HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Eklund: Weighted Draft Info

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-07-2005, 07:26 PM
  #26
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Blue Jacket's Curse
 
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 12,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kritter471
But since Columbus was the team to make that pick, doesn't it stand to reason that the pick would be accredited to them? If Florida had picked Nash and traded him to the BJ's, then the scenario you're describing makes sense, but my reading of the draft lottery is that whichever team picked first (i.e., Atlanta, Columbus, Pittsburgh, Washington) loses that single chance.
Columbus had to pay (via trade) for the pick. Same with Pittsburgh.
No team that expended resources via trade to acquire a pick should be penalized for that, IMHO. They didn't get the pick for sucking or by luck of the draw. They paid for it. I don't think that should cost them.

In 02 and 03, Florida got the 1st pick because of a combination of sucking and luck.
CBJ and Pit had to pay for the pick.

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 07:32 PM
  #27
futurcorerock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 6,514
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Columbus had to pay (via trade) for the pick. Same with Pittsburgh.
No team that expended resources via trade to acquire a pick should be penalized for that, IMHO. They didn't get the pick for sucking or by luck of the draw. They paid for it. I don't think that should cost them.

In 02 and 03, Florida got the 1st pick because of a combination of sucking and luck.
CBJ and Pit had to pay for the pick.
Heck no... There should be no penalization for the first overall pick. Why is this even an issue, specifially. Why not penalize pickers in the top 5? You could argue that a player from any given draft is the best one, but was not the first overall.

futurcorerock is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 07:33 PM
  #28
ryz
Registered User
 
ryz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scugs
Yea.. that's great..
That doesn't seem like a bad system at all. Far better than the 30 teams with 1 ball each crap that the big spender (formerly) teams fans have been lobbying for on here.

ryz is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 07:44 PM
  #29
Jack Canuck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Hawaii
Country: Canada
Posts: 621
vCash: 500
He is also saying now that there is a minimum of 1 ball per team and the draft is rumored to take place July 30th in Ottawa.

Jack Canuck is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 07:49 PM
  #30
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe
Blue Jacket's Curse
 
KallioWeHardlyKnewYe's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 12,390
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by futurcorerock
Heck no... There should be no penalization for the first overall pick. Why is this even an issue, specifially. Why not penalize pickers in the top 5? You could argue that a player from any given draft is the best one, but was not the first overall.
I agree, but that seems to be a popular sentiment in all these theories about the draft.

Personally, I think it is stupid. The goal of playing the game is making the playoffs and winning the cup. It is NOT getting the number one pick.
I'm a firm believer in not penalizing teams that suck (hey, I'm a CBJ fan). People don't seem to realize that sucking IS the penalty.
If the goal of the draft is to improve the worst teams why should the worst teams be penalized?

You make a good point about the top level talent.
Sure, Nash and Fluery went 1st, but are they better than Lehtonen, Bouwmeester, Pitkanen, Horton, Staal and Zherdev? I suspect you'd get lively debate.

KallioWeHardlyKnewYe is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 07:56 PM
  #31
shveik
Registered User
 
shveik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,844
vCash: 500
I haven't gotten an answer to this simple question yet.

If the draft is supposed to help the teams that suck, how do we know which teams *do* suck with about half the players or more expected to hit UFA status? Are the teams that sucked pre-newCBA going to continue to suck?

shveik is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 08:01 PM
  #32
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 22,648
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanlambert
# of balls per team under this system...

3: NY Rangers, Columbus

2: Chicago, Minnesota, Calgary, Nashville

1: Philadelphia, New Jersey, Carolina, Florida, Detroit, St. Louis, Colorado, Boston, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Buffalo, Vancouver, Edmonton, San Jose, Dallas, Los Angeles, Anaheim, Phoenix, Atlanta

0: Washington, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh, NY Islanders


hahahahahaha

me2 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 08:05 PM
  #33
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 22,648
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanlambert
they should give it to whatever team's captain can guess the number bettman is thinking of.

Hide the draft order in 30 turds in a tub and have the GMs bob for him for their draft position. Let's see how much they REALLY want Crosby.

me2 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 08:08 PM
  #34
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 22,648
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by shveik
I haven't gotten an answer to this simple question yet.

If the draft is supposed to help the teams that suck, how do we know which teams *do* suck with about half the players or more expected to hit UFA status? Are the teams that sucked pre-newCBA going to continue to suck?

That is true. We have Mario talking about adding players because he has cap and others have to buy out players.

Pengs last sucky season + UFA bonanza could net them: Malkin, Blake and Sakic (or equiv)! Do they really need a better shot at Crosby as compensation for that?

me2 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 08:17 PM
  #35
London Knights
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 831
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benji Frank
I was thinking the GM's should play rock paper scizzors, but your idea is a good one too......

But which number...the Levitt or FORBES number?

London Knights is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 08:25 PM
  #36
Tra La La
Registered User
 
Tra La La's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Buffalo, New York
Country: Ireland
Posts: 4,715
vCash: 500
That 4 ball minus this minus that plan SUX! The only one I like is the Combined record of the last three seasons. With The worst Team getting 30 balls, next 29, and so on.....

Tra La La is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 08:26 PM
  #37
Slats432
Registered User
 
Slats432's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,595
vCash: 500
I am becoming more and more on the side of an only minorly adjusted lottery or equal lottery.

After you make Toronto, Philly, Detroit miss a season, lose millions of dollars in profits, then make them buy out some of their better higher priced players(Because of the cap), since they have picked late in every draft in the last 10 years (most of anyways), their prospect pool is shorted already. What is the reason they should get another kick in the balls?( )

This coming from a small market fan.

Slats432 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 08:46 PM
  #38
HSHS
Losing is a disease
 
HSHS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Redondo Beach, Ca
Country: United States
Posts: 17,648
vCash: 500
Side note: T&T please stop posting... I can't take it anymore. The GF won't be home for 2 more hours.

HSHS is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 09:16 PM
  #39
drbill28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Pomfret Center, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 206
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to drbill28
As long as they use a 3 or 4 ball system subtracting one from teams that make playoffs. It is actually a disfavor to those who did poorly. The number of balls for the other clubs outside the worst 5 far outnumber them. There's only a 42% chance that someone with two or three balls would be selected. Only a 17% chance that the Rangers or Blue Jackets get the pick. So if you're in favor of a slightly weighted draft this will do. It's a question of who is getting extra balls or none at all would be in question.

I would rank the teams by their final point total for each season over the last three or four. Average them out and the top 10 get one ball the next 10 get two, etc. The top 16 can get an extra ball by missing the playoffs twice or more. Or at least something that involves an average.


Last edited by drbill28: 07-07-2005 at 09:26 PM.
drbill28 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 09:20 PM
  #40
Taranis_24
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 661
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Taranis_24
All I want to know is that if a teams loses a ball because they had #1 pick in the previous 3 or 4 years is that ball put back in after the #1 pick is determined?

Taranis_24 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 09:26 PM
  #41
Taranis_24
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 661
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Taranis_24
If you want to make real fair and real entertaining you have a set up with 30 balls in two different buckets or bingo type baskets. The first has a # 1 thru 30 for draft position the second basket has a ball for each team. You draw the first ball from the basket (ex. #15) then you draw a ball from the second basket (ex. NYR). The NY Rangers get the 15th pick. You could do the team first or the pick first either way would be kind of entertaining.

Taranis_24 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 09:28 PM
  #42
A Good Flying Bird*
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by slats432
I am becoming more and more on the side of an only minorly adjusted lottery or equal lottery.

After you make Toronto, Philly, Detroit miss a season, lose millions of dollars in profits, then make them buy out some of their better higher priced players(Because of the cap), since they have picked late in every draft in the last 10 years (most of anyways), their prospect pool is shorted already. What is the reason they should get another kick in the balls?( )

This coming from a small market fan.

And now, with the salary cap seemingly in place, people are starting to actually consider other people's point of view.
This is gonna be weird.

A Good Flying Bird* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 09:34 PM
  #43
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 22,648
vCash: 50
Whatever they do rounds 2-9 should be in the opposite order to round 1, not snaked between rounds, but all exact opposite to round 1. Get 1st overall then you get last in every other round. This evens things out slightly.

me2 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 09:35 PM
  #44
HSHS
Losing is a disease
 
HSHS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Redondo Beach, Ca
Country: United States
Posts: 17,648
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taranis_24
All I want to know is that if a teams loses a ball because they had #1 pick in the previous 3 or 4 years is that ball put back in after the #1 pick is determined?
exactly... biggest f-ed up problem with removing the ball... glad to see someone else out there can see the forest

HSHS is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 09:39 PM
  #45
Vomiting Kermit*
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Edmonton, AB
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,561
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by T@T
Leave it alone,my Cinderella Flames still get one more ball than the Oilers
Fixed.

Vomiting Kermit* is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 09:50 PM
  #46
NYR469
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shveik
I haven't gotten an answer to this simple question yet.

If the draft is supposed to help the teams that suck, how do we know which teams *do* suck with about half the players or more expected to hit UFA status? Are the teams that sucked pre-newCBA going to continue to suck?
barring something drastic like all RFAs being declared UFAs, teams aren't going to change that drastically. teams for the most part will keep their good players under 31 keeping the foundation of the team similar

some older teams might see a big drop as they lose guys and some younger teams might get a big boost by being able to add some available free agents, but i don't think the balance of power will instantly shift. it isn't like they are throwing everyone into a pool and starting over from scratch. ottawa will still go into the season with hossa, havlat, spezza, redden, etc

NYR469 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 10:04 PM
  #47
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
 
Motown Beatdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shveik
I haven't gotten an answer to this simple question yet.

If the draft is supposed to help the teams that suck, how do we know which teams *do* suck with about half the players or more expected to hit UFA status? Are the teams that sucked pre-newCBA going to continue to suck?
It's simple, those people feel they should be be given EXTRA rewards for sucking. Remember "they've suffered", we've read a lot of that lately haven't we? Their argument has not merit what so ever cause if we've learned one thing about the NHL is predictions dont mean ****. We saw a team in the playoffs turn into one of the worst team in hockey in one year. And OTOH we saw a team who drafted 6th over made it to the Cup finals the following year. So predict away but chances are you wont be right.

Motown Beatdown is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 10:06 PM
  #48
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanlambert
# of balls per team under this system...

3: NY Rangers, Columbus

2: Chicago, Minnesota, Calgary, Nashville

1: Philadelphia, New Jersey, Carolina, Florida, Detroit, St. Louis, Colorado, Boston, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Buffalo, Vancouver, Edmonton, San Jose, Dallas, Los Angeles, Anaheim, Phoenix, Atlanta

0: Washington, Tampa Bay, Pittsburgh, NY Islanders
Hmm, Lightning made the playoffs twice in the last five years, we'd lose two balls and have one left, no?

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 10:07 PM
  #49
go_leafs_go02
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Langley, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,083
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029
Hmm, Lightning made the playoffs twice in the last five years, we'd lose two balls and have one left, no?
you have #1 pick in 1998 with Lecavalier.

go_leafs_go02 is offline  
Old
07-07-2005, 10:11 PM
  #50
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02
you have #1 pick in 1998 with Lecavalier.
Acquired via trade from San Jose which acquired it via trade from the Panthers. We've never won the lottery or "won" a first overall pick.

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:25 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.