[News] BoG approves Draft lottery changes

[Locke]

Originally Posted by kn

Why can't they make both changes for 2015?

Alteration of perceived value of assets.

[Eddie Bronze]

Why not give the top pick to the first team in the standings just outside of the playoffs? Get rewarded for actually trying instead of running your team into the ground and tanking. Year after year of seeing the same team at the top gets boring, reminiscent of the Nordiques.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Eddie Bronze

Why not give the top pick to the first team in the standings just outside of the playoffs? Get rewarded for actually trying instead of running your team into the ground and tanking. Year after year of seeing the same team at the top gets boring, reminiscent of the Nordiques.

Because that's not the intent of the draft.

[Jay Random]

Originally Posted by Eddie Bronze

Why not give the top pick to the first team in the standings just outside of the playoffs?

Because then the team at the bottom has no way to improve itself. Mediocre draft picks, free agents don't want to go there, and if they had assets to trade they wouldn't be in last place. Basically, you'd be creating a pocket of suck at the bottom of the league that would stay there forever.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by The Fonz

Sounding like it'll be closer to:


Odds:
30th - 19%
29th - 16%
28th - 14%
27th - 10%
26th - 9%
25th - 8%
24th - 7%
23rd - 5%
22nd - 4%
21st - 3%
20th - 2%
19th - 1%
18th - 1%
17th - 1%

I like this, except I don't think 17-22 or so should get a shot at #1. First time one of these long shots wins after just missing the playoffs, everyone is going to say "Well, that was a dumb idea!". You shouldn't get to improve your team that much by just pure luck.

[kn]

I actually like the idea of all non-playoff teams having a chance at #1. It's just another way of ensuring tanking isn't a guarantee and rewards teams that put in effort in qualifying for the playoffs right until the bitter end.

[Hemi-Cuda]

I can't wait to see the first time a team trades their first pick at the deadline for desperate help to make the playoffs, only to miss and win the lottery. That might set the record for how fast a GM gets fired

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

^Saying "they went 4-4-2 in their last ten, so obviously not tanking" ignores the fact that that team deliberately retained lame duck coaching and management and deliberately left one of its better players unsigned and consistently played below its skill level in the first 38 games. The Avs had no business finishing as low as they did.



The intent was rather obvious, however. IIRC, it was Elliotte Friedman who reported earlier this year that several GMs were angry with how Colorado pulled off the #1 pick. Edmonton's continual failure has got to be sticking in their craw as well.

Lame duck coaching? Sacco was a Jack Adams finalist 2 years before. They wanted to hire Roy and he had a job in Quebec so they had to wait. You think they should have hired someone in a lock out season for 30 games then fire him? Doesn't make sense. O'Reilly is having contract disputes AGAIN. Get over it. Colorado didn't tank.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

The Avalanche did indeed tank. How do you explain the exact same roster (sans MaKinnon) going from 66 points (last season prorated) to 112? Either Roy is the greatest head coach in the history of the NHL and MacKinnon is Gretzky or the Avs tanked. Honestly I can't believe we are still having this discussion as it's the Avs tanking that is the main purpose the NHL is making these changes one year later.

If the only change is the coach and it wasn't the coach then what was it? The players were told to not try for one year so they could have an 18% chance at drafting McDavid and everyone agreed? LOL. Give your head a shake.

[Resolute 14]

Sacco was an Adams finalist because his goaltender single-handedly pulled the Avs into the playoffs. It had nothing to do with Sacco himself - whose hiring was roundly criticized from the day he was hired to the day he was dismissed.

And you are deluding yourself if you think an NHL team ever has to wait on a junior team to bring in the coach they want.

Colorado completely threw the season. Deal with it.

[Hackey]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Sacco was an Adams finalist because his goaltender single-handedly pulled the Avs into the playoffs. It had nothing to do with Sacco himself - whose hiring was roundly criticized from the day he was hired to the day he was dismissed.

And you are deluding yourself if you think an NHL team ever has to wait on a junior team to bring in the coach they want.

Colorado completely threw the season. Deal with it.

LOL listen to yourself. Your just making things up and trying to fit them to your story. Sacco is such a terrible coach but the Avs hired him why? All part of the master plan to land Mcdavid 3 years later? All because they wanted to tank? Yet they tried to land Roy at that time but he declined. I mean it couldn't have anything to do with him coaching their AHL team. Teams never promote from within like that. And a team that was suppose to finish last in the West makes the playoffs strictly because of their goalie. The coach had nothing to do with it. Ok ya that sounds about right. Maybe if were trying to tailor things how you'd prefer. And Roy is just going to ditch the Remparts midseason? I think he has a little more respect than that for an organization that gave him a shot and a team he had coached for the last 8 years. Maybe the Avs realized he had turned them down once before and they didn't want to ask him to just quit his current job to come coach a struggling team in a shortened lock out season. I mean that just sounds ridiculous right? But hey according to you when the Avs were suppose to finish last and made the playoffs it had nothing to do with Sacco but when they finished 29th it had everything to do with Sacco. Funny how that works.