Quote:
Originally Posted by Joborule
You know if a team sucks so bad that they need a 1st overall pick, what makes people think that they'll win enough points after being mathematically eliminated to get the 1st? They were eliminated first because THEY CAN'T WIN GAMES!
If a team went 0-82, they wouldn't be able to get the first pick because some other team maybe went 1-81. If that doesn't show how dumb the logic is in rewarding teams that can yield more success than others giving them the best player in the draft, nothing will.
It's honestly a non-issue. Funny how it becomes a topic when Flames aren't a team that suck enough to get the first overall. Never heard this talked about so much in years past when Flames were winning games yet still missing playoffs.
If a team wants to suck so much that they get the first pick year in and year out, let them. Which they do not. They can't keep those players forever anyway, and if they wanted to do that, they'll hurt their bottom line since fans will get fed up with that crap. Look at the teams that constantly draft in the top 5, and see ask if they would prefer to be drafting later on or not.
|
I have no problem whatsoever with the WORST team in the NHL having the best odds at a top pick, that's how it should be. The issue is that rather than promote competition among the non-playoff teams, the league has went one step further and actually implemented a system that serves the exact opposite function. The argument that this is the way other leagues such as the NBA do it is not an argument at all, the NHL can set an example and find creative ways to help the bottom teams while not hindering the competitive atmosphere at the end of the season.
The "pts after elimination" is intriguing as it does just that. It gives a distinct advantage to the teams that are terrible, while promoting teams to try to grab each and every point available right up to the last minute of that last game. How can you not want to watch that as a fan?