Tanking and the Gretzky Factor

[ThisIsAnOutrage]

Felt this warranted its own thread since tanking gets talked about a lot on these forums. If you ask me it’s not worth another thought. Here’s why:

Gretzky is 1000 career points better than the next guy (who had the benefit of playing with Gretzky while both were in their primes and went on to play almost 300 more games than Gretzky). In a contest between two excellent hockey teams, the tie-breaker is which team Gretzky plays for. That’s the Gretzky factor: the team with Gretzky wins. He was individually good enough to make that difference. That’s why Edmonton won 4 cups in 5 years with him and a great team, but only one cup without him and a great team. It’s why Calgary’s great team in the last half of the 80’s only had one cup. It takes the Gretzky factor to win a bunch. The next closest thing to it was Lemieux and Jagr in Pittsburgh in 1991 and 1992.

Does anyone, any GM, really think Connor McDavid will be as good as Gretzky? How about as good as Lemieux and Jagr? Does he have the ability to score more goals than Mats Sundin (564)? If he does, that’s a heck of career, but Mats Sundin never won a cup. Even Sidney Crosby, the best player of the day, only has one cup. There was no Sundin factor, is no Crosby factor, and in my opinion there won’t be a McDavid (or Eichel) factor either. They’re good, but not that good.

So what is any team tanking for? Nothing.

Tanking these days is just tanking. It’s getting bad with the hope that a great player can pull your bad team up enough to lose in the conference quarter- and semi-finals a handful of times. Just like Mats Sundin on the Maple Leafs. So, Edmonton, Buffalo, and whoever else you want to say is tanking can tank away. Any decent team in the NHL has got nothing to worry about. Enjoy the show.

To clarify: Unless it's Gretzky, who was a difference maker between excellent teams (crappy team plus Gretzky is still crappy), there is no player worth tanking for, and no prospect worth talking about as though he will save the franchise. We see both in the media and the fans right now. Teams that tank are punished by the tanking itself.

[GGG]

I think that the Salary cap prevents this type of thing as well as better defensive structures. Its tough to say who is actually better given the disciplined systems that teams play now.

Hockey is the ultimate team game, and outside of Hasak level goaltending it takes a team to take home the puck.

So in modern hockey even gretzkey wouldn't posess the gretzkey factor.

[AcGold]

Mcdavid is amazing, but like Crosbys Penguins the Oilers have massive holes in their team. Mcdavid can't fix a broken team, Gretzky didn't win with LA or New York. We've seen that big teams with lesser elite talent win over individual efforts. If it was otherwise it would be Tampa Bay, Washington and Pittsburgh winning every year.

[alan21]

I don't understand the joke but what if you throw in a Hanowski?

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by ThisIsAnOutrage

Gretzky is 1000 career points better than the next guy (who had the benefit of playing with Gretzky while both were in their primes and went on to play almost 300 more games than Gretzky). In a contest between two excellent hockey teams, the tie-breaker is which team Gretzky plays for. That’s the Gretzky factor: the team with Gretzky wins. He was individually good enough to make that difference. That’s why Edmonton won 4 cups in 5 years with him and a great team, but only one cup without him and a great team. It’s why Calgary’s great team in the last half of the 80’s only had one cup. It takes the Gretzky factor to win a bunch. The next closest thing to it was Lemieux and Jagr in Pittsburgh in 1991 and 1992.

The Islanders won 4 straight with no Gretzky....Detroit has won multiple cups without Gretzky....Montreal has 24 cups without Gretzky.

I really dont disagree with your point (i think) but its a strange way to emphasize it.

[GioforPM]

I'd argue even Gretzky needed a supporting cast and maybe had a better supporting cast than Lemieux. The Oilers started not winning championships in 91 when Fuhr was replaced by Ranford, Kurri was gone, and then the next year EVERYONE was gone - Messier, Anderson, Lowe

[foshizzle11]

ya, I still think they won that many cups because they had a good team, not just because they had Gretzky. Yes, he was a major piece of those wins but it was obvious that without the supporting cast he couldn't win anywhere else.

Isn't that why the Islanders won those cups in the 80s as well or was it the Mike Bossy effect? I think the Islanders had good teams, not just good individuals.

In today's game, I think it is different and 1 player doesn't necessarily have that great of an affect. So I don't think that McDavid will make the Oilers/Sabres a winning team. They still need to draft well to get those top defenders and other top line players, plus develop bottom 6 players.

The Oilers seem to suck at that, that is their biggest problem. Drafting outside of the 1st round has sucked and their development of their draft picks outside of the 1st round has sucked.

McDavid might make them better but they won't win the cup just because they have McDavid.

[GioforPM]

I heard someone say that, to win a cup these days, you need two elite forwards, an elite defenceman and an elite goalie. Or something pretty darn close.

Plus the good supporting cast of course.

[foshizzle11]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I heard someone say that, to win a cup these days, you need two elite forwards, an elite defenceman and an elite goalie. Or something pretty darn close.

Plus the good supporting cast of course.

Ya, I think they were talking about this on the Fan maybe not that long ago.

So we are in need of two elite forwards, which I believe we have right now, but they are still too young to be the tops in the league (Bennett, Monahan, JG).

I think we have 2 elite defensemen this year in Brodie and Gio. We lack elite goal tending. Hopefully we have 1 in the system in Gillies or Ortio.

Say in 5 seasons, we should have 3 elite forwards in the guys I mentioned above, plus Brodie as the #1 guy and we have to hope one of the goalies pans out as an elite tender.

The future looks very bright for the Flames.

[Inglewood Jack]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I heard someone say that, to win a cup these days, you need two elite forwards, an elite defenceman and an elite goalie. Or something pretty darn close.

Plus the good supporting cast of course.

I don't think there's any team right now that has all 3 of these, if so that would be a perennial Presidents trophy winner with a string of 2 or more cups in a row. I think you need 2 of the 3, and with the good supporting cast that's probably all you can afford under the cap.

[Harry Lime]

I think that the point that the OP is trying to make, is that we have all seen a player take a team on his back for one game and will a win into existence. Very few players are capable of doing this multiple times during a season, and those are your Lemieuxs and Haseks. Gretzky was capable of doing this at a higher rate than anyone who has ever played the game, and no one is going to get close to that kind of impact from one player, probably ever again.

Personally, I think that there are two reasons for the tanking in today's game. The first is that desperate teams need something to engage their fans. When you are horrible to warrant a first overall selection, there is a real danger of losing a chunk of your fan base. And if you are in a non-traditional market or have hurt relations with that base, this is a sort of hail mary pass to the endzone. The second is basketball. They have engineered the sport itself to make a number one pick something of a franchise changer. The NFL fell into the well of believing that a top pick can turn around a franchise for the better part of a decade, and now are coming to the realization that football is in fact a team sport. Hockey is even more of a team sport, but basketball has cool shoes, and that mesmerizes a lot of hockey owners these days.

A top pick can get you a building block, but for every Tavares, there is a Stefan. And this is the first year Tavares wasn't playing in a vacuum. Even Snow can learn.

[Geeoff]

The key to a successful tank is not the quality of the first overall pick. It's the quality of depth players you bring in by selling off your vets.

[Finger Cookin]

I think the players like Crosby, Malkin, Toews, Kane, Kopitar, Doughty, Quick, and so on are that good. They're definitely difference makers.

The difference between them and the players like Lemieux, Yzerman, Gretzky, Lafleur, and on is that the gap between the best players and the ordinary or worst pro players isn't as significant as it used to be. This reduced gap is due to more than one factor, including things like improved athleticism and fitness, improved equipment, better coaching strategies, and changes to rules.

Tanking has never been and never will be a guaranteed path to future success in the NHL.

[Buff]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I'd argue even Gretzky needed a supporting cast and maybe had a better supporting cast than Lemieux. The Oilers started not winning championships in 91 when Fuhr was replaced by Ranford, Kurri was gone, and then the next year EVERYONE was gone - Messier, Anderson, Lowe

Ranford backstopped them to the cup in 90. Fuhr was backup and I don't think he played any games during the playoffs. At least he didn't start any.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by Inglewood Jack

I don't think there's any team right now that has all 3 of these, if so that would be a perennial Presidents trophy winner with a string of 2 or more cups in a row. I think you need 2 of the 3, and with the good supporting cast that's probably all you can afford under the cap.

I'd argue the Kings did in Kopitar, Carter, Doughty and Quick (and still have them, but the supporting cast has dropped). I'd argue that the Hawks do, depending on your view of Crawford.

The Pens think they do, but it depends on if you like Letang and if Fleury can ever post season like he does the regular season.

The Ducks are on their way and need a defenceman (because I'm really impressed by Anderson). The Blues have Shattenkirk, Elliot, Backes, Tarasenko. The Preds are there at the back end. And are closing in up front with Forsberg.

[CliffFletcher]

I'm not sure what the debate is about. It's better to have an elite player on your team than not have an elite player. Does anyone really think the Pens would be better off if they had drafted Bobby Ryan or Martin Hanzal instead of Crosby?

Players drafted higher tend to be better. The very best players (especially forwards) are almost all taken at the very top of the draft. The better your players are the better your team is. Bad teams are rewarded with the highest pick in the draft in the hopes that they will become better teams because the owners of the teams think that's best for their business.

What's all the confusion and frustration about?

[albertGQ]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

I'd argue even Gretzky needed a supporting cast and maybe had a better supporting cast than Lemieux. The Oilers started not winning championships in 91 when Fuhr was replaced by Ranford, Kurri was gone, and then the next year EVERYONE was gone - Messier, Anderson, Lowe

Ranford won the Conn Smythe in 1990

[FlamingHomer]

Originally Posted by albertGQ

Ranford won the Conn Smythe in 1990

Forget Stanley Cups. Right now the Oilers have 12 wins and Calgary, clinging to the final playoff spot, has 26. Will McDavid somehow win 14 more games for them? I'm not sure if Gretzky in his prime could do that.


Edit: Sorry, I meant to reply to the whole topic not your post specifically.

[BsFaninCGY]

Only one team wins the cup. 29 other teams need something to do. It's called business. And they need to be profitable. Marketing around a McDavid sure goes easier than around a, oh I dunno, David Moss?

[CSharp]

Until someone beats all of Gretzky's record for points, overall goals, single season goals, etc (too many to list) there is no one greater than Gretzky. The hype surround McDavid last year or for a couple of years now is "Better than Crosby". Crosby is good, but not Gretzky good. I would say Mario Lemieux is even better than Crosby. Even between Crosby and Malkin, I would say Malkin is better. But when any team can get a generational franchise player that can make a difference like a Crosby, Malkin, or an Ovechkin and the team is rebuilding and the playoff chances are mediocre, yeah, sure why not tank. It would absolutely make sense for a team to tank especially when the new rules are in place after this year to make it harder for the bottom team to get the lottery win year after year. This is the Oilers last chance to do it and they have either McDavid and Eichel as a backup. I think the Flames should offer them Gio and see what'll happen