Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

chayne

A new look at the NHL Draft- Great Read

34 posts in this topic

I love this!

Should the NHL ban the draft lottery?

By Greg Wyshynski | Puck Daddy – 23 hours ago

Say, have you heard of Connor McDavid?

He’s THE NEXT ONE, after Sidney Crosby and Eric Lindros were THE NEXT ONEs before him. He’s the Canadian major junior ice hockey player with preposterous talent, vision, skills and potential. Put him on a struggling franchise, and it’s like terra-forming a barren planet. At least, in theory.

So it’s expected that the 2014-15 season, after which McDavid can be drafted, will feature more tanks than a parade in Red Square. Teams will be falling over themselves in a race to the bottom. It’s possible the best team in the NHL will have 164 points, standing proudly as the only one that wants to win anything that season.

Of course, the NHL’s fail-safe for teams throwing their seasons is the draft lottery, which was instituted in 1993 after the Ottawa Senators tanked for Alexander Daigle. (Who knew the NHL just needed to wait for karma to do her thing?) The format called for the bottom four teams to have a chance at No. 1 overall, although it was tweaked to allow all 30 teams a shot at Crosby after the 2005 lockout. Under the new CBA, all non-playoff teams have a chance to win the top pick, but their odds dramatically increase as their number of wins decrease.

The question is whether it’s time to reinvent the wheel on the Draft Lottery.

It’s the question being asked in the NBA, according to Zach Lowe of Grantland. From his piece on the new lottery-scrapping format that's being considered by the Association:

Grantland obtained a copy of the proposal, which would eliminate the draft lottery entirely and replace it with a system in which each of the 30 teams would pick in a specific first-round draft slot once — and exactly once — every 30 years. Each team would simply cycle through the 30 draft slots, year by year, in a predetermined order designed so that teams pick in different areas of the draft each year. Teams would know with 100 percent certainty in which draft slots they would pick every year, up to 30 years out from the start of every 30-year cycle. The practice of protecting picks would disappear; there would never be a Harrison Barnes–Golden State situation again, and it wouldn’t require a law degree to track ownership of every traded pick leaguewide.

… Put another way: The team that gets the no. 1 pick in the very first year of this proposed system would draft in the following slots over the system's first six seasons: 1st, 30th, 19th, 18th, 7th, 6th. Just follow the wheel around clockwise to see the entire 30-year pick cycle of each team, depending on their starting spoke in Year 1.

Here's "The Wheel"to better understand it. It’s a game-changer, obviously, and a move that revolutionize the way teams build teams.

At the very least, Brian Burke would love it.

The pros are obvious: The end of the traditional draft format means the end of teams being in a race to the bottom. It would incentivize teams to remain competitive, to not gut their rosters for the sake of high draft choices.

It would also turn the first overall pick into something tangible during the season. Could you imagine the top pick, guaranteed to be in one team’s possession, being in play at the trade deadline with not lottery protections?

(From a marketing standpoint, you could award the NHL Draft to whichever team owns the top pick that season, too.)

The cons? Well, this is a bit like kicking a guy begging for a dollar on the street, isn’t it?

The draft exists as a mechanism to get “amateur” players into the professional ranks in an equitable manner. And equitable means that teams that need to turn their fortunes around are given a chance at drafting foundational players for that turnaround: The Pittsburgh posse, John Tavares, Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews, Alex Ovechkin and Steven Stamkos, to name a few.

In a league where parity is paramount, where even the losers get a point in the standings in overtime, does it make sense to allow the rich to get richer just to ensure the poor aren’t inflicting this pain on themselves on purpose?

There is, after all, something to be said for the power of dynastic teams when it comes to a sport’s popularity. (See: Yankees, Bulls, Steelers and Cowboys of the 1970s, Montreal Canadiens.)

The NHL has a long tradition of borrowing from the NBA, be it the draft lottery or Gary Bettman. If the NBA went in this direction, “the wheel” couldn’t be implemented until all of the league’s currently traded draft picks had been used. It’s years away. But in the meantime, it presents an interesting moral debate for fans of all sports:

Should the meek be rewarded, or does the draft format corrupt more than it encourages?

More to the point: What would your reaction be if the Chicago Blackhawks were already promised the top pick in the Connor McDavid draft, just because it was their year

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a way to kill off the teams in bad markets. I can't imagine the NHL wanting to do this.

But if they ever would do it, I can already see Vancouver being no where near getting a first overall pick in the next 20 years. It would have to turn out something like Phoenix, Columbus, Florida, NYI etc. etc. for the NHL to want it to happen. There is better odds with these teams getting the pick how things currently are then there would be with this new proposed system.

Very good read though!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current system is fine in my opinion. Since the changes they have made post lockout, every non-playoff team has a chance at 1st. It has significantly reduced the chances of picking 1st while finishing in 30th place.

This rotating system just seems like a lot of trouble as it will likely cause imbalance. The worst teams should be able to pick the best players so that they have shot at improving their team. It doesn't make sense that a team like the Hawks or Bruins could potentially end up picking another superstar while Buffalo continues to suck.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting theory if nothing else.

Case in point, Pitts would have drafted Crosby and then dropped to the 30 spot the following year. Canucks could draft 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 and then 30th.

I myself appreciate the idea, the league would never allow this because then how would teams that get really high top 10 draft picks every single year be competitive. I mean how would Florida, New York, Edmonton, Buffalo ever be in the tight races they are right now for playoff spots if they couldn't get multiple 1st round picks in the top 10?

Oh yeah...wait....

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno. Imagine being 10th in the first draft.... Then having a top 10 pick for 10 straight years... I dont think this system would work.... Basically I feel that what ever teams fall in the 20-30 range for the 1st draft would get screwed for a decade or two.

My idea is that you keep the system the same, except every team that lands the 1st overall cannot draft in the top 3 spots for the following 3 drafts.

This would help to eliminate rewarding teams for their complete failure. You get the #1, then the best you can do for 3 more years is 4th. This would mean that there would be 3 teams every season that would not be able to get inside the top 3, dispite their possible failure, and allow for some of those middling teams that have bottom 10 finishes to move higher up into the top 3 selections. Also with this format, you might see the trading of that #1 pick to teams whom arent worried about finishing in the bottom 3, and therefore have no concern for the 3 year draft penalty.

At the end of the day, I absolutely hate when teams build their team of superstars by failing the best.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much simpler would be to reverse the order of the teams that don't make the playoffs, with the team that missed out the most narrowly getting the 1st pick, all the way down to Edmonton getting the 14th pick, and then continue as normal.

It'd be nice to see the Canucks with a high pick at some point: The last 5 single digit picks we've had are #9 Horvat (by trade), #2 Sedin (by trade), #3 Sedin, #4 Allen and #7 Stojanov.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one thing this will do is add a specific value to each teams 1st round pick. Since the team trading for it will exactly know what number the pick will be.

I do think in trade talks the 1st rd pick's overall value will go down. Without the uncertainty what the pick could be teams will ask for more in trade for example. If this was implemented before the Kessel to TO trade. Brian Burke's 2 1st round picks and 1 2nd pick would not be enough if they were say 20-30 picks.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love it if this system was put into place.

Teams shouldn't be rewarded for failure anyway. Just think, Pittsburgh would have one of Crosby and Malkin, Chicago would have one of Kane and Toews. Instead both teams now have Stanley Cups.

Of course the league would never do this, as it would stop them from saving struggling franchises.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the people who didn't look at the link for "The Wheel" it doesnt go 1-30-29-28-27 etc. it goes 1-30-19-18-7-6-25-23-14-11-2......

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but teams never tank though. Isn't that right, Cdc braintrust?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, but teams never tank though. Isn't that right, Cdc braintrust?

I can't see any team purposely tanking unless they know they're out of the playoffs 100%.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha that's not how the draft even works. Stopped reading when they explained how the draft worked to get the first overall.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. Not a fan. I don't think this would be a good idea in anyway. Especially because a team that could win the Stanley cup could also get the first overall. I don't think there is anything wrong with how it is now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best spot to start would be 16. 16 - 9 - 4, 27, 24, 13, 12 ,1 would be pretty sick first years of the draft, 6 out 8 years picking inside the top 16 concluding with first overall.

going by this from 2008 the team would have selected:

Joe Colborne

Jared Cowen

Ryan Johansen

Vladislav Namestnikov

Henrik Samuelson

Josh Morrissey

Kasperi Kapanen (for the 12 spot this year maybe?)

Connor McDavid in 2015.

Not bad for just the first rounders.

Alternativly 18 7 6 25 23 14 11 2 up to last years draft would look like

Chris Stewart.

Jakub Voracek

Colin Wilson

Jordan Caron

Mark Pysyk

Jamie Oleksiak

Filip Forsberg

Barkov

These are fun by the way haha.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also Every time I look at the 2006 draft it hurts. Could have had Giroux, Berglund, or Foligno in our lineup instead of trading grabner and buying out ballard...

Giroux!!! Common, or even Lucic.

What ever can't win em all.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A 30-team lottery for McDavid would definetly be interesting.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.