Around the NHL - 2013-2014

[Eleven]

Apparently a trip to Starbucks is more expensive than tickets to the Panthers Game Tonight.

 

https://twitter.com/...7815168/photo/1

 

No surprise. I once (PLAYOFFS 1998) tried to give away Caps tix. GIVE AWAY. Because I had thirty. There were no takers except for the top of the newspaper box outside MCI Center.

 

Bandwagoning fools missed the team's best playoff season. Keep marketing Ovi.

[Hoss]

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie

 

NYI owner Charles Wang in talks to sell majority stake in NHL franchise. Nothing done yet, no telling if it gets done, but talks underway.

 

 

This would be great news for the Islanders.

[Ghost of Dwight Drane]

Bob McKenzie @TSNBobMcKenzie

 

NYI owner Charles Wang in talks to sell majority stake in NHL franchise. Nothing done yet, no telling if it gets done, but talks underway.

 

 

This would be great news for the Islanders.

 

LaLaLa........

[qwksndmonster]

LaLaLa........

LaLaLaLaLarry Quinn?

[carpandean]

This would be great news for the Islanders.

 

But, assuming Snow goes too, this would be bad news for us (assuming they pick this year and give us next year's first.)

[That Aud Smell]

Sounds like two separate things are in the works that are good or at least arguably good for the NHL long-term, but bad for the Sabres near-term: (1) tweaks to the draft lottery and (2) Wang's sale of the (control of the) Islanders.

 

#1 can be debated, but I think it's for the betterment of the league. #2 would be a gift to the NHL as an enterprise.

[Hoss]

 

 

But, assuming Snow goes too, this would be bad news for us (assuming they pick this year and give us next year's first.)

 

The length of the sale and the time it takes to get new management would offset that.

[bunomatic]

With the proposed changes to the lottery getting the isles first next year might work out even if it isn't top 5 but in the 5-10 range. Who knows ? I want to see improvement next year. Baby steps ?

[apuszczalowski]

The length of the sale and the time it takes to get new management would offset that.

They could decide to keep this years pick (mostly likely will), then sell and dump snow before this offseason starts and actually put together a playoff team for next year (Giving the Sabres a later pick), they are much closer to being able to do that then the Sabres are.

 

Sounds like two separate things are in the works that are good or at least arguably good for the NHL long-term, but bad for the Sabres near-term: (1) tweaks to the draft lottery and (2) Wang's sale of the (control of the) Islanders.

 

#1 can be debated, but I think it's for the betterment of the league. #2 would be a gift to the NHL as an enterprise.

I actually like this idea and think it would be best for the league cause it would keep things like this years Sabres from happening again.

Keep the actual lottery, weigh the chance at #1 the same as now and base the weighing off of the teams standing, but have the entire order of all the non playoff teams decided by the lottery, not just the #1 pick. This would eliminate teams from deciding to throw away a season in order to have a chance at the #1 spot and keep teams focused on playing better and trying to make the playoffs or win and play spoiler

[MattPie]

I actually like this idea and think it would be best for the league cause it would keep things like this years Sabres from happening again.

Keep the actual lottery, weigh the chance at #1 the same as now and base the weighing off of the teams standing, but have the entire order of all the non playoff teams decided by the lottery, not just the #1 pick. This would eliminate teams from deciding to throw away a season in order to have a chance at the #1 spot and keep teams focused on playing better and trying to make the playoffs or win and play spoiler

 

So being the worst team still has the same chance of getting the #1 overall? I'm having a tough time figuring out why this would stop teams from trying to be bad in order to get the first pick.

[Trettioåtta]

So being the worst team still has the same chance of getting the #1 overall? I'm having a tough time figuring out why this would stop teams from trying to be bad in order to get the first pick.

 

They calculate the total number of points the bottom 14 teams missed out the playoffs by (e.g. if the 8th seed has 50 points and team A has 40, that is 10 points, team B has 43, that is 7 points etc.). You work this out for the last 5 years for all non playoff teams (so if you have a good season and get into the playoffs that is a negative season to the points).

 

The teams chances are then worked out by working out what percentage of the points they contributed. So if this season you finished last and over the last 5 years you miss the playoffs by 100 points (say 20 points a season). And it total, the bottom 14 teams all missed the playoffs by 700 points over the last 5 years. Then you get a 14.2% chance of winning. That is over 10% less than it currently is.

 

Not only does this change, but they will also use this to determine the top 3 or top 5 picks. Thus you could finish last but only get the 6th pick.

 

I quite like it. But I think you could also end up with a system where a team that has two atrocious years but then a few good ones could get a high pick when they were a bubble team. But maybe that isn't a bad thing. It forces teams to always be competitive. The Pittsburgh model isn't a guaranteed turn around

[Taro T]

They calculate the total number of points the bottom 14 teams missed out the playoffs by (e.g. if the 8th seed has 50 points and team A has 40, that is 10 points, team B has 43, that is 7 points etc.). You work this out for the last 5 years for all non playoff teams (so if you have a good season and get into the playoffs that is a negative season to the points).

 

The teams chances are then worked out by working out what percentage of the points they contributed. So if this season you finished last and over the last 5 years you miss the playoffs by 100 points (say 20 points a season). And it total, the bottom 14 teams all missed the playoffs by 700 points over the last 5 years. Then you get a 14.2% chance of winning. That is over 10% less than it currently is.

 

Not only does this change, but they will also use this to determine the top 3 or top 5 picks. Thus you could finish last but only get the 6th pick.

 

I quite like it. But I think you could also end up with a system where a team that has two atrocious years but then a few good ones could get a high pick when they were a bubble team. But maybe that isn't a bad thing. It forces teams to always be competitive. The Pittsburgh model isn't a guaranteed turn around

Not according to the Friedman article that was linked in the 2014 draft thread. According to that, the odds are set by how far the non-playoff position slots were out of the playoffs NOT by how far a paryicular team has been out of the playoffs for the past x years.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/sports-content/hockey/opinion/2014/03/30-thoughts-changing-odds-in-nhl-draft-lottery.html

 

Has there been anything else released since that article?

[shrader]

Not according to the Friedman article that was linked in the 2014 draft thread. According to that, the odds are set by how far the non-playoff position slots were out of the playoffs NOT by how far a paryicular team has been out of the playoffs for the past x years.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/sp...ft-lottery.html

 

Has there been anything else released since that article?

 

I'd love to hear some justification for that proposed scenario other than "we don't want the odds to be as high as they currently are for the worst team". I really can't think of any other argument.

[apuszczalowski]

So being the worst team still has the same chance of getting the #1 overall? I'm having a tough time figuring out why this would stop teams from trying to be bad in order to get the first pick.

Because you aren't guaranteed the second spot even if you lose, you could end up drafting 10th or later

Right now if your the worst team you may not get #1, but then your assured #2, the change I would make is making the entire order calculated by the lottery system and drawing all of the draft positions for non-playoff teams

[shrader]

Because you aren't guaranteed the second spot even if you lose, you could end up drafting 10th or later

Right now if your the worst team you may not get #1, but then your assured #2, the change I would make is making the entire order calculated by the lottery system and drawing all of the draft positions for non-playoff teams

 

There's problems with every system. What happens when a team decides to tank in the last week or so to avoid getting the last playoff slot and a very likely quick defeat at the hands of Chicago or St. Louis? I'm sure some would like their shot at a high draft pick over being locked into the 16 slot.

[Taro T]

I'd love to hear some justification for that proposed scenario other than "we don't want the odds to be as high as they currently are for the worst team". I really can't think of any other argument.

Which is the reason for having a lottery in the 1st place and then allowing teams to jump all the way from 14 to 1. TB was not wise to speak the truth about the Sabres' plans for next season.

[shrader]

 

Which is the reason for having a lottery in the 1st place and then allowing teams to jump all the way from 14 to 1. TB was not wise to speak the truth about the Sabres' plans for next season.

 

I think they're all just spoiled by the fact that they all had a shot at Crosby. Now they suddenly think it should happen each time.

[sabre snipe]

 

 

There's problems with every system. What happens when a team decides to tank in the last week or so to avoid getting the last playoff slot and a very likely quick defeat at the hands of Chicago or St. Louis? I'm sure some would like their shot at a high draft pick over being locked into the 16 slot.

 

I highly doubt any team is going to tank when they have a good shot at the playoffs and playoff revenue.

[Eleven]

I highly doubt any team is going to tank when they have a good shot at the playoffs and playoff revenue.

 

Yes, but it's the race to the bottom (Taro, was it the Pit and the Devils?) that leads to this. Look at what the Indy Colts did two years ago. Tell me it wasn't at least in their heads, if not deliberate.

[Taro T]

Yes, but it's the race to the bottom (Taro, was it the Pit and the Devils?) that leads to this. Look at what the Indy Colts did two years ago. Tell me it wasn't at least in their heads, if not deliberate.

It was, it was.

[shrader]

 

 

I highly doubt any team is going to tank when they have a good shot at the playoffs and playoff revenue.

 

A deep pockets team has to walk away from two games worth of playoff revenue if they have a decent shot at the #1 pick? It's not that far fetched at all. If they convert to a system that gives the best non playoff team a good shot at #1, this is what will happen.

[deluca67]

Yes, but it's the race to the bottom (Taro, was it the Pit and the Devils?) that leads to this. Look at what the Indy Colts did two years ago. Tell me it wasn't at least in their heads, if not deliberate.

The Colts lost Peyton Manning for the season. There wasn't much they could do.

[pastajoe]

 

The Colts lost Peyton Manning for the season. There wasn't much they could do.

 

They may have kept Manning out for the season even though he could have played near the end, knowing he might leave in free agency so lets get the highest pick possible.

 

If they change the rules, then they should make the ball selection public, not do it behind the scenes and then just show us team cards. Otherwise Conner McDavid will "just by luck" end up in Brooklyn, Toronto, or Florida.

[deluca67]

They may have kept Manning out for the season even though he could have played near the end, knowing he might leave in free agency so lets get the highest pick possible.

 

If they change the rules, then they should make the ball selection public, not do it behind the scenes and then just show us team cards. Otherwise Conner McDavid will "just by luck" end up in Brooklyn, Toronto, or Florida.

I would think that decision would have been up to Manning and his doctors.

[Campy]

Here's a reminder to never drink and skate:

 

 

Here's a reminder that a sober goaltender is a better goaltender: