Playing to Lose - '83 Pens

[flyercanuck]

My only problem with this topic is it's kind of early don't ya think? I mean we still have the draft to look forward to, then free agency, then wait a few weeks until it gets really lame around here...THEN you bring up tanking, 40 years and 52 foot plasmas!

[doom88]

Yeah, and the one year that they did suck (worst in franchise history), they did not even get the best player (kane).

That really burns. Plus THAT guy scores a Cup winner in Philly, for the other team. FML

[Polaris922]

@canoli

A lot of good points there. Now imagine if they'd drafted Toews instead of Staal... Oh the humanity! Lol

[AJgoal]

On to the topic at hand, I know I'll take some heat for this, but I'm ok with tanking. The team exploring this option is taking a huge risk. The player could be a bust and the losing could be contagious and continue on into the next season. If you think player A is the guy you need to take the team to the next level, or save your team from moving....go get him....at any cost. It's really a moot point now anyways, with the lottery firmly installed. I don't know many executives crazy enough to risk shaming the franchise, losing season ticket holders etc just for the *chance* to maybe draft somebody. The JVR/Kane fiasco sits front and center in this line of thinking. One thing for sure, this theory will be put to the test next season...cause if ever there was a player who was "tanking worthy", it's Connor McDavid.

 

This is the main reason why I hate it. You tell your players (and your fanbase) that it's ok to lose.

 

And if the Flyers were towards the bottom of the pack and Wayne Gretzky was coming out next year, would you (not necessarily  you Jammer, anyone who feels the team should do everything in its power to win) really be ok with Hextall trading Mason, Simmonds, and Giroux for draft picks if he felt that was what he needed to do to have the best shot at the #1 overall pick? I don't. A team is more than one player. I also see the trading of Utley and Lee, and to a lesser extent Hamels, somewhat differently. You're moving older guys on the downsides of their careers to get some players to help out in the near future that (hopefully) will be pretty good. You're not going to move them solely to ensure that you finish as close to last as possible - rebuilding or retooling isn't tanking - see Buffalo this year. What the Sixers did was sell every decent player they had for draft picks, which all but ensured they were going to have a terrible end of the season and finish with as high a draft pick as possible.

 

Then again, I'm not a fan whose enjoyment begins and ends with chamionships.When the Phils won in 2008, I jumped up and down a bit, then went to work the next day. When Kane scored on Leighton in OT of game six, or the Eagles lost in 2004, I finished my beer and went to work the next day.  I'm good with the team consistantly winning more games than it loses. Would I like to see another Cup come to Philly? Sure, but I don't get too worked up about it. Why should I?

Edited June 22, 2014 by AJgoal

[B21]

@canoli

@jammer2

@JackStraw

 

No heat here.  I agree it's OK to "tank" so long as  - like jammer noted - you aren't telling your players to lose on purposes.  The Pens were awful in '83 even without "tanking".  Their sketchy moves as the season progressed (which everyone seems to forget) were because the Devils were as equally inept.  Any Pens' fan with their head screwed on right would have been pissed if the Pens hadn't tried to tank to get Lemieux.

 

@AJgoal

 

Your point is very valid.  But for me - I'd rather my team do whatever it takes to win a championship versus putting the "best possible team" out there so they can finish .500.

[JackStraw]

This is the main reason why I hate it. You tell your players (and your fanbase) that it's ok to lose

 

That's not how I see it. If the Sixers management felt it was ok to lose they would have just kept on going as they were, because they were losing plenty. Instead, management decided to make some difficult decisions, essentially telling the fan base "we're not ok with this and we're going to do what we think we have to do to turn this team into a winner."

 

I'd rather my team do whatever it takes to win a championship versus putting the "best possible team" out there so they can finish .500.

 

Exactly.

[murraycraven]

1st - props to @hf101. Great reply.

@Bakanekimiwa - to post this then act like you just uncovered some great mystery is a complete and total fraud. The Pens tanked to get Lemieux. Period. They didn't tell the players to lose on purpose...they simply called up players who weren't that good and traded/sent down those that were. This is no great secret. Even the coach at the time admitted it.

My opinion...you wanted to start another thread that gives you yet another chance to shite on the Pens and thought keeping it out of the Pens forum or even the general hockey topics forums would accomplish that. Oops. Posting this topic in the Pens forum would not be trolling. Posting it in the Flyers forum for "just Flyers fans" is...well...chickenshite on your part.

I can only imagine the backlash if I started a topic in the Pens forum called "Flyers - 40 Years of Failure"....only for Pens fans.

How did the Pens tanking impact your Flyers? It didn't...no more or less than any other NL team.

So if you want to leave because you don't like where the moderator puts your "Pens-Tanked" circle jerk of a thread then by all means - don't let the door hit you on the way out. I'm sure Kuato needs more friends over on Silly.com.

While I agree that this should be in a different forum if it was only for pens fans there would only be 3 people discussing and I don't think it being posted as it was is chickenshite...

Deep breaths B... Deep breathes...

Maybe the original post was overly critical, and yes it has been beaten to death, but name calling bc it was specifically directed at flyers fans is pretty low too. It us not like we only post in each others teams forums. We all see nearly every post as HF stated.

Edited June 22, 2014 by murraycraven

[Polaris922]

This is the main reason why I hate it. You tell your players (and your fanbase) that it's ok to lose.

And if the Flyers were towards the bottom of the pack and Wayne Gretzky was coming out next year, would you (not necessarily you Jammer, anyone who feels the team should do everything in its power to win) really be ok with Hextall trading Mason, Simmonds, and Giroux for draft picks if he felt that was what he needed to do to have the best shot at the #1 overall pick? I don't. A team is more than one player. I also see the trading of Utley and Lee, and to a lesser extent Hamels, somewhat differently. You're moving older guys on the downsides of their careers to get some players to help out in the near future that (hopefully) will be pretty good. You're not going to move them solely to ensure that you finish as close to last as possible - rebuilding or retooling isn't tanking - see Buffalo this year. What the Sixers did was sell every decent player they had for draft picks, which all but ensured they were going to have a terrible end of the season and finish with as high a draft pick as possible.

Then again, I'm not a fan whose enjoyment begins and ends with chamionships.When the Phils won in 2008, I jumped up and down a bit, then went to work the next day. When Kane scored on Leighton in OT of game six, or the Eagles lost in 2004, I finished my beer and went to work the next day. I'm good with the team consistantly winning more games than it loses. Would I like to see another Cup come to Philly? Sure, but I don't get too worked up about it. Why should I?

That actually defends the Pens as rebuilding that season. Something I agree they were doing. Thanks! Lol

[Polaris922]

@B21

I don't embrace the idea they "tanked" to the level you do. I agree they weakened the team through trades, but all of those trades were building a future. Did they care if they lost more? No. Who would? They sucked and had no chance. Did they intentionally throw games? No.

[sarsippius]

My only problem with this topic is it's kind of early don't ya think? I mean we still have the draft to look forward to, then free agency, then wait a few weeks until it gets really lame around here...THEN you bring up tanking, 40 years and 52 foot plasmas!

Best post on this thread. Couple weeks and there'll be plenty of time for kvetching and overreacting and Jacuzzis.

[Vanflyer]

Maybe the original post was overly critical, and yes it has been beaten to death, but name calling bc it was specifically directed at flyers fans is pretty low too. It us not like we only post in each others teams forums. We all see nearly every post as HF stated.

 

I don't even click on specific forums, I just click on "view new content". if the topic is something I am interested on, I read it, otherwise pass. 

 

Just citing my patterns on here and would like to think I am in the majority. 

 

On the 3 pens fans thing, while probably truthful, still hurtful. I personally would like their be equal number if not greater number of other teams fans on here. The only condition is as long as it does not deteriorate the quality and intent of this forum and regress back into a Philly.com sess pool (or enter any other forum where there is little to know moderation or spirit of general hockey camaraderie ie. hfboards.com).  

[murraycraven]

I don't even click on specific forums, I just click on "view new content". if the topic is something I am interested on, I read it, otherwise pass.

Just citing my patterns on here and would like to think I am in the majority.

On the 3 pens fans thing, while probably truthful, still hurtful. I personally would like their be equal number if not greater number of other teams fans on here. The only condition is as long as it does not deteriorate the quality and intent of this forum and regress back into a Philly.com sess pool (or enter any other forum where there is little to know moderation or spirit of general hockey camaraderie ie. hfboards.com).

Bingo Van... Well said!

[King Knut]

I believe the Nords were accused of it re: Lindros (an unspoken reason he wouldn't sign) and also the Senators were more openly a caused of it too. For Yashin of all people I think.

I would actually like to go back to those days, watching teams tank on purpose can actually be fun to watch.

[B21]

While I agree that this should be in a different forum if it was only for pens fans there would only be 3 people discussing and I don't think it being posted as it was is chickenshite...

Deep breaths B... Deep breathes...

Maybe the original post was overly critical, and yes it has been beaten to death, but name calling bc it was specifically directed at flyers fans is pretty low too. It us not like we only post in each others teams forums. We all see nearly every post as HF stated.

 

Sorry, MC...I call 'em like I see 'em.  Dead horse topic.  Pens fans...heck, the entire hockey world...knows they tanked.  OP wants Flyers fans only to chime in? Under the guise of how this affected the Flyers? Puh-lease.

 

Have some stones and deal with the inevitability of Pens fans taking issue.  Oh wait - we all agree in happened.   (OK - most of us...)

[B21]

@B21

I don't embrace the idea they "tanked" to the level you do. I agree they weakened the team through trades, but all of those trades were building a future. Did they care if they lost more? No. Who would? They sucked and had no chance. Did they intentionally throw games? No.

 

Fair.  But when they coach comes out and confirms it - it's kinda hard to deny. It wasn't so much about the trades and who they were sending down and calling up.

[murraycraven]

Sorry, MC...I call 'em like I see 'em.  Dead horse topic.  Pens fans...heck, the entire hockey world...knows they tanked.  OP wants Flyers fans only to chime in? Under the guise of how this affected the Flyers? Puh-lease.

 

Have some stones and deal with the inevitability of Pens fans taking issue.  Oh wait - we all agree in happened.   (OK - most of us...)

 

 

Hahaha!  Just busting your balls man!   And I agree with you on this one...

[Polaris922]

Fair. But when they coach comes out and confirms it - it's kinda hard to deny. It wasn't so much about the trades and who they were sending down and calling up.

The coach never said they tanked. Angotti's interview regarding the "tanking" was as follows:

"If Pittsburgh hadn't gotten Mario Lemieux that year, I think the franchise would've folded," Angotti said. The plan was hatched over a midseason lunch between him and E.J. Forget gold, they were going for the mold. "We didn't actually try to throw games. But, you know, we went in there with the understanding ... we weren't going to be upset if we lost." The "We didn't actually try to throw games" part often gets left off to argue the point.

Most of their good players, Kehoe, Paul Gardner and Randy Carlysle were all hurt. Did they make a questionable move in bringing up an AHL goalie to play some games towards the end of the season? Sure.. but many teams that are out of playoff contention do so to see what the kid has, which is exactly how E.J. Johnson said they did it. It's not like their current goalies were winning big games. Why did they not mess with Mike Bullard? He scored 51 that season... you'd think he'd be someone you'd want sitting, not scoring 92 points. The best goaltender was Denis Heron... with 8.. yes EIGHT wins. A stellar 4.08 GAA. That team just really really sucked! And if you look, the Devils losing streak to end the season was a couple games longer than the Pens.

What was the big lineup change they made to guarantee them losing? Replacing a 25 losses goalie with a young kid to see what he can do? Bringing up some AHL kids to cover injuries to Kehoe and Gardner? They traded Carlysle trying to fill gaps and get a high pick for the draft in an already lost season. commin practice. They lost a ton of games before the end of the season, and the Devils lost their last 8... more than the Pens... so who was really tanking at that point??

I get your notion of just embracing the idea and saying "so what". I just don't think the facts really bear out the allegation. I agree 100% on the so what part at least. I used to think that's what happened till the discussion last year got me looking more closely at what was actually said and done. Now I think they just really did suck that badly.

Edited June 23, 2014 by Polaris922

[TedZep]

The "We didn't actually try to throw games" part often gets left off to argue the point.

 

But his eye was twitching something fierce when he said it, and he had all his toes crossed, so take the "sincerity" with a grain of salt.

[TedZep]

This was the spirit of the original board... talk about everything hockey, but mostly how it relates to the Flyers. By moving things around that aren't specifically about the Flyers, I think we've lost that.

 

And because HockeyForums.net is for all hockey fans, topics such as the above that belong elsewhere on the site will be moved by moderators to the proper forums.

 

It's almost as if the mods don't trust the members to post where they meant to post in the first place.  Thirty five hundred topics in the Flyers section of the forum are more than all other topics and subtopics combined.  Over 77 thousand comments in the Flyers section are almost twice as many as all the other comments combined - and a good many of them originated in the Flyers' forum but were moved.

 

I appreciate the effort by the modmins to broaden the appeal to other fan bases, but the fact remains that the vast majority of this site's "constituency" and contributers are Flyers' fans, and here is where I check first for the topic(s) I'm interested in.  At least redirected threads are identified, and not just apparently "disappeared."

 

Thanks to everyone, this is a great place to come to discuss all things Hockey... but mostly the Flyers.

[jammer2]

  Myself, I'm really hoping the Flyers fans in here will be in the minority someday....that will be a sure sign this site has truly "made it". It won't happen overnight, but Rome was not built in a day.....

[flyercanuck]

@Polaris922

 

 "Angotti has also said that there was an "understanding" between the two, that Lemieux was the target, and that they needed to lose, end of story.  Former player Mike Bullard has even come out and said "all you have to do is look at the transactions, and roster, it tells the entire story.  We did play to lose."

 

One particular game the Penguins were up 3-1 at the end of the 2nd, and Johnston entered the locker room and asked Angotti "What are you doing? We need to lose." according to Angotti.  The Penguins would go on to lose that game, and Johnston ever the stoic PT Barnum, would deny any such claims that he wanted the team to lose.
 

 

Now what are we going to talk about in August?

[B21]

@Polaris922

 

The coach never said they tanked. Angotti's interview regarding the "tanking" was as follows:

"If Pittsburgh hadn't gotten Mario Lemieux that year, I think the franchise would've folded," Angotti said. The plan was hatched over a midseason lunch between him and E.J. Forget gold, they were going for the mold. "We didn't actually try to throw games. But, you know, we went in there with the understanding ... we weren't going to be upset if we lost." The "We didn't actually try to throw games" part often gets left off to argue the point.

 

On the same page here.  They didn't throw games.  It was about who they put out on the ice.

 

Most of their good players, Kehoe, Paul Gardner and Randy Carlysle were all hurt. Did they make a questionable move in bringing up an AHL goalie to play some games towards the end of the season? Sure.. but many teams that are out of playoff contention do so to see what the kid has, which is exactly how E.J. Johnson said they did it. It's not like their current goalies were winning big games. Why did they not mess with Mike Bullard? He scored 51 that season... you'd think he'd be someone you'd want sitting, not scoring 92 points. The best goaltender was Denis Heron... with 8.. yes EIGHT wins. A stellar 4.08 GAA. That team just really really sucked! And if you look, the Devils losing streak to end the season was a couple games longer than the Pens.

 

I don't think the Carlyle trade was meant to help them get Lemieux. Moves like that are made all the time.  Romano actually was considered a pretty good prospect at the time. He wins 4 straight and he gets sent down and replaced with Vincent Tremblay (??) who, all due respect to, was not someone "worth a look" as the Pens said.

 

Bullard would have made it obvious.

 

I get your notion of just embracing the idea and saying "so what". I just don't think the facts really bear out the allegation. I agree 100% on the so what part at least. I used to think that's what happened till the discussion last year got me looking more closely at what was actually said and done. Now I think they just really did suck that badly.

 

I think the allegations give the inpression that the Pens went balls out for Lemieux from the start of the season.  They were going to be bad.  Once they saw how bad they actually were (and how bad the Devils were) I think they made a few tweaks to make sure the ended up #1...err worst...overeall.

 

I'll say it again (and I know you agree)....so what?  Anyone who takes the how-dare-they!! nose-in-the-air position on this that it tarnishes the integrity of the game or the Pens did their fans wrong by not putting the (cough cough) best possible team on the ice is only fooling themselves...and probably trying to take some luster off those Cups.

[B21]

@Polaris922

 

 

Now what are we going to talk about in August?

 

Who won the Richards trade?

[flyercanuck]

@B21

 

 Thanks. Now I have that to look forward to....again!

[jammer2]

 This topic has been literally beaten to death, nothing new here, all this info was supplied in the last 5 threads about this topic.