A new method for the draft lottery

[mephnick]

21 hours ago, RonMexico said:

Pre lottery and the current lottery are just fine.

 

You just can't please everyone.

I think there is a major problem with teams like Philly and Dallas just missing the playoffs and getting franchise players in the lottery over a team that actually needs them. Kind of defeats the purpose of the whole thing.

[RonMexico]

2 minutes ago, mephnick said:

I think there is a major problem with teams like Philly and Dallas just missing the playoffs and getting franchise players in the lottery over a team that actually needs them. Kind of defeats the purpose of the whole thing.

 

There are no guarantees when you draft though. Outside of Crosby or McDavid types, the draft is a crapshoot.

[peaches5]

On 2/23/2019 at 1:12 PM, BlastPast said:

Well, as it appears we may be headed for another draft lottery I thought I would dust off an idea I had a while back to make the draft lottery odds more accurately reflect a teams performance .  I can't be the only one who finds it inequitable that 2 or more teams can have the same point total but because of ROW and how the odds are designated they can have relatively differing chances.  

 

For example, as of right now NYR and Arizona are both at .500 but because of how the current draft lottery works NYR have a 5% chance at #1 and Arizona have 3.5% .  This gives NYR a relative advantage of approx. 43 %. ( 5-3.5=1.5.  1.5/3.5%=~43%).  Does this seem fair ? Of course not. What I am going to propose will give each team exactly the chances they deserve in accordance with their point total relative to their competition.

 

The  current format is static in that  odds are pre-designated according to where a team finishes in the standing.  Ties are broken, for the most part, with ROW (regulation and overtime wins).  What I suggest is a system that is more dynamic and is based on a teams point totals relative to other non-playoff teams. It would better account for parity and get rid of scenarios (like the one described above) where a team had a large statistical advantage despite having identical or very close point totals.  

 

Here is what I am suggesting:

 

You start with a figure of 164 representing the point total of a perfect season (82 games X 2 pts.) You then deduct the points accumulated throughout the season by each team (exp.  last season Buffalo finished with 62 points so for them it would be 164-62=102) You then add up all those figures for each team and get a total.  Using last seasons totals I have done this for all eligible teams.

 

The total for all 15 non-playoff teams is 1290. You then use the teams number and this total to get a percentage , this represents the team's lottery odds. Therefore Buffalo would have 102/1290 % = 7.9% chance of #1 overall. I am only only going to do the calculations for first place to make things more wieldy but it can be used to designate odds for 2nd and third if necessary . I would disregard ROW ,etc in favor of giving tied teams the same percentage. (ie. if two teams have 80 points, they have the same odds)

 

The following is a list of odds for this past draft lottery using this method. As you can see, it evens things out while still giving poorer performing teams an appropriate advantage. All figures rounded to 1 decimal place but in practice should go to 2.

 

1) Buf-102/1290%= 7.9%

2)Ott-97/1290= 7.5%

3)Ari- 94/1290= 7.3%

4)Mtl- 93- 7.2%

5)Van- 7.1%

6)Det-7.1%

7)Chi-6.8%

8)Nyr-6.7%

9)Edm-6.7%

10)Nyi-6.5%

11)Car-6.3%

12)Cal-6.2%

13)Dal-5.7%

14)Stl-5.6%

15)Flo-5.4%

 

With the current method the last place team has 18.5 X the odds the 15th worst team has (18.5% Vs. 1 %)  giving them , I would say, an extremely disproportionate advantage. 

 

I think with this method I would actually advocate for the lottery to be drawn for only first overall , this way a team can only slide a maximum of one spot. This method may  also have the effect of diminishing the benefit of tanking . Fans of these teams can now be less disappointed with wins down the stretch knowing it won't hurt their odds too severely. 

 

 

So you're bitching because you think a team that has the same amount of points but far fewer regulation wins should have the same odds? Regulation wins determine how much better your team is than picking up some garbage shootout points. The system is perfect the way it is. Tanking doesn't give you the first, second or third and missing the playoffs gives you a shot at the top 3, albeit a low chance.

[BlastPast]

14 minutes ago, peaches5 said:

So you're bitching because you think a team that has the same amount of points but far fewer regulation wins should have the same odds? Regulation wins determine how much better your team is than picking up some garbage shootout points. The system is perfect the way it is. Tanking doesn't give you the first, second or third and missing the playoffs gives you a shot at the top 3, albeit a low chance.

Suggesting an alternative does not equal bitching. Apologies if English is not your first language and you misunderstood. How often do you see a team have equal points but far fewer ROW ?

[peaches5]

2 hours ago, BlastPast said:

Suggesting an alternative does not equal bitching. Apologies if English is not your first language and you misunderstood. How often do you see a team have equal points but far fewer ROW ?

You are bitching. Even if a team has 1 more regulation win it means they were better and don't deserve to have the same lottery chances as a team with fewer. The league isn't rewarding shootout victories. Shootout wins should not equal regulation wins which they don't. 

[BlastPast]

4 hours ago, peaches5 said:

You are bitching. Even if a team has 1 more regulation win it means they were better and don't deserve to have the same lottery chances as a team with fewer. The league isn't rewarding shootout victories. Shootout wins should not equal regulation wins which they don't. 

Because you said so? Can you quote which part would qualify as "bitching "?  Merely suggesting an inequity and a possible way to amend it is not even close to bitching . Maybe you are lacking the ability to infer tone .