Possible frame work for next draft

Status
Not open for further replies.

borro

Registered User
Oct 8, 2002
3,141
0
Texas
Visit site
ClashCitiRockr said:
Surprised this wasn't posted previously.

NHL teams hoping to hit the big Sid jackpot

This systemcompletely sucks. I would not approve a CBA based on losing a chance at a correct pick if I was a nonplayoff team. VERY VERY VERY bad idea. Why does Philly and Toronto and Vancover deserve a shot at Crosby? Answer-they don't. Theynever would have if no strike had occured. Talk about taking advantage of people. Why do they suddenly get a chance at guys they never would have had a chance at. The concept is not entertain the haves but fairness for the have nots. This proposal is putrid.
 

The Old Master

come and take it.
Sep 27, 2004
17,403
4,758
burgh
Ola said:
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.

The framework thats been sugested is horrible though... :shakehead
your wasteing your time. don't confuse me with facts my mind is made up. i want my team to have a shot at crosby for no good reason other than i want him, some call it greed but i call it.....ok ..so it's greed who cares what it dose to the nhls credibilty! ...........[ ok i'm more in jaded fans camp but i thought i would save a lot of dumb responses and post it for them(truthfully)] :)
 

DarthSather99

Registered User
Mar 2, 2002
3,313
15
NYC
Visit site
pavel datsyuk said:
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.


The draft is about giving the poorer teams a shot at younger talent, it creates parity. The rangers have missied the playoffs since the 20th century, they deserve a better shot than say a team like Colorado. The Rangers try to win it every year, obviously they have major management problems. It wasn't the Rangers who signed Jagr to a mammoth contract. It wasn't the Rangers who signed Pronger, Forsberg, Hasek, Amonte, Weight, Guerin and all the other superstars to outrageous contracts. Yeah we did make some bad signings, Holik and Kasperitis but to say the Rangers are responsible for 50% of this mess is rediculous.
 

norrisnick

The best...
Apr 14, 2005
28,819
13,315
DarthSather99 said:
The draft is about giving the poorer teams a shot at younger talent, it creates parity. The rangers have missied the playoffs since the 20th century, they deserve a better shot than say a team like Colorado. The Rangers try to win it every year, obviously they have major management problems. It wasn't the Rangers who signed Jagr to a mammoth contract. It wasn't the Rangers who signed Pronger, Forsberg, Hasek, Amonte, Weight, Guerin and all the other superstars to outrageous contracts. Yeah we did make some bad signings, Holik and Kasperitis but to say the Rangers are responsible for 50% of this mess is rediculous.
They signed Sakic to an offersheet that Colorado had to match. That was one of two or three such signings that got this whole thing out of control and made Jagr, Forsberg, Pronger 11-figure men.
 

Vatican Roulette

Baile de Los Locos
Feb 28, 2002
14,007
2
Gorillaz-EPWRID
Visit site
DarthSather99 said:
The draft is about giving the poorer teams a shot at younger talent, it creates parity. The rangers have missied the playoffs since the 20th century, they deserve a better shot than say a team like Colorado. The Rangers try to win it every year, obviously they have major management problems. It wasn't the Rangers who signed Jagr to a mammoth contract. It wasn't the Rangers who signed Pronger, Forsberg, Hasek, Amonte, Weight, Guerin and all the other superstars to outrageous contracts. Yeah we did make some bad signings, Holik and Kasperitis but to say the Rangers are responsible for 50% of this mess is rediculous.


What Norrisnick said, and add to the fact, they usually signed the "B" level free agents to high contracts as well, driving up the bottom line. Remember Dave Karpa and Sylvain Lefebvre?

I completely agree that the draft is about giving the poorer teams a shot at younger and better talent. So why should a team that is one of the major causes for the CBA mess be rewarded with a #1 pick?

And trust me, i dont think that Detroit, Colorado, Dallas or Philly should have a shot at it either.
 

hawksfan50

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
13,983
1,964
Better 3 than 2 balls for CHI --so if would prefer the 4 yr /4 ball starter then deductions for making playoffs (!) and #1 overall picks (0)--that's 3/4 balls for the Hawks and much better than 2/3 in the 3 year scenario...


Of course the Hawks deserve some bonus balls too:

1 = 44 years and no CuP!

1= Misery index far higher(worse) for Hawks in last 4 years than any other team= only 1 bright hope actually made it onto the ice--this just for ONE season (Ruutu)
---at least woeful Columbus had the pleasure of Nash already for TWO seasons,ATL had the pleasure of KOVALCHUK for a couple of seasons already..etc...

1= for the botch-ups of Mike Smith in the 2000 draft (Yakubov a bust,maybe Vorobiev too --he should have taken Frolov with one of those picks --as I desperately wanted)..

1= for Smith's idiotic trade with Columbus (Odelein)--costing us Dan Fritsche with the draft pick we gave them...


YES---the Hawks deserve 4 more bonus balls for all this MISERY piled upon Misery!


(OF course the Hockey Gods would never allow the Hawks the #1 --even if they had 7 ballls to some teams with even 4; the best the Hawks could hope for is not to get shoved back to some 9th-12th pick (or worse)--shoved back to more mediocrity...
 

Anthony Mauro

DraftBuzz Hockey
Oct 3, 2004
6,859
5
www.draftbuzzhockey.com
hawksfan50 said:
Better 3 than 2 balls for CHI --so if would prefer the 4 yr /4 ball starter then deductions for making playoffs (!) and #1 overall picks (0)--that's 3/4 balls for the Hawks and much better than 2/3 in the 3 year scenario...


Of course the Hawks deserve some bonus balls too:

1 = 44 years and no CuP!

1= Misery index far higher(worse) for Hawks in last 4 years than any other team= only 1 bright hope actually made it onto the ice--this just for ONE season (Ruutu)
---at least woeful Columbus had the pleasure of Nash already for TWO seasons,ATL had the pleasure of KOVALCHUK for a couple of seasons already..etc...

1= for the botch-ups of Mike Smith in the 2000 draft (Yakubov a bust,maybe Vorobiev too --he should have taken Frolov with one of those picks --as I desperately wanted)..

1= for Smith's idiotic trade with Columbus (Odelein)--costing us Dan Fritsche with the draft pick we gave them...


YES---the Hawks deserve 4 more bonus balls for all this MISERY piled upon Misery!


(OF course the Hockey Gods would never allow the Hawks the #1 --even if they had 7 ballls to some teams with even 4; the best the Hawks could hope for is not to get shoved back to some 9th-12th pick (or worse)--shoved back to more mediocrity...

With your scenarios and whining about a situation that your own team caused, the Rangers should have all the balls and dont even bother to hold a lottery. I hope this was just in jest though. 1 and 2 i can deal with, 3 and 4 just uggh. Rangers and the tandem of Neil Smith/Glen Sather >(Pre vet dumping 2003) got you beat.
 

DARKSIDE

Registered User
Nov 17, 2003
1,053
0
DarthSather99 said:
The draft is about giving the poorer teams a shot at younger talent, it creates parity. The rangers have missied the playoffs since the 20th century, they deserve a better shot than say a team like Colorado. The Rangers try to win it every year, obviously they have major management problems. It wasn't the Rangers who signed Jagr to a mammoth contract. It wasn't the Rangers who signed Pronger, Forsberg, Hasek, Amonte, Weight, Guerin and all the other superstars to outrageous contracts. Yeah we did make some bad signings, Holik and Kasperitis but to say the Rangers are responsible for 50% of this mess is rediculous.

Just some bad signings. :sarcasm: If the Rangers had the chance, they would have tried to sign Stevens, Marty and Niedermayer. You won't get any sympaty from this Devil fan for not making the playoffs for the last seven years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->