My issue is, management must have sat down and decided who would stay and who would go before the trade deadline last year and before we all received that missive.
I don't think this must be the case at all. I think they had a list of people to shop and they were likely willing to part only for specific amounts of picks or prospects. They likely also decided to keep a specific amount of vets because you absolutely must have some vets to at LEAST demonstrate work habits and give the kids a chance to play sheltered minutes.
I recognize that it’s not fantasy hockey and players can’t just be moved overnight, but to some extent, these are the players that management chose to move forward with.
Nothing wrong with that. It depends what they expect while moving forward with them All signs point to them having the right expectations.
These are the same guys management believed would take huge leaps in 2015,2016,2017 and have, year after year, been hanging their hats on the likes of Kreider, Hayes and Zucc. Almost every year, their play is inconsistent at best. I imagine this is “the core” because these are the guys that management has always believed capable of far more than what they actually have produced.
Wait how do you know managent absolutely expected huge leaps and from each and every one of them? What if they hoped for a huge leap from one or more of them but projected, reasonably, for them to continue to produce at their normal pace? Besides PR spin I doubt there's any evidence to support what you're saying. I was saying before, why not consider that this is less of a core and more of a few vets to help eat minutes and shelter the kids as they grow? Vets who can be traded if the right offer comes along.
Here’s the way I look at it- if these 3 guys were up for grabs via trade when they still had potential, would they have fetched more in return than what they do now that their potential has turned into a dream and reality is much less? To me the answer is clear, absolutely yes! If that’s the case, this team has no core and to me, that’s absolutely worse and hints that this rebuild will be far more painful than it could be.
I think you're making some massive leaps in logic. They can't carry the load themselves when surrounded by kids. Many of these same guys, when surrounded by more experienced, more competent players, were a part of cup contending teams. Some of them can be a small part of a better team again in the future. In the meantime, they can be vets doing what I mentioned before.
I also struggle to see how a team that has historically bad draft picks in the first round
What? I think you came to a completely unsupported opinion.
This is about identifying, scouting and selecting top end talent in the first 10 picks of the draft. Nothing else matters at this point because without game changing talent this team will suffer for as many years as that’s lacking.
Until literally last year we had a sample size of 1 in terms of this scouting staff having a crack at a top 10 pick. How are you coming to this assumption?
Right now, under this specific management regime Lias and Kravtsoff our only top 10 picks are looking really, really good. So 100% of the sample size that we have for this management team picking in the top 10 flies completely against your conclusion.
Chytil, a late first, is struggling as a teenage NHL rookie but has also looked great as a prospect.
Skjei was a late first who is a 2nd pair D man
JT Miller was a middle 6 winger
Where are these historic failings? We could talk about the back end of the draft but the 1st round is where the NYR have excelled.
