Draft Picks and Changing the Draft Age to 19

[indigobuffalo]

Okay so I know we've already had discussions on this topic and forgive me if this specific concept has been discussed, but I'm wondering if some teams are going to start playing loose with draft picks in the coming years if changing the draft age starts gaining more traction.

I mean, let's say they "cancel" the 2019 draft, so as to make the draft eligibility age 19 instead of 18.

Presumably teams will have some form of advanced notice, maybe a year.

But what happens to picks already traded? We know the precedent, based on the compensatory picks for poaching management personnel, those picks remained with the team that acquired them.

Could the NHL force the picks to be deferred? I'm not so sure. Because that might be unfair to a team that dealt its 2019 1st expecting to still have a 2020 1st to restock the cupboards. Not to mention the position might change.

So most likely what will happen is that teams will just lose whatever picks they hold.

So if that's the case, does anyone think we will see some GMs anticipate this and try and unload picks in the belief that they may completely lose value or is that too much of a gamble if you're talking several possible years.

Click to read more...

 

[Redline]

They would have to make segmental changes like 18 years 4 months for the 1st draft, 18 years 8 months the following and then get to 19 years old in the 3rd year.

Just to keep the impact reasonable.

 

[QJL]

No thanks. Kids like Matthews and Laine should be playing NHL hockey. Being drafted doesn't prevent players from choosing school or developing in a junior or overseas league. I don't get it.

 

[hohosaregood]

It'd only really make sense if they planned this change for like 4 years in the future so that all parties involved could deal with the logistics

 

[DudeWhereIsMakar]

It'll be the one season where no teams tank if they cancel the draft.

I still think exceptional status should exist though for players like Connor McDavid.

 

[Habsrule]

Why change something that works? The draft is not broken so why fix it?

 

[Malkinstheman]

No thanks. Kids like Matthews and Laine should be playing NHL hockey. Being drafted doesn't prevent players from choosing school or developing in a junior or overseas league. I don't get it.

Matthews turned 19 in his draft year so he doesnt really fit what your saving. He had to wait an entire year to be drafted just because he was born a couple of days late.

 

[Hisch13r]

It'll be the one season where no teams tank if they cancel the draft.

I still think exceptional status should exist though for players like Connor McDavid.

Most years no one tanks. There's no one tanking this year

 

[Daximus]

If they go to 19 years old they should go by birth years.

Eichel would be in the 2015 draft. McDavid and Matthews in the 2016 draft. Your birth year +19 would be your draft year.

 

[Hynh]

I would shift the draft year one month per year. It would take 7 years and would relatively painless since scouts always prefer older players.

If they go to 19 years old they should go by birth years.

Eichel would be in the 2015 draft. McDavid and Matthews in the 2016 draft. Your birth year +19 would be your draft year.

They probably would. It's only screwed up right now because they want all players to be 18 at the start of the year.

 

[Daximus]

I would shift the draft year one month per year. It would take 7 years and would relatively painless since scouts always prefer older players.

They probably would. It's only screwed up right now because they want all players to be 18 at the start of the year.

I also think along with making all draftees same birth year and 19 years old. They should lower the CHL age agreement to U19 instead of U20. That way good 19 year olds can play in the AHL as CHL would be getting an extra year from all players no matter how good they are. Maybe even lower the CHL entry year to 15 for all leagues and allow them to play. Have a roster limitation of maybe one or two 15 year olds.

 

[Flair Hay]

I love this idea. Make exemptions for certain kids. But it helps the junior leagues. Will be easier to identify Europeans because they will be at an age they can actually play first line minutes if they are good enough.

They are looking for even more parity and giving scouts an extra year to watch will result in GM's making better decisions.

 

[Whiston532]

Genuinely wondering, what exactly is the issue with the present system ?

 

[indigobuffalo]

For those asking why even consider this, Elliotte Friedman breaks it down here.

The NHL is considering it because it gives scouts more time, with more mature players, and it should increase the accuracy on the draft floor.

Special cases will be granted exempt status so the McDavids can be drafted at 18.

And the junior leagues of course benefit by having players remain with the club a year longer.

 

[Lempo]

But do the scouts really need more time? There are examples of players that especially good scouts have noticed and their team has been able to steal in the 18 y.o. Draft before the player's goodness becomes obvious to everyone. Excellence in scouting wouldn't be rewarded to same extent any more.

The more skilled players would suffer in their development if they were made to play in too easy league for another year, especially in comparison to their European peers who get to play with men as soon as they can handle it. I'm told that's where the element of thinking comes into the game as the elder dudes aren't so into the junior hockey dump & rush.

 

[mouser]

But do the scouts really need more time? There are examples of players that especially good scouts have noticed and their team has been able to steal in the 18 y.o. Draft before the player's goodness becomes obvious to everyone. Excellence in scouting wouldn't be rewarded to same extent any more.

The more skilled players would suffer in their development if they were made to play in too easy league for another year, especially in comparison to their European peers who get to play with men as soon as they can handle it. I'm told that's where the element of thinking comes into the game as the elder dudes aren't so into the junior hockey dump & rush.

This is an oft-repeated idea, yet I'm still waiting for a good example of a player that suffered in their development by playing another year of junior hockey?

 

[gwh]

The top10 picks will earn in Europe for 2 or more years. Likely not in NHL's best interest.

The shift could be gradual over 2 season or something similar.

 

[Prins Filip]

This is an oft-repeated idea, yet I'm still waiting for a good example of a player that suffered in their development by playing another year of junior hockey?

Sadly there is no access to a paraller universe to get a proper setting for an example like that. Often development requires challenge to push an individuals skills out of the comfort zone and its hard to see how playing multiple years against players clearly worse and weaker than a higly touted prospect can provide that.

Comfort kills development, and a familiar and too easy league does exactly that. Some players may get their motivation and areas pf improvement from the NHL team, which is able to see what the player is about to need in the future - one full year of extra guidance to make the NHL career better. A CHL team more focused on the present might just be happy enough to have a junior league superstar and ignore the fact that the player might be playing in NHL within a year.

 

[Slimmy]

Any superstar players in Europe would stay a year longer which would be a good thing for us here.

 

[Lebowski]

But do the scouts really need more time? There are examples of players that especially good scouts have noticed and their team has been able to steal in the 18 y.o. Draft before the player's goodness becomes obvious to everyone. Excellence in scouting wouldn't be rewarded to same extent any more.

The more skilled players would suffer in their development if they were made to play in too easy league for another year, especially in comparison to their European peers who get to play with men as soon as they can handle it. I'm told that's where the element of thinking comes into the game as the elder dudes aren't so into the junior hockey dump & rush.

I can't really think of a player that was "ruined" for playing one year too many in junior. You hear of rushed prospects all the time, however.

This is something that could apply to guys like Crosby or McDavid, but I would bet the overwheming majority of junior players would benefit from staying in juniors an aditional year. Having a bunch of high picks sticking around for an additional year would also raise the level of junior leagues.

For the truly exceptionals, moving to Europe for a year or two remains an option.

 

[ck26]

For those asking why even consider this, Elliotte Friedman breaks it down here.

The NHL is considering it because it gives scouts more time, with more mature players, and it should increase the accuracy on the draft floor.

Hey, NHL scouts. Get your **** together. This is actually MORE reason to keep the age young, because 18 year old future busts will get the "life benefit" or whatever of getting drafted, while the late bloomer who goes undrafted but catches on still has a go of it in the NHL. Two players benefit instead of just one.

Would this stupid idea survive an anti-trust lawsuit? If the NHL is subjectively giving out exemptions to "exceptional players" then what prevents someone just below that tier -- Dylan Strome, Mitch Marner, Aaron Ekblad, Sam Reinhart -- from suing the league to get an exemption themselves? You're denying a year of 6- or 7-figure income to an incredibly skilled worker in an incredibly dangerous field.

And which top kids wouldn't go to Europe? Why would you choose to make a stipend living in Brandon or Sudbury or Rouyn-Noranda when they could make a salary living in Hamburg or Zurich or Stockholm?

 

[Lebowski]

Would this stupid idea survive an anti-trust lawsuit? If the NHL is subjectively giving out exemptions to "exceptional players" then what prevents someone just below that tier -- Dylan Strome, Mitch Marner, Aaron Ekblad, Sam Reinhart -- from suing the league to get an exemption themselves? You're denying a year of 6- or 7-figure income to an incredibly skilled worker in an incredibly dangerous field.

And which top kids wouldn't go to Europe? Why would you choose to make a stipend living in Brandon or Sudbury or Rouyn-Noranda when they could make a salary living in Hamburg or Zurich or Stockholm?

Not a very good example considering both Marner and Reinhart spent their D+1 season in juniors, and Strome was just sent back to junior in his D+2 season...

 

[Amazing Kreiderman]

Would this stupid idea survive an anti-trust lawsuit? If the NHL is subjectively giving out exemptions to "exceptional players" then what prevents someone just below that tier -- Dylan Strome, Mitch Marner, Aaron Ekblad, Sam Reinhart -- from suing the league to get an exemption themselves? You're denying a year of 6- or 7-figure income to an incredibly skilled worker in an incredibly dangerous field.

And which top kids wouldn't go to Europe? Why would you choose to make a stipend living in Brandon or Sudbury or Rouyn-Noranda when they could make a salary living in Hamburg or Zurich or Stockholm?

What if they just have a rule where 18-year olds can only be drafted in the 1st round? The 2nd round and beyond, is only for 19 and older. That way, there is no ambiguous "exemption" rule

 

[jason2020]

Would this stupid idea survive an anti-trust lawsuit? If the NHL is subjectively giving out exemptions to "exceptional players" then what prevents someone just below that tier -- Dylan Strome, Mitch Marner, Aaron Ekblad, Sam Reinhart -- from suing the league to get an exemption themselves? You're denying a year of 6- or 7-figure income to an incredibly skilled worker in an incredibly dangerous field.

And which top kids wouldn't go to Europe? Why would you choose to make a stipend living in Brandon or Sudbury or Rouyn-Noranda when they could make a salary living in Hamburg or Zurich or Stockholm?

Not sure but in the States but in Canada there is a big push to move up ages from midget and up as for players going to Europe only the top 1% would go.

 

[Lebowski]

What if they just have a rule where 18-year olds can only be drafted in the 1st round? The 2nd round and beyond, is only for 19 and older. That way, there is no ambiguous "exemption" rule

I think that's the best middle-ground honestly.

Make it a 3 years transition, adding 4 months to the current draft eligibility dates every year.