Can we talk about the Draft some more?

[Idoit40fans]

You really can't judge a draft for at least three more years.

Shero is still getting defended for his first draft, citing that it takes time to develop players. Thats a hell of a lot more than 3 years. The organization is bare on forward prospects and has a glut of defensive prospects. Its no secret that they avoid European players and thats fine, but I thought the 8th round pick in this years draft was an obvious opportunity to take a chance on someone. Especially when it was virtually universally agreed that you reached on one guy to add to your strength and passed up on another guy that everyone was shocked was dropping who would have made your most glaring weakness upgrade from terrible to just really bad..

[Zach6668]

Remember when Angelo Esposito was supposedly the real deal? These experts have him ranked as #10 and #11 in the 2007 draft:

http://insidecollegehockey.com/7Archives/Draft/2007/predraft_ranks0536.htm

What's he doing now?


How about the 2005 entry draft? Check out some of the names that the ISS had has highly ranked prospects:

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/7785/iss_top15_prospects_for_the2005_nhl_draft/

Benoit Pouliot ranked second? Gilbert Brule ranked higher than Bobby Ryan or Anze Kopitar? How about Marek Zagrapan ranked 9th overall?


The point I am trying to make is that the draft is a crap shoot. Some of the most coveted players never pan out (Alexandre Daigle, anyone?), and some that many teams over looked end up being superb picks (Henrik Zetterberg going 210th overall).

Those of you who are complaining and whining that we didn't get Forsberg, calm down and wait a few years and see what happens. The guy has just as much of a chance as becoming an Angelo Esposito as he does an Anze Kopitar. If drafting players were as easy as sitting down at your computer, printing off a sheet of the highest ranked players, and then walking up to the stage to announce your pick, we'd all be in the running for an NHL career. Maybe I overlooked it, but did anyone here get a phone call from the Montreal Canadiens when the GM spot opened up? Call me crazy, but I'll trust Shero's judgement before I trust an internet source (or a forum poster).

If you are truly that ate up over us not getting Forsberg (which I don't think many are, I think it's more or less boredom and/or channeling aggression from us not getting Parise), bookmark this thread and watch the guy's career. If he is tearing it up in the NHL in a few years, come back and flame away.

Well, I think the point is not players though (although a bit sure because of the rankings) but more positional in the argument as well. As I said above you just cant trade prospects and get a quality player back straight up. It takes normally 2 and a draft pick unless the player is developed enough (Goligoski) but even then we are looking at 3 - 5 years before we have enough guys with enough experience to make that happen (assuming one young gun is good enuogh to take over for a traded young guy). Not only that we have no real trade chips at the NHL level And lastly most of the guys we have drafted are of the same mold.

The problem I have is in the short term. Not only next year but after next season we could have needs at:
1st line LW, 1st line RW with Crsoby
2nd line LW with Malkin
3rd LIne LW, 3rd line RW
4th line C

assuming Vitale sticks we would have to trade too many bodies to get a body back. And even with a new CBA UFA's cost a lot more. The myth of anyone wanting to play here at a discount is over.

Now, a lot of this could have been solved by having some solid forward picks. Now if we need to move quickly so we dont wast prime Crosby and Malkin years we need to dump 2 for 1 at the very least. The math just doesnt add up.

You shouldn't be drafting for the short term, IMO.

[BurghersAndDogsSports]

Remember when Angelo Esposito was supposedly the real deal? These experts have him ranked as #10 and #11 in the 2007 draft:

http://insidecollegehockey.com/7Archives/Draft/2007/predraft_ranks0536.htm

What's he doing now?


How about the 2005 entry draft? Check out some of the names that the ISS had has highly ranked prospects:

http://www.hockeysfuture.com/articles/7785/iss_top15_prospects_for_the2005_nhl_draft/

Benoit Pouliot ranked second? Gilbert Brule ranked higher than Bobby Ryan or Anze Kopitar? How about Marek Zagrapan ranked 9th overall?


The point I am trying to make is that the draft is a crap shoot. Some of the most coveted players never pan out (Alexandre Daigle, anyone?), and some that many teams over looked end up being superb picks (Henrik Zetterberg going 210th overall).

Those of you who are complaining and whining that we didn't get Forsberg, calm down and wait a few years and see what happens. The guy has just as much of a chance as becoming an Angelo Esposito as he does an Anze Kopitar. If drafting players were as easy as sitting down at your computer, printing off a sheet of the highest ranked players, and then walking up to the stage to announce your pick, we'd all be in the running for an NHL career. Maybe I overlooked it, but did anyone here get a phone call from the Montreal Canadiens when the GM spot opened up? Call me crazy, but I'll trust Shero's judgement before I trust an internet source (or a forum poster).

If you are truly that ate up over us not getting Forsberg (which I don't think many are, I think it's more or less boredom and/or channeling aggression from us not getting Parise), bookmark this thread and watch the guy's career. If he is tearing it up in the NHL in a few years, come back and flame away.

Well, I think the point is not players though (although a bit sure because of the rankings) but more positional in the argument as well. As I said above you just cant trade prospects and get a quality player back straight up. It takes normally 2 and a draft pick unless the player is developed enough (Goligoski) but even then we are looking at 3 - 5 years before we have enough guys with enough experience to make that happen (assuming one young gun is good enuogh to take over for a traded young guy). Not only that we have no real trade chips at the NHL level And lastly most of the guys we have drafted are of the same mold.

The problem I have is in the short term. Not only next year but after next season we could have needs at:
1st line LW, 1st line RW with Crsoby
2nd line LW with Malkin
3rd LIne LW, 3rd line RW
4th line C

assuming Vitale sticks we would have to trade too many bodies to get a body back. And even with a new CBA UFA's cost a lot more. The myth of anyone wanting to play here at a discount is over.

Now, a lot of this could have been solved by having some solid forward picks. Now if we need to move quickly so we dont wast prime Crosby and Malkin years we need to dump 2 for 1 at the very least. The math just doesnt add up.

You shouldn't be drafting for the short term, IMO.

Define short term? We have no forwards in our system, half our forwards contracts are up soon or they are pushing the wrong side of 30, and we used two first round draft picks on 2 defenseman who have the same skill set as all the other guys we have who wont see the light of day until 3 years at the earliest.

By short term as we meaning the next few seasons we could be in trouble at forward and we havent drafted for that. Forwards get here a lot quicker than d.

[bhaw]

I think the discussions we are having in other threads about which dmen will make the team this year proves the strategy is working. Going forward, we basically have a steady supply of guys who can start taking NHL spots. That means we don't have to keep investing tons of cap space into the defense because we have enough guys to plug in as a guy leaves or can be used for something else like a trade. We don't have to worry about trading our one of two guys who can help fill in on the blue line. We could literally trade 2 or 3 defensemen next year and not really miss too much of a beat. That frees up a lot of cap space for the forwards. The team can go after already established guys because someone who is 2-3 or 4-5 years out from hitting the NHL is worthless to Sid or Malkin right now.

Whether this is the best strategy or not remains to be seen, but it certainly isn't a poor strategy as some here are claiming.

What good would Forsberg have done for this team in 2012? 2013? 2014? Probably not much, if any. Puloit may not help in that time frame either, but the constant flow of prospects defensive prospects becoming NHL ready DOES help during that time frame.

It is also really funny that people are shocked that this is how it has gone. Where did Shero come from? And what has Nashville done for the last 10 years? Yeah, draft a constant supply of defensemen that have allowed them to be competitive with minimal spending and an abysmal offense. The Pens already have a solid base on offense and the funds to fill in the holes via free agency. That system produced 2 guys who people here were ready to throw $80m+ at or literally the next 4 first round draft picks plus $10M+ for 1 year. Given Shero came from that background and school of thought, I've been incredibly curious what people thought they were going to get from him.

The process has allowed us to obtain 3 really good long term top 6 guys already plus multiple short term guys. Why is there concern that won't keep happening? There will always be teams out of the playoffs or struggling with salary or in ownership issues or rebuilding looking to unload a good forward. It got us Neal, Dupuis, Kunitz, Guerin, and Hossa. 3 of those 5 became long term solutions. Guerin retired but clearly would have stayed. Hossa was the only one who left. The forward situation is not going to blow up on us anytime soon unless half of the top 50 forwards in the NHL bolt for the KHL.

/mytwocents

Ready for the flaming and lecturing about how drafting one forward would have changed the franchise forever.

[topshelf]

You really can't judge a draft for at least three more years.

Shero is still getting defended for his first draft, citing that it takes time to develop players. Thats a hell of a lot more than 3 years. The organization is bare on forward prospects and has a glut of defensive prospects. Its no secret that they avoid European players and thats fine, but I thought the 8th round pick in this years draft was an obvious opportunity to take a chance on someone. Especially when it was virtually universally agreed that you reached on one guy to add to your strength and passed up on another guy that everyone was shocked was dropping who would have made your most glaring weakness upgrade from terrible to just really bad..

In the past, Shero stated that decent defenders are harder to come by than decent wingers, and therefore more of a commodity. Just this year he was quoted as saying "there is no better asset to trade than a young defenseman" (http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=635096). When you hold good defensive talent, which is something that is coveted (if you don't believe that, look at what everyone was willing to overpay for Suter), the ball is in your court come trade time.

Examples:

- Ryan Whitney landed us Chris Kunitz and Eric Tangradi
- Alex Goligoski landed us James Neal and Matt Niskanen

If Shero's focus is to draft the best possible defensemen in the draft, assure their progression and development into NHL regulars, and then either keep them or trade them, I don't see why he would have the need to "take a chance" on someone that doesn't fit within the game plan. You stay the course.

Also, stating that Shero "passed up on another guy that everyone was shocked was dropping who would have made your most glaring weakness upgrade from terrible to just really bad" doesn't make sense. First, if everyone was shocked that he was dropping, I doubt it. He was probably dropping for a reason. Second, if you think our offense is "terrible", you haven't been paying attention. Third, your prospects and your system won't win you anything right now. They only thing that matters is the product that you put out on the ice. If Shero obtains that winning product through drafting defensemen and making trades, then that's all that matters. Remember, just as much as you may think another team is offensively stacked in their system, that same team is more than likely defensively weak and will need a defenseman at some point. Forth, how do you know that Forsberg would "upgrade" our talent pool? You couldn't possibly know that for a few more years.

[columbia]

I think the discussions we are having in other threads about which dmen will make the team this year proves the strategy is working. Going forward, we basically have a steady supply of guys who can start taking NHL spots. That means we don't have to keep investing tons of cap space into the defense because we have enough guys to plug in as a guy leaves or can be used for something else like a trade. We don't have to worry about trading our one of two guys who can help fill in on the blue line. We could literally trade 2 or 3 defensemen next year and not really miss too much of a beat. That frees up a lot of cap space for the forwards. The team can go after already established guys because someone who is 2-3 or 4-5 years out from hitting the NHL is worthless to Sid or Malkin right now.

Whether this is the best strategy or not remains to be seen, but it certainly isn't a poor strategy as some here are claiming.

What good would Forsberg have done for this team in 2012? 2013? 2014? Probably not much, if any. Puloit may not help in that time frame either, but the constant flow of prospects defensive prospects becoming NHL ready DOES help during that time frame.

It is also really funny that people are shocked that this is how it has gone. Where did Shero come from? And what has Nashville done for the last 10 years? Yeah, draft a constant supply of defensemen that have allowed them to be competitive with minimal spending and an abysmal offense. The Pens already have a solid base on offense and the funds to fill in the holes via free agency. That system produced 2 guys who people here were ready to throw $80m+ at or literally the next 4 first round draft picks plus $10M+ for 1 year. Given Shero came from that background and school of thought, I've been incredibly curious what people thought they were going to get from him.

The process has allowed us to obtain 3 really good long term top 6 guys already plus multiple short term guys. Why is there concern that won't keep happening? There will always be teams out of the playoffs or struggling with salary or in ownership issues or rebuilding looking to unload a good forward. It got us Neal, Dupuis, Kunitz, Guerin, and Hossa. 3 of those 5 became long term solutions. Guerin retired but clearly would have stayed. Hossa was the only one who left. The forward situation is not going to blow up on us anytime soon unless half of the top 50 forwards in the NHL bolt for the KHL.

/mytwocents

Ready for the flaming and lecturing about how drafting one forward would have changed the franchise forever.

:slow clap:

[BurghersAndDogsSports]

I think the discussions we are having in other threads about which dmen will make the team this year proves the strategy is working. Going forward, we basically have a steady supply of guys who can start taking NHL spots. That means we don't have to keep investing tons of cap space into the defense because we have enough guys to plug in as a guy leaves or can be used for something else like a trade. We don't have to worry about trading our one of two guys who can help fill in on the blue line. We could literally trade 2 or 3 defensemen next year and not really miss too much of a beat. That frees up a lot of cap space for the forwards. The team can go after already established guys because someone who is 2-3 or 4-5 years out from hitting the NHL is worthless to Sid or Malkin right now.

Whether this is the best strategy or not remains to be seen, but it certainly isn't a poor strategy as some here are claiming.

What good would Forsberg have done for this team in 2012? 2013? 2014? Probably not much, if any. Puloit may not help in that time frame either, but the constant flow of prospects defensive prospects becoming NHL ready DOES help during that time frame.

It is also really funny that people are shocked that this is how it has gone. Where did Shero come from? And what has Nashville done for the last 10 years? Yeah, draft a constant supply of defensemen that have allowed them to be competitive with minimal spending and an abysmal offense. The Pens already have a solid base on offense and the funds to fill in the holes via free agency. That system produced 2 guys who people here were ready to throw $80m+ at or literally the next 4 first round draft picks plus $10M+ for 1 year. Given Shero came from that background and school of thought, I've been incredibly curious what people thought they were going to get from him.

The process has allowed us to obtain 3 really good long term top 6 guys already plus multiple short term guys. Why is there concern that won't keep happening? There will always be teams out of the playoffs or struggling with salary or in ownership issues or rebuilding looking to unload a good forward. It got us Neal, Dupuis, Kunitz, Guerin, and Hossa. 3 of those 5 became long term solutions. Guerin retired but clearly would have stayed. Hossa was the only one who left. The forward situation is not going to blow up on us anytime soon unless half of the top 50 forwards in the NHL bolt for the KH
/mytwocents

Ready for the flaming and lecturing about how drafting one forward would have changed the franchise forever.

I am not going to flame you, I understand your point, just point out that if he would have balanced it out we would have 4 forwards and 4 d-men ready for the NHL soon and no need for trades. I understand the need for cheaper d-men due to the cap - but everyone on FA has been getting overpaid, not just d-men. Forwards too. Maybe not as much but still a lot.

Plus, in the examples above are not exactly clear cut. We did have to give up some other assets, draft picks, players, other prospects. Just because they didnt all work out neither did every player in our return. Kunitz and Dupuis are ok is but its not like they had/have huge pedigree, they forced a terrible Niskanen on us, we clearly didnt want him, we got some guys back that were not that great too.

.....the biggest point the last 3 years we were not able to pull a rabbit out of our hat for veteran FA's unless you count Ponikarovsky? You simply can not count on getting a Hossa or Guerin every year no matter how much the depth of one position you have. They have to be available on a team that has no shot, they have to be a UFA and you have to outbid other teams. Lots go into it, we got Hossa but how many 37 year old super leaders like Guerin are there in this situation? How many times can you actually get a Hossa? And our prospects that people want now are not Espisito.

If we have to count on deadline deals we will be in trouble.

[Fire0nice228]

bhaw POTM - I tried to say the same thing where cheap D via our prospects allows us to spend on offense, but not nearly so eloquently as you just did.

:golf clap:

But I see the other side, cant always rely on the trade for various reasons..

[Pavel Bure]

Building a team in the Nashville mold isn't bad at all because the Pens actually have money to spend. Quit crying about forwards.

[meecrofilm]

Can someone please convince me that not taking Filip Forsberg was the right decision

Give it 5 years. Consensus lists are fairly worthless.

Plus, pretty much everyone here (myself included) haven't even seen both Forsberg and Pouliot play more than just a few games -- most haven't seen them play any, so... yeah.

[sniper]

If the Penguins have Crosby, Malkin, and Neal as three of their top 6 forwards going forward and end up with the best group of 6 defensemen in the league 3 or 4 years from now nobody is going to be complaining. You can complain about who they draft now all you want, but if they have 6 defensemen with the skill level of top 4 guys to go along with that core group of forwards this is going to be one very difficult team to beat. Not to mention most of those guys will be working fairly cheap for a few years allowing you to go after FA forwards and if they need to trade them other teams will pay a ransom for them. I have no problem with Shero going after D-men every year in the first round.

[columbia]

One of the local experts threw a temper tantrum after Morrow was drafted.
It's - obviously - far too early to assess that pick, but the smart money says that reaction was absurd.

[Streaks House]

I think the discussions we are having in other threads about which dmen will make the team this year proves the strategy is working. Going forward, we basically have a steady supply of guys who can start taking NHL spots. That means we don't have to keep investing tons of cap space into the defense because we have enough guys to plug in as a guy leaves or can be used for something else like a trade. We don't have to worry about trading our one of two guys who can help fill in on the blue line. We could literally trade 2 or 3 defensemen next year and not really miss too much of a beat. That frees up a lot of cap space for the forwards. The team can go after already established guys because someone who is 2-3 or 4-5 years out from hitting the NHL is worthless to Sid or Malkin right now.

Whether this is the best strategy or not remains to be seen, but it certainly isn't a poor strategy as some here are claiming.

What good would Forsberg have done for this team in 2012? 2013? 2014? Probably not much, if any. Puloit may not help in that time frame either, but the constant flow of prospects defensive prospects becoming NHL ready DOES help during that time frame.

It is also really funny that people are shocked that this is how it has gone. Where did Shero come from? And what has Nashville done for the last 10 years? Yeah, draft a constant supply of defensemen that have allowed them to be competitive with minimal spending and an abysmal offense. The Pens already have a solid base on offense and the funds to fill in the holes via free agency. That system produced 2 guys who people here were ready to throw $80m+ at or literally the next 4 first round draft picks plus $10M+ for 1 year. Given Shero came from that background and school of thought, I've been incredibly curious what people thought they were going to get from him.

The process has allowed us to obtain 3 really good long term top 6 guys already plus multiple short term guys. Why is there concern that won't keep happening? There will always be teams out of the playoffs or struggling with salary or in ownership issues or rebuilding looking to unload a good forward. It got us Neal, Dupuis, Kunitz, Guerin, and Hossa. 3 of those 5 became long term solutions. Guerin retired but clearly would have stayed. Hossa was the only one who left. The forward situation is not going to blow up on us anytime soon unless half of the top 50 forwards in the NHL bolt for the KH
/mytwocents

Ready for the flaming and lecturing about how drafting one forward would have changed the franchise forever.

I am not going to flame you, I understand your point, just point out that if he would have balanced it out we would have 4 forwards and 4 d-men ready for the NHL soon and no need for trades. I understand the need for cheaper d-men due to the cap - but everyone on FA has been getting overpaid, not just d-men. Forwards too. Maybe not as much but still a lot.

Plus, in the examples above are not exactly clear cut. We did have to give up some other assets, draft picks, players, other prospects. Just because they didnt all work out neither did every player in our return. Kunitz and Dupuis are ok is but its not like they had/have huge pedigree, they forced a terrible Niskanen on us, we clearly didnt want him, we got some guys back that were not that great too.

.....the biggest point the last 3 years we were not able to pull a rabbit out of our hat for veteran FA's unless you count Ponikarovsky? You simply can not count on getting a Hossa or Guerin every year no matter how much the depth of one position you have. They have to be available on a team that has no shot, they have to be a UFA and you have to outbid other teams. Lots go into it, we got Hossa but how many 37 year old super leaders like Guerin are there in this situation? How many times can you actually get a Hossa? And our prospects that people want now are not Espisito.

If we have to count on deadline deals we will be in trouble.

1. This ASSUMES they all develop accordingly and none are busts. And unless a team has MULTIPLE top draft picks in any given year, it is going to be difficult to consistently be able to draft players with high ceilings, as these guys don't usually make it out of the top 50 picks.

2. What did these other assets end up becoming? Nothing significant. Colby Armstrong, Erik Christensen, Angelo Esposito, 1st rounder, mid-round picks. Nothing of value.

3. There hasn't been a great market of recent for these types of players, and teams have been overpaying. Look at what Nashville paid for Gaustad at the deadline. Look at this past season, there were only a few teams that were legitimately out of playoff contention. Tough for a team that is within a few points of a playoff spot to justify shedding one of their important pieces. Leopold was a solid acquisition aside from missing time with a concussion.

[Streaks House]

bhaw makes a great point regarding Nashville's drafting strategy...if you do something well, you should capitalize and exploit it. In Nashville and with GMRS, its identifying and drafting defensemen. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[Zach6668]

You shouldn't be drafting for the short term, IMO.

Define short term? We have no forwards in our system, half our forwards contracts are up soon or they are pushing the wrong side of 30, and we used two first round draft picks on 2 defenseman who have the same skill set as all the other guys we have who wont see the light of day until 3 years at the earliest.

By short term as we meaning the next few seasons we could be in trouble at forward and we havent drafted for that. Forwards get here a lot quicker than d.

Well, you were talking about 1-2 seasons, it seemed from your post, and obviously current drafts will almost never help the team in such short notice.

I mean, look, I'm not saying don't ever draft a forward, or that we don't have an organizational weakness at the position in the pipeline, but it's certainly not something that needs to be addressed so intently, IMHO.

My belief is that Shero and Co. thought Pouliot was the best player available to them, in the sense that they like his potential, his current play, and his potential trade value. All of those combined, and I believe they thought he was the best choice, regardless of what ISS and others think. Teams do their own scouting, they don't go by those rankings.

But, back to my short term point, they shouldn't be doing it because they see a need in the short term (1-3 seasons away) because unless they're drafting top 3, guys are going to be hit or miss, no matter which position they play, so they draft the guy they think is best at the time, for the future, doesn't matter if a guy takes 7 years to develop.

[the wicked child]

I think it's clear that Pouliot was their main focus in the first round. They had a great view of what he did this year, so obviously they were sold. I know nothing of Forsberg, so I can't really criticize the pick one way or another. We'll know in 3 years or so maybe if the right decision was made... not sure it's worth getting worked up over right now.

[bhaw]

bhaw makes a great point regarding Nashville's drafting strategy...if you do something well, you should capitalize and exploit it. In Nashville and with GMRS, its identifying and drafting defensemen. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I'm just using this to bounce a couple other points off of:

If you constantly try to balance out your draft, you are trying to be a jack of all trades (but master of none). By loading up in one position, the likelihood of having the numbers we are starting to see in feasible picks panning out is much greater. If you cut the pool of guys we have drafted in half, we don't have numbers on our side for ANY of those positions.

Also, when you own a huge piece of the market on a specialized position like, let's say, puck moving d-men, you have more buying power and more options. When you need a mattress, most people will go to a mattress store first to see what they have. They don't go to IKEA even though they have mattresses, albeit lower quality. You go to the mattress store first because they are more likely to have something you want. So when a team knows they have that need, it's likely the Pens are one of the first teams they call because a) we have a good selection and b) they aren't trying to pry off the only puck moving dman in our system.

EDIT to ADD: Lastly, don't underestimate the importance of the competition level among the prospects. There are 6-10 guys who all know they can't just be really good to crack the line up. They have to be the best out of that crop because there are options. It pushes those guys to be better. With athletes at that level, you can't discount that competitiveness. It's more than feasible that several of these guys become better than they ever would have been without this many defensemen in the system because they have to push to be better if they want to be in the NHL.

[columbia]

Even with the widespread objections to RS's approach, I don't doubt that folks will get attached to certain draft picks after a year or two; so we'll even see the detractors of his style wincing, whenever valuable assets are treaded off for young and immediately helpful Fs.

[Godric]

bhaw makes a great point regarding Nashville's drafting strategy...if you do something well, you should capitalize and exploit it. In Nashville and with GMRS, its identifying and drafting defensemen. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I'm just using this to bounce a couple other points off of:

If you constantly try to balance out your draft, you are trying to be a jack of all trades (but master of none). By loading up in one position, the likelihood of having the numbers we are starting to see in feasible picks panning out is much greater. If you cut the pool of guys we have drafted in half, we don't have numbers on our side for ANY of those positions.

Also, when you own a huge piece of the market on a specialized position like, let's say, puck moving d-men, you have more buying power and more options. When you need a mattress, most people will go to a mattress store first to see what they have. They don't go to IKEA even though they have mattresses, albeit lower quality. You go to the mattress store first because they are more likely to have something you want. So when a team knows they have that need, it's likely the Pens are one of the first teams they call because a) we have a good selection and b) they aren't trying to pry off the only puck moving dman in our system.

Thanks Bhaw. I asked someone to convince me picking Pouliot was the right decision and you did

[bhaw]

Glad I could ease your concerns. Hopefully I end up being right

[bhaw]

And I'd still be curious to hear what people were expecting given Shero's background and Nashville's strategy while he was there. It would be like Habs fans being shocked that Therrien eventually goes off on the team to the media.

[BurghersAndDogsSports]

I think the discussions we are having in other threads about which dmen will make the team this year proves the strategy is working. Going forward, we basically have a steady supply of guys who can start taking NHL spots. That means we don't have to keep investing tons of cap space into the defense because we have enough guys to plug in as a guy leaves or can be used for something else like a trade. We don't have to worry about trading our one of two guys who can help fill in on the blue line. We could literally trade 2 or 3 defensemen next year and not really miss too much of a beat. That frees up a lot of cap space for the forwards. The team can go after already established guys because someone who is 2-3 or 4-5 years out from hitting the NHL is worthless to Sid or Malkin right now.

Whether this is the best strategy or not remains to be seen, but it certainly isn't a poor strategy as some here are claiming.

What good would Forsberg have done for this team in 2012? 2013? 2014? Probably not much, if any. Puloit may not help in that time frame either, but the constant flow of prospects defensive prospects becoming NHL ready DOES help during that time frame.

It is also really funny that people are shocked that this is how it has gone. Where did Shero come from? And what has Nashville done for the last 10 years? Yeah, draft a constant supply of defensemen that have allowed them to be competitive with minimal spending and an abysmal offense. The Pens already have a solid base on offense and the funds to fill in the holes via free agency. That system produced 2 guys who people here were ready to throw $80m+ at or literally the next 4 first round draft picks plus $10M+ for 1 year. Given Shero came from that background and school of thought, I've been incredibly curious what people thought they were going to get from him.

The process has allowed us to obtain 3 really good long term top 6 guys already plus multiple short term guys. Why is there concern that won't keep happening? There will always be teams out of the playoffs or struggling with salary or in ownership issues or rebuilding looking to unload a good forward. It got us Neal, Dupuis, Kunitz, Guerin, and Hossa. 3 of those 5 became long term solutions. Guerin retired but clearly would have stayed. Hossa was the only one who left. The forward situation is not going to blow up on us anytime soon unless half of the top 50 forwards in the NHL bolt for the KH
/mytwocents

Ready for the flaming and lecturing about how drafting one forward would have changed the franchise forever.

I am not going to flame you, I understand your point, just point out that if he would have balanced it out we would have 4 forwards and 4 d-men ready for the NHL soon and no need for trades. I understand the need for cheaper d-men due to the cap - but everyone on FA has been getting overpaid, not just d-men. Forwards too. Maybe not as much but still a lot.

Plus, in the examples above are not exactly clear cut. We did have to give up some other assets, draft picks, players, other prospects. Just because they didnt all work out neither did every player in our return. Kunitz and Dupuis are ok is but its not like they had/have huge pedigree, they forced a terrible Niskanen on us, we clearly didnt want him, we got some guys back that were not that great too.

.....the biggest point the last 3 years we were not able to pull a rabbit out of our hat for veteran FA's unless you count Ponikarovsky? You simply can not count on getting a Hossa or Guerin every year no matter how much the depth of one position you have. They have to be available on a team that has no shot, they have to be a UFA and you have to outbid other teams. Lots go into it, we got Hossa but how many 37 year old super leaders like Guerin are there in this situation? How many times can you actually get a Hossa? And our prospects that people want now are not Espisito.

If we have to count on deadline deals we will be in trouble.

1. This ASSUMES they all develop accordingly and none are busts. And unless a team has MULTIPLE top draft picks in any given year, it is going to be difficult to consistently be able to draft players with high ceilings, as these guys don't usually make it out of the top 50 picks.

2. What did these other assets end up becoming? Nothing significant. Colby Armstrong, Erik Christensen, Angelo Esposito, 1st rounder, mid-round picks. Nothing of value.

3. There hasn't been a great market of recent for these types of players, and teams have been overpaying. Look at what Nashville paid for Gaustad at the deadline. Look at this past season, there were only a few teams that were legitimately out of playoff contention. Tough for a team that is within a few points of a playoff spot to justify shedding one of their important pieces. Leopold was a solid acquisition aside from missing time with a concussion.

1. True but the other way assume quite a bit too. Like all of those guys are going to develop enough to be able to trade for assets, that assets will be available, that teams want those assets to part with what we need, that salary related to cap/players/potential UFA's work in our favor where we can land guys at the deadline or summer etc.

2. I agree but everything people bring up is 3 or 4 years ago. What did Hossa end up for us? Tangradi? I mean Kunitz and Dupuis are nice pieces but hardly not replaceable. I am not saying there is zero validity to stockpiling defensive prospects my only point is that everyone thinks by stock piling these guys we can just simply go trade them for our needs. Signed, delivered. It doesnt work that way. At all. You need a player that fits the mold, a team willing to part for whatever reason, and a team that is willing to give up a forward for prospects and then of course overpaying at the deadline and also salary cap issues.

Its just not a slam dunk. I would rather draft and develop my own players and then adjust off of that.

3. That is my point. There are only a few teams out of playoff contention every year now, the market has been slim by product of the competitiveness of the salary capped NHL not by some weird coincidence. Teams overpaying for Gaustard at the deadline mean more to me that we cant just ship a prospect over, it will have to be 2 or 3 and/or a draft pick plus an NHL ready forward to pick up a goal scoring forward. Only having 5 teams out of contention mean you are bidding against more teams than a few years ago.

Look, I am not against everything that Shero did, if all the prospects turn out great so be it, I really hope so. And if we can just trade for forwards to plug into our needs great, even better. I just dont think its so easy as everyone is making it.

Because we got Neal in a trade that every year we can trade a d-men for a winger and problem solved because the player available if perfect, his salary is perfect (as you stated in point 1) we ASSUME that the other prospect we didnt trade is perfectly ready to play at a high enough NHL level.

By not having a good substance of forwards in our system at all, in a year or two we really could have serious depth problems that even trades cant solve ESPECIALLY at higher trade prices. Pretty much all of our wings and 4th line but Neal are gonna be gone in 2 years. The theory behind lower salaries for d-men in their first years holds true for forwards too and if we want someone to help us win a cup he probably has enough years of service that is entry contract will be up too, just like Neal.

[bhaw]

I don't think anyone is trying to say it's easy. Hence why it has taken 4-5 years to get to the point where we have 7 NHL defensemen signed and the possibility of 3-5 others who could make the team depending on camp. The following year prospects will be more ready and a bigger number will be knocking at the door. Hossa worked out great... he was with us int he Cup finals. We just couldn't sign him the next year, which worked out even better b/c we picked up Kunitz and won the Cup. Tangradi was not the major piece of that deal, so what happens with him is irrelevant. If you look at the deal: Whitney for Kunitz and Tangradi and assume ET never plays another minute, we won that trade and have Kunitz on the roster. We were forced to take Niskanen (your words and I don't know if that's true) with Neal. Look how that worked out: Neal was a top 5 scorer and Niskanen proved to be a good enough defenseman that we re-signed him.

I don't think any of this is easy but it's strength in numbers. If you are really good at pinpointing a certain type of player and you have 15 of them in the system, it is much much more likely that more of them work out than if you just pick 5 and try to be good at pinpointing everything. Maybe it's not the best method, but it appears to be working. Maybe someone with better knowledge of prospects can correct me, but aren't the Wings the exact opposite? They have good forward depth but the only d prospect they have grown into a role is Kindl. And he doesn't appear to be great yet.

[BurghersAndDogsSports]

I don't think anyone is trying to say it's easy. Hence why it has taken 4-5 years to get to the point where we have 7 NHL defensemen signed and the possibility of 3-5 others who could make the team depending on camp. The following year prospects will be more ready and a bigger number will be knocking at the door. Hossa worked out great... he was with us int he Cup finals. We just couldn't sign him the next year, which worked out even better b/c we picked up Kunitz and won the Cup. Tangradi was not the major piece of that deal, so what happens with him is irrelevant. If you look at the deal: Whitney for Kunitz and Tangradi and assume ET never plays another minute, we won that trade and have Kunitz on the roster. We were forced to take Niskanen (your words and I don't know if that's true) with Neal. Look how that worked out: Neal was a top 5 scorer and Niskanen proved to be a good enough defenseman that we re-signed him.

I don't think any of this is easy but it's strength in numbers. If you are really good at pinpointing a certain type of player and you have 15 of them in the system, it is much much more likely that more of them work out than if you just pick 5 and try to be good at pinpointing everything. Maybe it's not the best method, but it appears to be working. Maybe someone with better knowledge of prospects can correct me, but aren't the Wings the exact opposite? They have good forward depth but the only d prospect they have grown into a role is Kindl. And he doesn't appear to be great yet.

Sure, but again we gave up 4 pieces I think for Hossa and at this point short of giving up 2 first rounders and 3 d prospects we cant make that trade as they would need some NHL ready forwards. We have a position of depth/strength but we also have no other chips to put in there.

While it was nice that we got return for Whitney (and assuming Despres or Morrow turn out to be better than Whitney) would it not be great to keep those guys because we already have say a 2nd line LW and 3rd line LW in the line up which should have been doable over 6 years of drafting?

I mean we were talking about this as a strength already and then picked up 3 more like guys - even in their roles as puck movers? If the point is to just keep trading them because we think we can better value trading them then just drafting guys, I dont know. Seems it would just be easier to draft a good forward. Its like everyone assumes you draft defensive guys and then every teams will be salivating so bad because they forgot they can actually draft them too.

I mean everyone keeps raving about the return we got for Whitney but we basically selected Kunitz 5th overall in a draft? We are not always going to get a James Neal back and even when we do people overstate it because his stats are inflated. Dont get me wrong I like Kunitz and James Neal a lot but their stats are inflated a bit here. Good players sure but we would barely know them if they didnt play here.

[bhaw]

You didn't know James Neal or Chris Kunitz before they got here? I knew of them and what they could do. I didn't expect Neal to become THAT good with Malkin, but he did. So I don't get the point. And no, we got Whitney for several years then Chris Kunitz. I don't know why you would minimize it to say we spent a 5th overall pick on him, and even if we did... sure. We got a top line winger who helped us win the Cup for a 5th overall. If we forget all the production we got from Whitney, that sure seems like a good deal to me.

While it was nice that we got return for Whitney (and assuming Despres or Morrow turn out to be better than Whitney) would it not be great to keep those guys because we already have say a 2nd line LW and 3rd line LW in the line up which should have been doable over 6 years of drafting?

We wouldn't have had these guys if we were drafting forwards. The only reason we have them is because we drafted dmen. You seem to be under the assumption that every 20th+ overall pick is going to be slotted in the line up. You were talking about how it's not that simple to just make a trade but then make it sound super easy to just draft a top 6 forward every year along with an NHL capable dman.