| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Guest9808
( )
|
 Posted - 04/27/2013 : 20:21:17
|
From the other thread there was a discussion between Beans and Slozo as to which team is doing a better job of rebuilding.
It got me thinking, how can you compare and what are the measures of success? What is the period and span that would be used to determine these measurements?
Period: I'm guessing starting in 2007-08 or the 2009-10 season?
Span: 5, 10 or 15 yrs. I'll go with 10. 15 just seems too long.
Measures: wins, points, overall standings, playoff appearances, playoff series win, what else?
You guys should lay down a bet. Something epic since we are talking about a pretty big span. I'll step back and watch the sparks fly.
Looks like Toronto has a lead a the moment based on the measures indicated.
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/28/2013 : 11:31:17
|
I'll try to stay outta this if it's Beans V Slozo, but 10 years is a pretty long time for a rebuild! You better have some pretty patient fans if it's gonna take that long, assuming you mean to build a team that could be considered a top 4-5 favorite for the cup??
I think a rebuild should have your team in the mix in 5-6 years. If nothing else, at least to the point you're finishing in the top 10 in the league. |
 |
|
|
Guest9808
( )
|
Posted - 04/28/2013 : 19:21:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
I'll try to stay outta this if it's Beans V Slozo, but 10 years is a pretty long time for a rebuild! You better have some pretty patient fans if it's gonna take that long, assuming you mean to build a team that could be considered a top 4-5 favorite for the cup??
I think a rebuild should have your team in the mix in 5-6 years. If nothing else, at least to the point you're finishing in the top 10 in the league.
No it is not Beans vs Slozo only debate. I thought about 5 yrs but if you used the 2007-08 season, then neither of them have really rebuilt to meet the requirements you stated. That's why I left the question open. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 04/29/2013 : 06:09:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9808
quote:
Originally posted by Alex116
I'll try to stay outta this if it's Beans V Slozo, but 10 years is a pretty long time for a rebuild! You better have some pretty patient fans if it's gonna take that long, assuming you mean to build a team that could be considered a top 4-5 favorite for the cup??
I think a rebuild should have your team in the mix in 5-6 years. If nothing else, at least to the point you're finishing in the top 10 in the league.
No it is not Beans vs Slozo only debate. I thought about 5 yrs but if you used the 2007-08 season, then neither of them have really rebuilt to meet the requirements you stated. That's why I left the question open.
Certainly not just a debate Beans and I . . . as this subject of rebuilding and how to do it has been rehashed over and over again with many teams. As much as Pitssburgh has been discussed on the "tank, get high picks" model . . . we have also gone deeply into looking at the "draft amazingly, and make good signings" model that Detroit used.
Bottom line, there are teams that have succeed AND failed for each model. But the key for any team that has won the stanley cup, is that they always have some very good to great talent that has been nurtured through their system; AND, they have had at least a couple of great trades/signings to augment the team.
But it's a results based business . . . and as much as Edmonton may be able to point at "great talents" like Hall, RNH and now Yakupov . . . their great talents can't play goal or defence, so it's negated.
My answer for time span to look at?
I agree with Alex, 10 years is way too long - I think 5 or 6 years is fair. And yes, if judging the Leafs from the beginning of the Burke era, I would say we just made the cut-off of acceptability for rebuilding . . . although, I must say, we were bottom of the barrel in terms of talent previously.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Guest9808
( )
|
Posted - 04/29/2013 : 18:20:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
My answer for time span to look at?
I agree with Alex, 10 years is way too long - I think 5 or 6 years is fair. And yes, if judging the Leafs from the beginning of the Burke era, I would say we just made the cut-off of acceptability for rebuilding . . . although, I must say, we were bottom of the barrel in terms of talent previously.
Ok. 5-6 yrs starting when 2007-08?
Also what are the measuring criteria that defines a successful rebuild (other than winning a cup which takes about 10-12 yrs of complete rebuild like Pitts, Washington and Chicago)? How does someone know when the rebuilding is finished? Other than their fans telling you just wait another year, you'll see they'll do better next year. |
|
|
|
JOSHUACANADA
PickupHockey Veteran
Canada
2308 Posts |
Posted - 04/29/2013 : 18:56:57
|
A successful rebuild isn't a cup winning guarantee. I think a steady post season run over a few seasons shows a successful rebuild.
Teams like the Rangers or Penguins to me shows 2 different ways to successfully rebuild. Considered now as a lock for a playoff position, but go back a few years and both teams showed up on the outside looking in at the playoffs. Both took a different routes to retool or rebuild (whichever you like), with the Penguins going the draft route and adding veterans to mentor the young stars. New York developed role players thru the draft, but mostly took the free agent route, but both rebuilt and succeeded in the modern NHL.
Looking at Ottawa and Montreal now, didn't most people on this site assume both were due for a rebuild last year or the year before? I don't honestly think either team truly rebuilt, just dropped underperforming players and developed what was already in the minor systems. I think circumstance's (injury, underperforming stars) caused the rebuilding parts for both teams to happen on the fly, which through good scouting has caused great depth of NHL ready players for both teams.
What about Toronto? How long have they tried a rebuild then scrapped it for immediate results. Honestly this year was a blessing in disguise when the coaching and management didn't panick and allowed players in the system to develop without looking to the free agent market for immediate results. I think Toronto fans have learned a lesson this year. Dont panick and let small set backs become major problems. Trust in the guys you got.
That being said when management can't look at there team and see or fix parts missing or underperforming, maybe its time for a management change. There is an old saying if you can't see or fix the problem, maybe your are the problem. (Edmonton management)
I dont think there is a time frame for a successful rebuild. You can completely scrap a team for free agents, build from current core or you can draft for a decade. None of which guarantee success immediate or long lasting results.
"I now realise that the Toronto Maple Leafs, Canada's finest hockey team, is better than the Ottawa Senators - and always will be. PS - LOVE that Dion Phaneuf! " |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/29/2013 : 22:22:01
|
quote:
Originally posted by Guest9808
Ok. 5-6 yrs starting when 2007-08?
Also what are the measuring criteria that defines a successful rebuild (other than winning a cup which takes about 10-12 yrs of complete rebuild like Pitts, Washington and Chicago)? How does someone know when the rebuilding is finished? Other than their fans telling you just wait another year, you'll see they'll do better next year.
My idea of a successful rebuild is one that sees a team become a playoff team for a number of years (say 6-8), and have a legitimate shot at a cup. That would basically, imo, mean a top 4 team in it's conference for at least 3 or 4 seasons. It doesn't matter how good a team gets through a rebuild, the Stanley Cup is still considered by many to be the hardest trophy in pro sports to win. No matter how good your team is, there's no guarantee they're gonna win a cup!!! Trust me, i know!  |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 04/30/2013 : 05:41:58
|
Good question, and a very subjective one, on how to measure where the finish line is, knowing that not every team an win the cup.
I say it's probably making the playoffs three years in a row, and being at least a solid contender each time, with at least one deep run over two rounds in those three years. I would consider that a success.
That being said . . . there are different situations that can happen.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
How to measure a rebuild 
