Fan 590's Howard Berger: Contentious debate about draft

[Jaded-Fan]

Chicago fans would likely be the first to hammer their ownership. Phoenix and Washington have had mixed success, even they would admit that. But they were not tanking it, they merely screwed up. It happens to all teams sooner or later, the teams that do not get their act together pick high year after year. You pointed out Cincy in the NFL, not me, but they have been a good example. That is how it should be though. I will be another that will watch with interest what Philly does in this new CBA environment. You certainly set yourself for a long fall off that high horse you perched yourself on Flyersfan.

 

[wazee]

Neither of your points are correct as stated ... You apparently have not been reading carefully enough ... Bad and too quick expansion into non traditional Hockey markets is my biggest complaint, how they manage or mismanage their teams really isn't even an issue in fact, other than I don't believe that some markets will ever be good enough to sustain an NHL team long-term .. That Expansion should never have happened and the game would be much better, is a point that seems to be missing from your lists ..

Well, Messenger, I have read your posts well enough to know you believe expansion should never have happened. I left it off my list because it is a done deal. Expansion happened. And contraction is not going to happen. At least, not as part of this CBA.

Bad management occurs all markets big and small, as the Blues lost the most money last season according to the Levitt report and I would not consider them Small market but certainly TERRIBLE management ..

Bad management does indeed occur in big and small markets. However, under the old CBA, large market teams were able to buy their way out of bad decisions that would set a small market back for years. Leveling the financial playing field will force all teams to live with their decisions, good and bad.

I never once said that a Cap was a bad thing, I only ever said as a fan too low a Cap figure is bad for the game of Hockey as a whole as it will force teams to play with players that would otherwise not be NHLers, but fit now because of price and that the watered down NHL talent wise is already a problem that we have today. I am waiting for the time when the Ovechkin's and Kovalchuk's will make more money in their own countries as the NHL has priced itself out of making it the best league in the world, it will be the best league in NA.

I certainly do not have time to read back though your endless cut and paste posts to see if you actually ever said ‘A cap is a bad thing’ in those exact words. You have, however, consistent pointed out all the ills the cap will, in your opinion, visit on the NHL and shouted the advantages of any and every alternative no matter how unrealistic. If this year proved nothing else, it proved that the NHL salaries under the old CBA were vastly out of line with the world marketplace. Should that change, I have no doubt the NHL will make the adjustments needed to remain the best league in the world.

I am a prospect fan and do not live in an NHL town and spend my days following the CHL and prospects and would want nothing more then to see my NHL team full of young kids and that will happen as a result of a Cap .. In fact it will stop my own team from trading picks and prospects carelessly in the future in a GO FOR IT NOW .. poor planning approach. So nothing wrong with a Cap, it works in my favour to preserve the future... I am not a big fan of leaf management at all in fact and would sooner they stop playing vets.. So losing them because of a Cap is not a bad thing it makes my team like all others give out smarter contracts .. Don't pay Reichel's and Lumme's of the world 3 mil a season, when 1 mil is overpaying for what you get in return.. I have to follow my team long distance as I live West coast and my team is in the east and followable only by Satelite and TV ..

Are you saying you now favor a salary cap to level the financial playing field?

I just don't support the idea that owners need to be charging astronomical prices to go see and game and in the future will put that into their own pockets as profits, rather then spend it on the entertainment value on the ice.

Why do you care? When I buy a ticket, I do not care whose pocket my money goes into. The players will be well compensated with or without a cap. It is not as though they will be paid like some poor 3rd world child sewing sneakers. It is simply not a moral issue. I do not know of any way the league can force an owner to put an entertaining product on the ice, but,since most of them have overspent trying to do exactly that, I do not see it as a widespread problem.

So I really don't think you came close at all to summarizing my feelings in the past year as you say, you may not even be in the right ball park to tell you the truth..

Welcome aboard the salary cap bandwagon.

 

[HSHS]

And what you're missing Jaded-Fan is that the three cases that I've presented have been nothing more than a case of franchise neglect. Those were cases of three teams that intentionally screwed their organization and put blame on everywhere else for why they failed. And they get rewarded for that. Maybe you don't get it, but the problem that I have is that this continual reward for idiocy and mediocrity by rewarding high draft picks to these teams is nothing more than a slap in the face for us fans who truly enjoy the game.

Do you honestly think I want to see young talent go to any of those places where those organizations have done nothing but foster an attitude of losing and non chalence? No. Hell, I'd rather someone like Brule go to Anaheim or Edmonton before Philadelphia. But I have a huge problem with players going to organizations that continually tank their seasons or intentionally tank their seasons.

As I mentioned earlier....

Zig High

Zig High

All of Europe shall be given to the master race who is better suited for its use.

 

[HSHS]

Do you think something like this would go on in the NFL? Don't think so. People may point their fingers and say Cincinatti, but the problem in Cincinatti was Paul Brown. Wasn't it quite the thing when Marvin Lewis stepped in? He finally convinced Paul that his way wasn't working. And when you consider that Lewis has only been in Cinci for two years and there is already great progress, it just goes to show that once you get adequate people running the franchises, you can get to turning things around quickly.

yes it has.. it happens in every league.

Cinncy's main problems, just as Cleveland's, has been drafting. Paul Brown was a major issue cause he didn't create and environment that brought in UFAs. But Levi Jones, K. Carter, P. Warrick, etc. etc. etc. have all been horrible draft picks. Not until recently have they begun to turn it around... starting with the draft where they got Housh., K. Washington, and C. Johnson all in the SAME draft!!! Too bad that by the time they younger players started playing, the good vets left (Dillon, Spikes). And Cle... F'ing Cleveland!!! What a joke! How many players are on that franchise from their DOUBLE DRAFT PICK expansion years (2 years in a row). How many #1's from couch, warren, brown... no take away that number 3 and give it to NE... for they are better suited for B. Edwards or Johnson or Rolle.

Given me an F'ing break, it goes on and on to the Cards, Detriot, and recently SF (a team that really self imploded.)

Catch a clue before you spout off.

 

[HockeyCritter]

That's something that these organizations don't grasp. And that will always be my problem. Not as a fan of a large market team, but as a fan of the game. No, Chicago, Phoenix, nor Washington deserve a shot at Crosby. They're in their own mess because they created it. I don't think they should be rewarded for it. And yes, the draft is a reward.

Interestisng that you left Pittsburgh and NYRangers off that list . . . . . . I wonder, though, how you would feel if this were say 15 years ago and it was Detroit who was finsih near the bottom of the pile or Ottawa?

Every so often teams need to be torn down and rebuilt, it just so happen that Phoenix, Washington, Pittsburgh et al are doing so in light of a new CBA and when the Holy Grail is about to make an appearance.

Goodness, all this mess for one little boy . . . . . it seems a bit silly.

My feeling is that the only "fair" way to handle the draft is to play a season and base the draft on those results. . . . the wonderboy and his pals will just have to wait . . . to draft based on anything but seasonal results really will do a great deal of harm to an already damaged sport . . . perception is everything and the smacking of a "tainted" draft will damage the sport and the draftees.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

So?

And what exactly is the draft for in your book Flyersfan? I am all ears. And when was 'deserving' ever part of the equation. If you are picking near the top you obviously screwed up somewhere. That is a given. The draft is about need, not 'deserving.' How in your obviously warped universe is the Flyers need greater than teams who you yourself have pointed out have left their cupboards bare?

Not sure about the Flyers.
But take the Red Wings.
They've lost Hull. Schneider.
Yzerman could be done. SHanahan and Lidstrom are a year older. Cujo is a year older.
I really doubt that they'd have been atop the western conference this year.
To average out the last three or five years would be unfair to teams that are on the decline.

There was no season. There is no way to come up with a draft order.
So 30 teams in the hat would be fair.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Not sure about the Flyers.
But take the Red Wings.
They've lost Hull. Schneider.
Yzerman could be done. SHanahan and Lidstrom are a year older. Cujo is a year older.
I really doubt that they'd have been atop the western conference this year.
To average out the last three or five years would be unfair to teams that are on the decline.

There was no season. There is no way to come up with a draft order.
So 30 teams in the hat would be fair.

Would they have been the worst team in the league? Bottom Ten?

Here is what would remain of the Redwing's roster after losing those three:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/hockey/nhl/rosters/red.wings.html

Compare that to the teams that the bottom 7 or 8 teams would have put on the ice last year. Hell, compare what you likely will put on the ice from that list above to what any of those teams will have on the ice from their rosters (you can find them linked at the same place) next year. There is no comparison and everyone here knows that teams like the Redwings would have, and will at least for the near future, field a much better team with a legit cup chance and those teams will not. It is disengenuous at best to say that we have no clue how last year would have played out. The Redwings are indeed aging and will have to rebuild in 2-3 years. They very well may drop eventually to a lower tier team . . . we all likely will find ourselves there at some point under this new environment. That is when they should get their top pick. Now? I do not see any argument that makes them a candidate for what the is the intent of the draft.

 

[HSHS]

Not sure about the Flyers.
But take the Red Wings.
They've lost Hull. Schneider.
Yzerman could be done. SHanahan and Lidstrom are a year older. Cujo is a year older.
I really doubt that they'd have been atop the western conference this year.
To average out the last three or five years would be unfair to teams that are on the decline.

There was no season. There is no way to come up with a draft order.
So 30 teams in the hat would be fair.

I may be starting to agree with the theory that no season = equal rating. Or at least partial. Perhaps an idea that each team gets 60 balls, then based on 03-04 pts, each team gets 1-30 balls. Therefore noone gets >50% chance more than any other. That puts equality at 2/3 while 1/3 for historically based draft order determination.

However, I do not for one second think that the argument that "we lost this player" or "our players are one year older" has any basis. That's something that happens to all teams. Is 03-04 standings argument any more ligitatment, only slightly... that's why I think the 1/3 or heck even 75/25 split is more reasonable.

 

[HockeyCritter]

I may be starting to agree with the theory that no season = equal rating. Or at least partial. Perhaps an idea that each team gets 60 balls, then based on 03-04 pts, each team gets 1-30 balls. Therefore noone gets >50% chance more than any other. That puts equality at 2/3 while 1/3 for historically based draft order determination.

However, I do not for one second think that the argument that "we lost this player" or "our players are one year older" has any basis. That's something that happens to all teams. Is 03-04 standings argument any more ligitatment, only slightly... that's why I think the 1/3 or heck even 75/25 split is more reasonable.

That "excuse" can be made by each of the 30 teams . . . heck, Pittsburgh and Washington could argue that they have no bona fide NHLers under contract therefore they would most likely finish at the bottom of the pile.

No season = no draft, any silly solution is going to be unfair, taint the draft, and harm the game. It would be best to wait until there is a season and draft on seasonal results (there is nothing that says the league can't draft in Feb based on 41 game results) . . . . . I know the league has got it's knickers in a knot over Crosby, but I think to use any system but seasonal results is going to put even more pressure on the kid (especially if he ends up in a "market that is good for the league")

 

[bleedgreen]

i think eveyone should have a completely equal shot at crosby - then do a system that is based on past results. i liked the idea about lotteries for 2-10, 11-20, and 21-30. teams can still move up without dropping out of their range. this way, everyone has a shot at crosby and no one gets hosed. how much of an arguement can you make for bottom 10 teams getting out of there? wash, pitts, colombus,canes, nyr, chicago, are all looking at a strong possibility of returning there. the others could as well. this is supposed to be about crosby, but it turns into the good teams trying to turn this into a freebie top 10 pick they likely wouldnt see.

 

[HockeyCritter]

There is a small but evil side of me that wants the kid to be a bust just to show how silly the league looks trying to figure this mess out only to have it blow up in their faces.

That being said, I really don’t want the kid to be a bust . . . . . though I do wonder how he’ll ever live up to all that hype . . . . that's gotta be hard **shrug**


I'd prefer it if the draft weren't held until half a season was played . . . but if it has to be "weighted" I could live with the ten spot slots lottery thingy . . .

 

[Epsilon]

There is a small but evil side of me that wants the kid to be a bust just to show how silly the league looks trying to figure this mess out only to have it blow up in their faces.

That being said, I really don’t want the kid to be a bust . . . . . though I do wonder how he’ll ever live up to all that hype . . . . that's gotta be hard **shrug**


I'd prefer it if the draft weren't held until half a season was played . . . but if it has to be "weighted" I could live with the ten spot slots lottery thingy . . .

I don't want Crsoby to be a bust, but I'm going to laugh my ass off at all the "the NHL NEEDS Crosby here" types when he ends up being just another one of the league's top players and not the "chosen one". Personally I don't even care that much about this draft. I'm waiting until 4 years from now, when under the rules of the new CBA Ilya Kovalchuk becomes a free agent, and joins fellow Russians Pavel Datsyuk and Igor Grigorenko in Detroit under coach Igor Larianov.

 

[HockeyCritter]

I don't want Crsoby to be a bust, but I'm oing to laugh my ass off at all the "the NHL NEEDS Crsoby here" types when he ends up being just another one of the league's top players and not the "chosen one". Personally I don't even care that much about this draft. I'm waiting until 4 years from now, when under the rules of the new CBA Ilya Kovalchuk becomes a free agent, and joins fellow Russians Pavel Datsyuk and Igor Grigorenko is Detroit under coach Igor Larianov.

Very true . . . what the league needs, what the sport needs is to showcase the speed and talent that has been absent (mostly due to rule tampering) - - but that’s a whole different can of worms.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

I may be starting to agree with the theory that no season = equal rating. Or at least partial. Perhaps an idea that each team gets 60 balls, then based on 03-04 pts, each team gets 1-30 balls. Therefore noone gets >50% chance more than any other. That puts equality at 2/3 while 1/3 for historically based draft order determination.

However, I do not for one second think that the argument that "we lost this player" or "our players are one year older" has any basis. That's something that happens to all teams. Is 03-04 standings argument any more ligitatment, only slightly... that's why I think the 1/3 or heck even 75/25 split is more reasonable.

How can you not see merit to the "our players are a year older"
In Detroit, a year older most likely means not as good.
In Atlanta or Nashville or Columbus, that likely means better.

There are two "fair" ways to do this.
1) Everyone gets an equal shot.
2) Hold off until next year, and then group both draft years together.

Another idea I heard on the boards was to hold the next draft at mid-season, based on the record at mid-season.
At least this draft order would be based on real, recent results.

 

[HSHS]

How can you not see merit to the "our players are a year older"
In Detroit, a year older most likely means not as good.
In Atlanta or Nashville or Columbus, that likely means better.

There are two "fair" ways to do this.
1) Everyone gets an equal shot.
2) Hold off until next year, and then group both draft years together.

Another idea I heard on the boards was to hold the next draft at mid-season, based on the record at mid-season.
At least this draft order would be based on real, recent results.

Because there is no historical basis for using UFA losses or retirements as setting draft order. The NFL uses comp draft picks.

The Steelers fininshed 15-1, get the 30th pick based on previous season standings. They lost K Bell, Plex, and 2 of 5 starting OL. They are not going out demanding a top ten pick instead.

If the NHL CBA states comp picks with signed, then great, there is your method. I want apples for apples based on the intent of the draft. Intent being the standard used by every NA league (please no EPL or La Liga arguments)

Now please don't go with that "we've missed a season" argument. That only holds water with the 0-0-0-0 tie, not future losses.

I understand the mid-pt argument. And as a Caps fan, I say BRING IT ON!!!!! NHL will never do that though cause they need HIM. Also, you can't double dip forward by trying to prevent it on the back side. Now if we have two "41 game seasons" for draft purposes, then that's fine.... but it still can be viewed as forward double dipping.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Because there is no historical basis for using UFA losses or retirements as setting draft order. The NFL uses comp draft picks.

The Steelers fininshed 15-1, get the 30th pick based on previous season standings. They lost K Bell, Plex, and 2 of 5 starting OL. They are not going out demanding a top ten pick instead.

If the NHL CBA states comp picks with signed, then great, there is your method. I want apples for apples based on the intent of the draft. Intent being the standard used by every NA league (please no EPL or La Liga arguments)

Now please don't go with that "we've missed a season" argument. That only holds water with the 0-0-0-0 tie, not future losses.

I understand the mid-pt argument. And as a Caps fan, I say BRING IT ON!!!!! NHL will never do that though cause they need HIM. Also, you can't double dip forward by trying to prevent it on the back side. Now if we have two "41 game seasons" for draft purposes, then that's fine.... but it still can be viewed as forward double dipping.

This ain't the NFL.
And let me clear up confusion:
Right now the Wings should be playing hockey. If they were, they'd be doing so without Hull, without Schneider, maybe without Chelios and Yzerman.
If the NHL had been succesful in getting it's salary cap, the Wings might also be playing without Datsyuk.

So how in the world is it fair to say this year's red wings team should pick in the same spot as the President's Trophy winning team of last year, when the team, in all liklihood, is no longer of that caliber?

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

So how in the world is it fair to say this year's red wings team should pick in the same spot as the President's Trophy winning team of last year, when the team, in all liklihood, is no longer of that caliber?

Because as you like to point out so,eloquently from your soapbox, there have been no games played to prove otherwise. When play resumes the Tampa Bay Lightning are still defending Stanley Cup Champions, the Detroit Red Wings are still defending President Trophy winners and the Pittsburgh Penguins are still the worst team in hockey. Until results prove otherwise that's the reality.

 

[JohnnyReb]

Because as you like to point out so,eloquently from your soapbox, there have been no games played to prove otherwise. When play resumes the Tampa Bay Lightning are still defending Stanley Cup Champions, the Detroit Red Wings are still defending President Trophy winners and the Pittsburgh Penguins are still the worst team in hockey. Until results prove otherwise that's the reality.

So why not have the draft based on last season's results? Why bother with any weighted system at all?

 

[Jaded-Fan]

So why not have the draft based on last season's results? Why bother with any weighted system at all?

The lottery was meant to discourage tanking for the first pick, something the Pens had been accused of for Mario actually, and that may have been a major reason the lottery came in soon after.

There was a lottery last year, I am thinking that because the last season was lost the idea of spreading the losses and wins over three or four season was thought to be a compromise by those who advocated that system because it makes the rare fluke team that has a one year run or one year fall over injuries less likely to be penalized/rewarded. I think that is a fair compromise even though it bumps my team out of the top spot. That at least logically addresses the problems inherent in an imperfect system in a pretty fair way, maybe the most fair way out there. But to throw out everything we know about the teams just because we lost a season and have a team like Tampa Bay or Calgary, both young and stacked, or Detroit, Colorado, Toronto, Philly, old and stacked, have an equal chance at number one is a joke that perverts every reason behind having a draft.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

So why not have the draft based on last season's results? Why bother with any weighted system at all?

That's exactly what I am a proponent of. The result of the 2003-04 season stands and the draft is a based on that result. All of the non-playoff teams have a lottery chance of moving up, a maximum of four spots and at worst losing one spot in the selection order. That's it, move a head and everyone quite their bellyaching! ALL teams knew the teams knew we were heading to this so no one has any excuses. This is nothing but trying to get something for nothing. Its embarassing for the league IMO.

 

[mooseOAK*]

That's exactly what I am a proponent of. The result of the 2003-04 season stands and the draft is a based on that result. All of the non-playoff teams have a lottery chance of moving up, a maximum of four spots and at worst losing one spot in the selection order. That's it, move a head and everyone quite their bellyaching! ALL teams knew the teams knew we were heading to this so no one has any excuses. This is nothing but trying to get something for nothing. Its embarassing for the league IMO.

We've already had a draft based on the 2003-04 results, I saw it on TV.

 

[JohnnyReb]

That's exactly what I am a proponent of. The result of the 2003-04 season stands and the draft is a based on that result. All of the non-playoff teams have a lottery chance of moving up, a maximum of four spots and at worst losing one spot in the selection order. That's it, move a head and everyone quite their bellyaching! ALL teams knew the teams knew we were heading to this so no one has any excuses. This is nothing but trying to get something for nothing. Its embarassing for the league IMO.

Fair enough. That makes more sense to me than some historically weighted lottery system, which implies things would have been different, just "not that much different."

Still think a 1 in 30 chance is the fairest option, but I'd take yours over some quasi-weighted lottery that pays lip service to every team "having a shot but not really."

You think the belly-aching is bad now? Imagine if a team like Detroit actually beat the odds and won a weighted lottery? Or one of Calgary or Tampa, who have middle of the pack chances at winning? Oi vey...

 

[Scoogs]

So why not have the draft based on last season's results? Why bother with any weighted system at all?

How is that at all fair? For one horrible season, those top teams get 2 high picks?

 

[Jaded-Fan]

How is that at all fair? For one horrible season, those top teams get 2 high picks?

So for no lousy seasons, perhaps even winning a Cup, a team potentially gets a top if not the top pick? How is that fair? And most of those teams have been bad for a while, and would be so next year. Rebuilding is not an overnight thing, never is. Better to give the pick to a team who likely would have gotten it if the season had played out than to give it to a team as icing on a cake that will be competing for a cup again next year.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

We've already had a draft based on the 2003-04 results, I saw it on TV.

In the absence of a definitive selection order the common sense approach would be to default back to the last definitive result. Otherwise, why bother having a draft at all. The league would be better off raising the age to 19 and declaring all players eligible for the 2005 draft now eligible for the 2006 draft. Neat and simple with no tears from Toronto or Detroit.