Where did Yzerman go wrong with the rebuild?

[norrisnick]

I don’t see why the PA would agree to any of this.

The PA would love it. The owners would shit can it.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

There's been a lot of talk this year about how Yzerman's had plenty of time to turn it around, so I started looking around the league. I counted a rebuild having been started when a team misses the playoffs two straight years and for them to be out of the rebuild if they make the playoffs for two straight years.

Chicago: missed playoffs 9 out of 10 years. Currently missed 6 of last 7.
Pittsburgh: missed 4 years.
Arizona: missed 11 of last 12 playoffs
Ottawa: missed last 7
Tampa: missed 5 of 6
Edmonton: missed 12 of 13
Vancouver: has missed 7 of 8
St. Louis: missed 5 of 6
Washington: missed 3 in a row
New Jersey: missed 9 of 10 and 10 of 12 (still haven't made the playoffs in consecutive years)
Buffalo: has missed 13 straight

One, I know we missed the playoffs 3 years previous to this under Holland, but I have a hard time crediting those years to Yzerman's rebuild. Our 1st round picks in those years were Zadina, Ras, and Cholowski. If we had grabbed guys who actually helped us and played pivotal roles, I would have viewed them differently.

Short rebuilds look like a rarity. If you're crazy lucky, you pull guys like Crosby, Malkin, and Ovi from a draft and your rebuild is essentially over. If you're just regular lucky, you get out in 7ish years. 10+ isn't exactly a rarity, though. Yzerman has missed 5 years, which is at the very low end of these rebuilds. Even with Holland's last three years tacked on, it's not a crazy long run in context with these other rebuilds.

The only hole I see in this way of thinking is this...if the rebuild years in Detroit under KH don't count, then should that also not apply equally to all other franchises who changed GMs during their respective rebuilds?

I mean I get why we as DRW do this...but Sens fans can say the same...Buffalo.. Anaheim...NJ...all the same

Changes our narrative a little when rules are applied equally across the board

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

I don’t see why the PA would agree to any of this.

Players are already paid out approximately 2/3 of the contract value. Aside from very rare instances like Jack Campbell, players aren't often bought out early in a contract.

Consider this example; A veteran get bought out at year 6 of an 8 year contract. That veteran still gets his 2/3 of his remaining salary and can move on, taking a deal with another team and probably making about the same money when you consider everything. The team offering the buyout doesn't suffer the same recapture penalty and can use the salary freed up to pay their younger, performing players more money, or to go after a better free agent.

The system as it is now is punitive and made some teams dumping grounds for bad contracts. It's broken.

 

[SirloinUB]

Players are already paid out approximately 2/3 of the contract value. Aside from very rare instances like Jack Campbell, players aren't often bought out early in a contract.

Consider this example; A veteran get bought out at year 6 of an 8 year contract. That veteran still gets his 2/3 of his remaining salary and can move on, taking a deal with another team and probably making about the same money when you consider everything. The team offering the buyout doesn't suffer the same recapture penalty and can use the salary freed up to pay their younger, performing players more money, or to go after a better free agent.

The system as it is now is punitive and made some teams dumping grounds for bad contracts. It's broken.

Players that get bought out in year 6 of an 8 year contract are not getting comparable value as free agents. If they were playing at that value they wouldn’t be bought out.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

There's been a lot of talk this year about how Yzerman's had plenty of time to turn it around, so I started looking around the league. I counted a rebuild having been started when a team misses the playoffs two straight years and for them to be out of the rebuild if they make the playoffs for two straight years.

Chicago: missed playoffs 9 out of 10 years. Currently missed 6 of last 7.
Pittsburgh: missed 4 years.
Arizona: missed 11 of last 12 playoffs
Ottawa: missed last 7
Tampa: missed 5 of 6
Edmonton: missed 12 of 13
Vancouver: has missed 7 of 8
St. Louis: missed 5 of 6
Washington: missed 3 in a row
New Jersey: missed 9 of 10 and 10 of 12 (still haven't made the playoffs in consecutive years)
Buffalo: has missed 13 straight

One, I know we missed the playoffs 3 years previous to this under Holland, but I have a hard time crediting those years to Yzerman's rebuild. Our 1st round picks in those years were Zadina, Ras, and Cholowski. If we had grabbed guys who actually helped us and played pivotal roles, I would have viewed them differently.

Short rebuilds look like a rarity. If you're crazy lucky, you pull guys like Crosby, Malkin, and Ovi from a draft and your rebuild is essentially over. If you're just regular lucky, you get out in 7ish years. 10+ isn't exactly a rarity, though. Yzerman has missed 5 years, which is at the very low end of these rebuilds. Even with Holland's last three years tacked on, it's not a crazy long run in context with these other rebuilds.

Remember who said that all the time… Ken Holland

 

[AtlantaHotWings]

Just for grins looked at the Pens rebuild wishing we had this kind of luck

Year. OA pick
2003 - 1 Fleury
2004 - 2 Malkin
2005 - 1 Crosby Letang in the 3rd round
2006 - 2 Staal

If you are picking 1 or 2 for 4 straight years you are probably going to end your rebuild pretty pretty pretty quick

 

[norrisnick]

Just for grins looked at the Pens rebuild wishing we had this kind of luck

Year. OA pick
2003 - 1 Fleury
2004 - 2 Malkin
2005 - 1 Crosby Letang in the 3rd round
2006 - 2 Staal

If you are picking 1 or 2 for 4 straight years you are probably going to end your rebuild pretty pretty pretty quick

The Pens weren't even rebuilding. They were trading away assets because they were getting sold, moved, or contracted. Then the salary cap and Crosby "lottery" happened...

 

[TheClap]

They have added Raymond, Seider, Edvinsson, Kasper, Berggren & Johansson to the roster on top of a high end prospect pool.

Fixating on some placeholders UFAs while our young prospects develop is like ignoring your young kids while your great grandpappy dies of old age.

Management's unwillingness to let more of this high end prospect pool into the line-up, filling out the roster with overaged, overpaid crap, and not allowing the prospects to go through actual growing pains, is a large part of the reason the Wings have been in the position they've been in for a decade. It was an issue with Holland, and it remains an issue with Yzerman.

 

[SirloinUB]

Management's unwillingness to let more of this high end prospect pool into the line-up, filling out the roster with overaged, overpaid crap, and not allowing the prospects to go through actual growing pains, is a large part of the reason the Wings have been in the position they've been in for a decade. It was an issue with Holland, and it remains an issue with Yzerman.

I think its more of an issue for the impatient.

 

[Winger98]

couldn't you say similar things about many of those other teams too though?

most of them surely had multiple GMs too

The only hole I see in this way of thinking is this...if the rebuild years in Detroit under KH don't count, then should that also not apply equally to all other franchises who changed GMs during their respective rebuilds?

I mean I get why we as DRW do this...but Sens fans can say the same...Buffalo.. Anaheim...NJ...all the same

Changes our narrative a little when rules are applied equally across the board

No, because the point remains the same. Include Holland's years and we're still only at year 8 which is nothing special in that list. Rebuilds are almost never five year affairs, and even seven or eight years isn't common. Where the Wings are, including Holland's years or not, isn't abnormal.

Looking at that, I think you make a great case for overhauling the current salary cap structure. It's a league where the same teams every year are in the playoffs and the same teams are missing every year. Bad contracts keep a team bad for their duration and create terrible inflexibility to get away from the bad and improve.

I don't know if it's the cap system or the draft system. Kids who step in out of the draft and can immediately hold down a prominent spot are few and far between. Compare that to the NFL where draft picks step in every year as starters and being able to turn your team around quicker makes sense.

I wonder if we'd see teams turn it around quicker if the NHL draft had a minimum age of 20. Teams would have a far better idea of how good the different prospects actually are, and more would be physically mature enough to step in right out of the draft and play in the NHL.

Remember who said that all the time… Ken Holland

yeah, I've avoided mentioning that

 

[TheClap]

I think its more of an issue for the impatient.

On the contrary, I'm willing to play the long game and roll with a line-up of largely prospects, knowing it's going to be a slower longer process. It's far more impatient to delay NHL development of these prospects by signing a bunch of crap all for the sake of rushing an unrealistic playoff run.

 

[SirloinUB]

The only hole I see in this way of thinking is this...if the rebuild years in Detroit under KH don't count, then should that also not apply equally to all other franchises who changed GMs during their respective rebuilds?

I mean I get why we as DRW do this...but Sens fans can say the same...Buffalo.. Anaheim...NJ...all the same

Changes our narrative a little when rules are applied equally across the board

Isn't that all arbitrary and nothing more than semantics?

Whether you say the rebuild started in 2016 or 2019 you can only evaluate yzerman for the time he has been here.

Whether you categorize the first 3 years of the playoff drought as a different rebuild or just an unproductive part of the same rebuild, you cant really hold it against yzerman.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Isn't that all arbitrary and nothing more than semantics?

Whether you say the rebuild started in 2016 or 2019 you can only evaluate yzerman for the time he has been here.

Whether you categorize the first 3 years of the playoff drought as a different rebuild or just an unproductive part of the same rebuild, you cant really hold it against yzerman.

It's neither...it's just facts...

The DRW rebuild started 9 years ago...or 6 years ago...

Ottawas rebuild started 8 years ago or 2 years ago

Same goes with all the rest if they've had a GM change..

So long as we're consistent I could care less...that's all

No, because the point remains the same. Include Holland's years and we're still only at year 8 which is nothing special in that list. Rebuilds are almost never five year affairs, and even seven or eight years isn't common. Where the Wings are, including Holland's years or not, isn't abnormal.



I don't know if it's the cap system or the draft system. Kids who step in out of the draft and can immediately hold down a prominent spot are few and far between. Compare that to the NFL where draft picks step in every year as starters and being able to turn your team around quicker makes sense.

I wonder if we'd see teams turn it around quicker if the NHL draft had a minimum age of 20. Teams would have a far better idea of how good the different prospects actually are, and more would be physically mature enough to step in right out of the draft and play in the NHL.


yeah, I've avoided mentioning that

Well is 8 years w/o a playoff spot AND still looking to draft top 5 consistent with all those other comparables you mentioned?

 

[SirloinUB]

It's neither...it's just facts...

The DRW rebuild started 9 years ago...or 6 years ago...

Ottawas rebuild started 8 years ago or 2 years ago

Same goes with all the rest if they've had a GM change..

So long as we're consistent I could care less...that's all

I don't know if you can ever make these things apples to apples.

Ottawa for example, traded a top 10 pick for Debrincat. That's a move that signals a shift in organizational priorities from "drafting for the future" to "competing now." Whereas when Detroit went through their GM change the franchise held the same strategy of accumulating picks and drafting for the future.

I also think there can be phases. Sure Detroit started building for the future 9 years ago but had different people and scouts calling the shots for the first 3 years (and I would argue, making things worse LOL).

 

[Winger98]

Well is 8 years w/o a playoff spot AND still looking to draft top 5 consistent with all those other comparables you mentioned?

some drafted top5 more than once (Edmonton, Buffalo, NJ, ottawa).

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

some drafted top5 more than once (Edmonton, Buffalo, NJ, ottawa).

TBF that's not really what I was asking...

It was simply, did those other rebuilds still draft top 5 eight years after starting their respective rebuilds?

And further...if they did, when did they finally turn the corner?

 

[Winger98]

I don't know if you can ever make these things apples to apples.

Ottawa for example, traded a top 10 pick for Debrincat. That's a move that signals a shift in organizational priorities from "drafting for the future" to "competing now." Whereas when Detroit went through their GM change the franchise held the same strategy of accumulating picks and drafting for the future.

I also think there can be phases. Sure Detroit started building for the future 9 years ago but had different people and scouts calling the shots for the first 3 years (and I would argue, making things worse LOL).

and I was trying to get away from specific comparisons a bit by looking at as many teams as possible. Every team will always have specifics that separate them from each other in some way, but I don't think it's a coincidence that so many group together around that ten year mark. Some a little quicker, some a little longer but rebuilds just take a long time.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

I don't know if you can ever make these things apples to apples.

Ottawa for example, traded a top 10 pick for Debrincat. That's a move that signals a shift in organizational priorities from "drafting for the future" to "competing now." Whereas when Detroit went through their GM change the franchise held the same strategy of accumulating picks and drafting for the future.

I also think there can be phases. Sure Detroit started building for the future 9 years ago but had different people and scouts calling the shots for the first 3 years (and I would argue, making things worse LOL).

I am 100% positive Ottawa fans would argue that their previous GM(scouts and owner) were as problematic if not moreso than KH to the success, or lack thereof, of their rebuild..

 

[Winger98]

TBF that's not really what I was asking...

It was simply, did those other rebuilds still draft top 5 eight years after starting their respective rebuilds?

And further...if they did, when did they finally turn the corner?

Off top of my head, NJ drafted 2nd over all in 2022. TB drafted Drouin 3oa right before they turned into a perennial playoff team. Edmonton had to have drafted top5 pretty close to when they started making the playoffs consistently. Teams like Buffalo and Arizona are the scary ones because they have never seemed to really get off the ground.

From what I remember it wasn't odd for teams to draft pretty high late in their rebuilds, and it also wasn't odd for them to make the playoffs at some point just before dropping back a bit and then resurfacing. I used hockeydb.com to look thru this stuff, if you're curious.

 

[SirloinUB]

I am 100% positive Ottawa fans would argue that their previous GM(scouts and owner) were as problematic if not moreso than KH to the success, or lack thereof, of their rebuild..

Totally valid. They would (fairly) point to the initial Debrincat trade as something that set them back. But previous leadership also landed them Tkachuk, Stutzle and Sanderson which is a lot more than Holland can claim haha.

Still, that trade marked a pivot in how the team prioritized picks vs prospects as they shifted from seller to buyer.

 

[norrisnick]

Colorado drafted 3rd in '09, 2nd in '11, 1st in '13, 4th in '17, and then 4th again in '19 with a couple top 10s in between. The 4th in '19 was from trading the player picked 3rd in '09.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Off top of my head, NJ drafted 2nd over all in 2022. TB drafted Drouin 3oa right before they turned into a perennial playoff team. Edmonton had to have drafted top5 pretty close to when they started making the playoffs consistently. Teams like Buffalo and Arizona are the scary ones because they have never seemed to really get off the ground.

From what I remember it wasn't odd for teams to draft pretty high late in their rebuilds, and it also wasn't odd for them to make the playoffs at some point just before dropping back a bit and then resurfacing. I used hockeydb.com to look thru this stuff, if you're curious.

Yup NJ is a good example

5 straight misses
Then qualified
Then 4 straight misses in which they drafted 1st, 4th and 2nd OA
Then qualified

 

[Nut Upstrom]

We have no way of knowing that.

We don't know what the circumstances in the locker room were that led to it, though there was a lot of smoke that there were character/commitment issues with him. And given the lack of farewell from his teammates and some suspiciously ambiguous comments from Larkin, all that smoke points to a fire. Seems to me that getting rid of that is a good thing.

And we don't know what the trade market was like at that time and what anyone would have been willing to offer, if anything. Seems to me that this claim that we should have gotten something rather than giving something up relies on the idea that Yzerman did no due diligence whatsoever before pulling the trigger on that trade. Which would seem to me to be unlikely on its face, especially so when you consider Yzerman's overall trading history.

I'll continue to parrot what I think is the most reasonable explanation, Walman did not have the trade value that some around here thought. And trade value is determined at the time of the trade, not after the fact when everyone can benefit from hindsight. There is no reason to think that Walman would be producing like he is now if he was still a Red Wing. In June of 2024, Walman was not a valuable asset, especially since most teams had cap concerns. This isn't the first time a struggling player was dumped and found himself in the right situation and saw some success. Good for him, doesn't mean getting rid of him wasn't the right move. Again, no reason to think he'd be performing this way on the Wings.

Edvinsson is in his place now, and that is a massive upgrade in a number of ways. Was happy to see Walman gone, just like I'll be happy when Petry, Holl, and to a lesser extent Chiarot follow him out the door. I'm not concerned with the order that happens in.

Of course we have no way of knowing that, but the fact is, kakko and even Fowler were attained recently for a price comperable to what we paid to give away Walman.

 

[Retire91]

The Wings are going to have have 10 guys over 30 by the end of the year.

This is like telling your grandpappy growing pains are the reason his knees hurt.

Which "core" guys will be over 30?

 

[TheClap]

Which "core" guys will be over 30?

That's the problem. Why are the Wings signing so many crappy olds with no future when they're rebuilding. For the pretend goal of "staying competitive?" Look where it's it gotten them.

But to answer your question, Captain "We addressed the problem" Larkin is getting pretty close.