Draft, Muckler says BOG favour 30 balls in a bin

[me2]

You're fogetting something: there are no 'bottom' teams right now. There will be huge player turnover...a number will retire, the UFA list will be tremendous...And teams jump around in the standings all the time even without these former issues.

Now I'm a fan of Vancouver, and I would say that we're probably one of the least deserving of a high pick simply because we'll be in great shape (well, pending on Nazzy returning) after the lockout...or at least better shape than many others.

But there are other playoff teams who will likely be in far worse a position. If a season were played under a new CBA, there is every reason to believe that the standings could look alot different.

So why should a team that has been poor be handed another high pick when they were already 'rewarded' for their piss poor season two years ago?

Yet fans of these rich teams are constantly telling people their team will be be fine under a cap.

Only big spender that feels they'll suck in NYR, and well they are already a lottery pick team. Considering their spending habits from the last few years nobody is going to feel sorry for them if they miss Crosby.

I'd have more sympathy with big spending teams if they were all going to plummet down the rankings, but as the fans of these teams are all convinced they'll be fine under the cap. So that runs contra to the argument they would have been useless enough to challenge for the Crosby pick.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Let me ask a question. To the fans of the teams who would end up at the bottom of a weighted draft because they have won the past few years, and have vet laden teams. Now you all would love a shot at Crosby, how can I blame you? But how will you feel if he, in that 1-30 equal chance ends up on your stacked rival instead and you end up still at 30? The Sens get Crosby, how does that sound Toronto? Or Toronto, how would you like the Sens to get him? NJ gets him and you end up number 30 Philly? Sound good? How about Vancouver getting him and Calgary ends up 29, and Colorado 30? Feel as good now? You can rearrange those as needed to put your team on the outs and your biggest rival getting him.

Wouldn't you rather he ended up on a team that would not upset the balance, a team that needs a hand up rather than a team, your rival, that would put them out of reach for you and make them odds on favorites for the cup the next few years, to your detriment, when added to what they already have?

 

[Epsilon]

Wouldn't you rather he ended up on a team that would not upset the balance, a team that needs a hand up rather than a team, your rival, that would put them out of reach for you and make them odds on favorites for the cup the next few years, to your detriment, when added to what they already have?

The massive financial restructuring of the NHL is going to "upset the balance" far more than any single player ever could, no matter how overhyped.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

The massive financial restructuring of the NHL is going to "upset the balance" far more than any single player ever could, no matter how overhyped.

Long term, yes. Teams who could buy their way into contention will eventually have lean years. But anyone who thinks that the applecart will be very upset at all this coming season is deluding themselves. There will still remain a gap between those who spend all the way to the top of the Cap and those at the floor, at least 50% difference, as much as double. Players are going to make less so those spending near the top of the cap will get more. And the best players, vet players who lead a team to a cup, are and will remain almost entirely with the big market teams they are with now. You know that.

 

[PecaFan]

I'd rather admit that I cannot predict the standings and let a completely random order happen then lie profusely about it.

But that's just it. This whole thing isn't about "predicting" the standings of a missed year. That's why you can't get your head around this, you're hung up on predicting. If it was about predicting, then you'd be getting into trend line analysis to determine standings in the 04/05 season, and no one has ever mentioned that.

The missing year simply means that the status of teams has remained stationary for two years, instead of one year as per normal. Tampa Bay is still the Champ. Pittsburgh is still the worst team in the league. An extra year has passed, yes. But their status has not changed. Nobody got worse, nobody got better, everyone is just locked in stasis.

By your thinking, whenever the weather bureau has technical problems, they should just toss out yesterday's forecast.

Absolutely. Repeating the previous forecast would lead to quite accurate results. If there was a 40% chance for rain yesterday, repeating that will get you pretty darn close to what the "lost forecast" would have been.

It'd certainly be much closer than what you'd get by randomly choosing one of 30 equal weather outcomes. "100 degree weather tomorrow, odd since there was 6 feet of snow today..."

 

[Jaded-Fan]

.........


Absolutely. Repeating the previous forecast would lead to quite accurate results. If there was a 40% chance for rain yesterday, repeating that will get you pretty darn close to what the "lost forecast" would have been.

It'd certainly be much closer than what you'd get by randomly choosing one of 30 equal weather outcomes. "100 degree weather tomorrow, odd since there was 6 feet of snow today..."

I love that analogy. We may not be able to predict whether the temps will be 75 degrees in Richmond, Viriginia on July 14 or 85 degrees, but we sure as hell can predict that we will not get snow. Pretty great analogy to the situation with predicting how 2004-5 would have turned out. True we may not be able to place every team exactly how they would have come out, but the chances of a 2004 -5 bottom five team ending up with the Cup, or a 2004-5 top five team ending up bottom five are about as good as the chances of snow in Richmond in mid-July.

 

[EroCaps]

I love that analogy. We may not be able to predict whether the temps will be 75 degrees in Richmond, Viriginia on July 14 or 85 degrees, but we sure as hell can predict that we will not get snow. Pretty great analogy to the situation with predicting how 2004-5 would have turned out. True we may not be able to place every team exactly how they would have come out, but the chances of a 2004 -5 bottom five team ending up with the Cup, or a 2004-5 top five team ending up bottom five are about as good as the chances of snow in Richmond in mid-July.

Weather isn't professional hockey.

IMO there are way too many variables, many of which we won't learn until mid-season the next season and beyond to make any predictions. I'd rather a 30 ball random raffle than a four-year collective. As others have said, those teams have already been compensated. With cost certainty and a salary cap under 40 million there's good money on smaller market teams being in the market for mid to high-end FAs.

The NFL is a good example. I've seen more big name players sign with small market teams with slightly bigger pockets than I've seen in any other sport. Quality players who look to make 1-2 million more for a team with $ under the cap, whereas the powerhouses are saddled with big contracts that don't pan out.

 

[Mess]

Weather isn't professional hockey.

.

2000 Season .... Washington ....102 Points ...Lost in 1st round
Drafted : 26 th overall

2001 Season .....Washington .... 96 Points ...Lost in 1st round
Drafted : 24 th overall (traded away)

2001 Season : .. Washington 85 points .. Missed playoffs (Montreal 87 points)
Drafted : 15 th overall

2003 Season ... Washington 92 points .. Lost 1st round of Playoffs
Drafted : 18 th overall

** WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED TO WASHINGTON'S DRAFT POSITION IF IT WAS THE 2004 SEASON THAT WAS CANCELLED ???? **​

( 26 + 24 + 15 + 18 ) = 83 / 4 = DRAFTED 21st Overall in Weighted Lottery ..

What really Happened : !!!!

2004 Season .... Washington 59 points ... Missed Playoffs
Drafted : #1 overall

& now hope to get #1 overall again this year.

Conclusion :
Weighted lottery based on historical results seems to be very accurate way to determine draft position

Weather Forcast:
Snow in Tampa Bay as lightning win the cup .. & Hell Freezes over ..

FYI :
TB Weighted lottery Position ..
2001 (3rd) .. 2002 (4th) ... 2003 (4th) .. 2004 (30th) **Won Cup
Weighted Average : (3 + 4 + 4 + 30 ) = 41 / 4 years = 10 th or 11 th Overall

NOTE :

** 20 ** NHL teams will be weighted with worse odds for #1 overall after Tampa Bay just won the Cup ..

Washington will be weighted 15 th..(based on last 4 years)

Weighted lottery will give TB better odds than Washington for #1 overall.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

But that's just it. This whole thing isn't about "predicting" the standings of a missed year. That's why you can't get your head around this, you're hung up on predicting. If it was about predicting, then you'd be getting into trend line analysis to determine standings in the 04/05 season, and no one has ever mentioned that.

The missing year simply means that the status of teams has remained stationary for two years, instead of one year as per normal. Tampa Bay is still the Champ. Pittsburgh is still the worst team in the league. An extra year has passed, yes. But their status has not changed. Nobody got worse, nobody got better, everyone is just locked in stasis.

We're going to disagree until the end, then. We know for a fact everything has changed. Every player got older. Some players were not signed, Washington drafted Ovechkin, Pittsburgh drafted Malkin, Chicago drafted Barker and so on, until John Carter was drafted by Phildelphia to close the draft.

Now, when the league is going to go out of hiatus, we're faced with the problem of determining draft order, when the process usually boils down to compensating teams based on the previous' season performances

Absolutely. Repeating the previous forecast would lead to quite accurate results. If there was a 40% chance for rain yesterday, repeating that will get you pretty darn close to what the "lost forecast" would have been.

It'd certainly be much closer than what you'd get by randomly choosing one of 30 equal weather outcomes. "100 degree weather tomorrow, odd since there was 6 feet of snow today..."

You fail to see the difference. This isn't a weather forecast. The difference between me and you is that you think you can arbitrarily decide who should have a better chance. I make no such claims.

If this was a weather forecast, I'd close up shop if I couldn't call it. Unfortunately, it appears that for a variety of reasons, they just cannot pass up the draft (a preferable situation to this mess). They absolutely feel they must go with it.

Under those circumstances, I must declare I cannot determine an order. It would be intellectually dishonest to pretend I can do it.

Of course, I have my idea on certain organizations that are depleted. And I know a few teams are loaded. But there must be firm criteria at one point (this is why, after all, they use such a flawed process as draft standings in the first place). Without solid criteria, I can't go tell teams that deserve less of a chance.

And with all due respect for Bettman and his cronies, I don't think they have the ability to determine who deserves more of a chance either.

I only know that previous years standings have already been compensated, and do not reflect accurately what would have happened this year.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Its called an educated guess Vlad. In my profession (law) we would not have a job if we could not have experts making them, in matters that actually more often than not are much more important than who picks who in a given draft. The experts use the phase 'within a reasonable degree of (medical, engineering, etc. etc) certainty, the following is what would have happend.' And that opinion is legally accepted as evidence.

The draft is not so different a scenerio to be thrown completely on its head . . . as you and others would do . . . to avoid an 'educated guess.' I guess that is the crux of where you and I differ. I would rather be mostly right, as an educated guess would be, than to just shrug my shoulders and guarentee some pretty f'd up results, namely more teams than not ending up far from where they would have had there been a season . . .not just a few but a large number. If one team would have been a fluke last year and gets screwed it is better than the likely couple of dozen that will end up totally off by a totally random order.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

2000 Season .... Washington ....102 Points ...Lost in 1st round
Drafted : 26 th overall

2001 Season .....Washington .... 96 Points ...Lost in 1st round
Drafted : 24 th overall (traded away)

2001 Season : .. Washington 85 points .. Missed playoffs (Montreal 87 points)
Drafted : 15 th overall

2003 Season ... Washington 92 points .. Lost 1st round of Playoffs
Drafted : 18 th overall

** WHAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED TO WASHINGTON'S DRAFT POSITION IF IT WAS THE 2004 SEASON THAT WAS CANCELLED ???? **

( 26 + 24 + 15 + 18 ) = 83 / 4 = DRAFTED 21st Overall in Weighted Lottery ..


What really Happened : !!!!

2004 Season .... Washington 59 points ... Missed Playoffs

Drafted : #1 overall

& now hope to get #1 overall again this year.

Conclusion :
Weighted lottery based on historical results seems to be very accurate way to determine draft position

Weather Forcast : Show in Tampa Bay as lightning win the cup .. & Hell Freezes over ..

FYI :
TB Weighted lottery Position ..
2001 (3rd) .. 2002 (4th) ... 2003 (4th) .. 2004 (30th) **Won Cup
Weighted Average : (3 + 4 + 4 + 30 ) = 41 / 4 years = 10 th or 11 th Oveall

NOTE :
20 NHL teams will be weighted with worse odds for #1 overall after TB just won the Cup ..

Wow, what a great example! Now how about you go and do the Leafs. And then do the Red Wings. And then do the Stars. Oh, and do the Avs, Blues, Canucks and Flyers. These are the teams that do not deserve a shot at drafting in the top half of the draft in any shape or form, which is a good possibility in pulling names out of a hat. If you are so afraid of teams that have been bad up until the last year getting a shot at a top draft pick then how the hell can you argue that a team that has been dominant over the past five to ten years is deserving of a top draft pick? A little hypocritical?

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Wow, what a great example! Now how about you go and do the Leafs. And then do the Red Wings. And then do the Stars. Oh, and do the Avs, Blues, Canucks and Flyers. These are the teams that do not deserve a shot at drafting in the top half of the draft in any shape or form, which is a good possibility in pulling names out of a hat.

And yet, the Dallas Stars, which you just named, have been see-sawing for four seasons now:

2000-01 82 48 24 8 2 106
2001-02 82 36 28 13 5 90
2002-03 82 46 17 15 4 111
2003-04 82 41 26 13 2 97

You are talking about the same Dallas Stars who were 17th overall in the standings in 2001-02, then 2nd overall in 2002-03 and then 11th overall in 2003-04, right?

If we had used that blatantly unfair and inaccurate method had we missed the 03-04 season, Dallas would have been handed a high pick they absolutely did not deserve in retrospect.

There are other examples of reversal of fortune throughout history including the teams you mentioned.

We know that sooner or later, any team can go up or down. It doesn't matter that the Avs have constantly been good the last few years. One day, they might go down. It might have been this year. It might be next, or it might be in four years. But we don't know.

The fact you think those teams do not deserve a shot by any stretch is just your subjective opinion. And based on your logical reasoning here, I'd be inclined to take your personal opinion with a huge grain of salt.

You clealy do not know who deserves a pick or not. You just think you do. There's a difference.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Isn't that why the league seems to be going with the weighted system spread out over three of four years, to greatly lessen the impact of situations where there is some flux? By the way, you are stretching if all you could find was Dallas. They dropped no lower than what, 17th? There will be variences especially with teams in the middle of the pack to the top of the standings, but ranking those picks one hundred thousand percent accurately are far less important to most here than ranking the picks in the top ten, especiually the top five. In most years you have almost as good a chance of picking a good player at 17 as you do toward the bottom of the draft. Picks one to five are a different story though, especially in this year the top four.

 

[Mess]

Wow, what a great example! Now how about you go and do the Leafs. And then do the Red Wings. And then do the Stars. Oh, and do the Avs, Blues, Canucks and Flyers. These are the teams that do not deserve a shot at drafting in the top half of the draft in any shape or form, which is a good possibility in pulling names out of a hat. If you are so afraid of teams that have been bad up until the last year getting a shot at a top draft pick then how the hell can you argue that a team that has been dominant over the past five to ten years is deserving of a top draft pick? A little hypocritical?

What are you suggesting Weighted for some based on previous records and not others ??

As you can see Washington was only bad last year and was rewarded with the 1st overall as a result .. However based on the last 4 years weighted would pick 15th

Tampa Bay just WON the cup and drafted 30th as a result of that great season .. However based on the their history will draft 10th in a weighted lottery ..

If the system doesn't work for some how could it be fair for others ??

Blues, Canucks etc have never won a Cup, & including Philly & Toronto & Boston its been over 30 years for all of them.

What success have they had that you feel they need to be punished in a Draft lottery ??

Teams like Pittsburgh, Edmonton, New York Islanders, Montreal have all won MULTIPLE Stanley Cups during that time.

All would have better odds in a weighted lottery then the teams you mentioned..

Avs, NJ and Detroit also have won Multiple Stanley Cups in the past decade, so you feel the teams you named above should be equally weighted as them in this next draft, despite completely different Cup Success .. in fact only Vancouver in 1994 was the only team of the 5 to even play in a Final series during that time. .....yet Buffalo, Carolina, Anaheim & Calgary have all had a Final series cracks at the Cup in the past 5 years ..

How is success measured ?? .. Pretty Shiny Mean nothing regular season points..!!

How can anyone make a logical argument that the current Stanley Cup Champs would pick before 2/3 rds of the League and the teams you mentioned, in a weighted lottery based on previous years success or failure??

 

[Jaded-Fan]

What are you suggesting Weighted for some based on previous records and not others ??

As you can see Washington was only bad last year and was rewarded with the 1st overall as a result .. However based on the last 4 years weighted would pick 15th

Tampa Bay just one the cup and drafted 30th as a result of that great season .. However based on the their history will draft 10th in a weighted lottery ..

If the system doesn't work for some how could it be fair for others ??

Blues, Canucks etc have never won a Cup, & including Philly & Toronto & Boston its been over 30 years for all of them.

What success have they had that you feel they need to be punished in a Draft lottery ??

How can anyone make a logical argument that the current Stanley Cup Champs would pick before 2/3 rds of the League and the teams you mentioned, in a weighted lottery based on previous years success or failure??

How can you justify TB picking first? Or any of the top ten finishers over the last 3 or 4 years? There is a one in three chance of that happening under your scenerio. I could stomach TB picking 15th or 16th much more than any of those teams picking 1st. There is not a huge difference between 15 and 30 in most draft years, the players have warts by that time and better players are picked later in the round than are picked at number 15 in nice percentages every year. Number 1-4 or 5 is a very very different story.

 

[Matty]

Yet fans of these rich teams are constantly telling people their team will be be fine under a cap.

Only big spender that feels they'll suck in NYR, and well they are already a lottery pick team. Considering their spending habits from the last few years nobody is going to feel sorry for them if they miss Crosby.

I'd have more sympathy with big spending teams if they were all going to plummet down the rankings, but as the fans of these teams are all convinced they'll be fine under the cap. So that runs contra to the argument they would have been useless enough to challenge for the Crosby pick.

This has nothing to do with big spenders, rich teams, ect.

In an unweighted lottery, every team would have equal chance regardless of being rich or poor.

And there are rich teams that missed the playoffs (Columbus (huge fan base), Minny (huge fan base), Rangers, LA, Washington etc) as well as poor teams that made the playoffs. So again, this has nothing to do with rich and poor.

This has to do with teams being compensated twice for one bad season.

This had to do with people pretending that they can project standings when the NHL standings change yearly.

Nobody 'deserves' the Crosby pick this year. No group of teams 'deserve' a better shot at him over another group.

 

[think-blue-]

How can you justify TB picking first? Or any of the top ten finishers over the last 3 or 4 years?

It goes back to Tampa already being compensated for their failure to make the playoffs in the past, and their draft position based on their Cup Win. I mean, how could you justify the Caps getting Crosby after they got Ovechkin? Some might suggest that wouldn't seem fair, would it? I really have yet to see a good counter-argument to the fact that teams have already been compensated for their success (or lack thereof) in the past. If teams like the Pens and Caps continue to struggle when the league resumes, they will, and rightfully so, get their shot at the likes of Kessel and Frolik. But we're in a unique situation here. Hypothetically, what if this lockout extends next season and cancels 05-06? Would you pro-weighted lottery/use the last season standing people still advocate the same for future drafts?

 

[Jaded-Fan]

It goes back to Tampa already being compensated for their failure to make the playoffs in the past, and their draft position based on their Cup Win. I mean, how could you justify the Caps getting Crosby after they got Ovechkin? Some might suggest that wouldn't seem fair, would it? I really have yet to see a good counter-argument to the fact that teams have already been compensated for their success (or lack thereof) in the past. If teams like the Pens and Caps continue to struggle when the league resumes, they will, and rightfully so, get their shot at the likes of Kessel and Frolik. But we're in a unique situation here. Hypothetically, what if this lockout extends next season and cancels 05-06? Would you pro-weighted lottery/use the last season standing people still advocate the same for future drafts?

The Caps chances are so small, especially if they use what they have said they will, an averaged draft over the past three or four years (they drop to something like 16th under that scenerio) that if they beat the odds and win AO and Crosby, good for them. Also, they are not loaded with vet talent right now so I could stomach their getting him much more than TB or Toronto for instance. As for this lockout extending to the point of cancelling next year as well? Unlikely at best it is not going to happen, but if it did I would average the seasons as they are now. Have two weighted drafts, again everyone with some chance as has been proposed. It is a better sloution than totally randomizing the draft with a one in thirty chance for all.

 

[JohnnyReb]

How can you justify TB picking first? Or any of the top ten finishers over the last 3 or 4 years?

18 different teams have finished in the top 10 over the last four years.

Mmmm... parity...

EDIT:

Some more number crunching, using Steadfast's plausible weighted draft standings:

* Of the 12 teams who have never finished in the top 10 over the last four years, 5 would have virtually no chance at the top pick, being weighted lower than the 10th spot. Calgary, Montreal, Phoenix, LA and Edmonton.

* Of the top 10 weighted teams, 3 have finished in your "no top 10 finishers" list. Minnesota, Pittsburgh and Chicago.

* Still with the top 10 weighted teams, 2 have gone to the Stanley Cup finals over the last four years. Anaheim and Carolina.

* Five playoff teams (Calgary, Nashville, Islanders, Montreal, Tampa) are ranked higher than Washington and Phoenix, who finished in the bottom 5 of the league last season.

* Both teams from the Stanley Cup finals (Calgary and Tampa) are ranked higher than 5 non-playoff teams.

 

[mydnyte]

Such a horrible idea. Bad teams get good draft picks, its as simple as that, that is how the bad teams get better in the future. Because of the lockout that contempt just gets thrown out the door? If this was any other non-Crosby year this wouldn't even be an issue. The league really is a joke.

what makes a bad team, Pitt or WAS with a few of the best prospects in the world, or Toronto/Detroit/Philly etc with older teams where the core is past prime, and retired by the time anyone gets back on the ice. ...not to mention the fact that they may have lost the last chance they had at a cup until the crash/burn and rebuild which very well may be next season for any of them.

Had the 2002/2003 season been the one lost, Tampa Bay (current champs) would be getting a 'lottery' pick because they finished out of the playoffs, but teams like Chicago wouldnt because they were in the playoffs and finished alot higher than TB that year ...history shows us what happened, and if you don't learn from it...

 

[Taxman]

Wow, it is WEIRD that all the posters who are fans of good teams want it to be an equal shot at Crosby while those rooting for teams lower on the totem pole want the lottery to weigh 3, 4, or 5 year past record averages.

It truly isn't fair for the Devils, Red Wings and Senators to get as good of a chance at Crosby as the Blue Jackets, Hurricanes and Thrashers of the world.

 

[DARKSIDE]

Just as long as they don't go back to the 2004 season for draft positioning is fine with me. I new the so-called better teams would come out with guns blazing on this issue. I also do not believe this is all about Crosby, it's about being fair with a unique situation where a whole season was cancelled and teams like Pittsburgh and Washington have already benefited from being lousy!

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

What are you suggesting Weighted for some based on previous records and not others ??

As you can see Washington was only bad last year and was rewarded with the 1st overall as a result .. However based on the last 4 years weighted would pick 15th

Tampa Bay just WON the cup and drafted 30th as a result of that great season .. However based on the their history will draft 10th in a weighted lottery ..

If the system doesn't work for some how could it be fair for others ??

Blues, Canucks etc have never won a Cup, & including Philly & Toronto & Boston its been over 30 years for all of them.

What success have they had that you feel they need to be punished in a Draft lottery ??

Teams like Pittsburgh, Edmonton, New York Islanders, Montreal have all won MULTIPLE Stanley Cups during that time.

All would have better odds in a weighted lottery then the teams you mentioned..

Avs, NJ and Detroit also have won Multiple Stanley Cups in the past decade, so you feel the teams you named above should be equally weighted as them in this next draft, despite completely different Cup Success .. in fact only Vancouver in 1994 was the only team of the 5 to even play in a Final series during that time. .....yet Buffalo, Carolina, Anaheim & Calgary have all had a Final series cracks at the Cup in the past 5 years ..

How is success measured ?? .. Pretty Shiny Mean nothing regular season points..!!

How can anyone make a logical argument that the current Stanley Cup Champs would pick before 2/3 rds of the League and the teams you mentioned, in a weighted lottery based on previous years success or failure??

What a load of complete crap! Who cares who went where in the playoffs? Outside of the Stanley Cup teams no one has EVER had their draft position altered by how they did in the post season. Quick, run around waiving your arms in the air more. I'm sure someone will buy your stupidity if you continue with a diversionary display!

You have the gall to type all of that GARBAGE and then attempt to defend a system where teams that haven't missed the playoffs in decade are treated the same as teams that have made the playoffs once or twice during that same time frame, and THEN suggest that a system where drawing names out of a hat is fair? That makes no sense what so ever! How is drawing a name out of a hat fair, but considering the performance of the teams in question over the past three years not fair? You gotta explain that one to me, and no, no season last year is NOT a justifiable reason.

If you are SO offended by the concept of a weighted draft because it unfairly awards those teams that have won the Stanley Cup, then how about pulling them from the draft all together and making them draft in the same spot they did in the last draft? If that doesn't work, then how about taking them and putting them at the tail end of the draft? Would that satisfy your sensibilities? Now if we are going to do this, then I also recommend that any team that won their division during the regular season in the past three years also be pulled from the draft lottery and be put in a second lottery for the tail end of the opening round. The teams that have won the cup and have not won their division will be left in the draft for the first pick. Is that more fair?

BTW... as I have mentioned all along, I am in favor of basing the draft on the same finishing order from 2003-04 and using the same process for lottery and selection. There is no use throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

 

[I in the Eye]

BTW... as I have mentioned all along, I am in favor of basing the draft on the same finishing order from 2003-04 and using the same process for lottery and selection. There is no use throwing the baby out with the bathwater!

Do you believe that time is a unit of measuring what truly does exist? If so, than IMO, it doesn't make any sense to 'go back in time' by using the 2003-04 finishing order to determine the 2004-05 draft order... Not unless the BOG restore all events in current event B (now) to their positions and properties in event A (2003-04)...

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Do you believe that time is a unit of measuring what truly does exist? If so, than IMO, it doesn't make any sense to 'go back in time' by using the 2003-04 finishing order to determine the 2004-05 draft order... Not unless the BOG restore all events in current event B (now) to their positions and properties in event A (2003-04)...

Well it beats the hell out any other suggestion to date. The minute the NHL starts picking names out of a hat is when all creability for the league goes out the window. At that point the CFL will be the better operated sport.