Roster/Rumors/Speculation/Trade Talk - 2024-25: Re-Tool, Re-Group, Re-Mix, Re-Build

[SI]

Putting aside the fact that several of the teams you mentioned had literally some of the worst owners in recent sports history running the team while they were rebuilding (Charles Wang, Terry Pegula, Eugene Melnyk, etc), but if you think that losing in game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals (by a goal) means that Edmonton's rebuild didn't work then I'd say you're not being objective and simply have an axe to grind.

No, axe they have not won a SC. They could win this season and it fits your argument. Or they could not get close again and lose McDavid in 2 years.

And their original rebuild didn't work - 3 1st OA - Hall, RNH, and Nail not to mention Sam Gagner (6OA) and Pajaarvi (10th OA) in drafts just before that.

 

[SI]

I mentioned that many have tried this blueprint and haven't won.

But all who did win multiple cups took this route, without exception.



They fit this model. Kopitar may not be a Crosby or Kane based on gaudy numbers, but he carried that level of importance for the Kings in both of their Cups.

Brown was the other key self-drafted forward for that team.

Doughty was the self-drafted D anchor and Quick the self-drafted starting goalie.

Now, nowhere in my post did I mention that all these guys were high draft picks.

Simply that they were the self-drafted core of multiple cups.

Chapin,
You did not say in your post about High Picks that is @periferal stance.

The conversation was about rebuilding and acquiring high picks... my post was to say it may have worked for Pittsburgh, Tampa, and Chicago, but not for the many teams that have had several high draft picks and still have produced nothing. The Kings did not go into full teardown and hit on lower picks, like Kopitar, Brown, Quick as well as smart trades.

Crosby and Kane are generational talents - Crosby might be top 5 all time and Kane might be top American Point leader once his career is over.

 

[YearlyLottery]

I see I might be adding fuel to the flame but the truth of the matter is, every team to have won 2 or more cups in the past 15 years has had a self-drafted #1 star center, another self-drafted star forward, a self-drafted star Dman, and in most cases, a self-drafted SC-winning goalie, at least for one of the Cups.

Sticking with the importance of the self-drafted star forwards and Dman, one-Cup winners Capitals, Avelanche, and Panthers (granted Huberdeau was swapped for Tkachuk first) have certainly fit that bill as well.

The special exceptions seem to have been Vegas and St. Louis.

All certainly added key components from the outside along the way. That can't be denied. Certainly not.

But within the industry, it is more or less understood that the blueprint for winning multiple Cups in the modern era requires a minimum of 2 self-drafted impact/star forwards (one being a center) and a self-drafted #1 Dman.

Again, the multicup winners also each had a self-drafted starting goalie, at least for one of their cups.

***
Many teams have been trying to emulate this blueprint and have fallen short. There can only be one winner. But the teams that have multiple cups have gone exactly this route.

Without exception.

I appreciate your well thought out post. This still does not totally negate the fact that there is even MORE luck involved in the current lottery system.

Look, some people have taken my posts and feel the need to say I support trading firsts for more aging players when that is cannot be further from the truth. This team needs to trade Nelson, needs to trade Palmieri, and needs to continue a youth movement focused on skating ability first and foremost.

But what is the best way to get there? Is it really completing a full on rebuild and deciding all of Barzal, Sorokin, Dobson, Horvat, etc are not good enough?

I remain unconvinced at posters are feel a full on rebuild is the path forward who are still giving Pittsburgh as an example of a team who started getting built over two decades ago. Should Pittsburgh have followed the Bill Torrey method of building the Islanders?

Get multiple draft picks while keeping the core in tact (but trade Dobson please...), grab elite skaters from good hockey programs, and watch the organization build itself into a contender without risking a Buffalo territory rebuild.

I am extremely confused as to why @periferal is liking this post when it does not bring up attempting to get multiple FIRST OR SECOND PICKS IN THE DRAFT.

 

[denis5]

I appreciate your well thought out post. This still does not totally negate the fact that there is even MORE luck involved in the current lottery system.

Look, some people have taken my posts and feel the need to say I support trading firsts for more aging players when that is cannot be further from the truth. This team needs to trade Nelson, needs to trade Palmieri, and needs to continue a youth movement focused on skating ability first and foremost.

But what is the best way to get there? Is it really completing a full on rebuild and deciding all of Barzal, Sorokin, Dobson, Horvat, etc are not good enough?

I remain unconvinced at posters are feel a full on rebuild is the path forward who are still giving Pittsburgh as an example of a team who started getting built over two decades ago. Should Pittsburgh have followed the Bill Torrey method of building the Islanders?

Get multiple draft picks while keeping the core in tact (but trade Dobson please...), grab elite skaters from good hockey programs, and watch the organization build itself into a contender without risking a Buffalo territory rebuild.

I am extremely confused as to why @periferal is liking this post when it does not bring up attempting to get multiple FIRST OR SECOND PICKS IN THE DRAFT.

A lot of valid points here (though as much as he's struggled this year, trading away Dobson would probably come around to bite us on the ass -- although the crying if he turns into Towes 2.0 in a different situation would be epic).

The problem with the build through the draft approach is that the league is structured now, not before, but now, to prevent tanking as a road to rebuild. You could theoretically go 0-82 for five years straight and never have a pick in the top 3. Second, even if you hit on a "generational" talent, there's no guarantee that he won't bolt in 7 years -- just as he's reaching his prime -- because he's sick of the losing along the way.

Yes, you could trade away talent for multiple picks for more bites at the apple, but you need to face the math that by the middle of round 1, about a third of the players selected never have a meaningful career, while a whole bunch more are just filler quality, and by the time you get to the second round, the number that are no more than bubble players (or never make it at all) swells to around 2/3. No matter how good your scouts are, you are going to waste way more picks than you will hit on. That's why so many of the current rebuilds turn into decade long affairs, with no guarantee that what you wind up with is any better than what you started with. Just in the last few seasons, we've picked up other team's first round garbage, including a former 8th over all in Boqvist, and been forced to jettison some of our own failed picks.

As I saw elsewhere in an article (to lazy to look up the link) that defended the Blackhawks poor draft results one season, realistically speaking, if you hit 1 top six forward or 1 top 4 defenseman, you've had a good draft, and that's not wrong, but it is a long f'ing road to follow if your plan is to tear down to the ground and start over.

 

[YearlyLottery]

A lot of valid points here (though as much as he's struggled this year, trading away Dobson would probably come around to bite us on the ass -- although the crying if he turns into Towes 2.0 in a different situation would be epic).

The problem with the build through the draft approach is that the league is structured now, not before, but now, to prevent tanking as a road to rebuild. You could theoretically go 0-82 for five years straight and never have a pick in the top 3. Second, even if you hit on a "generational" talent, there's no guarantee that he won't bolt in 7 years -- just as he's reaching his prime -- because he's sick of the losing along the way.

Yes, you could trade away talent for multiple picks for more bites at the apple, but you need to face the math that by the middle of round 1, about a third of the players selected never have a meaningful career, while a whole bunch more are just filler quality, and by the time you get to the second round, the number that are no more than bubble players (or never make it at all) swells to around 2/3. No matter how good your scouts are, you are going to waste way more picks than you will hit on. That's why so many of the current rebuilds turn into decade long affairs, with no guarantee that what you wind up with is any better than what you started with. Just in the last few seasons, we've picked up other team's first round garbage, including a former 8th over all in Boqvist, and been forced to jettison some of our own failed picks.

As I saw elsewhere in an article (to lazy to look up the link) that defended the Blackhawks poor draft results one season, realistically speaking, if you hit 1 top six forward or 1 top 4 defenseman, you've had a good draft, and that's not wrong, but it is a long f'ing road to follow if your plan is to tear down to the ground and start over.

Turning the tide onto Dobson I do not think it will. Dobson likely has value right now to be a potential top pairing, elite point scoring defenseman and if that is his true value he needs to be dealt.

Dobson does not have the skating ability, offensive vision or stick handling ability to ever be an elite top pairing defenseman. This is just my opinion. I was also extremely disappointed that he did not step up come playoff time and came across as soft every single season.

Tony DeAngelo should not have been able to come in and outplay him offensively.

 

[doublechili]

I think there's a bunch of guys on this roster who don't fit the need for the Islanders anymore but could still have success someplace else. Mayfield is one of those guys for sure.

I've been harping for years now that the Isles' biggest problem is lack of skill on D (even more than a dynamic forward who can finish, although that's close). Even when they had Leddy and Toews (both good puck-transporters), I wanted upgrades because neither was dangerous once they gained the offensive zone. And the biggest problem recently has been that 3 of their top 4 D are defensive guys, not dynamic.

Keep Romanov. Keep one of Pelech and Pulock. Move Mayfield first. Have 4 puck-movers on D.

 

[Throttle]

Turning the tide onto Dobson I do not think it will. Dobson likely has value right now to be a potential top pairing, elite point scoring defenseman and if that is his true value he needs to be dealt.

Dobson does not have the skating ability, offensive vision or stick handling ability to ever be an elite top pairing defenseman. This is just my opinion. I was also extremely disappointed that he did not step up come playoff time and came across as soft every single season.

Tony DeAngelo should not have been able to come in and outplay him offensively.

Amen, I don’t think Tony D makes Dobson expendable, it’s more showing that Dobson isn’t really all that.

Yes, a guy that puts up 70 points has something, but the concerns you have are valid and do not appear to be ones that someone grows out of. He’s also been a trainwreck defensively under Roy and sort of under Lambert. And his future price is $7-8-9M, yikes.

Of the four recent castoffs, two can help now. Dobson ain’t turning into Doughty.

 

[seafoam]

Trade DeAngelo at the deadline, trade Dobson at the draft, and trade for Karlsson (PIT has to take back Mayfield).

Romanov-Karlsson
X-Pulock
Pelech-Boqvist
'

 

[Throttle]

I've been harping for years now that the Isles' biggest problem is lack of skill on D (even more than a dynamic forward who can finish, although that's close). Even when they had Leddy and Toews (both good puck-transporters), I wanted upgrades because neither was dangerous once they gained the offensive zone. And the biggest problem recently has been that 3 of their top 4 D are defensive guys, not dynamic.

Keep Romanov. Keep one of Pelech and Pulock. Move Mayfield first. Have 4 puck-movers on D.

I mentioned this last year, but Isles should have traded Barzal and Pelech for Tkachuk and Chyrchyn. OTT got tons of cost certainty and long term deals. Isles took the signing risk and swapped one piece of glass for another on defense, but Chrychyn has more offense than Pelech.

 

[BelovedIsles]

Reading this thread is like watching Real Housewives of hfboards!!
View attachment 982060

Can each post come with that eye candy.

 

[Throttle]

Trade DeAngelo at the deadline, trade Dobson at the draft, and trade for Karlsson (PIT has to take back Mayfield).

Romanov-Karlsson
X-Pulock
Pelech-Boqvist
'

Keep Tony D - he’s only going to cost $3M a year max and put up 40-50 points.

 

[SI]

I mentioned this last year, but Isles should have traded Barzal and Pelech for Tkachuk and Chyrchyn. OTT got tons of cost certainty and long term deals. Isles took the signing risk and swapped one piece of glass for another on defense, but Chrychyn has more offense than Pelech.

Brady Tkachuk is not available. He wasn't last season and is not now.
And Ottawa wanted a RHD to replace Chychrun. Pelech makes almost 2m more than Jensen and has way more term.

 

[PK Cronin]

I've been harping for years now that the Isles' biggest problem is lack of skill on D (even more than a dynamic forward who can finish, although that's close). Even when they had Leddy and Toews (both good puck-transporters), I wanted upgrades because neither was dangerous once they gained the offensive zone. And the biggest problem recently has been that 3 of their top 4 D are defensive guys, not dynamic.

Keep Romanov. Keep one of Pelech and Pulock. Move Mayfield first. Have 4 puck-movers on D.

Yep, I remember.

After Leddy was gone the team needed to upgrade in the same skillset but they didn't, and ultimately never even replaced the skillset. Dobson is nice but he's defensively weak and not a great puck transporter, he excels on the rush. If we could just combine Leddy and Dobson's abilities then we'd be in a good spot.

A few of us have mentioned the issue is the redundancy on the roster. Every grouping of players are incredibly similar, and that's why they're stale and non-dynamic.

 

[doublechili]

A few of us have mentioned the issue is the redundancy on the roster. Every grouping of players are incredibly similar, and that's why they're stale and non-dynamic.

Yes, agreed. And not only that, but they need more different kinds of players.

 

[periferal]

This is it. Period. End of story.

 

[Top Corner]

The one good thing to come from this losing streak near the deadline is there should be not doubt our GM needs to retool the roster. Lets hope he can maximize on all his deals to better set us up with a younger, faster and less cap restrictive roster for 2025-26

 

[impaaaaaact]

good chance we’re in line for a top 10 pick. Combine that with whatever we get from Brock/palms/ Pageau and we might have a pretty restorative offseason. Who knows, maybe we even trade up

 

[xECK29x]

Trade DeAngelo at the deadline, trade Dobson at the draft, and trade for Karlsson (PIT has to take back Mayfield).

Romanov-Karlsson
X-Pulock
Pelech-Boqvist
'

No

 

[SI]

4 L in a row -
@ Boston, Nashville, @ NYR, and WPG (back to back)

- Nelson and Palmieri must be moved.
- Explore JGP move too (who I believe could fetch a great return)

 

[ekill08x]

If Lou f**ks this up I swear to god I hope UBS is empty next season. This is a no brainer deadline.