Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

The morality of tanking


Recommended Posts

Also...are people forgetting Alexandre Daigle? Yes he's a bit of an exception but he's just a prime example that these highly touted prospects don't always turn into the players they're expected to be.

You're totally right, hyped prospects hardly ever amount to anything. Just look at Kane, Tavares, Stamkos, Crosby, Lindros...wait a second...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

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.

.

By creating a thread focused on this topic, not discussed in parts of other threads, when there doesn't already exist any I don't think I'm violating any of the rules. Again, you are a super mod and probably know better than us though.

I really haven't seen this specific topic discussed in very much depth. Link me to all the dam threads you want but I'm just not seeing it. I think it's a very interesting topic and has potential to provoke a lot of conversation and opinion. This isn't just about who's tanking, what they've done, etc. I'm talking about the impact it has on the NHL's fan base, something I haven't seen discussed to any length. Personally I think tanking is a poor way to manage a team and is usually just a desperate attempt to compensate for years of inadequate management, as we're seeing in toronto this year.

This isn't earth shattering news or innovation but like I said I don't see it breaking any rules either. As for the thread going off topic, a lot of that has been thanks to you. A REAL moderator (deb) actually chimed in to contribute to the conversation rather than knock it. That right there should tell you all you need to know. Please, if you don't want to contribute to the conversation and it's not in violation of board rules and policies, will you please please just f*ck off?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, again, what would you like to discuss that hasn't been already? You mention you're "just not seeing it" for the depth of the discussion elsewhere, but I've seen the inadequate management/desperate attempt argument, and the impact on the fans argument. What depth would you like us to discuss here?

To get the party started I'll reiterate my post from the first page:

Players don't tank though, so you're bound to see excellent effort from bottom feeder teams, just as you are poor efforts from top teams some nights. The real difference is what is the quality of the roster that the management has set up between those two teams for how they do over a course of a season.

I love the Canucks and I like the roster they have for the most part, but I've been to games where they've sucked big time against lesser teams only to go on and demolish a better team the next night. That poor effort the one night has nothing to do with tanking though.

But that's just it, all the fans practically cheering for the Canucks to tank want it to happen, they just don't want to watch while it does. If they showed the same level of support in actually watching games for a poor team as they did for the team in 2011 and surrounding years, then teams wouldn't be as opposed to a quick rebuild.

It wasn't that long ago that Canucks fans were very unhappy with the on ice product and didn't watch a lot of games. Even in the 80's it was a long spell between our cup final and drafting Linden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're totally right, hyped prospects hardly ever amount to anything. Just look at Kane, Tavares, Stamkos, Crosby, Lindros...wait a second...

When did I say "hardly ever"? I said "not always", which is entirely true. If you read through the thread I actually said it usually does work.

Aside from Daigle there's also Dipietro, Stefan, and Erik Johnson. Johnson isn't a bust certainly hasn't panned out to what he was hoped to be.

That dates back to 1999, for a total of 16 drafts. Almost 1 in 5 of those first overall picks were a "bust" or not nearly to the level they were expected to be (you can hardly call Johnson a star) so maybe I'm not as big of a moron as you think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, again, what would you like to discuss that hasn't been already? You mention you're "just not seeing it" for the depth of the discussion elsewhere, but I've seen the inadequate management/desperate attempt argument, and the impact on the fans argument. What depth would you like us to discuss here?

To get the party started I'll reiterate my post from the first page:

To remind you, a real mod participated without any issue which is solace enough for me so I'm not going to continue arguing here with a wannabe mod over the rules of CDC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To remind you, a real mod participated without any issue which is solace enough for me so I'm not going to continue arguing here with a wannabe mod over the rules of CDC.

I'm aware a mod has already participated, and I even re-posted my reply to her as proof of my taking part in the discussion that I'm asking you about.

So you don't want to debate your own topic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm aware a mod has already participated, and I even re-posted my reply to her as proof of my taking part in the discussion that I'm asking you about.

So you don't want to debate your own topic?

Thanks in large part to you this has gotten wildly off topic.

But in regards to what you said to deb, my originally intention was never about the players themselves. as much as I don't like dion phaneuf I don't think you'll ever see him give a half-assed effort. My issue is with the management teams using tanking to cover up their own mistakes. It looks bad on the franchise and it's an insult to the fan base. Using the leafs as an example again, last I heard their fans pay more for tickets than anybody else. This isn't a big deal when the team establishes themselves as consistently being a superior product to the majority of the league. But it's not, and the fans have suffered through their lame attempts at winning which ultimately brought them to the disaster they're in now. While they never explicitly said they were tanking, it seemed to be well known throughout the league and its fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No strategy is perfect and all can fail but it is one of the better ones for making ones team competitive.

For what it's worth 9 of the last 10 Stanley Cup winning rosters had at least 1 player who was a top 2 pick. Only the Red Wings did not. 8 of those teams drafted those players themselves the only one who didn't was Anaheim with Pronger. Though you could make the argument Seguin wasn't truly developed yet that season with the Bruins.

Still point being grabbing up a top pick can have its benefits.

Sports teams are starting to look to take advantage of this. Only in the MLB is the draft far more unpredictable. This year alone we have seen teams front offices in the NHL, NBA, and NFL intentionally tank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks in large part to you this has gotten wildly off topic.

But in regards to what you said to deb, my originally intention was never about the players themselves. as much as I don't like dion phaneuf I don't think you'll ever see him give a half-assed effort. My issue is with the management teams using tanking to cover up their own mistakes. It looks bad on the franchise and it's an insult to the fan base. Using the leafs as an example again, last I heard their fans pay more for tickets than anybody else. This isn't a big deal when the team establishes themselves as consistently being a superior product to the majority of the league. But it's not, and the fans have suffered through their lame attempts at winning which ultimately brought them to the disaster they're in now. While they never explicitly said they were tanking, it seemed to be well known throughout the league and its fans.

I mentioned in one line of a much larger post how it was similar to other threads after you'd specifically mentioned me in your OP and that very sentiment. Don't blame me if you chose to ignore the rest of my post.

But I didn't only reply to Deb or about the players, and even if I had that wasn't my point. Are you saying your point about the morality of tanking (which is what I was asking for) is that fans suffer through the lame attempt at winning using the Leafs as an example? The Leafs haven't tanked though, not really. They've had bad years, and plenty of seasons where they missed the playoffs, but they tried to be competitive and brought in players to try and win. They even made a trade for Kessel to that effect and gave up what turned out to be very good 1st round picks in successive years - kinda the opposite of tanking.

And with all that, the fans are still there at games. They may be wearing bags over their heads, or throwing waffles, jerseys and other things on the ice, but they're still there. Now, imagine if they had truly tanked, done much of what Buffalo and Arizona did this year making significant trades to get rid of older more expensive players they didn't see as a part of the rebuild. It would have probably been a shorter turnaround and they could have returned to a better team than they currently are much quicker. Or they could have if they had competent management. Calgary was in this same boat too.

So what's harder on the fans, a short term tank, or a long term but very unsuccessful retool?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sooner or later this team will have to tank. I highly doubt guys like Mcann can take over the 1st line duties in the future. Furthermore, guys like Horvat, Mcann, Virtanen are all looking like 2nd liners to me. Unless Mcann do something special, I don't see him ranking higher then a 1st liner. However, I do believe Mcann was the steal of the draft. My reason for this is because he has a under-rated shot. In short, I think this team will be tanking in the future; unless they find a gem in the next 2 years because here is what I see in the future.

Horvat Baerstchi

Kassian Mathias Virtanen

So that leaves Hunter Shinkurak, Jensen and Mcann. Still need to draft a 1st line gem.

You don't even know how to spell McCann but you somehow know whether he will or wont be a 1st liner?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont personally think teams purposly tank, until I saw Toronto role through western Canada that is, the Flames game was absolutely embarassing, like I mean terrible, didnt think I could see a worse display, then they played Vancouver and I was like WTF, this is 5X worse then last night, then they roled into Edmonton and Im like ok, theyll pick up a win here, then Edmonton steam rolled them... I can honestly say this years Maple Leafs is the first team in my 20 years of watching hockey who I can actually say appear to be tanking intentionally, well, except for Ottawa when Daigles draft was coming up... is this an omen that McDavid=Daigle?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, that's part of why I hate it. People are putting their money into the team, they should get the best effort possible. Someone's going to be bad, but stripping a team down to nothing and trying to lose irks me.

I don't like seeing intentional mediocrity rewarded via the draft either.

Not only is it unfair to the fans, it's unfair to the players. These guys are trying their best every night and it must be discouraging to see management purposely screwing them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since the introduction of the salary cap, the overwhelming majority of teams who won the cup picked in the top 5 at least 3 times in the 5 years preceding their victory.

Carolina (2006) - Staal (2003,2), Ladd (2004,4), Johnson (2005,3)

Anaheim (2007) - Ryan (2005,2) [only one, but look at their 2003]

Detroit (2008) - Lol we turn late picks into Lindstrom, Datsyuk and Zetterberg

Pittsburgh (2009) - Malkin (2004,2), Crosby (2005,1), Staal (2006,2) [also Fleury in 2003 #1 overall)

Chicago (2010) - Toews (2006,3), Kane (2007,1)

Boston (2011) - Kessel(2006,5), Seguin (2010,2) [i know...]

LA (2012) - Hickey (2007,4), Doughty (2008,2), Schenn (2009,2)

Chicago (2013) - See 2010

LA (2014) - See 2012

If you were to stretch it to top 10 picks over 7 years - you'd see even more. Does tanking always work? Edmonton 2008-present. Do you need to tank to win? Not always. But if you do it right, it sure seems to help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same rule applies to tanking as it does to not tanking: you need to have smarts. You need to make the right trades. You need to make the right signings. You need to let go of the right people You need to have the right kind of luck and it all needs to be timely.

Only a couple of teams have really been successful at tanking and creating a successful team. Most teams that tank fail to develop their team into a legitimate contender.

My conclusion: Unless if you're already near or at the bottom of the pack, it would be absolutely foolish to tank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...