Where would you rather finish at the end of the regular season?

[groovejuice]

There are even less guarantees in the pipedreams being peddled in this forum. Yeah let's continue tanking. My freaking blood boils when I hear myself repeating that sentence. It's a loser's mantra.

The Rangers are tanking. We don't have a clue what Bergevin is thinking or actually doing for that matter. Letting Scherbak and Hudon rot on the bench is not tanking, trading Galchenyuk is not tanking and neither was allowing Radulov to walk.

The case for drafting high for several years is demonstrably the best route to get a Cup in the Cap era. Denying it is having one's eyes squeezed shut.

 

[Habs Icing]

You'd think most people would have come to understand that you need to endure a little pain in order to sustain any sort of meaningful success in the modern NHL.

If the goal is to be mediocre for another 25 years, then, by all means, let's go all in with our group.

So how many more tanks do we need? As of today I count 2 in three years and 3 in six years.

 

[DAChampion]

So how many more tanks do we need? As of today I count 2 in three years and 3 in six years.

Sergachev abd Galchenyuk were squandered.

The Habs have one viable product of tanking now: Kotkaniemi.

 

[Lebowski]

So how many more tanks do we need? As of today I count 2 in three years and 3 in six years.

Hard to say. You adapt to the growth of the players within the organization. If Brooks turns out to be another Subban-like gem in the 2nd round, it obviously speeds up the process. If Poehling turns out into a bonafide top 6 center, it speeds up the process.

As it stands, though, I don't see a defenseman we can build around long-term, and I'd like a true high-end forward. Kotkaniemi is good, but I don't know if he'll be franchise-center kind of good.

I think we need at the very least another top pick, so that's minimum another tanking season. Beyond that, we'll have to wait and re-assess next July.

 

[Habs Icing]

The Rangers are tanking. We don't have a clue what Bergevin is thinking or actually doing for that matter. Letting Scherbak and Hudon rot on the bench is not tanking, trading Galchenyuk is not tanking and neither was allowing Radulov to walk.

The case for drafting high for several years is demonstrably the best route to get a Cup in the Cap era. Denying it is having one's eyes squeezed shut.

Like Arizona, Edmonton, Buffalo, Carolina and a half dozen other teams that have tanked for years. Last year's Cup winner had three tank players go through their team but only two of them were on the team. Alzner drafted 5th OV, Backstrom 4th, Ovechkin 1st. Tell me again how tanking for a number of years is the best way. That team won with just two tank players on their team.

 

[groovejuice]

Like Arizona, Edmonton, Buffalo, Carolina and a half dozen other teams that have tanked for years. Last year's Cup winner had three tank players go through their team but only two of them were on the team. Alzner drafted 5th OV, Backstrom 4th, Ovechkin 1st. Tell me again how tanking for a number of years is the best way.

Did anyone suggest it was a guarateed strategy? Of course it's not. There's luck involved as well as salary issues, development and coaching issues ad nauseam. Look at the teams who have won multiple Cups in the Cap era and tell us again what a myth tanking is.

 

[Habs Icing]

Did anyone suggest it was a guarateed strategy? Of course it's not. There's luck involved as well as salary issues, development and coaching issues ad nauseam. Look at the teams who have won multiple Cups in the Cap era and tell us again what a myth tanking is.

1) They may have won their cups in the Cap era but they were built pre-lottery.
2) But let's look at one of those teams. The Pens. On their roster They had only three tank players that were drafted by them: Fleury, Crosby and Malkin. Crosby was a gift because of the lock out lottery. But we'll go with three. We've had three tanks in six years. That's the same amount as Pittsburgh. What's the dif. They traded for Kessel, Horqvist. They had excellent coaches, scouting both amateur and pro. They didn't continue to tank until there was no more room on their roster.
3) We can't tank even if we want to thsi team is too good to tank. Unless you want to decimate the team by trading Weber, Price, Tatar, Byron and Petry. And then I wish you luck getting comparable players to fill their skates in the near future.

 

[Lshap]

Don't know that any of the players you listed were better prospects than Galch at the time of their respective drafts...

I'm not trying to diminish the guys we drafted -- all of whom are or will be good -- but imagine how drastically different the Habs would be today had they instead drafted Draisaitl, Horvat, and Marner. Shuffle the deck and give Montreal three equally lousy seasons in a different year and our three top-10 picks could've been those three guys. They ended up where they are not because of any scouting genius, but because their teams sucked at the right time.

 

[groovejuice]

1) They may have won their cups in the Cap era but they were built pre-lottery.
2) But let's look at one of those teams. The Pens. On their roster They had only three tank players that were drafted by them: Fleury, Crosby and Malkin. Crosby was a gift because of the lock out lottery. But we'll go with three. We've had three tanks in six years. That's the same amount as Pittsburgh. What's the dif. They traded for Kessel, Horqvist. They had excellent coaches, scouting both amateur and pro. They didn't continue to tank until there was no more room on their roster.
3) We can't tank even if we want to thsi team is too good to tank. Unless you want to decimate the team by trading Weber, Price, Tatar, Byron and Petry. And then I wish you luck getting comparable players to fill their skates in the near future.

None of those players you mentioned are currently elite. The Habs are at best a MOR team, and likely considerably worse than that. The lottery makes it more difficult if you finish bottom 3 in the standings but also improves the odds if you don't.

I'm not really sure why you're trying so hard to make tanking disreputable. It's a reality in today's NHL.

 

[montreal]

I see this fixation with a lot of posters. It's all about top draft picks. I'm telling you it's the draft picks, trading, signing UFAs, scouting, development and coaching. I keep making this point but no one responds to it. Last year at this time how many top 2 centers did we have on the team or in our prospect pool? Answer none. Today we may have 3: Kotkaniemi, Domi and Suzuki. Last April we had JJD, Lefebvre and Lacroix. Today we have Richardson, Ducharme and Bouchard. We unloaded a slug like Patches for a virtual goldmine. Think about it. An idiot like MB made such drastic and sweeping improvements We don't need to tank..

by any chance do you actually read what posters say to you? I just ask cause I have said several times that it's not all about top draft picks. I have said over and over that it starts with said top 2 pick and then you have to build a winner. Some teams can do this others can't.

But we don't have any 70 pt centers, we have Domi who hasn't played much at center but as a winger averages around 50 pts. Kotka we have no idea what kind of production he will have this year or next. Suzuki is in the OHL and I bet he plays wing.

This team doesn't have goal scorers, they don't have much offense from the blueline. They need to tank but they won't, instead of getting a great prospect we'll likely end up just missing out and picking 9th or 10th.

So how many more tanks do we need? As of today I count 2 in three years and 3 in six years.

We haven't had a top 2 pick since 1980. But it's not how many tanks do we need, it's what does management do to turn us into a cup contender.

Like Arizona, Edmonton, Buffalo, Carolina and a half dozen other teams that have tanked for years. Last year's Cup winner had three tank players go through their team but only two of them were on the team. Alzner drafted 5th OV, Backstrom 4th, Ovechkin 1st. Tell me again how tanking for a number of years is the best way. That team won with just two tank players on their team.

Again, getting a top 2 pick is the start, it works for SOME teams, and others it doesn't. WHY? Because after getting said top 2 pick you need to build a winner. Some teams can pull this off like the Pens, Hawks, Caps, Kings. Other teams like Oilers who didn't draft well, Yotes who have their struggles drafting among other things. Canes we'll see where they end up in the next 5 years or so. They got a stud at 2nd OA. Sabers can't seem to be able to build a winner.

THERE IS NO DO THIS AND WIN A CUP.

 

[Canadienna]

To some of you this might seem like a obvious answer, but I'm curious at this stage of the season what people are hoping for.

I think this summer more people were just focused on tanking this year and getting a great pick. Now, seeing this team grow on people and play hard I wonder how much of that has changed.

Just to be clear, it would be this exact team + injured players, not knowing what would happen in the playoffs.

Which would you prefer?

 

[mariolemieux66]

To some of you this might seem like a obvious answer, but I'm curious at this stage of the season what people are hoping for.

I think this summer more people were just focused on tanking this year and getting a great pick. Now, seeing this team grow on people and play hard I wonder how much of that has changed.

Just to be clear, it would be this exact team + injured players, not knowing what would happen in the playoffs.

Which would you prefer?

I still want this team to tank for another 2 seasons, it's the best way to add elite talent.

 

[Andrei79]

I known what would happen as a wildcard team, we'd be swept in 4 games.

Bottom 5 and we pick Kakko or Dach.

 

[Sterling Archer]

I think one more tank year is what we need to be competitive moving forward. Still missing that top end skill to compete with the best in the NHL. We might be able to get that in the top 5 of this draft. It’s pretty deep and we might even get a player like that in the top 7-10.

 

[Canadienna]

The way I see it is if you finish around a wildcard slot it means you're not as far from greatness as if you finished bottom 5.

On the other hand, if you are a slightly above average team it can be hard to build into a solid annual contender only getting those mid first round picks.

I don't think it's a clear cut answer. Finishing bottom 5 means we have a long way to go still..

 

[HabsWhiteKnightLOL]

Why even bother go playoff by the backdoor? We couldnt even beat the Awful Rangers in round 1.

Imagine trying to beat Toronto or Tampa in the first round.

This team got speed and work ethics but no raw talent or pure scorer.
and our D is awful.
and Price in the net is still a ?.

 

[yianik]

I want a Stanley Cup. I couldn't care less about crawling into the post season.

A top 5 pick is a shot of taking another step to being a contender. A wild card birth just gives us a chance to watch the team a bit longer, and I mean a bit, and to buy more Molson hot dogs. Whoopee.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

There are even less guarantees in the pipedreams being peddled in this forum. Yeah let's continue tanking. My freaking blood boils when I hear myself repeating that sentence. It's a loser's mantra.

The Leafs avoided rebuilding for 50 years. It got them nowhere. I heard over and over from many of their fans who said rebuilding was for losers... then they go and rebuild and now will probably win a cup within the next 5-10 years.

Again, it's not about intentionally losing. NOBODY is suggesting that the Habs go to their players and tell them to lose. The coach and the roster will try to win no matter what and nobody is or should suggest otherwise. But at the same time, there's nothing wrong with dealing off veteran players for younger ones so you can be better in the future. Yes, it will likely mean falling in the standings but you do it because your goal is to win cups, not games.

We aren't going to win now or next year or the year after anyway. There's almost no chance of it happening. So why waste time? Spend the time now to be better for the future so that five years from now we actually can ice a competitive team. This team has never rebuilt with lots of top picks. And what has that gotten us? The only reason we got Carey Price was a one time lottery. We haven't had a top ten scorer in points in over THIRTY YEARS! Think about that.

Even the worst managed teams who draft high have managed to get Richard winners and top ten scorers along the way. We haven't because we draft mid round. Yes, we've f***ed up along the way development wise and you could point to Galchenyuk as an example of this... but for the most part we just haven't drafted high enough nor have we traded for elite prospects.

There's no shame in recognizing that you aren't good enough to win and sacrificing veterans to improve yourself long term. The alternative is to try for 8th and hope that some miracle happens resulting in a cup. It's never going to happen. Even if we don't draft high at least we can trade for elite prospects. There are many ways to skin the cat. But rebuilding has consistently proven to be the most effective.

Rip the band aid off and just rebuild.

 

[Lebowski]

Like Arizona, Edmonton, Buffalo, Carolina and a half dozen other teams that have tanked for years. Last year's Cup winner had three tank players go through their team but only two of them were on the team. Alzner drafted 5th OV, Backstrom 4th, Ovechkin 1st. Tell me again how tanking for a number of years is the best way. That team won with just two tank players on their team.

The important part is having players you can build a team around.

There was half a decade between the Pens' 09 win and their back-to-back cups. They had players to build around.

We don't have that. I'm not saying we need to find ourselves generational talents, but at the end of the day, if you want to win the race, it doesn't matter how many times you give a paint job to your 2006 Toyota Corolla when you're competing against Ferraris.

It's all about playing the odds. Once there's enough talent in the pipeline, even then there won't be any guarantee that we'll end up winning a cup. But at least we'll know we made the effort of actually building a cup contender as opposed to a playoff contender.

 

[teamfirst]

1st overall

 

[Milhouse40]

Did anyone suggest it was a guarateed strategy? Of course it's not. There's luck involved as well as salary issues, development and coaching issues ad nauseam. Look at the teams who have won multiple Cups in the Cap era and tell us again what a myth tanking is.

Bad example.
Chicago really only drafted Toews and Kane as "Tank Players", all their teams was built with lower draft pick . trade and UFA signing.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

THERE IS NO DO THIS AND WIN A CUP.

This is definitely true.

But I would argue that the vast majority of cup winning teams have a top pick who's leading the way for them. Nothing is a guarantee but there is a roadmap to be followed. And again, top picks aren't the only way. You can trade for prospects and that works just fine too. It's just a lot better to have both.

So how many more tanks do we need? As of today I count 2 in three years and 3 in six years.

The Leafs tanked for years.... it doesn't mean anything if you trade those picks away. Look at the talent JFJ sent packing.

And let's face it, if you draft a player and mismanage him, you're likely to wind up with diminishing returns. Not only have we not drafted high but we've had the two worst development coaches in the league. It's not a surprise that our team (once known for getting great value out of mid round picks) suddenly couldn't develop anyone anymore. It was a recipe for disaster.

 

[BLONG7]

We need to have another strong draft in 2019.................the reality is we need to and probably will finish low in the standings.

 

[Canadienna]

I am not sure where I stand on this, but so if we win tonight will all of you who are hoping for a bottom 5 pick over a playoff spot be upset? Or will you be pleased despite yourself. That's where I'm going with this.

 

[peate]

I'll never wish for a failed year, but if it happens, oh well.