Do you think the Calgary Flames are tanking?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Locke

Once happens, twice is a coincidence but three times is a pattern.

Then again, this is the Oilers we're talking about. They are that terrible...

I think you just talked yourself into my line of thinking.

[Dagger]

Originally Posted by Locke

The Colorado Avalanche of 2012/13 is probably the single most obviously blatant tank job in recent sports history going from 29th overall to 3rd overall and winning the Western Conference while icing an identical lineup with the addition of Mackinnon.

I've yet to hear a single compelling argument against that being a massive tank job.

And the Edmonton Oilers goes without saying. They had slogans, draft-lottery parties, Devan Dubnyk and everything.

Even the luckiest of teams couldnt just fall ass-backwards into 3 consecutive First Overall picks without some effort and strategy.

That wasn't a tank job. It's a combination of how bad Joe Sacco was behind the bench, how good Semyon Varlamov became seemingly overnight,and how lucky the Avalanche were with their shooting percentage and corsi/fenwick. Everything went right for them in the regular season last year.

[flamesfever]

I don't believe there is any way the people associated with this team would lower themselves to tanking.

They have increased their size - Setoguchi, Engelland, Potter
They have imcreased their skill level - Gaudreau
They have improved their goaltending - Hiller

Everything suggests to me they are trying to improve, albeit slowly and in a very carefully planned manner.

[AcGold]

how can they be tanking when there are zero games played so far? It seems like this year there is a lot more reaction to the preseason than previous years. I do agree about Colorado obviously tanking, they wouldn't even skate in some of their games obviously giving zero effort. It was depressing to witness.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

I don't believe there is any way the people associated with this team would lower themselves to tanking.

They have increased their size - Setoguchi, Engelland, Potter - all widely regarded as bad/depth at best hockey players
They have imcreased their skill level - Gaudreau - saying our skill level is increased by mentioning a rookie and disregarding the fact that our leading goal scorer left as a free agent seems off...
They have improved their goaltending - Hiller - agreed.

Everything suggests to me they are trying to improve, albeit slowly and in a very carefully planned manner.

and that "carefully planned manner" certainly looks to include a top 5 draft pick next summer.

If you want to call it "smart managing", which it is - then that's fine. But we're also very clearly looking for a high draft pick in next year's draft, which is what I'd categorize as "tanking", at least by management. It's not a negative though. There simply is no other smart plan of attack at this stage for our hockey team. You can't build a winner via free agency, we don't have a deep enough pool of NHL-ready prospects to push the team into the playoffs.

It is what it is. They could have gone out and overpaid mid-level talent which could have made us a bubble team, but that's poor management.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by codynw

TSN had a documentary about it called "Playing To Lose". It wasn't a bad watch.

That was a really good documentary.

Originally Posted by Dagger

That wasn't a tank job. It's a combination of how bad Joe Sacco was behind the bench, how good Semyon Varlamov became seemingly overnight,and how lucky the Avalanche were with their shooting percentage and corsi/fenwick. Everything went right for them in the regular season last year.

So....one year everything went wrong and the next year everything went right?

I dont find that a very compelling argument, its basically saying that the entire team rests upon the whims of luck and the players on the ice mean little to nothing.

[indes]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

and that "carefully planned manner" certainly looks to include a top 5 draft pick next summer.

If you want to call it "smart managing", which it is - then that's fine. But we're also very clearly looking for a high draft pick in next year's draft, which is what I'd categorize as "tanking", at least by management. It's not a negative though. There simply is no other smart plan of attack at this stage for our hockey team. You can't build a winner via free agency, we don't have a deep enough pool of NHL-ready prospects to push the team into the playoffs.

It is what it is. They could have gone out and overpaid mid-level talent which could have made us a bubble team, but that's poor management.

If its such a blatant attempt at tanking could you enlighten us how to make the 27th place team last year into a competitive team? I don't understand what choices you believe they have available that they could have a good team if they decided to. You seem to infer they are tanking but they don't have a choice. That just means we suck, not that were tanking.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by Locke

That was a really good documentary.



So....one year everything went wrong and the next year everything went right?

I dont find that a very compelling argument, its basically saying that the entire team rests upon the whims of luck and the players on the ice mean little to nothing.

Pretty easy to see why Colorado was bad.

O'Reilly only played 29 games that year.
Johnson only played 31 games that year.
Varlamov posted a 3.02 GAA.
Stastny was awful.
Landeskog wasn't half the player he was last season. (.47 PPG Vs. .80 PPG last year)

...and they had David Jones.

They played exclusively Western Conference teams.

This is what happens with young teams. Once their players hit stride, the team can improve drastically. Oh, they also had a piss coach vs. coach of the year.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by indes

If its such a blatant attempt at tanking could you enlighten us how to make the 27th place team last year into a competitive team? I don't understand what choices you believe they have available that they could have a good team if they decided to. You seem to infer they are tanking but they don't have a choice. That just means we suck, not that were tanking.

I'm saying they have no other *smart* options but to tank.

If they were deadset on not tanking, they could have used the near 20m they have in cap-space and gone after players the way Edmonton did. They could have been a bubble playoff team.

They could have traded away their 1st round pick for a good player. They could have signed RFAs to offer-sheets. There's a lot of dumb options they could have chosen to enter that "bubble" group of teams. I'm glad they didn't of course, but yes - they could have done stuff to avoid being in this very conversation.

[Simon96Taco]

Since they are undefeated so far this year, I'll say........

No.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

and that "carefully planned manner" certainly looks to include a top 5 draft pick next summer.

If you want to call it "smart managing", which it is - then that's fine. But we're also very clearly looking for a high draft pick in next year's draft, which is what I'd categorize as "tanking", at least by management. It's not a negative though. There simply is no other smart plan of attack at this stage for our hockey team. You can't build a winner via free agency, we don't have a deep enough pool of NHL-ready prospects to push the team into the playoffs.

It is what it is. They could have gone out and overpaid mid-level talent which could have made us a bubble team, but that's poor management.

We could argue semantics as to what constitutes tanking until we are blue in the face, but I just don't see how the changes to our team, since last year, makes us any worse or even the same as last year. Sure our top scorer has departed, and we haven't gone out and shot our wad on top UFAs. However:

- goaltending is 50% of winning and we have improved on that with Hiller...possibly improving on the one goal game losses

- I see continued improvement in players like Monahan, Colborne, and
Brodie

- I think Raymond and Setoguchi have the potential to provide decent
upside.

- I see Gaudreau having a potential significant impact

- I see the main core of our team at least being as good

- I see huge strides in many of our prospects, who will be able to step in
for injured players.

- etc.

[ComixZone]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

We could argue semantics as to what constitutes tanking until we are blue in the face, but I just don't see how the changes to our team, since last year, makes us any worse or even the same as last year. Sure our top scorer has departed, and we haven't gone out and shot our wad on top UFAs. However:

- goaltending is 50% of winning and we have improved on that with Hiller...possibly improving on the one goal game losses

- I see continued improvement in players like Monahan, Colborne, and
Brodie

- I think Raymond and Setoguchi have the potential to provide decent
upside.

- I see Gaudreau having a potential significant impact

- I see the main core of our team at least being as good

- I see huge strides in many of our prospects, who will be able to step in
for injured players.

- etc.

All fair points, although the main core of our team included a career year from Giordano, who isn't on the right side of the 30, and very rarely do you see that maintained.

I guess a counter argument to your points is that you're viewing the team in a bubble. A lot of other teams in the Western Conference also improved this year, and again - arguably more than what the Flames did. So would you truly believe that the Flames improved more than other teams in the Conference? Or did they simply keep pace/maybe lost a step?

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

Oh, they also had a piss coach vs. coach of the year.

That's the particular thing Colorado did that amounts to tanking. If you deliberately choose to use your players in a way that wastes their strengths and exposes their weaknesses, that's tanking. (The TSN documentary about the '83-84 Penguins mentions that.)

I don't think Sacco mis-coached his team on purpose. I just think he's that bad a coach, and management left him on the job because they decided they might as well write off the season and gun for a high draft pick. It was pretty obvious that the players had tuned him out, too, so by the end of the year nobody was making much effort to win.

The big difference between that team and the Flames is that Bob Hartley had his players giving everything they had. If that continues, nobody can accuse the team of tanking. Will they go into the tank if things go sour this season? Maybe. But this is not the time to accuse them, because it hasn't happened yet.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by ComixZone

A lot of other teams in the Western Conference also improved this year, and again - arguably more than what the Flames did. So would you truly believe that the Flames improved more than other teams in the Conference? Or did they simply keep pace/maybe lost a step?

That's irrelevant.

Even if the Flames lost a step against the competition, they still made an effort to improve the team. If they were tanking, they wouldn't have bothered to try.

[Oil Stain]

I'd say the Flames are tanking.

They acquired a few players to meet the salary cap floor and that's it.

It's probably the smart play for the future, but it will be painful for the fans.

[Nme-Territory]

They didn't tank last year and they still drafted one heck of a player. If tanking didn't just get you a lottery ticket, I'd be more inclined to think it was an option. However, nothing is guaranteed, even if you deliberately tank... so why go that route?

Play hard, take a step toward their individual potentials and finish in a place they deserve... that's all I want.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Oil Stain

I'd say the Flames are tanking.

They acquired a few players to meet the salary cap floor and that's it.

One of those players is a pretty decent goalie – far better than McDonald and Berra were last year. If you want to lose games on purpose, the easiest way to do it is to put some schlub between the pipes who can't stop a beach ball.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Jay Random

One of those players is a pretty decent goalie – far better than McDonald and Berra were last year. If you want to lose games on purpose, the easiest way to do it is to put some schlub between the pipes who can't stop a beach ball.

True but is Hiller really an upgrade over Ramo? Hiller had a better GAA at 2.48 than Ramo's 2.65 but he also played on a much better team. They both had identical Save %'s at .911

I think we are kind of treading water in the goal tending dept. We didn't get worse but we didn't get much better.

[driveway]

Originally Posted by Locke

That was a really good documentary.



So....one year everything went wrong and the next year everything went right?

I dont find that a very compelling argument, its basically saying that the entire team rests upon the whims of luck and the players on the ice mean little to nothing.

It's happened before. In 2005-2006, the Penguins went 22-46-14 for 58 points. They drafted second and took Jordan Staal. The next season they went 47-24-11 for 104 points.

In 2008-2009 The LA Kings went 34-37-11 for 79 points, drafted Brayden Schenn 5th overall. 2009-10 they went 46-27-9 for 101 points.

Chicago took two seasons to turn around, 71 points in 06-07, 88 points in 07-08, then 104 in 2008-09.

The pattern in the modern NHL is several seasons of bottom-dwelling followed by a very quick advancement up the standings. Using the reversal of fortune of the Avalanche is not at all good evidence that they 'tanked.' Though, I would agree if you claimed that management decided not to get rid of Joe Sacco when, in a competitive year they would.

Likewise, I believe there is nothing that Bob Hartley can do, short of assaulting a player, that could get him fired this season. If he completely loses the room and the entire team is playing like garbage, they won't fire him. Because it would be beneficial to the team this year (in the long term) to be crap this season. Is that tanking? Perhaps you say yes, and I suppose that's a fair argument.

[Jer Bu]

I don't like the word tanking, but the Flames leadership have clearly decided not to attempt to put together a winning team this year.

Clearly they could have done more to improve the team in the off-season had they chosen to, even without giving up picks and prospects. They chose not to spend the required cash to do so. But in today's league, that is a reasonable decision.

I wouldn't use the word tanking because to me that implies players and coaches not giving their all, which is not the case. But when talking about ownership and front office, I would not fault someone for using that word. It is what it is.

I don't think Hiller is a sign of not tanking. A young team needs solid goal tending to help them develop with more confidence. Goalies like Ramo need competition as well. Hiller is a great signing, but he isn't going to bring the flames a bunch more wins. He will make a bunch of the Flames losses a lot more interesting.

Management is looking to the future and would rather pocket the cash than spend it in years they know they can't compete. No matter if they chose to spend they still couldn't have put together a truly competitive team given what they are up against. The team this year is worse than it could be, and I am personally fine with that as want them to be truly competitive.

That being said, I hope their patience is as short as mine. I expect this year to be the worst the Flames will be for the next 10. Not improving significantly (or truly attempting to) year over year starting next year would be unacceptable in my books.