Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Whats wrong with TANKING the season?


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#1 Anima

Anima

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 250 posts
  • Joined: 20-April 03

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:34 AM

Why is it such a bad idea?

Lets be real, this team will either barely miss the playoff or make the playoffs and get DESTROYED in the first round. No we are no LA Kings, quit dreaming..... Why be like the Calgary Flames and finished 9th or 10th and get lousy draft picks?

Last time we missed the playoffs, we got *ahem* Cody Hodgson.....lets not beat the dead horse on that one....

Last time we have a top 5 pick, we got Henrik/Daniel Sedin.

Excluding the last 2 drafts (too early to tell with Gaunce/Jensen), the previous picks we had in the late 20's, it was Jordan Schroeder and Patrick White...yup....

With the RIDICULOUS salary cap next year, we NEED a prospect that can play next year (i.e a top 5 draft pick). With the signing of Kellan Lain and the potential of Nicklas Jensen, a top 5 pick that can play next year will be ENORMOUS.

This is what MG is facing next year, PRETTY scary...

Unrestricted free agents:
-Raymond, Higgins, Lapierre, Alberts, Barker, Pinizzotto

Restricted free agents:
-Tanev (will get a raise for sure), Weise, Sestito

Getting rid of Luongo's contract (trade) + Ballard's contract (buyout), we have $53 MILLION committed to everyone else. Thats $11 Million to sign Tanev, Raymond, Higgins, Lapierre, etc. NOT HAPPENING.

Tanev will likely get at least $3-4 Mill, that means we have $7-8 Mill to sign 5 forwards, 2 defensemen and 1 back up goalie. Yup, TOTALLY screwed....

Insert a Top 5 draft pick that can potentially play in the first season (i.e. Alex Galchenyuk)

Short term pain, long term gain...

Feel free to rip this apart!
  • 3
11 wins to go...

#2 gmen81

gmen81

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,179 posts
  • Joined: 27-May 07

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:44 AM

I kind of agree with this guy. This team isn't good enough to win a cup, but we aren't bad enough to get a top 5 pick. I still hope they make the playoffs because anything can happen. But having a better pick in this draft would help n
  • 3
Posted Image

#3 PlayStation

PlayStation

    XBox

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,282 posts
  • Joined: 12-April 08

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:45 AM

Well we cant really give up, however if this is as much heart our players are going to put in, I'd rather have a good draft pick rather than a first round sweep. With that, it'll bring the urgency for change, and hopefully a bounce back year next year.

But not giving up just yet, next 7 or 8 games will make or break out season, some will probably say oh just look at LA, well sure go ahead look at LA, how many times has that happened in the past? Anyways without a solid second line, this team is going no where, the Sedins arent getting any help and teams are shutting down their one line.


I kind of agree with this guy. This team isn't good enough to win a cup, but we aren't bad enough to get a top 5 pick. I still hope they make the playoffs because anything can happen. But having a better pick in this draft would help n


New draft lottery, any non playoff team can move up to first, but yes less of a chance as you go up the list.

Edited by PlayStation, 17 March 2013 - 12:47 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image


"Real Men" :bigblush:

#4 nucks07

nucks07

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 795 posts
  • Joined: 30-June 06

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:45 AM

*
POPULAR

Lol tanev 2 mill tops
  • 13

#5 DIBdaQUIB

DIBdaQUIB

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,587 posts
  • Joined: 21-November 10

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:46 AM

You're making the assupmtion that they have a choice in not making the playoffs.
  • 1

#6 prana16

prana16

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts
  • Joined: 11-July 07

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:49 AM

Why is it such a bad idea?

Lets be real, this team will either barely miss the playoff or make the playoffs and get DESTROYED in the first round. No we are no LA Kings, quit dreaming..... Why be like the Calgary Flames and finished 9th or 10th and get lousy draft picks?

Last time we missed the playoffs, we got *ahem* Cody Hodgson.....lets not beat the dead horse on that one....


Ya that turned out to be a horrible pick :rolleyes: I mean he's in his what 3rd NHL season and he is a 1st line centre with more goals than anyone on our team and almost as many points as either sedin. What a bust. But hey he couldn't play behind a centre that hasn't been in the line up for two years so we had to get rid of him instead of handling it like children

How do propose they go about losing games to tank that doesn't alienate all the players and all the fans. In what way can they make a concious decision to lose as much as possible to get a draft pick :picard:
  • 0

#7 prana16

prana16

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts
  • Joined: 11-July 07

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:49 AM

.

Edited by prana16, 17 March 2013 - 12:55 AM.

  • 0

#8 prana16

prana16

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts
  • Joined: 11-July 07

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:49 AM

.

Edited by prana16, 17 March 2013 - 12:54 AM.

  • 0

#9 ButterBean

ButterBean

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,228 posts
  • Joined: 23-February 09

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:49 AM

If we can make a trade this season to make a good improvement to this team there's no reason to tank. Looking at all the teams this year I don't notice any single team that is really a favourite to win it all and there is some good teams out there struggling as well.
  • 0

#10 Tom Sestito

Tom Sestito

    Probably Not A Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,162 posts
  • Joined: 10-February 12

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:52 AM

Look at like this.

Buyout both 4 m contracts (booth and ballard) leaving 6 m in capspace. I'm assuming we'll get around 4m back for Luo's contract. in total, 2m for those things happening.

Daniel - Henrik - Burrows (17m)
Higgins 3m resign - Kesler 5m - Jensen 900k (9m)
Raymond 2.7m resign - 3 M F/A - Hansen 1.3m ovrl about 7m.
700 k fighter - Lapierre 1.2m resign - Kassian 900k est 3m.

26 m in fwds ish

Edler - Bieksa (9.6m)
Hamhuis - Garrison (9m)
Tanev (2m est resign) - f/a 2m (4m)

22m in defenceman

Schneider 4m
backup 2m

6m in goalies

assuming we get cheap f/a's. just throwing it out there lol
  • 0
Posted Image
Thank you VC!

#11 prana16

prana16

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,282 posts
  • Joined: 11-July 07

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:53 AM

.

Edited by prana16, 17 March 2013 - 12:55 AM.

  • 0

#12 Anima

Anima

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 250 posts
  • Joined: 20-April 03

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:54 AM

If we can make a trade this season to make a good improvement to this team there's no reason to tank. Looking at all the teams this year I don't notice any single team that is really a favourite to win it all and there is some good teams out there struggling as well.


You kidding right? We will get absolutely DESTROYED if we face Chicago or Anaheim the first round.....

Certainly, players/coach won't just "TANK" the season, but what i'm merely saying, why is it so bad if we miss the playoff this year? Maybe a good thing really....
  • 0
11 wins to go...

#13 GLASSJAW

GLASSJAW

    LEGENDARY POSER

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,892 posts
  • Joined: 21-February 04

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:55 AM

that team looks far too much like our current awful team for my liking
  • 3

1999_1.jpg
 
i'm not alone; i'll never be
 


#14 jsihota15

jsihota15

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 40 posts
  • Joined: 25-January 08

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:56 AM

first of all, tanev 3-4million :picard:
i agree with tanking tho..this team isn't contending unless gillis makes a big move which probably won't happen
  • 0

#15 Spoosh

Spoosh

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,460 posts
  • Joined: 10-August 05

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:58 AM

I'd rather take the chance going into the playoffs as an underdog without home advantage than purposely give up and lose so that you could draft earlier. No way to run a franchise and entertain fans. Horrible actually. People still watch games to see their team win, not play tactics by losing!
  • 3
© 2000, 2014 K'Spoosh Entertainment Ltd.

Misuse of this almost copyrighted information will with near certainty lead to misuse of it.


Posted Image

#16 Pears

Pears

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,479 posts
  • Joined: 14-November 11

Posted 17 March 2013 - 12:58 AM

*
POPULAR

If you want to go cheer for a tanking team go cheer for Edmonton
  • 5

In my eyes drouin is overrated he can score in the qmjhl but did nothing in last two gold medal games that canada lost. Fox will be better pro than him talk to me in five yrs

Gaudreau has one NHL goal whereas all your "prized" prospects have none.

   ryan kesler is going to the chicago blackhawks ...       quote me on it


#17 ChenWei91

ChenWei91

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,400 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 08

Posted 17 March 2013 - 01:00 AM

Let's look at it this way... As soon as the Sedins retire... We're screwed...
  • 2

(>'-')>Posted Image<('-'<)


#18 Barry_Wilkins

Barry_Wilkins

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,473 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 09

Posted 17 March 2013 - 01:01 AM

You kidding right? We will get absolutely DESTROYED if we face Chicago or Anaheim the first round.....


So you'd rather lose on purpose -- by tanking -- in order to get -- what? -- a 10th overall pick as opposed to one in the low 20s? Because in order to get one of those "can't miss" top 5 impact players, the Canucks would have to be so obvious in their tanking strategy that the league would fine them, embarass them, and even legislate against them, in a big way.
  • 1

#19 ajhockey

ajhockey

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,487 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 10

Posted 17 March 2013 - 01:13 AM

*
POPULAR

One word: Dignity.

Clearly, you have none.
  • 7

14ndb35.jpg
Credit to -Vintage Canuck- for the awesome sig!

"Gino, Gino, Gino, Gino!"
Rest In Peace, Rypien, Demitra, and Bourdon


#20 Jai604

Jai604

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,039 posts
  • Joined: 14-October 10

Posted 17 March 2013 - 02:03 AM

*
POPULAR

The Oilers are that way --->

Feel free to go.
  • 7

RIP LB RR PD


#21 Gerbera

Gerbera

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 413 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 10

Posted 17 March 2013 - 02:07 AM

Why do people keep bringing this up? Look at the Oilers.. they have 3 1st overall picks and they are still at the bottom of the league..... and people suggest we tank it when most of our core guys are declining?
  • 3

#22 CHIPS

CHIPS

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,787 posts
  • Joined: 22-October 07

Posted 17 March 2013 - 02:17 AM

You missed the train. You no longer get those high draft picks just by being at the very bottom. It gives you no benefit whatsoever.

And do you really want us to be Oilers V2.0?

Edited by CHIPS, 17 March 2013 - 02:18 AM.

  • 1

CanucksvsBruinsPollsmall-1.jpgRogerNeilsonSmall.jpgSig too big. 


#23 etsen3

etsen3

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,616 posts
  • Joined: 02-July 10

Posted 17 March 2013 - 02:20 AM

Tanking is for pussies. If there's one thing that would make me quit watching this team it's tanking. Most pro athletes/organizations actually have some pride/dignity/competitive spirit, so tanking will never happen because it's completely pitiful and embarrassing. Not to mention the loss of money/fans/free agents who would be repelled. Why would anyone want to watch/support/play for/give their money to a team that loses on purpose?

Edited by etsen3, 17 March 2013 - 02:33 AM.

  • 1

#24 Gollumpus

Gollumpus

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,794 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 10

Posted 17 March 2013 - 02:25 AM

Why is it such a bad idea?

Lets be real, this team will either barely miss the playoff or make the playoffs and get DESTROYED in the first round. No we are no LA Kings, quit dreaming..... Why be like the Calgary Flames and finished 9th or 10th and get lousy draft picks?


One thing that is bad about it is how it affects free agents and their desire to come here. If the Canucks start to deliberately tank then a lot of guys who may have thought of coming here will go elsewhere. And for those in the crowd who already feel that very few UFA's want to come here, even fewer will want to sign here. And what does this do to guys who are already on the team and reach free agency? They may well take the position that the team is just using them and that their personal career options are better satisfied elsewhere.

Also, there is a team owner who has to be satisfied. He may well not be too happy with the team tanking, even if it is on purpose. The coach wouldn't like it as there might have to be a scapegoat to pay for this calamity, so those who want AV fired might get their wish. Gillis might also get pushed out, so this would be a reason he would not like this plan.

While we're being real, even the LA Kings aren't the LA Kings this year. Nor are the Rangers, or Montreal, or a lot of other teams. I find it surprising that people are writing off this team when the season is just past the half-way point. It makes me wonder why you even bother watching any Canucks games if you have already written them off for the season.


Last time we missed the playoffs, we got *ahem* Cody Hodgson.....lets not beat the dead horse on that one....


And yet, it is you who takes the whack...

Didn't you just say that a 10th overall was a "lousy" draft pick? I suppose you are correct on this point. Hodgson is slow, doesn't play a physical enough game, is poor in the faceoff circle, and is rarely gets one in the defensive zone because he is a liability in his defensive play as well.


Last time we have a top 5 pick, we got Henrik/Daniel Sedin.


The year before that the team got Bryan Allen. Not a bad player, but certainly not top-5 material. There are no guarantees of the quality you'll get with even a high 1st. Look up Brendl and Stefan.

Getting the Sedins also cost the team Bryan McCabe, a 1st, and one 3rd (Burke got a 3rd back in the moving the 1st overall to Atlanta)


Excluding the last 2 drafts (too early to tell with Gaunce/Jensen), the previous picks we had in the late 20's, it was Jordan Schroeder and Patrick White...yup....


All of this tanking hasn't really helped the Oilers much. And in a year or two, when more of their guys start looking for bigger paydays and are either traded or leave as UFA's, the Oilers will have to start the process all over again.


With the RIDICULOUS salary cap next year, we NEED a prospect that can play next year (i.e a top 5 draft pick). With the signing of Kellan Lain and the potential of Nicklas Jensen, a top 5 pick that can play next year will be ENORMOUS.


This is true. Younger, less expensive players will be highly sought after. This being said, getting a top-5 pick next draft doesn't mean you get a player who can help you next year.

Yakupov isn't putting up great numbers in his 27 games to date. Murray, Rielly and Reinhart haven't played a game in the NHL this season. Galchenyuk isn't setting the NHL on fire. Yes, they are all very likely going to have very good NHL careers, and I would like to have any of them on the Canucks' payroll.

Speaking of payroll, Yakupov's caphit is $3.775 million for the next two years after this season. Galchenyuk is being paid $3.225 million per season. If Murray were in the NHL he'd be making $3.525 million, Rienhart is at $3.725 million and Rielly would be getting $1.775 million.

Top-5 picks usually cost you a fair amount it would appear. Also, Burrows, Hansen and Raymond all make less than Yakupov and Galchenyuk but provide much more value. The best top-5 to come along in quite some time is Landeskog. If the Canucks could get someone like him then a tanking just might be worth it. And he makes $3.575 million per season.

This is what MG is facing next year, PRETTY scary...

Unrestricted free agents:
-Raymond, Higgins, Lapierre, Alberts, Barker, Pinizzotto

Restricted free agents:
-Tanev (will get a raise for sure), Weise, Sestito

Getting rid of Luongo's contract (trade) + Ballard's contract (buyout), we have $53 MILLION committed to everyone else. Thats $11 Million to sign Tanev, Raymond, Higgins, Lapierre, etc. NOT HAPPENING.

Tanev will likely get at least $3-4 Mill, that means we have $7-8 Mill to sign 5 forwards, 2 defensemen and 1 back up goalie. Yup, TOTALLY screwed....


What's so scary about this? The only really tough UFA decisions are whether to go after Raymond or Higgins, and whether or not to re-sign Lapierre, and if so, for how much? Tanev will get signed to a real contract. Weise and Sestito will probably be qualified at least, maybe signed with a minor raise.

Frankly, if Gillis can't sign Tanev and who ever else out of the players you've listed for $7 million or less than he perhaps should be fired. Tanev will get around $2 million, one of Higgins/Raymond will also get around $2+ million, and Lapierre won't go above $1.5 million.

FORWARDS
Daniel Sedin ($6.100m) / Henrik Sedin ($6.100m) / Alexandre Burrows ($4.500m)
Chris Higgins ($1.900m) / Ryan Kesler ($5.000m) / Zack Kassian ($0.870m)
Nicklas Jensen ($0.894m) / Jordan Schroeder ($1.750m) / Jannik Hansen ($1.350m)
Tom Sestito ($0.666m) / Maxim Lapierre ($1.250m) / Steve Pinizzotto ($0.600m)
Dale Weise ($0.677m)

DEFENSEMEN
Dan Hamhuis ($4.500m) / Kevin Bieksa ($4.600m)
Alexander Edler ($5.000m) / Jason Garrison ($4.600m)
Kevin Connauton ($0.688m) / Chris Tanev ($0.200m)
Cam Barker ($0.800m) /

GOALTENDERS
Cory Schneider ($4.000m)
Eddie Lack ($0.750m)

------
CAPGEEK.COM TOTALS
(these totals are compiled with the bonus cushion)
SALARY CAP: $64,300,000; CAP PAYROLL: $56,793,667; BONUSES: $0
CAP SPACE (22-man roster): $7,506,333

This is also leaving room for any guys who may be coming over in the assumed Luongo deal or the signing of any UFA's, or even keeping one of Booth or Ballard.


Insert a Top 5 draft pick that can potentially play in the first season (i.e. Alex Galchenyuk)

Short term pain, long term gain...

Feel free to rip this apart!


As mentioned above, there isn't a guarantee that a guy like Galchenyuk will pay off in the short term, which is your argument here. And there are lots of guys who will be UFA's who will likely be more productive and less expensive than a 1st round prospect.


regards,
G.

Edited by Gollumpus, 17 March 2013 - 02:28 AM.

  • 3
Following the Canucks since before Don Cherry played here.

#25 Moonshinefe

Moonshinefe

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,058 posts
  • Joined: 15-March 11

Posted 17 March 2013 - 02:45 AM

What an asinine notion... throwing a game as a professional athlete is simply poor sportsmanship. I'd rather have a team that's a competitor every single year, it's more entertaining that way. I guess you're suggesting we pull an Edmonton and get 1000 1st overall picks? Wow sweet, that's certainly working out well for them.

I'd much rather be a Canucks fan who gets "disappointed" & not winning the cup every year vs. Edmonton who tanks every single year and gets the top picks, only to have the POTENTIAL for a cup run in the future while underachieving.

Edited by Moonshinefe, 17 March 2013 - 02:46 AM.

  • 1

#26 Coconuts

Coconuts

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,041 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 09

Posted 17 March 2013 - 03:34 AM

You trying walking into the locker room and telling the guys we're throwing in the towel.

Good luck.
  • 0

Posted Image

Posted ImagePosted Image


#27 pianoman13

pianoman13

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 908 posts
  • Joined: 09-December 06

Posted 17 March 2013 - 04:12 AM

We probably wont tank because we, um, are tied for the division lead right now??
  • 0

No videos in sig please. 


#28 shiznak

shiznak

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,461 posts
  • Joined: 05-August 03

Posted 17 March 2013 - 05:31 AM

It's too late to tank, now.l
  • 0

15rntht.png


#29 Edlerberry

Edlerberry

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,245 posts
  • Joined: 01-February 12

Posted 17 March 2013 - 05:35 AM

If Tanev gets $4m, then Edler would have gotten 10
  • 0
July 7-2013

Toronto will take a step back next year.
Feel free to quote me.


July 8-2013

Wow I can't believe peoples replies...
Im done here. You people are disgusting..


#30 BedBeats™2.0

BedBeats™2.0

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,310 posts
  • Joined: 04-March 03

Posted 17 March 2013 - 07:02 AM

Real Hockey organizations do not run on that concept.

Even in some teams lowest points in their existence, you really think ownership and management have meetings to scheme with pro athletes to tank a season for the draft.

I guarantee you that Mario was not instructing Sid to help tank the Pens to land Gino.

Absolutely asinine. Its a terrible and silly notion and has no basis for discussion.
  • 1

Posted Image

Henrik breaking records.Kes approving.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.