draft lottery proposal by Gary B

[Colorado Avalanche]

Draft sucks anyway.... bad teams gets always best players.

SO THAT WOULD BE VERY FAIR TO HAVE 1,92% CHANCE TO HAVE CROSBY........................................................

 

[RangerBoy]

When the Rangers aren't stuck in the mud for 7 years, hockey is as big in NYC as any of the other sports are. People really don't remember how the market was in the 70s, 80s and early 90s. And when the Rangers come back into success, the market will be that way again. Crosby could be one major step on that path. And when the Rangers are good, and they have a star like Crosby on the team, the league benefits. The Rangers have a fan base that spans the country. Rangers games on ESPN and NBC will experience huge bumps in ratings when the team is good. Having a successful NYR team is on of the best marketing developments the league could hope for, and Crosby makes that happen just that much faster.

As for the one who made the statement that Gretzky and Messier taking them to the conference finals in 97 didn't do anything for the ratings... huh? Back that up, because I sincerely doubt what you just said... actually, I don't doubt it. Interest in hockey was still high at that point, it really couldn't have increased. One of the biggest reasons hockey's popularity has slowed over the last 5 years is because the Rangers, the Blackhawks and the Kings have all sucked. When those teams were extremely competitive, the league was growing. It's not the only factor, but it's a big one.

"Unless he is in a Yankee or Met uniform there is no time or inclination to be bothered covering him here regardless of what he does on the ice. It's a year-round baseball market with basketball and football fighting for what's left."

Do you even listen to New York talk radio? The Jets and Giants get precisely as much coverage as the Mets and Yankees, until it's obvious they're not going to be good this season. The same thing happens to the Mets, the same thing happened to the Yankees in the late-80s and early-90s. Do you even read NY papers? Same deal. And when the Rangers were good? Again, same deal. When the Knicks were good? Again, same deal. People's memories are too short.

Do the Knicks still play in New York?

 

[joepeps]

SO if I understand many posts.
For the betterment of hockey let New york have Crosby. It will bring back tons of fans and help the NHL overall.

Well if that's what it takes BUT not for free.

The Yankees spend like crazy but the fans don't care as long as the Yankees have the best playes and win.

So let them pay. Let the club that gets crosby sell him.
20million cash. + 2 first rounders.
The New York fans won't care as long as they get Crosby.

You lost me... but like I have been saying.. there shouldn't be a draft... All the plays who shoul dbe drafted this year go to whatever farm team they want for 1 year... and next year.. worst team gets first pick... so it works like this...

2 draft years combined into 1... Crosby and Kessle int he same draft....

Team 1 : Picks 1st
Team 2 : Picks 2nd
Team 3 : Picks 3rd
Team 4 : Picks 4th
Team 5 : Picks 5th
Team 5 : Picks 6th
Team 4 : Picks 7th
Team 3 : Picks 8th
Team 2 : Picks 9th
Team 1 : Picks 10th

thats the only fair way....

 

[NYIsles1*]

Rangers get Crosby and start winning, ESPN will take notice as well as the NY Post, Daily News, Times, Mike Lupica, etc.. Bet on it.

Why? Just for a little reference the Rangers were nine games over five-hundred in
Dec 2002 in first place which was the year the Isles were called New York's Hot Hockey team by Espn:

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/shanoff/011231.html

The Rangers received the same one article on gameday they received in 2003-04.

Mike Lupica was the man in the eighties who called
Nassau Coliseum " Fort Neverlose" in 2004 before the lockout he wrote " If the Rangers folded tomorrow 18,200 people would care and that's it"...He has no interest in hockey unless it's a quick comment to compare the Betuzzi hit to WWE so he never has to acknowldge hockey.

A few weeks later Mike Viccaro wrote the exact same words in the Post about the Rangers.

 

[Chayos]

Name me 3 teams that are likely to even lose 2 players under the various proposed systems, especially with a 24% rollback. I love seeing some posters, and this is not aimed at you but what I have seen generally, argue in posts like this how gutted their team is going to be and then in other threads argue how their teams not only will not be gutted but talking about which star players they will be adding to already loaded teams. The hypocracy of holding those two thoughts in one head boggles my mind.

Colorada: Foersberg blake and Sakic all make
huge money and only one will fit on the team unless tehy carve 2 players like Hejduk or tanguary or foote instead. They will lose at least 2.

Toronto belfour, sundin both make above 8 million under the old cba and if you add up the payroll they won't be able to keep both unless they carve hard in the middle which will mean more than 2 players.

Philly: even assuming they buy out Leclaire they will have to cut down and not sign and free agents. I am guessing Amonte and Kapanen.

While not all teams will be hurt by this and some teams will have to actually go on a spending spree to fill roster spots for next season(ie Bos, Chi)

The reality is the NHL will have even more parity after the Cap deal is put in as teams will not be signing expensive players for any where near the money and so team that need to move up to the Salary floor will be able to sign players like this for less money to give some star power.

I am willing to bet the new CBA will have a lower UFA and it will kick in as soon as the deal is signed. It would give more free agents for teams to choose from and help to keep the salaries a bit lower.

 

[joepeps]

You lost me... but like I have been saying.. there shouldn't be a draft... All the plays who shoul dbe drafted this year go to whatever farm team they want for 1 year... and next year.. worst team gets first pick... so it works like this...

2 draft years combined into 1... Crosby and Kessle int he same draft....

Team 1 : Picks 1st
Team 2 : Picks 2nd
Team 3 : Picks 3rd
Team 4 : Picks 4th
Team 5 : Picks 5th
Team 5 : Picks 6th
Team 4 : Picks 7th
Team 3 : Picks 8th
Team 2 : Picks 9th
Team 1 : Picks 10th

thats the only fair way....

and if you really want to balance out the league. (this will sound fantasy league type lol) everyone in your farm team and players with only 1-2 years exprience in the nhl stay on your team.. everyone else becomes a FA, and you draft your team... lol

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Colorada: Foersberg blake and Sakic all make
huge money and only one will fit on the team unless tehy carve 2 players like Hejduk or tanguary or foote instead. They will lose at least 2.

Toronto belfour, sundin both make above 8 million under the old cba and if you add up the payroll they won't be able to keep both unless they carve hard in the middle which will mean more than 2 players.

Philly: even assuming they buy out Leclaire they will have to cut down and not sign and free agents. I am guessing Amonte and Kapanen.

While not all teams will be hurt by this and some teams will have to actually go on a spending spree to fill roster spots for next season(ie Bos, Chi)

The reality is the NHL will have even more parity after the Cap deal is put in as teams will not be signing expensive players for any where near the money and so team that need to move up to the Salary floor will be able to sign players like this for less money to give some star power.

I am willing to bet the new CBA will have a lower UFA and it will kick in as soon as the deal is signed. It would give more free agents for teams to choose from and help to keep the salaries a bit lower.

That was one player on each of three teams that you cited, not two. But move that aside for a minute. The players left on these teams, even in your worst case scenerio set forth above on the three teams that you got to pick as in the worst shape salary cap wise will really suck won't they? The meek have inherited the earth, huh? Can we just stick a fork in the 'we will be gutted by the new CBA' argument already? It does not hold up well under even the most superficial of scrutiny does it?

 

[Jag68Sid87]

If this kid lives up to his tremendous hype, it won't matter. He wouldn't need a major market/major hockey market, the media will come to him.

Think of other young superstar-type players in hockey (or other NA sports for that matter). Big market, little market, market that some people apparently don't give a damn about; did not for one minute hurt the status of these players. As long as they were that good, the media coverage come to their doorstep.

Absolutely correct!
Look, Crosby is either going to do great things for an already strong market or potentially save a fledgling market. Either way, he's just going to do great things for whatever market he lands in.

It's up to the NHL and hockey in general to lift this kid to greater and greater things from a league-wide standpoint. I don't think the NHL is going to go out of its way to place him in a specific market. They should simply be happy that Crosby will definitely help one of its 30 markets much in the same way Mario saved Pittsburgh.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Isn't that the whole point. Who cares about Columbus, people in Columbus do. Well you know what, there are a lot more Ranger fans in NY then there are Blue-Jacket fans in Ohio, bet on it. And you are correct, more people hate NY teams then any other city, so, that means even more fans tune in just to root against them. Just like the Yankees, they sell out more road games then any other team.

And when New York teams are thought to be dominating people start to tune the sport out. I know lots of people that used to be baseball junkies, but the Yankees (and the Braves) domination really turned quite a few people off. I don't think the NHL can chance that alienation.

Also, care to explain how other markets build themselves up when all the talent gets shifted to the "big markets" because its good for the game? Hasn't the last decade proven that theory to be BS? The NHL was at its height when the whole shift toward big markets happened and all the "stars" migrated to the big spenders. Now the game is in the toilet. Its an interesting fact that people have been ignoring. Having the stars in the big markets actually hurt the sport more than it helped it. Interesting little twist don't you think?

 

[Tawnos]

Why? Just for a little reference the Rangers were nine games over five-hundred in
Dec 2002 in first place which was the year the Isles were called New York's Hot Hockey team by Espn:

http://espn.go.com/page2/s/shanoff/011231.html

The Rangers received the same one article on gameday they received in 2003-04.

Mike Lupica was the man in the eighties who called
Nassau Coliseum " Fort Neverlose" in 2004 before the lockout he wrote " If the Rangers folded tomorrow 18,200 people would care and that's it"...He has no interest in hockey unless it's a quick comment to compare the Betuzzi hit to WWE so he never has to acknowldge hockey.

A few weeks later Mike Viccaro wrote the exact same words in the Post about the Rangers.

umm... the Rangers were 9 games over .500 in Dec 2002? I think you mean Dec 2001 there buddy. And in the 2001-2002 season, the Rangers finished with 80 points to the Isles 96.. which was the hot NY team?

 

[Mess]

I would personally love to see him in Atlanta or Nashville if he doesnt end up in Dallas. Would really help hockey in those areas(although I dont think Nashville needs that much help as it is).

In the bigger picture of Bettman parity vision in the NHL would it not be better if proven NHL Stars as UFA went to these small market deep south teams to supplement the great young Stars they have already been given . .

The whole purpose of this new CBA is to give the best opportunity to the weak for the best well known, marketable, established players to bring all teams closer together in on ice competition .. What is going to put butts in the seats after all ??

How about Eric Lindros centering Heatley and Kovlachuk , or Chris Pronger stabilizing the young Nashville team and Pavol Demitra adding some offense.. Or Alexei Kovalev and Paul Kariya running shotgun with Rick Nash in Columbus .. How about Zigmund Palffy turning Mario Lemieux passes into 50 goal seasons or Glenn Murray and Teemu Selanne adding some vet experience in Florida for Mike Keenan, or Federov & Zhamnov combining to make the Ducks attack for dangerous ??

What again is the purpose and goal of any NHL team .. Someone please remind me ??

Unless of course these teams want both the best young talent and best UFA talent available, but that might seem a bit greedy would it not ??

 

[NYIsles1*]

NYIsles1,

The Islanders aren't the same as the Rangers, despite being in the same market. Put Crosby on the Island, and he'll never get the big media attention unless the Rangers are good. Same with the Devils.

Comparing the Isles, Rangers and Devils today is like comparing the SI Yankees with the Brooklyn Cyclones. The big media attention is not going to cover him daily like they will in other more visible hockey markets. The seventh, eighth and ninth teams have a very limited media.

Let's see... everything you said (with the exception of the 97 point) was just reiterating the current state of the media coverage. WFAN is a dinosaur anyway.
Francessa and Russo don't talk about hockey, but even in '94 they barely did.

WFAN is the pulse of the New York fan and these shows want no part
of discussing hockey. The only hockey Russo/Francesa remember are from traveling with the Rangers in 1994.

If they would ever generate interest, Mike and Mike on ESPNradio would talk about the Rangers. Wally and the Keeg did when they were on the air.

Wally and the Keeg even did games from the Coliseum when Espn radio had the Isles rights. Peter (from Long Island) Laviolette was on weekly. Milbury goes onto WFAN and in return they do a rare show from the Coliseum. But discussion of hockey games in studio? Never.

I should have said "have you read NY papers?" Because when the Rangers were good, it made the other 2 teams major news as well.

All I can say is the Isles never needed the Rangers for headlines when they were champions but like the 80's and early 90's that's over for good. What I can say is today both teams badly need the rivalry with one another which could not even generate extra coverage on gamedays in 2003-04.

The Devils winning the Cup in '95 got more attention to the Devils then they have before or since, even with the 2 Cup wins. Why? Because the Rangers kept hockey in the forefront by being competitive.

Hockey was in the forefront in 95? I must have missed that one. The Isles did not qualify for the playoffs, the Rangers finished under five-hundred and were swept by Philadelphia. The Devils pulled a surprise by sweeping Detroit.

All you've said is that hockey hasn't gotten major coverage recently in NY. Well, I say that's because the Rangers suck.

You hit the nail on the head even if you do not want to admit it. Hockey is not newsworthy in this market. There is nothing the Isles, Rangers or Devils can do with Crosby from October to April to change that. Good luck knocking Yankees-Mets off the back pages come inter-league games or Boston games.

Nothing like this was happening in 94.

 

[CGG]

Good to see you backpedal from your previous 'Formerly elite teams will be gutted with UFA's and a salary cap' even if you had to be made to think about it to do so. Quite a difference between 'gutted' and not being able to sign a bright shiny new FA isn't there? And with that admission, how about going all the way and admitting that it is highly unlikely the truly elite talent teams would have had there been a 2004-5 season, or even will next year, fall very far . . . at least next year, and the sad sack teams almost entirely are not competing for any cups anytime soon. Go on, it will feel good to admit it. And with that in mind, why in the world would you let an elite team go top ten, bottom team pick last, in percentages as high as is proposed here?

Alright smart guy, here we go. You tell me the Leafs won't be gutted.

Under contract for 2005-06:

Mats Sundin $9,000,000
Owen Nolan $7,404,009
Ed Belfour $6,000,000 (+ at least 1/3 of his $2MM signing bonus)
Bryan McCabe $4,550,000
Tomas Kaverle $3,000,000
Ken Klee $2,500,000
Darcy Tucker $2,100,000
Matt Stajan $1,060,000
TOTAL = $35,614,009

That's 8 players. Count 'em, eight. Already at $35.6 million, which is MORE than the NHL's last salary cap proposal already. You need to fill 23 roster spots, so 15 more to go.

RFA's: Mostly fill-ins, Berg, Antropov, Belak, Kilger, Pilar, Perrott made a combined $5.5 million in 04-05.

UFA's: Leetch, Mogilny, Roberts, Nieuwendyk, Domi were under contract for a combined $21 million for 2005-06.

You seem to be smarter than me, how do they fit the $35.6 million already committed plus about $5.5 million on RFA's and approx $21 million on their UFA's under a $35 million salary cap? Even a $40 million salary cap? Completely impossible. Even if you factor in a 24% rollback, which may not happen.

This means the Leafs are gonna lose a lot more than 2 or 3 players. The Leafs are about to be gutted.

 

[Tawnos]

And when New York teams are thought to be dominating people start to tune the sport out. I know lots of people that used to be baseball junkies, but the Yankees (and the Braves) domination really turned quite a few people off. I don't think the NHL can chance that alienation.

Also, care to explain how other markets build themselves up when all the talent gets shifted to the "big markets" because its good for the game? Hasn't the last decade proven that theory to be BS? The NHL was at its height when the whole shift toward big markets happened and all the "stars" migrated to the big spenders. Now the game is in the toilet. Its an interesting fact that people have been ignoring. Having the stars in the big markets actually hurt the sport more than it helped it. Interesting little twist don't you think?

Nobody was talking about domination, just success.

 

[xander]

Simply the fact that the Rangers have a better chance than the poster children of this lockout (Edmonton, Calgary) indicates this system is not fair.

The Rangers, as all of you know, have had among the highest, if not the highest payroll in the NHL all those years that they missed the playoffs. They could buy Tampa Bay and Calgary both, and still have change in their pockets. This scheme rewards their incompetence and punishes the younger teams who built from scratch. It also penalizes teams like the Oilers who did the best they could with an exchange rate handicap and limited funds as compared to New York or Toronto.

Wow, just wow. So it's not enough to loose to get a high draft pick, you have to do it in a certain way? This is rediculous, the purpose of weighting the draft is to ensure that talent gets to bad teams. The Rangers have been an awful team, what other criteria should they have to meet?

Everyone seems to be hung up on the question of who 'deserves' the top pick, as if there where some moral component in this equation. Morals have nothing to do with it, the top picks should go to the teams that need them the most, not the teams that have been declared deserving because they've 'done it in a certain way.' And the teams that need top picks are the teams that have done the poorest on the ice. Last time I checked the other important awards in hockey (like the stanley cup) where given out acording to wins and losses, why should the draft be any differant?

 

[DARKSIDE]

SO if I understand many posts.
For the betterment of hockey let New york have Crosby. It will bring back tons of fans and help the NHL overall.

Well if that's what it takes BUT not for free.

The Yankees spend like crazy but the fans don't care as long as the Yankees have the best playes and win.

So let them pay. Let the club that gets crosby sell him.
20million cash. + 2 first rounders.
The New York fans won't care as long as they get Crosby.

Again, I'm a Devils fan and have no interest in the Rangers getting Crosby, except getting to watch him play on a nightly basis. However, I rather see him play for the Devils on a nightly basis, but in reality, it's highly unlikely. No, my posts were pertaning to where this kid could better help the NHL, should he fulfill is potential and hype, NY or Columbus? Sorry, but it's New York. That's just a fact.

 

[Matty]

Not the worst idea for a 'weighted' lottery (though I'm against the idea of a weighted lottery anyways)

But a better one IMO would be...one ball to all teams and an extra ball to those teams which missed the playoffs AND were not awarded with a top 3 pick that year.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Alright smart guy, here we go. You tell me the Leafs won't be gutted.

Under contract for 2005-06:

Mats Sundin $9,000,000
Owen Nolan $7,404,009
Ed Belfour $6,000,000 (+ at least 1/3 of his $2MM signing bonus)
Bryan McCabe $4,550,000
Tomas Kaverle $3,000,000
Ken Klee $2,500,000
Darcy Tucker $2,100,000
Matt Stajan $1,060,000
TOTAL = $35,614,009

That's 8 players. Count 'em, eight. Already at $35.6 million, which is MORE than the NHL's last salary cap proposal already. You need to fill 23 roster spots, so 15 more to go.

RFA's: Mostly fill-ins, Berg, Antropov, Belak, Kilger, Pilar, Perrott made a combined $5.5 million in 04-05.

UFA's: Leetch, Mogilny, Roberts, Nieuwendyk, Domi were under contract for a combined $21 million for 2005-06.

You seem to be smarter than me, how do they fit the $35.6 million already committed plus about $5.5 million on RFA's and approx $21 million on their UFA's under a $35 million salary cap? Even a $40 million salary cap? Completely impossible. Even if you factor in a 24% rollback, which may not happen.

This means the Leafs are gonna lose a lot more than 2 or 3 players. The Leafs are about to be gutted.

Can you keep everyone? Unlikely. But Gutted as some claim? Not even close. The teams who were stanley cup contenders 2003-4 will be so still, the new CBA is not going to have a huge effect on that. It will however mean that when age does catch up with these teams in a couple of years they can not simply buy and reload, and yes eventually all will have rebuilding years. But to claim that it will be some dramatic cataclysm next year is disengenuous at best, usually (wrongly as I have shown above) used to justify a grab for Crosby in threads like this.

 

[kdb209]

So having Crosby in New York is a good thing because of what? Because they are a media center? Great. So Crosby gets buried behind coverage of the Yankees, the Mets, the Giants, the Jets, the Knicks, etc. and ignored like the Rangers normally are (with the exception of their rise from the ashes ever 54 years). Instead Crosby could end up in a growing market like Columbus where the Blue Jackets are the only game in town and will get all the coverage he deserves and generate a buzz.

Getting all the local coverage only so that does what for the game? Sure helps Columbus but it's about 30 markets remember? Having him in a big market like NY in my mind would actually benfit the game ..and IF he was succesfull enough to take them deep woudl be awesome. Look at the highest point of "Buzz" the NHL has had in the last 10-20 years, 1994, the year the Rangers won the cup..

But the New York sports market has fundamentally changed since 1994. There is now year round frenzy for the Yanks (and to a lesser extent he Mets) - there is no longer an MLB offseason. New York has become an oversaturated sports market. Even if the Rangers did miraculously become good again, they would still rank behind: Yankees, Yankees, Yankees, Mets, Knicks, Giants, Jets, and Yankees, Yankees, Yankees. And god help them if the Knicks ever get good again and when the Nets move to Brooklyn.

No. New York is about the worst place for the league for Crosby could end up. A major US city, yes - NYC - no. Crosby in Chicago, LA, Philly, Boston, Atlanta, Detroit, hell even San Jose, would be better for the league than NYC.

 

[Tawnos]

Comparing the Isles, Rangers and Devils today is like comparing the SI Yankees with the Brooklyn Cyclones. The big media attention is not going to cover him daily like they will in other more visible hockey markets. The seventh, eighth and ninth teams have a very limited media.

You just aren't getting it. You really just aren't. You think that's an accident? You think that's because the Yankees are sooooo good? No, it's because the Rangers suck. NO ONE IS DENYING THAT THERE ISN'T GREAT HOCKEY COVERAGE IN NYC TODAY. What you don't seem to understand is that can change. And all it takes in the Rangers success.

WFAN is the pulse of the New York fan and these shows want no part
of discussing hockey. The only hockey Russo/Francesa remember are from traveling with the Rangers in 1994.

WFAN was the pulse of the NY fan. WAS. ESPN has taken more than half of the FAN's listening audience. Read up on this.

Wally and the Keeg even did games from the Coliseum when Espn radio had the Isles rights. Peter (from Long Island) Laviolette was on weekly. Milbury goes onto WFAN and in return they do a rare show from the Coliseum. But discussion of hockey games in studio? Never.

Because except for the obligatory coverage, NY media doesn't give a rat's ass about the Islanders.

All I can say is the Isles never needed the Rangers for headlines when they were champions but like the 80's and early 90's that's over for good. What I can say is today both teams badly need the rivalry with one another which could not even generate extra coverage on gamedays in 2003-04.

The Rangers were good in much of the 80s and early 90s. What I'm telling you is that, were the Isles to win a Cup now, the NY media wouldn't give a damn. Were they to win a Cup in 1997, the NY media would care. 7 years of the Rangers not making the playoffs means that NY media outlets don't care about hockey.

Hockey was in the forefront in 95? I must have missed that one. The Isles did not qualify for the playoffs, the Rangers finished under five-hundred and were swept by Philadelphia. The Devils pulled a surprise by sweeping Detroit.

Hockey WAS in the forefront of '95. And you need to get your facts straight. The Rangers were swept by Philly in the 2nd round of the playoffs after knocking off the 1st place Nordiques. There was media attention on hockey because the Rangers were involved and competitive. The Yankees weren't drawing any attention at that time (they would later that year), and neither were the Mets. All the Rangers had to compete with were the Knicks, and the two, when the teams are good, promote each other. They don't really compete.

You hit the nail on the head even if you do not want to admit it. Hockey is not newsworthy in this market. There is nothing the Isles, Rangers or Devils can do with Crosby from October to April to change that. Good luck knocking Yankees-Mets off the back pages come inter-league games or Boston games.

Nothing like this was happening in 94.

Nobody's talking about changing the state of the NY media market in 8 months. Oh, and the Garden in the playoffs in April? Somehow, I believe that it will knock the Yankees-Mets or Yankees-Sox off the back pages. Why do I believe that? BECAUSE IT HAPPENED WITH THE KNICKS LAST SEASON.

 

[MontrealCruiser_83*]

If you've missed the playoffs twice or more in the past 3 years: 3 Balls
If you've missed the playoffs once in the past 3 years: 2 Balls
If you haven't missed the playoffs in the past 3 years: 1 Ball

Teams that have consistently sucked shouldn't be given any noticable advantage. Pittsburgh and company have had their shot at franchise players for a few years now. In a system that will most likely value young stars higher than veteran stars due to contractual reasons, several teams (15 or so) should have a significant chance at winning. If it was up to me, I'd give every single team an equal shot. It's pretty clear we're heading into a brand new NHL and it should be a level playing field.

 

[DARKSIDE]

Comparing the Isles, Rangers and Devils today is like comparing the SI Yankees with the Brooklyn Cyclones. The big media attention is not going to cover him daily like they will in other more visible hockey markets. The seventh, eighth and ninth teams have a very limited media.


WFAN is the pulse of the New York fan and these shows want no part
of discussing hockey. The only hockey Russo/Francesa remember are from traveling with the Rangers in 1994.


Wally and the Keeg even did games from the Coliseum when Espn radio had the Isles rights. Peter (from Long Island) Laviolette was on weekly. Milbury goes onto WFAN and in return they do a rare show from the Coliseum. But discussion of hockey games in studio? Never.


All I can say is the Isles never needed the Rangers for headlines when they were champions but like the 80's and early 90's that's over for good. What I can say is today both teams badly need the rivalry with one another which could not even generate extra coverage on gamedays in 2003-04.


Hockey was in the forefront in 95? I must have missed that one. The Isles did not qualify for the playoffs, the Rangers finished under five-hundred and were swept by Philadelphia. The Devils pulled a surprise by sweeping Detroit.


You hit the nail on the head even if you do not want to admit it. Hockey is not newsworthy in this market. There is nothing the Isles, Rangers or Devils can do with Crosby from October to April to change that. Good luck knocking Yankees-Mets off the back pages come inter-league games or Boston games.

Nothing like this was happening in 94.

I don't believe NHL is stupid enough to hope that the Rangers can one day knock off the Yankees off the back page. I believe what the NHL would like is to have a successful Ranger team as well as a strong team in Chicago. Actually, there always interested in having a strong original six teams. And if the Rangers where winning the last few years instead of golfing, there would have been much more media attention concerning hockey in the NY Metro area. It's your team and mine (Devs & Isles) that will never get the proper media attention they deserve, no matter what they do.

 

[HockeyMan9]

It's pretty fair, I wish it were weighted a little heavier, mabey use the points from the last four seasons or something, but i like this idea a lot more than everyone getting a 1-30 chance at ther #1 pick.

 

[Mess]

So you mean Montreal, where he would play for his favorite team? I'd feel dirty every time I watched a game, but I could live with that.

If that was his choice I would support him 100%.

Freedom of choice .. Can't beat it ...

Here everyone is fighting over him and local Canadian papers are already saying that he may not go to a team that drafts him if it is not his choice and force that team to trade his rights or he may sit out two seasons play in the AHL and then become an UFA ... You can lead horse water but you can't make him drink as the saying goes ..

Since we had no season and there really isn't any fair method to please everyone .. Make this year only just like US College recruitment ..

Set the whole draft class free and then set a limit as to the number of players you can sign per team .. Nine NHL draft rounds .. Nine or 10 contracts to obtain players rights throughout NA and Europe ..

Let the players make the choice .. and the scouts and agents and gm's earn their money in recruitment decisions ..

What is wrong with that ??

 

[WC Handy*]

If that was his choice I would support him 100%.

Freedom of choice .. Can't beat it ...

Here everyone is fighting over him and local Canadian papers are already saying that he may not go to a team that drafts him if it is not his choice and force that team to trade his rights or he may sit out two seasons play in the AHL and then become an UFA ... You can lead horse water but you can't make him drink as the saying goes ..

Since we had not season and there really isn't any fair method to please everyone .. Make this year only just like US College recruitment ..

Set the whole draft class free and then set a limit as to the number of players you can sign per team .. Nine NHL draft rounds .. Nine or 10 contracts to obtain players rights throughout NA and Europe ..

Let the players make the choice .. and the scouts and agents and gm's earn their money in recruitment decisions ..

What is wrong with that ??

If you goal was to give poeple even more reasons to laugh at the NHL, the this would be a solid plan.