Which team has a better rebuild? Habs vs Red Wings?

[Mrb1p]

they preceded their scf run with years of being a bubble team and followed it with being a bottom feeder. it was a fun fluky run during a gimmicky time of weird divisions, play in rounds, and bubbles.

Because Carey Price wasn't on the team for those. He was part of that team and he was the reason they got there.

 

[Ezekial]

Raymond looks like an 85 point player for his ceiling , Demidov looks like the sky is the limit 120 point player ? Sabre's look better than either team going forward imo.

That's a weird cap to put on a player who had 72 points in his 21 year old season.

 

[Pavels Dog]

Who is gonna be the savior though ? Guys like Danielson, Kasper, MBN, etc. are nice prospects but realistically not gonna be 1st line players. I guess the one advantage you guys have is that you have been able to reliably sign free agents...

Stop thinking in terms of a ”savior” in a team sport and it becomes easier to see the path for Detroit. Think in terms of St.Louis cup team, with some outlier potential for something close to the recent Vegas/Florida/Boston type of builds. There’s always people nitpicking such comparisons, but bottom line is those teams aren’t built from one savior, but rather strong top-to-bottom rosters, with defense/goaltending as strengths. They’ll definitely need prospects to hit potential (maybe exceed perceived potential in some cases), but I’d argue that’s true for every single rebuilder.

 

[waitin425]

Real talk here....we won't know for a few years.

Habs fans are delighted with how it's looking right now as are Red Wings fans.

Without getting into what guys I love with the Habs (obviously my avatar gives away one) I will say that the Wings have an absolute gem in Raymond. Cup winning type guy. Seider is a stud on D as well.

I'm sick of the current eastern conference hierarchy, and I am looking forward to the days where the Habs, Wings and Devils are considered the cream of the crop. It is those three teams that I see rising above the rest in 3-4 years.

 

[Wayfarer13]

no one was doubting they were in the scf...

Some seem to doing their dangst to devalue the accomplishment

 

[David Suzuki]

The main point of difference for me remains the Habs are probably getting another top 1-8 pick next year. Another chance to add a high end asset. Detroit will be a bubble team and while it isn't impossible to add those high end assets in other ways, obviously being at the top of the draft remains the easiest way.

 

[Lshap]

Hockey is a high variance sport, let's just say, a confluence of factors came together to produce an unexpected outcome.

A fluke is defined as an unlikely chance occurrence, especially a surprising piece of luck. I think there's certainly an argument to be made regarding the "luck" piece (positive end of variance). It's not the same as saying a team was "undeserving".

Put another way, of all the teams that have made the Stanley Cup Finals in recent times, they are a very easy and popular choice for the weakest looking at all potential factors and angles to make that determination.

Wanted to address your points: As you explained, fluke means accidental or lucky. The word suggests you're giving credit to outside forces. Calling something a fluke in hockey is saying a team wouldn't have scored a goal or won a game without something helping them along, like a puck bouncing off the ref's ass into the net or a weird bounce off the stanchion.

Montreal's playoff run was totally unexpected, but what lucky or fluky thing helped them? I honestly can't think of a single goal or win or individual performance that was a fluke. No Fernando Pisani coming out of nowhere, no stanchions or weird bounces. Montreal's best players had a ton of injuries during the season, then they returned for the playoffs and played like their best players. I don't see any luck/fluke involved (if anything, they had BAD luck during the season). People mentioned rosters from different years – what do different rosters in different seasons have to do with that year's roster?

For me, the misuse of "Fluke" is like people misusing "They're", "There", "Their". I don't care if someone casually mixes up "Fluke" and "Unexpected". However, a couple of people in this thread seem oddly motivated to keep misusing the word. Whatever their agenda, they're not interested in analysis.

EDIT: Last night's date was amazing. This brilliant and attractive woman was attracted to me. Now THERE'S a real fluke!

 

[dirtydanglez]

Some seem to doing their dangst to devalue the accomplishment

thats why context is important. look at the context and draw your own conclusions. some seem to handle opposing viewpoints poorly.

 

[Tatar Shots]

Wanted to address your points: As you explained, fluke means accidental or lucky. The word suggests you're giving credit to outside forces. Calling something a fluke in hockey is saying a team wouldn't have scored a goal or won a game without something helping them along, like a puck bouncing off the ref's ass into the net or a weird bounce off the stanchion.

Montreal's playoff run was totally unexpected, but what lucky or fluky thing helped them? I honestly can't think of a single goal or win or individual performance that was a fluke. No Fernando Pisani coming out of nowhere, no stanchions or weird bounces. Montreal's best players had a ton of injuries during the season, then they returned for the playoffs and played like their best players. I don't see any luck/fluke involved (if anything, they had BAD luck during the season). People mentioned rosters from different years – what do different rosters in different seasons have to do with that year's roster?

For me, the misuse of "Fluke" is like people misusing "They're", "There", "Their". I don't care if someone casually mixes up "Fluke" and "Unexpected". However, a couple of people in this thread seem oddly motivated to keep misusing the word. Whatever their agenda, they're not interested in analysis.

EDIT: Last night's date was amazing. This brilliant and attractive woman was attracted to me. Now THERE'S a real fluke!

A fluke is an unlikely chance occurrence. The fluke was not Montreal’s play in the postseason. COVID was the fluke that caused the division realignment that year and also Montreal making the playoffs via play-ins the year before. Without a global pandemic, it is incredibly unlikely that Montreal would have had the success it did that year under normal conditions.

 

[norrisnick]

Wanted to address your points: As you explained, fluke means accidental or lucky. The word suggests you're giving credit to outside forces. Calling something a fluke in hockey is saying a team wouldn't have scored a goal or won a game without something helping them along, like a puck bouncing off the ref's ass into the net or a weird bounce off the stanchion.

Montreal's playoff run was totally unexpected, but what lucky or fluky thing helped them? I honestly can't think of a single goal or win or individual performance that was a fluke. No Fernando Pisani coming out of nowhere, no stanchions or weird bounces. Montreal's best players had a ton of injuries during the season, then they returned for the playoffs and played like their best players. I don't see any luck/fluke involved (if anything, they had BAD luck during the season). People mentioned rosters from different years – what do different rosters in different seasons have to do with that year's roster?

For me, the misuse of "Fluke" is like people misusing "They're", "There", "Their". I don't care if someone casually mixes up "Fluke" and "Unexpected". However, a couple of people in this thread seem oddly motivated to keep misusing the word. Whatever their agenda, they're not interested in analysis.

EDIT: Last night's date was amazing. This brilliant and attractive woman was attracted to me. Now THERE'S a real fluke!

The run wasn't the fluke. That they were eligible for the playoffs at all was the fluke. You guys are talking about two different things.

 

[Lshap]

A fluke is an unlikely chance occurrence. The fluke was not Montreal’s play in the postseason. COVID was the fluke that caused the division realignment that year and also Montreal making the playoffs via play-ins the year before. Without a global pandemic, it is incredibly unlikely that Montreal would have had the success it did that year under normal conditions.

The run wasn't the fluke. That they were eligible for the playoffs at all was the fluke. You guys are talking about two different things.

I get your point. Covid was certainly a fluke influence that created a one-off Canadian division. In the current Atlantic division, Montreal would probably not have gotten through Tampa. No team would've beaten Tampa that season had they been unlucky enough to be in their division.

Likewise, no team would've beaten Chicago a decade ago. Does that make Philly, Boston and Tampa lucky flukes because they didn't play in Chicago's division? Obviously not. They played in whatever division they were in - the rest is an imaginary what-if.

Having followed hockey for well over 50 years through many divisional alignments, I don't see the point in targeting one Cup Finalist from one particular alignment – even if it lasted one year. I've seen powerful divisions and super weak ones. So what? Almost every SCF would be different if we switched around who played in what division. As recently as 2013, Montreal was in the Northeast and Tampa was in the Southeast. The current divisions have only been around 10 years. You play who you play, and if you get to the SCF you've earned it, regardless of year/division.

 

[norrisnick]

I get your point. Covid was certainly a fluke influence that created a one-off Canadian division. In the current Atlantic division, Montreal would probably not have gotten through Tampa. No team would've beaten Tampa that season had they been unlucky enough to be in their division.

Likewise, no team would've beaten Chicago a decade ago. Does that make Philly, Boston and Tampa lucky flukes because they didn't play in Chicago's division? Obviously not. They played in whatever division they were in - the rest is an imaginary what-if.

Having followed hockey for well over 50 years through many divisional alignments, I don't see the point in targeting one Cup Finalist from one particular alignment – even if it lasted one year. I've seen powerful divisions and super weak ones. So what? Almost every SCF would be different if we switched around who played in what division. As recently as 2013, Montreal was in the Northeast and Tampa was in the Southeast. The current divisions have only been around 10 years. You play who you play, and if you get to the SCF you've earned it, regardless of year/division.

Because the fanbase is using fluke entries into the playoffs to try and argue that another team has been mired in the abyss oh so much longer. Which is 1. disingenuous and 2. annoying AF. Without the Covid "playoffs" the Habs are tied with the Wings at 8 years out of the show.

 

[Tatar Shots]

I get your point. Covid was certainly a fluke influence that created a one-off Canadian division. In the current Atlantic division, Montreal would probably not have gotten through Tampa. No team would've beaten Tampa that season had they been unlucky enough to be in their division.

Likewise, no team would've beaten Chicago a decade ago. Does that make Philly, Boston and Tampa lucky flukes because they didn't play in Chicago's division? Obviously not. They played in whatever division they were in - the rest is an imaginary what-if.

Having followed hockey for well over 50 years through many divisional alignments, I don't see the point in targeting one Cup Finalist from one particular alignment – even if it lasted one year. I've seen powerful divisions and super weak ones. So what? Almost every SCF would be different if we switched around who played in what division. As recently as 2013, Montreal was in the Northeast and Tampa was in the Southeast. The current divisions have only been around 10 years. You play who you play, and if you get to the SCF you've earned it, regardless of year/division.

You’re still missing the point. The point was it was a fluke Montreal even made the playoffs, not that they would have done worse if they were in the playoffs in the Atlantic division. The realignment that year created separate leagues. Montreal did not play anyone outside of the 7 team Canadian division. Without COVID as an intervening cause, Montreal would not have made the playoffs the past 7 years. The only reason they made it was because of the Canadian division where they competed only amongst Canadian teams.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

The main point of difference for me remains the Habs are probably getting another top 1-8 pick next year. Another chance to add a high end asset. Detroit will be a bubble team and while it isn't impossible to add those high end assets in other ways, obviously being at the top of the draft remains the easiest way.

I don't know. Detroit looks like they'll be picking between 7 and 12 this year to me. Habs look like they'll be picking between 4 and 8. It's a pretty deep draft so I don't think there's a big difference in the 2025 draft compared to the 2024 draft.

 

[Lshap]

Because the fanbase is using fluke entries into the playoffs to try and argue that another team has been mired in the abyss oh so much longer. Which is 1. disingenuous and 2. annoying AF. Without the Covid "playoffs" the Habs are tied with the Wings at 8 years out of the show.

I'd agree when it comes to the 2020 'playoffs'. In my opinion, starting the playoffs after a 5-month break with an extra 'play-in' round was silly. Montreal was (I think) 25th overall and had no business in the playoffs. Contrast that with 2021 when the NHL followed their traditional format – regular season followed by playoffs. Of course there was no 'overall' amongst teams that never played each other, but otherwise the process was the same and legit.

 

[Lshap]

You’re still missing the point. The point was it was a fluke Montreal even made the playoffs, not that they would have done worse if they were in the playoffs in the Atlantic division. The realignment that year created separate leagues. Montreal did not play anyone outside of the 7 team Canadian division. Without COVID as an intervening cause, Montreal would not have made the playoffs the past 7 years. The only reason they made it was because of the Canadian division where they competed only amongst Canadian teams.

Every team only played within its own division, which means every playoff team was a fluke. Which makes no sense.

 

[Tatar Shots]

Every team only played within its own division, which means every playoff team was a fluke. Which makes no sense.

If you’re ignoring any context, sure. Or you can factor in that Montreal would have missed the playoffs the three years before and after that season without COVID. I can’t think of any other team ever in a similar situation.

 

[Zetterberg4Captain]

Until Montreal is able to do the following this is just silly:

Draft
Develop
Attract
Keep

Top end elite talent this whole convo is nonsense...

Excitement is warranted but history and trends matter more

 

[wetcoast]

That's a weird cap to put on a player who had 72 points in his 21 year old season.

I don't really think so and sure he might top 85 points once or twice but IMO he is more likely to have seasons under 85 than over in his peak.

Came here to say that's too early to say as to which team will have the better rebuild but that Detroit has what looks like the best chance of creating a team that could make a deep playoff run but Montreal might look more dynamic maybe?

 

[Just Linda]

I wish Detroit would've slowed it down a year or two.

They'll be fine on D imo. Sieder, Edvinsson, ASP etc. Not sure if that combination of D will get it done for them but it gives them the foundation they need to build around. Id be confident running with that D core in the future, especially once the other contracts expire to give them space to take over.

Up front, I'm not confident they have the guns to compete against the rest of the division. I'm sold on Larkin and Raymond, both are top line guys. Beyond that though (and Debrincat in the top 6), I'm not seeing how they will fill out the forwards without needing to sign multiple free agents.

I feel the Habs have more room to have prospects bust. I feel Detroit's rebuild could be 1 or 2 unfortunate events away from falling apart, like a severe injury or regression from Sieder or Larkin would destroy them while the Habs could repivot if Suzuki or Guhle don't pan out.

 

[wintersej]

Detroit is further ahead but they probably left the rebuild too early and seemed to be destined to be a mushy middle team. Even if all their prospects hit, there just doesn’t seem to be enough up front to ever get to contender status.

Montreal still sucks, so they still have a better chance of some lottery luck.

 

[Ezekial]

I don't really think so and sure he might top 85 points once or twice but IMO he is more likely to have seasons under 85 than over in his peak.

They said ceiling. That makes it the high limit.

Not to say Raymond will be this player but Kucherov had 65 points in 82 games at 21 and 66 points in 77 games as a 22 year old. Plenty of other players have had that type of jump in production(more than 85) after 21, defining a 21 year old who's had success at the NHL level is dumb

 

[StreetHawk]

Detroit is further ahead but they probably left the rebuild too early and seemed to be destined to be a mushy middle team. Even if all their prospects hit, there just doesn’t seem to be enough up front to ever get to contender status.

Montreal still sucks, so they still have a better chance of some lottery luck.

Probably a fair comment but they were not going to get back to draft in the top 3-5 after 2021. SJ, Chi, Ana were really bad the past couple of seasons.

Det is ahead in the hardest area which is Dmen. Seider is rock solid big minute guy. Evindsson done what he was hoped to do on the A and now ready for nhl roster spot. Habs D can’t say that. All still hopefuls vs anyone locking in a spot long term.

Habs have more established young forwards but that is easier to develop in time over Dmen.

Both need to see a young G develop. Cossa older than Fowler so he’s further along. But both still a question mark at this point in time.

 

[wetcoast]

They said ceiling. That makes it the high limit.

Not to say Raymond will be this player but Kucherov had 65 points in 82 games at 21 and 66 points in 77 games as a 22 year old. Plenty of other players have had that type of jump in production(more than 85) after 21, defining a 21 year old who's had success at the NHL level is dumb

I know what was said about celing and my point still stands as only a few players ever break 85 points and while I think raymond is a solid first line player he simply hasn't domianted anywhere to see that he would break that barrier.

Hey I could be wrong but I really doubt he ever breaks that mark.

23 players had 85+ points last season and scoring was up, the season before it was 22.

 

[FMichael]

Detroit is further ahead but they probably left the rebuild too early and seemed to be destined to be a mushy middle team. Even if all their prospects hit, there just doesn’t seem to be enough up front to ever get to contender status.

Montreal still sucks, so they still have a better chance of some lottery luck.

And when Detroit was at rock bottom - zero lottery luck.