Just to clarify some math on the #1 pick:

Remember there was a placeholder team that won the lottery. Specifically, TEAM E who had a 2.5% chance of winning #1.

The 8 placeholder teams summed up to 24.5% chance of getting to #1. Which means that each of those 8 teams only had a 3.065% chance of winning #1 when the places were chosen.

Yes, it is true NOW that the pick placement has been chosen that there is a 12.5% chance for those losing teams to get the #1. But it's not true to say that those losing teams STARTED with a 12.5% chance.

This is the fairest system they could have come up with considering the circumstances. It's definitely annoying that the Penguins suck just enough to have a shot at this. But, we were the beneficiaries of some luck landing the #2 overall a few years ago. I'd still rather be a Flyers fan right now

Chart can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_NHL_Entry_Draft
- atibus

So, do it up to the point where some team amongst the play-in playoff losers gets #1, as you laid out.

But then, do a second lottery among these 8 teams. Instead of weighing each team equally at 1/8 chance each, weigh these 8 teams chances inversely proportional to regular season p/g. Why not that way?

I disagree. This has nothing to do with the original reason for the lottery. It doesn't make sense in any way for the teams who were in the play in to have that good of a chance at the top pick. They shouldn't get a chance at the top pick because they weren't in the bottom of the league in the standings. The incentive to get in the playoffs and win the Cup is enough.
- MJL

The bottom 15 have had a shot at the top picks recently (Flyers benefited from that). The play-in games are not the playoffs, and just a way to give the bubble teams a way to make the playoffs.

We can have a discussion about if there should have even been a play-in, but this lottery was pretty much the same as how it's always been done.

Flyers are the designated home team. Doesn't have anything to do with regular season records.
- atibus

Sweet. So determined by Rock Paper Scissors between Bill Daly and Gary?

So, do it up to the point where some team amongst the play-in playoff losers gets #1, as you laid out.

But then, do a second lottery among these 8 teams. Instead of weighing each team equally at 1/8 chance each, weigh these 8 teams chances inversely proportional to regular season p/g. Why not that way?
- PT21

I don't think that's a bad change. I don't decide the lottery rules though.

Sweet. So determined by Rock Paper Scissors between Bill Daly and Gary?
- Hextall271

I don't know their decision process.

I think you could make the case that the entire team played better under AV though, whatever structure he put in place was good for both sides of the puck. Recall people saying Jake much better all around too. I know the original comment was him getting lost or whatever under AV but jvr is paid to score goals and that’s not what he’s doing . He had 8 more goals with the same games last year.
- ClaudeFather

You absolutely can make that case. Our guys really bought into his system/style. Same applies to Jake, but Jake racks up the assists compared to JVR. As you said JVR is paid for goals so when they aren’t coming he gets put under the spotlight. JVR usually scores in streaks and he never really had a good streak this season. Like I mentioned, he had absurd puck luck (so did TK). I saw this absurd stat that Giroux lacked primary assists (this year) because TK And JVR were literally shooting 0% from grade A chances from Giroux.

Think it be wise to put money on PHI tonight if Carlson doesnt go? I got $25 on CBJ tonight already

I don't think that's a bad change. I don't decide the lottery rules though.
- atibus

Wait. You didn't?

Think it be wise to put money on PHI tonight if Carlson doesnt go? I got $25 on CBJ tonight already
- xShoot4WarAmpsx

I like the Flyers over Washington but it probably wouldn’t be the game I put money on. I like the Isles over the Panthers tomorrow.

I get your frustration to an extent. But how would you change it? There aren't enough days in the week, or ice surface available to only play at night or weekends without this whole tournament stretching way longer.
- MBFlyerfan

Dont get me wrong, I'm happy hockey's back and I guess the NHL "brass" know how to make money better than I do, but I dont see them getting many of the more casual fans tuning in during work hours. It looks like there are only two games in Toronto today. I think I'd prefer overlapping games.

Dont get me wrong, I'm happy hockey's back and I guess the NHL "brass" know how to make money better than I do, but I dont see them getting many of the more casual fans tuning in during work hours. It looks like there are only two games in Toronto today. I think I'd prefer overlapping games.
- Dkos

Its no bonanza. But they are roughly on par with what they usually bring in.

It was a little surprising that MLB and NBA also restarted, with much less planning and much worse execution, clearly.

https://www.sportsmediawa...c-stanley-cup-qualifiers/

Just to clarify some math on the #1 pick:

Remember there was a placeholder team that won the lottery. Specifically, TEAM E who had a 2.5% chance of winning #1.

The 8 placeholder teams summed up to 24.5% chance of getting to #1. Which means that each of those 8 teams only had a 3.065% chance of winning #1 when the places were chosen.

Yes, it is true NOW that the pick placement has been chosen that there is a 12.5% chance for those losing teams to get the #1. But it's not true to say that those losing teams STARTED with a 12.5% chance.

This is the fairest system they could have come up with considering the circumstances. It's definitely annoying that the Penguins suck just enough to have a shot at this. But, we were the beneficiaries of some luck landing the #2 overall a few years ago. I'd still rather be a Flyers fan right now

Chart can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_NHL_Entry_Draft
- atibus

that was not "lucky", we had the worst record that year and Chicago jumped ahead of us to get Kane. Or maybe you are talking about NoPa, we'll see how "lucky" that turns out to be.

Before a few years ago, the worst you could do if you finished last is #2. Now, it is #4. Similarly, your chances of getting in the top 3 if you were ranked better than the 7 worst teams was 0 before 2012. Now its small but far from zero.

In general, the league has "smoothed" the probabilities of landing a top pick by shifting the weight of the probabilities from the very worst teams more towards all of the non-playoff teams. The reasoning is fairly obvious.

Regarding your bolded statement, "shouldn't" is not what we are talking about here. The teams that did not make the playoffs had a crack at picks 1-3 from 2016 onwards.

This year is no different, except you did not know which those non-playoffs teams were at the time of the draft.
- PT21

It is absolutely is what we're talking about here. What makes you the spokesman for what "we" are talking about? There was no reason to shift the probabilities.

The bottom 15 have had a shot at the top picks recently (Flyers benefited from that). The play-in games are not the playoffs, and just a way to give the bubble teams a way to make the playoffs.

We can have a discussion about if there should have even been a play-in, but this lottery was pretty much the same as how it's always been done.
- atibus

In the past there weren't two lotteries.

You absolutely can make that case. Our guys really bought into his system/style. Same applies to Jake, but Jake racks up the assists compared to JVR. As you said JVR is paid for goals so when they aren’t coming he gets put under the spotlight. JVR usually scores in streaks and he never really had a good streak this season. Like I mentioned, he had absurd puck luck (so did TK). I saw this absurd stat that Giroux lacked primary assists (this year) because TK And JVR were literally shooting 0% from grade A chances from Giroux.
- arichardson22

Is anyone aware that JVR was tied for 4th among Flyers forward in EVP? Tied with #28 in EVP with 31 each. In 3 less games. JVR had a solid season before getting injured.

This is completely not factual. JVR played very well in the regular season before getting hurt. How are you determining that he lost it under Vigneault?
- MJL

My point was that he played better in Toronto. He may have played alright for us earlier in the season, but I still think he played better in Toronto. This season he was on pace for a 23goal/49point season which is not bad, but in Toronto he had 4 80+ game seaons 27-36goal/54-62point seasons.

My point was that he played better in Toronto. He may have played alright for us earlier in the season, but I still think he played better in Toronto. This season he was on pace for a 23goal/49point season which is not bad, but in Toronto he had 4 80+ game seaons 27-36goal/54-62point seasons.
- leon neon

You stated that he "lost it under AV". Simply not true.

I was just behind a car that had Eagles and Penguins bumper stickers on it. I can’t even. 🤯

Is anyone aware that JVR was tied for 4th among Flyers forward in EVP? Tied with #28 in EVP with 31 each. In 3 less games. JVR had a solid season before getting injured.
- MJL

The goals are down and that’s the issue, and watching the guy plenty of times he’s just not bringing anything out there. I do recall G setting up TK and JVR early in the year and neither can connect. If G isn’t scoring at least he’s in the dot making a difference or is in guys ears. Jvr has games where he’s just such a non factor.

I haven’t listened to sports radio since March. What have they even been airing?
- hereticpride

I don't listen to sports radio at all. So I have no clue. I was in my car and wanted to listen to the game.

You stated that he "lost it under AV". Simply not true.
- MJL

Well, if he is not scoring as much with us then with the Leafs... Something happened. You can't say that it's not part of the equation. Frankly, there's too many variables. I believe line mates, which line, PP ice time, system, etc. has a lot to do with it (some or most of it has to do with AV).

You stated that he "lost it under AV". Simply not true.
- MJL

I agree. JVR averaged .71 points per game with Toronto. His second stint with the Flyers he is averaging .66 per game. Down but not to a "lost it" level.

The goals are down and that’s the issue, and watching the guy plenty of times he’s just not bringing anything out there. I do recall G setting up TK and JVR early in the year and neither can connect. If G isn’t scoring at least he’s in the dot making a difference or is in guys ears. Jvr has games where he’s just such a non factor.
- ClaudeFather

He averaged .37 goals per game for the Leafs. He is averaging .35 per game in his second stint with the Flyers. That is a 1.64 goal difference over a whole season.

He averaged .37 goals per game for the Leafs. He is averaging .35 per game in his second stint with the Flyers. That is a 1.64 goal difference over a whole season.
- mickel25

This season....I don’t care about last year or the leafs years, taking about now.

About JVR and his lackluster play.. the guy just got to spend the most Magicka moments at home with his daughter for the last few months. I understand that these guys are pros and they do this for a living but there is a very human side to all of them. Being a new father and being present for the first couple months of your child's life would be very hard to walk away from and go live in a bubble and not get to see or hold your baby again. I'm sure that sucks for him and will take adjusting. But I will call it now... Once his family is living in the bubble with him I expect him to have a fire pit under him and think he will go on a tear. .it's just my opinion but as a father it sucked going back to work after my daughter was born. I couldn't wait to come home and see and hold her. I think that is what is happening with JVR