To Tank or To Tank

[91Kadri91*]

ill agree to the point where Jack is a really good prospect but to put him after Crosby and Mcdavid while leaving out likes of Ovechkin, Malkin and many more is something i will not buy into.

The post you quoted explicitly stated 'since Crosby'. Ovechkin and Malkin were picked in the 2004 draft; Crosby was picked in the 2005 draft.

 

[-DeMo-]

Neuvirth signed for 1.5 Mil ? That scared them off ? Enroth got 1.25.

Maybe they just wanted the picks thinking they could get an upgrade this summer but it looks a bit fishy. Again I may be wrong but it looked like tanking at the time.

just because they signed for that much doesn't mean that was there asking price to re-sign in Buffalo, Anahiem offered 4 million to Belesky and he ended up signing for 3.8 for the extra year, but both those goalie's signed for teams where they are going to be backups showing there really not good enough to bother to keep and they could get a goalie just as good on the open market in the summer and therefore moving them for picks/prospect in there position was the right move

 

[Gary Nylund]

You cant tell players and coaches to tank

If after the All Star break we are in 3rd last in the Conference, you start selling off assets that can return picks. If thats tanking, then I guess you tank.

If you are in 10th in the Conference at the All Star Break, you probably dont sell off assets. At the same time, you should sell futures to add to a 10th place team.

Yikes.

You're not serious...

You never know around these parts.

 

[Daisy Jane]

To what extent? Do you move 4 or 5 guys?

I would assume by that point, you know who you want to keep in your organization, and who you don't and made offers. If they don't agree. ship 'em out. (which is what they did last year).

 

[Swervin81]

You cant tell players and coaches to tank

If after the All Star break we are in 3rd last in the Conference, you start selling off assets that can return picks. If thats tanking, then I guess you tank.

If you are in 10th in the Conference at the All Star Break, you probably dont sell off assets. At the same time, you should sell futures to add to a 10th place team.

Calgary sold off Glencross at the eadline despite being in a playoff spot.

Under no circumstances do we trade futures away in this next couple of years. Kepp with the plan, sell off expiring for futures regardless of position.

 

[egd27]

I would assume by that point, you know who you want to keep in your organization, and who you don't and made offers. If they don't agree. ship 'em out. (which is what they did last year).

I'm just proposing that in the unlikely scenario that this hard working team has enough success to be in playoff contention at the TD, a major sell off sends a pretty bad message to both the fans and the players that have worked their butts off.

If they are in the position they were last year at the TD, it's a no brainer, move out as many as you can for the futures.

 

[I am I]

If you are in 10th in the Conference at the All Star Break, you probably dont sell off assets. At the same time, you should sell futures to add to a 10th place team.

I assume there is a "not" missing in there?

 

[WilliamNylander]

I'm just proposing that in the unlikely scenario that this hard working team has enough success to be in playoff contention at the TD, a major sell off sends a pretty bad message to both the fans and the players that have worked their butts off.

If they are in the position they were last year at the TD, it's a no brainer, move out as many as you can for the futures.

No...a sell off sends the complete opposite message.

Its more of a "we are thinking long term" mindset and not a "lets sell our futures to get bounced in the first round and give up long term potential".

Adding to a team that is barely a bubble team is Dave Nonis level thinking.

 

[egd27]

You cant tell players and coaches to tank

If after the All Star break we are in 3rd last in the Conference, you start selling off assets that can return picks. If thats tanking, then I guess you tank.

If you are in 10th in the Conference at the All Star Break, you probably dont sell off assets. At the same time, you should sell futures to add to a 10th place team.

You meant "shouldn't sell futures to add to a 10th place team"

Right?

No...a sell off sends the complete opposite message.

Its more of a "we are thinking long term" mindset and not a "lets sell our futures to get bounced in the first round and give up long term potential".

Adding to a team that is barely a bubble team is Dave Nonis level thinking.

I never suggested adding to the team, that would be foolish. I'm merely suggesting that once you've hired the all world coach, got rid of the problem child, and instilled a culture of hard work and accountability, intentionally making the team worse when they have shot at some success is a pretty bad message to send.

 

[Daisy Jane]

I'm just proposing that in the unlikely scenario that this hard working team has enough success to be in playoff contention at the TD, a major sell off sends a pretty bad message to both the fans and the players that have worked their butts off.

If they are in the position they were last year at the TD, it's a no brainer, move out as many as you can for the futures.

again - I don't know. but I figure that's why you have the conversation in January-February with those you want to keep vs. those you don't. those you know you aren't re-signing, trade them away. to me that's not sending a bad message, that's proper asset management (because how many times have we simply just let people walk away and we ended up with nothing).

Ditto the ones you know who turned down contract extensions. Because it's all well and good that they are working hard to make the playoffs, but if it doesn't help the team in the long run... yay? (for me i'd understand it either way).

 

[wulfio*]

the league and fans were fine with the Leafs being unintentionally non competitive, I don't see why anyone would have issues with them being intentionally non competitive.

 

[Orfieus]

Babcock himself said the team is going to be bad but hard workers. That is pretty much a direct quote.

I don't really believe in tanking but I do feel Toronto is fielding the best lineup they can.

 

[burpsalot]

I don't believe our management group will ever really lose on purpose, so in that sense, I don't see what we're doing as tanking. It will be demanded of this team to play hard every single night and to take this very, very seriously, regardless of expectations.

Essentially, I don't think management wants to lose, but they are braced for it, and that's perfect. Ship out the guys who don't fit the current direction, who don't buy into the system, and draft and develop and sign players who do. If that leaves us with a less-talented team that finishes low in the standings, so be it.

However, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if we place higher in the standings than last year, simply based off of strong efforts and work ethic, nor would I be disappointed.

Another high pick would be great, but I think seeing a shift in this organization's mentality, from the president to the players, is even more important. I've got faith in our scouting team now, as well as our coaches, that where we draft doesn't matter nearly as much as advertised, and that we can find great pieces for our future regardless of our final placement in the standings.

As long as that's the case, I'm looking forward to Babcock doing everything in his power to help us win 82 games and then some.

Agreed. I think some people don't really know what tanking means to a coach or player. It means intentionally losing.

Babcock will have zero intention of tanking, none of the players will have any intention of tanking & with guys like Hunter & Shanahan in management, there will be no tanking, it's not in their DNA. Last year, Shanahan said the management team would be watching & assessing the players & that management would not be fooled. Some of the players response was absolutely gutless & brutal. Management was ****ing pissed.

The goal is to build a legitimate Stanley Cup contender, so they will be willing to sacrifice some of the short term success for longer term & greater success. But that will not be at the expense of building & creating a culture to win & to work to win.

Nothing gained by bringing top draft picks to a losing environment that has no leadership, no effort & couldn't give a **** how they play. If you don't create the proper culture first, you will just continuously have to rebuild to rid yourself of the vermin. That's why Babcock is here now & not 3 year from now.

 

[Mats13]

Look at the roster, we suck. There is no choice between tank and no tank. We don't have a choice to "not tank", we suck to much for that to happen

 

[Joey24]

There is no other option. We need a few high caliber franchise type players. Next year has 2 I feel can be game changers. If the leafs can get one of them it would be amazing going forward. Then there is that kid in 2017 who is supposed to be crazy talented. Will have to look up his name.

But in short yes by all means tank and tank hard.

 

[HellasLEAF]

We should definitely want to finish as low as possible this season. I mean look at those projected lines. Most of those players will not be around to form what will be out core so trying to get into the playoffs with them is darn well pointless.

The focus should again be on the draft and high picks but I think they know that..

 

[Mess]

If the Leafs wanted to tank they would have retained Horachek and not signed the most expensive coach in the history of the NHL.

When they fired a former Cup winning coach in Carlyle who had the team with 45 points in 40 games and in a playoff spot at +5 games over .500 at the mid point and replace him with a Horachek a coach with a career .300 NHL winning % they got tanking like results as would be expected.

However when you fire Horachek and replace him with a Stanley Cup winning and 2 X Olympic gold medal winning coach with a .627 winning % in the NHL and only who missed the playoffs once in 12 years and that was prior to a Cap World CBA then the intention is not to intentionally lose.

 

[landeskog11]

we should therefore fire Babcock

 

[The CyNick]

I assume there is a "not" missing in there?

lol yes!!!

 

[LaPlante94]

Look at the roster, we suck. There is no choice between tank and no tank. We don't have a choice to "not tank", we suck to much for that to happen

A roster full of players who will do whatever it takes to win will surprise you.

I don't care how bad we finish, I just want to see our team not give up and waste my time when I sit to watch them play.

 

[Ovate]

If the Leafs wanted to tank they would have retained Horachek and not signed the most expensive coach in the history of the NHL.

When they fired a former Cup winning coach in Carlyle who had the team with 45 points in 40 games and in a playoff spot at +5 games over .500 at the mid point and replace him with a Horachek a coach with a career .300 NHL winning % they got tanking like results as would be expected.

However when you fire Horachek and replace him with a Stanley Cup winning and 2 X Olympic gold medal winning coach with a .627 winning % in the NHL and only who missed the playoffs once in 12 years and that was prior to a Cap World CBA then the intention is not to intentionally lose.

As if a coach's win % means anything. If Babcock had been coaching the 2013 Panthers and January 2015 Leafs, his stats would be terrible too. Win % is 90% the team in front of the coach. Additional correlation is because good coaches get to choose to go to good teams.

 

[Man Bear Pig]

If the Leafs wanted to tank they would have retained Horachek and not signed the most expensive coach in the history of the NHL.

When they fired a former Cup winning coach in Carlyle who had the team with 45 points in 40 games and in a playoff spot at +5 games over .500 at the mid point and replace him with a Horachek a coach with a career .300 NHL winning % they got tanking like results as would be expected.

However when you fire Horachek and replace him with a Stanley Cup winning and 2 X Olympic gold medal winning coach with a .627 winning % in the NHL and only who missed the playoffs once in 12 years and that was prior to a Cap World CBA then the intention is not to intentionally lose.

Well, bringing in a coach many consider the best seems like a pretty easy move to me, Horachek wasn't staying under any circumstance. Babcock said himself that painful times are ahead. This is a guy who had Datsyuk,Zetterberg and many other skilled players that are far better than anything we have. Take away Kessel and maybe some other vets and you aren't left with much. Babcock may be a great coach but he can't waive his magic wand and make this team significantly better. I want a tank next season as much as anyone but just as importantly I wanna see the structured system we saw in Detroit for so long implemented throughout the organization. Again though, Babcock won't have the players next year to make us anything more than 6th or 7th worst in the league. I just can't see it.

 

[SmoggyTwinkles]

This team is going to finish very near the bottom but the difference this year will (hopefully) be that they will be trying and learning how to be better under Babcock the entire season which will help with progressively getting better the following seasons.

We should be in a good drafting spot without management intentionally trying to weaken the team (like trading the starting goalie for ex.)

Only problem though is that the top 3 picks will all get raffled off, but still it's better odds at the bottom which is where the Leafs will likely be.

 

[kihei]

Play the kids and let them decide their own fate.

Sounds like the unsuccessful Edmonton approach in a nutshell. Let the kids get the experience they need at a level that suits them.

 

[kihei]

Babcock is the last person on the planet who'd entertain the idea of "tanking." However, I do think Shanny/Hunter/Dubas will do everything they can to strip this team by trade d-day, and have this team dive down to #29 or #30 by the end of the regular season

Exactly. Babcock will play to win, but he must also be okay with Shanahan's long term strategy. He must realize that his collection of future trade for picks players is not going to allow the team to be competitive this year. Sure, he will try to get the most out of them, but even he can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. So maybe we are stealth tanking this year.