Possible frame work for next draft

[Jaded-Fan]

You are howling in the wind NYRGoalie. The fans of teams who have had their way for years now and have grown used to it want their way once more when it comes to the draft. It is their God given right to have the best players after all, and they deserve as much of a chance (if not more . . . if they had their way) as the teams who have sucked and will suck for years more to come. Rebuild? Never, they should not have to . . . they are Toronto . . .the Devils . . .Colorado . . . and on and on. God smiles on them, and therefore why should fair come into play. No, by rights it would be unfair if Crosby ended up anywhere but with one of the golden teams. Get with the program. Be grateful that they even would allow the Rags, or one of the have nots of late to even have a chance at a top pick as well this year. They are being generous.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

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!

It's pretty simple. I can't arbitrarily decide who should have a better chance at higher picks under the current circumstances. I cannot predict the order with accuracy.

There has to be another system. The popular one in the eyes of many is to take the last few years of teams picking the highest and award them more chances at a high pick. It's so Pejorative Slured and unfair, it isn't even funny.

The only solution left is to go random. It is the only system where the integrity of the decision is at 100% safe.

All the other arguments I have heard are flawed, as has been pointed out a number of times.

All the arguments about what big and small market do, about where Sydney Crosby should go, about who suffered the most in the old CBA or who will suffer the most in a new CBA, about which teams will make the playoffs according to some nobodies on message boards are just fantasy with not a shred of relevance and/or evidence of accuracy.

All that matters is that we cannot predict the order the teams would have finished in, and that going by averaging the years and giving picks to teams who, on average, have picked the most number of high picks in the last few years is monumentally dumb, totally inconsistent with the process and absolutely unfair.

Now give me a system that makes sense or I still say the only fair solution is equal chances for all 30 teams.

 

[Epsilon]

I agree totally with Vlad. The only better solution to me is the following:

1. Cancel the draft completely for this year.

2. Raise the draft age to 19, assuming such a rule can survive legal challenges in Canada (it should have no problem in the USA). Hence the draft classes themselves are unaffected.

3. All traded picks for the 2005 draft become traded picks for the 2006 draft. All traded picks for the 2006, 2007, etc. drafts (if there are any), move down one year accordingly.

The draft happens at the end of next season as usual.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

You are howling in the wind NYRGoalie. The fans of teams who have had their way for years now and have grown used to it want their way once more when it comes to the draft.

Sorry, this is going to be irrelevant to the conversation but I find it amusing that:

1-You are sympatizing with a Rangers fan, responsible in great part for salary inflation, and who also screwed you hard on a deal for Kovalev

2-A team which, BTW, does demonstrate that there's more to success than being a big market (they are the biggest market of them all too)

3-That you seem to suggest teams "have their way" as if they were cheating. It's called winning.

4-That you seem to suggest that teams "that have their way" somehow also get "once more" their way at the draft. This is strange and sounds inaccurate to me.

It is their God given right to have the best players after all,

And yet I garantee you will be the first to be glowing when the name of Malkin comes up. And Caps fans are very happy with Ovechkin, and the Flames with Phaneuf. And Mario is still the best player in the league. And on and on.

There are countless great prospects, great young players and even some veterans on most franchises.

I will be the first to recognize that the CBA changes are needed. I have been very vocal about it for well over 5 years. On the UFA front, things are bad. But this isn't the role of the draft to fix whatever innacuracies you have perceived in the economic system. The draft is usually a system that compensates the teams that have sucked the most the previous season. That is fact. The rest of your story is a faerie tale built around parameters to make your wishes come true.

The true fact is, the Rangers can draft high like anybody else even if they are loaded. And Tampa drafts last when they win the Cup even if they are poorer.

as the teams who have sucked and will suck for years more to come.

Unsubstantiated fantasy. You do not know for a fact who will suck, nor for how long. This is fact.

Rebuild? Never, they should not have to . . . they are Toronto . . .the Devils . . .Colorado . . . and on and on. God smiles on them, and therefore why should fair come into play.

God smiled on the New-Jersey Devils when someone out there made the decision to hire Lou Lamoriello. Then everything fell into place. If you want teams like that, take a sign, park in front of your arena and ask the Penguins to get Mario out of decision-making processes and to stop handing out favors to clueless friends like Edzo. Hope for good performances and keep on pressuring for a fair CBA that will allow you to retain good players.

On this last item, I have to note again the irony that on various threads here, you have sympatized with Rangers and Caps fans. Probably the two single teams who have have took advantage of your franchise thanks to the CBA over the last few years. I guess you want a high pick pretty bad because the irony is incredible.

No, by rights it would be unfair if Crosby ended up anywhere but with one of the golden teams.

It would be unfair if a human decision to weight the lottery was not 100% accurate and fair. The result is largely irrelevant as long as nobody is slighted. This should be in the interest of the 30 franchises. The world does not revolve around your Penguins and whatever suffering you went through, sorry.

Nobody should give a **** about the big or small markets but rather find a 100% objective solution to this mess.


It's getting old, but since nobody ever answer it, I might as well ask again:

Why, if drafting higher is so important, should we average the last few years of teams picking the most numer of high picks and arbitrarily give them higher picks this year? This makes no sense.

You either believe the draft is important or you don't. Enought with the bull****. Is drafting high important or not?

If it is, shut up. You got your picks. You were rewarded for EACH and EVERY year you sucked.

If the draft is not important, shut up as well. Because in that case nobody cares who has a high pick.

Be grateful that they even would allow the Rags, or one of the have nots of late to even have a chance at a top pick as well this year. They are being generous.

Yeah, the poor Rangers/have-nots. Don't forget the Caps as well.

Let's average the last few years and give those have/nots, as well as Stanley Cup winning Tampa (who according to some of those stupid systems floating around would get more balls) a BETTER chance to draft high. Because of reasons that make no sense.

All that matters is how the draft is usually done, and what we are going to do to determine the order since the usual mean is not a possibility this year. The rest, including wild unsubstantiated projections, pity arguments, Crosby in the spotlight arguments and all those other things are just complete junk for the desperate.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

I agree totally with Vlad. The only better solution to me is the following:

1. Cancel the draft completely for this year.

2. Raise the draft age to 19, assuming such a rule can survive legal challenges in Canada (it should have no problem in the USA). Hence the draft classes themselves are unaffected.

3. All traded picks for the 2005 draft become traded picks for the 2006 draft. All traded picks for the 2006, 2007, etc. drafts (if there are any), move down one year accordingly.

The draft happens at the end of next season as usual.

I would very much like that to happen!

I just don't think they will go for it, unfortunately.

But your solution would be by far the BEST thing.

Nonetheless, they will need to make a ruling anyway in case such a mess ever happen again (another lockout in say, 2012 with another missed year of hockey followed by a draft). Because we couldn't keep on bumping the age everytime we need to determine draft order by other means than the standings. Such a ruling should be taken now and not after the fact, like it's the case here. You would see a LOT more objectivity from fans GMs and organizations, since it is virtually impossible to know what the league will look like several years from now.

 

[Jag68Sid87]

I don't like the idea of postponing the draft and/or moving the age back up to 19. I just think it really messes with the traded draft picks situation a bit too much.

That said, I now think that 30 balls in the bin, one equal shot for all NHL clubs, is the only fair solution to ROUND 1 of the 2005 NHL Entry Draft. After that, I think they should snake in Round 2. For Round 3, I'd probably have another lottery (this time weighted heavily based on the last 3-5 years) and stick to this order or snake again in the even rounds. After all, the teams that have struggled in recent years may want Crosby (everybody does), but they also need decent positioning in the other rounds to give them a better shot at stockpiling their futures. In many aspects, this is in fact even more important than landing the big prize (Crosby).

 

[NJDraft]

What a freaking mess. I was commited to a "balls" system. I believe in the nonplayoff half, improving themselves[except the rag$ who spend more than anybody anyway]. Even though the Wash Caps for example, may have had a very good '05 season had it been played. Or the NJD may have done very poorly had Marty been inj,and Scotty Stevens retired. The point is you just don't know what the order would have been.

So the more I think about it, a straight lott seems like the fairest system,though I acknowledge it is flawed. But everything in this league has gone nuts. I just don't see why teams like the Caps,BHawks,and rag$ should be draft-advantaged for a year that never started, simply because they run lousy hockey clubs. I mean it's not like everybody else cheats somehow.

Everybody, with one exception, is going to be disappointed and maybe angry after the draft order is set. So maybe a 1 in 30 shot is the least of the bad options.

 

[DARKSIDE]

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.

I'll speak about the Devils since I follow them. And I wish I could agree with their rating, because I rather have them chase the cup then a lottery pick. However, I can't take the ratings you posted seriously. Why? Because you have to take into consideration that Niedermayer and Rafalski are UFA's and we aren't 100% sure that Scott Stevens will be back and even if he does, he's 41. So, if the Devils lose two out of those three , how can you seriously pick the Devils behind Detroit, which I think is another mistake. My top 5 favorites would be Tampa, Ottawa, Philly, Colorado and San Jose.

 

[kingpin_19]

If Wayne Gretzky can't turn the Moose-less Rangers around.....

 

[Jaded-Fan]

I'll speak about the Devils since I follow them. And I wish I could agree with their rating, because I rather have them chase the cup then a lottery pick. However, I can't take the ratings you posted seriously. Why? Because you have to take into consideration that Niedermayer and Rafalski are UFA's and we aren't 100% sure that Scott Stevens will be back and even if he does, he's 41. So, if the Devils lose two out of those three , how can you seriously pick the Devils behind Detroit, which I think is another mistake. My top 5 favorites would be Tampa, Ottawa, Philly, Colorado and San Jose.

Those are not my odds, my picks, but a betting sites. Your opinion as well as mine means something, but the experts on that site, and dozens and dozens of others like it, are putting their money where their mouths are, with taking real bets and giving real odds. The link was posted in response to Vlad's assertion that you can not in any way make an educated guess as to what would have happened last year, what will happen next year, so let us give rank everyone the same. It is a total BS assertion, and those who make it are either lying or . . . well, not the brightest lights on the christmas tree, as is shown by the link. People make educated guesses on just such things all the time, they are called bets, and though imperfect it is a hell of a lot closer to what reality would have been than a totally random throwing 30 balls in a hopper.

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

It's pretty simple. I can't arbitrarily decide who should have a better chance at higher picks under the current circumstances. I cannot predict the order with accuracy.

There has to be another system. The popular one in the eyes of many is to take the last few years of teams picking the highest and award them more chances at a high pick. It's so Pejorative Slured and unfair, it isn't even funny.

The only solution left is to go random. It is the only system where the integrity of the decision is at 100% safe.

All the other arguments I have heard are flawed, as has been pointed out a number of times.

All the arguments about what big and small market do, about where Sydney Crosby should go, about who suffered the most in the old CBA or who will suffer the most in a new CBA, about which teams will make the playoffs according to some nobodies on message boards are just fantasy with not a shred of relevance and/or evidence of accuracy.

All that matters is that we cannot predict the order the teams would have finished in, and that going by averaging the years and giving picks to teams who, on average, have picked the most number of high picks in the last few years is monumentally dumb, totally inconsistent with the process and absolutely unfair.

Now give me a system that makes sense or I still say the only fair solution is equal chances for all 30 teams.

Yes you can, most of the teams that have been making the playoffs these last 4 years will make the playoffs again, and most of the sucky ones won't (however the first case is more of an exact science). If you can tell me without crossing your fingers and with a straight face, that NJ, Philly, Detroit, Colorado, Toronto, Ottawa, Dallas etc. don't won't almost all make the playoffs then you don't follow hockey. You try to go by probability, and try to make it most fair. The fact that it's an inexact science doesn't mean that you make it even more of an inexact science, and just completely make it random. As I said, when you have a wound, you put a band-aid on it, not pour salt on it. This has the highest probability of working correctly, and thus is the fairest. Anyway, hey Devils, Flyers, Avs, and Wings fans. I'll agree with you about giving one ball per team, if we can do a lottery like that for the Stanley Cup champion of 2004-2005. We didn't have a stanley cup champ, how about we give, the Rangers, Pens, Panthers, Caps, Jackets etc. the same exact chance of winning the cup. After all we can't always pick the team that'll win the cup. Yeah that would be fun and fair!

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

Sorry, this is going to be irrelevant to the conversation but I find it amusing that:

1-You are sympatizing with a Rangers fan, responsible in great part for salary inflation, and who also screwed you hard on a deal for Kovalev

2-A team which, BTW, does demonstrate that there's more to success than being a big market (they are the biggest market of them all too)

3-That you seem to suggest teams "have their way" as if they were cheating. It's called winning.

4-That you seem to suggest that teams "that have their way" somehow also get "once more" their way at the draft. This is strange and sounds inaccurate to me.



And yet I garantee you will be the first to be glowing when the name of Malkin comes up. And Caps fans are very happy with Ovechkin, and the Flames with Phaneuf. And Mario is still the best player in the league. And on and on.

There are countless great prospects, great young players and even some veterans on most franchises.

I will be the first to recognize that the CBA changes are needed. I have been very vocal about it for well over 5 years. On the UFA front, things are bad. But this isn't the role of the draft to fix whatever innacuracies you have perceived in the economic system. The draft is usually a system that compensates the teams that have sucked the most the previous season. That is fact. The rest of your story is a faerie tale built around parameters to make your wishes come true.

The true fact is, the Rangers can draft high like anybody else even if they are loaded. And Tampa drafts last when they win the Cup even if they are poorer.



Unsubstantiated fantasy. You do not know for a fact who will suck, nor for how long. This is fact.



God smiled on the New-Jersey Devils when someone out there made the decision to hire Lou Lamoriello. Then everything fell into place. If you want teams like that, take a sign, park in front of your arena and ask the Penguins to get Mario out of decision-making processes and to stop handing out favors to clueless friends like Edzo. Hope for good performan
ces and keep on pressuring for a fair CBA that will allow you to retain good players.

On this last item, I have to note again the irony that on various threads here, you have sympatized with Rangers and Caps fans. Probably the two single teams who have have took advantage of your franchise thanks to the CBA over the last few years. I guess you want a high pick pretty bad because the irony is incredible.



It would be unfair if a human decision to weight the lottery was not 100% accurate and fair. The result is largely irrelevant as long as nobody is slighted. This should be in the interest of the 30 franchises. The world does not revolve around your Penguins and whatever suffering you went through, sorry.

Nobody should give a **** about the big or small markets but rather find a 100% objective solution to this mess.


It's getting old, but since nobody ever answer it, I might as well ask again:

Why, if drafting higher is so important, should we average the last few years of teams picking the most numer of high picks and arbitrarily give them higher picks this year? This makes no sense.

You either believe the draft is important or you don't. Enought with the bull****. Is drafting high important or not?

If it is, shut up. You got your picks. You were rewarded for EACH and EVERY year you sucked.

If the draft is not important, shut up as well. Because in that case nobody cares who has a high pick.



Yeah, the poor Rangers/have-nots. Don't forget the Caps as well.

Let's average the last few years and give those have/nots, as well as Stanley Cup winning Tampa (who according to some of those stupid systems floating around would get more balls) a BETTER chance to draft high. Because of reasons that make no sense.

All that matters is how the draft is usually done, and what we are going to do to determine the order since the usual mean is not a possibility this year. The rest, including wild unsubstantiated projections, pity arguments, Crosby in the spotlight arguments and all those other things are just complete junk for the desperate.

Wow, so let's make this into a hating match. What does this have to do with anything? We're talking about sucky teams not why they're sucky. There are plenty of sucky teams other than the Rangers, so you're just hating to be hating.

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

What a freaking mess. I was commited to a "balls" system. I believe in the nonplayoff half, improving themselves[except the rag$ who spend more than anybody anyway]. Even though the Wash Caps for example, may have had a very good '05 season had it been played. Or the NJD may have done very poorly had Marty been inj,and Scotty Stevens retired. The point is you just don't know what the order would have been.

So the more I think about it, a straight lott seems like the fairest system,though I acknowledge it is flawed. But everything in this league has gone nuts. I just don't see why teams like the Caps,BHawks,and rag$ should be draft-advantaged for a year that never started, simply because they run lousy hockey clubs. I mean it's not like everybody else cheats somehow.

Everybody, with one exception, is going to be disappointed and maybe angry after the draft order is set. So maybe a 1 in 30 shot is the least of the bad options.

You know what if you want to have a mature conversation with adults, making stupid nicknames and adding a dollar sign at the end instead of a "S" won't accomplish that. We have some very mature people on this board don't we, are you a 10 year old moron? What does running a lousy club have to do with anything? If they suck they suck. To me, I believe I said this, what bothers me is not the fact that lousy teams won't get a chance to improve, though I do want the Rangers to get a higher pick, but that's very inexact, as a lot of lousy teams have improved (Anaheim, Carolina,Calgary, TB, though two of those showed that they were one year wonders). To me what bothers me the most is that the dominant powerhouses will get a chance to get the first pick. Screw the Rangers, Pens, Blackhawks, Caps, Panthers etc. SCREW THOSE TEAMS! I don't want perrenial powerhouses having as good of a chance of landing the #1 pick as any team. I'll even play along with the fact that teams have improved lately, though, then it seems that they disappeared next year and became one year wonders, that said forget them, look at the teams that have been winning the cup. Before Tampa Bay, FOUR teams have won cups since 1994. FOUR teams, NJ 3, Detroit 3, Colorado 2, and Dallas 1. That doesn't include perennial cup contenders and playoff contenders, Philly, Ottawa, and Toronto etc. These teams are ALWAYS cup/playoff contenders and them having as good of a chance of getting the #1 pick is a MOCKERY. And as long as the Devil's will have Lou and their system, they'll always be in the playoffs and for the most part cup contenders, lost players to FA or not. Losing Bobby Holik, REALLY hurt the Devils,just an example. These are all deep teams with good systems, and they won't be out of the playoffs, no need to even mention having a bottom 5 record, that'll give them a chance to get the #1 pick.

 

[Habs Icing]

This is a crazy idea but why not go back to the way it was 40-50 years ago. There was no hockey this year well there'll be no draft. The teams just go out and recruit the draft eligible players. The players sign with the team that offers them the best deal. With a cap in place the teams can't go crazy with their offers.

I haven't thought it through but I think that's the fair way to go. The problem is once you have a free market,will the players agree to go back to the draft? I'm really surprised such a draconian, backward idea as a draft is allowed to fly in North America. Can you imagine if the hospitals drafted all the graduating doctors out of university and restricted them to where they could work?

 

[Jag68Sid87]

Hockey players know that if they want to play in the NHL, they'll get drafted (probably) and they won't have a say in what team they START their careers with. They know that going in. If they have a problem with it, they can try becoming a doctor, since hospitals don't have these restrictions

It's not really draconian. To open it up again like it was 45-50 years ago is unrealistic. There was no salary cap back then, because there was no salary inflation back then. Heck, there wasn't even salary disclosure back then, so it would be sheer guesswork to figure out what anybody was making. Times have changed. Besides, teams would definitely spend a lot to acquire top young talent, but it would be at the expense of the established players. A number of vets would flee to Europe because they could get better deals there, which would lessen the NHL as they'd lose quality players because of the money spent on young players that for the most part are not ready to make an impact on the league. It would be a disaster.

NHLGoalieGlut, as for your statement that 'most of the teams that made the playoffs over the last 4 years will do so again', and vice-versa, I really don't think you can say that at this time. Players haven't donned NHL uniforms in a year. Some haven't even played competitive hockey at all. Meanwhile, a whole slew of players in the AHL, CHL, European elite leagues and elsewhere have caught up to (and in many cases surpassed) a number of inactive players in terms of current performance potential. Add to that the number of players that are likely to call it a career as casualties of the lockout, the number of players that established, playoff-bound teams will lose because of the salary cap (via trade, free agency and in some cases perhaps even contract buyouts) and the wholesale changes to the game on the ice that are expected to be implemented and we have totally uncharted territory right now.

To even suggest that Team X will continue to flourish is really premature. I think we can probably count on one hand the number of teams that will still be strong when all the dust settles, REGARDLESS of the details on the new CBA and regardless of what happens with the rule changes, etc.:

Tampa Bay, Ottawa, Calgary, New Jersey

From where I sit, that's pretty much it...and even New Jersey could be in some trouble, depending on their cap situation and just how open the game becomes in the new era.

Everybody else? Good luck with your predictions.

 

[Habs Icing]

...teams would definitely spend a lot to acquire top young talent, but it would be at the expense of the established players. A number of vets would flee to Europe because they could get better deals there, which would lessen the NHL as they'd lose quality players because of the money spent on young players that for the most part are not ready to make an impact on the league. It would be a disaster.

.

That argument really doesn't wash. Take this year's draft: how many of the prospects will be fauned over? 6-7 maybe 8. So 6-7 maybe 8 teams blow their budget and they cut some veteran players. What makes you think those veterans are going to Europe when there's 24-23 maybe 22 other teams that lost out on the prospect bidding and are more than willing to pick up the veterans.

 

[RangerBoy]

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?

Why would there be a major conspiracy against the Capitals?

Washington had 96 points in 00-01,85 points in 01-02 and 92 points in 02-03

 

[Ola]

Personally I belive this reported "frame work" is horrendous...

Sure teams that weren't competetive in 03-04 have been awarded with highpicks already. But the draft is about the competetive balance in the league. A balance that could be seriously disturbed if the top 3-5 picks where all awarded to teams that have made the PO's the last 4 years... The draft can't be about making every year status que. Success runs over a long period of time. It usually takes 4-5 years for bad teams to become competetive.

If the NHL weren't in such a mess there is no way a draftscenario like this would be in the running, talk about a commisioner afraid to step on the wrong toes... The competetive balance of the league is suppose to be sacred. With 30 teams in the league its extremly important for teams that the draftsystem works, its hard enough as it is to be competetive in the NHL. With this proposal teams with a poor roster and not allot of prospects in the system could end up picking 30th overall.

If teams with already a bunch of good players in their prime on the roster where awarded with high picks it would set them further apart from poor team, which could affect unfortunate teams for a really long time.

Its reasonable to expect that a couple of teams that where good before the lockout will suck after it, and that a couple of teams that missed the PO's before the lockout will be contenders after it. It happends every year without a lockout, Dallas and Minnesota are good examples. But the majority of bad teams will still suck and the majority of good teams will still be good after the lockout.

The reported draft scenario is IMO extremely far from reasonable and fair. There would be a 25% chance that a team that have made the PO's 4 straight years gets the 1st overall pick. If you add last years SC winner to that group and teams that have been in the SC finals the last 4 years the odds gets closer to 40%!!! And whats more astonishing is the odds where the top three picks all would go to teams that have made the PO's 4 straight years...

My proposal would be a combination of the two systems that have been talked about in the media. The first one where every round is diveded into groups of five, like 1-5, 6-10, 11-15 and on. Teams would be positioned by a combined standings of the last 4 years. There would be 6 separate lotterys, one for every group. Every lottery would hold 20 balls, in every group 16 balls would be diveded between the top 5 teams somewhat according to the rules in the latest proposal, and 4 balls would represent the rest.

Its allot more complicated and needs some fine-tuning but the bottomline would be that all teams would have a shoot at Crosby, the odds of him gooing to a team outside the 5 worst teams the last 4 years would be 20%(diveded on 25 teams), but there would also be a maximum of 2 teams moving up more then 20 spots. Poor teams would be gauranteed a pick with a range of 6 spots. Maybe its better to make three groups in a round, like 1-10, 11-20 & 21-30 and let four teams move free between the groups ect. That way a team could drop 11 spots.

The framework thats been sugested is horrible though...

 

[NYRGoalieGlut*]

E=RangerBoy]Why would there be a major conspiracy against the Capitals?

Washington had 96 points in 00-01,85 points in 01-02 and 92 points in 02-03

I guess maybe he thinks that those years aren't representitive of the current Caps team, and thus the Caps most likely would've sucked in 04-05. As a Rangers fan I don't feel bad for teams that have been good every year other than the last because the Rangers have been bad forever. However, I guess that the spirit of this lottery is to accurately predict which team would've sucked in 04-05, although, I'm not sure because of the way they were doing it. There's no conspiracy though, they may be screwed, but the conspiracy theory is hogwash. Oh and I forgot about Ovechkin, really crying about it is a joke.

 

[DaveMatthew]

Now just imagine if Ottawa got Crosby.

Crosby, Hossa, Havlat, Spezza, Alfredsson.

That would be sick.

A man can dream can't he?

 

[SwOOsh*]

If you lose a ball for winning the draft lottery in prior years you should definetly lose one for winning the Stanley Cup.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Wow, so let's make this into a hating match. What does this have to do with anything? We're talking about sucky teams not why they're sucky. There are plenty of sucky teams other than the Rangers, so you're just hating to be hating.

It's not a hating match.

I just think Jaded-Fan drapes himself in the mantle of "have-nots" that doesn''t fit when his argument seems to include teams like the Penguins and Rangers.

Those teams are not "have-not" teams by any stretch of the imagination. They're just teams that sucked on the ice, some longer than other.

 

[BrettNYR]

I see no point in this. The draft was already canceled and we are not likely to get an agreement until August or September. Why not raise the draft age to 19?

 

[Ola]

It's not a hating match.

I just think Jaded-Fan drapes himself in the mantle of "have-nots" that doesn''t fit when his argument seems to include teams like the Penguins and Rangers.

Those teams are not "have-not" teams by any stretch of the imagination. They're just teams that sucked on the ice, some longer than other.

You know, the draft IMO isn't about the haves and have-nots. Its should not even be about accurately predicting a 04-05 standing.

The draft is a tool too shift the powerbalance in a extremly competetive league. It usually takes a pretty long period of time for teams to become contenders.

Some teams are managed allot better then others, and that will always play a big part. But its insane if the league would put a random draft ranking out there. Just insane. And its about as far from fair as its possible to come if this proposed frame for a draft is used. Imagine if you are a GM/Coach/Fan for/of a team that have fought hard for a long period of time during a rebuild and a team in your division that have for a number of years won their division/conference/gone far in the playoffs suddenly is awarded top 3 pick in the draft while your team gets th 30th pick overall. Imagine if 3 teams from your division who all have finnished ahead of you in the standing all win top 5 picks. The draft is a too important tool to randomize.

A team that have been successful over a long period of time have all the other advantages over less successful teams. Among many other factors they have the winning atmosphere in the lockeroom, you as a Devil fan should know. Every single team that where successful the last 4 years will have some sort of frame left from what made them successful in the past next year.

The only reason this frame work is on the table is because there are about 20 winners, 30 teams in the league, thats a clear majority. IMO its a huge fuc-king mockery of all hockeyfans from the league.... Insane!

 

[Vatican Roulette]

Screw the Rangers, Pens, Blackhawks, Caps, Panthers etc. SCREW THOSE TEAMS! I don't want perrenial powerhouses having as good of a chance of landing the #1 pick as any team.

Thats ok, i dont want a team thats respondsible for 1/2 the CBA mess by(by driving up salaries) to have an equal shot at the 1st overall. All those years rangers fans were dancing in the streets in june because they signed all the top free agents adn thought they were going to buy a stanley cup, well, now they are sticking their hands out for charity.

Its just like a person winning the lotto and then filing for bankruptcy years later.