However, management can tank. Last year, Montreal fired their coach close to an 8th place spot then proceeded to replace him with an AHL coach, traded players mid game, got picks for any UFAs and then waiver picked up a goon to entertain the fans during losses. Then Price got hurt and didn't push it so the back up could play. Oh yeah, and played Geoffrion top six for several games.
That was pretty close to tanking as you could get.
However, management can tank. Last year, Montreal fired their coach close to an 8th place spot then proceeded to replace him with an AHL coach, traded players mid game, got picks for any UFAs and then waiver picked up a goon to entertain the fans during losses. Then Price got hurt and didn't push it so the back up could play. Oh yeah, and played Geoffrion top six for several games.
That was pretty close to tanking as you could get.
if you think marc bergevin is going that route you are dreaming bud.
One aspect of the whole "tank" and "don't tank" debate is the impact it has on your players production/value and young player development.
1-If you have player X who is a decent player but has grown up in Columbus or NYI and player Y who played on cup winners in Detroit or Pittsburgh and they have exactly the sake skill. Who do you think will get more in return by trade? The Gill to Nash trade is a perfect example, if he had little to no playoff experience or success, I'm sure we never get a 2nd for Gill.
2-It's harder for any player to produce when playing under a losing culture, very hard mentally. Instead of having a productive asset all of a sudden you have a "salary dump" that you get nothing for.
3-by the same token it's harder for young players. Not just in the losing culture but having the pressure of having to "ressurect" the franchise instead of just developing into a good player as part of a winning team.
If "tanking" would guarantee you a Crosby and Malkin in 2 years, then success within 2-3 years, then everybody, even Brian Burke would do it. But it's not like that, For every Crosby or Malkin you have a lot of Hortons, Bouwmeester Halls Turris Alzner E.Johnson Staals etc who are very good but not superstars plus a few Filatov Barker Zherdev Pouliot who are basically top 5 busts.
In the cap world, it makes little sense to really"tank" like some are proposing. If you draft and develop well, use yout cap space wisely and manage your assets you can go from 12th to cup contender in 2 years if you have a pretty good base.
Circle March 10 on your calendar. After that game, and for the first time this season the Habs will have played equally on the road and at home. It will also be just over the halfway point (26 games) into the season and a big road trip will have been closed off.
I think at that point fans will have a better opinion on what calls MB should make.
We have badly outdrafted Detroit the last 10 years. Post Datsyuk(1998) and Zetterberg(1999) their drafting is nothing above average.
Their front office had largely relied on Illitch's dollars to get big names and their pre 2000 drafting.
So other than their superstars we outdrafted them. Amazing, maybe we can trade an army of 3rd/4th liners for one of them? All of their cups were won with those drafts and our drafting has been pretty mediocre. The fact is that team is better managed than any team in the league, lots of teams spend to the cap and don't have a fraction of the success.
So if you are claiming the "tankers" are unrealistic and then use the Red Wings as a team we should mimic you are in a fantasy world.
Circle March 10 on your calendar. After that game, and for the first time this season the Habs will have played equally on the road and at home. It will also be just over the halfway point (26 games) into the season and a big road trip will have been closed off.
I think at that point fans will have a better opinion on what calls MB should make.
Plus the trade deadline will be approaching, so they will be laying out who if anybody should be dangled or what player(s) we should target.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble
So other than their superstars we outdrafted them. Amazing, maybe we can trade an army of 3rd/4th liners for one of them? All of their cups were won with those drafts and our drafting has been pretty mediocre. The fact is that team is better managed than any team in the league, lots of teams spend to the cap and don't have a fraction of the success.
So if you are claiming the "tankers" are unrealistic and then use the Red Wings as a team we should mimic you are in a fantasy world.
Detroit won cup with their pre 2000 drafts, not the subsequent ones.
Not sure how Price Subban Pacioretty Galchenyuk Beaulieu Tinordi Gallagher Plekanec etc equate to an "army or 3rd and 4th liners".
When have I said Detroit was a team we shoud mimic?
So other than their superstars we outdrafted them. Amazing, maybe we can trade an army of 3rd/4th liners for one of them? All of their cups were won with those drafts and our drafting has been pretty mediocre. The fact is that team is better managed than any team in the league, lots of teams spend to the cap and don't have a fraction of the success.
So if you are claiming the "tankers" are unrealistic and then use the Red Wings as a team we should mimic you are in a fantasy world.
There's a reason why they always have excuses as to why they dont want to talk about the Jackets, Islanders or Trashers/Jets of this world... doesnt fit their fantasy
if you think marc bergevin is going that route you are dreaming bud.
Marc Bergevin wasn't the GM last season.
I was just explaining tanking. I agree it's a dumb term and it's for the hockey fans who think everything can be fixed the same way they do it in EA Sports games. However, teams do tank.
If there's one thing I do believe Bergevin will do it's be patient with the right decision.
Plus the trade deadline will be approaching, so they will be laying out who if anybody should be dangled or what player(s) we should target.
Detroit won cup with their pre 2000 drafts, not the subsequent ones.
Not sure how Price Subban Pacioretty Galchenyuk Beaulieu Tinordi Gallagher Plekanec etc equate to an "army or 3rd and 4th liners".
When have I said Detroit was a team we shoud mimic?
Pleks was drafted 12 years ago, Price and Galchenyuk are those "horrible" top 5 picks you detest, Beaulieu, Tinordi and Gallagher have proven nothing at the NHL level and Pacioretty and Subban have what one good season under their belts? What about Franzen in 2004?
You are making a stronger case FOR tanking than against it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ECWHSWI
There's a reason why they always have excuses as to why they dont want to talk about the Jackets, Islanders or Trashers/Jets of this world... doesnt fit their fantasy
Ya and Calgary, Toronto and the Rangers don't fit your fantasy.
Couldn't find what the final voting results were for the Conn Smythe but I personally have Quick, Kopitar, and Brown ahead of Doughty. So I don't consider a team that has 1 high pick and that pick is the 4th most important player to be a team built on tanking.
Teams like Pittsburgh and Chicago the tank picks are the most important pieces, and there's more than 1.
It doesn't matter if Robinson is more important than Lafleur or if Quick is more important than Doughty dude... They are still key cogs of those teams. Do you seriously want to try to argue that Doughty wasn't a huge part of that team?
You aren't scoring any points here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth
So after one disastrous year we are now the poster child for rebuilding the proper way? I guess you must be a huge Gauthier fan since he was the only GM we've had for the past 20+ years to understand the value of tanking.
Poster child? No. But at least we FINALLY have some top picks to build with. At least we made a rebuild trade that's probably going to help us down the road.
Have we rebuilt enough? Maybe. But without Price or Galchenyuk this team has very little chance at winning anything in the future. And we'd be smart to learn from this and work towards stacking the deck. It's not going to hurt us man. Worst case scenario the trade doesn't work out and we lose the vet.
We aren't going to win a cup with Markov. I'm sorry but it's true. And it was true with Koivu... Once you accept this then maybe you'll understand what we're talking about here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth
A team aiming for the playoffs still trades Rivet just like we did, they will still have years like last year where everything goes wrong and get a high pick anyways. You can still make rebuilding moves while being a playoff team. Rebuilding and going for the playoffs are not mutually exclusive. You might not get as much high end talent as quickly, but then again you don't need as much either because the rest of the team is so much better.
If you're an 8th place team you can sit there and try to struggle to make the playoffs for years. That's what we've done for most of the last two decades and it got us nowhere. Then we got super luck in '05 with a one time lottery and now we have Galchenyuk. Without those guys this team's future would be very, very bleak.
But for some reason, you think that fighitng for 8th ever year somehow lead us somewhere... it didn't. It just made the rebuilding process longer and more painful. We just dragged it out as rebuilding teams like the Kings, Pens and Hawks leapfrogged us and won cups.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth
And how do you know we haven't been doing this all along. Gainey obviously got offers for Souray. He turned them down because he wasn't getting the value he wanted. You have no idea what value Gainey needed in order to move him but still complain.
Common sense. Going after Kaberle and Bourque were not rebuild moves. Letting everyone go and then re-upping with Gomez and co. was not rebuilding. And the return on Rivet clearly shows we could've got more for Souray.
Again, stop asking me to prove to you that water is wet. It is. Use your common sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth
If you don't like the word guarantees, how about even likely. Your hoping a late 1st will help us 5-10 years down the road. How many players are contributing to us right now that we're drafted over 5 years ago? The answer, only 1 Price, who was a top pick. These mid-late 1st you covet so much, they're unlikely to be around for your cup window in 5-10 years.
What's not likely is us winning a cup this year or next. Hell we might not even make the playoffs this year. We are STILL a bubble team. Why do you want to continue to waste assets that have value now?
As for the late 1st... in this year's draft it's going to be worth more than most years. Yes, we should be looking to deal vets for picks this year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sorinth
There's a chance this year if Price gets hot at the right time(s), beyond that it depends on how quickly Galchenyuk develops. We could quite easily get 2-3 years of Markov playing great and Galchenyuk as an elite NHLer.
Sure. And James Reimer could get hot too. Maybe the Leafs can win the cup this year too.
Pleks was drafted 12 years ago, Price and Galchenyuk are those "horrible" top 5 picks you detest, Beaulieu, Tinordi and Gallagher have proven nothing at the NHL level and Pacioretty and Subban have what one good season under their belts? What about Franzen in 2004?
You are making a stronger case FOR tanking than against it.
Ya and Calgary, Toronto and the Rangers don't fit your fantasy.
you're the one living in a dream, I'm not the one here asking for a miraculous recipe.
ouch!!!!!!how are the tankers (i mean quitters) gonna respond to that??
5 top ten picks in seven years including 3 top five picks and a number one. They also had two 11th overall picks in that span. Detroit tanked almost as much as New Jersey and Quebec did. Notice that all three of those tanking teams won multiple cups in the 90s btw.
They tanked, got one of the best players of all time and then won multiple cups with him. Yzerman also won a Conn Smythe. It's stupid (not to mention dishonest) to try to pretend like these guys didn't tank. The Wings have been great for a long, long time but they absolutely tanked to get there.
Let's trade kaberle and cole to the islanders for Griffin Reinhart, and then use the savings to sign Corey Perry.
There are alternatives to tanking
Ranger havn't won **** since 94 and drafted in the top 10 once in the last 12 years. I think they fall into the category of teams that havn't tanked and still failed.
I never said I was in favor of tanking but for some franchises there is a time to burn it to the ground, our time was before Gainey grabbed the reigns and took us on a 7 year nightmare. We have too many young skilled players to have a full on scorched earth tank, I was happy with last years mini tank.
real fans show they re true colors when faced with adversity.you are a quitter.plain and simple.
Don't let us catch you cheering for Alex Galchenyuk then. REAL fans don't cheer for top five picks right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price
We have badly outdrafted Detroit the last 10 years. Post Datsyuk(1998) and Zetterberg(1999) their drafting is nothing above average.
Their front office had largely relied on Illitch's dollars to get big names and their pre 2000 drafting.
Detroit got stupidlly lucky with Fedorov and Lidstrom. Everyone knew how good Fedorov was but nobody thought he'd play here. As for Lidstrom, the Flyers actually were going to draft him but took his teammate instead. If Detroit had known how good he was going to be they'd have taken him in the first round.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carey Price
One aspect of the whole "tank" and "don't tank" debate is the impact it has on your players production/value and young player development.
1-If you have player X who is a decent player but has grown up in Columbus or NYI and player Y who played on cup winners in Detroit or Pittsburgh and they have exactly the sake skill. Who do you think will get more in return by trade? The Gill to Nash trade is a perfect example, if he had little to no playoff experience or success, I'm sure we never get a 2nd for Gill.
2-It's harder for any player to produce when playing under a losing culture, very hard mentally. Instead of having a productive asset all of a sudden you have a "salary dump" that you get nothing for.
3-by the same token it's harder for young players. Not just in the losing culture but having the pressure of having to "ressurect" the franchise instead of just developing into a good player as part of a winning team.
If "tanking" would guarantee you a Crosby and Malkin in 2 years, then success within 2-3 years, then everybody, even Brian Burke would do it. But it's not like that, For every Crosby or Malkin you have a lot of Hortons, Bouwmeester Halls Turris Alzner E.Johnson Staals etc who are very good but not superstars plus a few Filatov Barker Zherdev Pouliot who are basically top 5 busts.
In the cap world, it makes little sense to really"tank" like some are proposing. If you draft and develop well, use yout cap space wisely and manage your assets you can go from 12th to cup contender in 2 years if you have a pretty good base.
If you draft consitently in the top five, it's hard not to draft at least one superstar and you'll probably draft more than one. Even if you land a Nathan Horton out of it, what's wrong with that?
The point of rebuilding is to deal for prospects and picks to accelerate the process. It's not just the draft picks that you get yourself that you build with.
As for it being harder on the prospects to produce without vets, it's not really true. We've gone over this before man. Tons of players have come into bad teams and done very well. There's benefit from mentoring from an Yzerman for sure but players can develop on their own. And it makes no sense to hold onto vets just to be mentors when there's young talent that you can go after. You build with the best talent that you can. That's the most important ingredient to rebuilding. Don't sacrifice talent at the expense of a nanny. Hal Gill can be a nanny, it doesn't have to be Andrei Markov.
5 top ten picks in seven years including 3 top five picks and a number one. They also had two 11th overall picks in that span. Detroit tanked almost as much as New Jersey and Quebec did. Notice that all three of those tanking teams won multiple cups in the 90s btw.
They tanked, got one of the best players of all time and then won multiple cups with him. Yzerman also won a Conn Smythe. It's stupid (not to mention dishonest) to try to pretend like these guys didn't tank. The Wings have been great for a long, long time but they absolutely tanked to get there.
Notice how those teams were just bad and tried everything they could to win. No one goes into the season looking to lose, not even the Columbus BlueJackets. Getting top picks != tanking. You can't cite a single team in history that has deliberately done this. Zero. It's about time you get back to the drawing board. Funny how quiet this thread was a week ago and how dead it was 2 weeks ago.
It feels like some of you wish for the habs to lose so you can come on here and tout your xbox strategy to the rest of us as if it's some sort of revolutionary idea that has a high success rate and is often implemented, however, this isn't xbox, you can't rid our junk for other teams treasures. No one is against building through the draft, it's a key and vital area, but it's a small piece of big puzzle.
