Draft lottery changes coming: 2015 odds tweaked, 2016 top three spots drawn

[Beerz]

THE NFL DOESN'T DRAFT 18 YEAR OLDS!

If the NHL waited until a kid was 21 to allow them to be drafted, you wouldn't need a lottery because you have a much clearer picture which guys had a better shot at making it.

and if you want to say MLB, hey you can't even trade a draft pick in that league.

That doesnt make sense.

 

[Karate Johnson*]

That doesnt make sense.

The notion makes sense. If kids were older when they got drafted you would have a better "hit" rate.

But his post isn't relevent to the draft lotto discussion.

 

[Beerz]

The notion makes sense. If kids were older when they got drafted you would have a better "hit" rate.

But his post isn't relevent to the draft lotto discussion.

Sure. But all teams would. It doesn't really solve anything.

 

[enthusiast]

one on a court doesn't do jack as it's shown all throughout NBA history.

Quite the contrary. One #1 pick and a supporting cast built around him can do everything, from the 80s pistons to the 90s rockets to the 00s spurs. The draft wasn't really the same before that, but you could argue the 70s Sonics had similar success around Webster before he fell off. And that's just champions.

 

[EichHart]

Sure. But all teams would. It doesn't really solve anything.

Agreed, it really doesn't solve anything. He uses the NBA as an example of parity...As an avid NBA fan, the NBA has the least amount of parity out of all the leagues. (Due to the salary cap structure) In terms of parity I think it goes like this with the NBA having the least and the NHL having the most.

NBA

MLB

NFL

NHL

 

[Karate Johnson*]

How many #1 overall draft picks not named LeBron have won the NBA championship?

 

[Beerz]

Quite the contrary. One #1 pick and a supporting cast built around him can do everything, from the 80s pistons to the 90s rockets to the 00s spurs. The draft wasn't really the same before that, but you could argue the 70s Sonics had similar success around Webster before he fell off. And that's just champions.

Pistons had Thomas, Mark Aguirre and Joe Dumars hardly a one man show ... (They won 1 NBA Championship in the 80's)

Rockets had Drexler, Hakeem and Sampson

Spurs had Duncan and Robinson

 

[jfb392]

I mean't we will have to tank for 2 more seasons.

The teams in the near future may have more talent, but will likely still lose a lot of games whether Murray likes it or not.
The roster was torn down completely and expecting kids to turn it around that quickly is unreasonable since forwards usually begin their prime around 23 and defenseman are likely a bit later (can't remember the number right now).

None of the key spots are even filled right now.

 

[enthusiast]

Pistons had Thomas, Mark Aguirre and Joe Dumars hardly a one man show ... (They won 1 NBA Championship in the 80's)

Rockets had Drexler, Hakeem and Sampson

Spurs had Duncan and Robinson

As long as we're going headlong off the rails:


Aguirre was already on the decline, and despite his reputation declined in scoring to the point that Rodman's deficiencies were no longer enough to have him coming off the bench. There's a reason he got moved for a 34 year old Dantley (Braves RIP). Dumars I'll give you, but all-defensive in the 90s NBA .

And yes, the season started in 1989. The team was built in the 80s if we're delving into semantic hyperspecificity.

Drexler played half a season for the Rockets during their championship years, and it was below average for his career during a point he was coasting on reputation. Ralph Sampson didn't play for the Rockets in their championship years, he was in the minors after a failed stint overseas.

For the Spurs, Duncan was the #1 I was referencing. Even if you think Rob was a major player at 38 for the 03 ship, that's yet another two that decade won without him. This year's was more of a collective effort than the prior 4 for sure.



The point remains that it's a dramatically different league. In the NBA, Ovechkin and Backstrom would have won a championship by now. In the NFL, Crosby would be Manning/Brady/Rogers.

 

[Beerz]

You're right.. I got the wrong Rockets team in my head .. But lets not act like Clyde was some old man ... he still was putting up over 20+ a game


Looking back I'll concede the Pistons and to a lesser extent Rockets were both pretty well rounded teams ... but it's still the exception to the norm

 

[enthusiast]

Looking back I'll concede the Pistons and to a lesser extent Rockets were both pretty well rounded teams ... but it's still the exception to the norm

That's also fair. Hopefully McDavid/Eichel round out to be anywhere from a James to a Nowitzki

 

[Paxon]

I think it's clear in basketball that one player does make a bigger difference, if for no other reason than he plays a massively greater percentage of the game if he's a high-end player. It's also easier to turn things around quickly in basketball because free agency is a much more viable avenue, and because top-end draftees make an immediate impact playing starters minutes.

 

[Beerz]

I think it's clear in basketball that one player does make a bigger difference, if for no other reason than he plays a massively greater percentage of the game if he's a high-end player. It's also easier to turn things around quickly in basketball because free agency is a much more viable avenue, and because top-end draftees make an immediate impact playing starters minutes.

I don't disagree with that assertion .. one player does have a bigger impact.

 

[Fotes18]

THE NFL DOESN'T DRAFT 18 YEAR OLDS!

If the NHL waited until a kid was 21 to allow them to be drafted, you wouldn't need a lottery because you have a much clearer picture which guys had a better shot at making it.

and if you want to say MLB, hey you can't even trade a draft pick in that league.

This literally has NOTHING to do with why certain leagues have a lottery and others don't.

First lets get to WHY there would be a lottery at all? A Lottery is put in place to discourage tanking, and keep the integrity of the game in tact.

The MLB's draft is purely prospect based, and the players themselves have options. If they're A High School kid, they hold the threat of college over their heads for a higher signing bonus, and if their a Junior in college, the same thing applies. They usually don't have a huge amount of options should they forgo 2 draft selections and make it to their senior year in college, and they're all but forced to sign regardless. Only high picks have any leverage.

In the NFL there is no lottery simply because there isn't a need. The NFL only has a 16 game schedule which often results in multiple, if not many teams being tied with the same records. The tie breaker is strength of schedule, where the team with the weakest SOS gets the higher pick because that shows they're the worse of the teams tied. The NFL season usually boils down to 1 team being the clear cut worst, usually around 2-14 or 3-13, then multiple teams being tied with the same record from 4-12 all the way to 9-7.

The NBA and NHL given the amount of games played, it's actually pretty rare to see a team with the same exact record. This could encourage a team to not field the strongest team possible in hopes of being the worst team and gifting them the #1 pick. If they aren't guaranteed it forces them to weigh the options of potential fan and $$ loss or a CHANCE at the #1 pick.

One of the most interesting ideas for changing the way the draft is run was done by Bill Simmons, it's a complete change, and it involves a wheel, but basically it locks each team in to a certain draft slot every year for the next 30 years. It's actually kind of intriguing to think about, but it will never ever happen.

But the notion that the NHL uses a lottery because they're drafting 18 year olds, while the NFL gets 21-22 year olds really doesn't make a connection. It's all about the amount of games played and the probabilities of teams finishing with the same record.

 

[Bearbait]

All I know is that if these owners change the lottery system for whatever motivation they may have.....and it all backfires on them.....and we pick 1,2 and 3 in the 2015 draft as a result.....I may literally LMAO

 

[Sports Enthusiast]

I like the idea of a lottery but I think both the NHL and NBA do it wrong. The 76ers tanked for the #1 pick and didn't get it. I think these leagues need to punish tanking teams more. This isn't the NFL where a bad team is a bad team. Granted basketball is a talent driven sport but still even a bad team should win 25 or so games with quirks in scheduling and such and lack of great teams. Its obvious the Sabres tried to tank. I would love to see these lotteries become fair to all teams who miss the playoffs. It would make it more interesting and make it more random and interesting. You shouldn't be rewarded for being bad. I hate watching bad teams not try and have their be no penalty for it.

 

[tsujimoto74]

I like the idea of a lottery but I think both the NHL and NBA do it wrong. The 76ers tanked for the #1 pick and didn't get it. I think these leagues need to punish tanking teams more. This isn't the NFL where a bad team is a bad team. Granted basketball is a talent driven sport but still even a bad team should win 25 or so games with quirks in scheduling and such and lack of great teams. Its obvious the Sabres tried to tank. I would love to see these lotteries become fair to all teams who miss the playoffs. It would make it more interesting and make it more random and interesting. You shouldn't be rewarded for being bad. I hate watching bad teams not try and have their be no penalty for it.

If we're only rewarding good teams then why not just give the 1st overall to the Cup winner every year? Intentional tanking is pretty much a myth. Nolan certainly wasn't coaching this team to lose, and the players weren't deliberately throwing games. All the GM did in the past year was move pending UFAs, who weren't coming back anyway, for the best assets available (some players, some picks, some prospects). Why is it Buffalo should be punished for that?

 

[Paxon]

I like the idea of a lottery but I think both the NHL and NBA do it wrong. The 76ers tanked for the #1 pick and didn't get it. I think these leagues need to punish tanking teams more. This isn't the NFL where a bad team is a bad team. Granted basketball is a talent driven sport but still even a bad team should win 25 or so games with quirks in scheduling and such and lack of great teams. Its obvious the Sabres tried to tank. I would love to see these lotteries become fair to all teams who miss the playoffs. It would make it more interesting and make it more random and interesting. You shouldn't be rewarded for being bad. I hate watching bad teams not try and have their be no penalty for it.

So essentially you're rewarding a team for missing the playoffs rather than making the playoffs with a non-negligible chance at getting 1st overall. The team that makes the playoffs gets bounced in the first round, while the team it outplayed down the stretch gets Connor McDavid. You don't see that as being just as big an issue as teams "tanking" for last? In the NBA this year the Atlanta Hawks basically dared the Knicks (who had no 1st rounder) to steal the last playoff spot from them. The coach or GM even said something to the effect of it not being so bad if they miss the playoffs. This was a team that had a substantial lead on the spot only a couple weeks before, and only the Knicks being pathetic prevented them from missing the playoffs.

The whole notion of tanking is so completely overblown. The Sabres aren't trying to be as bad as possible. They made pragmatic decisions that knowingly made them bad, because those were the right decisions. Potentially increasing the value of their own draft pick was an ancillary benefit to receiving a quality return for players who, for the most part, would have been lost for nothing.

The Sabres didn't sit Ryan Miller more often than they should have or anything silly like that. When they traded Vanek early in the year, they got a top 6 player back and then kept him until the very last moment, when they could've flipped him off the bat (and, in retrospect, have gotten better return), further ensuring they'd have been terrible.

It sounds like you're trying to incentivize building on mediocrity rather than engaging in rebuilds. Teams that can't build themselves out of being a mediocre non-playoff team shouldn't get an equal shot at 1st overall as some team that bottoms out at the start of a rebuild.

I can't think of NHL teams that have truly tanked in an unsportsmanlike fashion. All that really comes to mind is everything I've read about the Penguins in Mario's draft year.

 

[krt88]

That doesnt make sense.

Why by time a kid has completed 3 years of college, they are far more developed and you can see who has more potential. Does the NFL need a lottery? No because you know you'll find a good player and any place in the draft, especially within the first round, you have more to work with. Where are mistakes more often made, with one year flashes.

If the NHL drafted players at 21, they'd have completed a junior and gone on to something else, or they would have made multiple years in college, multiple years playing professionally in Europe, you'd have a far clearer picture. You know how big they were (kids don't fill out much after 20), the hockey sense thing would be clearer, the way they play the entire game would be more clear. It wouldn't be necessary.

Did the Colts plan to have having Manning miss an entire year when they knew Luck was in the draft? No but it certainly worked out well for them.

Think about it, if you knew that Patrice Bergeron was going be this good why was he picked 45th overall? Or what about any number of Detroit Red Wings. Zetterberg 110th overall, Datsyuk, 171st overall.

Had they had to wait until they were 21 years old, no way the skills these guys possess wouldn't have been more clear defined thus drafted much higher.

the 2003 NHL redraft, why do fans do this? Because we have a greater body of work to see what they become.

 

[Reddawg]

Typical why doesn't the NHL just come out and say we hate you Buffalo and hope you never succeed.

That's pretty much exactly what went on during the Crosby lottery when we had an equal chance of getting him and ended up with Zagrapan.

 

[LottoPlease]

Stepping away from the anti-Buffalo agenda/conspiracies, I think if anything the NHL has just realized how little Sabres' success means to the ratings and viewership of our market.

We are indeed a smaller market than almost ALL major NHL cities but a much stronger hockey market. They know we will keep watching regardless and thus have no reason not to help nurture the worse-off hockey markets, who are actually at risk of franchise failure, by allowing them even greater chances of success.

If Minny was a team of wet garbage yet the entire state still tuned in to the playoffs all the way through, I don't think the league would be very concerned about them either.

That these proposed changes (which we still don't know much about) may coincide with the most important stage of Sabres' rebuild is not only coincidence, it's of no consequence.

 

[Sabre Dance]

It actually may help us next year because of the Islanders pick. If they pick low teens or around 10th that pick has a better chance of #1. So yeah, we drop some % points for our own pick, but it helps the Islanders pick. Or if we somehow finish around 10th overall, which could happen it also helps us.

So IMo its a positive simply because we have 2 likely high picks. If we only had 1 pick I would be upset.Now if we finish 29th and 30th 1st and 2nd overall and we miss out on picks 1 and 2, I may hurt someone.

 

[B U F F A L O]

I wouldnt be so upset about it if the discussion to change the lottery happened in the past when other teams were so bad and used multiple top lottery picks to rebuild their teams. More specifically and most recently, why werent these proposals being floated when it was obvious the Oilers had a good shot at winning the #1 overall for the 3rd straight season?

 

[Sabre Dance]

I wouldnt be so upset about it if the discussion to change the lottery happened in the past when other teams were so bad and used multiple top lottery picks to rebuild their teams. More specifically and most recently, why werent these proposals being floated when it was obvious the Oilers had a good shot at winning the #1 overall for the 3rd straight season?

Probably because the Oilers were not publicly trying to suck. Tim Murray and the Pegula are so obviously trying, plus they have said it.

 

[Sabre Dance]

I think there should be some added rule, if you are the worst place team and fall out of the top 3, you get an extra pick at the end of the 1st or something. I mean the draft is supposed to be there to help bad teams get better, thats the whole point. If not, then just eliminate the draft and let players sign with whatever team they want.