Sean Monahan Posted March 19, 2015 Author Share Posted March 19, 2015 Isn't every tanking thread really about discussing whether it's right or not? And there are plenty of tanking threads (i.e. Are more teams tanking for McDavid?) From a quick read of those couple of threads, no. The business ethics of tanking come up here and there but those threads are in no way focused on it. Even the thread you just linked us to does not. From searching through the forums there really isn't that many threads dedicated to tanking, and certainly none dedicated to this specific aspect of tanking. It gets pretty dam tiresome watching you try to mod these boards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Love it or hate it, it works. And I'd rather see teams go from zero to hero rather than have dynasty's set up shop for ten years at a time because they have an equal chance at getting generational talents. And I think you guys are overblowing how long it takes to rebuild, a team with competent management should take 2-3 years of sucking at the most to acquire the prospects to fuel a new generation before trying to win again. The Oiler's are a complete anomaly. They threw out all their competitive veterans, hired a rookie coach, and ran with moronic upper management in hopes that a team of kids would somehow find a way without leadership. They're a poor example of tanking failing. A since they've brought in good veterans like Gordon and Roy, hired a new coach, they've been a great team to watch. Do tell of other teams that rebuilt in 2-3 years: LA missed 6 years straight, Chicago missed 9 of 10 years. WPG/ATL has made one post season appearance in the last 14 years. Florida 2 playoff appearances in 16 years, Columbus 2 playoff appearances in the last 13 years. New york islanders have 5 playoff appearance in the last 19 years And trust me, you don't even want to know how many top 5 picks have been choosing within that time frame Guess what I haven't even mentioned the Oilers. In reality tanking only works when you luck out and get "that" player. "That" player doesn't mean generational talent as capitals haven't made it past the second round. "That" player is the player that is a born winner and often "that" player doesn't go first overall. If tanking is such a success. There would be more than just 5 first overall picks to have won the cup in the last 30 years, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 There's slim chance McEichel will end up in TO btw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Monahan Posted March 19, 2015 Author Share Posted March 19, 2015 So what new and inventive argument around the topic do you have that hasn't been discussed in those other threads? I'm pretty sure people have more than adequately expressed their feelings on tanking already. You're not exactly the foremost authority on "new and inventive". As I already said, these threads are in no way focused on the morality of tanking. Yes, the topic comes up here and there but the discussion is most definitely not focused on it. Judging by the reasonably large number of responses to this thread in the relatively short time i wouldn't say people have "more than adequately expressed their feelings on tanking already". This thread is not redundant or a copy of another thread. You remind me a hell of a lot of Randall from Recess, for those who watched that show as kids. Just quit trying to moderate the boards when you're not a dam moderator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Monahan Posted March 19, 2015 Author Share Posted March 19, 2015 There's slim chance McEichel will end up in TO btw. http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?type=lea#&navid=nav-stn-league They're catching up though. Of course their chances are still slim but if Phil can continue to chip in a half-ass effort for the rest of the season and you pair that with the way half of their D core seems to become utterly stunned whenever the puck enters their zone and they have a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronalds.Kenins41 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Edmonton just climbed to 28th spot in the league yesterday. Now it's all but guaranteed that, Craig Mactavish will get fired Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TOMapleLaughs Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?type=lea#&navid=nav-stn-league They're catching up though. Of course their chances are still slim but if Phil can continue to chip in a half-ass effort for the rest of the season and you pair that with the way half of their D core seems to become utterly stunned whenever the puck enters their zone and they have a chance.No doubt they are embarrassing, but Buffalo and Arizona has put in a way bigger tanking effort this season imho. What TO did was just nail their recently signed bloated stars to the cross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herberts Vasiljevs Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 The Sedins' gives us 100 + points or more every year, so who will replace that part? Obvious troll is obvious. Isn't every tanking thread really about discussing whether it's right or not? And there are plenty of tanking threads (i.e. Are more teams tanking for McDavid?) Give it a rest… lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ForsbergTheGreat Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 http://www.nhl.com/ice/standings.htm?type=lea#&navid=nav-stn-league They're catching up though. Of course their chances are still slim but if Phil can continue to chip in a half-ass effort for the rest of the season and you pair that with the way half of their D core seems to become utterly stunned whenever the puck enters their zone and they have a chance. I really hope he goes to the desert. Fans in Arizona need something to be excited about in order to go to the games. A McDavid could be just that. Arizona has kept Doan for that very reason, they want him to be the mentor for the next player to take over. Perhaps some consistent regular season success and people will start to show up and support a winning team. I love going down there to golf and see some games, so I’m really hoping hockey works out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Monahan Posted March 19, 2015 Author Share Posted March 19, 2015 I really hope he goes to the desert. Fans in Arizona need something to be excited about in order to go to the games. A McDavid could be just that. Arizona has kept Doan for that very reason, they want him to be the mentor for the next player to take over. Perhaps some consistent regular season success and people will start to show up and support a winning team. I love going down there to golf and see some games, so I’m really hoping hockey works out there. Honestly I think the Coyotes have a few game-changing options here. McDavid is likely a game changer for everybody of course. Eichel probably is too but as an American citizen I think he'd be best suited for an American market. And next year's draft we have Auston Matthews, an Arizona native himself. I think he could do wonders for that franchise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Monahan Posted March 19, 2015 Author Share Posted March 19, 2015 Give it a rest… lol. thank you sir Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 The thing is, starting in the 2016 draft, tanking only guarantees you the 4th overall pick. The top-3 are chosen by lottery, and there usually is a big drop in quality after that. Sure, you have better odds by tanking, but it's not a surefire bet at top-2 like the current form of the draft lottery. Everyone is talking about Buffalo going for McDavid, but still, there is an 80% chance that they don't win the lottery. The thing is, this year Eichel is a pretty good consolation prize to whoever gets dead-last. But next year, they would still have to win 2nd to do it. And if not, they'd have to win to even get 3rd. I'm not sure on the odds, but it seems to be that last place would still have an over 50% chance of not winning one of the top-3 picks, and would end up picking 4th. So yeah, tanking was a good strategy in the past, if done right. But it's not going to be nearly effective from 2015-16 onward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Question: Would Pittsburgh's tanking have worked if they didn't win the league-wide Crosby lottery? I don't think Malkin, Staal, Fleury, and the immortal Ryan Whitney would have got the job done. Also, there were a lot of giant flops in the first round of the Crosby draft, so had they not hit the jackpot, they could have easily picked a bust there too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFCanuck Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 You should try to at least not make it so obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Monahan Posted March 19, 2015 Author Share Posted March 19, 2015 Question: Would Pittsburgh's tanking have worked if they didn't win the league-wide Crosby lottery? I don't think Malkin, Staal, Fleury, and the immortal Ryan Whitney would have got the job done. Also, there were a lot of giant flops in the first round of the Crosby draft, so had they not hit the jackpot, they could have easily picked a bust there too. The argument isn't about whether tanking works or not. History has shown that landing that first overall pick usually does change the franchise. The issue I have is, as a fan, it would be painful to experience. Leafs fans, as much as I hate them and their team, have been through it these last couple of years and this year has been a trainwreck for them. I don't blame them for throwing jerseys and wearing paper bags, they've had to watch management run the team into the ground with poor decision making and now watch them try to bail themselves out by tanking when more than likely they'll end up with a Hanifin or Marner rather than McDavid. Potentially great players, yes, but not worth the suffering imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I have nothing against it. Just another strategy to improve your team. Just like how the Patriots do whatever it takes to win even if it goes against the grain. or what the Colts did to get Luck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Barzal Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Do tell of other teams that rebuilt in 2-3 years: LA missed 6 years straight, Chicago missed 9 of 10 years. WPG/ATL has made one post season appearance in the last 14 years. Florida 2 playoff appearances in 16 years, Columbus 2 playoff appearances in the last 13 years. New york islanders have 5 playoff appearance in the last 19 years And trust me, you don't even want to know how many top 5 picks have been choosing within that time frame Guess what I haven't even mentioned the Oilers. In reality tanking only works when you luck out and get "that" player. "That" player doesn't mean generational talent as capitals haven't made it past the second round. "That" player is the player that is a born winner and often "that" player doesn't go first overall. If tanking is such a success. There would be more than just 5 first overall picks to have won the cup in the last 30 years, Difference between tanking and straight up sucking. And by 'rebuilding' I don't mean it takes three years to recoup and make the playoffs. I meant it takes 3 years to acquire the assets to begin climbing your way back up the ladder. Kings '06-'09. Hawks '04-'07. ATL poor drafting. FLA poor asset management. CBJ poor asset management NYI, they fit the bill for what you're pointing out. The reason it hasn't worked out for so long is because the NHL is an old boys club. Any dolt who played in the NHL and had a decent career could talk his way into an office job if he liked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 You're not exactly the foremost authority on "new and inventive". As I already said, these threads are in no way focused on the morality of tanking. Yes, the topic comes up here and there but the discussion is most definitely not focused on it. Judging by the reasonably large number of responses to this thread in the relatively short time i wouldn't say people have "more than adequately expressed their feelings on tanking already". This thread is not redundant or a copy of another thread. You remind me a hell of a lot of Randall from Recess, for those who watched that show as kids. Just quit trying to moderate the boards when you're not a dam moderator. That didn't really answer my question though. I'm genuinely curious about what ideas you have that makes this thread different. As I said, people have expressed their opinions multiple times on "how CDC felt about this." Will you get new answers here? I'd guess probably not. And as much as the morality of it all has been discussed partly in the other threads, the specifics about who drafts who are being partly discussed here too. I just don't see how this is really new compared to what else has been discussed recently. But I'm open to you changing my mind. ... Give it a rest… lol. And yet I've contributed more to the discussion in this thread than your fantastic one liner (well, two I guess with the first part of your reply - if I can shorten your post to ignore parts of it then you can shorten mine as well). That always amazes me; is there anything you have to say on the morality of tanking? Or have you said it all already in other threads? Again, I'm genuinely interested to hear people's opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathew Barzal Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I'm actually wondering something too, are you a mod in some capacity? Cause I see you take it upon yourself to kind of police CDC a lot of the time. Not prodding, just curious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I'm actually wondering something too, are you a mod in some capacity? Cause I see you take it upon yourself to kind of police CDC a lot of the time. Not prodding, just curious. Not at all, I just want this to be a better place to visit and discuss the Canucks without having the same discussions in several threads at once (or be cluttered with crap threads, not that I'm saying this is one of those). It's not like that's not the case around here far too often. I report things if I feel it warrants it, but if I reply it's not some crappy 'ibtl', 'ban' or 'spiderman' post, but rather a post that either links to relevant info or discusses it right then and there. I'm not even saying this would get locked and didn't report it at all, just genuinely asking what new discussion there is on the topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.