tachaudh Posted December 24, 2013 Report Share Posted December 24, 2013 In an effort to curb tanking and also to make the draft a more fair process, the NBA is considering the elimination of the draft lottery. Instead, there would be a preset order, a system in which each of the 30 teams would pick in a specific first-round draft slot once - and exactly once - every 30 years (not sure how the second and subsequent rounds would pan out but perhaps you could revert back to the order of standings, from worst to best to stick with the simplicity). Each team would simply cycle through the 30 draft slots, year by year, in a predetermined order designed so that teams pick in different spots of the first round each year. Teams would know with 100 percent certainty in which draft slots they would pick every year, up to 30 years out from the start of every 30-year cycle. Over time, I think this would weed out the crap GMs and you would get more of a focus on scouting experts as GMs. I like this idea. It's much more fair than the system that is currently employed and I think the NHL should consider it as well. You would lose some of the drama that comes along with the draft, and you would essentially know well in advance where Connor McDavid is going but at the same time, I don't like the thought of one team picking three years in row (or potentially 4 out of 5). But, I also don't think you should be rewarded for being woeful. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Argus Posted December 25, 2013 Report Share Posted December 25, 2013 Without putting too much thought into it, I like it. I don't know if it's the best way to do things, but I would definitely prefer it to the system that's in place now. Really, I would like anything that gets rid of the conflict between wanting to cheer for your team to win every game but knowing that they're not good enough to make the playoffs and that, by winning games, they're kind of shooting themselves in the foot (I'm sure many other Flames fans know the feeling...). And I don't like how, presently, teams are rewarded for being crappy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cross16 Posted December 25, 2013 Report Share Posted December 25, 2013 I personally think fans and the media are really overreacting to his whole idea of tanking. Personally I don't think it happen near to the extent people assume it does and I think the oilers have shown fans and the hockey world that it's a poor idea anyway and doesn't work. If you look over the history of the draft the concept of tanking doesn't really exist. I have no problems with the way the current system works because I believe he draft should be a parity tool and that's exactly what it so IMO it needs to changing now that get got rid of that dumb you can only move up 1 spot rule if you won the lottery. I think this is classic over analization of a rule to find a problem that doesn't exist. Nfl has the same draft concept, instead they have no lottery, and that is the most important draft in pro sports and you don't see them looking at "tanking" issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted December 25, 2013 Report Share Posted December 25, 2013 Just because the 1st pick would be set in stone doesn't mean that it would make it a deterrent to stop teams from then going for 2nd overall pick. This would be especially true for strong drafts like the last one where there are 3 strong prospects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTech780 Posted December 25, 2013 Report Share Posted December 25, 2013 I am not a fan of that setup for the NHL. I see how it could work for the NBA, their draft only has 2 rounds. I would be much more in favor of putting all non playoff teams in a draw to determine the order. That way even if you finish dead last you could be still drafting 14th overall. It gives teams that aren't playoff teams the chance to draft better players to change their fortunes but also weeds out the benefit of tanking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfreining Posted December 25, 2013 Report Share Posted December 25, 2013 The system would make it very interesting at the trade deadline. Since it could be that a buyer has the first overall pick, that all the sellers want to have. I think with that system the trade deadline would be the most important part of a rebuild. My only question is, how the pick sequence will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heartbreaker Posted December 25, 2013 Report Share Posted December 25, 2013 This might be a bit radical, but if handed the keys, here's how I'd change the NHL. First, I'd reverse the draft order for the teams out of contention. First overall would be selected by the team in 14th, and 14th would go to the last place team. That would keep everyone cheering for their team, and every game would be a meaningful one. The next thing I'd do is eliminate the three point game. A win is worth two points, and a loss is a loss regardless of how it happens. I'd leave the shootout, but cut it after three or five shooters and call it a tie. Only then will the two points be split. That way teams will fight to the finish, and there's no consolation for making it to overtime. Love. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tachaudh Posted December 25, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 25, 2013 Just because the 1st pick would be set in stone doesn't mean that it would make it a deterrent to stop teams from then going for 2nd overall pick. This would be especially true for strong drafts like the last one where there are 3 strong prospects. No, it's not just the 1st overall pick, DD, it's every single pick in the first round would be predetermined. You wouldn't only pick 1st once every 30 years you, would pick 2nd once in that 30 year period, and also 10th, 14th, 27th and 30th. I am not a fan of that setup for the NHL. I see how it could work for the NBA, their draft only has 2 rounds. I would be much more in favor of putting all non playoff teams in a draw to determine the order. That way even if you finish dead last you could be still drafting 14th overall. It gives teams that aren't playoff teams the chance to draft better players to change their fortunes but also weeds out the benefit of tanking. I certainly wouldn't mind that, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfreining Posted December 26, 2013 Report Share Posted December 26, 2013 The next thing I'd do is eliminate the three point game. A win is worth two points, and a loss is a loss regardless of how it happens. I'd leave the shootout, but cut it after three or five shooters and call it a tie. Only then will the two points be split. That way teams will fight to the finish, and there's no consolation for making it to overtime. Or just increase the points for a regulation win to 3, so every game is worth 3 points. So if the game goes to overtime you already loose at least a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bronco73 Posted December 27, 2013 Report Share Posted December 27, 2013 I'm torn on the draft lottery. On the one hand, the worst team in the league may not get the first pick with a lottery, and on the other hand without the lottery there isn't anything keeping a team from intentionally taking for that first pick. I cannot agree with a style that the NBA is looking at though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokernHockey Posted December 27, 2013 Report Share Posted December 27, 2013 I agree with cross, with notable exceptions. I don't think tanking is as common of a thing as people think. Teams that have either done it for players who are expected to be generational (Mario, Crosby, and Daigle), or delusional (kLow). I don't consider trading FA at the deadline for prospects/picks tanking though. Financially it just doesn't make sense. Look at Calgary as a case study: the past few years we have missed the playoffs, yet we sold out every game because even though most people did not expect us to make it, that was what the Flames were going for. Compare that to attendance since we have traded Iggy, etc., and especially this year. You would be hard pressed to convince me that it makes financial sense to intentionally tank for years, because it isn't a quick fix. And look at most of the teams that are perennially bad. They generally have horrible attendance and struggle to stay afloat. More often perennial bottom feeders are simply poorly managed. it is also important to realize that in large part because of the draft professional sports are cyclical in nature where teams will generally have years of being at the top and years of being at the bottom. Not every team will draft in the top 5 in there down years, just as not every team will make the cup finals in their up years. Personally, I do think that it being slated in favor of the worst teams makes sense, because otherwise teams would never get out of the basement other then by (rare) dumb luck since the worst teams have a lot of trouble attracting FA at competitive prices. However if it were up to me I would make it so all 14 spots are up for grabs, not just the first overall. something like last gets 14 balls, through 1 ball for the 14th placed team. and then perhaps a modifier where if you got the first overall pick in the past 3 years it was -2 balls and if you got the 2nd overall pick it is minus 1 ball, to a minimum of 1 ball. therefore everyone would always have a chance, and if you were really "that bad" you still could get multiple top picks in a row, but your chances would be reduced. under this the odds would be out of 98-105 (depending on how many balls are lost because of the past 3 years). basically every ball is worth 1% so the worst team would have a 14% chance of getting the first pick, but they also could draft 14th. I think that would get rid of any incentive to tank, but horrible teams would still get the (needed) opportunity to improve through the draft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phoenix66 Posted December 29, 2013 Report Share Posted December 29, 2013 Personally, I think the best method would be a non weighted bottom 10. You would eliminate the deliberate end of season tanking and legitimate rebuilding teams would still get a top 10 pick with a shot at 1st. But draw the entire order, not just the 1st overall pick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bronco73 Posted December 29, 2013 Report Share Posted December 29, 2013 Personally, I think the best method would be a non weighted bottom 10. You would eliminate the deliberate end of season tanking and legitimate rebuilding teams would still get a top 10 pick with a shot at 1st. But draw the entire order, not just the 1st overall pick this makes a ton of sense... so it will never be adopted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conundrumed Posted December 29, 2013 Report Share Posted December 29, 2013 I'm all for no lottery. You're last,you pick first. You tank to get it, yeah...the future is no brighter...your team is horrible. Tanking for a #1C doesn't fix AHL D and an AHL goalie. As the Oil have proven for about 5 years now.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bronco73 Posted December 30, 2013 Report Share Posted December 30, 2013 I'm all for no lottery. You're last,you pick first. You tank to get it, yeah...the future is no brighter...your team is horrible. Tanking for a #1C doesn't fix AHL D and an AHL goalie. As the Oil have proven for about 5 years now.... It does if you draft and develop well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DL44 Posted December 30, 2013 Report Share Posted December 30, 2013 Its an intriguing idea for the first round... Set it up so every team has a top 10 pick every 3 years... that should ensure an even spread of top level talent. But would this system decrease the amount of parity in the league? I don't think that would be healthy in the long run. Top end teams right now, receiving a Top 10 pick every 3 years to supplement already high end rosters... Doesn't seem fair. It's like the Canucks able to come off of 2 president's Cup Trophies and land a Horvat without trading away Schneider to do so.... and then get another Horvat or better within another 3 yrs. i can't see that being healthy in the long run.. At least with the present system, it's designed for teams to cycle up and down over the course of a decade... can't design a system to deter the extreme example at the expense of the big picture. ..... The NBA is poor example for anyone to follow... Their development system is among the worst systems. or sorry... the talent coming thru playing the sport is among the most pathetic for the system they have set up... They have 115 Division 1 schools playing basketball and developing talent.. add in European systems and talent... and they can't fill 2 rounds of an NBA draft with quality players. Scrub player after scrub player. It's understandable for them to explore this avenue considering they are talking about only 60 total drafted players with only about 4-5 of them being solid players.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_People1 Posted December 30, 2013 Report Share Posted December 30, 2013 This doesn't work because teams expand and contract meaning some teams may cease to exist before they get to pick #1 overall. Not fair at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfreining Posted December 31, 2013 Report Share Posted December 31, 2013 This doesn't work because teams expand and contract meaning some teams may cease to exist before they get to pick #1 overall. Not fair at all. Depends on how the trading will change, if a top seeded team with a 1st overall pick is a buyer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.