I hadn't looked at their draft picks. If they have spent those, then they can't do that because they will need to find a way to find Barkov and Ekblad's replacements via the draft and develop them so that they are NHL-ready in 6 years time when those guys are 35.UWSaint wrote: ↑Fri Jun 20, 2025 2:24 pmThey don't have their next two first rounders, so not sure what they go all in with. They have one of the weakest prospect groups in the league. Not criticizing that -- they built to the apex of the league and have the room to keep it together for awhile -- but they have the barest of non-NHL assets to move. Of course, they built this team in part by bold trading of NHL assets, and I think they'd do it again if needed. I think to stay the team to beat, they are going to need to keep Ekblad or add another top 3 caliber defenseman; its a bigger need (IMO) than re-signing Bennett. That said, it isn't either/or necessarily. The tight knit group, their success, and low taxes all make it more likely their cap will go farther and they can sign these men to better deals than they would accept elsewhere -- and has been pointed out, they have some cap room.Mëds wrote: ↑Fri Jun 20, 2025 1:39 pm Combined with the alleged team culture they have created that has resulted in a very tight knit group, Florida is in a position to remain a dominant force in the league for years to come if they draft and develop shrewdly. I think they can afford one more "all-in" at the trade deadline, but whether they actually need to in order to win is the question.
While I think the group is tight, I think there's a bit too much read into the "culture's" influence on the wins and losses in Florida.
Winning breeds cohesion. Cohesion likely contributes a bit to winning, too, but its the cohesion as primary causal agent seems like a marketing narrative, and it sells when you aren't confronted by the counterfactual (losing).
Losing creates tension. (Tension likely contributes to losing -- maybe moreso that cohesion, but losing makes this a positive feedback loop).
Winning buys silence. Pippen can yap about MJ today, but he wasn't doing that in the midst of the Bulls dynasty.
Losing loses an audience. A team can be the best of brothers, finish the season without making the playoffs, and no one cares about how tightly knit they are.
But what I will say is that the closer the group, the more a player will want to stick around. If you like your co-workers, if you feel you are all pulling in the same direction, and you are having success, life's good, keep it that way.
My comment regarding culture was directly referring to your final sentence. That culture will allow them (possibly) to keep key contributors on team-friendly contracts who would otherwise be departing because of salary cap constraints. The culture does not greatly impact the wins and losses beyond it's ability to keep the personnel together.
