draft lottery proposal by Gary B

[not quite yoda]

What fans do deserve him more than any other?

hardcore fans. faithfull fans. fans who pack the building win or lose. fans who are starving for the next great player. fans who ve gone through thick and thin. fans whose average fan will know how and why to appreciate him. fans who will know and realize how lucky they are. fans who haven t won the cup recently.fans who truely support their team. knowledgeable, caring fans.

enter philly, toronto, montreal, minnesota, nyr.

 

[Wolfpack]

Simply the fact that the Rangers have a better chance than the poster children of this lockout (Edmonton, Calgary) indicates this system is not fair.

The Rangers, as all of you know, have had among the highest, if not the highest payroll in the NHL all those years that they missed the playoffs. They could buy Tampa Bay and Calgary both, and still have change in their pockets. This scheme rewards their incompetence and punishes the younger teams who built from scratch. It also penalizes teams like the Oilers who did the best they could with an exchange rate handicap and limited funds as compared to New York or Toronto.

I am an Oilers fan, and I don't really see this system as "punishing" the Oilers. They will have an average to above average chance of getting a decent pick. Make no mistake, I do not anticipate the Oilers getting the 1st overall pick. But for a team that always struggles to make the playoffs and usually ends up with 1st round picks in the 12-18 range, a top 10 pick would be a good thing no matter how you look at it.

Unfortunately the Rangers are an anomoly - a big market, big budget team that broke the bank and still couldn't make the playoffs every year. I'm just not too sure how one would get around that.

 

[Matty]

hardcore fans. faithfull fans. fans who pack the building win or lose. fans who are starving for the next great player. fans who ve gone through thick and thin. fans whose average fan will know how and why to appreciate him. fans who will know and realize how lucky they are. fans who haven t won the cup recently.fans who truely support their team. knowledgeable, caring fans.

enter philly, toronto, montreal, minnesota, nyr.

Ahhh...you mean Vancouver

This is a dream world. Every team has fans like that. Every team. So how many 'fans' of this nature do you need to qualify

 

[PecaFan]

So why do you cut it off at 15 teams? Why should playoff team Nashville get a shot while the equally mediocre Islanders get no shot? Who of these teams gets the #1 pick? Or is it evenly weighted amongst the 15 teams? Carolina or Anaheim, both recent Stanley Cup finalists, could end up with Crosby, how do you explain that to Columbus? Or Calgary, who didn't even have a chance?

Isles have made the playoffs the last three seasons. Nashville only once. Even under the proposed system, they're getting more balls than the Isles. Nashville is several years behind the Isles on the "success curve".

You have to cut it off somewhere. Top half/bottom half makes good sense. In twenty five years, there's been a *single* team that fell from the top half of the league to the bottom.

Other years previous falls to the bottom:

'00: Atlanta - Expansion team, no previous results
'99: Tampa - 0 spots (last previous year as well)
'98: Tampa - 6 spots, (#20 to #26)
'97: Boston - 18 spots (#8 to #26)
'96: Ottawa - 0 spots
'95: Ottawa - 0 spots
'94: Ottawa - 0 spots
'93: Ottawa - Expansion
'92: San Jose - Expansion
'91: Quebec - 0 spots
'90: Quebec - 0 spots
'89: Quebec - 5 spots (#16 to #21)
'88: Minnesota - 3 spots (#18 to #21)
'87: Buffalo - 8 spots (#13 to #21)
'86: Detroit - 6 spots (#15 to #21)
'85: Toronto - 3 spots (#18 to #21)
'84: Pittsburgh - 0 spots
'83: Pittsburgh - 9 spots (#12 to #21)
'82: Colorado - 2 spots (#19 to #21)
'81: Winnipeg - 1 spots (#20 to #21)
'80: Colorado - 0 spots (last previous year, but four WHA teams added)

Teams just don't go from good to worst team in the league. Arranging your draft around that premise is simply assinine.

 

[WC Handy*]

hardcore fans. faithfull fans. fans who pack the building win or lose. fans who are starving for the next great player. fans who ve gone through thick and thin. fans whose average fan will know how and why to appreciate him. fans who will know and realize how lucky they are. fans who haven t won the cup recently.fans who truely support their team. knowledgeable, caring fans.

enter philly, toronto, montreal, minnesota, nyr.

Care to tell me why Blues fans don't match your description?

And after you get done with that, then please tell me how the Rangers fans do match your description.

 

[xander]

hardcore fans. faithfull fans. fans who pack the building win or lose. fans who are starving for the next great player. fans who ve gone through thick and thin. fans whose average fan will know how and why to appreciate him. fans who will know and realize how lucky they are. fans who haven t won the cup recently.fans who truely support their team. knowledgeable, caring fans.

enter philly, toronto, montreal, minnesota, nyr.

as Matty said, all teams have fans like that (though, as a ranger fan, I apreciate the compliment.) You can't award the top pick based on intangible and unmeasurable qualities like that. The only acceptable measure for weighting a lottery is wins and losses.

 

[Le Golie]

As a fan of a middle class team I think I have a pretty fair view, but it's not going to be popular.

The NHL last played in 03-04. The teams that were very bad that year got rewarded with high picks in the 2004 draft. To me, that's where the slate gets wiped clean. The NHL doesn't owe these teams anything more than that, they got their reward for being bad. Especially considering the impact this season off will have on every roster. Teams are going to be pretty unrecognizable when hockey starts up again.

 

[not quite yoda]

Care to tell me why Blues fans don't match your description?

average blues fan just ain't as hardcore as the average fan of the cities i named. just like st.louis blues fans aren't as intense as st.louis cardinals fans. it's not st.louis fans per say. it relates to what type of hockey market it is.

 

[X0ssbar]

Just horrible systems being talked about here. If they end up going with anything close to what's being proposed, its' going to be a frickin' disaster. The odds are way too close, and it's almost guaranteed that some great team is going to end up with the first pick.

There are about 15 teams that deserve *zero* shot at the #1 pick. Cup winners like Tampa, Detroit, Colorado, New Jersey, top teams like Ottawa, Philly, my own Canucks, etc.

Yes, we don't know how the standings would have turned out last year. But there's no way in hell any of those teams would have been worst in the league. Here are the last few 30th overall teams, and where they were the previous season:

'04 - Pittsburgh. Previously 29th
'03 - Carolina. 16th
'02 - Atlanta. 28th
'01 - Islanders. 26th

The closest was Carolina, but they were still a bottom half team. Frankly, only these teams should have a shot at the #1 pick:

Nashville Predators
Edmonton Oilers
Buffalo Sabres
Minnesota Wild
Los-Angeles Kings
Atlanta Thrashers
Anaheim Mighty Ducks
Carolina Hurricanes
Florida Panthers
New-York Rangers
Phoenix Coyotes
Columbus Bluejackets
Washington Capitals
Chicago Blackhawks
Pittsburgh Penguins

The league essentially has two possible outcomes here. They either give the pick to a team that was previously bad, or a team that was previously good. Since the whole point of the draft is to give high picks to bad teams, in what possible way can you justify giving it to a good team, that didn't have even a single season of bad play?

"Well, OK, sure they won the Cup and made the playoffs in the three years preceding the lockout, have one of the highest payrolls in the league, and have won the Cup again since the lockout, and haven't missed the playoffs for 10 years, but gosh golly gee, we really think that in that one year, they would have been the worst team in the league".

Finally, someone who gets it.

 

[not quite yoda]

as Matty said, all teams have fans like that (though, as a ranger fan, I apreciate the compliment.) You can't award the top pick based on intangible and unmeasurable qualities like that. The only acceptable measure for weighting a lottery is wins and losses.

i never said that crosby should actualy be awarded to one of those teams. it would just be justice. like detroit fans deserve to be on that list except they have 3 cups in the past 10 years and have been completely stacked with HOF talent for years. they aren't as hungry much less starving.

but, yes, i agree that it should be a weighted lottery based on performance.

 

[Le Golie]

If you want a weighted system, how about;

* Use the last five seasons.
* Start with each team having 150 balls for each year.
* Take one ball away for each point earned by a team each season.
* Take one ball away for each playoff series played.
* Take three balls away for each playoff series won.

 

[CREW99AW]

SO if I understand many posts.
For the betterment of hockey let New york have Crosby. It will bring back tons of fans and help the NHL overall.

Well if that's what it takes BUT not for free.

The Yankees spend like crazy but the fans don't care as long as the Yankees have the best playes and win.

So let them pay. Let the club that gets crosby sell him.
20million cash. + 2 first rounders.
The New York fans won't care as long as they get Crosby.

I've no interest in watching large market teams buy Crosby.That reeks of the Kovalev sale,very bush league.

teams that lost the Crosby sweepstakes want him??Then let them offer up their best young bluechip talent,outbid the other teams.

 

[WC Handy*]

average blues fan just ain't as hardcore as the average fan of the cities i named. just like st.louis blues fans aren't as intense as st.louis cardinals fans. it's not st.louis fans per say. it relates to what type of hockey market it is.

Actually, what it appears to relate to is nothing more than how far north a team is. Plenty of cities (including St Louis but not limited to) have more than proven themselves as hockey markets. So, you can go ahead and judge cities however you want, but I'm going to go ahead and put some stock in what the numbers say... such as the fact that only 4 teams have averaged more people per game than the Blues over the last 5 years (all while competing with two other successful sports teams).

Are you going to explain to me why the Rangers were on your list?

 

[ResidentAlien*]

If you want a weighted system, how about;

* Use the last five seasons.
* Start with each team having 150 balls for each year.
* Take one ball away for each point earned by a team each season.
* Take one ball away for each playoff series played.
* Take three balls away for each playoff series won.

 

[Drury_Sakic]

How can you say who would have been good...and who would have been bad last year...


Yeah, you know what... the Avs likely would have finished in the top 8 out west last year...but I cannot say that for sure...

You have Detroit, St. Louis, Dallas, San Jose, Nashville, LA, Calgary, Edm, Anahime, Phoenix... all of which if the ball rolled right could have bumbed Colorado out(remember it almost happend before Bourque was brought in).... Hell... there is an outside chance they could have finished last in the west...That said... they could have finished in 1st place.... you just don't know?

And the Wings... Think Cujo was going to cary them? Manny perhaps..... St. Louis could have been on the outside looking in..another perhaps last place team...


I have no problem with teams that have been "bad" getting a strong shot... but teams that were"good" must get at least a sniff of hope, because we really don't know what would have happend.. I dare say last season was shaping up to be one of great transition.... I expect the Pens would have made the playoffs.. Yotes would have been a good shot...Florida was looking at the 7-8 seed... Caps were bound for the bottom still.....Atlanta for me was a Dark horse for the ECF...The Jackets might have found their way in with a bit of luck(look at Nash). Teams like Colorado, Detroit, St. Lousi, and Dallas were all starting to show their age and could have tanked with an injury to the right/wrong player.....


Thats why each team must have SOME % chance at the top picks..

 

[Le Golie]

Yeah all those numbers were arbitrary but if I had the time to research it a bit and come up with something more structured and logical that seems to provide teams with fair odds then it might be better. I don't have the time right now.

 

[Matty]

As a fan of a middle class team I think I have a pretty fair view, but it's not going to be popular.

The NHL last played in 03-04. The teams that were very bad that year got rewarded with high picks in the 2004 draft. To me, that's where the slate gets wiped clean. The NHL doesn't owe these teams anything more than that, they got their reward for being bad. Especially considering the impact this season off will have on every roster. Teams are going to be pretty unrecognizable when hockey starts up again.

Actually, I agree that an unweighted lottery is the fairest solution. That or just move the draft age up to 19...which is the best solution IMO.

And my view doesn't stand on the fact that teams will be unrecognizable. It stands on the simple fact that no season was played and no standings are relevent. No teams got post season revenues. All fans suffered equally.

 

[not quite yoda]

Actually, what it appears to relate to is nothing more than how far north a team is. Plenty of cities (including St Louis but not limited to) have more than proven themselves as hockey markets. So, you can go ahead and judge cities however you want, but I'm going to go ahead and put some stock in what the numbers say... such as the fact that only 4 teams have averaged more people per game than the Blues over the last 5 years (all while competing with two other successful sports teams).

Are you going to explain to me why the Rangers were on your list?

(non-ridiculously loaded) hardcore ranger fans are loud animals. that's great. it's a big market that can use him. they've been out of the playoffs for how long? how long have there been ranger fans for?

(also:

if crosby becomes anywhere close to the one... and he plays his whole career in ranger blue... that is the kind of thing that can attract major television stations to put the nhl on primetime tv. that s been noted)

but it s not about that. the fans are hungry there. they are wild and deserving. much like philly fans.

 

[not quite yoda]

If you want a weighted system, how about;

* Use the last five seasons.
* Start with each team having 150 balls for each year.
* Take one ball away for each point earned by a team each season.
* Take one ball away for each playoff series played.
* Take three balls away for each playoff series won.

CBJ has only been in the league for 4 seasons. contrary to all other teams. which unbalances the whole thing. which prooves this wasn't thought out well. sorry. but try again.

 

[me2]

If this is the system that we must use, I'd much prefer to see the years weighted. Everyone starts with one ball and then...

Missing playoffs in 03-04 = 3 balls
Missing playoffs in 02-03 = 2 balls
Missing playoffs in 01-02 = 1 ball

Then the most balls a team could have would be 7 and the fewest would be 1. I still think that the worst teams over the last few years should have more than 7 times the chance than the best, team but this would at the very least be an improvement.

That is the system I live the best. either 3-2-1 or 2-1-1 but it should be something that weights more recent higher.

 

[CGG]

Because you say so? Every single year an arbitrary number is used to determine which teams have a shot at the #1 pick.

It's not even remotely arbitrary. It's always the worst 5 teams, only because you can move up four spots if you win the lottery. It's also heavily weighted so that the worse you are, the greater the chance of picking 1st. But by and large, you have actual results to base a draft on. No arguing at all. Standings speak for themselves. No one is trying to figure out who would have finished in the bottom 5 since you actually know who did finish in the bottom 5.

You miss the point though. Normal drafts are based on the results of the prior year, with only minor possible tweaking from a lottery to prevent the Lemieux / Daigle "intentional tanking" scenarios. Everyone knows the rules going in.

Now in the absence of a season, to try to come up with a scenario where only a handful of teams have a shot is absurd and leads only to problems. If you pick what someone determines to be the 5 worst teams in the league based on the last 5 years or the last 20 years or the colour of their uniforms, the #6 team on the list always has a serious beef. If only 10 teams get a shot, #11 has a legitimate beef.

You're dealing with complete uncertainty as to what would have happened. Columbus has been the worst team in recent times, but they could have won the Stanley Cup in '05, you don't know. Detroit also could have finished last. Who predicted both Tampa and Calgary would have made the playoffs, let alone face each other in the final?

Everyone needs a chance at the #1 pick because, had a season been played, everyone had a chance to finish last overall. The only argument should be how to weight it so that the "lesser" teams get a better chance, if that's what you really want.

 

[DARKSIDE]

How can you say who would have been good...and who would have been bad last year...


Yeah, you know what... the Avs likely would have finished in the top 8 out west last year...but I cannot say that for sure...

You have Detroit, St. Louis, Dallas, San Jose, Nashville, LA, Calgary, Edm, Anahime, Phoenix... all of which if the ball rolled right could have bumbed Colorado out(remember it almost happend before Bourque was brought in).... Hell... there is an outside chance they could have finished last in the west...That said... they could have finished in 1st place.... you just don't know?

And the Wings... Think Cujo was going to cary them? Manny perhaps..... St. Louis could have been on the outside looking in..another perhaps last place team...


I have no problem with teams that have been "bad" getting a strong shot... but teams that were"good" must get at least a sniff of hope, because we really don't know what would have happend.. I dare say last season was shaping up to be one of great transition.... I expect the Pens would have made the playoffs.. Yotes would have been a good shot...Florida was looking at the 7-8 seed... Caps were bound for the bottom still.....Atlanta for me was a Dark horse for the ECF...The Jackets might have found their way in with a bit of luck(look at Nash). Teams like Colorado, Detroit, St. Lousi, and Dallas were all starting to show their age and could have tanked with an injury to the right/wrong player.....


Thats why each team must have SOME % chance at the top picks..

I totally agree with you. For instance take my team the Devils, if you go back using records 4 or 5 yeras ago, their core players where in their prime and they had a pretty good stable of kids. That's not the case now, but yet people want to punish them because they had a great run. The hell with that. This whole lockout was due to the big spenders like the Rangers and Toronto and on the other side teams like Columbus, Pittsburgh and Edmonton. The heck with everyone. Let them use the system that's being discussed on this board and to quote uncle Vin from Good Fellas "Anda that's that!

 

[CGG]

Isles have made the playoffs the last three seasons. Nashville only once. Even under the proposed system, they're getting more balls than the Isles. Nashville is several years behind the Isles on the "success curve".

You have to cut it off somewhere. Top half/bottom half makes good sense. In twenty five years, there's been a *single* team that fell from the top half of the league to the bottom.

Other years previous falls to the bottom:

'00: Atlanta - Expansion team, no previous results
'99: Tampa - 0 spots (last previous year as well)
'98: Tampa - 6 spots, (#20 to #26)
'97: Boston - 18 spots (#8 to #26)
'96: Ottawa - 0 spots
'95: Ottawa - 0 spots
'94: Ottawa - 0 spots
'93: Ottawa - Expansion
'92: San Jose - Expansion
'91: Quebec - 0 spots
'90: Quebec - 0 spots
'89: Quebec - 5 spots (#16 to #21)
'88: Minnesota - 3 spots (#18 to #21)
'87: Buffalo - 8 spots (#13 to #21)
'86: Detroit - 6 spots (#15 to #21)
'85: Toronto - 3 spots (#18 to #21)
'84: Pittsburgh - 0 spots
'83: Pittsburgh - 9 spots (#12 to #21)
'82: Colorado - 2 spots (#19 to #21)
'81: Winnipeg - 1 spots (#20 to #21)
'80: Colorado - 0 spots (last previous year, but four WHA teams added)

Teams just don't go from good to worst team in the league. Arranging your draft around that premise is simply assinine.

You've just proved that it does happen though, look at Boston. I don't care if it's rare, to exclude a pile of teams who could have potentially legitimately landed the #1 pick had there been a season is very messy. Besides, you don't need to end up in the basement, just the bottom 5 in order to get a shot at the 1st pick, so add Carolina to your list.

You have to look at it backwards too. Teams quite often go from lottery picks to the upper half. San Jose last year was proof of this. And the ultimate winner was Quebec in 1992-93. 52 points to 104 points. They had been the worst team in the league 4 years running at that point. If the 1992-93 season had been cancelled, should they have gotten the first pick in 1993? Daigle was hyped just as much as Crosby.

I think it's quite probable that one of the lucky losers (i.e. Atlanta, Columbus, NY Rangers, etc.) would have finished in the top half in 2004-05, but they would get a shot at Crosby while St Louis doesn't?

 

[Mess]

Not a damn thing. Are the players going to pay for their own development costs then? What you suggest means that the minor leagues should be dismantled as with no draft why bother developing players when you can just buy them? I guess you can also get rid of the NHLPA all together as they are no longer needed, its every man for himself? Makes all the sense in the world. I'm actually all for that as it would mean the teams could set an industry wide entry level cap themselves and have collusion rights just like the players have had and not have to worry about the other BS. Now if we can only get the PA to go along with that things would be golden.

Did you miss that part about just this year due to the lockout .. ?

However on the topic .. What about all the training and development, coaching and experience and other costs that Hockey Canada has invested in these young players ...Euro leagues receive huge transfers fees from clubs to reimburse them and allow the Ovechkin, Kovalchuks and Zherdev's to come over to the NHL ...

Why should they bother if they all go off and increase the economy in another country??

 

[Le Golie]

CBJ has only been in the league for 4 seasons. contrary to all other teams. which unbalances the whole thing. which prooves this wasn't thought out well. sorry. but try again.

Ok, ok..I think I've got it. Let's use the last FOUR seasons.