Thoughts on an Alternative to the Draft Lottery Format

[Taro T]

Instead of only having the 1st 1-3 slots available to move, why not have a draft lottery where every slot is up for grabs, but in which teams are limited in both how far they could rise & how far they could fall.

There'd be 16 separate drawings, with say an inability to move up or down past teams that were more than 8 slots away from them.  So, in this year's draft, instead of Moe-ray-all having ~25% chance of staying where they are (their ~18% chance plus teams 12-16's chances), they'd also stay where they are if teams 10 or 11 won.

That's all pretty much how this season's draft would work.  The tweak would be that all lottery #'s stay in the subsequent lotteries, but the worst team that remains in the lottery would now win should there be a repeat winner.  So, if Moe-ray-all didn't win the 1st lottery, but say Seattle did, for the next draft Moe-ray-all gets a W on their #'s, teams 10-16's #'s, and Seattle's.  Team 10 still couldn't pass the Habs; so if they won that 2nd lottery, they get the 3rd pick, Moe-ray-all stays at 2, and now the Yotes win if any of the 3 teams now ahead of them win or if teams 11-16 win.

The cons are it is complicated, but not really all that complicated, and occasionally somebody will fall even further than Detroit did that 1 year.

The big pro is, now there's some interest in watching the results as seeing Vancouver at 16 doesn't mean Vegas is in slot 6 or 7, they could be anywhere from 8-15.  And, the Sabres would have a pretty good chance to move up just enough to keep Detroit from snagging Jiricek on us.  (Which is the real impetus for this thought exercise. 😉 )

Thoughts?

[Contempt]

How about not having a draft at all. Each team has x number of signing slots and a certain pool of money they can use but not exceed. You want to spend your entire pool on one person and not sign anyone else then so be it.

You could acquire additional slots and signing pool space from other teams via trade. The owners would probably want slot values and slot caps but I dont think it's necessary.

[Curt]

21 minutes ago, Contempt said:

How about not having a draft at all. Each team has x number of signing slots and a certain pool of money they can use but not exceed. You want to spend your entire pool on one person and not sign anyone else then so be it.

You could acquire additional slots and signing pool space from other teams via trade. The owners would probably want slot values and slot caps but I dont think it's necessary.

Sounds like the MLB international free agent system.

Problem with this is that some teams in undesirable locations would really get shafted.  Few prospects would want to sign there.

[SDS]

Why not? Because you have to choose something. And every time you choose something you didn’t choose 100 other plans.

[steveoath]

I like the following idea. 

Draft order is not lottery based but awarded in order of most points accrued after being mathematically eliminated from the post season. 

Heard it mentioned on 32 thoughts. 

Edited May 4, 2022 by steveoath

[Contempt]

22 minutes ago, Curt said:

Sounds like the MLB international free agent system.

Problem with this is that some teams in undesirable locations would really get shafted.  Few prospects would want to sign there.

Well. Guys want jobs first and foremost.  They'd still be going back to jr or the NCAA except for the top few players and to sign one of those players those teams would forgo their ability to sign anyone else so those guy would still be motivated to sign somewhere. The slot and total pool limit would prevent teams from stockpiling and hoarding.  There could be other things you do to prevent shenanigans but teams wouldn't want to just sign one guy a year that often so they wouldn't max out that often.  If you did that a couple years in a row your whole system would be screwed. In order to acquire extra slots or extra cap you'd be trading away other assets and additionally weakening yourself.  Are some guys worth that? Maybe, and maybe that might happen every year to an extent, but it would be hard for one team to do it over and over again. How many years in a row could you have just one draft pick and be successful?  Even if that draft pick was McDavid or Matthews? You'd have nothing else.

[Curt]

4 minutes ago, Contempt said:

Well. Guys want jobs first and foremost.  They'd still be going back to jr or the NCAA except for the top few players and to sign one of those players those teams would forgo their ability to sign anyone else so those guy would still be motivated to sign somewhere. The slot and total pool limit would prevent teams from stockpiling and hoarding.  There could be other things you do to prevent shenanigans but teams wouldn't want to just sign one guy a year that often so they wouldn't max out that often.  If you did that a couple years in a row your whole system would be screwed. In order to acquire extra slots or extra cap you'd be trading away other assets and additionally weakening yourself.  Are some guys worth that? Maybe, and maybe that might happen every year to an extent, but it would be hard for one team to do it over and over again. How many years in a row could you have just one draft pick and be successful?  Even if that draft pick was McDavid or Matthews? You'd have nothing else.

Yeah, a certain level of prospect would sign anywhere to get an NHL shot, but the top guys, those who would be lottery type picks, they would have a choice.  I don’t think that they would hardly ever choose to sign with Winnipeg or Edmonton, or Columbus......

[Brawndo]

31 minutes ago, steveoath said:

I like the following idea. 

Draft order is not lottery based but awarded in order of most points accrued after being mathematically eliminated from the post season. 

Heard it mentioned on 32 thoughts. 

They were referring to Gold Drafting, here is the explanation for it. 
 

https://hockeyviz.com/txt/gold

 

For the record, the Sabres would have run away with the First Overall Choice this year. 

[mjd1001]

I'm for the traditional draft, no lottery, you pick where you finish.

Want to throw something into it to prevent tanking a little?  After you pick first, you can't do it again for the next year or two.  You finish last 3 years in a row, you pick 1st, 2nd, and then 3rd...or something like that.

Or how about making entry level contracts 2 years instead of 3?  It won't impact the vast majority of the players, but if you get a 'generational' player like McDavid, in that case you are going to have to pony up the big contract a year earlier.

 

I Honestly don't see tanking as the big issue many others do, the draft lottery annoys me more. Who are the players that have been worth 'tanking' for in the last 25 years?  McDavid?  Great player but even with other high draft picks hasn't won a Cup in Edmonton.  Crosby? Took quite a few years to win the cup, and he did it with several other top 5 picks (lottery may or may not have fixed that). Ovi?  One cup.  Lindros?  none.

These days to tank and guarantee you get that first pick you have to be SO bad that you are going to need more time to dig yourself out of such a big hole.  Again, my solution is no lottery, just can't pick 1st more than 1 time every 3 years.

 

Edited May 5, 2022 by mjd1001

[Contempt]

32 minutes ago, Curt said:

Yeah, a certain level of prospect would sign anywhere to get an NHL shot, but the top guys, those who would be lottery type picks, they would have a choice.  I don’t think that they would hardly ever choose to sign with Winnipeg or Edmonton, or Columbus......

Depends. Winnipeg and Edmonton grow enough prospects. Maybe a kid really wants to play for the Oilers or the Jets.  Or maybe those teams are really good already.  Lower level teams that aren't as good are also able to offer NHL ice time sooner which accelerates their contracts sooner.  There are certainly potential issues. But as we've seen with the Sabres and Oilers, picking at the top (snagging the top prospects) isn't necessarily a recipe for success either and it might be that teams like that would be better served to acquire extra slots in order to use them to sign more players and develop them.  There would certainly be bidding for players all the way through but the slot pools would dry up pretty quickly in some case and the only teams left would be the ones "nobody wants to sign with"  Would a bad team like Buffalo have been better served to have the #1 every year for 3 years and only those 3 players, or 6 of the top 100 for 3 years in a row because 15 teams used up their entire slot pool (or at least most of it) to take 1 guy each year?

[GASabresIUFAN]

How about just get rid of the lottery?

[kas23]

3 hours ago, Contempt said:

How about not having a draft at all. Each team has x number of signing slots and a certain pool of money they can use but not exceed. You want to spend your entire pool on one person and not sign anyone else then so be it.

You could acquire additional slots and signing pool space from other teams via trade. The owners would probably want slot values and slot caps but I dont think it's necessary.

Can’t imagine this. It would be like our drafted NCAA players entering graduating from college each year. Wouldn’t be able to take it around here. 

[skaught]

Im with the people saying to just get rid of the lottery. It's a solution to a non-existent problem.

[SDS]

Everyone is offering solutions, but no one is defining the problem. If you want the draft to be held a different way, you first have to define your set of objectives/problems that you wish to address with your solution. 

[Taro T]

6 minutes ago, SDS said:

Everyone is offering solutions, but no one is defining the problem. If you want the draft to be held a different way, you first have to define your set of objectives/problems that you wish to address with your solution. 

Told you, want the Sabres to end up w/ Jiricek & it likely won't happen from 9.  😉

 

[thewookie1]

I’d rather they just remove the lottery; when your bad you should get the top pick and when you are good you shouldn’t 

[pi2000]

5 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

I’d rather they just remove the lottery; when your bad you should get the top pick and when you are good you shouldn’t 

This is the only correct answer.

End of discussion.

Edited May 5, 2022 by pi2000

[Curt]

7 hours ago, thewookie1 said:

I’d rather they just remove the lottery; when your bad you should get the top pick and when you are good you shouldn’t 

But for me, the lottery addresses I problem.  It works to combat blatant tanking like some teams were doing for McDavid.  Tanking in that manner is just an embarrassment for the league.  I guess we’ll see how well it works next season when Bedard is there for the tanking (pun intended).

[LabattBlue]

The best run and most successful professional sports league in NA doesn’t use a draft lottery.  It is not needed, and wish it would be eliminated. 

[Curt]

2 minutes ago, LabattBlue said:

The best run and most successful professional sports league in NA doesn’t use a draft lottery.  It is not needed, and wish it would be eliminated. 

The NBA does use a draft lottery.

[thewookie1]

3 minutes ago, Curt said:

The NBA does use a draft lottery.

The NFL, the NBA is a politically charged mess with players versus teams running the league

[Buffalonill]

15 hours ago, Contempt said:

How about not having a draft at all. Each team has x number of signing slots and a certain pool of money they can use but not exceed. You want to spend your entire pool on one person and not sign anyone else then so be it.

You could acquire additional slots and signing pool space from other teams via trade. The owners would probably want slot values and slot caps but I dont think it's necessary.

Yeah  I don't see that ever happening because we would be left with scraps.

Players aren't gonna choose Buffalo

[Buffalonill]

The lottery is  In place so teams can't tank.

 

[Curt]

3 minutes ago, thewookie1 said:

The NFL, the NBA is a politically charged mess with players versus teams running the league

 

Yes, I understood.  It was a joke.  I just don’t like the NFL very much.

[LGR4GM]

51 minutes ago, Curt said:

The NBA does use a draft lottery.

lol, i appreciated this