How did Vegas get the reputation of being the establishment?

[Dr Jan Itor]

I think this is a bit of revisionism.

Favourable compared to the last time they expanded, sure, but the old rules were brutal. Those teams were setup to fail. Vegas's rules were perfectly fine. A couple teams made some really dumb decisions. Even with that, the vast majority of people were certain Vegas would be bad before the season started.

My team is one that had to expand under those brutal rules, so I will admit my bias.

 

[hangman005]

This absolutely happened from my perspective. I remember reading around after the Vegas expansion draft and it seemed like the common sentiment was that while they obviously got much more favorable expansion draft rules than previous teams, that they bungled a bunch of their selections and the team was going to be awful. I will freely admit that I agreed with that general sentiment at the time. I thought that the expansion draft rules they got were basically about good enough to get them into the playoffs as a lower seed, but not any further than a first round loss. Then I saw the roster they selected and assumed they would miss the playoffs. Then they made the finals in their inaugural season.

I can only assume they made the finals in their inaugural season just to spite me personally.

I actually sat in on that team meeting, no need to assume anymore... its 100% true.

 

[Three On Zero]

I actually sat in on that team meeting, no need to assume anymore... its 100% true.

Finally an explanation as to why they turtle so often.

 

[hangman005]

Finally an explanation as to why they turtle so often.

Oh that's to spite me, I accidentally cast my OF during another team meeting, which lead to alot of awkward questions, first and foremost being who are you and how did you get in here?

 

[Greatzsky 99]

Favoritism with the refs.
Somehow they're the least penalized team in the league and if watch them, you'll never understand how that's possible

I can confirm this, i was at the meeting before the season started, all the referees gathered in
Bettmans basement, our top priority was Vegas last penalized team no matter what.

 

[Three On Zero]

Oh that's to spite me, I accidentally cast my OF during another team meeting, which lead to alot of awkward questions, first and foremost being who are you and how did you get in here?

Is that how Mark Spleen got hurt?

 

[hangman005]

Is that how Mark Spleen got hurt?

All the times in fact. did his back launching the TV out the window, did it again during a vivid flashback, and the trying to suppress another flashback he ruptured his spleen... which as it turns out are where flashback are stored.

 

[tfwnogf]

• Immediate success
• Attractive city to play in for 20-30 year old guys, at least compared to other new teams Seattle or Utah. so no shortage of interest in playing there
• Mark Stone
• Using the ltir circumvention so obviously
• The way they dump players no longer useful to them, no sentimental value. Which I actually respect, but other teams are not as cutthroat.

They are just really easy to dislike. And it's a compliment, because nobody dislikes crap teams. They are a force and if/when they are eliminated, every other team's fans will breathe a sigh of relief.

 

[HanSolo]

My team is one that had to expand under those brutal rules, so I will admit my bias.

Just like there's a difference between Vegas and Seattle. There's a big difference between, say, Anaheim and Columbus. I'd have to go back and check but the 93 expansion rules were slightly worse than the 2000 rules IIRC. Anaheim made a cup finals appearance in ten years. Won a cup in 14 years. Columbus has been a team for a quarter of a century and they haven't even gotten close.

Yeah the Vegas and Seattle rules were more favorable than they've ever been but all it did was give both teams the opportunity to be more competitive than previous expansion teams. Neither team was gifted a contender by the NHL. A lot of things went right for Vegas out of the gate:

1. NHL teams weren't judicious enough regarding their own assets and they didn't plan well enough ahead of the Vegas expansion draft (Anaheim in particular sat on their hands with their abundance of young defensemen and an NMC on Bieksa that required a protection slot). Vegas got a lot of useful players, but the majority line was they'd be a bad team for years.

2. That same group of players came in with a huge chip on their shoulders and something to prove. This led to a lot of them being motivated to reach new levels in their game that was either permanent or for a lot of guys was a short term exercise in playing over their heads.

3. While it's grim to credit a tragedy for on ice success, the Mandalay Bay shooting was huge for galvanizing that first year roster and fanbase by establishing a really strong symbiotic relationship. The team helped the city heal and that crowd drove that year 1 team big time.

4. Gerard Gallant is no one's long term solution but he's proven three times to be a great first year coach.

5. Because of that year one success and a lot of players having career years on top of a huge bank of future assets, Vegas was able to leverage a lot of futures and cast off players to acquire star talent. McPhee and McCrimmon had the green light to aggressively pursue trades and free agency signings and burn all futures in the process and they wasted no opportunity to do so. They took big risks with big rewards but they also have arguably the weakest prospect pool in the league as a result. Third rounder Pavel Dorofeyev emerging as well as he has was a stroke of fortune.

6. Moving on from Gallant after the team was starting to come back to earth with him seemingly happy with how his team performed in bad games, the team jumped at the opportunity to get Pete DeBoer, who is an upper tier coach but just didn't have the adaptability and capacity for making adjustments to get the Knights across the finish line.

7. In the same vein, Vegas jumped at the opportunity to hire Bruce Cassidy when the opportunity presented itself. Cassidy's systems, to me, were the biggest determining factor that got Vegas their first cup. Vegas doesn't get that far without the foundation that McPhee, McCrimmon, Gallant, and DeBoer set. The NHL had nothing to do with that.

By contrast, Seattle was a lot more conservative in the expansion draft by design and through the other GMs being far more prepared the second time around. They haven't been as aggressive in the transaction market and as a result they're nowhere close to contending in spite of having the same expansion draft conditions.

I think they're an example for why these new rules aren't that bad going forward since we're definitely getting at least two more expansion teams. Seattle was more competitive out of the gate and had some playoff appearances to generate excitement and connection with the local fanbase but they still have a long road to cup contention. The Vegas story is one marked by almost everything going perfectly and ideally with a few minor missteps along the way.

 

[Rodgerwilco]

Because people spin conspiracy theories instead of admitting they were wrong when clamoring about how bad Vegas was going to be. The narrative by many on this site was "This will be the worst team of all time" to "They won't keep winning" to "They will never make the playoffs" to "NHL rigged it so they would be good".

This is what I came to say. I remember when everyone was looking at their roster people were predicting them to be god-awful and ragging on them for putting together such a 'mediocre team'. Then they started winning and the sentiments flipped to the exact opposite.

 

[WarriorofTime]

The reason Vegas got such a favorable expansion draft is because of $$$. Vegas and Seattle paid a big amount to join the League and all the other owners got a big payday out of it. They were likely glad to let those teams get better quicker in exchange (granted nobody would have guessed Vegas to be that good right away).

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

because a Southwest hockey team had the audacity to win a Cup while Canada is looking at 32 years and counting without one

 

[qcal1427]

For me it was legitimately their social media team

 

[JKG33]

Jealousy. They out smarted *insert your favorite team here*. People hate a winner because they wish their team was as smart.

These takes that the NHL handed them a great team out of the expansion draft are insane. The NHL didn't hand them shit. They outsmarted practically every team they made a trade with

 

[WarriorofTime]

Just like there's a difference between Vegas and Seattle. There's a big difference between, say, Anaheim and Columbus. I'd have to go back and check but the 93 expansion rules were slightly worse than the 2000 rules IIRC. Anaheim made a cup finals appearance in ten years. Won a cup in 14 years. Columbus has been a team for a quarter of a century and they haven't even gotten close.

Yeah the Vegas and Seattle rules were more favorable than they've ever been but all it did was give both teams the opportunity to be more competitive than previous expansion teams. Neither team was gifted a contender by the NHL. A lot of things went right for Vegas out of the gate:

1. NHL teams weren't judicious enough regarding their own assets and they didn't plan well enough ahead of the Vegas expansion draft (Anaheim in particular sat on their hands with their abundance of young defensemen and an NMC on Bieksa that required a protection slot). Vegas got a lot of useful players, but the majority line was they'd be a bad team for years.

2. That same group of players came in with a huge chip on their shoulders and something to prove. This led to a lot of them being motivated to reach new levels in their game that was either permanent or for a lot of guys was a short term exercise in playing over their heads.

3. While it's grim to credit a tragedy for on ice success, the Mandalay Bay shooting was huge for galvanizing that first year roster and fanbase by establishing a really strong symbiotic relationship. The team helped the city heal and that crowd drove that year 1 team big time.

4. Gerard Gallant is no one's long term solution but he's proven three times to be a great first year coach.

5. Because of that year one success and a lot of players having career years on top of a huge bank of future assets, Vegas was able to leverage a lot of futures and cast off players to acquire star talent. McPhee and McCrimmon had the green light to aggressively pursue trades and free agency signings and burn all futures in the process and they wasted no opportunity to do so. They took big risks with big rewards but they also have arguably the weakest prospect pool in the league as a result. Third rounder Pavel Dorofeyev emerging as well as he has was a stroke of fortune.

6. Moving on from Gallant after the team was starting to come back to earth with him seemingly happy with how his team performed in bad games, the team jumped at the opportunity to get Pete DeBoer, who is an upper tier coach but just didn't have the adaptability and capacity for making adjustments to get the Knights across the finish line.

7. In the same vein, Vegas jumped at the opportunity to hire Bruce Cassidy when the opportunity presented itself. Cassidy's systems, to me, were the biggest determining factor that got Vegas their first cup. Vegas doesn't get that far without the foundation that McPhee, McCrimmon, Gallant, and DeBoer set. The NHL had nothing to do with that.

By contrast, Seattle was a lot more conservative in the expansion draft by design and through the other GMs being far more prepared the second time around. They haven't been as aggressive in the transaction market and as a result they're nowhere close to contending in spite of having the same expansion draft conditions.

I think they're an example for why these new rules aren't that bad going forward since we're definitely getting at least two more expansion teams. Seattle was more competitive out of the gate and had some playoff appearances to generate excitement and connection with the local fanbase but they still have a long road to cup contention. The Vegas story is one marked by almost everything going perfectly and ideally with a few minor missteps along the way.

I would say that was also a strong era for burgeoning upcoming talent that was ready to break out with more opportunity, hence why the "Misfits" had so much more success than people would have guessed. Now when that era of talent gets older and the younger guys behind struggle a bit more to find their footing (maybe somewhat COVID taking a year away from a lot of their development), somewhat variance in draft qualities) a "stay aggressive" type team like Vegas ("all in every year") content to trade away all of its former, current and future 1st round picks has been able to benefit from being on the right end of the fluctuations in the NHL. A team like Vegas that never drafted its core "shouldn't" have a 1st line center and number 1 defenseman, roles that you pretty typically have to draft and often draft very high in the draft, circumstances and an aggressive posture got them those. Eventually of course that won't be the case and like Bruins with Chara/Bergeron retirement, you can only hang on so long when those spots disappear unless another deux ex machina appears for you.

 

[WarriorofTime]

2017-18 did have shades of mirage, as in 2018-19, the Knights fell to 16th in the league and were knocked out in the first round. If their first season didn't exist and their trajectory began with their 2nd season, I don't think people would care as much about them. In 2017-18 regular season, their two biggest goal scorers both had fluke seasons (43 goals for Karlsson, 29 goals for Haula), driven by never again shooting percentages. The part where they were deep and balanced was definitely a "by design" factor, but they probably "should have been" a middle of the pack team.

 

[HanSolo]

I would say that was also a strong era for burgeoning upcoming talent that was ready to break out with more opportunity, hence why the "Misfits" had so much more success than people would have guessed. Now when that era of talent gets older and the younger guys behind struggle a bit more to find their footing (maybe somewhat COVID taking a year away from a lot of their development), somewhat variance in draft qualities) a "stay aggressive" type team like Vegas ("all in every year") content to trade away all of its former, current and future 1st round picks has been able to benefit from being on the right end of the fluctuations in the NHL. A team like Vegas that never drafted its core "shouldn't" have a 1st line center and number 1 defenseman, roles that you pretty typically have to draft and often draft very high in the draft, circumstances and an aggressive posture got them those. Eventually of course that won't be the case and like Bruins with Chara/Bergeron retirement, you can only hang on so long when those spots disappear unless another deux ex machina appears for you.

Well. Idk. Maybe I'm not understanding the latter half of your point but to me there's a lot of good young talent coming into the league but with 32 teams it can be really hard to play the transaction market as aggressively as Vegas has. They leveraged GM shortsightedness and the Misfit stuff to build a foundation for success. Success mixed with no income tax that helped attract Pietrangelo, DeBoer, and Cassidy as a few examples. The Stone trade they were the highest bidders at a good time because Ottawa was blowing their team up to reset their rebuild. The Eichel trade, seemingly, saw most of the gms around the league nervous about Eichel's health after surgery. Not Vegas. They figured it was a risk worth taking to get a 1C they didn't have to draft and develop.

But by the same token, it could have all gone worse for Vegas. They were reportedly right in the running for Erik Karlsson but pulled back given Ottawa's demand for Cody Glass. In hindsight, Glass didn't pan out but Karlsson wasn't really the same after his injuries. Maybe if they got Karlsson, they don't manage to get Eichel and never win the cup. Just a lot of things went perfectly for Vegas. But that steam will run out eventually.

 

[Kranix]

Because fans of eternally inept franchises like Vancouver, Buffalo, and franchises that started out as a joke, like Columbus, think an expansion team is supposed to be bad for several years, by some cosmic moral order, because that's what they went through, as if the 32 NHL franchises are some kind of stevedores local

 

[Sparky]

because a Southwest hockey team had the audacity to win a Cup while Canada is looking at 32 years and counting without one

Well they did lose to a Southeast hockey team first, so they paid their dues.

 

[State of Hockey]

My team is one that had to expand under those brutal rules, so I will admit my bias.

Yep, and I will never forgive the NHL/Vegas for it either. And let's add that we had to lose our team too, and then years later the league did everything to keep hockey in the desert. Of course we get a new team back, but both Minnesota and Columbus were given scraps and a long road ahead to long-term contention even if managed correctly. The difference in treatment even with the same commissioner will always be impossible to ignore.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Yep, and I will never forgive the NHL/Vegas for it either. And let's add that we had to lose our team too, and then years later the league did everything to keep hockey in the desert. Of course we get a new team back, but both Minnesota and Columbus were given scraps and a long road ahead to long-term contention even if managed correctly. The difference in treatment even with the same commissioner will always be impossible to ignore.

I blame all of the owners more than the NHL/Bettman/Vegas. The favorable rules were in exchange for the big expansion checks that they were able to keep 100% of. Hard sell for somebody to pay $500 million and just have their pick of 4th liners.

 

[Armourboy]

Yep, and I will never forgive the NHL/Vegas for it either. And let's add that we had to lose our team too, and then years later the league did everything to keep hockey in the desert. Of course we get a new team back, but both Minnesota and Columbus were given scraps and a long road ahead to long-term contention even if managed correctly. The difference in treatment even with the same commissioner will always be impossible to ignore.

Nashville didn't get squat either, freaking Tom Fitzgerald was our Captain. I look back now and laugh how much the media tried to hype him up as something special. On top of that your current owner forced the GM to sell off the team once it did get good, and then dang near gave the franchise to a hack that wanted to move it to Hamilton.

There is a reason lots of people around Minnesota, Columbus, and Nashville don't like Vegas, they didn't need to watch the garbage we did for years and we really don't care if people think that's a good reason or not.

 

[Summer Rose]

Nashville didn't get squat either, freaking Tom Fitzgerald was our Captain. I look back now and laugh how much the media tried to hype him up as something special. On top of that your current owner forced the GM to sell off the team once it did get good, and then dang near gave the franchise to a hack that wanted to move it to Hamilton.

There is a reason lots of people around Minnesota, Columbus, and Nashville don't like Vegas, they didn't need to watch the garbage we did for years and we really don't care if people think that's a good reason or not.

It's a perfectly fair reason to have if you're a fan of one of those teams.

I'm not a fan of any of those teams, but I'll keep my opinion to myself.

 

[Kranix]

Nashville's record in its first 4 seasons is more akin to Seattle's. 70 and 79 points average, respectively. Nobody hates on Seattle for having the same expansion rules as Vegas.

 

[north21]

Blame the Panthers for giving them Reilly and Marchessault, the Jackets for giving them a 1st and Karlsson, the Ducks for giving them Theodore, and the Wild for giving them Tuch and Haula.

There were no favourable expansion rules. NHL GMs are idiots who don’t know what they have under their own noses. That team was set to be Fleury backstopping a lot of junk before the side deals

Previous expansion drafts teams got to protect 14 players, vegas got much better odds but there were some bad moves by teams as well.