1 for 1 in next draft

[The Maltais Falcon]

The fairest way is to have 1 ball for each team. Is it the way I want it? Not really, I would rather the Capitals have a better shot but if you view it from other teams perspectives you get a better idea why it should be an equal oppurtunity situation. You can never tell what's really going to happen with a team... look at the Capitals in 2003-2004 with a good team on paper (well offense ) finishing 3rd last overall.

My thoughts exactly, and I'm a Thrashers fan - if they did the system that was rumored where the last five years' records are combined then we'd have one of the best shots of all at landing the first pick but I know that's completely unfair.

We were "rewarded" for our prior years' suckiness with Heatley, Kovalchuk, and Lehtonen. Pittsburgh's been "rewarded" with Whitney, Fleury, and Malkin. Columbus has gotten Nash, Zherdev, and that goalie whose name I'm forgetting. Yes, high picks go to bad teams but the bad teams have already gotten their high picks to compensate for being bad. With no season played and a new CBA that will force many top teams to shed talent which will presumably be absorbed by the bad teams, there's a clean slate. Everyone should have the same shot at the first pick. It's what's fair. I would love it if they just gave Crosby to Atlanta, but that wouldn't be fair to the other 29 teams.

 

[NYR469]

on people accusing others of being 'biased' don't make me laugh. lets all be honest and admit that we are ALL biased and want a system that benefits our team. we can talk about 'fair' but i don't think anyone will care about fairness if crosby puts their teams sweater on.

fans of teams at the bottom want a weighted system because it benefits them, fans of teams at the top want a unweighted system because it benefits them--and before anyone says 'how does it benefit them if everyone has the same chance?' here is how, since the options are a weighted or unweighted system, the unweighted system decreases the odds of the bottom teams and increases the odds of the top teams. therefore it benefits the top teams compared to the alternatives.

that said i want to see a weighted system that will benefit the rangers, but i'm not going to sit here and say that it is only 'fair' if a bad team gets him because i could careless if pittsburgh or columbus gets him vs another team. if the rangers end up with a crap pick i'll be pissed and it won't matter if they had a 3% chance or a 60% chance going in. the odds won't make me feel any better if they end up picking 24th. it might not be 'fair' but i'm being honest. i don't care how many ping pong balls my team has i just care about whether we get crosby or another top pick or not.

as far as people saying it would be wrong if a good team got crosby, i think you are directing the arguement in the wrong direction. you shouldn't be arguing over those teams having a 1% chance vs a 3% chance, that really isn't that big a difference and as long as every team has a shot at any pick 1-30 there is a chance that a top team gets a top pick and a bad team gets a low pick regardless of the odds. what you should be arguing is in favor of a tiered system that would prevent teams from jumping or falling 20+ spots in the lottery and only giving non-playoff teams a shot get a shot at the top picks. i'm not saying that a system like that would be fair but if you want to argue that a top team shouldn't get the pick under any circumstances than argue that they shouldn't even have a chance not over 1-2% difference in odds.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

I'm a huge Montreal fan and I don't see how either system would give them a benefit in any way. In reality, all you pissed off fans are caring about yourselves. It's not only about the first overall pick. What about Montreal. Do you think I would be happy if we ended up with the 27th or 28th pick while a team like Detroit or Colorado gets lucky with a 9th or 10th overall. Not at all. But I'm willing to accept something like that for the simple oppurtunity at getting a top 15, top 10 or even 3 pick. Some of you guys should be spending your time thanking god that your team hasn't been contracted instead of trying to argue for every little morcel of things arguable.

Yes, your are displaying that lack of bias with every word . . . 'But I'm willing to accept something like that for the simple oppurtunity at getting a top 15, top 10 or even 3 pick' . . . I remain in awe.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Thank You Jaded fan for putting an end to this foolish thread. Finally a reliable source. May this thread RIP forever.

............. and I never said that she (the hockey reporter for fox) was reliable, merely that a far more legit source (though as a FYI this article is also basically the hockey section in the Sporting News this week which arrived today . . . give her any more credibility being quoted and vetted by two sources, Fox and TSN?) . . . as it is in print by someone who is put out there as a sports reporter and therefore theoretically has some connections and sources . . . has said the exact opposite in writing than the rumor that this thread is based upon. Said it at the same time of after this thread starting rumor was said (The linked article was posted to Fox last night). According to her it will be a weighted lottery and my point is that after all the reporting that we have seen so far in this lockout, to think that no reporters would have heard this rumor and put it into print when they put every piece of garbage they can find into print (you know the 'reporters' that I am referring to) defies credulaty.

 

[rt]

I would prefer it if the NHL used the standings from the last season that was actually played (it's all we have to go on). Completely random is my second choice (snaking subsequent rounds). Using averages from 3, 4, or 5 seasons is very stupid, to me (the less complicated, the better).

 

[DarthSather99]

............. and I never said that she (the hockey reporter for fox) was reliable, merely that a far more legit source (though as a FYI this article is also basically the hockey section in the Sporting News this week which arrived today . . . give her any more credibility being quoted and vetted by two sources, Fox and TSN?) . . . as it is in print by someone who is put out there as a sports reporter and therefore theoretically has some connections and sources . . . has said the exact opposite in writing than the rumor that this thread is based upon. Said it at the same time of after this thread starting rumor was said (The linked article was posted to Fox last night). According to her it will be a weighted lottery and my point is that after all the reporting that we have seen so far in this lockout, to think that no reporters would have heard this rumor and put it into print when they put every piece of garbage they can find into print (you know the 'reporters' that I am referring to) defies credulaty.

when I said "reliable" I really meant an actual person with an actual name that works for an actual news reporting corporation. That kind of source is much more reliable to me that some poster who heard something on a radio ....

 

[MontrealCruiser_83*]

when I said "reliable" I really meant an actual person with an actual name that works for an actual news reporting corporation. That kind of source is much more reliable to me that some poster who heard something on a radio ....

This rumor is from Yvon Pedneault. Believe it or not, he's an actual person who also works for an actual news reporting corporation. I'm not a fan of his but he's pretty "in the know".

Pedneault also toiled for Montreal's two other daily newspapers during his career. "La Presse" on one occasion, where he again followed the NHL's Canadiens and "Le Journal de Montreal", on two separate instances, the first as a hockey writer and the second as their sports editor. Along with Pedneault's work as a reporter, he has also worked with four separate television stations in the Montreal area; CBC French, TVA, TQS and RDS. At each station he was one of the primary correspondents that covered the Habs. It is believed that Pedneault is the only person to work full-time for all three Montreal daily papers, as well as every television station that has carried Montreal Canadiens games.

Pedneault also spent a short stint as the General Manager of a team in the Quebec Major Junior Hockey League, acquiring a keen knowledge of hockey that helped produce educated articles on both the game and its players. Finally, he conducted a radio hot-line show for a few years with Quebec's oldest radio station, CKAC. Currently Pedneault is the colour commentator for hockey games on RDS (Reseau-des-Sports), TSN's French sister station in Quebec.

Yvon Pedneault, the 1998 recipient of the Elmer Ferguson Memorial Award as selected by the Professional Hockey Writers' Association.
http://www.legendsofhockey.net/html/ind98.htm

 

[The Maltais Falcon]

on people accusing others of being 'biased' don't make me laugh. lets all be honest and admit that we are ALL biased and want a system that benefits our team. we can talk about 'fair' but i don't think anyone will care about fairness if crosby puts their teams sweater on.

Go back and reread my post. I'm a Thrashers fan, and Atlanta would benefit from a weighted lottery more than it would one where every team gets an equal chance, yet I think the latter option is the one that's most fair and the one that should be used.

Just because you're biased doesn't mean everyone else is.

 

[WhiskeyYerTheDevils]

Going back 3-4 years is not fair. Do you honeslty think a system of 1 for 1 will be more acurate than reusing last years standings?



So now they should reward good teams with high picks they CLEARLY WOULDNT HAVE HAD for locking out their players? Cool, go NHL.



Its obviously not a fresh start. Teams still have better players then others and therefore have a head start.

The better teams are not being rewarded, they'll have the same oppurtunity as all the other teams, which is how it should be. And we cannot be certain that Tampa would still be the best team. How many times has a team won the Stanley Cup then missed the playoffs the next year. Its happened atleast a few.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

The better teams are not being rewarded, they'll have the same oppurtunity as all the other teams, which is how it should be. And we cannot be certain that Tampa would still be the best team. How many times has a team won the Stanley Cup then missed the playoffs the next year. Its happened atleast a few.

No, we can not peg teams to exactly how they would have finished. But we certainly can pretty accurately tier the teams. As I have often said, look to Vegas, they do it all the time, and come pretty close to the actual finish more often than not. There may be the odd exception now and then, but when we are dealing with the uncertainties this calls for better to be mostly right than entirely wrong, no?

 

[MontrealCruiser_83*]

No, we can not peg teams to exactly how they would have finished. But we certainly can pretty accurately tier the teams. As I have often said, look to Vegas, they do it all the time, and come pretty close to the actual finish more often than not. There may be the odd exception now and then, but when we are dealing with the uncertainties this calls for better to be mostly right than entirely wrong, no?

Not in a multi-million dollar industry. All owners have a significant amount of money invested in these franchises and when something this important and this ambiguous arises, you have to deal with it without giving one team an advantage over another.

 

[thedjpd]

I think some people need to read up on the concept of chaos, and the chaos theory.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Not in a multi-million dollar industry. All owners have a significant amount of money invested in these franchises and when something this important and this ambiguous arises, you have to deal with it without giving one team an advantage over another.

That is just the point. The appx. top ten loaded teams already have a huge advantage in competing now . . . . next year . . . and for a few years to come . . . over the appx. bottom ten teams. Fans of those teams, and those teams themselves, can not help but feel a huge greed factor of teams already stacked demanding top five pick chances equal to the sucky teams. And fans of teams who have suffered through putrid hockey while you all got to enjoy yourselves these past few years only had the draft and future to look forward to. Taking this as well away seems pathetic to those of us who actually had to sit through a few seasons of terrible hockey, and know that we will be doing the same for at least the next year or two. To end up picking 30th as well is really a kick in the teeth.

 

[Blane Youngblood]

All I can say is that no matter what the format. If a team wins the lottery and has been in the playoffs the last few years then the NHL will lose any fans that are currently on the fence about coming back to root for their teams, it will be the biggest joke in professional sports. The NHL better consider this draft and it's positional format very seriously. They are in grave danger of being extinct.

Do you honestly think that casual fans care that much about the draft?

 

[MontrealCruiser_83*]

That is just the point. The appx. top ten loaded teams already have a huge advantage in competing now . . . . next year . . . and for a few years to come . . . over the appx. bottom ten teams. Fans of those teams, and those teams themselves, can not help but feel a huge greed factor of teams already stacked demanding top five pick chances equal to the sucky teams. And fans of teams who have suffered through putrid hockey while you all got to enjoy yourselves these past few years only had the draft and future to look forward to. Taking this as well away seems pathetic to those of us who actually had to sit through a few seasons of terrible hockey, and know that we will be doing the same for at least the next year or two. To end up picking 30th as well is really a kick in the teeth.

How do you know? I think that's just a convinient excuse that fans of the bottom teams constructed to justify their own greed. The face of the NHL is going to change drastically and there's no way to predict which teams will be good and which teams will be bad under the new economic model. Is it out of the question to suggest that perhaps 6 teams that didn't make the playoffs in '04 will make it in '06? I think that's proof enough that the times are changing.

This is a business first and foremost. You can't punish teams for being better and more efficient businesses. So what if they've made the best product for the past half-dozen years. You can't say they would of done so last year so why punish them in the lottery for something totally unrelated to the usual determinant of the draft order -- performances a year and more removed from the draft.

 

[Highbuds]

I don't understand why we should give the teams that have had top picks in the last four drafts a better shot at number one this year. So all the good young talent can be on the same few teams? What about the teams that are condenders and lost a year of todays top players prime, lost playoff revenue and a shot at the cup. Why not reward them for there loss with a better shot a number one? We give the bad teams the best shot at number one in the past so they can get better. So, that would mean that the teams that have had the worst record in last four years should have been better last year and thus, not worthy of the number one pick.

 

[NYR469]

for what its worth, someone on the rangers board said that they emailed daly about this and got a reply that there is no truth to the rumor. of course he might just not want to say anything till it is official.

 

[neophool*]

For Carp's sake guys, the answer is obvious. Lock all the GMs in a big room with PS2s and play a simulated season on NHL 2k5.

anyways, the point of the draft is to reward the teams that had the worst records with the highest picks. That mindset should not change, season or no season. The NHL should make every effort to uphold the core purpose of the draft, and that is to reward the weakest teams with the highest picks. no season just makes it tougher to justify the order. heh heh.

 

[Jack Canuck]

For Carp's sake guys, the answer is obvious. Lock all the GMs in a big room with PS2s and play a simulated season on NHL 2k5.

I could go for this solution.

 

[miteymouse11]

i think that all the non-playoff teams have a shot at say the top 8 picks or so. then when it gets past pick 8 add the first round playoff losers. After maybe the 15th pick add the rest of the teams or maybe the second and third round playoff losers each team have one ball and, depending on the last seasons finish when your teams ball is added to the lottery.

 

[DARKSIDE]

Exactly. I think for the NHL to survive, it will be a fair agreement, though we all know alot of people will be upset. Just wait and see, I think whatever they come up with will be a great compromise...the future of the league probably rides on whoever gets Crosby.

I thought the survival of the league rides on a new CBA? And if we pick 30th, I won't give a hoot, just as long as we pick 31st.

 

[loadie]

I don't think there's any way of making everyone happy with this years draft. Personally, I don't agree with a one to one. You have teams that for years have been elite teams due to their abilities to buy talent, Rangers not included in the ability part. Now, they will have the same chance to get a generational talent? Sure, it can be argued that teams that draft poorly or are poorly managed shouldn't be rewarded with a talent like Crosby, but why should a team that has the ability to try and buy a championship, showing no fiscal responsibility or ability to maintain a farm system have the same opportunity? Teams that have been elite teams should feel lucky to have any chance at Crosby, it wouldn't of happened without the lockout. They certainly shouldn't have the same shot as poorer teams, the draft isn't suppose to work like that. Some folks really love having their cake and eating it too.

 

[borro]

The casual fan does not give a damn who drafts where. The only people who will be upset by a 1 to 1 formula will be bad teams and fans of bad teams. And, if their team doesn't win, fans who think the system was unfair.

I disagree. Poor teams don't like it regardless. It is taking advantage of the strike in a most basic way. Tell me Ottawa would have had a shot at Crosby if there had been no strike. No way. I think the draft should be in the order of the last finish. Caps would not get Crosby but it would still be right. No lottery nothing. Just choose. Not unless we had total and complete free agency with a salary cap would I see any scenario where teams would get a shot at the one player who might be able to carry a team.

 

[scout46]

Does it really matter who gets Crosby? If he lives up to the hype, he changes the game again. I don't care if he plays in Detroit. Or Philly. Or Pittsburgh. It makes no damn difference.[/QUOTE]

It makes no difference to you, living where you do. But it might to some fans living in an NHL city.

 

[me2]

30 ball equal odds is the way to go.

I was a big backer for a weighted lottery but that was back when we though it might be a $45m cap and 24% rollback. The best teams would still have been the best teams and kept their rosters mostly intact.

$36m cap, luxury tax starting around $30m, buyouts can't return... This changes everything. If teams like the Avs have to walk away from Sakic/Blake, Detroit buying out Lidstrom and others, then they deserve at shot at Crosby.

1. These teams deserve some kind of compensation for losing big chunks of their teams. If it is just a pitifully small 3.3% shot at Crosby why is anyone complaining?

2. One ice, the best could be comprehensively damaged. The bottom feeders with capspace could be loaded up to the max on cheap UFAs.

If anyone can safely say these teams haven't got the potential to lose enough talent to throw the rankings into disarray I don't know what I can say to convince you.