Happy with 6th Pick?

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

18 minutes ago, brett said:

expected a 4th or better. i dont think you should be allowed to get a worse pick. only better. would never work but yea. really should NOT be a freaking lotto and you get whatever pick you finish

 

with a 6th round pick we will get another non roster player. non impact player. a 4th liner 3rd liner at best. top 7 dman or bottom pairing d

May I recommend the internet? 

[Wheelchairsuperhero 1,453]

36 minutes ago, brett said:

expected a 4th or better. i dont think you should be allowed to get a worse pick. only better. would never work but yea. really should NOT be a freaking lotto and you get whatever pick you finish

 

with a 6th round pick we will get another non roster player. non impact player. a 4th liner 3rd liner at best. top 7 dman or bottom pairing d

lol you are seriously on another level with your tantrum.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, brett said:

expected a 4th or better. i dont think you should be allowed to get a worse pick. only better. would never work but yea. really should NOT be a freaking lotto and you get whatever pick you finish

 

with a 6th round pick we will get another non roster player. non impact player. a 4th liner 3rd liner at best. top 7 dman or bottom pairing d

In order for teams to move up, there have to be teams that fall back. Math.

[TLGTrico 624]

Remember when I said that game against  New Jersey that I said  was the definition of must lose?  Well it turns out if we lost that game, New Jersey would have finished with 74 points and we would have gotten 72.  So that win cost us our choice of Hughes or Kaako.

[krsmith17 7,191]

10 hours ago, brett said:

expected a 4th or better. i dont think you should be allowed to get a worse pick. only better. would never work but yea. really should NOT be a freaking lotto and you get whatever pick you finish

with a 6th round pick we will get another non roster player. non impact player. a 4th liner 3rd liner at best. top 7 dman or bottom pairing d

There's dumb comments, and then there's next level dumb...

[Dabura 12,207]

7 hours ago, TLGTrico said:

Remember when I said that game against  New Jersey that I said  was the definition of must lose?  Well it turns out if we lost that game, New Jersey would have finished with 74 points and we would have gotten 72.  So that win cost us our choice of Hughes or Kaako.

You could look at it that way. But you could also say that [insert any of the wins we had over the course of the season] cost us. And that's with the benefit of hindsight.

IMO, the real lesson here is that the lottery is bulls*** and teams should just focus on winning games and let the cards fall where they may.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

9 hours ago, TLGTrico said:

Remember when I said that game against  New Jersey that I said  was the definition of must lose?  Well it turns out if we lost that game, New Jersey would have finished with 74 points and we would have gotten 72.  So that win cost us our choice of Hughes or Kaako.

Not necessarily. Had NJ won that game, an alternate time line would have been created in which the lottery played out completely differently and the Wings drafted 6th anyway. - Science.

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

1 hour ago, Dabura said:

You could look at it that way. But you could also say that [insert any of the wins we had over the course of the season] cost us. And that's with the benefit of hindsight.

IMO, the real lesson here is that the lottery is bulls*** and teams should just focus on winning games and let the cards fall where they may.

Hindsight makes people appear to be forward-thinking.

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

1 hour ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

Not necessarily. Had NJ won that game, an alternate time line would have been created in which the lottery played out completely differently and the Wings drafted 6th anyway. - Science.

[kipwinger 8,522]

12 hours ago, TLGTrico said:

Remember when I said that game against  New Jersey that I said  was the definition of must lose?  Well it turns out if we lost that game, New Jersey would have finished with 74 points and we would have gotten 72.  So that win cost us our choice of Hughes or Kaako.

I blame Larkin and AA.  If they had each scored 10 few goals we'd likely have been even worse and our lottery odds would have improved by a few percentage points, thus basically ensuring us Hughes or Kakko.  The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars but in ourselves. 

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

Love that 70% picked big dorky baby

[DickieDunn 2,571]

On 4/10/2019 at 10:25 AM, The 91 of Ryans said:

You all know my thoughts on AA as #2C. It would be great if Veleno can get there. 

Normally I'm 100% BPA, but  I think we need to take the best play-making center that's available. If Dach's game compares to Thorton then he could be our guy. Or Zegras. I'd be "fine" with Turcotte or Cozens as well I just think this team lack elite playmakers. 

Or, if Byram's still there, take him. 

 

Much like a 40+ year old divorced woman at a bar for last call, Wings need a D.

 

But if a forward is clearly the best player available there, take the forward

Edited April 12, 2019 by DickieDunn