Are we disagreeing on any of this?
- Der Kaiser

No, we're not - I was just agreeing with your take on the matter with a similar example

As much as i believe that there should be rules in place to prevent tanking, i believe it punishes teams that try and trade their vets at the deadline for future assets. Just because these teams are trying to build for the future and may not do great the last 20 some games of the season does not necessarily mean that they are tanking.

This is one of the points tanner made about tanking for an entire (but single) season.

Let's face it, nobody can ice a team comprised exclusively of slobs for just one year, and then completely retool the line-up when the tank results in a first overall pick.
- Der Kaiser

Maybe not, but would it be possible for a team to pull off something like the Colorado Avalanche did to pick up McKinnon? I'm not saying the Avs had a poor (injury plagued) season on purpose, but it kind of worked out well for them.

As much as i believe that there should be rules in place to prevent tanking, i believe it punishes teams that try and trade their vets at the deadline for future assets. Just because these teams are trying to build for the future and may not do great the last 20 some games of the season does not necessarily mean that they are tanking.
- Fischbait_14

I think it gives teams one more thing to consider

Maybe a crappy team trades FOR a vet at the deadline, maybe a capable goaltender or something along those lines in an attempt to have the BEST final 20 game record...

Could happen, but the key point is to have every team in the league trying to win at the end of the season, instead of it being a race to the bottom once it's clear a team isn't going to make the playoffs

Tim Murray must of flipped his desk, really I don't think it was Sabers intention to tank unlike some teams.
- Alexzanki

it was definitely last year and is this year our intention to tank. it's not so blatant, as we have brought in gionta, brought back moulson and traded for gorges, but, on the whole, taking away miller, vanek, ott and ehrhoff on a team that only garnered 52 points last year, it's pretty obvious what the intentions are. we buffalo fans, however, are 100% behind the tank for mceichel.

Still not fixed, as it would be in a team's best interest to lose games, as they'd want to make sure they don't play themselves out of the bottom-5.

Think about it: If you have 3 games to go, are in 5th place, and are 1 point behind the #6 team with a game in hand, you're throwing those final 3 games, no questions asked.

Here's one that I liked:

The team that accumulates the most points after having been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs gets the #1 pick, and the team that accumulates the least points after being mathematically eliminated from the playoffs gets the #14 pick. So, you can be really bad, but you need to be able to ice a competitive team, as a low number of points won't be enough to get you a high pick.
- jmatchett383

Did anybody get his proposal? Hes saying best record over the last 20 games. Meaning that a team would want to win all 20 games to win the 1st pick.

There would have to be some criteria re: position prior to those final 20games though. Something like in golf and making the cut; you have to be below a certain amount of points in relation to league average.

I think it gives teams one more thing to consider

Maybe a crappy team trades FOR a vet at the deadline, maybe a capable goaltender or something along those lines in an attempt to have the BEST final 20 game record...

Could happen, but the key point is to have every team in the league trying to win at the end of the season, instead of it being a race to the bottom once it's clear a team isn't going to make the playoffs
- RoloTahmasee

Good point but what happens at the deadline when theres 30 buyers and no sellers

K, we've heard about supposed tanking for years now. But unless I'm wrong, most or all of these claims are hearsay and speculation.

To my knowledge, no team, coach or organization has ever been proven to have purposely tanked nor otherwise admitted to it.

So all this is still based on pure speculation anyway.

Do you really think professional hockey players would tank for a team...absolutely not!!
With millions of dollars at stake and little room for playing bad at the NHL level I doubt one NHL player has ever tanked. They all want to be paid as much as they can...

With that said...the NHL is trying to prevent management of NHL teams to dismantle their teams to have less quality hockey players so they have a less talented team than most others.

The problem I have is that the NHL is changing the rules too fast and not let teams prepare for those changes. Any team who is trying to rebuild now "aka Sabres" just got screwed because they changed the rules right in the middle of their rebuild in which they were following the current rules...now the NHL pulls the rug out under their feet which is a disgrace to not only the Sabres but any team who was in the rebuild stage.

I can see what the NHL is trying to do but they should have had a plan that started in 2 or 3 years from now so teams know the rules so they can adjust accordingly.

Yes the Sabres management pulled the plug hard but so did many other teams in the past who are now winning cups...

K, we've heard about supposed tanking for years now. But unless I'm wrong, most or all of these claims are hearsay and speculation.

To my knowledge, no team, coach or organization has ever been proven to have purposely tanked nor otherwise admitted to it.

So all this is still based on pure speculation anyway.
- MnGump

Well, sure, it's all done with a wink, but the Sabres are totally trying to tank and the NHL just decreased their odds of getting the first overall pick by 20%.

Do you really think professional hockey players would tank for a team...absolutely not!!
With millions of dollars at stake and little room for playing bad at the NHL level I doubt one NHL player has ever tanked. They all want to be paid as much as they can...

With that said...the NHL is trying to prevent management of NHL teams to dismantle their teams to have less quality hockey players so they have a less talented team than most others.

The problem I have is that the NHL is changing the rules too fast and not let teams prepare for those changes. Any team who is trying to rebuild now "aka Sabres" just got screwed because they changed the rules right in the middle of their rebuild in which they were following the current rules...now the NHL pulls the rug out under their feet which is a disgrace to not only the Sabres but any team who was in the rebuild stage.

I can see what the NHL is trying to do but they should have had a plan that started in 2 or 3 years from now so teams know the rules so they can adjust accordingly.

Yes the Sabres management pulled the plug hard but so did many other teams in the past who are now winning cups...
- keithl5633

That's pretty much exactly what I was saying in the blog.

I'd rather see previous seasons have an impact on draft pick order. Maybe along the lines of having a top 3 selection the previous year eliminates that team from getting the #1. I'm tired of seeing teams getting high selections year after year and still being terrible. While teams, hate to say it, like the leafs are a bubble team year after year. They may make the playoffs once a decade, but at least they are competitive. If a team can draft high and not willing to sign players while they develop then they shouldn't be in the league, no matter hockey heaven or hell.

As a Sabre fan... The NHL seems to change the rules after the fact... Ie.. Foot in crease... I don't care it they tanked it... Look at Pitt... WTF... It's been going on for years.... Who whiner .... Sindy Crosby.......

Well, sure, it's all done with a wink, but the Sabres are totally trying to tank and the NHL just decreased their odds of getting the first overall pick by 20%.
- James_Tanner

Whats your point...every team in the league has "tanked" at one point or another in order to get better...that is just one of the tools management uses to get better.
Now they are taking some of that away...but immediately.

There is no doubt that teams do tank. I've watched Tampa do it, to get Stamkos. I've seen other teams also do it. Something needs to be done and I hope this is the answer. To trade off assets at the trade deadline, to make sure that you sink, in a-ethical, not unethical. Legal, but against the principles of fair competition. Good for the league, to make it fair for the teams that really do try and climb the standings.

There is no doubt that teams do tank. I've watched Tampa do it, to get Stamkos. I've seen other teams also do it. Something needs to be done and I hope this is the answer. To trade off assets at the trade deadline, to make sure that you sink, in a-ethical, not unethical. Legal, but against the principles of fair competition. Good for the league, to make it fair for the teams that really do try and climb the standings.
- PrinceLH

I have no problem with that but start the change in 3 years so teams can adjust.

Good I like it

Still not fixed, as it would be in a team's best interest to lose games, as they'd want to make sure they don't play themselves out of the bottom-5.

Think about it: If you have 3 games to go, are in 5th place, and are 1 point behind the #6 team with a game in hand, you're throwing those final 3 games, no questions asked.

Here's one that I liked:

The team that accumulates the most points after having been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs gets the #1 pick, and the team that accumulates the least points after being mathematically eliminated from the playoffs gets the #14 pick. So, you can be really bad, but you need to be able to ice a competitive team, as a low number of points won't be enough to get you a high pick.
- jmatchett383

All of this is just so hard to come to terms with the idea you put forward is good but look at the Hurricans for example. On paper they have a team that is a playoff team but they just couldn't get the help they needed to win games. So once they were out of the race they could still lose every game and get a bad pick when they could be dead last and thats without trading away any players so you cant say they are tanking on purpose they just are bad. So I feel this system will really hurt the teams that are trying and not wanting to tank but still fail.

I have no problem with that but start the change in 3 years so teams can adjust.
- keithl5633

So you think it's unfair for the NHL to finally stop rewarding teams for tanking?

There is no doubt that teams do tank. I've watched Tampa do it, to get Stamkos. I've seen other teams also do it. Something needs to be done and I hope this is the answer. To trade off assets at the trade deadline, to make sure that you sink, in a-ethical, not unethical. Legal, but against the principles of fair competition. Good for the league, to make it fair for the teams that really do try and climb the standings.
- PrinceLH

idk if i agree that teams try to tank. Look at Buffalo they went out after making the playoffs a few years ago and spent a ton in FA to get to the next level. But when they went to play they all didn't gel and the were horrible. So If you no punish a team for trading these players away for 1st, 2nd, 3rd round picks whats left to do keep them and keep trying to win with what you have and make no adjustments. I dont think fans want to see there team keep the same group pf slugs when they arnt working out.

Once you realize we arnt good enough its time to rebuild and the only way is through the draft since players in UFA arnt as good anymore.

As a Sabre fan... The NHL seems to change the rules after the fact... Ie.. Foot in crease... I don't care it they tanked it... Look at Pitt... WTF... It's been going on for years.... Who whiner .... Sindy Crosby.......
- Movin111

Seems odd, it is totally uncharacteristic of the NHL to do something like this. What's next? are they going to approve a contract and then penalize that team for said contract? This is totally a direct shot at the Sabres.

There are a few great suggestions here on this blog, the last 20 game showdown is a cool idea and also incorporating something that locks out teams from the top 5 picks that performed at an elite level in past x seasons is good also.

I like the Toronto example, they try and try to be competitive to no avail where teams that tank get the best picks. They should up the % chance that mid range teams like Toronto have at getting one of these phenoms.

It would kind of suck to be one of these top 5 hotshot players, just to wind up on a lower end team, to potentially be alienated by the fans if they aren't the end all be all "hero" that everyone thought they were going to ride to the cup and end up taking the blame for the management who can't build the rest of the team.

How about locking out the top five and bottom five teams from the top 5 picks in the lottery? It would be pretty damn hard to calculated be in the middle to net a killer prospect, it would give teams such as Toronto a chance, and prevent tank nation from occurring.

So you think it's unfair for the NHL to finally stop rewarding teams for tanking?
- jmatchett383

But the thing is, the NHL already has a draft lottery that is supposed to do that, and it seems unfair to change it all of a sudden when there's a particularly important player available. I think Buffalo deserves to be pissed about this. And it's not like they altered it slightly, they are now 20% less likely to get rewarded for finishing last.

Seems odd, it is totally uncharacteristic of the NHL to do something like this. What's next? are they going to approve a contract and then penalize that team for said contract? This is totally a direct shot at the Sabres.

There are a few great suggestions here on this blog, the last 20 game showdown is a cool idea and also incorporating something that locks out teams from the top 5 picks that performed at an elite level in past x seasons is good also.

I like the Toronto example, they try and try to be competitive to no avail where teams that tank get the best picks. They should up the % chance that mid range teams like Toronto have at getting one of these phenoms.

It would kind of suck to be one of these top 5 hotshot players, just to wind up on a lower end team, to potentially be alienated by the fans if they aren't the end all be all "hero" that everyone thought they were going to ride to the cup and end up taking the blame for the management who can't build the rest of the team.

How about locking out the top five and bottom five teams from the top 5 picks in the lottery? It would be pretty damn hard to calculated be in the middle to net a killer prospect, it would give teams such as Toronto a chance, and prevent tank nation from occurring.
- TRDevil

It only seems like the Leafs never get a top pick. In 1991, they could have selected Scott Niedermeyer at #2 but they traded the pick. They could have taken Luongo at #4 in 1997 but traded the pick and finally, they could have taken Seguin #2 in 2010 but again, traded the pick.

It only seems like the Leafs never get a top pick. In 1991, they could have selected Scott Niedermeyer at #2 but they traded the pick. They could have taken Luongo at #4 in 1997 but traded the pick and finally, they could have taken Seguin #2 in 2010 but again, traded the pick.
- James_Tanner

At least the Leafs got 79 games of Tom Kurvers and washed Wendel Clark for his 2nd tour of duty.

At least the Leafs got 79 games of Tom Kurvers and washed Wendel Clark for his 2nd tour of duty.
- blacksheep1

The best was when they for some reason brought back Cliff Fletcher for a second tour of duty at the age of 409 and he traded away Alex Steen for Stepniak.