Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

DA_Champion

Preference: Early Playoff Exit Or Better Draft Pick?

59 posts in this topic

how about both. We make the playoffs this year and then trade up to get a high draft pick in the summer?? LOL

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nobody wants the team to tank to get a pick. But every season we load up on lower-tier or aging veterans to avoid falling too low. If we'd passed on players like Niinimaa, Smolinski, Bonk, Johnson, Brisebois, and even Lang, and concentrated on seriously developing the youth core for at least one season, we could have seen a quantum leap forward in the development of our kids and also stood an excellent chance of drafting high enough to land an impact player.

So you say nobody wants to tank, then the latter part of your post suggests just that. Maybe not in the exact words, but "developing" while knowing you will be bad is still tanking.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you say nobody wants to tank, then the latter part of your post suggests just that. Maybe not in the exact words, but "developing" while knowing you will be bad is still tanking.

What I'm saying is: no pro sports team goes into a game trying to lose (unless they're trying to get the coach fired, which is a different issue altogether). That's my definition of tanking. However, I see absolutely nothing wrong with committing to developing your young players over a season without always needing scads of lower-tier veterans to lean on as a crutch. And who's to say we would have been bad? The idea is simply: sink or swim with your kids. Just like Gainey's current philosophy is: sink or swim with your high-priced veterans. Nowhere is 'tanking' implied.

With the right coaches and the right system, there is no reason why we can't be a good young team going forward. If we lose, we lose. So be it. But you, more than anyone, should know that there are no guarantees. We could succeed, or fail, or fall somewhere in between. Just like the current team has not met expectations this season despite an established core of veteran talent.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I'm saying is: no pro sports team goes into a game trying to lose (unless they're trying to get the coach fired, which is a different issue altogether). That's my definition of tanking. However, I see absolutely nothing wrong with committing to developing your young players over a season without always needing scads of lower-tier veterans to lean on as a crutch. And who's to say we would have been bad? The idea is simply: sink or swim with your kids. Just like Gainey's current philosophy is: sink or swim with your high-priced veterans. Nowhere is 'tanking' implied.

With the right coaches and the right system, there is no reason why we can't be a good young team going forward. If we lose, we lose. So be it. But you, more than anyone, should know that there are no guarantees. We could succeed, or fail, or fall somewhere in between. Just like the current team has not met expectations this season despite an established core of veteran talent.

tanking games trying to get a coach fired is sooo childish

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I'm saying is: no pro sports team goes into a game trying to lose (unless they're trying to get the coach fired, which is a different issue altogether). That's my definition of tanking. However, I see absolutely nothing wrong with committing to developing your young players over a season without always needing scads of lower-tier veterans to lean on as a crutch. And who's to say we would have been bad? The idea is simply: sink or swim with your kids. Just like Gainey's current philosophy is: sink or swim with your high-priced veterans. Nowhere is 'tanking' implied.

With the right coaches and the right system, there is no reason why we can't be a good young team going forward. If we lose, we lose. So be it. But you, more than anyone, should know that there are no guarantees. We could succeed, or fail, or fall somewhere in between. Just like the current team has not met expectations this season despite an established core of veteran talent.

Sorry weep its where you said this,

and concentrated on seriously developing the youth core for at least one season, we could have seen a quantum leap forward in the development of our kids and also stood an excellent chance of drafting high enough to land an impact player.

Is where it seemed you were implying tanking.

However I would argue on your fact that, "No pro sports team goes into a game trying to lose." Maybe the players and coaches don't and I would fullheartedly agree, but I've seen GM's admit they built a team with the intent of losing, aka, the retarded concept of rebuilding.

Problem is with kids is some are developed and some aren't. Yes kids are cheaper, controllable, have more impact on your future etc., however not all are developed enough to be able to contrbiute enough. Some are like Higgins, Plekanec Akost to an extent, but then you have Pacioretty, Dags and OB. Kids who can do something, but not really anything.

It has to be a balance of valuing short term wins, and your long term future and extracting the most production in the process. Vets and kids can both do this, with a balance that is determined on the situation. Remember when a lot of these "depth" players were signed like Begin, Bouillon and Dandy, the Habs did not have kids budding and pushing through ready to produce at different positions. RIGHT NOW, it would be bad if Gainey signed a lot of depth players this summer, but at the time it actually made some sense, albeit not a whole heck of a lot.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see us bring up at least 2 of our D's from Hamilton. We have so many players down there who will be ready for next season that we don't really have much to worry about in our UFAs. Re-sign some veterans to help guide the younger players and we should be set.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd like to see us bring up at least 2 of our D's from Hamilton. We have so many players down there who will be ready for next season that we don't really have much to worry about in our UFAs. Re-sign some veterans to help guide the younger players and we should be set.

which of those D would you like to see on opening night in october?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd like to see us bring up at least 2 of our D's from Hamilton. We have so many players down there who will be ready for next season that we don't really have much to worry about in our UFAs. ...........

Interesting .

I think the guy's in Hamilton can fill in but are nothing to make the team better

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ETA: As for Brisebois, I'm not there were many more D who could have been developed this year. Next year though Carle, Weber, Belle and O'Byrne... some of them should be ready to step up, and I'd lose Brisebois and Bouillon. We also need to make room in Hamilton for Fischer, McDonagh and Subban.

The Habs only need to sign Subban this summer. Fischer does not need to be signed until 2010 and McDonogh until 2011. I fully expect them to stay in the NCAA. Carle (if he can stay concussion free - he has had 3 this year I believe) may be ready for some time in Montreal next year but I would say Weber will most likely see the better part of the season next year in Hamilton. As for Belle; a case could be made for him to play in Montreal but at 24 years old the plan may be for him to stay in Hamilton to provide veteran leadership for the young defencemen prospects like Baines and Biron did two seasons ago. However that is just my opinion.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.