How to Fix the NHL’s Disastrous Tanking Situation (Grantland)

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

Is Buffalo really having a 20% chance at first pick a bad thing?

Is anyone going to argue Buff, Edm, Phoenix, Toronto are all hideous and need major talent upgrades?

Who cares HOW hideous they are. If each had kept all their players (terrible asset management) they would still be hideous.

NO WAY does a team finishing 9th or 10th deserve the same shot at #1.

How would we have felt the last 2 drafts if we ended up with picks 10 or 11? How would we be without Monahan?

Or Bennett

[nfotiu]

I generally support the flattened odds that take away the incentive to tank. But I don't know that it sits right that you can improve so much just by lucky chance. How's everyone going to like the system if LA finishes 9th this year with 96 points and ends up with McDavid? All it takes is one long shot to win one of these years, and everyone will say, "Well, that was a dumb idea".

That's why I like the auction idea. All strategy, and no lotteries involved.

[skudr248]

I don't like how Team A say is eliminated with 20 games remaining and Team B is eliminated with 10 games giving Team A more time to get more points. Theorhetically I like the idea, but it should be a Win/Lose Percentage after elimination out of playoffs (OTL can be like 0.5 for example, or even 0). This would make more sense to me, I don't know just a thought to consider

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by JiriHrdina

Next year's system largely solves it. More than that, it is years when you have a guy like McDavid that this always seems to come up - I don't know if outside that it is really much of an issue.

This year is even more unusual because there are two franchise players available. Does anyone think the Sabres and Coyotes would be tanking like this if their likely reward for finishing in last place was Noah Hanafin or Mitch Marner?

Starting next season, a team finishing last will potentially drop four spots. There won't be nearly the incentive to tank.

Originally Posted by Frequitude

Next year's change merely decreases the incentive to lose, but the incentive is still there. Lower teams have a better shot at the top picks than higher teams.

Giving lower teams a better shot at the top picks is the whole point of the draft. It's a model put in place by the owners to put star players into struggling markets.

[DoubleF]

I like the Gold system. But I would tweak it slightly to even the playing field. The points would only start accumulating let's say for ALL teams a little after the trade deadline rather than mathematical elimination (or would activate for all teams once a single team is eliminated). It doesn't makes sense for a team to have a head start.

This might have the effect of bubble teams being great forever though. This might be fixed by taking the Gold's system and attaching a lottery to it?

Unless I misread how his system works.

[Cappy]

Love this:

https://twitter.com/DownGoesBrown/st...66083839614976

[cral12]

Originally Posted by Cappy

Love this:

https://twitter.com/DownGoesBrown/st...66083839614976

Classic DGB!

[Southside]

This tanking is serious business. Do not have fun with it.

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-...oke-deletes-it

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Southside

This tanking is serious business. Do not have fun with it.

http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/eye-on-...oke-deletes-it

That's great. Boo on the league for having it removed.

[shogged]

I'd go with relegation, but obviously that would never happen in North America.

[Southside]

Tank top with sweat pants combo all the rage in Edmonton.

[ben voyonsdonc]

This is my idea:

Have two lotteries.

1) Have 14 balls in a bag which go from 1-14. This lottery will determine how many of the bottom teams will have the highest percentage of winning the draft lottery. If the number 1 is picked, then the worst team will be the only team with the highest odds. If number 2 is picked, the two worst teams will get the highest odds. This would go all the way to number 14 and, in that case, all fourteen teams will have the same odds.
2) The true draft lottery will use the odds based on the first lottery to pick the first overall pick or could be used to pick the top 3 or 5.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I would favour a rule that teams couldn't get more than one nos 1 pick per 5 or 10 years, to stop perennial tanking, it could be called the Katzing Lowe rule.

I would do a control systems analysis on draft pick vs. finish, and use the resulting to formula. Then apply some noise (effectively, a lottery) to disincentivise tanking. It would be very math intensive and obscure to fans, but I believe also very fair - teams that would be expected to improve on the basis of previous years' draft positions would be penalized in further drafts.