The Flyers really need to take advantage of the expansion draft. It may cost a decent pick to take a contract off our hands.

Seattle can easily say they want NAK because he's cheap and young. They have all the power.

But if they would take JVR and his $7 million cap hit, that would help so much.
- Captain_Ahab

And in no way do I move a thing higher than a 4th to take someone. Ie jake. I’m not giving you a top pick to take a contract. Pound salt. The cap straightens out after next year if coots and g walk. At least a little at worst would only have another year of Jvr and 2 of Jake if can’t move. I’m not giving up pick 13 or draft capital 2nd /3rd round picks for cap if that means bye coots ✌🏻

To be fair. Gotta add vasy in that as he was top goalie projected that year and teams don’t generally even take goalies in round 1

So hedman..d
Vague…. G
Stamkos…1c(although maybe not 1c currently but a hall of famer)

3 absolute key positions that generally need elite talent at all were picked on top 5.

Kinda the point. Generally you need to pick there to up the chances
- Stayin alive

You can't count Vasy in this case, he was drafted 19th, Period! The point PT21 has made is that you must draft in the top 5 in order to have the best chance to get great players and build a true contender. Well clearly you don't! 18 other teams picking before Tampa that year could have picked Vasy if they wanted or needed to, they passed. A team like the Flyers picking at 14 for example could have taken Vasy for example, they did not need to be in the top 5 to get him! And we should really put an asterisk on Stamkos, because Tampa won the cup last year without him!

You can't count Vasy in this case, he was drafted 19th, Period! The point PT21 has made is that you must draft in the top 5 in order to have the best chance to get great players and build a true contender. Well clearly you don't! 18 other teams picking before Tampa that year could have picked Vasy if they wanted or needed to, they passed. A team like the Flyers picking at 14 for example could have taken Vasy for example, they did not need to be in the top 5 to get him! And we should really put an asterisk on Stamkos, because Tampa won the cup last year without him!
- jd250

Id count Vasey, usually goalies arent taken that high, and since they already grabbed stamkos and Hedman, everything lined up for them to take their goalie with a high pick for a goalie. Id count their captain STamkos also.

You can't count Vasy in this case, he was drafted 19th, Period! The point PT21 has made is that you must draft in the top 5 in order to have the best chance to get great players and build a true contender. Well clearly you don't! 18 other teams picking before Tampa that year could have picked Vasy if they wanted or needed to, they passed. A team like the Flyers picking at 14 for example could have taken Vasy for example, they did not need to be in the top 5 to get him! And we should really put an asterisk on Stamkos, because Tampa won the cup last year without him!
- jd250

Another point that has to be made. Hedman played 11 years before TB won the Cup. Stamkos played 12 years before they won the Cup. It wasn't until they built the team up well around them that they broke through. Having the top elite players is only one factor in building a top team. If having an elite player was the key, then a lot more teams with elite players would've won the cup than have lost. Many teams have elite players. It's how you build the team around them matters the most. That separates you from other teams with top players. That's why tanking is not a good strategy.

Tanking doesn't improve your chances of winning. It's more likely that you don't win then you do. Buffalo has drafted in the top 10 8 out the last 11 years. They're no where near contending. Edmonton has drafted in the top 10 9 out of the last 11 years. They're not a contender.

All picking high does is improve your chances of getting a star player. It does not always improve your chances of winning.

Rebuilding is a subjective term. One could say with the moves the Flyers are going to make this off season, after a disappointing season last year, that they are rebuilding.

This is confusing drafting high with having a team of better players. You don't just build a team with one high draft choice. If you fail to build the team around an elite player or two, then all you have is an elite player or two. We've seen that countless times over the years.
- MJL

I just proved your point looking at where all the Tampa players were drafted. Only 2 players in the top 5 and Tampa won last year without Stamkos, who was injured. Sure getting star players like Stamkos and Hedman are important, but look at all the other players around them and where they were drafted, Kucherov, Point, KIllorn, Palat, etc. The argument PT21 continues to make just doesn't hold up!

Id count Vasey, usually goalies arent taken that high, and since they already grabbed stamkos and Hedman, everything lined up for them to take their goalie with a high pick for a goalie. Id count their captain STamkos also.
- bradster

You're missing the point of the argument. It does not matter where goalies are generally drafted, the fact is Tampa did not need to tank and be in the top5 to draft him!

Another point that has to be made. Hedman played 11 years before TB won the Cup. Stamkos played 12 years before they won the Cup. It wasn't until they built the team up well around them that they broke through. Having the top elite players is only one factor in building a top team. If having an elite player was the key, then a lot more teams with elite players would've won the cup than have lost. Many teams have elite players. It's how you build the team around them matters the most. That separates you from other teams with top players. That's why tanking is not a good strategy.
- MJL

Agreed, Ovy was getting up there before he won. McKinnon hasnt won yet. Lots of great players still search for a cup, or even making it to the cup finals

I just proved your point looking at where all the Tampa players were drafted. Only 2 players in the top 5 and Tampa won last year without Stamkos, who was injured. Sure getting star players like Stamkos and Hedman are important, but look at all the other players around them and where they were drafted, Kucherov, Point, KIllorn, Palat, etc. The argument PT21 continues to make just doesn't hold up!
- jd250

He has an argument, it's just that he continually makes the wrong argument. If his point was just that the best way to obtain an elite player is to pick high in the draft, he would be correct and that can't be refuted. Doesn't mean it's the only way. You can't look at the teams who have won with an elite player and ignore all the teams that didn't win with an elite player.

You're missing the point of the argument. It does not matter where goalies are drafted, the fact is Tampa did not need to tank and be in the top5 to draft him!
- jd250

I disagree, tampa got stamkos and Hedman, best D man in the league, and got the goalie while still not a good team.

You can't count Vasy in this case, he was drafted 19th, Period! The point PT21 has made is that you must draft in the top 5 in order to have the best chance to get great players and build a true contender. Well clearly you don't! 18 other teams picking before Tampa that year could have picked Vasy if they wanted or needed to, they passed. A team like the Flyers picking at 14 for example could have taken Vasy for example, they did not need to be in the top 5 to get him! And we should really put an asterisk on Stamkos, because Tampa won the cup last year without him!
- jd250

Once again dude, the "best chance" can ONLY be refuted by looking at all the data and actually looking at chance from that data. A single observation, or even a handful, cannot refute the chance argument.

Come up with 5 players from each cup winning team that you would considered to be essential to their success. Call this critical/essential players the core of the team or the heart of the team or what you will. Their definition is that without them you would not have won the cup.

Then see what fraction of them come from the top five positions in the draft as opposed to any other five positions in the remainder of the draft. You will likely find that the top five contributes towards this core at a rate which is about 40 times the rate of any other five positions in the draft.

That is an argument for the best chance. Because by your own construction you have constructed a essential core of players without whom the team would not have won and you find that the contribution in the top five towards that core is many magnitudes higher than any other part of the draft. That is what chance means.

maybe a better question is,in the last 10 years, how many cup winning teams didnt have a #1 pick playing in the nhl

I disagree, tampa got stamkos and Hedman, best D man in the league, and got the goalie while still not a good team.
- bradster

But they didn't get Vasy by picking in the top 5! They did not need to tank to get Vasey! That is the argument. Of course Tampa got Stamkos and Hedman picking in the top 5, and they are great players but by themselves mean nothing without a strong team around them.

But they didn't get Vasy by picking in the top 5! They did not need to tank to get Vasey! That is the argument. Of course Tampa got Stamkos and Hedman picking in the top 5, and they are great players but by themselves mean nothing without a strong team around them.
- jd250

fine, they tanked to get stamkos and hedman....happy?

Once again dude, the "best chance" can ONLY be refuted by looking at all the data and actually looking at chance from that data. A single observation, or even a handful, cannot refute the chance argument.

Come up with 5 players from each cup winning team that you would considered to be essential to their success. Call this critical/essential players the core of the team or the heart of the team or what you will. Their definition is that without them you would not have won the cup.

Then see what fraction of them come from the top five positions in the draft as opposed to any other five positions in the remainder of the draft. You will likely find that the top five contributes towards this core at a rate which is about 40 times the rate of any other five positions in the draft.

That is an argument for the best chance. Because by your own construction you have constructed a essential core of players without whom the team would not have won and you find that the contribution in the top five towards that core is many magnitudes higher than any other part of the draft. That is what chance means.
- PT21

https://www.nhl.com/light.../stats/2019-2020/playoffs
Look at last year's cup winner, only 1 top 5 pick (Hedman) on that entire playoff roster! Yes to get an elite player the odds are much better if you pick in the top 5. However to win a cup its not as important as hitting on your draft picks wherever you do draft them (e.g. Kucherov and Point).

Once again dude, the "best chance" can ONLY be refuted by looking at all the data and actually looking at chance from that data. A single observation, or even a handful, cannot refute the chance argument.

Come up with 5 players from each cup winning team that you would considered to be essential to their success. Call this critical/essential players the core of the team or the heart of the team or what you will. Their definition is that without them you would not have won the cup.

Then see what fraction of them come from the top five positions in the draft as opposed to any other five positions in the remainder of the draft. You will likely find that the top five contributes towards this core at a rate which is about 40 times the rate of any other five positions in the draft.

That is an argument for the best chance. Because by your own construction you have constructed a essential core of players without whom the team would not have won and you find that the contribution in the top five towards that core is many magnitudes higher than any other part of the draft. That is what chance means.
- PT21

Again, this is the wrong argument. It's mixing the argument that the best way to get a top player is to draft in the top 5 with drafting a player with a top 5 pick as the most important aspect of a cup winning team. That is not accurate. Those same teams that you want to look at would not have won without the quality depth below them. I'd argue that the quality depth on the roster is equally if not more important.

Top 5 players on the last 3 Cup winners

TB Lightining

Victor Hedman 2nd overall
Nikita Kucherov 58th pick
Brayden Point 79th pick
Andrei Vasilevskiy 18th pick
Ryan McDonagh Acquired in trade

St. Louis Blues

Ryan O'Reilly Acquired in trade
Alex Pietrangelo 4th overall
Jordan Binnington 88th pick
Jaden Schwartz 14th overall
Vladimir Tarasenko 16th overall

Washington Caps

Alex Ovechkin 1st overall
Evgeny Kuznetzov 26th overall
Nik Backstrom 4th overall
John Carlson 27th overall
Brayden Holtby 93rd overall


So out of the 15 top key players in the 3 last Cup winners. 4 were chosen in the top 5 of the draft. Seems to be some holes in your theory.

Go ahead and post another youtube video. How was my grammar?

https://www.nhl.com/lightning/stats/2019-2020/playoffs
Look at last year's cup winner, only 1 top 5 pick (Hedman) on that entire playoff roster! Yes to get an elite player the odds are much better if you pick in the top 5. However to win a cup its not as important as hitting on your draft picks wherever you do draft them (e.g. Kucherov and Point).
- jd250

who was the captain?
How many cup winners didnt draft #1

Again, this is the wrong argument. It's mixing the argument that the best way to get a top player is to draft in the top 5 with drafting a player with a top 5 pick as the most important aspect of a cup winning team. That is not accurate. Those same teams that you want to look at would not have won without the quality depth below them. I'd argue that the quality depth on the roster is equally if not more important.

Top 5 players on the last 3 Cup winners

TB Lightining

Victor Hedman 2nd overall
Nikita Kucherov 58th pick
Brayden Point 79th pick
Andrei Vasilevskiy 18th pick
Ryan McDonagh Acquired in trade

St. Louis Blues

Ryan O'Reilly Acquired in trade
Alex Pietrangelo 4th overall
Jordan Binnington 88th pick
Jaden Schwartz 14th overall
Vladimir Tarasenko 16th overall

Washington Caps

Alex Ovechkin 1st overall
Evgeny Kuznetzov 26th overall
Nik Backstrom 4th overall
John Carlson 27th overall
Brayden Holtby 93rd overall


So out of the 15 top key players in the 3 last Cup winners. 4 were chosen in the top 5 of the draft. Seems to be some holes in your theory.

Go ahead and post another youtube video. How was my grammar?
- MJL

forgot to add that st louis had a number 1 pick in eric johnson, but they traded him to bolster the team

He has an argument, it's just that he continually makes the wrong argument. If his point was just that the best way to obtain an elite player is to pick high in the draft, he would be correct and that can't be refuted. Doesn't mean it's the only way. You can't look at the teams who have won with an elite player and ignore all the teams that didn't win with an elite player.
- MJL

Let’s say 20 of 30 teams have elite player(s) at the key positions g/d/1c or at least 1 or more on team at those positions.

If only 1 team wins the cup and 19 WITHOUT those players don’t win

What do think your odds are of winning cup WITHOUT ANY OF THOSE ELITE PLAYERS.

You can’t win without the elite players. Yes you have to STILL build the team around them. And spare the goalie steals a cup bs. Even when skilled teams win (blues popular reference) they still have a ton of fringe elite players that happen to have goalie play out of mind. And it happens very rarely

forgot to add that st louis had a number 1 pick in eric johnson, but they traded him to bolster the team
- bradster

Erik Johnson was traded by the Blues in 2011. They got Chris Stewart and Kevin Shattenkirk for him. Neither was on the team when the Blues won the Cup.

Erik Johnson was traded by the Blues in 2011. They got Chris Stewart and Kevin Shattenkirk for him. Neither was on the team when the Blues won the Cup.
- MJL

but they had a #1 pick, thats what we were talking about

But they didn't get Vasy by picking in the top 5! They did not need to tank to get Vasey! That is the argument. Of course Tampa got Stamkos and Hedman picking in the top 5, and they are great players but by themselves mean nothing without a strong team around them.
- jd250

And the goalie drafting theory was born. I don’t get why teams don’t take top goalie prospect in 1st round. Only top 1 or possibly 2 in a given draft. Vasy clearly a top 5 pick. Teams are dumb. Unfortunately Stevie y isn’t

Let’s say 20 of 30 teams have elite player(s) at the key positions g/d/1c or at least 1 or more on team at those positions.

If only 1 team wins the cup and 19 WITHOUT those players don’t win

What do think your odds are of winning cup WITHOUT ANY OF THOSE ELITE PLAYERS.

You can’t win without the elite players. Yes you have to STILL build the team around them. And spare the goalie steals a cup bs. Even when skilled teams win (blues popular reference) they still have a ton of fringe elite players that happen to have goalie play out of mind. And it happens very rarely
- Stayin alive

If the Islanders win the cup, they will be the first team i can think of, that won without an elite player. Everyone else has one, and had #1 picks

Again, this is the wrong argument. It's mixing the argument that the best way to get a top player is to draft in the top 5 with drafting a player with a top 5 pick as the most important aspect of a cup winning team. That is not accurate. Those same teams that you want to look at would not have won without the quality depth below them. I'd argue that the quality depth on the roster is equally if not more important.

Top 5 players on the last 3 Cup winners

TB Lightining

Victor Hedman 2nd overall
Nikita Kucherov 58th pick
Brayden Point 79th pick
Andrei Vasilevskiy 18th pick
Ryan McDonagh Acquired in trade

St. Louis Blues

Ryan O'Reilly Acquired in trade
Alex Pietrangelo 4th overall
Jordan Binnington 88th pick
Jaden Schwartz 14th overall
Vladimir Tarasenko 16th overall

Washington Caps

Alex Ovechkin 1st overall
Evgeny Kuznetzov 26th overall
Nik Backstrom 4th overall
John Carlson 27th overall
Brayden Holtby 93rd overall


So out of the 15 top key players in the 3 last Cup winners. 4 were chosen in the top 5 of the draft. Seems to be some holes in your theory.

Go ahead and post another youtube video. How was my grammar?
- MJL

Each one of those teams had at least 1 top 5 pick. Is that a trend. It’s about %. It goes up taking a top 5 pick. It goes down after. This been explained. If people can’t understand basic math and % idk what to tell them.

but they had a #1 pick, thats what we were talking about
- bradster

Not following the conversation. It's about the top 5 most important players on a Cup winning team and how they were acquired.

If the Islanders win the cup, they will be the first team i can think of, that won without an elite player. Everyone else has one, and had #1 picks
- bradster

I don’t even think need #1. But I’d say top 5 in most draft some drafts it’s only 3. And as good as Barzal is he’s not a top 5 pick. Although could end being someone who should’ve been.