The Official Tank Thread II

[SoupNazi]

Continue here.

Click to read more...

 

[Bench]

Are you saying there was consensus the Blackhawks would be perennial championship contenders when they drafted Kane and Toews...before they even ever made the playoffs?

Yes. There was lots of buzz about their future. How about this one titled "Blackhawks A Team on the Rise". Or is that a little too on the nose?

https://www.nhl.com/blackhawks/news/blackhawks-a-team-on-the-rise/c-477017

They didn’t make the Stanley Cup Playoffs, but the Chicago Blackhawks showed signs in 2007-08 that they could be major contenders in the NHL for years to come.

Here's an article also from 2008 comparing Toews to Steve *** Yzerman.

http://www.espn.com/nhl/preview2008/columns/story?id=3635150&columnist=burnside_scott

But to look at Toews -- whether he wanders out of the Blackhawks dressing room, approaches the media, signs autographs for fans, skates onto the ice or skates back into his own zone to cover an opposing center -- you catch a flash of the No. 19 on the back of his jersey, and we defy you not to think of another No. 19, a guy named Steve Yzerman.

Or here's another: "Central preview: Red Wings still rule, but Blackhawks are rising"

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/nhl/2008-09-30-central-preview_N.htm

CHICAGO BLACKHAWKS

Story line: The excitement surrounding the Blackhawks is reminiscent of the wave of enthusiasm that washed over Pittsburgh when Sidney Crosby came to town.

[...]

Three reasons to like the Blackhawks: 1. Toews and Kane are the NHL's best young center-wing combination, with a chemistry similar to Bryan Trottier and Mike Bossy. 2. The Blackhawks' defensive core, led by Campbell and Duncan Keith, rates among the best in the West. 3. The Blackhawks went 5-3 against the Red Wings last season. They are more confident than many opponents realize.

The hype train was super real. Although I'm sure you'll argue this isn't "consensus" so...

 

[WingedWheel1987]

The Wings weren't building towards anything over the past five years.

They were just trying to keep the status quo going. The goal wasn't to get better. The goal was to not get worse.

That type of team building philosophy will almost always lead to a bottoming out where a traditional rebuild has to take place. It takes too long and requires far too much luck for it to succeed.

If you think traditional rebuilds are too unpredictable and require too much luck to pull off, then rebuilding on the fly takes even more luck. Expecting an organization to draft elite talent in the 15-20 range on a more consistent basis then a team that is drafting in the top five over the span of five years is insane.

Frankly it's insulting to the rest of the league to suggest otherwise.

 

[Dotter]

I'm going to need you to explain to me how you define "tank." Because we are not tanking by any definition of the term.

Why do you think tank can only be at the beginning of the season? If Wings are trading Vanek, Ott, and/or Green/Nyquist/Tatar or whoever else at deadline for draft picks, that is a tank.

If Wings are trading those assets to upgrade... say for Shattenkirk (for example), that is not a tank.

If Ken Holland opts to keep Ott and Vanek, that is not a tank.

And I would be very happy if Ken Holland re-signs Vanek to 2 more years.

But I regress, I don't think you have to announce you're team is tanking at the start of the season for it to be 'officially' a tank. It could be giving up on the season and selling for picks. Which also means if you're selling Green, Vanek, Nyquist for example, that weakens next season and the season after. Which also means tank (unless they upgrade those players during free agency).

 

[AD1066]

Why do you think tank can only be at the beginning of the season? If Wings are trading Vanek, Ott, and/or Green/Nyquist/Tatar or whoever else at deadline for draft picks, that is a tank.

It's smart asset management, when faced with a <1% chance of making the playoffs.

 

[The Zetterberg Era]

Why do you think tank can only be at the beginning of the season? If Wings are trading Vanek, Ott, and/or Green/Nyquist/Tatar or whoever else at deadline for draft picks, that is a tank.

If Wings are trading those assets to upgrade... say for Shattenkirk (for example), that is not a tank.

If Ken Holland opts to keep Ott and Vanek, that is not a tank.

And I would be very happy if Ken Holland re-signs Vanek to 2 more years.

But I regress, I don't think you have to announce you're team is tanking at the start of the season for it to be 'officially' a tank. It could be giving up on the season and selling for picks. Which also means if you're selling Green, Vanek, Nyquist for example, that weakens next season and the season after. Which also means tank (unless they upgrade those players during free agency).

Well teams do outright declare that tank at the trade deadline and we best be one of them this year.

 

[Dotter]

Well teams do outright declare that tank at the trade deadline and we best be one of them this year.

It's hard to replace Vanek and Green. I doubt the picks they return will be close to their level... assuming any of those picks even develop into an NHL player at all. 2017 draft ain't showing much hope with draft eligible players.

Wrong year to try to tank for a top 5 pick. Unless you can land that #1. But in the draft lottery, who knows. They don't have to finish bottom 5 for the #1, either.

Keep Green and Vanek, trade Ott and Smith. I could live with that.

 

[obey86]

Yes. There was lots of buzz about their future. How about this one titled "Blackhawks A Team on the Rise". Or is that a little too on the nose?

https://www.nhl.com/blackhawks/news/blackhawks-a-team-on-the-rise/c-477017



Here's an article also from 2008 comparing Toews to Steve *** Yzerman.

http://www.espn.com/nhl/preview2008/columns/story?id=3635150&columnist=burnside_scott



Or here's another: "Central preview: Red Wings still rule, but Blackhawks are rising"

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/hockey/nhl/2008-09-30-central-preview_N.htm



The hype train was super real. Although I'm sure you'll argue this isn't "consensus" so...

These puff pieces are written every single offseason about every bad team that finally has a decent year and is now poised to be a stanley cup contender.

Flames: http://thehockeywriters.com/calgary-flames-in-the-playoffs-the-difference-a-decade-makes/

And now it begins. Whether they make it past the first round or not, the Flames have surprised everyone in the league with how far they’ve come, and have now established that they’ve got what it takes to be a constant Cup contender from here on out.

Avalanche: http://thehockeywriters.com/5-things-avalanche-fans-should-be-thankful-for/

These guys are exciting to watch and ooze with potential. Each of them possess unique skill sets that mesh well with each other and all of them get along very well on and off the ice. So thank whoever you’d like Avalanche fans, because that is one talented core for the near future. They are poised to become real contenders to win Championships in the upcoming years.

Panthers: http://www.si.com/nhl/2016/10/03/ap-hkn-panthers-preview

The Panthers were one of the NHL's surprises last year, winning the Atlantic Division - only two years after finishing a staggering 51 points back in the division race - and putting together the best regular season in franchise history. Now they have the look of a full-fledged contender, with expectations higher than they've been in two decades.

Stars: http://www.si.com/nhl/2016/05/12/dallas-stars-future-after-2016-nhl-playoff-elimination

In fact, their window has just cracked open. Given what they have on hand, and what's on the way, the best is yet to come.

http://www.star-telegram.com/sports/spt-columns-blogs/mac-engel/article63674377.html

The Stars are going to make the playoffs and should be back in it for a while, thus ending their run of missing the postseason in six of the previous seven years.

After that, once their defensemen catch up to their forwards, then they will be the Blackhawks.

There have been these types of articles written on the Lightning (deservedly so), there will be multiple articles this offseason on the Leafs and Oilers poised for championship success, and then next year when the Sabres probably make the playoffs they will be the next team to get articles written about how they will soon be a championship contender.

 

[Bench]

These puff pieces are written every single offseason about every bad team that finally has a decent year and is now poised to be a stanley cup contender.

Yeah, I had a hunch you wouldn't concede the point even though I found articles that specifically pointed to the hype train kicking up before they made the playoffs as you stipulated. Ah well, it was a good try.

 

[Mijatovic]

2017 draft ain't showing much hope with draft eligible players.

Ridiculous assertion.

 

[Run the Jewels]

It's hard to replace Vanek and Green. I doubt the picks they return will be close to their level... assuming any of those picks even develop into an NHL player at all. 2017 draft ain't showing much hope with draft eligible players.

Wrong year to try to tank for a top 5 pick. Unless you can land that #1. But in the draft lottery, who knows. They don't have to finish bottom 5 for the #1, either.

Keep Green and Vanek, trade Ott and Smith. I could live with that.

If you keep Vanek you would likely lose him for nothing this summer. If you trade him for a 1st or 2nd you could get the next Shea Weber or the next PK Subban or the next Duncan Keith! Isn't that what the anti-improvement people always chime in with? Since we are not making the playoffs why would you be opposed to trading Vanek for a draft pick?

 

[obey86]

do you have better odds of winning the cup if you miss or make the playoffs?

 

[cjm502]

do you have better odds of winning the cup if you miss or make the playoffs?

The answer is obvious, but you have to look at the bigger picture.

 

[Run the Jewels]

The answer is obvious, but you have to look at the bigger picture.

Wings currently have a 2% chance of making the playoffs.

So you're saying there's a chance we'll make the playoffs and win a Cup? Well then by all means keep Vanek for that Stanley Cup run!!

 

[Flowah]

do you have better odds of winning the cup if you miss or make the playoffs?

Over a 20 year span which gives you a better chance at winning the Cup?

1. Tank hard for 5 years, assemble a core with all the picks you've accumulated that can compete for 15.
2. Never rebuild, pick low for 20 years, hope to catch lightning in a bottle and find that Datsyuk and Zetterberg in the 6th and 7th round. Make the playoffs as a bubble team for 20 years straight.

It's the first one.

The chances of finding elite players after the first round are pretty much 0. They happen, but they're exceedingly rare. And they get even rarer when you realize that you're trading away draft picks at the TDL to keep making those playoff "runs" where you lose in 5 games in the first round.


Overall, in the long term, you can have better odds of winning the Cup if you miss the playoffs for a bit.

 

[Martinez]

Coyotes are 6-3-1 in their last 10

 

[HIFE]

Over a 20 year span which gives you a better chance at winning the Cup?

1. Tank hard for 5 years, assemble a core with all the picks you've accumulated that can compete for 15.
2. Never rebuild, pick low for 20 years, hope to catch lightning in a bottle and find that Datsyuk and Zetterberg in the 6th and 7th round. Make the playoffs as a bubble team for 20 years straight.

It's the first one.

The chances of finding elite players after the first round are pretty much 0. They happen, but they're exceedingly rare. And they get even rarer when you realize that you're trading away draft picks at the TDL to keep making those playoff "runs" where you lose in 5 games in the first round.

Overall, in the long term, you can have better odds of winning the Cup if you miss the playoffs for a bit.

Can't help but think of Chicago winning the Stanley Cup in 2010, 7 years ago! Winning it all another 2 times since and still 100% a danger. Like you say: allowing the team to fail for 5 years with a greater possibility of 15 years as a contender- sign me up!

 

[Cyborg Yzerberg]

do you have better odds of winning the cup if you miss or make the playoffs?

Going to say that if we miss the playoffs this year, we'll prolly win the Stanley Cup by June!

 

[jkutswings]

do you have better odds of winning the cup if you miss or make the playoffs?

If we're approaching this with a digital (on vs off) mentality, then do 29 teams fail every year?

A contender doesn't get built by always focusing on what's immediately in front of them. That's being shortsighted.

 

[WingedWheel1987]

do you have better odds of winning the cup if you miss or make the playoffs?

You have a zero percent chance of winning the powerball if you don't play.

vs.

You have a 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance of winning if you do play

I'll just save my 5 bucks and not play.

That's what it boils down to.

Bad teams do not win the cup. Bad teams do make the playoffs.

 

[Flowah]

You have a zero percent chance of winning the powerball if you don't play.

vs.

You have a 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% chance of winning if you do play.

But there's more to it than that.

It's more like this:

Goal: Buy an expensive house.
Option A: Work hard and save money
Option B: Buy lottery tickets with the money you would have otherwise saved

You *could* win the lottery and buy the house. Sure, logically, unless you buy a ticket you have 0 chance of winning that lottery so on some insane level you could argue you'd be foolish not to buy the ticket. But any rational, reasonable, sane person knows that buying those tickets are a waste of money and you'd be far better off saving your money and just working towards buying the house. You're far more likely to accomplish your goal that way.

 

[RedWingsfan55]

I will say with the unfortunate death of mike illitch if the philosophy might change. I believe Ken holland reported directly to MI. So with the kids running the show if they will put an effort into winning again. First by getting rid of holland.

 

[RedWingsfan55]

Over a 20 year span which gives you a better chance at winning the Cup?

1. Tank hard for 5 years, assemble a core with all the picks you've accumulated that can compete for 15.
2. Never rebuild, pick low for 20 years, hope to catch lightning in a bottle and find that Datsyuk and Zetterberg in the 6th and 7th round. Make the playoffs as a bubble team for 20 years straight.

It's the first one.

The chances of finding elite players after the first round are pretty much 0. They happen, but they're exceedingly rare. And they get even rarer when you realize that you're trading away draft picks at the TDL to keep making those playoff "runs" where you lose in 5 games in the first round.


Overall, in the long term, you can have better odds of winning the Cup if you miss the playoffs for a bit.

I honestly don't even think we need to tank for 5 years.

With mrazek, dekeyser, AA, mantha, larkin, oullette, as well as someone like svechnikov(spelling). If we get a high pick this year and sign say shattenkirk. I think we are competing again next year.

If we could dump kronwall and Ericsson even better but I doubt it.

 

[SpookyTsuki]

I honestly don't even think we need to tank for 5 years.

With mrazek, dekeyser, AA, mantha, larkin, oullette, as well as someone like svechnikov(spelling). If we get a high pick this year and sign say shattenkirk. I think we are competing again next year.

If we could dump kronwall and Ericsson even better but I doubt it.

We aren't getting shattenkirk. But yeah the rebuild shouldn't take long. Just acquire stud prospects and that should really be it. Wings are amazing at getting depth

Ouellet/Danny D are good depth dmen. Mantha should be a great goal scorer.

 

[Reilly19]

Would love to see Wings move out tatar, vanek and green for 1sts and prospects. Let AA move up into the top 6

Trade Nyquist, sheahan and smith for vatanen, despres

Hopefully Howard gets taken in the expansion draft

Draft a center in the top 5. Hague in middle to late 1st round

Take on a forward or two with a bad contract for picks and prospects