking in most cases until 2022 at the earliest. vegas has a window t build but stretching it past the 5 year mark to be competitive would be rough on the fan base. course the 2nds could be trade bait at the time now that I think about it so maybe there is some sense in a 5 year plan

Good one. Cool
- AxlRose91

says the man who just gave the equivalent of "you're a towel."

Need to remember Vegas is not the typical model for revenue. They will have a huge bump from visiting team fans attending games. That plus the novelty of a new franchise will buy them enough time to be good in 3 or 4 years.