Nashville Predators Talk - 2024/2025 Season

[glenngineer]

A lot to unpack here.

I'll start with something simple. One thing that has masked a lot failures over the years is the depth of the d-corp and what they provided for us. One was great D with the other being a significant amount of offense. As we've moved on from certain players or they've aged out, we are left with Josi as the only offensive threat. We have a combined 70 points from all our d this year, 46 of which are from Josi and Skjei. We've been top 5 for so long with our offensive contributions from our back end that is supplemented our lack of scoring from our forwards. Now that we're not getting that combined with forwards that aren't producing as expected, it's killing us. Now on to the fun stuff.

We have our second 3 game-winning streak going right now. We're halfway through the season. Not acceptable. Why has it taken until the last 4 games for us to look like an organized team in a system that appears engaged?

My worry is if we continue this type of play, even if for another 10-20 games, the coach and moreso the GM will think that is the truth and not look at what we've seen the majority of the season. We went on a nice run last year and Trotz based his moves off of a mirage and if we as fans can see it as such, how can a guy in hockey as long as he's been not see it for that too?

I don't sit down at the TV on any given night going, I sure hope the other team wins tonight or I hope the Preds keep their losing ways. I have found myself on some nights going, I hope the other team keeps the lead or that they make a comeback and beat us. I have never thought that way. I went to the Winnipeg game back in November that we won 4-1 hoping we'd lose so it would be the last time I had to see Brunette behind the bench.

It's also really hard to listen to the broadcast team continue to talk about how the bounces haven't gone our way blah blah blah. It's an excuse. The last 4 games, the team has been engaged and guess what, pucks are finding the back of the net. It had nothing to do with bad luck, it had to do with a lack of effort and the results showed. If the team had shown the same level of intensity since game 1, we might not be where we are.

My ambivalence towards the team is caused by the way the team has played the majority of the season and the decisions the staff has made. Nothing more, nothing less. I would after being here as long as I've been people would know the one thing I want for the team and this fan base is a Cup. We got a GM who said he wants to get out of the mushy middle. He said he wanted to see the kids so he'd be able to evaluate what he's got. He's made moves that have made me question the direction of this team. I'm allowed to be frustrated, even if misguided in my thoughts and actions.

I know there are risks with sucking, tanking, even losing as evidenced by other teams. There are also risks to continue to be what we've been. Do I want to see us lose games, of course not. At the same time with what I've seen from this team this year, it makes it hard for me to be excited about winning because if it pushes us to the mushy middle as opposed to a 1C via the draft, it's just more of the same next year and the years after. For all the crap we've had to watch this year, it would be nice if it panned out into an exciting young player that we can build the future around.

 

[Viqsi]

I guess I'm not quite sure what the anti-rebuild folks actually want.

I'm anti-tanking, not anti-rebuilding. Rebuilding is necessary at this point. The point is don't try to lose. It's not something you can just abruptly turn on and off.

 

[Viqsi]

I mean more power to some of you for being ok in the mushy middle but we've been mid since 2020 and it's been incredibly boring for me at least outside of a 18 game win point streak.

I understand we have three wins in a row, but this isn't a playoff team. They aren't. And if we do go on some run and end up 15th or whatever in the league how is that going to help the future of this retooling? Trotz is going to take that as this team had 3 rough months, load up or do nothing in the off-season and then we are potentially back where we were at the start of the year.

Let me give you a number: 7.

7 playoff series wins in 25 years. Almost half of those came in one year.

Meanwhile, teams that tore it down over that same twenty years with the exception of some outliers like Columbus and Buffalo have won more or the same number of series.

Anaheim is a perfect example of a team that had their window and it shut in 2018. They are currently in the process of their rebuild. It takes time.

San Jose is another perfect example.

I don't blame anyone for wanting the team to win games. It doesn't feel natural for wanting your team to lose. But 7 series wins in 25 years. We aren't doing something right.

It's the ones that have those big bouncebacks that are the outliers, and they've had similarly small competitive windows. You're playing a blind optimism game, and you're treating all rebuilds as equal when there are huge, significant differences between how teams do this sort of thing.

I want my parents to see a cup win in their life. The longer we delay a true tear down the less likely that is to happen

Unfortunately, this is an unrealistic motivation. It is literally harder to win your division in this modern era than it was to win a Cup in the O6 and expansion eras.

 

[Viqsi]

But you are assuming Bruno was going to play those youngsters, which again, is a problem with how this team is being run regardless of tank/not tanking mentality.

To the point of Anaheim, I think there is an issue with coaching and an issue with the GM side of things just a little. I also know they have been waffling on trading Gibson and Fowler for years (Fowler just got moved this year) but not moving on from their vets didn't help.

Again 7 series wins in 25 years. I'll give a pass to the first decade or so because expansion teams back then sucked but what excuse do we have after that?

Your logical fallacy is the texas sharpshooter

You cherry-picked a data cluster to suit your argument, or found a pattern to fit a presumption.

yourlogicalfallacyis.com

Nashville has far more playoff appearances than many of those teams you're talking about "tearing down". You're focusing on series wins because it maximizes the appearance of misery.


I swear to G-d, it's like I'm right back in HFCBJ circa 2020-2023. The same varieties of nonsense again and again and again by the shortsighted and the desperate.

 

[Roman Yoshi]

It's the ones that have those big bouncebacks that are the outliers, and they've had similarly small competitive windows. You're playing a blind optimism game, and you're treating all rebuilds as equal when there are huge, significant differences between how teams do this sort of thing.

Unfortunately, this is an unrealistic motivation. It is literally harder to win your division in this modern era than it was to win a Cup in the O6 and expansion eras.

I think your experience with Columbus is perhaps blinding you a bit. I know it's been a tough uphill struggle for the Jackets.

Which teams do you think are the outliers over the last 20 years?

I just don't considered playoff appearances special anymore. It was in the early 2000s, it was after cursed years of 2013. Half the teams make it.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

I'm anti-tanking, not anti-rebuilding. Rebuilding is necessary at this point. The point is don't try to lose. It's not something you can just abruptly turn on and off.

I don't think such a thing as "try to lose" even exists, not in any real-time on-ice sense of things. Not even for the consciously tanking teams. All the coaches, all the players, on all the teams, are trying to win, every game, regardless. I take that for granted.

What we're talking about here is at a higher level. The goal is actually to try to win even at that higher level too though... it's just the timeframe is different than on a per game basis. It's the player personnel decisions you make to try to maximize winning potential. Just... those wins might be realized a little further down the road.

So, in a practical sense, what does that mean specifically for our team the rest of this season? See if you can trade any and all of the following: Lauzon, Schenn, Sissons, Nyquist, McCarron/Jankowski/Smith. Replace them with younger, faster players. Increase the roles and icetime afforded to younger players. There could be an irony in the sense that such moves might actually improve the immediate performance of our team as well. But regardless, you ostensibly make the moves with an eye to improving future performance and accept with it any harm that does occur in the short-term performance. You don't shy away from making those moves simply out of a desire to win more hockey games this season, at any rate. And all the way along, each and every player you put on the ice is still trying their utmost to win each and every hockey game.

Is that "trying to lose"?

 

[Viqsi]

I think your experience with Columbus is perhaps blinding you a bit. I know it's been a tough uphill struggle for the Jackets.

Which teams do you think are the outliers over the last 20 years?

Pittsburgh and Chicago.

 

[Viqsi]

I don't think such a thing as "try to lose" even exists, not in any real-time on-ice sense of things. Not even for the consciously tanking teams. All the coaches, all the players, on all the teams, are trying to win, every game, regardless. I take that for granted.

What we're talking about here is at a higher level. The goal is actually to try to win even at that higher level too though... it's just the timeframe is different than on a per game basis. It's the player personnel decisions you make to try to maximize winning potential. Just... those wins might be realized a little further down the road.

So, in a practical sense, what does that mean specifically for our team the rest of this season? See if you can trade any and all of the following: Lauzon, Schenn, Sissons, Nyquist, McCarron/Jankowski/Smith. Replace them with younger, faster players. Increase the roles and icetime afforded to younger players. There could be an irony in the sense that such moves might actually improve the immediate performance of our team as well. But regardless, you ostensibly make the moves with an eye to improving future performance and accept with it any harm that does occur in the short-term performance. You don't shy away from making those moves simply out of a desire to win more hockey games this season, at any rate. And all the way along, each and every player you put on the ice is still trying their utmost to win each and every hockey game.

Is that "trying to lose"?

No, that's fair.

It's possible I see people talk about "wanting to lose" and am immediately jumping to memories of folks cheering against their team and wanting to throw away absolutely everything that isn't immediately a savior superstar. There's some PTSD there.

 

[herzausstein]

Ill just say....

It would suck to be this terrible for half the season and be this close to possibly drafting a 1C only to turn around and end up drafting a more middling prospect in the low teens. The wins would be nice and hockey more enjoyable to watch though

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

Ill just say....

It would suck to be this terrible for half the season and be this close to possibly drafting a 1C only to turn around and end up drafting a more middling prospect in the low teens. The wins would be nice and hockey more enjoyable to watch though

Well, unfortunately, it's going to suck. This team, first half+ evidence to the contrary, is just not bad enough to ultimately finish in a top3/top5 draft position. It's going to be exacerbated as a few of these teams ahead of us start selling off productive players that we won't be able to because of NMCs. I still think 10-12 is where we'll ultimately end up.

 

[Roman Yoshi]

Pittsburgh and Chicago.

Ok, what about Colorado and Tampa who had their own rebuild? Boston? Florida?

 

[herzausstein]

Well, unfortunately, it's going to suck. This team, first half+ evidence to the contrary, is just not bad enough to ultimately finish in a top3/top5 draft position. It's going to be exacerbated as a few of these teams ahead of us start selling off productive players that we won't be able to because of NMCs. I still think 10-12 is where we'll ultimately end up.

Ultimately you are likely correct unless we hit another spat of injuries to key players. Trotz doesnt want to purposely aim to a high draft pick. We dont really have much for UFAs... just Nyquist and im 50/50 on if he gets extended. May see Lauzon get traded since the active d group is doin well.

 

[Kat Predator]

As long as we finish in the bottom 13, we have a chance of landing a top 3 pick. It's just a matter of how long of a longshot. Outside of finishing in the bottom 3, there is no guarantee of a top 5 pick.

The pro-tank argument that a team needs a top pick to win a Cup is just shooting fish in a barrel by the way. Last time I checked, every team, whether good, bad, or in-between, had a top 5 pick on the roster. We even do. So, that line of argument really is just kicking back, seeing who wins the Cup, and cherry picking the top picks out of the lineup. If there was 1 set formula, everyone would buy the book, apply it, and win a Cup.

 

[Viqsi]

Ok, what about Colorado and Tampa who had their own rebuild? Boston? Florida?

Tampa's and Colorado's periods from misery to Cups each took over a decade. Florida's was over two. Boston never "tore it all down".

 

[glenngineer]

I don't think such a thing as "try to lose" even exists, not in any real-time on-ice sense of things. Not even for the consciously tanking teams. All the coaches, all the players, on all the teams, are trying to win, every game, regardless. I take that for granted.

What we're talking about here is at a higher level. The goal is actually to try to win even at that higher level too though... it's just the timeframe is different than on a per game basis. It's the player personnel decisions you make to try to maximize winning potential. Just... those wins might be realized a little further down the road.

So, in a practical sense, what does that mean specifically for our team the rest of this season? See if you can trade any and all of the following: Lauzon, Schenn, Sissons, Nyquist, McCarron/Jankowski/Smith. Replace them with younger, faster players. Increase the roles and icetime afforded to younger players. There could be an irony in the sense that such moves might actually improve the immediate performance of our team as well. But regardless, you ostensibly make the moves with an eye to improving future performance and accept with it any harm that does occur in the short-term performance. You don't shy away from making those moves simply out of a desire to win more hockey games this season, at any rate. And all the way along, each and every player you put on the ice is still trying their utmost to win each and every hockey game.

Is that "trying to lose"?

Thanks for summing up my thoughts. This is the heart of the matter for me.

 

[Legionnaire11]

Boston won one cup in the time frame we're talking about, so has Colorado and Florida. You can't say tanking for picks was their reason for success, the Preds were one Ryan Johansen injury away from winning one Cup as well IMO.

Vegas and St. Louis also won without tanking. I'd put Washington there as well since it was so long after getting Ovi.

Obviously some teams have had success with multiple lottery picks, a lot of other teams have not. But I think I was probably 17 when the Preds first came to town? I've had so much joy from watching them over the years, even from random regular season games. I don't want them to purposely be bad for five seasons (or more) and spend another decade after that still not winning it before starting again. I don't want to be in my 70s hoping for another cycle of tanking.

There's 32 teams in the league and probably more coming, it's INSANELY difficult to win the Cup even under the best circumstances and It's easy for me to accept that there's a good chance I'll never see the Preds win it all, only 20 teams have won it in my lifetime, only 10 have won it more than once. That's okay, I just want to be entertained and have hockey as an escape a few nights a week. And once in a while we will always have that 2017 chance to catch lightning in a bottle, one of those times we won't have Vokoun's blood clots or have every capable center injured at the same time.

And on the other side, as often as we have a season where we catch lightning in a bottle, we will also likely have a season where everything goes wrong and we do end up in the lottery. Hopefully it's not Seth Jones next time. But there are ups and downs, the ride is the fun part, if you only care about the finish line then you're missing what it's all about.

 

[Bringer of Jollity]

Tampa's and Colorado's periods from misery to Cups each took over a decade. Florida's was over two. Boston never "tore it all down".

Would generally add the Blues to Boston as well.

 

[Legionnaire11]

Adding to what I said, and kind of TLDR... I think fans see other teams winning it and lump them all together when comparing their own and you will never be satisfied comparing one team against the field.

 

[originalpredfan]

Reality check, whether we pick 1st or 15th in this years draft, it's still going to be Trotz, Bruno, and their minions making the pick. Can't say that comforts me that they will get it right.

 

[Viqsi]

Adding to what I said, and kind of TLDR... I think fans see other teams winning it and lump them all together when comparing their own and you will never be satisfied comparing one team against the field.

YES. This. Very this. You get a cookie.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Reality check, whether we pick 1st or 15th in this years draft, it's still going to be Trotz, Bruno, and their minions making the pick. Can't say that comforts me that they will get it right.

It's difficult most years to get the #1 pick "wrong" per se. Which is not to say that a #1 pick always pans out. But there's almost always enough of a consensus that you can't really pin any ultimate failure on the GM who picked the player. It'll be like that again this year. If we pick #1, I don't think Trotz is going to make "the wrong pick". If the player subsequently doesn't pan out... that's going to be down to other factors.

So yeah, I would MUCH rather have the #1 pick than the #15 pick, regardless of who is making the pick or coaching the team. This season. The odds of getting #1 are very slim anyway. As are the odds of picking as low as #15. But even if you change the goalposts to something more realistic like #3 vs. #11... I'll take #3. Again, even with Trotz making the call. It's actually easier to get it right the closer you get to the top.

Just in terms of making the pick, anyway. The thing with most successful teams, however, is that you have to hit on more than just a single draft pick. You have to succeed all over the map, with later picks, with development, with trades and contracts, and... coach selection. So... yes, we have some BIG challenges ahead if we're going to have a successful team, even past the question of who we draft in the 1st round this summer.

 

[Top 6 Spaling]

Would generally add the Blues to Boston as well.

Blues won the cup in 2019. Rewinding to 2006 (meaning players drafted this year were 30ish at the time of the cup):

2006: First overall (Erik Johnson), one additional first (Berglund)
2007: Three first round picks (Eller, Cole, Perron) - they had #9 and traded down
2008: 4th overall (Petro)
2009: 17th overall
2010: Two first round picks (Schwartz, Tarasenko)

Not all of those guys were necessarily on the team, but they aren't able to build their cup winner without the trade returns for them. They had the #1 and #4 overall pick, plus four additional firsts, in 5 years. I would qualify it as a "tear it all down" rebuild.

Worth noting the real secret sauce of the Blues success was drafting really, really well in rounds 2-3 over this stretch. You can't do it with tanking alone, have to have solid drafting and development outside of Top 5 too.

 

[Top 6 Spaling]

To the broader conversation, I'll put the short version of what I've opined a number of times before:

We are old and not very good. We have no promising players left between 20 and 25 years old. I see a lot of losses coming our way over the next 3-4 seasons no matter what we do, and I'd rather embrace that by getting picks for older players and giving our young guys more responsibility to speed up the turnaround.

Being bad is a forgone conclusion. How quickly we're able to turn it around is the only question now, IMO.

 

[Porter Stoutheart]

Well, unfortunately, it's going to suck. This team, first half+ evidence to the contrary, is just not bad enough to ultimately finish in a top3/top5 draft position. It's going to be exacerbated as a few of these teams ahead of us start selling off productive players that we won't be able to because of NMCs. I still think 10-12 is where we'll ultimately end up.

I still think we can pick as high as #7.

We're #3 right now still, but I do see Buffalo continuing to be dejected about their ongoing lot in life, and Anaheim and Seattle are teams that will continue to make moves to actively build for a future. I'm not sure the Islanders/Pittsburgh/Utah etc necessarily will though. So while our team turns things around in some respect, I'm not convinced we'll get all the way out of the Top 10.

Still, if we're looking for centers, it means who... Frondell or Desnoyers maybe? Who are kind of in the Svechkov layer of prospects? It's not going to move our needle at all.

 

[Scoresberg]

I think you all are seriously overlooking the way Trotz thinks about building a team. I don't believe for a second Trotz thinks the way to win is through the draft. That much we've learned about him this year (Fabbro, Pärssinen, Tomasino, eventually Evangelista). He's all for trying to win like Vegas did, being "aggressive" but to his fault, he's being that in all the wrong places. Overpaid UFAs and older teams is the way forward, or else you haven't paid attention in Trotz career in the NHL.

The guy lacks the creativity to be a successful GM. He doesn't pull off heists other GM's tend to do sometimes (Kakko, Laine, Chychrun, Holloway etc.), he can't seem to draft well and his talent evaluation is poor. The only thing in his playbook is throwing money at players in FA, and repeating same fancy lines like "I don't want you to come to Nashville to retire, I want you to come here and win". This team THIS SEASON was built to win NOW, but he couldn't even get rid of the coach who was obviously bringing the team down.