Let's discuss tanking.

[willy702]

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.

I think the points are quite valid, but the proof will be in the pudding as they say. I don't know about Brown's contract as he's really not much of a player anymore, but other guys who are a little shorter on term may make sense if there is a legit prospect coming this way with it. I don't even know about draft picks really, yeah take them early on because you have to stock the roster with prospects anyways until you get to your contract limit, but really a bunch of 3rd to 6th rounders just insures we will have a system full of replacement level players in a few years.

I think accept the team will be bad is reasonable, just maybe not 5 years of it. I love the talk of a Cup in six, I mean who doesn't want to hear that, but this is the most parity filled league there is so its just a matter of get to the playoffs and get hot and maybe its your year. That's the philosophy I hope they embrace, lets become a contender and get into the playoffs and see what happens. Even if you had the most loaded team with youngsters like the Oilers now, you still would be hard pressed to guarantee they will win a Cup so don't go there. Treat the expansion draft as an opportunity to get a couple of players for the long run, find a few guys with the right contract you can walk away from in a few years and find guys others want to trade for. That's not tanking and that's not trying to win now, its just doing what must be done.

 

[Cyborg LeClair]

As for where Foley came up with 6 years from, I think it's because the Philadelphia Flyers won their first Stanley Cup in their 7th season. He wants to do them one better.

 

[Mike Jones]

As for where Foley came up with 6 years from, I think it's because the Philadelphia Flyers won their first Stanley Cup in their 7th season. He wants to do them one better.

That was a completely different expansion and those cups were won in a completely different league.

In today's league it seems more realistic to think in terms of double figures when predicting the number of years it will take for a new team to win the cup.

 

[White Shadow]

That was a completely different expansion and those cups were won in a completely different league.

In today's league it seems more realistic to think in terms of double figures when predicting the number of years it will take for a new team to win the cup.

Yep, picking from the scrap heap of 6 team league yields better returns than the scrap heap of 30 team league.

 

[Cyborg LeClair]

That was a completely different expansion and those cups were won in a completely different league.

In today's league it seems more realistic to think in terms of double figures when predicting the number of years it will take for a new team to win the cup.

I 100% agree with you, but i imagine this was still his thought process

 

[BattleBorn]

As for where Foley came up with 6 years from, I think it's because the Philadelphia Flyers won their first Stanley Cup in their 7th season. He wants to do them one better.

That was a completely different expansion and those cups were won in a completely different league.

In today's league it seems more realistic to think in terms of double figures when predicting the number of years it will take for a new team to win the cup.

I 100% agree with you, but i imagine this was still his thought process

He's old and he wants to see them hoist the Cup. If he wouldn't have been destroyed for saying three years he likely would have said three years.

They're going to try to win.

 

[nobody important]

He's old and he wants to see them hoist the Cup. If he wouldn't have been destroyed for saying three years he likely would have said three years.

They're going to try to win.

Of course they'll try. Every team tries (well, maybe not Buffalo). But let's fast forward 12 months. Let's say the Desert Knights and the Desert Dogs (assuming they have not morphed into Le Tundra Dogs) are battling it out for last place. Your chances of making the post season are on a par with picking up Connor McDavid off waivers. Those lottery balls start looking very enticing.

How many of you will still be wanting to see the team win, and risk losing some of those precious balls and how many will start embracing The Tank? Taking the long view that finishing as low as possible at that point will be better for you in the long run? When you've seen what years of mediocre play and middling finishes have accomplished, there's something strangely appealing about being really, really bad. It's like that darkest before the dawn, light at the end of the tunnel that isn't a freight train feeling that gives you hope that you will soon rise like a Phoenix (oh, sorry that was cruel) from the ashes.

On the Jets board, I started the tank thread weeks and weeks ago, when they were below the line on Turkey Day. Some thought I was being premature, but here we are weeks later and still in the bottom 5 going by games lost. I will be happy to start a tank thread here, too. It is a place of solace for the bereaved. It is a place of hope for better days.

Give in to the tank side, Luke.

 

[BattleBorn]

I don't mind the team losing games.

I'm not a huge fan of paying $110 to see them lose games on purpose. As a detached fan or a guy that watches on TV, sure...tank.

If I'm dragging my happy ass to the T-MA 43 times a season, paying to park, drinking $9 Coors Lights (or whatever swill they serve,) and eating $13 chicken fingers, they'd better try to win every game, or at least every home game.

Lose on the road.

 

[MrLouniverse]

I don't mind the team losing games.

I'm not a huge fan of paying $110 to see them lose games on purpose. As a detached fan or a guy that watches on TV, sure...tank.

If I'm dragging my happy ass to the T-MA 43 times a season, paying to park, drinking $9 Coors Lights (or whatever swill they serve,) and eating $13 chicken fingers, they'd better try to win every game, or at least every home game.

Lose on the road.

Good man. I agree with BattleBorn.

 

[Mike Jones]

Yep, picking from the scrap heap of 6 team league yields better returns than the scrap heap of 30 team league.

Absolutely. The depth of those original six organizations was incredible. A lot of their AHL affiliates could beat the snot out of some NHL teams in today's league. There was enough talent buried away to not only fully stock 6 complete expansion organizations but also kick start an brand new league 5 years later.

 

[Mike Jones]

He's old and he wants to see them hoist the Cup. If he wouldn't have been destroyed for saying three years he likely would have said three years.

They're going to try to win.

I agree that it's nice to see someone committed to winning but a little reality has to go some distance here - self-delusion does not build winning organizations.

 

[BattleBorn]

I agree that it's nice to see someone committed to winning but a little reality has to go some distance here - self-delusion does not build winning organizations.

I agree.

However, and I hate bringing it up so often, but it's not like he's some 55 year old dude. He's 70, perhaps even 71 now. He bought a team because he wanted one, I'm sure he'd like to see it win rather than building his legacy as a solid club that can win a cup in 2027.

 

[Mike Jones]

I agree.

However, and I hate bringing it up so often, but it's not like he's some 55 year old dude. He's 70, perhaps even 71 now. He bought a team because he wanted one, I'm sure he'd like to see it win rather than building his legacy as a solid club that can win a cup in 2027.

He should be experienced enough, however, to know that this kind of lasting legacy can't be built overknight.

If he's getting conscious about how much time it's taking to build a winner maybe they can freeze his head and store it in an old deep freeze somewhere until the Knights make it to some future Stanley Cup finals.

 

[VanIslander]

I don't mind the team losing games.

I'm not a huge fan of paying $110 to see them lose games on purpose. As a detached fan or a guy that watches on TV, sure...tank.

Let's not confuse the issue.

The role of the GM is very different than the role of the coach & players. Coaches and players hate to lose, and it is that fact that cost coach Ted Nolan his job on Long Island as he led a crippled-by-GM squad to the playoffs on a late-season improbable run, against the wishes of the GM and the owner.

I have been a Caps fan throughout McPhee's GM days in Washington and the guy does not want to lose either. yeah, if the owner insists, maybe he will do what other GMs have sometimes done. But the fact is: Both the owner and GM of the Vegas team have said they want to be competitive, and very few coaches - if any - in the NHL today (unless you go college or European route) are willing to lose games on purpose. GMs can cripple teams through trades and non-acquisitions, but coaches and players are not on board with that.

So, all talk of tanking should be directed to the owner and GM, not the coaches and players. The product on the ice will always TRY (except when their is disharmony in the dressing room, argments with coaches or general sense of hopelessness).

Do you really think Foley or McPhee will reverse their positions and try to cripple or neglect rather than ENABLE their rosters to win ASAP? Knowing McPhee, I doubt it. Foley is a wild card.

 

[jwhouk]

Yep, picking from the scrap heap of 6 team league yields better returns than the scrap heap of 30 team league.

However, there is the thing about having to meet a cap floor, which means free agency - something that the Flyers et. al. didn't have 50 years ago.

 

[mjlee]

Too bad you aren't assured the 2018 1OA. If he develops like he hopefully will, Rasmus Dahlin is one of those players you build your team around. The 2017 draft unfortunately seem pretty weak.

 

[GKG18]

The Cubs built their championship team in less than five years. I know baseball is different, but there's no reason not to place a term on your goals in professional sports. The window of opportunity for a franchise is only as long as the prime of their best players. Even then, injuries or an unusually hot team (2012 Kings, 2007 NY Giants) can prevent even the best of dynasties from winning. So, If we somehow drafted a superstar player in the first 3 years, the remaining roster of veterans has, what, 3 more years of relevance while said superstar develops? With some shrewd moves and diligent scouting, a good team can be built virtually overnight. Tanking is garbage, period.

 

[VanIslander]

The only tanks I wanna see around here are...

Or this KNIGHT TANK:

 

[Franck]

The Pittsburgh Penguins went from the worst team in the league in 2003-04 to Stanley Cup Champions in 2009 and the Florida Panthers made the Stanley Cup Final in their third season. The Chicago Blackhawks also made a very rapid transition from awful to Stanley Cup Champions in the post-lock-out period.

Vegas winning the Stanley Cup within 6 seasons isn't impossible, but it would require a combination of both incredible management and tremendous luck. To actually pull it off Vegas would need to hit multiple home-runs over consecutive drafts (Pittsburgh got Malkin and Crosby with high picks and found Letang in the later rounds, Chicago picked Toews and Kane early and saw a late second round pick turn into a Norris winner with Keith) as well as great free agent signings and several astute trade acquisitions. The key to everything is to find a #1 defence prospect early, as those players almost always need 4-6 years of development before they begin to enter their prime and virtually never hit the UFA or trade markets.

Tanking helps if you want to make such a rapid transition because it is nearly impossible to find instant NHL stars outside of the top 3 positions even in a very deep draft.

I don't think Vegas will tank though, not because of some ideas of sportsmanship or fairness towards the fans, but for the simple reason that there will be several goaltenders available in the expansion draft good enough to keep even the most miserable group of skaters out of the league basement.

 

[YEM]

I don't think Vegas will tank though, not because of some ideas of sportsmanship or fairness towards the fans, but for the simple reason that there will be several goaltenders available in the expansion draft good enough to keep even the most miserable group of skaters out of the league basement.

I dunno, I think the first couple/few seasons will resemble tank-type years anyways

 

[Nalens Oga]

Wait wait wait. I thought we didn't nee to tank, the team was guaranteed 3rd highest odds in the 2017 and 2018 drafts, I've seen multiple writers state this, I don't think official word has been released yet but I'm pretty sure it's along those lines.

Either way, the 2018 draft is supposed to be decent enough so even if they don't tank but they get a solid top-10ish pick which is realistic (they won't likely make the playoffs in year one but won't be awful either depending on the coach).

I do think that the 6 year plan is realistic if things go well but the team obviously has to be in rebuild mode from day one to do that. Not try to compete for a few years then rebuild in which case it will take a lot longer than 6 years. Basically what I'm saying is go out and get draft picks, sell high on expansion acquisitions if they do well at the first trade deadline. We're starting out with only 7 draft picks excluding expansion trades which is way too low, they need to aim for having around 10 picks in both the 2017 and 2018 draft. So I wouldn't be tanking for position but I'd certainly be looking to move players for picks at least the first couple years.

 

[GardinerTheForward]

The Pittsburgh Penguins went from the worst team in the league in 2003-04 to Stanley Cup Champions in 2009 and the Florida Panthers made the Stanley Cup Final in their third season. The Chicago Blackhawks also made a very rapid transition from awful to Stanley Cup Champions in the post-lock-out period.

Vegas winning the Stanley Cup within 6 seasons isn't impossible, but it would require a combination of both incredible management and tremendous luck. To actually pull it off Vegas would need to hit multiple home-runs over consecutive drafts (Pittsburgh got Malkin and Crosby with high picks and found Letang in the later rounds, Chicago picked Toews and Kane early and saw a late second round pick turn into a Norris winner with Keith) as well as great free agent signings and several astute trade acquisitions. The key to everything is to find a #1 defence prospect early, as those players almost always need 4-6 years of development before they begin to enter their prime and virtually never hit the UFA or trade markets.

Tanking helps if you want to make such a rapid transition because it is nearly impossible to find instant NHL stars outside of the top 3 positions even in a very deep draft.

I don't think Vegas will tank though, not because of some ideas of sportsmanship or fairness towards the fans, but for the simple reason that there will be several goaltenders available in the expansion draft good enough to keep even the most miserable group of skaters out of the league basement.

Vegas don't be fooled. Chicago had years of finishing last collecting picks and pittsburgh got crosby the best player of our generation. Unfortunately for you vegas patrick/hischier aren't mcdavid. I come in peace and I warn you that the leafs tryig to be good for years from post sundin era until three years ago was the worst decision they couldve made. TANK. It is actually fun having a mission you can accomplish. I remember being so happy when we would lose to secure 1 OVA. (Deliberate) Tanking and getting marner/mathews turned the leafs around. Mid place syndrome is real and it will affect your market worse than bottoming out. Don't expect to be the exception to the rule.

 

[TheBusDriver]

I think their best bet is to tank for at least 2 years. Get a stud center and hopefully a stud D. You can build a competitive team after that with good drafting and developing. You NEED stars to win though. After you get a couple young stars UFAs will consider signing in Vegas and you can go from there. I think Vegas would be wise to embrace analytics as much as possible. It will pay dividends for a team without game breakers.

My opinion as an Oilers fan.

 

[kenfury]

I think their best bet is to tank for at least 2 years. Get a stud center and hopefully a stud D. You can build a competitive team after that with good drafting and developing. You NEED stars to win though. After you get a couple young stars UFAs will consider signing in Vegas and you can go from there. I think Vegas would be wise to embrace analytics as much as possible. It will pay dividends for a team without game breakers.

My opinion as an Oilers fan.

Pretty much the same thought from this Sabres fan. Take good prospects, players that could be middle 6 F or 2-4 D. Get as many bad contracts the expire in two years as you can afford as long as it comes with prospects or picks. Think the Marko Danno trade. There are about 10 teams that want to dump contracts and Vegas has room for about 5. Stockpile that pipeline. Try and get 10+ picks in the first 2 rounds over the next three years. Stay flexible in cap room long term. These days teams cant go the old Rangers model and pick up every UFA.

If you want to have consistently deep playoff runs in 5 years the first two years will have to have short term suffering for long term gain. Otherwise you get stuck in that treadmill of being a bubble playoff team that doesn't get the high picks to really turn the team around.

 

[VEGASKING]

There isn't going to be a need to tank. The team is going to be very bad the first few years regardless unless you get some lightning in a bottle with a coach/system and have a whole bunch of average players have career years at once.