Leafs @ Devils - Dec. 27th, 7:00pm - SNO, TSN 1050

[disco]

https://twitter.com/HennyTweets/status/1210618250696052736
If Marnthews can continue it's dominance you just need the other lines to be sound. The teams most dynamic center + team's most dynamic winger + the team's most complimentary winger =  8)

 

[rjd]

Doesn't that run counter to your thesis then? If you can have a good team without a #1 overall pick, why bother worrying about it at all? If a team is horrible enough to keep getting that pick, so be it...it's obviously not helping them.

I mean, that's not what I said. I said to be good teams didn't need 3 first overall picks in 5 years. The Leafs turned things around quickly with just the one, as did teams like Washington and Tampa and Chicago and so on and so forth(even Pittsburgh only technically won the one draft lottery).

Now, of course, some teams have turned things around without any 1st picks but my point was never about good teams, it was about providing less incentive for failure and eliminate there being an upside to being terribly run.

So what if we solved the problem a little differently.  Rather than move the pick to another team, what if the cap rules for the player taken with that pick changed based on a sliding scale.  So the first time you take a player with the first overall pick, the rookie cap is in effect for that player.  If a team gets the first pick in a second year, then there is an escalator clause that increases the rookie cap level for the player taken at first overall.  So if there is a player that you like, you take them, but you may have to pay them more.  Or you trade out of the spot and take a player later in which case the normal rookie cap rules apply for the player taken first overall and the player that you are taking.  Third time you draft first overall, if you draft a player with the first pick, then that player has no rookie cap, and if you can't sign them by such a date then, maybe they become a free agent, or something along those lines.  It gives the team that is being poorly run a chance to make a good choice.  They probably won't, but at least they have a chance.  They can take the player, but there is a cap implication, or they can trade out of the spot and let some other team take the player. 

I find the draft pretty arbitrary, which is why I think changing where a team drafts based on past draft history to be somewhat hit or miss.  It may be a pretty bad deterrent one year, but not that bad in another year.  Also I could totally see a scenario in the future, if this were implemented, where the Leafs get two picks first overall which are duds, and then miss out on a McDavid like talent in the third year after switching over their management team in an effort to get better.  I mean, why do you hate Eichel so much that you would make him play in Edmonton?

As an aside, don't the NFL and MLB have some sort of escalators for the contracts based on where a player is taken?  I've seen articles where teams don't take certain players with the first pick because they know the contract is going to be problematic, but I never really dove in to the details on how that works.

 

[louisstamos]

Insert standard statement about this singer being terrible...

 

[ZBBM]

I like the look of Engvall-Kerfoot-Kapanen too...I think Kappy is a lot more comfortable on the right side and his speed complements Kerfoot's a bit better (or visa versa). I think it will suit Engvall a bit better too...having him on Tavares' line was a pretty big ask since usually John's up against the opposition's top forward line or top D pair or both. Letting him get a bit easier competition on the 3rd line ought to help.

I do too.  These might be the most effective combos for the top 9 (minus Mango).

 

[ZBBM]

Insert standard statement about this singer being terrible...

She's got a pretty wide vibrato.  But I've heard many worse.

 

[lc9]

Slew foots are allowed now I see. 

 

[L K]

Not Hutch's fault there.

 

[ZBBM]

Whoa, nice pass for the bury by Hischier.

 

[herman]

That?s a good shot but the forwards lacking a bit of awareness of the trailer off the bench.

 

[barney_rebel]

We stink btw...

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

 

[lc9]

Muzzin has to be one of the worst starting 4 dman in the league.  He flat out struggles. 

 

[ZBBM]

Holl got beat by Palmieri on a rish and got beat there too.

 

[herman]

Holl got beat by Palmieri on a rish and got beat there too.

Muzzin got walked on that zone entry that led to the goal

 

[dappleganger]

I know Freddy likes to bail the guys out a lot, but play like that turn into goals almost every time. That?s not on Hutch. Can?t turn it over there. Make smarter plays.

 

[lc9]

That?s a good shot but the forwards lacking a bit of awareness of the trailer off the bench.

Muzzin was so lazy on that play.  Twice could have made a better play to move the puck but didn?t give any effort. 

 

[Guilt Trip]

That?s a good shot but the forwards lacking a bit of awareness of the trailer off the bench.

You mean JT? That's his guy.

 

[lc9]

Then muzzin whiffs on a wide open shot to ruin a good offensive chance and give the devils a chance the other way.  Got to find a way to bury him in the lineup. 

 

[lc9]

Lots of open space out there.  Suspect they will score some goals.

 

[lc9]

Matthews and marner look really good to start, again. 

 

[ZBBM]

Holl got beat by Palmieri on a rish and got beat there too.

Muzzin got walked on that zone entry that led to the goal

I'm referring to Holl losing the puck battle behind the goal that allowed the feed to Hischier.