Post by Jay Seo on Mar 10, 2015 19:04:50 GMT -5
I raised this issue last season that was rejected after some debate, but since we've been having a lot of discussions on league parity, I was wondering whether your thoughts have changed from a year ago.
Once again, I'd like to propose capping the number of first-round picks a team can hold in any given year at 3 first-round picks per draft year. 2nd and 3rd round picks and drafted players already on a prospect list would not be affected.
This would increase league parity by:
The main problem is that several GMs intentionally leave their pro rosters in complete shambles and trade their good roster players for draft picks because they enjoy making picks at the draft. To an extent, I don't blame these GMs - who doesn't like making picks? But the problem is that as it stands, the league actually provides an incentive for teams to do this - the worse their pro roster, the higher their pick. And since GMs who do this tend to do it year after year, and there is no consequence for doing so, these teams are stuck in a perpetual rebuild - they don't have the players to ice a competitive team, they have no reason to try to, and they have no shot at signing a high-profile free agent because their pro team has nothing. It's completely unrealistic - except for Oilers management, any team who did this year after year in the NHL would be fired.
What's more, the good teams know how to exploit this. They'll trade their draft picks for a quality player whose rights they control for a few years, and when they get prohibitively expensive, they can either trade that player for more assets or take their chances with a free agent because their team is competitive enough to do so. In the NHL, these guys would be traded to the bottom teams who need that talent (see: Boychuk and Leddy to NYI this season), but in the VHL, that doesn't happen - the top teams have so many assets between them that there's no need to trade with a bottom team, and the bottom teams are often unwilling to part with their prospects for NHL talent because they're "rebuilding".
IMO, that's the root of the parity problem in the VHL - there is no incentive for rebuilding teams who like to make draft pick after draft pick to actually get competitive. There's also no need for top teams to send quality assets to bottom teams.
This rule would address that - it wouldn't completely destroy a rebuilding team's ability to build through the draft, since 3 1sts per year and an unlimited amount of 2nds and 3rds is still plenty if you make the right picks (with smart drafting), but it'd encourage teams to try and ice a semi-competitive team because you wouldn't be able to draft 7 guys in the first round. At the very least, you'd see more trades involving established prospects rather than picks. As well, since a 3-pick cap limits the possibility that one team can hold most of the lottery picks, you wouldn't see as much tanking.
On the other hand, good teams who need to get value for an asset would be less likely to stockpile 1sts for that talent, and would also be more likely to send that asset to a bottom team.
I still don't see many downsides to this proposal, and I'm curious to know whether opinions have changed since last year.
Once again, I'd like to propose capping the number of first-round picks a team can hold in any given year at 3 first-round picks per draft year. 2nd and 3rd round picks and drafted players already on a prospect list would not be affected.
This would increase league parity by:
- Preventing top teams from easily replacing assets they can't afford by stockpiling draft picks (i.e., even more young talent) in exchange for those assets
- Encouraging bottom teams to actually ice a competitive roster with NHL-quality players, instead of leaving their pro rosters completely devoid of good players in favor of tanking and waiting years for prospects to possibly develop
- Heavily discouraging lopsided trades that leave a team completely devoid of any draft picks
- Limiting scenarios where 3 of the league's 30 teams will draft half of the available prospects in a given round, allowing for a more realistic distribution of young talent across the league
- Decreasing the chance of one team monopolizing several lottery picks in a given year, further discouraging tanking
- Still allowing teams to focus on drafting by allowing for three 1st-round picks, but also encouraging smarter drafting (more emphasis on 2nd and 3rd round draft choices) and long-term planning (staggering acquisitions of 1st-round picks)
The main problem is that several GMs intentionally leave their pro rosters in complete shambles and trade their good roster players for draft picks because they enjoy making picks at the draft. To an extent, I don't blame these GMs - who doesn't like making picks? But the problem is that as it stands, the league actually provides an incentive for teams to do this - the worse their pro roster, the higher their pick. And since GMs who do this tend to do it year after year, and there is no consequence for doing so, these teams are stuck in a perpetual rebuild - they don't have the players to ice a competitive team, they have no reason to try to, and they have no shot at signing a high-profile free agent because their pro team has nothing. It's completely unrealistic - except for Oilers management, any team who did this year after year in the NHL would be fired.
What's more, the good teams know how to exploit this. They'll trade their draft picks for a quality player whose rights they control for a few years, and when they get prohibitively expensive, they can either trade that player for more assets or take their chances with a free agent because their team is competitive enough to do so. In the NHL, these guys would be traded to the bottom teams who need that talent (see: Boychuk and Leddy to NYI this season), but in the VHL, that doesn't happen - the top teams have so many assets between them that there's no need to trade with a bottom team, and the bottom teams are often unwilling to part with their prospects for NHL talent because they're "rebuilding".
IMO, that's the root of the parity problem in the VHL - there is no incentive for rebuilding teams who like to make draft pick after draft pick to actually get competitive. There's also no need for top teams to send quality assets to bottom teams.
This rule would address that - it wouldn't completely destroy a rebuilding team's ability to build through the draft, since 3 1sts per year and an unlimited amount of 2nds and 3rds is still plenty if you make the right picks (with smart drafting), but it'd encourage teams to try and ice a semi-competitive team because you wouldn't be able to draft 7 guys in the first round. At the very least, you'd see more trades involving established prospects rather than picks. As well, since a 3-pick cap limits the possibility that one team can hold most of the lottery picks, you wouldn't see as much tanking.
On the other hand, good teams who need to get value for an asset would be less likely to stockpile 1sts for that talent, and would also be more likely to send that asset to a bottom team.
I still don't see many downsides to this proposal, and I'm curious to know whether opinions have changed since last year.
