North American Hockey Association (Waiting List Open!!)

The Instigator

Tom Wilson - NHL All Star
Feb 6, 2010
5,417
857
But if we're saying I came first, when the 2nd expansion team drafts can they pick from mine.
 

habsman56

Habs&Hoops
Nov 15, 2008
12,987
0
Having teams pick anything other than 1 player at a time will make it incredibly unfair. It shouldn't be too hard with only 4 teams..
 

johnnydollaz89*

Guest
the table keeps getting messed up on my laptop so i will not be making one im sorry
 

flyguy

Sean Cubeturier
Dec 28, 2004
7,803
551
Anchorage, Alaska
I honestly am not sure how the expansion draft will work yet. One thing I do no for sure is if we do the intervals of 5 it will be a fixed order and not a snake order.

I was thinking of randomly selecting the order. Say Quebec gets the first pick. They make their 20 picks, then the next team makes their 20 picks. So it's like each team came into the league at a different time. I think I am liking this idea more.

This is more decent, but there should be certain limitations on the type of players each team could pick. Even though there is a salary cap in place, the expansion teams could come out pretty stacked if they play their cards right. Also, each expansion team should only be able to take 1 player from a team throughout the entire draft. Not sure if this is what you meant in the original rules, but that makes it most fair for the the non-expansion teams as far as how many players they can lose.

As for other limitations, maybe something along the lines of these:

If a current NHL team blocks equal to or greater than two defenseman, only 1 defenseman can be picked from their current roster. If they block less than two defenseman, only 2 max d-men can be taken off their roster.

These kinds of limitations will help from the current NHL teams from completely being depleted of their depth in certain areas.

Also, although it may be very subjective to judge, the expansion teams should be limited as to what type of players they pick. For example, only 6 top 6 players, etc. I know these kinds of rules make it more complicated, but, IMO it makes it more fair because an expansion GM could totally own if they do it right.
 

The Instigator

Tom Wilson - NHL All Star
Feb 6, 2010
5,417
857
Not really. Expansion teams will be deep, but every other team has 6 superstars, while we have none.
 

habsman56

Habs&Hoops
Nov 15, 2008
12,987
0
Expansion teams really won't be that great.. they'll have the depth, like Ovechkin said, but they won't have the top 6/top defending/top goalie the other team's do...
 

Backlund

Registered User
Dec 29, 2009
5,146
1,257
Calgary, AB
If the expansion teams pick carefully and take time to see which 6 players each team protected, they might be able to end up with a pretty good team.
 

habsman56

Habs&Hoops
Nov 15, 2008
12,987
0
Just because they can keep 6 players won't mean they will all be superstars though. Heck, some teams still won't have any.

Well, look at some of the bottom teams. Florida for example:

Tomas Vokoun, David Booth, Stephen Weiss are better than mostly anybody that the expansion teams will get in the draft.

Even Toronto has Phil Kessel, Tomas Kaberle, Dion Phaneuf, Luke Schenn, that the expansion teams won't have.
 

habsman56

Habs&Hoops
Nov 15, 2008
12,987
0
If the expansion teams pick carefully and take time to see which 6 players each team protected, they might be able to end up with a pretty good team.

Expansion teams COULD get good teams, especially with people using this as a chance to get rid of bad contracts.
 

New York RKY

Let's Go Rangers!
Sep 6, 2009
13,846
1,860
Arizona
But if we're saying I came first, when the 2nd expansion team drafts can they pick from mine.

If that is the drafting method that we are using no. Expansion teams cannot pick players from other expansion teams.

Having teams pick anything other than 1 player at a time will make it incredibly unfair. It shouldn't be too hard with only 4 teams..

I understand your reasoning, and there could be the potential of teams to come out unfair. However, I am not doing a full on draft. That draft would wind up be twenty rounds, and even with 4 teams that could still take a really long time.

This is more decent, but there should be certain limitations on the type of players each team could pick. Even though there is a salary cap in place, the expansion teams could come out pretty stacked if they play their cards right. Also, each expansion team should only be able to take 1 player from a team throughout the entire draft. Not sure if this is what you meant in the original rules, but that makes it most fair for the the non-expansion teams as far as how many players they can lose.

As for other limitations, maybe something along the lines of these:

If a current NHL team blocks equal to or greater than two defenseman, only 1 defenseman can be picked from their current roster. If they block less than two defenseman, only 2 max d-men can be taken off their roster.

These kinds of limitations will help from the current NHL teams from completely being depleted of their depth in certain areas.

Also, although it may be very subjective to judge, the expansion teams should be limited as to what type of players they pick. For example, only 6 top 6 players, etc. I know these kinds of rules make it more complicated, but, IMO it makes it more fair because an expansion GM could totally own if they do it right.

What I started thinking about doing is having the draft go in intervals of 5. No specific draft order. I will say something like in the first interval of 5 you are allowed to pick one-two top 6 forward(s), two top 4 d-men and one goalie. And then like in the next interval do something like 2 3rd line forwards, two more d-men, etc.

The other 3 expansion teams would have no idea what each other are picking until the 5 players for each are revealed. If a player was picked twice, the person who sent the list to me 2nd would have to pick again.

This is all general ideas. Honestly when I was writing up the OP I had no idea how I wanted to handle the expansion draft. It may have to come down to doing an actual.

I really need some time to think about it because this is clearly a major point in the game. For now I want to worry about getting the last 8 people in here, and having everyone decided their 6 protected players.

I think before I make my decision on how the expansion draft will be handled I really need to take a look at the quality of players available in the pool to be picked from.
 

flyguy

Sean Cubeturier
Dec 28, 2004
7,803
551
Anchorage, Alaska
Yeah, but look at some of the top teams who actually have depth.

Teams like the Red Wings, Canucks, Flyers will lose a lot of their depth if they get more than 4 players taken from them, even after blocking 6. At the very least, there should be limitations on how many players a team can lose, and how many players a team can lose at each position (meaning forward, defenseman, and goalie)
 

New York RKY

Let's Go Rangers!
Sep 6, 2009
13,846
1,860
Arizona
I'm sorry I know my post above isn't exactly coherent because I was kinda brainstorming allowed.

My point in all this is that first I want to get everyone locked into the game. I then want to see who each team protects and who is left available. If there are numerous good-very good players available then a draft may be needed. If the pool players are judged to have equal talent for the most part then I may be able to go with the 5 interval method where one expansion team can only pick one player from each NHL team.

I will have a more definitive answer once I get the pool of players together on the same table. Although I do like everyone's enthusiasim right now.
 

New York RKY

Let's Go Rangers!
Sep 6, 2009
13,846
1,860
Arizona
Yeah, but look at some of the top teams who actually have depth.

Teams like the Red Wings, Canucks, Flyers will lose a lot of their depth if they get more than 4 players taken from them, even after blocking 6. At the very least, there should be limitations on how many players a team can lose, and how many players a team can lose at each position (meaning forward, defenseman, and goalie)

This I agree with, and kinda touched on it in my OP. I will find a way to limit the damage done to good teams. I won't allow teams like Detroit to get cleaned out. There will, for sure, be limitations. It may be that you can only pick one player from each team, or you can only pick one forward, one d-man, and one goalie from one team. I think the limitation will be 1 pick from each team, therefore the maximum damage that can be done to the 30 teams is a loss of 4 players, which isn't that bad.
 

stempniaksen

Registered User
Oct 12, 2008
11,005
4,264
Well, look at some of the bottom teams. Florida for example:

Tomas Vokoun, David Booth, Stephen Weiss are better than mostly anybody that the expansion teams will get in the draft.

Even Toronto has Phil Kessel, Tomas Kaberle, Dion Phaneuf, Luke Schenn, that the expansion teams won't have.

Just as an expansion team could end up with some combination of Timmonen, Setoguchi, Clowe, Edler, Vlasic, Burrows, Filpulla, JVR, Kronwall, ect. If picked right it could be awesome for the expansion teams.

Obviously will be tougher for them though.
 

flyguy

Sean Cubeturier
Dec 28, 2004
7,803
551
Anchorage, Alaska
I'm sorry I know my post above isn't exactly coherent because I was kinda brainstorming allowed.

My point in all this is that first I want to get everyone locked into the game. I then want to see who each team protects and who is left available. If there are numerous good-very good players available then a draft may be needed. If the pool players are judged to have equal talent for the most part then I may be able to go with the 5 interval method where one expansion team can only pick one player from each NHL team.

I will have a more definitive answer once I get the pool of players together on the same table. Although I do like everyone's enthusiasim right now.

I understand you want to get the last 8 GMs locked in. Not trying to rush you into a decision here, just brainstorming ideas.

Here is my proposal, the more I think about it. You have 4 teams in the expansion draft picking 20 players each (that's 80 total) from 30 teams. I think the most a team should be able to lose is 3 players (3 x 30 is 90, so it's more than enough). A team should not be able to lose more than 2 forwards, 1 dman, and 1 goalie (this seems most fair, since there will be double the forwards picked than d-man, but only 8 goalies picked).
 

New York RKY

Let's Go Rangers!
Sep 6, 2009
13,846
1,860
Arizona
I understand you want to get the last 8 GMs locked in. Not trying to rush you into a decision here, just brainstorming ideas.

Here is my proposal, the more I think about it. You have 4 teams in the expansion draft picking 20 players each (that's 80 total) from 30 teams. I think the most a team should be able to lose is 3 players (3 x 30 is 90, so it's more than enough). A team should not be able to lose more than 2 forwards, 1 dman, and 1 goalie (this seems most fair, since there will be double the forwards picked than d-man, but only 8 goalies picked).

I think this is a very good idea. Once the quota of each team is met then I would remove the rest of their players and return them back to their original team. Those 11 players would then be disbarred from the draft and ineligible to be picked.

I think this idea is better than my no more than 4 players from each team.

Thanks fly!

Also, thank you to all the rest who are really helping me brainstorm some ideas.
 

The Instigator

Tom Wilson - NHL All Star
Feb 6, 2010
5,417
857
What if there were specialty classes in the draft (#1 goalie, top 3 dman, 2 top 6 forward classes) and each team had one for the first round so it spreads out? The other 4 would be players not considered specialty picks.
 

flyguy

Sean Cubeturier
Dec 28, 2004
7,803
551
Anchorage, Alaska
What if there were specialty classes in the draft (#1 goalie, top 3 dman, 2 top 6 forward classes) and each team had one for the first round so it spreads out? The other 4 would be players not considered specialty picks.

Eh, I guess we could eliminate the "specialty classes", as you put it, if we are able to do it with how I laid it out above. If a team can lose no more than 3 players, and no more than 2 forwards, 1 dman, and 1 goalie, that should eliminate any team from being completely depleted in depth in any one position.

Although, I guess a team could still get kind of stacked if they choose wisely. I don't know...
 

Moses Doughty

Registered User
Aug 19, 2008
9,107
643
Can we have more protected players? Id like 8ish, or some teams will have ALOT of talent lost

And/or have a limit on how many players can be picked from one team. No more than 3 per team, as 4 teams, 20 per for 80 total. So that many guys from 30 teams means 3 or 2 player per team are picked up
 

flyguy

Sean Cubeturier
Dec 28, 2004
7,803
551
Anchorage, Alaska
I think this is a very good idea. Once the quota of each team is met then I would remove the rest of their players and return them back to their original team. Those 11 players would then be disbarred from the draft and ineligible to be picked.

I think this idea is better than my no more than 4 players from each team.

Thanks fly!

Also, thank you to all the rest who are really helping me brainstorm some ideas.

No problemo
 

The Instigator

Tom Wilson - NHL All Star
Feb 6, 2010
5,417
857
Can we have more protected players? Id like 8ish, or some teams will have ALOT of talent lost

And/or have a limit on how many players can be picked from one team. No more than 3 per team, as 4 teams, 20 per for 80 total. So that many guys from 30 teams means 3 or 2 player per team are picked up

Nooooooooo.
 

Moses Doughty

Registered User
Aug 19, 2008
9,107
643
Heh, me and fly think alike.

OV-at least one of the two. Depth filled teams are screwed otherwise if theres no limit
 

New York RKY

Let's Go Rangers!
Sep 6, 2009
13,846
1,860
Arizona
Anaheim Ducks | Atlanta Thrashers | Boston Bruins
Player 1|Player 1|Player 1|
Player 2|Player 2|Player 2|
Player 3|Player 3|Player 3|
Player 4|Player 4|Player 4|
Player 5|Player 5|Player 5|
Player 6|Player 6|Player 6|
Player 7|Player 7|Player 7|
Player 8|Player 8|Player 8|
Player 9|Player 9|Player 9|
Player 10|Player 10|Player 10|
Player 11|Player 11|Player 11|
Player 12|Player 12|Player 12|
Player 13|Player 13|Player 13|
Player 14|Player 14|Player 14|
Forwards (0/2)|Forwards (0/2)|Forwards (0/2)|
Defenseman (0/1)|Defenseman (0/1)|Defenseman (0/1)|
Goalie (0/1)|Goalie (0/1)|Goalie (0/1)|

I think this works, according to flyguy's method the draft board would look something like this. I think this definitely could work, thoughts?
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->