Tanking will always be a perceived problem

[The Underboss]

There are ways to fix that by changing the draft structure. It all hinges on the League actually wanting to do something about it.

 

[Unfriendly Ghost]

There would be no issue with "tanking" if the league could agree that the right thing to do when your team can't contend anymore is to sell off all your assets and start again from scratch.

The issue here is you get teams like Detroit and New Jersey who make it look like these "tanking" teams aren't trying hard enough to win with what they already have. It makes it look like they're taking the cheap way to winning. That's why we have this debate.

So if we want to remove the stigma, we need to either implement something that keeps Detroit and NJ from overachieving so much, or we need to do something that formally legitimizes the very worst teams getting the worst picks. The league doesn't seem to be doing that. In fact, it comes across like the league sympathizes with Detroit and NJ, and with draft lottery changes, is encouraging teams to avoid firesales and full-on rebuilds.

But, of course, this doesn't actually prevent tanking. So it strikes me that we'll still be having this debate in 5 years. It's sort of a narrative of "hard-working" teams vs "welfare stars" teams. But it makes you wonder what'll happen to poorly run teams in the future. What does the next Edmonton do when their awful management can't land several first overalls like this? Do they just flounder and eventually go under? Maybe owners will become more aggressive about hiring the right management team.

 

[SladeWilson23]

So you'd tank as hard as possible in the beginning of the season...it would make this non-problem way worse

It would still encourage winning which is a good thing. Also, tanking in the beginning of the season is harder to do because you're still in the playoff race then. That being said, I'm not a big fan of the gold system. The draft changes next year are perfect the way they are. We don't need to tinker with the draft anymore.

We need a system where there is nothing to lose for non playoff teams for going out and trying to win as many games as possible. We need a system where fans always root for their team to win at all costs. We need a system where there is incentives for the players do go out and try to win as much as possible. Playing for their next contract or playing for a spot on the team doesn't give those players an incentive to go out and win. It provides incentive for those players to go out and make themselves look good.

 

[Bleed orange]

The thing is, like said before, as long as there is a draft, there will always be what people perceive to be tanking. You can have all 30 teams fighting tooth and nail till the very end of the regular season. No matter what there's still gonna be a 30th place team. I really believe all this tanking stuff is prominent this year because of mcEichel. The tanking stuff comes from the teams in 4th overall-10th overall range who feel like their team should be entitled to a franchise player like mcEichel, but not have to endure a miserable season where they are the laughing stock of the league (buffalo and phoenix) to do so.

A lottery system does more harm than good. I remember before Edmonton won the lottery there was a thread about who we would like to see win the lottery. A very popular answer in the thread was CBJ, cause they have a good fan base and all and they deserve a league superstar that they never had.
No offense to CBJ fans, but look at their team. The only reason they didn't make the playoffs was injuries. Buffalo/ Arizona needed a mcEichel 100X more than CBJ. As said by others, the fact that LAK and boston even had the slightest chance to win mcdavid is absolute garbage.

Just let things be and just determine he order by reverse standings. I say this in every single tanking thread and I'll say it again. Go onto an NFL forum and tell me how many threads you see about tanking. You don't see any. Just let the worst teams get the best picks and be done with it. That's what the draft is for. To create parity (which the league wants).

 

[Sarcastic]

People realize the Gold Plan is flawed since if a team is bad enough to get eliminated 50ish games in, they're not suddenly flipping the switch and getting more points in the last 20+ games especially when the perceived motivation is to get a top draft pick, which again the players don't give a damn about. We are looking at the middle of the pack (6-10 range) getting the best draft picks possibly and the bottom of the league still being terrible with less hope.

 

[LeafsNation75]

The system was better before... sure you had some teams who never got out of their rebuild (NYI FLA EDM) but the majority of teams who touched bottom three got that piece they needed and took off with it... it is no coincidence that almost every Cup winner in the last decade has a top three draft choice in a key position on it:

2006, CAR- Eric Staal (2nd OV 2003)
2009, PIT- Crosby/Malkin/Fleury/Staal
2010, BOS- Seguin
2011, CHI- Kane/Toews
2012, LAK- Doughty
2013, CHI- Kane/Toews
2014, LAK- Doughty

Really ANH and DET were the last to buck that trend... there was no point fixing what worked before... and now it is a mess where some teams may never get that help they need

I said this before and I will say it again. Tyler Seguin was not a major reason for the Bruins winning the Cup in 2011. One year before they blew that 3-0 series lead in the 2nd round to the Flyers and if they win that I say chances are they play in the 2010 Stanley Cup Finals.

 

[TNCHL]

I still like the Gold Plan, where the top pick would go to the team who accumulates the most points after being mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. IIRC, Edmonton would have won with that plan this season.

Teams will try to become mathemtically eliminated as quickly as possible.

 

[Algernop Kreider]

I said this before and I will say it again. Tyler Seguin was not a major reason for the Bruins winning the Cup in 2011. One year before they blew that 3-0 series lead in the 2nd round to the Flyers and if they win that I say chances are they play in the 2010 Stanley Cup Finals.

And also the Bruins didn't bottom out in order to draft him.

 

[LeafsNation75]

And also the Bruins didn't bottom out in order to draft him.

That's true since the Bruins were very lucky the Leafs finished 29th in the standings giving them the 2nd overall pick.

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

The only way to prevent tanking would be a yearly dispersal draft.

Every player is up for selection by every team every year. No inter year metagame to play means no tanking. And every team tries its best to win every year.

 

[YEM]

Best idea is just not allowing a team who has picked in the top 3 be in any of those same slots in consecutive years

 

[PopeInTheWoods]

Best idea is just not allowing a team who has picked in the top 3 be in any of those same slots in consecutive years

#1 OA - ineligible for picks 1-3 next year
#2 OA - ineligible for picks 1-2 next year
#3 OA - ineligible for #1 pick next year

Those teams' lottery combos become "do-overs" for the specified draws in the lottery.

 

[Ducks in a row]

That's true since the Bruins were very lucky the Leafs finished 29th in the standings giving them the 2nd overall pick.

Maple Leafs tanked to help out Boston after all they sucked so they had to of tanked

Not every team that sucks tanks and that is a perfect example of a team honestly sucking. Anything that punishes a team that honestly sucks is stupid. Lotteries,reverse draft order,gold system whatever is a great way to make it so teams that honestly suck will have a harder time getting better that goes against what the draft is supposed to be a way to distribute better talent to teams that need it most.

 

[hizzoner]

No one should be able to move up more than 4 or 5 picks. No more than 2 top 3 picks in any five year period--you drop to number 4 instead if you were originally to pick top 3 after doing it twice. No issues with trades for futures but team must play its best available team each night and if not then can lose a pick but maybe not the first pick?

 

[Moops]

Honestly, I don't see a significant different between legitimately being bad, vs. trying to be bad. If there is an obvious reward for losing games, then why should a front office try to win games if they are in a position to take advantage of losing instead?

 

[TalkingProuder]

The lottery is solving a problem that didn't exist, to create problems that weren't there. The NHL should allow rebuilds but communicate to teams what is acceptable and not. If the Sabres had iced all ECHL players in a game they should have been warned not to do it again and then take away their draft pick if they do it.

But none of this "tanking" actually happened in the year that it mattered most. The Sabres almost lost last place! This was not some masterplan other than a typical rebuilding team that was already bad and was nearing its bottom.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

No one should be able to move up more than 4 or 5 picks. No more than 2 top 3 picks in any five year period--you drop to number 4 instead if you were originally to pick top 3 after doing it twice. No issues with trades for futures but team must play its best available team each night and if not then can lose a pick but maybe not the first pick?

Do you realize how unrealistic it is for a legitimately bad team to rebuild on just two top three picks in a five year period? This issue is just so weird to me with regards to how people react to it. Most of these kids are not contributing immediately to a team's winning within the first five years and most are not game-breakers if they are. People are vastly overrating how much impact these specific picks have on a team's rebuilding. If it mattered that much, Edmonton would've already been rebuilt and in the playoffs.

As for the other stuff, you can't really expect to be able to tell when a team is not playing the best available that night, can you? Players don't sit when they don't have to. Coaches don't sit their players when they don't have to.

People advocating for the most points after elimination seem to completely ignore the fact that if you make the losers want to win too, you kill the trade deadline and the legitimately good teams' ability to improve their roster for a real competition...the Cup. People need to really analyze what this 'problem' actually is, who it is impacting, and when offering solutions they need to think it through. It's obvious that isn't happening with that silly most points after elimination plan.

 

[MattMartin]

The lottery is solving a problem that didn't exist, to create problems that weren't there. The NHL should allow rebuilds but communicate to teams what is acceptable and not. If the Sabres had iced all ECHL players in a game they should have been warned not to do it again and then take away their draft pick if they do it.

But none of this "tanking" actually happened in the year that it mattered most. The Sabres almost lost last place! This was not some masterplan other than a typical rebuilding team that was already bad and was nearing its bottom.

I kindly disagree.

 

[ZeroPT*]

I kindly disagree.

Such an exceptionally well articulated post. Totally changed my perspective on the matter

 

[Jeremy2020]

It would still encourage winning which is a good thing. Also, tanking in the beginning of the season is harder to do because you're still in the playoff race then. That being said, I'm not a big fan of the gold system. The draft changes next year are perfect the way they are. We don't need to tinker with the draft anymore.

We need a system where there is nothing to lose for non playoff teams for going out and trying to win as many games as possible. We need a system where fans always root for their team to win at all costs. We need a system where there is incentives for the players do go out and try to win as much as possible. Playing for their next contract or playing for a spot on the team doesn't give those players an incentive to go out and win. It provides incentive for those players to go out and make themselves look good.

or much more simply...just realize that people will care once a decade or so when there is a generational player. It's not like "tanking" is a guarantee of success.

Also, do you really believe some teams "are in the playoff" race even at the start of the season? C'mon..

It is a little naive to think that "playoffs" are what motivate players and not money. If you're a great player on the last place team, they still want money. Maybe we should re-do contracts that only pay out if the team wins so much..

So much hand wringing and in 3 months, no one will care until the next McDavid comes along.

 

[LeafsNation75]

But none of this "tanking" actually happened in the year that it mattered most. The Sabres almost lost last place! This was not some masterplan other than a typical rebuilding team that was already bad and was nearing its bottom.

So how come after Jonas Enroth was traded a lot of people in the media claimed it's funny that it happened right after he won them a couple of games in a row.

 

[Mattilaus]

So how come after Jonas Enroth was traded a lot of people in the media claimed it's funny that it happened right after he won them a couple of games in a row.

The bolded is why. Look how many clicks this "tanking" has caused. Your article was a guaranteed success if it was about "tanking".

Enroth is a career back up and a UFA, we got a 3rd and Lindback (who played better than Enroth anyways) for Enroth. Even the Yotes got less for Dubnyk.

 

[30Yonge]

"But none of this "tanking" actually happened in the year that it mattered most."

I kindly disagree.

You are correct.

In the years that impacted the recent NHL the most, the Blackhawks, Islanders, Kings and Lighting all tanked - some harder than others. All drafted franchise players with Chicago adding a second and Tampa Bay selecting two such talents in consecutive years. The Blackhawks and Kings went on to win two Cups each, the Lighting made a conference final while the Islanders picked in the top5 in four of the next five years.

Tanking works and now even the poster children for the opposing view have a real chance to be significantly better in the near future.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

"But none of this "tanking" actually happened in the year that it mattered most."


You are correct.

In the years that impacted the recent NHL the most, the Blackhawks, Islanders, Kings and Lighting all tanked - some harder than others. All drafted franchise players with Chicago adding a second and Tampa Bay selecting two such talents in consecutive years. The Blackhawks and Kings went on to win two Cups each, the Lighting made a conference final while the Islanders picked in the top5 in four of the next five years.

Tanking works and now even the poster children for the opposing view have a real chance to be significantly better in the near future.

This is only if you believe that tanking is synonymous with losing. When the Hawks, Islanders, Kings, and Lightning all 'tanked' as you put it, they were genuinely bad teams.

 

[BakedBuffalo]

It's funny the correlation between what team one is a fan of, and stance on this issue. No **** Kings fans want changes, because they can benefit from it, and it doesn't hurt them. You think the Leafs, just starting their rebuild, are happy about this ****? They are going to have a couple years of rough hockey, and now they aren't even guaranteed a top 3 pick, which will make the process even longer and tougher. In fact, they have a 49.50% chance they won't even pick in the top 3 (assuming they finish last). That's just plain ridiculous.

I'm sick of seeing these anti-"tank" people who are fans of teams that draft changes do not even effect, and furthermore, they benefited from the old system. It's hilarious seeing these fans whose teams' have bottomed out and gotten better through "tanking" (rebuilding) and now they are banging the desk to have it changed. The old system is fine. The worst teams need the best picks to maintain parity, and the asinine notion that "they are still getting a top pick" needs to stop. The difference between the #4 pick and the #1 pick in many years is huge, so stop acting like there is no difference at all, or something.