View Poll Results: Result: 1 bad / 10 Amazing
|
10
|
  
|
4 |
3.42% |
9
|
  
|
0 |
0% |
8
|
  
|
0 |
0% |
7
|
  
|
4 |
3.42% |
6
|
  
|
12 |
10.26% |
5
|
  
|
13 |
11.11% |
4
|
  
|
14 |
11.97% |
3
|
  
|
44 |
37.61% |
2
|
  
|
20 |
17.09% |
1
|
  
|
6 |
5.13% |
04-11-2016, 09:13 AM
|
#1
|
Owner
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
|
Simulator Fix : April 11th
|
|
|
The Following 10 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-11-2016, 09:18 AM
|
#2
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: St. George's, Grenada
|
Canucks landing Mathews would suck, but otherwise I don't mind that result
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 09:41 AM
|
#3
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Fernando Valley
|
I like the Leafs and Oilers falling out of the top 3. Sucks to see the Flames move back but unfortunately it's the most likely outcome.
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:02 AM
|
#4
|
In the Sin Bin
|
61% chance we draft 6th or 7th. So we'll see those results a lot between now and the 30th. I'm happy with a top 7 pick. Top 3 would be incredible though.
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:03 AM
|
#5
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast
|
I don't worry too much what the other guy gets although their motives are interesting, and it seems that many here want Dubois, so we get our man. That's got to be a decent result so I voted a "5".
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:16 AM
|
#6
|
Owner
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
61% chance we draft 6th or 7th. So we'll see those results a lot between now and the 30th. I'm happy with a top 7 pick. Top 3 would be incredible though.
|
Totally agree, but I can't help but run the thing once a day just to see how that would go.
Thought I may as well put it up for discussion to keep us all discussing outcomes for the next three weeks.
|
|
|
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Bingo For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:20 AM
|
#7
|
In the Sin Bin
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Totally agree, but I can't help but run the thing once a day just to see how that would go.
Thought I may as well put it up for discussion to keep us all discussing outcomes for the next three weeks.
|
Yep I'm game. As for this result I love landing Dubois. But I hate EDM or VAN winning a top two pick. So mixed feelings on it.
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:21 AM
|
#8
|
Scoring Winger
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Montreal
|
Here's my new (admittedly illogical) way of looking at it: Almost every time you run the simulation at least 1 of the lowest 3 teams fall from the top 3. (Maybe someone smarter than me can figure out how much that actually happens)
That being the case at least 1 team from outside the bottom 3 will likely move up.
Being 5th worst, we have the 2nd best chance of anyone to move up to the top 3...
So really we still have a very good (or decent) chance to move up...at least that's what I keep telling myself.
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:23 AM
|
#9
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Fernando Valley
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
Totally agree, but I can't help but run the thing once a day just to see how that would go.
Thought I may as well put it up for discussion to keep us all discussing outcomes for the next three weeks.
|
Yeah it's easy to do the simulation over several times after you don't like the first outcome. The first outcome is what's going to matter when the NHL pushes the button so I like this approach.
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:39 AM
|
#10
|
Owner
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erick Estrada
Yeah it's easy to do the simulation over several times after you don't like the first outcome. The first outcome is what's going to matter when the NHL pushes the button so I like this approach.
|
Exactly.
Oh that one sucks, run it again, nope ... run it again.
But run it once and then think about what that would mean makes it a little easier to get your head around.
Hate Vancouver getting Matthews the year after the Oilers get McDavid doesn't seem right from a karma standpoint.
I do think 2 of the bottom 3 are going to exit the bottom three, and that could help end tanking in future seasons. Time will tell though.
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:41 AM
|
#11
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Edmonton,AB
|
The only real thing i care about is that the coilers dont get another 1st overall
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:41 AM
|
#12
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The C-spot
|
Here's my question. Which do you rank more highly -- (1) the Flames getting a top 3 pick, or (2) Edmonton falling out of the top 3?
In other words, would you rather:
(A) Flames draft 7th, Oilers draft 4th?
OR
(B) Flames draft 2nd, Oilers draft 1st?
Normally I would think, take the best possible option for the Flames and run laughing. But the Flames will still get a great player at 7th, and arguably already have a brighter future than the Oilers. However, the Oil grabbing Matthews or Laine could really free them up to address some holes in their roster.
Tough call. I think I pick (B).
|
|
|
The Following User Says Thank You to Five-hole For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:43 AM
|
#13
|
Scoring Winger
|
B by miles. Although I'll feel a pang of sympathy for Mr. Matthews.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ZedMan For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:43 AM
|
#14
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Edmonton,AB
|
I just ran it and got columbus, colarado, and winnipeg..... Do over!
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:43 AM
|
#15
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: NYYC
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Five-hole
Here's my question. Which do you rank more highly -- (1) the Flames getting a top 3 pick, or (2) Edmonton falling out of the top 3?
In other words, would you rather:
(A) Flames draft 7th, Oilers draft 4th?
OR
(B) Flames draft 2nd, Oilers draft 1st?
Normally I would think, take the best possible option for the Flames and run laughing. But the Flames will still get a great player at 7th, and arguably already have a brighter future than the Oilers. However, the Oil grabbing Matthews or Laine could really free them up to address some holes in their roster.
Tough call. I think I pick (B).
|
If the Flames get Laine/Matthews, I don't care who the Oilers get that much.
If we don't, Id forfeit a slot or two to make sure they don't pick Top 3. Even if Vancouver or the Leafs get 1 or 2.
|
|
|
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Table 5 For This Useful Post:
|
|
04-11-2016, 10:51 AM
|
#16
|
Franchise Player
|
This new system screws legit sports teams like the Flames.
There is no way Flames should draft any lower than 5th. Potentially dropping two places for an 8 % chance at #1 is just magic beans gambling idiocy. Just another stupid NHL gimmick.
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 11:00 AM
|
#17
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Sunshine Coast
|
Okay I just ran it and got 1. Calgary, 2. Leafs and 3. Canucks. This puts me in a quandary because I want Laine. I guess in this make believe world, we could make a deal with the Leafs.
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 11:06 AM
|
#18
|
Owner
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robo
I just ran it and got columbus, colarado, and winnipeg..... Do over!
|
Did you vote 10 by mistake?
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 11:29 AM
|
#19
|
#1 Goaltender
|
I voted 6. Any result that causes edmonton to fall out of the top 3 works for me.
|
|
|
04-11-2016, 11:36 AM
|
#20
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Thunder Bay Ontario
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Five-hole
Here's my question. Which do you rank more highly -- (1) the Flames getting a top 3 pick, or (2) Edmonton falling out of the top 3?
In other words, would you rather:
(A) Flames draft 7th, Oilers draft 4th?
OR
(B) Flames draft 2nd, Oilers draft 1st?
Normally I would think, take the best possible option for the Flames and run laughing. But the Flames will still get a great player at 7th, and arguably already have a brighter future than the Oilers. However, the Oil grabbing Matthews or Laine could really free them up to address some holes in their roster.
Tough call. I think I pick (B).
|
I take B. Not only do I think the oilers will get Matthews, I hope they do. I want the oil to get the first overall pick every year from now on because they'll still find a way to screw it up. Look at McJesus and how he's the future of the franchise, future captain, future face of the team and all that crap that goes with it. The kid is going to go crazy and then they'll just replace him with the next first overall pick. I think another first would also be great so they could have 5 first overall picks to go with their 5 cups 30 years ago.
The main reason I'd take B is because I don't care who the oilers screw up if it gets the Flames a kid like Laine. The oil will find a way to make the worst out of the best situation while the Flames will make the best out of a meh situation.
__________________
Fan of the Flames, where being OK has become OK.
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:37 AM.
|
|