Toggle sidebar

Speculation: Poll: Sneak into playoffs or 'tank' as much as possible

  • Xenforo Cloud has upgraded us to version 2.3.6. Please report any issues you experience.

Playoffs or Tank

  • Playoffs

  • Tank

Results are only viewable after voting.
RangerBlues said:
You can get generational talent by luck or suck.
Id rather be lucky than sucky.
Click to expand...

I also think you are overlooking scouting talent and trades. One can argue that the Oilers, Panthers, and Sabres have had subpar scouting, poor development systems, and have gotten poor returns on trades.

Chicago has had some real duds but their scouting was still able to pick up the likes of Duncan Keith, Corey Crawford, & Saad in the 2nd rounds, as well as late picks like Byfuglien, Hjalmersson, Kruger, Andrew Shaw. On top of Toews, Kane, and the now broken Seabrook, they really were able to get a great supporting cast that got them their Stanley Cups (well not Byfuglien).

Pittsburgh has the obvious Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, and to a lesser degree J.Staal super combo of top 2OA picks - I would say they are more of a product of good trades. Kessel, getting Neal + Niskanen for Goligoski (61OA) and Hornqvist for Neal later, Kunitz, Hagelin, Dupuis + Hossa, Guerin, Sydor, Justin Schultz on the cheap, etc. Letang at 62OA was also a good pickup for them. Their last 2 cups also owe some to draft picks like Guentzel, Maata, Matt Murray, Kunhackel, Rust, + Conor Sheary FA signing.

Contrast this with EDM, FLA, BUF

Edmonton, not the best drafters, questionable talent developers, and pretty terrible in trades. Exhibits Hall, Eberle, Petry, Dubnyk. Pajaarvi and Yakupov fit both into the bad development + trade categories too. They have almost no late pick finds to account for. Edmonton also had their ownership issues to contend with which led to years of overpaying marginal players because that is all they had or trading away players they could not afford to keep (sometimes after they've given them bad contracts and hurt their market value).

Buffalo is not as draft wealthy as you might think. Prior to the last 5 drafts, their picks have mostly been in the teens so it's too early to judge them. Eichel and Reinhart were both 2OA picks and Ristolainen, Nylander, and Mittelstadt are all 8OA picks. They'll need a few years to see if all of those players develop. Questionable trades (E Kane trade comes to mind) also affect them. Money too. They traded Brian Campbell at the height of his talent (and he would help the Hawks to their first cup).

Finally Florida's misfortunes can be tied to a single event. Not resigning Roberto Luongo. They had pretty good drafting the first two years Dave Tallon joined as GM but they last 5 or so years haven't yielded much past their 1st round picks.

You're a smart man, you should be able to figure it out. It's not something as juvenile as "luck." Those teams are bad because their asset management is piss poor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rangers in 7, KOVALEV022473, NikC and 2 others
KOVALEV022473 said:
Really??!! That’s what you get from that list? Did you catch the last six years?
Click to expand...

Those players are at most 24. Hardly an indictment on the player.

Let's not even bring up quite a few of those players are on Buffalo, Edmonton, Arizona, Florida, and Colorado. Those franchises get in their own way. Come back in a few years and I think we'll be adding more guys from these years to the lost of cup winners.
 
Inferno said:
If I was running this team... All my top prospects would be in Hartford making a playoff push there...I'd have echlers and worthless guys like McLeod playing a ton.

I'm an unapologetic tanker...I'd have this team doing everything possible to finish with a top 4 pick.
Click to expand...

Tank?

Ay yo I will waste your money, enjoy life in NYC, not know who you are while you worship me, and generally not give a shit at times.

I’ll bring in over paid veterans with a hype:production ratio unseen in the solar system that just keeps us meh...enough to fart around the central std dev of the league for most years.

I will raise prices through the roof and remove seats and make it hard for anyone who won’t or can’t out price casuals for tickets to watch the games in any other format besides a full $100+ tv package full of garbage.

I’d even bid to keep your arch rivals in another area on the island just to corner anyone trying to offer a third party venue for other non sports entertainment

But...tank?

I have integrity.

The irony of not being proud enough to not play like aparthetic and overpaid shit, but too proud to get a better draft pick.

W, w, what will the suites think?

RangersTown™️
 
Last edited:
Tank. If they get in as the 2nd wild card, they would get tuned up by Tampa. Need to take a few steps back before you can move forward.
 
mrjimmyg89 said:
Those players are at most 24. Hardly an indictment on the player.

Let's not even bring up quite a few of those players are on Buffalo, Edmonton, Arizona, Florida, and Colorado. Those franchises get in their own way. Come back in a few years and I think we'll be adding more guys from these years to the lost of cup winners.
Click to expand...
It’s not an indictment of the players. It’s a indictment of the logic behind drafting by itself. Some posters would be content never to have anyone over 22 play. Individual players do not win cups, teams do. The vast majority of posters here think 1st round drafting is the only way to success when in reality it’s a very fine balance. As n8 pointed out above, Shittsburg, Chicago and LA do not win any of their cups without key trades and FA signings. My argument is and always will be against sucking your way to success.
 
n8 said:
I also think you are overlooking scouting talent and trades. One can argue that the Oilers, Panthers, and Sabres have had subpar scouting, poor development systems, and have gotten poor returns on trades.

Chicago has had some real duds but their scouting was still able to pick up the likes of Duncan Keith, Corey Crawford, & Saad in the 2nd rounds, as well as late picks like Byfuglien, Hjalmersson, Kruger, Andrew Shaw. On top of Toews, Kane, and the now broken Seabrook, they really were able to get a great supporting cast that got them their Stanley Cups (well not Byfuglien).

Pittsburgh has the obvious Crosby, Malkin, Fleury, and to a lesser degree J.Staal super combo of top 2OA picks - I would say they are more of a product of good trades. Kessel, getting Neal + Niskanen for Goligoski (61OA) and Hornqvist for Neal later, Kunitz, Hagelin, Dupuis + Hossa, Guerin, Sydor, Justin Schultz on the cheap, etc. Letang at 62OA was also a good pickup for them. Their last 2 cups also owe some to draft picks like Guentzel, Maata, Matt Murray, Kunhackel, Rust, + Conor Sheary FA signing.

Contrast this with EDM, FLA, BUF

Edmonton, not the best drafters, questionable talent developers, and pretty terrible in trades. Exhibits Hall, Eberle, Petry, Dubnyk. Pajaarvi and Yakupov fit both into the bad development + trade categories too. They have almost no late pick finds to account for. Edmonton also had their ownership issues to contend with which led to years of overpaying marginal players because that is all they had or trading away players they could not afford to keep (sometimes after they've given them bad contracts and hurt their market value).

Buffalo is not as draft wealthy as you might think. Prior to the last 5 drafts, their picks have mostly been in the teens so it's too early to judge them. Eichel and Reinhart were both 2OA picks and Ristolainen, Nylander, and Mittelstadt are all 8OA picks. They'll need a few years to see if all of those players develop. Questionable trades (E Kane trade comes to mind) also affect them. Money too. They traded Brian Campbell at the height of his talent (and he would help the Hawks to their first cup).

Finally Florida's misfortunes can be tied to a single event. Not resigning Roberto Luongo. They had pretty good drafting the first two years Dave Tallon joined as GM but they last 5 or so years haven't yielded much past their 1st round picks.

You're a smart man, you should be able to figure it out. It's not something as juvenile as "luck." Those teams are bad because their asset management is piss poor.
Click to expand...
This is an excellent post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: n8
Making the playoffs may appease the fans, but does absolutely nothing good for the Franchise.

Now is the time for moral victories, not actual victories.

Use the remaining games as an audition for some of the kids that are on the radar for next season. Last 7 games of the year bring up Lias and Chytil and call it a day
 
I'm very sceptical how much a team is helped by finishing badly for a season. Yeah, we might get a great player at pick 7 or 8, but then, we might at pick 16 or 17. The Pens and the Hawks (two of the teams used most to push for the tank) were atrocious for a good while, got superstars and other high picks to compliment them. Losing for years got them results. Losing for years is yet to get Edmonton or Buffalo results.
Other teams have maintained a place at the top of the standings for a long time (an obvious example having been Detroit). They found good players without tanking and continued to find success. Even teams who haven't been winning, like us or St Louis have had decent shots at it for many years.
It is my opinion that we could have steered ourselves through and maintained high standards for longer. It might turn out that a bad finish lands us the next Crosby. More likely, in 5 years we'll do a re-draft and find that some guys who went from 15 to 20 were better than guys who went 5-10. Barzal and Boeser for example went 16 and 23. They're the top two rookies this year in points and number 3 (Gourde) was undrafted. Keller 7th and De Brincat 39th rounds out the top 5 rookies this year.
I realise that losing gives us better chances, but people have to see that good drafting is what matters and oftentimes that doesn't require a low finish.
Whatever, we're so far down the road of being crap now that maybe tanking is best, but for a season? I think to become the Pens and Hawks we need to do our time at the bottom AND draft AND develop well.

I vote playoffs, but meh.
 
People that are bringing up Buffalo and Edmonton are missing the point. That's the argument against trading away guys like McDonagh and Miller. That's not an argument against not winning meaningless games. There's almost zero upside in winning these games.
 
pld459666 said:
Making the playoffs may appease the fans, but does absolutely nothing good for the Franchise.
Click to expand...

Outside of obvious financial gains this is pretty much my stance unless someone wants to make a compelling argument that playoff experience (even a single round which is what the Rangers would be likely to participate in, if at all) and a mid-late 1st is more beneficial for the future of the team than a potential 1-5 pick which unless I am mistaken is the most statistically probable chance of drafting an impact NHLer. In order for me to want them forego the opportunity to potentially draft 1-5 I would want there to be a decent chance we'd see 2+ rounds of playoff hockey which I would personally value higher than a lottery ticket. One round of playoff hockey from a clearly flawed and now gutted team with Captain Ding-McDongington still at the helm does not excite me in the least. Which of course highlights another issue with trying to compare these two outcomes, the subjectivity of value placed on either side. Particularly the playoff side seeing as I'm certain that nearly 100% of the fanbase would be thrilled to be drafting 1-5, even if they were against the tank, but what about just making the playoffs? I don't think the same number of fans would be excited about making the playoffs if they were hoping for a lottery ticket.

The draft is a crapshoot, nothing is a guarantee, we're more likely for 7-12 than 1-5, the player could bust etc etc. Yet how is the likelihood of getting into the playoffs let alone winning, anymore likely than the aforementioned crapshoot? Whatever argument you can make against one outcome, you can essentially make for the other when talking probability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pld459666
SnowblindNYR said:
People that are bringing up Buffalo and Edmonton are missing the point. That's the argument against trading away guys like McDonagh and Miller. That's not an argument against not winning meaningless games. There's almost zero upside in winning these games.
Click to expand...

Buffalo and Edmonton ae such wonderful examples of why tanking doesn't work. It's such a convincing argument using one franchise that thought Robin Lehner was worth a 1st round pick, while the other thought the same of Griffin Reinhart. One thought it was a good idea to trade for Evander Kane on a team without leadership, while the other thought Adam Larsson was fair value for Taylor Hall. Yeah, Buffalo and Edmonton, those are shining examples of tanking doesn't work. (Not the incompetent management running each franchise.)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Pavel Buchnevich, DanielBrassard, Holocene and 5 others
Ail said:
Outside of obvious financial gains this is pretty much my stance unless someone wants to make a compelling argument that playoff experience (even a single round which is what the Rangers would be likely to participate in, if at all) and a mid-late 1st is more beneficial for the future of the team than a potential 1-5 pick which unless I am mistaken is the most statistically probable chance of drafting an impact NHLer. In order for me to want them forego the opportunity to potentially draft 1-5 I would want there to be a decent chance we'd see 2+ rounds of playoff hockey which I would personally value higher than a lottery ticket. One round of playoff hockey from a clearly flawed and now gutted team with Captain Ding-McDongington still at the helm does not excite me in the least. Which of course highlights another issue with trying to compare these two outcomes, the subjectivity of value placed on either side. Particularly the playoff side seeing as I'm certain that nearly 100% of the fanbase would be thrilled to be drafting 1-5, even if they were against the tank, but what about just making the playoffs? I don't think the same number of fans would be excited about making the playoffs if they were hoping for a lottery ticket.

The draft is a crapshoot, nothing is a guarantee, we're more likely for 7-12 than 1-5, the player could bust etc etc. Yet how is the likelihood of getting into the playoffs let alone winning, anymore likely than the aforementioned crapshoot? Whatever argument you can make against one outcome, you can essentially make for the other when talking probability.
Click to expand...


The idea is not that getting higher and more 1st round picks guarantees success. It's about increasing the odds for being successful. The important part becomes identifying the right talent and properly developing it.
 
It's like I've always said, high/top picks aren't a panacea for a poorly run franchise or a guarantee of success.

But if you know what you're doing, and your scouts are good at what they do, it can be a tremendous boost to your efforts.

Yes, sometimes you can find that elite level talent with later picks or lower first rounders.

But there's no denying that your odds are best with the higher pick. There's not just way around it.

If Toronto can take a step back to move forward, and Chicago, and other franchises can do so, there's no reason why the Rangers shouldn't at least take the opportunity to get into a position with better draft odds, in what is arguably one of the deeper drafts in recent memory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SnowblindNYR, Inferno and jas
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom