Exciting solution to "tanking" and the draft

[martyrme19 73]

I'm sure there are some glaring problems with this model I haven't thought of, so feel free to point them out. But no system is perfect so maybe the positives outweigh the negatives and I'm on to something?.....

So, one thing I completely dread being a sports fan is my team stuck in purgatory. Not good enough to ever truly contend for a championship, but not bad enough to get the draft picks needed to reshape your franchise. The Blues were the poster child of this problem until just this year when they were the beneficiaries of a perfect storm.

But I also hate tanking. I can't help but root for the Wings to tank again this year because I believe we still need that key player to give us that championship edge.
So I was thinking of the current process, and it's relatively the same with each major franchise. The worst team gets the best pick, or at least a weighted lottery system in order to hedge the guaranteed best pick as to *hopefully* discourage tanking. All I think this does is reframe the narrative to shooting for your best *chance* at a top pick.

So I thought, any real change to that system would have to be drastic. So what does drastic look like?
I came up with this idea:

Teams that don't make the playoffs play in their own, best of 3 playoff series. The better you finish, the closer to the #1 overall pick you get. Winner of the playoff gets the #1 pick, runner-up gets #2, etc.

*With this exercise, Seattle is in existence to give us 16 teams who miss the playoffs.
 

How would it bet set up?

• I'm thinking no conferences, but the best team who misses the playoffs is #1, through the worst team ranked #16. 1 plays 16, 2 plays 15 and so on.
• As teams lose in each round, their seeding on how they finish the regular season determines who drafts before who.

Why would players want to play in this tournament?

• Monetary compensation per round
• Contractually obligated
• Pride
• They care about the future of their franchise
• They may genuinely enjoy it
• They can showcase "clutch" traits to consider in contractual considerations down the road.
• I believe in the long run - it will result in higher paydays for more players. (further explanation provided a little later)

What are some immediate problems with this model?

• Teams that are on the playoff bubble may choose to be the best team to miss the playoffs than the worst team to make it
  - I don't think this would be an issue. I'm sure there are real pressures from the owner to make the playoffs as oppose to miss them. Look at how "all-in" Columbus went even when they knew they would lose 3 stars for nothing. The NHL also has a "Just get in" playoff mentality where anything can happen.
• If its likely the #32nd worst team loses to the #17th worst team, won't their woes continue for years and years?
  -I don't know. Maybe, maybe not. The idea is that if you're the worst team, you need to make other moves in the offseason to ensure you aren't as bad next season. If it's determined some things need to be tweaked, you tweak it.
• It's too many games for too many players.
  - That's why I suggested a best of 3 series. Far fewer games than a best of 7. If you really want to make that argument, we can explore shortening the regular season by a little.
• It will detract from the normal playoffs
  - I doubt it. Plenty of fans stop watching hockey after their local teams are out of the playoffs.  Hence, when small market teams play each other, ratings suck and vice versa. This will give those other fans another reason to keep watching. The diehard fans like myself will watch these games plus the normal playoffs. Plus, it'll be much shorter and over far before the best series in the playoffs begin. You can also explore delaying this playoffs a week/10 days which I think is a good idea
• It will most likely make the trade deadline less exciting
  - I could make an argument that this is a plus. (and I will a little later) But if teams that miss the playoffs want to do well in the tournament, they won't want to ship off all of their talent to make their team worse. I think it will still happen, but the value of those players will increase even more!

What are some positives to this model:

• Additional revenue and publicity
  - Maybe the games aren't televised nationally but just locally, but as a Wings fan I would probably watch the tournament with only slightly less enthusiasm than the normal playoffs. Whether it's for the cup or a draft pick, "best of" whatever games are just flat out exciting! They should still rake in better television dollars than a regular season game. The NHL has s*** national television agreements anyways.
• Prevents tanking
  - You can't be the worst team and win this tournament. Therefore, you can't just rely on selling off every good player for draft picks. Likely, the best GM's will find a combination of trading assets and preparing for this tournament.
• Awards being better
  - Every team's goal is now to finish as high as possible in the standings no matter what. If you aren't a playoff team this year like the Red Wings, us fans don't have to argue what's better for us - to win or to tank. We can cheer for the same thing - to be the best we possibly can. If we miss the playoffs, we can be excited to do well in the tournament for a high draft pick.
• Should increase players market value
  - Each year is different, but obviously there are some teams every season who just aren't in the market for certain players because they aren't ready to make a push yet. Look at us - our signings this offseason were purposefully "meh" because we aren't making that push yet. If the market for players widens, there will be more teams bidding for your services and more demand. That will result in more money for players. You'll have even less teams close to the salary floor.
• The trade deadline will help create even more parity
  -As I mentioned before, this will obviously alter trades throughout the season. Less trades will happen, I'm sure. But, the players that do get traded will now require an even greater bounty. The increase in assets for the good teams to acquire these players will affect them adversely down the road, causing more parity in the league.
• The smartest GM's will show their worth
  - There are simply more variables to consider now. How do you balance trading players for assets vs keeping them to do well in the tournament? If you're in the playoffs, how do you decide what to spend on rentals?
• Rentals are s*** anyways
  - Seriously, as excited as I was on trade deadline day to get guys like Larry Murphy, Jamie Macoun, Chris Chelios, Wendel Clark, Bill Ranford, Mathieu Schneider etc. etc...... I think the concept is kind of bulls***. The Stanley Cup winner should win the championship because of the team they acquired, not rented for a few months. That's just a personal opinion but I'm sure some people have to agree with me.
• The best players won't have to suffer years of a completely s***ty team where their talents will be wasted or ruined.
  -Nail Yakupov, Taylor Hall and Connor McDavid will thank you!
• The #1 pick will now go towards a team deserving instead of awarded with pity.
  - In sports, shouldn't we strive to make every aspect of the game about competition? Why should s*** teams like Edmonton be rewarded year after year just because they can't stop sucking? Why do the Blackhawks get to suck for years and years before striking gold with Toews and Kane? Similarly with Pittsburgh with Crosby and Malkin. Why does New Jersey just get to flat out get lucky with Hischier and Hughes this year. (granted, they probably would've done well in the tournament anyways)
  But what I'm saying is, make a team EARN everything. From the Stanley Cup to the best draft picks.
  
  
  OK -- I've wasted enough of my time and yours if anyone actually took the time to read all of this. I'd appreciate any thought, criticisms or feedback on the idea. I won't be too surprised if it just sinks to the bottom of the forum floor though!

[Buppy 1,720]

I didn't bother to read the whole thing, no need. 

For one you're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. The randomness inherent in the lottery is all that is needed to prevent overt tanking. Secondly, the one and only reason the draft even exists is for parity...give the worst teams the best chance at the best young talent. Any attempt to turn draft picks into a merit reward is simply wrong. Barely even makes any sense, since you're still limiting your competition to only the worst teams. You're still rewarding s*** teams. just switching it to the ones that do the best in a tournament. Why would the #17 team be more deserving than the #16?

[martyrme19 73]

3 hours ago, Buppy said:

I didn't bother to read the whole thing, no need. 

For one you're trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. The randomness inherent in the lottery is all that is needed to prevent overt tanking. Secondly, the one and only reason the draft even exists is for parity...give the worst teams the best chance at the best young talent. Any attempt to turn draft picks into a merit reward is simply wrong. Barely even makes any sense, since you're still limiting your competition to only the worst teams. You're still rewarding s*** teams. just switching it to the ones that do the best in a tournament. Why would the #17 team be more deserving than the #16?

You didn't need to say you didn't read it, it was quite obvious.

[LeftWinger 5,132]

I appreciate the effort to generate some chatter during this boring off season.  The only thing I feel would not be fair is if we had a 16 team playoff for the #1 pick, chances are pretty good that the #1 seed in that tourney would win the #1 pick and that would be the the team that finished 16th, one spot outside of the playoffs.  Even if it wasn't them, odds are a team within the 10-16 range would win it every-time, so in reality that would screw teams that legit stink and finish in the bottom 5 for a few years (like us.)

Again, great write up, thank you! You put a lot of though into it, but I think, the best way to stop "rewarding teams" that finish just out of the playoff or are just off winning 3 Cups in 6 years by giving them a top 3 pick or #1 OA, is to only put the bottom five in the lottery, the rest stay right where they finish. That way you don't have a 14th seed jumping to #2 or a team like Chicago, fresh off wining 3 Cups in the last 8 seasons getting a top 5. It wouldn't necessarily stop a "tank" but it would stop teams like Philly, NJ or Chicago getting "gifts."

we could do a #1/#2 playoff.  That would be very fun to watch!

Although, how would your scenario impact teams that have traded away a 1st round pick? Example Ottawa, whom finished last, and had to give their pick to Colorado, would they play "hard enough" to win the tourney just to watch Colorado pick Jack Hughes? Or would they "tank" the tourney, so Colorado would have to pick 16th? Would they want to play at all considering they don't even get to make the pick?

[Jonas Mahonas 1,872]

I would have picks 1 and 2 set automatically so each team would get one of each every 32 years with them separated 16 years.  Then have the lottery system in place now for pick #3 on.  The real stink of the draft is the Red Wings not having a legit shot at a number 1 overall since 1986.  Edmonton gets 4 though.  New Jersey gets 3.  Why?  They each won multiple Stanley Cups.  The reality is Bettman is doing what the owners tell him to do.  There is a reason the lotto balls are not drawn publicly.

[gcom007 1,465]

I think a tournament among the weaker teams would be a ton of fun and more revenue and all, but it shouldn’t determine the draft order. That said, that any more than the bottom 8 are in the draft lottery needs to change. 

[Buppy 1,720]

It's fun to imagine an alternate universe where Brett keeps growing more cynical because Ches never answered him, and instead he got some random, confusing post about the "gold plan".

[ChristopherReevesLegs 7,022]

WTF is going on in here lol

[Jonas Mahonas 1,872]

13 hours ago, ChristopherReevesLegs said:

WTF is going on in here lol

Im lost.

[Buppy 1,720]

[Buppy 1,720]

On 8/7/2019 at 5:25 AM, Kamsnubs said:

Good on him. I think he probably knows he is past his best. His keeping has been sloppy to say the least. I hope he gets runs in this test. He deserves them.

On 8/6/2019 at 7:55 AM, Kamsnubs said:

I was wondering how come you guys dont have a NHL Team? Is it the cost for new arenas? or simply no fan support of hockey in the area.

On 8/4/2019 at 7:57 AM, Kamsnubs said:

I got some okay photos but whenever i try to post them they dont work. Maybe i could email them to you? or i can just attach them here.

 

Edited August 9, 2019 by Buppy

[Euro_Twins 4,485]

This is my favourite thread now.