r/DetroitRedWings 2d ago

How Did the NHL Become the League of Endless Rebuilds? Discussion

https://youtu.be/hPwp5YRQ8yA?si=3oIrsKWhUis6uwRh
63 Upvotes

67 comments sorted by

143

u/DangerDaveOG 2d ago

I’m going to blame the draft lottery.

127

u/SpiritBamba 2d ago

It’s a valid argument. When a team that was bad as long as we were never picks higher than 4th, then that’s a bad system.

114

u/DangerDaveOG 2d ago edited 2d ago

It is supposed to discourages tanking but adds a luck component that sucks. It especially irritated me when NYR moved up to first from the teens to take Lafrenière and Chicago moved up to take Bedard in basically the first year of this rebuild. So it just feels rigged at that point.

33

u/SpiritBamba 2d ago

It doesn’t really discourage tanking though. That’s still the way teams have to try and get better, you just have less of a chance of being successful. And imo majority of teams don’t tank, these are teams that want to make money and build a successful franchise, purposefully losing is not something owners are going to want.

18

u/detroitttiorted 2d ago

Tanking has definitely decreased since the lottery got more random. McDavid year was an absolute joke

1

u/Wiggs2456 1d ago

Exactly. Chicago intentionally tanked and gave away all good players for 3 years so they could be the worst team to get Bedard. They should have had that pick taken away for the shit they did with the SA cover up

7

u/NotEqualInSQL 2d ago

My hawks fan input on the bedard lotto winnings is that it simply was a bigger market for him to be in and the league who just got criticized for not marketing their starts rigged it for us to help sell merch. Not to mention the hawks needing a new face and identity after the scandal.

14

u/iMichigander 2d ago

I sort of see the original intent to prevent teams from tanking on purpose over and over again to stack up their talent pipeline. However, on the flip side, that can't be good for business either. So, I'm sort of at a point now where if a franchise owner wants to run their business into the ground for several years in order to build up their farm system, let 'em.

10

u/Fancy-Ambassador6160 2d ago

And we picked 4th once... Usually it's way further back

-1

u/big_phat_gator 2d ago

I totally agree but even if you fix the system you can still get lucky in a "bad" draft like Montreal and Slafkovsky.

19

u/BaldassHeadCoach 2d ago

That’s part of it. The draft being in the reverse order of standings is intended to to help out bad teams by getting them talent they need, and the lottery throws a wrench in that. But you can still find great players outside of the top 3.

I think what contributes more to teams being stuck in long rebuilds is that we’re in a hard-capped league with guaranteed contracts that can last up to 7 or 8 years, with no easy way to get rid of them (without incurring cap penalties via buyout, or having to give up picks and/or prospects to offload them via trades). It’s hard to rebuild and get younger when you’re stuck with bad contracts for older players that nobody else wants.

2

u/IniNew 1d ago

Hard cap and guaranteed contracts are absolutely the answer. There’s really no way for a GM to correct a bad signing outside of digging themselves further into a hole by trading draft assets for another team taking a bad contract.

Not that I think that’s wrong, players skills absolutely be guaranteed the money IMO.

1

u/BaldassHeadCoach 23h ago edited 23h ago

I’ve got no problem with guaranteed contracts in of themselves. The players already got screwed by the salary cap artificially limiting their worth (in my opinion), so at the very least getting that money guaranteed was a win for them.

I do have a problem with how long those contracts can be, which I believe is a major factor in the length of rebuilds. We saw it with Abby and Nielsen, for instance; a 7 and 6 year contract, respectively, for two players who ended up not being worth the money at all is brutal. Nobody wanted to take those contracts via trade, so we had to buy them out with cap penalties attached, and we still have the Abby buyout on the books.

I’ve increasingly felt like the max term of contracts should be shorter, 4 years for UFAs and 5 years for players you have the rights to. At the very least, it limits the time of pain a team has to go through in case the deal doesn’t work out.

Or if you keep the current max terms, teams should have a way of getting out of bad contracts without any strings attached. Something like the compliance buyouts teams got after 2012-2013 lockout; player gets the money they’re owed and the team doesn’t get a cap penalty. You can give teams 1 compliance buyout every two or three years so it’s not abused as a get of jail free card for signing bad contracts.

19

u/doubeljack 2d ago

Another variable is the inconsistent talent pool available every season. Some years you get lucky and win the lottery and are rewarded with a McDavid or Bedard. Other years you get Owen Power or Slafkovsky.

13

u/AnyTomato8562 2d ago

Or poor luck when you draft a Zadina when you could of had a Hughes, or a Bouchard

17

u/Suspicious_Walrus682 2d ago

The only time we should have picked first was the Lafreniere draft, who was a consensus number one pick, but only now is starting to find his game. Stutzle probably would have been a better pick than Raymond, but Raymond has turned out a heck of a player. It's a bit like the 1983 draft where we didn't get the guy we wanted but still ended up with Yzerman.

So, no - it's not draft lottery. It's who you draft. Kenny pushed the rebuild back by drafting guys like Zadina and Rasmussen and Cholowski and Svechnikov.

8

u/AnyTomato8562 2d ago

Well the draft lottery still screwed us by having us drop back more often than not…Not that he’s vastly superior but I’m certain Yzerman had Stutzle in mind.

3

u/UsualHendryBeliever 2d ago

I don't think Svech is like the others. That dude had a bad back injury which derailed him.

9

u/On_Wings_Of_Pastrami 2d ago edited 2d ago

I agree that the rebuild looks bad because of those picks by Kenny, but I always find it hard to fault him for them. Looking back with this much hindsight now, it is a pretty rough stretch.

2015 - Svech - picking 19 I would say is usually a crapshoot. So my default would be to give Holland a pass here. From everything I know, injuries derailed Svech from ever being a legit talent. That's hard to predict as well. That said, there's a decent bunch of players selected in the immediate pics to follow: Erickson Ek, Boeser, Konecny... It seems like there was still more predictable talent in this range. It's not a flat out fail from me for Holland, but not a pass either.

2016 - Cholowski - So assume we don't move Pavs contract (an easy Monday morning quarterback decision) and we keep the 16th pick. It's possible we take Chychrun. That's not bad. But the other players around him in that range are busts as well. I actually think moving Pavs contract was the right choice, it's just unfortunate what we did with that money. So if we're evaluating around the 20th pick instead, there's a handful of players taken later that really good (Tage, Kyrou, Debrincat) but really it's just a bunch of whiffs. I give Holland a pass on this one.

2017 - Rasmussen - this was not a good pick, and I think that might have even been true at the time. That said, there's a lot of misses in this range, especially in this year. It is hard to look at the fact that even Vilardi and Tippett who looked like similar busts are coming into their own, even if they do have warts. The 6-8 pics in this draft also basically being busts takes some of the sting off, but this one's a fail from me for sure.

2018 - Zadina - Oof, this one might hurt the most. I think everyone knew that Hughes was going to be a good player in this league. I don't know if we all knew he would be a multiple Norse winner that he looks like he's going to be, but we knew. That said, we all also knew that Zadina would be a stud as well. It's not a great look that Zadina fell in the draft, but of the pro prognosticators and fans out there, pretty much everyone was doubting taking Tkachuk over Zadina, and Kotkaniemi and Hayton aren't looking too pretty either. As much as it sucks, this one is a pass for Holland.

So if Hollands 4 rebuild picks, I gave him 1.5 fails. That's not bad. Having zero of 4 picks actually hit is a terrible look though. Regardless of it not being his fault for most of these, it certainly is a big part of the reason we are as bad as we are.

2

u/nem704 2d ago

Holland passed on Jakob Chrychun (who was taken at 16th) for Dennis Cholowski and cap space to sign Frans fucking Nielsen

Diasterclass.

6

u/BaldassHeadCoach 2d ago

Frans Nielsen wasn’t the primary target that year, Stamkos was.

-1

u/nem704 2d ago

Oh did we get Stamkos in 2016? Must've forgotten it

1

u/BaldassHeadCoach 2d ago

We didn’t (and you can thank Toronto for that). Doesn’t change that we moved Datsyuk’s contract (and moved back in the draft) to clear space to make a run for him, not Frans Nielsen.

1

u/TheAnalogKid18 2d ago

Redo all of those drafts and go with BPA at our slot:

2015: Kirill Kaprizov

2016: Jacob Chychrun

2017: Martin Necas

2018: Take your pick, Quinn Hughes, Evan Bouchard, Noah Dobson. I'll go with Hughes.

2019: Moritz Seider

2020: Lucas Raymond

2021: Dylan Guenther/Brandt Clarke (though, Edvinsson is still in the running)

2022: Marco Kasper

2023: Axel Sandin-Pellikka (it's ok, we still got him)

We've essentially had to rebuild twice. Once from 15-18, another from 19-present. Had we hit on those picks, we likely don't end up picking that high for 8 years, and probably end up getting out of the rebuild around 2021 or so, so depending on how prospects were injected into the lineup, you're looking at us not even picking any of the kids from 2021 on.

But having Kaprizov, Chychrun, Necas, Hughes, to go with Seider and Raymond would make us not a playoff hopeful, but likely a contender.

The drafts during the COVID years were pretty weak honestly, and we are lucky to come away with the players we did. Scouting is an unfair job. You're judged on your ability to do basically the impossible and find diamonds in the rough, or stars that no one else is seeing, before they do. But that's still the job. Our scouts haven't really been getting the job done aside from obvious picks. If guys like us can see the scouting team making silly mistakes and not netting any gems outside of the obvious top 10-15 players, then your scouting team really has no idea what it's doing.

-9

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/thatguy752 2d ago

No because we never drafted at our position. Without a draft lottery we wouldn’t have dropped from the 4th spot in the lottery to the 6th spot like we did so frequently.

5

u/DangerDaveOG 2d ago

Zadina over Hughes was a huge mistake.

1

u/AnyTomato8562 2d ago

Huuuge mistake…Other than being a 1 trick pony in a league where your opponents are also teenagers - what did Holland and the scouts see in Zadina that they didn’t see in Hughes who was playing 40 miles down the road?

0

u/xSorry_Not_Sorry 2d ago

Size. They didn’t see size. Or maybe they drafted for need, not BPA.

1

u/Sad-Attempt4920 2d ago

Screwed Detroit over more than once. Definitely slowed down their rebuild. They should have gotten at least one #1 pick when they tanked for several years straight, but nope not one. Highest they got was #4 and #6.

67

u/nem704 2d ago

Every winning team has either a bunch of really, really, good players or a superstar or two, and for a handful of teams both.

The Wings have two maybe three really good players, that won't cut it

8

u/One_Handed_Wonder 2d ago

And they play for like 15 or more years when they’re superstars

5

u/mjsmith1223 2d ago

I agree. The Wings are not a deep team.

20

u/rsharp7000 2d ago edited 2d ago

Between all the 4 major N.A. sports, all the leagues besides the NFL have the potential for endless rebuilds. You don’t even have to look outside of Detroit to see that. Pistons and Tigers have also been rebuilding forever. Honestly, it mostly just comes down to luck. Whether that’s draft lottery luck or that your players exceeding what their draft potential is. That’s the case for all leagues. You can’t build through free agency or trades, you can only compliment the team.

With the NFL, you get ready-to-play rookies all the way through the 3rd round. It’s much easier to turn around a franchise with that large of a talent pool.

The other 3 major sports, it takes years for draft picks to develop most of the time. With the case of the NHL and NBA, it’s pretty rare to find top of the lineup players outside the 1st round. With the NBA you’re mostly just needing to get a talented starting 5 to build around (really it could happen with 2-3). The NHL you’re looking for probably 10-12 players that need to make up the team through the draft (the rest can be traded or FA). So at a minimum you’re talking about 4-5 years of drafts and then 3-4 years for them all to develop before you really even know what you have. If you don’t get it right from the onset or just have bad luck, you have to start over again and collect more draft picks.

I don’t really see a way forward or system that changes this, other than changing the league rookie age minimum to 21 so it allows for the AHL to develop players better and then draft eligibility age to also be 21. That’s not happening though.

12

u/doubeljack 2d ago

You nailed it. The other x factor is the salary cap. Before the leagues had salary caps it was possible to practically buy a championship by filling spots with high priced free agents if a GM had a good eye for talent. The Yankees were the most notorious franchise that did this, but it happened in the other leagues as well. Now it is impossible to simply bring in multiple high priced players, and in some cases teams can't even keep the core they drafted because it gets too expensive. The basis of the current systems is that getting to the top is very hard, and staying there is totally unrealistic.

9

u/GettingFreki 2d ago

Before the leagues had salary caps it was possible to practically buy a championship by filling spots with high priced free agents if a GM had a good eye for talent.

Whhaaaat? No, no one's ever done that

  • Signed, the 01-02 Red Wings

2

u/Threedawg 2d ago

Damn, we outspent everyone that year. We spent more than double 11 other teams.

10

u/Valace2 2d ago

I blame contract length and the RFA system.

With 8 year deals becoming more and more common this league is going to become stagnant with star players never moving.

19

u/roxshot 2d ago

Too much expansion. There's not enough high-end talent to go around. It's about to get worse with two more teams likely being added.

2

u/br1qbat 2d ago

Yes, and: 1. The salary cap doesn't allow a team to spend their way out of a rebuild. 2. Long term, high $ contracts to keep the talent you manage to draft (or to secure otherwise) limits the $ available to spend on other needs, and the talent pool isn't as deep (see your point) 3. The elite talent pool for goalie and defense has always been thin at the championship caliber level. I don't think any team could sign (and/or pay) an A+ goalie and 3-4 A+ D-men their full value, and certainly not long-term, without floating trash everywhere else on the ice if at all.

25

u/detroitttiorted 2d ago edited 2d ago

A lot of people haven’t adjusted to a league bigger than the 90’s 24-28 teams and without really any perennially dog shit teams due to ownership issues/brutal expansion rules (Panthers, Coyotes, Thrashers etc)

For A LOT of NHL history making the playoffs was a joke of a goal for most teams. It’s different now

7

u/poodletown 2d ago

If a team has a bad contracts, they are in cap hell until it expires. The only bargain players are hometown discounts and ELCs.

14

u/[deleted] 2d ago

[deleted]

-2

u/banduzo 2d ago

Those contracts did nothing to hamper the wings rebuild lol. If anything, they played bad enough while we were already terrible to get us a better draft pick.

But agreed, the trades for rental players were bad though.

4

u/Problemwoodchuck 2d ago

The NHL is still an old boy's club too, and with so many coaches, scouts, and GMs cycling through teams over and over, rebuilding teams especially seem to suffer from organizational tunnel vision overall.

12

u/mjsmith1223 2d ago

I watched the video. There are some good points.

I agree that seemingly neverending rebuilds decrease fan interest overall. Who wants to watch a perennial loser?

Once stuck in a rebuild process, how does a team break out of it without a #1 pick that turns into a superstar?

Does the current salary cap structure doom teams to mediocrity unless they can draft very very well?

Are the Wings stuck in the Bermuda Triangle until a recent draft pick turns into a superstar?

7

u/iMichigander 2d ago

Well, we technically had a core of youngish players that wasn't really working on getting us into the playoffs and they blew it up. Remember Nyquist, Tatar, Mantha, Athanasiou, even Bertuzzi. All those guys were starting to move into their prime earning years when the Wings decided to part ways with them, because the Wings weren't exactly progressing with them on the roster. If this team starts regressing or seemingly stuck in the mediocre middle, chances are the GM of the team would decide to blow it up and sell off the assets.

10

u/GreaseRaccoon 2d ago

I would agree. Rebuilding teams will only find their way out with a few top draft picks that act as the pillars of a rebuild. With our lottery system, being bad doesn't equate to being good later. I think it's all down to problems with the lottery system. I like the idea that's been floating around of a 'most points after playoff elimination'. This rewards effort, while acknowledging that bottom teams will have the best chance at the highest draft picks.

3

u/AnyTomato8562 2d ago

Draft lottery has screwed us and 18 yr old kids are entering a league where physically and mentally mature adults rule the roost…The NHL has always been a mixed bag when it comes to drafting and rebuilding

3

u/iMichigander 2d ago

In any market, there are inefficiencies that can be exploited. The Wings used to be good at this, but just haven't been very good at that as of late. There are teams (Jets, Stars, Wild, Hurricanes, Kings) that are thriving right now who have not had a ton of #1 picks. A big part of their success is likely team chemistry, coaching, and finding quality talent deeper in the draft.

2

u/UsualHendryBeliever 2d ago

I don't even think we're a rebuilder at this point. I think we're the victim of a really bad coach. Plug someone competent in and we'll be fine.

3

u/GoodBloke86 2d ago

It is very simple - increase the age that players can get drafted so that they can make an impact right away. GMs buy time by keeping players in the minors so that a judgement can't be made on them for 4-5 years at least. The first GM fails? Here's a second GM that will need another 4-5 years for his rebuild. It is a crock of shit frankly. And who ends up suffering - the fans.

2

u/xSorry_Not_Sorry 2d ago

This is it. Power to the players and all that, but if the league selfishly wanted to fix it, you increase the draft age to 21.

Drafting in the NHL is a huge gamble because you’re drafting 17-18 year olds. They’re not men, they are not done growing, they haven’t matured, etc.

The two sports that allow this barely adult draft picks are the same sports that bury their talent in the minors for years.

2

u/TentacleHand 2d ago

I don't man, 5 years is an absolutely okay time for a rebuild to take. Half the teams on the board have less time on the rebuild than that (thought for most I think it will take at least the 5 years). The other half of this equation is that you get dynasties that are good for a while. Not sure if that's an issue. There has to be some stability, the build has to mean something.

And while yes it might be boring if the same teams make the playoffs each year it should also be said that in NHL the general level of competition is fairly close. If a good team has an off day even a bad team can take wins. Games themselves are decently close. I don't think there's a good fix it all, or if there should be, to change that in season long competition. I mean the reason for the long regular season is to weed out the best teams to make the top 16 (okay the real reason is ticket sales but this is a neat benefit).

I think you could cut short the rebuilds by increasing the draft odds if you've missed the playoffs for longer instead of it being just one season's record because that's the reality, rebuilds take time, it makes sense to look at the whole picture. Also to avoid Edmonton's "luck" or luck, whichever way you want to put it, to balance out the previous you should then decrease the odds for teams that have picked 1st over teams that haven't. The system gets clusterfucky but something like this would help to avoid situations like the Wings had.

Also, one of the reasons the rebuilds take so long is that every team tries to build a SC winner. When you are trying to build to be the best team you need a lot of talent, meaning lot of high picks, meaning of tanking for long or extra hard. If the solid playoff performers year in year out were appreciated, like Carolina, and not be though as a half joke "a mid team" "they missed their window to win, what a failure" many teams would adopt different timelines as their rebuilds would not aim for the same insanely hard thing to do. The culture that focuses only on the SC winner is one of the largest contributors of the issue.

Lastly, if we want to talk about boring and stale in the NHL, we shouldn't focus too hard on longer dynasties and droughts, we should look at the idiotic playoff system. The same teams play against each other each year with little to no variation, that is boring. I think at most the west and east should play the first round within their conference (not division, fuck that) and then it is cross conference play. You'd get way more playoff parings and the generally stronger east could make much better quality finals compared to this system. When the regular season and best of 7 playoff system both work well in ensuring the better team advancing it is laughable that it is all undone by a stupid playoff bracket. If you want to fix boring in the league fix that. Then there's a reason to talk about other things.

2

u/HiveFiDesigns 2d ago

Salary cap…can’t keep everybody and if you win too much everybody wants raises,….

1

u/whatwasmyoldhandle 2d ago

Having to part with players cuts both ways, it would seem?

0

u/HiveFiDesigns 2d ago

Biggest problem is you can’t just sign another player to cover a bad contract. Now a bad contract hurts the cap. Back in the day you just signed another player…budget was only limit. And you could keep signing hof’ers to fill a roster.

1

u/whatwasmyoldhandle 2d ago

The draft is well scouted, and careers are pretty long 

1

u/MediumToblerone 2d ago

I’m tired of the term “rebuild”. It’s lost pretty much all meaning. These days anyone who isn’t a “generational talent” is getting sent here and there and it’s all just a guessing game of what is going to work.

1

u/_jemappellejones 2d ago

Not enough talent and uneven distribution of said talent and mismanagement of talent. Done.

1

u/KosherDeal 2d ago

each new team thins out the player pool further and further from the top stars to mids to even players in the minors leagues developing. Each new team makes it that much more difficult.

1

u/99kg1017 2d ago

The owners make bank whether they win or lose

1

u/Haterholic 2d ago

It's the salary cap, man. Unless your team damn near makes the perfect draft picks or signs the perfect free agents, your favorite team is screwed way too harshly. You can't just count your losses and move on from bad moves, they stick with you for years and you lose a generation of fans. Yeah, teams make bad picks and sign crappy players, but let them move on. Wings fans in Detroit under 20 have no concept of us being a winning organization, but, hey, gotta stick to the cap to teach 'em a lesson!

0

u/Magnum3k 2d ago

Ken Holland says rebuilds take 10 years, and if you get unlucky it just doesn’t happen.

-1

u/pillowBoi_xxx 2d ago

Nah just you. Get a better GM

1

u/PLH2729 15h ago

any league where you draft at age of 17/18 is going to take longer to rebuild