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

Recommended Posts

Just now, Crabby said:

Yes it would. But I wont be the one complaining at that time :P

Assuming there will be more flux with more parity, then we will all hopefully get the ups and downs of this rule over time. But more teams will likely not intentionally tank with this in place with the major benefit of doing so is removed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tony Romo said:

Yes, and this rule wont really do anything to stop that. 

but it will stop rewarding being dead worst in any given year. That alone will help incredibly with league parity.

 

In fact, the discussion thus far is proving to me that the reward for being worst is far too high if people are 'fighting' for the right to be worst. LOL. see what I am saying? 

 

I enjoy all your ideas, and appreciate being in the discussion but my interest is flagging and I have to do chores. Moving on now. Hopefully everyone can get past which year the bottom five clubs are inconvenienced in and we can see how this works for a few seasons before we look back on the reality of how it worked out and decide if we got our intended results. I expect the divide from 1st to 31st will shrink in points gap dramatically even in the first full year of the rule, and possibly even right now in the final two months before the trade deadline. Some folks think it may get worse, but i fail to see how. My money is on the point gap shrinking making parity closer to reality, and over the far horizon, keeping GML going for another decade, and it is already far longer lasting than most any other keeper league. Small rule changes like this seems to be why it is lasting. Enjoy your day everyone, was good to discuss this without anyone getting totally upset, I appreciate that a lot, the most actually! You are all great folks that love our chosen sport as much as I do, that is awesome and what makes GML awesome. 

Edited by Primal Optimist
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Tony Romo said:

Yes, and this rule wont really do anything to stop that. 

This rule is suppose to prevent intentional tanking. GM firings will take care of not icing a full roster.

 

Perhaps middling teams may want to drop a little to get them that chance, but that means they've tried at least during the offseason or season to improve to get to that point rather than going into the year with a plan to not even try for 2 years or whatever. It won't be as blatant as teams unloading every player with a bit of value as GMs can try, but they won't last long. The minimal you can do here is to have a full roster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

Assuming there will be more flux with more parity, then we will all hopefully get the ups and downs of this rule over time. But more teams will likely not intentionally tank with this in place with the major benefit of doing so is removed.

Trust me your about to see a whole new level of tank under this rule

 

If im in the playoff picture but minimal playoff players.. Why not trade a guy or 2 to get decent odds off a top 5 pick. That pick could put me over the top in 2 year. Might not be your traditional tank but it is still a tank

Edited by Crabby
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Primal Optimist said:

but it will stop rewarding being dead worst in any given year. That alone will help incredibly with league parity.

But if the worst team is drafting 14 I do not see how that will help parity. And more teams will try and tank, which also does not help parity. I honestly view this as a nice idea, but how it will actually play out is it will be absolutely riveting watching the lottery unfold and it will give me my gambling fix, but the end result could be more teams tanking and the worst teams getting worse prospects. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Crabby said:

Trust me your about to see a whole new level of tank under this rule

 

If im in the playoff picture but minimal playoff players.. Why not trade a guy or 2 to get decent odds off a top 5 pick. That pick could put me over the top in 2 year. Might not be your traditional tank but it is still a tank

Once you get a taste of playoff GML Hockey. You will want to win.

 

Its addictive. Lol. Regular season is just a build up to the excitement of playoff hockey baby!

 

 

edmonton oilers GIF by NHL

ice hockey sport GIF by NHL

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Crabby said:

Trust me your about to see a whole new level of tank under this rule

If GMs want to try their luck and win basically two lotteries to win 1st overall, then by all means. Just have a meaningful roster for the season. If teams are trying to fandangle their rosters to land one spot outside of the playoffs between the TDL and end of regular season with the hopes they will jump draft spots, then that is their choice and could backfire just as easily as it could be beneficial.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, theo5789 said:

If GMs want to try their luck and win basically two lotteries to win 1st overall, then by all means. Just have a meaningful roster for the season. If teams are trying to fandangle their rosters to land one spot outside of the playoffs between the TDL and end of regular season with the hopes they will jump draft spots, then that is their choice and could backfire just as easily as it could be beneficial.

Only need top 5 in 1st lottery and im good. Thats what, a 33% shot if I just barely miss the playoffs. Id take those odds

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Tony Romo said:

But if the worst team is drafting 14 I do not see how that will help parity. And more teams will try and tank, which also does not help parity. I honestly view this as a nice idea, but how it will actually play out is it will be absolutely riveting watching the lottery unfold and it will give me my gambling fix, but the end result could be more teams tanking and the worst teams getting worse prospects. 

 

right now the middle third cut off is 1122 and all but three teams are only 200 points from making it into the middle third. 

Right now those last three teams are so far tanked that they are kind of screwed, Vegas would need to double its current points to get to 20th overall. 

no matter what year the rule changes, these worst teams will have to claw their way back to within a shot of that middle third, right? so the year is irrelevant if we all stand back and take a broad general look at it. 

The new rule itself wills stop any future teams from trying to get intentionally that bad to secure the best possible draftpick, that is where the rule will help future parity, even though future GM's will still make team decisions that they can't really win the cup and so may back off and trade a piece or two to 'try to gerrymander' and not make the playoffs. 

The funny thing is, as I have proven in CFL with a mediocre club two years in a row I went super deep in the playoffs one year missing hte cup win by 7 points. With a team that any subjective GM would have been iffy on even making the playoffs with, and so may have chosen to tank with. I think for sure we have to revisit this in a few years to see the intended results worked out but I see it as being that most non playoff clubs will end up within a few hundred points of each other while no new teams will be striving to get a prize by being worst, so they will not sell as much if they are trying to subtly avoid the playoffs. Subtely is a good strategy, but there has never been a right to tank in the league, it has just gotten more and more brazen as time goes by that the action was likely necessary by the league. Anywho, I have spent far too much time here now today and am going outside. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Crabby said:

If im in the playoff picture but minimal playoff players.. Why not trade a guy or 2 to get decent odds off a top 5 pick. That pick could put me over the top in 2 year. Might not be your traditional tank but it is still a tank

I see that as at least you gave it a shot for the regular season. Trading a guy or two is not as blatant as selling everyone off your roster and not having enough to ice a proper team. I'm not opposed to a "tank" and think there is a benefit for the league for teams to do so, but when an entire roster is blown up a 1/3 of the season in, the intention is obvious and I believe that's what the goal of this rule is to prevent.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Tony Romo said:

But if the worst team is drafting 14 I do not see how that will help parity. And more teams will try and tank, which also does not help parity. I honestly view this as a nice idea, but how it will actually play out is it will be absolutely riveting watching the lottery unfold and it will give me my gambling fix, but the end result could be more teams tanking and the worst teams getting worse prospects. 

 

I say let's give it a chance. If it needs tweaks down the road we can possibly explore weighting picks based on finish. This is a nice move though imo - Sure it sucks now but in time this may help the league.  I agree some teams may opt out of the playoffs but honestly that's their loss. Why would you purposely lose the playoffs for a 50% chance of picking in the top 8? why not go for the playoffs and ty to make it work. If you lose you still get those odds. The goal should be to build up a team of playoff bound assets. If you have a team worthy of playoffs with a few shroud moves involving picks you can quickly transform your club from a playoff team with non playoff guys to a playoff juggernaut. We have all see how 1-2 players can vastly outproduce big name players in the playoffs.  Have to use ur savvyness to try and find those pieces! 

 

I would take a chance in the playoffs over a 50% chance at a top 8 pick. Maybe that's just me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Crabby said:

Only need top 5 in 1st lottery and im good. Thats what, a 33% shot if I just barely miss the playoffs. Id take those odds

You have to balance selling enough between the TDL and the end of the regular season while still having a full roster. If you can accomplish that and just miss out on the playoffs and then win the lottery for the top 5 in Phase 1, then good for you. You could still end up drafting a dud or that pick could take another year or 2 before making an impact to your roster. That player could drafted to a bottom feeding NHL team that doesn't help you in your future if you plan on making the playoffs in the next year. It's still a lot more effort and luck than blowing a team up, getting to the bottom and then getting the top picks. To try and do this year after year to build a team wouldn't be fun for me, I rather give it a go in the playoffs and maybe win an elusive championship one day.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So for those of you interested.

 

Thomas Greiss (G)

Craig Anderson (G)

Christian Wolanin (D)

 

To my knowledge have all been waived today. If you need a G or defender and have the cap space.. you cannot say you can't acquire one. If you want to place a claim on either, both, or all send a PM to @canuck2xtreme.  Happy waiver surfing folks!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Primal Optimist said:

right now the middle third cut off is 1122 and all but three teams are only 200 points from making it into the middle third. 

Right now those last three teams are so far tanked that they are kind of screwed, Vegas would need to double its current points to get to 20th overall. 

no matter what year the rule changes, these worst teams will have to claw their way back to within a shot of that middle third, right? so the year is irrelevant if we all stand back and take a broad general look at it. 

The new rule itself wills stop any future teams from trying to get intentionally that bad to secure the best possible draftpick, that is where the rule will help future parity, even though future GM's will still make team decisions that they can't really win the cup and so may back off and trade a piece or two to 'try to gerrymander' and not make the playoffs. 

The funny thing is, as I have proven in CFL with a mediocre club two years in a row I went super deep in the playoffs one year missing hte cup win by 7 points. With a team that any subjective GM would have been iffy on even making the playoffs with, and so may have chosen to tank with. I think for sure we have to revisit this in a few years to see the intended results worked out but I see it as being that most non playoff clubs will end up within a few hundred points of each other while no new teams will be striving to get a prize by being worst, so they will not sell as much if they are trying to subtly avoid the playoffs. Subtely is a good strategy, but there has never been a right to tank in the league, it has just gotten more and more brazen as time goes by that the action was likely necessary by the league. Anywho, I have spent far too much time here now today and am going outside. 

One of those teams just acquired David Pasternak, so Im not sure if they are clearly tanking. 

 

I don't think anyone is intentionally trying to be bad, they just have an eye on the future, for example trading for Pasternak was good for Minnesotas future even though it hurt his draft position.  

 

Most rebuilding teams will still tear it down and have a bad team, and they do that not because of the reward for a top pick, but because thats just what happens when a rebuilding team prioritizes the future, this rule just incentives more teams to rebuild.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thomas Greiss (G)

His 2 year term hurts me for next year. I will be looking to acquire a legit #1 for next season and I am hoping Ingram or Askarov gets some starts for me as a backup

 

Craig Anderson (G)

2GP this year. He even a backup anymore or just a 3rd option?

 

Christian Wolanin (D)

He has 9GP in NHL and 9GP in AHL. Not really an NHL guys, seems more like a possible call up option. I alrready have enough AHL Dmen and it will just make it tougher for me to sign someone I actually have interest in next year. Tried getting Jack Ahcan but that issue is why I couldnt sign him

 

Just my thoughts on why I wont be placing a claim on either of these 3. Its what I feel is best for my team, and I took this team over to build a winner. Just though id put it out there b4 people assumed im just purely tanking and not actually giving things some thought. 

 

If anyone has a backup G in their minors and are currently sour about me not having one, feel free to offer him for FC. Unless hes coming with 3+ years term id strongly consoder it :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Crabby said:

Thomas Greiss (G)

His 2 year term hurts me for next year. I will be looking to acquire a legit #1 for next season and I am hoping Ingram or Askarov gets some starts for me as a backup

 

Craig Anderson (G)

2GP this year. He even a backup anymore or just a 3rd option?

 

Christian Wolanin (D)

He has 9GP in NHL and 9GP in AHL. Not really an NHL guys, seems more like a possible call up option. I alrready have enough AHL Dmen and it will just make it tougher for me to sign someone I actually have interest in next year. Tried getting Jack Ahcan but that issue is why I couldnt sign him

 

Just my thoughts on why I wont be placing a claim on either of these 3. Its what I feel is best for my team, and I took this team over to build a winner. Just though id put it out there b4 people assumed im just purely tanking and not actually giving things some thought. 

 

If anyone has a backup G in their minors and are currently sour about me not having one, feel free to offer him for FC. Unless hes coming with 3+ years term id strongly consoder it :)

Think of ways you can incorporate a guy like Greiss for this season. Move him next season perhaps?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Rush17 said:

Think of ways you can incorporate a guy like Greiss for this season. Move him next season perhaps?

Cant guarentee there will be a taker. He probably wont even be a starter next year. I get the whole anti tank thing but im not about to make knee jerk poor moves that will hurt my plan of building a contender. im going to need to take a few days an re-evaluate some things with my team. might ship out some young guys and chase 25th place :towel:

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Crabby said:

Cant guarentee there will be a taker. He probably wont even be a starter next year. I get the whole anti tank thing but im not about to make knee jerk poor moves that will hurt my plan of building a contender. im going to need to take a few days an re-evaluate some things with my team. might ship out some young guys and chase 25th place :towel:

Waive and or bury in the AHL if you can't find a taker.

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Crabby said:

Thomas Greiss (G)

His 2 year term hurts me for next year. I will be looking to acquire a legit #1 for next season and I am hoping Ingram or Askarov gets some starts for me as a backup

 

Craig Anderson (G)

2GP this year. He even a backup anymore or just a 3rd option?

 

Christian Wolanin (D)

He has 9GP in NHL and 9GP in AHL. Not really an NHL guys, seems more like a possible call up option. I alrready have enough AHL Dmen and it will just make it tougher for me to sign someone I actually have interest in next year. Tried getting Jack Ahcan but that issue is why I couldnt sign him

 

Just my thoughts on why I wont be placing a claim on either of these 3. Its what I feel is best for my team, and I took this team over to build a winner. Just though id put it out there b4 people assumed im just purely tanking and not actually giving things some thought. 

 

If anyone has a backup G in their minors and are currently sour about me not having one, feel free to offer him for FC. Unless hes coming with 3+ years term id strongly consoder it :)

lol $2.25 next year will hurt you?

  • Haha 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Rush17 said:

Waive and or bury in the AHL if you can't find a taker.

Well then if he has a goalie target next year, he might be told that he already has a goalie in the system and they will look elsewhere. So I get there are also negatives in picking up people's scraps especially if it helps other clear cap and contract space.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...