FlyersFan10 said:
I think though that if you're drafting first overall year after year after year after year and you aren't making any progress, then I think something needs to be addressed. There should be no reason why a team can't improve from one season to the next. If, as a team, your whole concept is to be mired in mediocrity for a five year period, while expecting your fans to pay top dollar for tickets and you aren't doing anything in the meantime to improve your team, then no, you shouldn't be consistently rewarded with the 1st overall choice. It's a joke. The draft does nothing to make bad teams want to get better. It allows for mediocrity and that's something that the league needs to address.
There have been very few teams in the history of the draft that hasn't been able to pull itself into the playoffs after drafting high for a period of a few years.
If you really believe that ANYONE considers drafting high to be any kind of goal that's more important than building a winning team, then you need something, ANYTHING, to remove your horrible cynicism. I'm a pretty cynical person, but that's just flat-out ridiculous.
Fact is, rebuilding in the NHL usually takes right around 5 years. This isn't an arbitrary number, it's something that has happened over and over again. Bad managament can cause it not to work (see Carolina Hurricanes, Florida Panthers, Anaheim Mighty Ducks). But adequate management shows that it does work (see San Jose Sharks, Tampa Bay Lightning, Ottawa Senators, Detroit Red Wings, Colorado Avalanche, Philadelphia Flyers, New York Rangers [early 90s], New Jersey Devils).
The draft's goal isn't to make teams want to get better, as you imply. It's to make teams ABLE to get better. And it works, as proven by the 8 examples listed above