The 5 tanks are back at it!

[Nogatco Rd]

The Toronto Maple Leafs and Auston Matthews say hi! We're still here. (and yes I understand you referenced only Cup winners - that's silly)

Probably because you don’t need to tank to win 1 playoff round in 8 seasons.

Obviously the team has some really talented players but idk what particular relevance they have to this discussion? Jury is still out on whether they’ll have anything other than regular season success to show for their tanking effort

 

[tiburon12]

Probably because you don’t need to tank to win 1 playoff round in 8 seasons.

Obviously the team has some really talented players but idk what particular relevance they have to this discussion? Jury is still out on whether they’ll have anything other than regular season success to show for their tanking effort

This poster was responding to me, who left the leafs and matthews off the list of "teams with top 5 picks who have won a cup" and is somehow confused by that clear definition lol

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

Probably because you don’t need to tank to win 1 playoff round in 8 seasons.

Obviously the team has some really talented players but idk what particular relevance they have to this discussion? Jury is still out on whether they’ll have anything other than regular season success to show for their tanking effort

The relevance is the Leafs finished dead last in 2016 and scored a pretty good first pick overall in 2017 as a result. The poster I was responding to narrowed it down to tanking only being worth it if it results in a Cup. I'm pretty sure half the league would have tanked to get Matthews whether it eventually results in a Cup or not.

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

This poster was responding to me, who left the leafs and matthews off the list of "teams with top 5 picks who have won a cup" and is somehow confused by that clear definition lol

I literally made reference to your "clear definition" in my response. I'm not confused, I just think it's an arbitrary way to judge if tanking is still worthwhile. "Investing in stocks isn't smart because not all stock values go up." Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It's still worth bottoming out if it means getting a top tier draft pick.

 

[spintheblackcircle]

Honestly it is surprising how consistent those teams are season to season. Same bottom 5 for 3 years now.

22-23 season:

32- Ducks 58 pts
31- Jackets 59 pts
30- Hawks 59 pts
29- Sharks 60 pts
28- Habs 68 pts

23-24 season

32- Sharks 47 pts
31- Hawks 52 pts
30- Ducks 59 pts
29- Jackets 66 pts
28- Habs 76 pts

This season
View attachment 932116

I am not sure of that stats but it must be pretty rare to have the same 5 teams at the bottom for 3 years straight.

Sharks win, Ducks win, Jackets win and Montreal wins and the Sharks and Canadians are no longer bottom 5.

Nice reverse jinx

 

[Hamilton Bulldogs]

Sharks win, Ducks win, Jackets win and Montreal wins and the Sharks and Canadians are no longer bottom 5.

Nice reverse jinx

These 5 teams shall now run the league

 

[tiburon12]

I literally made reference to your "clear definition" in my response. I'm not confused, I just think it's an arbitrary way to judge if tanking is still worthwhile. "Investing in stocks isn't smart because not all stock values go up." Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It's still worth bottoming out if it means getting a top tier draft pick.

I don't think "winning the Stanley Cup" is an arbitrary metric at all, actually.

 

[MeinerEiner]

Penguins making a real push to make it into the top 5

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

I don't think "winning the Stanley Cup" is an arbitrary metric at all, actually.

So no one won the draft lottery at all if they haven't won a Cup yet. Is that seriously your position?

 

[herzausstein]

Nashville is doing their best to make sure they dont do this 3 years in a row.

You're welcome NHL

 

[FiveTacos]

Penguins making a real push to make it into the top 5

If we look at points %, they're already there:

CHI .361
NSH .395
SJS .400
MTL .421
PIT .425

CBJ are actually just outside at 6th, and ANA is currently running 9th on that list.

 

[MeinerEiner]

If we look at points %, they're already there:

CHI .361
NSH .395
SJS .400
MTL .421
PIT .425

CBJ are actually just outside at 6th, and ANA is currently running 9th on that list.

If we're honest, the number will drop much further in the next ten games.

 

[Nemesis Prime]

Gary is happy the Cali teams and Hawks are down there.

 

[Bounces R Way]

How about leaving some high picks for the rest of us sheesh

 

[tiburon12]

So no one won the draft lottery at all if they haven't won a Cup yet. Is that seriously your position?

wtf are you talking about? My position has been abundantly clear:

We have this perception that tanking will lead to good picks and good picks will lead to cups. For ~10 years we've been using the Pens, Kings, and Hawks as examples of tank->cup in a short window. BUT, that isn't the reality anymore. I used a rough overlook at players drafted in the top 5 since 2008 and if they or their teams won a cup. In the cases where those top picks won a cup, the amount it time it took for them to win was FAR greater than that of the Hawks/Pens/Kings.

Thus, my position is that we need to adjust our expectations for what tanking means and the time it takes for teams to go from the basement to the top, AND appreciate the incredible risks that come with it.

Now, i didn't mention the Leafs or Matthews because, guess what, they havent won a cup! so is it that "arbitrary" to use the winning the cup as a mark of success? Is it really that hard to understand why I didnt mention the Leafs and Matthews? I don't think so.

I hope that helps clear things up for you!

 

[Devonator]

I think my Flyers can enter the bottom 5 by the end of this season.

 

[Pablo El Perro]

I Would like to see someybing like european soccer. 2 lousiest teams drop to the lower teir league. Let's see tanking tben

Not sure any owner or the PA are agreeing to that.

 

[ClydeLee]

wtf are you talking about? My position has been abundantly clear:

We have this perception that tanking will lead to good picks and good picks will lead to cups. For ~10 years we've been using the Pens, Kings, and Hawks as examples of tank->cup in a short window. BUT, that isn't the reality anymore. I used a rough overlook at players drafted in the top 5 since 2008 and if they or their teams won a cup. In the cases where those top picks won a cup, the amount it time it took for them to win was FAR greater than that of the Hawks/Pens/Kings.

Thus, my position is that we need to adjust our expectations for what tanking means and the time it takes for teams to go from the basement to the top, AND appreciate the incredible risks that come with it.

Now, i didn't mention the Leafs or Matthews because, guess what, they havent won a cup! so is it that "arbitrary" to use the winning the cup as a mark of success? Is it really that hard to understand why I didnt mention the Leafs and Matthews? I don't think so.

I hope that helps clear things up for you!

Who is we? There are fans of tanking teams admitting it takes 7 years out before you should expect deep playoff results. It's been tried to get.

There are risks, but are they worse than the alternatives. Vegas is a bizarre outlier. But there is about 1 team a decade that wins apart from this formula. Blues in 19 and Boston in 11. To me to goes hand with nfl teams that win without elite Qbs but elite defense. It happens in the range of 1/2 times a decade. You're not setting yourself for better results going to middling route and hope you get low odds great players.

 

[SheldonJPlankton]

There’s tanking...and then there's tanking.

Some teams are just bad teams. Others, like Toronto, spend the season selling off veteran players for future picks and prospects to artificially keep themselves a bottom team.

 

[Johnny HFBOARDS]

The final 5

Final Five - Battlestar Wiki

en.battlestarwikiclone.org

 

[The Hanging Jowl]

wtf are you talking about? My position has been abundantly clear:

We have this perception that tanking will lead to good picks and good picks will lead to cups. For ~10 years we've been using the Pens, Kings, and Hawks as examples of tank->cup in a short window. BUT, that isn't the reality anymore. I used a rough overlook at players drafted in the top 5 since 2008 and if they or their teams won a cup. In the cases where those top picks won a cup, the amount it time it took for them to win was FAR greater than that of the Hawks/Pens/Kings.

Thus, my position is that we need to adjust our expectations for what tanking means and the time it takes for teams to go from the basement to the top, AND appreciate the incredible risks that come with it.

Now, i didn't mention the Leafs or Matthews because, guess what, they havent won a cup! so is it that "arbitrary" to use the winning the cup as a mark of success? Is it really that hard to understand why I didnt mention the Leafs and Matthews? I don't think so.

I hope that helps clear things up for you!

31 teams per year don't win a Cup. It's a bad measuring stick. Every single team in the league would have tanked to get McDavid regardless if it's worked out (yet) or not. Other teams with high-end talent that were criticized and mocked for years before they finally hit the right combination: Detroit, Chicago, Washington. It happens easier for some teams, harder for others. But if you're committed to rebuilding, there's no credible reason not to tank. Even now with the reduced lottery odds.

 

[tiburon12]

Who is we? There are fans of tanking teams admitting it takes 7 years out before you should expect deep playoff results. It's been tried to get.

There are risks, but are they worse than the alternatives. Vegas is a bizarre outlier. But there is about 1 team a decade that wins apart from this formula. Blues in 19 and Boston in 11. To me to goes hand with nfl teams that win without elite Qbs but elite defense. It happens in the range of 1/2 times a decade. You're not setting yourself for better results going to middling route and hope you get low odds great players.

"We" is general consensus among fans. This thread is a great example, and just after this thread was started 32 Thoughts did a segment about the realities of tanking. I think it's fair to say a large number of fans think it's a magic solution. I see it in the Sharks communities, especially with less-hardcore fans. They are mad that Will Smith isnt a superstar already lol.

I don't think there is a one-size-fits-all solution or formula to follow. What works for some wont work for others because of the variance of players, coaching staff, franchise location, ownership, etc

31 teams per year don't win a Cup. It's a bad measuring stick. Every single team in the league would have tanked to get McDavid regardless if it's worked out (yet) or not. Other teams with high-end talent that were criticized and mocked for years before they finally hit the right combination: Detroit, Chicago, Washington. It happens easier for some teams, harder for others. But if you're committed to rebuilding, there's no credible reason not to tank. Even now with the reduced lottery odds.

No it's not lol. Are you seriously suggesting that you want to be a fan of a franchise whose goal is not to win a cup? If we're judging the success of a league-wide strategy, what other measuring stick should we use that winning?

I'm also very clearly not talking about single season success. I'm talking about success of a multi-year plan. If Detroit makes the playoffs this year than the year is a success, but if they never win with this core than the rebuild was a failure.

Using any other measuring stick is just so fans can feel better about their team not winning. I'm a Sharks fan, we had the most successful team of the 2010s to not win the cup. That's a failure, not something to celebrate. Celebrating that is a loser mentality.

 

[Bottomshelf]

The having a new GM take the reigns and start a rebuild on a team that typically wasn’t ready for one (due to contracts and the previous GM clinging onto their job) makes the rebuilds much slower. If you start a rebuild and are low on retention slots, buyout slots, picks or even have long term contracts you’re going to be spinning the tires at the bottom for years.

 

[TheDawnOfANewTage]

Y’know, I don’t usually have much faith in the Sabres, but I believe they can still win this thing. With Lindy at the helm and Adams studying the art of tic-tac-toe upstairs- gosh dang it, never count these guys out.

 

[x Tame Impala]

I think expansion is making and will continue to make rebuilding much more difficult than in a 30 team league.

The success rate for a top 1, top 3, 5, 10, 20, late 1st, 2nd rounder, 3rd rounder and beyond seems pretty arbitrary at this point. You just have to get lucky with your picks and hypothetically while you have a better chance of a pick panning out the higher they’re selected it’s far from certain you’re getting a guaranteed great player by drafting high.

I looked at the top 10 picks from the last 8 or so years and the success rate wasn’t super promising. Even if they’re full time nhl players or very good nhl players there’s still differing levels of impact there. There’s a huge difference between a McDavid—>J. Hughes—>Slafkovsky. You could get a home run 1st OVR like Matthews and have them be poor playoff performers. You could get the super-hyped kid like Bedard and have him struggle with a terrible roster.

One could also argue that draft picks are very overrated and GMs should be trading them for proven nhl talent in this 32+ team league. The Hawks traded for Seth Jones, a controversial trade no doubt. They traded the 6th (Jiricek), 12th (Sillinger), and former 8th (Boqvist) for 9 years of Seth Jones and Nolan Allen. Look at all those high picks back to Columbus! Bad trade for Chicago yeah? Well maybe not. Jones has his warts but he’s playing 25+ minutes a night and giving us 45+ points a year. While still early, how are Jiricek and Sillinger looking for CBus right now? Jiricek is pouting in the AHL, Sillinger is a 30 point player, and Boqvist is rarely healthy and he’s already on another team getting only 11 minutes a night.

Long post but tanking is not the be all end all of team construction anymore. I hope the Hawks are done with it after this season and try to be a playoff team from here on out.