Friedman: The top 3 picks in the draft to be decided by lottery?

[The Fonz]

Don't think anyone's done it in here yet? Here are the bottom-10 teams over the last 5 years (including what they're on pace for this season):

Odds - Team - Avg (includes lockout shortened season)
1 - Edmonton - 62.2
2 - Florida - 69.8
3 - NYI - 71.6
4 - Columbus - 74.6
5 - Carolina - 75.2
6 - Winnipeg - 76.2
7 - Buffalo - 77.6
8 - Calgary - 78.0
9 - Toronto - 78.2
10 - Ottawa - 80.0

I'm fine with where Calgary is. What scares the hell out of me... Edmonton has out sucked everyone else over the last decade by such a huge margin... They could hypothetically make the playoffs next year and the year after, and still be the favorites to win the #1 overall. That's disgusting.

This system may eliminate the 1 year tank (Colorado - MacKinnon)... but could promote the half decade of suck (Edmonton 2006-2010, Edmonton 2011 - present). Not sure what I think anymore.

[The Fonz]

Originally Posted by Husky

I think the formula should include some sort of logic that if you have a 1st overall selection in the past 5 years....it hurts from chance of getting 1st overall again.

Yes, agreed.

For no other reason than I stated above. Edmonton.

[TjRhythmic]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The wheel system is absolutely horrible. Its purpose is the complete opposite of what a draft is meant to do. The wheel system ensures that rich/good teams always get top prospects, which takes away from rebuilding/poor teams. How would you feel right now if the wheel system had Calgary drafting 30th this year and Chicago 1st?

I don't think it's a horrible idea. What it would do is give teams a choice, yet taking a lot of the guesswork out of running a team. You pretty much get to see your window. If your a bubble playoff team with an aging core you can look at the wheel and decide whether you start the rebuild now as your getting that top pick in a couple years. Also if your a top team and you need that extra to push you over that pick all of a sudden has more weight if it's known where that pick is going to land.

Not saying it's a perfect solution as I feel it kind of takes the fun out of the gamble. Yet if Calgary knew they would be getting the first pick this year or the year before does the rebuild start earlier cause they know exactly what they will be getting.

Scouting staffs would be projecting 3 or 4 years in advance trying to help with the decision. Do we stay the course, or do they see a kid in Bantam that has "it"

Would definitely change the dynamic of what it means to manage a hockey club.

[Hockey_Ninja]

This trufully is the only way i can see tanking going away:

Every non playoff team gets one ball and each pick from 14 to 1 gets randomized. that means the 14th place team could pick 1st and the last place team could pick 14th.

As unfair as that is it's pretty much the only way i can think of that will force every team to compete on a nightly bases.

[Robbob]

Originally Posted by getbak

With the team that drafted them? It works out to about 2 out of every 10 first overalls.

Crosby (2005) and Fleury (2003) in Pittsburgh
Kane (2007) in Chicago
Lecavalier (1998) in Tampa (Boo)
Modano (1988) in Dallas (drafted by Minnesota, but same franchise)
Lemieux (1984) in Pittsburgh
Potvin (1973) in New York
Lafleur (1971) in Montreal
Houle (1969) in Montreal

Just out of curiosity I looked at the second picks. Recent history was rather surprising:

Seguin (2010)
Doughty (2008)
J. Staal (2006)
Malkin (2004)

After that there are players drafted 2nd but won with other teams

Tverdovsky (1994)
Pronger (1993)
Shanahan (1987)
Simpson (1985)
Muller (1984)

This goes back to 1984 where I stopped (because I want to go to lunch). Pretty much the same over the time span, but really a bunch recently.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by getbak

With the team that drafted them? It works out to about 2 out of every 10 first overalls.

Crosby (2005) and Fleury (2003) in Pittsburgh
Kane (2007) in Chicago
Lecavalier (1998) in Tampa (Boo)
Modano (1988) in Dallas (drafted by Minnesota, but same franchise)
Lemieux (1984) in Pittsburgh
Potvin (1973) in New York
Lafleur (1971) in Montreal
Houle (1969) in Montreal

I liked this stat, I also looked how many 1st won with a different team. Interestingly enough, there were 4, and all of them involved an Alberta team.

Joe Murphy with the Oilers.
Rob Ramage with the Flames

Rick Green and Bobby Smith with the 86 Canadians

about 1/4 1st overall picks have ever one the Stanley cup. So if the Oilers can just win this years draft lotto, the odds are finally in their favour.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Antithesis

You are looking at a 5+ year window for implementation, so it is not an immediate fix, but if you are looking for equitable talent distribution, it is my opinion that the wheel is the way to go.

I don't really agree with your overall point. Equitable distribution is the goal in the overall talent pool, but not the draft itself. The purpose of the draft is to help balance the talent pool by giving the teams with the least talent the best odds at selecting the best players entering the league. The wheel draft only exacerbates talent inequality because the teams with the most talent will get a much higher proportion of those top players.

[troutman]

Originally Posted by Hockey_Ninja

This trufully is the only way i can see tanking going away:

Every non playoff team gets one ball and each pick from 14 to 1 gets randomized. that means the 14th place team could pick 1st and the last place team could pick 14th.

As unfair as that is it's pretty much the only way i can think of that will force every team to compete on a nightly bases.

There is another way:

The non-playoff teams can have a mini-playoffs for draft order.

[Split98]

This would be weird, but what if part of your draft position was determined at the All-Star break? Truely terrible teams (at the bottom all year) will be given the higher probability of a high draft pick, where teams that tank when their playoff chances dwindle will be affected by their All-Star break placement.

As a reminder, here's how things stood at the Olympic Break:

[Enoch Root]

same 5 teams at the bottom

[Split98]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

same 5 teams at the bottom

Currently, yes. But I'm a) a proponent of a lottery involving all non-playoff teams and b) addressing the current tank-show by Carolina and Nashville

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

same 5 teams at the bottom

Calgary and Islanders flip spots though if you go by PPG.

[Scoreface]

It doesn't matter. Edmonton is in the war room night and day and they are probably light years beyond us to figure out a loophole.

I'd actually be intirigued to see a Captain Crunch authored dialogue between the brain trust up there!

I'll stick with our current mantra of hard work and play to win and let the chips fall where they may. Let that and good management/scouting/player development run its course. Not to focus on a draft lottery system.

I think good organizations do this, and for the most part, carry on with business, per se. I'm fine with that.

[TjRhythmic]

Originally Posted by #-3

I liked this stat, I also looked how many 1st won with a different team. Interestingly enough, there were 4, and all of them involved an Alberta team.

Joe Murphy with the Oilers.
Rob Ramage with the Flames

Rick Green and Bobby Smith with the 86 Canadians

about 1/4 1st overall picks have ever one the Stanley cup. So if the Oilers can just win this years draft lotto, the odds are finally in their favour.

I think you just revealed MacT and Lowe's plan

[nfotiu]

Do you really need a draft with a salary cap? What if you just let the teams bid on players. Put in a rule that forces the player to go to the highest bidder, so they can't just pick the best team, but seems like a good way to let the bad teams with lots of cap room get competitive quickly.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Do you really need a draft with a salary cap? What if you just let the teams bid on players. Put in a rule that forces the player to go to the highest bidder, so they can't just pick the best team, but seems like a good way to let the bad teams with lots of cap room get competitive quickly.

I think it still serves a purpose, but not nearly the same purpose.

You're right that the cap ear has created parity and a level playing field that the draft was never able to achieve and with a level playing field, it seems silly to give any team advantages elsewhere.

However, I think it is still a good way to keep fans of bad teams hopeful and interested while they wait from April until October (especially good in non-traditional markets where fan support is tedious). From a business point of view, I think the draft makes sense. The draft is a consolation prize. The thought of it bringing some kind of equality it obsolete.

With the way the standings are and with loser points though, I don't believe that there are big differences in the standings. Is the 28th worse team really in such worse shape from the 25th worse team that their draft position warrants an automatic chance to draft a higher tier prospect? Not in my opinion.

I would prefer to see a tiered lottery system, somewhat based on the typical draft (top 3 prospects are usually the top tier, then the next few a little lower, and so on...):

• The bottom 3 teams have a lottery to determine draft positions 1 through 3 with each team getting and equal chance.
• The teams from 4 through 7 have a lottery for positions 4 to 7 with equal odds.
• The teams 8 to 14... same thing as above.
• Then the remaining 15 teams have a lottery for positions with equal odds.
• The Stanley Cup champ picks last.

[Red Menace]

You really want to eliminate tanking? All teams who miss the playoffs have equal odds in the lottery, and they pick all 14 spots....so you really have as much chance to get 1st as you do 14th....
Everyone would try to make the playoffs in this scenario as missing the playoffs would give little or no guarantee of getting a top pick.

[Sidney Crosby's Hat]

It sounds like what the NHL wants to get rid of is the decent teams who have one terrible year swooping in and picking up a top prospect. Doesn't seem like they really want to handicap the truly terrible teams here.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Sidney Crosby's Hat

It sounds like what the NHL wants to get rid of is the decent teams who have one terrible year swooping in and picking up a top prospect. Doesn't seem like they really want to handicap the truly terrible teams here.

Yep. The last thing the NHL wants is Florida or the Oilers relocating. That would hurt the value of all the franchises. It's a matter of owners and GMs being ticked off that the Avs grabbed the best prospect to come along in years because of one bad season.

[SuperMatt18]

Going back 5 years feels like going back too far.

Easy for a team to be terrible for 2 seasons, mediocre for 2 seasons, and then be a playoff team in the 5th season and they get another really good pick that they likely don't need.

IMO 3 seasons seems like the ideal time frame. Enough that it prevents tanking for one season and not too long where it encourages long term sucking (cough:Edmonton:cough).