2019 Draft

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

On another note. The lottery simulators run on an algorithm. The Wings will win 1st overall 9.5% of the time. Exactly what their draft odds are. They're fun to play with, but they are what they are.

Edited April 8, 2019 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[kipwinger 8,520]

3 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

On another note. The lottery simulators run on an algorithm. The Wings will win 1st overall 9.5% of the time. Exactly what their draft odds are. They're fun to play with, but they are what they are.

Not true.  They'll win 9.5% of the number of time if you run them reaches a large enough sample.  For instance, I just ran Tankathon 3 times and the Wings won the 1st pick 1 time and then I stopped (33.3%).  I suspect that if I did it about 2,000 more times the Wings would win about 9.5% of the time.

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

 

48 minutes ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

On another note. The lottery simulators run on an algorithm. The Wings will win 1st overall 9.5% of the time. Exactly what their draft odds are. They're fun to play with, but they are what they are.

 

42 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

Not true.  They'll win 9.5% of the number of time if you run them reaches a large enough sample.  For instance, I just ran Tankathon 3 times and the Wings won the 1st pick 1 time and then I stopped (33.3%).  I suspect that if I did it about 2,000 more times the Wings would win about 9.5% of the time.

But if their ball falls, they will have one 100% of the time. Correct? I mean I'm not a stats guy or anything.......

[Neomaxizoomdweebie 3,083]

You cant win 9.5% of time if u only run it 3 times. 

It doesnt change the math. The lottery is only run once. So anything can happen. 

If you only run it once than the team who wins gets it 100% the time. We all know that's not real. 

Its designed so that each team, over a large enough sample size, wins the exact amount of their %. Thats how it works. Its fun because that 1 in 10 times the Wings win the lottery could be the one that hapoens tomorrow night.

Edited April 8, 2019 by Neomaxizoomdweebie

[Jonas Mahonas 1,872]

Jack Hughes makes us a lot harder to play against.  Especially if Vancouver trades us Petterson and Quinn Hughes for Abdelkader and Helm.

[xault 272]

12 hours ago, krsmith17 said:

Not sure how many people have heard of the "Gold" Standings to determine draft position, that has been making it's rounds on social media, but I personally love the idea.

So basically the way it works is teams start accumulating point once they are officially eliminated from the playoffs. So the bottom teams that are eliminated earlier, get a head start on gaining points, but it promotes winning right up until the final game, rather than this "tanking" bulls***.

This is how the draft would go, based on this season's standings...

OTT - 13 GP - 12 PTS - 3rd overall pick
DET - 12 GP - 16 PTS - 1st overall pick
LAK - 10 GP - 13 PTS - 2nd overall pick
NJD - 10 GP - 9 PTS - 4th overall pick
NYR - 8 GP - 7 PTS - 6th overall pick
BUF - 8 GP - 5 PTS - 9th overall pick
FLA - 5 GP - 8 PTS - 5th overall pick
ANA - 4 GP - 6 PTS - 7th overall pick
VAN - 4 GP - 5 PTS - 8th overall pick
PHI - 4 GP - 0 PTS - 15th overall pick
CHI - 3 - GP - 4 PTS - 10th overall pick
EDM - 3 GP - 2 PTS - 12th overall pick
MIN - 2 GP - 0 PTS - 14th overall pick
MTL - 1 GP - 2 PTS - 11th overall pick
ARI - 1 GP - 0 PTS - 13th overall pick

... and no, I'm not just saying I like this model because Detroit would be picking 1st overall. I just hate seeing fans cheer for losses for a percentage in a f***ing lottery... It's stupid.

Yea I've mention in passing in a post a week or two ago. The Gold Plan is a solid idea. It's at least in the right direction in my opinion. I think the idea kind of starter floating around in 2016. But a bunch of grumpy old owners don't like it from what I've read about in the pass.

Edited April 9, 2019 by xault

[xault 272]

52 minutes ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Jack Hughes makes us a lot harder to play against.  Especially if Vancouver trades us Petterson and Quinn Hughes for Abdelkader and Helm.

It would never happen but..

If DET won 1st overall, VAN won 2nd. DET 1st pick to VAN for 2nd+Petterson? I don't VAN would dare to do that, I am just being silly about the Hughes brothers thing. I am guessing VAN would be more than happy with sticking with Petterson+Kakko over Hughes.

[nyqvististhefuture 1,002]

You said it ... Vancouver will never make that trade so why bring it up , no chance in hell 

 

as for tomorrow I predict wings take #2 pick and devils #1 since nobody goes to devils games bettman will rig it to try and fill that arena 

[kipwinger 8,520]

7 hours ago, Neomaxizoomdweebie said:

You cant win 9.5% of time if u only run it 3 times. 

It doesnt change the math. The lottery is only run once. So anything can happen. 

If you only run it once than the team who wins gets it 100% the time. We all know that's not real. 

Its designed so that each team, over a large enough sample size, wins the exact amount of their %. Thats how it works. Its fun because that 1 in 10 times the Wings win the lottery could be the one that hapoens tomorrow night.

I know, that's the exact point I'm making. The trouble with the lottery, of course, is that it's only run one and not "over a large enough sample size" so that randomness becomes absolutely paramount in the process. There is not randomness in an algorithm.   We're on the same page here bro. 

3 hours ago, xault said:

Yea I've mention in passing in a post a week or two ago. The Gold Plan is a solid idea. It's at least in the right direction in my opinion. I think the idea kind of starter floating around in 2016. But a bunch of grumpy old owners don't like it from what I've read about in the pass.

I think people only like the idea because it would have worked out for the Red Wings this year.  If we were in Ottawa's position nobody would be clamoring for the "Gold Plan". 

[xault 272]

4 minutes ago, kipwinger said:

I know, that's the exact point I'm making. The trouble with the lottery, of course, is that it's only run one and not "over a large enough sample size" so that randomness becomes absolutely paramount in the process. There is not randomness in an algorithm.   We're on the same page here bro. 

I think people only like the idea because it would have worked out for the Red Wings this year.  If we were in Ottawa's position nobody would be clamoring for the "Gold Plan". 

I guess that can be said for some. But in 2 of my fantasy keeper leagues I've run / co-run we've been doing it for the last 2 years. In a fantasy keepers, it works pretty great as well. For myself, when I first heard about it, it was pretty much after EDM drafted McDavid, so I was all for anything that would stop EDM tanking year after year.

[kipwinger 8,520]

5 minutes ago, xault said:

I guess that can be said for some. But in 2 of my fantasy keeper leagues I've run / co-run we've been doing it for the last 2 years. In a fantasy keepers, it works pretty great as well. For myself, when I first heard about it, it was pretty much after EDM drafted McDavid, so I was all for anything that would stop EDM tanking year after year.

I don't think it's a bad theory or anything, I just think it's short sighted.  It's like the electoral college, people are only against it when their party loses.  If Detroit wins the lottery tomorrow nobody will be talking about this anymore.  That's all. 

As far as Edmonton, who cares?  They drafted in the top five a billion times in a row and they're still terrible.  Buffalo too.  So clearly tanking year after year isn't the advantage some people think it is. 

[amato 3,210]

Say your prayers to the hockey gods, use all your good luck charms, follow every superstition in the books, and bring on that Hughes boy! 

Happy draft lotto day!  

[Dabura 12,207]

6 hours ago, kipwinger said:

I think people only like the idea because it would have worked out for the Red Wings this year.

No.

[krsmith17 7,191]

6 hours ago, kipwinger said:

I think people only like the idea because it would have worked out for the Red Wings this year.  If we were in Ottawa's position nobody would be clamoring for the "Gold Plan". 

6 hours ago, kipwinger said:

I don't think it's a bad theory or anything, I just think it's short sighted.  It's like the electoral college, people are only against it when their party loses.  If Detroit wins the lottery tomorrow nobody will be talking about this anymore.  That's all. 

Not at all. I've hated the draft lottery (or more so "tanking") for years, and that wouldn't change if Detroit won it. Fans cheering for their team to lose, or even worse tuning out altogether is terrible for the league.

If we were in Ottawa's position I would still be clamoring for the "Gold Plan". With a mere 18.5%, I'll bet every time that the last place team doesn't win the lottery. I'd have the same mindset if we were sitting in dead last. Hence why I hate tanking and the current system in general.

ALL games would be much more exciting down the stretch. Imagine the last game of the season between two bottom teams and winning gets the first overall pick. Much more exciting than hoping your team loses so they have a couple percent advantage in getting the first overall pick...

This would also change the way teams approach the trade deadline. Teams would maybe be a little more reluctant to trade away rental players, putting a premium on return.

In my opinion, something needs to change with the current system, and that won't change if we happen to win the lottery tonight.

[AtlantaHotWings 983]

I really like the idea of play to win the pick makes it like playoffs for losers. Games remain meaningful the WHOLE season vs tuning out in March hoping for losses. Not sure why the owners would be against it. As an owner if my team is out of the playoffs but has a chance for the 1st pick maybe seats get filled. We went to the last game debacle and in the lower bowl we were surrounded by empty seats. If I was an owner I want every seat filled as 1 or 3 beers per seat or someone buying some food is more revenue for me. Not to mention our attitude once Buffalo went up was sadly YAAY we have more % points.  I would have preferred to be pissed off that we lost and missed 1st pick for instance. 

If I am Ottawa I would be a wee bit happier as i wouldn't be handing the Avs the potential first pick. Now that situation would cause a reverse tank in the play for the pick. 

11 hours ago, Jonas Mahonas said:

Jack Hughes makes us a lot harder to play against.  Especially if Vancouver trades us Petterson and Quinn Hughes for Abdelkader and Helm.

I fully expect Kenny to pull this off tonight right after we get the 1st pick. If not he needs to be GONE cause any half brained GM could do that trade!!!

[Dabura 12,207]

38 minutes ago, AtlantaHotWings said:

I really like the idea of play to win the pick makes it like playoffs for losers. Games remain meaningful the WHOLE season vs tuning out in March hoping for losses. Not sure why the owners would be against it.

Probably lots of valid reasons, tbh.

• Differences in strength of schedule could be a sore point and would probably have fans complaining just as much if not more than they do about the current system
• Injuries could also be an issue, e.g. the Devils probably don't finish third from the bottom this season if Taylor Hall doesn't miss most of the season (again, fans would howl)
• Might change the standard development curves of prospects, as teams might be less inclined to give young players a serious look in the late stages of the season

I'm sure there's other stuff.

[gcom007 1,465]

30 minutes ago, Dabura said:

Probably lots of valid reasons, tbh.

• Differences in strength of schedule could be a sore point and would probably have fans complaining just as much if not more than they do about the current system
• Injuries could also be an issue, e.g. the Devils probably don't finish third from the bottom this season if Taylor Hall doesn't miss most of the season (again, fans would howl)
• Might change the standard development curves of prospects, as teams might be less inclined to give young players a serious look in the late stages of the season

I'm sure there's other stuff.

I don’t know if those are dealbreakers. The schedule thing is somewhat of a weak argument. Injuries don’t seem like an issue either as it doesn’t really deviate much from the current situation where said team is going to have higher lottery odds for finishing lower. And the development factor? Honestly, I think that can sometimes be an advantage. Young guys playing to impress and hoping for a spot next year can inject some energy that a vet or regular worn down from a losing season might not bring. I don’t think it’s hurt us in the past at the very least.

It’s definitely an interesting idea, though I can see where you’re coming from and generally agree that it’s going to be tough to get anyone to really agree on this, but I think they need to explore ways to add some excitement to the end of the season for non-playoff teams and reward teams for finishing strong. As much as I wanted to lose for the better odds at a high draft pick this year, the whole charade felt so ******* stupid. It’s definitely more fun to cheer and hope for wins, and if there was more reason to be excited about it, I think that’s good for the game as a whole.

Hell, maybe there should be a playoffs for non-playoff teams to compete for the draft picks. We’ve got the shootout now. They’re talking about possibly bringing the shootout to the playoffs. Why not?

[Dabura 12,207]

2 minutes ago, gcom007 said:

I don’t know if those are dealbreakers. The schedule thing is somewhat of a weak argument. Injuries don’t seem like an issue either as it doesn’t really deviate much from the current situation where said team is going to have higher lottery odds for finishing lower. And the development factor? Honestly, I think that can sometimes be an advantage. Young guys playing to impress and hoping for a spot next year can inject some energy that a vet or regular worn down from a losing season might not bring. I don’t think it’s hurt us in the past at the very least.

It’s definitely an interesting idea, though I can see where you’re coming from and generally agree that it’s going to be tough to get anyone to really agree on this, but I think they need to explore ways to add some excitement to the end of the season for non-playoff teams and reward teams for finishing strong. As much as I wanted to lose for the better odds at a high draft pick this year, the whole charade felt so ******* stupid. It’s definitely more fun to cheer and hope for wins, and if there was more reason to be excited about it, I think that’s good for the game as a whole.

Hell, maybe there should be a playoffs for non-playoff teams to compete for the draft picks. We’ve got the shootout now. They’re talking about possibly bringing the shootout to the playoffs. Why not?

Don't get me wrong, I'm in favor of switching over to a system like this one. Just playing devil's advocate.

Edited April 9, 2019 by Dabura

[Learn2LuvIt 245]

33 minutes ago, Dabura said:

Probably lots of valid reasons, tbh.

• Differences in strength of schedule could be a sore point and would probably have fans complaining just as much if not more than they do about the current system
• Injuries could also be an issue, e.g. the Devils probably don't finish third from the bottom this season if Taylor Hall doesn't miss most of the season (again, fans would howl)
• Might change the standard development curves of prospects, as teams might be less inclined to give young players a serious look in the late stages of the season

I'm sure there's other stuff.

Yep.  Also IMO, this goes against strategy of trying to create consistent parity within the league.  The way it is now, the poorest get the best chance to get significantly richer.  If they changed it to "play for the pick", then it changes the equation to: the poorest will likely remain poor because as stated, they were the poorest and shouldn't be expected to miraculously become better in the final stretch of the season to win the highest or very high draft pick.  They are the poorest/worst team for a reason and the league has a vested interest in making sure these teams have a fighting chance at becoming rich in the future.

Last thought...playing for the pick might actually cause teams to "fake tank" ...."lying in the bushes and wait" until the "play for the pick" sweepstakes begin...then they kick it in gear and suddenly look like the best of the worst teams and win the highest for a very high draft pick.

[gcom007 1,465]

2 minutes ago, Learn2LuvIt said:

Yep.  Also IMO, this goes against strategy of trying to create consistent parity within the league.  The way it is now, the poorest get the best chance to get significantly richer.  If they changed it to "play for the pick", then it changes the equation to: the poorest will likely remain poor because as stated, they were the poorest and shouldn't be expected to miraculously become better in the final stretch of the season to win the highest or very high draft pick.  They are the poorest/worst team for a reason and the league has a vested interest in making sure these teams have a fighting chance at becoming rich in the future.

Last thought...playing for the pick might actually cause teams to "fake tank" ...."lying in the bushes and wait" until the "play for the pick" sweepstakes begin...then they kick it in gear and suddenly look like the best of the worst teams and win the highest for a very high draft pick.

That second point is what I’m hung up on. I think they’d have to keep it to bottom 8 teams or less. That seems like a reasonable dividing line between the bubble teams fighting for a playoff spot and those teams that are truly “poor.” I think it’s harder to imagine a fake tank if you’re a few points shy of a playoff spot, whereas if you’re bottom 8, your top team this year for example is still 10 points out from a wildcard spot, and other than Ottawa, there’s a 9 point gap between 2nd to last and 8th to last. Pretty even playing field at that point. And honestly, Ottawa is such an outlier and unique mess. I don’t think the league should be rewarding teams like that that clearly have deep organizational troubles at the moment anyways. Get the house in order and at least get marginally competitive and you get a seat at the table. 

[F.Michael 4,590]

Received this email this morning...Found the bold  quite interesting...

'The Red Wings have the fourth-best odds (9.5%) of landing the No. 1 overall pick and a 28.8% chance of getting a top 3 pick in the upcoming NHL Entry Draft. Tune into NBCSN tonight at 8:00 pm. as this June's draft order is revealed.

 

By most accounts, this year's draft has an abundance of talent up front with a consensus that the top three players on the draft board, including American center Jack Hughes, are in a class by themselves'.

[Dabura 12,207]

18 minutes ago, F.Michael said:

Received this email this morning...Found the bold  quite interesting...

'The Red Wings have the fourth-best odds (9.5%) of landing the No. 1 overall pick and a 28.8% chance of getting a top 3 pick in the upcoming NHL Entry Draft. Tune into NBCSN tonight at 8:00 pm. as this June's draft order is revealed.

 

By most accounts, this year's draft has an abundance of talent up front with a consensus that the top three players on the draft board, including American center Jack Hughes, are in a class by themselves'.

It's true. Or, at least, it's true that that's the consensus.

[The 91 of Ryans 3,014]

Hey. Anyone (that doesn't hate me) know of a way to stream this torture-porn tonight? I live in Canada but think that cable TV is the spawn of satan. 

[F.Michael 4,590]

9 minutes ago, Dabura said:

It's true. Or, at least, it's true that that's the consensus.

Who's this magical-mystical 3rd player not named Hughes, or Kakko?

[F.Michael 4,590]

11 minutes ago, The 91 of Ryans said:

Hey. Anyone (that doesn't hate me) know of a way to stream this torture-porn tonight? I live in Canada but think that cable TV is the spawn of satan. 

TSN online, or possibly the NHL.com online ?

Edited April 9, 2019 by F.Michael