Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxFanInIL. Show SoxFanInIL's posts

    Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall

    In Response to Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall : As far as the criticism of the MIT students, I wonder if you understand what their argument is. Do you appreciate that they point out the worst teams lose games at a far greater rate after they have been eliminated from the playoffs? This means that these teams aren't just bad, they are intentionally losing games at this point to gain better position in the draft. Posted by Olsonic[/QUOTE]

    OK, I teach college and although it's not at MIT, if someone made this statement in my class I'd send them home for Remedial Logic 101.

    It does NOT mean they are intentionally losing games for draft position.

    After a team has been eliminated, or close to eliminated, a lot of things are in play.  They often sell off higher-priced players in order to rebuild with draft picks.  It often means you don't push stars like Nash if he were hurt or Taylor Hall last year, to return from injury prematurely.  It also means they just might test out younger players in an opportunity to prove themselves.  It might mean you have individual players that aren't that good that are psychologically giving up for no other reason than that's where they are mentally.

    There's lots of reasons that this happens and many of them do not include "intentionally losing games to tank for draft status."

    That's not to say it doesn't happen; I just have trouble with the constant "A = B" incorrect assumptions that go on here.

    Personally, I think the big issue is the REPEAT high picks by teams. Pittsburgh, Edmonton, Tampa Bay (Lightning AND Rays)... I think in an effort to make the rules less complicated, if a team recieves a #1 pick, they cant have another top 3 pick for 2 years. If they get a #2-5 pick, they cant get another 2-5 pick for 2 years... or something like that thought process.  Forget a complicated system to make the final draft order work out the way you want... make it so a team CANNOT get repeated top picks over and over.

    Weak teams can rebuild with plenty of 1st round picks.  They don't need Malkin and Fleurey and Crosby in consecutive years.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from SoxFanInIL. Show SoxFanInIL's posts

    Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall

    Hockeyguy, I love your avatar, but shouldn't it say "CUP WINNER, B--CHES?"
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall

    Most excellent post on all counts.

    In Response to Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall : OK, I teach college and although it's not at MIT, if someone made this statement in my class I'd send them home for Remedial Logic 101. It does NOT mean they are intentionally losing games for draft position. After a team has been eliminated, or close to eliminated, a lot of things are in play.  They often sell off higher-priced players in order to rebuild with draft picks.  It often means you don't push stars like Nash if he were hurt or Taylor Hall last year, to return from injury prematurely.  It also means they just might test out younger players in an opportunity to prove themselves.  It might mean you have individual players that aren't that good that are psychologically giving up for no other reason than that's where they are mentally. There's lots of reasons that this happens and many of them do not include "intentionally losing games to tank for draft status." That's not to say it doesn't happen; I just have trouble with the constant "A = B" incorrect assumptions that go on here. Personally, I think the big issue is the REPEAT high picks by teams. Pittsburgh, Edmonton, Tampa Bay (Lightning AND Rays)... I think in an effort to make the rules less complicated, if a team recieves a #1 pick, they cant have another top 3 pick for 2 years. If they get a #2-5 pick, they cant get another 2-5 pick for 2 years... or something like that thought process.  Forget a complicated system to make the final draft order work out the way you want... make it so a team CANNOT get repeated top picks over and over. Weak teams can rebuild with plenty of 1st round picks.  They don't need Malkin and Fleurey and Crosby in consecutive years.
    Posted by SoxFanInIL[/QUOTE]
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall

    In Response to Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall : OK, I teach college and although it's not at MIT, if someone made this statement in my class I'd send them home for Remedial Logic 101. It does NOT mean they are intentionally losing games for draft position. After a team has been eliminated, or close to eliminated, a lot of things are in play.  They often sell off higher-priced players in order to rebuild with draft picks.  It often means you don't push stars like Nash if he were hurt or Taylor Hall last year, to return from injury prematurely.  It also means they just might test out younger players in an opportunity to prove themselves.  It might mean you have individual players that aren't that good that are psychologically giving up for no other reason than that's where they are mentally. There's lots of reasons that this happens and many of them do not include "intentionally losing games to tank for draft status." That's not to say it doesn't happen; I just have trouble with the constant "A = B" incorrect assumptions that go on here. Personally, I think the big issue is the REPEAT high picks by teams. Pittsburgh, Edmonton, Tampa Bay (Lightning AND Rays)... I think in an effort to make the rules less complicated, if a team recieves a #1 pick, they cant have another top 3 pick for 2 years. If they get a #2-5 pick, they cant get another 2-5 pick for 2 years... or something like that thought process.  Forget a complicated system to make the final draft order work out the way you want... make it so a team CANNOT get repeated top picks over and over. Weak teams can rebuild with plenty of 1st round picks.  They don't need Malkin and Fleurey and Crosby in consecutive years.
    Posted by SoxFanInIL[/QUOTE]

    Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc - After, therefore because of it. It's a common intellectual fallacy, and it's usually not true.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall

    Sometimes solving a problem is found outside of overthinking.  This may seem totally off of the subject but to this fan revenue sharing is a joke.  Lower end teams do not have to put fans in the stands for they are sharing revenue with teams like Boston, Toronto, Philly, and NYRangers.  The bottom feeders are on the take.  So eliminate tanking by how much a team actually puts fans in the stands.  If you are not doing well, and the attendance is down then you do not get number 1.  If you put fans in the stands and you fail, then you get the number 1.  If the NHL is going to pay bottom feeders then let them promote the game and be competitive.  Just a thought.  
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from OatesCam. Show OatesCam's posts

    Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall

    The NHL has a weighted lottery too, just the odds are better for the worst teams. In response to "Re: Eliminate tanking for the 1st overall": [QUOTE]Actually the NBA has a fairly effective system in place that doesn't even require a "draft order" playoff.    They have a "Weighted Lottery System" for the 11 teams that don't make the playoffs.  Each team gets a shot at the #1 pick, with the team witht he worst record having a 25% chance at it.  It has suceeeded in avoiding tanking to a degree because all you're playing for is a 1 in 4 chance to get the best pick. Posted by ipot[/QUOTE]
     

Share