Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2014 18:24:37 GMT -5
you can't make this change happen for any entry drafts where any of the 1st round picks have been traded. These are the kinds of rules, imo, that you need to decide when all teams have equal amount of planning to make decisions upon. The weight for the last place team should be maybe slightly higher in percent, considering it is 8 teams, not the NHL's 14. also a rule they have (though I think they may be looking to get rid of) is that only the bottom 5 teams can have a shot for the #1 over-all. That might be something to consider. I am generally in favor of a lottery as we should not be encouraging teams to tank, that said in the last decade or so with the improvements in scouting it is pretty hard to go wrong with a top 5 pick. Gauging how great of an NHL player an 18 year old is going to become is still not easy but these kids that have the potential for the NHL are being groomed at like 13. By the way only the top 5 bottom team can get the 1st overall since they can only jump 4 spot. Look at New Jersey when they won the lottery pick and still pick 4th overall and grab Adam Larsson. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Mar 14, 2014 18:55:04 GMT -5
you can't make this change happen for any entry drafts where any of the 1st round picks have been traded. These are the kinds of rules, imo, that you need to decide when all teams have equal amount of planning to make decisions upon. The weight for the last place team should be maybe slightly higher in percent, considering it is 8 teams, not the NHL's 14. also a rule they have (though I think they may be looking to get rid of) is that only the bottom 5 teams can have a shot for the #1 over-all. That might be something to consider. I am generally in favor of a lottery as we should not be encouraging teams to tank, that said in the last decade or so with the improvements in scouting it is pretty hard to go wrong with a top 5 pick. Gauging how great of an NHL player an 18 year old is going to become is still not easy but these kids that have the potential for the NHL are being groomed at like 13. By the way only the top 5 bottom team can get the 1st overall since they can only jump 4 spot. Look at New Jersey when they won the lottery pick and still pick 4th overall and grab Adam Larsson. Nope...rules have changed since then. |
|
|
|
Post by WillyBilly (Tire Fires) on Mar 16, 2014 16:41:21 GMT -5
I will be honest i thought the draft would have been like the regular NHL draft not reversal after the 1st round and thats the way i would like it
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Mar 16, 2014 17:33:48 GMT -5
It's not a snake draft Sens...
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Mar 17, 2014 9:49:28 GMT -5
Belfast
Erie
Abbotsford
Calgary
Colorado
Niagara
Central Red Army
Surrey
Please vote ASAP
|
|
|
|
Post by ltcompton (Red Army) on Mar 17, 2014 14:10:58 GMT -5
Voted, I think we should do the weighted lottery for the bottom 8. Discourages tanking somewhat and is closer to what the NHL does
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 14:50:52 GMT -5
This poll should not even exist.
Just because Daves makes a poll, doesn't mean it is okay to alter rules only a few months before the draft. unreal. I mean especially for Canners who traded a signifacant piece (Kopitar) to get that top 3 pick. It would be a shame to all of a sudden drop on that spot because of a sudden rule change. 2015 OK. 2014 way too soon.
Step up GMs and slap a big NO on this one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruyns (Barrie) on Mar 17, 2014 16:42:32 GMT -5
What rule is being altered? I don't think it was ever agreed on that the draft is reverse order of the standings, but maybe I'm just not seeing it. I voted no too, but with no 1st it doesn't really matter to me. If we were actually changing the rules I could understand your post, but I don't see that rule anywhere.
At worst Canners would drop to 3rd overall and it gives him a good chance to get #1 overall. If I was 2nd worst I would definitely want the lottery rather than reverse standings since to me a chance at #1 is worth the risk of dropping to 3rd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 18:03:33 GMT -5
I agree with you Matt in the sense of not knowing there was once a rule. It is hard to prove when our one and only rulebook is updated. What used to be there no longer displays.
Going on my understanding, the rule book at one point did say the entry draft order is reverse order of the standings. I wish I had proof to show you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Mar 17, 2014 18:24:23 GMT -5
Eric, we understand your position and I don't necessarily disagree with it, I just want to give everyone a chance to vote on this. Right now it's moot because the no vote is winning.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2014 18:51:36 GMT -5
We should have two separate polls. From what I am reading, some of the GMs who are voting seem to indicate they are in favor of a lottery in the entry draft.
I am in favor of a lottery for the entry draft.
I am just not in favor of it for this season. I don't have a dog in the race but it is just wrong to alter a rule a few months prior to the result of it. A rule like this needs a new season to take place and seeing as no 1st round picks have been traded for next season, that is the perfect place to begin this new rule.
you can use whatever terminology you would like to try and state otherwise, it is a new rule thus it is a change to the rules.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Mar 17, 2014 19:05:46 GMT -5
Holy flying fuck.. We aren't changing,altering or inventing a new rule....there was no rule in place. If someone thought one was implied then they were mistaken.
This poll is for 2014 ONLY...it says so in the poll thread.
Just read the damn thing.
We have 24 GMs to vote.... What can be more fair than that..
|
|
|
|
Post by Bruyns (Barrie) on Mar 17, 2014 19:28:17 GMT -5
I agree with you Matt in the sense of not knowing there was once a rule. It is hard to prove when our one and only rulebook is updated. What used to be there no longer displays. Going on my understanding, the rule book at one point did say the entry draft order is reverse order of the standings. I wish I had proof to show you. No problem, maybe it used to say it was reverse order. I don't remember it and thought it was just the waiver draft that said that. If it never did and it was just an assumption than it's not really fair to say rules are being changed is the only point I was trying to make. You seem pretty confident it used to be in there though so who knows maybe it was at one point. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave (PLK) on Mar 17, 2014 19:39:41 GMT -5
I know for a fact that I had NOTHING in the rules about the entry draft until the other day. When I inserted the rules for the entry draft I did briefly post it the same as the waiver draft rule re order but within a few minutes I changed it to what it is now and put up the poll.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 0:05:21 GMT -5
Reverse standings is simple and clean.
|
|
