xander
Registered User
MojoJojo said:What about teams that traded draft picks from the cancelled draft?
they will carry over. I guess you could consider it a postponed draft rather than a cancled draft.
MojoJojo said:What about teams that traded draft picks from the cancelled draft?
MojoJojo said:What about teams that traded draft picks from the cancelled draft?
HockeyCritter said:[/i]
If you cannot base a draft on seasonal results . . . cancel it.
Permanently raise the draft age to 19 (something that has been proposed by the league in the past).
Sure, every one has got their knickers in a twist over Crosby. But it isn’t about the number one pick, it’s about picks 2-30 and I still haven’t heard a reasonable, equable solution put fort to address that issue.
EDIT: Because sometimes Critter’s fingers move faster than her brain
NYR469 said:if sidney crosby wasn't the top pick then they would probably just do that without even thinking about it. but they look at drafting crosby as way too important and they will make him the poster boy for the future of the nhl as soon as the lockout ends.
PecaFan said:It's both. The biggest fall I'm aware of is 20 spots. So you can pretty much guarantee that none of the top ten teams would have got the #1 spot overall.
Ultimately, it's this simple: We have a choice. We can implement a system that's accurate, but not 100% perfect, or go completely random, that is a system that will nearly 0% accurate.
Which should we choose?
To know where I fall, when I asked my employees when their programming projects would be finished, I asked them to be as accurate as possible in their estimations, rather than spin a wheel that said "one day", "two weeks", "three months", "four years"...
Not even trying to be as accurate as possible simply because you can't be perfect is insane.