How would you do the draft?

Status
Not open for further replies.

arrbez

bad chi
Jun 2, 2004
13,352
261
Toronto
Rancid said:
worst ever...your accounting cup wins from over a decade ago. Half those players are retired.

My opinion is that the lotto should be slightly favoured to certain teams by overall records over the last 5 yrs and also by implementing the payrolls at the end of 2003/2004 season as a factor. That would be fair because in the interest of fairness Detroit and Colorado don't even deserve a ball because there is no way they would have finished bottom 5.

No offense, but I think it's just dumb to penalize a franchise for being profitable and trying to win. It's not like they were breaking any rules
 

drbill28

Registered User
Feb 25, 2003
206
0
Pomfret Center, CT
Visit site
Neither solution is fair. Taking away more of a chance for the teams that really didn't sandbag isn't fair either. There are no fair solutions. Just a logical answer of, screw it and move on.

But one thing a 1 ball per team solution would do is to make it far more exciting for the fans. People would at least want to pay attention to the outcome since my (insert local team) might win. It creates some level of interest that say the NFL draft has. Who is going to trade what. They're familiar with the players which makes it interesting to pay attention to. Also, we could all just assign teams a number and plug them into a Random Number Generator until your team wins.

It might be wrong to directly link a player to Gretzky that hasn't played in the NHL. But to create that interest they might have to do that and market getting people familar with Crosby and what he's done as much as possible. We're not just talking hype, but providing his history along with it. Even if it ends up not true at all. I bet they will just believe people will notice and try and let his play do the talking and it won't work.
 

ChrisKreider20

But y u mad?
Jul 21, 2004
5,664
20
Toronto
ToMaLe said:
By far the worse ive heard yet....yours would never be implemented....payrolls dont have a thing to do with anything....and what about the last 5 years?....making the playoffs dont mean a dam thing, the only thing that matters are cup wins...im just going for how long fans have suffered without a cup.....20 teams with 5 balls and the latest cup winners getting 1 and some in between.....im thinking about the fans not the teams....your dont make any sense at all...you think detroit and colorado fans would like your proposal? im sure they would say it sucks!

so your saying that teams with bad management 30 years ago should be rewarded? :amazed: wow

i guess making the playoffs don't mean a damn thing...considering thats what they use yearly to determine the draft order. :biglaugh:

i mean i was just throwing around ideas with the payroll thing if anything I would prefer the rumoured system with the 4 balls and - 1 for every playoffs appearance and -1 for every 1st overall. (the one tsn or what ever was reporting) I actually like that one the best. The payroll idea was one i just threw in to see how it would test and obviously its unpopular so forget I even said that.
 

drbill28

Registered User
Feb 25, 2003
206
0
Pomfret Center, CT
Visit site
arrbez said:
No offense, but I think it's just dumb to penalize a franchise for being profitable and trying to win. It's not like they were breaking any rules
We've been doing that every year for a long long time. Whether there's a season or not doesn't matter the principle is the same.
 

Debrincat93

Registered User
Dec 4, 2002
22,669
468
Michigan
Nhl.com
as a wing fan, i want to have 30 balls in the pot, if we get the 30th pick, WOW bad luck, if not anything from 29 and down i think we pretty much ran away like bandits...

as for what id probably perfer in honesty, average the last 3 seasons together and give it to teams that needs it, tho i dont think CBJ or ATL need it as badly as Carolina and Pittsburgh need it... lol... atl doesnt need crosby, tho that would be a exciting top 3 for YEARS APON YEARS to come
 

drbill28

Registered User
Feb 25, 2003
206
0
Pomfret Center, CT
Visit site
zetterberg40 said:
as a wing fan, i want to have 30 balls in the pot, if we get the 30th pick, WOW bad luck, if not anything from 29 and down i think we pretty much ran away like bandits...

as for what id probably perfer in honesty, average the last 3 seasons together and give it to teams that needs it, tho i dont think CBJ or ATL need it as badly as Carolina and Pittsburgh need it... lol... atl doesnt need crosby, tho that would be a exciting top 3 for YEARS APON YEARS to come
A while back on this thread I posted an indea of a three year point average. Then ranking them and assigning one ball to the best ten and so on down in goups of 10. Then maybe add or subtract balls for various happenings during that 3 year span. It actually works out quite good. There's less teams to argue about than a straight "lose x balls for making playoffs" system. I even made a spreadsheet. But in the end there's no fair solution so just say screw it.
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
Let me preface this by saying that my first choice (and the only real fair resolution) would be to up the draft age to 19, skip the draft this year, and let Crosby et al be picked based on next season's results. And I am a fan of the Sharks and Isles, who would do much better in a completely random "everybody gets one ping pong ball" draft lottery than in any past performance based lottery.

The draft is not about (and never has been about) predicting the future, it has always been about past results (ignoring the first few drafts in the 60s with the round robin #1 picks). Any talk about trying to predict how teams may or may not do under a new CBA, and using that to base draft order, is a complete red herring.

No, we don't have standings from last year, but does that make all 30 teams suddenly equal - no. Just because we don't have perfect information about what happened (or would have happened) last season, people (mostly fans of the good teams in enlightened self interest) say we need to throw out any information we do have.

I believe a lottery, based on performance (weighted over the last 3 yrs) is the most fair way to determine draft order.

I made a previous analysis which showed that various proposed draft lottery schemes historically were much more accurate two years down the road than a pure random draw:

http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=144410

So I ask you, proponents of the "everybody get an equal chance" camp, would you bet $100 that a random draw (picked in a public and transparent way) would do a better job in predicting the non-playoff teams next year than two out of three of these lottery weighting schemes - either a single draw or greater than 5 of 10 random draws.


Applying these schemes to the 2003-04 results:

Scheme A - Single Season (2003-04) Points

Rank Team Pts

1 Pittsburgh Penguins 58
2 Chicago Blackhawks 59
3 Washington Capitals 59
4 Columbus Blue Jackets 62
5 Phoenix Coyotes 68
6 New-York Rangers 69
7 Florida Panthers 75
8 Carolina Hurricanes 76
9 Anaheim Mighty Ducks 76
10 Atlanta Thrashers 78
11 Los-Angeles Kings 81
12 Minnesota Wild 83
13 Buffalo Sabres 85
14 Edmonton Oilers 89


15 Nashville Predators 91
16 New-York Islanders 91
17 St. Louis Blues 91
18 Montreal Canadiens 93
19 Calgary Flames 94
20 Dallas Stars 97
21 Colorado Avalanche 100
22 New-Jersey Devils 100
23 Philadelphia Flyers 101
24 Vancouver Canucks 101
25 Ottawa Senators 102
26 Toronto Maple Leafs 103
27 Boston Bruins 104
28 San Jose Sharks 104
29 Tampa-Bay Lightning 106
30 Detroit Red Wings 109



Scheme B - 3 yr Weighted Avg (03-04 50% / 02-03 30% /01-02 20%)

Rank Team 03-04 02-03 01-02 avg

1 Pittsburgh Penguins 58 65 69 62.3
2 Columbus Blue Jackets 62 69 57 63.1
3 Florida Panthers 75 70 60 70.5
4 Atlanta Thrashers 78 74 54 72
5 Chicago Blackhawks 59 79 96 72.4
6 New-York Rangers 69 78 80 73.9
7 Washington Capitals 59 92 85 74.1
8 Carolina Hurricanes 76 61 91 74.5
9 Phoenix Coyotes 68 78 95 76.4
10 Anaheim Mighty Ducks 76 95 69 80.3
11 Buffalo Sabres 85 72 82 80.5
12 Nashville Predators 91 74 69 81.5
13 Los-Angeles Kings 81 78 95 82.9
14 Minnesota Wild 83 95 73 84.6


15 Calgary Flames 94 75 79 85.3
16 Montreal Canadiens 93 77 87 87
17 New-York Islanders 91 83 96 89.6
18 Edmonton Oilers 89 92 92 90.5
19 San Jose Sharks 104 73 99 93.7
20 Tampa-Bay Lightning 106 93 69 94.7
21 St. Louis Blues 91 99 98 94.8
22 Boston Bruins 104 87 101 98.3
23 Dallas Stars 97 111 90 99.8
24 Vancouver Canucks 101 104 94 100.5
25 Toronto Maple Leafs 103 98 100 100.9
26 Colorado Avalanche 100 105 99 101.3
27 New-Jersey Devils 100 108 95 101.4
28 Philadelphia Flyers 101 107 97 102
29 Ottawa Senators 102 113 94 103.7
30 Detroit Red Wings 109 110 116 110.7


Scheme C - Made Playoff last 3 years

Rank Team 03-04 02-03 01-02

1 Pittsburgh Penguins 0 0 0 0.000
2 Columbus Blue Jackets 0 0 0 0.000
3 Florida Panthers 0 0 0 0.000
4 Atlanta Thrashers 0 0 0 0.000
5 New-York Rangers 0 0 0 0.000
6 Buffalo Sabres 0 0 0 0.000
7 Chicago Blackhawks 0 0 1 1.001
8 Phoenix Coyotes 0 0 1 1.001
9 Los-Angeles Kings 0 0 1 1.001
10 Carolina Hurricanes 0 0 4 1.004
11 Washington Capitals 0 1 0 1.010
12 Edmonton Oilers 0 1 0 1.010
13 Minnesota Wild 0 3 0 1.030
14 Anaheim Mighty Ducks 0 4 0 1.040


15 Nashville Predators 1 0 0 1.100
16 Calgary Flames 4 0 0 1.400
17 Dallas Stars 1 2 0 2.120
18 Montreal Canadiens 2 0 2 2.202
19 San Jose Sharks 3 0 2 2.302
20 Tampa-Bay Lightning 5 2 0 2.520
21 New-York Islanders 1 1 1 3.111
22 Boston Bruins 1 1 1 3.111
23 St. Louis Blues 1 1 2 3.112
24 Vancouver Canucks 1 2 1 3.121
25 Ottawa Senators 1 3 2 3.132
26 New-Jersey Devils 1 5 1 3.151
27 Toronto Maple Leafs 2 1 2 3.212
28 Colorado Avalanche 2 1 3 3.213
29 Detroit Red Wings 2 1 5 3.215
30 Philadelphia Flyers 3 2 1 3.321
 

RangerBoy

Dolan sucks!!!
Mar 3, 2002
44,912
21,238
New York
www.youtube.com
Crosby has already stated that he will report to whichever of the 30 NHL teams drafts him. How that team will be determined and when and where the draft will be held are still not certain, but the subjects were broached yesterday at the league's executive committee meeting.

There is speculation that each team will get an equal shot at Crosby, but other sources maintain that the likelihood of winning the lottery will be based on how teams finished over the past four seasons and whether or not they've had the first overall selection in the past four drafts.

There is also talk of the league holding the scaled-down draft in Toronto rather than Ottawa. The Corel Centre has been booked for another event Aug.6. One GM said he has heard that there's a good chance that the draft will be held mid-week, which would make Toronto a more likely destination because of connecting flights for the prospects.


http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...ageid=968867503640&col=970081593064&t=TS_Home
 

Tb0ne

Registered User
Nov 29, 2004
5,452
33
Victoria
I'd go by how long a team has been without a cup in some sort of ratio of how many cups they've had.

The lowest "cup to time in the league" ratio, gets the first pick. If there is a tie, then the team with fewer stanley cup final apperances gets the first pick. If there is still a tie, then the team with the fewest apperances in the playoffs gets the pick.
 

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
kdb209 said:
So I ask you, proponents of the "everybody get an equal chance" camp, would you bet $100 that a random draw (picked in a public and transparent way) would do a better job in predicting the non-playoff teams next year than two out of three of these lottery weighting schemes - either a single draw or greater than 5 of 10 random draws.

How about we all take a guess once we've seen the actual CBA and we know which players get release and what the teams look like. I'll bet most of the lists are at least as accurate as the 3 year averaged result.
 

A Good Flying Bird*

Guest
kdb209 said:
So I ask you, proponents of the "everybody get an equal chance" camp, would you bet $100 that a random draw (picked in a public and transparent way) would do a better job in predicting the non-playoff teams next year than two out of three of these lottery weighting schemes - either a single draw or greater than 5 of 10 random draws.

No. But will you bet me a Hundred dollars that the Wings win the Stanley Cup next year?
 

Jaded-Fan

Registered User
Mar 18, 2004
52,446
14,304
Pittsburgh
Newsguyone said:
No. But will you bet me a Hundred dollars that the Wings win the Stanley Cup next year?


Red herring alert. How is $100 bet on the Red Wings winning next year's cup be comparable to the almost 1000% sure bet set forth by kdb209 above you?
 

Jester

Registered User
Jul 9, 2004
34,076
11
St. Andrews
So I ask you, proponents of the "everybody get an equal chance" camp, would you bet $100 that a random draw (picked in a public and transparent way) would do a better job in predicting the non-playoff teams next year than two out of three of these lottery weighting schemes - either a single draw or greater than 5 of 10 random draws.

obviously it doesn't... my argument would be that there is NO "good" way to figure that out. how does ANY system account for the Boston Bruins for example? that goes for a number of teams that have very few contracts left at this point...

the league that was before the lockout in terms of rostered players no longer exists... it simply isn't there anymore. the past three to four years have almost NO relation to some of the teams that are going to skate onto the ice the next time we drop the puck...

come up with a weighted model that accounts for that and i'm all for it... i just don't think you can, and in the absence of being able to do that the non-weighted lottery makes the most sense. i attempted an inductive proof of my reasoning a few weeks ago, but it flew right over people's heads...
 

ToMaLe

Registered User
Sep 24, 2002
4,843
2,459
Saskatchewan
MontrealCruiser_83 said:
Looks like your idea got rave rewiews. If somebody with less brains than a Pejorative Slured clam managed to predict it, then I think it speaks volumes about your hockey acumen. Or rather, lack thereof.

who didnt like this format?...2 habs fans and a rangers fan....all of whom dont have 5 picks...all crying cuz they wouldnt have 5 balls....did i expect they would like this format?...no....but would 20 teams with 5 balls like it?...im assuming they would go for it....and as far as i remember that is a majority.....i dont mind you not agreeing with this proposal but what i do mind is you coming in here and tryin to shoot your mouth off....well i can mix it up with the best of them buddy....if you dont like it then say what you think it should be....which you still havent mentioned....some want 1 ball for each team, i dont like that idea so i stated what I think should be done.....thats my opinion...thats what these threads are for not to come in here shooting your mouth off..guys like you make a bad name for habs fans in here, althou some are good posters....case closed
 

Timmy

Registered User
Feb 2, 2005
10,691
26
MikeJones said:
Jeez, there is a comment I am dying to make, but I don't want to be banned...

We have balls.

Well, hopefully at least one.

That's enough to get by on.

Or....so I've heard. :jump:
 

ChrisKreider20

But y u mad?
Jul 21, 2004
5,664
20
Toronto
HockeyCritter said:
And that has precisely what to do with drafting?

well the idea behind it is that it would allow there to be fair drafting by seperating the stronger teams from the weaker teams,which is done every year through the standings...i was brainstorming a way w/o having standings. Now it was just a suggestion i threw out there and it didn't swim so forget it. At least I didn't go back 3 decades with my proposal. ;) - yes i said it.

I personally prefer the rumoured idea with the 4 balls - 1 for playoff appearance and -1 for 1st pick... I like that one personally and I think it seperates the worst from the best and it stops washington from picking 1st 2 yrs in a row.
 

ToMaLe

Registered User
Sep 24, 2002
4,843
2,459
Saskatchewan
Rancid said:
well the idea behind it is that it would allow there to be fair drafting by seperating the stronger teams from the weaker teams,which is done every year through the standings...i was brainstorming a way w/o having standings. Now it was just a suggestion i threw out there and it didn't swim so forget it. At least I didn't go back 3 decades with my proposal. ;) - yes i said it.

I personally prefer the rumoured idea with the 4 balls - 1 for playoff appearance and -1 for 1st pick... I like that one personally and I think it seperates the worst from the best and it stops washington from picking 1st 2 yrs in a row.

No you didnt go back 30 years but maybe you should.....as agreed by everyone your proposal was a joke....do yourself a favour and not post...your making yourself look worse with every posting....i personally wouldnt mind listening to your proposal but you always got to put your annoying little dig into your posts...grow up!
 

MontrealCruiser_83*

Guest
ToMaLe said:
who didnt like this format?...2 habs fans and a rangers fan....all of whom dont have 5 picks...all crying cuz they wouldnt have 5 balls....did i expect they would like this format?...no....but would 20 teams with 5 balls like it?...im assuming they would go for it....and as far as i remember that is a majority.....i dont mind you not agreeing with this proposal but what i do mind is you coming in here and tryin to shoot your mouth off....well i can mix it up with the best of them buddy....if you dont like it then say what you think it should be....which you still havent mentioned....some want 1 ball for each team, i dont like that idea so i stated what I think should be done.....thats my opinion...thats what these threads are for not to come in here shooting your mouth off..guys like you make a bad name for habs fans in here, althou some are good posters....case closed
If you managed to post your idea without stopping and saying to yourself "this is the most Pejorative Slured proposal to date", then it's clearly not worth my time to try and explain certain concepts which would undoubtedly fly right over your head.
 

ToMaLe

Registered User
Sep 24, 2002
4,843
2,459
Saskatchewan
MontrealCruiser_83 said:
If you managed to post your idea without stopping and saying to yourself "this is the most Pejorative Slured proposal to date", then it's clearly not worth my time to try and explain certain concepts which would undoubtedly fly right over your head.
run along now little boy...the grown ups are talking
 

Shawnski

Registered User
Jan 8, 2004
94
0
There are certainly several ways to look at possible draft options. For the long term betterment of the game, deferring this draft until next year (using the upcoming seasons results to dictate the draft order) and then going with 19 year olds thereafter is the logical approach in my opinion.

However, that said, if a draft this year must (or is chosen to) be held, then one has the obligation to look at the impacts of the player movement post new CBA and the resulting team capability. Will the recent powerhouses (i.e. most big market teams) still be that strong? Not likely. And one must ask themselves who gave up the most for this CBA? Looks like it is the big market teams who were profitable or close to it. Then one should look at who they have in their cupboard to help rebuild from within. What have they recently drafted (i.e. first rounders for example).

How can you justify that a team like Atlanta who has picked first overall once and second overall twice (in the last five years) plus an 8th, 10th, and 30th pick, needs Crosby to prosper? I can't. Nor can I see Columbus with one first, 2 fourth overall, and 2 eighth overalls needing Crosby. These are the up and coming teams, if they play their cards right.

What about Detroit? "Hockeytown" has been perennial contenders, but post CBA, where will they be? They have not chosen a player in the first round in the last four years, and only had the 29th pick five years ago. Their cupboard isn't truly bear as they have a knack for getting good, if not great, players outside the first round, but all in all, if you isolate it to firsts, it is quite sparse.

If this whole negotiation was about team parity, a case can be made that Detroit should have the best odds of picking first. Even if they have a 1 in 5 chance of selecting Crosby, it's still unlikely that they get their ball picked first (and PS, thanks PecaFan for that fabulous calculator.. good job!!) But perhaps, if one looks at the "cupboard" situation (combined with their helping small market teams in this CBA negotiation), and not the recent results criteria, they as well as others like (gag...) Toronto, perhaps should get a better shot at Crosby.

Ironically, this would actually favour those teams that one might consider "broke" the game in the first place. But going back to the parity situation, using this logic might be for the best of the league in the long run.

And this is from a Flames fan, who is trying to look at the situation objectively.

Now, all of that aside, ultimately Crosby will become a Flame via the lottery and be mentored by Iggy!!! :handclap:

<ducking and covering from the flack this will receive...>
 

ToMaLe

Registered User
Sep 24, 2002
4,843
2,459
Saskatchewan
Shawnski said:
There are certainly several ways to look at possible draft options. For the long term betterment of the game, deferring this draft until next year (using the upcoming seasons results to dictate the draft order) and then going with 19 year olds thereafter is the logical approach in my opinion.

However, that said, if a draft this year must (or is chosen to) be held, then one has the obligation to look at the impacts of the player movement post new CBA and the resulting team capability. Will the recent powerhouses (i.e. most big market teams) still be that strong? Not likely. And one must ask themselves who gave up the most for this CBA? Looks like it is the big market teams who were profitable or close to it. Then one should look at who they have in their cupboard to help rebuild from within. What have they recently drafted (i.e. first rounders for example).

How can you justify that a team like Atlanta who has picked first overall once and second overall twice (in the last five years) plus an 8th, 10th, and 30th pick, needs Crosby to prosper? I can't. Nor can I see Columbus with one first, 2 fourth overall, and 2 eighth overalls needing Crosby. These are the up and coming teams, if they play their cards right.

What about Detroit? "Hockeytown" has been perennial contenders, but post CBA, where will they be? They have not chosen a player in the first round in the last four years, and only had the 29th pick five years ago. Their cupboard isn't truly bear as they have a knack for getting good, if not great, players outside the first round, but all in all, if you isolate it to firsts, it is quite sparse.

If this whole negotiation was about team parity, a case can be made that Detroit should have the best odds of picking first. Even if they have a 1 in 5 chance of selecting Crosby, it's still unlikely that they get their ball picked first (and PS, thanks PecaFan for that fabulous calculator.. good job!!) But perhaps, if one looks at the "cupboard" situation (combined with their helping small market teams in this CBA negotiation), and not the recent results criteria, they as well as others like (gag...) Toronto, perhaps should get a better shot at Crosby.

Ironically, this would actually favour those teams that one might consider "broke" the game in the first place. But going back to the parity situation, using this logic might be for the best of the league in the long run.

And this is from a Flames fan, who is trying to look at the situation objectively.

Now, all of that aside, ultimately Crosby will become a Flame via the lottery and be mentored by Iggy!!! :handclap:

<ducking and covering from the flack this will receive...>
actually not having a draft this year and raising the age to 19 would be my first choice....but the NHL says they are having a draft this year with a weighted system...im not in favour of a 1 ball for all teams idea but many like it.....it will be interesting to see what type of weighted system they will implement if any...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->