Fixing the Draft, Stopping the Tank

[bizaro86]

I don't like rollover, because I think it would cause weird/undesirable dynamics in the year or two prior to someone who is considered "generational" coming up.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

I don't like rollover, because I think it would cause weird/undesirable dynamics in the year or two prior to someone who is considered "generational" coming up.

I don't know if I like it or not, but there's something to be said for the efficacy of stockpiling draft points for a decade to get someone like that and using your scouts to find good undrafted free agents, of which there would be quite a few more.

[ThisIsAnOutrage]

Originally Posted by butterfly

I don't know if I like it or not, but there's something to be said for the efficacy of stockpiling draft points for a decade to get someone like that and using your scouts to find good undrafted free agents, of which there would be quite a few more.

Did this thread loop all the way back around to discussing the original idea?

Holy farts, I didn't think that could happen.

I don"t like rollover points because I think every GM will stockpile all of the time to get a chance for the next generational player. It would have the effect of watering down the effects of the points slots system by promoting a draft system that leans heavily toward 1 point/1 player. Ie, less competitive, less steals.

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by ThisIsAnOutrage

Did this thread loop all the way back around to discussing the original idea?

Holy farts, I didn't think that could happen.

I don"t like rollover points because I think every GM will stockpile all of the time to get a chance for the next generational player. It would have the effect of watering down the effects of the points slots system by promoting a draft system that leans heavily toward 1 point/1 player. Ie, less competitive, less steals.

In fairness, that says a lot about the relative value of draft picks. Would you agree?

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by butterfly

In fairness, that says a lot about the relative value of draft picks. Would you agree?

Definitely. I think any team with a 1st rounder from say 5 down would trade a draft worth of picks for #1, and I think most years that doesn't get it done.

The ELC/RFA years of a superstar are the biggest advantage available, and those players are disproportionately found at the very top of the draft.

[ThisIsAnOutrage]

Originally Posted by butterfly

In fairness, that says a lot about the relative value of draft picks. Would you agree?

I think it speaks to relative values of players drafted. A generational player is worth how many times more than a 7th round selection. Is there even a limit? As to a generational player versus a superstar level player, I don't know where the line would be.

Would GM pass on drafting someone like Kaprizov in order to stockpile points in the hopes of landing someone like Crosby in the next year or two?

So I agree with you, yes, for the most part. I think it also speaks to how.GMs and teams might handle rebuilding in a slots/points system where points roll over year to year. The chance to stockpile points would encourage spending minimum points.in any particular draft, which would,.presumbaly, minimize stealing and creation of new slots. Hence, I don't like the roll over.