shrader Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Seriously, if you have Draisaitl, Ekblad and the Sams rating virtually even, you'd be foolish not to see what the Oilers would offer you to switch, especially if if you are having the same conversation with the Flames and leveraging them against other. Now if you have a guy head and shoulders above the rest, then, yes, you sit tight and take him. But at the same time, if Edmonton also has all those guys rated as virtually equal, why would they want to give up an asset to move up one spot? The only teams that would want to jump into that spot are the ones who have a shot at none of these guys. That's the same team's draft pick that we have no interest in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
North Buffalo Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 The more I think about it, it doesn't matter so much if the Sabres pick 2 this year other than it perpetuates the curse. More important they get No. 1 next year, either by their own pick from someone else's, the Islanders or... Any chance Snitzle er K-Raut er Erhoff could be traded for a No. 1 next year? Say to a team that looks like it won't be any good next year. Guess the Sabres should probably wait till the first half of the season is over. My other question is are there any Diamonds in the rough in the late 1st early 2nd round this year. I think it is important the Sabres hit on at least 2 players in this year's draft. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 The biggest question of the night I'd like answered is "When the fuq did Brian Burke go full-on Sonic the Hedgehog? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sicknfla Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 We seem to be discounting not winning the lottery. The difference between 1 or 2 is huge - even though we will still most likely get the player we wanted anyhow. Florida controls this draft. Don't think for a minute that GMTM did not want to be in this position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude_Verret Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I might be on board with the curse theory if we had a 75% chance of winning and then didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 (edited) We seem to be discounting not winning the lottery. The difference between 1 or 2 is huge - even though we will still most likely get the player we wanted anyhow. Florida controls this draft. Don't think for a minute that GMTM did not want to be in this position. I imagine he'd want to be #1, but don't think for a minute that with a 3 in 4 chance of not getting the first pick, he was surprised. Edited April 16, 2014 by Campy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 The biggest question of the night I'd like answered is "When the fuq did Brian Burke go full-on Sonic the Hedgehog? :w00t: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sicknfla Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I imagine he'd want to be #1, but don't think for a minute that with a 3 in 4 chance of not getting the first pick, he was surprised. Hopefully he (and all of us) keep that perspective when he gets visions of McDavid in blue and gold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I might be on board with the curse theory if we had a 75% chance of winning and then didn't. Now that some info is out there on how they actually run the lottery, it looks like we actually had a 24.975% chance of winning it (without factoring the NJ scenario). They've been lying to us the whole time. Conspiracy! Conspiracy! The NHL hates Buffalo! :wallbash: I'm actually surprised that more people aren't crying fix instead of going the curse route. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudacek Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 But at the same time, if Edmonton also has all those guys rated as virtually equal, why would they want to give up an asset to move up one spot? The only teams that would want to jump into that spot are the ones who have a shot at none of these guys. That's the same team's draft pick that we have no interest in. The scenario is there is no clear-cut number one this year. But that doesn't mean that individual teams don't have a clear-cut number one, just that many teams have different number ones. The Oilers and Flames may think Ekblad is the next Drew Doughty while the Sabres and Panthers think he is the next Uwe Krupp. It's virtually the only scenario where movement in the top five is possible because it can lead to situations where everyone gets who they want. Hopefully he (and all of us) keep that perspective when he gets visions of McDavid in blue and gold. I think it's myth that this board favours a "tank for McDavid" strategy. Just because many posters desperately want McDavid doesn't mean most of them think he is likely. Most of us understand that even under the unlikely best-case scenario of us and the Islanders finished 29th and 30th next year, chances of getting him is still less than 50% I think what the "tankers" really favour is acquiring first-line forwards, with the understanding there is a better chance of making that happen with a couple years of picking in the top five than a couple years of picking 13th. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlueGED Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 The scenario is there is no clear-cut number one this year. But that doesn't mean that individual teams don't have a clear-cut number one, just that many teams have different number ones. The Oilers and Flames may think Ekblad is the next Drew Doughty while the Sabres and Panthers think he is the next Uwe Krupp. It's virtually the only scenario where movement in the top five is possible because it can lead to situations where everyone gets who they want. I think it's myth that this board favours a "tank for McDavid" strategy. Just because many posters desperately want McDavid doesn't mean most of them think he is likely. Most of us understand that even under the unlikely best-case scenario of us and the Islanders finished 29th and 30th next year, chances of getting him is still less than 50% I think what the "tankers" really favour is acquiring first-line forwards, with the understanding there is a better chance of making that happen with a couple years of picking in the top five than a couple years of picking 13th. Another thing that may inflate Ekblad's value to some team: there are no other Dmen. After Ekblad it's basically a Grand Canyon-esque drop to the next defender. So if for whatever reason a team really wants a defensive prospect, it really is Ekblad or bust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALF Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 The Red Wings have made the playoffs for the last 23 years. Better scouting makes a big difference http://www.forbes.com/sites/jesselawrence/2014/04/15/at-23-red-wings-have-longest-active-nhl-playoff-streak-cheapest-tickets-in-eastern-conference/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bunomatic Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 The Red Wings have made the playoffs for the last 23 years. Better scouting makes a big difference http://www.forbes.co...ern-conference/ Better scouting and development. The wings rarely rush a player into the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claude_Verret Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I think it's myth that this board favours a "tank for McDavid" strategy. Just because many posters desperately want McDavid doesn't mean most of them think he is likely. Most of us understand that even under the unlikely best-case scenario of us and the Islanders finished 29th and 30th next year, chances of getting him is still less than 50% I think what the "tankers" really favour is acquiring first-line forwards, with the understanding there is a better chance of making that happen with a couple years of picking in the top five than a couple years of picking 13th. Thanks for laying this all out.....again. It's amazing that this has been repeated over and over and over since late last season when tanking became a hot topic around here and yet still people misrepresent the pro tank argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jsixspd Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 We seem to be discounting not winning the lottery. The difference between 1 or 2 is huge - even though we will still most likely get the player we wanted anyhow. Florida controls this draft. Don't think for a minute that GMTM did not want to be in this position. From the press conference, he clearly preferred winning the lottery outright - but the next best possibility would be the Islanders winning. We lost on both chances They used to call Buffalo the Queen City - now for my money it's the Curse City. For anyone who disagrees, my reply is "Wide Right?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Better scouting and development. The wings rarely rush a player into the league. It also didn't hurt being carried by a pair of Hall of Famers in Yzerman and Lidstrom for the vast majority of that streak. The influence of those players is still rubbing off on current Red Wing players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derrico Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 I think it's myth that this board favours a "tank for McDavid" strategy. Just because many posters desperately want McDavid doesn't mean most of them think he is likely. Most of us understand that even under the unlikely best-case scenario of us and the Islanders finished 29th and 30th next year, chances of getting him is still less than 50% I think what the "tankers" really favour is acquiring first-line forwards, with the understanding there is a better chance of making that happen with a couple years of picking in the top five than a couple years of picking 13th. But when the Blues end up in third last....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Sam Bennett will be on WGR right now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pastajoe Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 As far as changing the lottery goes, I think there needs to be less teams in the lottery for the first pick. I still think the "pockets" lottery idea is best. And it would make for much better tv. It would work like this: Teams 1-5 are in a lottery together. Any of the top five teams can pick in any order. So the third team could pick 1, fourth could be 2, 1 could pick 3... And so on. Worst team gets a 29% shot at pick one, second gets 25%, third gets 20%, fourth gets 15% and fifth gets 11%. Teams 6-10 are in the second lottery together. Same concept. They could end up in any order. Sixth gets 29% shot at the sixth pick, seventh gets 25%, eighth gets 20%, ninth gets 15% and tenth gets 11%. Teams 11-14 are in the third lottery. Same. Eleventh gets 34%, twelfth gets 28%, thirteenth gets 22% and fourteenth gets 16%. The show would be so much better. Since teams can be in any order in each pocket then it would start off with the 11-14 pocket. They would reveal 14 then 13 then 12 then 11... Then have a discussion about that. Then they would move to the 6-10 pocket. Then to the 1-5 pocket. It'd be so much more exciting, and I think it would be a better system that still promotes parity. Chances are each of the teams in the pockets aren't that much different in the standings. You could have saved alot of typing and just quoted my earlier post yesterday when I said the same thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Campy Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Sam Bennett will be on WGR right now! Couldn't listen. Did he say anything of note? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
26CornerBlitz Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 4/16 Sam Bennett chats with Hockey Hotline <8:29> Couldn't listen. Did he say anything of note? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGR4GM Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 Couldn't listen. Did he say anything of note? He was leafs fan. He is willing to go back to juniors next year if that is what his team decides. He likes to play physical. Over the summer, he plans to work as hard as he can to try and make a NHL lineup in the fall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoss Posted April 16, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 We seem to be discounting not winning the lottery. The difference between 1 or 2 is huge - even though we will still most likely get the player we wanted anyhow. Florida controls this draft. Don't think for a minute that GMTM did not want to be in this position. If you get the player you wanted at number two then it's 100% irrelevant. We still have the first pick in every other round. Florida doesn't control anything other than who goes number one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfreeman Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 #2's: 2013: Aleksander Barkov (FLA) 2012: Ryan Murray (CLB) 2011: Gabriel Landeskog (COL) 2010: Tyler Seguin (BOS from TOR) 2009: Victor Hedman (TBL) 2008: Drew Doughty (LAK) 2007: James van Riemsdyk (PHI) 2006: Jordan Staal (PIT) 2005: Bobby Ryan (ANA) 2004: Evgeni Malkin (PIT) 2003: Eric Staal (CAR) 2002: Kari Lehtonen (ATL) 2001: Jason Spezza (OTT from NYI) 2000: Dan Heatley (ATL) Good info. Thanks. I think it's myth that this board favours a "tank for McDavid" strategy. Just because many posters desperately want McDavid doesn't mean most of them think he is likely. Most of us understand that even under the unlikely best-case scenario of us and the Islanders finished 29th and 30th next year, chances of getting him is still less than 50% I think what the "tankers" really favour is acquiring first-line forwards, with the understanding there is a better chance of making that happen with a couple years of picking in the top five than a couple years of picking 13th. All true, and yet there were a number of posters in this very thread exclaiming how they "couldn't believe the Sabres got screwed again." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted April 16, 2014 Report Share Posted April 16, 2014 It also didn't hurt being carried by a pair of Hall of Famers in Yzerman and Lidstrom for the vast majority of that streak. The influence of those players is still rubbing off on current Red Wing players. Steve Y: 4th overall. Lindstrom: 58th. Take from that what you will. All true, and yet there were a number of posters in this very thread exclaiming how they "couldn't believe the Sabres got screwed again." I'm really hoping most of those are sarcastic, but hoping doesn't make it so. 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.