HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Toronto Maple Leafs (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=17)
-   -   Would you be willing to lose the year for MacKinnon? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1281477)

Steve 11-09-2012 10:31 PM

Would you be willing to lose the year for MacKinnon?
 
Would you be willing to sacrifice this entire year, knowing the leafs would have a great chance to draft MacKinnon? (Assuming the Crobsy draft rules are used)

Short term pain, long term gain at it's finest.

Thee Implication 11-09-2012 10:33 PM

Nope

Grant 11-09-2012 10:33 PM

We will probably have just as good of a change as getting him whether we play hockey or not. I want hockey.

Gutchecktime 11-09-2012 10:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve (Post 55659123)
Would you be willing to sacrifice this entire year, knowing the leafs would have a great chance to draft MacKinnon? (Assuming the Crobsy draft rules are used)

Short term pain, long term gain at it's finest.

Less chance than we had winning the lottery last year and getting Yakupov.

Leafs at Knight 11-09-2012 10:40 PM

Yes, without even thinking twice. A future #1 C for the next 10+ years, or play 50 some odd games and pbly draft outside top 5.

Gatorade* 11-09-2012 10:40 PM

The odds are probably better if there were a season.

Quik 11-09-2012 10:44 PM

Pittsburgh (1), Columbus (7), Buffalo (12), NYR (16) had max 3 balls last time. Play the season

Brody 11-09-2012 10:51 PM

If we have a higher chance than we do now, yes, otherwise no.

Ari91 11-09-2012 10:51 PM

The odds of MacKinnon might be better if we do play :laugh:

I'm thoroughly entertained by these negotiations. If you don't have a sense of humour about it, it's going to drive you nuts.

DirtyDion03 11-09-2012 10:55 PM

I'd rather make no deals and play the season. There's no way this deal could survive in the East with this team..

I Believe 11-09-2012 10:55 PM

I might if it was a great chance of getting MacKinnon. But since it's only 6%, nah :laugh:

Radiohead 11-09-2012 10:56 PM

I don't consider 3/50 a "great chance" of winning, assuming we go by the 2005 rules.

Play the damn season. I want hockey.

egd27 11-09-2012 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve (Post 55659123)
Would you be willing to sacrifice this entire year, knowing the leafs would have a great chance to draft MacKinnon? (Assuming the Crobsy draft rules are used)

Short term pain, long term gain at it's finest.

Define a "great chance".

Evileye 11-09-2012 11:07 PM

No because they could very easily be drafting 30th and the Kings could get 1st.

I think the lottery draft should be arranged so that the criteria for 'getting balls' is the same, however teams with the max three balls should be the 'lottery teams' Meaning if there are 5 of them, they would get the first 5 picks, then the rest of the league.

Another way of doing it would be to average the points over the past 3 seasons and do the draft order that way. With the normal lottery rules for bottom five teams. One twist though, any team that had a first or made the playoffs in the last three years, drops out of lottery spot.

hockeygeek 11-09-2012 11:20 PM

Throwing seasons just as our team should be entering it's prime sounds painfull. If we can't start winning when hockey starts up we need to blow the entire thing up because the core of our team should be at their best

The Apologist 11-09-2012 11:22 PM

We had a better chance at Nail last year than we'd have this year without a season.

TMLOBI 11-09-2012 11:34 PM

I'm against tanking so I'm obviously against this. If there were an NHL season and the Leafs tanked they would have a much higher chance at getting Mckinnon.

If the the 2012 draft lottery is the same as the 2005 draft lottery the Leafs would have a 1 in 16 shot at drafting first overall. That is a 6.25% chance. Those odds are awful. The math after that gets a little complex and I am lazy.. but if someone is bored (or smart enough) figure out the most likely draft spot for the Leafs with those odds. It is definitely out of the top 5. Probably closer to 11 or 12.

4 teams 3 balls

10 teams 2 balls

16 teams 1 ball

That tells me there is a 1 in 3 chance a playoff team (from last season) gets to draft first. That is a 33.3% chance. Those are pretty good odds for playoff teams.


So after reading my post does anyone who voted yes want to change their vote?

Leafs For Life* 11-09-2012 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evileye (Post 55659775)
No because they could very easily be drafting 30th and the Kings could get 1st.

I think the lottery draft should be arranged so that the criteria for 'getting balls' is the same, however teams with the max three balls should be the 'lottery teams' Meaning if there are 5 of them, they would get the first 5 picks, then the rest of the league.

Another way of doing it would be to average the points over the past 3 seasons and do the draft order that way. With the normal lottery rules for bottom five teams. One twist though, any team that had a first or made the playoffs in the last three years, drops out of lottery spot.

YOU ARE WRONG! LA TRADED THEIR 1ST TO CBJ WITH JOHNSON, SO UNLESS DEY GOT HACKS, THEY ARE OUT OF LOTTERY BUSINESS! haha I do like your idea though.

Evileye 11-09-2012 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leaffan16 (Post 55660409)
YOU ARE WRONG! LA TRADED THEIR 1ST TO CBJ WITH JOHNSON, SO UNLESS DEY GOT HACKS, THEY ARE OUT OF LOTTERY BUSINESS! haha I do like your idea though.

OK OK, did not look up whether LA had their pick.
My point was that one of the strong contenders could just as easily get the pick, defeating the purpose of the draft as a mechanism for strengthening the weak teams.
League got lucky last time (or did they? :sarcasm: ) when Pittsburg got Crosby.
If it happens again, it should not be possible for an already strong team to be drafting top 10.
(outside of trades)

TheNorthFace 11-09-2012 11:52 PM

If we were 100% guaranteed to be able to draft MacKinnon then yes, without a doubt.

7even 11-10-2012 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evileye (Post 55659775)
No because they could very easily be drafting 30th and the Kings could get 1st.

I think the lottery draft should be arranged so that the criteria for 'getting balls' is the same, however teams with the max three balls should be the 'lottery teams' Meaning if there are 5 of them, they would get the first 5 picks, then the rest of the league.

Another way of doing it would be to average the points over the past 3 seasons and do the draft order that way. With the normal lottery rules for bottom five teams. One twist though, any team that had a first or made the playoffs in the last three years, drops out of lottery spot.

It's like you structured it specifically to favour Toronto. I like your style ;)

Leaf Rocket 11-10-2012 12:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheNorthFace (Post 55660615)
If we were 100% guaranteed to be able to draft MacKinnon then yes, without a doubt.

prety much exactly this.

cyris 11-10-2012 12:39 AM

How many times has this topic come up since last season?
We around the same or better chance of drafting first overall last season they we would if a strike wiped out this season.

Aplayaz2000 11-10-2012 12:52 AM

well i voted yes... because the season is pretty much done for

the winter classic is already cancelled... wtf u guna have like 30 games? oh yeahhh! 30 games of greatness

the season is already butchered
everyone is in europe
our 24/7 special is already expired

just leave it for 2013

Hurt 11-10-2012 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheNorthFace (Post 55660615)
If we were 100% guaranteed to be able to draft MacKinnon then yes, without a doubt.

We aren't. In fact, we have a 6% chance at it (assuming they follow the same procedure as 2005).


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:18 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.