News Article: NHL considering two changes to draft lottery

[jvirk]

Do you guys think that this "rule"/change will:
1. Be approved?
2. Be approved in time for the 2015 draft? (assuming that it gets voted down or tweeks/changes need to be made to the proposal)

 

[sabres4ever]

Do you guys think that this "rule"/change will:
1. Be approved?
2. Be approved in time for the 2015 draft? (assuming that it gets voted down or tweeks/changes need to be made to the proposal)

1. Maybe
2. No

Edmonton crushes Nashville to go up 13 pts. on Buffalo. Won't be long til 1st pick will be locked up. (not counting the BS lottery)

Tank on!

 

[McCauleyChirps]

Do you guys think that this "rule"/change will:
1. Be approved?
2. Be approved in time for the 2015 draft? (assuming that it gets voted down or tweeks/changes need to be made to the proposal)

1) If its even on the table. The NHL has been mum on this, and was reported by 1 person and IMO being blown out of proportion by one fan base.
2) If its on the table, and it gets passed - yeah, it can be.

 

[ClassicBusiness]

So the plan to eliminate or reduce tanking is to encourage more teams to tank? Brilliant NHL.

This is the owners complaining to Bettman about wanting a shot at top talent. Bettman will likely cave so the question is when does some bogus idea like this get implemented. I hope not before the 2015 draft...

 

[haseoke39]

EDIT: I guess I'll leave this up for interest value, but Boots and Woodhouse each just posted good breakdowns of the new proposal that show that I'm not thinking of the right analysis at all. Apparently it's something asinane regarding averaging the number of points by which each team in your position missed the playoffs by over the last five years, dividing it by the total number of points that all teams missed the playoffs by over the same period, and using that fraction to signify your lottery odds. This isn't just ********, this is ADVANCED ********.

My original post:

Just for everyone's edification, if they switched to a 5 year rolling average to determine draft position and/or lottery odds, this is where people would line up over the last four seasons (up to current standings this season). The numbers are points. As you can see, Buffalo would be most likely to sit in fourth position by this time next year, with the Islanders most likely to sit in third.

Edmonton 59 45 74 62 = 240
Florida 60 36 94 72 = 262
NYI 61 55 79 73 = 268
Columbus 76 55 65 81 = 277
Buffalo 46 48 89 96 = 279
Carolina 69 42 82 91 = 284
Winnipeg 71 51 84 80 = 286
Colorado 93 39 88 68 = 288
Calgary 63 42 90 94 = 289
Ottawa 69 56 92 74 = 291
NJ 71 48 102 81 = 302
Toronto 80 57 80 85 = 302
Minnesota 82 55 81 86 = 304
Dallas 75 48 89 95 = 307
Tampa Bay 81 40 84 103 = 308
Nashville 68 41 104 99 = 312
Montreal 83 63 78 96 = 320
Phoenix 77 51 97 99 = 324
Washington 76 57 92 107 = 332
Los Angeles 82 59 95 98 = 334
Rangers 78 56 109 93 = 336
Flyers 79 49 103 106 = 337
Detroit 75 56 102 104 = 338
Anaheim 97 66 80 99 = 342
San Jose 97 57 96 105 = 355
St Louis 101 60 109 87 = 357
Vancouver 72 59 111 117 = 359
Boston 99 62 102 103 = 366
Chicago 93 77 101 97 = 368
Pittsburgh 94 72 108 106 = 380

 

[Selanne00008]

EDIT: I guess I'll leave this up for interest value, but Boots and Woodhouse each just posted good breakdowns of the new proposal that show that I'm not thinking of the right analysis at all. Apparently it's something asinane regarding averaging the number of points by which each team in your position missed the playoffs by over the last five years, dividing it by the total number of points that all teams missed the playoffs by over the same period, and using that fraction to signify your lottery odds. This isn't just ********, this is ADVANCED ********.
Pittsburgh 94 72 108 106 = 380

My thought process was way off as well. Regardless the idea is WAY to ridiculous.

But what do you know, Isles and Sabres technically end up 3rd and possibly 4th just outside of McDavid and Eichel.

I do agree with a few others that don't think it's really feasible to get this process set into place quickly, and possibly not even by the 2015 draft.

 

[Jim Bob]

My thought process was way off as well. Regardless the idea is WAY to ridiculous.

But what do you know, Isles and Sabres technically end up 3rd and possibly 4th just outside of McDavid and Eichel.

I do agree with a few others that don't think it's really feasible to get this process set into place quickly, and possibly not even by the 2015 draft.

The Sabres getting Barzal and Hanifan wouldn't be too bad.

Heck, who knows what happens between now and next year. Maybe Hanifan passes Eichel for the 2nd pick and it's Eichel and Barzal if the Sabres pick 3 & 4 next year...

 

[Moskau]

The Sabres getting Barzal and Hanifan wouldn't be too bad.

Heck, who knows what happens between now and next year. Maybe Hanifan passes Eichel for the 2nd pick and it's Eichel and Barzal if the Sabres pick 3 & 4 next year...

Eichel may not be the lock for #2 that people think. He has the same experience as McDavid does but has an extra year of development on guys like Barzal, Hainfin, Strome and Kylington. Not that I expect all or any of those guys to pass him but he's not a lock.

 

[haseoke39]

I do agree with a few others that don't think it's really feasible to get this process set into place quickly, and possibly not even by the 2015 draft.

What would hold the process up? Why couldn't you do a vote tomorrow and that's that?

 

[1972]

Eichel may not be the lock for #2 that people think. He has the same experience as McDavid does but has an extra year of development on guys like Barzal, Hainfin, Strome and Kylington. Not that I expect all or any of those guys to pass him but he's not a lock.

I agree, as good as Eichel is I kinda think he is more of a good 1st overall prospect then any where near as much of a talent as McDavid. He can be passed.

I wouldn't be all that surprised if a player like Travis Konecny came knocking on the door for that second spot. Especially if he could grow a couple inches.

 

[joshjull]

This team has 4 wins this year with a goalie not named Miller in net. 4.

The battered roster we've iced post Miller will not be the roster we start next season with. Goaltending has hardly been an issue either

 

[Jim Bob]

The battered roster we've iced post Miller will not be the roster we start next season with. Goaltending has hardly been an issue either

If they continue to shelter the kids, it could be.

 

[1972]

If they continue to shelter the kids, it could be.

At the very least Larsson, Pysyk, Deslauriers and Ristolainen will be full time players next season. And they will probably trade for one or two NHL roster players and sign 3-4 guys as UFAs.

I think you can expect 8 or so new full time players next year. We can get a hell of a lot better and still finish 27-30th.

 

[Selanne00008]

What would hold the process up? Why couldn't you do a vote tomorrow and that's that?

I'd have to look at when GMs have their annual (quarterly, etc?) meetings. The draft lottery is in less than a month, so come on there's no way it happens in the next 3 weeks.

I think adhoc GM meetings would only take place if something is urgent. Such as a loophole in a penalty or rule. They are going to meet about this soon and rush a decision. I know, I know, the nhl is a clown league and maybe I have too much faith.

Maybe in the off-season/2014 recap GM meeting? (I'm assuming there is one).

 

[haseoke39]

I'd have to look at when GMs have their annual (quarterly, etc?) meetings. The draft lottery is in less than a month, so come on there's no way it happens in the next 3 weeks.

I think adhoc GM meetings would only take place if something is urgent. Such as a loophole in a penalty or rule. They are going to meet about this soon and rush a decision. I know, I know, the nhl is a clown league and maybe I have too much faith.

Maybe in the off-season/2014 recap GM meeting? (I'm assuming there is one).

sure, I didn't mean literally tomorrow, but whenever they convene next, I don't see why they couldn't just say "all those in favor of a lottery for the top 5 picks say aye." I don't see why there should have to be any holdup.

 

[N.Y. Orangeman]

1) If its even on the table. The NHL has been mum on this, and was reported by 1 person and IMO being blown out of proportion by one fan base.
2) If its on the table, and it gets passed - yeah, it can be.

It likely has a window to happen within the next 3-4 months, as they would never tamper with the formula in-season. Given its controversial nature, I consider this to be a very remote possibility for 2015.

 

[Jim Bob]

It likely has a window to happen within the next 3-4 months, as they would never tamper with the formula in-season. Given its controversial nature, I consider this to be a very remote possibility for 2015.

I think there is no chance it happens for 2014 and a very good chance something changes for 2015.

Outside of Buffalo, nobody cares and there isn't a controversy.

 

[MayDay]

I think there is no chance it happens for 2014 and a very good chance something changes for 2015.

Outside of Buffalo, nobody cares and there isn't a controversy.

Well obviously we care the most, because we stand the most to lose. We will likely finish in the bottom 3 next year and may not even draft in the top 5. Of course that should bother us.

 

[boots electric]

I think there is no chance it happens for 2014 and a very good chance something changes for 2015.

Outside of Buffalo, nobody cares and there isn't a controversy.

This is ultimately why I think something changes before the next draft.

Under the proposed system using existing numbers, the odds of winning the draft lottery for teams finishing 30th, 29th, and 28th are going to decrease by a decent bit--somewhere in the neighborhood of ~15% total. That ~15% gets distributed amongst the remaining 11 lottery teams.

There's a much bigger crop of teams likely to finish in that 27th-17th range, and those teams aren't going to turn down increased odds at McDavid.

 

[MayDay]

This is ultimately why I think something changes before the next draft.

Under the proposed system using existing numbers, the odds of winning the draft lottery for teams finishing 30th, 29th, and 28th are going to decrease by a decent bit--somewhere in the neighborhood of ~15% total. That ~15% gets distributed amongst the remaining 11 lottery teams.

There's a much bigger crop of teams likely to finish in that 27th-17th range, and those teams aren't going to turn down increased odds at McDavid.

The problem is that if you keep going down that path of logic and self-interest eventually you wind up with a system where every team gets an equal 1/30 shot in the lottery for the top pick (and maybe the top 3 or 5).

And if that happens, it defeats the entire purpose of the draft as a system for promoting league parity and helping bad teams return to competitiveness.

 

[ZZamboni]

This doesn't bother me in the least. Until it actually happens, it's only speculation. I'm of the frame of mind it won't happen.... Until it does. And I certainly don't believe the NHL will change things with the main purpose of "screwing over buffalo". That garbage theory belongs in dramatic fantasyland.

 

[B U F F A L O]

This doesn't bother me in the least. Until it actually happens, it's only speculation. I'm of the frame of mind it won't happen.... Until it does. And I certainly don't believe the NHL will change things with the main purpose of "screwing over buffalo". That garbage theory belongs in dramatic fantasyland.

Individual team combines.

 

[brian_griffin]

I was pretty ticked at first reading this, but I see two big upsides:

- NYI pick. I dont think anyones pulled together an average win % over the past 5 seasons, but NYI gotta be near the bottom of the list. So even if they're a playoff team next year, they could have a 6-9 draft position before the lottery.

- Our picks after 2015. Say we get someone good next year. 15-16 will likely be another not so great year. But look forward another year to 16-17, and we'll BOTH be in the playoff hunt and in the play for the #1 pick. Who knows what kind of talent will be available then.

You mis-read or mis-interpret the Friedman article. Neither of your hypotheticals above could happen under the proposed system. See either my post a couple pages back, or posts by Boots or Woodhouse.

I maintain that a far greater impact on draft odds for an individual team / draft position will be: (1) how many picks will be lottery-eligible, and (2) how many draft positions a team will be able to move up. Pay attention if the NHL starts messing with those factors, ignore and move along if they adjust lottery odds slightly as proposed in the Friedman article.

 

[Jim Bob]

You mis-read or mis-interpret the Friedman article. Neither of your hypotheticals above could happen under the proposed system. See either my post a couple pages back, or posts by Boots or Woodhouse.

I maintain that a far greater impact on draft odds for an individual team / draft position will be: (1) how many picks will be lottery-eligible, and (2) how many draft positions a team will be able to move up. Pay attention if the NHL starts messing with those factors, ignore and move along if they adjust lottery odds slightly as proposed in the Friedman article.

Definitely.

If they went with flat odds for all the non-playoff teams, but they kept the lottery to just the top pick, I'm nowhere near as worried as if they lottery the top 3 or 5 picks.

 

[Mit Yarrum]

If there are changes, it absolutely will happen for next year. The top of next year's draft is the entire reason they are talking about it.