Skip to content

Opinion: No, Mr. Stinson, the NHL draft is not broken

Scott Stinson has a radical solution to the peculiarities rising from the NHL entry draft as presently structured. Abolish it. Writing this week in the National Post , Stinson pokes holes in this business of teams picking players based on a lottery.

Scott Stinson has a radical solution to the peculiarities rising from the NHL entry draft as presently structured.

Abolish it.

Writing this week in the National Post, Stinson pokes holes in this business of teams picking players based on a lottery.

As an alternative, he advocates a scheme in which newcomers to the league simply sign with the highest bidder.

Stinson’s problem with the entry draft is a familiar one. Simply put, it rewards losing. Or, more precisely, it encourages teams that already suck to suck enough so as to finish at or near the bottom of the league standings.

Doing so improves a club’s chances of securing the top draft pick. Some years, that number one pick can transform a franchise.

This is certainly one of those years, with Connor McDavid, The Next One, to be drafted first overall by Edmonton today.

The McDavid sweepstakes produced what Stinson called the “strangest hockey game of this past season” in March, when Buffalo fans cheered a Sabres’ home loss because it moved their team “closer to clinching the coveted 30th place in the league.”

Of course there’s never been bona fide proof that a team has thrown games to step backwards down the standings.

Certainly the accusations have been made. Many allege Pittsburgh purposely tanked so it could nab Mario Lemieux.

Others believe Ottawa threw games to assure itself Alexandre Daigle, one of the biggest draft busts in NHL history.

Lemieux and Daigle were drafted under the old system in which placement was determined solely by standings. If you were worst, you picked first.

Everyone could see that methodology made no sense. So in 1995 the NHL established a lottery. Bad teams still had the best chance at the top pick, but there were no guarantees.

And that’s really the best way to go, as it ensures that bad teams have the best shot at improving their lot in life.

The lottery also limits any urge for teams to throw in the towel in hopes of a better future, thus compromising the integrity of the game – and remember, this is not something that has ever necessarily actually happened.

There’s no good reason to change the draft format. Other than Stinson, I doubt anyone is seriously considering it.

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks