- Nov 11, 2017
- 4,013
- 4,960
I dislike how the current draft lottery system encourages fans to root for their team to lose at the end of the season to improve their draft position. I also dislike the concept of using random chance to determine draft position, especially something as important as who gets the #1 pick. I used to think the best solution was the Gold Plan. However, there are a couple of problems with it.
First, teams in different conferences can be eliminated at vastly different times, regardless of their points total, due to conference strength, which can change from year to year. Second, and more importantly, under the Gold Plan, if a team is unlikely to make the playoffs, fans are incentivized to cheer for early losses so the team is eliminated from contention as soon as possible.
With these issues in mind, let me introduce the tentatively named Silver Plan.
For example, in 2024, after 62 games, the Buffalo Sabres had 62 points. Over the next 20 games, they earned 22 Silver Points, giving them a final adjusted total of 40 points for draft positioning. Ties would be broken by regulation wins (more wins = better draft position) and the other usual tie-breakers.
Here's how that would work for the rest of the teams last year (OG = original draft order, NEW = Silver Plan Draft Order):
While this system changes the draft order, it does not dramatically alter the top selections. Outside of Montreal, the top seven teams remain the same, just reordered. Additionally, this system benefits teams that consistently hover around the playoff line. Under the current system, such teams rarely land top talent, keeping them stuck in the “mushy middle.” Under the Silver Plan, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and Minnesota would have earned top-10 picks despite finishing near the top of the wild card race.
This system could also influence how teams approach the final stretch of the season. Columbus, Anaheim, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Montreal, Minnesota, and St. Louis would have been in a dog fight for draft positions 5-11. Suddenly, those games would carry more significance, energizing fans and motivating players to compete harder.
Think of the difference in narrative, too. Imagine Chicago going on a late season run to claim the #1 draft pick, rather than it just being awarded by the luck of the draw and as a reward for being terrible.
Now, the Gold Plan offers similar benefits, but the Silver Plan is more consistent. Every team starts accumulating Silver Points in game 63 (around the trade deadline), eliminating the need to rely on uneven playoff elimination across conferences and divisions. Teams also have 20 games to accumulate points, whereas under the Gold Plan, teams may get as few as 0–15 games, with most getting fewer than 10. As a result, the Gold Plan's benefits apply only to a small fraction of games, even for teams certain to miss the playoffs. An underrated flaw of the Gold Plan would be those last games leading up to mathematical elimination, where hardcore fans would be desperate for their team to lose.
Also, under the Gold Plan in 2023/24, Arizona/Utah would have received the second overall pick despite finishing with 77 points, while Chicago and San Jose had 52 and 47 points, respectively. San Jose, despite finishing dead last, would have dropped to the third draft position. Under the Silver Plan, Arizona would have needed to win 13 of its final 20 games just to match Chicago’s point total. It would then have had to win more games than Chicago over the remaining seven games to earn that 2nd draft slot. This scenario would be technically possible but extremely unlikely. Under the Silver Plan, the worst teams would still receive the best draft picks.
One possible drawback is that it could reduce trade activity at the deadline since teams would still be incentivized to win. However, while the trade deadline is exciting, a league where every team has a reason to compete in every game is far more compelling.
Finally, of course for the first 62 games of the season, fans of bottom-ranked teams may still hope for losses to improve their chances at a high pick. This is a flaw, but any system that rewards bad teams will have it. From what I’ve seen, this system is the best way to reward struggling teams without excessively incentivizing losing.
Thank you for reading. What do you think?
First, teams in different conferences can be eliminated at vastly different times, regardless of their points total, due to conference strength, which can change from year to year. Second, and more importantly, under the Gold Plan, if a team is unlikely to make the playoffs, fans are incentivized to cheer for early losses so the team is eliminated from contention as soon as possible.
With these issues in mind, let me introduce the tentatively named Silver Plan.
How It Works
Starting in game 63, every point a team earns is banked as Silver Points. If the team then misses the playoffs, their Silver Points are subtracted from their total points, determining their draft position.For example, in 2024, after 62 games, the Buffalo Sabres had 62 points. Over the next 20 games, they earned 22 Silver Points, giving them a final adjusted total of 40 points for draft positioning. Ties would be broken by regulation wins (more wins = better draft position) and the other usual tie-breakers.
Here's how that would work for the rest of the teams last year (OG = original draft order, NEW = Silver Plan Draft Order):
TEAM | 62GP | SP | TOTAL | OG | NEW | DIF |
Chicago | 35 | 17 | 18 | 2 | 1 | +1 |
San Jose | 37 | 10 | 27 | 1 | 2 | -1 |
Ottawa | 54 | 24 | 30 | 7 | 3 | +4 |
Arizona/Utah | 55 | 22 | 33 | 6 | 4 | +2 |
Columbus | 52 | 14 | 38 | 4 | 5 | -1 |
Anaheim | 49 | 10 | 39 | 3 | 6 | -3 |
Buffalo | 62 | 22 | 40 | 11 | 7 | +4 |
Pittsburgh | 64 | 24 | 40 | 14 | 8 | +6 |
Montreal | 58 | 18 | 40 | 5 | 9 | -4 |
Minnesota | 64 | 23 | 41 | 13 | 10 | +3 |
St. Louis | 67 | 25 | 42 | 16 | 11 | +5 |
New Jersey | 64 | 17 | 47 | 10 | 12 | -2 |
Calgary | 67 | 14 | 53 | 9 | 13 | -4 |
Seattle | 67 | 14 | 53 | 8 | 14 | -6 |
Detroit | 72 | 19 | 53 | 15 | 15 | 0 |
Philadelphia | 71 | 16 | 55 | 12 | 16 | -4 |
Why It Works
The biggest advantage is that it incentivizes teams to win even if they are out of playoff contention, at least for the final 20 games of the season. As shown in the table, Pittsburgh would have been rewarded for its late-season surge instead of being punished with a worse draft position. Meanwhile, Montreal’s collapse would have cost them rather than helping.While this system changes the draft order, it does not dramatically alter the top selections. Outside of Montreal, the top seven teams remain the same, just reordered. Additionally, this system benefits teams that consistently hover around the playoff line. Under the current system, such teams rarely land top talent, keeping them stuck in the “mushy middle.” Under the Silver Plan, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and Minnesota would have earned top-10 picks despite finishing near the top of the wild card race.
This system could also influence how teams approach the final stretch of the season. Columbus, Anaheim, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Montreal, Minnesota, and St. Louis would have been in a dog fight for draft positions 5-11. Suddenly, those games would carry more significance, energizing fans and motivating players to compete harder.
Think of the difference in narrative, too. Imagine Chicago going on a late season run to claim the #1 draft pick, rather than it just being awarded by the luck of the draw and as a reward for being terrible.
Now, the Gold Plan offers similar benefits, but the Silver Plan is more consistent. Every team starts accumulating Silver Points in game 63 (around the trade deadline), eliminating the need to rely on uneven playoff elimination across conferences and divisions. Teams also have 20 games to accumulate points, whereas under the Gold Plan, teams may get as few as 0–15 games, with most getting fewer than 10. As a result, the Gold Plan's benefits apply only to a small fraction of games, even for teams certain to miss the playoffs. An underrated flaw of the Gold Plan would be those last games leading up to mathematical elimination, where hardcore fans would be desperate for their team to lose.
Also, under the Gold Plan in 2023/24, Arizona/Utah would have received the second overall pick despite finishing with 77 points, while Chicago and San Jose had 52 and 47 points, respectively. San Jose, despite finishing dead last, would have dropped to the third draft position. Under the Silver Plan, Arizona would have needed to win 13 of its final 20 games just to match Chicago’s point total. It would then have had to win more games than Chicago over the remaining seven games to earn that 2nd draft slot. This scenario would be technically possible but extremely unlikely. Under the Silver Plan, the worst teams would still receive the best draft picks.
One possible drawback is that it could reduce trade activity at the deadline since teams would still be incentivized to win. However, while the trade deadline is exciting, a league where every team has a reason to compete in every game is far more compelling.
Finally, of course for the first 62 games of the season, fans of bottom-ranked teams may still hope for losses to improve their chances at a high pick. This is a flaw, but any system that rewards bad teams will have it. From what I’ve seen, this system is the best way to reward struggling teams without excessively incentivizing losing.
Thank you for reading. What do you think?
Last edited: