Herc-Rock's Solution for the 2005 draft lottery

[The Mighty Duck Man]

All I've seen so far for solutions that see you get more balls for each year you missed the playoffs. IMO, the flaws in that are what about those teams that just barely miss the playoffs, yet have equal shots as teams that are on the bottom most of the time. Therefore, I've decided that a way to do this would be to use a weighted system, but based on point totals over the last three years rather than if they made the playoffs or not. The bottom five would get six balls, the next five would get five balls, the next five would get four balls, the next five would get three balls, the next five would get two balls, and the last four would get one ball. Here's the standings that would determine the order:

Columbus-188 points
Pittsburgh-192 points
Florida-205 points
Atlanta-206 points
New York Rangers-227 points
Carolina-228 points
Chicago-234 points
Nashville-234 points
Washington-236 points
Buffalo-239 points
Anaheim-240 points
Phoenix-241 points
Calgary-248 points
Minnesota-251 points
Los Angeles-254 points
Montreal-257 points
Tampa Bay-268 points
New York Islander-270 points
Edmonton-273 points
San Jose-276 points
St.Louis-288 points
Boston-292 points
Dallas-298 points
Vancouver-299 points
Toronto-301 points
New Jersey-303 points
Colorado-304 points
Philadelphia-305 points
Ottawa-309 points
Detroit-335 points




On top of that, I used my system and drafted out a potential order. Here it is:

1.Columbus Blue Jackets
2.Nashville Predators
3.Florida Panthers
4.Phoenix Coyotes
5.Anaheim Mighty Ducks
6.Dallas Stars
7.Carolina Hurricanes
8.New York Rangers
9.Los Angeles Kings
10.Calgary Flames
11.Atlanta Thrashers
12.Chicago Blackhawks
13.Buffalo Sabres
14.Minnesota Wild
15.Washington Capitals
16.Vancouver Canucks
17.Pittsburgh Penguins
18.New York Islanders
19.Tampa Bay Lightning
20.Philadelphia Flyers
21.Toronto Maple Leafs
22.Montreal Canadiens
23.Ottawa Senators
24.Edmonton Oilers
25.San Jose Sharks
26.Detroit Red Wings
27.Boston Bruins
28.St.Louis Blues
29.Colorado Avalanche
30.New Jersey Devils

Click to read more...

 

[cassius]

The last ranked team gets 17th pick?

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

The last ranked team gets 17th pick?

That's just what I did, picking them on my own. It's obviously surprising, but that's what could happen if Pittsburgh's ball wasn't pick.

Actually, the last ranked team(C-Bus) got first overall. P-Burgh was second last.

 

[DARKSIDE]

That's just what I did, picking them on my own. It's obviously surprising, but that's what could happen if Pittsburgh's ball wasn't pick.

Actually, the last ranked team(C-Bus) got first overall. P-Burgh was second last.

I have no problem picking at 30 if that means we pick at 31. Really, not an entirely bad deal for the teams that pick late in the first and early in the second. It's like having to late first rounders, if this is the NHL plan.

 

[Dave is a killer]

*drools over the thought of adding Jack Johnson to the Predators blueline*

 

[nomorekids]

*drools over the thought of adding Jack Johnson to the Predators blueline*

I would be shocked if we took Johnson, with so many high profile centers on the board. I'd trade the pick to someone we know wanted Johnson and move down...and snag Pouliot, Brule or Kopitar

 

[tmangos]

This is not entirely a new idea. What's different about this idea from some I've seen is the concept of "the bottom five would get six balls, the next five would get five balls, the next five would get four balls, the next five ...". From the list above, then, what you state as a flaw with the "missed the playoffs" idea:

... the flaws in that are what about those teams that just barely miss the playoffs, yet have equal shots as teams that are on the bottom most of the time. ...

can also be seen as a flaw here, too. i.e. Why should the Rangers get 6 balls and Carolina only 5 when just 1 point separated the two? Why should Buffalo get 5 and Anaheim just 4, or Toronto 2 Devils 1, again only 1 point difference?
I'm not saying I don't like this idea - I think it's a start. In fact, I do like it better than the "missed the playoffs" one.
How about modifying your idea to something like this:
- Each team on the list should get more "balls" (or lottery tickets, if you will) assigned to them than the next team in the list, because they got less points. And the # tickets more should somehow reflect how much "worse" the team was.
- One way to do this: give each team 350 minus #Pts lottery tickets! e.g. Columbus gets 350-188=162 tickets, next Pit gets 350-192=158 tickets, ..., lastly Det gets 350-335=15 tickets. I chose 350 cuz it's a bit bigger than the highest points - feel free to change.
- Doing this means a total of 2,699 "balls" or possible outcomes of the lottery.
Here's the list again. Last column would be #tickets assigned to the team using 350-Pts formula:
Team Pts 350-Pts=#tickets
CLB 188 162
PIT 192 158
FLO 205 145
ATL 206 144
NYR 227 123
CAR 228 122
CHI 234 116
NAS 234 116
WAS 236 114
BUF 239 111
ANA 240 110
PHO 241 109
CAL 248 102
MIN 251 99
LAK 254 96
MON 257 93
TBL 268 82
NYI 270 80
EDM 273 77
SJS 276 74
STL 288 62
BOS 292 58
DAL 298 52
VAN 299 51
TOR 301 49
NJD 303 47
COL 304 46
PHI 305 45
OTT 309 41
DET 335 15
Tot 7801 2699

 

[The Mighty Duck Man]

This is not entirely a new idea. What's different about this idea from some I've seen is the concept of "the bottom five would get six balls, the next five would get five balls, the next five would get four balls, the next five ...". From the list above, then, what you state as a flaw with the "missed the playoffs" idea:

can also be seen as a flaw here, too. i.e. Why should the Rangers get 6 balls and Carolina only 5 when just 1 point separated the two? Why should Buffalo get 5 and Anaheim just 4, or Toronto 2 Devils 1, again only 1 point difference?
I'm not saying I don't like this idea - I think it's a start. In fact, I do like it better than the "missed the playoffs" one.
How about modifying your idea to something like this:
- Each team on the list should get more "balls" (or lottery tickets, if you will) assigned to them than the next team in the list, because they got less points. And the # tickets more should somehow reflect how much "worse" the team was.
- One way to do this: give each team 350 minus #Pts lottery tickets! e.g. Columbus gets 350-188=162 tickets, next Pit gets 350-192=158 tickets, ..., lastly Det gets 350-335=15 tickets. I chose 350 cuz it's a bit bigger than the highest points - feel free to change.
- Doing this means a total of 2,699 "balls" or possible outcomes of the lottery.
Here's the list again. Last column would be #tickets assigned to the team using 350-Pts formula:
Team Pts 350-Pts=#tickets
CLB 188 162
PIT 192 158
FLO 205 145
ATL 206 144
NYR 227 123
CAR 228 122
CHI 234 116
NAS 234 116
WAS 236 114
BUF 239 111
ANA 240 110
PHO 241 109
CAL 248 102
MIN 251 99
LAK 254 96
MON 257 93
TBL 268 82
NYI 270 80
EDM 273 77
SJS 276 74
STL 288 62
BOS 292 58
DAL 298 52
VAN 299 51
TOR 301 49
NJD 303 47
COL 304 46
PHI 305 45
OTT 309 41
DET 335 15
Tot 7801 2699

Heck, that's an even better idea. I used mine because I could figure out who'd get Crosby under my formula, but that's a much better idea. Something I'd love to see the NHL use.

 

[GKJ]

The last ranked team gets 17th pick?

Better than 30th which is also a possability.


Kings get 9th pick and Flyers get 20th, I'll take it.

 

[The Old Master]

as nice as it would be for det or any other top team to draft crosby, do the rest of you realy want to take that chance? how would you guys in det. feel if ott., phi., col., or njd. drafted cosby does your greed to darft crosby override the major setback you would face if one of your rivals gets crosby?

 

[CGG]

as nice as it would be for det or any other top team to draft crosby, do the rest of you realy want to take that chance? how would you guys in det. feel if ott., phi., col., or njd. drafted cosby does your greed to darft crosby override the major setback you would face if one of your rivals gets crosby?

I think that risk is worth it, it's a far better option than having someone declare that only the worst five crap teams of the past few years have a shot at getting Crosby. Add Crosby to Atlanta, for instance, and I'd be a lot more worried about Atlanta in 2 years than New Jersey.

You can't insert a cutoff point anywhere without being completely unfair. For instance, if only 5 teams have a shot, the 6th worst will have a legitimate complaint. If only 25 teams have a shot, the 26th worst will have a legitimate complaint.

 

[Canucks5551]

This is not entirely a new idea. What's different about this idea from some I've seen is the concept of "the bottom five would get six balls, the next five would get five balls, the next five would get four balls, the next five ...". From the list above, then, what you state as a flaw with the "missed the playoffs" idea:

can also be seen as a flaw here, too. i.e. Why should the Rangers get 6 balls and Carolina only 5 when just 1 point separated the two? Why should Buffalo get 5 and Anaheim just 4, or Toronto 2 Devils 1, again only 1 point difference?
I'm not saying I don't like this idea - I think it's a start. In fact, I do like it better than the "missed the playoffs" one.
How about modifying your idea to something like this:
- Each team on the list should get more "balls" (or lottery tickets, if you will) assigned to them than the next team in the list, because they got less points. And the # tickets more should somehow reflect how much "worse" the team was.
- One way to do this: give each team 350 minus #Pts lottery tickets! e.g. Columbus gets 350-188=162 tickets, next Pit gets 350-192=158 tickets, ..., lastly Det gets 350-335=15 tickets. I chose 350 cuz it's a bit bigger than the highest points - feel free to change.
- Doing this means a total of 2,699 "balls" or possible outcomes of the lottery.
Here's the list again. Last column would be #tickets assigned to the team using 350-Pts formula:
Team Pts 350-Pts=#tickets
CLB 188 162
PIT 192 158
FLO 205 145
ATL 206 144
NYR 227 123
CAR 228 122
CHI 234 116
NAS 234 116
WAS 236 114
BUF 239 111
ANA 240 110
PHO 241 109
CAL 248 102
MIN 251 99
LAK 254 96
MON 257 93
TBL 268 82
NYI 270 80
EDM 273 77
SJS 276 74
STL 288 62
BOS 292 58
DAL 298 52
VAN 299 51
TOR 301 49
NJD 303 47
COL 304 46
PHI 305 45
OTT 309 41
DET 335 15
Tot 7801 2699

I like this idea

 

[Big McLargehuge]

I would be so ****ing pissed off if the Penguins pick anywhere outside the top 10.

 

[BrettNYR]

All I've seen so far for solutions that see you get more balls for each year you missed the playoffs. IMO, the flaws in that are what about those teams that just barely miss the playoffs, yet have equal shots as teams that are on the bottom most of the time. Therefore, I've decided that a way to do this would be to use a weighted system, but based on point totals over the last three years rather than if they made the playoffs or not. The bottom five would get six balls, the next five would get five balls, the next five would get four balls, the next five would get three balls, the next five would get two balls, and the last four would get one ball. Here's the standings that would determine the order:

Columbus-188 points
Pittsburgh-192 points
Florida-205 points
Atlanta-206 points
New York Rangers-227 points

It's about damn time the Rangers get some balls.