Draft Lottery Article - everyone a chance, weighted past three seasons

[Jaded-Fan]

And the teams that were bad got their picks in the '02, '03, and '04 drafts.

And as I say above, I have not sniffed a game of playoff hockey involving my team for five years now. Want to trade?

 

[MontrealCruiser_83*]

And as I say above, I have not sniffed a game of playoff hockey involving my team for five years now. Want to trade?

Too bad. You've been compensated for those 5 years. Piss and moan to your teams management if you want some sympathy... you sure as hell won't get it from us.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Too bad. You've been compensated for those 5 years. Piss and moan to your teams management if you want some sympathy... you sure as hell won't get it from us.

I certainly do not want . . . or expect . . . sympathy from you or anyone. I was merely responding to the argument of Norris with the obvious counter argument. I am not sure what you were doing with that comment but if it felt good have at it.

 

[MontrealCruiser_83*]

I certainly do not want . . . or expect . . . sympathy from you or anyone. I was merely responding to the argument of Norris with the obvious counter argument. I am not sure what you were doing with that comment but if it felt good have at it.

I was merely saying that this is a business, not pre-school. Remember that? Back when everybody got an A for effort in fear of hurting another students feelings. Poor baby, no playoffs for 5 years. Do you want a cookie? You've been compensated for those 5 years. Do you think your team deserves special treatment for the draft? Because that's how you're making it sound.

 

[NYRangers]

I have not sniffed a game of playoff hockey involving my team for five years now.

5 years? Please, what are we on what.... 8 seasons? And we are just starting to rebuilding.

 

[sensens]

A lightly weighted look at 2004 or nothing at all. Looking at '03 and '02 is beyond absurd at this point.

I have to agree... by the 'equalization' theory of the draft (and I'm a small-market guy who believes pretty strongly in the importance of this element of the draft), teams who did poorly in the 01/02 draft have already been compensated with players like Nash, Lehtonen & Bouwmeester... just like the lesser teams of 02/03 were compensated with Fleury, Staal, Horton & Zherdev, and the lesser teams of 03/04 were compensated with Ovechkin, Malkin & Barker.

At the end of the day, there was no 2004/05 season, and so there is no accurate way of guaging who would have finished where. As I'm sure has been pointed out before (God only knows how many times), awarding the #1 pick based on the last 3 years of regular season futility makes no more sense than awarding the Stanley Cup based on the last 3 years of playoff success. Frankly, the move to a reversing order draft (i.e. #1 pick gets the #60 pick next) is about as fair a system as you can have for a draft that is essentially baseless.

The only qualifier that I can think of that would be remotely appropriate would be one based on team revenues, as this would 'generally' indicate which teams are likely going to be able to compete more aggressively off the mark. And given that this would be contentious to say the least, it would have to be a pretty mild qualifier at best, and certainly not one that eliminated any team's chance of winning the draft.

 

[Radek27]

I was merely saying that this is a business, not pre-school. Remember that? Back when everybody got an A for effort in fear of hurting another students feelings. Poor baby, no playoffs for 5 years. Do you want a cookie? You've been compensated for those 5 years. Do you think your team deserves special treatment for the draft? Because that's how you're making it sound.

Wow somone has thier panties in a bunch! Your team will have a chance at the #1, but not as good as ours, so why are you complaining?

Anyone else find it strange this club(NYR) has never had a #1 overall draft pick in it's history?

 

[Matt Foley*]

Piss and moan

You seem to be better than Jaded-Fan at this.

 

[NYR469]

Wow somone has thier panties in a bunch! Your team will have a chance at the #1, but not as good as ours, so why are you complaining?

Anyone else find it strange this club(NYR) has never had a #1 overall draft pick in it's history?

the rangers have had the #1 pick once...they took Andre Veilleux 1st overall in the 1965 draft.

 

[MontrealCruiser_83*]

Wow somone has thier panties in a bunch! Your team will have a chance at the #1, but not as good as ours, so why are you complaining?

How about we give my team an extra 10 pts in the standings right from the get-go? Your team will have a chance at the playoffs, it just won't be as good as ours. Your idea doesn't sound so hot when it doesn't favor you, eh?

 

[Tawnos]

How about we give my team an extra 10 pts in the standings right from the get-go? Your team will have a chance at the playoffs, it just won't be as good as ours. Your idea doesn't sound so hot when it doesn't favor you, eh?

Stop comparing two entirely different things. One (the season) is competition, the other (the draft) is a lottery. They aren't remotely comparable.

 

[HSHS]

How about we give my team an extra 10 pts in the standings right from the get-go? Your team will have a chance at the playoffs, it just won't be as good as ours. Your idea doesn't sound so hot when it doesn't favor you, eh?

Okay fine, your team finished with 10 points last year and we all got 0.

 

[HSHS]

Number 300!!!!!!! cookie please!

 

[Radek27]

the rangers have had the #1 pick once...they took Andre Veilleux 1st overall in the 1965 draft.

Wow thanks for the info, I didn't know that.........about 10 years before I was born. So that was 40 years ago.........you know things come for the Rangers in 40 year periods.

 

[NYIsles1*]

Washington under a 3 year weighting would not have a great shot . . .they fall somewhere in the middle if I remember correctly. The Rangers though, have 'earned' their place in the top ten missing the playoffs for how many years running now?

The Rangers the last three years have finished 6th, 12th and 10th which would not even qualify them for a lottery because only the bottom five teams are eligible to win the lottery for number one overall pick.

Before that they only qualified once for a lottery pick (4th) in the 1999 draft in seven years.

So how have they earned any right to win a lottery.

 

[Captain Conservative]

Washington under a 3 year weighting would not have a great shot . . .they fall somewhere in the middle if I remember correctly. The Rangers though, have 'earned' their place in the top ten missing the playoffs for how many years running now?

We'd be 7th if they used the past 3 years, with 2003-2004 worth double.

 

[Kritter471]

If they're going back three years, here's the "order" of points.

1.) CBJ 188 pts
2.) PIT 192 pts
3.) ATL 206 pts
4.) NYR 227 pts
5.) CAR 228 pts
6.) FLA 230 pts
7.) CHI 234 pts
7.) NSH 234 pts
9.) WAS 236 pts
10.) BUF 239 pts
11.) ANA 240 pts
12.) PH X 241 pts
13.) CAL 248 pts
14.) MIN 254 pts
14.) LA 254 pts
16.) MTL 257 pts
17.) TB 268 pts
18.) NYI 270 pts
19.) EDM 273 pts
20.) SJ 276 pts
21.) STL 288 pts
22.) BOS 292 pts
23.) DAL 298 pts
24.) VAN 299 pts
25.) TOR 301 pts
26.) NJ 303 pts
27.) COL 304 pts
28.) PHI 305 pts
29.) OTT 305 pts
30.) DET 335 pts

 

[NYRangers]

Thats a lot of balls.

 

[Boltsfan2029]

If they're going back three years, here's the "order" of points.
17.) TB 268 pts

Aw, go back four years. That would give the Bolts another non-playoff year where we finished something like 28th overall. That oughta bump us up a spot or two...

Said with tongue planted firmly in cheek. We've been the Michael-Jordan-of-hockey route with Lecavalier, I'm not sure I want to see another kid struggle through the hype!

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Wow somone has thier panties in a bunch! Your team will have a chance at the #1, but not as good as ours, so why are you complaining?

Anyone else find it strange this club(NYR) has never had a #1 overall draft pick in it's history?

Because you're team has all ready been rewarded for its mediocrity.

With a salary cap, I don't even see the need to reward bad teams with high draft picks.
Maybe it should be a 1/30 shot every year, with the flow reversed in the second round.

To me it's a travesty that a team like the Caps can unload Jagr, GOnchar and Lang and end up with the first overall pick.

 

[ryz]

How about we give my team an extra 10 pts in the standings right from the get-go? Your team will have a chance at the playoffs, it just won't be as good as ours. Your idea doesn't sound so hot when it doesn't favor you, eh?

Regardless of what team I cheer for, you sir are an idiot.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

And as I say above, I have not sniffed a game of playoff hockey involving my team for five years now. Want to trade?

The salary cap addresses your team's biggest concern.
You've got MA Fluery, it's just too bad that the Kovalev and Jagr trade returns have been duds thus far.

 

[Tawnos]

Because you're team has all ready been rewarded for its mediocrity.

With a salary cap, I don't even see the need to reward bad teams with high draft picks.
Maybe it should be a 1/30 shot every year, with the flow reversed in the second round.

To me it's a travesty that a team like the Caps can unload Jagr, GOnchar and Lang and end up with the first overall pick.

They were that bad when they had them... their record didn't get much worse after they traded those guys.

And seriously Mr. Special Breed, what is not to understand about the need to use reverse standings for draft picks? The point is to allow the teams a chance to build themselves into a contender from within, which is the surest route to success.... salary cap has nothing to do with that.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Regardless of what team I cheer for, you sir are an idiot.

Hey man, I've been getting Warning points up the wazoo for a lot less than that.
I'm essentially a eunech around here for the next 90 days.

 

[Kritter471]

Hypothetical:

Assume this lottery - maximum of three balls, minimum of one.

You get a ball for - each season you missed the playoffs.
You lose a ball for - each season you had the number one overall pick

Teams with one ball
DET (never missed playoffs)
OTT (never missed playoffs)
PHI (never missed playoffs)
COL (never missed playoffs)
NJ (never missed playoffs)
TOR (never missed playoffs)
VAN (never missed playoffs)
DAL (missed playoffs once)
BOS (never missed playoffs)
STL (never missed playoffs)
SJ (missed playoffs once)
NYI (missed playoffs once)
TB (missed playoffs once)
MTL (missed playoffs once)
WAS (missed playoffs twice, one first overall pick)

Two balls
EDM (missed playoffs twice)
LA (missed playoffs twice)
MIN (missed playoffs twice)
CAL (missed playoffs twice)
PHX (missed playoffs twice)
ANA (missed playoffs twice)
NSH (missed playoffs twice)
CHI (missed playoffs twice)
CAR (missed playoffs twice)
PIT (no playoffs, one first overall pick)
CBJ (no playoffs, one first overall pick)

Three balls
BUF (no playoffs)
FLA (no playoffs)
ATL (no playoffs)
NYR (no playoffs)