They really don't want Columbus to get Mackinnon.
i like it. year end tanking is a joke. teams tank and it affects playoff positioning. it affects players stats as guys like malkin rack up the pts in the meaningless games.
the only thing worse is tankers in fantasy that do it under the guise of "im building for the future"
sure you are tanker
tankers ruin real and fantasy hockey
My question is who would people want to land that lottery pick to get 1st overall?
I have to admit, something in me loves the idea of Colorado landing Mackinnon or Seth Jones. I miss the days when they were a dominant team even though I'm a Sharks fan.
Perhaps Toronto, but that would make people too crazy on here.
I like the idea of Winnipeg getting that. They need a true star center for the future to line up with Kane. That's probably my number 2 team to land that first pick.
I love it. Still gives the worst teams the best chance to win, but also creates a bit more drama for the draft lottery.
Perfect timing. The Oilers shouldn't be a bottom feeder team much longer, but could miss the playoffs. Would love to see them land MacKinnon even though they don't deserve it!!
Yeah... Anyone who follows the NBA knows that an expanded lottery only makes the problem worse. Now you are giving teams that actually could make a run at the playoffs a reason to tank it since everyone gets a shot at a top three pick. This certainly won't help the problem, in fact, it could exacerbate it.
I'd like to see a year end tournament between all non-playoff teams where they battle it out for higher draft position. This is something that Bill Simmons has suggested to resolve the NBA's own issue with tanking because draft lotteries do not work. Oh, and if you think people wouldn't watch remember that 1.8 million tuned in to watch the NHL draft lottery this past spring. People would watch a tournament to determine the first overall pick and it would generate real revenue for non-playoff teams. Seems like a no-brainer to me. Why can't these idiots look outside the box?
Exactly what MD is saying. Just handing losers something isn't providing them with incentive to make a proper effort. A year-end draft tournament would be awesome. I'm sure the owners would love it since it would bring in even more revenue.
I've thought about the loser tourney before, but the main issue with it is that it punishes the legitimately awful teams which is contrary to the purpose of the draft lottery.
While both systems discourage tanking to a certain extent, only the lottery helps the teams that need it most
So to me there's no downside. If a team is terrible and continues to miss out on high draft picks because they can't seem to get better then it would just accelerate the process of them firing their management group which is clearly not doing a good enough job.
And one final point. Basically, teams would have to change the way they think. It's far too prevailing a belief in sports right now that the model for rebuilding is to get worse to get better. This would change the way that everyone thinks in that regard. Now the thought would be "we need to get better to get better," which is the logical direction to go.
right but my point is that if there's a team that is so bad that they simply can't win hockey games, the system has to provide them with the ability to improve. a draft tourney would punish a team like that and at the very worst, result in the loss of the franchise altogether down the road due to a fan base with nothing to cheer for
Simply put if you eliminate the incentive for teams to tank and go for higher draft picks then you eliminate that sort of thinking. You wouldn't kill the ability of teams to fail but you'd create greater accountability and you'd quell any urge to engage in tanking. So yes there is a chance that you'd cost yourself a franchise or two that simply cannot get the right management team in place to build a half decent team without the benefit of top picks but you must realize how pathetic that franchise would have to be and how maybe that franchise shouldn't be owned by its owner if he really sucks that much at picking managers.
Also, and this is an entirely different topic but if a team cannot survive because it continues to fail well odds are that's going to happen regardless of getting first overall selections or not and more to the point those teams would seemingly be in locals where hockey may not be able to survive long term regardless of the team's ability to put a winner on the ice. So the point of a lottery shouldn't be, "let's rescue these terribly run franchises," it is supposed to be, "let's prevent teams from intentionally sucking." No amount of lottery seems to quell that instinct to suck intentionally so we need new thinking and a new set of incentives. If a team under a new set of incentives really can't get themselves to compete for even a year or two, even if it's just to compete enough to earn a higher pick then my goodness that team must be dreadful. As of yet there hasn't been a franchise to achieve that level of absolute failure so I personally think that if you are using that as an excuse to poo-poo the "draft pick tournament" then I think you are building yourself quite the straw man.