Teams couldn't hoard high volumes of talent, but the sexy teams (Rangers, LA, Toronto, etc.) would most definitely be able to hoard the highest quality prospects.
Basically, "So <insert young undrafted stud>, want to come play in the sexy big apple or in no good Mulletville".
They wouldn't if the ELC maximum was raised and there was a cap limit. No team would be able to sign more than one or two of the best prospects without letting one go. There are many measures that could be put into place. Unless you are worried that the best prospects will sign for a minimum with one team, but I seriously doubt that would happen.
In this situation, a team already loaded with prospects would be forced to miss out on the big fish the following season without trading from their current stock.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
They wouldn't if the ELC maximum was raised and there was a cap limit. No team would be able to sign more than one or two of the best prospects without letting one go. There are many measures that could be put into place. Unless you are worried that the best prospects will sign for a minimum with one team, but I seriously doubt that would happen.
In this situation, a team already loaded with prospects would be forced to miss out on the big fish the following season without trading from their current stock.
The only way it works is to put enough restrictions on things to maintain fairness and balance.
So why not just stick with the draft, since it is already fair and balanced?
Imagine one round of a draft. and then after that, everyone else becomes a free agent... how many of the best free agents do you think sign with Winnipeg or Edmonton or whatever?
I would need to see some tangible proof that the draft contributes to parity. Can draft position advantages make bad teams good? Sure. But that is not what parity is.
Eventually, prospects would have to go to Winnipeg, Edmonton, etc..., because the more desirable locations would fill up and with the proper cap measures in place, they would be SOL the following year.
Just imagine if in order to add Matthews or Laine under the ELC max, Edmonton had to dump McDavid or Draisaitl. If anything, such a system would force a more equitable distribution of talent around the league.
It would also help with player development IMO. For example, if the Flames wanted to add RWs to their prospect pool, they could target them specifically and perhaps offer more money than a team that would have simply drafted them because they were the BPA but already had oodles of RW depth and therefore couldn't give them the same opportunities to develop.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 03-08-2016 at 04:11 PM.
I would need to see some tangible proof that the draft contributes to parity. Can draft position advantages make bad teams good? Sure. But that is not what parity is.
Eventually, prospects would have to go to Winnipeg, Edmonton, etc..., because the more desirable locations would fill up and with the proper cap measures in place, they would be SOL the following year.
Just imagine if in order to add Matthews or Laine under the ELC max, they had to dump McDavid or Draisaitl? If anything, such a system would force a more equitable distribution of talent around the league.
It would also help with player development IMO. For example, if the Flames wanted to add RWs to their prospect pool, they could target them specifically and perhaps off more money than a team that would have simply drafted them because they were the BPA but already had oodles of RW depth and therefore couldn't give them the same opportunities to develop.
Simple question: do you think a league with no draft would have more parity or less parity than a league with a draft?
Any potential 2nd rounders catching your eyes, armchair GMs?
I have a few.
1. Yegor Korshkov. To be honest, he could go high in the 2nd or low into the last round, but I really loved what I saw from him at the WJC. PWF, highly skilled, big bodied RW with a left shot. I'm not sure he was Russias best player, but he was one of their top players for sure. 6'3" and 180 LBS. looks like he is signed until after the 2017/18 season but thats decent development time for a later pick winger. Could also drop his ranking down too.
2. Sean Day. Not living up to his prefered draft status but looks like a solid Defensive D man option. Wouldn't mind taking a shot with one of the extra 2nds. Just not the Flames'. 20 points in 53 gp and a minus 12. May end up regressing a bit from his previous seasons stats with Missisauga. Who by all accounts has a better team this year. A bit of a gamble.
3. Maxim Lazarev. Average sized natural RW. Plays really well with Dubois and Svechnikov. 72 points in 49 gp? Good enough for me to think he could go in the 2nd.
4. Tyler Benson. Could slip into the mid to low 2nd round after being shut down for the season with injuries. Could be a sleeper pick as when he was healthy and in the pre-season rankings was ranking as high as a mid first round guy.
EDIT: Honestly, the 2nd round is pretty weak. I'm glad the Flames will at least get a shot at another decent talent with their own 2nd round pick but it's rather bland after that. At least from what I have been reading. It might be a good draft to take Russians high than normal. Or other lesser known european quantities.
Last edited by dammage79; 03-08-2016 at 06:39 PM.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to dammage79 For This Useful Post:
There seems to be a pretty big dropoff in the middle of the second round. Wouldn't mind packaging a 3rd and low second to get another pick in the top 40 or so.
A few players that have been climbing the boards lately that should be available in the second round are Johnathan Dahlen and Cam Dineen.
As Dammage suggested, could be a good idea taking some chances on euros, maybe even a goalie, or second go rounds that have shown improvement like Brooks, Salituro or Strand with a late pick.
Puljujarvi has caught my eye all year long. He is exactly what we're missing. Laine and Matthews would be amazing too, but Puljujarvi would be the tonic for what ails this team.
What that post emphasizes is what we knew all along. If you're picking 1st you pick Matthews without really thinking about it and you don't trade the pick.
Simple question: do you think a league with no draft would have more parity or less parity than a league with a draft?
With the proper measures in place, getting rid of the draft could help. It all depends on what replaces it. There would still need to be a system that promotes talent distribution. It's just that IMO, the draft has never been able to do that in a fair way.
It's a little bit better now that the odds have been changed. The way I look at it, the salary cap and 27yo UFA age has done more to create parity than the draft ever did and now that parity has been established, there is no point to having a draft so heavily in favour of bad teams. The difference between a playoff team and a non-playoff team is not as great as it used to be, but the talent drop off after the top 5 or 10 is relatively more drastic in an average draft year.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 03-09-2016 at 08:39 AM.
Love that isolation video, reminds me of actually trying to scout juniors.
McLeod I think has Kesler type upside. Fast, relentless, two-way centre. Great prospect, I don't think he fits our needs as well as some of the other kids.
Jake Bean is the best Hitman prospect I've seen in a long while.
The thought of him going to another Canadian team (Montreal, Ottawa, Vancouver, etc) makes me sick.
It's kind of too bad that he's likely to be picked no where near Dallas or Calgary's first round pick.
Who would you compare him to stylistically? What do you think his upside is at the NHL level? Redline really likes him, I think they have him up at #6.
