Suggested NHL Draft System: Honour for Connor

[#-3]

the article over complicated things. If this it they way really wanted to go, why not just use the points after Elimination system. Teams in the 9-12 range wouldn't really have a chance to compete for the 1st overall because they would be eliminated with 3 games left, and presumably even the Oilers and Sabers can stumble into 6 or 7 points in 20 games.

[Mister Yamoto]

I can't wait for the Flames to become a good team again. Then I can just go back to not really caring about the draft lottery format or even the actual draft for that matter.

Leave it the way it is, let Edmonton pick top 3 the next 30 years in a row.

[googol]

The problem with this is if you traded your draft pick.

Would you want your rivals to pick higher by winning more games? I suppose you move up in the other rounds too, but this could pose to be a problem. Though more minor than the issues with tanking in the current format.

[Incogneto]

Originally Posted by Murph

Some guy, somewhere suggested that draft order be determined based on number of points accumulated after a team is mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. I like that a whole lot better than the system suggested here. The crappiest of the crappy teams would still have the best chance of drafting higher (and so they should) as they'd be eliminated earlier and have more games to get points.

I came to post this exact thing. I love this concept, and seems fair and balanced imo. I would LOVE to see this implemented.

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Couldn't have said it better, nik

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by CalgaryFan1988

The Oilers sure made a mess of the NHL draft. Never has there been so much talk of revamping the draft, year after year.

And yet somehow they maintain their status as one of the most arrogant fanbases and management groups around. I mean, how much friggen humble pie does someone have to eat before they become, well, humble?

[SebC]

Originally Posted by stormchaser

This is a BS post. We all wish everyday was trade dead line day but come on...its the middle of summer. I'm grateful for qualitly posters on this site and the effort shown in this thread. Its an interesting read if you click on the link the OP provided.

It might be an interesting read, but it's not news. The [News] tag should be saved for news.

[Split98]

Originally Posted by SebC

It might be an interesting read, but it's not news. The [News] tag should be saved for news.

It's ruined my day too

[Finger Cookin]

The draft lottery as it is does not need to be changed.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by googol

The problem with this is if you traded your draft pick.

Would you want your rivals to pick higher by winning more games? I suppose you move up in the other rounds too, but this could pose to be a problem. Though more minor than the issues with tanking in the current format.

The lotto has never applied to any round other than the 1st, but I think after ~pick 20 I think it is probably rare that moving up 1 pick would change the guy a team ends up with. I'm sure the teams lists are pretty different by that point.

Edit: 1 pick being the difference for the last 2 draft lottos, I guess it it were moving up 5 picks every round it could make a big difference.

[nfotiu]

I bet they could work out a pretty good system that ditched the draft and let everyone bid up to 2 years of their cap room for each pick. ie, you could bid 15 million for the next 2 years on McDavid, and the club would have to put that in a pool that distributed to the other 29 times and increased the floor and cap by an equivalent amount.

It would make for some nice parity where teams that are already stacked wouldn't be able to make a good bid unless they tried to sell off their players. All sorts of different build and rebuild risk/reward strategies could come into play.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

I like this suggestion more than the current system, though it is pretty complicated.

But I'm a believer in the wheel now - just a rotation of who picks where. Now that the 'smart' rebuilding method is to tank, the draft doesnt create parity anymore, it wrecks it. Teams that try are punished while teams that deliberately get and stay bad are rewarded - and applauded. Its gross. And getting worse every year.

Anyone at the bottom of the league now is there because they want to be, or because they are inept. Neither should get rewarded at the expense of teams that do their best to give their fans a decent product.

And get off my lawn.

[Geeoff]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

I like this suggestion more than the current system, though it is pretty complicated.

But I'm a believer in the wheel now - just a rotation of who picks where. Now that the 'smart' rebuilding method is to tank, the draft doesnt create parity anymore, it wrecks it. Teams that try are punished while teams that deliberately get and stay bad are rewarded - and applauded. Its gross. And getting worse every year.

Anyone at the bottom of the league now is there because they want to be, or because they are inept. Neither should get rewarded at the expense of teams that do their best to give their fans a decent product.

And get off my lawn.

I think that "tanking" is fool's gold. There are teams that tank every year and still have no sign of being "rewarded" with a playoff berth.

[cral12]

Originally Posted by Murph

Some guy, somewhere suggested that draft order be determined based on number of points accumulated after a team is mathematically eliminated from the playoffs. I like that a whole lot better than the system suggested here. The crappiest of the crappy teams would still have the best chance of drafting higher (and so they should) as they'd be eliminated earlier and have more games to get points.

I like that option as well and I actually wrote about that option over 2 years ago in the article that was linked within the linked article in the OP. (see option #2) It's based on an idea from a NBA writer.

Fixing the NHL Entry Draft Lottery System: Playoff For Number One (Plus Three Other Options)

[d_phaneuf]

lottery for the top 5 picks

group the percentage to remove any real taking, something like bottom 5 teams have 10%, teams 6-10 have 7%, teams 11-14 have 3.75%

can't pick in top 3 back to back, can't pick in top 5 three straight years

[#-3]

I am a fan of the points after elimination system.

But if they want to stick with the percentages, I suggested this last year, a little complicated but it would make a fun event for TSN or Sportsnet to air.

Get a Giant Lotto Hopper.

17 & 18 - 96 Balls 21.7%
19 & 20 - 64 Balls 14.4 %
21 & 22 - 32 Balls 7.2%
23 & 24 - 16 Balls 3.6 %
25 & 26 - 8 Balls 1.8 %
27 & 28 - 4 Balls 0.9 %
29 - 2 Balls 0.5%
30 - 1 ball 0.25%

Draw one Ball, Whoevers logo comes out gets 14th overall.

Dump all the balls in a out, and have Girls in Yoga Pants with the Tim Hortons Logo on the butt, come in with bags full of replacement balls for each of the remaining teams, while you interview the disappointed AGM of the team whos name just got picked.

Then lets just assume 17th or 18th place got the 14th overall pick. Chances at the 13th overall pick.

18 - 96 Balls 27.7%
19 & 20 - 64 Balls 18.4 %
21 & 22 - 32 Balls 9.2%
23 & 24 - 16 Balls 4.6 %
25 & 26 - 8 Balls 2.3 %
27 & 28 - 4 Balls 1.2 %
29 - 2 Balls 0.6%
30 - 1 ball 0.3%

Sure you would need to print 6202 balls, held in 196 different bags. but how much could that really cost $1000?

[DJones]

NBA is doing the same thing, tanking is just inevitable under the current system

[Huntingwhale]

The correct term is Dishonor for Connor

[CliffFletcher]

The whole point of the draft system is to reward bad teams. Any 'fix' that fails to make rewarding bad teams the main feature of the draft misses the point entirely, and will find no traction with the NHL board of governors. And if that bothers you as a fan, you need to recognize that your wants are sometimes at odds with the interests of the people who own the teams.

[Weitz]

The only issue I have with the "cant pick top 3 2 years a row" or anything similar is it just makes it that much longer for a team to get better. Say Buffalo sucks again this year they auto cant get a generational talent because they picked top 3 last year? So now they will suck for even longer?

I don't see the NHL ever doing this because parity is the best for business. They want teams to get better quicker, because that will make them more money.