Let's end tanking forever: draft lottery pick delayed 1 year going forward

[MattPie]

This thread is primarily bull excrement smeared all over the internet.  

 

Except for my posts, you mean.

[LastPommerFan]

This thread is primarily bull excrement smeared all over the internet.  

 

 

Except for my posts, you mean.

 

 

And mine. 

[MattPie]

And mine. 

 

Of course, sorry about being so self-centered.

[Samson's Flow]

the problem isn't drafting high, it's intentionally sabotaging your roster by dealing away the majority of your talent to make yourself bad enough to get the first overall pick. Good teams and GMS cam build a winning team without having to be the worst team in recent history hoping to have the best odds at the #1 pick.

 

Want to stop tanking, make the draft lottery for every draft position for all teams that don't make the playoffs. Meaning a team that misses the playoffs by a point could chose first overall and the team coming in dead last can pick last before all of the playoff teams. Tanking would be meaningless and would make fights for the last playoff spots more exciting cause teams will continue to try and make the playoffs instead of giving up and playing for a draft spot. The only negative for the league is it could make the trade deadline less exciting with less teams willing to have fire sales

See point above about bad teams staying bad.

 

The whole point of the draft is to even the playing field and giving the worst team the opportunity to acquire the best players, therefore making them not the worst team next year.

 

Even lottery odds or some sort of basement playoff would just give the bad teams less ability to make themselves better, leading to bankruptcies and terrible league parity.

[LGR4GM]

See point above about bad teams staying bad.

 

The whole point of the draft is to even the playing field and giving the worst team the opportunity to acquire the best players, therefore making them not the worst team next year.

 

Even lottery odds or some sort of basement playoff would just give the bad teams less ability to make themselves better, leading to bankruptcies and terrible league parity.

no no no! Tanking is dishonest and unfair and the NHL is always fair with everything from free agency to talent distribution!  Uhg why don't you understand the Sabres are terrible for doing what every other cup winner has done for the past 40 some odd years. How dare they draft in the top 3 2 years in a row. It is shameful we should change the entire draft system over this!  Pitchforks and Feathers and Tar!!! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!

 

 

Seriously the majority of the argument to change the lottery in this thread, is . 

[MattPie]

no no no! Tanking is dishonest and unfair and the NHL is always fair with everything from free agency to talent distribution!  Uhg why don't you understand the Sabres are terrible for doing what every other cup winner has done for the past 40 some odd years. How dare they draft in the top 3 2 years in a row. It is shameful we should change the entire draft system over this!  Pitchforks and Feathers and Tar!!! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!

 

 

Seriously the majority of the argument to change the lottery in this thread, is ######. 

 

Except for my, and Vodka Bottle's, arguments, you mean.

Edited April 2, 2015 by Met'yuPirog

[Samson's Flow]

no no no! Tanking is dishonest and unfair and the NHL is always fair with everything from free agency to talent distribution!  Uhg why don't you understand the Sabres are terrible for doing what every other cup winner has done for the past 40 some odd years. How dare they draft in the top 3 2 years in a row. It is shameful we should change the entire draft system over this!  Pitchforks and Feathers and Tar!!! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!

 

 

Seriously the majority of the argument to change the lottery in this thread, is ######. 

I'm gonna assume the censored word is "amazeballs". :flirt:

 

The freakin NFL doesn't have a problem with giving the worst team the #1 pick ferchristsakes. That league is the biggest because there is a thought that every year can be your year and bad teams can get good in a hurry.

[drnkirishone]

the only idea i have ever seen that made sense for ending tanking for the Lemiuexs/McDavids involved averaging the records of teams over a 3 to 5 year period. I can't see a team trying to intentionally tank for that length of time. The one thing I would add is that once i team selects 1st overall they are barred from selecting 1st overall again for 2 drafts

[apuszczalowski]

no no no! Tanking is dishonest and unfair and the NHL is always fair with everything from free agency to talent distribution!  Uhg why don't you understand the Sabres are terrible for doing what every other cup winner has done for the past 40 some odd years. How dare they draft in the top 3 2 years in a row. It is shameful we should change the entire draft system over this!  Pitchforks and Feathers and Tar!!! RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE!!!

 

 

Seriously the majority of the argument to change the lottery in this thread, is ######.

 

again, as been said before many times, this is not just a team being bad getting the first pick, the difference is that the Sabres INTENTIONALLY made themselves bad by dumping all of their talent for picks and prospects, and went into the season with the intention of being the worst team. This isn't even the same as last year with this team, at least last year they went into the season with the intention of trying to be a good team, then when they were out of contention sold off talent. Problem is, no other franchise has then decided to continue to just make themselves worse and try to be the worst. They try to improve the team and get better. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't (edmonton)

 

But go ahead and keep thinking that everyone's just upset because buffalo is doing it. name me one of the recent Stanley Cup winners that intentionally went into a season with the goal of being the worst team at the beginning of the season to get the top pick in the draft. It's ok, I will wait.......

I'm gonna assume the censored word is "amazeballs". :flirt:

 

The freakin NFL doesn't have a problem with giving the worst team the #1 pick ferchristsakes. That league is the biggest because there is a thought that every year can be your year and bad teams can get good in a hurry.

the last time a team "tanked" in the NFL was when the Colts sucked for luck, how many teams in the NFL in the last decade have had the #1 overall pick and won a superbowl?

 

The majority of these ideas for changing the draft lotery are over complicating it. Playoffs, points for wins after being eliminated, using results over previous years, making the lottery for the next season are all just over complicating it. As I said previously, if you don't make the playoffs, your in the lottery and all draft spots are drawn so it won't matter if your dead last or almost made the playoffs, your draft spot is determined by a random draw. Makes for a good TV broadcast for the lottery too

[K-9]

You left out general managers will manage.

That. too. And let's not forget that owners, own. 

 

They need to go back to no lottery system and having teams draft in the inverse order of their records, with the worst teams picking first. What, are teams gonna tank? How? By not playing hard? Or by calling up ECHL goalies? Maybe. And so what? I think this "integrity of the game" crap is just that. Sucking bad enough to even be in contention for the worst record is bad enough so why penalize  bad teams further? It makes no sense. Besides, lottery systems don't deter tanking, anyway. 

 

GO SABRES!!!

[LGR4GM]

again, as been said before many times, this is not just a team being bad getting the first pick, the difference is that the Sabres INTENTIONALLY made themselves bad by dumping all of their talent for picks and prospects, and went into the season with the intention of being the worst team. This isn't even the same as last year with this team, at least last year they went into the season with the intention of trying to be a good team, then when they were out of contention sold off talent. Problem is, no other franchise has then decided to continue to just make themselves worse and try to be the worst. They try to improve the team and get better. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't (edmonton)

 

But go ahead and keep thinking that everyone's just upset because buffalo is doing it. name me one of the recent Stanley Cup winners that intentionally went into a season with the goal of being the worst team at the beginning of the season to get the top pick in the draft. It's ok, I will wait.......

Prove the Sabres went into the season intending to lose every game in January.  

 

Actually keep waiting... because I have handed out all my give a f##ks for one season.  

[LastPommerFan]

again, as been said before many times, this is not just a team being bad getting the first pick, the difference is that the Sabres INTENTIONALLY made themselves bad by dumping all of their talent for picks and prospects, and went into the season with the intention of being the worst team. This isn't even the same as last year with this team, at least last year they went into the season with the intention of trying to be a good team, then when they were out of contention sold off talent. Problem is, no other franchise has then decided to continue to just make themselves worse and try to be the worst. They try to improve the team and get better. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't (edmonton)

 

But go ahead and keep thinking that everyone's just upset because buffalo is doing it. name me one of the recent Stanley Cup winners that intentionally went into a season with the goal of being the worst team at the beginning of the season to get the top pick in the draft. It's ok, I will wait.......

 

 

 

There has not been a player available at the next draft as good as Connor McDavid in decades. If we had played the 2005 season you can be damn sure the results would have look exactly like this season except instead of edmonton, buffalo, and arizona, it would have been pittsburgh, washington, and chicago.

[MattPie]

again, as been said before many times, this is not just a team being bad getting the first pick, the difference is that the Sabres INTENTIONALLY made themselves bad by dumping all of their talent for picks and prospects, and went into the season with the intention of being the worst team. This isn't even the same as last year with this team, at least last year they went into the season with the intention of trying to be a good team, then when they were out of contention sold off talent. Problem is, no other franchise has then decided to continue to just make themselves worse and try to be the worst. They try to improve the team and get better. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't (edmonton)

 

But go ahead and keep thinking that everyone's just upset because buffalo is doing it. name me one of the recent Stanley Cup winners that intentionally went into a season with the goal of being the worst team at the beginning of the season to get the top pick in the draft. It's ok, I will wait.......

the last time a team "tanked" in the NFL was when the Colts sucked for luck, how many teams in the NFL in the last decade have had the #1 overall pick and won a superbowl?

 

The majority of these ideas for changing the draft lotery are over complicating it. Playoffs, points for wins after being eliminated, using results over previous years, making the lottery for the next season are all just over complicating it. As I said previously, if you don't make the playoffs, your in the lottery and all draft spots are drawn so it won't matter if your dead last or almost made the playoffs, your draft spot is determined by a random draw. Makes for a good TV broadcast for the lottery too

 

First paragraph: there are teams every year that go into the season "bad" and don't mortgage the future to get a little better. Or do you think teams aren't smart enough to read the pre-season rankings that every sports media outlet puts out?

 

Bolded: Eli Manning, first overall in 2004, two-time Superbowl MVP and Champion.

 

EDIT: Eli isn't a great example, since the Giants were supposed to pick #4 that season but traded with the whole "I won't play there" situation. The Giants did have the same 4-12 record as the Chargers that season though.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Met'yuPirog

[Brennan Huff]

This happens in every sport and I don't see what the big deal is. If your team is bad, how else are you supposed get good?

This. My god people

[TrueBlueGED]

You guys are responding to someone who thought they actually went into last season trying to be good.

[North Buffalo]

Here's an idea that would making tanking even less likely in the future.

 

Why not make it so that there is still a lottery, but it is for the pick in the following year's draft?

 

For example, the lottery in April 2015 would be for the 2016 draft. Also, you could drop 4-5 slots no matter what.

 

I think it would go a LONG way to never seeing this garbage again. The reward would be so far away and so uncertain that tanking would not have a clear prize.

 

Are we really this crazy about losing a game in March 2015 that would not affect the draft order until summer 2016?

 

Thoughts?

 

I think you have an interesting thought in search of a problem. I don't think tanking if you have a bad team is a problem and people who say otherwise I question their loyalty to the Sabres. If tanking makes sense talent wise economically and commercially then I have no problem with it if it means future reward.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Fargenov Iceholeski

[apuszczalowski]

There has not been a player available at the next draft as good as Connor McDavid in decades. If we had played the 2005 season you can be damn sure the results would have look exactly like this season except instead of edmonton, buffalo, and arizona, it would have been pittsburgh, washington, and chicago.

but I thought the penguins did tank to get Crosby? That's what all the tankers keep saying

I think you have an interesting thought in search of a problem. I don't think tanking if you have a bad team is a problem and people who say otherwise I question their loyalty to the Sabres. If tanking makes sense talent wise economically and commercially then I have no problem with it if it means future reward.

why are they not loyal to the Sabres? Because they want to see a team at least try to compete and not put garbage out on the ice to get a slightly better chance of drafting one player That may or may not lead to a cup. So far the last saviour generational player crosby has only brought his team one cup

 

I question the tankers being loyal to the Sabres cause they don't care about the team, they care about one name to go on the back of the team and are willing to cheer against the Sabres to get that name

Prove the Sabres went into the season intending to lose every game in January.

 

Actually keep waiting... because I have handed out all my give a f##ks for one season.

their general manager basically came out and said it, they were tanking for mcdavid

[North Buffalo]

Why are they not loyal to the Sabres? Because they want to see a team at least try to compete and not put garbage out on the ice to get a slightly better chance of drafting one player That may or may not lead to a cup. So far the last saviour generational player crosby has only brought his team one cup

I question the tankers being loyal to the Sabres cause they don't care about the team, they care about one name to go on the back of the team and are willing to cheer against the Sabres to get that nametheir general manager basically came out and said it, they were tanking for mcdavid

but I thought the penguins did tank to get Crosby? That's what all the tankers keep sayingwhy are they not loyal to the Sabres? Because they want to see a team at least try to compete and not put garbage out on the ice to get a slightly better chance of drafting one player That may or may not lead to a cup. So far the last saviour generational player crosby has only brought his team one cup

I question the tankers being loyal to the Sabres cause they don't care about the team, they care about one name to go on the back of the team and are willing to cheer against the Sabres to get that nametheir general manager basically came out and said it, they were tanking for mcdavid

And while coming out and saying we are tanking is honest, business wise may be an iffy strategy before the seasone, once it appeared the Sabres would suck the only rational fan option is to support the tank. if the hockey brain trust of the Sabres as it appears figured that out earlier, then so be it. But at some point though it may offend fan sensibility, going against the tank past December of this year brings into question in my mind your Sabre loyalty or in the very least your level of denial about this teams potential for success without tanking longterm. Edited April 3, 2015 by Fargenov Iceholeski

[LastPommerFan]

but I thought the penguins did tank to get Crosby? That's what all the tankers keep saying

 

If someone is saying that, and you heed them as worthy of having a conversation with, then that's on you.

 

The Pens did tank, 25 years ago, for Super Mario.

[TheFunPolice]

I started this thread due mostly to blind rage at the thought of Arizona, Darcy, and the 7 fans who follow that team being rewarded for sucking for 1/2 of 1 season while we basically haven't had hockey for 2 years now.

 

So the logic isn't the best... This is why I should not comment during or right after games

 

lol

[MattPie]

I started this thread due mostly to blind rage at the thought of Arizona, Darcy, and the 7 fans who follow that team being rewarded for sucking for 1/2 of 1 season while we basically haven't had hockey for 2 years now.

 

So the logic isn't the best... This is why I should not comment during or right after games

 

lol

 

FWIW, based on what AZ have sent out and what's coming back, they're going to suck mightily next year too.

[Taro T]

FWIW, based on what AZ have sent out and what's coming back, they're going to suck mightily next year too.

Pretty sure their AGM described it as "suffering."

[deluca67]

Here's an idea that would making tanking even less likely in the future.

 

Why not make it so that there is still a lottery, but it is for the pick in the following year's draft?

 

For example, the lottery in April 2015 would be for the 2016 draft. Also, you could drop 4-5 slots no matter what.

 

I think it would go a LONG way to never seeing this garbage again. The reward would be so far away and so uncertain that tanking would not have a clear prize.

 

Are we really this crazy about losing a game in March 2015 that would not affect the draft order until summer 2016?

 

Thoughts?

I prefer the one team on ball lottery. Where your ball is drawn is where you draft making it a true lottery. That will kill tanking forever which at this point should be the top priority of the NHL.

[TrueBlueGED]

Yes, something that happens to the degree it did this year takes place every 10 Year. Obviously should be top priority. Not scoring, or parity, or hits to the head, or failing markets...but tanking. :rolleyes:

[LGR4GM]

I prefer the one team on ball lottery. Where your ball is drawn is where you draft making it a true lottery. That will kill tanking forever which at this point should be the top priority of the NHL.

No.  

 

Yes, something that happens to the degree it did this year takes place every 10 Year. Obviously should be top priority. Not scoring, or parity, or hits to the head, or failing markets...but tanking. :rolleyes:

Yes.