I really enjoyed the podcast, and the previous ones. Guys, you're doing a great job and it's wonderful to have consistent coverage for the Sharks (even if our audience is a lot smaller than other fan bases). I just have a few critiques with the analysis.
1. "Tank" vs. "No Tank" -- the first three "no tanks" were *in* the modern era, but they were legacies of the previous era. So 3 "no tank" successes isn't all that strong of evidence. So many of the modern successes, especially multi-year contenders and not just one-off non-tankers (Carolina), are built around extremely high draft picks. Almost all of the contenders are.
2. All of the multi-year contenders these days are built around at least one high draft pick, oftentimes far more than one. Sure, sometimes it wasn't a pure intentional tank. But the picks are there, AND they have to hit, AND you have to build around them... but without them, you're not a multi-year contender, you're a pretender. Even if a team didn't blatantly tank for a high pick, almost every one of the modern era cup winners had an *extended* period of rebuilding intentionally, top 5 pick or no. Yes, some teams are stuck in these perennial rebuilds (Vancouver, CBJ, etc... until recently, Buffalo). But it takes a top 5 pick, ideally more than one, and ideally a whole lot more picks accumulated over a down period, even if not bottom-of-barrel period. Sure, some of the big names won't be top 5... but if they were accumulated during down years and drafted for the future, I think this still counts as "intentional rebuild" even if not "tank."
Comments on winners since 2005:
1. Canes: no tank, legacy solid team + high Staal pick as you mentioned
2. Ducks: legacy built team.
3. Wings: legacy built team.
4. Penguins: team built around great luck, AND, a ton of down years. Agreed "tank" but also long rebuild and lots of dark years.
5. Hawks: as you said, Tank... but ALSO, huge amount of drafted and developed players. You guys breezed over Keith, Byfuglien, Hjalmarsson... all these players (and more!) acquired from 2002 onward, so it wasn't just Kane/Toews to build a winner, it took a long time of slowly building with a whole lot of "shots on goal" in the draft.
6. Bruins, no tank, but a (short) painful and careful rebuild after trading away Jumbo. No playoffs for 2 years, then a first round exit, then 2 2nd round exits, then the cup.
7. Kings: No "Tank", but a very extended rebuild through the 2000's, resulting in 11OA Kopitar in 2005, 2OA Doughty in 2008, and many more.
8. Blackhawks, Kings, Blackhawks, Penguins, Penguins. All teams tanked and/or rebuilt around some stellar high draft picks.
9. Capitals. Tank AND a long, lengthy rebuild. The Sharks of the East, but with Ovechkin instead of having to trade for Thornton.
10. Blues -- no "tank," but a long rebuild in the 2000's and a lot of their late 2010s success owed to that solid foundation - Pietrangelo 4th overall. Binnington 2011 (thank god he sucks now, but...). 2010, Tarasenko #16 and Jaden Schwartz #14. And so on.
11. Lightning -- goes without saying. Hedman 2nd overall in 2009, Stamkos 1st in 2008, and many more in those late 2000's. Note -- it took them 12 years!!! from Stamkos to a Cup.
12. Avalanche -- goes without saying. Mackinnon, Landeskog, Rantanen, Makar, Toews, Byram. Intentional or no, a very long period of pain built a huge number of successful draft picks (and some duds). Still took them 10 years.
13. EDIT: Vegas. Yes, they are an exception, but they are an exception for obvious reasons. They got a solid team to start (not spectacular), built very well from there, and have worked magic on cap circumvention before catching lightning in a bottle. They're f'd from here on out though.
The takeaways for me:
1. Unless your high draft pick is a generational talent like Sid the Kid, it's going to take more than 5 years from your top pick before you're truly competitive for the cup. More likely 10, from your first high pick.
2. It takes more than one tank year... it takes an extended period of pretty bad/mediocre teams, and ideally more than one top pick, if you want to be a perennial contender.
3. If you never tank, you may pretend, but you are not likely going to contend, because the last team to be successful doing this were the Kings, and even they had a whole long period in the 2000's to stockpile solid picks (and have 11OA turn into Kopitar and 2OA turn into Drew Doughty).
4. To make it very specific to the Sharks, we need to expect about 2-4 more years in the dungeon, hopefully accumulating some very high picks and also lots of shots on goal in late 1st round and beyond, and hope that we nail about 4-5 of them. By 2028, we should be excited about our team and looking like New Jersey. By 2030 we could/should be a playoff force and hopefully by 2032 we're well and truly contending at the top of the league. If only our ownership had realized we needed to start this process in 2019, we would be 3-4 years ahead of where we are, instead of where we are. (EDIT 2): if we try to pull out of it too fast, we risk finding ourselves in the Flames/Canucks/Predators (and more) dead zone. Pretenders or forever lukewarm.
sjhnpod.transistor.fm
