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

[neelynugs]

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.

i generally haven't agreed with a word you've said on just about any post you've put up, but this one, i agree completely. i still have no idea how you can reward teams twice for poor performances. should be a straight 1 out of 30 shot for everyone, plain and simple as i see it.

 

[Kritter471]

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

From the context, I assume you're talking about the Pens? According to my research, the Pens made the playoffs at the six seed in the East in 2001 with a record of 42-28-9-3, which is four calender years ago and three seasons. They made it all the way to the Eastern Conference Finals, defeating Washington in six games and Buffalo in seven games before falling to the Devils in five.

Edit: Just for reference, the only teams to have missed the playoffs in the previous four seasons are Columbus, Atlanta, New York Rangers and Florida.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

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.... salary cap has nothing to do with that.

Oh, I've found my rat, have I?

You've all ready had your good pick based on your poor finish.

Seriously.

Try to look at it from another team's perspective.
Virtually every weighted draft scenario gives the Wings the worst chance to win the #1 pick.

Is that fair? Do you honestly consider the Wings the best team in the league?
Seriously? Do you really think the Wings would have finished first overall last year?

If you don't, then how can you support this draft scenario?

If you are fair minded, you can't.

Now you'll say that I'm just some greedy big market fan only looking out for my team.

But I am seeking a fair resolution.

I've advocated holding off on the draft until next year, which I believe is the most fair and most beneficial to all teams (Essentially, every one gets to pick a guy who's considered top 15 material).

But people don't like this idea? Why not? It's because they're not seeking a fair solution.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

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, QUOTE]

Special Breed ... I was pretty happy with myself when I wrote it ...

 

[dunwoody_joe]

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)

Seems like a fair enough system.
Under this scenario, the best chance lives with the bottom four teams but is only 6.12%. So in reality, these teams have a 93.88% chance of not getting the #1!

Under an unweighted system, each team has 3.33% chance (or conversely 96.67% chance of not getting the #1.

The difference is less than 3% for the 4 worst teams under the two disparate systems (and only 1.29% for the best teams).

Hardly enough to get worked up over!

 

[Tawnos]

Try to look at it from another team's perspective.
Virtually every weighted draft scenario gives the Wings the worst chance to win the #1 pick.

Is that fair? Do you honestly consider the Wings the best team in the league?
Seriously? Do you really think the Wings would have finished first overall last year?

If you don't, then how can you support this draft scenario?

If you are fair minded, you can't.

Not necessarily. (Hypothetically.. as if I actually have a say) I'm willing to allow every team a shot at #1. And yes, I'm aware of my farce comment earlier. It's called compromise. Do I know that the Wings are the best team in the league. No. Do I know that they aren't? No. Do I know that the Rangers are the worst team in the league? No. Do I know that they aren't? No. Does probability speak to both of those scenarios? Yes. How? Based on history. Is historical trend ever broken? Absolutely. Is the possibility of it enough to hang my hat on? Absolutely not. (By the way, the first overall team doesn't receive the last pick of the round, the Cup winner does). Also, I'm willing to allow the draft order to be reversed for each round, which is something I don't actually have to give up.

Now you'll say that I'm just some greedy big market fan only looking out for my team.

No, I wouldn't say that, it's not in my nature.

But I am seeking a fair resolution.

I've advocated holding off on the draft until next year, which I believe is the most fair and most beneficial to all teams (Essentially, every one gets to pick a guy who's considered top 15 material).

But people don't like this idea? Why not? It's because they're not seeking a fair solution.

I am seeking a fair solution as well... fair to everyone including the kids getting drafted, which your solution at the end there is not. Besides which, if the NHL decided to put off the draft til next year, then I would hope that they get sued and all 2005 draft-eligible players get declared free agents, as should be their right.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Also, I'm willing to allow the draft order to be reversed for each round, which is something I don't actually have to give up.

See ... but it's not yours to give up.

Where does this ownership come from?

You only get to pick high if you finished near the bottom.

Well there was no season ...

Forget it.

 

[Tawnos]

It was a hypothetical man... did you miss that in the first sentence?

 

[HSHS]

Oh, I've found my rat, have I?

You've all ready had your good pick based on your poor finish.

Seriously.

Try to look at it from another team's perspective.
Virtually every weighted draft scenario gives the Wings the worst chance to win the #1 pick.

Is that fair? Do you honestly consider the Wings the best team in the league?
Seriously? Do you really think the Wings would have finished first overall last year?

If you don't, then how can you support this draft scenario?

If you are fair minded, you can't.

Now you'll say that I'm just some greedy big market fan only looking out for my team.

But I am seeking a fair resolution.

I've advocated holding off on the draft until next year, which I believe is the most fair and most beneficial to all teams (Essentially, every one gets to pick a guy who's considered top 15 material).

But people don't like this idea? Why not? It's because they're not seeking a fair solution.

No we can not say that Detroit would have been the worst, but Detroit is not getting the 30th worst odds... they will be tied for worst with at least 5-10 teams.

 

[tmangos]

One interesting idea in the article :

"The NHL should leave the hockey world in suspense until the last possible moment before Crosby is drafted. ... instead of holding it weeks in advance why not hold it that very day?"​

He then goes on to shoot down this idea a bit. I'm sure most of us would be totally against it for the very reasons that he states:

"Teams normally spend months preparing the draft, whether it's scouting prospects or compiling a draft board. It would be unfair to expect NHL GMs and their personnel staffs to be able to get themselves ready with a strategy when their prep time can be measured in minutes. Afterall, this isn't a fantasy draft."​

... But ... how about a slight variation?
Why not do the lottery well in advance for all EXCEPT the top 3 teams or so? There's nothing wrong with "drawing the balls" in reverse order, no one says it has to be 1st ball out = 1st pick, 2nd = 2nd, etc. As long as the original probabilities are always true (e.g. Team X has a Z% chance at 1st pick, etc. whether weighted or not), then it can be done bottom up.
So, the 3 or so unkown teams know roughly where they will pick and can scout & plan for those possibilities. The other 27 or so know exactly where they'll pick, and they too can scout & plan accordingly.
Then, imagine the excitement on draft day! Down to a few teams and just like a Miss America contest, choose the 2nd runner up (i.e. 3rd), and then it's down to the final 2! And the winner is ... !

 

[Jaded-Fan]

If TSN trumps LA Times . . . then the lottery sounds a hell of a lot like what we heard of Bettman's plan, with the 4, 3, 2, 1 lottery balls:


The Times reported some details of what it believes will be in the new accord. One of them was that when the NHL entry draft lottery is held to determine order of selection that every team will have an equal chance -- one in 30 -- of getting the first overall pick and the right to choose phenom Sidney Crosby.

Sources tell TSN that when the lottery is conducted, it will be a slightly weighted lottery, giving the teams that have performed poorly over the last three or four seasons a slightly better chance than those who have performed well.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=129820

 

[Mothra]

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.

No.....whats sad is they were in last place with all those guys

 

[HockeyCritter]

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.

But the fact that the Caps were never higher than 27th WITH those players means nothing??

 

[HockeyCritter]

And I don't care about Crosby ---- take him ----- I just want my top five pick dagnabbit!!!!!!!

 

[HSHS]

Here's to hoping that both TSN and LA Times are right on the draft... 1/30 for #1 pick and slightly weighted for picks 2-30.