Flames & Losing For Higher Draft Order.

[kehatch]

I see Sam bennet as the most likely of the "top 3" to fall to us, and I would be beyond happy about it, if it were to happen.

 

There is lots of speculation Edmonton will go with Draisaistl and now Tate is talking about possibly taking Ehlers top 5.  I think this draft is wide open this year.  The only player I would be shocked to see slip to 4 is Reinhart.  

[cross16]

There is lots of speculation Edmonton will go with Draisaistl and now Tate is talking about possibly taking Ehlers top 5.  I think this draft is wide open this year.  The only player I would be shocked to see slip to 4 is Reinhart.  

I think this draft is changing in terns of the levels of talent. IMO the brakdown is:

Reinhart/ Ekbkad

Dal colle, Bennett, Draisaistl,Ehlers, Perlini, Ritchie and so e would include Kappanen and Nylande in here but IMO they would be in the next level.

Draisaitl actually makes a ton of sense for the Oilers. Sure their blueline needs help but they are also very small and very weak, from a stature standpoint, down the middle. A big centre would be a huge boost for them

[kehatch]

I think this draft is changing in terns of the levels of talent. IMO the brakdown is:

Reinhart/ Ekbkad

Dal colle, Bennett, Draisaistl,Ehlers, Perlini, Ritchie and so e would include Kappanen and Nylande in here but IMO they would be in the next level.

Draisaitl actually makes a ton of sense for the Oilers. Sure their blueline needs help but they are also very small and very weak, from a stature standpoint, down the middle. A big centre would be a huge boost for them

 

I would probably add Fleury to that second tier.  But other than that I agree.  As for the top tier I would be shocked if Reinhart isn't picked top 2.  But I wouldn't be shocked to see Ekblad fall to 4 or 5 though.  Teams seem very reluctant to pick a D top 3.  The few that have generally get burned.  

 

Florida got burned last time it happened (2010).  Tampa is probably kicking themselves for not going for Duchene in 2009.  St Louis messed up picking Johnson number 1 in 06.  08 is really the only modern exception, and that was a super deep draft for D.  Teams don't seem able to accurately predict the development of young D.  

 

Though maybe the season Jones is having will cause teams to rethink things this season. Who knows.  

[cross16]

I would probably add Fleury to that second tier.  But other than that I agree.  As for the top tier I would be shocked if Reinhart isn't picked top 2.  But I wouldn't be shocked to see Ekblad fall to 4 or 5 though.  Teams seem very reluctant to pick a D top 3.  The few that have generally get burned.  

 

Florida got burned last time it happened (2010).  Tampa is probably kicking themselves for not going for Duchene in 2009.  St Louis messed up picking Johnson number 1 in 06.  08 is really the only modern exception, and that was a super deep draft for D.  Teams don't seem able to accurately predict the development of young D.  

 

Though maybe the season Jones is having will cause teams to rethink things this season. Who knows.  

I like fleury but I personally think he is a step down for those guys. Fleury is a really solid all around prospect but I think all those guys bring potential top talent fleury lacks.

I think the problem teams run into with picking dman high is the cave to the pressure and play them too early just because they were high picks. I'm not so sure I agree Tampa is kicking themselves because Hedman is playing like a top 10 dman right now and has anchored that blueline. Eric Johnson has become a stable for the Avalanche as well so I'm not sure they "messed up" either. I just think it's so tough to stay patient with top picks and dman in general you need to be patient. I also think with a lot of those names you mentioned yes their stats arnt overly impressive but they are linchpin dman that are anchoring their various teams defensive cores which is a very difficulty thing to find and I think if you get that you've got yourself a very good draft pick.

I don't disagree with you that we may see Ekblad fall just like jones did especially considering you have guys like Ritchie, Reinhart, and Ehlers all having very good playoffs and potentially altering the draft order and evening out the previously believed talent levels.

[s4xon]

Don't forget there's the prospect combine before the draft...you know, where all the prospects become a petting zoo for the various NHL clubs, media, and fanbases.  Some draft lists may change during this time depending upon interviews, showings, and test results.

 

As for Ekblad falling, I doubt he makes it past top 2.  It's not everyday a kid gains exceptional status, especially on the blue line.  His shot is better than Jones'.  The fact that this draft isn't as deep doesn't justify Ekblad being any worse than Jones.  It was in fact the reason that Jones fell because last year's draft was so deep.

[cross16]

Don't forget there's the prospect combine before the draft...you know, where all the prospects become a petting zoo for the various NHL clubs, media, and fanbases.  Some draft lists may change during this time depending upon interviews, showings, and test results.

 

As for Ekblad falling, I doubt he makes it past top 2.  It's not everyday a kid gains exceptional status, especially on the blue line.  His shot is better than Jones'.  The fact that this draft isn't as deep doesn't justify Ekblad being any worse than Jones.  It was in fact the reason that Jones fell because last year's draft was so deep.

As a prospect I think jones is more then just a little better then Ekbkad IMO but that's not the issues for me. I think one of the main reasons jones dropped was because team looked and saw several impact and potentially dynamic forwards and then he saw a good safe, steady eddy dman and I think sometimes it's really tough to pass up that talented and impact full forward for a cornerstone dman. Your right though that this years draft is different and I don't necessarily see him falling either. I could see Ekblad falling to 3 but no further as I could see buffalo and Edmonton passing but not florida.

[joeyabs]

Perlini had very poor showing in playoffs this year, wouldn't be surprised to see his stock / ranking drop.  I know a lot of people had him ranked interchangeably with Ritchie in a second tier.  Like Cross had mentioned the other guys (including Ritchie and Ehlers are having good playoffs) so I think they will have passed Perlini.

 

I don't see Ekblad falling past #2.  If Ekblad gets picked first overall, I could see Oilers possibly picking Draisaitl which means Rienhart would slide though.  If Reihart goes #1, I think the Oilers would be stupid not to pick Ekblad - but who's to say - It's the Oilers  

[kehatch]

As a prospect I think jones is more then just a little better then Ekbkad IMO but that's not the issues for me. I think one of the main reasons jones dropped was because team looked and saw several impact and potentially dynamic forwards and then he saw a good safe, steady eddy dman and I think sometimes it's really tough to pass up that talented and impact full forward for a cornerstone dman. Your right though that this years draft is different and I don't necessarily see him falling either. I could see Ekblad falling to 3 but no further as I could see buffalo and Edmonton passing but not florida.

 

I agree that Ekblad should go top 3.  But I also thought Jones should have went top 3. I don't agree that this draft is all of that different.  There is a lower top end for sure.  But the situation is the same.  One forward above the pack (Reinhart), than a bunch of forwards that are attractive for different reasons.

 

The top D going into the season according to TSN were Chara, Weber, Karlsson, Keith, Subban, Pietrangelo, Letang, and Ekmann-Larsson. Most of those guys weren't drafted in the first round. Only one was drafted top 5, and he was in 08 when almost all of the top end were D.  Meanwhile a huge chuck of the top forwards were top 5 picks.  

 

I think NHL teams are reluctant to choose D with a top 5 pick.  We saw Edmonton pass on Murray in 2012 (dummies).  We saw Jones drop last season.  Larsson was project to go number 2 and dropped in 2011.  Fowler dropped way down the year before that.  Etc.  

[Flyerfan52]

I agree that Ekblad should go top 3.  But I also thought Jones should have went top 3. I don't agree that this draft is all of that different.  There is a lower top end for sure.  But the situation is the same.  One forward above the pack (Reinhart), than a bunch of forwards that are attractive for different reasons.

 

The top D going into the season according to TSN were Chara, Weber, Karlsson, Keith, Subban, Pietrangelo, Letang, and Ekmann-Larsson. Most of those guys weren't drafted in the first round. Only one was drafted top 5, and he was in 08 when almost all of the top end were D.  Meanwhile a huge chuck of the top forwards were top 5 picks.  

 

I think NHL teams are reluctant to choose D with a top 5 pick.  We saw Edmonton pass on Murray in 2012 (dummies).  We saw Jones drop last season.  Larsson was project to go number 2 and dropped in 2011.  Fowler dropped way down the year before that.  Etc.  

I doubt there are many on that TSN list that LA would swap Doughty (1/2 in '08) straight across for.

[cross16]

I agree that Ekblad should go top 3. But I also thought Jones should have went top 3. I don't agree that this draft is all of that different. There is a lower top end for sure. But the situation is the same. One forward above the pack (Reinhart), than a bunch of forwards that are attractive for different reasons.

The top D going into the season according to TSN were Chara, Weber, Karlsson, Keith, Subban, Pietrangelo, Letang, and Ekmann-Larsson. Most of those guys weren't drafted in the first round. Only one was drafted top 5, and he was in 08 when almost all of the top end were D. Meanwhile a huge chuck of the top forwards were top 5 picks.

I think NHL teams are reluctant to choose D with a top 5 pick. We saw Edmonton pass on Murray in 2012 (dummies). We saw Jones drop last season. Larsson was project to go number 2 and dropped in 2011. Fowler dropped way down the year before that. Etc.

I think the difference for me in last years draft to this years was 1 through at least 4 you could argue for any of those 4 guys to go number one and where they ranked. This year to me it's Ekblad and Reinhart and they are a clear 1-2 it's not just clear what order it is but I don't think there and much debate that it's a two horse race. That's why i think it's less likely you'll see Ekblad slide but of course it is possible. Jones sliding to me honestly wasn't that big of a surprise once Colorado decided they were going with Mackinnon, who was he best player anyway.

I don't necessarily agree It's a case that teams are reluctant to take d.I think the issue at play is the dman take longer to develops then forwards so when you are I picking at e bottom of the draft you are under pressure to get it turned around quick. Typically I would say you are looking at a good 4 years before a dman will make an impact and many Gms don't have that long and I think when you take dman in latter rounds you have the luxury of watching them develop with less pressure and thus why I think many great dman come from later rounds they are allowed to be developed more effectively. Picks like Hedman, and the 2 Johnsons I think have been criticized a lot in years past but I think all 3 are excellent dman now but they took some time.

[robrob1974]

I would probably add Fleury to that second tier.  But other than that I agree.  As for the top tier I would be shocked if Reinhart isn't picked top 2.  But I wouldn't be shocked to see Ekblad fall to 4 or 5 though.  Teams seem very reluctant to pick a D top 3.  The few that have generally get burned.  

 

Florida got burned last time it happened (2010).  Tampa is probably kicking themselves for not going for Duchene in 2009.  St Louis messed up picking Johnson number 1 in 06.  08 is really the only modern exception, and that was a super deep draft for D.  Teams don't seem able to accurately predict the development of young D.  

 

Though maybe the season Jones is having will cause teams to rethink things this season. Who knows.  

 

Do you think that Edmonton would pass on drafting a good solid D-man? I think that if Ekblad gets to where the Oilers pick, they will draft him, unless there's a hulking forward they're eying out because of the size they lack up front. With all of the knocks on the team, I guess you can never know which way they will go with their draft?

I see Sam bennet as the most likely of the "top 3" to fall to us, and I would be beyond happy about it, if it were to happen.

 

I second this! I would love to see him fall to our spot.

[The_People1]

There are 23 guys in that locker room. All know that hockey is a business & some probably won't be in that room next season.

 

Since you are so gung ho on drafting 1/1 if possible to get the player the talking heads are hyping (they go by stats & really haven't met the player in many cases) I'll pose a question.

If that flashy player with gaudy numbers is a SoB with no concept of team play (but he's great @ cherry picking) do you really want him over a slightly less naturally gifted player that gives his all for the team that would be available @ #5,6 or 7 (where we'd be picking as it stands due to work rather then "possible" top end) ?

 

Good scouts analize character as much as talent. Bad GMs ignore that & draft by the numbers on the stat board.

 

Drafting 1/1, you can pick any player ranked #5,6, or 7.

Drafting #5,6, or 7, you can't pick quality character players already selected ahead of you.

 

Does that make sense?

 

It's that simple and whether it's worth it or not to lose games to gain this advantage may differ from person to person.  The advantage itself cannot be denied.  The advantage is worth assets in a trade.  It's a valued commodity.  Winning 2 or 3 more games the rest of this season is valuable too in it's own ways, but not nearly as valuable as moving up the draft ranking.

[DirtyDeeds]

Drafting 1/1, you can pick any player ranked #5,6, or 7.

Drafting #5,6, or 7, you can't pick quality character players already selected ahead of you.

 

Does that make sense?

 

It's that simple and whether it's worth it or not to lose games to gain this advantage may differ from person to person.  The advantage itself cannot be denied.  The advantage is worth assets in a trade.  It's a valued commodity.  Winning 2 or 3 more games the rest of this season is valuable too in it's own ways, but not nearly as valuable as moving up the draft ranking.

This is not a debate on whether it is a better player the higher you draft... Peoples. Everyone already knows the odds are just slightly the higher you pick. You seem to want to argue that point as an excuse for tanking to get those higher picks.

 

The thread debate is actually "Is it worth tanking for a higher pick". Only one person thinks it is worth it, or has the balls to put their name behind the conviction of a yes vote. (see poll)

[The_People1]

This is not a debate on whether it is a better player the higher you draft... Peoples.

 

No one ever claimed the higher you pick, the better player you get.  Just saying it's a mathematical truth that the higher you pick, the more players you get to choose from.

[conundrumed]

Math aside, I can't think of 1 #1 pick that made his team glorious alone, not even Crosby.

There are so many good players that it's a crapshoot. Many of the top players in the league weren't even top 10 selections.

So to want to lose for a higher pick does nothing to help. All you invite is a ton of hype that many don't live up to.

Play to win, and things tend to get better, play to lose, they get worse for all practical purposes.

Many like to bandee out the Pens and Hawks argument, but overlook how those orgs bordered total collapse. I don't want to border total collapse for a #1 pick, no matter who it is.

Want a massive C like Getzlaf or Backes? they weren't top 10 picks.

Want a franchise dman, for every Pietrangelo, there are Weber's and Kronwall's further down the list.

Building through the draft is a great component, but a higher selection, and losing to attain it, is apart from looking at drafting facts that are plain to see by looking through past drafts. Even having a great draft on paper doesn't correlate to success 5 years later.

You only have your scouts and hope they don't succumb to the hype machine.

5 years in the toilet does not guarantee anything either.

Watching Yakupov and Galchenyuk, entire sections would be filled with scouts, it's laughable. If you're a Pittsburgh, say, at the top of the league, why scout these 2? Why? There is no point.

Further proof scouting tends to cling to the flavour of the day, and why it's far from perfect.

[The_People1]

Math aside, I can't think of 1 #1 pick that made his team glorious alone, not even Crosby.

 

I don't recall even one person in this thread saying a 1/1 would single handedly make this team glorious alone.

 

So, we all agree there.

 

There are so many good players that it's a crapshoot. Many of the top players in the league weren't even top 10 selections.

 

Then why even draft at all?

 

During the Darryl Sutter era, the Flames spent many years mortgaging the future to win immediately by trading away second round picks.  Should we just keep doing that?

 

 

So to want to lose for a higher pick does nothing to help. All you invite is a ton of hype that many don't live up to.

 

It helps in the way of more choices to pick from.  Yes, you can still make the wrong pick.  It's absolutely incorrect to say it does nothing to help at all and imply it invites unwanted hype.  That's going too far.

 

 

I don't want to border total collapse for a #1 pick, no matter who it is.

Want a massive C like Getzlaf or Backes? they weren't top 10 picks.

Want a franchise dman, for every Pietrangelo, there are Weber's and Kronwall's further down the list.

 

29 other teams don't want a total collapse and still draft franchise altering talent.  Get in line.  That's why drafting higher gives you better odds at getting the guy you want.

 

We all want something for nothing.

 

 

Building through the draft is a great component, but a higher selection, and losing to attain it, is apart from looking at drafting facts that are plain to see by looking through past drafts. Even having a great draft on paper doesn't correlate to success 5 years later.

 

If the Chicago Blackhawks drafted Nail Yakupov in 2012, would they have still won the Cup in 2013?

 

Probably yes.  1/1's don't hurt you.  The difference between a Tampa Bay Lightning and New York Islanders is that Stamkos has a supporting cast and Tavares does not.  Depth players play a big role but they play a big role until two teams have good depth, then it's the superstars who make up the difference.

 

 

5 years in the toilet does not guarantee anything either.

 

Why does thou even go there? 

[conundrumed]

I don't recall even one person in this thread saying a 1/1 would single handedly make this team glorious alone.

 

So, we all agree there.

 

 

Then why even draft at all?

 

During the Darryl Sutter era, the Flames spent many years mortgaging the future to win immediately by trading away second round picks.  Should we just keep doing that?

 

 

 

It helps in the way of more choices to pick from.  Yes, you can still make the wrong pick.  It's absolutely incorrect to say it does nothing to help at all and imply it invites unwanted hype.  That's going too far.

 

 

 

29 other teams don't want a total collapse and still draft franchise altering talent.  Get in line.  That's why drafting higher gives you better odds at getting the guy you want.

 

We all want something for nothing.

 

 

 

If the Chicago Blackhawks drafted Nail Yakupov in 2012, would they have still won the Cup in 2013?

 

Probably yes.  1/1's don't hurt you.  The difference between a Tampa Bay Lightning and New York Islanders is that Stamkos has a supporting cast and Tavares does not.  Depth players play a big role but they play a big role until two teams have good depth, then it's the superstars who make up the difference.

 

 

 

Why does thou even go there? 

Drafting higher gives you a better chance at the guy you want, hahaha.

I enjoyed your dissembling of me to that point.

But yeah, no it doesn't.

It's on the scouts, you can't speak to other scouting depts, focus on your own.

Again, this is displayed in past drafts. You're getting caught up in losing to get a better player, then you wrap it all shiny about the potential to do that.

Picking 3rd vs 5th is an extremely minimal advantage, if there is any advantage at all. It's perception.

You have to have actively scouted a great number of players, for every C you want, there's 5 more. Losing one guy because you're 2 places lower amounts, really, to nothing.

It's the difference between Ekblad and Bennett or Drasaitl.

Every round.

Stop treating it as a big difference, to the point that you want your team to lose.

Facts don't support your argument, only theory does.

Not what I'd be wanting to hang my hat on.

[redfire11]

Math aside, I can't think of 1 #1 pick that made his team glorious alone, not even Crosby.

I personally think this was one example where a 1st overall DID completely change a franchise. I think Crosby put a little legitimacy into this franchise and you started seeing FA's take notice and want to play for the pens. ( You never heard that Iggy wanted to go to Pitts to play with Letang, or Fleury, or Malkin ( just an example- nothing to debate about))

 

Peeps you keep pushing that we need to lose for a higher pick. Well a thumbs up for your determination, your perseverance, and your willingness to push against the common thought; Hey VERY much like what our flames are doing.

[conundrumed]

If it's nothing to debate about, don't mention it. Outside of that, Crosby entered the league with Malkin.

If you think Malkin is way below Crosby, you're crazy.

The Pens aren't the Pens without Malkin, too. Don't kid yourself.

[robrob1974]

If it's nothing to debate about, don't mention it. Outside of that, Crosby entered the league with Malkin.

If you think Malkin is way below Crosby, you're crazy.

The Pens aren't the Pens without Malkin, too. Don't kid yourself.

Malkin steps it up when Crosby is out and I think he is almost on par with Crosby. 

 

The thing about Pittsburg is, in my opinion is, that it's Crosby's team. Malkin doesn't have to step it up, players look to Crosby to make the difference. It was the same when the Flames had Iginla. I don't watch Pittsburg very often but if it's anything like it was with Iginla, the team just plays better as a whole without because they have to make up for the fact that someone like Crosby or Iginla is in the line-up; to keep to both references. 

 

It's why you see the Flames play so well. As long as all of the players buy in and play together, the team will do what the Flames are doing. I wonder when we get a player who will be "the man," will the team continue with the work ethic, will they continue to try and win the way they are?

 

[robrob1974]

 

I am half on Peeps side. lol. For me, I just wonder how much of this culture that is being created this year will stick when we draft the hopefuls? Like when we have the (could be) stars on the team. That's my only worry. Player development is a new concept for the Flames so it's my biggest fear that we draft from 5-7th overall for a bunch of years the players do not turn out. Not every draft is going to be like last year where we get a Monahan at 6th. 

 

It's quite possible we draft between 5th and 7th this year with the fact the Flames do not give up and I think other teams will just not care anymore, especially ones who are just missing the playoffs, like the Canucks. 

[SheriforPM]

I'm with conundrumed on this. To me losing for a slightly better pick doesn't make much sense. Especially with what? 4 games left? 

 

We have seen teams tank on purpose for higher picks. The reputation of those teams are still talked about today. Re: Pens with Crosby. Yes they have Sid, and I love the guy but you have to ask yourself, was it worth it? 

Edmonton trades Ryan Smith for what amounts to about 500k difference, then loses the next 20 some games. Can't tell me they weren't tanking. 3 number 1's later and where are they? They still suck.

I like listening to the analysts talking about Calgary being pesky, hard working and never quitting. How many jerseys hit the ice with a flaming C on them this year?

 

None.

 

Reason? Fans are behind this team. Completely! Why? We try every single game! 

 

Losing for the sake of a higher pick is dumb.

[The_People1]

Drafting higher gives you a better chance at the guy you want, hahaha.

I enjoyed your dissembling of me to that point.

But yeah, no it doesn't.

It's on the scouts, you can't speak to other scouting depts, focus on your own.

Again, this is displayed in past drafts. You're getting caught up in losing to get a better player, then you wrap it all shiny about the potential to do that.

 

You can't gaurantee you get a better player by picking higher.  No one can.  It's only a gaurantee you get to choose from more players the higher you pick.

 

 

Picking 3rd vs 5th is an extremely minimal advantage, if there is any advantage at all. It's perception.

 

Perception?  Lol it's math bro.  It shouldn't even need explanation.

 

That's like saying finishing 3rd vs 5th last in the overall league standings is perception.

 

 

You have to have actively scouted a great number of players, for every C you want, there's 5 more. Losing one guy because you're 2 places lower amounts, really, to nothing.

It's the difference between Ekblad and Bennett or Drasaitl.

Every round.

Stop treating it as a big difference, to the point that you want your team to lose.

Facts don't support your argument, only theory does.

Not what I'd be wanting to hang my hat on.

 

Ekblad, Bennett, and Draisaitl are contradicting your point that for every C you want, there's 5 more.  For example, if you want a Right Hand shot Dman who has top pairing potential, there's only one.  If you miss it, then there's no more.  Prospect potential only starts to get murky when you get to the second round... but we're talking about the first round here.  In that critical first round, there are clear differences between one prospect and another.  It's not theory.

[The_People1]

We have seen teams tank on purpose for higher picks. The reputation of those teams are still talked about today. Re: Pens with Crosby. Yes they have Sid, and I love the guy but you have to ask yourself, was it worth it?  

 

Considering the Crosby draft order was fully determined by an NHL lottery, your example is a double face palm total fail.  That, and they won the Cup too.  Was it worth it?  Oh boy.

 

 

Edmonton trades Ryan Smith for what amounts to about 500k difference, then loses the next 20 some games. Can't tell me they weren't tanking. 3 number 1's later and where are they? They still suck.

 

Talked about to death.  Oilers suck because of a lack of depth and they rushed their prospects.

 

 

I like listening to the analysts talking about Calgary being pesky, hard working and never quitting. How many jerseys hit the ice with a flaming C on them this year?

 

None.

 

Reason? Fans are behind this team. Completely! Why? We try every single game! 

 

Losing for the sake of a higher pick is dumb.

 

Someone threw a Flames jersey onto the ice last year.

[FeyWest]

Considering the Crosby draft order was fully determined by an NHL lottery, your example is a double face palm total fail.  That, and they won the Cup too.  Was it worth it?  Oh boy.

 

I'd much rather have our own identity and develop our team because of us not become a Pittsburgh "Copy" however this is all relative per fan so no need to debate this.

 

 

Talked about to death.  Oilers suck because of a lack of depth and they rushed their prospects.

 

Correct and makes for one good case for rushing prospects and hype, I believe in Hartley and BB for development, unless our prospects blow socks off pre-season AND their 9-games there is no rush or hurry to bring them to the big club because I love what Troy G. Ward  does for our guys on the farm.

 

 

Someone threw a Flames jersey onto the ice last year.

 

He was referring to this year in which majority of the fan base seems to be on-board with the rebuild and how competitive we seem night in and night out.

 

Last year was a one off because of how situational it was with the lockout, so many unknowns to the team, major changes to the team and such.  I think this year and the years of our rebuild will be a better indication of our culture change and systems.

 

I can understand and agree that drafting 1st overall gives you the best chances to get the guys you want. Even I am tempted to say throw the last few games to guarantee our spot, however, me personally am more inclined to think the hockey gods will provide us better luck and results if we work our checking from behind off and fall where will in the draft rankings.

 

As long as our management and scouts do their due diligence and are consistent in our needs and look at the BPA I think we will turn out just fine without that 1st overall pick.

 

Although I wouldn't mind just one 1st overall just once to feel how the Penns did with Crosby! (ie: win the lottery and play spoiler) just mho