Prospect Info: Official 2014 NHL Draft Discussion, Suck for Sam or Play Bad For Ekblad?

[Miller Time NYR]

1) If Sather told Dolan we were gonna start playing without a goalie he'd be ok with it. Dolan doesn't care about hockey. If he did, Sather wouldn't be here.

2) Isles won't affect the Rangers market share whatsoever. They could be the worse team in the league and it wouldn't matter.

dolan cares about money over everything else, rebuilding will lead to less money from marginal fans, and sponsors that will jump ship as soon as the rangers start sucking and the isles are playing right around the corner

 

[Savant]

I'd sign for that. We need a true rebuild. All retooling will get us is another 54 year cup drought.

What was that Albert Einstein quote about insanity?

 

[Championship*]

dolan cares about money over everything else, rebuilding will lead to less money from marginal fans, and sponsors that will jump ship as soon as the rangers start sucking and the isles are playing right around the corner

No it wont. The Rangers will still sell out every night. Don't know how many times people need to be told that he doesn't care about hockey. If he cared about hockey as much as he cared about the Knicks you would see his hand in things. You'd think people would realize that by now. Maybe you just started watching the Rangers or something. Isles will not take one fan away from the Rangers. Sponsors will jump ship? Please. Get some perspective.

 

[nsvoyageurs]

What was that Albert Einstein quote about insanity?

Doing something over and over again and expecting a different result? Sounds like the Ranger management to me.

Anyway, I'd be on board for a full rebuild, very long overdue; unfortunately I don't think it'll ever happen as long as Dolan/Sather are running things. I hope I'm wrong though.

 

[BroadwayBlues]

No it wont. The Rangers will still sell out every night. Don't know how many times people need to be told that he doesn't care about hockey. If he cared about hockey as much as he cared about the Knicks you would see his hand in things. You'd think people would realize that by now. Maybe you just started watching the Rangers or something. Isles will not take one fan away from the Rangers. Sponsors will jump ship? Please. Get some perspective.

True. Just someone mentioned the Rangers won't rebuild because of Dolan. Like you said, Dolan don't care about the Rangers. The Rangers not fully rebuilding is %100 Sather's decision.

 

[Championship*]

True. Just someone mentioned the Rangers won't rebuild because of Dolan. Like you said, Dolan don't care about the Rangers. The Rangers not fully rebuilding is %100 Sather's decision.

Right, I've said this hypo before but it bears repeating. If Sather went to Dolan and said he thought the team should play without a goalie, Dolan wouldn't say a thing. If they somehow started incorporating a basketball into hockey, then you might see this guy start to care. Until then, the Rangers are Glen's show. Dolan needs money? He has the Knicks and Cablevision. Hockey is the 4th most popular sport in this city by a country mile and the Rangers are the second most valuable team in the league after the Leafs.

 

[jniklast]

I ask again: those who are in favor of blowing it up completely, are you convinced, that we will get significantly better players in the draft in the next years than we are trading away? Namely considerably better players than Lundqvist, Nash and Staal? Consider that finishing last in the league can't be guaranteed and the first overall pick even less so. If we don't get McDavid, chances are very high, that we won't get better players within the next five years, than those we are trading away. Look at the Oilers, they drafted at #1 three years in a row and they have no one at Lundqvist level, Hall maybe at Nash level and then arguably no one even at Staal level after that.

 

[mike14]

I ask again: those who are in favor of blowing it up completely, are you convinced, that we will get significantly better players in the draft in the next years than we are trading away? Namely considerably better players than Lundqvist, Nash and Staal? Consider that finishing last in the league can't be guaranteed and the first overall pick even less so. If we don't get McDavid, chances are very high, that we won't get better players within the next five years, than those we are trading away. Look at the Oilers, they drafted at #1 three years in a row and they have no one at Lundqvist level, Hall maybe at Nash level and then arguably no one even at Staal level after that.

I'm not convinced at all, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't give it a crack however it's not my money (obviously) so I can afford to be a bit blase about it.

If I was going to "blow it up", I'd probably try to keep one of Staal/Nash if not both. I know people will say that is half-arsing it, but if you moved out Lundqvist, Cally, Giradi, MDZ, MZA, Boyle, Pyatt and Moore (Dom) then you'd be replacing at least 8 of your starting 20 as well as buying out BR.

? - Step - Nash
Kreider - Brassard -
Hagelin - Miller - ?

You throw in a potential top-6 winger or 2 from trades and an (intelligent) FA signing and you have a pretty good (if unproven) top 9 as well McD, Staal, Moore and Stralman (maybe) still holding the D together.

If you then add in up to maybe 5 draft picks inside the top 60 (1st and 2nd rounders in trades for guys like Lundy, cally, girardi) and you've 'rebuilt' the image of the team in one fell-swoop.

There's no guarantee it will work of course, and the goalie situation needs to be fixed (FA or offer sheet unless you can add a good prospect in one of the trades), but if you are like me and believe that this team as currently constructed isn't a legit cup threat then it is worth a shot

 

[jniklast]

I'm not convinced at all, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't give it a crack however it's not my money (obviously) so I can afford to be a bit blase about it.

If I was going to "blow it up", I'd probably try to keep one of Staal/Nash if not both. I know people will say that is half-arsing it, but if you moved out Lundqvist, Cally, Giradi, MDZ, MZA, Boyle, Pyatt and Moore (Dom) then you'd be replacing at least 8 of your starting 20 as well as buying out BR.

? - Step - Nash
Kreider - Brassard -
Hagelin - Miller - ?

You throw in a potential top-6 winger or 2 from trades and an (intelligent) FA signing and you have a pretty good (if unproven) top 9 as well McD, Staal, Moore and Stralman (maybe) still holding the D together.

If you then add in up to maybe 5 draft picks inside the top 60 (1st and 2nd rounders in trades for guys like Lundy, cally, girardi) and you've 'rebuilt' the image of the team in one fell-swoop.

There's no guarantee it will work of course, and the goalie situation needs to be fixed (FA or offer sheet unless you can add a good prospect in one of the trades), but if you are like me and believe that this team as currently constructed isn't a legit cup threat then it is worth a shot

That isn't a full rebuild though. That's still a rather big retool. I'd try to keep Lundqvist, as you simply won't find anyone better and the return for a UFA goalie won't be a kings ransom even if it's one of the very best. But there's definitely some roster overhaul needed. MDZ and Girardi are prime candidates to be dealt, hopefully acquiring some young talent up front in the process. Richards will be, all those plugs should be gone for next season, which would result in quite some roster turnover, but keep our most talented players.

As enticing as blowing it all up might seem after such a disastrous start, replacing our core with draft picks does not guarantee success at all.

 

[mike14]

"rebuild" vs "retool" probably just comes to semantics at some point but I don't really care what you call it, turning over half your roster is a significant step to take IMO. I'm torn on Lundqvist, he's one of the best goalies in the game (if not the best), but his price will be extremely high and maybe it's time to try putting some of that $$ into different positions.

Like I said, there are no guarantees, but what we've tried thus far hasn't worked (outside of one season to an extent); time for something different.

 

[Jim Ramsay]

We're not talking about trading a signed Lundqvist we're talking about trading him as a UFA if the indication is he wants to test free agency or doesn't want to sign here. In that case it's essential to trade him instead of letting him leave for free.

I don't think Lundqvist is the kind of guy to say he doesn't want to sign here... and also if teams know that he wants to test free agency/wouldn't resign here than what kind of return do you think we would get with him being a pending UFA? I don't think the rangers would get the kind of return people in this thread think we would..... but yes, I agree if it is known that he doesn't want to re-sign here, you have to try and get something for him I suppose.

 

[Championship*]

I ask again: those who are in favor of blowing it up completely, are you convinced, that we will get significantly better players in the draft in the next years than we are trading away? Namely considerably better players than Lundqvist, Nash and Staal? Consider that finishing last in the league can't be guaranteed and the first overall pick even less so. If we don't get McDavid, chances are very high, that we won't get better players within the next five years, than those we are trading away. Look at the Oilers, they drafted at #1 three years in a row and they have no one at Lundqvist level, Hall maybe at Nash level and then arguably no one even at Staal level after that.

Stop using this is as an excuse. How many times to people have to point out the flaw in the Oilers rebuild to you? Or the fact that maybe it isn't over. Move on from this as an argument, because people can just as easily say "Chicago, Pittsburgh"

Chances are very high? What is that based on? It's based on nothing. It's based on a fact that you don't want to rebuild. Are we going to find another Lundqvist, Nash, Staal? Another Henrik for sure not, but do we need one? Another Nash, Staal? Drafting up top, I'd say there is a very good chance. Ekblad will be a better player than Staal.

You're also not taking into account the players/picks we would get back from trading these players. You don't just trade them away and get nothing in return. You're 100% focused on the draft and not on anything else.

 

[jniklast]

Stop using this is as an excuse. How many times to people have to point out the flaw in the Oilers rebuild to you? Or the fact that maybe it isn't over. Move on from this as an argument, because people can just as easily say "Chicago, Pittsburgh"

Chances are very high? What is that based on? It's based on nothing. It's based on a fact that you don't want to rebuild. Are we going to find another Lundqvist, Nash, Staal? Another Henrik for sure not, but do we need one? Another Nash, Staal? Drafting up top, I'd say there is a very good chance. Ekblad will be a better player than Staal.

You're also not taking into account the players/picks we would get back from trading these players. You don't just trade them away and get nothing in return. You're 100% focused on the draft and not on anything else.

You want to blow up the team, so that we get high draft positions, right? That's the usual way of a full rebuild. You say Pittsburgh and Chicago, here are some more examples of top 10 picks by teams from the last ten years:

Columbus Blue Jackets: Nik Zherdev (4th overall), Alexandre Picard (8th), Gilbert Brule (6th), Derick Brassard (6th), Jakub Voracek (7th), Nikita Filatov (6th), Ryan Johanson (4th), Ryan Murray (2nd)

Edmonton Oilers: Sam Gagner (6th), Magnus Paarjavi (10th), Taylor Hall (1st), Ryan Nugent-Hopkins (1st), Nail Yakupov (1st), Darnell Nurse (7th)

Florida Panthers: Nathan Horton (3rd), Rostislav Olesz (7th), Michael Frolik (10th), Keaton Ellerby (10th), Erik Gudbranson (3rd), Jonathan Huberdeau (3rd), Aleksander Barkov (2nd)

New York Islanders: Kyle Okposo (7th), Josh Bailey (9th), John Tavares (1st), Nino Niederreiter (5th), Ryan Strome (5th), Griffin Reinhard (4th)

Phoenix Coyotes: Blake Wheeler (5th), Peter Mueller (8th), Kyle Turris (3rd), Mikkel Boedker (8th), Oliver Ekman-Larsson (6th)

Winnipeg Jets (Atlanta Thrashers): Brayden Coburn (8th), Boris Valabik (10th), Zach Bogosian (3rd), Alexander Burmistrov (8th), Mark Scheifele (7th), Jacob Trouba (9th)


I'd argue, that none of the above teams got three better players with their top 10 picks than Lundqvist, Nash and Staal. Overall, there are maybe four players that are near the level of Lundqvist.

In the end, having high picks alone is just a little part of building a real contender, unless you get really lucky (like the Penguins for example). Far more important are all the other moves that are needed. That's why contenders aren't all build by tanking. There are many examples for teams, that did not rebuild over multiple years and are (or were) still among the best. It's not only the Red Wings and Devils, but also the Bruins, Sharks or Canucks, who each were bad for only one year.

I agree that this team needs some changes before we can contend again, but selling the few right pieces we have and going into full rebuild just isn't maximising the chances. Doing something different doesn't necessarily mean we have to blow it up, so that's a pretty lame reason to do it.

 

[Championship*]

You want to blow up the team, so that we get high draft positions, right? That's the usual way of a full rebuild. You say Pittsburgh and Chicago, here are some more examples of top 10 picks by teams from the last ten years:

Columbus Blue Jackets: Nik Zherdev (4th overall), Alexandre Picard (8th), Gilbert Brule (6th), Derick Brassard (6th), Jakub Voracek (7th), Nikita Filatov (6th), Ryan Johanson (4th), Ryan Murray (2nd)

Edmonton Oilers: Sam Gagner (6th), Magnus Paarjavi (10th), Taylor Hall (1st), Ryan Nugent-Hopkins (1st), Nail Yakupov (1st), Darnell Nurse (7th)

Florida Panthers: Nathan Horton (3rd), Rostislav Olesz (7th), Michael Frolik (10th), Keaton Ellerby (10th), Erik Gudbranson (3rd), Jonathan Huberdeau (3rd), Aleksander Barkov (2nd)

New York Islanders: Kyle Okposo (7th), Josh Bailey (9th), John Tavares (1st), Nino Niederreiter (5th), Ryan Strome (5th), Griffin Reinhard (4th)

Phoenix Coyotes: Blake Wheeler (5th), Peter Mueller (8th), Kyle Turris (3rd), Mikkel Boedker (8th), Oliver Ekman-Larsson (6th)

Winnipeg Jets (Atlanta Thrashers): Brayden Coburn (8th), Boris Valabik (10th), Zach Bogosian (3rd), Alexander Burmistrov (8th), Mark Scheifele (7th), Jacob Trouba (9th)


I'd argue, that none of the above teams got three better players with their top 10 picks than Lundqvist, Nash and Staal. Overall, there are maybe four players that are near the level of Lundqvist.

In the end, having high picks alone is just a little part of building a real contender, unless you get really lucky (like the Penguins for example). Far more important are all the other moves that are needed. That's why contenders aren't all build by tanking. There are many examples for teams, that did not rebuild over multiple years and are (or were) still among the best. It's not only the Red Wings and Devils, but also the Bruins, Sharks or Canucks, who each were bad for only one year.

I agree that this team needs some changes before we can contend again, but selling the few right pieces we have and going into full rebuild just isn't maximising the chances. Doing something different doesn't necessarily mean we have to blow it up, so that's a pretty lame reason to do it.

Again, completely ignoring the relevant facts that part of the rebuild is based on assets you acquire during the rebuild. Can't say I'm surprised you keep missing that at this point because it's clear you have a very base understanding of the whole thing.

You do realize that there are RIGHT ways to do a rebuild and WRONG ways to do one, right? It's not just one way and maybe it works maybe it doesn't. You must not understand that, because it's been told to you time and time again and you can't grasp that concept. Reinhart was the 1st D the Isles drafted in the 1st round since Wade Redden. And that's the prevailing theme up there. How many of those players are D-men in list above? The majority are forwards. The Isles also terribly mismanaged their prospects - also a prevailing them. And let's just add to the fact that ALL the teams you mentioned have problems signing UFAs. All of them. NYR are more comparable to Pitt and Chicago. Bolded players up there are complete studs and I would kill to have them on my team.

The players you are suggesting keeping are not getting younger. That is not how things work. I feel that I have to spell that out since comprehension of simple things does not come easy for you.

Blowing it up is the only doing something different we haven't done yet. Retooling doesn't work. That is proven. You can't properly rebuild with guys like Lundqvist and Staal on your roster. Staal will be a UFA after next year. Lundqvist is a UFA after this year, and looks horrible. Both of these players are not getting any younger.

This team isn't close to being a contender. The sooner you realize that the better.

 

[Clown Fiesta]

I don't think Lundqvist is the kind of guy to say he doesn't want to sign here... and also if teams know that he wants to test free agency/wouldn't resign here than what kind of return do you think we would get with him being a pending UFA? I don't think the rangers would get the kind of return people in this thread think we would..... but yes, I agree if it is known that he doesn't want to re-sign here, you have to try and get something for him I suppose.

I think they'd figure it out once Sather started shopping him...

It doesn't matter though like I've said numerous times if a team is desperate or think they have a chance to sign him they'd be willing to acquire him for the extra negotiation time. As well as contenders who think they need to solidify their goaltending to have a good run.

 

[LaffyTaffyNYR]

rebuilding? isnt that pretty much what we have been doing? going into next season only Nash, Stepan, Hagelin are signed for forwards as BR should be bought out, while Staal and Mcdonagh arethe only defensemen signed. Miller, Kreider, fast, Lindberg, Moore, Kristo etc, this team is full of young players. I think because we are classified as a " win now" team, people forget how young we really are

 

[jniklast]

Again, completely ignoring the relevant facts that part of the rebuild is based on assets you acquire during the rebuild. Can't say I'm surprised you keep missing that at this point because it's clear you have a very base understanding of the whole thing.

You do realize that there are RIGHT ways to do a rebuild and WRONG ways to do one, right? It's not just one way and maybe it works maybe it doesn't. You must not understand that, because it's been told to you time and time again and you can't grasp that concept. Reinhart was the 1st D the Isles drafted in the 1st round since Wade Redden. And that's the prevailing theme up there. How many of those players are D-men in list above? The majority are forwards. The Isles also terribly mismanaged their prospects - also a prevailing them. And let's just add to the fact that ALL the teams you mentioned have problems signing UFAs. All of them. NYR are more comparable to Pitt and Chicago. Bolded players up there are complete studs and I would kill to have them on my team.

The players you are suggesting keeping are not getting younger. That is not how things work. I feel that I have to spell that out since comprehension of simple things does not come easy for you.

Blowing it up is the only doing something different we haven't done yet. Retooling doesn't work. That is proven. You can't properly rebuild with guys like Lundqvist and Staal on your roster. Staal will be a UFA after next year. Lundqvist is a UFA after this year, and looks horrible. Both of these players are not getting any younger.

This team isn't close to being a contender. The sooner you realize that the better.

Of course there's a lot more to rebuilding than drafting high, that's exactly what I just wrote. But the other things you suggest aren't exclusive for a full rebuild like you suggest. We don't need to blow everything up to get assets, we can deal away a few players. And I'm not talking about obvious spares like Pyatt or Boyle. We should definitely explore options for trading one of our dmen (MDZ, Girardi prime candidates, Staal if he doesn't want to re-sign). We should also take a long hard look at Callahan's demands. I really like him and he's our captain, bu with his playing style and injury history, I'm not so inclined in investing heavy dollars in him. If we really are out at the deadline, a player like Cally could fetch a premium.

And you act like all retooling is the same and there's absolutely no middle ground between doing nothing and blowing it all up.

But the most telling part by far is the players bolded, and it's really an epitome of these boards (well, they are called hockey's futere to be fair). Young prospects are always the next best thing and almost certainly better than proven superstars.

 

[Bullseyes]

I ask again: those who are in favor of blowing it up completely, are you convinced, that we will get significantly better players in the draft in the next years than we are trading away? Namely considerably better players than Lundqvist, Nash and Staal? Consider that finishing last in the league can't be guaranteed and the first overall pick even less so. If we don't get McDavid, chances are very high, that we won't get better players within the next five years, than those we are trading away. Look at the Oilers, they drafted at #1 three years in a row and they have no one at Lundqvist level, Hall maybe at Nash level and then arguably no one even at Staal level after that.

Not that I'm for or against blowing it up, but I'd take Hall over Nash at this point and I think once RNH progresses, he'll easily be better than Staal. And I love Staal.

Teams that blow it up don't just find success because their drafting with top 5 picks. They find success because they draft right outside of that plus find the perfect players in other ways for their roster. Look at Chicago and Pittsburgh and how they rebuilt.

EDIT: The thing with drafting high is it's sometimes the only way to get young, cheap potential star forwards, especially centers. Trading for or signing free agent forwards like the Rangers do hurts them because their more expensive and their older.

 

[EspenK]

There is too much talent on this team to blow it up.

Unfortunately for Ranger fans there is little to be had in the trade market either. Take Nash for an example. First I believe his NT clause came with him so right away there are only 5 teams or so that he will go to. One of them I believe was Boston so that is most likely off the table. Secondly he didn't return the kind of players that will cure Ranger ills immediately. Not that the Jackets want him back but if the trade was reversed, would the Rangers be any more of a contender than they are now? I think not.

Next what makes you think that other teams are going to trade their top 6 F's or top 2 D for guys you want to get rid of? Best hope is for the system to take hold, get all the guys healthy and maybe add a couple of fits through trades, FA or the draft.

Remember at this time last season Jacket fans thought they might have two real good chances (3 if you count the Kings slow start) at winning the lottery or at least 3 picks in the top 10. We got 14, 19 & 27.

Having that brutal road trip in the rear view mirror and a bunch of games against the less than spectacular Metro Division also will help the cause.

Here's hoping my second favorite team rebounds strongly.

 

[Championship*]

Of course there's a lot more to rebuilding than drafting high, that's exactly what I just wrote. But the other things you suggest aren't exclusive for a full rebuild like you suggest. We don't need to blow everything up to get assets, we can deal away a few players. And I'm not talking about obvious spares like Pyatt or Boyle. We should definitely explore options for trading one of our dmen (MDZ, Girardi prime candidates, Staal if he doesn't want to re-sign). We should also take a long hard look at Callahan's demands. I really like him and he's our captain, bu with his playing style and injury history, I'm not so inclined in investing heavy dollars in him. If we really are out at the deadline, a player like Cally could fetch a premium.

And you act like all retooling is the same and there's absolutely no middle ground between doing nothing and blowing it all up.

But the most telling part by far is the players bolded, and it's really an epitome of these boards (well, they are called hockey's futere to be fair). Young prospects are always the next best thing and almost certainly better than proven superstars.

If you want to get the proper assets for a rebuild you gotta trade the proper players - no inbetween.
So now you are advocating trading Girardi, MDZ, Staal, Callahan. That certainly seems like a large bulk of the "core" you've been advocating for keeping. You can't rebuild with Henrik, he's a UFA and only getting older. Nash is going to be 30 soon. Not getting any younger. Window is closing.

Retooling is what we've been doing, and it hasn't been working, and you can't see it. I'd call that willful blindness.

All those players bolded are already, or will be, excellent players in this league. Fact. There is no debating that. Tavares is one of the top 5 players in this league already. Please, you're embarassing yourself even further.

The time is right for rebuilding.

There is too much talent on this team to blow it up.



Remember at this time last season Jacket fans thought they might have two real good chances (3 if you count the Kings slow start) at winning the lottery or at least 3 picks in the top 10. We got 14, 19 & 27.

@ Bolded - No there isn't.

If you thought you'd have 3 chances at lottery instead of the 1 then I gotta say your delusional. At the end of the day, was that run to not the playoffs worth it? Probably not.

 

[jniklast]

If you want to get the proper assets for a rebuild you gotta trade the proper players - no inbetween.
So now you are advocating trading Girardi, MDZ, Staal, Callahan. That certainly seems like a large bulk of the "core" you've been advocating for keeping. You can't rebuild with Henrik, he's a UFA and only getting older. Nash is going to be 30 soon. Not getting any younger. Window is closing.

Retooling is what we've been doing, and it hasn't been working, and you can't see it. I'd call that willful blindness.

All those players bolded are already, or will be, excellent players in this league. Fact. There is no debating that. Tavares is one of the top 5 players in this league already. Please, you're embarassing yourself even further.

The time is right for rebuilding.

I'm advocating trading one of Staal, MDZ and Girardi and maybe Callahan.

Of course some of these players are studs, and Tavares certainly is one of the best. Hence why I said there are four players on the Lundqvist/Nash level on the list. Stating that all of those prospects will turn out to be studs as a fact is beyond delusional. There is no fact when projecting the future. You know what was written about guys like Brule, Zherdev, Filatov, Niederreiter or Turris? The exact same thing you now state as a fact. The list of high end draft picks not fulfilling expectations is probably just as long as those who fulfill their promises.

But arguing with you is pretty pointless, as everything is a definite fact for you. It's a fact we have been doing the same thing, it's a fact that we would do the same thing again, it's a fact that retooling never works, and it's a fact that those prospects all reach their potential.

This love for prospects and high picks really is out of hands at times. Now "Nash is going to be 30 soon", so trade him while he still has value. I guess the Penguins window will be closing in two years then, right? After all Malkin and Crosby soon will be 30 by then as well...

 

[KreidertheGlider]

If Lundqvist gets resigned for more than 5 years, this organization will be bad for a long time.

 

[Championship*]

I'm advocating trading one of Staal, MDZ and Girardi and maybe Callahan.

Of course some of these players are studs, and Tavares certainly is one of the best. Hence why I said there are four players on the Lundqvist/Nash level on the list. Stating that all of those prospects will turn out to be studs as a fact is beyond delusional. There is no fact when projecting the future. You know what was written about guys like Brule, Zherdev, Filatov, Niederreiter or Turris? The exact same thing you now state as a fact. The list of high end draft picks not fulfilling expectations is probably just as long as those who fulfill their promises.

But arguing with you is pretty pointless, as everything is a definite fact for you. It's a fact we have been doing the same thing, it's a fact that we would do the same thing again, it's a fact that retooling never works, and it's a fact that those prospects all reach their potential.

This love for prospects and high picks really is out of hands at times. Now "Nash is going to be 30 soon", so trade him while he still has value. I guess the Penguins window will be closing in two years then, right? After all Malkin and Crosby soon will be 30 by then as well...

What about those guys? Are we going to go back in time and draft them? They are irrelevant. Time moves forward, not backward.

As far as the window thing goes, it's clearly over your head. Malkin and Crosby are better than any of the players we have, and will be for years.

Arguing with me is pointless for you because I keep proving you wrong. Sorry.

 

[jniklast]

What about those guys? Are we going to go back in time and draft them? They are irrelevant. Time moves forward, not backward.

As far as the window thing goes, it's clearly over your head. Malkin and Crosby are better than any of the players we have, and will be for years.

Arguing with me is pointless for you because I keep proving you wrong. Sorry.

You have proved nothing, you just stated your opinion as fact.

How about some numbers? There are 38 players on the above list, you bolded 13. So even if every of the prospects bolded reach their full potential (which I guarantee you won't happen), there's just a little better than 1/3 chance that we get a better player than our current "stars". So it could take 9 years just to replace them, and even if we trade for more picks and do it in five, players like Stepan and McD will be 30+. So unless you get a generational talent that you can build around, it's a pretty risky way, whether you like it or not.

 

[Championship*]

You have proved nothing, you just stated your opinion as fact.

How about some numbers? There are 38 players on the above list, you bolded 13. So even if every of the prospects bolded reach their full potential (which I guarantee you won't happen), there's just a little better than 1/3 chance that we get a better player than our current "stars". So it could take 9 years just to replace them, and even if we trade for more picks and do it in five, players like Stepan and McD will be 30+. So unless you get a generational talent that you can build around, it's a pretty risky way, whether you like it or not.

Again, is Nikita Filatov in this upcoming draft? If he's not then we don't have to worry about drafting him...