5 replies to this topic

[Duck304]

Honestly, I am getting extremely tired of people wanting their teams to lose to get into the "Stamkos Sweepstakes". It is such a lame thing to do to root for your team to lose in order to get a higher pick in the lottery. I have seen Marc Crawford throw away games in the shootout. He puts guys like Willsie out there. It's shameful.

This is a reward for terrible performance that teams get for losing. It is a chance at the number one pick in the draft. Rewards for playing awful? The spirit of hockey and sports is in trouble. In hockey, the GM, the coach, the staff, and the player should be giving 100% of their effort to WIN. That's the beauty of hockey and sports. 30 organizations composed of hundreds of people cooperating together at an extremely high level in order to win. That's what we are brought up to believe. We are supoosed to try to win, and to never give up. What kind of fan/organization wants their own team to tank?

Because of the reward, being competitive, yet mediocre (As in finishing 9th in the conference) is a punishment, yet going 20-51-11 is luxury. Why?

We need a change in this league. A team like LA has been wallowing in the bottom for years and is just picking up top prospects left and right, while competitive teams like Toronto get nothing at all. Where is the logic in that? LA will certainly be more competitive because of this.

The NHL needs a new drafting system. I still somewhat think that the worst team should have a better shot at the top pick, but here is my idea:

The teams that finish 17th - 30th (The teams that didn't qualify for the postseason) should ALL be included in a lottery for the top picks, instead of just five lowly teams. For example: (Using the spinning lottery ball system: each team get's a certain number of balls. They are spun around. Whichever order the teams are picked in is the order of the draft.):

17th. 1 ball
18th. 2 balls
19th. 3 balls
20th. 4 balls
21st. 5 balls
22nd. 6 balls
23rd. 7 balls
24th. 8 balls
25th. 9 balls
26th. 10 balls
27th. 11 balls
28th. 12 balls
29th. 13 balls
30th. 14 balls

With this system, the team that is excited to be in the bottom five has a good chance, but they aren't safe by any means at all. 19th could easily steal the first pick. 29th might get the 9th pick. 17th might get the fifth pick. This way, BEING COMPETITIVE IS NOT PUNISHED.

If you really want to crack down on teams deliberately losing and fans hoping for losses to get a good draft pick, then use my other system:

17th. 1 ball
18th. 1 ball
19th. 1 ball
20th. 1 ball
21st. 1 ball
22nd. 1 ball
23rd. 1 ball
24th. 1 ball
25th. 1 ball
26th. 1 ball
27th. 1 ball
28th. 1 ball
29th. 1 ball
30th. 1 ball

This would eliminate the problem, and cause a 30-team war for the playoffs. It would increase competitiveness, but at the same time, it might be too harsh. I still think the struggling teams should have a better chance to draft high, but not the advantage they have now.

What are your thoughts?

[BritDuck]

I'm not sure. By your reckoning, a team that is just plain bad will rarely get the chance to improve, whereas the teams near the top will get much more opportunity to keep picking up top prospects. In that case, you're looking a an even bigger divide than what we have now, say the top 20 teams would be rotating into the play-offs each year whilst the bottom 10 never get a look in because they rarely have the opportunity to improve due to the top draft picks going to the teams above them.

I know the current system is flawed, but I don't think it needs anything so radical as this as a change.

[Dutch Duck]

Losing is better to swallow once one knows his team will be better in four or five years. So one of the worst teams must have the highest pick, and hopefully the GM does something good with that pick. But I do agree with you. Maybe it's better to include every team that didn't make the playoffs to the lottery. But don't forget that even late picks can be outstnading picks. Getzlaf (19th) and Perry (28th) are great examples of those. Not to mention players like Lidstrom (3rd round 53rd overall), Zetterberg (7th round 210th overall), Datsyuk (6th round 171st oerall) and Alfredsson (6th round 133rd overall). It's all about scouting too. Everyone would pick a Zetterberg or an Alfredsson before an Alexandre Daigle or a Patrick Stefan, right?

You just need to know what you're doing when you're drafting a player. And that's the challenge (sometimes).

[Duck304]

Thanks a lot for the input.

[Dark Knight]

We could also just get rid of the LAK, Thrashers, and Columbus and bring back Winnipeg

[Duck304]

Check out the poll at TSN.ca