Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Brian Burke on changing the Draft Lottery Format


Recommended Posts

Be careful people, we definitely do not want the system to change now. The Canucks could very well be one of those teams that just misses out on the playoffs next year, and from what ive seen of the prospects next year Alexis Lafreniere and Quentin Byfield look bloody amazing. The Canucks do not want to miss out on an opportunity to draft either of them if they unfortunately do not make the playoffs. 

The Canucks have been shafted every draft in recent history (although both JB's have done very well with their selections) could you imagine if they changed the rules again and the Canucks finished just outside the playoffs and had no chance to move up to 1st overall. I think that may just tip some of us over the edge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, canuckpuckluck15 said:

Be careful people, we definitely do not want the system to change now. The Canucks could very well be one of those teams that just misses out on the playoffs next year, and from what ive seen of the prospects next year Alexis Lafreniere and Quentin Byfield look bloody amazing. The Canucks do not want to miss out on an opportunity to draft either of them if they unfortunately do not make the playoffs. 

The Canucks have been shafted every draft in recent history (although both JB's have done very well with their selections) could you imagine if they changed the rules again and the Canucks finished just outside the playoffs and had no chance to move up to 1st overall. I think that may just tip some of us over the edge.

Byfield please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, WHL rocks said:

I like this format.  

 

Canucks have been unlucky but it'll balance out over the long run. 

 

Maybe Canucks jump feom 13th to 1st and get lafrenier in 2020 

Or they don't. Luck doesn't have to balance out.

 

I think Burke is pretty on point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Rounoush said:

Or they don't. Luck doesn't have to balance out.

 

I think Burke is pretty on point.

Ya. Maybe. 

 

I like this format. Can't be changing it every cpl years. 

 

Canucks are past the worst years. I don't expect they'll be bottom 5 team next year or anytime soon. 

 

They might miss the playoffs so I'd rather they still have a chance at top 3 if they don't make playoffs.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, combover said:

I’ve been saying the same thing since before the lottery, when the oilers made lastplace  the seasons goal, 

 

Option A 

bottom 5 team equal lottery odds complete draft order. Of the top 5

only one 1st over in 3years. Best you can do is second then 

Only 2 top 3 picks in three years the 5 pick is then that teams for two season if they end in the bottom 5. 

 

 

Option B 

equal odds in a lottery that determines the complete bottom 10 draft order.

Done LIVE by a third party. 

If you can’t pick players in the top ten in today’s drafts that should become difference makers then you shouldn’t have your job.

11-31 draft in  reverse order of standings. 

 

I agree with Burke it needs to be changed to help the teams that actually need help but still punish the ones that do like the oilers and can’t seem to manage talent. 

 

Sad part is the rule changed when Vancouver needed help and the rules will most likely change when Vancouver won’t. 

 

 

 

 

Option A .....nicely structured!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should just go to an equal odds scenario for every non-playoff team for the lottery. 

Players do NOT want to lose so they will still play to win every night.

If an owner/GM purposely tanks, then you're not doing it for better odds and you run the risk of pissing off your fan-base and generally looking like a pathetic franchise to the rest of the sporting community (yes, I know, some franchises 'Edm/Ott' don't care that they already look pathetic).   

 

This eliminates the 'tank' effect entirely and puts the onus of maintaining the integrity of the game into the players/owners/GM's hands - they can do with it what they choose at the risk of their fan-base support. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if a hybrid system would work. Bottom five have an equal lottery for the top five picks. 

 

All other teams are placed according to how many points they earn after elimination. Teams that get knocked out earlier have more games to earn those points but there are no guarantees if they keep sucking. 

 

Prevents tanking among the the bottom five and provides more incentive and reward for playing meaningful games at the end of the season for everyone else. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kind of agree that the bottom 8 teams should get a lottery chances (bottom 2 in each division when Seattle joins the league) get a chance for #1 pick.  When I said equal, I mean the same percent of chances because of difference on strength of divisions and schedule matrix. If #9 wins the lottery, highest they could go is 4th (moves up 5 spots).   If 16th place team happens to win the lottery, the highest they could go is to get in the top 10 pick.    I would hate to see if borderline team missed the playoffs by a few points get the #1 pick and wins the Cup the year after is kind of unfair for other teams having to build their teams the hard way.   So if they like the top 3 pick then use that system where everybody would not feel being undeserved but according to their range rather than leapfrogged everybody.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would make sense that the NHL change it now.

It was clear that we were heading into rebuild and the league changed the rules just in time to make it harder for bad teams to get good pics.  

Now we are on the upswing they will change it so middle of the road teams can't win.  

Pretty much exactly what would expect from the NHL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the weighting of selection could be adjusted a little more to favor the top 5 or 6 teams.

 

I also think that a team that wins the lottery, should not be eligible for the next 2 or 3 years. I think if a team wins the lottery and the next year finishes 2nd to last, they should automatically be slotted in at #4. If they finish 8th, they stay at 8th and they don't move.

 

The way its structured right now, the odds are worse than 2 - 1, that a team that finishes in the bottom 3, will not win the lottery. That should change.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WHL rocks said:

I like this format.  

 

Canucks have been unlucky but it'll balance out over the long run. 

 

Maybe Canucks jump feom 13th to 1st and get lafrenier in 2020 

We won't be alive in the time it takes to 'even out'. 

 

I like the idea of the worst 4/8 have a lottery playoff of 3 game series. Think about it....extra money for the league and players. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When this was introduced, it was not only to punish a team like Edmonton and Buffalo, who purposely put their teams into play for first by being beyond terrible, but to give teams that were bubble playoff teams a chance at selecting a player that would help propel them into the playoffs and out of lottery contention, and to that end, it has worked.  You look at Winnipeg, got Laine, haven't been in lotto contention since.  Dallas got their pick, and that pick was a major part of them making the playoffs this year. 

  We might find ourselves next year just outside the playoffs, but close, like Montreal was.  I'd hope that we'd be able to pick up that top pick and become a contender in the same situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

                        7 team Lottery

 

I think all teams have an obligation to win and draft well

This encourages teams to spend and to hire good staff

 

In saying that, there are cycles of age, and strength

So, I believe, that there should be a lottery, so to speak

 

I would like to see a 7 year cycle, so that a team can not 

with 1 spot more than once every 7 years...…..that is...

1-1st, 1-2nd, 1-3rd, 1-4th, 1-5th, 1-6th, 1-7th , then repeat if necessary

 

What that means, is a team that is climbing can still falter, and pick up

a 2nd 1st on its 8th year if so lucky. Obviously there need to be tie breakers

for some spots, but basically if a team can not start moving upward

they need new management...….

 

This should all be done via lottery's and tie breakers

If you don't need to be in the lottery good!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with the idea that if you've won a lottery - say in the last 3 or 5 years - you should be excluded from subsequent lotteries for a period of time - perhaps 3 years.

You simply stay in the draft order you fall - with no chance of moving up.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, NUCKER67 said:

Teams that have a #1 pick on the roster:

 

COL - McKinnon 

CGY - n/a

WPG - n/a

STL - n/a

NSH - n/a

DAL - n/a

SJ - Thornton

VGK - n/a

BOS - n/a

TOR - Matthews and Tavares

WAS - Ovechkin

CAR - n/a

CBJ - n/a

TB - Stamkos

NYI - n/a

PIT - Crosby

 

Guaranteed, one of the teams with a name next to it will win the Cup this year.

 

On the other hand, these teams all have #1 overall and missed the playoffs.

 

CHI (Kane)

NJ (Hall, Hischier)

BUF (Dahlin, could also include Eichel who would have been if not for McDavid)

EDM (McDavid, RNH)

FLO (Ekblad)

LA (Kovalchuk) :lol:, ok this one is a stretch

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I give it a shot too.

 

- Keep all non playoff teams in the lottery to prevent tanking

but adjust the odds based on your previous luck. (This seems such an obvious solution to me). 

 

You would have to work out the details (numbers), but just increase the chances of moving up or down proportionally to the places you dropped/moved up in previous 5 years. (No adjustment if your not in lottery those years). 

 

This systen retains randomness, disencourage tanking, but also creates fairness in the long run. The current system needs to take into account your previous luck, otherwise it will take 500 years till 'luck will balance out'. 

 

Thoughts?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...