Vegas Knights - Unprecedented success in their 1st Year

[pilldoc]

19 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

But man, possibly an astounding call on the Knights, huh?

 

Yeah ... no one saw this coming.  We all remember wretched expansion teams are.  Not to take this thread totally off-topic, but just for giggles here is a list of expansion teams and their records .....

 

https://www.goliath.com/sports/15-best-and-worst-first-seasons-by-nhl-expansion-teams-since-1967/

 

15. Washington Capitals (worst, 1974-75): 8-67-5 (Interesting fact … This team was so bad that hard-luck defenceman Bill Mikkelson logged a team worst -82, in just 59 games.)

14. Ottawa Senators (worst, 1992-93): 10-70-4

13. New York Islanders (worst, 1972-73): 12-60-6

12. Atlanta Thrashers (worst, 1999-00): 14-57-7-4  (this team crashed and burned in Atlanta and revived the Jets in Winnipeg)

11. Kansas City Scouts (worst, 1974-75): 15-54-11 (eventually went to Colorado then to NJ as the Devils)

10. Oakland Seals (worst, 1967-68): 15-42-17 (Moved to Cleveland in mid 70’s then merged with Minnesota North Stars which later became defunct and then later reestablished as Dallas Stars)

9. San Jose Sharks (worst, 1991-92): 17-58-5

8. Tampa Bay Lightning (worst, 1992-93): 23-54-7

7. Minnesota Wild (best, 2000-01): 25-39-13-5

6. Hartford Whalers (best, 1979-80): 27-34-19 (eventually moved to Carolina to become the Hurricanes)

5. Nashville Predators (best, 1998-99): 28-47-7

4. Columbus Blue Jackets (best, 2000-01): 28-39-9-6

3. Mighty Ducks of Anaheim (best, 1993-94): 33-46-5

2. Florida Panthers (best, 1993-94): 33-34-17

1. Philadelphia Flyers (best, 1967-68): 31-32-11

So yeah ....who would have dreamed what Vegas is currently doing ....

 

[ruxpin]

50 minutes ago, pilldoc said:

1. Philadelphia Flyers (best, 1967-68): 31-32-11

So yeah ....who would have dreamed what Vegas is currently doing ...

 

First, I don't think I realized the Flyers previously had the best first-year record.  That's interesting...and completely blown up.

 

I did like some of the players Vegas took, especially Marchessault (sp?), Neal (who I don't like as a human) and the guys from Minnesota (Fletcher deserved to be fired), and of course Fleury.   Some others, too.

 

So, here's the question:   Was this expansion draft done vastly different than previous drafts or is this by virtue of the fact that in the Cap era, players were exposed due to salary and cap concerns rather than playing ability and, therefore, the Knights had much better players to pick from?   

 

Sorry, I'm driving this further off-topic and is probably a discussion for a public thread.   I'll let you do the work of that, @pilldoc, if you choose to.  

 

[pilldoc]

11 minutes ago, ruxpin said:

 

First, I don't think I realized the Flyers previously had the best first-year record.  That's interesting...and completely blown up.

 

I did like some of the players Vegas took, especially Marchessault (sp?), Neal (who I don't like as a human) and the guys from Minnesota (Fletcher deserved to be fired), and of course Fleury.   Some others, too.

 

So, here's the question:   Was this expansion draft done vastly different than previous drafts or is this by virtue of the fact that in the Cap era, players were exposed due to salary and cap concerns rather than playing ability and, therefore, the Knights had much better players to pick from?   

 

Sorry, I'm driving this further off-topic and is probably a discussion for a public thread.   I'll let you do the work of that, @pilldoc, if you choose to.  

 

Interesting thoughts ...I agree.   Will definitely move this to the Vegas forum as a new thread.  Could be a very worthy topic of discussion.

 

EDIT:  Topic now moved to this forum for further discussion ......

[FD19372]

I KNOW THIS...even if Vegas doesn't beat Winnipeg to get to the finals, MAF should be the front runner for the Conn Smythe. He's been spectacular in net.

[ruxpin]

33 minutes ago, FD19372 said:

I KNOW THIS...even if Vegas doesn't beat Winnipeg to get to the finals, MAF should be the front runner for the Conn Smythe. He's been spectacular in net.

 

I think they need to get to the finals for Conn Smythe consideration (not by rule, just me saying).   But you're absolutely right that he's been spectacular.   Gotta talk about Holtby IF they get there.  

 

I don't know who I'd argue for on either the Bolts or the Jets.    You could probably make a case for Hellboy, but other than that I'm not sure who.   Stastny has been very good, but I don't think he gets my vote for Conn Smythe.   The Bolts, I really don't know.

 

If the Knights get to the finals (and especially if they win) you've got to go with Fleury.   Others on the team have been very good, but it's Fleury in a walk.

 

 

[pilldoc]

7 hours ago, ruxpin said:

So, here's the question:   Was this expansion draft done vastly different than previous drafts or is this by virtue of the fact that in the Cap era, players were exposed due to salary and cap concerns rather than playing ability and, therefore, the Knights had much better players to pick from? 

 

In answer to your question... yes...the draft was different.  It had to be. Think about this, the last NHL Expansion Draft was way back in 2000.  That was 17 years.  That seems like a lifetime ago as I was still living in Virginia Beach at the time busting my nuts as a retail pharmacist. (Off topic I know but you get the point.)

 

1) Instead of just one (1)  team drafting, there were two (2) --- The Wild and Blue Jackets.  So right there the talent pool was going to thinned out a bit.  Also remember both Nashville (1998) and Atlanta (1999) were exempt from having to leave players unprotected since they were extremely new franchises in the NHL.  That left 26 other teams for which to choose from.

Fifty-two players were chosen in the draft; each previously existing team lost two players, and both expansion teams filled a roster of twenty-six players. Only one goaltender or one defenseman could be selected from each franchise. Both the Blue Jackets and the Wild were to use their first 24 selections on three goaltenders, eight defensemen, and thirteen forwards. The final two picks for each team could be any position.  For those with inquiring minds ....the Flyers lost Artem Anisimov (D) and Martin Streit (F).  Complete of all players taken is here ---- > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_NHL_Expansion_Draft

 

2) This was pre-salary cap so that had a HUGE impact on the expansion draft. The salary cap floor, for one, has risen to $54 million. Columbus general manager Doug MacLean had a $17 million payroll to work with on his first roster in the pre-cap era.

 

3) In the age of technology, evaluating players has grown tremendously since then. The advent and use of analytics has given front offices more tools with which to evaluate players. IMO, there's a higher caliber of prospects reaching the league now, too, fueled by elite skills camps and national development programs.

 

4) Continuing the thought from pont #3, I firmly believe the Salary Cap had implications on teams on who to protect to and whom yhou had to expose.  The Pens are a prime example of this.  They simply could not afford both Murray and MAF.  Murray is younger and MAF had a huge contract.  Therefore the Pens left MAF unprotected.  It was a no brainer for Vegas to choose MAF.  Compare that to who the Wild and Blue Jackets selected.

 

 

MAF / Subban >>>>>>>>> All the goalies both the Wild and Jackets selected.   So right off the bat from a goalie perspective the Knights had a Stanley Cup winning goalie in MAF. 

 

"There were very few players you really wanted," MacLean said, adding: "It was a fun process to go through, but at the end of the day you get your list and you say, 'Oh, this is it? This is it for $80 million?'"

 

That's what the fee was for those teams to join the league. The price tag for Las Vegas is $500 million. Thus, MacLean said, it's only fair that the new franchise will start with a stronger talent base.

 

http://www.foxnews.com/sports/2016/06/29/new-las-vegas-club-has-edge-over-nhl-2000-expansion-teams.html

 

5) The protection rules changed.  They got a solid start thanks to the expansion rules stipulating that each existing team could protect only one goaltender, guaranteeing the Golden Knights a choice of decent-to-good goalies.  McPhee could also make trades to not pick certain available players something the Wild and Blue Jackets did not have.

 

Although the Golden Knights will draft 30 players, their roster limit will be 23, meaning McPhee will be wheeling and dealing after the NHL trade freeze is lifted Thursday morning. He also can add to his stockpile of talent in the annual entry draft Friday and Saturday. The Golden Knights are scheduled to pick sixth in the first round and third in each subsequent round.

 

http://www.latimes.com/sports/ducks/la-sp-nhl-expansion-draft-elliott-20170620-story.html

 

https://sports.vice.com/en_us/article/vbgjq9/vegas-golden-knights-enter-nhl-in-better-spot-than-previous-expansion-teams

 

I'm sure there are a lot more reasons, but this is a good start for discussion.  I'm not saying Vegas was given a gold goose in which to start a franchise, but looking back at the NHL 2000 Expansion, the Knights certainly had a much better chance to ice a competitive team than that of the Wild or Jackets because of the rules that were put in place.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BluPuk]

Well, I'm going to just toss this out there to see if it has any traction. I think the way Vegas has succeeded is a result of having a terrific goaltender (who seriously had his pride ruffled by being "let go" and therefor is motivated to play his arse off) and the poor (mediocre at best) level of play and talent in the NHL.  The Vegas nights have no 'stars' at all on their roster of out skaters. Not one. Due to the "set up" of the draft, there were none to be had (with the exception of Fleury). But there was an entire team (teams, actually) of middle-of-the-road players. The fact that a mediocre team can win over teams in the NHL based on the superstar-and-others model is not surprising at all. There is simply not enough talent to go around thanks to the hard cap. You spend for your superstar (if you are lucky enough to even get to bid on one) and you have very little left over. Not enough for any team to dominate or separate themselves from the pack. Makes for very boring hockey IMHO. Bring back the years of the great teams. Who am I kidding? Like that's gonna happen. BTW, I am now cheering for the Golden Knights..... 

[davethehammer]

its called entertainment.. sorry ,thats my view.

this isnt some random natural thing. They have Knights win and it helps everyone involved..including the Raiders moving in.

they are whipping everyone local up to a buying/sports frenzy.

apparently team chemistry isnt needed anymore

[hf101]