[News] BoG approves Draft lottery changes

[Biff]

NHLPA statement should be: "We absolutely support any initiative that limits potentially fine top-drafted players from having to play in Edmonton."

[driveway]

1. Colorado didn't tank, or if they did, we are as guilty of tanking as they are. The results of the April 8th game where we bet them 3-1 would have switched our positions in the standings. Well, actually, Tampa would have been #29 and we'd have been #28 based on Regulation Wins.

Originally Posted by Zevo

This would...Of the bottom five teams at the end of the year, the team with the best winning percentage in the last 20 games gets 1st overall pick, 2nd best percentage gets 2nd pick, and so on. Would be good for the fans as well as they would still have something to cheer for, besides losses.

So, just doing this quickly, in 2012-13, 1/4 of the season was about 10 games, we'd still have picked 6th, finishing out of the bottom 5, but the order of picks would have been:

1. COL: 4-4-2
2. CAR: 3-5-2
3. FLA: 3-7-0
4. TBL: 2-6-2
5. NSH: 1-8-1

Colorado still gets #1 overall, further evidence they didn't tank.

The order for this year, under this 'best last-20' system would look like this:

1. NYI: 11-6-3
2. CGY: 11-9-0
3. EDM: 9-10-1
4. FLA: 6-13-1
5. BUF: 3-16-1

[Alberta_Beef]

They should use a lottery to determine almost every pick.

Picks 1-14 with variant odds between the non-playoff clubs
Picks 15-22 with equal odds between teams eliminated in the 1st round
Picks 23-26 with equal odds between teams eliminated in the 2nd round
Picks 27-28 with equal odds between teams eliminated in the 3rd round
Stanley Cup Finalist
Stanley Cup Champion

[UKflames]

Originally Posted by driveway

1. Colorado didn't tank, or if they did, we are as guilty of tanking as they are. The results of the April 8th game where we bet them 3-1 would have switched our positions in the standings. Well, actually, Tampa would have been #29 and we'd have been #28 based on Regulation Wins.


So, just doing this quickly, in 2012-13, 1/4 of the season was about 10 games, we'd still have picked 6th, finishing out of the bottom 5, but the order of picks would have been:

1. COL: 4-4-2
2. CAR: 3-5-2
3. FLA: 3-7-0
4. TBL: 2-6-2
5. NSH: 1-8-1

Colorado still gets #1 overall, further evidence they didn't tank.

The order for this year, under this 'best last-20' system would look like this:

1. NYI: 11-6-3
2. CGY: 11-9-0
3. EDM: 9-10-1
4. FLA: 6-13-1
5. BUF: 3-16-1

The problem with looking at it this way is that they had nothing to play for except to lose for a better pick, ie. playing under the current system, so you cannot make a direct comparison and say even under the new system nothing would change. It would change because the teams would be playing to win not hoping to lose.

[Resolute 14]

^Saying "they went 4-4-2 in their last ten, so obviously not tanking" ignores the fact that that team deliberately retained lame duck coaching and management and deliberately left one of its better players unsigned and consistently played below its skill level in the first 38 games. The Avs had no business finishing as low as they did.

Originally Posted by nik-

Colorado won MacKinnon with an 18% chance slot. So this wouldn't really resolve it either.

The intent was rather obvious, however. IIRC, it was Elliotte Friedman who reported earlier this year that several GMs were angry with how Colorado pulled off the #1 pick. Edmonton's continual failure has got to be sticking in their craw as well.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Caged Great

I guarantee with this system that McDavid and Eichel will go to teams like Florida, Nashville or Carolina.

Doubt it. If the league wanted to cheat a future star onto a specific team, it wouldn't be one that nobody cares about. It would be a Ewing to the Knicks scenario.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

What happens if you cheer for them to win and they lose, but can never seem to find themselves in a good draft position because of these changes?

I would think the Oilers and Panthers smacking you in the face would have made it obvious that drafting top two or three every year does not create winning teams. You need competent management in all aspects of team building to win. So if your team keeps losing, it's not these changes to the draft that will be the cause.

And as far as the Flames are concerned, good. Wanting to lose should never be a palatable option.

[#-3]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Doubt it. If the league wanted to cheat a future star onto a specific team, it wouldn't be one that nobody cares about. It would be a Ewing to the Knicks scenario.

Nobody cared about the Penguins years ago. The only talk was when they would become the Hamilton Blackberries. But they fixed that Draft.

Pit had the worst odds and picked 1st.
Flames had the best odds and picked what, 26th?

Exactly the way Betman planned it.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by driveway

1. Colorado didn't tank, or if they did, we are as guilty of tanking as they are. The results of the April 8th game where we bet them 3-1 would have switched our positions in the standings. Well, actually, Tampa would have been #29 and we'd have been #28 based on Regulation Wins.

The Avalanche did indeed tank. How do you explain the exact same roster (sans MaKinnon) going from 66 points (last season prorated) to 112? Either Roy is the greatest head coach in the history of the NHL and MacKinnon is Gretzky or the Avs tanked. Honestly I can't believe we are still having this discussion as it's the Avs tanking that is the main purpose the NHL is making these changes one year later.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by #-3

Nobody cared about the Penguins years ago. The only talk was when they would become the Hamilton Blackberries. But they fixed that Draft.

Pit had the worst odds and picked 1st.
Flames had the best odds and picked what, 26th?

Exactly the way Betman planned it.

Pittsburgh had pretty good odds actually (as did the Flames).

But I suspect some funny business there was well. Drafting Crosby essentially got them the support for the arena that Bettman was so hands-on in fighting for. It was like the knockout punch. It was just so convenient that I can't help but wonder if the fix was in.

[_Q_]

I haven't been following this thread much so excuse me if this has been mentioned before.

The "best last 20 games" or any variants of in theory sounds like a decent idea. The problem with this scenario, however, is that scheduling variances between clubs make this kind of unfair. For example, say Calgary plays it's last 20 games against the likes of LA, Anaheim, Boston and St. Louis, while Vancouver plays mostly against Edmonton, Winnipeg, Columbus and Toronto. While the NHL can attempt to schedule the final 20 more evenly, it's a bit difficult to predict who will be the good teams and who won't (look at Colorado this season). Furthermore, I'm not entirely convinced that teams won't intentionally tank the first 60 or so games in order to be out of playoff contention and then light it up for the final 20 games so they can get that coveted franchise player in drafts like 2015.

I think, ultimately what would work best is to award the first over-all to the non-playoff team with the best record against non-playoff teams throughout the season (not just the last 20 games). Since its close to impossible to guess who will and who won't be a playoff team at the beginning of the season, teams are forced to try hard every night in order to guarantee that they either make the playoffs or get a high draft pick.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by #-3

Nobody cared about the Penguins years ago. The only talk was when they would become the Hamilton Blackberries. But they fixed that Draft.

Pit had the worst odds and picked 1st.
Flames had the best odds and picked what, 26th?

Exactly the way Betman planned it.

While I am no more convinced that draft was on the level than you are, the Penguins actually had better odds (three balls) than the Flames did (two balls).

[Ashasx]

Still the odds of Calgary and Edmonton picking so late with 2 balls was just not good.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Ashasx

Still the odds of Calgary and Edmonton picking so late with 2 balls is just really odd.

That it was. But that likely really was just dumb luck. Even if the league intended to rig the draw in Pittsburgh's favour, it is very unlikely they cared enough to rig it all the way down to 25 and 26.

[sureLoss]

John Vogl @BuffNewsVogl
Sabres GM Tim Murray says Draft Lottery odds for last-place team will go from 25 percent to 20 percent or 19 percent in 2015.

John Vogl @BuffNewsVogl
Sabres GM Tim Murray says in the 2016 NHL Draft, the first three spots will be determined via lottery.

[Enoch Root]

I wouldn't mind those changes

[The Fonz]

Love it

[The Fonz]

I like the sounds of evening out the odds, as well as more picks determined by lottery.

Knowing the NHL, it's likely just a small change to the current system.... Maybe something like:

Odds:
30th - 14%
29th - 13%
28th - 12%
27th - 11%
26th - 10%
25th - 9%
24th - 8%
23rd - 7%
22nd - 5%
21st - 4%
20th - 2%
19th - 2%
18th - 1%
17th - 1%

Lottery held for picks 1 thru 3.
At pick #4, order goes back to reverse standings.

Sounding like it'll be closer to:


Odds:
30th - 19%
29th - 16%
28th - 14%
27th - 10%
26th - 9%
25th - 8%
24th - 7%
23rd - 5%
22nd - 4%
21st - 3%
20th - 2%
19th - 1%
18th - 1%
17th - 1%

[kn]

Why can't they make both changes for 2015?

[Antithesis]

Originally Posted by kn

Why can't they make both changes for 2015?

I would assume it has a fair bit to do with a number of first round picks in the 2015 having already changed hands. I'm surprised, given that fact, that there are any changes being made for the 2015 draft.