hf101 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 @hf101I don't see that as weighted enough to help the bottom teams. The draft isn't meant to provide instant success for any team. GM's still need to be responsible in their player management and tanking shouldn't be rewarded. Teams should be trying to make the playoffs. A bottom 8 equal lottery allows teams to play to win without tanking for the best chance at a lottery win. Look at the 2013 draft class for example. You can't tell me that any of those bottom teams wouldn't be happy with any of those eight players. Each of those players will have an impact for it's team. Having a lottery with the bottom 8 would prevent tanking. 1. McKinnon Col2. Barkov Fla3. Drouin TB4. Jones Nash5. Lindholm Car6. Monahan Cal7. Nurse Edm8. Ristoleinen Buf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 The draft isn't meant to provide instant success for any team Is there somewhere that the NHL specifically describes what the draft is "meant" for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted April 20, 2015 Author Share Posted April 20, 2015 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 I think there's a bit of a "Chicago Cubs" kind of vibe going on in Toronto and Edmonton. The "lovable losers" role. I guess as long as they sell tickets, making money is all they need to do. Winning is optional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Is there somewhere that the NHL specifically describes what the draft is "meant" for? The draft is means of systematically selecting amateur players to professional teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JR Ewing Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 I think there's a bit of a "Chicago Cubs" kind of vibe going on in Toronto and Edmonton. The "lovable losers" role.I guess as long as they sell tickets, making money is all they need to do. Winning is optional. I couldn't disagree more. The men running this team have had the rarest kind of success you can get at the NHL level as players, and I think it's killing them that they don't have the answers as managers. Kevin Lowe is the type of guy who played games with broken wrists and broken ribs he just had taped up. Regular season losses drove him wild enough to rip apart the dressing room piece by piece and fist fight his own best friends. He risked alienating every other GM in the league to make his team better because he thought that's what he was forced to do. He's bad at his job, but being a "loveable loser" is simply not in his DNA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polaris922 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 The draft isn't meant to provide instant success for any team. GM's still need to be responsible in their player management and tanking shouldn't be rewarded. Teams should be trying to make the playoffs. A bottom 8 equal lottery allows teams to play to win without tanking for the best chance at a lottery win.Look at the 2013 draft class for example. You can't tell me that any of those bottom teams wouldn't be happy with any of those eight players. Each of those players will have an impact for it's team. Having a lottery with the bottom 8 would prevent tanking.1. McKinnon Col2. Barkov Fla3. Drouin TB4. Jones Nash5. Lindholm Car6. Monahan Cal7. Nurse Edm8. Ristoleinen BufThat was a very rare draft class. And would you trade Mackinnon for Nurs? I sure wouldn't. The draft is weighted the way it is for the exact purpose of favoring weaker teams to help make them competitive. No draft alone can do it, of course, but without it some teams would be unable to attain any talent or future at all. They already "fixed" it to reduce the odds of 'tanking'... To do any more favors teams that maybe suffered an untimely injury or just missed the playoffs. Making already competitive teams stronger while the weaker fail and collapse. Next step will be somebody suggesting the Stanley Cup winner drafts first pick as reward for winning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 That was a very rare draft class. And would you trade Mackinnon for Nurs? I sure wouldn't. The draft is weighted the way it is for the exact purpose of favoring weaker teams to help make them competitive. No draft alone can do it, of course, but without it some teams would be unable to attain any talent or future at all. They already "fixed" it to reduce the odds of 'tanking'... To do any more favors teams that maybe suffered an untimely injury or just missed the playoffs. Making already competitive teams stronger while the weaker fail and collapse.Next step will be somebody suggesting the Stanley Cup winner drafts first pick as reward for winning. I don't think it is a rare draft class at all. There are just more top amateur players than in years back. The finals standings of that year. 30. Florida 36pts29. Colorado 39 pts28. Tampa Bay 40pts27. Nashville 41 pts26. Carolina 42 pts25. Calgary 42 pts24. Edmonton 45 pts23. Buffalo 48 pts. ( NJ, Dallas also had 48 pts ) Is 5 or 6 wins in a season really that much of a difference in deciding which team is the worst? Why is it we should we basically reward the worst finish with the best player. Look how quickly Calgary recovered. McKinnon didn't help Colorado this year yet they were a playoff team last season. I think there is enough parity in the league that the draft should be something won and not necessarily poorly earned. The idea here is to reduce tanking as bottom teams are would get good picks to improve their franchise. Take the opposite for example -- The top 16 play for the Stanley Cup we don't automatically reward the Presidents Trophy Winner the Stanley Cup. 20 - 25 points roughly is the difference between the best in the league to the last playoff spot yet any of those 16 teams can win it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polaris922 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 I don't think it is a rare draft class at all. There are just more top amateur players than in years back.The finals standings of that year.30. Florida 36pts29. Colorado 39 pts28. Tampa Bay 40pts27. Nashville 41 pts26. Carolina 42 pts25. Calgary 42 pts24. Edmonton 45 pts23. Buffalo 48 pts. ( NJ, Dallas also had 48 pts )Is 5 or 6 wins in a season really that much of a difference in deciding which team is the worst? Why is it we should we basically reward the worst finish with the best player. Look how quickly Calgary recovered. McKinnon didn't help Colorado this year yet they were a playoff team last season. I think there is enough parity in the league that the draft should be something won and not necessarily poorly earned.The idea here is to reduce tanking as bottom teams are would get good picks to improve their franchise.Take the opposite for example -- The top 16 play for the Stanley Cup we don't automatically reward the Presidents Trophy Winner the Stanley Cup. 20 - 25 points roughly is the difference between the best in the league to the last playoff spot yet any of those 16 teams can win it. We don't just reward the last place team... Ask Buffalo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JR Ewing Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 Acquired, but then re-signed. Right, but that's a contract extension, not a UFA deal. It's not like any other teams had a crack at signing him. Oh well, it doesn't really matter much anyway. He's long gone from EDM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hf101 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 We don't just reward the last place team... Ask Buffalo. But how many teams turned off their "competitive" button in an attempt to get a better % at acquiring McDavid after the trade deadline? Having an equal chance for the #1 pick for all the bottom 8 teams could greatly decrease tanking. And probably increase the competition to make the playoffs which for the fans is a better game to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polaris922 Posted April 20, 2015 Share Posted April 20, 2015 But how many teams turned off their "competitive" button in an attempt to get a better % at acquiring McDavid after the trade deadline? Having an equal chance for the #1 pick for all the bottom 8 teams could greatly decrease tanking. And probably increase the competition to make the playoffs which for the fans is a better game to watch.None. Teams competed until they knew they were climbing a mountain. Then GM's did what they're paid for... Improve the future when the present is lost. I understand frustration from fans of traditionally borderline teams being frustrated, but shouldn't the fix be better GM's? Trading year in year out for moderate talent or replacing one star with another doesn't support success. It ensures continued mediocrity. Shrewd GM's add the pieces to support the stars, or rebuild through trades for pucks and Ealing the draft every chance they get. Anyone who thinks the Sabres or Oilers got on the ice throwing games to get McDavid is a fool. These men are pro's. And who's the fool that decided trading talent for draft picks and suffering in the short to gain in the long is tanking? It's smart management. It's investing in futures. As all successful businesses do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 The draft is means of systematically selecting amateur players to professional teams.And sometimes that process changes the future of teams.PenguinsTampaWashingtonJust in the past ten years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 But how many teams turned off their "competitive" button in an attempt to get a better % at acquiring McDavid after the trade deadline? Having an equal chance for the #1 pick for all the bottom 8 teams could greatly decrease tanking. And probably increase the competition to make the playoffs which for the fans is a better game to watch. That's trying to solve a problem that does not exist. Since the Lemieux draft, how may teams have truly tanked? None. Trading away free agents-to-be or overpriced veterans signed to multi-year deals for future assets is not tanking. The losing is a byproduct of that - not the intention. I will never get the obsession that this forum (generalization to make a point) has with something that hasn't happened in 30 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 Saying the NHL's current draft system doesn't encourage tanking is like saying an abandoned car parked in a deserted lot with the windows down, doors unlocked, and a million dollars in cash laying on the seat doesn't encourage theft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Saying the NHL's current draft system doesn't encourage tanking is like saying an abandoned car parked in a deserted lot with the windows down, doors unlocked, and a million dollars in cash laying on the seat doesn't encourage theft. Except that nothing backs up that assertion.Buffalo didn't get the #1 pick. Arizona didn't get the #2 pick. Those are the primary two "tankers" alleged this season. Edmonton clearly isn't "tanking" - they're just not very good and something of a disaster of an organization. So, what about the system - which is changing even more next year - "encourages tanking" like "an abandoned car parked in a deserted lot with the windows down, doors unlocked, and a million dollars in cash laying on the seat" encourages theft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 Saying the NHL's current draft system doesn't encourage tanking is like saying an abandoned car parked in a deserted lot with the windows down, doors unlocked, and a million dollars in cash laying on the seat doesn't encourage theft. The speedometer on my car (OK - minivan) goes up to 160 MPH. That doesn't encourage me to drive that fast. If it encourages tanking, why hasn't a team tanked since Reagan was in the White House? (OK - your are Canadian - so since Brian Mulroney was living at 24 Sussex Drive?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackStraw Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 The speedometer on my car (OK - minivan) goes up to 160 MPH What do you have, a Ferrari minivan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 The speedometer on my car (OK - minivan) goes up to 160 MPH. That doesn't encourage me to drive that fast. If it encourages tanking, why hasn't a team tanked since Reagan was in the White House? (OK - your are Canadian - so since Brian Mulroney was living at 24 Sussex Drive?) LOL. I don't know what league you were watching but I saw Toronto, Arizona, and Buffalo tanking this year. Edmonton was already bad in the first half of the season and simply stayed there. Buffalo had this planned a year in advance. No wonder they're pissed about not getting #1. They worked harder at it than anyone and just missed, but still won by getting #2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted April 21, 2015 Author Share Posted April 21, 2015 The speedometer on my car (OK - minivan) goes up to 160 MPH. That doesn't encourage me to drive that fast. For some people it does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
radoran Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 LOL. I don't know what league you were watching but I saw Toronto, Arizona, and Buffalo tanking this year. Edmonton was already bad in the first half of the season and simply stayed there. Buffalo had this planned a year in advance. No wonder they're pissed about not getting #1. They worked harder at it than anyone and just missed, but still won by getting #2. Toronto was simply a bad, dysfunctional team. They "tanked" all the way to fifth worst team in pursuit of... what, exactly? An 8.5% chance at #1? It's an odd system that "encourages tanking" yet doesn't actually "reward" the activity... You seem to want to punish bad teams for being bad. You have yet to explain how any of the legitimately bad franchises were supposed to become "better" without the benefit of higher drafting position. You haven't posited any "moves" teams could have made to become "better" if UFAs don't want to go there and other teams won't trade them "good" players. I suspect that is because you know they can't. The only thing your "systems" would do is keep bad teams bad. And that's bad for the cities they are in, the league as a whole and the sport in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 LOL. I don't know what league you were watching but I saw Toronto, Arizona, and Buffalo tanking this year. Specifics, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B21 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 What do you have, a Ferrari minivan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polaris922 Posted April 21, 2015 Share Posted April 21, 2015 LOL. I don't know what league you were watching but I saw Toronto, Arizona, and Buffalo tanking this year. Edmonton was already bad in the first half of the season and simply stayed there. Buffalo had this planned a year in advance. No wonder they're pissed about not getting #1. They worked harder at it than anyone and just missed, but still won by getting #2. We've been asking you from the start to explain what these teams did that was tanking and you have yet to say.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted April 22, 2015 Author Share Posted April 22, 2015 We've been asking you from the start to explain what these teams did that was tanking and you have yet to say.... Trading away all the players that were helping the team win now. Creating an environment where the remaining players felt no urgency to win. Creating an environment where it was actually beneficial to lose. You're never going to have an interview where you hear the coach or GM say that their organizational plan is to lose 82 games next season and get the #1 draft pick. So in that sense, you'll never get the "smoking gun" evidence that you're looking for. Rather, I just call it as I see it. When a team trades away all their best current players in exchange for prospects, they are making an effort to finish last in the present (with the hopes of getting a high draft pick) to finish first in the future. It has become so ingrained in the NHL that tanking is a strategy. Fans not only accept tanking, they consider it to be the honorable thing to do! In fact, tanking is now the ONLY way you can win the Stanley Cup! There is almost no other way to get better anymore other than to crater for five years and go 1-1-1-1-1, then rebound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WordsOfWisdom Posted April 22, 2015 Author Share Posted April 22, 2015 So in a nutshell: When you say a team is "rebuilding"..... I call the first few years of that rebuilding phase tanking. When you say that a team is having a "firesale"....... I call that tanking. Firesale = Throwing in the towel on the current season = Tanking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.