Victims of "bad" tanks and rebuilds: How soon did you know something was going wrong?
- Thread starter ReHabs
- Start date
CaptainShark
Registered User
After hours and hours of highly scientific research, I can confirm that the most telling sign is this.
Nogatco Rd
Pierre-Luc Dubas
- Apr 3, 2021
- 3,360
- 6,238
Great question by OP. Something I’ve wondered about and I’m surprised isn’t discussed more often. Looking forward to some serious answers.
WhatTheDuck
9 - 20 - 8
Luigi Lemieux
Registered User
- Sep 26, 2003
- 22,398
- 11,221
I think a troubling sign is if your young players are regressing.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
MarkusNaslund19
Registered User
- Dec 28, 2005
- 5,802
- 8,737
I genuinely think that a lot of people don't understand how important intent is in situations like this.
Like the Penguins, Blackhawks, Kings, and Lightning cores were built, in part, with high picks, yes. But mostly these were teams going through serious ownership adversity, or other kinds of limiting factors while trying their darndest.
One can overcome adversity if one maintains their integrity and pride. This is especially true of interdependent groups. Overcoming a big hurdle is possible.
But intentionally quitting, throwing in the towel. I firmly believe that this creates a stink that is very, very hard to shake.
The Sabres did it and haven't looked like a top half team in the league for more than half a season at a time since.
The Oilers did it and it took ten years to even approach competence and that was because they won the lottery of lotteries, and then won another lottery with Draisaitl becoming so good (I also suspect that playing with McDavid raised his ceiling) and then some competent hockey men came in because they wanted to build around McDavid. This cannot be reliably replicated.
The Hawks look utterly lost.
-
Accepting reality is one thing. Trading upcoming free agents, not signing old guys and taking your lumps while your young players learn.
But trading every competent player and laying down on the road ruins a team's culture.
Look at the Sabres in 2015, look at the Hawks recently with Hagel, DeBrincat, etc.
Look at the Rangers right now (different situation, but a similar cultural problem where the players feel like management has literally quit on them).
Group psychology in sports is woefully, woefully misunderstood.
Like the Penguins, Blackhawks, Kings, and Lightning cores were built, in part, with high picks, yes. But mostly these were teams going through serious ownership adversity, or other kinds of limiting factors while trying their darndest.
One can overcome adversity if one maintains their integrity and pride. This is especially true of interdependent groups. Overcoming a big hurdle is possible.
But intentionally quitting, throwing in the towel. I firmly believe that this creates a stink that is very, very hard to shake.
The Sabres did it and haven't looked like a top half team in the league for more than half a season at a time since.
The Oilers did it and it took ten years to even approach competence and that was because they won the lottery of lotteries, and then won another lottery with Draisaitl becoming so good (I also suspect that playing with McDavid raised his ceiling) and then some competent hockey men came in because they wanted to build around McDavid. This cannot be reliably replicated.
The Hawks look utterly lost.
-
Accepting reality is one thing. Trading upcoming free agents, not signing old guys and taking your lumps while your young players learn.
But trading every competent player and laying down on the road ruins a team's culture.
Look at the Sabres in 2015, look at the Hawks recently with Hagel, DeBrincat, etc.
Look at the Rangers right now (different situation, but a similar cultural problem where the players feel like management has literally quit on them).
Group psychology in sports is woefully, woefully misunderstood.
when we signed Tavares.
It wasn't signing Tavares it was hiring Dubas.
You notice how Dubas isn't here and they are 1st in the Atlantic, battling for 1st in the NHL?
This is what happens when you have a REAL GM and and REAL coach
MakoSlade
Registered User
Serious answer, you have to hit on most of your draft picks, and lottery luck helps. Devils started their rebuild with Pavel Zacha, a good player but not someone who lived up to his draft position in any way, shape or form. They followed that up with Mikey MacLeod, another good player but they missed on better options after.
The turnaround started with lottery luck and good decisions with that luck. Cornerstones Hischier and Hughes were picked over terrible options (Nolan Patrick and Kappo Kakko), both in drafts where the 1 / 2 were a toss up. (I still think the Hughes / Kakko debate was manufactured for attention, I never for one microsecond thought the Devils were going to pick KK).
So yeah, draft is huge. And also a good GM. GMTF has been brilliant for the Devils. He turned around a shattered defense in months 3 years or so back, didn't make any panic moves last year, and addresses their biggest weaknesses this year. He has an eye for need and a solid plan.
The turnaround started with lottery luck and good decisions with that luck. Cornerstones Hischier and Hughes were picked over terrible options (Nolan Patrick and Kappo Kakko), both in drafts where the 1 / 2 were a toss up. (I still think the Hughes / Kakko debate was manufactured for attention, I never for one microsecond thought the Devils were going to pick KK).
So yeah, draft is huge. And also a good GM. GMTF has been brilliant for the Devils. He turned around a shattered defense in months 3 years or so back, didn't make any panic moves last year, and addresses their biggest weaknesses this year. He has an eye for need and a solid plan.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
One of the challenges appears to be having the talent coming through the pipeline while also having a sufficiently positive veteran presence to help develop those players in the right way.
If you are too flush with mediocre veterans, it may prevent you from getting into the top 5 in drafting on a regular basis and acquiring the necessary talent to get out of the playoff bubble cycle.
But if there are too few, or they are the wrong guys, the potential that everyone is raving about never really pans out and the youngsters only learn about how to lose.
If you are too flush with mediocre veterans, it may prevent you from getting into the top 5 in drafting on a regular basis and acquiring the necessary talent to get out of the playoff bubble cycle.
But if there are too few, or they are the wrong guys, the potential that everyone is raving about never really pans out and the youngsters only learn about how to lose.
People being overly dramatic about the Leafs already, which should come as no surprise. Our core is dysfunctional and incapable of winning meaningful games, no arguments there, but our rebuild was one of the better ones all things considered.
We got the lottery luck. Our top10 picks in Nylander and Marner were huge successes. Even when we tanked, we had just hired the most in-demand coach in the game, and that dead-last team had no talent but still worked their butts off every night. Once we'd secured Matthews, we started bringing in some more vets and built a pretty good team out of it. We kept our "own rentals" like James Van Riemsdyk and Tyler Bozak in those early years to try and build that winning culture.
If any of Matthews/Marner/Nylander had been duds, it wouldn't have worked. If we had really sold out the soul of the team and gained the "stench", it wouldn't have worked. There were mistakes made, such as the Marleau and Zaitsev deals, Babcock turned out to be Babcock, but by just about any reasonable assessment we built a team that was good enough to make playoff runs. That's something that so many of these lame-duck rebuilds never manage.
For the Leafs I believe it went wrong when the team's culture was built around the egos of our big guns. Most of this lies at the feet of Dubas, and his "we can and we will" comment is probably what really put us on the path to repeated failure that we ended up on. Quite the juxtaposition to Shanahan's comments about players needing to take less to win! I accepted that our core was a sham when we lost to Montreal, others did before that and still others are holding out hope.
Did we have a "bad" tank? No, our early success and the promise we showed is probably one of the factors that actually encouraged many other teams to tank. It was all the rage in 2015 and we made it look easy. It was just those dysfunctional Oilers who couldn't make it work. I remember a Sens fan back in 2019 or so getting really mad at me and asking if it worked for us, why wouldn't it work for them? But a decade into the tanking trend, I think teams are realizing what a fine tightrope it is to walk. We haven't really had recent tank teams win cups in a long, long time.
We got the lottery luck. Our top10 picks in Nylander and Marner were huge successes. Even when we tanked, we had just hired the most in-demand coach in the game, and that dead-last team had no talent but still worked their butts off every night. Once we'd secured Matthews, we started bringing in some more vets and built a pretty good team out of it. We kept our "own rentals" like James Van Riemsdyk and Tyler Bozak in those early years to try and build that winning culture.
If any of Matthews/Marner/Nylander had been duds, it wouldn't have worked. If we had really sold out the soul of the team and gained the "stench", it wouldn't have worked. There were mistakes made, such as the Marleau and Zaitsev deals, Babcock turned out to be Babcock, but by just about any reasonable assessment we built a team that was good enough to make playoff runs. That's something that so many of these lame-duck rebuilds never manage.
For the Leafs I believe it went wrong when the team's culture was built around the egos of our big guns. Most of this lies at the feet of Dubas, and his "we can and we will" comment is probably what really put us on the path to repeated failure that we ended up on. Quite the juxtaposition to Shanahan's comments about players needing to take less to win! I accepted that our core was a sham when we lost to Montreal, others did before that and still others are holding out hope.
Did we have a "bad" tank? No, our early success and the promise we showed is probably one of the factors that actually encouraged many other teams to tank. It was all the rage in 2015 and we made it look easy. It was just those dysfunctional Oilers who couldn't make it work. I remember a Sens fan back in 2019 or so getting really mad at me and asking if it worked for us, why wouldn't it work for them? But a decade into the tanking trend, I think teams are realizing what a fine tightrope it is to walk. We haven't really had recent tank teams win cups in a long, long time.
Last edited:
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Useless Thread MCMXCVII - 51 Year Old Spams His Plushies (Xmas Still Canceled)- Latest: Sega Dreamcast
-
