OT: The true key to long term sustainable success

[WaitingForUser]

Bare with me this is going to be a long post.

With the recent Keith addition something has started to occur to me. The number one key to long term sustainable success is succession. If you look at all the elite teams around the league past and present they all have one thing in common or at least most do. They had star players who taught young prospects the ropes. A great example of this is the Detroit Red Wings. in the 90's they had guys like Hull, Shannahan, Yzerman and Federov. They were succeed by great players like Datsyuk and Zetterberg. so they had top players that taught good prospects how to be great players. TB had Richards, Lecavalier, Boyle and St Louis. These guys were succeeded by great players like Stamkos and Hedman. ANH had guys like Perry and Getzlaf learn from guys guys like Kariya and Selane. Dallas had a guys like Turco who learned from Belfour. Turco passed what he learned on to Mike Smith. NY had Lundquist who passed on what he learned to Talbot. Are we seeing a pattern here? Crosby played with Lemiuex for half a year in Pittsburgh and guys like Guerin and Rechie. I could name tons of others but I think you see my point.

Lets turn to other side of the coin now. Teams like Edmonton and Buffalo have drafted high for years and had many promising prospects who all failed to meet their expectations. Buffalo had nobody to teach Eichel or Dahlin and so the team has remained terrible. Edmonton had guys like Horcoff, Ference and Whitney try to teach guys like Nuge, Hall and Schultz. This is the difference between long term success and a couple good runs. When you have star players teaching top prospects those prospects usually turn in to star players. Its the method of passing the torch so to speak and all the top teams do it. One of the reasons the oilers have never had much success after the 80's is lack of star players to teach the young guys how to make it.

There you go the number one ingredient IMO is succession. what say you?

Click to read more...

 

[North Cole]

1. Pro-scouting
2. Amateur scouting
3. Competent signing strategy
4. Development

The number one key is pro-scouting. You can't win an NHL trade if you over-value players you don't have, regardless of how you value the players you do have. You can't sign reasonable contracts to retain your own players or bring in new players if you don't have good pro-scouting. Since you'll get the market comparables wrong, or similarly to trading - overvalue the UFA guys and pay them too much. Being bad at #1 basically sinks your team. Pro-scouting also helps development as you touch on in your post, having the right mix of vets is big for development. It's just a shame we are doing this now, instead of in 2017 after we lost to Anaheim. That was a great opportunity to bring in some older guys to keep developing the mentality of the younger guys we would bring up. Instead we do some dumb shit for Griffin, and bring in bums like Koskinen and Manning. That's a failure of scouting/the GM.

I get that people like to take a dump on our Amateur scouting because it's rightfully bad, but we literally never seem to win a trade and we overpay $ for virtually all players. I'd say we are average with our RFA's. Our management group is running this team like a robinhood account, the FOMO is palpable through my computer screen.

I get what you're saying but without pro-scouting you ain't gonna have the right vets around to teach the kids, and the vets you do have are overpaid so you get into cap hell and the young superstars just end up like McDrai. The Hawks and Pens got their elite core and let the core mentor the others, they succeeded in the trial by fire (We tried that with the Hall core and it blew up). The teams youre talking about were crazy good at pro-scouting and in the case of Anaheim won because Chris Pronger literally chose their team.

 

[WaitingForUser]

1. Pro-scouting
2. Amateur scouting
3. Competent signing strategy
4. Development

The number one key is pro-scouting. You can't win an NHL trade if you over-value players you don't have, regardless of how you value the players you do have. You can't sign reasonable contracts to retain your own players or bring in new players if you don't have good pro-scouting. Since you'll get the market comparables wrong, or similarly to trading - overvalue the UFA guys and pay them too much. Being bad at #1 basically sinks your team. Pro-scouting also helps development as you touch on in your post, having the right mix of vets is big for development. It's just a shame we are doing this now, instead of in 2017 after we lost to Anaheim. That was a great opportunity to bring in some older guys to keep developing the mentality of the younger guys we would bring up. Instead we do some dumb shit for Griffin, and bring in bums like Koskinen and Manning. That's a failure of scouting/the GM.

I get that people like to take a dump on our Amateur scouting because it's rightfully bad, but we literally never seem to win a trade and we overpay $ for virtually all players. I'd say we are average with our RFA's. Our management group is running this team like a robinhood account, the FOMO is palpable through my computer screen.

I get what you're saying but without pro-scouting you ain't gonna have the right vets around to teach the kids, and the vets you do have are overpaid so you get into cap hell and the young superstars just end up like McDrai. The Hawks and Pens got their elite core and let the core mentor the others, they succeeded in the trial by fire (We tried that with the Hall core and it blew up). The teams youre talking about were crazy good at pro-scouting and in the case of Anaheim won because Chris Pronger literally chose their team.

All very good points. I think one goes hand in hand with the other however. To many prospects that have learned the ropes from elite players have become elite players to ignore the correlation IMO.

 

[North Cole]

All very good points. I think one goes hand in hand with the other however. To many prospects that have learned the ropes from elite players have become elite players to ignore the correlation IMO.

I dont disagree but it takes a certain type of elite/old player to take on that role. None of the players in the Hall core seemed interested in it, Yak, MPS, even Schultz just seemed left to their own devices. ROR stopped giving a poop in Buffalo when he was the veteran guy, now he's the captain in STL. Whereas you get a guy like Crosby, Toews, etc - maybe they actually take the time to mentor people. Seems McDavid is actually doing something with Poolparty this time around.

We brought in Lucic because he had been there done that and then he quit on the team. That's probably a big difference between him and Keith. Hawks fans were saying he Keith actually took the time to explain things and mentor their younger D. IMO that's pro-scouting. Chiarelli just signed a player he knew from a decade before, im hoping we get something better from Keith (im still mad about the cap hit though).

If you target the right mentality of young player they can also take on that role. Some teams get away with it, some teams need the veteran guys in the beginning. I'm just tried of us trying to do both and getting neither one right lmao

 

[Beerfish]

Get a really good #1 goalie and keep him.

 

[WaitingForUser]

I dont disagree but it takes a certain type of elite/old player to take on that role. None of the players in the Hall core seemed interested in it, Yak, MPS, even Schultz just seemed left to their own devices. ROR stopped giving a poop in Buffalo when he was the veteran guy, now he's the captain in STL. Whereas you get a guy like Crosby, Toews, etc - maybe they actually take the time to mentor people. Seems McDavid is actually doing something with Poolparty this time around.

We brought in Lucic because he had been there done that and then he quit on the team. That's probably a big difference between him and Keith. Hawks fans were saying he Keith actually took the time to explain things and mentor their younger D. IMO that's pro-scouting. Chiarelli just signed a player he knew from a decade before, im hoping we get something better from Keith (im still mad about the cap hit though).

If you target the right mentality of young player they can also take on that role. Some teams get away with it, some teams need the veteran guys in the beginning. I'm just tried of us trying to do both and getting neither one right lmao

Yea it absolutely can work that way as well. McDavid taking PJs under his wing is a great example. I just wonder how much better a guy like RNH or Hall would have been learning for a Thorton or Getzlaf or the like instead of Horcoff. The Hawks and Avs seem to be an exception rather than the standard is all I’m saying. Imagine if Mess and Gretz had been around to teach Weight and Arnott the ropes. They were great players but with their skill they could have been super stars.

 

[McGoMcD]

Ya. drafting and development is of course huge. After that there is a lot to be said for recognizing your core. In the cap world you only get so many big contracts, you have to choose wisely who to hand those out to. The oilers have actually done good with that, McDavid, Drai, Nuge, now Nurse... in some ways easy enough. After that just stay away from long term deals with any one. Keith isn't actually bad in this regard, sure he is 5.5 mill, but it is only two years.... Neal, Koski, Kassian are crap in this regard. I will give Holland credit he has stayed away from these deals so far (well kass aside). Those are on Chia, he thought Lucic deserved core money... horible.

 

[GOilers88]

I always felt we lacked the "right vets".
This sums that up perfectly. Obviously it falls on good pro scouting, but I basically agree with your OP.

 

[TheNumber4]

1. Pro-scouting
2. Amateur scouting
3. Competent signing strategy
4. Development

The number one key is pro-scouting. You can't win an NHL trade if you over-value players you don't have, regardless of how you value the players you do have. You can't sign reasonable contracts to retain your own players or bring in new players if you don't have good pro-scouting. Since you'll get the market comparables wrong, or similarly to trading - overvalue the UFA guys and pay them too much. Being bad at #1 basically sinks your team. Pro-scouting also helps development as you touch on in your post, having the right mix of vets is big for development. It's just a shame we are doing this now, instead of in 2017 after we lost to Anaheim. That was a great opportunity to bring in some older guys to keep developing the mentality of the younger guys we would bring up. Instead we do some dumb shit for Griffin, and bring in bums like Koskinen and Manning. That's a failure of scouting/the GM.

I get that people like to take a dump on our Amateur scouting because it's rightfully bad, but we literally never seem to win a trade and we overpay $ for virtually all players. I'd say we are average with our RFA's. Our management group is running this team like a robinhood account, the FOMO is palpable through my computer screen.

I get what you're saying but without pro-scouting you ain't gonna have the right vets around to teach the kids, and the vets you do have are overpaid so you get into cap hell and the young superstars just end up like McDrai. The Hawks and Pens got their elite core and let the core mentor the others, they succeeded in the trial by fire (We tried that with the Hall core and it blew up). The teams youre talking about were crazy good at pro-scouting and in the case of Anaheim won because Chris Pronger literally chose their team.

I would put amateur scouting ahead of pro scouting, at least when it comes to the Oilers this should be the priority. The choices available to the non-attractive Edmonton market in terms of UFAs or Trades is always lacking. Which means we really need to build from the draft.

 

[Bank Shot]

Who did Chicago have? John Madden?

I'm sure most every cup winning team has some past their prime old dude on it, but so does every other team around the league.

 

[WaitingForUser]

Who did Chicago have? John Madden?

I'm sure most every cup winning team has some past their prime old dude on it, but so does every other team around the league.

Sharp Campbell Hossa Sopel Bulin Justin Williams.

 

[Bank Shot]

Sharp Campbell Hossa Sopel Bulin Justin Williams.

so no one? I don't think any of those guys were key pieces in championship teams.

I don't buy that having some old dude on the bench makes the team play better as a whole.

 

[WaitingForUser]

so no one? I don't think any of those guys were key pieces in championship teams.

I don't buy that having some old dude on the bench makes the team play better as a whole.

You don’t think Brian Campbell who was a top D man on the sabres for years during the Hasek days helped Keith and Seabrook break into the league. Or that Bulin who was a staple on Tampa when the won the cup helped Crawford and Niemi ? Justin Williams has more game 7 winners than anyone in NHL history. Hossa played significant role in both Pittsburgh and Detroit.Or Lapointe who was part of two cups with the wings as well? Just because we overpaid for Keith does not mean he can’t be a very valuable member of our team.

 

[Bank Shot]

You don’t think Brian Campbell who was a top D man on the sabres for years during the Hasek days helped Keith and Seabrook break into the league. Or that Bulin who was a staple on Tampa when the won the cup helped Crawford and Niemi ? Justin Williams has more game 7 winners than anyone in NHL history. Hossa played significant role in both Pittsburgh and Detroit.Or Lapointe who was part of two cups with the wings as well?

Brian Campell may have been a top AHL defenceman during the Hasek years...
Justin Williams never played for Chicago...

I expect this is the kind of confused thinking that drives acquiring guys that are "good in the room".

 

[WaitingForUser]

Brian Campell may have been a top AHL defenceman during the Hasek years...
Justin Williams never played for Chicago...

I expect this is the kind of confused thinking that drives acquiring guys that are "good in the room".

Ok sorry it was Jason Williams so I will add a different guy who was instrumental in our 06 run. Samsanov:

 

[WaitingForUser]

Brian Campell may have been a top AHL defenceman during the Hasek years...
Justin Williams never played for Chicago...

I expect this is the kind of confused thinking that drives acquiring guys that are "good in the room".

12	1	4	5	-2	4	0	2	0	0	0	0	10	10	0
2000-2001	BUF	8	0	0	0	-2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	7	0	0
2001-2002	BUF	29	3	3	6	0	12	0	1	0	0	0	0	30	10	0
2002-2003	BUF	65	2	17	19	-8	20	0	3	0	0	1	0	90	2.22	0
2003-2004	BUF	53	3	8	11	-8	12	0	1	0	0	0	0	45	6.67	0
2005-2006	BUF	79	12	32	44	-14	16	5	27	0	0	5	1	105	11.43	0
2006-2007	BUF	82	6	42	48	28	35	1	9	0	1	1	0	92	6.52	0
2007-2008	BUF	63	5	38	43	-1	12	3	21	0	0	0	0	102	4.9	0
2007-2008	SJS	20	3	16	19	9	8	2	12	0	0	0	0	40	7.5	0
2008-2009	CHI	82	7	45	52	5	22	4	24	0	0	1	0	108	6.48	0
2009-2010	CHI	68	7	31	38	18	18	3	11	0	1	2	0	131	5.34	0
2010-2011	CHI	65	5	22	27	28	6	2	6	0	0	1	0	84	5.95	0
2011-2012	FLA	82	4	49	53	-9	6	1	31	0	0	0	0	131	3.05	0
2012-2013	FLA	48	8	19	27	-22	12	6	17	0	0	2	0	70	11.43	0
2013-2014	FLA	82	7	30	37	-6	20	2	12	0	2	2	0	116	6.03	0
2014-2015	FLA	82	3	24	27	4	22	1	12	0	0	0	0	118	2.54	0
2015-2016	FLA	82	6	25	31	31	26	0	8	1	1	1	1	99	6.06	0
2016-2017	CHI	80	5	12	17	12	24	2	5	0	0	1	0	74	6.76	0
Career	-	1,082	87	417	504	63	277	32	202

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TFOOT] [/TFOOT]

care to take a guess who this is?

 

[Bank Shot]

12	1	4	5	-2	4	0	2	0	0	0	0	10	10	0
2000-2001	BUF	8	0	0	0	-2	2	0	0	0	0	0	0	7	0	0
2001-2002	BUF	29	3	3	6	0	12	0	1	0	0	0	0	30	10	0
2002-2003	BUF	65	2	17	19	-8	20	0	3	0	0	1	0	90	2.22	0
2003-2004	BUF	53	3	8	11	-8	12	0	1	0	0	0	0	45	6.67	0
2005-2006	BUF	79	12	32	44	-14	16	5	27	0	0	5	1	105	11.43	0
2006-2007	BUF	82	6	42	48	28	35	1	9	0	1	1	0	92	6.52	0
2007-2008	BUF	63	5	38	43	-1	12	3	21	0	0	0	0	102	4.9	0
2007-2008	SJS	20	3	16	19	9	8	2	12	0	0	0	0	40	7.5	0
2008-2009	CHI	82	7	45	52	5	22	4	24	0	0	1	0	108	6.48	0
2009-2010	CHI	68	7	31	38	18	18	3	11	0	1	2	0	131	5.34	0
2010-2011	CHI	65	5	22	27	28	6	2	6	0	0	1	0	84	5.95	0
2011-2012	FLA	82	4	49	53	-9	6	1	31	0	0	0	0	131	3.05	0
2012-2013	FLA	48	8	19	27	-22	12	6	17	0	0	2	0	70	11.43	0
2013-2014	FLA	82	7	30	37	-6	20	2	12	0	2	2	0	116	6.03	0
2014-2015	FLA	82	3	24	27	4	22	1	12	0	0	0	0	118	2.54	0
2015-2016	FLA	82	6	25	31	31	26	0	8	1	1	1	1	99	6.06	0
2016-2017	CHI	80	5	12	17	12	24	2	5	0	0	1	0	74	6.76	0
Career	-	1,082	87	417	504	63	277	32	202

[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TFOOT] [/TFOOT]

care to take a guess who this is?

Its Brian Campbell. Research when Hasek left Buffalo.

 

[WaitingForUser]

Its Brian Campbell. Research when Hasek left Buffalo.

Regardless the point stands he was a very top tier Dman that Chicago acquired to shelter their young prospects Keith and Seabrook. And Hasek left in 2001 I am well aware. To where Detroit? And he helped to make them a two time winner when he was there. A team that did exactly what I described to remain a consistent threat every year.

 

[Bank Shot]

Regardless the point stands he was a very top tier Dman that Chicago acquired to shelter their young prospects Keith and Seabrook. And Hasek left in 2001 I am well aware. To where Detroit? And he helped to make them a two time winner when he was there. A team that did exactly what I described to remain a consistent threat every year.

Keith played more than Campbell the year they acquired him.

Chicago acquired a good D-man which is so much more important than acquiring someone who is "good in the room".

Who are all the d-men Keith mentored and made into good defenders? Yeah.....that's what I thought.

 

[BudBundy]

1) The entry draft.
2) disciplined GM with a clue, a plan, and patience
3) stable, non-interfering ownership
when it comes right down to it, that is all.

 

[ujju2]

Keith played more than Campbell the year they acquired him.

Chicago acquired a good D-man which is so much more important than acquiring someone who is "good in the room".

Who are all the d-men Keith mentored and made into good defenders? Yeah.....that's what I thought.

Hopefully, they're in Edmonton's future

 

[PaPaDee]

Two biggest elements for success: excellent amateur drafting and player development. If you have both, you’ll find success.

 

[SaltNPeca]

It's a factor, but not "the true key".

#1 is having the talent (already discussed ITT related to scouting/drafting/trading). Of course having the right leadership, complimentary players, coaching, and even luck are part of it.

Look at any draft year if you like, but let's look @ 1990

• Calgary and NJ swapped picks with Kidd going to CGY at #11 and Brodeur going at #20 to NJD. I see no scenario where Kidd outplays Brodeur, especially not because of a "torch passing" / mentorship scenario.
• Jags drafted #5. No offence to Mario, but Jags becomes one of the GOATs regardless of where he goes. If PIT took, for example, Turner Stevenson or even Nolan... do you think either of those guys goes into the HHoF or PIT wins the same # of cups? I don't.

 

[AM]

Winning is the key.