Aladeen Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 25 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said: you think your system is unable to be abused? people won't tank to lose from 24th to 23rd? and yes the rich get richer, the st.louis blues would have been just as close to the first overall picks as the senator's,. and boston would have been closer to the first overall pick as detroit last year. and no corporate bailouts are not similar to nhl draft. corporate bailouts isn't free money, it's usually in exchange for stocks, which then are later sold back to the public to recur costs. what i was referring to was poor people, (IE people on welfare) have a hard time getting out of poverty. this is very similar to your proposal. the new changes sort out the edmonton 4 first round picks in 6 years, it can no longer happen more than twice in every 5 years. What abuse? trying to tank for the 10th last place or trying to play hard for 10th last place? I never said it was perfect but it’s better than the system they have now and even what they’ve changed to. also the changes still allow for 3 first overalls in 6 years so it didn’t change much. You should really check into corporate bailouts because you are so wrong it’s hilarious. But the bottom line is, it is what it is and I don’t control the NHL draft so I don’t really give af what they do or what you think for that matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad_BOI_pete Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, Aladeen said: What abuse? trying to tank for the 10th last place or trying to play hard for 10th last place? I never said it was perfect but it’s better than the system they have now and even what they’ve changed to. also the changes still allow for 3 first overalls in 6 years so it didn’t change much. You should really check into corporate bailouts because you are so wrong it’s hilarious. But the bottom line is, it is what it is and I don’t control the NHL draft so I don’t really give af what they do or what you think for that matter. https://marketbusinessnews.com/financial-glossary/bailout/ well i looked it up. it's exactly as i explained it. "When a ‘too important to fail’ bank is about to crash, the government provides capital in exchange for shares" you see the reason why the bottom teams get the first overall picks is so the league is more competitive, for all the teams. it could take a couple of failed 11th overall picks and the bottom team would become a perennial loser, potentially taking tens of years before becoming a playoff team again. on the other hand top teams only have to fall to to 23rd overall before getting the ultimate award. keeping the bottom teams down and the top teams up, creating a disparity but also not fixing the fact that teams could still finish with four first overall picks in 6 years with your system. your system doesn't fix tanking for first, and all it accomplishes is punishing the bottom teams for being bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aladeen Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 52 minutes ago, Petey_BOI said: https://marketbusinessnews.com/financial-glossary/bailout/ well i looked it up. it's exactly as i explained it. "When a ‘too important to fail’ bank is about to crash, the government provides capital in exchange for shares" you see the reason why the bottom teams get the first overall picks is so the league is more competitive, for all the teams. it could take a couple of failed 11th overall picks and the bottom team would become a perennial loser, potentially taking tens of years before becoming a playoff team again. on the other hand top teams only have to fall to to 23rd overall before getting the ultimate award. keeping the bottom teams down and the top teams up, creating a disparity but also not fixing the fact that teams could still finish with four first overall picks in 6 years with your system. your system doesn't fix tanking for first, and all it accomplishes is punishing the bottom teams for being bad. you think that happens all the time? https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thebalance.com/amp/bearn-stearns-collapse-and-bailout-3305613 didn’t realize Jp Morgan was the same as the government but I guess they might as well be. What about taxing? Corporate socialism isn’t limited to bailouts: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2013/02/19/tax-increases-why-facebooks-billion-dollar-income-isnt-taxed-at-all-by-irs/amp/ just one of hundreds of companies. Just wait until you see how much tax apple pays. Keep living in your land of lollipops and fairy tales Petey Boi, bad teams should be punished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad_BOI_pete Posted March 10, 2021 Share Posted March 10, 2021 (edited) this is getting out of hand, how is taxes relevant to my argument? it's more relative to your argument which is punishing bad teams, or good teams that lose several key players. regardless, your creating a system that is inequal and after a few years could very likely see owners selling/closing thier buisness or possibly go bankrupt even. this rule would ruin the nhl if the top revenue earning teams got into the basement and stayed there too long. the more inequal you make the nhl the less profitable it becomes. pretty sure bettman wants the league to grow. *edit* as per your link you sent regarding bailouts, you should read it again. it's exactly as i explained it. "The Fed's March 14 loan to Chase was repaid on March 17. The Fed Board met on March 16 to approve a $30 billion loan to Chase in return for Bear's assets. The Fed would be able to sell the assets at a higher value in several years, once the market had improved" Edited March 10, 2021 by Petey_BOI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted March 23, 2021 Share Posted March 23, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted March 23, 2021 Share Posted March 23, 2021 (edited) 6 minutes ago, -Vintage Canuck- said: Yep, Canucks were at the lowest point at exactly the times when it was hardest for the worst teams to win first overall. Now, that they're on the rise, of course they make it easier. I know it's a coincidence, but that's so Canucks and that's so NHL. Edited March 23, 2021 by Wilbur 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilentSam Posted March 23, 2021 Share Posted March 23, 2021 (edited) Makes some changes to the “Expansion “ while they are at it.. Perhaps exempt the bottom 10 teams from exposure. it affects how fragile teams have been trying to rebuild and restructure over previous years and stalls their progression. The Expansion clubs seem to have an upper hand far too great. Edited March 23, 2021 by SilentSam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AK_19 Posted March 23, 2021 Share Posted March 23, 2021 Considering it looks like we're going to end up a bottom 10 team, these rules probably help us for this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khay Posted March 23, 2021 Share Posted March 23, 2021 3 hours ago, Wilbur said: Yep, Canucks were at the lowest point at exactly the times when it was hardest for the worst teams to win first overall. Now, that they're on the rise, of course they make it easier. I know it's a coincidence, but that's so Canucks and that's so NHL. This is what I want to say. Where were those people that felt Detroit shouldn't have picked 4th overall, when Canucks were picking 5th overall in two straight years? Luckily, we still picked the best forward in 2017 but the way NHL operates is just so odd. They do things because they had a problem with Detroit picking 4th overall last season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobSacamano Posted March 24, 2021 Share Posted March 24, 2021 So previous wins don’t count towards the new rules. Yet Luongo... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now