Gator Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 I understand the anti tank system but I feel it's a little too anti tank and can create a lot of problems for teams trying to catch their rivals. Example of this would be the Oilers or Blackhawks getting Dahlin. Could you imagine? I mean, wow, talk about unfair. HOW IT IS CURRENTLY Points vs. No. 1 overall % vs. top three % Buffalo Sabres 62 points 18.5% 49.4% Ottawa Senators 67 points 13.5% 38.8% Arizona Coyotes 70 points 11.5% 33.9% Montreal Canadiens 71 points 9.5% 28.8% Detroit Red Wings 73 points 8.5% 26.1% Vancouver Canucks 73 points 7.5% 23.3% Chicago Blackhawks 76 points 6.5% 20.4% New York Rangers 77 points 6.0% 19.0% Edmonton Oilers 78 points 5.0% 16.0% New York Islanders 80 points 3.5% 11.4% Carolina Hurricanes 83 points 3.0% 9.9% New York Islanders (via Flames) 84 points 2.5% 8.2% Dallas Stars 92 points 2.0% 6.6% Philadelphia Flyers (via Blues) 94 points 1.5% 5.0% Florida Panthers 96 points 1.0% 3.3% HOW I THINK IT SHOULD BE Points vs. No. 1 overall % vs. top three % Buffalo Sabres 62 points 16.0% 50.0% Ottawa Senators 67 points 15.0% 45.0% Arizona Coyotes 70 points 14.0% 40.0% Montreal Canadiens 71 points 12.5% 35.0% Detroit Red Wings 73 points 10.5% 30.0% Vancouver Canucks 73 points 9.0% 25.0% Chicago Blackhawks 76 points 6.5% 20.0% New York Rangers 77 points 5.0% 15.0% Edmonton Oilers 78 points 3.5% 13.0% New York Islanders 80 points 2.5% 10.0% Carolina Hurricanes 83 points 1.5% 1.5% New York Islanders (via Flames) 84 points 1.0% 1.0% Dallas Stars 92 points 1.0% 1.0% Philadelphia Flyers (via Blues) 94 points 1.0% 1.0% Florida Panthers 96 points 1.0% 1.0% Every team will get a shot at 1st OA but it lessens the odds a very good team that just had a bad year adds a generational talent like McDavid/Dahlin to their roster. Also picks 2 & 3 will be drawn for but only the 10 worst teams will be eligible for those picks. The reason I like this is it doesn't scream I want to tank to the bottom but at the same time it helps to keep generational players going to teams that should need them rather tan going to cup contenders like the Blackhawks and Oilers. Do you like the idea of the change? EDIT: how about this idea. The bottom 8 teams get a shot at first overall and the top 3 picks. 1 - 15% 2 - 15% 3 - 13% 4 - 13% 5 - 11.5% 6 - 11.5% 7 - 10.5% 8 - 10.5% ----------------- If you win or trade for 1st OA: you are ineligible to get a top 3 pick for 3 years. If you win or trade for 2nd OA: you are ineligible to get a top 3 pick for 2 years. If you win or trade for 3rd OA: you are ineligible to win a top 3 pick for 1 year. You can trade for multiple 1st OA picks but your are just not eligible to win that pick if you had a top 3 pick in the previous year. If your team is for sure going to be bad next year and there's a generational talent in next year's draft, then maybe you are better off trading this top 3 pick so you are eligable to try and get that generational talent in the next draft. Then maybe have a shootout tournament between remaining teams for picks 4+. Create some more excitement for the fans of eliminated teams. It might confuse some people and I know it's a reach but I kind of like this way a lot. I know it'll never happen though lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bp79 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 Just go back to the old way. last gets first so on and so on. In the end, the worst team most likely will finish last with the parody we have now anyway. Why should a team like Buff this year only have an 18% chance at a player that may forever turn their franchise around While a team like the Blues who missed by what 2 points who just had an off year have Have a chance at Dahlin?. If they insist on a lotto make it the 3 worst teams. and give the worst team a 50% chance At least if they lose they still get a top 3 pick. And if a team is caught tanking impose severe sanctions so no other team will try it again. When was the last time a team tried to circumvent the cap? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 The problem with this is that it encourages the tank. I'm pretty sure the rules were changed precisely to try to ensure we don't see teams intentionally tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucker 67 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 I wish they'd go back to the old way, but make this change: - if a team gets a Top 3 pick, the highest they can pick is 4th the following year. (eg.) EDM (#1), ARI (#2), BUF (#3), these teams will have to pick from #4-on the next Draft, even if they finish in the bottom 3 again. The idea is that teams cannot pick in the Top 3 two years in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete M Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 Lotto change 1 to 5...roll the dice for those positions 7 to 10...roll the dice for those positions 11 to 15...roll the dice for those positions Bottom 6, if you look at this year, are very close in points...any of those teams could/ should be picking #1 overall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 5 hours ago, bp79 said: Just go back to the old way. last gets first so on and so on. In the end, the worst team most likely will finish last with the parody we have now anyway. Why should a team like Buff this year only have an 18% chance at a player that may forever turn their franchise around While a team like the Blues who missed by what 2 points who just had an off year have Have a chance at Dahlin?. If they insist on a lotto make it the 3 worst teams. and give the worst team a 50% chance At least if they lose they still get a top 3 pick. And if a team is caught tanking impose severe sanctions so no other team will try it again. When was the last time a team tried to circumvent the cap? you are correct. .it is a bit of a parody and the reason why buffalo should not necessarily have that advantage is that your built in assumption is in fact incorrect as we have seen with edmonton giving a bottom team a so called chance to turn their organization around has not in fact worked the chance is squandered and the given team is again at the table seeking another chance and another chance and gobbles up too many of the chances which creates an unfairness to the other teams this becomes even more irritating when that given team appears to then create as a goal the desire to achieve more chances and attempts to remain a bottom team so a distortion is created and the original goal of the old process has been twisted by the bottom teams that squander these chances this then begins to remind me of the story "the boy who cried wolf" and at some point these bottom franchises' needs simply need to be ignored and others who have not squandered assets be given a chance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bp79 Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 8 minutes ago, coastal.view said: you are correct. .it is a bit of a parody and the reason why buffalo should not necessarily have that advantage is that your built in assumption is in fact incorrect as we have seen with edmonton giving a bottom team a so called chance to turn their organization around has not in fact worked the chance is squandered and the given team is again at the table seeking another chance and another chance and gobbles up too many of the chances which creates an unfairness to the other teams this becomes even more irritating when that given team appears to then create as a goal the desire to achieve more chances and attempts to remain a bottom team so a distortion is created and the original goal of the old process has been twisted by the bottom teams that squander these chances this then begins to remind me of the story "the boy who cried wolf" and at some point these bottom franchises' needs simply need to be ignored and others who have not squandered assets be given a chance I think Edmonton is the exception, not the rule. Look at the Pens The Hawks. The Pens may have been relocated if it werent for the great 66. And the Hawks were so irrelevant they didn't even have a local tv deal. That being said I do see your point. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal.view Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 1 minute ago, bp79 said: I think Edmonton is the exception, not the rule. Look at the Pens The Hawks. The Pens may have been relocated if it werent for the great 66. And the Hawks were so irrelevant they didn't even have a local tv deal. That being said I do see your point. Cheers. no they are not buffalo is a prime example as well and the pitts example is equally a distortion it is the clearest example in nhl history of a team distorting the process and intentionally tanking to get lemieux toronto is another good and very recent example intentional tank and got matthews why should an organization which had been crappy so long with so many resources available to it be rewarded in the manner it was due to intentionally distorting the purpose of the draft it is a parody in that it makes the draft system comical and makes people laugh at the nhl draft system since it lacks integrity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heretic Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 How about penalty percentage of the top 3 picks based on previous last 10 year draft picks? 1st = -5% 2nd = -3% 3rd = -1% That would make it impossible for a team like Edmonton to get so many 1st's. If you are at 0 = you can't move up in the current draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sbriggs Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 10 hours ago, Brock Botanen said: I understand the anti tank system but I feel it's a little too anti tank and can create a lot of problems for teams trying to catch their rivals. Example of this would be the Oilers or Blackhawks getting Dahlin. Could you imagine? I mean, wow, talk about unfair. HOW IT IS CURRENTLY Points vs. No. 1 overall % vs. top three % Buffalo Sabres 62 points 18.5% 49.4% Ottawa Senators 67 points 13.5% 38.8% Arizona Coyotes 70 points 11.5% 33.9% Montreal Canadiens 71 points 9.5% 28.8% Detroit Red Wings 73 points 8.5% 26.1% Vancouver Canucks 73 points 7.5% 23.3% Chicago Blackhawks 76 points 6.5% 20.4% New York Rangers 77 points 6.0% 19.0% Edmonton Oilers 78 points 5.0% 16.0% New York Islanders 80 points 3.5% 11.4% Carolina Hurricanes 83 points 3.0% 9.9% New York Islanders (via Flames) 84 points 2.5% 8.2% Dallas Stars 92 points 2.0% 6.6% Philadelphia Flyers (via Blues) 94 points 1.5% 5.0% Florida Panthers 96 points 1.0% 3.3% HOW I THINK IT SHOULD BE Points vs. No. 1 overall % vs. top three % Buffalo Sabres 62 points 16.0% 50.0% Ottawa Senators 67 points 15.0% 45.0% Arizona Coyotes 70 points 14.0% 40.0% Montreal Canadiens 71 points 12.5% 35.0% Detroit Red Wings 73 points 10.5% 30.0% Vancouver Canucks 73 points 9.0% 25.0% Chicago Blackhawks 76 points 6.5% 20.0% New York Rangers 77 points 5.0% 15.0% Edmonton Oilers 78 points 3.5% 13.0% New York Islanders 80 points 2.5% 10.0% Carolina Hurricanes 83 points 1.5% 1.5% New York Islanders (via Flames) 84 points 1.0% 1.0% Dallas Stars 92 points 1.0% 1.0% Philadelphia Flyers (via Blues) 94 points 1.0% 1.0% Florida Panthers 96 points 1.0% 1.0% Every team will get a shot at 1st OA but it lessens the odds a very good team that just had a bad year adds a generational talent like McDavid/Dahlin to their roster. Also picks 2 & 3 will be drawn for but only the 10 worst teams will be eligible for those picks. The reason I like this is it doesn't scream I want to tank to the bottom but at the same time it helps to keep generational players going to teams that should need them rather tan going to cup contenders like the Blackhawks and Oilers. Do you like the idea of the change? All I know, is if the Oilers or Chicago get the first pick I am done with the NHL. 40 + years of being an NHL fan gone in seconds Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kloubek Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 2 hours ago, Heretic said: How about penalty percentage of the top 3 picks based on previous last 10 year draft picks? 1st = -5% 2nd = -3% 3rd = -1% That would make it impossible for a team like Edmonton to get so many 1st's. If you are at 0 = you can't move up in the current draft. I do like this idea, but only because I'm pissed that Oilers keep getting awesome picks and squandering them all. The fact is, the lottery is there so that the worst teams get a better chance of getting a better player so that we don't have really awful teams in the league, which would potentially lead that market to lose a fan base and force the team to move. I know one may take the perspective that if a team messes up their drafting or can't put it all together (like Edmonton), screw 'em. Which is a fair perspective, but if you have that perspective, please refer to my original point. 5 hours ago, Pete M said: Lotto change 1 to 5...roll the dice for those positions 7 to 10...roll the dice for those positions 11 to 15...roll the dice for those positions Bottom 6, if you look at this year, are very close in points...any of those teams could/ should be picking #1 overall. See, I like this bracketed idea the most. I like that a #15th team (which isn't really that bad of a team) has no chance of getting the #1. Why should they, if the intent is to truly help the lesser teams? I would say, however, that you can still weigh a bit in the favour of the lowest team in each bracket. So let's go for 1-5 positions: For 1st OA: 1st worst: 25% 2nd worst: 22.5% 3rd worst: 20% 4th worst: 17.5% 5th worst: 15% This way, presumably the teams that need the help the most are the ones that have the best chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IBatch Posted April 17, 2018 Share Posted April 17, 2018 5 hours ago, Pete M said: Lotto change 1 to 5...roll the dice for those positions 7 to 10...roll the dice for those positions 11 to 15...roll the dice for those positions Bottom 6, if you look at this year, are very close in points...any of those teams could/ should be picking #1 overall. This is a way better system than the one currently in place. One thing I'd add to it is whomever got the first overall the previous year couldn't do it again the following year. Theyd compete with the worse five teams for second if they ended up in the bottom five again. I also am fine with just having the bottom three teams doing a lotto to see where they pick, the remainder keep their spots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpeg.0d00651e5a8af8c57be7732916818427.jpeg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.