The annual NHL entry draft has always been described in two very different ways, by two very different vantage points.

 

National Hockey League teams with a rich and successful history in the draft tend to talk about the work that they've done, the stones they've over turned and the cohesion of their scouting staff; an effective team that has proven time and again that they are able to find hockey talent.

 

The other camp focuses more on how hard it is to judge the future of an 18 year old hockey player and lean their views more to just how lucky a team has to be in order to find that diamond in the rough.

 

The reality? While somewhere in-between these two extremes, history certainly points to the latter. The NHL Entry Draft is a real crap shoot.

 

When one thinks of top teams in scouting the organizations of New Jersey and Colorado come to mind, both clubs have rich traditions of uncovering hockey talent all over the world. Yet when you examine the recent draft records of both clubs you'll find that New Jersey hasn't drafted a player in the first four rounds since '95 that rated a 4.0 (above average player) in our analysis (Peter Sykora), and for Colorado the drought has been three less years to '98 (Alex Tanguay).

 

The reasons the Avalanche and the Devils continue to ride high in the standings season to season (other than money) is their ability to find assets - not necessarily superstars - at every single entry draft.

 

In this ten year time period, the New Jersey Devils reeled in 27 different hockey players that received a rating of 2.0 or greater (a player that plays some NHL role, but doesn't crack in full time). That's 27 assets in 10 years of four rounds of picks. Not a lot of mistakes. For comparisons sake league average for ten years is well back at 15.

 

Similarly, the Colorado Avalanche sit second in this department, pulling in 25 players over the same ten year time period. 

 

If you up the quality quotient somewhat and look at teams that lead the way in players that have a rating of 3.0 or greater (average player), the Avalanche lead the way again, tied with the New York Islanders with 12 in ten years. New Jersey sits 7th with 8 players rated above 3.0. The league average is six.

 

The draft is the only time in a hockey league season where member clubs can acquire assets free of contractual entanglement and without having to yield player assets in return. Do well on draft day and you give yourself plenty of developmental depth to replace current players on your roster when they wind down their careers, or maneuverability in the trade market to fill holes.

 

Come up empty on draft day one year and a team is disappointed. Come up empty on two or three drafts in a tight time frame and the club is doomed to tumble down the standings and likely stay there for a long period time.

 

Take a team like the New York Rangers. The Rangers have missed the playoffs for six consecutive seasons which should have given them a great opportunity to draft young assets high in the draft. In these ten years ('92-2001) the Rangers have found only 11 players in four rounds a season of drafting that can boast a rating of 2.0 or higher. Of that group, only five players have a rating of 3.0 or higher, and no single player tops out over 4.0. It's a good thing they have money.

 

Some teams have the drafting part down cold, but lack the patience to let this bumper crop come on and make an impact.

 

New York's other team is a perfect example of this crime of development. The New York Islanders are ranked 4th in talent greater than 2.0, and 1st in the number of players greater than 3.0 and greater than 4.0. With the increased payroll provided by the new ownership group they should be challenging for the Stanley Cup.

 

Instead the Islanders have dealt away most if not all of this great haul of hockey talent including; Todd Bertuzzi 4.7, Wade Redden 4.6, Roberto Luongo 4.3, Eric Brewer 4.1, Zdeno Chara 4.1, Bryan McCabe 4.0, Darius Kasparaitus 3.8, Tim Connolly 3.3, Taylor Pyatt 3.2, J.P. Dumont 3.2, Jan Hlavac 3.0. The only player they've drafted in the past ten years that ranked over 3.0 and was retained by the Islanders is Rick DiPietro 3.3.

 

Not the way to build a hockey franchise.

 

The Calgary Flames are similar in that only two players of the nine rated greater than 3.0 currently hold down roster spots in Calgary (Toni Lydman and Denis Gauthier), while two others may still be on the way (Chuck Kobasew, and Andrei Medvedev). Derek Morris, Robert Svehla, Cory Stillman, and Jarret Stoll no longer toil for the organization.

 

Just How Thin is A Draft Year?

 

Every year it seems each National Hockey League franchise holds their number one pick close to their hearts like a sacred right toward future riches, future winning, a blue chip stamped for arrival.

 

The truth of the matter is quite a bit different than the perception of the value of a number one pick.

 

If you adjust each draft year to look at the top 30 picks, instead of the true break between the first and second rounds, it's alarming to see that on average only three players per year turn out to have a rating of 4.0 or greater. Since a true star in our analysis would haul in a value of 5.0, a player that has somewhere between four and five is a good player, but certainly not a franchise player.

 

Three a season or 10% of first round picks are truly successful? Kind of makes you wonder about the draft this weekend doesn't it? Which three of these 20 or so great players will actually be great when the dust settles?

 

The years '93 and '97 were very good in terms of the draft, when six players turned in report cards averaging 4.0 or greater. These players included '93 graduates Chris Pronger 5.0, Paul Kariya 4.9, Jason Allison 4.7, Todd Bertuzzi 4.7, Saku Koivu 4.4, and Jason Arnott 4.1, and '97 upper classmen Joe Thornton 5.0, Marion Hossa 4.9, Sergei Samsanov 4.6, Roberto Luongo 4.3, Eric Brewer 4.1, and Patrick Marleau 4.1.

 

On the flipside, '96 and '99 each had only one player hit the 4.0 mark with Derek Morris (13th overall) at 4.4 in '96, and Martin Havlat (25th overall) in '99.

 

Often when teams get a pick in the top ten of a draft they feel fairly certain that they will uncover a gem, a future star, a player to add to their club's nucleus. 

 

In actuality however, the best player selected in each of these ten drafts was only taken in the top ten picks on five occasions (Chris Pronger '93, Joe Thornton '97, Vincent Lecavalier '98, Dany Heatley '00, Illya Kovalchuk '01), and to be honest, the jury is still out on the latter two.

 

Clearly there are no guarantees.

 

If you look at every player selected through four rounds and ten years you'll find 1,123 players chosen. Out of this group only three players received the honour of a perfect 5.0 from our panel (0.27%). Only 49 players received a grade of 4.0 or greater (4.36%), and only 177 players were deemed above average (15.76%). It gets worse, out of these 1,123 players only 440 had a grade that would suggest they will at least play. That's only 39.18% of players selected. Put another way, only two of five players selected on draft day will even see the light of an NHL arena.

 

Quantity over Quality

 

With the less favourable odds described above, it certainly makes sense to try to acquire as many kicks at the cat as possible on draft day.

 

Each teams starts out with nine picks to their name, a pick for every one of the nine rounds in every NHL Entry Draft. Through trades and complicated future consideration pacts some teams end up with far fewer selections, opting for more picks higher up the draft or tangible assets that can step in right away. Other teams quietly amass huge pick totals and hope that the extra lottery ticket will bring in that star player.

 

Two of the teams identified earlier as finding the most assets in the draft; Colorado and New Jersey, both figuere prominently in the ranking of number of picks per season (New Jersey 2nd with 5.5 per year, and Colorado 3rd with 5.3 picks in the first four rounds).

 

The Nashville Predators, a relatively young franchise looking to build a solid foundation, lead the way with 5.8 picks per year in the top four rounds.

 

Philadelphia, a club that always seems to be in the battle for the cup every spring, has peddled a good deal of their picks away, keeping a study low 2.8 picks in the first four rounds on average.

 

So What's With Calgary?

 

So just what in heaven have the Calgary Flames done wrong over this time period? They sit 5th in the average number of picks in the top four rounds over ten years. They rank 3rd in finding players that at least play, 3rd in finding players average or better, but only 15th in finding players that can play a huge role, or impact players.

Over this decade of choices, the Flames have had some very good draft positions, and with a low number of impact players found, they didn't get the job done. The result? They miss the playoffs for 7 straight seasons.

 

In ten years and exactly 50 picks in the first four rounds, the Flames have drafted only one impact player; Derek Morris. 

 

The short to mid-term future of pending players like Tomi Maki, Yuri Trubachev, Andrei Medvedev, Eric Nystom, Chuck Kobasew, and Andrei Taratukhin may move this record to a much more positive light, but until they do, the Flames will continue to rank well down the lists when it comes to draft day shrewdness.