Draft Lottery rule: max 1 top2 pick in 6-7 years

[Squarp]

Besides Chicago moving up, let's not pretend like the teams that moved up were good or anything. Both the Devils and the Rangers were horrible this year. Kings had 31 wins. Devils had 31 wins. Red wings 32. Sabres 33. Rangers 32. All of these teams were equally bad with the only difference being loser points and a +-1 win. The blackhawks got incredibly lucky but that's how this draft design is supposed to work.

 

[Todd from Leduc]

A team should not be allowed to pick the 1st Overall more than 5 times in a 10 year period. We need to spread the top end talent around the league.

 

[JetsHomer]

One of the worst rule proposals I've ever read

 

[SnuggaRUDE]

The artificial lottery is what caused these problems re: Edmonton 4 1OA. More lottery is not the way to solve it.

 

[Telos]

Honestly, they just need to figure out a way that they don't always give the top pick to just whoever is last, but also don't give the pick to teams wildly underserving and jumping over 10 spots to get it, etc. Then throw in something that keeps a team from getting 1st overall 20 times in a row... There has to be a middle ground somewhere.

 

[Muikea Bulju]

The artificial lottery is what caused these problems re: Edmonton 4 1OA. More lottery is not the way to solve it.

It's not more lottery, it's less lottery, because you wouldn't be able to get the most extreme outcomes for any team

 

[1865]

Some people are such cry babies. The lottery works the same for every team, deal with it already.

I'm sure you would be the first to whine if your team drafted Sam Reinhart and you couldn't draft Mcdavid the year after because of it.

You want a "fair" lottery? Make it so that every team draft 1st once every 31 year. But how boring would that be.

But it doesn't work the same for every team. Some teams suck in various levels but win 3/4 lottery picks. Whereas one team could miss the play-offs once in a decade, get a superstar out of sheer fluke and never miss again. It's luck, it's random and it's nonsense.

 

[DomBarr]

Got any evidence that those GMs made those trades/transactions with the intended purpose of making their team worse in an effort to improve their draft position? Or are we supposed to pretend that GMs can't be inept and any failure to improve must be purposeful?

haha..the selling off of pending UFAs has nothing to do with them being inept it is what non-playoff teams do to get worse and to get an asset for their better players before the players walk for nothing...
Case in point
Edmonton trading David Perron for Klinkhammer and a 1st...a very good return for a rental kudos to the GM for getting a 1st...however there is no way Klinkhammer made the Oilers better

Even better and this was not a rental trade but a hockey one was the Buffalo/Jets deal centered around Kane and Bogosian to the Sabres for Stafford/Myers/picks and prospects this contains both, the Sabres not only overpaid for Kane and Bogosian (ineptitude) but both players were injured so there is NO WAY that the Sabres could be better after the trade than before.

The whole key to "Rebuilding" is to make your team as bad as possible to get the highest draft pick, and as many picks and prospects you can get for your players in trades...

 

[Ace Card Bedard]

You win some you lose some, it's fine.

Philly moved up from #13 to #2 a few years ago.
Chicago moved up from #12 to #3 this year.
Chicago dropped from #7 to #8 last year.

 

[Muikea Bulju]

Jagr was 5OA in 1990.
1) Nolan
2) Nedved
3) Primeau
4) Ricci
5) Jagr

He's not even in the photo on the 90-91 Upper Deck hockey card showing the top four picks in that ridiculously deep draft since he was 5th.

He would have been 1st or 2nd overall, but he deliberately told every other team except Pittsburgh that he would not come to North America. (He was a Mario-fan, and wanted to go to Pittsburgh)

He absolutely dominated the U20 WJC in 1990 before the draft and before turning 18:



That draft is just yet another example of drafts that had 2 very, very solid and almost guaranteed stars on the top of the draft.

 

[LT]

I was wondering why every year seemed to have great top 2 picks. It's because you left out the ones that didn't

Talk about selective data. You left out almost half of the draft years in that entire period.

 

[Muikea Bulju]

You win some you lose some, it's fine.

Philly moved up from #13 to #2 a few years ago.
Chicago moved up from #12 to #3 this year.
Chicago dropped from #7 to #8 last year.

If you have paid any attention at all, it's not "you win some, you lose some"

It is "some win a f***ing boatload, and some never win anything"

The talent should be more evenly spread out, there is absolutely no sense in giving the team that has Taylor Hall over 50% of 1st overall picks

 

[Muikea Bulju]

I was wondering why every year seemed to have great top 2 picks. It's because you left out the ones that didn't

Talk about selective data. You left out almost half of the draft years in that entire period.

Did you read the post at all?

I did not claim that every year has 2 great top2 picks, I claimed that some years have great top2 picks - but that there is almost never 3 equally great picks on the top of the draft.

That is why I proposed to restrict the lottery only concerning the top2 picks, and not just the 1st overall picks, or top3 picks.

If some team wins a five 3rd overall picks in a row, it's not that bad for the rest of the teams as winning two 1st overall picks in the same time.

3rd overall picks have historically not been anywhere near the value of the top2 picks.

 

[ManofSteel55]

The lottery was fine before they rehauled it, thanks Edmonton.

The funniest part is that if they didn't rehaul it, Edmonton would have had a far lower chance at getting McDavid. Thanks for unncessarily changing the spread so we got McDavid. Thanks Bettman.

The lottery system itself is flawed. Just give the worst team the top pick. Or the team with the most points after being eliminated.

 

[AfroThunder396]

The issue isn't the #3 team moving up to #1, or the #6 team moving up to #2. That's the whole point of the draft lottery, is to give bad teams the opportunity to better themselves.

The issue is when you have teams that miss the playoff by a hair that cut 10 other teams in line and get a franchise player.

 

[LT]

Did you read the post at all?

I did not claim that every year has 2 great top2 picks, I claimed that some years have great top2 picks - but that there is almost never 3 equally great picks on the top of the draft.

That is why I proposed to restrict the lottery only concerning the top2 picks, and not just the 1st overall picks, or top3 picks.

If some team wins a five 3rd overall picks in a row, it's not that bad for the rest of the teams as winning two 1st overall picks in the same time.

3rd overall picks have historically not been anywhere near the value of the top2 picks.

But then what about the fairly numerous years where 2nd overall isn't as good? What then? You're trying to project out draft pick value which I'd imagine is a lot more difficult than your method here.

I feel like people think the purpose of the lottery is to prevent tanking, when I'd argue it's moreso to get middling teams out of mediocrity. If the latter is true, the problem you're suggesting isn't really a problem at all.

 

[Hunter Gathers]

The entire premise of limiting the times someone can win a lottery is silly.

It's a lottery. It's luck.

 

[llamateizer]

The colorado pick would count against Ottawa?

also with your 7 years top 2
year 1 NJD/NYR
year 2 CHI, COL
year 3 LAK DET
year 4 BUF EDM
year 5 ANH VAN
year 6 PHI MIN
year 7 FLA ARI

year 8, that means only NJD/NYR and MTL(15th) can pick top 2 ?


1. New Jersey Devils
2. New York Rangers
3. Chicago Blackhawks
4. Colorado Avalanche (from the Ottawa Senators)
5. Los Angeles Kings
6. Detroit Red Wings
7. Buffalo Sabres
8. Edmonton Oilers
9. Anaheim Ducks
10. Vancouver Canucks
11. Philadelphia Flyers
12. Minnesota Wild
13. Florida Panthers
14. Arizona Coyotes
15. Montreal Canadiens

 

[VoluntaryDom]

I get that they don’t want teams drafting 1 over and over and over again, but I think they overcorrected a few years back. A team barely missing the playoffs winning a top 3 pick should be possible but rare, and more often than not, the teams that need help the most shouldn’t be falling 3 spots.

The draft exists to improve terrible teams, so you know, do that.

what do u think of my idea

keep odds and stuff the same but instead of only using the lottery to determine the top 3 picks, use it for the top 15 picks.

i made this in wheel decide and ill demonstrate how the top 15 could play out, using authentic 2019 draft odds

1. COL (via OTT)
2. NJD
3. EDM
4. LA
5. BUF
6. VAN
7. DET
8. NYR
9. CHI
10. PHI
11. MTL
12. MIN
13. ANA
14. FLA
15. AZ

so teams like montreal chicago philly could get "wins" without moving all the way to the top. and a team like in my example anaheim could fall pretty hard.

 

[Muikea Bulju]

But then what about the fairly numerous years where 2nd overall isn't as good? What then? You're trying to project out draft pick value which I'd imagine is a lot more difficult than your method here.

I feel like people think the purpose of the lottery is to prevent tanking, when I'd argue it's moreso to get middling teams out of mediocrity. If the latter is true, the problem you're suggesting isn't really a problem at all.

What about the numerous years that the Draft has no good players, should we just skip the Lottery and give the 1st overall to the worst team, because no one would be tanking to get 1str overall?

Top2 restriction should apply every year. If a team doesn't like the draft that year at all, and doesn't want their lottery pick from the top2, they could just keep your own spot + take a compensatory pick in the end of the 1st round (or somewhere) . Or they could just slide down to 3rd and take their chances next year.

 

[LT]

Can you or anyone else give me a good reason to even have a lottery in the first place? Has it prevented tanking, or just changed it? Is it actually useful and helpful?

 

[Muikea Bulju]

The colorado pick would count against Ottawa?

also with your 7 years top 2
year 1 NJD/NYR
year 2 CHI, COL
year 3 LAK DET
year 4 BUF EDM
year 5 ANH VAN
year 6 PHI MIN
year 7 FLA ARI

year 8, that means only NJD/NYR and MTL(15th) can pick top 2 ?


1. New Jersey Devils
2. New York Rangers
3. Chicago Blackhawks
4. Colorado Avalanche (from the Ottawa Senators)
5. Los Angeles Kings
6. Detroit Red Wings
7. Buffalo Sabres
8. Edmonton Oilers
9. Anaheim Ducks
10. Vancouver Canucks
11. Philadelphia Flyers
12. Minnesota Wild
13. Florida Panthers
14. Arizona Coyotes
15. Montreal Canadiens

The teams in the lottery are not the same every year.

If you think 6-7 years is too much, then take 3-5.

With the 7 year rule, only Fla-Buf-Edm-Njd-Phi from the non-playoff-teams would have been out of the top2 lottery for this year, and the 2019 draft order would have been:

1. Nyr
2. Chi
3. Njd
4. Col (via Ott)
5. Lak
6. Det

etc

(If you slide down Njd to 3rd in the case that they win again, as it happened to be)

I'd say that draft order would please most of the league. Even New Jersey would be happy.

 

[Tawnos]

Can you or anyone else give me a good reason to even have a lottery in the first place? Has it prevented tanking, or just changed it? Is it actually useful and helpful?

I'm not sure if it's prevented tanking or not because these things are a little hard to prove. However, I will say that the Rangers played every game to win down the stretch. They didn't win much, but they certainly tried. Then they got 3 points in their last 4 games of the season, including forcing OT in both games... one of which they tied up with 6 seconds left in the 3rd. Lots of Rangers fans were pissed, because had they lost both of those games in regulation, they would've been 4th from the bottom instead of 6th. Of course, it turned out that 6th was the better slot, but anyway..

 

[Muikea Bulju]

Can you or anyone else give me a good reason to even have a lottery in the first place? Has it prevented tanking, or just changed it? Is it actually useful and helpful?

It has prevented the most outrageous cases, but it still has rewarded some superlucky teams that choose to suck year after year (... cough... edmonton... cough... new jersey...)

It's not fair to the Phoenixes and Vancouvers of the world who never seem to win.

 

[Tawnos]

This is a little complex, but I do think that the rule should be that you can only win the lottery from outside of the top-3 twice in a 5 year span.

So, for example, if the Rangers win the 2OA as they did this year, and then they win the 1-3OA next year after finishing 5th from the bottom, the only way they'd be allowed to pick top-3 in the next 3 years is if they actually finished in the bottom-3 of the league.