Im for the plan that once you're mathmatically eliminated from the PO, every win gives you a ball. Teams that fail the last day of the season/game are auto signed at least one. Then, all picks 1-14 are done by lottery.
- Danformo

I'm alright with that....except what if you're soo bad you can't win a game at all and 12 teams pass you in the lottery? Good luck rebuilding.

Im for the plan that once you're mathmatically eliminated from the PO, every win gives you a ball. Teams that fail the last day of the season/game are auto signed at least one. Then, all picks 1-14 are done by lottery.
- Danformo

Good luck ever rebuilding a team then!

I think the system now is fine

Only change I would make is you are only allowed one first overall pick every 5 years and only allowed 3 top 5 picks in a five year period

Or maybe top 3 but you know where I'm going through

Good luck ever rebuilding a team then!
- Snowblind

Exactly. It's stupid. Nobody cared when the Oilers drafted Hopkins or Yakupov, they only care because it was McDavid.

Again, show me a championship team post lock out that hasn't benefited from a top 3 pick or 2. It's how you build in the cap era.

You want teams to stop tanking? Eliminate free agency and Gauranteed contracts.

I think the system now is fine

Only change I would make is you are only allowed one first overall pick every 5 years and only allowed 3 top 5 picks in a five year period

Or maybe top 3 but you know where I'm going through
- Santo_44

How is that fair? Not all draft classes are created equal. Sorry, you can't have Ovechkin, you drafted Stepan less than 5 yrs ago?

Real tanking is what the Philadelphia 76ers have been doing for the past few years. No team in the NHL has done anything like that in decades.

Changing the draft lottery to benefit the teams that narrowly miss the playoffs will only create a glut of 5-10 lousy teams who will stay at the bottom of the league for years on end, many of whom will either go bankrupt, move and possibly drag the rest of the league down with them. Sure the league can carry a couple of ne'erdowells but if you make a half dozen+ semi-permanently terrible teams with no hope, then THAT would be a real league crisis.

I'm alright with that....except what if you're soo bad you can't win a game at all and 12 teams pass you in the lottery? Good luck rebuilding.
- TheIronSheik

But that fixes the tanking problem no?

They could also implement a program where if you draft top 5 one year your odds are worse in next years lottery

Eliminate entry level contracts and Restricted Free Agency, maintain a hard salary cap.

Done.

Teams will only draft talent they think they can afford. Tanking year after year will be eliminated.
- BINGO!

This is a terrible idea. Entry level contracts and rfa bridge deals are how teams afford to pay their top end talent.

But that fixes the tanking problem no?
- Danformo

That doesn't fix the bad teams getting worse problem. Much more important.

This is a terrible idea. Entry level contracts and rfa bridge deals are how teams afford to pay their top end talent.
- Isles_since_6

Agreed. That idea is the worst.


Let's face it, tanking for lottery position sucks but what is worse is a few teams stuck in rebuild hell with no young stars with high end talent coming their way, no reason for UFA's to sign there and no quality assets to trade. The system is fine. Dorks need to get over it.

They could also implement a program where if you draft top 5 one year your odds are worse in next years lottery
- Danformo

Again. How is that fair if you win the lottery for a poopty draft and the next year there's a generational talent and you're ineligible?

Simple...
Once a team is eliminated from playoffs it starts earning points towards the draft. Team with most points at the end of the season gets 1st overall pick and so on. Forcing teams to play harder for number one pick.

Teams that make playoffs stays the same as normal for draft order.

Problem solved for teams tanking

Simple...
Once a team is eliminated from playoffs it starts earning points towards the draft. Team with most points at the end of the season gets 1st overall pick and so on. Forcing teams to play harder for number one pick.

Teams that make playoffs stays the same as normal for draft order.

Problem solved for teams tanking
- 87Pens87

It's a good thing for you they didn't have that rule when the Pens lost about 20 games in a row at the end of 2004. No Malkin for you, No Crosby for you, no new arena for you and, ultimately, no Pens for you! They'd have long been in Vegas or Seattle by now.

Simple...
Once a team is eliminated from playoffs it starts earning points towards the draft. Team with most points at the end of the season gets 1st overall pick and so on. Forcing teams to play harder for number one pick.

Teams that make playoffs stays the same as normal for draft order.

Problem solved for teams tanking
- 87Pens87

Dumb. Doesn't help the teams that are truly bad become better.

You can't prevent teams from tanking without further punishing bad teams for being bad.

Why on earth would the NHL want to keep bad teams bad forever?

Simple...
Once a team is eliminated from playoffs it starts earning points towards the draft. Team with most points at the end of the season gets 1st overall pick and so on. Forcing teams to play harder for number one pick.

Teams that make playoffs stays the same as normal for draft order.

Problem solved for teams tanking
- 87Pens87

What about the teams that are eliminated on the last game of the year?

There is no tanking problem in the NHL.

The Sabres decided to tear it down 2013 when they realized their core of Vanek, Pominville, Miller, Ehrhoff, and, um Ville Leino was getting them nowhere.

The Leafs decided the same thing in 2015 with Kessel and now Phaneuf.

The Oilers suck because they haven't drafted well outside of their high-1st round picks and they can't get quality free agents to come to the Arctic Circle.

The Jackets were supposed to be good this year and hired the NHL's premiere ass-kicker to get them in line.

The Yotes have exceeded all expectations.

Who is tanking?

Should teams like the Sabres and Leafs continue to throw good money after bad on their mistakes just so teams that suck less can get a better shot at Auston Mathews?
- Snowblind

Sums it up.

The Leafs got rid of Clarkson, Kessel and Phaneuf's contracts. That's just sensible rebuilding. They were a bottom five team even with those players, so how is cutting loose their contracts even tanking? It wasn't possible for the Leafs to tank any harder, they are actually that bad.

Every year people throw out an idea like this and every year it's still a bad one.

Do people just want to create a hockey ghetto? You think it's bad with the Oilers now? Just imagine an Oilers team that didn't even get high picks for their trouble and then make that a handful of teams that simply exist at the bottom of the NHL constantly. The worst teams getting the highest picks is there for a reason. So those franchises can get out of the pit.

People may whine and complain about tanks, but teams need to rebuild. Creating situations where they are encouraged not to trade expiring contracts for assets that can actually help them win in the future is just not good. All you do there is slow down a team's rebuild and keep them at the bottom longer.

They've done well enough. Doing a lotto for the bottom 3 picks prevents a team from guaranteeing themselves a super star. While still giving them a high enough pick that they can draft what they need in order to turn things around.

But sure, if people want the worst teams to stay bad and never recover then go ahead and put in that kind of system.

One Devils fan had a pretty good idea or at least I thought it could possibly work is that they raise the draft age to 20 then the teams who get the top picks don't need as many top picks to turn their team around because those players are more ready to compete.
- blizzzard

I'm not totally against that in principle. But I think you'd have to open the AHL to the players who are way too good for junior/college at 18 and 19. What good could Connor McDavid possibly be doing in Erie this year? NHL players have a hard time containing him. He'd probably put up 200+ points if he played in Erie this year. That would do absolutely nothing for his development. And then add another year on top of it? That would kill his development. And you're still going to have players too good for the AHL at 18/19 like McDavid and Eichel and Larkin and Matthews.

Every year people throw out an idea like this and every year it's still a bad one.

Do people just want to create a hockey ghetto? You think it's bad with the Oilers now? Just imagine an Oilers team that didn't even get high picks for their trouble and then make that a handful of teams that simply exist at the bottom of the NHL constantly. The worst teams getting the highest picks is there for a reason. So those franchises can get out of the pit.

People may whine and complain about tanks, but teams need to rebuild. Creating situations where they are encouraged not to trade expiring contracts for assets that can actually help them win in the future is just not good. All you do there is slow down a team's rebuild and keep them at the bottom longer.

They've done well enough. Doing a lotto for the bottom 3 picks prevents a team from guaranteeing themselves a super star. While still giving them a high enough pick that they can draft what they need in order to turn things around.

But sure, if people want the worst teams to stay bad and never recover then go ahead and put in that kind of system.
- FlareKnight

Excellent, sensible post. The rest of these idiots need to take notes.

Every year people throw out an idea like this and every year it's still a bad one.

Do people just want to create a hockey ghetto? You think it's bad with the Oilers now? Just imagine an Oilers team that didn't even get high picks for their trouble and then make that a handful of teams that simply exist at the bottom of the NHL constantly. The worst teams getting the highest picks is there for a reason. So those franchises can get out of the pit.

People may whine and complain about tanks, but teams need to rebuild. Creating situations where they are encouraged not to trade expiring contracts for assets that can actually help them win in the future is just not good. All you do there is slow down a team's rebuild and keep them at the bottom longer.

They've done well enough. Doing a lotto for the bottom 3 picks prevents a team from guaranteeing themselves a super star. While still giving them a high enough pick that they can draft what they need in order to turn things around.

But sure, if people want the worst teams to stay bad and never recover then go ahead and put in that kind of system.
- FlareKnight

The Oilers are the perfect example as to why getting a high pick every year isn't the be all end all anyway. There are TONS of players in the middle of the 1st round, and even beyond, that become contributing players to teams - some even stars.

The idea behind this is to incentivize you for playing well after a GM has made their buys or sells at the deadline. Even if you don't end up with the 1st pick, you're still in the top 5 or top 14...and it doesn't limit a GM's ability to made deals to move up.

If you're so dead set against teams being rewarded for losing I guess you'll also stop accepting the big fat welfare check your team receives every year from the money making teams right??? If that's not being rewarded for losing I don't what is!! Hypocrit!

Excellent, sensible post. The rest of these idiots need to take notes.

- TheIronSheik

It's funny how distasteful a blogger from Carolina finds it that a team gets rewarded for losing considering his team is one of the franchises with it's hand out receiving a check every year from the money making teams. If that's not being rewarded for losing I don't know what is!!!

It's funny how distasteful a blogger from Carolina finds it that a team gets rewarded for losing considering his team is one of the franchises with it's hand out receiving a check every year from the money making teams. If that's not being rewarded for losing I don't know what is!!!
- kayakerjack

If the Canes had been around for 100 years, we might be as engrained as to be one of those money making (with no bearing on how the team fares on the ice) teams. Making money isn't the measure of success that you seem to think it is. Not every hockey town is fortunate enough to be centered among hundreds of thousands of devoted hockey fans - it takes time to get there.

I'm not sure how the blog was twisted to mean I was trying to make the draft process favor the team I cover. Sure, I'm a fan too, but if the Hurricanes were 30th every year, I'd be saying the same thing.