James Tanner: Are the Draft Lottery Rule Changes Fair to the Sabres? The new draft lottery rules could unfairly impact the the Buffalo Sabres.

Unless the NHL specifically calls out the Buffalo Sabres hockey club, "yes."

James Tanner: Are the Draft Lottery Rule Changes Fair to the Sabres?
The new draft lottery rules could unfairly impact the the Buffalo Sabres.
- James_Tanner

Tim Murray must of flipped his desk, really I don't think it was Sabers intention to tank unlike some teams.

Gorges.

Take the worst 5 teams in the league

Among those 5, the team with the BEST record in the last 20 games gets 1st pick

2nd BEST record gets 2nd pick

3rd Best record gets 3rd pick...etc

Tanking for 60 games only to turn it on in the last 20 games (while still finishing bottom 5) would be pretty tough to pull off

BOOM - Problem FIXED

exposing the young players you're trying to develop to a culture of losing and failure

Exhibit A: The Edmonton Oilers.

I like the idea that the last place team isn't guaranteed the first pick. Teams shouldn't tank in order to rebuild. Rebuilding should be about making good trades and scouting and development, not taking stud 18-year-old prospects and throwing them into the same awful system that just finished in last place the year before. And it sucks for the top prospect that he's guaranteed to go to one of the worst-run franchises in the league.

Take the worst 5 teams in the league

Among those 5, the team with the BEST record in the last 20 games gets 1st pick

2nd BEST record gets 2nd pick

3rd Best record gets 3rd pick...etc

Tanking for 60 games only to turn it on in the last 20 games (while still finishing bottom 5) would be pretty tough to pull off

BOOM - Problem FIXED
- RoloTahmasee

I like you.

It's fair. Does it suck a little more for us fans? Sure. But it's fair. When you try to circumvent the rules they punish you (Like Jersey with the Kovalchuk contract).

Take the worst 5 teams in the league

Among those 5, the team with the BEST record in the last 20 games gets 1st pick

2nd BEST record gets 2nd pick

3rd Best record gets 3rd pick...etc

Tanking for 60 games only to turn it on in the last 20 games (while still finishing bottom 5) would be pretty tough to pull off

BOOM - Problem FIXED
- RoloTahmasee

Makes so much sense (sarcasm)

Yes lets make teams tank the last 20 games when ALL the teams that are good are in playoff races. The good teams will play the "tanking teams" some more than often which will be unfair to the good teams.

The NHL is trying to get rid of tanking completely. the NHL pretty much telling teams they can tank the last 20 games is terrible.

Also using the records of the last 20 games does not reflect a whole season so once again a terrible idea.

Makes so much sense (sarcasm)

Yes lets make teams tank the last 20 games when ALL the teams that are good are in playoff races. The good teams will play the "tanking teams" some more than often which will be unfair to the good teams.

The NHL is trying to get rid of tanking completely. the NHL pretty much telling teams they can tank the last 20 games is terrible.

Also using the records of the last 20 games does not reflect a whole season so once again a terrible idea.
- JVR_42_PK81

I think you might need to read his proposal another time.

Take the worst 5 teams in the league

Among those 5, the team with the BEST record in the last 20 games gets 1st pick

2nd BEST record gets 2nd pick

3rd Best record gets 3rd pick...etc

Tanking for 60 games only to turn it on in the last 20 games (while still finishing bottom 5) would be pretty tough to pull off

BOOM - Problem FIXED
- RoloTahmasee

Still not fixed, as it would be in a team's best interest to lose games, as they'd want to make sure they don't play themselves out of the bottom-5.

Think about it: If you have 3 games to go, are in 5th place, and are 1 point behind the #6 team with a game in hand, you're throwing those final 3 games, no questions asked.

Here's one that I liked:

The team that accumulates the most points after having been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs gets the #1 pick, and the team that accumulates the least points after being mathematically eliminated from the playoffs gets the #14 pick. So, you can be really bad, but you need to be able to ice a competitive team, as a low number of points won't be enough to get you a high pick.

It's fair. Does it suck a little more for us fans? Sure. But it's fair. When you try to circumvent the rules they punish you (Like Jersey with the Kovalchuk contract).
- Zschalberg

But that's just the problem: they didn't try to circumvent any rules and there really is no reason to police tanking since the consequences of doing so are so apparent and detrimental.

Makes so much sense (sarcasm)

Yes lets make teams tank the last 20 games when ALL the teams that are good are in playoff races. The good teams will play the "tanking teams" some more than often which will be unfair to the good teams.

The NHL is trying to get rid of tanking completely. the NHL pretty much telling teams they can tank the last 20 games is terrible.

Also using the records of the last 20 games does not reflect a whole season so once again a terrible idea.
- JVR_42_PK81

Your reading comprehension is brutal. You realize he said the best record for the last 20 games right? So who would be tanking??

The idea I like better is that as soon as you are mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, the team with the most points in their remaining games gets the first pick, the team with the second most get the second pick and so on.

That gives the worst teams more of a chance to get points and get the first pick along with making sure no one is tanking.

You are either in a playoff race or a race to get the most points and pick 1st overall.

Done.

I think you might need to read his proposal another time.
- Der Kaiser

Thanks for pointing it out Its even worse So they will be playing to get out of the bttom five pretty much... So once again a terrible idea.

Your reading comprehension is brutal. You realize he said the best record for the last 20 games right? So who would be tanking??

The idea I like better is that as soon as you are mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, the team with the most points in their remaining games gets the first pick, the team with the second most get the second pick and so on.

That gives the worst teams more of a chance to get points and get the first pick along with making sure no one is taking.

You are either in a playoff race or a race to get the most points and pick 1st overall.

Done.
- bjm1717

I said it first :-)

Take the worst 5 teams in the league

Among those 5, the team with the BEST record in the last 20 games gets 1st pick

2nd BEST record gets 2nd pick

3rd Best record gets 3rd pick...etc

Tanking for 60 games only to turn it on in the last 20 games (while still finishing bottom 5) would be pretty tough to pull off

BOOM - Problem FIXED
- RoloTahmasee

Yep, that should do it

Your reading comprehension is brutal. You realize he said the best record for the last 20 games right? So who would be tanking??

The idea I like better is that as soon as you are mathematically eliminated from the playoffs, the team with the most points in their remaining games gets the first pick, the team with the second most get the second pick and so on.

That gives the worst teams more of a chance to get points and get the first pick along with making sure no one is tanking.

You are either in a playoff race or a race to get the most points and pick 1st overall.

Done.
- bjm1717

Well, I think all of the systems are imperfect.

If you think about it, this proposal just gives teams like the 14-15 Sabres more incentive to lose early and often, to mathematically eliminate themselves early, then turn on the talent they stockpiled but didnt use in order to maximize points after the elimination.

I think.

Well, I think all of the systems are imperfect.

If you think about it, this proposal just gives teams like the 14-15 Sabres more incentive to lose early and often, to mathematically eliminate themselves early, then turn on the talent they stockpiled but didnt use in order to maximize points after the elimination.

I think.
- Der Kaiser

True, but the lineup would have to be constructed to be full of guys willing to throw away a year of their careers. It's one thing to try to win and not be able to, and another to have 20 guys intentionally throw games for the majority of a season.

Well, I think all of the systems are imperfect.

If you think about it, this proposal just gives teams like the 14-15 Sabres more incentive to lose early and often, to mathematically eliminate themselves early, then turn on the talent they stockpiled but didnt use in order to maximize points after the elimination.

I think.
- Der Kaiser

More like the sooner you get eliminated the better chance you have to accumulate the most points purely by playing more games after elimination

you wouldn't even need to "turn it on" - If you got to play 30 games after being "mathematically eliminated" and the next team only got to play 20, the odds are already in your favor merely by showing up

So instead of teams tanking at the end of the season, they'll be tanking hard at the beginning? - Big advantage to the team that can get itself out of the race early

More like the sooner you get eliminated the better chance you have to accumulate the most points purely by playing more games after elimination

you wouldn't even need to "turn it on" - If you got to play 30 games after being "mathematically eliminated" and the next team only got to play 20, the odds are already in your favor merely by showing up

So instead of teams tanking at the end of the season, they'll be tanking hard at the beginning? - Big advantage to the team that can get itself out of the race early
- RoloTahmasee

But, as I said, unless you have 20 guys willing to throw a season, you'd have to be a bad team that suddenly can play well. If you get eliminated that early, you may not have the talent to "turn it on." The team with 20 games to go probably passes you because they're not as terrible as you.

Interesting blog. But I feel this may only be true if the Sabres finish in last place. The season hasn't even started yet.

More like the sooner you get eliminated the better chance you have to accumulate the most points purely by playing more games after elimination

you wouldn't even need to "turn it on" - If you got to play 30 games after being "mathematically eliminated" and the next team only got to play 20, the odds are already in your favor merely by showing up

So instead of teams tanking at the end of the season, they'll be tanking hard at the beginning? - Big advantage to the team that can get itself out of the race early
- RoloTahmasee

Are we disagreeing on any of this?

I was hoping they'd go to the rolling lottery system (the 3 year one they had in the 05 draft) and then have a separate lottery for the top 3 but really I can live with it.

Finishing last would still get us a pretty good player this year. Fair or not as long as Murray does his job right it won't matter a few years from now.

Interesting blog. But I feel this may only be true if the Sabres finish in last place. The season hasn't even started yet.
- ClarkHitsBell

Yeah, the Panthers aren't looking like a lock to finish above them.

But, as I said, unless you have 20 guys willing to throw a season, you'd have to be a bad team that suddenly can play well. If you get eliminated that early, you may not have the talent to "turn it on." The team with 20 games to go probably passes you because they're not as terrible as you.
- jmatchett383

This is one of the points tanner made about tanking for an entire (but single) season.

Let's face it, nobody can ice a team comprised exclusively of slobs for just one year, and then completely retool the line-up when the tank results in a first overall pick.