All 14 Non Playoff teams could get#1
- Thread starter Leaf Lander
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
It's a great idea.
Odds dont change, any team past say 6th or 7th has about a 2% chance or less from what I remember.
But if this rule was in effect NJ would've had the first pick.
Dangles McGavin
RIP Lounge
crump
~ ~ (ړײ) ~ ~
I haven't seen it written in stone yet, but ya, The weighting system for each team may remain, but four-spot move restriction will be eliminated.
It prevents teams from having an incentive to tank. They only get a marginally better chance now to tank. Say a team is 10 points out of a playoff spot with 7 games left. They may give up due to odds being low of making the playoffs so they may as well try and tank to have a chance at #1. Now since they have a chance at #1 even if they miss the playoffs, they will still try to win all 7 games and possibly sneak in.
I don't agree that any team tanks. I believe it's a fantasy of fans. Guys on ****** teams are still playing for their jobs.
If there were actual commands from GMs or owners to the players to give up on the season (and Hey guys, don't worry, no one's job is at risk), then that creates such a dangerous environment.
Not to mention that someone, somewhere would have let that memo leak to the media.
If there were actual commands from GMs or owners to the players to give up on the season (and Hey guys, don't worry, no one's job is at risk), then that creates such a dangerous environment.
Not to mention that someone, somewhere would have let that memo leak to the media.
I believe this measure would be included because the NHL is moving closer to parity, and this clause further institutes parity because it helps prevent (to a statistically small degree, albeit) teams that finish just outside the playoffs on a continuous basis, from stagnating.
I don't think players give up, but it is possible that the gm tells the coaches to maybe not prepare them as well. For example in a PK meeting they may give inaccurate info on how the opposing team runs their PP or just not have a meeting at all. I think it is hard for a team to tank due to the competitiveness of the players (exception being Chinese badminton players
) but I think there are little things here and there that could help.It's not that they tank.
But If I want my team better and there's oh say 5 or so games left, I'd still try, but I'd try much less than if I were in the playoffs.
They know a team can get better through the draft(Although I find this is far more important in the NBA, the NHL can take a few years before being impacted by a drafted player.)
But If I want my team better and there's oh say 5 or so games left, I'd still try, but I'd try much less than if I were in the playoffs.
They know a team can get better through the draft(Although I find this is far more important in the NBA, the NHL can take a few years before being impacted by a drafted player.)
charliolemieux
rsTmf
- Apr 1, 2010
- 9,715
- 55
Where the hell was this little gem when we were finishing 9th 10th and 11th with Sundin and Co.?
I guess I like it going forward. Must burn NJD 's butt. They went from 8th to 4th.
I guess I like it going forward. Must burn NJD 's butt. They went from 8th to 4th.
alcanalz
whys and wherefores
- Nov 3, 2009
- 6,900
- 0
None of the players on a team care about losing a couple more games so they can draft third instead of sixth. The fans might, same with the GM, but these guys are still going to go in to each game and battle.
I don't understand changing the system or how it affects anything for the better. The Stanley cup champs could have been one loss away from drafting first overall, how does that make sense?
People will rage when Pitts or Philly or a good team has a down year with injuries and such and gets first.
Stephen
Moderator
- Feb 28, 2002
- 83,058
- 61,964
I really don't get this, since teams give more or less effort randomly throughout the season anyway, and someone has to finish dead last...
Lebanese Leaf
Registered User
I agree, you don't really see teams intentionally 'tanking' anymore, but IIRC back in the day the Pittsburgh Penguins and New Jersey Devils were scratching healthy NHL players in favour of minor-league guys so they could get to the bottom of the standings and draft Lemieux.
It will be the same odds as before. All teams missing the playoffs were always involved in the lottery there was just a rule in place that said a team couldn't move up more than 4 spots. Now the 4 spot limit rule has been eliminated.
BayStBullies
Burn the Boats!
- Apr 1, 2012
- 5,620
- 5,144
Shimso
Registered User
- Oct 9, 2011
- 1,709
- 0
I agree about players not tanking. They may lose enthusiasm and motivation on a crappy team but they're not going to be thinking "we better lose so we can get someone who might take our roster spot".
However, I very much believe that some GMs & coaches would tank.
If a team is headed for bottom 5 in the league at the trade deadline, how many of these teams will make a move that might get them a few more wins? Virtually none; they'd rather sell assets than make a push to do whatever is possible to win games and IMO, anything that's not trying to win games is considered tanking/rebuilding/etc.
Kirkpatrick
Registered User
This was linked in the general forum, interesting comparison to the Ovechkin draft: http://old.post-gazette.com/pg/04088/292486.stm
I don't even really see this as a deterrent to tank. The last place team usually wins the lottery anyway and if they don't they are still getting the second pick. What they should have done is used the balls to determine picks one through fourteen.
Canada4Gold
Registered User
- Dec 22, 2010
- 43,234
- 9,423
Last place team only has something like a 28% chance to win the lottery. Before their odds to get first pick were almost 50% because any team between 6 and 14 winning it still gave them the 1st pick, now they have to win the lottery so they only have about a 28% chance to pick first.
Yeah I do agree though, should determine all picks through lottery, not just 1 lottery winner getting 1st pick
Exactly. A one in three to get first overall and one hundred percent chance at a top two pick.
Leaf Rocket
Leaf Fan Till I Die
Lebanese Leaf
Registered User
Let me repeat this, TANKING HAS NOT BEEN ELIMINATED.
Look at the NBA draft lottery, the worst team still has a 25% at the first pick, with a 100% chance of picking in the top 4. the 14th worst team has a 98.2% chance of picking 14th. It's not as if all non-playoff teams now suddenly have a realistic shot at the #1 pick.
Here are the odds for each seed to get specific picks if there were no ties (rounded to 3 decimal places):
Seed Chances 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th
1 250 .250 .215 .178 .357
2 199 .199 .188 .171 .319 .123
3 156 .156 .157 .156 .226 .265 .040
4 119 .119 .126 .133 .099 .351 .160 .012
5 88 .088 .097 .107 ------ .261 .360 .084 .004
6 63 .063 .071 .081 -------------.439 .305 .040 .001
7 43 .043 .049 .058 -------------------.599 .232 .018 .000
8 28 .028 .033 .039 --------------------------.724 .168 .008 .000
9 17 .017 .020 .024 --------------------------------.813 .122 .004 .000
10 11 .011 .013 .016 ---------------------------------------.870 .089 .002 .000
11 8 .008 .009 .012 ---------------------------------------------.907 .063 .001 .000
12 7 .007 .008 .010 ----------------------------------------------------.935 .039 .000
13 6 .006 .007 .009 ----------------------------------------------------------.960 .018
14 5 .005 .006 .007 ----------------------------------------------------------------.982
Look at the NBA draft lottery, the worst team still has a 25% at the first pick, with a 100% chance of picking in the top 4. the 14th worst team has a 98.2% chance of picking 14th. It's not as if all non-playoff teams now suddenly have a realistic shot at the #1 pick.
Here are the odds for each seed to get specific picks if there were no ties (rounded to 3 decimal places):
Seed Chances 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th 10th 11th 12th 13th 14th
1 250 .250 .215 .178 .357
2 199 .199 .188 .171 .319 .123
3 156 .156 .157 .156 .226 .265 .040
4 119 .119 .126 .133 .099 .351 .160 .012
5 88 .088 .097 .107 ------ .261 .360 .084 .004
6 63 .063 .071 .081 -------------.439 .305 .040 .001
7 43 .043 .049 .058 -------------------.599 .232 .018 .000
8 28 .028 .033 .039 --------------------------.724 .168 .008 .000
9 17 .017 .020 .024 --------------------------------.813 .122 .004 .000
10 11 .011 .013 .016 ---------------------------------------.870 .089 .002 .000
11 8 .008 .009 .012 ---------------------------------------------.907 .063 .001 .000
12 7 .007 .008 .010 ----------------------------------------------------.935 .039 .000
13 6 .006 .007 .009 ----------------------------------------------------------.960 .018
14 5 .005 .006 .007 ----------------------------------------------------------------.982
Latest posts
-
Confirmed with Link: Vladislav Namestnikov extends 2 years 3 million AAV- Latest: Mortimer Snerd
-
-
