Hoss Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) I would rather get the 2nd pick this year and then win the lottery next year! The two are completely independent. I'd rather win the lottery this year and worry about next year then. Sam Reinhart is really falling into the category of too much talk/tape. He's fantastic. Best forward in the draft in my opinion, and in the opinion of just about everybody (still). But since he's been talked about for almost a year people are starting to look at other names because it gets boring focusing on one guy in a mediocre draft. We'd regret passing on Reinhart. Edited March 17, 2014 by Tankalicious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 At first I wasn't thrilled but watching them play has realized they are ok. It's going to take more than that to fully convince me. I too am skeptical of the Sabres taking a Euro so high. I like Risto and Zadorov but they are defenders and I think that makes a difference. Obviously all players are different but Draisaitl is below Reinhart, Dal Colle, Bennett, Nylander IMPO. Not a knock against Draisaitl who I think is a very good player but I wonder how well his style will transfer. You're sitting at the Sabres draft table, before the 1st pick is made the phone rings. The Ducks are calling to see if you are willing to deal the #1 overall pick for the 8th overall pick, 27th overall pick and Andrew Cogliano. Do you make the trade? I would try to swap out Cogliano for Silfverber, in the end either way I would make that deal. Absolutely not. There is a tremendous drop off after the top 5. Drafting 8 again who are we getting? Virtanen (who I really like)? Perlini? These guys are outside of the top 5 and far outside the top 3. Reinhart, Bennett and Ekblad will all be very good maybe all star level players. The guys you would want us to take are questions. As for the other crap you would get, Cogliano is a meh. I don't need another smallish player who clearly IMPO gets his offensive from his teammates. The 27th overall pick is another crapshoot that I don't even want to think about. No I would not under those options trade that pick. It would be absolutely stupid to do so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robviously Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 You're sitting at the Sabres draft table, before the 1st pick is made the phone rings. The Ducks are calling to see if you are willing to deal the #1 overall pick for the 8th overall pick, 27th overall pick and Andrew Cogliano. Do you make the trade? I would try to swap out Cogliano for Silfverber, in the end either way I would make that deal. If we have the first overall pick, I'm not even answering the phone. Let Murray take exactly the player he has ranked best in the draft. We don't need extra picks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 Tank update: We're currently in last place. Eleven points behind Edmonton who has played one more game than us. The team is on pace for 55 points which would be two points less than any other team in the league CURRENTLY has. If we get a point per game for the rest of the season that would give us 60 points which only two other teams have less than. Our goal differential is -65 which is -12 more than the next lowest. That's 134 below the highest in the league (St. Louis at +69). Only 131 goals. That's 28 below the next lowest and 94 below league-leading Chicago. 13 regulation and overtime wins is lowest in the league. Florida is second lowest with 17. If we finish on a point-per-game pace, which would leave us with 60 points, then the following teams would have to finish with these records to have a better slot in the lottery than us: Edmonton Oilers: 1-11-1 (3 points or worse in 13 games) Florida Panthers: 1-13-0 (2 points or worse in 14 games) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 I purpose we make April 29th our new VT-Day: our Victory-in-Tanking day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabresBillsFan Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 Tank update: We're currently in last place. Eleven points behind Edmonton who has played one more game than us. The team is on pace for 55 points which would be two points less than any other team in the league CURRENTLY has. If we get a point per game for the rest of the season that would give us 60 points which only two other teams have less than. Our goal differential is -65 which is -12 more than the next lowest. That's 134 below the highest in the league (St. Louis at +69). Only 131 goals. That's 28 below the next lowest and 94 below league-leading Chicago. 13 regulation and overtime wins is lowest in the league. Florida is second lowest with 17. If we finish on a point-per-game pace, which would leave us with 60 points, then the following teams would have to finish with these records to have a better slot in the lottery than us: Edmonton Oilers: 1-11-1 (3 points or worse in 13 games) Florida Panthers: 1-13-0 (2 points or worse in 14 games) Embrace the Tank! We have at least one more year of this I purpose we make April 29th our new VT-Day: our Victory-in-Tanking day. I'm making next year VT-Day as long as we are this bad next year. Let the kids develop and keep this same crap squad around for another year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 Embrace the Tank! We have at least one more year of this I'm making next year VT-Day as long as we are this bad next year. Let the kids develop and keep this same crap squad around for another year. I think next year is our tour in the Pacific Theater. This year we fought valiantly in our European Theater; it all began with a sabotage on our own troops by our leader himself fDR. After our declaration of tanking was obvious, we eventually confronted the enemy head on in our DR-Day. After such, in the beginning of winter our Battle of Pat Lafontaine's Bulge would take us near through the end of the war. We came out successful in landing General Tim Murray, but unfortunately Lafontaine would grow envious of GMTM and retire. Then, on April 29/30th of 2014 Da Fuhrer Garth Snow tragically ends his terrible campaign with franchise suicide in losing out on the 2014 NHL draft lottery and forcing his franchise to draft 5th overall, choosing, who else, but the German born Leon Draisaitl. However, the war is not done gentlemen. In undertaking such a campaign we have yet to deal with the second half of the war. Yet we've gone through one theater, and so we understand how to do such now. It will be difficult, and we will have to race there in hopes of reaching McDavid before the likes of the the Great Red North in Calgary, but before it's all over there will be not one, but two nuclear bombs dropped upon the NHL world, Little McDavid and Fat Eichel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 The news we're all afraid of... http://www.cbc.ca/sports-content/hockey/opinion/2014/03/30-thoughts-changing-odds-in-nhl-draft-lottery.html The NHL is considering two intriguing changes to its draft lottery.Last season, the league opened up winning the No. 1 pick to all 14 non-playoff teams. Previously, only the five-worst teams had a shot. But no one feared moving down more than one position, meaning the 30th-place club could select no lower than second. That protection is in peril. As we head towards a 2015 draft with two talents that have scouts drooling -- Jack Eichel and Connor McDavid -- the NHL is considering a system that could see the lottery going beyond just the No. 1 overall choice. There are discussions about having the top three picks, or even the top five, selected this way. Although odds would continue to favour those teams with the fewest points, a decision to go in this direction would mean the worst team could potentially pick fourth -- or sixth. Currently, the last-place squad gets a 25 per cent chance of snaring the top choice, with the best non-playoff finisher at 0.5 per cent. That may be different, too. What we're looking at here is a system where the odds would be weighted by how positions 17 through 30 in the NHL standings finish over a five-year period relative to the final playoff qualifier. The exact formula is not yet determined. But one of the potential scenarios is something like this: If you go back over the last five seasons (2008-09 to 2012-13), you can easily check how close those teams ranked 17-30 came to making the playoffs. The 30th-place finishers (Edmonton Oilers twice, Columbus Blue Jackets, Florida Panthers, New York Islanders) were a combined 131 points out. Overall, the 70 non-playoff teams totalled 693 points behind during that span. I assume the NHL would want to use the current season to make each year's lottery as relevant as possible. So if this were the league's method of choice, it can only be used as a comparison to the 2013 odds. Anyway, 131 is 18.9 per cent of 693. That would give the 30th-place team an 18.9 per cent shot at the top selection, down from the current 25 per cent. It would be a "rolling" five-year period. As you moved into the next season, the oldest would be dropped. However, there is one pothole. In 2011, the Dallas Stars and Calgary Flames, who missed the playoffs, finished ahead of the New York Rangers, who made it. In 2010, the St. Louis Blues, Flames and Anaheim Ducks were above the Philadelphia Flyers and Montreal Canadiens. And in 2009, the Florida Panthers beat out St. Louis, Columbus and Anaheim. Therefore, the teams who finished 17th overall were actually four points better than the last playoff team. That would have to be addressed. It's interesting stuff. No one wanted to use the word "tanking." But there is concern about how competitive things will be with McDavid and Eichel available next summer. If you're an owner or a general manager, would the adoption of this policy change the way you approach the 2014-15 season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 The news we're all afraid of... http://www.cbc.ca/sp...ft-lottery.html Just another reason why I do not want NYI to defer that pick they owe us until next year. Unfortunatetly, with news of this, NYI is much more likely to use the pick this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 Just another reason why I do not want NYI to defer that pick they owe us until next year. Unfortunatetly, with news of this, NYI is much more likely to use the pick this year. I agree that they probably will, but the good news is that, if they don't, our combined odds will then be higher than the ~32% we would get if we finished last and the Islanders finished 5th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabresBillsFan Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 I agree that they probably will, but the good news is that, if they don't, our combined odds will then be higher than the ~32% we would get if we finished last and the Islanders finished 5th I'm gonna go out and say this again that the Islanders will keep their pick this year and go all out to sign a goalie, a forward and a defenseman or two during the offseason. If that happens we will probably be picking in the 10-15 range. They wouldn't be that bad if they had better goaltending and losing Streit on defense to Philly really hurts. Plus who says Moulson doesn't go back to play with Tavares! Nobody really knows what they are gonna do but they are not and I repeat not gonna just stand pat and give us a top five pick this year or next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weave Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 I agree that they probably will, but the good news is that, if they don't, our combined odds will then be higher than the ~32% we would get if we finished last and the Islanders finished 5th You are assuming that the league does not change the way they determine who picks first. I wouldn't assume that right now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 I'm gonna go out and say this again that the Islanders will keep their pick this year and go all out to sign a goalie, a forward and a defenseman or two during the offseason. If that happens we will probably be picking in the 10-15 range. They wouldn't be that bad if they had better goaltending and losing Streit on defense to Philly really hurts. Plus who says Moulson doesn't go back to play with Tavares! Nobody really knows what they are gonna do but they are not and I repeat not gonna just stand pat and give us a top five pick this year or next year. I agree that they probably will, but the good news is that, if they don't, our combined odds will then be higher than the ~32% we would get if we finished last and the Islanders finished 5th Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 Just another reason why I do not want NYI to defer that pick they owe us until next year. Unfortunatetly, with news of this, NYI is much more likely to use the pick this year. It goes both ways though. We all think the Isles will suck next year but if they add a few guys in the offseason then they may end up somewhere in the 5 to 15 worst record. In that case, the odds of them winning a top 3 or 5 lottery draw would actually improve when compared to this years odds (if I read it correctly). Also, I'm assuming the Isles have not had a great record over the previous 5 years if they are using that metric. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildCard Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 You are assuming that the league does not change the way they determine who picks first. I wouldn't assume that right now. Sorry, but what do you mean? If we were to, just hypothetically, finish next season with the same exact bottom five, from my understanding (although this could be wrong), is this year we would have a ~32% chance at the number one overall pick and at worst an automatic 2nd overall pick whereas next year we could have a `38% chance at the number one overall with the downfall being we could end up drafting 6th at worst. Granted that final percentage of `38% will change a little bit because they will factor in this season's numbers, but it will still be higher than our ~32% now. I'm not happy about the change because I'd rather have a shot at McDavid or an automatic Eichel than a little bit more of a chance at McDavid or a 6th overall pick but it's better than nothing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 I'm not happy about the change because I'd rather have a shot at McDavid or an automatic Eichel than a little bit more of a chance at McDavid or a 6th overall pick but it's better than nothing Ya I agree that I hope this does not change. However, the way I read it it's not McDavid or 6th overall. We would have a % chance at McDavid and then a higher % chance at the #2 pick and if we didn't win that we would have an even higher % chance at #3 and so on. Therefore we could pick no lower than 6th (assuming we finish last) but have a shot at 1-5. I think the biggest way to stop teams from tanking yet give an advantage to the worst teams is their idea on having the avg. number of points over a 5 or even 3 year horizon count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabresBillsFan Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) Ya I agree that I hope this does not change. However, the way I read it it's not McDavid or 6th overall. We would have a % chance at McDavid and then a higher % chance at the #2 pick and if we didn't win that we would have an even higher % chance at #3 and so on. Therefore we could pick no lower than 6th (assuming we finish last) but have a shot at 1-5. I think the biggest way to stop teams from tanking yet give an advantage to the worst teams is their idea on having the avg. number of points over a 5 or even 3 year horizon count. Not many teams are purposely trying to tank like Buffalo. Most teams are piss poorly run and they do it themselves. I highly doubt Edmonton tries to tank next year. The Fans are going to get pissed. They added goaltending now all they need is a defenseman or two and they will be alot better. Calgary on the other hand is a team I could see trending down as well as Nashville, Carolina and Florida is probably another year away from being better. There is no reason that if Buffalo can let the kids develop one more year than I could seeing us landing easily in the bottom 3. Edited March 17, 2014 by SabresBillsFan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 The NBA's lottery system puts the top three pick up for grabs... The number one team has only dropped one spot in each of the last three years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabresBillsFan Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) The NBA's lottery system puts the top three pick up for grabs... The number one team has only dropped one spot in each of the last three years. The lottery works for teams purposely trying to tank which isn't many. Most are just poorly run organization's kinda like the Buffalo Bills. The bottom 5 teams should be the only one's competing for the top pick in my opinion. Edited March 17, 2014 by SabresBillsFan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 Ya I agree that I hope this does not change. However, the way I read it it's not McDavid or 6th overall. We would have a % chance at McDavid and then a higher % chance at the #2 pick and if we didn't win that we would have an even higher % chance at #3 and so on. Therefore we could pick no lower than 6th (assuming we finish last) but have a shot at 1-5. I think the biggest way to stop teams from tanking yet give an advantage to the worst teams is their idea on having the avg. number of points over a 5 or even 3 year horizon count. I agree with this. I feel like one misconception about the tank is it's about the #1 pick, especially next year. That really isn't the case, as tanking is about getting a prospect with a much higher chance of success than others, which is on average the top 3-5 each year. I don't think going from guaranteeing a top-2 pick to a top-5 pick changes the incentives much at all. But a rolling average? Now we're talking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) The lottery works for teams purposely trying to tank which isn't many. Most are just poorly run organization's kinda like the Buffalo Bills. The bottom 5 teams should be the only one's competing for the top pick in my opinion. The entire NBA is tanking this year. Okay, that's hyperbole. But the Sixers, Bucks, Lakers, Magic and Celtics all took steps to ensure a terrible pick this year. A few of them because injuries pushed them to do so. Despite my desire for things to stay the same... I do think it should be more of a lottery than it is. More picks should be open. Top three or five would be fine. But a system I like the idea of is a lottery for every five picks in the lottery. Teams one through five have a weighted lottery system. Five could end up with one or one could end up with five. Then six through ten should have a lottery where ten can get six and six can get ten. Then 11 to 14. So there would be a grouping, heavily weighted to the top. Six can't go higher than six, 14 can't go higher than 11. It would allow more movement. Edited March 17, 2014 by Tankalicious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwksndmonster Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 Why are they changing it again? Because a lot of GMs want shots at the top guys? What a joke. Let's just change the lottery system every year. The year after next lets give the 1st overall pick to the team that wins the cup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabresBillsFan Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 Why are they changing it again? Because a lot of GMs want shots at the top guys? What a joke. Let's just change the lottery system every year. The year after next lets give the 1st overall pick to the team that wins the cup. I agree it's stupid. The bottom teams are on the bottom for a reason. Not most teams tank for the top pick they are just poorly run teams who have a revolving door of players going in and out and mostly all the good one's are going out. Kinda like the Buffalo Bills. Any decent player they get once there initial contract is up is outta here. Then you wonder why the bills are mediocre at best. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 (edited) If they were to adopt the five-year plan for the lottery odds then we would have to finish 41 points below Edmonton between now and the end of next season to get the best odds in the lottery. I don't think five years is a fair shot. Maybe three years. But even that ignores the fact that sometimes you lose the face of your franchise. Sometimes they retire and that changes everything, so considering anything more than the single year is unfair. Edited March 17, 2014 by Tankalicious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SabresBillsFan Posted March 17, 2014 Report Share Posted March 17, 2014 The entire NBA is tanking this year. Okay, that's hyperbole. But the Sixers, Bucks, Lakers, Magic and Celtics all took steps to ensure a terrible pick this year. A few of them because injuries pushed them to do so. Despite my desire for things to stay the same... I do think it should be more of a lottery than it is. More picks should be open. Top three or five would be fine. But a system I like the idea of is a lottery for every five picks in the lottery. Teams one through five have a weighted lottery system. Five could end up with one or one could end up with five. Then six through ten should have a lottery where ten can get six and six can get ten. Then 11 to 14. So there would be a grouping, heavily weighted to the top. Six can't go higher than six, 14 can't go higher than 11. It would allow more movement. See my opinion is the bottom 5 teams should all be in a battle for the top pick. I like the idea of grouping. No teams should fall more than a few spots. So if we were the worst we shouldn't be able to pick no worse than 5. Like I said before most teams don't purposely try to tank they are just piss poor organizations that have no clue on what they are doing. Or just want to make money and they don't care about the revolving player door. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.