Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2014 8:29:53 GMT -5
It seems like outside of Detroit all the lastest Cup winners have had top 3 picks on them (Doughty, Kane/Toews, Seguin, Crosby/Toews, Staal). The Ducks didn't have their own top 3 pick but had two picks in the first round of the greatest draft ever which seems unlikely to happen again.
Sure it isn't a guarantee for success as dumb management like the Oilers will ruin anything but the notion of building great teams without elite level talent picked in the top 3 seems like a myth fans like to tell themselves when they don't have those guys. Good drafting in other rounds is needed to supplement those elite guys for sure but the elite level players are needed.
I know that if the Flames this year were to have the lowest point totals and got say the 10th pick because they sucked after the 62 game mark I would be livid and my desire to continue to watch the NHL would be affected greatly. Especially if some garbage team like the Jets got the top pick for again being too stupid to build a team that can make the play-offs but just incompetent enough to build a team that isn't getting better for the future as well.
|
|
|
Post by Hawks on Aug 5, 2014 9:27:45 GMT -5
Well, its the Oilers fault for drafting 3 scorers in a row and making no moves to actually balance the roster. Edmonton should have traded that last 1st round pick (Yakupov) for a #1 defenseman+ if they were really serious about building a contender.
Had the Hawks drafted another player like Kane instead of Toews, they wouldn't have won any cups. Kane is a great player, but a team needs more than just a talented offensive player to win the cup…or 3 of them even.
|
|
|
Post by Nordiques - Chris on Aug 5, 2014 9:37:24 GMT -5
Well, its the Oilers fault for drafting 3 scorers in a row and making no moves to actually balance the roster. Edmonton should have traded that last 1st round pick (Yakupov) for a #1 defenseman+ if they were really serious about building a contender. Had the Hawks drafted another player like Kane instead of Toews, they wouldn't have won any cups. Kane is a great player, but a team needs more than just a talented offensive player to win the cup…or 3 of them even. Funny - this Edmonton Journal journalist tried to crucify in their paper with his retort to my article about just that - trading Yakupov before he played a game with them...too funny when ya look back now! (One of the approaches I suggested was going after pre-Norris Subban who was in contract negotiations and the trouble signing with the Habs he had...) Link: blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2013/01/11/trade-nail-yakupov-not-if-you-want-to-win-a-stanley-cup/
|
|
|
Post by Nordiques - Chris on Aug 5, 2014 9:40:53 GMT -5
It seems like outside of Detroit all the lastest Cup winners have had top 3 picks on them (Doughty, Kane/Toews, Seguin, Crosby/Toews, Staal). The Ducks didn't have their own top 3 pick but had two picks in the first round of the greatest draft ever which seems unlikely to happen again. Sure it isn't a guarantee for success as dumb management like the Oilers will ruin anything but the notion of building great teams without elite level talent picked in the top 3 seems like a myth fans like to tell themselves when they don't have those guys. Good drafting in other rounds is needed to supplement those elite guys for sure but the elite level players are needed. I know that if the Flames this year were to have the lowest point totals and got say the 10th pick because they sucked after the 62 game mark I would be livid and my desire to continue to watch the NHL would be affected greatly. Especially if some garbage team like the Jets got the top pick for again being too stupid to build a team that can make the play-offs but just incompetent enough to build a team that isn't getting better for the future as well. I hear ya Scott, but did you see in the article what the Flames could have had (hindsight 20/20) if a change would have been in place. The system would actually help the mediocre teams, like the Flames for several years, who just on the outside of the playoffs, but then not with high enough pick to help them get to next level. To be honest, I want the rule as is, selfishly, because of where the Flames are at right now in their (finally!) rebuild. I still don't think that makes it right, but that's just one opinion and why I love hockey - we can all discuss our own opinion. Again, realistically, nothing will change other than some minor tinkering with the current lottery system and the deployment of odds.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2014 12:14:30 GMT -5
Yes I saw that and am trying not to be a homer and like the system because it would have helped the FLames earlier and hurt the Oilers.
For me the Flames teams from ~09-12 were so poorly put together and held on for so long past when they should have they did not deserve to be rewarded with good players for that.
I am sure we could go back and forward for ever on this, especially since my main point is that the current system works well and should not be changed.
That said the one tweek I would like to see is like the NBA where it isn't just the top pick that can move. I think you should draw for every pick in the lottery so that the order of picks could be something like: 2nd, 1st, 4th, 3rd, 5th, 9th, 6th, 7th, 8th etc. or even more dramatic with the last place team dropping to 3rd or 4th or even lower. Under the current system I want the Flames to finish last and worst case scenario they get Eichel instead of McDavid not really worried about the potnetial to lose top pick as the 2nd guy pretty damn good so tanking for last is very advisable for the Flames and others. Under NBA system still incintive to be dead last but more benefit to not being god awful and finishing 2nd, 3rd, 4th.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2014 12:42:17 GMT -5
Also wanted to add just because I don't agree with the idea I do like that you posted and love to talk about stuff like that.
I may not think the system needs changing but that doesn't mean someone may not come up with an idea that changes my mind!
|
|
|
Post by Nordiques - Chris on Aug 5, 2014 18:25:41 GMT -5
Yes I saw that and am trying not to be a homer and like the system because it would have helped the FLames earlier and hurt the Oilers. For me the Flames teams from ~09-12 were so poorly put together and held on for so long past when they should have they did not deserve to be rewarded with good players for that. I am sure we could go back and forward for ever on this, especially since my main point is that the current system works well and should not be changed. That said the one tweek I would like to see is like the NBA where it isn't just the top pick that can move. I think you should draw for every pick in the lottery so that the order of picks could be something like: 2nd, 1st, 4th, 3rd, 5th, 9th, 6th, 7th, 8th etc. or even more dramatic with the last place team dropping to 3rd or 4th or even lower. Under the current system I want the Flames to finish last and worst case scenario they get Eichel instead of McDavid not really worried about the potnetial to lose top pick as the 2nd guy pretty damn good so tanking for last is very advisable for the Flames and others. Under NBA system still incintive to be dead last but more benefit to not being god awful and finishing 2nd, 3rd, 4th. I actually like this option, Scott, a lot, if it has to be a lottery system, which inevitably it will likely be. I'll even be really happy if the Flames land the lesser talked about Noah Hanifin, who should make it a 3 horse race!
|
|
|
Post by Philly on Aug 6, 2014 12:22:53 GMT -5
Does anyone besides me think the DF ratings for most the mobile d-men is a bit low, except for the bigger dudes who block shots. Guys with 80pa's and 64 df's are useless in a sim league. jmo
|
|
|
Post by Nordiques - Chris on Aug 6, 2014 12:52:41 GMT -5
Does anyone besides me think the DF ratings for most the mobile d-men is a bit low, except for the bigger dudes who block shots. Guys with 80pa's and 64 df's are useless in a sim league. jmo I agree with ya on that, Ray, but maybe we're a little late on feedback.
|
|
|
Post by LeafsGM on Aug 6, 2014 12:57:16 GMT -5
Does anyone besides me think the DF ratings for most the mobile d-men is a bit low, except for the bigger dudes who block shots. Guys with 80pa's and 64 df's are useless in a sim league. jmo Not sure about useless, you can always play those guys on the PP and get the most out of them. Obv if you're going to play them top 4 ES, PP, PK you're in trouble but if you keep them strictly on PP, 4v4, and 3rd pairing, and match them up with a high DF partner, it shouldn't be too bad. That said, I do agree that a lot of the mobile puck movers got shafted with their DF ratings (Subban, Karlsson, Yandle, Green). Some of these guys are Norris winners. I know formulas and numbers speak for themselves, but are these guys really as bad defensively as they DF ratings would suggest?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2014 13:30:36 GMT -5
That said, I do agree that a lot of the mobile puck movers got shafted with their DF ratings (Subban, Karlsson, Yandle, Green). Some of these guys are Norris winners. I know formulas and numbers speak for themselves, but are these guys really as bad defensively as they DF ratings would suggest? Yes.
|
|
|
Post by Hawks on Aug 6, 2014 13:32:41 GMT -5
Disagree Dad.
Buff last year had a 65 DF rating. He was a +38 for the season, the best on my entire roster and with a measly 55 points.
As long as they have a fairly high CK rating to make up for it, they still perform pretty well.
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Aug 6, 2014 13:35:13 GMT -5
If you guys have a suggestion on another stat listed on NHL.com to base DF on, I can look into next year.
Our DF formula takes into account several different stats... takeaways, PK time, plus minus, blocked shots.... A player really only needs to excel in a couple of those areas to end up with a decent DF. The guys brought up so far really had to suck at all of those areas to get a sub 70 DF.
Personally, I think guys like Yandle and Franson deserve low DFs.
|
|
|
Post by RangersRon on Aug 6, 2014 14:05:46 GMT -5
If you guys have a suggestion on another stat listed on NHL.com to base DF on, I can look into next year. Our DF formula takes into account several different stats... takeaways, PK time, plus minus, blocked shots.... A player really only needs to excel in a couple of those areas to end up with a decent DF. The guys brought up so far really had to suck at all of those areas to get a sub 70 DF. Personally, I think guys like Yandle and Franson deserve low DFs. But that is a personal opinion, since it is personally.
|
|
|
Post by RangersRon on Aug 6, 2014 14:08:52 GMT -5
If you guys have a suggestion on another stat listed on NHL.com to base DF on, I can look into next year. Our DF formula takes into account several different stats... takeaways, PK time, plus minus, blocked shots.... A player really only needs to excel in a couple of those areas to end up with a decent DF. The guys brought up so far really had to suck at all of those areas to get a sub 70 DF. Personally, I think guys like Yandle and Franson deserve low DFs. But that is a personal opinion, since it is personally. Some guys just suck in their own zone
|
|