Here's how I'd handle the 2005 draft. It's a one-time proposal, and we should go back afterwards to the traditional draft ordering. My idea is fair to all teams, and does not reward any one team with a huge windfall by landing Crosby. It also lets teams fulfill their biggest needs, whether it is a superstar, depth, existing prospects, or even cash for free agents. Each team has 270 chips. They auction each draft pick off, one at a time. So what stops us from having a 30-way tie for the 1st pick, with everyone "all in"? You can trade or sell chips. So the team that wins the Crosby Sweepstakes really pays for it. He would almost surely be their only draft choice, and they would part with prospects and some cash in exchange for other teams' chips. So what stops a wealthy team from just buying Crosby? For example, what if Toronto simply bought all of Nashville's chips for $10 million? We'd have a rule that net purchased chips count against the salary cap, amortized over say a 3-year period. You could buy Crosby, but you couldn't pay the players around him. If you really wanted Ryan or Pouliot or Johnson or someone, you could get him, but it would cost you in lesser draft choices and/or prospects. It would be up to the team and their trade partners. And a team like Pittsburgh, with a lot of prospects, could sell their chips and use the money on veteran free agents, if that is what would help them. Another team could pass on the first round, and load up on 2nd and 3rd round picks, just by sitting tight and bidding on picks as they roll around. Yet another team could come away from the draft with 30 late picks, Europeans they had scouted, or projects that just need patience. Each team could have a unique strategy, and fill their needs.