Terry loves fracking
Sabres tanking and slacking
Buffalo pride lacking
There are varying degrees of "statistically unlikely" and some outcomes, while still unlikely in the overall sense, are have a higher chance of occurring than others. Yet, the outcomes with the lowest probability seem to occur far more often than they would in a truly random process...
Of all people, I shouldn't have to explain this to you.
That's the problem with having a party. Who wants to go to a party where there's an 80% chance that the outcome will be disappointing? Not that getting Eichel would be a disappointment, but drafting second is already guaranteed. The only reason to watch is the hope that we'd come away with McDavid.
Who says everyone needs to know the outcome? Last year the specials consisted of the two guys on the air lifting up cardboard squares to reveal the team in that slot. They wouldn't need to know ahead of time: only the person who put the cards with the team logos behind them would have to know.
And btw, the lottery is done behind the scenes before the special airs- it doesn't occur on the air. So whether it's rigged or not, the results are known before the special is filmed.
That's because that's not true. Your perception of this really isn't reality.
Please point out to me when the outcomes with the lowest probability occurred.
2014 - Florida wins the lottery, 2nd best odds
2013 - Colorado wins the lottery, 2nd best odds
2012 - Edmomton wins, 2nd best odds
2011 - New Jersey wins, moves from 8th to 4th
2010 - Edmonton wins, was already picking 1st
2009 - Islanders win, were already picking 1st
2008 - Tampa wins, was already picking 1st
2007 - Chicago wins, move up to 1st from 5th
2006 - Blues win, were already picking first
2005 - Pittsburgh wins "Special lottery (due to cancelled season" They were one of the teams with the highest odds of winning
2004 - Washington wins, moves up from 3rd
2003 - Florida wins, moves up from 4th to 1st
2002 - Florida wins, moves up from 3rd to 1st
2001 - Atlanta wins, moves up from 3rd to 1st
2000 - Islanders win, move up from 5th to 1st
1999 - Chicago wins, moves up to 4th from 8th
1998 - San Jose wins, was already last
1997 - Boston wins, were already picking 1st
1996 - Ottawa wins, were already picking 1st
1995 - Kings win, move from 7th to 3rd
Wait a minute Mr. Buffalo Low Self-esteem.
Yes, the lottery is taped, but the actual lottery is taped in front of the GMs who have a stake in it earlier in the day. I doubt they are in on this conspiracy.
It is my understanding that today the NHL will post on its website which 200 of the 1,000 4 number (some two digit numbers) sequences belong to the Sabres (and which 10 belong to the Bruins for example).
Tomorrow afternoon, they will use a lottery ball system to draw for balls that contain numbers from 1 to 14 and in which sequence.
That sequence is matched up to the team's numbers to see which team has that sequence.
Tomorrow evening they will show the ball lottery drawing and which team drew the #1 overall pick.
I can't see how they can cheat the Sabres with that transparent process.
mightysimi (04-17-2015)
HOW DO I KNOW IT'S NOT RIGGED? The number-drawing process is supervised by accounting firm Ernst & Young.
The drawing of numbers from the lottery machine will be filmed and released publicly on Sportsnet.ca and NHL.com after the results are announced.
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/n...el-number-one/
I ran the simulator down in the link above and you guys won 5 out of 20 times.
If it's about maximizing McDavid's star power, he ends up in Toronto.
sukie (04-17-2015)
ekblad isnt a franchise saving guy. Not many D-men sell tickets. and florida isnt going to benefit in that way from him.
Pittsburgh had the best odds to win that lottery. So you're wrong on that one. Who was supposed to win? A team with lower odds?
Washington was second that year. Hardly going against all odds.
Why Florida last year? They were second and picked a guy that wasn't a consensus top pick.
Come on. You had a perception that wasn't based on reality. The facts don't back your point.