GASabresIUFAN Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 I read that there is some talk about the Agents and Union want to reduce the draft from 7 rounds to 4. https://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-draft-4-round-potential/. Apparently Elliotte Friedman raised the issue in his podcast. THW raises the issue of UDFAs gravitating towards good teams, making it harder for the Buffalo’s of the world to compete. I also know that most teams don’t even have 150 kids on their draft board on draft day. My initial reaction is that reducing it to 5 rounds won’t make much of a difference. Ullmark is probably the most impactful 6th or 7th rd pick to have a major impact. VO was a nice story for a while. With colleges soon to opening their doors to CHL players, we will probably see an influx of college FAs that might even the playing field. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freester Posted June 17 Report Share Posted June 17 On 6/12/2024 at 2:02 PM, GASabresIUFAN said: I read that there is some talk about the Agents and Union want to reduce the draft from 7 rounds to 4. https://thehockeywriters.com/nhl-draft-4-round-potential/. Apparently Elliotte Friedman raised the issue in his podcast. THW raises the issue of UDFAs gravitating towards good teams, making it harder for the Buffalo’s of the world to compete. I also know that most teams don’t even have 150 kids on their draft board on draft day. My initial reaction is that reducing it to 5 rounds won’t make much of a difference. Ullmark is probably the most impactful 6th or 7th rd pick to have a major impact. VO was a nice story for a while. With colleges soon to opening their doors to CHL players, we will probably see an influx of college FAs that might even the playing field. Thoughts? It would be better if they changed the minimum draft age to 20 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kas23 Posted June 17 Report Share Posted June 17 I don’t think players would automatically gravitate towards good (ie playoff) teams. Players want to play, so they’ll likely go to teams that have potential spots open. That said, sometimes players have the wrong priorities and pick solely based on city. In the end, it should be a mix of factors: multiple spots open, stability of FO/coaching, make-up of the rest of team (they don’t want to go to a complete bottom dweller), and locale. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kas23 Posted June 17 Report Share Posted June 17 39 minutes ago, freester said: It would be better if they changed the minimum draft age to 20 That would be a bit much. There’s always a small handful players each draft that make it to the NHL as 18 year-olds. And more that make it at 19. All those players (basically stars in the making) would be sitting in juniors or Europe waiting to be drafted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjd1001 Posted June 17 Report Share Posted June 17 I don't think it makes a difference. Most guys after round 4 hardly make an impact on the teams they are drafted by. And as far as the guys who are late picks who DO make an impact? The draft or lack of it will have little to do with it. If you weren't drafted by round 4, that means that NO-ONE (not even the teams that players 'gravitate' to) thought you were good enough to be a top 120+ pick in the draft. If you are one of those guys and DO turn out to be good, its just as likely it will be with a team that signs you as a free agent that isn't a 'desirable' or 'big market' team as any other team....each team can only have a certain number of contracts anyway. If there is a guy that you might think is going to be very good, then just draft him in the first 4 rounds. Its a lotter after that anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted June 17 Report Share Posted June 17 I hate any idea of shortening the draft as it gives an advantage to a small number of teams who can "bring them in" either via being their local team or top teams in the league. Additionally it would wreck the trade market as picks from Round 5 through 7 have always been filler assets and since fans don't want to see anyone traded for nothing; a 5th is a concrete asset we can look at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattPie Posted June 17 Report Share Posted June 17 7 hours ago, kas23 said: I don’t think players would automatically gravitate towards good (ie playoff) teams. Players want to play, so they’ll likely go to teams that have potential spots open. That said, sometimes players have the wrong priorities and pick solely based on city. In the end, it should be a mix of factors: multiple spots open, stability of FO/coaching, make-up of the rest of team (they don’t want to go to a complete bottom dweller), and locale. Weird that you get to decide which priorities are "wrong". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewookie1 Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 1 hour ago, MattPie said: Weird that you get to decide which priorities are "wrong". Well, there are certainly priorities that are wrong such as fame or underhanded bribery. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerreaultForever Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 9 hours ago, kas23 said: I don’t think players would automatically gravitate towards good (ie playoff) teams. Players want to play, so they’ll likely go to teams that have potential spots open. That said, sometimes players have the wrong priorities and pick solely based on city. In the end, it should be a mix of factors: multiple spots open, stability of FO/coaching, make-up of the rest of team (they don’t want to go to a complete bottom dweller), and locale. Oh I don't think so. I think this would definitely result in more players choosing teams closer to where they grew up, the teams they supported as kids, and locations like Buffalo would get the leftovers who think they could land a spot. Leafs, Bruins, maybe Montreal for French guys, big American cities and so forth would all benefit. I hate the idea. Used to be more than 7 rounds. Used to be 20 years olds. Things never go back, but I wish it would. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddoublee Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 10 hours ago, freester said: It would be better if they changed the minimum draft age to 20 I wouldn't mind if they increased it to 9 rounds if they raised the minimum draft age. Teams would have a much better handle on what they are getting by doing so. Maybe more franchises would feel more patient with prospects and not being them up until they are 22-23 without worrying about premature bust labels. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erickompositör72 Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 21 hours ago, kas23 said: I don’t think players would automatically gravitate towards good (ie playoff) teams. Players want to play, so they’ll likely go to teams that have potential spots open. That said, sometimes players have the wrong priorities and pick solely based on city. In the end, it should be a mix of factors: multiple spots open, stability of FO/coaching, make-up of the rest of team (they don’t want to go to a complete bottom dweller), and locale. 14 hours ago, MattPie said: Weird that you get to decide which priorities are "wrong". 13 hours ago, thewookie1 said: Well, there are certainly priorities that are wrong such as fame or underhanded bribery. I think the point is that making the argument that something is idealistically the "wrong reason" doesn't prove that it isn't a significant factor in the real world Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erickompositör72 Posted June 18 Report Share Posted June 18 What would the effect on junior and/or NCAA hockey be? It seems like it could have a big effect there (as would changing the draft age to 20, but I only see that suggested in this thread, not elsewhere...). Are there parties lobbying for this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthEbriate Posted June 19 Report Share Posted June 19 Keep 7 rounds. My preference is to enforce drafts for all league entry. You didn't get drafted at 18 but then went to college and now you're worthy of a 2nd-round selection? Great. Get drafted. Don't want to sign with the team that drafted you at 18? Great. Re-enter the draft. Always give the crap teams a chance for hope. But then, for balance and to placate the Players Association, allow UFA earlier. Finish your ELC, 1 season max of RFA, and UFA is yours. It'd mess with goalies and other long-developing players... but they could also weave their way through the minors and still be a cheap 2nd contract before they figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.