Proposal: What changes would you want to see made in the NHL?

[Javaman]

I would be in favour of making other changes, to ensure competitive balance. I don't mind maximum contracts, and other tweaks.

But nonsense where teams are awarded great players for their incompetence has all but killed the sport for me.

What kind of tweaks do you think would be effective at ensuring competitive balance?

My assumption is that by "competitive balance", you mean to replicate the distribution of talent of the draft and free agency.

 

[Billy Kvcmu]

Let the top 4 seed in the conference pick their first round opponent.
Maximum chaos and entertainment

 

[bbud]

Get rid of Bettman half the issues would be gone with him he is all money and could care less about hockey even less about hockey in Canada .

 

[Hit the post]

Get rid of Bettman half the issues would be gone with him he is all money and could care less about hockey even less about hockey in Canada .

He’s just a tool of the owners. Replacing him with someone else isn’t going to change a thing.

 

[passive voice]

Teams in Saskatoon, Hamilton, London, Quebec, Halifax, and Hartford. Florida and Arizona get nuked for sure. Seattle, Anaheim, Vegas, Dallas, Nashville, Raleigh, Tampa, Brooklyn, and Newark can fight over five spots--I don't care who keeps them.

No more draft/ELCs. Hard cap stays.

As an experiment I'd like to see the nets an inch or two taller (at the AHL level to start, I guess). I suspect that would make the difference in goaltending talent wider, and make the game slightly less random. If it doesn't, no big deal.

Oh also: fewer regular season games, playoffs go to best-of-nine

 

[Melvin]

What kind of tweaks do you think would be effective at ensuring competitive balance?

My assumption is that by "competitive balance", you mean to replicate the distribution of talent of the draft and free agency.

Correct.

Every time I bring this up, people have the same objection, that the Leafs would just sign every player, or that Edmonton would never get anybody, which is demonstrably false. The salary cap does a pretty great job of re-distributing talent and has made the original purpose of the draft somewhat obsolete. If you blow a significant amount of your cap on a hot shot prospect and he ends up being a bust, then what are you going to do? Think about how many prospects there are, every year, think of the hype around all of them. Having said that, I would be in favour of adding additional rules to limit things somewhat. For example, there can be maximums, and perhaps teams can only offer a certain number of rookie contracts per year, and/or only offer 1 contract over a certain value each year, or even every two years. Then teams would have to decide whether to blow their wad on this years hype machine or maybe save it for next year.

The broader point is, there are other solutions to the problem aside from the draft, but we are so locked into the idea of a draft that nobody is willing to even consider what other solutions might exist. I don't believe that teams like Edmonton and Vancouver deserve to be rewarded for their gross incompetence by simply being gifted brilliant players that are signed for peanuts. I think teams should have to put in the work to earn the services of these players. Convincing the latest hot shot prospect to sign with your club should be a skill of sorts, and deciding how to allocate your rookie contracts (assuming there are some sort of limits in place) would be an absolutely critical skill in building a club, rather than just having a blundering dumbass in charge who f***s everything up and gets rewarded for it, and I don't believe that players like McDavid should be forced to play for Edmonton just because they have run their team into the ground for a decade and won the lottery at the right time.

 

[Melvin]

I think the lottery addresses that somewhat. Not a perfect solution obviously.

I truly believe the lottery has made things worse. It's added another layer to the !draft! and made tanking far more visible and achievable. Now everybody knows that if their team loses as many games as they can, they don't even have to finish last to have a chance at the #1 overall pick. Now there's a lottery! Lotteries are fun! Everyone loves lotteries! So this has incentivized losing to an even broader degree by offering a fun lottery system to all teams that have performed poorly.

 

[Wo Yorfat]

iq tests for GMs. Sorry Jimbo, 75 minimum.

 

[Hit the post]

I truly believe the lottery has made things worse. It's added another layer to the !draft! and made tanking far more visible and achievable. Now everybody knows that if their team loses as many games as they can, they don't even have to finish last to have a chance at the #1 overall pick. Now there's a lottery! Lotteries are fun! Everyone loves lotteries! So this has incentivized losing to an even broader degree by offering a fun lottery system to all teams that have performed poorly.

I dunno, the Mario Lemieux sweepstakes were pretty in just how blatant the Pens tanked to get #1. Habs were able to manipulate the system to get Guy Lafleur. At least with a lottery, it gives it an element of chance that even the best laid plans of tanking will go for naught.

 

[Melvin]

I dunno, the Mario Lemieux sweepstakes were pretty in just how blatant the Pens tanked to get #1. Habs were able to manipulate the system to get Guy Lafleur. At least with a lottery, it gives it an element of chance that even the best laid plans of tanking will go for naught.

I believe the only team to blatantly intentionally tank in the last 10 years was the Leafs when they traded away everyone who was performing even moderately well, completely torpedoed their season and got Auston Matthews.

The lottery has been a failure.

 

[The Drop]

How about they just call penalties in the playoffs like they’re supposed to?

 

[Javaman]

Correct.

Every time I bring this up, people have the same objection, that the Leafs would just sign every player, or that Edmonton would never get anybody, which is demonstrably false. The salary cap does a pretty great job of re-distributing talent and has made the original purpose of the draft somewhat obsolete. If you blow a significant amount of your cap on a hot shot prospect and he ends up being a bust, then what are you going to do? Think about how many prospects there are, every year, think of the hype around all of them. Having said that, I would be in favour of adding additional rules to limit things somewhat. For example, there can be maximums, and perhaps teams can only offer a certain number of rookie contracts per year, and/or only offer 1 contract over a certain value each year, or even every two years. Then teams would have to decide whether to blow their wad on this years hype machine or maybe save it for next year.

The broader point is, there are other solutions to the problem aside from the draft, but we are so locked into the idea of a draft that nobody is willing to even consider what other solutions might exist. I don't believe that teams like Edmonton and Vancouver deserve to be rewarded for their gross incompetence by simply being gifted brilliant players that are signed for peanuts. I think teams should have to put in the work to earn the services of these players. Convincing the latest hot shot prospect to sign with your club should be a skill of sorts, and deciding how to allocate your rookie contracts (assuming there are some sort of limits in place) would be an absolutely critical skill in building a club, rather than just having a blundering dumbass in charge who ****s everything up and gets rewarded for it, and I don't believe that players like McDavid should be forced to play for Edmonton just because they have run their team into the ground for a decade and won the lottery at the right time.

Edit: I have no idea why HF separated my reply to your post from the quote of your post Melvin, lol

See post 43

 

[MS]

1) all 15 non-playoff teams go into an equally-weighted draft. I’m not as extreme as Melvin on this but tanking and teams and fans celebrating losing makes me sick.

2) offside reviews are only for a direct continuation of the play. A 2-on-1 is offside and scores directly, sure. An offside 90 seconds before when the defending team has had 5 chances to clear, nope.

3) get rid of the stupid nonsensical puck over glass penalty.

4) no line changes allowed on any whistle your team caused. Goalies freezing the puck, offsides, whatever.

5) season starts earlier and ends earlier. No hockey in June, ever.

6) NHL goes back to the Olympics, the only international hockey that anyone - players or fans - actually cares about.

 

[Melvin]

1) all 15 non-playoff teams go into an equally-weighted draft. I’m not as extreme as Melvin on this but tanking and teams and fans celebrating losing makes me sick.

2) offside reviews are only for a direct continuation of the play. A 2-on-1 is offside and scores directly, sure. An offside 90 seconds before when the defending team has had 5 chances to clear, nope.

3) get rid of the stupid nonsensical puck over glass penalty.

4) no line changes allowed on any whistle your team caused. Goalies freezing the puck, offsides, whatever.

5) season starts earlier and ends earlier. No hockey in June, ever.

6) NHL goes back to the Olympics, the only international hockey that anyone - players or fans - actually cares about.

If we're talking in-game stuff, I agree with most of these. I would eliminate or significantly reduce pre-season. Maybe 3 games against the teams geographically closest to you, and that's it.

I prefer the Olympics without NHL players though. I don't care that much about the Olympics, but it should be the time for amateur athletes to shine. The NHL players get enough.

 

[Fire Benning]

-Season needs to be shorter.

-No draft.

-Less playoff teams.

-Abolish loser points.

 

[MS]

If we're talking in-game stuff, I agree with most of these. I would eliminate or significantly reduce pre-season. Maybe 3 games against the teams geographically closest to you, and that's it.

I prefer the Olympics without NHL players though. I don't care that much about the Olympics, but it should be the time for amateur athletes to shine. The NHL players get enough.

Nobody is really an amateur in the Olympics anymore. And the guys who went there instead were just crappy professionals. Seeing Linden Vey compete for Canada in the most prestigious international tournament does nothing for me. The only game I watched at the last Olympics was the Gold Medal game, and only because Germany had fluked their way into it.

 

[bandwagonesque]

Season needs to be shorter.

Hockey would definitely be way better if the season was shorter. Oreo cookies would also be better if Nabisco crafted each batch on demand for me and delivered them by courier/drone/sherpa to wherever I am when I'm hungry.

 

[Javaman]

What about eliminating bonuses, signing and performance, in all contracts?

What about eliminating variances in salary... there is only an AAV, same salary every year of the deal?

My hunch is there would be a pretty intense phase of "survival of the fittest" with regards to NHL GMs if you what you're proposing went through. People like Benning would likely not survive very long in the changed environment.

 

[Melvin]

Nobody is really an amateur in the Olympics anymore. And the guys who went there instead were just crappy professionals. Seeing Linden Vey compete for Canada in the most prestigious international tournament does nothing for me. The only game I watched at the last Olympics was the Gold Medal game, and only because Germany had fluked their way into it.

Oh, I wouldn't want Vey or any other professionals in it either. But as I said, I don't really care about it very much and haven't watched the last two.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Ok my second crazy idea.


I really wish they would push the draft eligibility age limit up by a year, maybe even two.

This would make projecting the drafted players far less volatile.

Drafting for need could become a thing. 2nd rounders are actually worth A LOT.

 

[Melvin]

Ok my second crazy idea.


I really wish they would push the draft eligibility age limit up by a year, maybe even two.

This would make projecting the drafted players far less volatile.

Drafting for need could become a thing. 2nd rounders are actually worth A LOT.

Now that would be God awful. It's bad enough that the CHL exists, but at least let the ones good enough to get paid for their work out of it as soon as you can.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

Now that would be God awful. It's bad enough that the CHL exists, but at least let the ones good enough to get paid for their work out of it as soon as you can.

Your idea would kill watching the NHL for me so guess we disagree a bit.

 

[Melvin]

Your idea would kill watching the NHL for me so guess we disagree a bit.

How does your idea even work? They are going to play in the ahl or Europe for two years before they are allowed to be drafted? They have to play for peanuts somewhere else even if they are skilled enough to play in the nhl?

Your idea has like the most fringe possible benefit while carrying a ton of downside. Oh yay, I'm gonna go watch Sidney Crosby play for the River Rats.

You haven't even explained why you require a draft to enjoy the nhl, that literally no other system aside from the draft would be acceptable to you.

 

[PuckMunchkin]

How does your idea even work? They are going to play in the ahl or Europe for two years before they are allowed to be drafted? They have to play for peanuts somewhere else even if they are skilled enough to play in the nhl?

Your idea has like the most fringe possible benefit while carrying a ton of downside. Oh yay, I'm gonna go watch Sidney Crosby play for the River Rats.

You haven't even explained why you require a draft to enjoy the nhl, that literally no other system aside from the draft would be acceptable to you.

Sorry I just find your idea shit.
With all the parity issues it would present... Holy crap. Just remove half the teams from the league while you are at it.

 

[Melvin]

Sorry I just find your idea ****.
With all the parity issues it would present... Holy crap. Just remove half the teams from the league while you are at it.

Why?

You've fallen into the same false dichotomy that I described in my subsequent post. Why are the only options a draft or no parity? Why is the draft the only system that can work? Do we or do we not have a salary cap? How would there be no parity if there is still a hard cap and a maximum # of players you can get?