norrisnick
Registered User
- Apr 14, 2005
- 32,114
- 17,654
They've been "trying" not trying. He wanted to be better than rock bottom as getting caved in is bad for everyone involved. But a serious team does not have Jeff Petry in the top 4. Every move he's made points to biding time until the kids he's drafted slot in.Last year and this year they have been trying to compete for a playoff spot. They have tried to do this by bringing in veteran players in UFA and trades without sending away any premium future assets (this is a strategy I largely agree with and think they should pursue!). However, the vast majority of these players they have brought in have been bad. DeBrincat and Kane have been the only hits and there have been a pretty staggering amount of misses up next to them. I don't think it's unreasonable to say a different GM could have pursued the same strategy but made much better pro scouting decisions and ended up with a better team because of it.
It's the same with the drafting. Yes, most prospect writers have their system as at worst top 10 in the league. I'd say that's mostly due to the volume of picks they've had, not the overwhelming success that Yzerman's regime has had. They've had 13 (!!!) second round picks since he's taken over and they've played a combined total of 2 NHL games. Of their 3rd round and onwards picks, only Soderblom has played any amount of NHL games. The strategy of accumulating a lot of high picks was good, but to me those picks haven't been executed particularly well so far.
Not to mention it's not like there have been any impact players available in free agency. Or that impact players would sign with a rebuilding team. Like Kane and Tarasenko were mentioned above. No serious team has them in a top 6 role.