DL44
Status quo
Ryan Miller in vintage form... just made a couple sick ones.. preserve the 1 goal lead.. 3 some mins left.
E: jinx
E: jinx
Last edited:
2017-18 Around the League Thread - Part III
- Thread starter Bleach Clean
- Start date
- Status
MarkusNaslund19
Registered User
- Dec 28, 2005
- 5,751
- 8,595
But that's not what any of those teams did.
The Pens were in financial dire straits which required them to shed all of their good players in order to survive. They happened to to get the 2nd overall pick in Malkin's year. Ovy Malkin years don't happen often.
They then won a lottery that, while not unrelated to the standings, was convoluted and according to which, we got 10th overall and the Ducks got 2nd. Did us or the Ducks tank?
From that they got a generational superstar.
With a bit of different lottery luck they could have had Fleury, Cam Barker, and Jack Johnson.
The Hawks had one of the worst owners in professional sports. Most of their important players weren't even spectacularly high picks. It just so happens that they hit on their two high ones with Toews and Kane and managed to pick two superstars who complimented each other perfectly.
However, they were augmented by Ladd (trade), Byfuglien (late pick), Keith (2nd rounder), Seabrook (14th overall), Crawford (later rounder). etc.
In fact, if we hadn't been f***ed by the lottery we would have basically had the same picks in back to back years as the Hawks did.
The lightning were in ownership dire straits and were, again, fortunate to be the right level of bad in the right years.
None of these teams 'tanked'. Tanking is quitting.
Psychology is important in sports. Quitting is antithetical to winning.
I think the Sabres are showing us that right now. I have to think that Eichel would be doing better on any other team.
Tanking alone doesn’t work. But neither does not tanking! It’s quite simple...being a GM requires a multitude of skills one needs to be competent in. It didn’t work with the Oilers because they couldn’t suppliment the tank core with additional picks that turned out, good trades, good UFA signings or good coach selection. Drafting first overall is great but it’s merely one piece of a very large puzzle.
On the flip side you have the Leafs who indeed tanked but with competent management has taken the winnings from the tank to create a pretty good team.
The lightning are likely another example. Over the years they have tanked and collected good assets that way. They are also a player development machine. They are one of Likely a few times in history where a team may have actually had too many NHL worthy players in the system.
It’s what worries me about Canucks management. Yes they have some prospects looking really good right now but the draft is only one aspect of things and in the other areas management has been woefully incompetent (and they have screwed up the draft as well)
On the flip side you have the Leafs who indeed tanked but with competent management has taken the winnings from the tank to create a pretty good team.
The lightning are likely another example. Over the years they have tanked and collected good assets that way. They are also a player development machine. They are one of Likely a few times in history where a team may have actually had too many NHL worthy players in the system.
It’s what worries me about Canucks management. Yes they have some prospects looking really good right now but the draft is only one aspect of things and in the other areas management has been woefully incompetent (and they have screwed up the draft as well)
Melvin
21/12/05
I actually agree with you surprisingly.
The only counter point I have is the leafs. They clearly tanked a couple years ago, drafted Matthews and are now doing well.
stampedingviking
Registered User
Melvin
21/12/05
They didn't tank either.
There is a difference between being comically bad and intentionally losing.
The only recent teams that I think were actually "tanking" their seasons were the leafs and the sabres. And both were only a couple years after just being comically bad for a long time.
Pena, Kings, hawks, panthers, pliers, they just sucked and got lucky. And the Oilers just sucked, got lucky, and then f***ed it all up pretty much immediately.
The leafs are an example of how tanking can work if everything break your way. Us handing them Nylander, drafting Matthews, etc.
The sabres are an example of how tanking can not work if things don't break your way. Missing mcdavid, etc.
Ita all just luck. There is no correct approach naotld nothing anyone does really matters.
You need to be smart with your cap space/contracts and the handling of your prospects/young players, and make sure you have some solid, reliable, veteran players to support the young guys. You can't just suck for a while and expect to automatically be a good team in 3-5 years.
Sure if you want to go into an in-depth analysis, this is correct. I would counter that the teams I mentioned were all just bad and not intentionally "tanking" they also steered into it and made smart moves all around. My comment was more on the basis of just randomly naming a team that sucks that did X means nothing. You need good management and smart moves.
I agree, it's all about good management. These days only one team wins the cup, 16 make the playoffs, in a 31 team league. You need good management and a bit of luck to win.
I think you have to look at it in context, sure while these teams didn't plan to tank, they did know there were not going to be good and took advantage. Hell Chicago is still great at selling their non core players to bring in more assets. The Canucks should by now know they are going to suck and steer into it.
Yeah lets name two teams that just have some of the worst management out there... I am sure that has nothing to do with why they are terrible.
Mostly agreed. What do all the bad teams have in common? Bad management. What do the good teams have? Good Management.
Melvin
21/12/05
I would argue that this is mostly post hoc reasoning and somewhat begs the question.
I am not completely sure what you mean?
I think especially here tanking gets lumped into just being a bad team, so I guess you can make an argument there.
Jack Burton
Pro Tank Since 13
Pastor Of Muppetz
Registered User
- Oct 1, 2017
- 26,372
- 16,351
Leafs have had good high first pickswith good nucleus of previous era players. Kadri and Reilly are as important as Marner and Nylander. The Matthews pick of course is every thing. Switch him with OJ and we are the Leafs and they are the Canucks.
Melvin
21/12/05
I mean that good teams have good management because we define having good management by having a good team. It is circular reasoning.
Jim Rutherford was a laughingstock in Carolina. Same level as Benning. Now he's suddenly super genius? Dubious.
Sure, but we don't know until management starts making moves if they are good or bad. I remember most here myself included being happy with the Benning hire, I also remember most here being impressed with the Dubios hiring from the leafs, and the way they originally structured the team.
Jim Rutherford won a cup in Carolina, then also had to deal with a team in financial peril, I think there is probably a mixd bag if we take a solid look at his Carolina Past. I think What he has done in Pits has been closer to modern. What I would question is his ability to build. Probably a deeper dive would tell us more though.
I don't think Benning has the same cap issues to be worried about.
mossey3535
Registered User
- Feb 7, 2011
- 14,025
- 11,253
Egghead1999
Registered User
- Nov 9, 2007
- 3,241
- 905
Unlike sabres, Leafs was tanking with only a couple of "tank commanders" instead of full tank mode . If Leafs had the adequate goaltending, they would have finished around 7 to 12 forever.
Billy Kvcmu
Registered User
Leafs had a hardass president who had a laser sight on his direction and was honest with fans, plus a quiet but extremely efficient GM.
We have Linden and Benning...
It's funny to see the Oilers. They get gifted a generational talent. Have some good pieces that can compliment him. Trade some of them away. They should make a long playoff run this year. Instead they will be lucky to make the playoffs. Crosby and the Pens made the SC finals in his third year. McDavid will be golfing. Their cap situation sucks for next year too. I don't see how they could really improve their team either. For the most part the trade chips they have are ones they want to keep. Meanwhile Hall is averaging more than a point per game and Eberle is close. Lucic has four goals in 24 games.
That was one of the best drafts the Nucks have had in their history. It's a shame Jimmy traded Forsling and McCann.
Hit the post
I have your gold medal Zippy!
Some teams not only have to deal with bad management but cheap or meddling owners. The real unfortunate ones have to deal with cheap AND meddling owners. At least one can't accuse Aquaman of being cheap.
- Status
