Let's discuss tanking.

[BattleBorn]

This writer with Bleacher Report thinks that the Knights should go for terrible records right off the bat since expansion teams are awful in the first few seasons anyway. He's pretty dismissive of what (most people think) are pretty decent expansion draft rules and doesn't think it matters much.

Either way, I thought I'd bring it here for you all to read and share what you think.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/...s-golden-knights-to-tank-right-from-the-start

I don't think Foley would be down with this program given his age and statements about where he wants the team to be in the next three to six years, but what do you think?

Warning: This is a Bleacher Report article so be prepared for auto-play videos. I usually avoid BR like the plague, but I thought this was a different perspective than we're used to seeing and worth the link.

Click to read more...

 

[Mike Jones]

A former expansion GM was told that the best thing he could have done was finish last the first five seasons his new team was in the league. I guess the thinking was that five first overalls (Or close enough to them) would form the basis of a pretty good team.

From what I've seen from the predicted rosters I think Vegas will have a shot at 2-3 first overalls. Unless the salary cap goes up a lot that's probably all they're going to be able to support.

 

[Ginormousthumbs]

I agree with Mike. I hope nobody is taking Foley's 6 year claim seriously.

 

[hi]

Everything is contingent on who is left exposed in the expansion draft. If teams trade away their good players that would have been exposed otherwise and Vegas is left with a potential roster that isn't even half as good as some of the more optimistic mock expansion draft rosters, then they should look into taking on bad contracts in exchange for draft picks and prospects.

Of course that plan requires the GM with the bad contract to first actually perceive the contract as a bad one, and then be willing to trade an asset or assets to entice McPhee to draft that contract.

What would the Sabres be willing to trade to get rid of Moulson's contract? At the time of the expansion draft Moulson would have 2 years left at a $5M cap-hit.

Avalache - Soderberg 3yrs/$4.75M
Red Wings - multiple bad contracts
Panthers - Luongo 5 yrs/$4.533M
Islanders - Grabovski/Kulemin
Rangers - Staal/Girardi (NMC's)
Senators - Bobby Ryan 5yrs/$7.25M
Flyers - MacDonald 3yrs/$5M
Sharks - Martin/Boedker 2yrs/$4.85M and 3yrs/$4M
Blues - Lehtera/Bouwmeester 2yrs/$4.7M and 2yrs/$5.4M
Lightning - Garrison/Coburn/Callahan (NMC)
Canucks - Sbisa/Dorsett
Capitals - Orpik 2yrs/$5.5M


You'd have to think that the GM's of those teams would be doing backflips at the thought of getting rid of those contracts without having to take salary/cap space back. I'm not saying that McPhee should take on all of those contracts, but if the deal makes sense then he should seriously consider drafting a few of them.



Even if McPhee drafts the best possible team he can in the expansion draft, the Golden Knights are likely going to be picking in the top 10 in the 2018 entry draft. In all realistic scenarios, Vegas will have a decent defense, good goaltending, and forwards that will struggle to score. There's no need to "tank". The team on the ice won't lose on purpose, they will lose because they won't be good enough to win.

The question is would McPhee rather draft this team:

Zucker - Namestnikov - Grabner
Lee - Jarnkrok - Anderson
Byron - Dowd - Dano
Nordstrom - Kruger - Riley Nash
Weise/Sorensen/Gaunce/Comeau

Methot - Schultz
Schlemko - Petrovic
Benn - Connauton
Sproul/Kulak/Marincin

Grubauer
Nilsson
Kinkaid
Brossoit
Copley

and trade some of those players for assets or draft this team:

Moulson - Soderberg - Ryan
Zucker - Lehtera - Brown
Dano - Namestnikov - Panik
S. Wilson - Jarnkrok - Bennett
Karlsson/Shinkaruk/Rychel/McGinn/Hudon

Martin - Orpik
MacDonald - McQuaid
Sbisa - Stoner
Connauton/Oleksiak/Ouellet

Luongo
Raanta
Brossoit

and acquire assets in exchange for selecting the bad contracts and then trade some of the drafted players for more assets?

Maybe it would be a good idea to blend those strategies in some way. Take on a few bad contracts while still using other expansion picks on decent assets that other teams would have interest in. Load up on 2018 picks and hope you find some talent in the entry draft.

 

[jwhouk]

The other problem you have is, can you grow hockey in the southwest with a crappy team for two-three years?

 

[hi]

The other problem you have is, can you grow hockey in the southwest with a crappy team for two-three years?

I guess the rationale would be "we're going to be bad for a while no matter what, let's approach the expansion draft looking 5-10 years down the line instead of trying to be as "competitive" as possible in the first few years. Will fans accept that? Probably not.

I understand why Foley has to say that he wants to be competitive right away and a cup within 6 years, but hopefully McPhee doesn't actually try and make that happen.

 

[Not So Mighty]

Foley is right to say he wants an immediately competitive team, but I don't really get his logic for winning the Cup in six years. I don't know how he came to that number or why he would even throw it out there. If he believes that's realistic, he really doesn't have much knowledge or respect for how good the good NHL teams are and what it takes to become so good.

Anyway, tanking... I'd like to see the team win some games but I don't think tanking is going to be an issue in the sense that they'll have to try to ice a bad team. They are going to be awful their first couple years. It's no secret that their forward depth is going to be abysmal. They are going to lose a lot of games.

 

[HanSolo]

I don't like talking as a concept. I have more respect for a team like Calgary who tried their best to build a winner and failed repeatedly than I do for Edmonton.

 

[Mike Jones]

Foley is right to say he wants an immediately competitive team, but I don't really get his logic for winning the Cup in six years. I don't know how he came to that number or why he would even throw it out there. If he believes that's realistic, he really doesn't have much knowledge or respect for how good the good NHL teams are and what it takes to become so good.

Anyway, tanking... I'd like to see the team win some games but I don't think tanking is going to be an issue in the sense that they'll have to try to ice a bad team. They are going to be awful their first couple years. It's no secret that their forward depth is going to be abysmal. They are going to lose a lot of games.

It isn't tanking if you're legitimately bad. Tanking is an intentional act and probably won't be an issue for at least a few years yet.

As for the six year number Foley probably pulled that number out of thin air. Florida was in the finals by year 3 but it took 11 years for Tampa Bay to win their cup. Anaheim took 13 years to win their cup.

Foley may be basing his prediction on the predicted quality of this draft's available players but as someone has stated above, by the time the wheeling and dealing and burying of contracts is done there will be precious few reasons for optimism.

 

[Mike Jones]

I don't like talking as a concept.

I agree. Sign language is far more expressive.

 

[Not So Mighty]

It isn't tanking if you're legitimately bad. Tanking is an intentional act and probably won't be an issue for at least a few years yet.

As for the six year number Foley probably pulled that number out of thin air. Florida was in the finals by year 3 but it took 11 years for Tampa Bay to win their cup. Anaheim took 13 years to win their cup.

Foley may be basing his prediction on the predicted quality of this draft's available players but as someone has stated above, by the time the wheeling and dealing and burying of contracts is done there will be precious few reasons for optimism.

Yeah, like I said, Vegas won't have to tank. They'll be bad enough as it is. The defense should be decent but I can't imagine them churning out a Stanley Cup capable forward group in only six years. That's awfully optimistic.

 

[Mike Jones]

Yeah, like I said, Vegas won't have to tank. They'll be bad enough as it is. The defense should be decent but I can't imagine them churning out a Stanley Cup capable forward group in only six years. That's awfully optimistic.

Unfortunately I think this will be a more conventional expansion draft than people have been hoping for. You're right - defense will become a strength as Vegas will be able to choose a pile of 4th and 5th defensemen. That's not as bad as it sounds and some of these Defensemen can be traded for picks so that helps with the team building.

Goaltending will also be OK if the right veterans and prospects are made available.

With the right coach and system Vegas will be OK but they won't go too far until the drafting and developing efforts start churning out contributing NHL'ers.

 

[Ginormousthumbs]

I believe Foley originally claimed a Cup in 7 years but knocked off one year at the big name reveal.

 

[Mike Jones]

I believe Foley originally claimed a Cup in 7 years but knocked off one year at the big name reveal.

There's a slim chance he's right but the averages suggest he add 4-5 years onto that prediction.

 

[Soundgarden]

The other problem you have is, can you grow hockey in the southwest with a crappy team for two-three years?

I think the first two or three years will still have that shiny new toy feel to it, people should still be pretty excited about the first sports franchise in their city, not to mention the tourist factor which other teams haven't really had.

I will say, as long as you build a contending team with competent management you can grow hockey anywhere. If Foley and GMGM are smart they can be a Tampa or Nashville and make the playoffs consistently, even if it takes a few years to get there, if they aren't just look at Atlanta.

 

[MMC]

Am I right that the team will have the same draft odds of the 3rd to last team for the 2017, 18, and 19 drafts?

 

[hi]

Am I right that the team will have the same draft odds of the 3rd to last team for the 2017, 18, and 19 drafts?

That is only true for the 2017 draft. 2018 2019 2020 etc. drafts will be based on their position in the league standings like any other team.

 

[Mike Jones]

That is only true for the 2017 draft. 2018 2019 2020 etc. drafts will be based on their position in the league standings like any other team.

Not to worry - they'll probably have a decent lottery position in 2018 and 2019 anyway.

 

[Esteban Tornado]

The NHL set up the expansion draft so that Vegas is gonna get a lot of decent players. And thats not counting a top 3 draft pick and free agency. I'm looking forward to being pleasantly surprised at how well the team is gonna do.
I think the idea of tanking is a ridiculous premise to get some clicks on a website.

 

[Mike Jones]

The NHL set up the expansion draft so that Vegas is gonna get a lot of decent players. And thats not counting a top 3 draft pick and free agency. I'm looking forward to being pleasantly surprised at how well the team is gonna do.
I think the idea of tanking is a ridiculous premise to get some clicks on a website.

There may be voices that want you to think the new team is going to be competitive but reality is probably going to be a lot different then what the claims are. As I have said before, by the time existing teams get done trading away, buying out, and burying their extra players there may not be that many high end players available. And with so many young players needlessly off the table through exemptions that list is going to shrink even further.

People may have originally hoped that this draft would be different but it's looking more and more like it will be one or two small notches above what's happened in previous expansions.

 

[VanIslander]

I don't like talking as a concept.

Oh, if that were true.

And, to the point: Tanking is not in the cards. Both the owner and GM have indicated that they want a competitive team from the opening draw. Don't expect them to fold their hand.

 

[HanSolo]

I agree. Sign language is far more expressive.

Dammit

 

[Not So Mighty]

And, to the point: Tanking is not in the cards. Both the owner and GM have indicated that they want a competitive team from the opening draw. Don't expect them to fold their hand.

Vegas is going to be a jackpot of headline puns.

 

[ZiGOODejad]

I don't like talking as a concept. I have more respect for a team like Calgary who tried their best to build a winner and failed repeatedly than I do for Edmonton.

this i agree with. a team that just tanks for first overall picks. especially one that does it repeatedly

 

[VanIslander]

Vegas is going to be a jackpot of headline puns.

You can bet on that.