NHL 2023-2024 Out of Town: Stanley Cup Playoffs II

[Aussie Bruin]

Almost never disagree with you.

But I do on this one.

That's fair. I get why some people are against tanking but to me it's simply a lowly team doing what's in its best interests. If the argument is that it damages the quality of the product well there's plenty of dud games in all the major leagues as it is, a few more won't make much difference. If it's about integrity, I think any true notion of that flew out the window of professional sports a long time ago. If it's that playing to lose violates the true nature of sport or something like that, well I won't disagree but my pragmatism wins out. I don't necessarily love the thought of it, but it doesn't bother me either.

But the more important part for me is the lottery issue. I would accept tanking as a lesser evil than draft rigging. Do you believe that the NHL doesn't manipulate it in any way?

 

[BMC]

Former Bruin Connor Clifton became a dad. Congratulations Cliffy Hockey!!

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

If the argument is that it damages the quality of the product well there's plenty of dud games in all the major leagues as it is, a few more won't make much difference. If it's about integrity, I think any true notion of that flew out the window of professional sports a long time ago. If it's that playing to lose violates the true nature of sport or something like that, well I won't disagree but my pragmatism wins out. I don't necessarily love the thought of it, but it doesn't bother me either.
But the more important part for me is the lottery issue. I would accept tanking as a lesser evil than draft rigging. Do you believe that the NHL doesn't manipulate it in any way?

Actually, I do.

Of course, I don't know it for a fact. But until I see some evidence that's what I'll believe.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

Actually, I do.

Of course, I don't know it for a fact. But until I see some evidence that's what I'll believe.

Obviously I can't prove it the other way either, and I'm not generally one for conspiracy theories. But too many of the picks for genuine top talents have gone to convenient teams for me not to think something might be up. On top of that the commercial incentive to manipulate things is there, nothing the league has released to 'prove' the fairness of the system is convincing, and the league has shown in other areas that its commitment to integrity is flexible at best. I don't think the whole lottery is rigged every year, but on balance I do lean towards believing that the NHL will pre-determine some aspects of the draw when it especially suits them to do so.

Even if the whole thing really is squeaky clean, I'd still prefer there was no lottery because it removes even the temptation of rigging it and the ability of the league to do so should they ever feel the need. And it reduces the possibility that a proper struggling team in genuine need of help winds up with pick 4 or 5 or whatever. Which are still high picks, but sometimes the talent gap between pick 1 and 5 can be pretty wide in context. For those reasons I prefer a nice clean reverse standings draw, and if the downside of that is occasional tanking and a race to the bottom, which I'd argue still happens to some degree even with the lottery anyway, I'll accept it.

Side story: Australia's largest sporting league runs a straight last place picks first etc. draft. Last year there were two teams at the bottom of the table and the one that was very last just had to lose their final game to secure pick one in a draft featuring a Bedard-type generational talent. But they won that game, despite only winning two games all season before that, the second-last team lost their match, and their places in the standings and the draft switched. Fast forward to half-way through this year's season and said generational talent is already thriving and, while his team still has a long road ahead, there's hope and something they can build around. While the team that could have had the top pick but threw it away hasn't won a single game yet and looks as miserable as ever. Of course they have some good young talent on the roster that might blossom in time but that extra spark is missing. Sometimes getting a proper star really makes a big difference.

 

[bobbyorr04]

What's the expiration date on hating the Habs then?

December 31st, 9999

 

[bobbyorr04]

I agree. Don't care about tanking, don't see it as any sort of 'crime'. One of my local sports teams is having a bad year and I hope they lose every game through the back half of the season and scoop the best draft picks possible.

Running the draft in straight reverse standings order would be simpler and fairer and it removes the ability of the league to rig the lottery. Which they do, frequently and blatantly. But the NHL won't do it, they much prefer being able to manipulate things.

I think all pro sports are prone to some kind of manipulation, rigging and corruption, that the public isn't privy to

NFL owners back in the 1920's and 30's were heavily involved in gambling, and some owners were involved with Al Capone and the mob

"Going back to the infancy of the NFL, gambling has been a driving force for the league".

The History of Gambling and How it Built the NFL

On Monday, the Supreme Court reversed the anti-sports sports gambling law, a major hurdle in nationwide sports betting. A business

fullpresscoverage.com

Where there's gambling and big money involved in sports, there's going to be some manipulation, rigging and corruption.......it's the nature of the beast

 

[Gee Wally]

MSN

During a recent appearance on "The Jeff Merek Show," Florida Panthers GM Bill Zito delved into the similarities between the current Panthers team and the controversial 2011 Stanley Cup champions, the Boston Bruins.

Zito highlighted the level of competition, composure, and team unity that he sees in both teams, reckoning the way they support each other. Despite not having heard of this comparison before, Zito agreed with the parallels after reflecting on the qualities of the 2011 Bruins, especially their level of camaraderie.

Here's what Zito said of the similarities between the Panthers and the 2011 Stanley Cup-winning Boston Bruins (via Sportsnet):

"Well, specifically I've never heard that from anyone, but listening to you (Marek) and having been intimate with that series because I represented Tim Thomas ... that level of compete, composure, the way the team pulls for each other, I see a lot of similarities."

"The personnel ones ... those are easy comparisons to draw, but there's some accuracy to them."

Zito acknowledged that there are clear distinctions between the two teams and suggested that one could also examine those distinctions to change the viewpoint.

The Florida Panthers GM reckoned that while similarities exist, there are always multiple perspectives to consider when making comparisons:

"Eventually I'm sure we could probably tear it apart as well. If we wanted to take the other side of the coin: 'oh it's nothing like that!''

The Boston Bruins' 2011 Stanley Cup win was memorable, and somewhat many consider it to be one of the most controversial finals in the NHL. The Bruins claimed the Cup by defeating the Vancouver Canucks in a hard-fought seven-game series.


The series was marked by intense physical play and some controversial calls by the referees, which added to the drama of the matchup. The Bruins ultimately emerged victorious, securing their sixth Stanley Cup title in franchise history.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Obviously I can't prove it the other way either, and I'm not generally one for conspiracy theories. But too many of the picks for genuine top talents have gone to convenient teams for me not to think something might be up. On top of that the commercial incentive to manipulate things is there, nothing the league has released to 'prove' the fairness of the system is convincing, and the league has shown in other areas that its commitment to integrity is flexible at best. I don't think the whole lottery is rigged every year, but on balance I do lean towards believing that the NHL will pre-determine some aspects of the draw when it especially suits them to do so.

Even if the whole thing really is squeaky clean, I'd still prefer there was no lottery because it removes even the temptation of rigging it and the ability of the league to do so should they ever feel the need. And it reduces the possibility that a proper struggling team in genuine need of help winds up with pick 4 or 5 or whatever. Which are still high picks, but sometimes the talent gap between pick 1 and 5 can be pretty wide in context. For those reasons I prefer a nice clean reverse standings draw, and if the downside of that is occasional tanking and a race to the bottom, which I'd argue still happens to some degree even with the lottery anyway, I'll accept it.

Side story: Australia's largest sporting league runs a straight last place picks first etc. draft. Last year there were two teams at the bottom of the table and the one that was very last just had to lose their final game to secure pick one in a draft featuring a Bedard-type generational talent. But they won that game, despite only winning two games all season before that, the second-last team lost their match, and their places in the standings and the draft switched. Fast forward to half-way through this year's season and said generational talent is already thriving and, while his team still has a long road ahead, there's hope and something they can build around. While the team that could have had the top pick but threw it away hasn't won a single game yet and looks as miserable as ever. Of course they have some good young talent on the roster that might blossom in time but that extra spark is missing. Sometimes getting a proper star really makes a big difference.

Just wondering what is meant by convenient teams. What's the league's incentive to give these teams the top pick?

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

MSN

During a recent appearance on "The Jeff Merek Show," Florida Panthers GM Bill Zito delved into the similarities between the current Panthers team and the controversial 2011 Stanley Cup champions, the Boston Bruins.

Zito highlighted the level of competition, composure, and team unity that he sees in both teams, reckoning the way they support each other. Despite not having heard of this comparison before, Zito agreed with the parallels after reflecting on the qualities of the 2011 Bruins, especially their level of camaraderie.

Here's what Zito said of the similarities between the Panthers and the 2011 Stanley Cup-winning Boston Bruins (via Sportsnet):




Zito acknowledged that there are clear distinctions between the two teams and suggested that one could also examine those distinctions to change the viewpoint.

The Florida Panthers GM reckoned that while similarities exist, there are always multiple perspectives to consider when making comparisons:



The Boston Bruins' 2011 Stanley Cup win was memorable, and somewhat many consider it to be one of the most controversial finals in the NHL. The Bruins claimed the Cup by defeating the Vancouver Canucks in a hard-fought seven-game series.


The series was marked by intense physical play and some controversial calls by the referees, which added to the drama of the matchup. The Bruins ultimately emerged victorious, securing their sixth Stanley Cup title in franchise history.

Biggest difference is that Boston was much more dependent on Tim Thomas than Florida has been on Bobrovsky.

 

[Roll 4 Lines]

Obviously I can't prove it the other way either, and I'm not generally one for conspiracy theories. But too many of the picks for genuine top talents have gone to convenient teams for me not to think something might be up. On top of that the commercial incentive to manipulate things is there, nothing the league has released to 'prove' the fairness of the system is convincing, and the league has shown in other areas that its commitment to integrity is flexible at best. I don't think the whole lottery is rigged every year, but on balance I do lean towards believing that the NHL will pre-determine some aspects of the draw when it especially suits them to do so.

Even if the whole thing really is squeaky clean, I'd still prefer there was no lottery because it removes even the temptation of rigging it and the ability of the league to do so should they ever feel the need. And it reduces the possibility that a proper struggling team in genuine need of help winds up with pick 4 or 5 or whatever. Which are still high picks, but sometimes the talent gap between pick 1 and 5 can be pretty wide in context. For those reasons I prefer a nice clean reverse standings draw, and if the downside of that is occasional tanking and a race to the bottom, which I'd argue still happens to some degree even with the lottery anyway, I'll accept it.

Side story: Australia's largest sporting league runs a straight last place picks first etc. draft. Last year there were two teams at the bottom of the table and the one that was very last just had to lose their final game to secure pick one in a draft featuring a Bedard-type generational talent. But they won that game, despite only winning two games all season before that, the second-last team lost their match, and their places in the standings and the draft switched. Fast forward to half-way through this year's season and said generational talent is already thriving and, while his team still has a long road ahead, there's hope and something they can build around. While the team that could have had the top pick but threw it away hasn't won a single game yet and looks as miserable as ever. Of course they have some good young talent on the roster that might blossom in time but that extra spark is missing. Sometimes getting a proper star really makes a big difference.

What, exactly, are "convenient teams?"

 

[Aussie Bruin]

Just wondering what is meant by convenient teams. What's the league's incentive to give these teams the top pick?

What, exactly, are "convenient teams?"

Convenient generally due to one of four reasons – being in a big hockey market (Chicago, NYR, Toronto, Montreal), an emerging market that the league rightly or wrongly particularly cares about (Florida/Tampa), a team on its knees that’s considered important enough to earn a helping hand (Pittsburgh), or a situation where the league seems keen to recreate arguably its most famous history (Edmonton).

To substantiate the argument, I’m looking at two factors – the drafts with genuine elite talents, and the seeding history of a few particular teams. The best prospects of the last 20 years have probably been Ovi, Crosby, Kane, Stamkos, MacKinnon, McDavid, Matthews and Bedard. Crosby to the Pens is notorious, the Blackhawks twice moved up to secure generational talents, Edmonton ‘lucked’ into McDavid as the new Gretzky despite already having had 3 top picks through 2010-12. Tampa and Toronto already had the default top picks in 2008 and 2016, which is fine, but what’s notable there is they didn’t lost them. Which leaves Ovi and MacKinnon where I don’t think a case for any sort of shenanigans can be made.

On the teams front there are a select few in markets deemed important – Rangers, Blackhawks, Florida – who have historically done quite well for themselves, plus the unique case of the Oilers. Just when they really needed some help, the Rangers twice moved up from 6th to 2nd and then more implausibly from playoff fringe to 1st. And I think it’s safe to say that Toronto was never losing the Matthews pick and, while the 2022 draft wasn’t so good, the Habs weren’t losing their top pick either. Whereas teams like Anaheim, Arizona and Columbus never seem to get any real luck, despite ample opportunities for it, and Buffalo have a better history lately but have also been shuffled aside on a couple of occasions, the McDavid year probably being the worst for them.

I don’t think it’s a slam dunk argument. Not everything fits the mould in terms of how you might expect something to play out were the league manipulating things, and there will undoubtedly be examples of where the league could easily have benefited this or that team for good reasons but didn’t. Again, I don’t think the league rigs the lottery routinely. I think I said ‘frequently’ in another post but that may have been overstating the case. But I do think there is enough evidence to make at least a plausible argument that they will intervene at certain points where it particularly suits them to do so. That’s how I see it, but I could well be wrong.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Convenient generally due to one of four reasons – being in a big hockey market (Chicago, NYR, Toronto, Montreal), an emerging market that the league rightly or wrongly particularly cares about (Florida/Tampa), a team on its knees that’s considered important enough to earn a helping hand (Pittsburgh), or a situation where the league seems keen to recreate arguably its most famous history (Edmonton).

To substantiate the argument, I’m looking at two factors – the drafts with genuine elite talents, and the seeding history of a few particular teams. The best prospects of the last 20 years have probably been Ovi, Crosby, Kane, Stamkos, MacKinnon, McDavid, Matthews and Bedard. Crosby to the Pens is notorious, the Blackhawks twice moved up to secure generational talents, Edmonton ‘lucked’ into McDavid as the new Gretzky despite already having had 3 top picks through 2010-12. Tampa and Toronto already had the default top picks in 2008 and 2016, which is fine, but what’s notable there is they didn’t lost them. Which leaves Ovi and MacKinnon where I don’t think a case for any sort of shenanigans can be made.

On the teams front there are a select few in markets deemed important – Rangers, Blackhawks, Florida – who have historically done quite well for themselves, plus the unique case of the Oilers. Just when they really needed some help, the Rangers twice moved up from 6th to 2nd and then more implausibly from playoff fringe to 1st. And I think it’s safe to say that Toronto was never losing the Matthews pick and, while the 2022 draft wasn’t so good, the Habs weren’t losing their top pick either. Whereas teams like Anaheim, Arizona and Columbus never seem to get any real luck, despite ample opportunities for it, and Buffalo have a better history lately but have also been shuffled aside on a couple of occasions, the McDavid year probably being the worst for them.

I don’t think it’s a slam dunk argument. Not everything fits the mould in terms of how you might expect something to play out were the league manipulating things, and there will undoubtedly be examples of where the league could easily have benefited this or that team for good reasons but didn’t. Again, I don’t think the league rigs the lottery routinely. I think I said ‘frequently’ in another post but that may have been overstating the case. But I do think there is enough evidence to make at least a plausible argument that they will intervene at certain points where it particularly suits them to do so. That’s how I see it, but I could well be wrong.

If the league wanted to rig the lottery for its own benefit they wouldn’t have stuck McDavid in Edmonton.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

If the league wanted to rig the lottery for its own benefit they wouldn’t have stuck McDavid in Edmonton.

Heard that argument before. Disagree. The Gretzky/McDavid parallel is a marketing dream and makes all kinds of sense.

 

[MarchysNoseKnows]

Heard that argument before. Disagree. The Gretzky/McDavid parallel is a marketing dream and makes all kinds of sense.

Not for money it doesn’t

 

[Mr. Make-Believe]

Not for money it doesn’t

Agreed. If they wanted to rig it, they’d have given McDavid to a struggling franchise who had trouble pulling fans into their arena. In the south.

All to grow the game and get new fans.

No such requirement in Edmonton. Those people care more about their Oilers than they do their own relatives. Doubt there’s a notably more passionate fan base in the NHL.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

Not for money it doesn’t

The realistic alternative to Edmonton in that lottery was Toronto and for sure, dollar for dollar, more cash in that option than the Oils. But the Gretzky thing has huge appeal. I get the argument for the Leafs, but put it this way, if I were in charge and happy to rig the lottery, I'm picking Edmonton. The marketing aspect would be irresistible to me. So on that basis I think it's at least arguable that that draw was manipulated.

 

[RiverbottomChuck]

Agreed. If they wanted to rig it, they’d have given McDavid to a struggling franchise who had trouble pulling fans into their arena. In the south.

All to grow the game and get new fans.

No such requirement in Edmonton. Those people care more about their Oilers than they do their own relatives. Doubt there’s a notably more passionate fan base in the NHL.

They should have rigged it for Arizona to get Matthews tbh.

 

[Aussie Bruin]

Agreed. If they wanted to rig it, they’d have given McDavid to a struggling franchise who had trouble pulling fans into their arena. In the south.

All to grow the game and get new fans.

No such requirement in Edmonton. Those people care more about their Oilers than they do their own relatives. Doubt there’s a notably more passionate fan base in the NHL.

Rightly or wrongly the NHL doesn't work that way. Point out an example of when a star prospect has gone to a poor or even bland market. Jack Hughes to NJ is about the closest you'll get. It just doesn't happen. Is that pure luck? I'm not convinced.

 

[eightspokedb]

I don't like days without hockey....

 

[Banded Peak]

Rightly or wrongly the NHL doesn't work that way. Point out an example of when a star prospect has gone to a poor or even bland market. Jack Hughes to NJ is about the closest you'll get. It just doesn't happen. Is that pure luck? I'm not convinced.

if New Jersey is a bland/poor market then what is Buffalo? Who got Eichel and two further first overalls. I guess you can sort of squint and see the Gretzky connections with Edmonton but the Sabres have never won anything. If you recall Gary Bettman was pretty visibly annoyed when the Oilers won their fourth draft lottery in six years in 2015. Why on earth would the league willingly rig a lottery to keep sending the best players at the top of the draft year after year to Edmonton? I think you might be forgetting how poorly the Oilers were run during those years. They were also Ottawa Senators levels of dysfunctional. They once fired a coach over Skype.

Poor or bland also tends to fluctuate. Carolina, Dallas and Tampa fit that bill at some point in the recent past. Remember when Florida was a soulless league doormat where hockey players went to sign retirement contracts and play golf and they picked top five pretty regularly and sucked forever? The sunbelt hockey teams were once the definition of both poor and bland.

If the league was playing favorites why has Detroit been shafted and moved down in the lottery multiple times? The years Chicago and Toronto picked first they were the worst teams in the league. I don’t buy it. Makes no sense.

 

[bobbyorr04]

MSN

During a recent appearance on "The Jeff Merek Show," Florida Panthers GM Bill Zito delved into the similarities between the current Panthers team and the controversial 2011 Stanley Cup champions, the Boston Bruins.

Zito highlighted the level of competition, composure, and team unity that he sees in both teams, reckoning the way they support each other. Despite not having heard of this comparison before, Zito agreed with the parallels after reflecting on the qualities of the 2011 Bruins, especially their level of camaraderie.

Here's what Zito said of the similarities between the Panthers and the 2011 Stanley Cup-winning Boston Bruins (via Sportsnet):




Zito acknowledged that there are clear distinctions between the two teams and suggested that one could also examine those distinctions to change the viewpoint.

The Florida Panthers GM reckoned that while similarities exist, there are always multiple perspectives to consider when making comparisons:



The Boston Bruins' 2011 Stanley Cup win was memorable, and somewhat many consider it to be one of the most controversial finals in the NHL. The Bruins claimed the Cup by defeating the Vancouver Canucks in a hard-fought seven-game series.


The series was marked by intense physical play and some controversial calls by the referees, which added to the drama of the matchup. The Bruins ultimately emerged victorious, securing their sixth Stanley Cup title in franchise history.

The big difference between the 2011 Bruins and the 2024 panthers is...

The Bruins were a classy team with very likeable players, who played the right way...

The panthers have many unlikeable players with no class, who are often helped by shady officiating

 

[Aussie Bruin]

if New Jersey is a bland/poor market then what is Buffalo? Who got Eichel and two further first overalls. I guess you can sort of squint and see the Gretzky connections with Edmonton but the Sabres have never won anything. If you recall Gary Bettman was pretty visibly annoyed when the Oilers won their fourth draft lottery in six years in 2015. Why on earth would the league willingly rig a lottery to keep sending the best players at the top of the draft year after year to Edmonton? I think you might be forgetting how poorly the Oilers were run during those years. They were also Ottawa Senators levels of dysfunctional. They once fired a coach over Skype.

Poor or bland also tends to fluctuate. Carolina, Dallas and Tampa fit that bill at some point in the recent past. Remember when Florida was a soulless league doormat where hockey players went to sign retirement contracts and play golf and they picked top five pretty regularly and sucked forever? The sunbelt hockey teams were once the definition of both poor and bland.

If the league was playing favorites why has Detroit been shafted and moved down in the lottery multiple times? The years Chicago and Toronto picked first they were the worst teams in the league. I don’t buy it. Makes no sense.

I've already spoken about Buffalo. I've already made the point that we're talking about the very top prospects here. And I've already stated that I don't think the league is going out of its way to screw over the smaller teams at every opportunity. Eichel who fair enough was a very highly regarded prospect I think can be explained - he was pick 2 behind McDavid. One thing to rob Buffalo or Arizona of Connor, quite another to whack them again.

The Oilers have a mystique about them that goes beyond rationality. To get as bad as they were was embarrassing, and all the more cause to help pull them out of it.

Detroit I'll freely admit don't fit the argument. They've been done no favors and I've got nothing to say to account for that. Again, the case for lottery rigging isn't watertight.

One thing though I'm sure on - the likes of Bedard don't go to Anaheim or Columbus. They just don't. And until they do I'll find the whole process suspect.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

The big difference between the 2011 Bruins and the 2024 panthers is...

The Bruins were a classy team with very likeable players, who played the right way...

The panthers have many unlikeable players with no class, who are often helped by shady officiating

Says the Bruins fan....

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

The realistic alternative to Edmonton in that lottery was Toronto and for sure, dollar for dollar, more cash in that option than the Oils. But the Gretzky thing has huge appeal. I get the argument for the Leafs, but put it this way, if I were in charge and happy to rig the lottery, I'm picking Edmonton. The marketing aspect would be irresistible to me. So on that basis I think it's at least arguable that that draw was manipulated.

McDavid has been in the league 9 seasons now. Other than a couple of Gretzky/McDavid commercials I haven't seen any great appeal to the connection to Edmonton. Those commercials could have been done no matter what team McDavid played for. And they weren't even made until McDavid became the consensus best player in the world. Best player was the connection, not Edmonton.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

Says the Bruins fan....

Yeah, was gonna say if you leave this board the opinion of the 2011 Bruins team sounds identical to what we say about the Panthers