The NHL Needs to Embrace the Gold Plan

[Itse]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Here's my question about this mindset, how little of a difference in percentages of the lottery will get you to not be conflicted? As it stands, the chances of winning the lottery really don't change a whole lot. Even if you are the very worst team, there's only a 20% of getting that spot. Yeah it's better than everyone else, but it still leaves an 80% chance of not. So what is the percentages that will get someone such as yourself to not cheer for losses? To me, those percentages are not different enough for me to care about them moving from 6th to 3rd for example.

The teams position also matters if you don't win the lottery. In fact it matters even more.

If you're 2nd before the lottery, win or lose you're drafting in the top 5.

If you're 4th before the lottery, you're still pretty likely to be in the top 5.

If you're 6th, you're probably going to draft 6th or 7th.

[Demetric]

Originally Posted by DazzlinDino

Does it matter? Some teams need incentive to try; Seems when the oilers get an injury they throw in the towel for the rest of the season (which is every year).

I would say yes, if a team tries hard all year and cannot seem to buy a win, ie not tanking and just bad, which could be the exact situation the expansion team is in, vs like you suggested a team that seems to stop trying. How do you tell the difference between the two? who makes that call?

If the real problem seems to be when the players mail it in, then, there needs to be more team based bonuses for players, every win = more $$$ in their pockets. Now that is going to get teams from mailing it in.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by Demetric

I would say yes, if a team tries hard all year and cannot seem to buy a win, ie not tanking and just bad, which could be the exact situation the expansion team is in, vs like you suggested a team that seems to stop trying. How do you tell the difference between the two? who makes that call?

If the real problem seems to be when the players mail it in, then, there needs to be more team based bonuses for players, every win = more $$$ in their pockets. Now that is going to get teams from mailing it in.

That would sink the leagues bottom dwellers, as players would have even more incentive to not sign there.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Itse

It actually seems to me that the current system might already be doing what it's supposed to.

- Winnipeg is clearly not tanking, they've collected points in 5 of their last 6 games and have just beaten three playoff teams in a row.
- Vancouver clearly isn't tanking, you don't accidentally sweep California on the road while trying to lose.
- Calgary clearly isn't tanking, we've watched the games. You don't accidentally crush two teams really close to you in standings by 4-5 goals while trying to lose.
- Edmonton most likely isn't tanking. They've just recently beaten Vancouver twice, who are one of the teams threatening to beat them to the bottom. They also beat San Jose on the road recently, which isn't easy. They just suck.
- Toronto? Yeah maybe they're tanking. But they also really did need to be blown up. Plus they've had some serious injuries.
- Columbus? Maybe, don't know. They've won 2 out of last three including a 5-1 whooping of Toronto.

So at worst I think you have like 1-2 teams that are tanking, which means it doesn't seem to be much of an issue.

The problem is really just Edmonton always winning the damned lottery. That, and having to feel ambiguous about your team winning.

The latter is the main reason why I would like the 1-14 positions just be randomized. The draft position race just bugs me, I don't want it to be a thing at all.

I've always thought maybe a system where last years draft height should count against this years might be good, give teams say 14 balls for a lowest finish but then take way the number of balls you got for the previous year, so if you drew 3rd the year before you'd lose 12 balls etc.

[Jason14h]

when is a team tanking vs just really really bad?

When it's not your team!

Flames trade Hudler and Russell = Asset Management
Sabres trade players = Tanking!

[Jason14h]

If the real problem seems to be when the players mail it in, then, there needs to be more team based bonuses for players, every win = more $$$ in their pockets. Now that is going to get teams from mailing it in.

If players are mailing it in any good organization would ensure these players are out of a job the next season.

[Jason14h]

The teams position also matters if you don't win the lottery. In fact it matters even more.

If you're 2nd before the lottery, win or lose you're drafting in the top 5.

If you're 4th before the lottery, you're still pretty likely to be in the top 5.

If you're 6th, you're probably going to draft 6th or 7th.

This is the biggest issue. The lottery should be a true lottery for the full draft for all non playoff teams. Odd's seem fairly fine, but the 1st team should be able to drop to any pick, not the max 3 down

[Demetric]

Originally Posted by Itse

That would sink the leagues bottom dwellers, as players would have even more incentive to not sign there.

is that any different that it is now?

Other than they might be able to pay more as they likely dont have big names there already?

[mrkajz44]

Only skimmed the thread here but:

This new lottery system works out pretty well in my opinion. What it does is give poor teams a good chance to draft high, but doing a complete "tank" doesn't really guarantee anything.

-If you finish last, you will be no worse than 4th. So trying your best to come in last doesn't mean 1st or 2nd overall now, but you still get a great player
-If you finish around 4th-6th last, you have the opportunity to get some top picks, but if you don't, you are not likely to get bumped too far
-Anything further than that, you still have a shot at getting top 3, so there is no point to try and tank because what's the difference between 6% vs 8.5% really?

So bad teams still get good players, which they need, but they are not a lock for a top guy. Slightly better teams still have a shot at a top pick, but don't need to try and lose to increase their chances.

[Dan403]

Originally Posted by Alberta_Beef

I think this is an absolutely stupid idea. All it will do is have teams throwing in the towel at Christmas rather than the deadline just so they have more time to accumulate points.

But those teams STILL have to WIN games.

[CliffFletcher]

The whole point of the draft is to ensure the best prospects go to the worst teams, so the worst teams don't fold or relocate and damage the investment of every owner in the league. It's not about the fans. It's about the owners and their investments.

[getbak]

The problems with this idea are multiple (and mostly have already been mentioned), the biggest one is that teams generally aren't mathematically eliminated until very late in the season. While it might eliminate fans cheering for losses in the last 5-10 games of the season, it would just make it worse in the first 72-77 games.

Look at what Columbus did last year, they were really out of the hunt for a long time, but still went on a ridiculous winning streak to end the season. Because of those wins, they didn't officially get eliminated until very late in the season. You want to rewards teams for winning down the stretch, but would punish teams that won down the stretch, but started winning too soon.


The other major problem is that this would hurt the trade deadline. Teams would be torn between trading away players to playoff contenders for picks & prospects or holding on to them for post-elimination points.

[Itse]

Originally Posted by mrkajz44

Only skimmed the thread here but:

This new lottery system works out pretty well in my opinion. What it does is give poor teams a good chance to draft high, but doing a complete "tank" doesn't really guarantee anything.

I agree that it's not completely terrible and a clear improvement over previous ones.

-Anything further than that, you still have a shot at getting top 3, so there is no point to try and tank because what's the difference between 6% vs 8.5% really?

This part actually isn't true. The difference between Ottawa (8.3% chance for a top 3 pick) and Winnipeg (23.5% chance) is 7 points. A serious tankjob would easily make up that difference. It's would also take you from 12th in draft to 6th in draft. Those spots are easy to drop too, because your competitors aren't actually terrible teams.

Trying to lose more than the Oilers and other bottom-dwellers on the other hand is so hard that most teams just aren't going to bother.

The reason why a teams don't do this is that the playoff line is also close in the other direction. But from a draft perspective it would absolutely be worth it.

[JonDuke]

Originally Posted by TheScorpion

...

This system still rewards the worse teams, because they're eliminated from the playoff race earlier and have more time to accumulate points. However, it also encourages winning. The Gold Plan would provide an incentive for fans to cheer for their teams' success. We wouldn't need to feel mixed emotions after crushing the Canucks; we'd have increased the gap between us and them in the Gold Plan race.
...

Mixed emotions? Ain't nobody got time for that.
I hope each and every fan was ecstatic to embarrass the Canucks.

[PeteMoss]

The main benefit is that a game like yesterday against Vancouver, you no longer feel conflicted about the Flames winning. You want to win every possible game.

Even with the new odds - you're still incentivized to lose against Vancouver yesterday even its only a 5% swing, its still a swing.

EDIT: also lol at Scorpion pretending he didn't pull this exact idea off the internet somehwere that pulled it from that Down Goes Brown post.

[Savvy27]

Okay here are the draft standings as of today under the Gold Plan:
1. Sabres
2. Maple Leafs
3. Jets
4. Flames
5. Canadiens
6. Canucks
7. Oilers
8. Blue Jackets
9. Coyotes
10. Senators
11. Hurricanes
12. Devils

Detailed standings in spoiler tag.

Spoiler!

Anyways, I'm curious to see what people say. The Sabres vs. Blue Jackets game on right now would be more interesting if they were able to lock down first overall with a win. Too bad.

p.s. I think that this is accurate. I used the DownGoesBrown numbers from his article on Monday and included the games that happened that night.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by PeteMoss

EDIT: also lol at Scorpion pretending he didn't pull this exact idea off the internet somehwere that pulled it from that Down Goes Brown post.

I never said it was my idea. I’ve said twice in this exact thread that this is Adam Gold’s idea, which got ramped up by McIndoe. I just hadn’t read McIndoe’s latest article.

[Finger Cookin]

This shouldn't be implemented -- but if it was, the easiest way to get around the "points accumulated after elimination" problem in this proposed system is to use points percentage. A team who got 10 points in 6 games (.833) after being eliminated would get a better pick than a team who got 15 points in 12 games (.625) after being eliminated.

But the current system is fine as it is. No changes are necessary, and no changes should be made.

[TheScorpion]

Originally Posted by Finger Cookin

This shouldn't be implemented -- but if it was, the easiest way to get around the "points accumulated after elimination" problem in this proposed system is to use points percentage. A team who got 10 points in 6 games (.833) after being eliminated would get a better pick than a team who got 15 points in 12 games (.625) after being eliminated.

But the current system is fine as it is. No changes are necessary.

What if you had a team that got 2 points in 1 game?

[Finger Cookin]

Congratulations, they get the #1 pick. Unless more than one team won out the string after being eliminated. Then they send their five best prospects to compete against the other teams, Hunger Games style. Winner gets the spoils.