Longgone

The Tigers last year and the Red Wings this year tried to win every game. They did nothing wrong. Trading vets for prospects is not wrong, it's smart, and they shouldn't be punished for it. Delaying investment is not wrong, it's prudent. It is not tanking and it is not trying to lose, it is a cycle that some teams manage to avoid.

You can beat me because you are better than me, or I can deliberately try to lose. When you are rebuilding, you are going to field an inferior product for a while. That is NOT TANKING!

A team deliberately trying to lose should be severely punished, I think we can all agree on that, however, a team who is rebuilding, and fields an inferior product should not be punished and should be afforded the opportunity to replenish. I believe the NBA went to a lottery, not because tanking was a problem, but reacting to public perception, and I think you get in trouble when you react to perception rather than reality. You have evidence someone tried to lose? Punish them. But don't mess with a competitive balance vehicle like the draft.

Losing teams get mocked for everything, it's a disincentive to tank!

Ottawa has the 2nd and 3rd slots, so between them they have the top 3 slots, which makes it even crazier.

Why take drastic measures to change a long standing system in response to a perception that isn't, in actuality, a problem? For the record, going with inexperienced youth, trading veterans for prospects, refusing to allocate current resources for short term gain, is not tanking, it's rebuilding and it's an appropriate practice.

Teams have fans and employees and players; there is a strong incentive to win. If a team legitimately tried to lose a game(s), the league should step in and discipline them, but leave the draft alone. The worst teams should get the best picks, that is the function of a draft!

A good example is this year's Red Wings. I don't believe they "tanked". I believe they legitimately tried to win every game they could. They were by far the worst team in the league, and the most deserving of upgrading talent. Yet, due to the ridiculous lottery system, odds are they won't get the first pick, the clear top talent, which is a travesty.

That study does not show that any team is guilty of tanking, only that there is the "incentive to tank" in the current systems, i.e. the worse you perform, the more you are rewarded in the draft. Well, duh, that is the purpose and function of a draft. I maintain "tanking" is not a problem in fact, only in perception.

It would take parity to keep teams from the rebuilding cycle that you refer to as tanking.

Also, there is no incentive for teams to put out a losing product for long, winning is more profitable and satisfying, especially with the caps in place to keep certain teams from simply dominating economically.

It fulfills the intent of a draft, gives teams on the bottom hope and a means to get back on top. If you want a league of perpetual parity, that is probably an interesting discussion.

Fans of teams on the bubble would root for their teams to lose to get into the lottery.

I disagree that it would have any impact, and I disagree that it is a problem.

Well and concisely stated.