NHL Entry draft age is too low

[Blacktape]

If the 2004 draft was held today based on current performances, how would you rate the following: no change, much higher way higher etc.
Radulov, Schwarz Meszaros, Schremp, Bolland, Krejci,
IMO, most are being drafted way to early to tell if they’re NHL material and it would make more sense dollarwise for the NHL to have a entry draft of 20 year olds.

Click to read more...

 

[NYRangers]

How would it make more sense money wise? Unless I'm missing something obvious. Then what about the 18 year olds who are good enough for the NHL?

Plus, half the fun is not knowing how there going to end up.

 

[Kevin Forbes]

In North American alone, raising the draft age to 20 would wreak havoc on the way the CHL and the AHL are set up, due to things like the over-ager rules.
The flip side would be allowing teams in the CHL to have as many over-agers as they want, which would then ruin a lot of the notion of the CHL being there for developing young players.

The draft age is at 18 in order to still have some questions, still have that risk towards the future. If teams were always getting a sure thing, then a lot of the more exciting parts of hockey development would be missed.

 

[DownFromNJ]

I wouldn't mind players being able to enter the draft at any age. That way, late bloomers would get drafted, and a player could choose to go to college, like in Baseball.

 

[SPORTSMANIAC]

I can't see the draft age going up. If it does I already had enough with the Maurice Clarett vs the NFL. That is why most teams when they draft somebody the only ones that might make the team are the top 5 draft picks. Maybe you will see a few others but not many after that. I think Patrice Bergeon fell into that catgory. Teams hold on to the rights and let them play in the CHL, Europe, NCAA. If they need more training time the AHL. No need for draft age going up.

 

[Legionnaire]

Why does it not surprise me that this was posted by an Oilers fan. :lol

 

[MS]

If the 2004 draft was held today based on current performances, how would you rate the following: no change, much higher way higher etc.
Radulov, Schwarz Meszaros, Schremp, Bolland, Krejci,
IMO, most are being drafted way to early to tell if they’re NHL material and it would make more sense dollarwise for the NHL to have a entry draft of 20 year olds.

They can't legally. It was a 20 y/o draft pre-1979, until Tom McCarthy won a legal challenge to enter at age 18. The league would love to raise the draft age, but they know if they try it won't hold up in court.

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

It seems like teams that can't draft are the teams complaining. There should be risk in the draft, thats what makes it fun and the only reason why this site is in business.

 

[PanthersRule96]

It seems like teams that can't draft are the teams complaining. There should be risk in the draft, thats what makes it fun and the only reason why this site is in business.

Well, if you perenially suck (cough FLA cough), there is not much of a risk at the draft

You can't go wrong with Weiss, Bouwmeester, Stewart, Horton, and Olesz. The draft age is fine as it is, except in 2003, where FLA could've had Ovechkin but a couple days

 

[Legionnaire]

It seems like teams that can't draft are the teams complaining. There should be risk in the draft, thats what makes it fun and the only reason why this site is in business.

Right. Like it or not, it evens things up a bit. If you have a good scouting department, you can be as successful as any team; even if you pick dead last.

 

[Brock]

Isn't it also too early to say about whether these kids would have gone higher or lower, much like you believe that these kids are drafted too early?

The reality is that, if the NHL draft were held today, I'm sure some teams would make a few changes, but for the most part it would be done the same. If you want to look 3 years down the line, then you'll have teams changing who they drafted.

 

[Jason MacIsaac]

Isn't it also too early to say about whether these kids would have gone higher or lower, much like you believe that these kids are drafted too early?

The reality is that, if the NHL draft were held today, I'm sure some teams would make a few changes, but for the most part it would be done the same. If you want to look 3 years down the line, then you'll have teams changing who they drafted.

Which isn't fair....it takes away from the teams scouting talents and it would kill the CHL. Who would play CHL when you have the college ranks. Poeple who's main goal is to get drafted high usually go to the CHL because they can start playing there at the age of 16 and prove their worth for two years. If that limit goes up to 20 then they will have two years of college hockey for free to prove themself. You can't beat that deal.

 

[Blackjack]

My biggest problem with increasing the draft age is that it's not fair to the kids. Obviously there are exceptions to the rule, but for the most part, if you are not drafted at the age of 18, you can be pretty sure you'll never play in the NHL. Players can then, if they choose, go to college or pursue a different career. Look what happens to football players that don't make it; someone posted a stat that said more than half of the BCS players won't even graduate.

 

[Fozz]

I fully agree that the age should be increased. I think 19 would be a good compromise.

 

[The Commish]

The above poster was right, they legally cant change the draft age. You hear people like Bill Watters and others talk frequently about the benefits of a 20yr old draft but it will never happen due to legal issues.

 

[David A. Rainer]

They can't legally. It was a 20 y/o draft pre-1979, until Tom McCarthy won a legal challenge to enter at age 18. The league would love to raise the draft age, but they know if they try it won't hold up in court.

The above poster was right, they legally cant change the draft age. You hear people like Bill Watters and others talk frequently about the benefits of a 20yr old draft but it will never happen due to legal issues.

Actually, it's very easy to do - it only needs to be collectively bargained for. However, getting the NHLPA to agree to it would be the hard part.

The legal challenges that you are referring to (both in the NHL, NBA and MLB) were challenges to a unilaterally imposed rule by the owners setting the minimum age. The court cases prohibited the rules only because they were not collectively bargained for and they are tantamount to a "group boycott" (in this case, of 18 & 19 year-olds) that was not agreed to by labor. The only thing the league would have to do to validate the rule for labor law purposes is to include it in an agreed-to CBA (in other words, collectively bargain for it). But, as I said above, I don't know if the NHLPA would go for it.

In short, the owners could not legally change the rule all by themselves.

 

[J17 Vs Proclamation]

Bad bad idea. It stops the elite talent from getting in to the NHL when there ready. if the draft age was higher we wouldn't have seen Nash or Kovalchuk. It kills the CHL and prevents younger kids from playing. It also kinda stops the fun of drafting. It would be a bit boring if you knew your players outcome. Basically the later rounds would be a way to find fringe players instead of hoping to find a great talent in the later rounds.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

Isn't it also too early to say about whether these kids would have gone higher or lower, much like you believe that these kids are drafted too early?

The reality is that, if the NHL draft were held today, I'm sure some teams would make a few changes, but for the most part it would be done the same. If you want to look 3 years down the line, then you'll have teams changing who they drafted.

I respectfully disagree. I think rankings change all the times, as they should. Even some off-ice life-changing decsions will affect the order. Such as a guy like Wick just *moving* to North America, regardless of performance.

We now have a good chunk of this season underway. Prospects can grow a lot through the summer (physically and mentally) and we now have a new sample of games played on top of that. I think we would be surprised by how much things might change overall. But that is just my suspicion. We will unfortunately never know.

All I know is that I have never kept my rankings the same during more than 2-3 months. During a draft year, you can see all the scouting services also change their rankings. Some do it monthly or 3-4 times a year. Redline, ISS, CSS, you name it.

Guys like McKenzie will give you reports and say which guys are moving up, which are going down, who stays the same. It changes a LOT, IMO. While Bob McKenzie doesn't know everything, he seems to have very solid sources close to teams.

It doesn't mean teams are killing themselves over who they took. But they obviously monitor the prospects until the very last minute to make a decision, and if you gave them another couple of months (such as, up to right now) you can bet your ass they would have monitored them right up to this minute and the draft would be much different. At least that's what I think.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

The draft age is at 18 in order to still have some questions, still have that risk towards the future. If teams were always getting a sure thing, then a lot of the more exciting parts of hockey development would be missed.

I think you're confusing the reasons *you* find the draft exciting at this particular age to why the NHL has it that way.

I don't think the NHL is trying to create the kind of excitment you are talking about.

 

[Vlad The Impaler]

They can't legally. It was a 20 y/o draft pre-1979, until Tom McCarthy won a legal challenge to enter at age 18.

This is all a myth, and I wish people would stop saying that.

The league would love to raise the draft age, but they know if they try it won't hold up in court.

It will probably hold up in court, BTW.

 

[Blind Gardien]

Anyway, the easiest way to sidestep any potential legal challenges (whether they would hold up in court or not) is just to go back to a system whereby 18-year olds can only be drafted in the first round, or first two rounds, or first three rounds, etc, wherever you want to set the cutoff. Obviously, some 18-year olds are ready to jump straight into the NHL right after being drafted, and there's no point in curtailing their opportunity to do so. But most of those guys are highly-touted first round picks (top-10 esp.), so if we let the draft go forward in tiers, you'd get the best of all worlds, letting the lesser prospects having extra years to develop, letting the stars step in right away, and avoiding any possibility of any legal challenges.

1st round: players 18 yrs and over are eligible
2nd-3rd round: players 19 yrs and over are eligible
4th-9th round: players 20 yrs and over are eligible

Besides, if the NHLPA ever got any of its concessions in the CBA about limiting player retention rights for NCAA and European draftees, you'd pretty much have to go to a 20-year old draft for those guys.

 

[leaflover]

If(when) this entire season is lost due to the lockout it would be a great opportunity if the NHL were to decide to go back to the 19 year old draft.Just compensate teams that had traded for higher end picks this june with compensatory picks from that trading partner in 06.

 

[Brodeur]

Actually, it's very easy to do - it only needs to be collectively bargained for. However, getting the NHLPA to agree to it would be the hard part.

This is correct. Look at the NFL with Mike Williams and Maurice Clarett for this most recent draft. The NFL and NFLPA have an agreement which specifies who can be drafted. The NFL, being a private enterprise, can make its own rules that might not adhere to other common labor laws.

 

[in the net]

I think it should stay the way it has for years, if it ain't broke don't fix it. I like the way it works

 

[saskhab]

At age 18, you are legally an adult. You can play in the NHL. You can enter any workforce provided you meet the qualifications of that industry. Pro hockey is no different.