So was Lindros the only one to hold out as a top level pick

[Roomtemperature]

I know sometimes there are players who can't come to terms years later after playing some college and are free to sign but was Lindros the only top level pick to do so. I know of a few in the NFL and NBA. The MLB draft is all kinds of screwed up so it happens a bit there.

Click to read more...

 

[Big Phil]

Since the draft there was always Bryan Berard in 1995. He did not want to go to Ottawa and they made a trade after the draft to get Redden for Berard. People forget this, but Berard was always booed in Ottawa after this and ironically it was in Ottawa where Berard had his major injury with his eye. He wasn't booed after that, but he was actually booed in that very game before the accident.

So there's him.

Lemieux didn't put the sweater on during his draft day either because he was negotiating with the Pens who eventually gave him what he wanted. But he didn't hold out.

So Lindros really did set a terrible precedent of the entitled 18-year old. Not only did he demand it on draft day but they did it two years earlier in the OHL. It wasn't even that Lindros could sleep on it and realize things were actually on the way up in Quebec. Because he stood firm and months later the trade happened. We can thank Bonnie and Carl for that one too.

 

[reckoning]

In 1974 Tom Lysiak said he wouldn't go to Montreal if they drafted him, then later added he wouldn't go to Toronto or Vancouver either.

In 1979 Michel Goulet said he would only play for Quebec, and if any other team drafted him he would go play in Europe instead.

In the 80s during the Ballard circus in Toronto, a few agents were advising their clients to tell the Leafs they wouldn't go there if they were drafted. At the time, it was rumoured that was why Toronto didn't take Craig Simpson in '85 when he was the top-ranked prospect.

It was mentioned here in another thread, but apparently in '83 the reason Hartford passed on Pat Lafontaine was because they had reason to believe he wouldn't sign with them.


Personally I have no problem with what Lindros did. He didn't owe the NHL or Quebec anything, and gave them plenty of advance notice about his intentions.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

Personally I have no problem with what Lindros did. He didn't owe the NHL or Quebec anything, and gave them plenty of advance notice about his intentions.

Indeed. The draft serves the interests of the NHL, not the players, and is an artificial restriction on the player's ability to offer his services to whoever he wishes to. Professional sports gets a free pass on this sort of thing, but you cannot blame a player for not merely submitting to rules that are not designed with his best interests in mind.

 

[frontsfan2005]

Since the draft there was always Bryan Berard in 1995. He did not want to go to Ottawa and they made a trade after the draft to get Redden for Berard. People forget this, but Berard was always booed in Ottawa after this and ironically it was in Ottawa where Berard had his major injury with his eye. He wasn't booed after that, but he was actually booed in that very game before the accident.

So there's him.

Lemieux didn't put the sweater on during his draft day either because he was negotiating with the Pens who eventually gave him what he wanted. But he didn't hold out.

So Lindros really did set a terrible precedent of the entitled 18-year old. Not only did he demand it on draft day but they did it two years earlier in the OHL. It wasn't even that Lindros could sleep on it and realize things were actually on the way up in Quebec. Because he stood firm and months later the trade happened. We can thank Bonnie and Carl for that one too.

Yes, I remember Berard refusing to play in Ottawa. He of course was traded with Beaupre and Straka to the Isles for Redden and Rhodes. That of course was a great trade for Ottawa, who despite Straka turning into an offensive star with the Penguins for a few years at the turn of the millenium.

While Berard was much better offensively than Redden, Wade was the much better defenseman and overall player. Berard was brutal in his own end. Getting Rhodes solidified the Senators goaltending situation, as Beaupre, who was immediately dealt to Toronto, never won another NHL game (he lost his last 27 decisions in his NHL career) and the two of them helped turn the Senators into a playoff team in 1996-97.

If Berard stayed in Ottawa, I think he'd have problems with Jacques Martin, Martin preached defense first, so unless if Berard adapted, which I doubt he would have, his time in Ottawa would have been a disappointment.

 

[IComeInPeace]

In 1974 Tom Lysiak said he wouldn't go to Montreal if they drafted him, then later added he wouldn't go to Toronto or Vancouver either.

I had never heard that about TO or Vancouver.
I'm surprised by that.
Lysiak is an underrated player. A guy that I really thought highly of.

I thought he didn't want to go to Montreal bc of their depth, and how slowly he would be eased into a full time spot.
TO: Ballard wasn't in crazy mode in 1974... So that's a little odd.
Van was a relatively new organization...why wouldn't he go to Van?

 

[BenchBrawl]

I don't really hold it against players to refuse to go play for some team or some city.

It's not like you are going to play there for a single year, it's a multiple-year obligation to move to this city and play for that team ran by that management.

Look at what happens to the guys in Edmonton.Let's say McDavid gets picked by them, why the hell would he risks ruining his career or seriously damage his early start by playing for an abysmal franchise?

You only get one shot to have a great career, 4-7 years of damage will probably ruin it.

 

[IComeInPeace]

In the 80s during the Ballard circus in Toronto, a few agents were advising their clients to tell the Leafs they wouldn't go there if they were drafted. At the time, it was rumoured that was why Toronto didn't take Craig Simpson in '85 when he was the top-ranked prospect.

I thought The '85 draft was more or less a toss up at who would go number 1, with more people leaning towards Wendel???

I do recall in 1984 Craig Redmond said he wouldn't play for Toronto if they drafted him.

 

[reckoning]

I had never heard that about TO or Vancouver.
I'm surprised by that.
Lysiak is an underrated player. A guy that I really thought highly of.

It's talked about here:

"Atlanta held the 5th overall pick in the draft and made it clear to Lysiak's agent Dick Sorkin that the Flames wanted the scoring sensation. Lysiak really wanted to go to Atlanta too, but it was highly unlikely that he would clear Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver and still be available to Atlanta.

"Sorkin told me to start telling everyone who'd listen that I didn't want to play in Canada," Tom said. "So whenever a newspaperman would interview me, I would tell them I wasn't going to play for any team in Canada."
http://blackhawkslegends.blogspot.com/2006/05/tom-lysiak.html

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Indeed. The draft serves the interests of the NHL, not the players, and is an artificial restriction on the player's ability to offer his services to whoever he wishes to. Professional sports gets a free pass on this sort of thing, but you cannot blame a player for not merely submitting to rules that are not designed with his best interests in mind.

Because that totally wouldn't cause the entire concept of parity in the NHL to break down.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

Because that totally wouldn't cause the entire concept of parity in the NHL to break down.

Even if you consider parity in the NHL to be very important, it is not the responsibility of an individual player to maintain parity in the NHL. Eric Lindros did not owe the NHL anything, and neither does any undrafted player.

As I said, the rules are not designed with the player's best interests in mind. So a player can choose to submit to those rules anyway, which is certainly his prerogative, or he can refuse to accept the restrictions that the league tries to put upon him without giving him anything in return.

Draft rules are not a contract that a draftee has agreed to. They amount to collusion among ownership to restrict what players they offer contracts to. It may benefit the league, but things like the draft and entry-level contract limits certainly are not designed with the best interests of young players in mind.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Lindros and Lemieux are the two poster boys for what not to do on draft day. I lost a lot of respect for each of them when they were picked and they never did gain it back with me.

 

[Terry Yake]

I know sometimes there are players who can't come to terms years later after playing some college and are free to sign but was Lindros the only top level pick to do so. I know of a few in the NFL and NBA. The MLB draft is all kinds of screwed up so it happens a bit there.

bryan berard is the only other one aside from lindros who refused to play for the team who drafted him in recent memory

mcdavid should do the same if the oilers draft him #1

 

[Cursed Lemon]

Even if you consider parity in the NHL to be very important, it is not the responsibility of an individual player to maintain parity in the NHL. Eric Lindros did not owe the NHL anything, and neither does any undrafted player.

As I said, the rules are not designed with the player's best interests in mind. So a player can choose to submit to those rules anyway, which is certainly his prerogative, or he can refuse to accept the restrictions that the league tries to put upon him without giving him anything in return.

Draft rules are not a contract that a draftee has agreed to. They amount to collusion among ownership to restrict what players they offer contracts to. It may benefit the league, but things like the draft and entry-level contract limits certainly are not designed with the best interests of young players in mind.

So what happens to Pittsburgh when they lose Lemieux? When they lose Crosby and Malkin?

 

[Ogopogo*]

Indeed. The draft serves the interests of the NHL, not the players, and is an artificial restriction on the player's ability to offer his services to whoever he wishes to. Professional sports gets a free pass on this sort of thing, but you cannot blame a player for not merely submitting to rules that are not designed with his best interests in mind.

If the players don't like the NHL's rules, they could always go to the KHL. They could sell insurance. There's a million other things they could do if they really have a problem with how the NHL operates.

 

[Big Phil]

Indeed. The draft serves the interests of the NHL, not the players, and is an artificial restriction on the player's ability to offer his services to whoever he wishes to. Professional sports gets a free pass on this sort of thing, but you cannot blame a player for not merely submitting to rules that are not designed with his best interests in mind.

Or they can forget making millions of dollars and punch in at a factory.

 

[Caeldan]

Does Blake Wheeler count in the fact that he was a 5th overall, and then never came to terms with Phoenix?

I know you mention that you're aware that sometimes it happens with college kids, but this is the only first rounder I can recall in recent memory it actually happening with. ELCs are pretty cut and dry (only so many bonus options you can tack on - and reportedly the Coyotes included all of them), so not coming to an agreement on one pretty much amounts to refusing to play for the team.

 

[seventieslord]

Even if you consider parity in the NHL to be very important, it is not the responsibility of an individual player to maintain parity in the NHL. Eric Lindros did not owe the NHL anything, and neither does any undrafted player.

As I said, the rules are not designed with the player's best interests in mind. So a player can choose to submit to those rules anyway, which is certainly his prerogative, or he can refuse to accept the restrictions that the league tries to put upon him without giving him anything in return.

Draft rules are not a contract that a draftee has agreed to. They amount to collusion among ownership to restrict what players they offer contracts to. It may benefit the league, but things like the draft and entry-level contract limits certainly are not designed with the best interests of young players in mind.

I get what you're saying, but the perspective completely changes if you define who the employer is.

If the employer is the team, then sure. They don't own that player, he can refuse to take a job with that employer and offer himself up to another employer.

If the employer is the league, then if you want to work for this employer you take what job you can get, work in the "department" that they start you in, pay your dues and eventually have some say in what happens to you.

 

[TheTwelfth]

Personally I have no problem with what Lindros did. He didn't owe the NHL or Quebec anything, and gave them plenty of advance notice about his intentions.

I mean, do you have to enter the draft if you don't want to? Couldn't he have signed as a FA, or can't you do that until you turn 21?

I think the NFL (and I think NBA does the same) does drafting right. There is a monetary incentive to through the draft for the players, but you can sign with any team as FA if you would rather prefer that. I hope the NHL is the same, but guess not since we have overaged players enter the draft.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

So what happens to Pittsburgh when they lose Lemieux? When they lose Crosby and Malkin?

The team suffers. But once again, it's not the responsibility of an individual player to make sure that a team they might not want to play for doesn't suffer.

If the players don't like the NHL's rules, they could always go to the KHL. They could sell insurance. There's a million other things they could do if they really have a problem with how the NHL operates.

Absolutely, and one of those millions of things they could do is challenge the NHL's rules and play on their own terms.

Bear in the mind that the NHL would literally be nothing without hockey players. This fact is why players like Lindros can challenge the system and play on their own terms if they're willing to put up the fight.

Or they can forget making millions of dollars and punch in at a factory.

They could. But they could also challenge the NHL rules to try to play on their own terms. Nothing wrong with either option.

Seems to me that Lindros did challenge the system, and still made millions of dollars. The idea that team will refuse to deal with a talented hockey player because he doesn't want to operate under the rules imposed upon him is a fiction, as cases like Lindros' have borne out. This isn't the 1950s.

I get what you're saying, but the perspective completely changes if you define who the employer is.

Sure, but it's pretty clear in this case who the employer is, in reality. It's not the league, it's the team.

 

[Iain Fyffe]

I mean, do you have to enter the draft if you don't want to? Couldn't he have signed as a FA, or can't you do that until you turn 21?

The league's rules would prevent a team from signing such an undrafted player as a free agent.

 

[Ogopogo*]

The team suffers. But once again, it's not the responsibility of an individual player to make sure that a team they might not want to play for doesn't suffer.


Absolutely, and one of those millions of things they could do is challenge the NHL's rules and play on their own terms.

Bear in the mind that the NHL would literally be nothing without hockey players. This fact is why players like Lindros can challenge the system and play on their own terms if they're willing to put up the fight.


They could. But they could also challenge the NHL rules to try to play on their own terms. Nothing wrong with either option.

Seems to me that Lindros did challenge the system, and still made millions of dollars. The idea that team will refuse to deal with a talented hockey player because he doesn't want to operate under the rules imposed upon him is a fiction, as cases like Lindros' have borne out. This isn't the 1950s.


Sure, but it's pretty clear in this case who the employer is, in reality. It's not the league, it's the team.

I do recall how much I enjoyed watching Lindros' anger and frustration at being kept out of the NHL for a full year until Quebec unloaded him. Teach the punk a lesson.

Honestly, bucking the NHL's established system reeks of an attitude problem. "It's all about me!". Garbage. Pay your dues, where you are selected and once you have earned the right to be a UFA, exercise that option. People who can't play by the rules aren't the kind of people you can win with. How many rings does Lindros have?

 

[Iain Fyffe]

I do recall how much I enjoyed watching Lindros' anger and frustration at being kept out of the NHL for a full year until Quebec unloaded him. Teach the punk a lesson.

So would you consider a university graduate a "punk" if he/she doesn't accept the first job he/she's offered, preferring to "shop around" to find the best fit for him or her? If not, why not?

Why does it matter to you what a person decides to do with respect to his/her own livelihood?

 

[Ogopogo*]

So would you consider a university graduate a punk if he/she doesn't accept the first job he/she's offered, preferring to "shop around" to find the best fit for him or her? If not, why not?

Why does it matter to you what a person decides to do with respect to his/her own livelihood?

Every NHL drafted player has that option. Go to the KHL. Go to the SHL. Go work at Walmart. They all have a million choices and they have to abide by the rules of whatever employer they pick. Pick the NHL and you follow their rules.

Why do I care? Because it directly affects my enjoyment of the NHL product. It becomes tainted when spoiled ****** think the tail wags the dog.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Why do I care? Because it directly affects my enjoyment of the NHL product. It becomes tainted when spoiled ****** think the tail wags the dog.

But based on your earlier remark, it sounds like Lindros holding out improved your enjoyment - you talked about how much it made you happy.