What are you even talking about?? It’s nearly the same odds as it has always been. Detroit is just as likely to get a top 3 pick as they were before this whole deal.

And yes Toronto COULD lose (odds are against it) and then win the top pick (odds are heavily against it) but that was always possible. A team could have gone on a cold stretch, narrowly missed the playoffs, and hit the jackpot of the first pick.

Just bad reporting and bad logic. And don’t even get me started on the conspiracy theory...just dumb. As a coyotes fan knowing that the greatest thing for the league would have been putting McDavid or Eichel or Matthews in one of the top markets that they can’t seem to get a foothold in, and it never happened. Because it’s down to the luck of the lottery balls and they didn’t bounce our way.

We shall see if they bounce in Detroit’s favor or not, but long gone are the days of tanking to guarantee a top pick...and good riddance!!

In general I agree with you. From Detroit's perspective this is pretty much the scenario we were preparing for all year.

From a "feelings" perspective it sucks to get jerked around, told that the new plan is to guarantee you a top-2 pick, then say "just kidding" and go back to a 50% shot at picking fourth. But that's not really my main gripe.

My main complaint about the system is that it allows some absolutely stacked teams that would have likely made a traditional 16-team playoff (Pittsburgh, Edmonton, Toronto) a shot at the top three (even first overall) if they get bounced in the qualifying round. I don't think that's fair at all.

I'd prefer some kind of hybrid system where, even if three lotto balls must be selected and teams that bomb out of the qualifying round are eligible, there's still a max number of slots (somewhere in the 4-8 range) that they can move up.

If, say, the rule was that teams that are selected by the lotto can move up by up to six slots, that would mean only the seven teams completely outside the 24-team tournament could select first overall. I think that's more reasonable.
- Sven22

I agree with you on this one. Moving up 6 spots maximum would of been a good solution to ensure that a already stacked team can't end up with the #1 overall pick.

There was no system that would of appealed to everyone, for the wings, nothing really changes. It is what it should of been all along.

So let me get this straight, you guys had an 18.5% chance of winning the lottery in March when the season ended, and now STILL have an 18.5% chance of winning the lottery.

How do you get screwed?

COnspiracy?
This is litterally the same odds the last placed team had for years.

. The delineation between lottery eligible and not is if a team is in the playoffs. You expand the number of playoff teams you should reduce the number of lottery eligible teams.
- Queenie_5_hole

Very well put

The Draft gives 1% to team H, that’s just enough to get the 1st pick.

Who will be TEAM H ?

In general I agree with you. From Detroit's perspective this is pretty much the scenario we were preparing for all year.

From a "feelings" perspective it sucks to get jerked around, told that the new plan is to guarantee you a top-2 pick, then say "just kidding" and go back to a 50% shot at picking fourth. But that's not really my main gripe.

My main complaint about the system is that it allows some absolutely stacked teams that would have likely made a traditional 16-team playoff (Pittsburgh, Edmonton, Toronto) a shot at the top three (even first overall) if they get bounced in the qualifying round. I don't think that's fair at all.

I'd prefer some kind of hybrid system where, even if three lotto balls must be selected and teams that bomb out of the qualifying round are eligible, there's still a max number of slots (somewhere in the 4-8 range) that they can move up.

If, say, the rule was that teams that are selected by the lotto can move up by up to six slots, that would mean only the seven teams completely outside the 24-team tournament could select first overall. I think that's more reasonable.
- Sven22

Well thought out. The principle issue is a system wide open to some nasty results. Well done

Montreal loses, if they win the series they lose the lottery eligible lock. If they lose the round, that means they still lose... They lose both ways...

And yes Toronto COULD lose (odds are against it) and then win the top pick (odds are heavily against it) but that was always possible. A team could have gone on a cold stretch, narrowly missed the playoffs, and hit the jackpot of the first pick.

Narrowly missing a 16-team playoff due to injuries or a cold stretch, after 82 games have been played, is one thing. If Toronto had been in that position, I could stomach them winning the lottery.

A strong playoff-quality team just outside the top four in their conference getting a top three pick is completely different.

Instead of cherry picking Toronto (an arguably great but divisive team having an underwhelming season), let's look at Pittsburgh. They were seventh place in the NHL when the season ended, at 40-23-6. Pretty close to stone cold locks to make a 16-team playoff and legit Cup contenders before the season got torpedoed. Yet under the proposed system they could wind up with Lafreniere.

In a normal year you've gotta finish 17th place or worse to have a chance at the top three (disregarding conference imbalances). This year only the top 8 are out of the running. And actually since the East is so much better than the West right now, 7th place could wind up with the No. 1 overall. I think that's too generous.

If the league feels it needs to "compensate" qualifying round losers with lotto balls, I'm cool with that -- even if they've got a top-10 NHL squad. But that doesn't mean they should jump all the way to first overall. Would you seriously be okay with a team that won 40 out of 69 games this season getting Lafreniere?

Would love to hear more about this draft conspiracy theory that has been going on for 15 years! So obviously Bettman is involved, and probably Bill Daly too. Some of the owners would of course be involved since someone needs to whisper in Bettman's ear who gets #1 in any particular year. Then of course you have the accounting firm who observes and audits the results...that guy is risking his entire career on this conspiracy so he needs to be paid off.

So we have numerous individuals involved to perpetuate this 15+ years of conspiracies...yet not a single individual has ever leaked a word of it. Not even on their deathbed.

Amazing!

Of course, the alternative is it is just a random lottery. I mean, that explains why Matthews didn't end up rescuing Arizona but instead ended up in a market that would support any 20 guys on the ice. Oilers fans are just as passionate, they didn't need McDavid, who might have looked good in California, Texas, or Florida. Any other cool stories to share? I heard the earth is flat and the moon landing was filmed in Hollywood!

Very well put
- Jeremy Laura

On one hand this is correct, on the other you now have to compensate teams that were sure-fire playoff teams that might now get knocked off in a best of 5 play in.

On one hand this is correct, on the other you now have to compensate teams that were sure-fire playoff teams that might now get knocked off in a best of 5 play in.
- BINGO!

I mean, if I understand the procedure correctly (which I think I do, but correct me if I'm wrong), the draft order is going to look like this:

Picks 1 through 3: Selected by lottery

Picks 4 through 7, 8, 9, or 10: Teams outside the 24-team tournament in reverse standings order. This goes through pick 7 if no placeholder teams win a lottery ball, pick 8 if one placeholder team wins, etc.

Picks 8, 9, 10, or 11 through 15: Teams that lose in qualifying and do not win any lottery balls, in reverse standings order.

Picks 16-31: Possibly same as normal? Since there are no divisional playoffs and no benefit for division winners this year it might be slightly modified in terms of how picks 16-26 are selected, but I'm not clear on this.

So you can argue that a surefire playoff team like Pittsburgh or Carolina is already being somewhat compensated if they lose in qualifying.

For example, under normal draft rules and playoff seeding the best Pittsburgh could hope to pick after a first-round flameout would be like 20th overall (I think), and even then they'd need two teams below them to make the Eastern Conference finals and none of St. Louis, Colorado, or Vegas to make the conference finals in the West.

Whereas if Pittsburgh flames out of the qualifying round under the 24-team tourney rules, they're already locked into 15th even without lotto balls.

I mean, if I understand the procedure correctly (which I think I do, but correct me if I'm wrong), the draft order is going to look like this:

Picks 1 through 3: Selected by lottery

Picks 4 through 7, 8, 9, or 10: Teams outside the 24-team tournament in reverse standings order. This goes through pick 7 if no placeholder teams win a lottery ball, pick 8 if one placeholder team wins, etc.

Picks 8, 9, 10, or 11 through 15: Teams that lose in qualifying and do not win any lottery balls, in reverse standings order.

Picks 16-31: Possibly same as normal? Since there are no divisional playoffs and no benefit for division winners this year it might be slightly modified in terms of how picks 16-26 are selected, but I'm not clear on this.

So you can argue that a surefire playoff team like Pittsburgh or Carolina is already being somewhat compensated if they lose in qualifying.

For example, under normal draft rules and playoff seeding the best Pittsburgh could hope to pick after a first-round flameout would be like 19th overall (I think), and even then they'd need two teams below them to make the Eastern Conference finals and none of St. Louis, Colorado, or Vegas to make the conference finals in the West.

Whereas if Pittsburgh flames out of the qualifying round under the 24-team tourney rules, they're already locked into 15th even without lotto balls.
- Sven22

Well Pittsburgh also wasn't counting on playing an extra 5-game series just to "make" the playoffs. They were pretty much locked and secured a spot. Now they have to battle a team just to get in. So if Pittsburgh runs into a hot goalie, or can't shake off the rust, or just get unlucky, well then they get "compensated" for that extreme disappointment with a very small shot at the lottery. I have no issue with that. Same with Edmonton. They were sitting in 5th and a lock for the playoffs. Now they have to play an extra 5-game series just to make it. If they lose that is a devastating season for them. They deserve to pick higher.

Maybe it helps to stop calling this a 24-team playoff. It's a 16-team playoff. But instead of playing out the regular season to determine those 16 teams, they are simply going to invite 24-teams to play a handful of games and sort that out.

Well Pittsburgh also wasn't counting on playing an extra 5-game series just to "make" the playoffs. They were pretty much locked and secured a spot. Now they have to battle a team just to get in. So if Pittsburgh runs into a hot goalie, or can't shake off the rust, or just get unlucky, well then they get "compensated" for that extreme disappointment with a very small shot at the lottery. I have no issue with that. Same with Edmonton. They were sitting in 5th and a lock for the playoffs. Now they have to play an extra 5-game series just to make it. If they lose that is a devastating season for them. They deserve to pick higher.

Maybe it helps to stop calling this a 24-team playoff. It's a 16-team playoff. But instead of playing out the regular season to determine those 16 teams, they are simply going to invite 24-teams to play a handful of games and sort that out.
- Kooleus

I have no objection to giving Pittsburgh a lottery ball if they flame out in qualifying. My objection is giving them a top three pick if they win it.

The point of a lottery is to discourage tanking, not to reward a couple of random teams with a golden ticket each year.

If Pittsburgh loses in qualifying and gets their ball drawn in the lottery, I think moving them six places (15th to 9th), when in a normal season they'd be restricted to 20th or worse even if they went 0-4 in the playoffs, is more than fair. Still a sucky way to end a season, but they'll have a lot of company in that department.

In general I agree with you. From Detroit's perspective this is pretty much the scenario we were preparing for all year.

From a "feelings" perspective it sucks to get jerked around, told that the new plan is to guarantee you a top-2 pick, then say "just kidding" and go back to a 50% shot at picking fourth. But that's not really my main gripe.

My main complaint about the system is that it allows some absolutely stacked teams that would have likely made a traditional 16-team playoff (Pittsburgh, Edmonton, Toronto) a shot at the top three (even first overall) if they get bounced in the qualifying round. I don't think that's fair at all.

I'd prefer some kind of hybrid system where, even if three lotto balls must be selected and teams that bomb out of the qualifying round are eligible, there's still a max number of slots (somewhere in the 4-8 range) that they can move up.

If, say, the rule was that teams that are selected by the lotto can move up by up to six slots, that would mean only the seven teams completely outside the 24-team tournament could select first overall. I think that's more reasonable.
- Sven22

I agree about the top 16 having a shot as BS. But you guys definitely shouldnt have been guaranteed a top 2. Every other fanbase would have been saying its rigged for Detriot.

I mean, if I understand the procedure correctly (which I think I do, but correct me if I'm wrong), the draft order is going to look like this:

Picks 1 through 3: Selected by lottery

Picks 4 through 7, 8, 9, or 10: Teams outside the 24-team tournament in reverse standings order. This goes through pick 7 if no placeholder teams win a lottery ball, pick 8 if one placeholder team wins, etc.

Picks 8, 9, 10, or 11 through 15: Teams that lose in qualifying and do not win any lottery balls, in reverse standings order.

Picks 16-31: Possibly same as normal? Since there are no divisional playoffs and no benefit for division winners this year it might be slightly modified in terms of how picks 16-26 are selected, but I'm not clear on this.

So you can argue that a surefire playoff team like Pittsburgh or Carolina is already being somewhat compensated if they lose in qualifying.

For example, under normal draft rules and playoff seeding the best Pittsburgh could hope to pick after a first-round flameout would be like 20th overall (I think), and even then they'd need two teams below them to make the Eastern Conference finals and none of St. Louis, Colorado, or Vegas to make the conference finals in the West.

Whereas if Pittsburgh flames out of the qualifying round under the 24-team tourney rules, they're already locked into 15th even without lotto balls.
- Sven22

You keep on saying Pittsburgh was a lock, but by definition they were not. They had a really great chance, but it was not guaranteed. Let’s say the math cane out to a 90% chance of making it, which means a 10% chance they wouldn’t. If they didn’t, they had a 3% chance of getting the first pick. So in total, their chances of the first round pick (pre-covid) were a little less than half a percent. Now, (post covid) they have to lose to Montreal..what’s the odds of that? 30%? 20%? and if they do their slot needs to win the pick which is a 3% chance.

I know my numbers aren’t exact, but the point is in both cases, statistically, it is very unlikely that they win the lottery, BUT in both cases was definitely possible.

Any follow-up explanation on how the NHL has perpetuated this rigged draft for the last 15 years, which would involve numerous people, and yet without a single person ever yapping about it?

Stevie presser going on now......Non-comment about bring Blashill back. I would hope we see something soon on whether or not the Wings are going to have a new coach or not.

You keep on saying Pittsburgh was a lock, but by definition they were not. They had a really great chance, but it was not guaranteed. Let’s say the math cane out to a 90% chance of making it, which means a 10% chance they wouldn’t. If they didn’t, they had a 3% chance of getting the first pick. So in total, their chances of the first round pick (pre-covid) were a little less than half a percent. Now, (post covid) they have to lose to Montreal..what’s the odds of that? 30%? 20%? and if they do their slot needs to win the pick which is a 3% chance.

I know my numbers aren’t exact, but the point is in both cases, statistically, it is very unlikely that they win the lottery, BUT in both cases was definitely possible.
- Dahlmanyotes

Your math is incorrect on both counts -- on the one hand you are overestimating Pittsburgh's chances of missing the playoffs, and on the other you are incorrect about a 3% chance of their "slot" getting drawn. Actually, all play-in losers will have an equal 1/8 chance to be selected for every "placeholder" ball that is drawn in the first lottery, regardless of whether that ball is for "Team A" or "Team B" or team whatever.

Statistically Pittsburgh's odds of making the playoffs were more like 97%, not 90%. So the theoretical odds under the old system would be more like one tenth of one percent (0.1%) to pick within the top three, or about three hundredths of a percent (.03%) for first overall.

Under the new system, there is a ~43% chance that there will be exactly one placeholder team, ~15% chance of two placeholder teams, and ~2% chance of three placeholder teams selected in the top three. So the expected number of total placeholders in the top three is about 0.8 teams, and all eight play-in losers will have an equal shot at those slots.

So if you give Montreal a 25% chance of knocking out Pittsburgh in qualifying, that still gives the Penguins about a 2.5% chance of picking in the top three -- or about 25 times more likely than one tenth of a percent. (EDIT: I originally put 250 here due to my own math error; apologies.)

But let's say for the sake of argument that, in an alternate universe where the season was never cancelled, Pittsburgh closed out the year on a massive skid, only won 2-3 of their last 13 games, and finished just outside the playoff cutline.

In that alternate universe I would be totally fine with them being in the lottery. If they had played 82 games and finished outside the top 16 that would be good enough for me.

That isn't the universe we live in though. In this universe they won 40 out of 69 and clearly look like one of the best teams in the league, especially when healthy.

True, we don't know for sure what would have happened if they played those last 13 games. But since we never will, I think it's reasonable to make the best projection we can based on the 69 games they did play. And that projection is "really really good team that has no business picking in the top three."

If you don’t make the playoffs, you’re reward is the right to be in the lottery. It’s a simple format that has worked in other leagues but it appears the NHL doesn’t believe in it.

While the odds may appear to be the same, the caliber of teams that may get included makes it sketchy to say the least.

They should’ve left it with the 7 teams that didn’t make the playoffs or only add those that wouldn’t have been included under a normal season. Why bother with all the smoke and mirrors?

Regardless, Wings deserve to win it and let Ottawa drop a few spots for getting so lucky.

Our chances always were #4 and this just confirms it. Noway was Detroit ever getting the #1 or #2 overall pick. That just isn't happening. So we assume that Yzerman takes one of Drysdale, Raymond, Rossi or Askarov with the number 4 pick.