robrob1974 Posted April 14, 2016 Report Share Posted April 14, 2016 Yeah, good one. Impossible to be fourth, unless we trade up. Or trade down Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjgallow Posted April 14, 2016 Report Share Posted April 14, 2016 So does anyone else feel the need to explain DirtyDeed's joke? I hope so, because it just keeps getting funnier every time it's spelled out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted April 14, 2016 Report Share Posted April 14, 2016 This is why I couldn't help but be frustrated by beating Minnisota. I wish we can send this post to Bill Daly and the NHL crew who decides how the draft lottery/system works. A fan is frustrated by their team winning. How can this have gone so wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob1974 Posted April 14, 2016 Report Share Posted April 14, 2016 So does anyone else feel the need to explain DirtyDeed's joke? I hope so, because it just keeps getting funnier every time it's spelled out! do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted April 14, 2016 Report Share Posted April 14, 2016 So does anyone else feel the need to explain DirtyDeed's joke? I hope so, because it just keeps getting funnier every time it's spelled out! Deeds usually adds when he is being sarcastic or Captain Obvious. I thought my little added post might curtain that discussion, but I guessed wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted April 14, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 14, 2016 Deeds usually adds when he is being sarcastic or Captain Obvious. I thought my little added post might curtain that discussion, but I guessed wrong. Usually but.. Maybe I would run into someone willing to bet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
travel_dude Posted April 14, 2016 Report Share Posted April 14, 2016 Usually but.. Maybe I would run into someone willing to bet Sorry to burn your chances on finding a sucker. Cheersman might still be up for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darth_henning Posted May 2, 2016 Report Share Posted May 2, 2016 Interesting find from an article today. Hopefully this can finally put the tanking discussion to bed. "On the other hand, here’s one for you: Since Mike Modano was drafted No. 1 overall in 1988, 27 players, beginning with Mats Sundin, have been taken in the top spot. Among those 27 players, they have won only five Stanley Cups: Patrick Kane has three with the Blackhawks, Vinnie Lecavalier won once, and Sidney Crosby and Marc-André Fleury shared one with Pittsburgh. That’s it. Five Stanley Cups — and one guy has three of them, so 23 top picks never got a sniff of the champagne. So after all the tanking, the controversy, the hype, the buildup that makes every top pick sound like Bobby Orr — the truth is that except in rare years when a player like Connor McDavid is available, it’s all a lot of lukewarm air." http://montrealgazette.com/sports/jack-todd-draft-lottery-leaves-a-bad-smell-hovering-over-nhl With Gaudreau and Monahan top of their respective draft classes, and top 6 picks in Bennett and whoever we get this year, I think we can officially close the book on the "high pick" obsession of some. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted May 2, 2016 Report Share Posted May 2, 2016 Interesting find from an article today. Hopefully this can finally put the tanking discussion to bed. "On the other hand, here’s one for you: Since Mike Modano was drafted No. 1 overall in 1988, 27 players, beginning with Mats Sundin, have been taken in the top spot. Among those 27 players, they have won only five Stanley Cups: Patrick Kane has three with the Blackhawks, Vinnie Lecavalier won once, and Sidney Crosby and Marc-André Fleury shared one with Pittsburgh.[/size] That’s it. Five Stanley Cups — and one guy has three of them, so 23 top picks never got a sniff of the champagne. So after all the tanking, the controversy, the hype, the buildup that makes every top pick sound like Bobby Orr — the truth is that except in rare years when a player like Connor McDavid is available, it’s all a lot of lukewarm air." http://montrealgazette.com/sports/jack-todd-draft-lottery-leaves-a-bad-smell-hovering-over-nhl With Gaudreau and Monahan top of their respective draft classes, and top 6 picks in Bennett and whoever we get this year, I think we can officially close the book on the "high pick" obsession of some. Your conclusion has nothing to do with your premise because neither Gaudreau, Monahan, or Bennett has won Cups. So to conclude not tanking wins Cups based on your example is also not true. You can only conclude that you can draft the best player in any draft year regardless of draft position.The article is not entirely fair. Tanking doesn't automatically result in the top pick. It could mean the second pick, which if also considered, would increase the number of Cups won over the time span dramatically. Tanking just means managerially orchestrating a slide down the standings once the playoffs are realistically out of reach. Like, Buffalo tanked it last year and didn't get the #1 pick. If they win the Cup, they wouldn't tally a stat against the article, yet they clearly tanked. Not to mention, 1987 was the Joe Sakic year so some disingenuous cut off date there. You can also argue the Flames tanked it as much as they can to get Monahan as well. Had we not tanked, we may have had to settle for someone else not as good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 As many of us said, the number of your pick is arbitrary. What is important is the quality of the player you get. Sure high picks help with that. But they aren't essential. Monahan is currently either the best or second best player in his draft year (so far). Now nhl.com did a redraft for 2011 and Gaudreau was selected as the number one guy from that year. http://flames.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=886485 I would much prefer to have the best player in the draft versus the highest pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cccsberg Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 As many of us said, the number of your pick is arbitrary. What is important is the quality of the player you get. Sure high picks help with that. But they aren't essential. Monahan is currently either the best or second best player in his draft year (so far). Now nhl.com did a redraft for 2011 and Gaudreau was selected as the number one guy from that year. http://flames.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=886485 I would much prefer to have the best player in the draft versus the highest pick. Kehatch, that's absolutely correct. To have the best player of the draft several years out is incredible! Keep it up Flames. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 Kehatch, that's absolutely correct. To have the best player of the draft several years out is incredible! Keep it up Flames. Gaudreau and Monahan are clearly near the top of their draft class. Bennett was projected as first overall and could very well be at the top. Brodie and Hamilton are near the top of their class, certainly top 10. Plus we get a top 6 pick this draft. That's a lot of young talent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 As many of us said, the number of your pick is arbitrary. What is important is the quality of the player you get. Sure high picks help with that. But they aren't essential. Monahan is currently either the best or second best player in his draft year (so far). Now nhl.com did a redraft for 2011 and Gaudreau was selected as the number one guy from that year. http://flames.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=886485 I would much prefer to have the best player in the draft versus the highest pick. For whatever reason, your link doesn't work but here's the article i think you are referring to. https://www.nhl.com/news/2011-nhl-re-draft-gaudreau-jumps-to-no-1/c-280996940 There's so much wrong with your assertions that i don't even know where to begin. Like, - Nobody is arguing the contrary per se. - Faulty generalizations based on the misapplication of the article on the subject at hand. - Hindsight/crystal ball debate method. In the face of the Penguins winning yet another Cup, i think we can conclude a few items, TRUTHS - Tanking is immoral. - Drafting #1 overall doesn't guarantee you get the best player in the draft. - Drafting #1 overall doesn't cause you to win the Cup shortly after. - It is possible to tank, yet not end up getting the #1 overall pick, thus skewing perspectives. - When counting the number of teams that have won a Cup in the post-cap era, all except the Detroit Red Wings have drafted top 2. - It is possible to win the Cup after tanking but you have to draft well in all rounds, make the right trades, UFA moves, coaching hires, etc. MYTHS - Since tanking is immoral, then it must not work. - You can always draft the best player in the draft regardless of draft position. - If you draft #1 overall, then you automatically tanked for it. - Drafting #1 overall means you don't need to draft well in all other rounds. - Many teams have won the Cup in the post-cap era without ever tanking. - Tanking is guaranteed to create a perpetual losing culture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 There is nothing wrong with my argument. Getting better players is better then getting higher draft picks. The Flames got some of the best players in recent drafts without getting into the top 3. You added a whole lot of other stuff. But none of it changes those facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 There is nothing wrong with my argument. Getting better players is better then getting higher draft picks. The Flames got some of the best players in recent drafts without getting into the top 3. You added a whole lot of other stuff. But none of it changes those facts. But no one is arguing you can't draft Monahan and Gaudreau with the #1 overall pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kehatch Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 But no one is arguing you can't draft Monahan and Gaudreau with the #1 overall pick. No one is arguing tapioca is better then chocolate either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartbreaker Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 No one is arguing tapioca is better then chocolate either. Well, that'd just be silly. Love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob1974 Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 Now imagine if we got a really good player in the other rounds in the Gaudreau draft? We got Sven and they switched on the draft floor, but, was there any leak on who the guy they switched out?? Sven is, so far, an ok NHLer. I wonder what he'd be like with the high end skill that we have now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 No one is arguing tapioca is better then chocolate either. Tanking did not prevent the Oilers from drafting Gaudreau nor has RNH completely fallen our of the top 10. You can argue COL tanked just as hard that year and Landeskog remains the 2nd best player in that draft year and both players affirm tanking was justified. At the end of the day, nobody has a crystal ball, just like nobody knows who will be the best player in this year's draft so its an advantage to draft higher. Vs winning down the stretch when the playoffs are mathematically impossible. Not to mention, the Oilers and Avs could have drafted Gaudreau in the 3rd round too and 25 other non-tanking teams missed on Gaudreau so their best outcome was to tank for a top 10 pick to draft a top 10 ranked player. What this means is without realizing, you presented two scenarios the Flames could have faced and chose one, Scenario 1, Sven Baertschi Johnny Gaudreau +32 points in the standings but missed playoffs Kept high morals Scenario 2, RNH Johnny Gaudreau -32 points in the standings and missed playoffs Lost morals I've always agreed that you can get the best player without drafting #1 overall. I've only argued that you don't know who that player is on draft day so the advantage goes to the team that drafts higher. You've done nothing to dismiss the validity of tanking for a higher pick by presenting the idea the draft is nothing more than a random throwing of darts on a dart board. It's not as random as you are presenting it to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carty Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 TRUTH The Jets finished with 78 points and are drafting 2nd... The Flames finished with 77 points and are drafting 6th... So if the Flames had won one more game, it might have been them drafting 2nd this year... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan52 Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 ^^^ Years of drafting high got the Oilers nowhere. In most draft years the top picks are a given. Winners have great/good scouts & draft well in the later rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 The Jets finished with 78 points and are drafting 2nd... The Flames finished with 77 points and are drafting 6th... So if the Flames had won one more game, it might have been them drafting 2nd this year... Ironically, the Jets traded Ladd and gave up on the season. The Flames fought hard to the very last game. ^^^ Years of drafting high got the Oilers nowhere. In most draft years the top picks are a given. Winners have great/good scouts & draft well in the later rounds. The Oilers are a great example of tanking not guaranteeing a Cup. You must do everything else right in complement with tanking to win Cups. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 Ironically, the Jets traded Ladd and gave up on the season. The Flames fought hard to the very last game. Won their last 4 games and 6 of their last 10. Had a better record than the Flames. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robrob1974 Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 Ironically, the Jets traded Ladd and gave up on the season. The Flames fought hard to the very last game. The Oilers are a great example of tanking not guaranteeing a Cup. You must do everything else right in complement with tanking to win Cups. Yet, that's still not a given because they can very well win a cup with their new toy, and get something in a trade for some of their other older ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.