Rumor: No weighted draft lottery

Status
Not open for further replies.

ti-vite

Registered User
Jul 27, 2004
3,086
0
Steve L said:
They must draw the 30th pick 1st and count down until you have 2 balls left and one of them is going to get Crosby! The tension would be insane.

Mtl an T.O.... ;)
 

Deebo

Registered User
Jan 28, 2005
8,327
1,822
Toronto
I did a little bit of math

under the wieghted system..

there are 69 balls, 30 each guaranteed, then 13 for each of the last 3 season (30 - 16 playoff teams - 1 first overall team)

Under the proposed weighted lottery:
teams with 4 balls have a 5.7971% chance of winning
teams with 3 balls have a 4.3478% chance of winning
teams with 2 balls have a 2.8986% chance of winning
teams with 1 balls have a 1.4493% chance of winning

Under an unweighted lottery each team has a 3.3333% chance of winning, so teams with 3 or more balls in the weighted lottery have a better chance of winning than under the unweighted lottery.

teams with 4 balls: ATL, BUF,FLA, NYR
teams with 3 balls: ANA, CAL, CAR, CBJ, CHI, EDM, LA, MIN,NAS, PHX, PIT
Teams Better off with weighted: 15

teams with 2 balls: DAL, MTL, SJ, TBY,WAS,
teams with 1 balls: BOS, COL, DET, NJD, NYI, OTT, PHI, STL, TOR, VAN
Teams Better off with unweighted: 15

so it's even
 

Blueshirts4me

Registered User
Mar 11, 2003
101
0
Visit site
King_Brown said:
Explain how that is fair? And provide hard examples with your answers also, as to why its not fair to give every team a chance, since there was no season, and no way in the world knowing what the results would of been.

There is no perfect solution. But a 1/30 lottery is far from the best way they can do it. The draft is supposed to supplement teams in hope to make them better. I believe that every team should have a shot at Crosby, but not an equal one. A team like the Tampa Bay Lightning, who were awful for years and got better through the draft, but now that they are good, should not be able to capitalize on the season's cancellation. Why should a team like the Detroit Red Wings have as good of a chance at Crosby as the Rangers, when they have made the playoffs for 14 straight years, while the Rangers have missed it for 7?

I will guarantee you that this would not be as big of a deal, if the Rangers were good. If you are not a Rangers fan, you do not know disappointment. We have been kicked in nuts time and time again, and this would be just another blow. Sooner or later, we will realize that we should start wearing a cup. But that's not the point. The point is, that if a rich team like the Rangers, was not bad, this wouldn't be an issue. The Rangers are no longer a rich team. Under a cap, all the teams are essentially the same. It is ironic that people hate seeing the rich get richer, but that is what an equally weighted draft would do. So get over it, and stop kidding yourself. The Red Wings were not going to be bad, the Devils would have still kicked our butt, and the Tampa Bay Lightning are still defending cup champions. So, why the hell should they have a shot at Crosby, without having to suffer the pain of mediocrity?
 

HSHS

Losing is a disease
Apr 5, 2005
17,981
233
Redondo Beach, Ca
The Messenger said:
That fair that they where having a bad year, but that happens to a lot of teams..

Good morning M... you should have known this would bring me out.

They had two bad years out of three with an overpaid, underperforming team. The only good year was sandwiched between the 2 bad ones and resulted in another Caps collapse from 3-1 to 3 straight loses to TB. :eek:

The Messenger said:
There are two sides two every story though .. Its never a good plan just because you are having a bad season to destroy the team .. They could also have made a trade or two in an effort to right the ship or changed the coach ..

As is said over and over again, this lost season was something out of the ordinary. The Caps would have traded some players had this lockout not been immenent. But since it was coming and each player was not going to be part of a 2005-2006 Caps team, they were shipped to support the future.

The Messenger said:
In keepiong in line with this tread .. The Caps for financial purposes rid themselves of all their big contracts on big market teams and now in turn the League wants to punish those teams indirectly via a cap system for helping out the struggling teams.. ie . Detroit has Robert Lang now under a big $$ deal and may have to let Stevie Yzerman retire as a cap casulaty..

:shakehead
You're being a little absurd here... the cap was a goal of the NHL prior to the 2003-2004 season, and hence before the Caps player realignment (see I can speak like a lawyer too). So everyone knew what was coming, and Ott, NYR, LA, Det, Bos, Buf, and Col all knew what was coming and the salary committments of the players THEY traded for... Yes they VOLUNTEERED to take these guys.

The Messenger said:
Had the Caps kept all their players and had a off year and received Ovechkin as a result they certainly would not be a weak team on paper like you are making them out to be now in the new CBA ..
:help:

They are actually stronger post CBA due to these trades... but still not even good on paper.

Had these trades not happened:
Kono: not part of 05-06 Caps team. Johansson won't be either.

Jagr: would be part of 05-06 Caps team. But addition by subtraction as the salary dump freed up other players for them to build a MORE competive 05-06 team.

Carter: Would not be part of 05-06 team. Aulin will be.

Lang: Would be part of 05-06 team. But as with Jagr, this is a salary dump. Though his 3.8M post rollback is reasonable to top line center. This is the only deal I disagreed with. Green and Fleischman will not be part of 05-06 Caps

Bondra: Would not be part of 05-06 team (though he may be resigned). Laich and 05 2nd round pick will not be part of 05-06 team.

Nylander: Was not part of 03-04 team due to injury and would not be part of 05-06 team. Neither will 06 2nd round pick (think that was the compensation)

Gonchar: Would not be part of 05-06 team. Morrisson will. Shultz and Yunkov will not.

The Messenger said:
They did control their own destiny as a direct result of their own actions, much different then a recent expansion team Columbus, Atlanta, Columbus who are starting from the bottom up ..

Same with the NYR .. The had the highest payroll and worst results .. Not a team that deserves to be rewarded for failure ..

Yes the Caps decided to make themselves into a near expansion team. You will not find many Caps fans that care about getting SC, we just believe that losing picks between 2 & 10 are more problematic.
 
Last edited:

Jaded-Fan

Registered User
Mar 18, 2004
52,446
14,304
Pittsburgh
Steve L said:
Im happy with this, the big market team lost a whole bunch of money pandering to the small market teams. The least they could do is give everyone an equal chance, although it would kill me if he ended up on the Leafs or Devils.

They must draw the 30th pick 1st and count down until you have 2 balls left and one of them is going to get Crosby! The tension would be insane.


I am impressed with the history rewrite actually. But reality is that if hockey were not very very broken for everyone there would not have been the unity among the owners necessary to get the deal they are about to get. And this is not about big markets pandering to small markets. In fact small markets signed off on a deal with minimal revenue sharing which the players rejected. The revenue sharing elements came from the players for THEIR interests. Not the small markets are complaining, and not that it is not very very good for the future health of the game, but let us get straight where the revenue sharing push came from, ok?
 

HSHS

Losing is a disease
Apr 5, 2005
17,981
233
Redondo Beach, Ca
Deebo said:
I did a little bit of math

under the wieghted system..

there are 69 balls, 30 each guaranteed, then 13 for each of the last 3 season (30 - 16 playoff teams - 1 first overall team)

Under the proposed weighted lottery:
teams with 4 balls have a 5.7971% chance of winning
teams with 3 balls have a 4.3478% chance of winning
teams with 2 balls have a 2.8986% chance of winning
teams with 1 balls have a 1.4493% chance of winning

Under an unweighted lottery each team has a 3.3333% chance of winning, so teams with 3 or more balls in the weighted lottery have a better chance of winning than under the unweighted lottery.

teams with 4 balls: ATL, BUF,FLA, NYR
teams with 3 balls: ANA, CAL, CAR, CBJ, CHI, EDM, LA, MIN,NAS, PHX, PIT
Teams Better off with weighted: 15

teams with 2 balls: DAL, MTL, SJ, TBY,WAS,
teams with 1 balls: BOS, COL, DET, NJD, NYI, OTT, PHI, STL, TOR, VAN
Teams Better off with unweighted: 15

so it's even
But the there are teams with 2 balls that would prefer to lose their .4% chance in order to keep the other teams at 1.4%
 

Deebo

Registered User
Jan 28, 2005
8,327
1,822
Toronto
heshootshescores said:
But the there are teams with 2 balls that would prefer to lose their .4% chance in order to keep the other teams at 1.4%

maybe, but if i were montreal or tampa, i'd be more concerned about a team like atlanta or florida who already have a strong team for the future with players like Heatley, Lehtonen (sp?), and Kovalchuk or Horton, Luongo and Bouwmeester then teams like colarado or toronto who have pretty weak collections of future talent.

Could you imagne heatly and kovalchuk flanking crosby on the powerplay?
 

Jaded-Fan

Registered User
Mar 18, 2004
52,446
14,304
Pittsburgh
With the percentages that some have posted above as to who benefits (roughly 15 to 15 split) I could actually see one part of the rumor to be plausible . . . a coalition to reject Bettman's plan. However, for vastly different reasons, Bottom Ten and Top Ten teams together rejecting Bettman's plan, but then all bets are off. I can not see enough teams supporting one team one ball to get . . . how many votes would be needed? Simple majority? More?
 

B-MEL

Registered User
Mar 25, 2002
631
0
La Habra, CA
Visit site
Here is the Only Possible FAIR Draft Lottery System.

Criteria:

#1 - Any Team that has won a Cup is OUT

(Canadians, Rangers, Bruins, Leafs, Hawks, Wings, Flyers, Islanders, Oilers, Flames, Penguins, Devils, AVS, Stars and Lightning are OUT!!)

#2 - Any team that has been to the Finals since 1994 is OUT

(Ducks, Hurricanes, Sabres, Capitals, Panthers, Canucks are OUT)

#3 - Team must have been in Existance in their Current City Prior to 1991!

(Sharks, Coyotes, Thrashers, Senators, Predators, Wild & Blue Jackets are OUT)

#4 - Teams Must have Started in the 1967/68 Season

(Blues are OUT)

So after all the criteria has been met. The Draft Lottery will take place and the Winning team will be:


The Los Angeles Kings!!!


Do the math.. It's a given
 
Last edited:

HockeyCritter

Registered User
Dec 10, 2004
5,656
0
The Messenger said:
That fair that they where having a bad year, but that happens to a lot of teams..

There are two sides two every story though .. Its never a good plan just because you are having a bad season to destroy the team .. They could also have made a trade or two in an effort to right the ship or changed the coach ..

Obviously you don’t follow the Capitals nor do you have any understanding of what has happened the past six years. Not only did they change coaching staff (twice! – firing one in the middle of a season) they brought players up, they demoted players, they brought players in, they rewarded players they drafted with new contracts, and they made trades. Nothing worked. It wasn’t just a single bad season; it was three missed playoff in six years, it was the inability to win more than three playoff games in three six years.

It was abundantly clear that that the roster wasn’t going to win. Hell 90-percent of the times the players acted like they did not care nor did they put forth any effort to win. The team was middle of the road for far too long; just good enough to get into the playoffs, but not good enough to win. Bad enough to get bounced first round every year, but not bad enough to finish bottom five and properly rebuild. Blow up the team, get rid of the overpaid underachieving aging players and replace them with younger, hungrier, and yes, cheaper talent. That is the cyclical nature of sports, you’re up and then you’re down.


The Messenger said:
In keepiong in line with this tread .. The Caps for financial purposes rid themselves of all their big contracts on big market teams and now in turn the League wants to punish those teams indirectly via a cap system for helping out the struggling teams.. ie . Detroit has Robert Lang now under a big $$ deal and may have to let Stevie Yzerman retire as a cap casulaty..


The only contract that the Caps moved for purely financial reason was Jagr’s. Every other move was made to rebuild the team. Gonchar was headed for arbitration; he was moved for picks and a quality defensive prospect. Bondra was set to be a UFA; you know the old adage can’t let a guy walk for nothing, Konowalchuk was set to be a UFA (never mind the fact that he asked to be traded three times over the course of two seasons). Lang filled a need for Detroit, if they didn't want him they wouldn't have traded for him.

If you think Detroit will let any player take precedence over Stevie Y. you’re delusional. Detroit certainly knows the value he brings to the organization and the city, they won’t let him go. And if it were truly such a concern, perhaps the Wings shouldn’t have so willingly taken on Lang’s contract nor should they have signed those other top heavy contracts knowing what was on the horizon. The Wings, along with every other team, knew this CBA fighting was looming. I don't blame teams from signing big one-year deals in hopes of making the Final, especially if they were pretty close. They made those decisions knowing full well what was ahead. Some teams elected to ignore the signposts while some prepared themselves. Each team reaps what they sowed.

The Messenger said:
Had the Caps kept all their players and had a off year and received Ovechkin as a result they certainly would not be a weak team on paper like you are making them out to be now in the new CBA ..

They did control their own destiny as a direct result of their own actions, much different then a recent expansion team Columbus, Atlanta, Columbus who are starting from the bottom up ..

So because the Caps are not an expansion team, merely a team that elected to rebuild in the face of a new economic landscape they should be penalized?

The Messenger said:
Same with the NYR .. The had the highest payroll and worst results .. Not a team that deserves to be rewarded for failure ..

Sure the Rangers spent stoopid (yes, I intentionally misspelled stupid) money and have been horrendously mismanaged. That mismanagement, more so than the dollars spent, have resulted in missing the playoffs for seven years. How i that “rewarding†them?
 
Last edited:

jacketracket*

Guest
HockeyCritter said:
You mean how they managed to be in last place (or tied for last) before the trades happened? That's last place with Jagr, Gonchar, Bondra et al . . . . .
Don't think that was the case, and I seriously doubt that the trades "helped" improve their lot, regardless. How did the Caps finish, with the same players, in previous seasons?

My beef isn't with the questionable* moves made by the Caps down the stretch, it's with a Caps fan who attempts to suggest that another --- legitimate --- cellar-dweller is somehow less "deserving" of the top pick.


Edit: "questionable" moves only in regards to their impact on Washington's draft position.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DARKSIDE

Registered User
Nov 17, 2003
1,053
0
go kim johnsson said:
I've said it before, I'll say it again, New York is the 28th most popular place the NHL wants Sidney Crosby to be in. The Islanders and Devils are 29th and 30th.

Ha, and Booby Clarke deserves the #1 pick. I'm sure most fans would be happier if Sid landed on the Island or Jersey over Philly. Even Sid probably rather play with a winning organization over Philly (30 + years since your last cup?). Plus he'd be playing with his good buddy Parise.
 

HockeyCritter

Registered User
Dec 10, 2004
5,656
0
jacketracket said:
Don't think that was the case, and I seriously doubt that the trades "helped" improve their lot, regardless. How did the Caps finish, with the same players, in previous seasons?

My beef isn't with the qestionable moves made by the Caps down the stretch, it's with a Caps fan who attempts to suggest that another --- legitimate --- cellar-dweller is somehow less "deserving" of the top pick.
As a Cap fan, I don’t think our “chances†should be as good as Pittsburgh or the Rangers, nor do I think it should be equal to or worse than Philly, Toronto, or Detroit.

And for what it's worth, yep - - the Caps were contending for last place by early December 2003 - - - - that's when Cassidy was given his walking papers. When the team didn't turn it around by January, Leonsis had enough of the players . . . he ordered the blowup and we began rebuilding in earnest. . . . actually, I'm surprised he waited that long considering how the team laid down and died in the Tampa series the previous spring.
 

Jester

Registered User
Jul 9, 2004
34,076
11
St. Andrews
DARKSIDE said:
Ha, and Booby Clarke deserves the #1 pick. I'm sure most fans would be happier if Sid landed on the Island or Jersey over Philly. Even Sid probably rather play with a winning organization over Philly (30 + years since your last cup?). Plus he'd be playing with his good buddy Parise.

disregarding cups... the flyers are the most winning team in the NHL over the last 30 years....

plus, i'm sure he'd hate to enter the NHL and get real good with Carter, Richards, Pitkanen, etc...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jacketracket*

Guest
HockeyCritter said:
As a Cap fan, I don’t think our “chances†should be as good as Pittsburgh or the Rangers, nor do I think it should be equal to or worse than Philly, Toronto, or Detroit.
As a CBJ fan, I think all 30 teams should receive the same lottery odds. The Jackets, the Caps, the Pens, ... , have already been compensated for their last season of poor play.

That said, I take exception to the "my team's suckiness is more legitimate than yours" -style arguments.
 

HockeyCritter

Registered User
Dec 10, 2004
5,656
0
jacketracket said:
As a CBJ fan, I think all 30 teams should receive the same lottery odds. The Jackets, the Caps, the Pens, ... , have already been compensated for their last season of poor play.

That said, I take exception to the "my team's suckiness is more legitimate than yours" -style arguments.
I understand where you're coming from . . . . . but I still want my top five pick dagnabbit!!!!

And I agree about the “suckitude†arguments . . . . however, just as you don’t like those, I’m not a fan of the “well, the new CBA is going to decimate my team†line of thinking.

:)
 

HockeyCritter

Registered User
Dec 10, 2004
5,656
0
heshootshescores said:
Yes there are actually 2 angry Caps fans in this world... sure there are more. :)

I’m sure there are . . . . but I think we’re the only two rational angry Cap fans.
 

DARKSIDE

Registered User
Nov 17, 2003
1,053
0
Jester said:
disregarding cups... the flyers are the most winning team in the NHL over the last 30 years.... moron.

sorry... that was rude.

plus, i'm sure he'd hate to enter the NHL and get real good with Carter, Richards, Pitkanen, etc...

Don't think so! A$$h...!!
 

Jester

Registered User
Jul 9, 2004
34,076
11
St. Andrews
go kim johnsson said:
I've said it before, I'll say it again, New York is the 28th most popular place the NHL wants Sidney Crosby to be in. The Islanders and Devils are 29th and 30th.

i couldn't disagree more... this league is desperate for the Rangers to be a premier team in the league. TV ratings alone would be a massive boost for the league and if those idiots up north could have spent their money wisely the last few years it would have been a major boost to any negotiating power the league had with the NHL.

as i've said, it is no mistake that Ranger/Flyer games, Colorado/Detroit, etc... are consistently put on sundays in the spring so they would get aired nationally... they draw the biggest TV number.
 

DARKSIDE

Registered User
Nov 17, 2003
1,053
0
Jester said:
disregarding cups... the flyers are the most winning team in the NHL over the last 30 years.... moron.

sorry... that was rude.

plus, i'm sure he'd hate to enter the NHL and get real good with Carter, Richards, Pitkanen, etc...


30 years is 30 years. Opps, I meant 33 years!
 

Boltsfan2029

Registered User
Jul 8, 2002
6,264
0
In deleted threads
Blueshirts4me said:
The Red Wings were not going to be bad, the Devils would have still kicked our butt, and the Tampa Bay Lightning are still defending cup champions. So, why the hell should they have a shot at Crosby, without having to suffer the pain of mediocrity?

From 1997 or so to 2002, I don't believe the Lightning finished higher than 27th overall. We were the poster children for mediocrity!

Heck, we were worse than mediocre...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->