#24 – Not Sure If Serious or Playing Dumba

[dekedangle_rpf_mod]

This is the twenty-fourth post of Deke Dangle RPF Anon, a community for all your ice hockey anon meme needs.

THE RULES

1. Mods retain the right to delete, freeze, and/or screen threads and comments.
2. Meme rules do not require warnings.
3. Respect flock. Do not repost or share information from private tumblrs, locked twitter accounts, flocked LJ posts, etc.
4. No linking fans to their real life identities.
5. No looks bashing or body shaming. This applies to players and people associated with those players and their clubs, as well as fellow fans.
6. No embedded music.
7. No embedded images.
8. No spamming the meme, whether through repeated comments or other means. 
9. No discussing trolling, individual trolls, or their efforts.





Meme rules do not require spoiler cuts. However, this layout does allow for them. Any of the following tags will create a spoiler cut when closed: <div cut>, <span cut>, <font cut>, <font color="white">

If you have any questions or concerns, please direct them to The Mod Post. 

Threaded View
Flat View
Top-Level Comment View

Next post opens at 5,000 comments.

Comments

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

Meh, what's a quick rebuild? Has any team successfully done that? Maybe the Lightning could count? I don't think a quick rebuild is realistic for any team regardless of what contracts they have.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

DA

depends on how you define a rebuild. The Pens have changed their entire roster except iirc seven players in two years.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

na

I don't think it counts as a rebuild if you've still got the same core, which the Pens do.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

da

I mean, the Blackhawks still very much have the same core. It just remains to see what they'll be able to do with them with the state of their contracts.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

na

Complete tear down rebuilds aren't the only way to go. If they win another Cup seven years from now, they'll probably still have Kane, Toews& Keith still on the roster but everything else will have changed. Edmonton is not the only model.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

Isn't that natural attrition, though? Or a "retooling"? (Also, Keith? He'll be 39. Not sure on that one lasting another 7 years when he's already showing his age.)

Vancouver could do that with the Sedins, and still be contending, but they haven't been so great at it the last two years, and probably will be forced into a rebuild.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

Vancouver could do that with the Sedins, and still be contending, but they haven't been so great at it the last two years, and probably will be forced into a rebuild.

That's Vancouver's entire problem, that they don't seem to know whether they are rebuilding or contending. They are obviously in no condition to contend, but haven't been making moves necessary to rebuild. That's what people foresee for the Blackhawks, although less out of ineptitude and more out of being forced into that position by the contracts they've given out (many of which have already paid rewards that make whatever consequences that follow more than worth it).

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, soft rebuilds don't work if you haven't already had success.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

As a Canucks fan, the last three years have been painful. We should have started rebuilding the second that Kesler left. It didn't happen. Now the twins are two years older and we are no closer to anything.

I think Keith will still be playing at 39. The Hawks have two terrible contracts IMO - Seabrook and Hossa, for different reasons - and their core takes up so much cap space that this is going to keep happening for them. And I don't think they will be able to keep Panarin, eventually, but then he plays so well with Kane I'm not sure he'd be as good on another team.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

Agree. Pens real rebuild will happen when Sid/Geno/Tanger are all traded/retired. It will probably be painful.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

Somehow I always thought a rebuild meant sucking so they get top picks? And not just trading players. Like, whatever Edmonton is trying to do.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

da

Was going to say this -- also, as recently as the end of the 14-15 season, the Pens were getting fucked over by the cap and people said their window had closed. Also the Flyers -- obviously not the same level of success, but they made the SCF as recently as 2010. They've turned over pretty much their entire roster except Giroux since then. This year was supposed to be a rebuild year for them, but they still made the playoffs (and came in as a better team than the Hawks according to most analytics).

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

I would not count the Pens. Your team generational talent can't be the same person(s) both before and after a rebuild and you can't make the playoffs every year of a rebuild either. That's just a new GM.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

da

The way I use "rebuild" (and see it used very often) is when a team is making moves to make a team better in the long run instead of making moves that will help them win games now, which obviously happens through some level of roster turnover. But either way, the point still stands -- you said the Hawks will just rebuild once they're crappy, but the crappiness has already started to set in, and they still have their generational talent and core signed to mammoth contracts. No matter what any haters say, I'm sure any fans would take being in that position if it meant three cups in six years. But while some of the Hawks' moves that are hurting them now were very obviously a worthwhile trade off for those cups (Keith, Hossa contracts), other ones seem like they are trapping the Hawks in a no man's land where they can't contend or rebuild (Toews, Kane contracts), foolish mistakes that they especially can't afford in that position (Scuderi trade), or unforeseen longterm costs of earlier moves (losing Saad and Teravainen).

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

I did not say the Hawks would just rebuild once they are crappy. I said if they were so crappy they came in last place and got the first overall pick, they'd *start* rebuilding.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

I'd be generous enough to round that down to a bottom four pick, with the new lottery system and all. But you need a couple of those.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

But that's exactly the problem. They're NOT going to be bad enough to come in last and get the first place draft pick next year. Depending on one's outlook on their immediate future, they might arguably be in a better position if they were. And if they are smart, they should be thinking to rebuild before they get to that point, not after. The problem is if they spend years not good to really contend OR bad that they will be able to get good picks/think to start shipping guys out. And it will be even worse if they aren't good enough to contend but try to anyway, and expend even more future resources trying to do so.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

This is a tangent to the rebuild discussion but I'd like to challenge the use of the 'generational talent' term here. I think you may mean franchise players/core instead?

Crosby is a generational talent and so is McDavid. (Some called Eichel that in his draft year, but it seems unlikely they'll continue doing so.) There is only one player at the Crosby-level right now and that's Crosby. When McDavid reaches Crosby-level, Crosby will no longer be that good. Generational players are meant to be peerless within their age group and functionally within the league. There's (usually) only 1, maybe 2, generational player(s) at a time.

Presumably you're talking about Toews and Kane, maybe Keith when you used the term. The're elite and certainly franchise players but there are a handful of players of their type at this time in the league. And that's generally true of players at that tier. Bergeron and Kopitar are the Toews comparables. Ovi, Kessel, and Stamkos for Kane maybe (in terms of being elite pure scorers types, not necessarily style comparables and I know Stammer's a C). And Keith is quite similar to Letang and Doughty.

Just thought I'd throw this out there. Obviously these 3 players are HoF shoe-ins, but generational player is a label that really should be used more rarely.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

"Generational" as a designation isn't, and hasn't ever been, meant to be as literal as you're taking it here. I mean, I actually do agree on some of your thoughts as far as who is or who isn't, but the idea that There Can Only Be One is not what that term is mean to convey. Not to mention that your concession that Actually There Could Maybe Be Two undercuts your entire argument. Sure, there could be a more apropos term for it, but this isn't a fucking dictionary.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

NA

I'd argue that Ovechkin is also a generational talent, purely because he's one of the best scorers of all time, but yeah, right now it's just him and Crosby. He's already 33rd all time in goals scored with 525, and literally the only other person drafted after the year 2000 in the top 100 is Nash, at 99th with 393.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

I used the phrase "generational talent" because the airt used it, it was already pretty clear what they meant without nitpicking and arguing over semantics, and I didn't want to start wank about what a generational talent is and WHO is a generational talent, especially when the players under discussion were Kane, Toews, Crosby, and Malkin. I believe that you meant well by your comment but it comes off as really condescending -- I don't think that people who got into a long argument about the minutiae of rebuilds needed it explained that Crosby and McDavid are rare players and better than other players.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

I agree, there's gotta be some major changes to the face of the team for it to be a proper rebuild.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

Late to the long discussion and haven't read the whole subthread yet, sorry if I'm repeating what others have said.

I believe a rebuild means booting a majority of your core (or the foundation of it) and finding new pieces to build around. Toronto moving out Phil and Phaneuf are a rebuild. The Flames trading Iggy was a rebuild.

To me, the Pens retooled. They changed around a lot of the periphery pieces and added Phil to the core, sort of, but it's still Letang, Crosby, Malkin at the center of that team. St. Louis getting rid of Oshie would count as minor retooling to me too. Tampa letting Stamkos go would not be in rebuilding mode, but retooling I think as they'd have most of the same core in place.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

Nashville kind of did a quick rebuild depending on if you put Weber and Rinne in the same group of core players as Legwand and Erat, I guess. I don't think most would consider them part of the core right now at least when you're talking about a window to win in. Still haven't done much on either side of things though compared to Tampa.

Re: What is <i>up</i> with your team? –– non-SCF edition

[(Anonymous)]

IMO, Nashville did a rebuild ("rebuilding on the fly", as Poile put it), but they didn't have quite the same amount of boom and bust as some anons think rebuilding requires. They went from what was considered a bit of a contender, lost a big name player and traded away a top line winger, had a horrible season thanks to injury to land them a top pick (which still wasn't a 1C...), and through some savvy trades managed to land top line players while prospects panned out. It's not glamourous and there's no Cup, but that's pretty much how it should be done.