Should a team tank on purpose?

Turbo

Registered Member
#1
I was watching NHL Live on the NHL Network earlier and the topic of tanking the season once you know your out of playoff contention. Considering the worse your record is results in a better draft pick; should a team whose completely out throw games in order to better the future through draft or should they continue to play for their jobs?
 

Mirage

Administrator
Staff member
V.I.P.
#2
Interesting question. So teams with a worse record get better draft picks?

Regardless I don't think that's fair to throw games just to get a better draft pick. The unfortunate thing is that I'm sure this happens and there isn't really any way to prove it's happening. The coach or team owner could just argue that the morale was down or something.

I don't think it's fair but then again I also don't think there's any fair way to prevent it.
 

Vidic15

No Custom Title Exists
V.I.P.
#3
If they tank, they should be fined.

There's a team in AFL, who tanked just got get a better draft pick, they got him, and later on, assistant coach quit and accussed them of tanking.
 

Turbo

Registered Member
#4
Hybrix, the worse you record the better percentage you have of winning a early pick in the draft lottery.

I don't see tanking becoming an issue in the NHL just yet. But now that we have the salary cap teams are beginning to sign players for long term deals, which means if you were to tank to get the better pick you'd still have your long term guys while stocking up on the new talent.

Also, its an issue of proof. Kind of hard to prove that they didn't play to their fullest potential.
 

padd

Registered Member
#5
I never looked into tanking as a problem for the NHL. Although i dont have a problem with it PERSONALLY. If my team gets eliminated from playoff contention with 5 games remaining, i wont give a shit anymore.. lol. Anyways what comes to mind is the 2000 season, Montreal's worst season in history. they had the oppurunity to tank but didnt, and decided to end the season in wining fashion for NOTHING, absolutley NOTHING. and for not tanking, they didn't get Kovalchuk (or was it Heatley that year.. i 4got).

but that was then, nowadays, if im not mistaking the last 14 teams get draft picks through their own lottery, while back then last place was guranteed 1st overall draft pick.
 

Merc

Certified Shitlord
V.I.P.
#6
I think it should be punishable because rather than just be a team of slackers and losers, you could at least play some rookies or inexperienced faces if you're not in contention anymore. Losing for the sake of draft picks is cowardly and pathetic.
 

Turbo

Registered Member
#7
cons, most teams out of contention do play upcoming players, but often their inexperience and awe of the NHL can result in loses. i'm iffy on the penalties because you come back to the point of proof.
 

Major

4 legs good 2 legs bad
V.I.P.
#9
Yes, teams should absolutely tank games at the end of the regular season. There are no rules against it and it benefits them to do so. What they need to prevent it is a relegation system, where the bottom few teams are demoted to the minor league. Soccer in Europe has that and it's great.
 

Turbo

Registered Member
#10
i did padd, plus they are trying to hype up Okposo as their Malkin for next season...i got tickets for the Rangers last home game against the Fishsticks next friday...could be a funny night....they are just tanking from lack of talent on the team, not purposely
------
Yes, teams should absolutely tank games at the end of the regular season. There are no rules against it and it benefits them to do so. What they need to prevent it is a relegation system, where the bottom few teams are demoted to the minor league. Soccer in Europe has that and it's great.
as a Ranger fan and a believer that suffolk doesn't count as a major city, i'd want the Isles to tank every year because they are a minor league team IMHO.
 
Last edited: