Possible frame work for next draft

[Barnaby]

1.) Toronto
2.) Atlanta
3.) Montreal
4.) Chicago
5.) St Louis
6.) Washington
7.) Ottawa
8.) Colombus
9.) Calgary
10.) Florida
11.) Dallas
12.) Philly
13.) New York Rangers
14.) Tampa Bay
15.) San Jose

Next 15 in a few minutes

If Philly, Toronto, or Stanley Cup runner up Calgary picks ahead of NYR then I am done with the NHL.

 

[Barnaby]

They need some type of a tier system IMO. Whether it be 6, 8, or 10 team tiers something needs to keep this in a realistic order...

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

There has to be some type of system rewarding lousy teams. There is no way taking a team like Colorado who has been elite for 8 or so years, and giving them the same chance as someone like Chicago or Pitt whose fans haven't seen a winner in years is fair. Could a team get better or worse? Sure, but I guarantee a system based on the last 3-4 years will be much more accurate then 30 balls and 30 teams.... by the way the lottery should be on ESPN when/if it happens...

Bah, already covered. If getting higher picks is so valuable, then they have already been rewarded for that properly under the regular system. Teams that were lousy in 2000 got higher picks, and teams that were lousy in 2001 got higher picks, and on and on.

If getting higher picks was not so valuable then, it's not any more valuable now, and nobody could care less who will pick higher this year.

Right?

The irony that we should average teams that picked the highest over the last few years, to give them higher picks this year because picks are so important, is delicious.

Basically, it's like saying picks are crap, but we want them bad anyway. It doesn't make any sense.

No season, no definite order.

30 balls in a hat = most fair system under the circumstances.

 

[Barnaby]

Bah, already covered. If getting higher picks is so valuable, then they have already been rewarded for that properly under the regular system. Teams that were lousy in 2000 got higher picks, and teams that were lousy in 2001 got higher picks, and on and on.

If getting higher picks was not so valuable then, it's not any more valuable now, and nobody could care less who will pick higher this year.

Right?

The irony that we should average teams that picked the highest over the last few years, to give them higher picks this year because picks are so important, is delicious.

Basically, it's like saying picks are crap, but we want them bad anyway. It doesn't make any sense.

No season, no definite order.

30 balls in a hat = most fair system under the circumstances.

Had there been a season we all know what the draft would look like in general. 30 balls in a hat just sets back teams that have sucked and are rebuilding compared to teams that are among the elite. Screw the organizations, but does a fan in Chicago not deserve a shot at a better player that could potentially help them return to playoff contention? That is the whole idea of the draft system. Just because of a lockout doesn't mean that all hell should break loose making great teams better and setting back terrible teams even more. It sucks for the game in general as well. How are fans interest going to be in Chicago when they haven't had a winner in X amount of years. It's better for the fans, and it's better for league competition so it is absolutely fair.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Had there been a season we all know what the draft would look like in general. 30 balls in a hat just sets back teams that have sucked and are rebuilding compared to teams that are among the elite. Screw the organizations, but does a fan in Chicago not deserve a shot at a better player that could potentially help them return to playoff contention? That is the whole idea of the draft system. Just because of a lockout doesn't mean that all hell should break loose making great teams better and setting back terrible teams even more. It sucks for the game in general as well. How are fans interest going to be in Chicago when they haven't had a winner in X amount of years. It's better for the fans, and it's better for league competition so it is absolutely fair.

 

[EroCaps]

The Caps get screwed the most in that scenario. Just like their fans predicted. Maybe there is a conspiracy.

Vlad - I'm guessing that the Panthers lose a ball for winning the lottery, and the Pens lose a ball for acquiring that pick?

I'd welcome conspiracy theorists over a casual dismissal from the league. I'm willing to bet big Ted pulls a Ghandi if the Caps pick bottom 10.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Had there been a season we all know what the draft would look like in general.

I dare you or anyone to come up with the 30 team order for next year, prior to draft determination method. I garantee you it won't look anything like the results of the next season.

I've never seen anyone accurately predict this stuff with consistency. It cannot be done.

30 balls in a hat just sets back teams that have sucked and are rebuilding compared to teams that are among the elite. Screw the organizations, but does a fan in Chicago not deserve a shot at a better player that could potentially help them return to playoff contention?

The teams that were weak got high picks. That's how they built. The Chicago fans got high picks under the system when they deserved them.

That is the whole idea of the draft system. Just because of a lockout doesn't mean that all hell should break loose making great teams better and setting back terrible teams even more.

That is the thing. My contention is, there's no way to accurately and objectively assess who are the great teams right now. Not precisely enough to decide how a complete draft order should look like.

I'd like to point you to someone who can accurately and objectively make such an assessment but I've never met one. No coaches, no general manager, no reporter, no fan, no computer system/prediction software has an immaculate track record when it comes to assessing team sports performances accurately and consistently.

If such a system was possible, I would have provided the accurate draft order a long time ago.

How are fans interest going to be in Chicago when they haven't had a winner in X amount of years. It's better for the fans, and it's better for league competition so it is absolutely fair.

The interest in Chicago is going to be just fine. They got plenty of great young prospects for when they sucked. They got rewarded appropriately. It all depends on putting all the parts together. There's more to winning Stanley Cups than just drafting high.

Every year, some teams get shafted and life goes on.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

I dare you or anyone to come up with the 30 team order for next year, prior to draft determination method. I garantee you it won't look anything like the results of the next season.

I've never seen anyone accurately predict this stuff with consistency. It cannot be done.



The teams that were weak got high picks. That's how they built. The Chicago fans got high picks under the system when they deserved them.



That is the thing. My contention is, there's no way to accurately and objectively assess who are the great teams right now. Not precisely enough to decide how a complete draft order should look like.

I'd like to point you to someone who can accurately and objectively make such an assessment but I've never met one. No coaches, no general manager, no reporter, no fan, no computer system/prediction software has an immaculate track record when it comes to assessing team sports performances accurately and consistently.

If such a system was possible, I would have provided the accurate draft order a long time ago.



The interest in Chicago is going to be just fine. They got plenty of great young prospects for when they sucked. They got rewarded appropriately. It all depends on putting all the parts together. There's more to winning Stanley Cups than just drafting high.

Every year, some teams get shafted and life goes on.

Sorry Vlad, but that is a buch of BS. Here is one set of odds, set by the experts, who put their money where their mouths are:

http://www.betroyal.com/Hockey/Defa...lines&lo=12&propnr=14600343&st=Hockey Futures

There were similar for last season. The point is that it can be done and is a hell of a lot closer to what might happen, or what would have happened than throwing all 30 teams in a hat with an equal chance for all, or this crappy system that they are rumored to have come up with.

 

[ZombieMatt]

It would be funny to see the teams start to argue that they WOULD HAVE been the worst this season though.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Sorry Vlad, but that is a buch of BS. Here are one set of odds, set by the experts, who put their money where their mouths are:

http://www.betroyal.com/Hockey/Defa...lines&lo=12&propnr=14600343&st=Hockey Futures

There were similar for last season. The point is that it can be done and is a hell of a lot closer to what might happen, or what would have happened than throwing all 30 teams in a hat with an equal chance for all, or this crappy system that they are rumored to have come up with.

My nemesis strikes again!

The way odds work, Jaded, is that you win some and lose some.

I've taken a look at that order, and I garantee you it won't look anything like it. For one, it's ludicrous to rank a team like Boston that high when they don't even have enough players signed to ice a full team last time I checked.

Odds is something that you can play with and have fun with. It's a lot different than being at the other end of it

I'm going to copy/paste that order for future reference.We'll see what it looks like at the end of next season.

 

[Legionnaire]

Sorry Vlad, but that is a buch of BS. Here is one set of odds, set by the experts, who put their money where their mouths are:

http://www.betroyal.com/Hockey/Defa...lines&lo=12&propnr=14600343&st=Hockey Futures

There were similar for last season. The point is that it can be done and is a hell of a lot closer to what might happen, or what would have happened than throwing all 30 teams in a hat with an equal chance for all, or this crappy system that they are rumored to have come up with.

Those odds are so messed up. The Kings with the 10th best chance to win the Cup

 

[the_gman83]

1.) Toronto
2.) Atlanta
3.) Montreal
4.) Chicago
5.) St Louis
6.) Washington
7.) Ottawa
8.) Colombus
9.) Calgary
10.) Florida
11.) Dallas
12.) Philly
13.) New York Rangers
14.) Tampa Bay
15.) San Jose
16.) Minny
17.) Vancouver
18.) Anaheim
19.) Colorado
20.) Buffalo
21.) Edmonton
22.) Nashville
23.) Boston
24.) New York I
25.) Detroit
26.) Los Angelas
27.) Phoenix
28.) Buffalo
29.) New Jersey
30.) Pittsburgh

That's funny, because in the sample lottery I did, Toronto ended up with the 30th pick.

 

[allin4466]

be VERY interesting to see crosby go to a team like columbus. Zheredev, crosby and nash on the same team? in a capped system where teams can afford players, columbus could build a dynasty around these guys. or a team like atlanta.. kovalchuk, heatley and sid the kid?

 

[kingpin_19]

I may have picked this up from the Hockey Scouting forums, but here goes

Go by the combined record of the last five seasons. That would give the perenial contenders higher picks, but continuous cellar dwellars would be sitting lower. The teams who have not completed five full seasons (ie. Minnesota, Columbus) will go on the average point totals of the seasons in which they did not take part in.

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

Most fair = 30 balls, one for each team.

That's not even close to most fair. So Colorado, Detroit, Philly, NJ etc. will have an equal chance of winning as the Pens, the Rangers, the Blue Jackets? I didn't even include my team. That's a joke. H/ell going by the 2003-2004 standings where the Rangers would have no shot at Crosby is more fair, than that sham of a system. Of course, I'd be happier with this way than that way, but as far as being fair, that would be a lot more fair. Personally I think it should go back to the last expansion teams, which are the Wild and Blue Jackets, I don't remember how many years is that. Wild guess it's four, because if it's anything less, then how do you figure out how many balls the Jackets or Wild get? If it's more, then where'd they get the number 4?

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

That's not even close to most fair. So Colorado, Detroit, Philly, NJ etc. will have an equal chance of winning as the Pens, the Rangers, the Blue Jackets? I didn't even include my team. That's a joke. H/ell going by the 2003-2004 standings where the Rangers would have no shot at Crosby is more fair, than that sham of a system. Of course, I'd be happier with this way than that way, but as far as being fair, that would be a lot more fair. Personally I think it should go back to the last expansion teams, which are the Wild and Blue Jackets, I don't remember how many years is that. Wild guess it's four, because if it's anything less, then how do you figure out how many balls the Jackets or Wild get? If it's more, then where'd they get the number 4?

Who cares....it is pretty sad that teams fans are counting on getting a shot at Crosby to turn their team around. Thats the problem with paridy in this league, most teams sell off trying to increase their chances at a good pick.

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

I dare you or anyone to come up with the 30 team order for next year, prior to draft determination method. I garantee you it won't look anything like the results of the next season.

I've never seen anyone accurately predict this stuff with consistency. It cannot be done.




The teams that were weak got high picks. That's how they built. The Chicago fans got high picks under the system when they deserved them.



That is the thing. My contention is, there's no way to accurately and objectively assess who are the great teams right now. Not precisely enough to decide how a complete draft order should look like.

I'd like to point you to someone who can accurately and objectively make such an assessment but I've never met one. No coaches, no general manager, no reporter, no fan, no computer system/prediction software has an immaculate track record when it comes to assessing team sports performances accurately and consistently.

If such a system was possible, I would have provided the accurate draft order a long time ago.



The interest in Chicago is going to be just fine. They got plenty of great young prospects for when they sucked. They got rewarded appropriately. It all depends on putting all the parts together. There's more to winning Stanley Cups than just drafting high.

Every year, some teams get shafted and life goes on.

I didn't read all the posts after this one so this may have been discussed, but sorry you're completely exaggerating. It's not as hard as you say it is. There are a number of teams that make the playoffs every year, and those teams winning the lottery make the lottery and the entire NHL a joke (even more than the NHL is already in the eyes of most Americans). Are you telling me that NJ, Philly, Detroit, and Colorado won't make the playoffs? There are 4 teams that have no shot of missing, and that's just off the top of my head. Those four teams getting a chance at supposedly the next great one, f/ucks up the entire league. Then you have St. Louis a team that hasn't missed the playoffs in ages, BUT has been weaker lately, but still have a good chance, Dallas, almost always makes them, and have a great chance etc. Honestly while things almost always don't come out EXACTLY how you expect them, it's just as unlikely for things to come out exactly the OPPOSITE of how you expected them to happen. It's logic, that almost all of these teams (also throw in Ottawa and Toronto) will make the playoffs if not all. This isn't football, this is an 82 game season where things don't change as much year to year.

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

Who cares....it is pretty sad that teams fans are counting on getting a shot at Crosby to turn their team around. Thats the problem with paridy in this league, most teams sell off trying to increase their chances at a good pick.

Um, this is such a joke, most teams have been selling off because a)they have no money (Pittsburgh) b)they're afraid of the cap (NYR) c)their overpriced vets aren't working (NYR). You're just bitter that your team stands in no man's land, mediocre. Can't make noise in the playoffs and aren't bad enough for that high of a pick.

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

My nemesis strikes again!

The way odds work, Jaded, is that you win some and lose some.

I've taken a look at that order, and I garantee you it won't look anything like it. For one, it's ludicrous to rank a team like Boston that high when they don't even have enough players signed to ice a full team last time I checked.

Odds is something that you can play with and have fun with. It's a lot different than being at the other end of it

I'm going to copy/paste that order for future reference.We'll see what it looks like at the end of next season.

Smart, so because it's not an exact science, you completely go random? How's making something MORE random going to help? Who cares if it's an inexact science, this has more chances of happening than just a random lottery. You basically think that the chances of having educated guesses work, is low, so you make the chances even lower? So let's pour some salt on the wound, I guess that'll make it better!

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

Um, this is such a joke, most teams have been selling off because a)they have no money (Pittsburgh) b)they're afraid of the cap (NYR) c)their overpriced vets aren't working (NYR). You're just bitter that your team stands in no man's land, mediocre. Can't make noise in the playoffs and aren't bad enough for that high of a pick.

My team is the Devils, won 3 cups in last 10 years, best drafting team in the NHL. I don't care if we get a shot at Crosby.

Teams that don't have money don't because they sold off all they players to rebuild and fans don't want to watch that sort of stuff.

Teams that are scared of the cap? The Rangers are the reason why there will be a cap. I have no pity for them if they don't get Crosby.

There was no 2004-05 season so how are we suppost to know if a team that gets a major injury wouldn't fall or a team that loses players via UFA wouldn't fall. The Penguins, Capitals, Rangers ect got rewarded for their poor season, no way in hell should they be rewarded again for that season.

 

[Barnaby]

There was no 2004-05 season so how are we suppost to know if a team that gets a major injury wouldn't fall or a team that loses players via UFA wouldn't fall. The Penguins, Capitals, Rangers ect got rewarded for their poor season, no way in hell should they be rewarded again for that season.

You never know for sure, but what's more likely? Elias gets hurt and the Devils miss, Modano gets hurt and the stars miss, Sakic gets hurts and the Avs miss, Lidstrom or Sundin along with their respective teams? Or is it more likely Chicago, Pitt, NYR, Columbus, etc.. won't make the playoffs? It isn't an exact science, but you should find a way to make the draft as close as to what would have happened. Is it exact? No, but we all no Toronto picking first and Pitt 30th like in that mock is ridiculous.

 

[Dadof5boys]

30 balls 1 ball per team. Like Vlad said, that is the fairest way. Who is to say with a new economic system that any of these elite teams will be able to retain their players? The teams that sucked already were rewarded in past drafts. I don't get the logic of wanting EXTRA high picks just because of the past and this is coming from a fan who would have 3 balls in the system that we are talking about.

 

[Vatican Roulette]

Thanks for the lecture, but I've already heard it many a time. What I gave was the condensed version. It was the large market teams that skewed the competive balance by offering outrageous money to players.

You're right the league needed a cap and the system was flawed, but it was those teams that were spending the money that were most resistant to putting that cap in place.

I always blame peter karmanos, the dallas stars, and the NYR. Those were the three in my mind that offered crazy amounts of money that shot up the rate of a UFA.

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

My team is the Devils, won 3 cups in last 10 years, best drafting team in the NHL. I don't care if we get a shot at Crosby.

Teams that don't have money don't because they sold off all they players to rebuild and fans don't want to watch that sort of stuff.

Teams that are scared of the cap? The Rangers are the reason why there will be a cap. I have no pity for them if they don't get Crosby.

There was no 2004-05 season so how are we suppost to know if a team that gets a major injury wouldn't fall or a team that loses players via UFA wouldn't fall. The Penguins, Capitals, Rangers ect got rewarded for their poor season, no way in hell should they be rewarded again for that season.

Ok, I was wrong, sorry, and you don't have to give me all the of the good things your team did. Isn't that guy on your avatar wearing a Kings jersey? I'm not saying you should have any sympathy for the Rangers, that's a whole different issue, but the reason they sold off was not because they wanted Crosby, but because they were afraid of the cap. C'mon, go by common sense, in the last how many years, the Devils, the Red Wings, the Avalanche, and the Flyers, have been in the playoffs, and have been cup contenders. Are you saying they never had any injuries? It's called depth and a good system. Toronto, Ottawa are other such teams (I can also add St. Louis and Dallas, though St. Louis almost missed the playoffs last season and Dallas missed them not too long ago, but those were abberations). One, maybe two of those teams max maybe won't make the playoffs, you know that most of the teams I listed will make the playoffs, injuries or not. So why should all these teams have an equally good chance at winning the lottery? Besides, the spirit of the lottery is to help teams that truly suck get a good player, not that suck for one year because of some injuries. You're just incredibly biased, and it shows. While I'm biased too, I already said that going by the exact same standings and system as 03-04, will be more fair than throwing teams' names into a hat. Under those standings and that system the Rangers have ZERO shot at Crosby, but it's more fair. The fact that technically the Devils might get Crosby and the Penguins the 30th pick, where the chances of the Devils not only not making the playoffs last year but also being in the bottom 5 of the league, injuries or not, and the Penguins being good enough for the 30th pick, are ZERO. However, the chances that the Devils will indeed get that first pick and the Penguins the 30th are as good as the teams getting getting any other picks, and that's ridiculous and will make the NHL a MOCKERY. If you don't feel this way, you're truly have no sense of impartiality. And what bothers me more, is not the fact that bad teams can get an equal chance of getting bad picks, but that the entire spirit of the league, of having bad teams improve will be completely wiped out, and perennial powerhouses that would almost certainly not have a chance at Crosby, if the teams played, and anyone that says otherwise is fooling themselves, will have a chance at him. If the NHL would do anything where perennial powerhouses get as good of a chance to win the lottery as the Rangers or Penguins, I'll be done with it, as it'll be an even bigger joke than it already is.

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

30 balls 1 ball per team. Like Vlad said, that is the fairest way. Who is to say with a new economic system that any of these elite teams will be able to retain their players? The teams that sucked already were rewarded in past drafts. I don't get the logic of wanting EXTRA high picks just because of the past and this is coming from a fan who would have 3 balls in the system that we are talking about.

So all of a sudden all of the powerhouse teams would start sucking? I can see it now, a mass exodus of players from the powerhouse teams to the crappy teams and the crappy teams become powerhouses and the powerhouses become crappy teams. The powerhouses won't lose all their good players and the good players that they do lose won't come to the bad teams and all of a sudden make them great. There may be more parity, but the perennial good teams won't all of a sudden become bad, and vice versa. The capped NBA is a MUCH better example than the NFL. WHY? Because a 16 game season is much more of a game of roulette than an 82 game season. Even if the cap is stronger in the NFL (not sure, not a cap expert), the biggest reason for parity is not so much the cap (even thogh it helped as you see the difference bettween the capped and uncapped years), but the fact that there's a 16 game schedule. Things have a way of evening out after 82 games, the best organizations tend to show why they're good and no matter if they lose players they would still be good year in and year out because those teams would know how to manage a cap. Sorry, the powerhouses will most likely remain powerhouses, and there's no reason to believe that they should have an equal chance at the #1 pick. Anyone that believes otherwise is fooling themselves. I can see NJ (especially), Philly, Detroit, and Colorado, all teams with very good depth all of a sudden sucking enough to be bottomn 5 in the league. Oh and every team will have the cap, and there will still have to be a cup winner and a president's trophy winner, the deepest and best run teams still would probably be the best teams, going by probability in a capped league.