Grantland is in my brain

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Grantland is in my brain

    In response to Orrthebest's comment:

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

     

    It's a fun idea, would be fun if they at least tried something. It would make the trade deadline interesting.




     




     

    How?  Every team would be buyers and there would be no sellers.  There would be very few trades.  TSN and Sportnet would be looking for new ways to fill up 6 hours of programming they commit to the trade deadline.




    There would still be plenty of upcoming UFA's that the team has no interest in re-signing with more buyers on the market. I think there would be fewer deals, but they'd be bigger.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Grantland is in my brain

    I wonder about that, kel.  Who's selling if everyone want to win right to the wire?  Take Calgary last year.  They know they're not going to make the playoffs, so they auction off Iginla, Bouwmeester, and try to trade Kiprusoff knowing that they're better off losing and getting a higher pick than keeping these guys and losing them as UFAs.

    The trades net them a few mid-level prospects and a couple of 1st rounders.  The picks are in the 20+ range of the draft - Jordan Caron territory.  I'm pretty sure I heard a rumour that Feaster tried to move up by dealing the pick he used on Monahan plus one or both of the other picks.  In other words, he was pretty much willing to sacrafice the return on those UFA deals for the highest possible pick in a year where that could be a franchise forward or D if you pick top 3 (or 4 if the Panthers are there).  So - wouldn't you see rebuilding teams like the Flames choose to keep their UFAs rather than trade them for picks and prospects if it means trying to win games and earn the best possible prospect? It just seems like the best return they could get. 

    Some teams would do the NHL equivalent of the game show contestant who chooses to take the money on the table rather than spin - so make the three lower first round picks and hope you hit at least one home run.  But not all.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: Grantland is in my brain

    One questiom - couldn't this strategy lead to teams (I mean the really bad teams - I'm looking at you Florida) tanking it earlier in the year. The sooner they get eliminated, the more games they'll have over other teams, the longer they have a chance to make the requsite points to get the first picks. May sound obtuse, but couldn't this just reverse the problem? Innstead of teams tanking late, they tank early and then push?

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Orrthebest. Show Orrthebest's posts

    Re: Grantland is in my brain

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

    In response to Orrthebest's comment:

     

    In response to kelvana33's comment:

     

    It's a fun idea, would be fun if they at least tried something. It would make the trade deadline interesting.




     




     

    How?  Every team would be buyers and there would be no sellers.  There would be very few trades.  TSN and Sportnet would be looking for new ways to fill up 6 hours of programming they commit to the trade deadline.

     




    There would still be plenty of upcoming UFA's that the team has no interest in re-signing with more buyers on the market. I think there would be fewer deals, but they'd be bigger.

     




    So you think GMs will give up a chance at first overall to add a late first or second round pick, sorry but I disagree.  The prices at the deadline are already too high and this will push them much higher. 

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RichHillOntario. Show RichHillOntario's posts

    Re: Grantland is in my brain

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

     


    It brings an element of quality that we have been missing for about the past decade.  That "Rant Sports" article is written about the B's picking up two guys.  It fills the quote, depite not making much sense overall.  Grantland is good writing for smarter fans.  Not "advanced stats" smarts, but just smarter than many.

     

     

     



    All true, NAS.  Love the hip way the articles are written.  Not high brow.  Not low brow.  Just hip, cool, entertaining and enlightening. 

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Orrthebest. Show Orrthebest's posts

    Re: Grantland is in my brain

    In response to red75's comment:

    One questiom - couldn't this strategy lead to teams (I mean the really bad teams - I'm looking at you Florida) tanking it earlier in the year. The sooner they get eliminated, the more games they'll have over other teams, the longer they have a chance to make the requsite points to get the first picks. May sound obtuse, but couldn't this just reverse the problem? Innstead of teams tanking late, they tank early and then push?




    I believe it would.  What the stat something like 90% of teams in a playoff spot after 20 games make the playoffs.  Any good GM will know early on and start bringing up prospects under the guise of finding a winning lineup.


    The other thing that I don't like is injuries.  Say next season both Crosby and Malkin get injured in training camp and are out for 5 months the Penguins fall out of the playoffs then get Malkin and Crosby back.  They win the first overall and select McDavid.  How would that be good for the NHL?

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Grantland is in my brain

    All good points Orr, my argument is just if Buffalo is out and they have chance to win the number one pick or trade Ryan Miller to a contending team you'd have teams offering them alot to get him. Buffalo feels they can win the draft pick tournament with Ehnroth who they see as their number one for the next year and beyond. They deal Miller to a contending team for picks and a player or two of there roster. Now, they might have just increased their chances of winning the tournament. They stunk with Miller as it was.

    I just think they'll always be trades, so you dont have the 20 or so Ian Moran or Dan McGillis trades, you have the big star going for the big package with both teams having something at stake.

    I still love the draft pick tournament idea. Would be great for the game.




     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Grantland is in my brain

    I think it would be some ug LY hockey.  Psychologically, I think you'd see guys lose interest.  If your a bubble second line forward who could see his job go away if the team drafts a stud rookie, you're at least conflicted.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from kelvana33. Show kelvana33's posts

    Re: Grantland is in my brain

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    I think it would be some ug LY hockey.  Psychologically, I think you'd see guys lose interest.  If your a bubble second line forward who could see his job go away if the team drafts a stud rookie, you're at least conflicted.

     

     

    Are you not entertained?!?!




    And thats probably the most damning reason. Playoff share wont fix that....

     

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BSXIII. Show BSXIII's posts

    Re: Grantland is in my brain

    That article was well thought out and a very good read. I agree with the vast majority of it, but disagree with a few of the points.

    Draft position based on the best record after being eliminated sounds interesting but teams throw in the towel well before they are mathematically eliminated. I agree that could lead to teams tanking even earlier.

    I especially dislike the idea of larger nets. I'm sure they can make smaller and lighter equipment that offers even more protection for goalies. Go that route first.

    Not sure why they'd want less outdoor games. Hockey relies on local revenue more than any other sport. The outdoor games have been a hit in the host cities. Why not try to have it an annual event in markets that will support it?

    Home white jerseys are a step backwards. Most people prefer to buy the dark jerseys simply because they don't stain as easy and last longer.

    I didn't see any mention of softening the rock hard pads skaters wear.

    They mentioned the cap floor, but I'd like to see more flexibility to the cap ceiling. Definitely have a hard number where teams can no longer scoop up free agents, but maybe allow some flexibility for resigning their own players or acquiring players in trades. I think you can maintain a competitive balance while allowing teams to exceepd the cap. Let small market teams acquire more prospects and draft picks in exchange for cap space. I think the right formula could benefit everyone.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: Grantland is in my brain

    In response to red75's comment:

    One questiom - couldn't this strategy lead to teams (I mean the really bad teams - I'm looking at you Florida) tanking it earlier in the year. The sooner they get eliminated, the more games they'll have over other teams, the longer they have a chance to make the requsite points to get the first picks. May sound obtuse, but couldn't this just reverse the problem? Innstead of teams tanking late, they tank early and then push?




    If Florida can't win in October because they are supposed to try hard, I don't think they can suddenly try harder in February because they could get the #1 pick.  Florida is a miserable team.  If they were to rachet it up a notch in order to get the first pick overall, they'd have to trade half the team.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share