The Connor McDavid sweepstakes

[Cosmic]

The Sabres showed complete lack of respect for their fans tonight. They could have had this thing all but wrapped up, but instead they "win" to keep it close, and it likely will come down to the wire.

[FGM13]

Do the Oilers want McDavid?

[2001mark]

Do the Oilers want McDavid?

Sure, I think they'd keep him & deal one (or 2) of the others for more seasoned help.

(others* the bluechippers who've accomplished a whole lot of nothing so far)

[Sport]

12 ways to fix the draft lottery

By Down Goes Brown from Grantland.

Here's my favorite idea, which I'd never heard: The draft order is determined by who has the most points after they've been eliminated from playoff contention. You don't tank for McDavid. You have to win for McDavid.

"Ah, here we go. This is my personal favorite, and I’ve lobbied for the NHL to adopt it before. It’s based on an idea that Adam Gold presented at Sloan in 2012, and it’s freaking brilliant.

Here’s how it works: Each year’s draft order is determined by a ranking of most points earned by each team after being eliminated from the playoffs. As soon as you’re officially out of the running for a playoff spot, you start the clock on earning points toward your draft position. Bad teams still get a big advantage here, since they’d be getting a head start of several weeks. And teams that narrowly miss the playoffs on the final weekend are basically eliminated from the running for a high pick entirely.

But now, we’re rewarding teams for winning instead of losing. Imagine having a “points since elimination” column in the standings for fans of bad teams to obsessively reload. And then picture how this week’s Sabres/Coyotes games would have played out if both teams were trying to win their way to Connor McDavid."

[FGM13]

Do the Oilers want McDavid?

Sure, I think they'd keep him & deal one (or 2) of the others for more seasoned help.

(others* the bluechippers who've accomplished a whole lot of nothing so far)

No, I mean that they keep winning. Stop winning, you guys. I want McDavid.

[kevsim1]

12 ways to fix the draft lottery

By Down Goes Brown from Grantland.

Here's my favorite idea, which I'd never heard: The draft order is determined by who has the most points after they've been eliminated from playoff contention. You don't tank for McDavid. You have to win for McDavid.

"Ah, here we go. This is my personal favorite, and I’ve lobbied for the NHL to adopt it before. It’s based on an idea that Adam Gold presented at Sloan in 2012, and it’s freaking brilliant.

Here’s how it works: Each year’s draft order is determined by a ranking of most points earned by each team after being eliminated from the playoffs. As soon as you’re officially out of the running for a playoff spot, you start the clock on earning points toward your draft position. Bad teams still get a big advantage here, since they’d be getting a head start of several weeks. And teams that narrowly miss the playoffs on the final weekend are basically eliminated from the running for a high pick entirely.

But now, we’re rewarding teams for winning instead of losing. Imagine having a “points since elimination” column in the standings for fans of bad teams to obsessively reload. And then picture how this week’s Sabres/Coyotes games would have played out if both teams were trying to win their way to Connor McDavid."

I really like this. The only thing I can really think of is if the east is really bad, for example, with their 2nd WC team a good 10 or so points behind the corresponding west team. Arizona, even though better than Buffalo, might be eliminated in advance just because of the strength of their conference.

[HedleyLamarr]

12 ways to fix the draft lottery

By Down Goes Brown from Grantland.

Here's my favorite idea, which I'd never heard: The draft order is determined by who has the most points after they've been eliminated from playoff contention. You don't tank for McDavid. You have to win for McDavid.

"Ah, here we go. This is my personal favorite, and I’ve lobbied for the NHL to adopt it before. It’s based on an idea that Adam Gold presented at Sloan in 2012, and it’s freaking brilliant.

Here’s how it works: Each year’s draft order is determined by a ranking of most points earned by each team after being eliminated from the playoffs. As soon as you’re officially out of the running for a playoff spot, you start the clock on earning points toward your draft position. Bad teams still get a big advantage here, since they’d be getting a head start of several weeks. And teams that narrowly miss the playoffs on the final weekend are basically eliminated from the running for a high pick entirely.

But now, we’re rewarding teams for winning instead of losing. Imagine having a “points since elimination” column in the standings for fans of bad teams to obsessively reload. And then picture how this week’s Sabres/Coyotes games would have played out if both teams were trying to win their way to Connor McDavid."

Pretty good idea. Gives some incentive to try to win from January on. A couple things though....

Still gives the incentive to tank the first 55-60 games or so. Even Buffalo and Edmonton were mathematically alive entering March. GM's can play putrid rosters, claim they're "giving the young guys some experience" and stash their better players in the minors until they need to get points.

Also, this may impact the trade deadline. Bad teams now have an incentive to keep their good players that otherwise would be two-month rentals.

Remember the lockout season's draft lottery (the Crosby Sweepstakes)? All 30 teams were eligible, and depending on the past couple-few seasons, you got 1 to 3 ping-pong balls in the tank. I'd go that route. Give every team at least one ball in the tank. The conference finalists (last four playoff teams remaining) from the most-recent playoffs get one ball. All division winners and 2nd-place teams in the regular season standings from that previous season get one ball. The rest of the playoff participants (the third place teams and wild card teams that didn't make the conference finals) get two balls. The next best seven teams (in other words, the teams that just missed the playoffs) get three balls, and the worst seven teams get four balls in the tank. Then, to make things a little more weighted towards the truly bad teams, any team that made the playoffs from the previous season loses a ball (unless they have only one to begin with). After this, the lottery is held and all balls get drawn until all 30 teams' balls have been picked.

For instance, for the 2014 Draft, this would have been the ball breakdown for the draft:

1 Ball: Los Angeles, NY Rangers, Chicago, Montreal, Colorado, St. Louis, Anaheim, San Jose, Pittsburgh, Boston, Tampa Bay, Detroit, Minnesota

2 Balls: Columbus, Dallas, Philadelphia, Washington, Ottawa, Toronto

3 Balls: NY Islanders, Vancouver, New Jersey, Arizona, Nashville, Winnipeg

4 Balls: Buffalo, Edmonton, Florida, Calgary, Carolina

[Still MIGHTY]

Yeah, the problem is, and it's evident with the recent Buffalo players comments, the players aren't trying to lose. Management is trying to lose. The fans want you to lose, but the players probably don't give a damn what draft pick they get. Especially in a situation like Buffalo where half of those players won't be Sabres next year.

You can't build a team trying to make it lose, then make it try to win once you've lost. And if you're in a top-heavy division with a division-heavy schedule down the stretch, it's going to be much harder to pick up those post-elimination wins than if you're in a weaker division.

Plus, is tanking really this big of a problem it needs fixing? Yes it happens when you have a McDavid/Crosby/Ovechkin, but was the "Fail For Nail" really as bad of a tank job as the label insinuates? Yes, the Sabres are pulling the tank job of all tank jobs, but how often does this actually happen in the NHL? And what does it really hurt?

Unless you get rid of the draft entirely or set an predetermined order, you have to be bad to get better sometimes.

[HedleyLamarr]

Plus, is tanking really this big of a problem it needs fixing? Yes it happens when you have a McDavid/Crosby/Ovechkin, but was the "Fail For Nail" really as bad of a tank job as the label insinuates? Yes, the Sabres are pulling the tank job of all tank jobs, but how often does this actually happen in the NHL? And what does it really hurt?

Well, the perception that sports is about trying your best to win today. As well as the concept that all teams are trying to put on a quality entertainment product and doing their best to win a championship each season.

It's borderline cheating. The only difference between a team trying to tank a season and Pete Rose is that money was involved (directly or indirectly) with putting your best chance of winning on the field.

People respond to incentives. That's true for just about any aspect of life. If you reduce/eliminate the incentive for tanking, you only make the league and the product better.

Using my model for a draft lottery, a team that can be argued for tanking a season stands the same amount of chance that a team that tried to make the playoffs (I'll pick Carolina, based off of the logic of their moves) but had a bad season, and only slightly better odds than a team that tried their damndest to not only make the playoffs, but go deep (let's say Vancouver). The team that was trying to tank has under a 10% chance of landing the #1 pick, and with no security blanket of having the #2 pick at worst.

I totally get the reason why a team would tank. I also get that tanking goes against everything I've ever done as a sports fan. I've been cheering for this team for X-number of years to win every game and hope for the best...and now I want them to lose with the realization that there's an 80% chance they don't come away with the prize for tanking? I just can't get behind that. And it's also bad business and ethically questionable.....you're purposely giving me a Grade F product this season, you better be slashing ticket prices and concession prices and parking costs! Wait, you aren't?

[habsfan1]

Yeah, the problem is, and it's evident with the recent Buffalo players comments, the players aren't trying to lose. Management is trying to lose. The fans want you to lose, but the players probably don't give a damn what draft pick they get. Especially in a situation like Buffalo where half of those players won't be Sabres next year.

You can't build a team trying to make it lose, then make it try to win once you've lost. And if you're in a top-heavy division with a division-heavy schedule down the stretch, it's going to be much harder to pick up those post-elimination wins than if you're in a weaker division.

Plus, is tanking really this big of a problem it needs fixing? Yes it happens when you have a McDavid/Crosby/Ovechkin, but was the "Fail For Nail" really as bad of a tank job as the label insinuates? Yes, the Sabres are pulling the tank job of all tank jobs, but how often does this actually happen in the NHL? And what does it really hurt?

Unless you get rid of the draft entirely or set an predetermined order, you have to be bad to get better sometimes.

Yeah, that's the thing.

Unless you're a mainstay like Z Girgensons, or Tyler Ennis/Matt Moulson (at least one of the 2), you won't prioritize the future of this franchise if chances are you're likely not gonna be a part of it. And this is the reason why many players will not oblige on purpose to the desires of the fans and management. I understand if the team still has a key player who knows that his "role" is to lose, but that's where it ends. I can't imagine it being a big confidence booster, knowing that you're only here temporarely because you suck. So while those players understand the situation, in a way it's also a very particular scenario to see how these players will ultimately react to it on the ice.

Edit: these tweets I stumbled across are just too funny. Ted Nolan gets a lot of direct tweets from fans asking him to "Please start Hackett", "Please start Hackett", LMAO!!

[Cosmic]

I think the NHL is on the right track with the second half of the latest changes being phased in... next year, the worst team could pick as low as fourth. That will pretty much break the tank, even if a McEichel situation pops up again. I think teams will still have fire sales, but probably not as strenuously.

[HedleyLamarr]

I dunno, doesn't the NBA have a similar setup to where the worst team can fall to 4th in the draft order? Hasn't deterred NBA teams from purposely not trying their best to put forth a good product on the court. Hell, the 76ers traded away Evan Turner a couple years ago because he was doing too good and wasn't helping them lose games.

Give #14 a much closer chance of landing the top pick as the worst team in the league....and wipe away the lifeboat of having the #2 pick as a consolation prize as well.... and that will deter tanking.

[The_Admiral]

I don't care if teams bottom out. I like that better than everyone trying to finish with 84 points and mostly succeeding.

[habsfan1]

So some Leafs fans cheered for Buffalo goals and some Sabres fans cheered for Toronto goals. Every goal at FNC got a mixed reaction, but you can't tell who's cheering who anymore.

This has to be a record for the most absurdity in one game.

[Dexter Morgan]

So what's the % number the Leafs can get the 1 or 2 pick?

[Cosmic]

They'll have no shot at the #2 pick. They'll have 8ish% chance at the #1 pick.

[Dexter Morgan]

They'll have no shot at the #2 pick. They'll have 8ish% chance at the #1 pick.

really? why no shot at 2?

[pollux]

They'll have no shot at the #2 pick. They'll have 8ish% chance at the #1 pick.

really? why no shot at 2?

The lottery is only for the #1 pick. The rest of the draft order stays the same. So to have a shot at #2, you either need to finish first and lose the lottery, or finish second with the first team winning the lottery.

Toronto can't finish first or second in the race to mediocrity.

[Cosmic]

I've talked myself down off the ledge slightly regarding the Sabres. Even if Arizona doesn't get any additional points the rest of the season, the Sabres could (should?!?) be OK. They should lose to Pittsburgh, the Islanders, and Chicago. It seems like the Beej are playing well lately, too? That just leaves Carolina after that. So if they lose the games against the playoff teams and split their two games with non-playoff teams, they'll still be 30th. Even if Arizona completely checks out; the Sabres hold the tiebreaker.

Five game winning streak in 3... 2... 1...

[RyanMcD29]