Idea - Last place can't pick 1st overall

[Varlan]

I like my idea best. No change to the system. It makes the most sense.

 

[Mc5RingsAndABeer]

Apart from last year, tanking isn't much of an issue. The Oilers just sucked all those seasons.

 

[Cawz]

Players don't but GMs do. If you're a player who loses on purpose, the guy you just drafted could take your job or you could get traded. It could also effect your pay.

But GMs have iced bad teams on purpose to build through the draft.

When exactly has this happened since the lottery was implemented?

 

[Beerz]

How to Prevent Tanking 101.


Step One.

Go back to calling it rebuilding instead of tanking.

Step Two.

Enjoy.

 

[Thenameless]

I like my idea best. No change to the system. It makes the most sense.

I agree. As a Habs fan, it's not fun for me to see another team like Edmonton get so many high picks in a short time, but I realize it's a game of chance, and they've come out extremely lucky. I think the lottery is pretty exciting as is.

 

[yahhockey]

I don't like the idea at all. A team finished last for a reason, maybe somewhat intentional, but even if they were a purposely created bad team they are still a bad team that needs help. Most teams need to win to succeed long-term. A team may pull a Buffalo for a year or two however they don't need to be punished more than the current lottery system where they only have a 20% chance of winning and with the new three lotteries system they may already be drafting fourth.

In terms of where this conversation quickly headed, Edmonton is a ridiculous anomaly that is incredibly frustrating but should probably be ignored. I think we can all agree that having four 1st overall selection in six years is absurd but they are a terrible team that got a lucky. At some point things will balance out. Maybe this year they finish 30th and draft 4th, who knows. Unless in the future another team or two has the same type of draft selections that Edmonton has there is no need to overreact.

 

[HamiltonNHL]

Tanking is a realistic way for a team to get better.
And tanking is fun ... when you team sucks ... all they can play for is the tank.

 

[TheOtherOne]

I have a better idea. Last place CAN pick first overall. This solves the problem of a sucky team continuing to suck.

 

[GeeoffBrown]

Having lots of 1st overall picks hasn't turned out to be a competitive imbalance. The Oilers still aren't a good team. I believe this is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[Menzinger]

Make the bottom 10 teams have an equally weighted lottery for the top 5 picks, and make it so that once a team wins #1 overall they can't win again for 2 years.

 

[trentmccleary]

Why not just remove a ball or two for every 1st overall pick you've had in the past 5 years?

 

[Ducks in a row]

What if the team that finishes last simply sucks? Not every team that finishes last tanked the season.

This is not a good idea.

Totally agree you can suck without tanking. Injuries,players struggling,bad coaching and so on can make a team suck so bad to finish last punishing a team for finishing last is stupid.

 

[trentmccleary]

Having lots of 1st overall picks hasn't turned out to be a competitive imbalance. The Oilers still aren't a good team. I believe this is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist.

Quebec did the same and picked a million forwards too. Then a competent GM came in and realized there was a whole other half of the ice and traded some of that wealth of forwards for defensemen and a goalie. They won a Cup immediately and again 5 years later. Edmonton can and will do something similar at some point.

 

[itsmagic]

This thread is dripping with bad karma. I am convinced that the longer and more vocal this debate becomes, particularly since the format is already decided for the 2016 draft, the more likely that the Oilers will select first overall. Again.

I almost want to see it happen...

 

[Brainiac]

I don't like the idea, but I think it could sort of work. But then again, you'd be aiming at second to last. Same principle as tanking, but with a tweak.

I'd rather hold a short tournament between non-playoffs teams. Single game elimination rounds. Bottom two teams pass the first round.

R1: 12 teams play 1 game elimination matches. Winners move on.

R2: 6 winners + 2 bottom teams play 1 game elimination matches. Winners move on.

R3: 4 teams left, same as above.

Finals: 2 teams left, they play one game to determine who gets to pick first.


This could happen during first round of the POs and would be done pretty quick. Additional revenues for non-playoffs teams. Bottom two teams are sure to pick top 8. These two team need to win one game in order to pick top 4 (not too much to ask).

Having it as 1 game elimination tourney means it's also a little random (like the lottery). Tanking is pointless because even if you're not in the POs, you still want to ice the best possible team.

And I'm pretty sure the 'losers' finals would draw some serious attention.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

I don't like the idea, but I think it could sort of work. But then again, you'd be aiming at second to last. Same principle as tanking, but with a tweak.

I'd rather hold a short tournament between non-playoffs teams. Single game elimination rounds. Bottom two teams pass the first round.

R1: 12 teams play 1 game elimination matches. Winners move on.

R2: 6 winners + 2 bottom teams play 1 game elimination matches. Winners move on.

R3: 4 teams left, same as above.

Finals: 2 teams left, they play one game to determine who gets to pick first.


This could happen during first round of the POs and would be done pretty quick. Additional revenues for non-playoffs teams. Bottom two teams are sure to pick top 8. These two team need to win one game in order to pick top 4 (not too much to ask).

Having it as 1 game elimination tourney means it's also a little random (like the lottery). Tanking is pointless because even if you're not in the POs, you still want to ice the best possible team.

And I'm pretty sure the 'losers' finals would draw some serious attention.

Almost this exact idea has come up in a conversation with some of my regular hockey watching buddies, and we were all surprised that none of us could come up with any strong reasons to hate it. Non-playoff teams get more revenue. Fans get more to watch. Interesting stakes. Discourages teams from icing the least competitive team possible, like you said. We liked the idea of single elimination, too, as it provides the weakest teams their best shot at overcoming the best non-playoff teams in the process. And it can all be done within a week (4 games in 7 days allows travel day between games), maybe even before the "real" playoffs.

Other possibilities for fitting in "byes" for the weakest two teams exist, but I agree that one round of bye is enough.

 

[Brainiac]

Almost this exact idea has come up in a conversation with some of my regular hockey watching buddies, and we were all surprised that none of us could come up with any strong reasons to hate it. Non-playoff teams get more revenue. Fans get more to watch. Interesting stakes. Discourages teams from icing the least competitive team possible, like you said. We liked the idea of single elimination, too, as it provides the weakest teams their best shot at overcoming the best non-playoff teams in the process. And it can all be done within a week (4 games in 7 days allows travel day between games), maybe even before the "real" playoffs.

Other possibilities for fitting in "byes" for the weakest two teams exist, but I agree that one round of bye is enough.

Hey man, we disagree on a lot of things, but the fact that we agree on this 'draft tournament' format is something.

 

[NeverForget06]

Hey man, we disagree on a lot of things, but the fact that we agree on this 'draft tournament' format is something.

We'll call it the "Toilet Bowl"

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Hey man, we disagree on a lot of things, but the fact that we agree on this 'draft tournament' format is something.

Hey, players and analysis can be polarizing. When it comes to creative thinking, though, it tends to be easier to find common ground with people.

 

[MessierII]

What's funny is if they just left it last overall gets the first pick oilers would only have two.

 

[Oscar Acosta]

Lottery was screwed around to make sure the Oilers didn't get McDavid and we did haha.

I like most fans would laugh if we got it again but I doubt you'll see any of us wanting another embarrassing first overall pick. It would have to be traded.

 

[Martinez]

Let the crappy teams suck while the rest of our teams go to the playoffs. I don't really see the issue. Who cares if the oilers always pick first, they are a joke.