Is tanking the right move?

[mfitz804]

Personally, I consider this potential move of Mark Fraser taking Severson's spot due to injury, and some of the questionable call-ups (Sestito, Sislo) tanking. Lou knows what he's doing, not making a move the rest of the season. We have a BAD team.

But that's the same kind of crap that happened last year, when we certainly were not "tanking".

Personally, I don't think there is any way LL goes along with any kind of tanking plan.

[CarpathianForest]

But that's the same kind of crap that happened last year, when we certainly were not "tanking".

Personally, I don't think there is any way LL goes along with any kind of tanking plan.

 

Lou doesn't have to actively tank. With the lineup we have we'll still end up in the basement.

[Jerzey]

Let's just hope he doesn't do something like trade assets for another vet.

[mfitz804]

Lou doesn't have to actively tank. With the lineup we have we'll still end up in the basement.

Oh, I agree totally. But that's "sucking" not "tanking". We may well get a very high draft pick by our natural sucktitude.

[Daniel]

Tanking would not be trading all their impending UFAs. It would be trading all those guys, sending Kinkaid back to Albany, and having Clemmensen split games with Schneider. Holding core guys out with minor injuries. At bottom, it's intentionally trying to lose games without being that obvious about it. And no, it's not the right move, for a myriad of reasons, and ethics isn't one of them. It's just not a smart move.

If the end result is McDavid or Eichel, why is it not smart?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[hystyk28]

I used to hate 3 point games, now I root for them.

[Chimaira_Devil_#9]

I posed this question earlier - but what DO the Devils stand for at this point?

The same thing we always have. Playing for the badge on the front. And being a team that plays hard and works hard. And a team that treats people the right way and does things professionally.

That's my interpretation.

This current group doesn't play as well as others , and they don't have the skill of teams from the past. But they still put the jersey on every night. They still compete for the badge on the front and not the name on the back, and I still want to see them try.

Having an identity does not come down to how successful you are on the ice. If you happy to see our team intentionally under perform and piss on the legacy of the team and what the badge means then I find that quite sad.

Edited December 19, 2014 by Chimaira_Devil_#9

[BostonNala370]

The same thing we always have. Playing for the badge on the front. And being a team that plays hard and works hard. And a team that treats people the right way and does things professionally.

That's my interpretation.

This current group doesn't play as well as others , and they don't have the skill of teams from the past. But they still put the jersey on every night. They still compete for the badge on the front and not the name on the back, and I still want to see them try.

Having an identity does not come down to how successful you are on the ice. If you happy to see our team intentionally under perform and piss on the legacy of the team and what the badge means then I find that quite sad.

I like your interpretation.

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

Tanking would not be trading all their impending UFAs.  It would be trading all those guys, sending Kinkaid back to Albany, and having Clemmensen split games with Schneider.  Holding core guys out with minor injuries.  At bottom, it's intentionally trying to lose games without being that obvious about it.  And no, it's not the right move, for a myriad of reasons, and ethics isn't one of them.  It's just not a smart move.

 

Yeah, big difference between tanking and sucking.  When you're looking for subtle (or not-so-subtle) ways to take natural sucking to a higher level, that's true tanking.

 

What some people don't realize is that players and coaches on bad teams will still be looking for jobs in the seasons to come...they want to show potential new employers that they have something to offer.  Obviously a GM or team president can make a deal with a coach behind the scenes and say "Look, we know it's going to be rough here over the next 2-3 years, but we know once we get you the pieces, you'll do the job.", but what motivation do players like Elias and Jagr have to tank?  Or for that matter, guys like Schneider, Henrique and Cammalleri?  It's easy for us to say "Tank and get some prospects," but losing for the sake of losing goes against the inherently competitive nature found within most professional athletes...and I think a lot of guys on the current roster wouldn't be too happy if Lou ever made some of the moves you allude to (which would be an obvious attempt to lose games).  Some will say "Well, these guys suck anyway, and a lot of them won't be here much longer, so who are they to be angry about anything?  If they were any good, they wouldn't be in this mess to begin with."  But even if it's not showing up in the results, guys still have pride...I don't think it's easy for them to lose, especially when it's for a future that many of them won't be around to benefit from (and that's assuming the losing will pay dividends down the line).  

Edited December 19, 2014 by Colorado Rockies 1976

[SterioDesign]

All i want from this team is try their best (it's not enough clearly so that's no problem) and Lou to figure out sooner than later who he wants to keep for next season and who he's willing to trade. And do it. No gambling. Not a fvcking gambling to keep players he might lose anyway to try to "stay competitive" to squeeze in the playoffs.

 

That's not tanking that's what any GM in his situation and with a team in this shape should do it's only common sense.

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

All i want from this team is try their best (it's not enough clearly so that's no problem) and Lou to figure out sooner than later who he wants to keep for next season and who he's willing to trade. And do it. No gambling. Not a fvcking gambling to keep players he might lose anyway to try to "stay competitive" to squeeze in the playoffs.

 

That's not tanking that's what any GM in his situation and with a team in this shape should do it's only common sense.

 

I know you think that 2014 Lou is an idiot who can't see what's right in front of him, but I think his days of trying to keep the team afloat are over.  Long-time Devils like Elias and Zubrus can no longer do what is needed from them.  Other Band-Aid guys like Ryder flat-out didn't work out.  The team is not competitive in its current state, and there's nothing to suggest that it will improve much on that front.  This may not happen right away, but Lou will start trying to move the deadwood before the deadline...not all of it (the Devils will need some bodies to finish out the year, especially since too many of the current ones can't seem to stay on the ice consistently...here's looking at you, Mike Cammalleri), but there's no way he's not getting some of these guys off the team (even if it's for minimal returns). 

 

If some of the mid-20s non-prospects at Albany get some games up here, so be it.  But be prepared for an even higher level of ugliness.

[SterioDesign]

I know you think that 2014 Lou is an idiot who can't see what's right in front of him, but I think his days of trying to keep the team afloat are over.  Long-time Devils like Elias and Zubrus can no longer do what is needed from them.  Other Band-Aid guys like Ryder flat-out didn't work out.  The team is not competitive in its current state, and there's nothing to suggest that it will improve much on that front.  This may not happen right away, but Lou will start trying to move the deadwood before the deadline...not all of it (the Devils will need some bodies to finish out the year, especially since too many of the current ones can't seem to stay on the ice consistently...here's looking at you, Mike Cammalleri), but there's no way he's not getting some of these guys off the team (even if it's for minimal returns). 

 

If some of the mid-20s non-prospects at Albany get some games up here, so be it.  But be prepared for an even higher level of ugliness.

 

I can take the ugliness, actually im welcoming it at this point lol

 

I could still see Lou trading a ufa for an underachieving guy with something to prove with one year left on his contract that a team want to unload to make room.

[EdgeControl]

Yeah, big difference between tanking and sucking.  When you're looking for subtle (or not-so-subtle) ways to take natural sucking to a higher level, that's true tanking.

 

What some people don't realize is that players and coaches on bad teams will still be looking for jobs in the seasons to come...they want to show potential new employers that they have something to offer.  Obviously a GM or team president can make a deal with a coach behind the scenes and say "Look, we know it's going to be rough here over the next 2-3 years, but we know once we get you the pieces, you'll do the job.", but what motivation do players like Elias and Jagr have to tank?  Or for that matter, guys like Schneider, Henrique and Cammalleri?  It's easy for us to say "Tank and get some prospects," but losing for the sake of losing goes against the inherently competitive nature found within most professional athletes...and I think a lot of guys on the current roster wouldn't be too happy if Lou ever made some of the moves you allude to (which would be an obvious attempt to lose games).  Some will say "Well, these guys suck anyway, and a lot of them won't be here much longer, so who are they to be angry about anything?  If they were any good, they wouldn't be in this mess to begin with."  But even if it's not showing up in the results, guys still have pride...I don't think it's easy for them to lose, especially when it's for a future that many of them won't be around to benefit from (and that's assuming the losing will pay dividends down the line).  

lets get one thing straight.. in pro sports, players and coaches DONT TANK! Period!  tanking (probably a bad name to call it) is an ownership / GM decision regarding personell and their future. its taking well planned action without regard to the current here and now, for the improvement or potential improvement long term

 

its not blowing up the team, we need to field a team next year

its not intentionally losing, that doesnt happen

 

this season is over! wins are not the most important thing right now

the highest draft pick is probably top 3 of important things

[BostonNala370]

Yeah, big difference between tanking and sucking.  When you're looking for subtle (or not-so-subtle) ways to take natural sucking to a higher level, that's true tanking.

 

What some people don't realize is that players and coaches on bad teams will still be looking for jobs in the seasons to come...they want to show potential new employers that they have something to offer.  Obviously a GM or team president can make a deal with a coach behind the scenes and say "Look, we know it's going to be rough here over the next 2-3 years, but we know once we get you the pieces, you'll do the job.", but what motivation do players like Elias and Jagr have to tank?  Or for that matter, guys like Schneider, Henrique and Cammalleri?  It's easy for us to say "Tank and get some prospects," but losing for the sake of losing goes against the inherently competitive nature found within most professional athletes...and I think a lot of guys on the current roster wouldn't be too happy if Lou ever made some of the moves you allude to (which would be an obvious attempt to lose games).  Some will say "Well, these guys suck anyway, and a lot of them won't be here much longer, so who are they to be angry about anything?  If they were any good, they wouldn't be in this mess to begin with."  But even if it's not showing up in the results, guys still have pride...I don't think it's easy for them to lose, especially when it's for a future that many of them won't be around to benefit from (and that's assuming the losing will pay dividends down the line).

Thank you very well stated.

[NewarkDevil5]

I know you think that 2014 Lou is an idiot who can't see what's right in front of him, but I think his days of trying to keep the team afloat are over.  Long-time Devils like Elias and Zubrus can no longer do what is needed from them.  Other Band-Aid guys like Ryder flat-out didn't work out.  The team is not competitive in its current state, and there's nothing to suggest that it will improve much on that front.  This may not happen right away, but Lou will start trying to move the deadwood before the deadline...not all of it (the Devils will need some bodies to finish out the year, especially since too many of the current ones can't seem to stay on the ice consistently...here's looking at you, Mike Cammalleri), but there's no way he's not getting some of these guys off the team (even if it's for minimal returns). 

 

If some of the mid-20s non-prospects at Albany get some games up here, so be it.  But be prepared for an even higher level of ugliness.

 

You summed this up perfectly. I don't ever actually want the Devils to lose, but now every time they do its in the back of my mind that at least there's a possibility that they might be better for it.

[Mike Brown]

No team ever tanks.  Players are far too competitive to tank.

[Colorado Rockies 1976]

'83-'84 Penguins tanked to get Lemieux...there's a number of articles on the subject. Some Devils who played on the '83-'84 team that finished with the second-worst record were pretty surprised that McMullen was trying NOT to tank that season (he hired Tom McVie to turn things around after a 2-20-0 start). Meanwhile, Pittsburgh was very clearly not icing its best lineup some nights (you can find a lot of info on this online).

As for the San Antonio Spurs (Tim Duncan) and Indianapolis Colts (Andrew Luck)...yes, in both cases key injuries played a role, but suffice it to say neither team exactly went out of their way to make their "down" seasons any better.

Edited December 20, 2014 by Colorado Rockies 1976

[Neb00rs]

No team ever tanks.  Players are far too competitive to tank.

 

That's not how it works. The coach/GM doesn't ask the players to play poorly, that's silly, they build a roster that sucks and make purposefully bad starting lineup and strategy decisions. It's out of the players' hands.

And players themselves would never tank, but not because they are too competitive, this is also silly, it's because they would depreciate their own value as a commodity and injure their careers.

Edited December 20, 2014 by Neb00rs

[RizzMB30]

I feel that tanking is unacceptable on all levels, in any form. I'd rather have a mediocre team with a chance (see 2012, 09), than have the Devils be god-awful for at least 2-3 years, and that's even if u draft a generational talent, that player has to develop and adjust to life in the NHL. Those of you saying tank, explain to me how just one player is going to put this team where we want it. A young, un-tested player is not going to Crosby or Lemieux this team to multiple cups. Say we tank for a top 2, and he busts or we get hit with another Larsson type young player who needs time to develop. Larsson was a 4th overall and he still has some work to do. Id rather see the Devils play with some honor and dignity. Moot point anyway because Lou would never intentionally tank this team

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

[John Wensink]

I feel that tanking is unacceptable on all levels, in any form. I'd rather have a mediocre team with a chance (see 2012, 09), than have the Devils be god-awful for at least 2-3 years, and that's even if u draft a generational talent, that player has to develop and adjust to life in the NHL. Those of you saying tank, explain to me how just one player is going to put this team where we want it. A young, un-tested player is not going to Crosby or Lemieux this team to multiple cups. Say we tank for a top 2, and he busts or we get hit with another Larsson type young player who needs time to develop. Larsson was a 4th overall and he still has some work to do. Id rather see the Devils play with some honor and dignity. Moot point anyway because Lou would never intentionally tank this team

Sent from my VM670 using Tapatalk 2

I'll tell you why it can be a good idea. It's not about next year and maybe not even about the year after that. It's about getting the hardest thing there is to get in hockey today, a superstar center. You can build great teams with that. People will come just to see him even if the team sucks.

Most drafts I'd not be so hung ho, but these two kids are going to be great. My one reservation is the lottery. The odds make it tough to chance it.

[Jerzey]

The most successful teams in the game today are built on high draft picks. It's better to be bad than mediocre. Sad truth about today's professional sports. Also we're not exactly a team that attracts high profile ufa's so the only way we really have a chance at one is through drafting.

Edited December 20, 2014 by Jerzey Devil

[StarDew]

'83-'84 Penguins tanked to get Lemieux...there's a number of articles on the subject. Some Devils who played on the '83-'84 team that finished with the second-worst record were pretty surprised that McMullen was trying NOT to tank that season (he hired Tom McVie to turn things around after a 2-20-0 start). Meanwhile, Pittsburgh was very clearly not icing its best lineup some nights (you can find a lot of info on this online).

As for the San Antonio Spurs (Tim Duncan) and Indianapolis Colts (Andrew Luck)...yes, in both cases key injuries played a role, but suffice it to say neither team exactly went out of their way to make their "down" seasons any better.

McVie was very vocal about not caring about the pick.  Professionals do not lose intentionally.  If they do then they are professional.  You always play to win.  He got a lot of respect from me on that issue.  btw we got Kirk Muller and that was a good thing.

[BostonNala370]

McVie was very vocal about not caring about the pick.  Professionals do not lose intentionally.  If they do then they are professional.  You always play to win.  He got a lot of respect from me on that issue.  btw we got Kirk Muller and that was a good thing.

You got that right

"If they do they aren't professionals"

[caron14]

No tanking... You never know in life. A lot of if for us but you never know. I will take a look at wjc to see what eikel mcdavid could bring. If mcdavid is really a crosby. It would be awesome to get him. Anyways. I will watch every devils game and try to enjoy it

[John Wensink]

McVie was very vocal about not caring about the pick.  Professionals do not lose intentionally.  If they do then they are professional.  You always play to win.  He got a lot of respect from me on that issue.  btw we got Kirk Muller and that was a good thing.

Just no where near as good as Lemieux would have been both on and off the ice for this franchise. I agree players don't / shouldn't lose intentionally. Setting up a team that will lose a lot though, that happens and it does work from time to time.