Proposed Overhaul Of The NBA Draft Would Eliminate Tanking. Should NHL consider?

[bubbsy]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think it does.

Look at LA's rebuild. They were in the cellar for a decade. Pittsburgh, Boston and Chicago obviously. Islanders made the playoffs last year, Florida won the division in 2012.

There is obviously only one cup but the bad teams are improving. It's still tough to make the playoffs (16/30) and if there is mismanagement, a team falls back a few years. In the Oilers case, forever.

even in the best case scenarios, teams had to be in the dump for practically a decade. This type of system would force a garbage team to manage their roster's better, and use avenues like the trade market and free agency to improve themselves. Florida is an example of that, where that 2012 year, they were extremely active in bringing in secondary pieces to fillout their roster. The islanders, blue jackets, oilers, are teams that have drafted high for how many years over the past 5 years, and the teams that used other avenues like FAs and trades are the ones that actually turned things around (just look at the BJs for that).

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by bubbsy

even in the best case scenarios, teams had to be in the dump for practically a decade. This type of system would force a garbage team to manage their roster's better, and use avenues like the trade market and free agency to improve themselves. Florida is an example of that, where that 2012 year, they were extremely active in bringing in secondary pieces to fillout their roster. The islanders, blue jackets, oilers, are teams that have drafted high for how many years over the past 5 years, and the teams that used other avenues like FAs and trades are the ones that actually turned things around (just look at the BJs for that).

But no one is ever going to Edmonton or Columbus (or many other cities) as a free agent. Teams that suck, in cities that players don't want to live in, are pretty much entirely screwed from getting free agents without massive overpays, which in a cap league, prevents you from adding depth of talent, which is what you need to win (see Chicago, Boston, Pittsburgh, LA, Anaheim etc...).

The Oilers and Blue Jackets and Jets of the world, they need the draft as a means of getting high end talent. Once you have established a winning culture, then you have a chance at getting free agents. And if the only way you can get high end talent is the draft, and if you change the draft so that it prevents them from doing that, you're pretty much dooming these franchises to permanent irrelevancy. Very, very difficult to grow a sport (which is what leagues truly want) when a large portion of teams are consistently in a hopeless state.

Besides, the Oilers, the Clippers, the Browns, every league has teams that tried for years to tank to win. And only the Clippers escaped and only that was due to NBA intervention (the Chris Paul trade). Tanking doesn't ensure anything, and usually builds a culture of losing.

[Skaloper]

The answer is as soon as you are mathematically eliminated you start earning points toward your draft pick based on your performance in the remaining games. This gives the worst teams a huge edge as they start accumulating points before teams ahead of them but teams that tank toward the end of the season once they know they are out of it are not rewarded they still need to get points to better their draft position. The tie-breaking category would then look at the overall standings.

It might also help to include the last 10 games played since before they were officially eliminated to avoid situations where teams could "Tank" to get points sooner

Only negative in this design is that teams would not be as likely to call up young players for try-outs.

[GirlySports]

but the Islanders rebuild nicely, make the playoffs and then make trades like the Moulson one... you can't legislate stupid.

[photon]

I like that teams could 100% try to improve all the time. Right now there's trades the Flames maybe could make but wouldn't because it doesn't make sense to try and earn 10 extra points in the standings and hurt your draft position (or at least you have to ask the question). With fixed draft positions, all teams don't have to ask the question.

[Jacks]

Posted this back in April.
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...8&postcount=83

Originally Posted by Jacks

There are 14 teams that don't make the playoffs. Make the first 14 picks lottery picks with the following formula.

56 balls
29 & 30 - 7 balls = 12.5%
27 & 28 - 6 balls = 10.7%
25 & 26 - 5 balls = 8.9%
23 & 24 - 4 balls = 7.1%
21 & 22 - 3 balls = 5.4%
19 & 20 - 2 balls = 3.6%
17 & 18 - 1 ball = 1.8%

If team 27 wins the first pick then team 29 & 30's odds of getting pick 2 increase to 14% each and so on. Winning some games and moving from the 26th spot to the 23rd spot only increases your odds by 1.8%. No real reason to tank yet the worst teams are still favored to get the best picks.

You could also subtract 1 ball from the team that picked first the previous year(s). If either team 17 or 18 picked first last year then they automatically are awarded pick 18, etc.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think it does.

Look at LA's rebuild. They were in the cellar for a decade. Pittsburgh, Boston and Chicago obviously. Islanders made the playoffs last year, Florida won the division in 2012.

There is obviously only one cup but the bad teams are improving. It's still tough to make the playoffs (16/30) and if there is mismanagement, a team falls back a few years. In the Oilers case, forever.

Law of averages dictates that bad teams generally get better and the good teams get worse. There doesn't seem to be much of a reason to suspect it has something to do with the draft. Also, Florida and the Islanders suck again. Their passing non-suckage seems more like by-product of the overall weakness of the Eastern conference than anything else. A blip on the radar when it comes to the big picture.

Also, LA and Chicago are both teams that not only drafted high, but drafted a lot.

[photon]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

The Oilers and Blue Jackets and Jets of the world, they need the draft as a means of getting high end talent. Once you have established a winning culture, then you have a chance at getting free agents. And if the only way you can get high end talent is the draft, and if you change the draft so that it prevents them from doing that, you're pretty much dooming these franchises to permanent irrelevancy. Very, very difficult to grow a sport (which is what leagues truly want) when a large portion of teams are consistently in a hopeless state.

Maybe, though it doesn't prevent teams from getting high end talent in the draft, it just means they can't amass them year after year.

But I get your point (as well as the point about draft eligibility, agree there).

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Itse

Law of averages dictates that bad teams generally get better and the good teams get worse. There doesn't seem to be much of a reason to suspect it has something to do with the draft. Also, Florida and the Islanders suck again. Their passing non-suckage seems more like testament of the overall weakness of the Eastern conference than anything else. A blip on the radar when it comes to the big picture.

Also, LA and Chicago are both teams that not only drafted high, but drafted a lot.

sure they made good deals in order to draft a lot.

With this wheel system you wouldn't get many trades. Burke would never trade for Kessel if he knew that both of those picks would be high.

I like that there is an element of chance and if a team is delusional and trades away picks when they suck, then they suck.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Jacks

Posted this back in April.
http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpos...8&postcount=83

I did this!

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthread.php?t=133259

[puckluck2]

News is beginning to reach Edmonton..

[FlamesAddiction]

I don't think tanking is an issue. My issue is that the badly managed teams are rewarded for their bad management. Those same teams tend to often rush and mismanage the top prospects that they are rewarded with. It's really not good for anyone.

With the parity brought in by the salary cap and the standings parity created by loser points, I think the line between the teams that are legitimately talent deprived and those that simply don't know how to build a team, is a really blurry line. For example, did Colorado really need the 1st overall pick last draft more than the Flames? Anyone who knows anything about hockey could tell you that Colorado's problem was not a lack of high-end young talent, and the fact that the Flames finished higher in the standings was not due to having more talent.

Having said that, I still prefer a weighted draft that favours non-playoff teams. Even though the line is blurry, there is still a line there somewhere.

I think the NHL took the right step in at least acknowledging last year that the draft system was obsolete, but I don't think they went far enough to correct it.

[AcGold]

I like the idea of getting points specifically towards the draft, make it so if Edmonton beats Chicago they get a huge boost in getting a better draft spot. That way bottom feeders will play like it's the finals to get a better draft spot so that if you tank you do actually tank.

[jeffman]

I don't like the idea of the Canucks getting first overall every 5 years unless it is preceded by the dismantling of their team due to suckiness

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by AcGold

I like the idea of getting points specifically towards the draft, make it so if Edmonton beats Chicago they get a huge boost in getting a better draft spot. That way bottom feeders will play like it's the finals to get a better draft spot so that if you tank you do actually tank.

hmmm another 3 columns in the standings?

[Badgers Nose]

I love this NBA idea!

It's the only way an honourable club like the Flames will ever pick first IMO.

[TurnedTheCorner]

What happens under this proposed system if the league expands?

Changing the draft system would be bad for the game, as it would make comparing modern tank jobs against tank jobs from prior eras more difficult. /purist

[lazypucker]

How about instead of the league equally distributing money to the teams, have a prize money structure instead? The Stanley Cup champ gets the most money, then the finalist, and so on, and the last-placed team will get the least prize money.

The $$$ incentive may help avoid teams to purposely suck.

[Mister Yamoto]

Have all of the teams that miss the playoffs play in a short tournament. The tournament of losers. The winning team gets the first overall pick.

[Erick Estrada]

The NBA has the worst tanking issue in professional sports so I can see why they are looking at this. The NHL doesn't have the same degree of obvious tanking but it's getting worse as we saw the Predators, Flames, Avalanche, Hurricanes all purposely tank to a degree last season. I would like to see that if a team picks top 5 for two years straight that they be relegated to picking in the teens if they finish bottom 10 in year 3. I think everyone is getting tired of seeing the same group of teams pick top five almost every season as it's just not good for the sport or fans of those teams.

I think the allure of a top five pick takes pressure off coaching staff and management to go all out and try and win games down the stretch as getting a high pick probably outweighs needless points at the end of the season but that's bad for the fans and the league to watch non-competitive teams like we saw in the last month of the season as some teams in particular were disgusting with their lack of compete.