Flames & Losing For Higher Draft Order.

[senor_incendiarse]

That's the way it's always been but the ongoing ideas to re-vamp the draft order directly challenges traditions and old-time thinking.  Basically, if you overly suck, then you will no longer get a free pass to the #1 pick.  Like in my suggestion, the draft order is determined by team records after trade deadline where the team with the best record and still misses the playoffs gets #1 overall and the worst record gets 14th.

 

Wow, what would that change?  Let's take a closer look.

 

1. Teams trading away good pending UFAs at the trade deadline for draft picks risk "tanking" and getting a worser pick.

 

2. Teams like the Sabres would be buyers at the Trade Deadline. They will try to win down the stretch to get the #1 overall pick.  This would alter the course of the universe as we know it.  Who would sell at the Trade Deadline?  Well, why does there have to be a barrage of trade activity anyways?  Let the trades happen in the summer and prevent teams from loading up going into the playoffs.  The Trade Deadline was invented in the first place to prevent late season player loading anyways.  By altering the course of the universe, we completely solve this problem.  We lose Trade Deadline day excitement but we gain league wide integrity.  Every team will try to win until the end of the season.  Way worth it.

 

3. What about pending UFAs of the Sabres? Simple.  Instead of having no use for pending UFAs when the playoffs are out of reach, they now have a use.  Use them to win games to get the #1 overall pick.  Mind blowing.  They can still be traded at trade deadline if the team chooses to.

 

It's different for sure but it's hard to say it's worse.

I'll never agree on this, but I'll add in a few points missed.  In order for this to work every team must have a completely balanced schedule at the deadline, I don't know if there is ever a date outside of day 1 to the last day of the season where every team has played the same amount of games, if your looking at a team 2 teams that were great down the stretch but one finishes with 4 more points but had 2 games in hand at the deadline where is that fair.  Also other factors like home/road split or strength of schedule are just going to create controversy.  This isn't the NFL and there is no way to logistically plan for an even stretch drive.  I still say the lottery is the best anti tanking device, if you disagree then ask yourself why Patrick Kane isn't a Flyer, Yakupov isn't a BlueJacket or Mackinnon isn't a Panther.

[Carty]

 other factors like home/road split or strength of schedule are just going to create controversy.

 

This is what I was going to mention...

 

There is no way to predict what would be a fair schedule where teams would face opponents so the remaining games were equally balanced in terms of competition...   and that is one of the main reasons why Peeps idea wouldn't work...

[cross16]

I'll never agree on this, but I'll add in a few points missed.  In order for this to work every team must have a completely balanced schedule at the deadline, I don't know if there is ever a date outside of day 1 to the last day of the season where every team has played the same amount of games, if your looking at a team 2 teams that were great down the stretch but one finishes with 4 more points but had 2 games in hand at the deadline where is that fair.  Also other factors like home/road split or strength of schedule are just going to create controversy.  This isn't the NFL and there is no way to logistically plan for an even stretch drive.  I still say the lottery is the best anti tanking device, if you disagree then ask yourself why Patrick Kane isn't a Flyer, Yakupov isn't a BlueJacket or Mackinnon isn't a Panther.

Agreed again.

I really think if the league really must do something, and to r honest IMO the league has to do nothing because this is not an issue I think this whole tanking this is 100 fabricated by media and fans, then just put a lottery in and remove he remove where you can only go back one spot. Make it a true lottery from picks 1-6 and then 7-14 and boom problem solve and you save he completely silliness that is being banded about here.

Keep in mind too it's not just the teams that want to ship out pending UFAs. You think Ryan miller would have preferred to stay buffalo so eye can help e sabres get a better draft spot and this finally he can leave in the summer? Why hold players back as well as teams? Sorry I just think this whole concept is ridiculous and trying to correct a problem that isn't even there.

[irock19]

I knew when Burke retained Cammy that Cammy would go on a bit of a tear. Hes in a contract year Cammy will give us a hand full of game winning goals and punt us slightly down on draft day. Arrghhh!!

[FeyWest]

For those interested, there was a "Roundtable" last night on Flames Nation, I thought it was interesting and good to see the different perspectives. 

 

All involved were: Ryan Pike, Ryan Lambert, Kent Wilson, Justin Azevedo,And Christian Roatis

 

Link: http://flamesnation.ca/2014/3/19/the-fn-faceoff-to-tank-or-not-to-tank-7pm-mt-live

 

What was covered (May not be in order):

• Should we tank for draft position VS. Not
• Trading (or there lack of) Mike Cammalleri on Trade Deadline Day
• Merits of keeping Sean Monahan up VS. back to the OHL
• When Johnny Gaudreau signs what is the best way we can introduce him to the system w/o big media and fan poop storm (ie. Unrealistic expectations, saviourism, etc...)
• Validity of the "Winning Culture" ideology

Might have missed something but can't double check while at work

 

Let me known what you all think I'd love to discuss!

[The_People1]

I'll never agree on this, but I'll add in a few points missed.  In order for this to work every team must have a completely balanced schedule at the deadline, I don't know if there is ever a date outside of day 1 to the last day of the season where every team has played the same amount of games, if your looking at a team 2 teams that were great down the stretch but one finishes with 4 more points but had 2 games in hand at the deadline where is that fair.  Also other factors like home/road split or strength of schedule are just going to create controversy.  This isn't the NFL and there is no way to logistically plan for an even stretch drive.  I still say the lottery is the best anti tanking device, if you disagree then ask yourself why Patrick Kane isn't a Flyer, Yakupov isn't a BlueJacket or Mackinnon isn't a Panther.

This is what I was going to mention...

 

There is no way to predict what would be a fair schedule where teams would face opponents so the remaining games were equally balanced in terms of competition...   and that is one of the main reasons why Peeps idea wouldn't work...

 

Great points guys.  I didn't consider the strength of schedule which would be huge.

[The_People1]

IMO the league has to do nothing because this is not an issue I think this whole tanking this is 100 fabricated by media and fans

 

How is it fabricated by fans when in a sport like the NBA that has a similar draft system, you had a former GM admit to tanking?

 

It's not fabricated.  It's real.  It hurts the image of the league and its fans when teams shoot for the #1 overall pick instead of the playoffs.

I knew when Burke retained Cammy that Cammy would go on a bit of a tear. Hes in a contract year Cammy will give us a hand full of game winning goals and punt us slightly down on draft day. Arrghhh!!

 

I'd rather he just mailed it in and be disgruntled so he can help the Flames get a higher pick too.

 

All this scoring and winning would've helped back in November but not anymore. 

For those interested, there was a "Roundtable" last night on Flames Nation, I thought it was interesting and good to see the different perspectives. 

 

All involved were: Ryan Pike, Ryan Lambert, Kent Wilson, Justin Azevedo,And Christian Roatis

 

Link: http://flamesnation.ca/2014/3/19/the-fn-faceoff-to-tank-or-not-to-tank-7pm-mt-live

 

What was covered (May not be in order):

• Should we tank for draft position VS. Not
• Trading (or there lack of) Mike Cammalleri on Trade Deadline Day
• Merits of keeping Sean Monahan up VS. back to the OHL
• When Johnny Gaudreau signs what is the best way we can introduce him to the system w/o big media and fan poop storm (ie. Unrealistic expectations, saviourism, etc...)
• Validity of the "Winning Culture" ideology

Might have missed something but can't double check while at work

 

Let me known what you all think I'd love to discuss!

 

We are on page 12 of this topic.  I think we've covered a lot already!

[Flyerfan52]

1 way to remove any incentive for tanking is to make the 1st round draw totally unweighted. 30 teams, 30 balls. If the SC winner occasionally gets the 1st overall so be it. Only way to increase your odds are to trade for more picks (which would be worth more as every pick is a potential winner).

 

For rounds 2 & on revert to the rewarding the losers so worst team gets #31, etc.

If anyone wants to tank to be guaranteed that #31 let them.

[FeyWest]

We are on page 12 of this topic.  I think we've covered a lot already!

 

Hahaha yehhh fair enough, didn't even realize that 'til you mentioned it

 

I was thinking more on the Roundtable for discussion but it covered alot of topics not directly related to this OP now but don't think it deserved a new thread either. Just bein' a little selfish I guess . Been a slow week so I've depleted all the new content thus far...

[FlamesLogic]

That is dumb

1 way to remove any incentive for tanking is to make the 1st round draw totally unweighted. 30 teams, 30 balls. If the SC winner occasionally gets the 1st overall so be it. Only way to increase your odds are to trade for more picks (which would be worth more as every pick is a potential winner).

 

For rounds 2 & on revert to the rewarding the losers so worst team gets #31, etc.

If anyone wants to tank to be guaranteed that #31 let them.

 

The whole point of a draft rank is to facilitate turning around teams that are having a hard time be it self inflicted or just bad luck (Ilya going back to russia, etc).

The problem is that it is too skewed towards tanking.

What they need to do is set a base draft order as of say the trade deadline and then rewards teams with extra balls for how well they perform down the stretch. As such those teams that tried to make it but ended up in 17th place still get a little bit of love because going for it and just missing is alot harder on a fan base than saying boarding it and tanking for 4 months.

Example last place (30) gets 140 balls, second last gets 130 balls, etc until 17th place gets 10 balls.
Every point your team gets from trade deadline on earns you another ball. Lets assume that there is about 60ish games played by deadline day. In the next 20 games each point earns you a ball. If you win out but just miss playoffs you get an extra 40 balls.

Chances are good teams wouldnt earn more than say 10-20 extra balls than bad teams but it wouldnt make fans feel so bad if they team does infact win that game. Yea, we moved up a spot in the draft order but at least we got another 2 balls into the lottery.

Now use these balls to determine the entire draft order.

The crap teams should theoretically have a greater shot at higher picks but its not a given.

Lets say last place ends up with 15 extra points after deadline day. Whereas the 17th place team ends up with 27 extra points.

Last place gets 155 total balls in the lottery and 17th gets 37. So instead that crap team have 14 times better odds to get the first pick they now have like 4.2.

Im sure the numbers need some work but the theory is sound.

[SheriforPM]

Said it before and it makes the most sense. Why not have an unweighted draft for the bottom 14? Balls numbered 1 through 14. Each Gm or rep picks a ball. Poof you get what you pick. 

For the top 16 do the same thing. Excitement again on Draft lottery day and everyone but Edmonton is happy! 

[Kulstad]

How about a full-out WWE-style Battle Royal for draft position?  GMs come to the ring in reverse order of the standings (30th is first in the ring, 29th is second, etc), last man standing gets the first overall pick, the rest of the first round is determined in reverse-order of elimination (first out = 30th pick, second = 29th pick, etc)

 

You could sell this on PPV!  Who wouldn't want to see a physical clash between Burke and Lowe?  Anyone and Garth Snow?

[robrob1974]

1 way to remove any incentive for tanking is to make the 1st round draw totally unweighted. 30 teams, 30 balls. If the SC winner occasionally gets the 1st overall so be it. Only way to increase your odds are to trade for more picks (which would be worth more as every pick is a potential winner).

 

For rounds 2 & on revert to the rewarding the losers so worst team gets #31, etc.

If anyone wants to tank to be guaranteed that #31 let them.

 

if you go that route, i think it should be only the teams out of the playoffs who get even chances of winning the lottery.

[DirtyDeeds]

I'll put this here instead of starting a whole new thread for it.

 

My prediction : is that the NHL will add a new franchise in the west this summer.

Seattle/Portland (for example). They need 2 more teams in the west to balance for the east so might even give out two.(Las Vegas) might be another.

 

All the hype around the Connor McDavid?? Well forget about tanking for him. The first picks will be awarded to the new franchise(s).

 

You heard it here. *puts away his crystal ball*

[travel_dude]

I'll put this here instead of starting a whole new thread for it.

 

My prediction : is that the NHL will add a new franchise in the west this summer.

Seattle/Portland (for example). They need 2 more teams in the west to balance for the east so might even give out two.(Las Vegas) might be another.

 

All the hype around the Connor McDavid?? Well forget about tanking for him. The first picks will be awarded to the new franchise(s).

 

You heard it here. *puts away his crystal ball*

I hope they don't add any teams for a few years.  My fear with that is having to protect players and exposing others from the expansion.  Sure we don't have all that many players that would get claimed, but the way we have added new guys would mean we would have a lot of available prospects.  Course it depends on the rules of said entry draft.

[The_People1]

I'll put this here instead of starting a whole new thread for it.

 

My prediction : is that the NHL will add a new franchise in the west this summer.

Seattle/Portland (for example). They need 2 more teams in the west to balance for the east so might even give out two.(Las Vegas) might be another.

 

All the hype around the Connor McDavid?? Well forget about tanking for him. The first picks will be awarded to the new franchise(s).

 

You heard it here. *puts away his crystal ball*

 

Can't remember who it was on radio, might have been Bob McCown, said the word on the street was, Seattle may be announced as an expansion team as early as this summer.  Although, they would not actually come into the NHL for a couple years (or until they build a new arena). 

 

It was also mentioned that a second expansion team could be Las Vegas.  Would be crazy if Seattle and Las Vegas got to draft Connor McDavid and Jack Eichel top 2 this season.

[The_People1]

Said it before and it makes the most sense. Why not have an unweighted draft for the bottom 14? Balls numbered 1 through 14. Each Gm or rep picks a ball. Poof you get what you pick. 

For the top 16 do the same thing. Excitement again on Draft lottery day and everyone but Edmonton is happy! 

 

Exactaloooo.  Makes too much sense though.

 

I would also settle for:  Worst team gets 14 balls, 2nd worst gets 13, 3rd gets 12, etc and then pick em until you settle the first round.

[DirtyDeeds]

I hope they don't add any teams for a few years.  My fear with that is having to protect players and exposing others from the expansion.  Sure we don't have all that many players that would get claimed, but the way we have added new guys would mean we would have a lot of available prospects.  Course it depends on the rules of said entry draft.

I don't think that process would be too painful for us. While we have a fair number of prospects, most are borderline or simply not ready for NHL. It should be easy to put together a list of players that would not figure "prominently" in the Flames long term plans.

[jjgallow]

I don't think that process would be too painful for us. While we have a fair number of prospects, most are borderline or simply not ready for NHL. It should be easy to put together a list of players that would not figure "prominently" in the Flames long term plans.

 

Agreed, this would be no big deal.   We have the world's largest supporting cast of players.  We could easily protect all our core players (those that we have), as well as any potential core players. 

[cross16]

How is it fabricated by fans when in a sport like the NBA that has a similar draft system, you had a former GM admit to tanking?

It's not fabricated. It's real. It hurts the image of the league and its fans when teams shoot for the #1 overall pick instead of the

So one out of the over 100 gms in the major professional sports and this is a problem? Why doesn't the nfl ever have issues of tanking an they don't have a lottery

My definition of tanking though is losing on purpose in order to get a better draft pick. I don't define a team like Buffalo as tanking not would I define what te raptors did as tanking unless he actually went to the coach and said I want so and so played because I want to lose which he admits he didn't do. I'm fine with teams making long term based decisions and don't define yk as tanking so long as the work ethic is there to win every night and it is across as pro sports, IMO, this why I think this is fabricated. To me, what collangelo said is what fans think. Deep down yes you want that draft pick and yes you want the chance to get the best potential player but you are not prepared to do whatever it takes, ie my definition of tanking, to get there. I get it if you disagree with my definition or don't like that idea but that's my approach and because I don't see and issue with that and I see the draft as a critical part of parity I'm joy interested in fixes that take away the parity element.

[Carty]

How about a full-out WWE-style Battle Royal for draft position?  GMs come to the ring in reverse order of the standings (30th is first in the ring, 29th is second, etc), last man standing gets the first overall pick, the rest of the first round is determined in reverse-order of elimination (first out = 30th pick, second = 29th pick, etc)

 

You could sell this on PPV!  Who wouldn't want to see a physical clash between Burke and Lowe?  Anyone and Garth Snow?

 

My money is on Burke...

 

[The_People1]

So one out of the over 100 gms in the major professional sports and this is a problem? Why doesn't the nfl ever have issues of tanking an they don't have a lottery

My definition of tanking though is losing on purpose in order to get a better draft pick. I don't define a team like Buffalo as tanking not would I define what te raptors did as tanking unless he actually went to the coach and said I want so and so played because I want to lose which he admits he didn't do. I'm fine with teams making long term based decisions and don't define yk as tanking so long as the work ethic is there to win every night and it is across as pro sports, IMO, this why I think this is fabricated. To me, what collangelo said is what fans think. Deep down yes you want that draft pick and yes you want the chance to get the best potential player but you are not prepared to do whatever it takes, ie my definition of tanking, to get there. I get it if you disagree with my definition or don't like that idea but that's my approach and because I don't see and issue with that and I see the draft as a critical part of parity I'm joy interested in fixes that take away the parity element.

 

I understand we have a different definition of the word "tanking".  Similar to "rebuild", it can mean many things to many different people.  When the Flames traded Iginla, JBo, and Kipper retired, to me, that is rebuilding.  But to some, it wasn't because it wasn't a "full" dismantle like, we still had Glencross, Giordano, etc.  Feaster was also still GM.

 

Tanking can mean any of the two extremes,

 

1. Doing everything/whatever it takes get a higher draft pick.

2. Doing less than 110% of everything/whatever it takes to win.

 

To me, tanking falls closer to "2" than it does to "1". To Colangelo, it's probably "2".  He could've done things to win but he saw the ship sinking closer to a high pick so he let it sink.  The Sabres are not trying to win either.  Management is not going to the players to tell them to lose but they sure aren't doing anything to win any games.

[travel_dude]

I don't think that process would be too painful for us. While we have a fair number of prospects, most are borderline or simply not ready for NHL. It should be easy to put together a list of players that would not figure "prominently" in the Flames long term plans.

So if a team can only protect 9 forwards, 6 D and 1 goalie. who would you opt to protect?

In nets?  Ramo, Ortio or Gillies?

 

A lot would depend on the draft rules.  Just saying it would suck to lose a prospect like Ferland or Gillies or Ortio because we can't protect enough young players/prospects. 

[cross16]

I understand we have a different definition of the word "tanking".  Similar to "rebuild", it can mean many things to many different people.  When the Flames traded Iginla, JBo, and Kipper retired, to me, that is rebuilding.  But to some, it wasn't because it wasn't a "full" dismantle like, we still had Glencross, Giordano, etc.  Feaster was also still GM.

 

Tanking can mean any of the two extremes,

 

1. Doing everything/whatever it takes get a higher draft pick.

2. Doing less than 110% of everything/whatever it takes to win.

 

To me, tanking falls closer to "2" than it does to "1". To Colangelo, it's probably "2".  He could've done things to win but he saw the ship sinking closer to a high pick so he let it sink.  The Sabres are not trying to win either.  Management is not going to the players to tell them to lose but they sure aren't doing anything to win any games.

This is circular and I know well disagree but I personally think if you ask Tim Murray he would tell you hey want to win but they just are not going to make a short term win now move they are going to think long term. So yes you deal miller, you deal Ott and you decrease your chances to win now but hopefully better in a few years. Is that deliberately trying to lose now, not IMO because I think the sabres would still rather win games but they are just not going to put whatever they can into the team to do so and get will accept the consequences. I'm personally fine with that and I don't blieve that affects the integrity of the game.

I have no problem with what the sabres are doing or what the hawks or Avs did previously. I do have a problem with what Edmonton did but IMO they paid the consequences for the decisions by all of the bad habits they picked up and by going through 3 GMs in short order and IMO that penalty is more harsh then anything th league could instil on them which is why I just don't see the point of further rule changes. I believe these things work themselves out.

[Flyerfan52]

So if a team can only protect 9 forwards, 6 D and 1 goalie. who would you opt to protect?

In nets?  Ramo, Ortio or Gillies?

 

A lot would depend on the draft rules.  Just saying it would suck to lose a prospect like Ferland or Gillies or Ortio because we can't protect enough young players/prospects. 

In the last expansion draft in 2000 each team could lose either 1 goalie or 1 defense. I think that those that had to be exposed also needed to have played x # of pro games.

With 30 teams to pluck from the 2 expansion teams would likely pick 2 or more experienced goalies & then a few younger prospective 1s. There are better prospects then what we expose.

 

Mostly teams lose unwanted vets. With the salary cap/floor some with big cap hits/low true $s are especially attractive as (unless they get a special exemption for x # of years) they need to hit the floor.