Do NHL fans overrate the importance of 'depth'?

[coolboarder]

If you are talking about depth as in having a pre-cap superteam, certainly. But then again, depth is relative; meaning that once you have your bottom six clearly outperform their opponents' depth players, and maybe even saw off the opponent's top players, you're truly a powerhouse. Usually that happens when you have bargain contracts on your team. Sometimes that's prudent signings, but most often it is drafting well and having young players come in and contributing before getting their payday - as you say. This is what the Blackhawks and Lightning did so well. Boston had Marchand on the third line when they won, Giroux was the same when the Flyers went to the finals. But it is hard to keep replenishing when you have to shed players in order to get under the cap - but this is what the cap is all about. The Hawks did it really well for years and stayed competitive, same with the Bolts.

In some sense, depth is about having the fewest weaknesses - which is cleary a relative measure, no matter how "diluted" the league is as such.

My NHL Salary Cap Idea: Reward Home-Grown Talent
Here’s my proposal to tweak the NHL salary cap to reward teams for drafting and developing players, while keeping the free market and player movement intact:

• Cap Exemption for Drafted Players: Players you draft and keep through their UFA years get a partial cap hit exemption. The exemption depends on their draft round:
  • 1st round: 10% of their cap hit is exempt.
  • 2nd round: 20% exempt.
  • 3rd round: 30% exempt.
  • 4th round or later: 50% exempt.
  • Example: A 4th-round pick signs a $6M UFA deal. Only $3M counts against the cap, but they still earn the full $6M.
• No Exemption for Other Teams: If a drafted player signs with another team as a UFA, the full cap hit applies. This stops teams from offering crazy contracts to steal talent. Especially to a drafted college UFA that choose to sign with other teams after August 15 of year 4.
• Preventing Cap Tricks: Traded players lose the exemption, even if they return to their drafting team as UFAs. This stops teams from gaming the system.
• Why It Works:
  • Rewards teams for scouting and developing gems, especially late-round picks who become stars.
  • Lets teams keep home-grown players for their whole career, freeing up cap space to sign UFA depth players.
  • Keeps the 50-50 owner-player revenue split. Owners who want to keep players with exemptions might pay more, but that’s their choice.
  • Makes drafting a priority, not a throwaway.
  • This exemption only apply to all players that is in UFA age, not RFA which is still 100% of the cap hit to all RFA..
  • If you buy out players with exemption, all of their remaining years will be 100% buyout cap hit.

This system encourages teams to invest in their draft picks, makes them more valuable than UFAs, and still lets players get their market-value payday. It’s just an idea—what do you think?

 

[Duffy13]

If expansion happens 4 more times, and it seems like it is going to, then that's 4 backup goalies becoming starters, and everyone's 3rd and 4th line getting worse than it is now. I wouldn't' want to be that 4th expansion team, pickens be slim b'ye

 

[dgibb10]

Depth is inconsistent, unpredictable, and overrated yes.

Teams who win will retroactively have their depth viewed through a different light (because winning a cup requires you to get hot at the right time, which generally involves your depth overperforming their standard).

It all comes back to the fact that it's not fun to admit how much of NHL cups come down to luck.

 

[JFedol]

Depth is another way to say that your superstars are possibly fraudulent underperforming players when the lights get bright. Your star player obviously can't play the whole game but Imagine putting your whole faith on unconsistent, unreliable and unsustainable depth to win championships lol.

2010s-2020s Flames (decent depth), 2020s Canes, 2010s Sharks (Marleau was decent) are the perfect examples of this.

Very solid teams (except from Calgary) paired with very semi-elite if not medicore high end talent who either continuously choked or flamed out in the playoffs (ECF, WCF) because they didn't have that game breaking forward to lead them through.

If this was the NBA, there'd be so many playoffs teams be exposed because of their lackluster star power lmao.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Depth is another way to say that your superstars are possibly fraudulent underperforming players when the lights get bright. Your star player obviously can't play the whole game but Imagine putting your whole faith on unconsistent, unreliable and unsustainable depth to win championships lol.

2010s-2020s Flames (decent depth), 2020s Canes, 2010s Sharks (Marleau was decent) are the perfect examples of this.

Very solid teams (except from Calgary) paired with very semi-elite if not medicore high end talent who either continuously choked or flamed out in the playoffs (ECF, WCF) because they didn't have that game breaking forward to lead them through.

If this was the NBA, there'd be so many playoffs teams be exposed because of their lackluster star power lmao.

Having depth doesn’t mean your star players are underperforming.

 

[3074326]

Depth is not overrated. Seems insane to feel that way. Stars carry teams’ offenses, but depth separates the good teams from the great.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

It's a common refrain when the stars we love and admire fall out of the playoffs early.

'Oh, well, he/they simply didn't have the support around him to succeed. If only the bottom 6 or 4-through-6 defensemen had been better, they surely would have had the time/space necessary to overcome.'

At what point is it BS rationalization to let star players off the hook for simply failing to perform or being outperformed by the best players on the other team?

This seems flawed from the start. Depth helps win championships. You seem to be arguing that the stars must be underperforming as well in this scenario.

 

[JFedol]

Having depth doesn’t mean you’re star players are underperforming.

True, but it does take away needed blame for star players who do have a large sample size of underperforming if not choking. Almost every team is built with the mindset of having your best players be big time playoff performers, not through the reliance of 3-4 lines to get it done.

You need your star players to lead the ship forward and lead your teams to wins when the going gets tough.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

True, but it does take away needed blame for star players who do have a large sample size of underperforming if not choking. Almost every team is built with the mindset of having your best players be big time playoff performers, not through the reliance of 3-4 lines to get it done.

You need your star players to lead the ship forward and lead your teams to wins when the going gets tough.

That's kinda the point... when your stars are having an off game, depth scoring is important. It's a team sport.

 

[Regal]

In general, you need to be deep enough to not be exploited in the minutes your stars arent on the ice. But your best players being better than the other teams best players is the main contributor to winning

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

My NHL Salary Cap Idea: Reward Home-Grown Talent
Here’s my proposal to tweak the NHL salary cap to reward teams for drafting and developing players, while keeping the free market and player movement intact:

• Cap Exemption for Drafted Players: Players you draft and keep through their UFA years get a partial cap hit exemption. The exemption depends on their draft round:
  • 1st round: 10% of their cap hit is exempt.
  • 2nd round: 20% exempt.
  • 3rd round: 30% exempt.
  • 4th round or later: 50% exempt.
  • Example: A 4th-round pick signs a $6M UFA deal. Only $3M counts against the cap, but they still earn the full $6M.
• No Exemption for Other Teams: If a drafted player signs with another team as a UFA, the full cap hit applies. This stops teams from offering crazy contracts to steal talent. Especially to a drafted college UFA that choose to sign with other teams after August 15 of year 4.
• Preventing Cap Tricks: Traded players lose the exemption, even if they return to their drafting team as UFAs. This stops teams from gaming the system.
• Why It Works:
  • Rewards teams for scouting and developing gems, especially late-round picks who become stars.
  • Lets teams keep home-grown players for their whole career, freeing up cap space to sign UFA depth players.
  • Keeps the 50-50 owner-player revenue split. Owners who want to keep players with exemptions might pay more, but that’s their choice.
  • Makes drafting a priority, not a throwaway.
  • This exemption only apply to all players that is in UFA age, not RFA which is still 100% of the cap hit to all RFA..
  • If you buy out players with exemption, all of their remaining years will be 100% buyout cap hit.

This system encourages teams to invest in their draft picks, makes them more valuable than UFAs, and still lets players get their market-value payday. It’s just an idea—what do you think?

Any proposal that breaks the linkage between a 50/50 split of HRR is a non-starter.

 

[doublechili]

A 3rd line that contributes offensively is a common denominator of Cup winners, especially of late. It's hard to win 4 rounds without depth.

 

[Ghost of Murph]

Most Cup winners have great depth. Teams key on stopping the stars. Depth guys many times are the difference makers in the playoffs. Heck, just had a series finish up last night where without their depth guys scoring the Panthers would be golfing today. Caps wouldn't have won their Cup without their depth scoring being vital. Tons of examples could be listed in the cap era. Trade deadlines are dominated by contenders shoring up depth. Not overrated whatsoever.

 

[ShootIt]

I mean, not every team has a McDavid superstar that can almost will himself to get points any given night.

Florida doesn't have an offensive dynamo, but they have been able to run 3 deep lines. With a healthy Tkachuk, they got two good 1st lines and their 3rd becomes a strong 2nd line in the playoffs.

The Luostar-Lundell-Rat line has been crucial to the Panthers success in getting into the ECF.

Being able to roll 3 lines that has talent to create high scoring chances is big, especially when 2 of the 3 can also be effective on all 200ft of ice.

Florida also has some depth to survive a handful of games when someone goes down. Erod hurt? Cool Boqvist fits in with the 1st line.
They have Sturm, Samo and Boqvist as healthy scratches, players could slot up and down(Boqvist or Samo) without a huge drop in chemistry.

 

[tarheelhockey]

A few teams have won a Cup without star power.

I can’t think of a team that has won a Cup without depth.

 

[JFedol]

In general, you need to be deep enough to not be exploited in the minutes your stars arent on the ice. But your best players being better than the other teams best players is the main contributor to winning

This is basically Edmonton and Pittsburgh's entire playoff success history lol.

But you still have people who would rather have depth

 

[TheBeard]

A few teams have won a Cup without star power.

I can’t think of a team that has won a Cup without depth.

I don't think the Capitals were a deep team when they won in 2018. Top line and Holtby went nuts.

 

[David Bruce Banner]

It's important to have depth, but it's even more important to not overpay for it.

 

[TheBeard]

It's important to have depth, but it's even more important to not overpay for it.

I think this is what it is. You need guys in your bottom two lines to overachieve in comparison to what they get paid. Whether that's rookies on ELCs playing lights out or waiver wire fodder vets like Forsling in Florida or Corey Perry in Edmonton.

 

[JFedol]

I've commented here alot of times. (If this statement is annoying for people, my bad lol)

But I feel like a minority of fans around the league need to just realize that superstar players are 100% the ones leading the ship of your respective team at the end of the day. They are the people that drive the ticket revenue and are the sole reason why your team is relevant. It's been this WAY for all sports.

There a superstar for a f***ing reason.

Building dreams towards a possible Stanley Cup with your team, needs the evaluation of your star players in playoff settings to be studied, emphasized and scrutinized a f*** TON, way more than just thinking about attaining more depth pieces to get it done. it isn't the NBA, but it unironically is.......

Also, blaming linemates on reduced production of your best players is lowkey a deflection just a tad bit IMO. Probably is a indication of your players being not as good as you think they are and maybe he/they are soft as HELL.

That's why just off the eye test alone, the Leafs playoff struggles for the past 8 years weren't that surprising IMO.

The greats players have a very common theme of LEGIT willing their teams to wins or atleast have that mindset because the depth can only do so much. Watching FULL games, I've seen it so many f***ing times.

Just recently, 2020/2021 Kucherov, 2022 McDrai vs LA and CGY. Prime 2021 Marchand vs WSH, 2022 Marchand vs CAR (11pts in 7 games on a f***ed up shoulder lol). 2014 Kane vs LA, 2009 Malkin, 2024 McDavid.

Pre-Cap, 91/92 Lemieux, Oilers Gretzky (not just the stats, the f***ing eye test, Pure DOMINANCE), 93 Roy, 94 Bure, 96 Sakic, 99 Forsberg, 02 Forsberg,

If you watched the actual games during those years for each player, it wasn't any surprising why those teams either won or made the respective series competitive.

I can't type well, but it's just there....

My ranking of star power of each cup winning/cup bound team

1. Edmonton (McDrai)
2. Pittsburgh (Crosby/Malkin)
3. Prime Tampa (Kucherov/Point/Hedman/Vasy)
3. Colorado (Mackinnon/Makar)
4. Chicago (Toews/Kane/Hossa/Keith)
5. Prime Boston (Marchand/Pastrnak/Krejci. Especially Marchand lol, what a player)
6. Florida (Barkov/Tkachuk)

 

[JFedol]

The whole discussion is one I really don't think it's as close as some people want to believe it is IMO. Yes, there's exceptions but they (depth) all have of a underlying theme of huge unsustainability.

Elite players (top of the league) with polished offensive games + disgusting play-driving and ice tilting moments have a greater chance of leading you to wins in a playoff season.

More better to have good players than just 3-4 lines.

The NHL unironically is close to the NBA.

 

[Golden_Jet]

The whole discussion is one I really don't think it's as close as some people want to believe it is IMO. Yes, there's exceptions but they (depth) all have of a underlying theme of huge unsustainability.

Elite players (top of the league) with polished offensive games + disgusting play-driving and ice tilting moments have a greater chance of leading you to wins in a playoff season.

More better to have good players than just 3-4 lines.

The NHL unironically is close to the NBA.

Thankfully the NHL is nothing like the trash NBA and their whiny stars and load management.

 

[PistolPete]

Exactly. Shame on Marcel Dionne for never dragging the 1970s kings to multiple cups.

Even the Triple Crown Line!

Shitty goaltendjng? Then score more!

 

[HSF]

non expensive depth is important but you def need skill in the top of your line up as well
depth is easier to find with good scouting.

Lots of guys became avaliable as cap dumps over the past few years who have turned into solid players. Walman is a good example