New York Rangers: What if there was no entry draft?

The New York Rangers are going to pick second in this year’s NHL entry draft. What if the league used a different model?

For all of the NHL’s labor problems, one that rarely gets discussed is the draft. At least in America, the draft is the league’s way of distributing amateur talent to all of the teams in a semi-fair manner. This is in direct contrast to the model that soccer uses where players are signed in their early teens and sent to academies. The New York Rangers would benefit from another model.

Prior to the NHL entry draft in 1963, the original six franchises (Bruins, Maple Leafs, Canadiens, Red Wings, Blackhawks and Rangers) were all in a direct free for all when it came to amateur talent. This is at least in part why the Rangers won only one Stanley Cup between 1940 and 1994.

The other teams hoarded the amateur talent and New York was unable to sign quality pieces to compete. Sure, the Rangers haven’t exactly knocked the amateur draft era out of the park either, but that’s a point for a different day.

In the modern NHL, this free market system would better serve the quality of the league, player rights and ultimately the individual franchises over time. While it may seem counter-intuitive to give individuals freedom straight out of amateur or college hockey, it would lead to a better marriage between talent and franchise.

The no draft model

So, in this alternate universe, there are no ping pong balls, no tanking and no draft. Rookie salaries would be capped at a certain figure, think of this as a “rookie max-contract,” which would replace the entry-level deal which artificially depresses player wages. These players would count against the salary cap like veterans and a team could sign as many as possible.

Now, the natural response to this hypothetical is that the amateur talent would only go to prominent franchises like the Rangers, Canadiens, Maple Leafs and Blackhawks to live in major cities and increase their profile. However, it does not consider the team factors that come along with roster building.

Let’s say this was in effect this year, the Rangers sign Kappo Kakko, Alex Turcotte and Cole Caufield to overhaul the forward core and instantly jump New York into the playoff mix this fall. That would discourage other players from signing with the team in future years for a lack of playing time and opportunity.

Instead, it’d encourage other players to seek out larger roles with smaller and less prominent organizations over time. If Bowen Byram in this year’s draft wanted to start in the NHL this season, he could sign with the Oilers and be on their blue line come opening night regardless of the team’s quality.

This level of player empowerment would make for a better sport as a whole because there’d be greater autonomy. Instead of players being at the whim of the team that drafts them until they’re 27-years-old, they’d have greater agency over their role and earning power.

In addition, the removal of the draft would force teams into being more competitive. If there’s no lottery to incentivize losing, those teams that struggled would be forced to make changes and not rely on amateur talent coming into save them.

The argument

So, using Connor McDavid’s situation as the reasoning for this no draft model, there’s ample cause. Ever since McDavid’s sublime age 17 season for the Erie Otters of the OHL, it was clear he’d be a generational talent. But, because of an arbitrary drawing process, he was drafted to a franchise where he’d be compared to Wayne Gretzky for his entire career.

Not only does Gretzky loom large over the franchise as a symbolic figure, but it doesn’t help that players from those immortal teams of the 1980s are so heavily involved with the franchise’s direction to this very day.

The Ontario native has put on a brave face through four NHL seasons and tried as best as humanly possible to carry the Oilers to success. However, there’s only so much one player, even one as great as McDavid, could do. This was totally out of his hands and something that could’ve been avoided.

Let’s say that McDavid could pick his landing spot in the summer of 2015. All 30 franchises could’ve made a pitch to the forward and laid out a vision for him to succeed. He could’ve joined the reigning Stanley Cup champion Chicago Blackhawks and lined up behind Jonathan Toews on the depth chart for the next decade.

McDavid could’ve joined his childhood team the Maple Leafs to lead the team out of the decade long abyss it was trapped in. The Rangers could’ve made a sales pitch to McDavid as being the final piece to put a President’s Trophy winning team over the top as the focal point.

Unfortunately, the smaller market team owners would never agree to this scenario. They’d cause enough of a ruckus to get it thrown out even though they were perfectly capable of ponying up more money for talent.