How much more painful can the Vancouver Canucks be to watch?
The Vancouver Canucks seem like they have nothing more to lose. Maybe that is because they actually have nothing more to lose. The way the team has been playing, they deserve the second overall pick — a pity pick. You know, maybe the John Tortorella hiring was to prepare Vancouver of a greater pain — this year’s pain. If the Lost Season still feels worse than how this year does, check again. You are wrong.
In this fourth episode of Tanking 101, the question arises as to how much more painful this season could get. Would everything be alright by drafting in the top-five on June 23rd, 2016 at the NHL Entry Draft? Does tanking, actively or passively, just hurt when the team is actually carrying out? Does it have future repercussions?
After all, Tortorella did fetch the Canucks a Columbus Blue Jacket second-round pick in the near future. One can only hope that this season fetches a high-end prospect. And plus, there is this to consider when looking at the Lost Tortz year:
So the Canucks have played a more painful brand of hockey, but they didn’t make the fans feel as much pain as they did two years ago. If that is true, then the Canucks have set themselves up nicely to tank rather painlessly for the rest of the season. I would attribute this to the youth movement and the veteran presence and performance of the Sedins.
So isn’t that what a nice rebuild is? To inject and nurture youth while the veterans lead the way, making the rebuild not seem as painful as it really should be?
But really, does tanking exist?
To tackle that one crucial question, here it is, the Tanking 101 edition of the Canucklehead Lament, recapping this week’s Tanking 101 and answering the question if tanking really exists.
Next: Defining the Pains of Tanking