NHL’s new draft lottery rules will encourage tanking. Here’s why

[freebuddy]

NHLs new draft lottery rules will encourage tanking. Heres why

By: Brian Costello on October 24, 2014

The NHLs revamping to the draft lottery format will probably backfire this year when the leagues bottom feeders make a concerted effort to sink to 30 place. Theres just too much to gain from finishing last overall.

First, some background.

In August, the league announced changes to the draft lottery to be phased in over two years. The changes for 2015 are small adjustments to the odds of winning theyre more evenly balanced now and the last-place team has a 20 percent chance of winning rather than 25 percent under the old format.

The real change doesnt happen until 2016 when the lottery will be used to determine the top three selections in the draft.

By not making these sweeping changes right away for 2015, the NHL inadvertently will encourage the leagues worst teams to tank it in an effort to secure 30 place. Thats because for the 2015 draft, there are two generational prospects available. Connor McDavid has been called the stud of the 2015 draft for close to three years now. Hes been incredible this season. And in the past year, Jack Eichel has emerged as a close second option to McDavid. Theyre head and shoulders better than the rest of a deep draft class.

So why will a team want to tank hard this year? Under the 2015 format, the team finishing 30 has a 20 percent chance of winning the right to select first (McDavid) and an 80 percent chance of getting second pick (Eichel), because a team can only fall one slot. In other words, the last-place team has a 100 percent chance of drafting a generational player.

The 29th-place team, on the other hand, has a 13.5 percent chance of winning first pick, a 20 percent chance of selecting second (if the 30 -place team wins the lottery), and a 66.5 percent chance of falling to third pick (if another non-playoff team wins the lottery). In others words, the second to last-place team this season has a two in three chance of missing out on a generational player.

The difference between finishing 29 and 30 this season is absolutely massive 100 percent certainty youre getting the next NHL superstar versus 33.5 percent chance.

Had the NHL called all-in on the draft lottery change rather than phase it in over two years, there would be less incentive to tank. Thats because the bottom three teams could each slip three spots in draft order. So instead of the 30th-place team having a 100 percent chance of getting McDavid or Eichel, it would be two stabs at 20 percent apiece.

Lets use Buffalo and Carolina as examples (but any two teams will work) seeing theyre the most likely to be at the bottom of the standings. Theyll realistically be out of playoff contention by January. As the season draws into its final months and weeks, its going to behoove them to tank their remaining games in order to finish in the basement. Not near the bottom, but literally in 30 place.

Dont think tank in the pejorative sense. I use it here because thats the accepted term on the street. (Gasp! Shameful! Hes endorsing tanking!). I prefer strategic roster management. Ive never believed tanking is possible in team sports. There isnt a professional coach out there who would instruct his players to purposely lose. Its too corrosive to his reputation. Even if there was such a coach, getting buy-in from an entire group of players is improbable, if not impossible.

But I do think strategic roster management can be manufactured in a completely justifiable manner by a cagey GM. Why shouldnt the Sabres recall third-string goalie Nathan Lieuwen for a good chunk of games down the stretch? Hes been good in the AHL and the team should want to see how he performs at the NHL level. Why shouldnt the Hurricanes recall minor-league defense prospects Keegan Lowe and Danny Biega in March to give them an opportunity trying to shut down NHL forwards?

A big part of rebuilding a floundering team is determining whats in the system and giving them real-life litmus tests. Clearly, the lineup that started the NHL season wasnt good enough if theyre in the conversation for last overall. In essence, the GM is gathering information to do his job, and the side benefit is losing games during a season in which the consolation prize is exceptional. Whats wrong with that?

Flashback to 1983-84 and the Pittsburgh Penguins and New Jersey Devils were far and away the two worst teams in the league. There was no draft lottery back then and both teams knew there was a generational player up for grabs in that summers draft. And it went to the team finishing last overall.

Its as though the Penguins and Devils were discreetly falling over themselves trying to fall to last place. Both teams won just two of 14 games in the final month of the season. The key battle was a March 6 head-to-head game. Pittsburgh called up Vincent Tremblay from the minors for that game because backup Michel Dion was hurt. The Penguins lost 6-5 and New Jersey jumped ahead of them in the standings. Tremblay played three more games for Pittsburgh down the stretch starter Denis Herron played the other seven and the third-stringer had a GAA of 6.00 with a save percentage of .831.

With that sluggish finish, Pittsburgh finished in last place (38 points), then drafted Mario Lemieux first overall. The Devils, who won that important four-point game March 6, finished with 41 points and drafted Kirk Muller.

That leads us back to the 2015 draft in which two generational players are available. (A lot could change between now and June when youre evaluating 17 and 18-year-olds, but scouts say McDavid and Eichel are in a class of their own now.) Under the NHLs new, partially phased-in lottery format, the last-place team this season will for sure get one future superstar. The other generational star? Chances are it wont go to the team in second-last place.

So dont kid yourself. If an NHL bottom-feeder has a chance to sink to 30 place, theres going to be an effort, discreet or otherwise, to make it happen. It probably wont be as overt as the 2013-14 NBA Philadelphia 76s, whose GM Sam Hinkie had the blessing of ownership to assemble a roster designed to lose, but it is going to happen in the NHL this season.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/nhls-new-draft-lottery-rules-will-encourage-tanking-heres-why/

[Dral]

I really don't see the big deal - if you're out of the playoffs you should be trying to get the best draft pick you can anyways.

[SabreFan1]

I'm confident that the Sabres have 30th place locked up in the McEichel draft!!!! I'm just hoping that whichever player the Sabres get between the two doesn't end up getting a career ending injury the following preseason.

[Riviera82]

I really don't see the big deal - if you're out of the playoffs you should be trying to get the best draft pick you can anyways.

I agree. Is playing for pride in what becomes a meaningless season really worth screwing your team over for the future? I say if your'e near the bottom of the standings anyways, you should be trying to race for the basement.

[jstewboy]

I really don't see the big deal - if you're out of the playoffs you should be trying to get the best draft pick you can anyways.

I agree. Is playing for pride in what becomes a meaningless season really worth screwing your team over for the future? I say if your'e near the bottom of the standings anyways, you should be trying to race for the basement.

What about the guys playing for contracts? There is no sense in trying to lose a game for an uncertain draft pick... And there is no way a Coach or GM would ever convince a professional athlete to lose on purpose. Unless there was a substantial amount of money involved, which is illegal and would result in a ban from the NHL

[tas]

what intelligent, self-respecting player would intentionally try to lose so that his team can draft an 18 year old kid to take his roster spot?

get real.

[SabreFan1]

We've all talked about this before. It's the front office that tanks a team. It's never ever in a players or in a coach's interest to tank a season. As a player, you are playing either to keep your job or you are playing for a bigger payday. As a coach, you are trying to keep your job and your assistant's jobs safe by winning.

Whichever teams both McDavid and Eichel go to they will automatically be taking a job away from a current player. If I was a bottom 6 player with a family to feed and kids to put through university as well as a mortgage to pay, I sure wouldn't want to lose my job to a teenager.

As is with the Sabres, I've always liked Ted Nolan a lot, but I feel incredibly bad for him. He gets back in the NHL after being semi-blacklisted and he inherits the league's worst hockey team by far. I wouldn't be surprised if he is scapegoated and fired by or just after seasons end. This is his final shot as an NHL head coach.

Since Myers put in the work in the off-season and is actually doing much better this year with Josh Gorges as his partner, if he gets traded for anything less than a B-level prospect and a 2015 first rounder then I will be the first to admit that there is an on purpose front office tank job happening here in Buffalo.

It's rumoured that there are a handful of teams bidding on his services with Boston and Detroit pushing the hardest. I beg to the hockey gods nightly to not let him go to Boston and become a Bruin.

[goalie13]

What a ridiculous article. Or at the very least, a poorly titled article.

First off, you don't have to look that far back to find there used to be no lottery at all (he even references it). So coming in last guaranteed you the top pick. So the new rules are obviously an improvement over that.

Secondly, he even states that the odds have been evened out. The new rules make it less likely that the worst team will get the top pick. So again, the new rules are an improvement over that.

The point of the article shouldn't be that the rules encourage tanking, it should be that the changes don't go far enough, soon enough, for the author's liking.

[sponge62]

what intelligent, self-respecting player would intentionally try to lose so that his team can draft an 18 year old kid to take his roster spot?

get real.

It's not about the players. The coach and gm can do it by playing/not playing certain players, and by moving guys around in the system. Former Penguins coach Lou Angotti has all but admitted that he and the gm at the time tanked for Mario Lemieux.

"When we sat down to see what we had to do to get the first draft choice, E.J. said it would cost us both our jobs," laughingly recalled Angotti, who never coached again and retired to Florida after that summer. "Obviously, it turned out to be the right thing, because look what it did."

Source: http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/04088/292486.stm

Or you can listen to him say it himself in the TSN video all about how they did it. By trading guys for nothing, bringing up a goalie that had no business in the NHL, putting the 4th line out against the other teams 1st to get rolled over and putting guys out on the penalty kill that had never even practiced it. Good stuff starts around 2:10 and around 5:10 the gm refuses to admit it but gets pretty close.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijLmRmRTnu8

[khay]

I would be so embarrassed to call myself a fan of a team that tanks on purpose like the Penguins. If the Canucks ever did that, I don't think I will be able to love the team as I do now. Winning is important, but winning it right is even more important. At least that's what we are taught when we were kids, aren't we?

As for the article, it's not like league was ever fairly run anyways.

[I.Am.Ironman]

I think the author raises a fair point in saying that the changes shouldn't necessarily be segwayed in but put to use right away. Which I agree with, especially with this draft being a 'generational draft'.

If the 2016 rules were implemented it would be much more of an anti-tanking format. Whereas this year, as the author pointed out, if you come in 30th you have guaranteed a franchise players.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

Players don't tank. Does cody Hodgson think. I better suck so that my team can go out and get a top draft pick next year?

Players care about there own personal success more than the future of a team they may or may not be apart of. Stupid article.

[ForsbergTheGreat]

It's not about the players. The coach and gm can do it by playing/not playing certain players, and by moving guys around in the system. Former Penguins coach Lou Angotti has all but admitted that he and the gm at the time tanked for Mario Lemieux.

Or you can listen to him say it himself in the TSN video all about how they did it. By trading guys for nothing, bringing up a goalie that had no business in the NHL, putting the 4th line out against the other teams 1st to get rolled over and putting guys out on the penalty kill that had never even practiced it. Good stuff starts around 2:10 and around 5:10 the gm refuses to admit it but gets pretty close.

What year was that again?? There's a lot more awareness around the league. Random fans can tell you a teams depth all the way down to the ECHL. It wouldn't be hard to see a team putting out a no name player for the sake of losing. It's 2014 if the NHL suspected a team of doing that, they would forfeit there pick.

again....stupid article

[cdubuya]

Your use of statistics is plain wrong. Check your wording.

[-DLC-]

what intelligent, self-respecting player would intentionally try to lose so that his team can draft an 18 year old kid to take his roster spot?

get real.

Hit the nail on the head with this...exactly.

[BanTSN]

what intelligent, self-respecting player would intentionally try to lose so that his team can draft an 18 year old kid to take his roster spot?

get real.

You didn't read. The GM is designing his team to lose, so it doesn't matter what the self-respecting player does. There's only so much one player can do, but if the player is an excellent franchise player/difference-maker, then the team in question doesn't really need to tank all that bad, do they.

[Amish Rake Fighter]

It's not about the players. The coach and gm can do it by playing/not playing certain players, and by moving guys around in the system. Former Penguins coach Lou Angotti has all but admitted that he and the gm at the time tanked for Mario Lemieux.

Source: http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/04088/292486.stm

Or you can listen to him say it himself in the TSN video all about how they did it. By trading guys for nothing, bringing up a goalie that had no business in the NHL, putting the 4th line out against the other teams 1st to get rolled over and putting guys out on the penalty kill that had never even practiced it. Good stuff starts around 2:10 and around 5:10 the gm refuses to admit it but gets pretty close.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijLmRmRTnu8

good stuff, sponge

[BanTSN]

The new argument against tanking is 'look at the oilers!' fail!

Don't look now, but they're just one point behind us in the standings. (Calgary is ahead of us.)

But other than that, you have to chose the right years to tank in, or even pick the right players in the draft to tank for. The Oilers didn't do a bang up job in either regard.

This year you can plainly see which teams have managed their way into a tank scenario:

-Arizona buys out Ribeiro and he goes to Nashville and does fairly well along with his team.

-Carolina doesn't dip into free agency to improve any of their glaring weaknesses and now they have sustained injury after injury after injury. (I doubt the hurt players are rushing back too quickly this season.)

-Buffalo: 'nuff said. They've been performing seller moves for years.

-Boston: Not so much moves to tank all the way to the bottom, but you can see the need to re-shuffle their deck. Like us.

[Ghostsof1915]

If no player will intentionally tank, then why do we have a lottery in the first place? I've said it before, and I'll say it again. No one complains that the NFL doesn't have a lottery. And its one of the most competitive leagues. There's no dynasties. And last year the Seahawks were finally able to win a championship. That's how the system is supposed to work. The bad teams get better. And looking at Edmonton, even getting 1st overall a few years in a row is no guarantee when you can't draft properly.

Dump the lottery. I say hold a snake draft. That way teams with good scouts, will be successful. If your management and scouts have no clue what they are doing, you'll still be bad team.

[ChuckNORRIS4Cup]

What if Buffalo has a chance at getting both Mcdavid and Eichel, supposedly there is a very small chance this could happen, and would make sense to see them tank as much as they are, but they need to hope that one other team sucks just as bad...

One storyline I haven’t heard yet, however: what if Buffalo lands McDavid and Eichel?

It’s far-fetched, even borderline silly. At this moment, however, the odds of one NHL team picking first and second in the draft are better than they’ve ever been, excluding the zany days in the late 1960s and early 1970s when the Montreal Canadiens were gifted the first few selections.

The reason is three words long: New York Islanders.

If you’ll recall, the past year was Murphy’s Law incarnate for the Isles. John Tavares blew out his knee and the team slipped out of the playoffs after making it one season prior. And there was also the Thomas Vanek debacle. Not only did Vanek end up asking out of town and getting dealt to Montreal at the deadline, acquiring him in the first place last fall cost the Isles Matt Moulson, a 2015 second-round pick and a conditional 2014 first-round pick. The Isles had the option to defer that first-rounder to 2015. It was a risky proposition given how mouthwatering the 2015 draft class is, but when the Isles finished 26th overall, they realized they couldn’t pass up a guaranteed top-five selection in 2014. They used it on promising scorer Michael Dal Colle.

Deferring was the right move, in my mind. But it creates a wild hypothetical situation next spring.

Say the Buffalo Sabres, who had the NHL’s worst record last season, are one of the NHL’s two worst teams again. And say the New York Islanders, the NHL’s 26th-best team last season, finish 29th or 30th. With the deferred pick plus their own pick, the Sabres would be guaranteed at least the No. 2 selection. If a team other than them or the Islanders won the lottery, they’d still end up with the No. 2 and 3 picks. If the Sabres and Islanders finish 29th and 30th and one of them wins the lottery, however…BOOM. It would give Buffalo the first and second pick in 2015. Oh. My. God.

The odds are slim, especially since the league altered the lottery odds to give the bottom team a worse chance of winning, decreasing the motivation to tank. But slim is a relative term. We’re not talking a trillion to one, here.

The 30th-place team in the new system has a 20 percent chance of winning the lottery. The 29th-place team has a 13.5 percent chance. Put those together and the Sabres would have a 33.5 percent chance of landing the first and second picks in the draft, if and only if they and the Islanders finish bottom two in the league.

Of course, the chances of landing McDavid and Eichel aren’t actually 33.5 percent. There’s still the matter of Buffalo and the Isles finishing 29th and 30th. But it’s not the tallest of orders (our mathematically inclined intern, Dom, crunched the numbers behind the curtain and estimates there’s about a 1 in 20 chance both teams finish with fewer than 70 points, which would put them in the last overall hunt). All the worst team in the NHL has to do is repeat its feat. The Isles, with their vastly improved goaltending and forward depth, are a real long shot to struggle as badly as they did last season. But stranger things have happened than the Isles sucking again. And as long as the Isles miss the playoffs, that’s two full lottery entries for Buffalo.

http://www.thehockeynews.com/blog/can-the-buffalo-sabres-get-connor-mcdavid-and-jack-eichel/