Tank Nation: Matthews Edition

[GhostofPotvin29]

Also, while I'm obviously no scout and haven't really watched these guys, I feel like Chychrun is getting a little underrated in this draft while the opposite is happening to Juolevi. Rankings seem to largely be using Juolevi's performance the WJC and the Top Prospects game when saying why his stock is rising. One was a tournament that Chychrun didn't participate in (when he probably should have) and the other is one game. I'm always surprised how much people talk about the Top Prospects game.

And maybe LK can chime in here a bit, but Juolevi's scoring doesn't seem to be very impressive when you consider the insane firepower he's playing behind in London. Chychrun's 4th among defencemen in scoring in the OHL, while Juolevi is 20th. You'd think Juolevi would be racking up some more assists passing to Marner/Dvorak/Tkachuk.

Is he playing with them?  I was thinking it could be a similar situation to one I'm more familiar with, Zach Senyshyn with the Soo last season - he was playing well down in the lineup because the team was stacked offensively with older players and were going for it so he didn't get the same ice time or opportunities as he might have elsewhere, so his stats were a little underwhelming.

20 of his 34 points have come on the PP and yes, he often plays with at least one of Marner/Dvorak on the ice.  He's not always on the top PP unit though because Marner plays the point.  He's not far off from a Olli Maatta clone.  I certainly would take Chychrun over him.  Honestly, if I had to choose, I might even argue that trading down and drafting Victor Mete might be better if we are talking about the Pittsburgh pick.  I don't think Juolevi is going to pan out as the best/second best defenseman out of the draft.

Who I really want the Leafs to get their hands on is Evan Bouchard (2017 draft).  A big right handed defenseman with a hard shot.  I think he's going to have a massive year next season.

I....don't know who I was thinking of but I was thinking of a forward.  Whoops.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

20 of his 34 points have come on the PP and yes, he often plays with at least one of Marner/Dvorak on the ice.  He's not always on the top PP unit though because Marner plays the point.  He's not far off from a Olli Maatta clone.  I certainly would take Chychrun over him.  Honestly, if I had to choose, I might even argue that trading down and drafting Victor Mete might be better if we are talking about the Pittsburgh pick.  I don't think Juolevi is going to pan out as the best/second best defenseman out of the draft.

Thanks for the input. Have you seen much of Sergachyov in watching the Knights? If the Leafs trade down into that 8-ish slot I'd lean towards Chychrun/Nylander if they drop or Sergachyov/Keller.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

I....don't know who I was thinking of but I was thinking of a forward.  Whoops.

Max Jones probably. And I don't believe he's played much in London's top-6 this year.

 

[bustaheims]

The Canucks seem like the most likely possibility there.

They only have the one pick in the 2nd round though, that wouldn't be nearly enough.

They could have a 2nd if Columbus decides this is the year they give up the Torts pick. That would mean another 2 top 40 picks.

Otherwise, Calgary, maybe. If Dallas doesn't make it to the 3rd round, they'll have three 2nd round picks - or they'll have two 2nd rounders and a late 1st. They're right behind the Leafs at the moment, but, there's definitely potential for them to end up 5-8.

 

[bustaheims]

Without moving the Pens pick, the Leafs coudl very well end up with one of Fabbro/Bean/McAvoy. I'd be happy with that.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

They could have a 2nd if Columbus decides this is the year they give up the Torts pick. That would mean another 2 top 40 picks.

Otherwise, Calgary, maybe. If Dallas doesn't make it to the 3rd round, they'll have three 2nd round picks - or they'll have two 2nd rounders and a late 1st. They're right behind the Leafs at the moment, but, there's definitely potential for them to end up 5-8.

Ah, yeah, I imagine Columbus keeps their 2nd this year considering how high it will be. Calgary could definitely be an option if they go up the standings a little.

 

[Highlander]

Also, while I'm obviously no scout and haven't really watched these guys, I feel like Chychrun is getting a little underrated in this draft while the opposite is happening to Juolevi. Rankings seem to largely be using Juolevi's performance the WJC and the Top Prospects game when saying why his stock is rising. One was a tournament that Chychrun didn't participate in (when he probably should have) and the other is one game. I'm always surprised how much people talk about the Top Prospects game.

And maybe LK can chime in here a bit, but Juolevi's scoring doesn't seem to be very impressive when you consider the insane firepower he's playing behind in London. Chychrun's 4th among defencemen in scoring in the OHL, while Juolevi is 20th. You'd think Juolevi would be racking up some more assists passing to Marner/Dvorak/Tkachuk.

An OHL coach told me that Chychrun is Ekblad light.

He could add a few pounds then

 

[herman]

Also, while I'm obviously no scout and haven't really watched these guys, I feel like Chychrun is getting a little underrated in this draft while the opposite is happening to Juolevi. Rankings seem to largely be using Juolevi's performance the WJC and the Top Prospects game when saying why his stock is rising. One was a tournament that Chychrun didn't participate in (when he probably should have) and the other is one game. I'm always surprised how much people talk about the Top Prospects game.

This is the kind of cognitive bias Dubas and Co. like to exploit.

 

[KGB]

Someone said on Sportsnet that the last place team only has a 50% chance of a top three pick.

I just ran the simulator 100 times and, lo and behold, the Leafs landed in 4th 50 times.  On the plus side, they scored first overall 23 times, slightly above the odds. 

It just doesn't seem right that the most likely draft position, based on mathematical odds, is fourth overall for the worst team in the league. 

 

[bustaheims]

It just doesn't seem right that the most likely draft position, based on mathematical odds, is fourth overall for the worst team in the league.

It does when you consider that the reason the lottery exists is to prevent teams from blatantly throwing a season like the Nordiques did for Lindros and the Sens did for Daigle. If the odds favour a team ending up with the 4th pick, teams are less likely to be intentionally awful because of a particular prospect. There's obviously still going to be teams that strip down to the bare bones - largely because that's the most direct path starting over - but, the idea is that they won't necessarily time it to focus on getting an individual player, but rather, part of a group of high-end prospects.

That being said, I still think there are flaws in the lottery system, but, this is at least an improvement on the previous versions of it.

 

[KGB]

It just doesn't seem right that the most likely draft position, based on mathematical odds, is fourth overall for the worst team in the league.

It does when you consider that the reason the lottery exists is to prevent teams from blatantly throwing a season like the Nordiques did for Lindros and the Sens did for Daigle. If the odds favour a team ending up with the 4th pick, teams are less likely to be intentionally awful because of a particular prospect. There's obviously still going to be teams that strip down to the bare bones - largely because that's the most direct path starting over - but, the idea is that they won't necessarily time it to focus on getting an individual player, but rather, part of a group of high-end prospects.

That being said, I still think there are flaws in the lottery system, but, this is at least an improvement on the previous versions of it.

But your examples only illustrate that tanking's no surefire route to success and that there's a lot of consideration that has to go into it.  The Nordiques, in a roundabout way, won a Cup with that pick.  The Sens... not so much.  I guess I'm not sure why tanking is so taboo to the league.  We all know what's going on when it happens and fans react accordingly.  Some approve, others don't, and interest in the game reflects that.  I'm not sure it results in less fan interest than if a team stunk naturally. 

 

[bustaheims]

But your examples only illustrate that tanking's no surefire route to success and that there's a lot of consideration that has to go into it.  The Nordiques, in a roundabout way, won a Cup with that pick.  The Sens... not so much.  I guess I'm not sure why tanking is so taboo to the league.  We all know what's going on when it happens and fans react accordingly.  Some approve, others don't, and interest in the game reflects that.  I'm not sure it results in less fan interest than if a team stunk naturally.

Well, there is no surefire way to success. If there was, everyone would be doing it. I also don't think it's a taboo, per se. It's more that the league doesn't feel that intentional failure should be encouraged. If that's the route teams choose, then so be it. The league clearly doesn't have a significant issue with it taking place, otherwise there'd specific rules against it. It's more about maintaining a facade of integrity.

 

[Kin]

But your examples only illustrate that tanking's no surefire route to success and that there's a lot of consideration that has to go into it.  The Nordiques, in a roundabout way, won a Cup with that pick.  The Sens... not so much.  I guess I'm not sure why tanking is so taboo to the league.  We all know what's going on when it happens and fans react accordingly.  Some approve, others don't, and interest in the game reflects that.  I'm not sure it results in less fan interest than if a team stunk naturally.

Problem is you're seeing it through the lens of a Leafs fan where regardless of what approach the team takes the vast majority of tickets are still going to be sold at exorbitant prices. If, however, you're a team like Arizona or Carolina and fan interest isn't as solid you're almost certainly going to have problems convincing people to go to games you're trying to lose.

And that's why there's a difference between "tanking" and being naturally bad. Tanking by definition is not players trying to lose, players don't do that, it's a team making intentional decisions to put themselves in a position to lose. Leafs fans might look at the Reimer trade and say "Trading the team's starting goalie for a draft pick and minor leaguers? Smart asset pick-up. Time to see how Sparks does!" where someone in Carolina might look at a similar move if it was made(and you'll keep in mind they maybe could have moved Ward) and say "Trading our starting goalie for draft picks? Time to start watching more College basketball!".

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

An excellent article on the "tank". Lots more to read other than what I've quoted.

For the past couple of seasons a standard narrative has cropped up around this time of year, and it has to do with teams allegedly tanking in order to secure the first pick in the June NHL Entry Draft.

Last year it was the epically bad Buffalo Sabres and almost-as-bad Arizona Coyotes. This year it?s supposedly the Toronto Maple Leafs.

A week before the trade deadline, The Hockey News?s Ken Campbell wrote a blog piece on the subject. Campbell even found an authority?a nameless GM whose complaints about the Leafs were expressed thus:  ?It?s bullsh? ? It drives me nuts.?

The GM then went on to imagine an alternate scenario that would most assuredly eliminate tanking: Teams that didn?t make the playoffs would be awarded picks based on how many points they could accumulate after being eliminated from playoff contention.

Campbell decided to one-up the GM by imagining a scenario in which draft position was based on a team?s winning percentage after elimination.

Since last July the Leafs have shipped out veterans Phil Kessel, Dion Phaneuf, Shawn Matthias, Nick Spaling, Roman Polak, James Reimer and Daniel Winnik. That fire sale arguably has made them a worse team in the short run and might improve their position for this year?s draft, but what?s at work is more complicated than simply tanking in the hopes of picking first.

The Leafs have been consistently bad all season. So while it?s fair to expect that their current four-game losing streak will continue, it?s also possible their current roster, which includes some promising prospects getting their first taste of NHL play, just might find its footing and actually put together a winning streak.

Nevertheless, let?s concede a point to Campbell and our nameless GM and assume the Leafs are in fact a worse team than they were a few weeks ago and do finish dead last.

There?s still a massive impediment to the realization of their allegedly diabolical scheme, and that?s the draft lottery.

 

[KGB]

So what's the alternative?  Hang on to dead wood and bloated contracts?  I just don't see how what the Leafs are doing can be described as tanking.  They're charting a course that they believe has the best odds of creating a sustained improvement in the team.  Unfortunately, short term pain is part and parcel of the route they've chosen.  Why should they be punished for it?  If anything, punishment would be the new regime being forced to cling to the likes of Phil Kessel and Dion Phaneuf, thus retarding the team's rebirth by a number of years. 

 

[Kin]

So what's the alternative?  Hang on to dead wood and bloated contracts?  I just don't see how what the Leafs are doing can be described as tanking.  They're charting a course that they believe has the best odds of creating a sustained improvement in the team.  Unfortunately, short term pain is part and parcel of the route they've chosen.  Why should they be punished for it?  If anything, punishment would be the new regime being forced to cling to the likes of Phil Kessel and Dion Phaneuf, thus retarding the team's rebirth by a number of years.

Nobody's saying they should be punished for it, just that the league has legitimate reasons to want to limit the incentives for failure, intentional or otherwise.

 

[Kin]

And, maybe more to the point, you shouldn't punish relative success. If the draft is important for the distribution of talent, which is debatable in a hard capped league, then that goal is achieved regardless. Why should a team with 61 points get an edge over a team with 62 points? They're both terrible. That one point isn't really indicative of a greater need. Points are won and lost all the time as a matter of random chance.

So the idea that the team with the fewest points in the league is legitimately more deserving of the #1 pick than than the team with the second or third worst doesn't have much basis. All it does is encourage an all or nothing attitude towards being bad. Combine that with the all or nothing attitude towards success we have and you have this bizarre situation where for a lot of fans the two most desirable finishes a team can have are winning the championship and finishing dead last.   

 

[McGarnagle]

An excellent article on the "tank". Lots more to read other than what I've quoted.

The GM then went on to imagine an alternate scenario that would most assuredly eliminate tanking: Teams that didn?t make the playoffs would be awarded picks based on how many points they could accumulate after being eliminated from playoff contention.

I actually really like that idea. Imagine the "race" began just post trade deadline. There might be some more interesting deal scenarios.

 

[jdh1]

What would you do?

If the Leafs got to pick 1st for Matthews,would you trade him to the Coyotes for a boatload of their prospects that are on their team and immediately upgrade the Leafs rebuild? It has been mentioned that he is from that area and that Arizona would immediatly solve their attendance problems and virtually gaurantee they stay in that state.

 

[McGarnagle]

What would you do?

If the Leafs got to pick 1st for Matthews,would you trade him to the Coyotes for a boatload of their prospects that are on their team and immediately upgrade the Leafs rebuild? It has been mentioned that he is from that area and that Arizona would immediatly solve their attendance problems and virtually gaurantee they stay in that state.

Depends which prospects. Define a "boatload". Like a two man kayak kind of scenario, or rubber dinghy? I demand clarification.