Quite possibly. That's why I'm a Red Wings fan. We always seem to pull it off every year even without incredible first rounders. We make it work with the draft picks, and how well they fit in the spots that just opened.Maybe everyone should just consider beign a Red Wings fan. You'll learn the true art of hockey, and watch another Stanley Cup of '08-'09.
The only way finishing at the bottom is better than finishing at the top is that your scouting staff has their decisions made by the media and not by their skill. This resounding success of which we speak is not proven anywhere. The successful teams are those which draft well in the middle rounds and have a farm system that supports their NHL team. As far as Datsyuk is concerned don't look upon it as a wise coup by the Detroit Scouting staff. Look upon it as blind luck. In the 1998 Draft Detroit chose Jiri Fischer in the first round and Pave Datsyuk in the 6th round. Most know what happened to Fischer but Detroit's 9 other picks that year accumulated 2 games in the NHL: in 10 years. Hardly a ringing endorsement for their scouting staff. Toronto still has two of their picks from that year. And I'd still rather have Tampa's picks from that year than Detroit's picks even if Fischer were still healthy. Finishing last and winning the lottery means that you won't likely make a mistake. San Jose has had good success from smart (not lucky) drafting.
NO, it will not help the franchise. How can losing help a franchise....or the league for that matter. Obviously, being the worst doesn't mean you are going to pick up the number one overall pick. It is a lottery system. You list Martin St. Louis, which I hope you know was an UN-DRAFTED player. This goes to show that sometimes, talent is not dead accurate with Central Scouting. Look at Detroit...Datsyuk (171st overall), Zetterberg (210th overall), Lidstrom (53rd overall).......The Penguins haven't even won a cup yet with their new team. Why would that be a blueprint for success? I think not-involved-owners, a good GM, great scouting, and a team with chemistry...is what it takes to get to the playoffs. People are not going to games, because (a) some people decided to buy World Series tickets instead and (b) nobody wants to go to a game when they KNOW the Lightning have a 80% of losing. It is a mess, and now the Lightning are the joke of the league......and it makes it difficult to be a fan considering they have no history and they are in the south. I need a drink....
As my friends in England like to say, the Lightning couldn't organise a pissup in a brewery.They have a wholly inexperienced GM, two meddling owners who know just enough to be dangerous (remember that it was these folks who decided to hire Barry Melrose), and a raft of offseason signings that look worse by the day (their defence and their goaltending is brutal).Plus, they could always lose the lottery for the #1 pick.
i don't think Lightning and success can be used in the same sentence. not so long as the ownership stays the same as it is. they're trigger happy and swapping players like a shady fantasy owner. even though they'll get their top draft picks, they're just going to do what they've done with Stamkos and rush them into the NHL even Melrose said he wasn't ready.you've also gotta have the thought in the back of your mind that this franchise won a cup not that long ago. the only players that remain from that cup winning team? Lecavalier and St. Louis. wow. should they even be in this horrible losing position?
-------------------------------------------------- Canadian mortgage broker news
The same blueprint the Maple Leafs should have been using for a few years now, yet haven't and continue to wallow in mediocrity because of it. A couple of other things about your theory.....when you are dead last and really "sucking" and the trade deadline rolls around, you become sellers, further adding future assets in the form of draft picks and prospects. When you are 9th in your conference every year at the trade deadline (Toronto) then you are handcuffed into trying to rent guys for just a CHANCE to make the postseason and you give up your future assets. So, for a team like the Leafs, they have always mortgaged their future and wind up missing the postseason or a 1st round loss......then the draft rolls around and IF they have a draft pick, it's a 17th overall. LOL I mean......they get excited over a Luke Schenn, sure he looks like he's going to be a good defender for alot of years but HELLO, every other team (even the teams that have been winning) has a handful or two of them. As far as where you pick in the draft is.....we all know that some years are top heavy....with one, two or three stand-outs.....other years are deep and it is hit and miss if you pick 5-15 (last year??) BUT getting lots of blue chip draft picks certainly can turn around a franchise.....you mention it is how Pittsburgh got where they are and it also why the Ottawa Sens were perennial contenders.......they stunk in the early 90's and loaded up!! Stamkos WILL be a star. Hedman and Tavares WILL be stars! If you can accumalate assets so you have 2 or 3 first round picks, it can turn around a franchise......for instance, the Flyers had 2 first round picks in 2003.....Jeff Carter and Mike Richards (plus they acquired Coburn in a trade).........where would they be without those guys and Carter was 11th overall, Richards 24th and Coburn 8th. When it is all said and done, 2003 will be looked at as one of the best draft years ever.......meanwhile the Leafs had NO pick. Turned the Blackhawks around.......it will end up turning TB around. Phoenix and LA will follow. Meanwhile, we'll keep laughing at the foolish Leafs. I agree with you 110%.......LOSING BREEDS WINNING. Of course, you still need to be smart about it. We also see it some other sports.....how could the TB Rays ever have competed with the free spending Yankees and Red Sox without a bunch a cheap highly drafted phenoms?