How to address tanking

[Referee3083]

in my leagues to qualify for a lotto pick (bottom 5) you have to play 80% of the leagues average games played per team as well as a lottery for 1st ov using the nhl's results .

This is exactly what my league does too. If you fail to meet the 80% three times, then you are booted from the league.

[hockeyrobot]

Yep using the NHLs lottery results is a must as well.

[Pengwin7]

Unfortunately there's no catch-all rule that works in every situation. I like HR's idea. One of my leagues has a minimum season GP limit for non-playoff teams to be eligible for the draft lottery, although they botched it by setting the limit too low. Teams can get there even when they're extremely negligent with their roster.

Put a simple disclaimer in your rules stating tanking is not permitted and all teams are expected to ice their best possible roster. All GMs and their activities are evaluated by the commissioner(s) and any activity going against the spirit of the league rules (even outside the written rules) will result in the GM being booted from the league.

Tankers will get creative, so you make it clear it's not just about the written rules, but about the global idea that tanking is wrong. If they try tanking they won't be around to draft the player they're targeting. Simple as that.

This post is just about as good as a league (& commissioner) will do. Great summary, eric!

My favourite leagues put a lot of emphasis about the "intent" or "guidelines" - even though one might have to refer to them as rules.
Teams can always skirt being competitive. The cleverest of teams roster non-playing back-up goalies and healthy-scratch defensemen to get them zero points.
There's all kinds of creative ways of tanking. You can't police teams much more than asking them to set line-ups with active NHL pros.

The two keeper leagues I commish or co-commish use this "please try / don't tank" philosophy along with two other concepts:

1) In one of my leagues (WHL), I preset a schedule with teams pre-arranged in tiers. At end of season (when teams are tanking), the top teams play other top teams (only) and the bottom teams play the bottom teams (only). So all the "passive tankers" are playing each other - which means they'll tattle on each other about how they are each skirting the system. It's pretty brilliant and they police each other.

2) Both of my keepers use a lottery for the top 3 draft picks.
We match our league teams finish with teams in the NHL.

In the 24-team WHL, 16 teams do not qualify for the main playoffs... but they play in two 8-team consolation brackets.
The winner of each tier gets a TWO position bump in their reverse standings finish.
The runner-up of each tier playoff gets a ONE position bump in their reverse standings finish.
Then we match each WHL team with the like-finishing NHL team, and our first round drafts exactly where that matched team drafts.
So, if WHL team finishes 5th last regulars season but wins consolation, they might bump up to an effective "3rd last" placement.
That might match them with NHL-3rd last, like ARI.
If NHL-ARI wins the NHL lottery, then that WHL team gets our league's 1st pick.
The bad teams will still get top picks, but they may not get a top 3 pick, much like NHL.

In my 12-team SHL, top 6 make playoffs and cannot win lottery (unless they own a non-playoff pick).
Then the bottom 6 are matched with several NHL teams.
The very worst team matches with NHL worst team,, the 7th worst finishing team, etc... something like a 35% shot to win lottery.
The 2nd worst team matches with NHL 2nd worst team, the 8th worst NHL team, etc.... something like a 25% shot to win lottery.
Then 15%, 12%, 8%, 5%, something like that for the next four worst finishing teams.

The WHL format has been in place for 4-seasons now, most seem to like the set-up, especially the small incentive to still compete for something in March/April.
The SHL format has been in place for 10-seasons now, and usually the worst-finishing team still ends up with a top 3 pick.

[skinnypete88]

I haven't seen this posted yet but in our league we have the last place person pay for the 1st place person's entry fee the following season. And since the fee is $50 that's $100 to be paid for coming in last.

We also do a draft lottery so coming in dead last does not guarantee 1st overall pick. I find that with this method people play to not be in dead last, however there are always a few bottom feeders I think that's just how it is.

[hockeyrobot]

1) In one of my leagues (WHL), I preset a schedule with teams pre-arranged in tiers. At end of season (when teams are tanking), the top teams play other top teams (only) and the bottom teams play the bottom teams (only). So all the "passive tankers" are playing each other - which means they'll tattle on each other about how they are each skirting the system. It's pretty brilliant and they police each other.

So you mean you decide at the beginning of the year which teams will be good and which won't? Or is there a point in the season where you adjust the schedule?

- - - Updated - - -

I haven't seen this posted yet but in our league we have the last place person pay for the 1st place person's entry fee the following season. And since the fee is $50 that's $100 to be paid for coming in last.

I love that idea as well but I would say a lot of keeper leagues aren't for cash.

[fantasyhockeygeek]

What's the downside to teams tanking?

I understand the concern that teams facing them will have easier weeks but the teams they played earlier in the season already beat them or they would not be tanking. If a team wants to lose intentionally then that's the choice they make. I don't know why leagues try to make rules that prevent tanking. Let GMs run their teams how they see is best for the long-term viability of their franchise. If you don't think they are capable GMs, then get rid of them.

I'm with chuckcouples here. If it's a keeper league, your job as a GM is to win the league as soon as is practical. If your team doesn't have a shot at winning the title in a given year, what the hell is the point of finishing middle of the pack? I don't see anything wrong with managing your team to give you a better shot to win the titles as soon as possible.

There's also something to be said for building your league so that the H2H schedule shakes out as each team plays every other team the same number of times... that at least levels the field.

[hockeyrobot]

I'm with chuckcouples here. If it's a keeper league, your job as a GM is to win the league as soon as is practical. If your team doesn't have a shot at winning the title in a given year, what the hell is the point of finishing middle of the pack? I don't see anything wrong with managing your team to give you a better shot to win the titles as soon as possible.

There's also something to be said for building your league so that the H2H schedule shakes out as each team plays every other team the same number of times... that at least levels the field.

I think the tanking here is not paying attention and not setting your lineups. That is the unfair part. If you want to set your 5-6-7-8 whatever number of keepers and then pick up every prospect who has a shot at being a stud....by all means you can do that. But set your roster so you're at least somewhat competitive / not reaching the goalie minimum.

[fantasyhockeygeek]

I think the tanking here is not paying attention and not setting your lineups. That is the unfair part. If you want to set your 5-6-7-8 whatever number of keepers and then pick up every prospect who has a shot at being a stud....by all means you can do that. But set your roster so you're at least somewhat competitive / not reaching the goalie minimum.

No no, I'm not talking about rebuilding, trading for futures or anything like that. I'm talking about having a core group of competitive players (in a full keeper or limited keeper) and using the bench to pick up less productive players to deliberately move your team down the standings... things like benching your studs and playing scrubs, barely hitting the minimum GP thresholds, etc to have your team perform worse than its underlying ability.

I'm 100% ok with that, because it improves your chances of winning in future years. If you're a participant in the league, paid or unpaid, that should be your goal and it seems very arbitrary to me to have rules that prevent you from making your team better.

[skinnypete88]

The problem with supporting tanking in H2H is for the people who are battling for a playoff spot. If I'm competing with another team for a spot and that other team has a matchup against a guy who is tanking or not setting his lineups for tanking, is that fair? I think no

[hockeyrobot]

The problem with supporting tanking in H2H is for the people who are battling for a playoff spot. If I'm competing with another team for a spot and that other team has a matchup against a guy who is tanking or not setting his lineups for tanking, is that fair? I think no

Right. Especially in 12 team leagues where everyone isn't playing each other twice.

[fantasyhockeygeek]

In a 12 team league, you should just set your schedule for 22 regular season matchups + playoffs. All you have to do is merge a couple matchups to account for shortened weeks (first week, all star break) and that problem goes away.

It seems to me that the underlying issue is poor league construction, no?

[Pengwin7]

So you mean you decide at the beginning of the year which teams will be good and which won't? Or is there a point in the season where you adjust the schedule?

It goes by previous year regular season record.
The league has 24-teams... and they are put in tiers before the season starts based on previous year's finish.

Tier I (or "A"): 1st-6th place teams
Tier II (or "B"): 7th-12th place teams
Tier III (or "C"): 13th-18th place teams
Tier IV (or "D"): 19th-24th place teams

Then we have a 23-week H2H schedule so that every team plays every opponent once. (fair)
Weeks 1-6, Tier I play against Tier IV, II against III
Weeks 7-12, Tier I play against Tier III, II against III
Weeks 13-18, Tier I play against Tier II, III against IV
Weeks 19-23, all teams play intra-Tier... GREAT battles in upper tiers... and, yes, the bottom teams are policing their other peer bottom teams.

A few years ago, I made a spreadsheet that shows which team plays which for every single week.
Downside is that it takes about 1.5-2hrs to schedule 12 matches for 23 weeks in Fantrax.
It's a bit of a grind, but I think it works well.

Yeah - one of the big issues with "tanking" is a "random" schedule (which many actually ASSUME is "fairer")...
TankCitySharks might be giving it a half-effort in Week 15 match-up vs. GoodTeamA... whereas
TankCitySharks might be giving no shits in Week 22 match-up vs. GoodTeamB.

It's a bit of an advantage for GoodTeamB.

But people tend to think that a majority concept ("randomized" schedule) is fairer - because that's what most leagues do.
I had 2-3 detractors in our 24-team league over past 3 seasons... but generally, people like it.

Teams also have a clearer picture by mid-season how they are doing vs. their peers - and knowing they have a very equal schedule upcoming.
WHL has had great trade activity at our trade deadline, I think because so many teams very clearly know whether they are buyers or sellers.

But... again... 1.5-2hrs of "scheduling" is too much of a grind for many commissioners.
It can be a hard sell (pre-set scheduling) to many dinosaur GMs that don't like the concept that "change"... could be better.

We also rename the tiers each year based on quality.
It can be quite fun & create a bit of bonding to be in a group/tier with peer teams for a season.
WHL Year #4: Gretzky Division, Yzerman Division, Sutter Division, Baumgartner Division
WHL Year #3: Roy Division, Belfour Division, Bryzgalov Division, Red Light Racicot Division
WHL Year #2: Orr Division, Coffey Division, Zalapski Division, Beukeboom Division


*Click attachment for PDF view.

[hockeyrobot]

^^^ That's intense and awesome.

[FFleming5]

This has been a very insightful and helpful discussion. We have decided to implement another interesting option.

At the end of the season, the 8 playoff teams will vote on draft order - if any of the bottom 4 teams have entered into any kind of questionable tanking activity it will be addressed by the teams that make the playoff. Each vote that would change the pre-established order must have a valid reason for the change - to ensure there is no popularity contest. The vote structure may also reward a manager who is fighting for the final playoff spot rather than acting in an anti-competitive manner.

[Stan Smyl]

My league has gotten pretty creative with this and have nailed it for our format. We started with bottom 10 teams (of 15) were all equal lottery picks, then added modest fines for bottom 5. And just this year we added a really unique but cool feature: We are a points only season long pool. We added an offline h2h points only with $20 per week side bets. So basically we run our regular pool thru yahoo, and then track a h2h in excel. Its been good. No one tanking anymore lol