James Tanner: Arizona Coyotes Get Set for the P̶l̶a̶y̶o̶f̶f̶s̶ Draft Lottery

theres no such thing as a loser point. that is a hockey point. it is a reward for sixty minutes of hockey before the winner is decided by a skills competition(3 on 3 or shootout). The extra point for the winner is called the skills competition point.

I agree, I don't like the loser point. The NHL just needs to make every game worth 3 points. That would end this conversation. 3 points for a regulation win, 2 for an OT/SO win, 1 for an OT/SO loss and 0 for a regulation loss. Not sure what the harm in doing this is? Can anyone let me know why this would be a bad idea? Or is there another solution? Or we could go back to ending in a tie, which I would be in favor of rather than the loser point.

another fresh piece. jimmy come on man mix it up just a little.

its all luck anyway no?

The Prize is Jack Hughes, a player projected to be up there with Connor McDavid and Auston Matthews as the best players in the NHL.
I don’t think Mathews is close to McDavid and I don’t think Hughes will be close to Mathews.

Overtime & Shootouts are a coin toss for who wins. Tanner is basically saying because Colorado got unlucky in OT & SO, they don't deserve playoffs. But if Toronto had missed the playoffs because they went 3-12 in the post regulation coin toss, you can guarantee he'd be talking about how unfair that was too.

I was skimming your article, and for a second I thought Paul Simon was playing at the lottery.

Mrs. Robinson feels like an odd choice

I guess we're just going to overlook the Avalanche having a goal differential that was 24 points higher than Arizona?

I guess we're just going to overlook the Avalanche having a goal differential that was 24 points higher than Arizona?
- Judeman5000

If you're going to take this article seriously, then 100% do that.

theres no such thing as a loser point. that is a hockey point. it is a reward for sixty minutes of hockey before the winner is decided by a skills competition(3 on 3 or shootout). The extra point for the winner is called the skills competition point.
- Njuice

Do you also write angry letters to the Onion?

That's a very odd response.

I often get angry at onions. Actually it's more the dumbass McDonalds employees who can't understand the meaning of no onions

The Prize is Jack Hughes, a player projected to be up there with Connor McDavid and Auston Matthews as the best players in the NHL.
I don’t think Mathews is close to McDavid and I don’t think Hughes will be close to Mathews.
- Ross77

Consensus is that Hughes is the Number 1 pick, but many feel that Kakko is right there behind him, and that his size and grit could make him just as good, if not better over time.. After those two, there is quite a bit of a drop off.

As a NYR fan, I'd rather get 2nd pick....That way we can't stress over who we should've/could've taken at #1. Who knows, Gorton might take another goalie anyway

Consensus is that Hughes is the Number 1 pick, but many feel that Kakko is right there behind him, and that his size and grit could make him just as good, if not better over time.. After those two, there is quite a bit of a drop off.

As a NYR fan, I'd rather get 2nd pick....That way we can't stress over who we should've/could've taken at #1. Who knows, Gorton might take another goalie anyway
- rrentz

I can pretty much guarantee you that if player A is more talented, but player B has size and grit, that player A will 100% be the better player. It's almost like certain kinds of hockey people are incapable of learning. And for the record, I don't mean you, the specific poster. It's just funny, in general, that we're still overrating players in 2019 because of size and grit.

I remember people on draft day saying Debrincit should be a top ten pick, just for example.

I can pretty much guarantee you that if player A is more talented, but player B has size and grit, that player A will 100% be the better player. It's almost like certain kinds of hockey people are incapable of learning. And for the record, I don't mean you, the specific poster. It's just funny, in general, that we're still overrating players in 2019 because of size and grit.

I remember people on draft day saying Debrincit should be a top ten pick, just for example.
- James_Tanner

So the more talented player is more talented? Groundbreaking. Maybe you really are extremely educated

I agree, I don't like the loser point. The NHL just needs to make every game worth 3 points. That would end this conversation. 3 points for a regulation win, 2 for an OT/SO win, 1 for an OT/SO loss and 0 for a regulation loss. Not sure what the harm in doing this is? Can anyone let me know why this would be a bad idea? Or is there another solution? Or we could go back to ending in a tie, which I would be in favor of rather than the loser point.
- GeriHattric7

Because it would knock teams out of the playoff race sooner.

Yeah, I know you don't like this answer, but there it is.

Because it would knock teams out of the playoff race sooner.

Yeah, I know you don't like this answer, but there it is.
- Atomic Wedgie

That is a great answer and explains why the NHL will refuse to change. Keeps people coming to the arena for what might be meaningless games otherwise.

I can pretty much guarantee you that if player A is more talented, but player B has size and grit, that player A will 100% be the better player. It's almost like certain kinds of hockey people are incapable of learning. And for the record, I don't mean you, the specific poster. It's just funny, in general, that we're still overrating players in 2019 because of size and grit.

I remember people on draft day saying Debrincit should be a top ten pick, just for example.
- James_Tanner

Kakko just had one of the best u18 seasons ever in the Finnish league. What are you blabbering about.

Kakko just had one of the best u18 seasons ever in the Finnish league. What are blabbering about.
- tomburton99

Does Kakko rent or own?

Does Kakko rent or own?
- eichiefs9

He'll probably own because he's not an idiot.

I agree, I don't like the loser point. The NHL just needs to make every game worth 3 points. That would end this conversation. 3 points for a regulation win, 2 for an OT/SO win, 1 for an OT/SO loss and 0 for a regulation loss. Not sure what the harm in doing this is? Can anyone let me know why this would be a bad idea? Or is there another solution? Or we could go back to ending in a tie, which I would be in favor of rather than the loser point.
- GeriHattric7

The current system creates an illusion of parity, which makes the games mean more, which means more viewers and therefore more $$ for the league. No way in hell they're gonna stop.

I agree, I don't like the loser point. The NHL just needs to make every game worth 3 points. That would end this conversation. 3 points for a regulation win, 2 for an OT/SO win, 1 for an OT/SO loss and 0 for a regulation loss. Not sure what the harm in doing this is? Can anyone let me know why this would be a bad idea? Or is there another solution? Or we could go back to ending in a tie, which I would be in favor of rather than the loser point.
- GeriHattric7

It's a great and obvious solution. In that case Colorado would have 123 points and Arizona would have 116 points, so Colorado would still be safely in the play off.

It's not a good/lucky thing to lose 14 times in OT!

Does NHL Network in United States have the lottery on tonight???

Does NHL Network in United States have the lottery on tonight???
- BlackhawkMike

NBC sports?

Edit: Yup NBC sports @ 8pm.

The Prize is Jack Hughes, a player projected to be up there with Connor McDavid and Auston Matthews as the best players in the NHL.

I bleed the blue and white but Auston isn't even the best player on his own team, let alone the whole league. Top 10? Maybe.