HOH from Detroit: a twist on draft

[dunwoody_joe]

R-E-A-C-H

Pretty soon we'll be basing the draft order on number of players each team had overseas..

"We should get Crosby b/c 'team A' had more players play overseas - they are in better shape!"...

Anyhow, thanks for the update HOH.. It makes for entertaining reading if nothing else I guess

Or maybe the better definition of a team in need: those with the fewest season ticket holders left!

Hey, that actually makes sense!

 

[Steve L*]

This makes as much sense as the Wings or Leafs GM saying "were the oldest team so we need younger players the most", actually that makes more sense than the Bruins argument.

Everyone is putting forward an idea that gives their team the highest change at the #1 pick.

Col, Det, Phi are all wanting an unweighted draft, the bottom 5 teams want it based on last years lottery, Ive no doubt we will see a couple more creative ideas from GMs desperate for the #1 pick.

 

[Nich]

easiest solution...put crosby in the #1 tv market where he can raise ratings, and then all of hockey gains....hey the rangers are in the best market AND they are a bottom deweling team that hasn't made the playoffs in 7 years....hmmmmm looks like they fill both of those needs....=)

 

[Morbo]

Boston will get the first pick. Jeremy Jacobs is the only owner who`s opinion matters to Gary Bettman. So if Jacobs wants the first pick, then he`ll get it. This pathetic "team that needs it the most " reason is the best justification for it they could find but it doesn`t matter. Bettman does what Jacobs says. Boston gets the pick.

Keep dreaming.

 

[FlyersFan10*]

I say if Crosby were to go to a large market, the ideal place for him to go would be Los Angeles. That would be the ideal market and would be almost Gretzky-esque in terms of impact. Crosby on the eastern seaboard would be a waste. When you consider that the East already has Thornton and Lemieux, not to mention that players like Ovenchicken, Malkin, Carter, Richards, Parise, etc...., Crosby might not get the market attention that he would get in the West. Crosby would be the star attraction out west, where the market will take a serious hit once Forsberg retires. That would make the most sense anyways.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

If we're "picking" teams where Crosby should go, because "a large market has to have the stars" (which is so much bull its not even funny), I would say the following teams should be at the top of the list.

1. St Louis Blues
2. Dallas Stars
3. Colorado Avalance

These are big market teams with big budgets that will have to be trimmed. They are all short on quality prospects and could use an addition of a young star to take place of their top dog as he ages and retires (the likes of Weight, Modano and Sakic).

If we're "picking" teams that should get a serious crack at Crosby, have a historical basis for the selection, and could use the player to establish a strong market (isn't that what the league and the fans want, strong markets everywhere and teams that everyone wants to see?) then the list looks like this.

1. Chicago Blackhawks
2. Phoenix Coyotes
3. Buffalo Sabres

All are markets that have struggled in finding the playoffs. All are markets that could do really well from the perspective of spreading the popularity of the game. All are teams that don't have that star that could draw in the big crowds. While I would like to see Crosby go to Phoenix and spread the popularity of the game in the southwest I think he would be best used by the league in Chicago and turned into a star player by Sutter (Crosby is the type of player Sutter could do things with IMO). This would be good for TV, good for a major market, good for the player, and good for the game itself IMO.

Of course I think the draft should happen as it normally does and that the teams that have been the worst over the past thre or four years get the best opportunity at Crosby. I have no vested interest in using this scheme, as my favorite teams are all in the middle of the pack, so I think this is the fairest approach to dispersal of talent. Any system that tilts the selection to someone's "favorite team" without a historical or common sense approach doesn't hold water and just talking out of one's buttocks. There are reasons why things have been done the way they have (in all professional leagues BTW) and there is no reason to change this because a "season" was lost in a labor dispute.

 

[Vic Rattlehead*]

If we're "picking" teams where Crosby should go, because "a large market has to have the stars" (which is so much bull its not even funny), I would say the following teams should be at the top of the list.

1. St Louis Blues
2. Dallas Stars
3. Colorado Avalance

These are big market teams with big budgets that will have to be trimmed. They are all short on quality prospects and could use an addition of a young star to take place of their top dog as he ages and retires (the likes of Weight, Modano and Sakic).

If we're "picking" teams that should get a serious crack at Crosby, have a historical basis for the selection, and could use the player to establish a strong market (isn't that what the league and the fans want, strong markets everywhere and teams that everyone wants to see?) then the list looks like this.

1. Chicago Blackhawks
2. Phoenix Coyotes
3. Buffalo Sabres

All are markets that have struggled in finding the playoffs. All are markets that could do really well from the perspective of spreading the popularity of the game. All are teams that don't have that star that could draw in the big crowds. While I would like to see Crosby go to Phoenix and spread the popularity of the game in the southwest I think he would be best used by the league in Chicago and turned into a star player by Sutter (Crosby is the type of player Sutter could do things with IMO). This would be good for TV, good for a major market, good for the player, and good for the game itself IMO.

Of course I think the draft should happen as it normally does and that the teams that have been the worst over the past thre or four years get the best opportunity at Crosby. I have no vested interest in using this scheme, as my favorite teams are all in the middle of the pack, so I think this is the fairest approach to dispersal of talent. Any system that tilts the selection to someone's "favorite team" without a historical or common sense approach doesn't hold water and just talking out of one's buttocks. There are reasons why things have been done the way they have (in all professional leagues BTW) and there is no reason to change this because a "season" was lost in a labor dispute.

Or, we could do.....

- Original 6 teams that need to help their market (Chicago, NYR, Boston).

etc..... List goes on. None will happen though.

 

[EroCaps]

01-02 has almost as much relevance as 03-04, in terms of standings, with regards to the 2005 draft. In other words, not much relevance at all. That's why I like the idea of using an average of regular-season performance based on the last 4 regular seasons (the only 4 with a 30-team NHL). Sure, a team like Washington will get the short end, but in the grand scheme of things I think this scenario satisfies the most teams. And in the end, it's the fairest system for the majority, especially if we use a weighted lottery where everybody has a shot at Sid the Kid.

The Caps won the lottery in 2004. If they are the team that is shafted the most when they come up with a draft system for 2005, I don't see a problem.

03-04 has the same relevance to 05 as 01-02? Literally speaking, maybe. But you know how bogus that is. I think it's antipathy speaking.

No team should be "shafted". Pittsburgh, NYI and Atlanta entered the rebuilding process and took several top 3 picks each. No one complained.

 

[NYR94]

It doesn't really matter anymore right now. O'Connell is not getting it his way. Bettman said that the draft will have a weighted lottery that gives all 30 teams a chance to pick first although it will favor the teams with the worst records over the past three or four years. He'll be more likely to go to a team like Columbus or the Rangers than the Bruins, although there is still a small chance that he could go to a top team.

 

[Canucker]

Personally I feel that everyone should have an equal chance at the #1 pick overall. Large market franchises went to bat for the smaller markets in this lock out and lost a lot of earnings, plus they are typically older teams who lost a chance at have their name on the cup. Also, you can't overlook the fact that it is possible to go from worst to first, and vice versa. Injuries, holdouts and suspensions to key players can decimate a team, taking them from perrenial favorites to a lottery team. Finally, I really don't care who gets the #1 pick overall, if it happens to be my most hated teams in the league (Toronto, Philadelphia, Rangers and Colorado) so be it, thats just the way the lottery ball bounces. I'm shooting for #2 anyhow, I'm really on the Brule bandwagon.

 

[Icey]

Personally I feel that everyone should have an equal chance at the #1 pick overall. Large market franchises went to bat for the smaller markets in this lock out and lost a lot of earnings, plus they are typically older teams who lost a chance at have their name on the cup. Also, you can't overlook the fact that it is possible to go from worst to first, and vice versa. Injuries, holdouts and suspensions to key players can decimate a team, taking them from perrenial favorites to a lottery team. Finally, I really don't care who gets the #1 pick overall, if it happens to be my most hated teams in the league (Toronto, Philadelphia, Rangers and Colorado) so be it, thats just the way the lottery ball bounces. I'm shooting for #2 anyhow, I'm really on the Brule bandwagon.

Bingo! The draft will be the payback for teams such as Detroit, Toronto, Philadelphia, Dallas, Colorado who all lost during this lockout instead of making money if they had actually played. They have sat out an entire year for the small market teams and Bettman knows that. Just as the NHL has to throw the PA a bone to get this deal done, Bettman has to throw the big market teams a bone. They have to get something out of this deal and the NHL knows that, remember they are still counting on those teams for most of the NHL's revenues.

 

[gvkmedia]

The best way....

without a doubt, to preserve the tradition and history of the NHL would be to have the original 6 teams pick in alphabetical order....



I stole this idea from the home board...

 

[EroCaps]

Bingo! The draft will be the payback for teams such as Detroit, Toronto, Philadelphia, Dallas, Colorado who all lost during this lockout instead of making money if they had actually played. They have sat out an entire year for the small market teams and Bettman knows that. Just as the NHL has to throw the PA a bone to get this deal done, Bettman has to throw the big market teams a bone. They have to get something out of this deal and the NHL knows that, remember they are still counting on those teams for most of the NHL's revenues.

...the lockout was partially "payback" for the big market team's part in inflating the league's salary.

Having a lockout in the name of parity and then turning upside-down one of the primary methods of providing parity in the same calendar year seems way too hypocritical.

We'll just have to wait and see.

 

[R0CKET]

Anyone who feels that every team should have a shot at this potential super star player is not playing with a full deck.

So for $hits & giggles, lets say that Tampa got him?

How many other legitamate pro leagues have the championship club drafting the next star of the game?

None.

Get real.

It would make this game a bigger joke than it already has become.

The draft needs to be sensibly weighted to include playoff success (wins) and championships over the last 2 years to go along with their regulaer season records.

Besides its not just about Crosby, how about the other top blue chip prospects going to a slew of talent-rich teams? That's simply not a realistic outcome that's any good for the NHL.

 

[Icey]

...the lockout was partially "payback" for the big market team's part in inflating the league's salary.

Having a lockout in the name of parity and then turning upside-down one of the primary methods of providing parity in the same calendar year seems way too hypocritical.

We'll just have to wait and see.

So the small market teams were "paying back" to the big market teams for inflating salaries by voting for the lock-out? God, they are stupider than I thought.

Fact is that NOBODY and I mean NOBODY knows where any team would have ended up at the end of the season. Phoenix could have gone on to win the Stanley Cup after the signings they did over the summer. Boston could have fallen to the basement considering they have no players signed. Iginla could have held out the entire season and Calgary could have returned to its previous state of not making the playoffs. So to give the small market teams the advanage over the big market teams because you don't like their payrolls is just ludicrous.

Throw all thiry teams into a lottery and starting picking.

 

[EroCaps]

So the small market teams were "paying back" to the big market teams for inflating salaries by voting for the lock-out? God, they are stupider than I thought.

Fact is that NOBODY and I mean NOBODY knows where any team would have ended up at the end of the season. Phoenix could have gone on to win the Stanley Cup after the signings they did over the summer. Boston could have fallen to the basement considering they have no players signed. Iginla could have held out the entire season and Calgary could have returned to its previous state of not making the playoffs. So to give the small market teams the advanage over the big market teams because you don't like their payrolls is just ludicrous.

Throw all thiry teams into a lottery and starting picking.

Both sides make valid points.

 

[thenextone]

A good point has been made - why do teams with poor records from a year ago feel they are entitled to getting another top selection?

The NHL idealogy on drafting are pretty simple, a team with a poor record will be rewarded with a better selection in the entry draft for THAT year. There is no precendent that says if you do badly for a number of years, you are entitled to future top selections. It's strictly year to year.

The fact that every team played no games this season should be reason enough to randomize the draft evenly.

Teams like Florida, Chicago and Pittsburg which have been getting top selections and doing very little rebuilding should in fact be punished in my mind. But that wont happen.

 

[Cole Caulifield]

A good point has been made - why do teams with poor records from a year ago feel they are entitled to getting another top selection?

The NHL idealogy on drafting are pretty simple, a team with a poor record will be rewarded with a better selection in the entry draft for THAT year. There is no precendent that says if you do badly for a number of years, you are entitled to future top selections. It's strictly year to year.

The fact that every team played no games this season should be reason enough to randomize the draft evenly.

Teams like Florida, Chicago and Pittsburg which have been getting top selections and doing very little rebuilding should in fact be punished in my mind. But that wont happen.

I completely agree with this sentiment.

And they should do a snake draft too.

And before someone says : WHAT IF DETROIT ENDS UP WITH THE 1st PICK THAT WOULD BE SO UNFAIR !!!11! No I don't care if Tampa Bay, Philly, Detroit or Colorado ends up with the 1st pick. I say good for them. Personally I'd rather not see Crosby ends up in those places, but I don't see a problem with it as it would have been a fair way to decide. Besides those teams that gets early picks wouldn't pick again until the late 2nd round if they did a snake draft.

What I think would be unfair is for crappy teams to get double the reward for a certain period of suckyness. The worst team that could get the first pick in my mind is Florida. They've already been compensated more than enough with the draft system. It would be absolutely ridiculous if they were to get Crosby.

 

[me2]

What I think would be unfair is for crappy teams to get double the reward for a certain period of suckyness.

As opposed to a good team getting Crosby for a period of no crappiness. Seems to me that is exactly the same as the above. Both are getting something for nothing, so give the best chance to get Crosby to the team that would have been the worst (4 year avg seems fairest).

 

[Bruwinz37]

Anyone who feels that every team should have a shot at this potential super star player is not playing with a full deck.

So for $hits & giggles, lets say that Tampa got him?

How many other legitamate pro leagues have the championship club drafting the next star of the game?

None.

Get real.

It would make this game a bigger joke than it already has become.

The draft needs to be sensibly weighted to include playoff success (wins) and championships over the last 2 years to go along with their regulaer season records.

Besides its not just about Crosby, how about the other top blue chip prospects going to a slew of talent-rich teams? That's simply not a realistic outcome that's any good for the NHL.

There really is no fair way to do this. Personally I am in favor of an equal chance, snake draft. There are too many FA's over the past two years even go by the last season's standings. Teams like Pitt and Washington have already been rewarded for giving away all of their talent, its two years later now.

The best way for the league to generated interest in all markets is to market the hell out of every team getting the same chance and televising the lottery. Then to make it fair have it be a snake draft so even if a team loses they still get the first pick in the second round.

This, imo, is the fairest way to do the draft.

 

[PecaFan]

The logic around here is insane: "Since a weighted draft won't be 100% perfectly accurate, we should therefore abandon all attempts at accuracy, and go to a purely random method that is guaranteed to be as far away as possible from the purpose of the draft. 0% accuracy is far more preferable than 90%"

As a Canucks fan, I'd be embarrassed to win this lottery, when there are clearly far more deserving teams out there.

 

[Chili]

Then to make it fair have it be a snake draft so even if a team loses they still get the first pick in the second round.

I like that idea.

With no standings to base the draft order on, no matter which way it goes down it will only please those who benefit the most.

I like the idea of every team having a chance at the first pick in some type of weighted form. It would make for a heckuva interesting draw. But, to be really fair, winning the first overall pick should not mean the first pick in all rounds.

Therefore the snake draft sounds like a good idea.

 

[X0ssbar]

The logic around here is insane: "Since a weighted draft won't be 100% perfectly accurate, we should therefore abandon all attempts at accuracy, and go to a purely random method that is guaranteed to be as far away as possible from the purpose of the draft. 0% accuracy is far more preferable than 90%"

As a Canucks fan, I'd be embarrassed to win this lottery, when there are clearly far more deserving teams out there.

I can't tell you how refreshing it is to read objective posts about the draft like this!

 

[chara]

Every team will get at least one chance at the Number 1 pick.

However, those teams that have missed the playoffs the last 2-3 years will get additional shots and thereby increasing their odds. Bettman has stated this already and when he backs a proposal, he only needs 8 other owners to agree with him.

For the owners to pass a proposal without Bettman's blessing, they will need a majority of votes. Good luck getting that.

 

[VanIslander]

Random pick each and every round... now that would be fun!