In my previous article (How to Rectify the NHL Draft Lottery) I put forth a proposal on how
to rectify what I see as the issues with the current NHL Draft Lottery. My
proposal was to give each NHL team what I call a Protected Draft Territory or
P.D.T.
In that previous article, I mentioned the uneasiness I
had with my proposal – that it would bestow an unfair advantage on the NHL’s
Canadian teams because of their proximity to large amateur hockey leagues and
unfairly penalize the NHL’s U.S. teams because of their perceived lack of
amateur hockey leagues in their vicinity. But as you will see in this article, the
application of the P.D.T. to the Entry Draft for the year 2008 did not result
in any discernible level of advantage or disadvantage.
At this point I’ll quickly rehash the three P.D.T. rules that
I applied to the 2008 NHL Entry Draft:
- A player’s birth place,
not his last amateur hockey team before becoming eligible for the NHL
Entry Draft, determined which P.D.T., if any, the player would be eligible
for.
- Where more than one NHL
team shares a natural territory (such as a province or a state), how close
a player’s birth place is to an NHL team determined which P.D.T. the
player would be eligible for.
- As each player was removed
from the original entry draft because of designation under the P.D.T., the
players below the removed player were moved up in the draft order. This
seems rather arbitrary. But without any knowledge of what each team would
have drafted had the player they originally drafted not been available, it
seems like a fair compromise. So, for example, if the first player chosen
in the original entry draft had been designated under the P.D.T., the
second player chosen in the original entry draft was moved up to the first
player chosen in the revised entry draft.
The year 2008, though not as deep as 2003, was another stellar
entry draft. In fact, there was discussion that Steven Stamkos would be a
franchise player for whichever team was lucky enough to draft him. The
application of the three simple rules above most definitely would have altered the history of
the NHL as we know it. A few key players on Cup winning teams might not have
been there to help those teams secure their Cups or perhaps might have helped
their new teams secure a Cup instead.
Table 1 below is actually two tables in one. The first
six columns represent how the original NHL Entry Draft played out. The second
six columns represent how a revised NHL Entry Draft might have transpired after
the application of the P.D.T. rules.
Table 1.
Regardless of the fact that it wasn’t as deep a draft as
2003, there are more than a few recognizable names from the original 2008 Entry
Draft. For example, Steven Stamkos, Drew Doughty, Zach Bogosian, Alex Pietrangelo, Luke Schenn, Colin Wilson, Joshua
Bailey, Cody Hodgson, Tyler Myers, Erik Karlsson, Jake Gardiner, Luca Sbisa,
Michael Del Zotto, Jordan Eberle, and Tyler Ennis.
Without a doubt, the Maple
Leafs would have been able to secure, via designation of their P.D.T., another
franchise player in Steven Stamkos.
With only two of the top ten picks being designated under
the P.D.T., the picks in the revised draft would have been slightly different. For
example, Drew Doughty, Alex Pietrangelo, Luke Schenn, Colin Wilson, Joshua
Bailey, Cody Hodgson, Erik Karlsson, Luca Sbisa, Michael Del Zotto, and Jordan
Eberle would have all been drafted by different teams.
By looking closely at Table 1 above, we can see the
players in Table 2 below are the players from the first round of the draft who
would have been eligible for designation under the P.D.T. rule and therefore
would have started their careers with and played for different teams:
Table 2
The casual fan, looking at the names from Table 2, would find
the list about evenly split between recognizable and less recognizable names.
From that same list of names above, the one having the most interest for Maple Leafs fans would, of course, be Steven Stamkos. The obvious
question:
1.
Does the acquisition of Steven Stamkos allow the
Maple Leafs to start unloading some of their centre depth to provide more
prospects and picks for continued contention for a Cup?
As intriguing as that question is, the answer will never
be known.
As was the case for the revised Entry Drafts from 2000
onwards, the revised Entry Draft for 2008 provides many questions for endless
speculation, discussion, and debate.
No comments:
Post a Comment