25 teams want equal chance for Crosby

[DARKSIDE]

For a moment, let's take it as a given that a high draft pick is the reward for sucking.

I guess the reward for not sucking is winning some games?

If the non-sucky teams were denied their reward this year, how in good conscience can you give the sucky teams their reward?

Now, that's an excellent point!

 

[futurcorerock]

...so what happens if neither the worst teams in the league nor the ones with bigger markets win the Crosby lottery?

"With the first overall pick, Buffalo/Edmonton/New York (Islanders)/St Louis choose from the Rimouski Oceanic; Sidney Crosby"

I can see fans from all over being angry with that, except ofcourse fans of said team.

 

[norrisnick]

Where did I ever say anything like that. I basically argued a fairly simple proposition. The draft is a vehicle to get the first chance at new talent to the teams whose cupboards are most the most bare. You argued basically that the new talent should because of what is basically a loophole be, for this year, given an equal chance among loaded and berift of talent teams. Sorry, but you can not sugar coat reality and that is reality.

Here's your bare cupboard ranking. Reverse and weight the lottery.
http://www.hockeysfuture.com/orgrankings.php

 

[Epsilon]

What's funny, is that if a team like the Wings or Avs had crashed and burned this season, like San Jose a few years ago, made it into the lottery, and won the first overall pick, I bet people like Jaded-Fan would still be complaining. They'd be whining about how Crosby was "stolen" from the teams that "deserved" him by a big-market team that "tanked".

 

[HSHS]

Sure billysaberfan or joecapitalfan might get steamed if he goes to a major market like Chicago or LA.

Hey... how do you know what I think???

 

[X0ssbar]

You know.. all this squabling over who should get what kind of pick got me thinking.. I would really, just once, love to hear an honest opinion from a fan of a team who was considered a Stanley Cup contender this year... no spins, no dogging other franchises - just an honest opinion... If I was that fan (and lord I wish I was) my response would be something like this:

"Look, I know in all reality my team would have probalby made the playoffs this year and we would have had a decent shot at drinking (insert favorite drink) out of the cup.... but the fact of the matter is that just like the other 29 teams, I didn't get to watch a single fuggin game last year and I'm pissed.....

While you clowns argue over your 2 billion bones I have been robbed from my favorite past time... No more NHL on Saturday nights, no more screams from the wife to turn the channel, no more 75 dollar lower bowl seats, no more 8 dollar beers -- basically you idiots at the NHL/PA have totaly screwed me out of my favorite winter activity... I feel like due to my dedication and loyalty to this beaten down league that I deserve something..better yet, my team deserves something... and now its time for a little payback...

... that payback should come first in the form of a high draft choice.. yea, my team would have made the playoffs, yea we were considered stanley cup contenders this year but I DON"T CARE! you took hockey from me i want to take the "next one"... simple as that..... you as a league and the 'PA can deal with the other '29 teams.. but for me, to get me back as a fan - it all starts with Crosby...."

Now as a Columbus Blue Jackets fan - just gurantee me a spot in the playoffs next year (or whenever) and I'm a happy camper... you all can keep Crosby...

 

[HSHS]

I said because they had the number 1 pick last year, not because they suck in general and have had top 5 picks consistantly over the last few years. I also said this was MY OPIONION! I don't criticize you for whoever your favorite team is, or for presumably being at least in your teens and having a cartoon character as your avatar, I wouldn't do it, I am not in grade school anymore, but again everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

I think she is stating the fact that many teams, especially in the SE, had multiple years of top 5 picks. So excluding washington (for have the first top 5 pick in 5 years and only the 2nd time since 1981) does not follow any historical trend.

While I do value anyone's opinion, please make sure you have your facts straight to validate that opinion.

 

[DARKSIDE]

So wait - your saying teams with winning records should get the highest draft picks?

Somebody should indeed contact Quebec/Colorado and Ottawa and tell them that they only had rights to high draft picks every other year or so no matter how bad their records were during their down years. When they ask why? Just tell them they are whiney babies and they should have become stanley cup contenders over night.

When did 'common sense' and 'rationality' leave this discussion?

Common sense? Let's try some...Since there was no season played, there are no winning or losing records to go by for the 2004/2005 season.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

What's funny, is that if a team like the Wings or Avs had crashed and burned this season, like San Jose a few years ago, made it into the lottery, and won the first overall pick, I bet people like Jaded-Fan would still be complaining. They'd be whining about how Crosby was "stolen" from the teams that "deserved" him by a big-market team that "tanked".

And if that happens, more ower to the Wings or Avs. At least they would have earned the pick the same way other teams do. And they would have suffered the same things that the losing teams do (even San Jose suffered from it) like lost reveues from ticket sales, concessions, mechandise, etc. I know I would have zero problem with any team getting the first pick that way. Washington did it. Good on them.

 

[pei fan]

Who's to say the team with first pick wouldn't take Brule?

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

You know.. all this squabling over who should get what kind of pick got me thinking.. I would really, just once, love to hear an honest opinion from a fan of a team who was considered a Stanley Cup contender this year... no spins, no dogging other franchises - just an honest opinion... If I was that fan (and lord I wish I was) my response would be something like this:

As a Calgary and Tampa fan I can say that NEITHER of my favorite teams deserve the first pick. They played too well when hockey was last played and don't deserve the pick. I would actually feel embarassed if they got it. And that also includes the many doomsayers around here who are calling Calgary a flash in the pan and not likely to repeat their success and are sure to hit the bottom of the league when the game starts back up. I don't care! The Flames and the Bolts were both playoff teams the last time the league was in action and they performed to a level where the expectation of the first pick overall never enters into your imagination.

To be honest with you, when it came to this draft I have never considered the possibility of getting Crosby because the normal reality is that it would be an impossibility without trading up. I've been looking at other players and am more focused on them. Crosby doesn't exist in my framework so I haven't even thought about the possibility of drafting him.

 

[I in the Eye]

For a moment, let's take it as a given that a high draft pick is the reward for sucking.

I guess the reward for not sucking is winning some games?

If the non-sucky teams were denied their reward this year, how in good conscience can you give the sucky teams their reward?

Great point...

Let's take it as a given that the Stanley Cup is the reward for being great... Two opposite ends of the same 'success ranking' spectrum... The #1 pick is the reward for being the worst overall in the season (team was bad enough to be in the lottery, and lucky enough to win the pick), the Cup is the reward for being the best overall in the season (team was great enough to be in the run, and lucky enough to win the cup)... Where the 'year's season' is the combination of the regular and playoff seasons...

Some are arguing that it's perfectly fine for there to be a draft this year (even though the season doesn't exist)... Do these same people argue that there should be a Stanley Cup rewarded this year (even though the season doesn't exist)? How is one ok (the draft), but the other not (the Stanley Cup)? What is the justification why one makes sense but the other doesn't, when historically, both have been rewarded based on the performance during the year's season?

Some are arguing that until proven otherwise, TB is the best team and Pitt is the worst team - based on the 2003-2004 season... Because of this, Pitt is the most deserving of the #1 pick in the 2004-2005 season... I assume that the argument is that TB is then also the most deserving of the Stanley Cup in the 2004-2005 season - the NHL should just hand TB the Stanley Cup for 2004-2005... For those who don't agree this is the best method, perhaps have an equal chance lottery (to be most fair to all teams)... For those who don't agree, perhaps have a weighted lottery based on the past 3/5 year playoff success...

How is one justified (rewarding the #1 pick in 2004-05), but the other not (rewarding the Stanley Cup in 2004-05)?

 

[norrisnick]

Personally I don't wish and hope that the Wings get Crosby. Bobby Ryan would do nicely.

 

[X0ssbar]

Common sense? Let's try some...Since there was no season played, there are no winning or losing records to go by for the 2004/2005 season.

uhhh.. yeah.. I think we've all got that part figured out.. That is why the league is looking to use records over the past 3 or 4 years.. You can use "common sense" and "rationality" and something called "forecast" to make an educated guess..

We've been down this road before so I know we'll agree to disagree.

 

[Epsilon]

Great point...

Let's take it as a given that the Stanley Cup is the reward for being great... Two opposite ends of the same 'success ranking' spectrum... The #1 pick is the reward for being the worst overall in the season (team was bad enough to be in the lottery, and lucky enough to win the pick), the Cup is the reward for being the best overall in the season (team was great enough to be in the run, and lucky enough to win the cup)... Where the 'year's season' is the combination of the regular and playoff seasons...

Some are arguing that it's perfectly fine for there to be a draft this year (even though the season doesn't exist)... Do these same people argue that there should be a Stanley Cup rewarded this year (even though the season doesn't exist)? How is one ok (the draft), but the other not (the Stanley Cup)? What is the justification why one makes sense but the other doesn't, when historically, both have been rewarded based on the performance during the year's season?

Some are arguing that until proven otherwise, TB is the best team and Pitt is the worst team - based on the 2003-2004 season... Because of this, Pitt is the most deserving of the #1 pick in the 2004-2005 season... I assume that the argument is that TB is then also the most deserving of the Stanley Cup in the 2004-2005 season - the NHL should just hand TB the Stanley Cup for 2004-2005... For those who don't agree this is the best method, perhaps have an equal chance lottery (to be most fair to all teams)... For those who don't agree, perhaps have a weighted lottery based on the past 3/5 year playoff success...

How is one justified (rewarding the #1 pick in 2004-05), but the other not (rewarding the Stanley Cup in 2004-05)?

There we go! We can have a lottery for the draft picks and a lottery for playoff spots, maybe a 4 team mini-tournament for the Stanley Cup? Washington and Pittsburgh can have their precious draft weighting, while the spots in the Cup tourney are weighted in favour of Tampa Bay, Detroit, Philadelphia, Vancouver, and so on.

 

[DARKSIDE]

uhhh.. yeah.. I think we've all got that part figured out.. That is why the league is looking to use records over the past 3 or 4 years.. You can use "common sense" and "rationality" and something called "forecast" to make an educated guess..

We've been down this road before so I know we'll agree to disagree.

And I remember someone doing the math by using the records of the last 4 years and you know what, Tampa Bay actually has a better chance then Wasington at the top pick. Is that using rational and common sense?

 

[Jaded-Fan]

And I remember someone doing the math by using the records of the last 4 years and you know what, Tampa Bay actually has a better chance then Wasington at the top pick. Is that using rational and common sense?

That is a product of Washington falling quite a bit in an averaging (reflecting the selloff that they engaged in last season). They fall to something like 17th, Tampa Bay something like 16th. To be honest picks from 16 - 30 in most drafts are not that far apart, I can live with that result much more than Detroit or a similar team ending up in the top five where it makes a huge difference.

Any more red herrings to toss out? You all have a ton of them.

 

[norrisnick]

Any more red herrings to toss out? You all have a ton of them.

Yeah, I addressed your "bare cupboards" comment from earlier.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Yeah, I addressed your "bare cupboards" comment from earlier.

At work, no time to dive into that link yet . . . will do so later tonight though. But until then, without even looking, isn't it intuitive who has the bare cupboards and who does not? Or more importantly who did in 2004-5 the year we are reconstructing?

 

[bennysflyers16]

Just done reading all this, wow !!!
As a lifetime Flyer fan, I consider myself lucky the last few years of being able to cheer and root for a winning team. Do we deserve Crosby, absolutely not, A bad season for the Flyers would be like finishing 10th in the league, so there is 100% no way we would have finished last. BUT, teams like Boston, who had a great reg. season last year, meaning they would of picked in the bottom 10 ( not 100% sure where exactly, but not the point ) they had tons of free agents, who is to say that they would of been in the bottom say 8 this year. They may have picked higher this year, we don't know. This applies to the bottom 10 teams from last year, this year the worst team could have finished 10th worse and vice-versa. So, do the Flyers deserve the #1 pick, no, but how do you know for sure. Give everyone a chance, but weigh it heavily for the chronic bad teams, and we know who they are.
On another side note, every year I have a fishing trip in the middle of the bush on May long week-end, I always am worrying at this point of the year if I am going to miss a Flyer game ( Last year I missed Game 7 vs T-Bay), but his year we are arguing about crap like this, FRUSTRATING.

Peace

 

[norrisnick]

At work, no time to dive into that link yet . . . will do so later tonight though. But until then, without even looking, isn't it intuitive who has the bare cupboards and who does not? Or more importantly who did in 2004-5 the year we are reconstructing?

Depends on your definition of "cupboards." I see it as the young up and coming talent, blue-chippers or otherwise. A bare cupboard would IMO, be the team with the fewest and worst prospects.

 

[MacDaddy TLC*]

They are now all non playoff teams, if you haven't noticed by your black television screens. All are non playoff teams. All teams have been drastically hurt on and off the ice to try and save the unworthy. All teams deserve an equal shot at a top pick.


God I am sick of these small market fans: No appreciation for the sacrifice the big market teams have made to try and save the sorry not worth saving franchises, they want big market teams to give them money (Revenue Sharing), and then don't want to give anything back in return. Screw them all. lockout goes until they are forced to fold!

 

[Dave is a killer]

They are now all non playoff teams, if you haven't noticed by your black television screens. All are non playoff teams. All teams have been drastically hurt on and off the ice to try and save the unworthy. All teams deserve an equal shot at a top pick.


God I am sick of these small market fans: No appreciation for the sacrifice the big market teams have made to try and save the sorry not worth saving franchises, they want big market teams to give them money (Revenue Sharing), and then don't want to give anything back in return. Screw them all. lockout goes until they are forced to fold!

as a fan of a small market team, that understands THE BIG PICTURE ... I am of the belief that IF the league gets revenue sharing/then the GMs/Owners of the bottom 5 teams of the last 5 years in terms of record are going to have to give up the idea of getting another ungodly prospect

 

[mooseOAK*]

Just done reading all this, wow !!!
As a lifetime Flyer fan, I consider myself lucky the last few years of being able to cheer and root for a winning team. Do we deserve Crosby, absolutely not,

Deserve is an interesting word, no team deserves anything. A high draft pick is awarded to a team that did poorly the season before whether they actually even tried to win or not and not because they suffered some hardship.

Since there was no season to tell us who sucked badly enough I believe that every team has a right for the chance to pick first.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

But the thing is, nothing is DEFINITE in a lottery situation. They could announce tomorrow that all 30 teams will get equal shot at the No. 1 pick, in return for a solid revenue-sharing plan...and when the balls are shown the Columbus Blue Jackets may still walk away with the No. 1 pick...just as the weighted lottery system would have wanted it.

So that's why I am in favor of such a system, especially if it helps with the revenue-sharing plan. Just because a Detroit has a better CHANCE at winning the lottery, it doesn't mean they'll win the lottery.