2023 NHL Draft Thread

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

So your turn comes around, and you get Yakupov. Then you have no chance again for 31 years.

Yes and no. You could still trade the pick or trade for someone else's pick if that was the inclination of either team. So there is potential for more than one every 32 years.

I would prefer this system to one where the Flames have not had a number one pick in the 40+ years they've been in Calgary and watched Edmonton draft #1 four times in six years. Anything that prevents the latter is step in the right direction.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Giving the most popular and wealthy cities (NY, TOR, etc) more of an advantage.

The cap solves that problem.

Even better would be to lower the cap.

Bonus: it would also allow NHL franchises to miraculously afford to build their own buildings rather than having taxpayer subsidies be flowed through to player salaries.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

The cap limits talent consolidation.

The draft spreads out talent.

You need both, in order to have a level and competitive playing field.

The draft does not spread out talent. It consolidates it in the teams willing and able to suck.

Teams at the bottom choose it. They want it. Because they are rewarded for it.

[shutout]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

Sure.

These are billion dollar orgs. I don't buy the idea that they 'need' picks as league welfare.

If you know your next few picks are 4th, 14th, 24th, and 1st, or whatever, plan accordingly and go win. May the best team win and if you win the cup AND didn't trade the upcoming first.. how fn good are you?

I know its counter to sports history but think about it a sec.
Edmonton is rewarded for being horrible. Chicago now twice.The Rangers. Florida. Tampa. Be bad. As bad as you can. Eventually, losing wins.

Teams like Nashville get completely screwed for building a great franchise and trying to win, even if they fell short. I think of SJ too. There are more.

So would you have it sequentially?
You pick first this year and second the year following, and then third?
Or how do you skip to ensure that every team is getting the first every 32 years?

[stemit14]

Any solution I can come up with is likely too complicated. I think adjusting the drafting odds each year based on playoff appearances and top 5 picks in previous years could add some parity. For example, any teams that have both missed the playoffs in the last 2-3 years and not had a pick in the top 5 in the last 2-3 years could get a bump in the lottery odds. It would have to be at the expense of teams that had won a draft lottery in the last 2-3 years.

Not sure exactly how it would work. The years out of the playoffs and out of the top five picks would likely need to be adjusted but this makes it so teams in the “middle” could keep trying to win and still have a decent chance at a top five pick. It makes it so teams would not need to “bottom out” for so long and could try to rebuild faster.

Alternatively, the simpler solution might be to make it so teams cannot pick in the top 5 more than once every 2 years. So your team finishes 32nd but already picked in the top five last year, your pick is automatically 6th overall. This truly spreads the top picks around the teams that do not make the playoffs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ComixZone]

Now that things are more or less settled, I’m hoping for one of:

Matt Wood
Colby Barlow
Brayden Yager
Andrew Cristall

If we walk away with 1 of those guys, I’ll feel like “hey, at least we benefited somewhat from having a down year in a strong draft”.

[JohnnyB]

Giving all non-playoff teams a random draft order for 1-16 would be a good way to go.

[stemit14]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

Giving all non-playoff teams a random draft order for 1-16 would be a good way to go.

Would like this as well. However, all the bottom teams got upset when Dallas and New York jumped up to the top 3 in the draft when they finished outside the top ten so I don’t see that happening again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by stemit14

Would like this as well. However, all the bottom teams got upset when Dallas and New York jumped up to the top 3 in the draft when they finished outside the top ten so I don’t see that happening again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Part of them being upset was probably that they had played the game of being a bottom team to get a high pick rather than competing to make the playoffs.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

The cap solves that problem.

Even better would be to lower the cap.

Bonus: it would also allow NHL franchises to miraculously afford to build their own buildings rather than having taxpayer subsidies be flowed through to player salaries.

No it doesn't. The less popular cities have to pay up to attract talent. The more free agency there is the less level the playing field

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

The draft does not spread out talent. It consolidates it in the teams willing and able to suck.

Teams at the bottom choose it. They want it. Because they are rewarded for it.

They are rewarded for it because they are currently low on it.

The draft definitely spreads out talent. Once you acquire more talent, your draft position worsens, and teams with less talent get a more favourable draft position.

No system is perfect, but you're simply ignoring the facts.

[Bandwagon Surfer]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

So the most popular cities perpetually have the best teams. Cool.

Of course, and this is a good thing. These are city based sports, we are playing city vs city games. The quality of your city should matter.


It lets people be more invested in their local team since the team now does represent their city. Instead of just being a collection of players a billionaire bought.



Helping make your city a more appealing place would be helping your local team attract talent. Fans going out and supporting minor league teams would be helping their local nhl team by showing players this is a place they will be supported.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Bandwagon Surfer

Of course, and this is a good thing. These are city based sports, we are playing city vs city games. The quality of your city should matter.


It lets people be more invested in their local team since the team now does represent their city. Instead of just being a collection of players a billionaire bought.



Helping make your city a more appealing place would be helping your local team attract talent. Fans going out and supporting minor league teams would be helping their local nhl team by showing players this is a place they will be supported.

So I can join NY and be on a powerhouse, or I can go to Calgary because their fans support minor hockey... what to do, what to do?

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

How would you like them to distribute new young talent?

I like the Elimination Standings or whatever they are called.

The day you are officially eliminated, you start collecting points (normal NHL points). The team with the most Elimination Points gets first overall, etc.
The earlier you are eliminated, the more points you can accumulate. The better teams can accumulate more by simply being better, even though they are eliminated later.

It then gives teams something to play for, and makes Columbus vs. Buffalo on the last day of the year meaningful.

The problem with it is that it might take away from trades if you are out of the playoffs, but in the Elimination Standings...

[Edit: Found it. It is the Gold Plan, by Adam Gold
https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...ottery-draft/]

[Tkachukwagon]

Detroit has three picks in a row in the second round - 41, 42 & 43. They also have two picks in the first round - 9 & 18.

If the Flames are willing to trade down from 16 to 18 (if the Red Wings really like a player at 16), I am wondering if one of those three 2nd rounders could be had?

[Canada 02]

Originally Posted by Tkachukwagon

Detroit has three picks in a row in the second round - 41, 42 & 43. They also have two picks in the first round - 9 & 18.

If the Flames are willing to trade down from 16 to 18 (if the Red Wings really like a player at 16), I am wondering if one of those three 2nd rounders could be had?

in 2020, the Flames acquired a 3rd round pick for moving down from #19 to 22
Then moved #22 for #24 plus another 3rd.

This draft is different, but I doubt moving 2 spots is worth a 2nd round pick

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by IamNotKenKing

I like the Elimination Standings or whatever they are called.

The day you are officially eliminated, you start collecting points (normal NHL points). The team with the most Elimination Points gets first overall, etc.
The earlier you are eliminated, the more points you can accumulate. The better teams can accumulate more by simply being better, even though they are eliminated later.

It then gives teams something to play for, and makes Columbus vs. Buffalo on the last day of the year meaningful.

The problem with it is that it might take away from trades if you are out of the playoffs, but in the Elimination Standings...

[Edit: Found it. It is the Gold Plan, by Adam Gold
https://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl/...ottery-draft/]

People think this will prevent tanking, but it doesn't. Teams will tank for the 1st half of the season, then start trying to win down the stretch. Problem is, the better teams will win more down the stretch, and acquire better draft position, leaving the weaker teams in no man's land.

[Tkachukwagon]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

in 2020, the Flames acquired a 3rd round pick for moving down from #19 to 22
Then moved #22 for #24 plus another 3rd.

This draft is different, but I doubt moving 2 spots is worth a 2nd round pick

Yeah, you are right. I am being a bit to hopeful on recouping draft picks.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Canada 02

in 2020, the Flames acquired a 3rd round pick for moving down from #19 to 22
Then moved #22 for #24 plus another 3rd.

This draft is different, but I doubt moving 2 spots is worth a 2nd round pick

Might be, if there is a guy Detroit really wants.

[IamNotKenKing]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

People think this will prevent tanking, but it doesn't. Teams will tank for the 1st half of the season, then start trying to win down the stretch. Problem is, the better teams will win more down the stretch, and acquire better draft position, leaving the weaker teams in no man's land.

It will encourage competitive hockey.
A team cannot try to tank early, then hope to play well late. It is not possible to simply flip the switch.

"OK guys. We're eliminated. Now start trying!"
Not going to happen.

Better teams, by definition, have fewer games to accumulate points, so that is their disadvantage. It's a neat concept, but I don't think it will be implemented.