NHL Promotes, Facilitates, and Encourages Tanking.

[WordsOfWisdom]

So you want them to play for the right to draft first? Lol. Again favors the stronger teams that don't need the talent quite as desperately.

 

No. Every 30 years a team gets the #1 overall pick. They could even plan for it in advance. It would be a regular rotation. Start with a random number sequence and then continue to loop through that sequence of teams going forward. ie: Toronto in 2015, 2045, 2075, etc...   

 

The idea of a single elimination tournament (with each series being a best-of-1) for the #1 overall pick is out there too, but that would compete against the Stanley Cup playoffs.

[Polaris922]

No. Every 30 years a team gets the #1 overall pick. They could even plan for it in advance. It would be a regular rotation.

The idea of a single elimination tournament for the #1 overall pick is out there too, but that would compete against the Stanley Cup playoffs.

You're still trying to "fix" something that's not broken. Once every thirty years still hangs crap teams out to dry. Are you going to do the entire draft order that way? If not, Then teams will tank to be second worst every year.

Just leave it as it is.

[WordsOfWisdom]

Just leave it as it is.

 

[Polaris922]

Why isn't it fair?? Lol

[WordsOfWisdom]

Why isn't it fair?? Lol

 

Because I disagree with your assessment that the current system is not broken. But you won't let me fix it! 

 

If you just want the worst team to get better, why not eliminate the randomness and just do this:

 

17: 14th pick.

18: 13th pick.

19: 12th pick.

20: 11th pick.

21: 10th pick.

22: 9th pick.

23: 8th pick.

24: 7th pick.

25: 6th pick.

26: 5th pick.

27: 4th pick

28: 3rd pick

29: 2nd pick

30: 1st pick

 

That way Buffalo gets McDavid (the worst team getting the best player) instead of McDavid accidentally going to a "much" better team    like New Jersey or Philadelphia, and that way Buffalo is saved from the abyss, the team can win 60 games the following year, and you're happy!   

 

Assuming you believe bad teams are just bad and not tanking intentionally, then the system above would speed their recovery better than any other! Let's jump on it! 

[Polaris922]

Because I disagree with your assessment that the current system is not broken. But you won't let me fix it!

If you just want the worst team to get better, why not eliminate the randomness and just do this:

17: 14th pick.

18: 13th pick.

19: 12th pick.

20: 11th pick.

21: 10th pick.

22: 9th pick.

23: 8th pick.

24: 7th pick.

25: 6th pick.

26: 5th pick.

27: 4th pick

28: 3rd pick

29: 2nd pick

30: 1st pick

That way Buffalo gets McDavid (the worst team getting the best player) instead of McDavid accidentally going to a "much" better team like New Jersey or Philadelphia, and that way Buffalo is saved from the abyss, the team can win 60 games the following year, and you're happy!

Assuming you believe bad teams are just bad and not tanking intentionally, then the system above would speed their recovery better than any other! Let's jump on it!

That's what it used to be. Lol

[WordsOfWisdom]

That's what it used to be. Lol

 

LOL. 

[WordsOfWisdom]

You're still trying to "fix" something that's not broken. Once every thirty years still hangs crap teams out to dry. Are you going to do the entire draft order that way? If not, Then teams will tank to be second worst every year.

Just leave it as it is.

 

So you agree with me that teams are tanking. This is progress!

[radoran]

So you agree with me that teams are tanking. This is progress!

 

Would you say that Edmonton was "tanking" or that the Oilers have just been godawful for an extended period of time? They haven't made the playoffs in nine years...

 

How, exactly, do you propose that Edmonton gets "better" without the draft? Even the guy that was traded there and got them to the Final whined his way out after signing.

 

And how did "tanking" work out for Arizona this year? They don't even get one of the two "generational" talents.

[hf101]

So here is my 2 cents as to how to eliminate tanking.

 

Treat the bottom 8 teams in the league as equals.  Organizations enjoy their playoff money so I still think we will still see 1 or two teams from each division desperately playing to make the playoffs.

 

Draw randomly each of the bottom 8 teams for picks 1 -8.  The remainder of the league's picks continue as is currently done in the NHL.

 

Once the league has and equal number of teams in each division -- choose the bottom 8 teams by the two worst records in each division, and by lottery pick 1-8. 

[WordsOfWisdom]

Would you say that Edmonton was "tanking" or that the Oilers have just been godawful for an extended period of time? They haven't made the playoffs in nine years...

 

How, exactly, do you propose that Edmonton gets "better" without the draft? Even the guy that was traded there and got them to the Final whined his way out after signing.

 

And how did "tanking" work out for Arizona this year? They don't even get one of the two "generational" talents.

 

Maybe Edmonton is in the business of accumulating #1 draft picks. Maybe they have no incentive to improve. They might simply want to be known as the transient destination for every great young player that enters the league so that they can sell McJesus jerseys (and whoever else comes along) in perpetuity. Also, they get way more press by losing, and this draft lottery has been a PR dream for the Oilers. Why wouldn't they want to be in the draft lottery again next year? They can build up the excitement for months. I get the sense that winning or losing is not as important as getting publicity. 

 

You have to tank for a few years before you're guaranteed a top pick. Arizona will try again next year and will probably get the #1 pick.

 

Edmonton can get better by good management.

[JR Ewing]

Maybe Edmonton is in the business of accumulating #1 draft picks. Maybe they have no incentive to improve. They might simply want to be known as the transient destination for every great young player that enters the league so that they can sell McJesus jerseys (and whoever else comes along) in perpetuity. Also, they get way more press by losing, and this draft lottery has been a PR dream for the Oilers. Why wouldn't they want to be in the draft lottery again next year? They can build up the excitement for months. I get the sense that winning or losing is not as important as getting publicity. 

 

You have to tank for a few years before you're guaranteed a top pick. Arizona will try again next year and will probably get the #1 pick.

 

Edmonton can get better by good management.

 

You think that Oilers ownership and management WANTS to be referred to as a joke, that Connor McDavid's career will be ruined by his association with them, and so on and so on? I'm sure that the Oiler are

 

a) Thrilled with their bit of luck and are happier than pigs in **** to draft McDavid, and

b) Are embarrassed by the way they're spoken about in the hockey world.

 

Craig MacTavish hasn't been losing on purpose; he's just bad at his job.

[flyercanuck]

So here is my 2 cents as to how to eliminate tanking.

 

Treat the bottom 8 teams in the league as equals.  Organizations enjoy their playoff money so I still think we will still see 1 or two teams from each division desperately playing to make the playoffs.

 

Draw randomly each of the bottom 8 teams for picks 1 -8.  The remainder of the league's picks continue as is currently done in the NHL.

 

Once the league has and equal number of teams in each division -- choose the bottom 8 teams by the two worst records in each division, and by lottery pick 1-8. 

 

 

 

That's actually one of the best proposals I've heard HF.

[radoran]

Right, but who was the last big name UFA to sign with Edmonton? Pronger, and he whined his way right out of town.

Who was the last one before that?

And that was a decade ago.

What chance do they have at all if the #17 team has the best shot at no. 1 overall and the no. 30 team has virtually none?

Even Crosby didn't make the playoffs in his first season and didn't get out of the first round in Malkin's first - and that team had four top two picks in four years

[JR Ewing]

Right, but who was the last big name UFA to sign with Edmonton? Pronger, and he whined his way right out of town.

Who was the last one before that?

And that was a decade ago.

What chance do they have at all if the #17 team has the best shot at no. 1 overall and the no. 30 team has virtually none?

Even Crosby didn't make the playoffs in his first season and didn't get out of the first round in Malkin's first - and that team had four top two picks in four years

 

Even at that, Pronger was acquired by trade, and not UFA. Big UFA signings by EDM?

 

Souray maybe, and he's not in the same stratosphere as Pronger. You're right: the only way they're getting a star player is through the draft or trade. As far as trades go, so many people seem to think it's this easy and straight-forward matter of packaging a good forward and BAM!, you get your #1 defenseman. Those players are not growing on trees, and teams are exceptionally loathe to move them unless there are major issues which forces their hand.

[flyercanuck]

@JR Ewing

 

hey congrats on getting McDavid. The Oilers just became relevant once more. The good fans there deserve it.

[AJgoal]

Even Crosby didn't make the playoffs in his first season and didn't get out of the first round in Malkin's first - and that team had four top two picks in four years

 

And misfired a little on the fourth of those (Some would argue the first, as well).

 

And as much as I like to harp on Buffalo, they didn't really tank. If they were actively tanking, Girgensons would have spent the last two years in the AHL. Grigorenko would not have seen the NHL while he had junior elligibility. Buffalo sold high on some assets that didn't fit their future. The worst anyone could say (and I have) was they traded away Myers - but in that, they got back Bogosian, a good defenseman in his own right, and Evander Kane, who may just need a change of scenery. That Kane was unable to play the rest of the season is immaterial to the fact that they got back a guy who is big and skilled.

[radoran]

Even at that, Pronger was acquired by trade, and not UFA. Big UFA signings by EDM?

 

Acquired, but then re-signed.

[radoran]

And misfired a little on the fourth of those (Some would argue the first, as well).

 

And as much as I like to harp on Buffalo, they didn't really tank. If they were actively tanking, Girgensons would have spent the last two years in the AHL. Grigorenko would not have seen the NHL while he had junior elligibility. Buffalo sold high on some assets that didn't fit their future. The worst anyone could say (and I have) was they traded away Myers - but in that, they got back Bogosian, a good defenseman in his own right, and Evander Kane, who may just need a change of scenery. That Kane was unable to play the rest of the season is immaterial to the fact that they got back a guy who is big and skilled.

 

Yeah, they definitely understood that they would go down before going up, but they did bring in some good pieces.

 

Moulson-Eichel-Kane next year? That could be a very nice first line.

 

And I saw a team in the Sabres that on the ice was trying to win. They were in something like 35 1-goal games this season.

[AJgoal]

Yeah, they definitely understood that they would go down before going up, but they did bring in some good pieces.

 

Moulson-Eichel-Kane next year? That could be a very nice first line.

 

And I saw a team in the Sabres that on the ice was trying to win. They were in something like 35 1-goal games this season.

 

Which is why the Nolan firing is maddeningly incoherant. The team lost - well, that's what management wanted. But they were competetive, even with the drek of a roster and goaltending that they had.

[radoran]

Which is why the Nolan firing is maddeningly incoherant. The team lost - well, that's what management wanted. But they were competetive, even with the drek of a roster and goaltending that they had.

 

I don't get firing Nolan, beyond Murray "wanting his own guy in there."

 

Or if they think Babcock might want to coach Eichel.

 

Or if Scotty Bowman decides he wants to coach the home games...

[Polaris922]

@hf101

I don't see that as weighted enough to help the bottom teams.

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

Just gonna throw my $2.39 in....

 

Despite what things 'look like' where teams are supposedly losing on purpose, I don't think that is the case.

 

I DO believe, however, that GM's who see an upcoming season as grim even before it begins, very well MAY set things a certain way so that the team that gets put on the ice TRIES to win, but the chances of them doing so is lower than normal....and said GM's, while not telling coaches or players to lose and throw games, are counting on high draft picks as a fallback plan.

 

This idea that teams like Edmonton and Arizona would prefer to keep losing year after year on purpose for some sort of notoriety and money...well, I just can't buy into that.

As some have mentioned already, NO ONE wants to be known as the perennial butt-end of jokes!

We are talking about professionals in both management, coaching and the players themselves....99% of which, I am pretty sure, have a lot of pride.

And I simply cannot see them trading in that pride, taking on the stink of being league jokes, for some sort of publicity stunt.

 

I  never played ice hockey, but from what I understand, hockey players....hardcore hockey players (which more than likely populate the NHL, AHL, Juniors and the various Euro leagues)....are quite simply, some of the most prideful (in a good way) athletes you can find.

They sacrifice much, put their bodies through hell and back, all because they want to be known as being the best at what they do.

 

Same with coaches and GM's involved in the sport.

 

I am pretty sure players, coaches, and GM's would RATHER be known for winning championships, playoff bound streaks, and producing (and keeping on hand) as many HOF type players as they can more than they'd rather be associated with losing year after year, being ridiculed year after year, and generally being looked down on by the rest of the league and those out of the league as well.

 

The NHL may not have this draft thing down right (heck, they have lots of things they still need to 'get right'), but rewarding teams that make the playoffs or close to it is definitely not the answer IMO.

Sure, the worry will always be that the lower teams will continue to 'throw away games and seasons' just to acquire the best talents.

 

But the reason any team would want to acquire those talents is to STOP the losing and STOP being the jokes of the league.

 

I just don't see a scenario where teams (like was inferred with Edmonton) purposely have a business model set up where they think that losing every year and collecting high draft picks just for the sake of collecting them or selling merchandise is a viable way to go about running their team!

 

Now, again, GM's probably WILL use the draft as a fallback plan and make signings accordingly, but to me, that's about the extent of it.

Whether GM's, coaches, and owners are CLUELESS is another matter entirely as well.

 

Some teams are most likely consistently awful because the people owning or running them are simply complete hockey morons.

Maybe they were good to great players, but have no clue how to run a franchise....maybe they are smart businessmen or women in other areas, but absolutely SUCK at knowing what it takes to develop, hire people for, and invest properly in a successful hockey franchise.

 

Look to the recent past to teams like the Islanders and yes, my very own Lightning, as teams whose ownership (and the people managing the team) damn near ran those franchises into the ground.

 

I don't know what the answer for the NHL is regarding the draft...for now, I say leave it as it is.

But despite the ribbing and joking that even I have done with it, I honestly don't believe teams purposely set up shop to lose, lose, lose, and lose some more.

Real hockey people, whether players, coaches, and owners, simply aren't wired that way.

[JR Ewing]

This idea that teams like Edmonton and Arizona would prefer to keep losing year after year on purpose for some sort of notoriety and money...well, I just can't buy into that.

As some have mentioned already, NO ONE wants to be known as the perennial butt-end of jokes!

We are talking about professionals in both management, coaching and the players themselves....99% of which, I am pretty sure, have a lot of pride.

And I simply cannot see them trading in that pride, taking on the stink of being league jokes, for some sort of publicity stunt.

 

I  never played ice hockey, but from what I understand, hockey players....hardcore hockey players (which more than likely populate the NHL, AHL, Juniors and the various Euro leagues)....are quite simply, some of the most prideful (in a good way) athletes you can find.

They sacrifice much, put their bodies through hell and back, all because they want to be known as being the best at what they do.

 

Same with coaches and GM's involved in the sport.

 

I am pretty sure players, coaches, and GM's would RATHER be known for winning championships, playoff bound streaks, and producing (and keeping on hand) as many HOF type players as they can more than they'd rather be associated with losing year after year, being ridiculed year after year, and generally being looked down on by the rest of the league and those out of the league as well.

 

Kevin Lowe has made mistakes in his time in upper management in Edmonton. He was not a horrible GM, but the fact is that he's over-seen an unsuccessful rebuild here.

 

But he hates losing, and I mean really hates it. He had a reputation for having a volcanic temper if the team lost in a bad way. Here's a bit from an Edmonton Journal article about a fight between Lowe and Barrie Stafford, who was the team's equipment manager, and Lowe's best friend:

 

Along with his on-ice temper, Lowe was known to tear up the odd dressing room when the team lost or he got tossed from a game. “He would whack and hack and just rearrange the whole room.”

 

Says Lowe: “I didn’t do it often. . It was never staged. Whether it was deserving or not, I felt it was.”

 

Stafford’s own run-in with Lowe came after the Oilers had just renovated their dressing room. Stafford was proud of his new working place. He was also responsible for keeping it clean and in order.

One game, the Oilers tied the San Jose, then one of the worst teams in hockey. “We were just choked, just ticked off,” Stafford says. “It was a disgrace.”

 

Stafford stormed away from the bench, fuming. Lowe did the same. He was team captain at the time and the squad was teetering early in the 1991-92 season. The Oilers needed the win against San Jose and Lowe was steamed at one Oilers defenceman pairing that had made a key mistake, allowing San Jose to tie it up. As he left the ice, fans started to heckle him and his teammates. “I was just all around mad,” Lowe says. “I was just ready to explode and rather than explode on the fans . Instead of taking a b-line to attack them, I contained myself until I got to the dressing room (corridor).”

 

Stafford was in the dressing room when he heard crashing, banging and cursing behind him, then saw a waft of dust blow into the middle of the new room. While walking down the corridor, Lowe had smashed his stick to the floor, only to have it bounce up hard. It punctured the new ceiling tiles. Lowe tried to yank out the stick. He jerked it forward, which set off a chain reaction, all the ceiling tiles crashing down, one by one, along the hall. Lowe crashed into the dressing room, covered in dust, his eyes hot with anger.

 

Stafford turned to Lowe, “What the f- are you doing?! You can’t do that to this room!”

“I just did,” Lowe shot back. “What are you going to do about it?” At once, the two charged at one another. They were about to come to blows when Lowe’s brother Kenny ran in and tackled Stafford.

The other players filed in through the mess, saw the three men grappling, and wondered what in the world was going on.

 

The guy hates to lose. Always has and always will.

[Polaris922]

So you agree with me that teams are tanking. This is progress!

 

No.  I agree there are teams who accept a season is lost and that make personnel moves for a brighter future which often makes them worse in the current year.  That's as close as I'll get, but it's what you call tanking.