MLB draft lottery way better than NHL’s

[Gregor Samsa]

They might need it the most, but they might not deserve it the most.

It depends if you want a competitive league. No fan wants to sit through a 60 point season. A small market team could be doomed and a large market team would lose a ton of money for the league. The league is a business after all

 

[The Gr8 Dane]

The MLB Draft Lottery doesn't matter because the talent dropoff from #1 to #30 is negligible.

This , they are also all 21-22 when drafted

 

[CharasLazyWrister]

I have no idea about anything to do with the draft for MLB, but I do agree with the point about making it a higher likelihood to get the first pick for a bigger spread of teams.

The entire concept of “last place team gets first pick” is, to me, just another feature indicative of the “rigging” of American professional sports. All these things like salary caps, a commissioner representing a bunch of collaborating owners, draft placement etc is there to make the league less competitive from a business standpoint and make it easier for owners to increase their wealth. I want as little of that as possible. Make them actually compete to win every year. If they don’t, their business suffers and they don’t get an out with a high draft pick.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

Mike Piazza was the 162537th overall pick

 

[Random schmoe]

This , they are also all 21-22 when drafted

Not really. The MLB draft allows for drafting players right out of high school, generally age 18, OR once they've completed 3(?) years of college. I'd guesstimate 2/3rds of first round players are from college, but the remainder are high schoolers.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Just watched it this afternoon. A lot more interesting and compelling than the NHL. NHL made it even more boring a few years ago after Whinezerman complained. I would like to see all 16 non-playoff teams have a shot at the top 5 picks. Why should crappy teams load up for 4-5 years with top 5 picks??? Time to take power away from GMs. Imagine the hype and excitement if all 16 teams had a shot at the top 5 picks in a weighted format that still gives the odds to bottom teams but for first five, not first two.

No that’s crap. MLB one sucks.

 

[amnesiac]

Draft lotteries are stupid. Just do reverse standings order and call it a day.

then you have GMs who will purposely tank a la 1983 Pens, and it worked

 

[Seedtype]

If the only major concern is tanking they should do this:
(Maybe this is too crazy of an idea)

If a team has two consecutive top 5 picks they get a warning. This warning stays in effect for 5 years.

If they do it again they get fined 2 million dollars and the GM must be removed.(The money goes to a fund to support low income families get into hockey)
The GM cannot be allowed to be hired for half a decade.

Teams can appeal the punishment/warning either due to injuries or other major circumstances.

 

[Shark Finn]

Just reverse the picking order and be done with it.

 

[Cas]

then you have GMs who will purposely tank a la 1983 Pens, and it worked

So what? Some teams will be awful, whether through design or incompetence, the result is the same.

 

[Golden_Jet]

So what? Some teams will be awful, whether through design or incompetence, the result is the same.

League doesn’t want tanking for 1OA, nor should they. Reverse standings is lazy and dumb.

 

[benfranklin]

Just watched it this afternoon. A lot more interesting and compelling than the NHL. NHL made it even more boring a few years ago after Whinezerman complained. I would like to see all 16 non-playoff teams have a shot at the top 5 picks. Why should crappy teams load up for 4-5 years with top 5 picks??? Time to take power away from GMs. Imagine the hype and excitement if all 16 teams had a shot at the top 5 picks in a weighted format that still gives the odds to bottom teams but for first five, not first two.

Thats how the Rangers got Lafrenniere and jumped up from 14. Not really fair either a bubble team on the edge of being good should get McDavid handed to them either potentially.

 

[PlayersLtd]

If the only major concern is tanking they should do this:
(Maybe this is too crazy of an idea)

If a team has two consecutive top 5 picks they get a warning. This warning stays in effect for 5 years.

If they do it again they get fined 2 million dollars and the GM must be removed.(The money goes to a fund to support low income families get into hockey)
The GM cannot be allowed to be hired for half a decade.

Teams can appeal the punishment/warning either due to injuries or other major circumstances.

The warning is the gate revenue they lose by being uncompetitive for too long. The removal of the GM is him getting fired if he can't get his team back on track.

We don't need anything artificial, nobody is actively tanking in perpetuity. Why does this side of the debate act like thats the case?

 

[amnesiac]

So what? Some teams will be awful, whether through design or incompetence, the result is the same.

well if you dont care about the integrity of the game, then fine. Most people do, though.... Its one thing to lose because your team is bad as a whole, its another to purposely manipulate a team to be bad.

GMs trying to tank may sometimes happen regardless, but not nearly as much than if it were an automatic last place get #1.

 

[frightenedinmatenum2]

I knew that as soon as the Senators graduated from complete shit to just kinda shit, they would change the rules so they couldn't get a top 3 pick from that 9-14 type ballpark.

 

[Cas]

well if you dont care about the integrity of the game, then fine. Most people do, though.... Its one thing to lose because your team is bad as a whole, its another to purposely manipulate a team to be bad.

GMs trying to tank may sometimes happen regardless, but not nearly as much than if it were an automatic last place get #1.

Yes, of course nobody tanks now to get the best odds at #1 and a guaranteed pick no worse than #3, and building a tanking team can backfire if the prospect you were planning on gunning for next year turns out not to be as good as advertised anyway.

The draft lottery changes nothing and just makes it harder for bad teams to get better by throwing an artificial and pointless element of randomness into the mix.

Don't overcomplicate a method for distributing young talent across the league (while also controlling salaries, which is of course the real purpose of all drafts).

 

[amnesiac]

Yes, of course nobody tanks now to get the best odds at #1 and a guaranteed pick no worse than #3, and building a tanking team can backfire if the prospect you were planning on gunning for next year turns out not to be as good as advertised anyway.

The draft lottery changes nothing and just makes it harder for bad teams to get better by throwing an artificial and pointless element of randomness into the mix.

Don't overcomplicate a method for distributing young talent across the league (while also controlling salaries, which is of course the real purpose of all drafts).

Overcomplicate? whats complicated about a lottery?

if say 3 teams were at the bottom of the standings next year going for Gavin McKenna, youd have all 3 GMs doing stuff like keeping #1 goalies out of the lineup with a mysterious "ailing injury", trading away decent vets at the deadline for nothing to make the team worse, etc etc.

We'd essentially be seeing that every time theres a consensus 1OA pick. With a lottery there would be less of that.

 

[DuklaNation]

Downside of some lottery systems is that it can extend periods when bad teams can continue to struggle without elite talent. It's preferable to have 1 or 2 core pieces. If you only get high picks in bad drafts, you're screwed.

 

[qc14]

The lottery system as it is currently is completely fine and works for the most part as intended by giving struggling teams first choice at the best incoming talent while also preventing real "race for last" scenarios

 

[amnesiac]

Downside of some lottery systems is that it can extend periods when bad teams can continue to struggle without elite talent. It's preferable to have 1 or 2 core pieces. If you only get high picks in bad drafts, you're screwed.

what does the lottery have anything to do with that? A bad draft year is a bad draft year whether its a lottery or not.

Sometimes you pick #2 and draft Nolan Patrick over Cale Makar. Has nothing to do with the lottery and everything to do with scouting.

 

[Metroid]

Keep the NHL as is with one small change. Teams playout the season assume there is a lottery for whatever teams it is at the moment... So you may end up dead last and not the balls thrown your way.. Buuuuuut here's the kicker, at the end of the year hold a coin toss sorta idea. Heads, there's a lottery like usual, tails, order stays as the standings (so if you finish dead last, you get first pick). No one will know which way the draft will go and it'll be little extra fun on the side...

 

[Gregor Samsa]

You are either competing now or hoping to compete in the future. A team like SJ or Chicago has no chance this year so why shouldn’t they sell off their players who are good now for players that can be good in the future? That is the basis of most trades: now or future, except for the odd player for player trade. You can’t really tell a team to be good today if they just aren’t. No player wants to be in the cellar, neither does a GM or coach. No GM is hoping to pick 1OV 5 years in a row

 

[Toby91ca]

Just watched it this afternoon. A lot more interesting and compelling than the NHL. NHL made it even more boring a few years ago after Whinezerman complained. I would like to see all 16 non-playoff teams have a shot at the top 5 picks. Why should crappy teams load up for 4-5 years with top 5 picks??? Time to take power away from GMs. Imagine the hype and excitement if all 16 teams had a shot at the top 5 picks in a weighted format that still gives the odds to bottom teams but for first five, not first two.

Having bottom feeders isn't good for the league, so you want the really bad teams to get the potentially good picks to make their teams better. Good drafting is generally the best way to build a winning team in the NHL, that isn't necessarily the case with MLB....they can still spend their way to good rosters.

I like that they don't simply automatically give the last place team the first pick anymore, but have no issue with the lottery process currently.

It may seem like semantics, but that’s not true at all.

The draft is there just as much for the best team in the league, as it is for the worst team in the league.

It’s primarily a means to distribute the signing rights of each new cohort of players among the all the teams, in such a way that no one team can hoard all the prospects, and so that only one team at a time holds a player’s signing rights, avoiding the bidding wars and rapid salary increases that come from multiple teams competing for the services of the same player.

In the interest of promoting parity, it was decided that the worst teams should have priority during the allocation of players. But that shouldn’t be conflated with the false notion that promoting parity is the primary purpose of the draft.

Your correct regarding the purpose for actually having a draft, I think what the other poster meant to say the "draft order" and not simply the "draft"

 

[snag]

Mike Piazza was the 162537th overall pick

He also had a fairy godfather that worked some magic

 

[Brodeur]

While I like the idea of all non playoff teams having a shot at winning the lotto but if a team who missed the playoffs by a single pt wins and they actually have a good team but for what ever reason they missed the playoffs? THis board would go nuts

One of my favorite random stories is that the NHL wanted to avoid an "Orlando situation" when they were hashing out the lottery rules in 1995.

Orlando won the 1992 NBA lottery and drafted Shaquille O'Neal. They won 42 games the following season but missed the playoffs due to a tiebreaker. They improbably won the 1993 Draft Lottery despite having the lowest odds. Orlando would eventually trade down for Penny Hardaway.

So as the NHL was deciding the rules in spring 1995, Orlando was the #1 seed in the East (en route to an NBA Finals appearance) and most people thought they'd be the next dynasty. So the compromise was that the winner could only jump four spots which remained until 2013.

Just do a fully weighted lottery. Have the team that finishes last have 16 balls and have the team that finishes one spot out of the playoffs have one ball.

Nah, that's how the NBA did it in the early 90's and they switched it to how the NHL does it currently. Current method only requires 14 balls whereas yours requires 136 balls and the odds aren't "better." You could accomplish the same odds with the current 14 ball method anyways.

-------------

MLB adding a lottery seemed unnecessary given how different it is compared to the NBA/NHL (no international players, sheer number of varying positions). I don't know if more random is necessarily better in my book.