Official 2015 NHL Draft Thread

[MattPie]

It should probably be noted that you could smooth out the odds and still leave last place at 25%. Just not have as much of a curve downward from picks 2-14. 25-15-10-7-5-4-4-4-3-3-3-3-2-2 (I think, I'm not really adding that up). I doubt the NHL will leave last place alone, but it's possible.

 

This does show why the BOG should be left out of some decisions: the tyranny of the majority.

Edited June 27, 2014 by MattPie

[That Aud Smell]

Wait, it's OK for the Sabres to purposely be bad so they can get a higher draft pick, but it's not OK for the league to try to encourage teams playing to win instead of lose? Of course, if the league changes its rules to better the chance of the Sabres getting a #1 pick, I'm sure everyone would be fine with that?

 

By the way, you realize that today is the 2014 Draft and that this 2015 thread is more active? Wow.

 

Easy, hoss.

 

I don't have a problem with the league's responding to what the Sabres are doing, and altering the system. It's the timing of this change that stinks to high heaven. They're making an 11th hour change (that's what this is, btw) in advance of a draft year where there is 1, likely 2 generational talents available.

 

Put it another way: We've lined up to try the field goal, and they're moving the goal posts on us as the ball is about to be snapped.

[TrueBlueGED]

Easy, hoss.

 

I don't have a problem with the league's responding to what the Sabres are doing, and altering the system. It's the timing of this change that stinks to high heaven. They're making an 11th hour change (that's what this is, btw) in advance of a draft year where there is 1, likely 2 generational talents available.

 

Put it another way: We've lined up to try the field goal, and they're moving the goal posts on us as the ball is about to be snapped.

 

So that's what happened in SB XXV! :cry:

[stenbaro]

I've never been much of a conspiracy theorist but the lottery change stinks like fresh doo doo. Either they are rigging this draft like the NBA did for Ewing to the Knicks or a couple of good ol' boys are thoroughly annoyed at how well the Sabres are working the system and decided to do what the NHL does. Make ###### up on the fly!!

 

WWHL baby

 

World

Wrestling

Hockey

League

 

The people that make and enforce Rules and policies of the NHL are the problem

The game itself is amazing, however the BS that goes along with it makes it a BUSH JOKE LEAGUE

[nfreeman]

I'm all for discouraging tanking, but the league continues to befuddle with its decision-making process. This change should be enacted two or three years down the road. How can you just pull the rug out from under teams that are operating under league rules and preparing accordingly? It's bush/garage league, and they'll never live down the speculation that they're trying to rig the McDavid draft to get him to a better team/better market.

 

Good post.

 

Easy, hoss.

 

I don't have a problem with the league's responding to what the Sabres are doing, and altering the system. It's the timing of this change that stinks to high heaven. They're making an 11th hour change (that's what this is, btw) in advance of a draft year where there is 1, likely 2 generational talents available.

 

Put it another way: We've lined up to try the field goal, and they're moving the goal posts on us as the ball is about to be snapped.

 

And another one.

 

FTR, I am in favor of moves that disincentivize tanking (and I think it's a much bigger problem than TBPhD thinks it is). But there needs to be much more advance warning than we are seeing here.

[That Aud Smell]

So that's what happened in SB XXV! :cry:

 

i had not considered that tie-in.

 

/throws down 4 fingers of well-drink whisky.

[Stoner]

I wish I could remember where I read this (and I just read it this morning; early senility?) but the writer opined that all this is, is a bunch of GMs trying to improve their odds of getting McDavid. FWIW.

[TrueBlueGED]

I wish I could remember where I read this (and I just read it this morning; early senility?) but the writer opined that all this is, is a bunch of GMs trying to improve their odds of getting McDavid. FWIW.

 

I believe it was either Tom Webster or Claude Verret who first posited this theory here. Given the timing of the draft changes, I'm inclined to agree.

[26CornerBlitz]

@BNHarrington

Murray on changes to lottery: "From talking to Gary (Bettman), the concerns were not about the Buffalo #Sabres."

[Sabre Dance]

 

 

FTR, I am in favor of moves that disincentivize tanking (and I think it's a much bigger problem than TBPhD thinks it is). But there needs to be much more advance warning than we are seeing here.

 

Why? Because it adversely affects the Sabres? Hey, the 2015 draft is still a year off. If Mom moves the cookie jar to the top shelf because you've been sneaking cookies, should you be mad at Mom for moving it or yourself for sneaking the cookies?

[MattPie]

I wish I could remember where I read this (and I just read it this morning; early senility?) but the writer opined that all this is, is a bunch of GMs trying to improve their odds of getting McDavid. FWIW.

I believe it was either Tom Webster or Claude Verret who first posited this theory here. Given the timing of the draft changes, I'm inclined to agree.

 

I don't want to sound condescending, but: DUH. Based on Crosby, whomever gets McDavid is going to reap a ton of Marketing and Merchandise dollars and National TV exposure, plus probably be in the playoffs for a solid string of years. The BOG (owners) would be stupid to NOT try to make a play like this in each's own self-interest, but it comes off as bush-league and short-sighted (because it is).

 

McDavid will be playing in Buffalo for sure. 1-3 games a year. I think everyone will be less stressed if they accept that now.

Edited June 27, 2014 by MattPie

[TrueBlueGED]

Why? Because it adversely affects the Sabres? Hey, the 2015 draft is still a year off. If Mom moves the cookie jar to the top shelf because you've been sneaking cookies, should you be mad at Mom for moving it or yourself for sneaking the cookies?

 

It's actually more akin to your mom being perfectly okay with you stealing cookies, but then she gets an extra-special batch only she wants to eat, and proceeds to move the jar out of your reach.

[That Aud Smell]

Not as drastic as some thought: @BNHarrington: #Sabres GM Tim Murray says No. 1 odds next year drop to 19-20 % and confirms they would only drop to No. 2 in '15 if last/lottery loser

[inkman]

@BNHarrington

Murray on changes to lottery: "From talking to Gary (Bettman), the concerns were not about the Buffalo #Sabres."

My interpretation: We always have and always will ###### the Buffalo Sabres.

 

Oh yeah...###### the Buffalo Sabres!

[That Aud Smell]

Why? Because it adversely affects the Sabres? Hey, the 2015 draft is still a year off. If Mom moves the cookie jar to the top shelf because you've been sneaking cookies, should you be mad at Mom for moving it or yourself for sneaking the cookies?

 

Turbl analogy, bruh. Teams have been acting in reliance on the playing field's parameters for the 2015 draft for some time now.

 

I infer that, in your scenario, sneaking cookies is against the rules. What was Buffalo doing that was against the rules? Nothing. The team was acting rationally based on what the rules were.

 

This is more akin to a graduate-degree program changing the requirements for enrollment after the period time in which candidates can alter their course of study to suit the program's revised requirements.

 

It's actually more akin to your mom being perfectly okay with you stealing cookies, but then she gets an extra-special batch only she wants to eat, and proceeds to move the jar out of your reach.

 

Or your Mom being okay with your sneaking cookies, but then, after letting you do it for months on end, suddenly turns around on you in March, and says "Okay, that's been a whole lot of cookies, Mister. As a consequence, you get no X-Box this summer." To which the child would rightly mutter, "That is some ######."

[inkman]

I don't want to sound condescending, but: DUH. Based on Crosby, whomever gets McDavid is going to reap a ton of Marketing and Merchandise dollars and National TV exposure, plus probably be in the playoffs for a solid string of years. The BOG (owners) would be stupid to NOT try to make a play like this in each's own self-interest, but it comes off as bush-league and short-sighted (because it is).

 

McDavid will be playing in Buffalo for sure. 1-3 games a year. I think everyone will be less stressed if they accept that now.

Bettman was a key NBA exec when the Knicks took the frozen envelope...er...luckily won the draft lottery.

[Taro T]

Personally I think designing a system that can damage league parity is worse than a handful of teams occasionally intentionally tanking. Teams don't often deliberately tank in the manner the Sabres have, so I think it's bad league policy to design a system around such outliers.

The last time a team ((un?)intentionally) tanked this bad was on 7/1/7. The league didn't seem to mind the Sabres jettisoning 3 quality centers that day.

 

I'm in the camp that says this rule change is about middle of the pack teams wanting a crack at McDavid rather than Edmonton, Buffalo, Florida, & a couple others having the only chance at him. BUT if Black hadn't have been so cavalier in his comments it would have been tougher to pass a change.

 

Obviously, I want to see the Sabres end up w/ Eichel & McDavid (and pick 3 overall as well), but true poetic justice would be the Eulers ending up 6th or 7th from the bottom and winning the lottery w/ a 'most favored status' team getting bumped from 2 to 3. I can see it now: 'great work guys, you hosed the Loafs and gave Edmonton a top 3 pick for the 47th consecutive year. Bravo. Bra-####ing-vo.'

[That Aud Smell]

The last time a team ((un?)intentionally) tanked this bad was on 7/1/7. The league didn't seem to mind the Sabres jettisoning 3 quality centers that day.

 

My memory fades. Three? (Zubrus?)

[Taro T]

My memory fades. Three? (Zubrus?)

Yep. When it became obvious the captains were gone, he should have been priority 1 rather than still thought of as a rental.

[beerme1]

 

 

It's for the tankers.

 

I've changed my avatar to show the tankers how it feels as a season ticket holder.

[Crusader1969]

I've changed my avatar to show the tankeurs how it feels as a season ticket holder.

so you are saying you would rather sit through years (if not a lifetime )of mediocre hockey? do you think penguin season ticket holders dont say 83-84 was worth it? its 1 more season , we've come this far already - there is no turning back

you do know the sabres arent forcing you to buy tickets? the reason why no one is giving up their seats is because they want to be there when all these high draft picks are ready to dominate the league

Edited June 27, 2014 by Crusader1969

[beerme1]

so you are saying you would rather sit through years (if not a lifetime )of mediocre hockey? do you think penguin season ticket holders dont say 83-84 was worth it? its 1 more season , we've come this far already - there is no turning back

you do know the sabres arent forcing you to buy tickets? the reason why no one is giving up their seats is because they want to be there when all these high draft picks are ready to dominate the league

 

Well I'm merely pointing out how it feels. Obviously I don't want mediocre and I do have a breaking point. This year is not it. I'm curious what the renewal rate was on season's after the deadline on the 23rd.

[Weave]

 

I'm in the camp that says this rule change is about middle of the pack teams wanting a crack at McDavid rather than Edmonton, Buffalo, Florida, & a couple others having the only chance at him. BUT if Black hadn't have been so cavalier in his comments it would have been tougher to pass a change.

 

 

The rallying cry for a tank is that you can only get elite talent from the top of the draft. How do you get there? You either 1. have a skinflint owner who cheapskates his way to last place, 2. have inept management that can't draft for ###### and makes poor personnel choices, or 3. You purposely set your team up to lose. With this change elite talent can get distributed beyond 1. and 2. and it negates the necessity for 3.

 

Question, would Darcy still be here if he had these new rules and bumbled his way into Stamkos or Tavares? :ph34r:

[Sabre Dance]

so you are saying you would rather sit through years (if not a lifetime )of mediocre hockey? do you think penguin season ticket holders dont say 83-84 was worth it? its 1 more season , we've come this far already - there is no turning back

you do know the sabres arent forcing you to buy tickets? the reason why no one is giving up their seats is because they want to be there when if all these high draft picks are ready to dominate the league

 

Fixed.

[kas23]

The Colts have Luck and we have EJ. See? Tanking couldn't possibly good for the long term health of a franchise.

 

In seriousness, the Sabres have tried to do it the honorable way for years, yet here are still, hoping for next year's draft. Since it hasn't been said yet; you have to break a few eggs to make an omelette.