Dab
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 3,193
- 3,001
Such a poor analogy. 82 games of terrible hockey to go to the lottery does not equal a 6/49 draw. I didn't just buy the ticket Wednesday, I bought it in October, 2016!
Post-Game Talk: Vancouver will pick 5th in the 2017 NHL Draft | Pt 2
- Thread starter ginner classic
- Start date
Such a poor analogy. 82 games of terrible hockey to go to the lottery does not equal a 6/49 draw. I didn't just buy the ticket Wednesday, I bought it in October, 2016!
Bad News Benning
Fallin for Dahlin?
I think the best solution is the following.
more playoff teams. I was against this idea for a long time but with expansion (32 teams soon) i think its needed. Set it up so 10 teams make the playoffs in each conference with 6 auto berths and 4 wild cards. The wild cards duke it out in a best of 3. You could even allow the highest rated wild card team to pick its opponent for added entertainment. Not only would this fix the "no man's land attitude" of finishing 12-15 but it would also finally give an advantage (and some incentive) to the top teams in the conference who get to face banged up/ bruised opponents after the wild card round.
If you only have 11 or 12 teams in the lottery it makes it more likely a team in need of talent is going to get it which is the point of a draft.
Hold lotteries for the top 2 spots (team cant drop more than 2 places). Set the odds like this when Seattle/quebec city is added
1.)25%
2.)20%
3.)15%
4.)10%
5.)10%
6.)5%
7.)5%
8.)2.5%
9.)2.5%
10.)2%
11.)2%
12.)1%
This would make sure that 60% of the time a team in the top 3 would win first pick and 80% of a time for a team in the top 5. Teams outside the top 5 could still move up from time to time but the bad teams would generally be awarded the best players.
I just don't think you can do a lottery with so many teams unless you give the teams in the 10-15 range the a 1% chance like the NBA does. If the nhl continues to expand into questionable markets you can't leave this lottery the same. It's just going to kill franchises that need the help.
If we somehow manage to dump, LE, Sutter and trade Tanev for more futures, id be ok with anyone. If we keep all of the above and resign Miller. Suddenly this pick becomes everything. I'm not really sure what they mean by rebuild. Are they really going to blow things up? we need a large volume of futures so the law of averages start bearing fruit.
RobertKron
Registered User
- Sep 1, 2007
- 15,516
- 8,652
This is the big problem. By not hoarding picks and volume drafting, as has been done by the majority of successful rebuilding teams, they become more reliant on each pick hitting.
I'd imagine that what they mean by rebuild is pretty close to what it seems like when Linden says "okay, fine - we'll call it a rebuild if that'll make you happy. Harumph."
They likely think that their process has been good, if hampered by bad luck, and that the fans are just being impatient.
I've been pretty busy, so I could well have missed it, but I still haven't really seen them come out and state what they think has gone wrong, and how they'd like to change course moving forward.
Middlestat is out guys. Go read the prospects thread about him he wants to finish his 4 year college degree before signing in the NHL which means he will be 22 and can sign with whoever he wants. OUT
No way id draft him now not even at 32
Down to
Glass
Makar
Heisky
Vilardi
Necas
No way id draft him now not even at 32
Down to
Glass
Makar
Heisky
Vilardi
Necas
Sadly, there is a higher probability of us trading away futures to a team covering their losses at the expansion draft then there is of us dumping roster players for futures. Which would make that 5th an even bigger deal, if they don't trade it away for someone stupid like Evander Kane. Benning has also mentioned this possibility earlier on. Taking advantage of the expansion draft. Or more like the expansion draft taking advantage of him.
Let's not assume DAL/COL/whoever take D because their current D-core sucks. Smart teams don't draft for positional needs with high picks. Take the best player available and if needed in the future you deal from a position of strength to get a piece where you are weak. It's just smart asset management.
It's like the argument that Bourdon was a good pick because Jovo was getting old. There were people actually arguing that.
The sad truth is that our prospect pools are weak in multiple areas, including Centre and Defence, and luckily for us (caveat: because we're so weak) the players ranked in our zone are almost exclusively C and D. And please don't try to argue we have good prospect depth because of [a list of names of recently drafted prospects who aren't playing pro hockey yet].
It's like the argument that Bourdon was a good pick because Jovo was getting old. There were people actually arguing that.
The sad truth is that our prospect pools are weak in multiple areas, including Centre and Defence, and luckily for us (caveat: because we're so weak) the players ranked in our zone are almost exclusively C and D. And please don't try to argue we have good prospect depth because of [a list of names of recently drafted prospects who aren't playing pro hockey yet].
thepuckmonster
Professional Winner.
Yeah I went in and it seems like an unfounded rumour.
The amount of high talent prospects who exercise that clause vs those who don't is minuscule. Not to mention I'm sure he wouldn't be ranked as high as he is by multiple scouting experts if that was even an inkling.
Hell, Shinkaruk and McCann fell from 10-15 to the 20s solely because they interviewed poorly. If there was any truth to Middelstadt saying that he would fall like a rock. In fact, he's done the opposite.
Pretty much. It's also something no prospect would ever say publicly before the draft. But I shouldn't be surprised, college players are MtB's kryptonite.
thepuckmonster
Professional Winner.
thepuckmonster
Professional Winner.
Hell even if Middelstadt hypothetically said that, you still draft him and spend the next 3-4 years courting him, showing him his place in the franchise, how big of a piece he can be. If he's easily the best talent at that spot that's a calculated risk that you'll probably win. We heard the same about Demko and Boeser and they both signed with relative ease. It's just such an overblown issue.
The biggest reason a lot of these NCAA guys leave is because their organizations haven't really paid attention to them until their last year or two.
The biggest reason a lot of these NCAA guys leave is because their organizations haven't really paid attention to them until their last year or two.
Lol....those guys fell for a lot other reasons than how they interviewed.....size and defensive diligence were two of the biggest reasons.....and both got traded after basically two years in the Canuck organization.....it's a cautionary tale for guys like Goldobin and Dahlen, who were also traded by the teams that drafted them.
Nah if Middelstadt says that you draft someone else. Focus needs to be on the team not courting a prospect. I don't think he'd bolt, Vancouver is a pretty nice place but I hope we take Vilardi.
vanarchy
⠀
- May 3, 2013
- 9,167
- 8,461
thepuckmonster
Professional Winner.
vanarchy
⠀
- May 3, 2013
- 9,167
- 8,461
I was gunna go with Trev initially but I'm trying not to hate every ounce of his being because of the career he had.
Jack Burton
Pro Tank Since 13
thepuckmonster
Professional Winner.
Thankfully I can separate Trev the player and Trev the Pres but admittedly it is getting harder.
Ad
Latest posts
-
Series Talk: WCSF: Dallas Stars vs Colorado Avalanche | COL leads 1-0- Latest: nightonthesun
-
-
Upcoming events
-
-
-
Game 3 Texas Stars @ Milwaukee Admirals - Texas Stars leads series 2-0Wagers: 2Staked: $75.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 2 Indiana Pacers @ New York Knicks - NY leads series 1-0Wagers: 4Staked: $2,200.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 3 Ontario Reign @ Abbotsford Canucks - Ontario Reign leads series 2-0Wagers: 3Staked: $794.00Event closes
- Updated: