How to Eliminate Tanking

[Dogewow]

Rewarding failure fundamentally goes against every aspect of sports and competition.

People need to stop looking at the situation like this.

 

[412 Others]

Tanking

 

[Ducks in a row]

What if the team that wins the draft lottery didnt get the 1st pick for this draft, but for next year's draft. So, the Leafs (who won in 2016) would be drafting first overall this season.

I think this would work because teams would have no incentive to tank because draft rankings fluctuate so much.

For example, if the Leafs wanted to draft first overall in 2016, they would have to win the lottery in 2015 and would therefore have to begin the tanking process in 2014. But it would be absurd to tank in 2014 to get the 2016 pick because there is no way to tell from that pint who will go first or even if it will be worth tanking in the case of a weak draft.

In the above example, the Leafs may begin tanking in 2014 to get the exceptional Sean Day. But he became a late round pick which goes to show how badly draft rankings can fluctuate

Unless you have every pick from all the rounds among non playoff teams be randomized you can always have a team tank. Even if you say you wont be rewarded right away you still will be rewarded at some time later.

The way the draft was before lottery was fine. Now we have a draft lottery and its not good enough for some people. Some people just won't be happy until the draft is ruined with equal draft odds which will then make it so very hard for bad teams to get better.

 

[Jack Burton]

Even though my Canucks have lost out the last couple of years, I'm even more hardcore about my team tanking and I hope their the worst team in the league for the next couple of seasons....we desperately need the talent! It may not be a top 3 pick but guaranteed to be top 5 and a 32nd is better than a 35th pick

You'll never stop tanking

 

[JaegerDice]

Yep, and then all of the best prospects go to big markets and rich teams and we see a good chunk of the NHL teams eventually fold.

The salary cap still exists. If big market teams pay up for every new top prospect, they're not likely to be able to ice a roster any more than a team that tries to put Crosby, Ovechkin, Benn, Karlsson, Doughty, Kane, Toews, etc on their roster.

 

[Dogewow]

The salary cap still exists. If big market teams pay up for every new top prospect, they're not likely to be able to ice a roster any more than a team that tries to put Crosby, Ovechkin, Benn, Karlsson, Doughty, Kane, Toews, etc on their roster.

Big markets still get first dibs on the absolute best of the best and have a better chance of filling their roster full of talent. They couldnt assemble all star teams, but would still very likely always be a cut above.

For example, Edmonton, Buffalo, and Pittsburgh very likely don't end up with their franchise forwards under the system you suggest. The current system gives every franchise, no matter what size city or wealth, a chance at the very best of the best. That's how it needs to be.

 

[Howboutthempanthers]

Rewarding failure fundamentally goes against every aspect of sports and competition.

Teams are punished by the failure itself. You think it's fun for a team and it's fans to have their skulls kicked in by other teams for 82 games? Wasting a year of your life following along with this crap?
The reward you get for not failing, is the actual winning.

 

[flyersfan187]

Want to eliminate tanking? There's one simple solution but everyone hates the idea for some reason.

You miss the playoffs. You get one lottery ball.

That's it.

I would be all for this. You have to build your team by more then high draft picks and some teams build right but they just need that franchise player to put them over the top which is near impossible.

 

[Dogewow]

I would be all for this. You have to build your team by more then high draft picks and some teams build right but they just need that franchise player to put them over the top which is near impossible.

Every single team that has had success in some form or another has built their team through means outside of high draft picks. Go ahead and ask Edmonton how drafting high and doing nothing else correctly has worked out for them up until a few years ago.

I don't know where this mindset came from that franchises that acquire high draft picks and win championships are somehow cheating the system, are lazy, or "aren't building right". It's flat out incorrect, and there is very real work to be done to build a championship team outside of drafting high.

The system doesn't need to be changed anymore than it already has.

 

[syc]

You have no idea how many teams would fold over the next 20 years if the league got rid of tanking.

You think the Hawks and Pens would still be in those cities without tanking? Guaranteed they would have been moved a long time ago.

Hawks had 5000 people at games the year after they drafted Kane. The Pens won Crosby in a lottery and still needed the arena to be subsidized via slot machine revenue. Horribly run teams will have zero chance to get good without tanking.

 

[Lara Emily]

Slightly off topic here, but John Scott came right out and said in an interview I heard yesterday on NHL radio that when he was in Buffalo they said in camp that they were aiming for either Mc David or Eichel. He said they pretty much came out and said they didn't want to win.

He didn't say who said it, but he said that's what was said in training camp. My assumption was that either management or the coaching staff said something or implied it. He said something like "We're in for either McDavid or Eichel this season, we're not looking to win."

That's funny because he signed with San Jose on July 2 in 2014... Sabres didn't draft Eichel until the end of that season (2014-2015). So he was nowhere near Buffalo's training camp in the tank for McDavid/Eichel year... I mean unless they told him almost 2 years in advance. Besides if they were truly going to plan to tank that early they'd have just re-signed him and played him a ton because that's a pretty good way to ensure your team tanks.

 

[Mcnotloilersfan]

There is and never was a tanking problem... the lottery is stupid and they should get rid of it.

See the Lemieux, McDavid and Matthews draft years. Tanking was legit (especially for Mario).

I love the lottery.

Colorado still gets the 4th pick. Even if a team is terrible for years, picking in that 4-7 range should eventually get you out of the hole.

 

[johnjm22]

Where you finish in the standings should have no impact on where you draft.

Each round of the draft should be determined by lottery. Seven rounds. Seven separate lotteries. In each lottery there's 31 balls and each team gets one of those balls.

 

[Sens of Anarchy]

Tanking is part of rebuilding...

 

[TaLoN]

See the Lemieux, McDavid and Matthews draft years. Tanking was legit (especially for Mario).

I love the lottery.

Colorado still gets the 4th pick. Even if a team is terrible for years, picking in that 4-7 range should eventually get you out of the hole.

Being bad is legit. Colorado didn't tank, they just purely sucked.

Tanking may happen when management sees the current path leads to no where and thus make the decision that they need to realign their assets dramatically... rebuilding is required eventually in all sports. The players on the ice and the coach behind the bench still try to win because their future in the league still depends on that more than anything.

Bad teams are bad and need THE MOST help, period.

The NFL has no lottery and there has never been a call for one from the fans, because the fans there get that the worst teams need the most help. Lotteries go against that most basic fundamental fact.

They are not needed.

 

[Mcnotloilersfan]

Being bad is legit. Colorado didn't tank, they just purely sucked.

Tanking may happen when management sees the current path leads to no where and thus make the decision that they need to realign their assets dramatically... rebuilding is required eventually in all sports. The players on the ice and the coach behind the bench still try to win because their future in the league still depends on that more than anything.

Bad teams are bad and need THE MOST help, period.

The NFL has no lottery and there has never been a call for one from the fans, because the fans there get that the worst teams need the most help. Lotteries go against that most basic fundamental fact.

They are not needed.

I never said Colorado tanked. If you actually read my comment, I pointed out 3 situations where it was a known fact that teams tanked for a specific player. I, and most hockey fans, don't like this idea.

 

[TaLoN]

I never said Colorado tanked. If you actually read my comment, I pointed out 3 situations where it was a known fact that teams tanked for a specific player. I, and most hockey fans, don't like this idea.

The teams are going to be bad either way... the only reason you call it tanking was because of who was available at that pick.

 

[Dogewow]

The teams are going to be bad either way... the only reason you call it tanking was because of who was available at that pick.

Bingo.

 

[66871]

eliminating "Tanking" has always been a solution in search of a problem. The oilers weren't terrible for years by design

AFAIK the only confirmed case of tanking was the Islanders of the mid/early 70s. I saw a documentary on their dynasty and there were some FO guys speaking rather directly about keeping salaries low so they could get good draft picks.

As for unconfirmed, there's obviously Pittsburgh and NJD tanking for Mario. Otherwise, it seems like it is normally a combination of factors.

I'm sure I'm in the minority, but I would like to see the last placed team in each division ineligible for the next season's wild-card berths in the playoffs.

 

[bob27]

Relegation to AHL would be great.

 

[Dogewow]

Relegation to AHL would be great.

That would never work from a business/economic or competitive standpoint.

 

[LeafsNation75]

Sure-every team has to decide when to fish or cut bait. Leafs did a lll they could to finish last to get Matthews and they were wildly successful. The year before that they gave up at Christmas and managed to get Marner. The same methods--tanking.

Prior to that the Leafs were on a 10-1-1 stretch and all of the sudden things went down hill. So I don't think it's as easy to say they just gave up on the season.

 

[Mcnotloilersfan]

The teams are going to be bad either way... the only reason you call it tanking was because of who was available at that pick.

Bingo.

It is also well documented that Buffalo tanked for Connor with Eichel as the consolation prize and Toronto's goal was 30th and hoped for Matthews.

Keep reading hockey history. Its fun!

 

[Dogewow]

It is also well documented that Buffalo tanked for Connor with Eichel as the consolation prize and Toronto's goal was 30th and hoped for Matthews.

Keep reading hockey history. Its fun!

You've found a video I've already watched. Good for you?

I never said tanking never happens ever or in what capacity. There are instances of situations like that happening, and you found one of them. How much it actually happens and to the degree it does is what I contest.

It really isn't a serious issue if it is even one at all. The actual cases where you can legitimately make an argument for it happening are few and far between, and one of the things that kills me about these tanking arguments are how people pick an choose what is and isn't tanking based on who's in the draft, whether or not they like the team/consider them rivals, if the team actually gets the coveted player, and a bunch of other irrelevant reasons. It's a highly opinionated discussion more so than it is based in actual fact.

Also, who documented what in relation to Buffalo/Toronto "tanking"? If you mean fans and the media went crazy those years towards both teams then yes, that did happen. No one from the NHL front offices, those teams, or anyone of legitimate importance "documented" or acknowledged anything in that regard.

 

[ottawa]

Best way to eliminate tanking is by counting after elimination points as the order for the draft lottery. Means that a team needs to put their best foot forward either way.

So if a team has been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs at game 60, they have 22 games to get as many points as possible, the team that gets eliminated at game 70 has 12 games, and the team that gets eliminated at game 82 gets no games.

Whoever gets the most points of the 14 (now 15) eliminated teams after being mathematically eliminated from the playoffs gets the highest % chance in the lottery.

1st Tie-breaker: Less points overall
2nd Tie-Breaker: More GP
3rd Tie-Breaker: More Wins
4th Tie-Breaker: More Regulation wins
etc.

Admittedly, not a bad idea. But the current system is anti-tank, see top 3 picks this year.