Tanking to rebuild?

Remove all ads!

My post in the thread for the NHL season got me thinking. Is it realistic to expect a team that is not doing well to simply tank for a few years to amass a few high draft picks and then come back with a vengeance?

I have a few problems with that idea.

First, why is the team missing the playoffs?

Is it injuries? Underperforming free agents?

While you can't do much about injuries, they aren't cause to panic and do something drastic.

Free agents are a different problem. Some can be offloaded on a trade, or bought out to free up a roster spot, others you may be stuck with until their contract expires. Too many, and maybe the blowing up process should begin...

Secondly, look at the nucleus of the team. If you have a good young core, then tanking to restart is not needed. Just move an impending free agent at the deadline to get a couple more prospects and you're not far from the playoffs. Without that core, then tank it...

Third, and this is my biggest concern, can you really tank?

There's 30 teams in the NHL, and only 16 playoff spots. That means 14 teams that wrestle with that decision. Only one can be last place. And that's something you can't fake...

And even if you do get 30th place, that only gives you a 48.5% chance for the first overall pick.

From there, How good is your scouting staff? ALexandre Daigle anyone? Or Pat Faloon second over all with Scott Neidermayer third overall? And is there really that franchise player in the draft? Solid NHL player yes, but that sure fire superstar? No guarantee that it will be there...

And with the new rules on Free Agency, they'll just be hitting their stride when they're free to sell their services to the highest bidder, and what are you left with?

Honestly, I don't think that "tanking" is really a viable strategy for any team. Instead, just tinker your way to the top if you're Gm is that good. If not, replace him with one that can...

 

That pretty much meshes with what I think.

I think that we can all say that tanking it might help build a strong team. It certainly has with Pittsburg and going back to the late 80s/early 90s it did with Quebec/Colorado.

At the same time it is almost certain that tanking it will kill your revenue stream. If you have no money then it is pretty hard to maintain a roster of good players.

Crosby, Ovechkin and Malkin have been nothing short of incredible considering their age and lack of experience. The odds of another rookie coming in and having a similar impact would seem pretty low to me.

Much more likely would be that the 1st overall pick would develop into an elite player around the time that his initial contract is up. Thus just by the time that your investment is starting to pay off his salary will shoot through the roof. Without a decent revenue stream you will be hard pressed to resign him. Next thing you know you are the Montreal Expos of the NHL.

The NHL's very tight salary cap truly is the great equalizer. Parity in the league has reached the point where just about anyone can win the cup and I think the parity will continue going forward.

Neither of last year's finalists made the playoffs this year. It wouldn't surprise me if a team that barely made it into the playoffs this year were to win the cup and then fail to make the playoffs next year.

If you field a competitive team that will keep the fans' cash coming in and work on making small improvements over time that will probably serve you best.

I think we can all agree that Philly was so bad this year because their GM made several boneheaded decisions over the last couple years and because their players didn't perform up to their potential. Despite the GMs poor decisions if you look at their line up you wouldn't think that they would be that bad. I would be willing to bet that Philly will eventually claw its way back up via smart trading, good free agent signings and better coaching - not by drafting Crosbyesce wonder rookies.

 

I don't think it will work either. Finishing near the bottom of the league for a few straight seasons just to get high draft picks is not good for ticket sales, job security for the general manager and coach, and also for player development.

If the team sucks, people won't buy tickets so where are you going to get revenue from? In the end, sports is just another form of business and you need to turn in a profit. So staging an entertaining product and marketing is everything. Getting into the playoffs for extra home games means more money. Running a losing team disinterests your customers. Not good, unless you are willing to lose money for 4-5 years and bank on volatile draft picks.

Which links to the next point about your job as GM. You're probably going to get fired if you do this and lose money. The NEXT GM will benefit greatly I suppose, but what do you care? You've just lost your job. So while the strategy may work for the franchise in the long run, whoever initiates the tanking plan isn't going to be around to reap the benefits. Not good for whoever who decides to employ this method.

The last point is about player development and morale. If you draft high and still finish last for a few years, doesn't it mean that the high draft pick player isn't the franchise player that you thought he'd be? You can't tell him to play dumb, because he still needs to develop and get experience. As for morale, it sucks to be playing in a team that loses all the time. A player could get bad habits or indifferent attitudes from a losing environment. I'm thinking about the Vancouver Grizzlies basketball team as I type, and they were just awful year after year. Then whatever good players we had got traded away from this losing place, and I think they're doing well now (thinking Mike Bibby... I don't follow anymore). And when they relocated the team, the overhauled the roster because the history is like a dark cloud over the players' heads. So yeah... the effect this tanking strategy could have on your players could hamper their development.

Agreed about good drafting. First round picks don't always work out. A lot key players who aren't going to be superstars are drafted in the later rounds, in which case you don't have to finish dead last to draft them - you just need to find them before other teams do. When a real gem comes along, then fine, try to trade up to get him like how Ottawa got Jason Spezza a few years ago. But on average your chances aren't very good to both finish last, win the lottery for the top pick, and have a franchise player available that year to draft.

 

For the most part I'm clueless about the NHL, but based off what I've seen in the NFL and NBA I'll try to add something...

It seems that most teams that are rebuilt are done moreso with free agents and trading for young- but proven players- more than anything else. You get a solid young core and let them develop. The problem with this is that it's hard to sign coveted free agents to a bad team, so you need to be consistantly competetive.

I think the draft helps NHL teams more than most other sports though, as from what I've seen the rookies seem to have greater impact. This is probably due to hockey players being drafted more from what they can do than what they have the potential to do, unlike other sports. Also the fact that lots of the youngsters have professional experience only adds to their immediate impact. The only reason not to tank from a drafting standpoint is that there are still some tremendous picks available a few slots after what you could've gotten while tanking.

The negative certainly outways the possible gain, the losses in fan interest, team-security, confidence, and desire to play are too great. I don't know if I was too clear, but those are my thoughts.

EDIT: new gem!

 

It's possible. A couple teams in the NFL live off the draft, barely using free agency, and never spending high dollars for the pick-ups they do make. The Steelers live through the draft..as do the Bengals, and San Diego...none of them have really made any huge free agency pick-ups in the past few years. Any who watch football could tell you it hasn't been that long since they were at the bottom of the league.

 

In the Australian Football league St. Kilda kinda tried the whole tanking thing, and ended up with what was pretty much undeniably the most talented and young team in the competition. While they greatly improved they were still a fair way behind the top three teams that year. So yeah, even if you do manage to get some talent out of the draft, it doesn't really ensure a finals berth if other teams are peaking at the same time.