Best Option for the NHL for this Season?

[OccamsRazor]

2 hours ago, flyercanuck said:

 

 I can't believe anyone would when it comes to their numbers. 

Same with Russia.

 

Speaking of numbers. This is sad.

 

FEMA seeks 100,000 body bags from Pentagon as coronavirus pandemic worsens.

[Podein25]

Just now, OccamsRazor said:

 

Speaking of numbers. This is sad.

 

FEMA seeks 100,000 body bags from Pentagon as coronavirus pandemic worsens.

 

I saw a funny-not-so-funny tweet about MAGA-branded body bags earlier.

[WordsOfWisdom]

4 hours ago, fan4ever said:

 

If you can believe anything China says.......

 

 

I think China's Coronavirus numbers are bogus. They don't match the figures we're seeing in most other countries. Everyone in the media continues to praise China's efforts in stopping the spread of the virus (which I think is rich considering they're responsible for creating the damn virus). Its origin is Wuhan, China. 

 

Do I believe China (with 1 billion people, inhumane population density, and mass poverty) has fewer cases than the US does? No. 

Do I believe China has fewer deaths than the US, Italy, or Spain? No.

 

5 hours ago, fan4ever said:

I think you need to give this up

 

[ruxpin]

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

Late to the party here, but voted cancel everything.
Logistical nightmares, greater chance of injury now that players have "cooled down", and the paranoia that will still be prevalent not only in the sports world, but amongst fans, even when we are "officially clear" of Covid-19..... 
All that will conspire to make this season is just done.

An asterisk should just go next to the 2019-20 season....stats count, of course, standings...but ultimately, its a big nothing because no Division, Conference, or Cup champions will be crowned.

The NHL is better served just trying to get ahead of things by concentrating on trying to have the best possible 2020-21 season (and some indications are THAT might be affected in some way too!), and focus on how to get a proper draft, and new Seattle team, integrated into the infrastructure.

Forget this season. Everyone's focus is on health and safety...players are scattered all over the world....fans are on lockdown....just let everyone be and cut the losses this year.
Look ahead to next season and perhaps trying to start the season with everyone healthy and things going back to normal and on time.

[Alexandron]

9 hours ago, ruxpin said:

Interesting fact, that most people started to wash more often their hands during a quarantine/or isolation time, but some healthy people started to drink more often an alcohol now because they do not know what they can do during this time. Impossible to stay in front of the TV and watch a lot of depressive news. Definitely, people are changing their habits during such a difficult unusual period of our life. Hope, we will never see these harmful pandemics in the future. Our medical science should be on the top to prevent that stuff in the future. I am worry already that we will see during the next hockey seasons less fans in our arenas , because of 2020 unpleasant experience regarding COVID-19 as well as less visitors to the musical arenas , especially in aged/an old fans category and less tourism too.

I recently watched a documentary about the most genius inventor of our global history Nikola Tesla (1856-1943; 86 y.o.) where it was mentioned his unusual habit to wash his hands about 100 times per day. He was an extremely interesting person to admire.

Here is a link to read about him:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla

 

 I looked also through the Internet for not only on a negative sides but for the positive sides of some viruses and found few interesting links to read:

https://www.sciencealert.com/not-all-viruses-are-bad-for-you-here-are-some-that-can-have-a-protective-effect

 

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/annurev-vi-04-071217-100011

 

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/327167

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 6, 2020 by Alexandron

[WordsOfWisdom]

5 hours ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

Late to the party here, but voted cancel everything.

 

Welcome back! 

 

5 hours ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

An asterisk should just go next to the 2019-20 season....stats count, of course, standings...but ultimately, its a big nothing because no Division, Conference, or Cup champions will be crowned.

 

It's easy to say they should do that (since we have no financial interest at stake) but I don't think the NHL can afford to lose any more seasons. This is a league that has lost more games due to work stoppages or pandemics than every other professional sports league combined. 

 

This is a league that plays half seasons every 6-7 years when their current CBA expires. This is a league that already lost a Stanley Cup final to influenza and another to a lockout. I think it's "line in the sand" time for the NHL.  They need to find a way to make it work.

 

We're going to get past this virus in a few months (hopefully) and I think the NHL should pick up right where they left off. If this virus drags on for more than a few months longer, the decision is going to be made to send people back to work regardless of the curve or the death toll. Life will carry on with or without Coronavirus as it did before, because there is no economic choice in the matter.

 

So ultimately, this Coronavirus issue comes to a conclusion in the next two months maximum. People are not going to stay locked in their homes for the next 18-24 months as some have suggested this might drag on. 

 

[radoran]

11 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

I don't think the NHL can afford to lose any more seasons. This is a league that has lost more games due to work stoppages or pandemics than every other professional sports league combined. 

 

Why can't they afford it? The league is more popular, more profitable, and more valuable now than it ever has been.

 

And that's after losing a season and a half to work stoppages in the past 20 years.

 

If losing seasons over millionaires arguing with billionaires over how to divide up hundreds of millions of dollars didn't hurt, I don't see why "the fans" will hold losing this season against them.

[WordsOfWisdom]

6 hours ago, radoran said:

Why can't they afford it? The league is more popular, more profitable, and more valuable now than it ever has been.

 

I'm not sure that's going to be the case going forward. The NHL owners run businesses. Those businesses are sitting idle right now losing money as more and more of the population sits idle and turns to government assistance for money. There will come a point where the NHL owners also go bankrupt. 

 

6 hours ago, radoran said:

If losing seasons over millionaires arguing with billionaires over how to divide up hundreds of millions of dollars didn't hurt, I don't see why "the fans" will hold losing this season against them.

 

I wasn't referring to fans or anyone holding it against them. I'm talking about the broader impact of a lost season on the game itself, the business, etc.

 

I dunno.    

 

 

 

Edited April 6, 2020 by WordsOfWisdom

[WordsOfWisdom]

Check out the cute puppy? 

 

 

Sorry, just trying to get a LIKE.   

[radoran]

16 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

There will come a point where the NHL owners also go bankrupt. 

 

Can I introduce you to a little company named Rogers? With $29.175B in assets? True, that's Canadian dollars, but Billions are Billions.

 

How about a little organization named Comcast - $36.98B in market value?

 

Even the Arizona Coyotes' primary owner is worth $2B

 

Nobody's going "bankrupt" because they're not playing this season out. LMAO

[WordsOfWisdom]

38 minutes ago, radoran said:

 

Can I introduce you to a little company named Rogers? With $29.175B in assets? True, that's Canadian dollars, but Billions are Billions.

 

How about a little organization named Comcast - $36.98B in market value?

 

Even the Arizona Coyotes' primary owner is worth $2B

 

Nobody's going "bankrupt" because they're not playing this season out. LMAO

 

I'm just going to say: Look at the cute puppy!   

 

(I'm feeling under the weather today. No desire to debate/argue/comment/ponder/converse/etc....)

  

[OccamsRazor]

So i have seen the question asked on how they decide to continue the season...

 

 

...i haven't seen it asked on how do they decide on who gets Lafreniere???

 

And just looking because i wasn't sure till now when i looked wow Yzerman tanked hard for him. 39 points on the season. Wow.

 

The next closest is Ottawa with 62 points. 

 

So i wonder how the decide how to do the ping pong balls??

[WordsOfWisdom]

3 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

...i haven't seen it asked on how do they decide on who gets Lafreniere???

 

And just looking because i wasn't sure till now when i looked wow Yzerman tanked hard for him. 39 points on the season. Wow.

 

The current draft system is so broken.   

 

The fix:  Every team that misses the playoffs goes into a draft lottery with equal odds of winning the #1 pick. 

 

The remaining draft picks (2-32) are selected using a lottery system but now all of the remaining teams are in the draft and all of them have the same probability.

 

In other words...........

 

The Process:

1. Place 16 balls in a machine, one ball for each non-playoff team.
2. Pick one ball at random. There's your #1 draft pick.
3. Place 31 balls in a machine, one ball for every team except the team that won the lottery from step 2.
4. Keep drawing balls at random until the machine is empty. Draw #1 is Pick #2.
5. Draw #2 is Pick #3.
6. Draw #3 is Pick #4.
7. Draw #n is Pick #n+1  etc......

The last ball left in the machine is draft pick #32.

 

 

But to answer your question, they will seed the teams by points percentage.    

 

Edited April 8, 2020 by WordsOfWisdom

[notfondajane]

6 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

The current draft system is so broken.   

 

The fix:  Every team that misses the playoffs goes into a draft lottery with equal odds of winning the #1 pick. 

 

The remaining draft picks (2-32) are selected using a lottery system but now all of the remaining teams are in the draft and all of them have the same probability.

 

In other words...........

 

The Process:

1. Place 16 balls in a machine, one ball for each non-playoff team.
2. Pick one ball at random. There's your #1 draft pick.
3. Place 31 balls in a machine, one ball for every team except the team that won the lottery from step 2.
4. Keep drawing balls at random until the machine is empty. Draw #1 is Pick #2.
5. Draw #2 is Pick #3.
6. Draw #3 is Pick #4.
7. Draw #n is Pick #n+1  etc......

The last ball left in the machine is draft pick #32.

 

 

But to answer your question, they will seed the teams by points percentage.    

 

I'm not sure if I want the Cup champion picking number 2. Otherwise I like the idea.

Yes points percentage. It's only way to be fair for everyone.

[ruxpin]

On 4/7/2020 at 11:21 AM, radoran said:

Nobody's going "bankrupt" because they're not playing this season out. LMAO

 

Not among owners, anyway.

There may be some concessionaires or ushers, etc., that are in a world of hurt right now. 

[WordsOfWisdom]

8 hours ago, notfondajane said:

I'm not sure if I want the Cup champion picking number 2. Otherwise I like the idea.

Yes points percentage. It's only way to be fair for everyone.

 

Well in a random draw, it's almost never going to happen.

 

But even if it did happen, so what? What's the harm? I'm always baffled by people who subscribe to the 1-32 ---> 32-1 draft system. (If that makes sense.) It would be like saying if your team finished last this season (Detroit) then we're simply going to award you the Stanley Cup next season... because you deserve it. So whoever finishes last the year prior automatically gets the Stanley Cup the following year as compensation for suffering through a bad season. Why? We wouldn't do that with the Stanley Cup, why would we do it with the draft? Why does finishing first mean that you get punished? Why are we always looking to tear teams apart?

 

Here's what would happen if the draft system was changed as I described:

• If a stacked team happens to draft #2 (not gonna happen but let's pretend).... they will probably trade the draft pick away for an aging roster player who can make an impact now, thereby trying to keep their winning team together rather than wait for the draft pick to develop.
• OR maybe they dump an existing aging roster player and add the draft pick in the hopes of sustaining success.
• OR the salary cap comes into play and forces the team to dump salary and keep the draft pick instead, hoping for the best.

In any event, we shouldn't be giving draft pick welfare to teams for finishing last.  I'm fine with having the #1 pick be among the non-playoff teams, so long as everyone in that group has an equal shot and we're not punishing teams for busting their ass to get a playoff spot and just barely missing the mark. After that however, I think it should be fair game.

 

 

 

 

[flyercanuck]

1 hour ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

Well in a random draw, it's almost never going to happen.

 

But even if it did happen, so what? What's the harm? I'm always baffled by people who subscribe to the 1-32 ---> 32-1 draft system. (If that makes sense.) It would be like saying if your team finished last this season (Detroit) then we're simply going to award you the Stanley Cup next season... because you deserve it. So whoever finishes last the year prior automatically gets the Stanley Cup the following year as compensation for suffering through a bad season. Why? We wouldn't do that with the Stanley Cup, why would we do it with the draft? Why does finishing first mean that you get punished? Why are we always looking to tear teams apart?

 

Here's what would happen if the draft system was changed as I described:

• If a stacked team happens to draft #2 (not gonna happen but let's pretend).... they will probably trade the draft pick away for an aging roster player who can make an impact now, thereby trying to keep their winning team together rather than wait for the draft pick to develop.
• OR maybe they dump an existing aging roster player and add the draft pick in the hopes of sustaining success.
• OR the salary cap comes into play and forces the team to dump salary and keep the draft pick instead, hoping for the best.

In any event, we shouldn't be giving draft pick welfare to teams for finishing last.  I'm fine with having the #1 pick be among the non-playoff teams, so long as everyone in that group has an equal shot and we're not punishing teams for busting their ass to get a playoff spot and just barely missing the mark. After that however, I think it should be fair game.

 

 

 

 

 

The entire concept behind having the draft in the first place was to help the bad teams get better...not hand some of the best teams in the league the top players. 

 

 Of course it's gotten where teams like Pittsburgh or Buffalo or TORONTO tank on purpose, taking the entire idea of sportsmanship out of the equation. Which is what this is supposed to be about. 

 

 I'd bet if your Leafs were near the bottom of the heap you wouldn't want a "fair" draft, you'd want a "Mathewts" draft.

[WordsOfWisdom]

18 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

The entire concept behind having the draft in the first place was to help the bad teams get better...not hand some of the best teams in the league the top players. 

 

I believe the draft is a method to allocate new players to NHL teams. That's all it is.

 

Every season there are n new players entering the league and m old players who are retiring. Without the draft, there would be no formal process to get new players onto teams other than teams just sending out representatives to contact rookie players and sign them. 

 

In the absence of a draft, presumably every team would have had a rep show up at Matthews door offering him a contract and then the player would simply select the best offer. 

 

There is nothing about the draft that needs to favour bad teams. The implementation of the draft may work that way but the method itself says nothing about the distribution of the players because the method can be changed to be anything we want it to be.

 

26 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

Of course it's gotten where teams like Pittsburgh or Buffalo or TORONTO tank on purpose, taking the entire idea of sportsmanship out of the equation.

 

So why not eliminate the reward for tanking as I've suggested? Equal odds of #1 for all non-playoff teams. Don't give me this 25% odds for the last place team stuff. Don't tell me the problem is solved when you lower it from 25% to 12% or 5% or whatever. People hate tanking and complain about teams that tank for the #1 pick, yet they stubbornly refuse to change the system to prevent it from happening. Tanking will never stop until there's no statistical justification for doing it. If there's even a 1% advantage to finishing last, teams will tank to get it.   

 

28 minutes ago, flyercanuck said:

 I'd bet if your Leafs were near the bottom of the heap you wouldn't want a "fair" draft, you'd want a "Mathewts" draft.

 

#MatthewsGot55.  

[OccamsRazor]

4 minutes ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

I believe the draft is a method to allocate new players to NHL teams. That's all it is.

 

Every season there are n new players entering the league and m old players who are retiring. Without the draft, there would be no formal process to get new players onto teams other than teams just sending out representatives to contact rookie players and sign them. 

 

In the absence of a draft, presumably every team would have had a rep show up at Matthews door offering him a contract and then the player would simply select the best offer. 

 

There is nothing about the draft that needs to favour bad teams. The implementation of the draft may work that way but the method itself says nothing about the distribution of the players because the method can be changed to be anything we want it to be.

 

 

So why not eliminate the reward for tanking as I've suggested? Equal odds of #1 for all non-playoff teams. Don't give me this 25% odds for the last place team stuff. Don't tell me the problem is solved when you lower it from 25% to 12% or 5% or whatever. People hate tanking and complain about teams that tank for the #1 pick, yet they stubbornly refuse to change the system to prevent it from happening. Tanking will never stop until there's no statistical justification for doing it. If there's even a 1% advantage to finishing last, teams will tank to get it.   

 

 

#MatthewsGot55.  

 

I would be ok with all the non playoff teams getting equal odds.

 

Every team gets a ball.

 

It makes it simple.

 

The current way doesn't work well hence the Devils getting the top pick in back to back draft as a primary example.

 

It can't hurt right?

[WordsOfWisdom]

4 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

I would be ok with all the non playoff teams getting equal odds.

 

You could even doll out the top 3 draft picks that way. 16 balls in a machine..... randomly pull out 3 balls. Equal odds for everyone. Simple as can be and 100% fair. There's your #1, #2, and #3 draft picks... all going to teams who missed the playoffs. Then you could do the remaining 29 balls and draw randomly for the rest of the draft (now with all remaining teams in).   

 

4 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

The current way doesn't work well hence the Devils getting the top pick in back to back draft as a primary example.

 

The current system will always encourage the bottom ~5 teams to aim for dead last. As soon as a playoff spot becomes a lost dream, then teams will strive to finish out the season with 15 game losing streaks to try to dodge points. 

 

4 hours ago, OccamsRazor said:

It can't hurt right?

 

My thoughts exactly.  

 

I subscribe to the "Simple, Fair, Equal Opportunity" draft system. There are others who like "Complex and Convoluted", and others who prefer "Equal Outcome". 

 

• "Simple, Fair, Equal Opportunity" draft system would be as I described.
• "Complex and Convoluted" draft system is sort of what the NHL has now.
• "Equal Outcome" draft system is what the NHL continually strives for.

Under an "Equal Outcome" draft system, the NHL would assign the top draft picks to the teams that "deserve" them the most, leaving nothing to chance. So a team that finishes last (ie: Detroit) would nab themselves the next Sidney Crosby, but if they finish dead last two years in a row the NHL would give the #1 pick to the 2nd last place team because Detroit "already got theirs" and can't have another until they "deserve" another, etc... The Equal Outcome system seeks to make all teams the same, regardless of managerial effort, so failure is rewarded by having success given instead of earned. Some people like a system like that. I don't.     

 

[notfondajane]

4 hours ago, WordsOfWisdom said:

 

You could even doll out the top 3 draft picks that way. 16 balls in a machine..... randomly pull out 3 balls. Equal odds for everyone. Simple as can be and 100% fair. There's your #1, #2, and #3 draft picks... all going to teams who missed the playoffs. Then you could do the remaining 29 balls and draw randomly for the rest of the draft (now with all remaining teams in).   

 

 

The current system will always encourage the bottom ~5 teams to aim for dead last. As soon as a playoff spot becomes a lost dream, then teams will strive to finish out the season with 15 game losing streaks to try to dodge points. 

 

 

My thoughts exactly.  

 

I subscribe to the "Simple, Fair, Equal Opportunity" draft system. There are others who like "Complex and Convoluted", and others who prefer "Equal Outcome". 

 

• "Simple, Fair, Equal Opportunity" draft system would be as I described.
• "Complex and Convoluted" draft system is sort of what the NHL has now.
• "Equal Outcome" draft system is what the NHL continually strives for.

Under an "Equal Outcome" draft system, the NHL would assign the top draft picks to the teams that "deserve" them the most, leaving nothing to chance. So a team that finishes last (ie: Detroit) would nab themselves the next Sidney Crosby, but if they finish dead last two years in a row the NHL would give the #1 pick to the 2nd last place team because Detroit "already got theirs" and can't have another until they "deserve" another, etc... The Equal Outcome system seeks to make all teams the same, regardless of managerial effort, so failure is rewarded by having success given instead of earned. Some people like a system like that. I don't.     

 

My question then what happens if Detroit is that bad again? And not on purpose!

[ruxpin]

35 minutes ago, notfondajane said:

My question then what happens if Detroit is that bad again? And not on purpose!

Their city will still suck.   

[WordsOfWisdom]

3 hours ago, notfondajane said:

My question then what happens if Detroit is that bad again? And not on purpose!

 

Depends whose draft system we're using lol.    

 

I truly believe teams need to build their own roster. I don't believe it's the NHL's job to build rosters for teams who aren't capable.

 

Detroit can improve their roster with or without draft picks. You could build the Red Wings into a playoff team without using any draft picks at all. Easily. Heck, I could select any collection of free agents available this summer and ice a more competitive team than what Detroit had this year. (That's me throwing darts at a dartboard with names on it lol.) 

 

 

[WordsOfWisdom]

2 hours ago, ruxpin said:

Their city will still suck.   

 

I have never seen a city rot like Detroit. Ever.

 

When I was a kid, Detroit was 10x larger than my tiny, humble, little hometown. Today, my hometown is the size of Detroit.