Actually, my sample size was "10-15 years." Therefore, 1997-2000 is irrelevant to the conversation.
----- 8< snip (too long to quote) ----
I think you both make good points.
How you approach a rebuild / retool really depends on what condition the team is in (there are also market considerations, but maybe that's a different post).
There is the Toronto / Buffalo situation - both teams are hopelessly non-competitive. Chicago circa 2002 is probably another example. When they began their respective rebuilds, both teams had a couple of quality prospects, but not enough quantity, quality or depth to really build around. In this situation, a full on rebuild where you sell off your veterans, accumulate picks and prospects and play a very young and inexperienced team is sensible.
At the other end of the spectrum are teams like Detroit and New Jersey (from late 80's until 2012 or so). These teams were always contenders and were almost always drafting late in the 1st round. It should be noted that New Jersey started their long run of success with some high picks that landed them Kirk Muller, Bill Guerin, Scott Niedermayer and Brendan Shanahan then picked Martin Brodeur with a 20th OA pick. Detroit also had some high picks in the late 80's but did better with their later round picks. But both teams retooled again in the 90's, and 2000s while remaining competitive for 20+ years, before and after the NHL salary cap. Doing so require exceptional scouting, drafting, development and asset management - finding value in late round picks, 2nd tier and European free agents and astute trades. It should be noted that Lou Lamoriello, Jimmy Devellano, Brian Murray, Scotty Bowman, Jim Nill and Ken Holland are probably the most respected and often emulated hockey operations people in the business. So a New Jersey or Detroit model is possible, but you have to have the front office talent and be able to maintain the type of continuity that Detroit and New Jersey have enjoyed.
Most teams fall between these scenarios. They have neither been futile for decades nor have they been consistently competitive. For the Canucks, I would not support a full on 'blow it up' rebuild as we have not been through multiple failed retool attempts (Leafs) or been forced to sell off core players that we couldn't afford to re-sign (Buffalo). But unlike Detroit, we have to make deeper changes to get back into contention, and we can't count on finding HOF players in the 5th round. The Canucks need to accurately assess where they are in terms of age, contract structure, competitive potential and the state of team's prospect pool. IMO - as we approach the TDL, the playoffs are a mirage. The sensible thing is to sell off the veterans on expiring contracts and try to improve our draft position.
We have had 4 pretty good drafts in a row and have accumulated a pretty decent young prospect pool - Boeser, Virtanen, McCann, Demko, Horvat, Shinkaruk, Cassels, Subban, Hutton, Gaunce, and added Baertschi and Vey through trades. But there are 2 key pieces missing - a true #1 C and a top pairing puck moving defenseman. IMO - one more really solid draft will set the team up for the next 10 years. We can probably pick up 1 of those 2 key pieces and find the other through free agency or a trade.
